Why We Need to Call for “All-Remote” Now
Mulgrew sounded militant Wednesday. Talked about a strike. Made demands about safety. But the message was wrong. By continuing to fight to open schools safely (which might seem reasonable) the UFT leadership is diverting us. We should be leaning, as hard as we can, on de Blasio to open remotely. Everyone, including de Blasio, notices that the UFT has not called for “All-Remote.”
1a. Parents need to know what their schedules will be, where their children will be, and when. A million parents being forced to make personal decisions (remote vs hybrid) is unfair. The City should be creating solutions for New York City’s parents.
1b. Parents need this now, not three weeks from now. The City needs time to create arrangements and options, and time to meet the needs of families.
2a. Teachers need to create plans for their classes. While some schools have managed to create a hybrid plan that makes sense, they are in a tiny minority. Most teachers in the city either do not have a set-up for their class schedule, or have one that does not make sense.
2b. Teachers need to know this now, to allow us three weeks to at least mentally prepare for fully remote planning.
3. In particular, “blended learning” in high schools is a mess; it is an idea conceived (poorly) for elementary schools. It was never going to work in high schools. We don’t need three more weeks to figure that out. We knew it in June. If I teach part of my class Monday, another part Tuesday, another on Wednesday, and the last group on Thursday, what are the kids who are not in class doing while I am teaching? What, am I saying “read section 3.4 and do all the odd numbered questions, we will talk about them in a week? It’s not teaching.
4a. The logistics planning is missing (Morning entry, etc). We are being asked to trust that principals are taking care of it.
4b. Logistics are not included in schools’ plans. If you click on the DoE’s school finder and find a school, you will see their reopening plan. But know what’s missing from those plans? Specifics. And logistics.
5a. Safety. The UFT checklist is good. The call for testing, tracing, seem reasonable. But the UFT is fixated on trying to make schools safe.
5b. By spending the next three weeks fighting to make schools safe, they will either i) cut corners or ii) delay the move to remote, disadvantaging families and teachers.
5bi) The UFT demands do not include doing away with “instructional lunch” – given what we suspect about aerosols, this is a real issue. It is not clear if UFT Safety teams going into buildings are primarily identifying unsafe conditions, or primarily finding ways to say that ventilation can be made ok. This is an issue.
5bii) While the UFT is stuck on trying to make schools safe, teachers wait. Unworkable hybrid plans get rolled out. Families scramble for every other or every third day childcare.
One district after another delays opening, or moves to all-remote. Yesterday Yonkers added itself to that list. NYC has become the outlier. This needs to change, as quickly as possible.
“We want to open, blended, but safe”
and
“We wnt to open remotely”
– are not the same message. We need to dump the first and switch to the right one, today.
No Need to Delay Reopening; Go “All-Remote” instead
Carranza yesterday threatened to delay reopening… but that would put the 180 days at risk.
So why not do what every sensible district is doing? Make the fall term remote.
The 180 days would be safe.
More and more the call is for full remote. At this point the biggest player left to get on board is the UFT, and then we can put serious pressure on the Mayor and Chancellor, like we did in March.
de Blasio is stubborn, but he bends to pressure.
Come on, Mulgrew, get on board.
UFT: Need for a New Course
Since June the UFT leadership’s position has been
- We really want schools open in the Fall
- We think blended learning is the best option for the Fall
- We will not open schools unless we are certain that they are safe.
Let’s grant for the moment, that this may have been reasonable in June. (This is more than generous; there was ample evidence that blended learning would not work, as early as June, certainly not how the DoE was envisioning it.)
In the second half of August, this is no longer reasonable. The new message must be:
- We really wanted schools to open in the Fall
- We looked closely at blended learning
- But the daily logistics will not work
- But the weekly schedules will not work
- But the safety, while there has been progress, is not close to being where it needs to be. Equipment and supplies are missing. Many procedures are not yet in place – and in some cases we don’t have a procedure, or know that we can have one. As issues arise the DoE is making up responses on the fly.
- Today is August 19. It is too late to address these items for a September, and some of them (logistics, schedules) cannot be adequately addressed
- Even the items that could be addressed, our partners at the Department of Education have not been up to the task
Schools, children, parents, teachers – all of us should be planning for a remote term. We can know now what the outline of the fall will look like, and begin filling in details. We can do work to make the fall more successful than the spring was.
The alternative – hanging on for three weeks, then pivoting suddenly to remote – will lead to chaos. It will lead to a repeat of March. It is the last-minute decision making that we can not afford to let happen.
