Creating the least bad option

The follow-up to last night's post

Let me preface this (again) by noting that I have next to no say over any of this, in any of my capacities.

And let me add (again) that I am speaking only for myself.

I fear that in the entirely legitimate concerns over what kids are losing by not being in school--food, mental health support, physical activity, along with education--we may have lost sight of the overarching concern of the time:

we are in a pandemic

As of today, more than 100,000 American people--that would be, for example, more than half the population of Worcester--have died of this disease, most of them in the past two months. That is almost certainly an undercount. And we are early in this outbreak in the U.S..

Internationally, more than 350,000 people have died. That's as if we lost all of Anaheim.

The highest risk category for coronavirus includes one-third of American teachers, as well as significant numbers of school staff.

Risks are also particularly high if you are Latinx, or Black, or Native American, or poor. 

Some people who don't die get very sick.
That includes children.
It also includes particular high risk categories, which also includes children.

We are months, if not years, away from a vaccine, if we ever get one at all.

Antibody testing, as yet, is unreliable, and we don't know yet if you can get it again.
To create herd immunity, 70-90% of a population needs to have immunity; we don't know for sure yet, but most estimates have us in the U.S. at below 10% exposure at this point.
And herd immunity alone isn't a solution. 

In short, we are putting the actual lives of children and school staff up against their education.
People who gather together share this disease, and then people die of this disease.
We need to not do that.

What then, are we do to?
I've heard several times lately that there is no good option: there are only bad options, and we should choose or create the least bad option possible.

To start: we need to stop and make an actual plan this time. We went flying out of schools in mid-March as if the buildings were on fire. We needed to do that, and some districts and schools managed better than others, but now we have a chance to take a breath.

We're also going to need resources, and thus, if you're reading this, here's your one ask from me: send an email to Congress and tell them we need funds for public education. Only the federal government has the resources to pull off what is needed here.

I've seen lots of citing of "Maslow before Bloom" over the course of the time we've been out: in essence, that people's basic needs of things like physical safety and enough to eat must be met before their learning needs are. It is what was recognized when the first order of business for schools was to feed kids.

And so, first: we feed kids. Right now, we're missing thousands of kids across the state: Multiply that across the country, and we have millions of kids who are missing meals.
First order of business then is do what it takes to make sure kids are fed. There are lots of models out there: deliveries are happening in some districts, some have added adult meals (without reimbursement), and the P-EBT benefit is also designed to help with that. Nationally, food insecurity is growing during the pandemic. The numbers we had for free and reduced lunch qualification in mid-March are bound to be wrong right now; we should update those numbers, as we can.
But above all: Get food to kids who need food, whoever they are, wherever they are, whatever their need.

Then, we make sure they're connected, so we can make sure they're well.
We need internet connections to every kid, no matter where they are. This is now a necessity. This isn't only about schools: it's about medicine, jobs, food...you need connection to do it. Some have made the parallel with rural electrification, in it being a matter of public interest and equity to get such access. Obviously, a federal effort on that would be ideal. Lacking that, state efforts, local efforts need to be organized such that families aren't without or dependent on making a cell phone data payment for access.
I would argue that if schools require it, districts should pay for it, but if it is used beyond that, then that could be broader.
This means, by the way, that we also need to have conversations around things like bandwidth, because some families, but also some communities, are maxed out.
Likewise, no more essays on cell phones or sharing devices. We're not sharing slates or spellers in colonial times: every student has a laptop or something of its ilk to do their work on.
We also need to recognize: kids are going to socialize on these, too. That's also part of school.
We find every kid, though, and we connect every kid.

That, of course, doesn't get us too much farther forward than we are now, save fixing some of what's broken. Next we try being actively constructive.

This takes first noting that the pandemic has hit kids inequitably. There are students right now who need more support than others. This is where our taking a breath comes in: What do those students need? How do we meet those needs?

Most of our students are going to need to feel connected. It's going to be hard to have that connection, starting off a new year with new teachers and classmates. Some have suggested looping classes, having students stay with the same teacher and classmates for another year; this gives the added benefit of perhaps having the teacher coming in with an idea of where students are at as the year begins. That won't work for everyone, though, but each student should have an adult (at least one!) who is their link to the school. Some schools have homeroom teachers for this; some have mentoring groups; with buildings closed, it is possible that this could extend beyond teachers. Students need a home base, though, from which to start. This means taking stock of each student before school starts to base the year off those connections.  For the adults: those are their kids. For the kids, this is their link to the school and district.

Some students need mental health supports. Much like everything else, this is harder to even figure out when we aren't seeing students in person. Persistence in who have we heard from and who haven't we heard from is one way, particularly through their connection with the school. Some of this can be over video, but sometimes the connection may be written. Some may be over the phone. In some cases--and this isn't the only time I am going to suggest this--maybe we are finding a way to get students someone in person, but through a glass door.
This is probably going to take more staff than we have now, too, and it's not the last time I am going to make that observation, either. Student mental health needs are higher than ever during the pandemic, and if we're going to get students through this as healthy as possible, then we need to meet that need.

