The Worcester School Committee takes up operational safety

 part of the continuing "I'm in COVID isolation and so catching up on the blogging while I wait to get well" series here...

Last Thursday, the Worcester School Committee received a report on emergency preparedness as the report of the superintendent. You can find the presentation here; on the video, it's about 22 minutes in.

What I think is most important about this is we're finally--after far too many years of "school safety" being about little other than "what if there's ever an active shooter"--looking in a holistic way at actually having staff and students be safe at school. 

To that end, the following information shared shows most frequently is happening at our schools:

Note also here the reasons why the police have been on WPS campuses.

One of the first things that Dr. Monárrez asked about when she came on was for our last full evaluation of district security and emergency response. There...isn't one? There was a partial evaluation of some of 15 of our buildings in 2015, but no action was taken on that under the previous administration (in fact, I don't know that it ever was even shared). 
Thus we're well overdue for a full look, not only at the physical security of our buildings, but all else that we do to make and keep staff and students safe at school. WPS thus now has a contract with Guidepost Solutions to do a full review of all of that. The report goes to administration, but if there are aspects that need School Committee involvement (that would largely be policy and budget), that will come to us.

What also is very useful is the way in which the district looks at responding to what happens in schools has changed. This isn't only about the increased attention to student mental health supports and school climate supports, though it is that:

..it's also, as above, recognizing that most of the time there is something that students and staff need to respond to in a building, it isn't (thankfully) an active shooter: it's a myriad of other things. The district then is using materials and training from the I Love U Guys Foundation, which, again, are about responding to emergency situations of many kinds with a standard set of actions: Hold, Secure, Lockdown, Evacuate, and Shelter. That's their Standard Response Protocol. You can read the full document from their website. 

As I said at the meeting, one of the things I found most encouraging--maybe even revolutionary, and I mean that in a good way--is the commitment the foundation requires from districts using their training (this is from page 9 of the above): 

The protocol also carries an obligation. Kids and teens are smart. An implicit part of the SRP is that authorities and school personnel tell students what’s going on. Certainly, temper it at the elementary school level, but middle schoolers and older need accurate information for the greatest survivability, and to minimize panic and assist recovery.

Being honest with kids. It's quite a concept. 

I was a teacher when Columbine happened, and the parent of a first grader when Sandy Hook did. I am accustomed to leaving sessions on what often gets presented as 'school safety' shaken and furious about how little it seems to do or comprehend about public education, those who work in it, and the kids we serve. 
Last Thursday, instead, I was encouraged that we're doing something constructive, that evaluates with an honest eye what we are actually doing, and works on things that will in fact make our staff and students safer.

That's an encouraging change. 

Worcester updates

I am behind on these...apologies.

There was an article in the weekend edition of the Worcester Telegram and Gazette stemming from what appeared to be a lengthy interview with Superintendent Binienda and School Safety manager Rob Pezzella last week. The thrust of the article, clearly an attempt to put controversy over the superintendent's tenure (and contract) to rest, is where the Worcester schools struggle, so do others, and regardless, the superintendent is working on it. The comparisons in the article rather missed the ways--and there are several--in which Worcester is an outlier (and not in positive directions), some of which have also been covered by the T&G. 
This led to a reflective piece by Clive McFarlane noting that much of what would seem to be necessary, and in some cases what Superintendent Binienda is now saying, are items put forward by Superintendent Boone, which were not popular by many of the same parties now defending Superintendent Binienda, leading to the question of if, in fact, the superintendent is in a position to carry such needs out.
Councilor Rivera, councilor of District 4 and the sole Latinx elected official city official, put out a statement regarding the situation, which reads in part:

More recently, legal actions by former Worcester Public School employees challenged my conscience to speak out rather than continuing to sit waiting...Ultimately I joined the public call because it felt all other possible routes to bringing about dialogue and change had failed.

This evening, she spoke at the Worcester School Committee, reading much of these statements, calling for the superintendent to "listen to the call" for change.
You can also read much of this in Bill Shaner's weekly "Worcesteria".