Will the mayor listen to the UFT? In March it took a lot of voices to force de Blasio to change his mind. It took every voice. He must be aware that the UFT has not called for remote for the fall.
The UFT speaking out for remote will not necessarily change de Blasio’s mind. But the absence of the UFT’s voice GUARANTEES that the mayor will stubbornly delay. The UFT needs a new course, today.
Exposure Notification
Rating the August 13 UFT Town Hall
Technical – calls seemed to have gone out on time. Some people needed to dial in. The audio quality was fine on my end, though several callers complained about theirs. They had trouble connecting some questioners, and lost at least one partway through the question. I did try pushing the question button, and got silence, not even a “the queue is full” message. Overall the technical side was ok. It was certainly far better than the May DA. Grade: B
Pace – it seemed to me that the amount of light banter (which for people who want to ask questions is frustrating) was reduced from July. Honestly folks, it only makes one or two questions difference, but I get that you want to move ahead. Mulgrew had a longer opening report, but only slightly. My count had the number of questions drop from about 30 to about 25, which makes sense with the slightly longer report. The number of long, rambling answers was about the same, but that may have been intentional. Grade: B+
Clarity – some answers were quite clear, but many were not. There were veiled threats of doom and gloom when there should have been explicit discussion of what the city and state have already proposed. There was a direct question about teaching assignments, asking if we have an agreement in writing. Direct questions from members should have direct answers (even if the answer is “it’s complicated”). There was none. I did not get much clarification on what is actually happening now. The lines between what the UFT thinks should happen, what they’ve raised with the DoE, what they’ve agreed with the DoE – these were all left very fuzzy. There was also some weirdness around lunch – is it instructional, or not? is Mulgrew’s message “things must be safe” or “given that we are going in, this is the best we can do as far as safety”. Not clear, but I think there was a reason. The only thing that was VERY CLEAR: the UFT’s leadership wants schools to open in September if they can be opened safely, but that is not where things are now. Grade: a very generous C
Big Message – This was clear:
the UFT’s leadership wants schools to open in September if they can be opened safely, but that is not where things are now. There was lots of info about how the UFT officers and staff are rushing to address the outstanding safety issues, and making progress, but we are not there.
This was completely the wrong message. Less than one month out, with a host of really serious safety issues unresolved, with scheduling issues unresolved (and probably unsolvable), and with bumbling counterparts in the DoE, the message should have been “It is now clear that we must go fully remote in September. We have changed our approach to get us there, to allow parents to plan for it, and to allow you in the schools to start preparing”. Only the emphasis on safety saves this grade from being lower. Grade: D
Overall: Having the wrong message and not speaking clearly to members are big, big problems. I’m glad the phone lines work. If this were the July Town Hall, it would have gotten a B or B-, but it is August. There are less than four weeks left. This was not ok. Overall Grade: D+/C-
For those of you curious, here are three sets of minutes (I know there are many more floating out there).
UFT Town Hall Minutes
I’ll say something substantive, about a meeting that really was not very. But that’s tomorrow. For now, a friend took notes – and offered them for sharing:
UFT Town Hall Meeting Minutes August 13, 2020
Michael Mulgrew
MULGREW:
- Welcome and thanks. We’re getting into crunch time! GOAL: Little bit longer report, but still majority questions.
- All eyes on schools at all times. Horrors of colleagues in school districts that have no business opening.
- Our mayor seems to be ready to open schools— WE are not ready.
- Spoke to him for the first time since March. Mugrew said we don’t feel safe. We don’t think your plan is workable. We don’t have what you’ve ALREADY agreed to. We will follow CDC guidelines. Mayor put a timeline on principals to pick a schedule.
- Have your CL send your district rep any programs/ schedules that imply a mix of hybrid/ remote scheduling.
- These schedules the DOE put out were more suggestions– not really “agreed upon”.
- Hard to open school on time with this lack of clarity.
- No one is teaching 6 period/ no one is teaching 5 in a row. This all still needs to be worked out.
- We dealt with all the steps since March: to close schools, to get remote learning up and running, we got grade fairness, we dealt with evaluations. Now we are getting medical accommodations!
- In APRIL, we said: if you want to open safely in September, we have to start planning together NOW. He ignored it in May and June. Only in July did he begin to engage.
- CSA President: This isn’t going to work. We must make sure the mayor doesn’t try to blame us or pit parents against teachers. CSA and UFT agree: we cannot open NYC schools safely on September 10.
- Mayoral “dog and pony show” with the press, highlighting one school with appropriate PPE.
- Still decisions to be made but WE WILL NOT BE PUT IN HARM’S WAY AGAIN.