As a note to this: we also know that some kids aren't safe where they are, making those connections with other adults crucial. 

The pandemic has been particularly difficult for students with special needs and their families. This has been a really hard one for schools, and there is no easy answer at all. It is another one, though, where the level of staffing, and the level of connection with families, makes a huge difference. Some of this can be done via video. Some students, though, don't respond to that. How do we get students their connections with staff members? And how to we actually PARTNER with families--who, after all, are doing much of the lifting on this--to meet student needs? Can we send people to porches and windows? I know of examples of aides moving in with families (and thus becoming part of their 'pandemic pod'). Can we somehow directly support families that are most strained by this? 

We have large numbers of students whose first language isn't English and whose families may not speak English at all. First, we've got to stop sending work home to these children in English; that makes no sense! Translation programs, with all due respect to Google, aren't that strong. Here's another staffing issue: we need more people who work for districts who speak the languages that students do at home, and that can connect with families where they're at. It is difficult to do that well if we don't have people working with them and for us who can speak and listen directly.

Not everything can be done on a computer, and families need to not be trying to scramble to get students what they need for school during a pandemic. Students need school supplies: they need paper and pencils and crayons and art supplies and science kits. If students are learning at home, they need those supplies at home. For little kids in particular, learning means hands-on materials. We need to not assume that families have blocks or markers or whatever else is needed for school. 

Note that for gym class and art class and music class, that may mean something different. Nerves would probably be strained unduly if we gave every student a recorder, but music and art should be made as well as studied (it's in the standards!) and keeping students active is essential. Worcester Hearts Connected has made a start on that last, if you're looking for examples.
That last means a renewed emphasis from the state, incidentally, that outdoor time and recess time and gym time are part of school time. School time doesn't mean you've spent hours in front of a Chromebook, home or no.

One of the disparities for students is a quiet space to work. Here is the one place that I would open buildings, but with strict scheduling for those who live together and limited access and lots of cleaning. Giving students and their families, if needed, space that is quiet to work through their math or read, if that isn't possible with limited space at home is part of attempting to make up for equity gaps. 

Little kids in particular struggle to learn remotely, and for them, we should bring our student/adult ratio WAY down, and flood early elementary with people. Unemployment is up; we have everything from students talking about taking gap years to college graduates looking for work to people sidelined by the economic downturn. CORI them all, get them some training, and create a teaching assistant corps.
Note here: assistant corps. I'm under absolutely no illusions about what it takes to teach elementary school, and that can't be replicated short term (regardless of what particular national programs may have done). But what would be stations in elementary school are not something one can replicate well online. Teachers teach; assistants ensure that students are connected to the learning by getting it to them.

For all students, we always start by finding out where we are. The level of online reaction (to put it mildly) to the not-revolutionary notion that we assess kids as they come back has been...something. Teachers have always need to figure out what kids know and can do before they move forward with teaching them. That is significantly more true than it ever was before this year, as some students will have continued moving forward (and may even have leapt well ahead of what would otherwise have been intended for them), and some have slid during their time away.
I have seen some suggestions, relatedly, that moving to a mastery based system, as Cleveland is considering doing, would be a timely switch. This means each student fully learns the skill or material before moving on. As students are coming in next year in radically different places from one another--always true, but more true now!--they need to start different places. They'll take different amounts of time to get to where they need to be--also always true!--so maybe it is time to make that how this works.

And speaking of teachers and of staff: first, let's get them a break, for sure, as this spring has been exhausting. Then, let's look at their needs, too. Some of them are working from home with their own kids; how do we as districts and as schools effectively work to help teachers and staff balance their home lives while teaching? What does that look like around time and scheduling and planning? If we are going to do this for an extended period of time, we need to actively be seeking solutions to that issue.
Next, what do staff need to be able to do this work well? I've seen a BIG push on tech training, which is understandable, and in many cases, was needed. But we are also talking about a societal trauma on a scale not seen in decades. We're trying to teach students in a way that hasn't been done on this scale ever. We're watching inequities grow vastly right in front of us. We are having to reach students in their homes with their families. What does that mean both for professional development and for staff support? What do staff and teachers need to connect with students, to keep and get students engaged, to actively work to overcome inequities, and to not burn out themselves? That's work that needs to start this summer and continue through the year.
This means that cultural competency has never been more important: knowing and appreciating the strengths of families is crucial to connection.

The above doesn't, of course, solve anywhere near anything. 

It won't, of course, make up for what we're missing by not having school in person. 

As best as I can tell, though, the real push to have school in person is coming less from educators, and more from those who see schools as a way of "restarting" the economy. I'd suggest we need to consider the health and well-being of people ahead of that. 

While the above doesn't fix education, it might, though, keep schools from killing people.