Worcester updates

Another week in which it's good that Worcester is a two newspaper town...

• Last week's Worcester Magazine cover story on how sex ed failed caught the attention of both Mass Politico (scroll down to "Local Angle") and Commonwealth Magazine, which followed up with some of those involved. Janice Harvey likewise devoted her column to the need for such education. 
• The students who spoke out last week for change are gathering signatures in support.They also have scheduled a press conference for Tuesday.  
• The Worcester Principals' Association have sent a letter of support for the superintendent, covered here in the Telegram and Gazette. Note that this is not a union; principals in Massachusetts are not unionized and probably have among the least job protections of those working in public districts. 
• The entirety of "Worcesteria" this week is on Worcester School Committee. 
• Molly McCullough was on Radio Worcester earlier in the week. 
• Doug Arbetter, a Doherty High grad who ran for school committee several years ago, wrote a blistering letter to Worcester Magazine about the need for change on the Worcester School Committee. 
• Regarding questions of systemic bias, it is useful to read what Framingham is doing. 

More as I have it! 

Worcester, pay attention to emergency removals

I'd missed that the Telegram had covered Worcester's outlier status on emergency removals until this weekend.

Worcester accounted for almost 60 percent of all “emergency removal” procedures carried out at schools across the state two years ago. Emergency removals allow a school to effectively suspend for two days a student who has committed some offense and is deemed a danger or disruptive presence in his or her classroom and for whom there is no alternative in-school placement.

You can find the full report from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice here.
Since emergency removals don't require the same sorts of reporting, and, frankly, aren't being watched quite the same way, they become an easy out for getting a kid out without it becoming a suspension on the school and district tracking.
Thus:

“Since being introduced ... the use of emergency removal has risen dramatically, from just 460 instances in 2014-15 to over 2,600 in 2016-17,” the report says. “This is cause for serious concern, as these emergency removals are intended for unusual circumstances, not as a general workaround for vital due-process protections.”
The study further says, for example, that just over half of those emergency removals in 2016-17 were used for an “incident of minor misbehavior,” which would seem to go against the intent of the practice.

There had been some question from those who watch such numbers as to what was happening with emergency removals across the state. Scott O'Connell wasn't able to get anyone on record from Boston and Springfield about why their numbers are not up--Boston Globe and MassLive, over to you--but Worcester was quick to chalk this all up as a misunderstanding:

“According to the school system, they were following the policy as they understood it,” he said, adding “it was a complete misread” of the law.
Mr. Pezzella acknowledged “the message from (the state’s education department) was somewhat misconstrued” by administrators in Worcester. “I think it was a misunderstanding of the intent of emergency removals.”

...but then defended it, anyway:

“It can be an effective tool,” Ms. Binienda said. “We’re just being very conscious not to use it when it’s not necessary.”
“Of all the ones I’ve seen, every one of them has been considered appropriate,” Mr. Pezzella said. “All it takes is one student to create upheaval in the classroom.”

Remember what was said above: that over half were for an incident of minor misbehavior.

And, continuing the discussion that Worcester refuses to have, the demographic discrepancies are outrageous:

In 2016-17, for instance, Worcester’s emergency removal rate for disabled students and Latino students was 9 percent and 5.8 percent, respectively, compared to just 2.7 percent for white students, according to state records.

The administration, however, is refusing all outside help, saying that they'll ask for it if their own findings suggest they need it.
The numbers do.

Called it

If you bet that Parkland was suddently going to mean advocacy for increases in "security" spending, you are correct!

"It clearly does raise the bar. Are we spending enough?" asked Rob Pezzella, director of school safety for Worcester Public Schools. "You have to reexamine what your priorities are."

That's from this WBUR article, which otherwise has much more to do with guns around schools and notes this:

It's worth noting that some such security measures were in place at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, and that alleged gunman Nikolas Cruz had been disciplined for bringing firearms and accessories onto campus. Like other shooters before him, he wasn't enrolled at the time of the killing.

You're not going to police and gadget your way out of this one.