- NYC in a much different place. Our daily infection rates are less than 1%. Many graphs we see with high numbers are about percentage positive rates– we ARE close to the 1% daily infection rates.
- Parents are our allies/ families have to deal with the dilemma– do I send my child to school, can I afford my house? Do I know my child is safe?
- We as teachers are in a difficult dilemma. What if the mayor insists we go in when it isn’t safe?
- SOLUTION: Push the city to do what no other school district has done, hold their feet to the fire. Mr. Mayor, you want your schools open? You need to do YOUR job!
- Final decision will not be made until right before the beginning of the school year.
- 100 trained people to do “Covid” visits. Will check ventilation/ PPE/ Signage/ Custodians/ equipment and personnel (not in place in most schools) Will return to the schools in the couple of weeks before schools open and take appropriate measures to make sure the city cannot open them up.
- Must be smarter then them and do our work better than them.
- Can we open? No, I do not believe that. It’s all about the evidence. We have to show WHY it isn’t so. And the mayor must be able to show why it IS SAFE enough to open.
- Tough problems: HEROES ACT/ stimulus package has completely imploded. Without this $$, we don’t believe we can afford to open safely. City is preparing departments for layoffs.
- Other avenues to pursue. We don’t want any of our members to face being laid off. Taking care of our profession and our livelihood. Being put in jeopardy.
- It is NOT hopeless though. We have a plan. Working together, working with Albany, working on budgets, will execute quickly since we have a little time (October re: budget stuff) Multiple crises at a time!
- Must communicate and stick together! What we see in the media is insane!
- Our national union is in court today over our 2000 colleagues in quarantine in Florida; similar in GA. Huge positivity rates different than us.
- Could we be breaking the Taylor Law? Maybe. I’ll make sure everyone knows the ramifications. Also have legal avenues to pursue. Taylor Law makes it illegal to strike (unless we can prove “clear and present danger” to open every school. If we do this, employees that participate can receive disciplinary actions or financial penalties. Mulgrew has penalties, he can go to jail, but we have to decide if this is what we need to do.
- OUR medical professionals are telling us we CAN do this with the rates we have, but we have to be SO CAREFUL. We still don’t have agreement on a testing protocol (then must be customized for every building, which is why Sept. 10 is feasible. If you’re testing, screening, distancing, PPE, you may/ would be able to pull this off.
- Mayor says we have a lot of time? We have a month and a LOT to do.
- Mayor says today there WILL be a nurse in every building.
- Serving lunch in classrooms is different from restaurants how? All people, students and teachers facing the same direction– not satisfied with this answer.
- Another Town Hall in a couple of weeks.
- 2 great challenges: SAFETY AND LIVELIHOOD. Not opening schools without safety. Without additional funding, layoffs could come.
- We will make decisions at the appropriate time. We are going to take care of each other.
- Parents will listen to US– the teachers that they trust, not the mayor, not the chancellor. We can’t break that trust with them.
- I guarantee you that all decisions are being made from independent doctors advising us. Only school district who got through the last recession without a layoff.
- Understands the anger/ fear/ anxiety. Will meet again in a couple of weeks.
Q&A:
- Q: Medical accommodation: haven’t received word on if it is approved. Ones who have gotten approval indicate it said through Dec. 31, 2020. What happens after?
- A: It’s a legal thing: pushed them to change the process for medical accommodations to speed it up. Lawyers said, “people don’t have medical accommodations forever, so they should reapply”. We’re pushing back as a waste of time, regardless of whether we are remote or in the buildings. We will figure this out.
- Q: REMOTE LEARNING: don’t know what this looks like. Will remote teachers with medical accommodations have a larger remote load? Being on a camera? How will grading work?
- A: 30% of students have opted out. Only about 15% teachers have applied for medical accommodations. Yes,remote teachers will need to stream live for their students but will not attempt to replicate a normal school day. We have a teacher shortage PLUS layoffs threatened. We don’t have enough teachers to staff both remote and hybrid. Will adhere to traditional class size requirements with remote.
- Q: Ventilation/ filtration: my bldg’s report was 3 (fair), too old for HVAC system. Which forms say where we are at? How will info be made public? How will we handle it if it isn’t safe?
- MANY schools with old and poor ventilation systems. What was acceptable pre-Covid is clearly not acceptable now. Many schools will not be able to open. Because these are safety reports, they must be transparent– why we can go into schools to check things out. Don’t need and HVAC system to have proper ventilation: windows better. Don’t think because you have an AC blowing cold air in the room that your room is properly ventilatedL you need outside air. Could lead to big fights.
- Q: Mayor said by October 1, 200,000 city workers could lose their jobs. Does this include us?
- A: Yes, we’re in that pot. Our economy has been decimated by the virus. Closed establishment means they are not paying taxes. We’re facing a huge deficit. Had a surplus before but things are not looking good now without federal stimulus.
- Q: How are we going to prevent kids from using their masks properly/ maintaining social distance, etc?
- A: An agreement: (we have to train them first how to follow these new rules, IF we get to open schools; these new procedures). If they can’t follow the safety procedures, they have to go home. Simple– not messing around. The more challenging a situation, the more PPE needed. Our own nurses will do training around PPE, if we go back live. Shields might be more common than we thought; all teachers might need them.
- Q: What happens when parents don’t come to pick up sick children or children who can’t follow the safety protocols?
- A: Not a behavioral issue but a safety issue. Still working out protocols. Kid might have to be put in a “save” or “isolation” room when kids are sick or being problematic in terms of safety. We have to push it with the DOE to tell the parent– they need to follow the rules or they can’t be in school. DOE has plenty of employees, let them deal with it, especially since Tweed members with teaching certificates can be compelled into teaching service.
- Q: Can we have a buy-out to mitigate layoffs?
- A: We have requested and had conversations with the municipal labor council about this. Talks are progressing. First, if we open, we want to use this “other avenue” for funding. City is going to ask for things back– we will NOT give things back, with all the new and extra work we do. Figure out a new funding source, and at the same time, get to the place where a buyout can be favorable. Our retirement chapters have found solutions that are acceptable, pension-wise, so we will see what happens. If we do this work, we can combat layoffs, and also hire new teachers with buyouts.
- Q: Blended learning: in person teacher will not do remote learning? Principal seems to say you must teach live– understaffed school… might have to bridge classes of different grades which will require double planning? We need some ammo against principal about what the union has agreed to in terms of contractual obligations. Is there something in writing?
- A: Hasn’t even been brought up. Don’t want to entertain it. We’re not trying to recreate the school day, but we will have synchronous instruction. Live streaming? Many Ps being pressed by Superintendents to do this. If schools can figure out a way to do this where people are ok, and it works, maybe. Live streaming lessons with students and a camera is not super effective–you can’t get much worse than that. A teacher CANNOT do both remote and in person. There might be teachers who will go into the building to “tape” their lessons. Many asynchronous “taped” lessons can be super effective. Live streaming is not ok UNLESS teacher says it’s ok! (It’s not ok!)
- Q: Got a denial for medical accommodation. Said there wasn’t a “diagnosis” listed, even though there was. Some discrepancies in the way different applications are being handled.
- A: Send UFT an email immediately. The DOE used to take months to process a small number of medical accommodations– and now they are processing SO MANY. An online form to process issues with this.
- Q: Concerned about instructional lunch (HS speech teacher). “Facing the other way” is not a good way to avoid particle spread. If asked to teach during lunch, can I decline if I am not comfortable? (call dropped)
- A: With a mask, eyeballs are still open. If people are eating maskless, they NEED to have a shield to protect their eyes as well. Staff have to be able to decline if they don’t feel comfortable. If you move kids to a DIFFERENT place for lunch, you’ll need even MORE staff to monitor/ be put at risk. Instructional lunches can help speed up their school day so we can all spend as little time as possible in the building. That’s why the prep period is at the end of the day, so we can prep wherever we need.
- Q: Art teacher. For clusters: how many cohorts are we able to come into contact with in a day or in a week? P mentioned cluster teachers doing both in-person AND remote, and the in-person could be instructional lunch.
- A: For you as a cluster teacher, working through these issues. Take issue when mayor says everyone will be in a POD: this isn’t something that is feasible in NYC. This is why testing/tracing/ PPE is essential. As an art teacher, how do you deal with materials? Do you have access to an ionizer so every supply you use can be sanitized? Need to work through these details. Is there a way you could do a combination of in person and remote? MAYBE, if you don’t have a full in-person schedule.. For most, it’s all one or all the other.
- Q: CAR days if we have to quarantine?
- A: Nope, answered this, they do not come out of your CAR.
- Q: How are we as educators going to be able to help our own teachers in remote learning if their schedule doesn’t match up with ours?
- A: We should be able to find ways to take care of our own staffs as schools. Mayor announced a few weeks ago the idea of childcare for the city of NYC. If schools are open, we are the essential workers needing childcare. Haven’t heard much detail since then about it, but need to ratchet up this line of questioning.
- Q: Social worker:we travel to various DOE and community programs every day. Some have up to 13 locations. Is it safe for this to happen? Will schools even want to welcome this? When we ARE in schools we are in classrooms. Is this feasible?
- A: As an itinerant, we have asked/ DOE said they would limit the number of sites per person and have their own cache of PPE. Will come up with a plan to ensure how this works because it is risky, bringing in anyone from the outside in terms of contact tracing.
- Q:Told in spring that we had to work through spring break. Will be compensated whenever, that’s fine. Now they are saying we are all ready to start. WHERE IS THE CALENDAR?? Waiting until after they open up the building, and then there will be no holidays and breaks. This makes no sense; we’ve worked harder in the last 6 months than we ever have. Are they hiding the calendar because there are no days off?
- A: I don’t believe we are going to be ready. Mayor has made a mistake by not engaging earlier. You have to put out the calendar. “We might have to change it”… no. You’re not changing passover, you’re not changing Kwanzaa, the dates are the dates. WHat happened in the spring was horrible, especially the religious observances. We were in the midst of his pandemic where rates were over 20%– imagine if we opened up then– this is what is happening is FL. The UFT does not submit to the same bureaucracy as the DOE. We do NOT trust the DOE.
- Q: Partner is a teacher that was granted a medical accommodation. What is the story with someone who LIVES with an immunocompromised person/ medical accommodation?
- A: Don’t take a leave yet! No promises– but the number of students choosing remote is huge and will continue to go up as other states open to crazy and horrible stories. More families WILL choose remote. We are thinking about how to handle people who are primary care-givers who live with people with medical conditions to be able to teach remotely. Do we have the legal rights? Maybe not, but we are dealing with HUMANITY. We want to see what can be done to accommodate for this.
- Q: Federal IEP compliance; students mandated for ICT compliance/ ratios:
- A: DeVos doesn’t care if your kid has an IEP. We in NY are going to try to meet all IEP needs. An ICT teacher has to have access to both a general education and special education teacher. PROBLEM; don’t have enough SPED teachers already in order to be able to meet their needs. Do NOT let principals split your class into IEP/ non. Is there a SPED remote teacher that can pair with a gen ed in person? Kids must have access to both.
- Q: Paraprofessionals: how will they be impacted by how many students needs support plus contractual obligations? What if the kid you are assigned is remote?
- A: Working on these issues. Trying to ensure no one loses their jobs. Plenty to do. Paras picked up so much work and found so many ways to support students and teachers.
- Q: CAR days and self-quarantining: what if you are exposed individually by someone outside the classroom or are just not feeling well?
- A: If the quarantine is due to Covid, CAR days are not affected. If a contact tracer has put you into quarantine, it won’t come out of your CAR. If you’re sick, it just has to come out of your days. Teachers in GA have to use their own sick days if you are in quarantine, and if they run out of days, they lose pay. Disgusting ways teachers are being treated in other places.
- Q: D75. Face shields for everyone? Can teach kids to wear masks. My school with severe autism and masks might directly interfere with their disability. Is there greater PPE available for us?
- A: We have had no decisions with the DOE about D75, because the mayor drug his feet on talking about the nuances of our schools. Our medical professionals understand these issues and know what kinds of PPE are needed. There is NO way to go back into these schools safely without MUCH PPE; these parents know these students are NOT doing well in remote learning. This is all much more expensive and higher volumes of PPE. We have to go into schools and know what kinds of safety precautions each school needs– no such thing as a cookie cutter school, especially D75.
- Q: Teacher evaluations? Hearing from my P we will be having 2 evaluations.
- A: Don’t know. We’re busy figuring out how we can open safely. If we open, we will have to figure this out. We have no agreement on ANY evaluations– our contractual agreements are completely invalid in this situation.
- Q: With the number of children remote/ in person/ parents opting in/ opting out/ different times to opt in? Changes in rosters and such?
- A: Hasn’t been clear guidance even to principals now on the 13th of August. Yet, they were told to “program”. We usually have initial programming done in June, preferences, et cet. Everyone is under a lot of pressure. If principals get crazy on us, we have to push back. Parents can’t “opt back in” until Thanksgiving– can’t have too many people popping in and out of remote/ in person at random. UFT doing everything we can to tamp this down. We are still saying IT IS NOT SAFE. He said 25% chance, and it gets worse each day that goes by without clarity. Good meeting with CSA. Got the nurses we have needed for years today. Going to get uglier as we get closer because that’s the only way stuff can really get done.
- Q: Family member is hesitating to apply for accommodation as it is her tenure year. Might get assigned a different school, and if she’s not in the building, might it affect her tenure?
- A: No way we can solve all the problems. Don’t want to have teachers serving students in another building. We will make sure no harm comes to a teacher (ie an untenured teacher denied tenure due to a medical accommodation).
- Q: Last Q: If we go all remote, is there any training to guarantee continuity across the city? Any word on retro?
- A: We will have to coordinate together and have to have an extended period of training for any scenario. All teachers MUST have coordination with their colleagues before we teach. Schools MUST have a standardized curriculum– might be multiple teachers teaching the same content so we all have to be on the same page. All schools must have educational platforms with scopes and sequences up and running– we’ve got people that have been working on this since May! Our retro and our raise? Let’s put it all together. City will come to us to ask to give stuff back– we expect that we will. We have another plan, another way to try to solve that problem. Why would we, after everything we’ve been through, what we are walking into in September, we do not give them a DIME back. If you wanna change my mind, I’ll listen. We’ve worked too hard for this– it’s OUR school system, not the mayors. WE know their families. We will continue to go above and beyond, but we do not work for free. We are the ones who kept our school systems going and we are going to keep it going and keep it safe. More challenges, but we will get through this as we take care of our students and each other. Thank you and please send in your questions. Get some relaxation in because come the end of this month? Buckle up.
Two Course Adjustments for the UFT
I disagree with the union leadership, on any number of things. I’m pro-union. And I believe that the leadership can sometimes adjust course. So I am asking today about two course adjustments, confident that the vast majority of UFT members would like to see them happen.
Can we say “We do not think blended learning will work”?
I thought from June that blended learning was a mistake. I don’t think it will work in many schools. It was absolutely not designed for high schools. When I met with some teachers and union officials, including Mulgrew, I said this. They did not agree with me. Mulgrew thought we should leave some grades at home, or some classes at home (not ok, as it turns out, with Carranza), but they would not say “Blended won’t work.”
In fact, lo and behold, Mulgrew sent out an email to members on July 8:
We believe a blended learning model, with students in class on some days and remote on others, balances our safety concerns with the need to bring students back.
So we disagreed. But now, with five more weeks of evidence of DoE inflexibility and incompetence and refusal to collaborate, can we say that blended learning will not work for reopening this fall?
It is possible to say that we wanted blended to work, but that it was just not possible in this timeframe, with this administration. See, not so hard.
Can we say “Schools should not open for in-person instruction in September?
Yesterday a group of principals in District 15 came out against a September 8 opening. They were looking for a transition. Then the CSA issued a statement, calling for schools not to open.
A more realistic, phased-in approach would instead welcome students for in-person learning toward the end of September, following a fully remote start to the year.
Mulgrew appeared to support the principals. But take a look at his statement:
The UFT has said repeatedly that we cannot re-open schools unless they are safe for students and staff. The principals union — whose members will be responsible for enforcing coronavirus safety protocols in the schools — now believes that school buildings will not be ready to open in September. We need both safety and sanity in this crisis. Will any parents be willing to put their children in a school whose principal believes the building is not ready to open because it is not safe?
Notice what he does not say? He doesn’t say “We should not open schools September 10.” If it is an omission, that will be easy to correct. If it is a tactical maneuver, it’s time to adjust that course.
It is possible to say that we wanted schools to open, but that it is not possible in this timeframe, with this administration. See, not so hard.
Let Schools Prepare!
Yesterday the Mayor and his Chancellor lied, and deceived, and omitted, and lied some more. But one of his Chancellor’s lies is not getting attention, and that’s a shame, because it was a whopper. Carranza said that 85% of teachers are planning for blended learning.
It’s not true. Teachers are frozen with uncertainty. Those who know their classes (most of us) do not know what mode we will teach in. Most teachers are not planning for blended learning.
In-person
This is what we have done in the past.
Remote teaching
This is what we tried to do in the Spring, with three day’s planning, and we had very little idea how it would turn out. Some teachers already had strong remote experience. Others figured things out quickly. Most of us muddled through, and tried to make improvements as we went – but that was hard – as the NYCDoE took away our only break, when many of us had planned to reflect, discuss, revise.
We learned some things. Preparation for remote learning is very different than for in-person. Grading moves much more slowly. And assigning classwork and assigning homework felt like different categories for the teacher, but both felt like “screen-work” for the students, and became overwhelming.
We modified what we assigned, and need to modify more. We altered what kind of work we did in class, and what we assigned for homework. And we need to further consider those things. Assessment was hard, and we are looking at alternate methods (both procedure, and assessing through other-than-tests).
And we need to know if there will be state tests, or if we can slow down. Remote teaching moves more slowly than in person.
Hybrid or Blended teaching
So this might be every other, or every third day, or even every fourth in person, and the rest of the time remote. This is by far the most challenging, because we do not know the mix of activity. We do not know if we will be doing both the in-person and the remote instruction. We are wondering about today’s lesson being in-person for one group (which would suggest certain activities) and remote for other students (which would suggest other activities).
We also have coordination between all-remote and blended classes. And coordination (maybe?) between two instructors for one class, if there are separate instructors for the in-person and the remote parts. (Mulgrew and Carranza seem to disagree about this.)
Blended, if it happens, will require the trickiest planning, and will involve the greatest challenges with implementation.
Which do Teachers plan for?
Teachers have our classes – but we do not know which to plan for. And the planning for all three is different (actually, forget in-person for now, it is not happening anytime soon).
At my school, teachers are assembling committees to review best practices from the Spring – what worked, what did not work. While we faced the same problems that schools did across the city, we did have quite a bit of positive feedback from students on many of our classes (flexibility, mix of instructional modes, some in-person lessons), and some negative (very heavy workload, especially at the start, too much live instruction, too little live instruction). I know, some of this seems contradictory, but that’s the nature of learning something new through experimentation.
But no matter what we find, no matter what teachers in any school, anywhere in the city find, we will not know what to plan for until we are convinced an actual decision has been made.
And while the vast majority of educators in New York City (unsurveyed, but true) believe we should be all-remote, we are caught waiting. We are waiting for Bill de Blasio, all bluster, to back down, the way he backed down Sunday afternoon, March 15, after days of pigheadedly insisting he would put teachers and students and all New Yorkers at risk by keeping schools open.
We are waiting.
What do schools plan for?
Schools can begin thinking about what it would mean to bring students into the building, but just start. Our ventilation systems? We don’t fix them, the DoE does. Temperature checks? The DoE sets the protocols. PPE? The DoE delivers – or as many suspect will happen – doesn’t. Sanitizer? The DoE is stockpiling it. Special Ed? The DoE promises information.
Schools can write plans for teaching, but they get caught waiting for approval. I am my school’s programmer. I know where I should be, during a normal year, with schedules. I am not there. I talk to other programmers. They are (vast majority) not there. Blended schedules and remote schedules look very different from each other, and require many specific decisions. Most schools are gathering information, and waiting.
I have heard Michael Mulgrew say we are preparing for both blended learning and remote learning. I am not sure who “we” is, but I’m pretty sure he’s not talking about anyone I know.
Look, here’s what has to happen. Mr. Mayor, you are going to surrender. The only question is whether you, Mr. Mayor, surrender today, and let us start planning, or whether you wait until September 7, and make the coming chaos even worse. I don’t know that you have any legacy at stake. Maybe just a touch of compassion?
OPC vs jd – who would you choose?
So pretend for a moment that you are an NYCDoE principal and that you need to get September ready and you can have an outside helper, and you have it narrowed down to the Overpaid Private Consultant (OPC) that the DoE uses, or me (JD)… and all you have to go on are these little bits that each of us wrote about entry into buildings. Read on, and prepare to make your choice.
Overpaid Private Consultant
Checklist for General Student Entry Procedures
(from the 2020 – 2021 School Year | Reopening Playbook for Principals)
playbook-for-principals-2020-2021-school-reopening – p22
-
-
- Yes, our school entry procedures align with health and safety measures related to temperature checks. Yes, I have referred to Health Policy for up-to-date guidance on temperature check protocols.
- Yes, our school (and campuses if applicable) has assigned sufficient staffing to accommodate multiple points of entry should identify these multiple points of entry, ensure that students report to classrooms, and avoid shared spaces at the beginning of the day.
- Yes, sufficient staff to ensure that students are supported in maintaining physical distancing and using PPE supervises each point of entry.
- Yes, this includes staff presence outside the school building to support students and families lining up for entry.
- Yes, either I, as school principal, and/or the Building Response Team (BRT) Leader in collaboration with BRT have identified staff.
- Yes, the staff assigned to morning entry and dismissal only include administrators, school aides, deans, and clerical staff, School Safety Agents, and Circular 6 staff.
- [IF APPLICABLE TO YOUR SCHOOL] Yes, guidance staffing entry and dismissal at District 75 sites to follow.
- Yes, if possible, school counselors and social workers have been assigned to morning entry or designated locations to support any students exhibiting signs of distress.
- Yes, our school ensures all students (or their families on their behalf) have completed a health screening before entering the school; refer to “Daily Health Screenings” in the COVID-19 School Health Policy. Yes, I am aware additional guidance is forthcoming.
- Yes, we have recommended our students arrive with their own face coverings, and if they do not have a face covering, one will be provided before entering the school building.o Yes, our school has a plan to implement a single file line up with six feet markers and identified traffic patterns with directional markings.
- Yes, signage identifying the morning entry protocols and outlining the four DOHMH core actions is conspicuously posted at points of entry and within the lobby. Yes, my school has taken into consideration the fact that signage will be available in multiple languages.
- Yes, upon entry to our school building, students are directed to their assigned classrooms (six feet from one another) and have the ability to collect breakfast (grab and go) at entry.
- Yes, students clean their hands with sanitizer or with soap and water after entry and before entering class.
-
jd
What needs to be in an entry plan?
(from this here blog post)
Time; Number
An entry plan must include time that each entry begins, and how many students are entering. For example, a 6 – 8 school of 1350 students, might be operating in three cohorts, of 450 each. Bringing in 450 all at once would likely cause the crowd to smoosh together. Perhaps the school brings in 150 7th graders at 8, 150 8th graders at 8:30, 150 6th graders at 9:00. That’s the beginning of a plan. Has your school begun a discussion that looks like that? No? Probably very few have.
Doors
Will your school be using one entry door? More doors would allow quicker entry, but see “Post-Entry” below for complications. Also, multiple doors require more staff.
Gathering Location
An entry plan must include where the children are prior to entry. What if your school always had kids come hang out in the playground or school yard? Issue, right? Ever try to keep middle schoolers from touching each other? Who will keep them socially distanced in a school yard? Or perhaps they should be lined up from the moment they arrive? (I was getting to that). A six foot distanced line for 150 students is about 900 feet (almost 0.2 mile). That’s approximately one full avenue block in Manhattan, or 3 1/2 short street blocks. Is there adequate sidewalk space? Are there issues with driveways? Perhaps the street could be shut off from 7:30 – 10:00 for entry, and a zigzag Disneyland-style (but with much more space) line could be constructed. Maybe there is a nearby parking lot? The least of the problems are putting down marks and cones.
Line mechanics
A sidewalk line with markings doesn’t have to be reset each day. Blocking off driveways does. Blocking off a street and putting up cones or stanchions and ropes does. That’s not the hard part, but it’s part. Much more challenging, as students arrive, moving them to the right spot, and getting them to stay there. Assume our 900 foot line has been folded so that it is 150 feet, zigzagging about 25 feet in the street (making a rectangle). There is work to do monitoring the line (from outside the line), maintaining spacing, moving students forward. These are serious assignments. If a person assigned is a teacher, this is not prep time.
Entry duration
I have no idea how long it takes to bring 150 students into a building while maintaining social distancing. I am here assuming that 30 minutes is more than enough time – but do I know that? No. And see “Post-entry” below, which could slow things down. If 30 minutes are insufficient, the “stagger” might need to be greater. I can’t imagine that less than 15 minutes is possible.
Post-Entry
As a student enters the building, the DoE requires they wash hands. Where are your bathrooms? How will the student reach the bathroom? How long will hand washing take? Will you create a line outside each bathroom? How long can the line be before you cause crowding / lose control? Remember, social distancing must be maintained in the hallways and lines and bathrooms, not just the classroom. The answers to some of these questions may lead you to slow entry, to keep the numbers under control. Also, if you are using multiple entries, how will you coordinate to prevent pile-up in the hallway?
Wrong Day Richard
Students will arrive on the wrong day. It will happen by mistake. It will happen intentionally. The student might miss school. The parent might seek to drop off the child because there is no one to watch her. How will the school verify that the correct students have arrived? What will happen to the student who arrives on the wrong day? And here, I’m sorry, the answer can’t just be “call the parent to come pick him up” – where will the child stay in the meantime? One option in regular times that is not an option today: no mass preps in the auditorium without violating social distancing.
Mr. Principal
You Choose
Which one of these authors would be more helpful?
OK, so I have had my little fun. Let’s get serious for a second.
On a serious note, Scanning Schools
I did not address scanning schools. I skipped them (and campus schools) because they include complexities I know less about. But I also skipped scanning schools because they are more accustomed to details procedures related to entry, and vitally, to rhythms related to entry. I don’t think a scanning school will have an easier time getting things right, but I think they will have an easier time correcting mistakes. That being said, I would have never written what the DoE’s overpaid consultant did at the opening of a completely separate scanning session:
Yes,I am aware that given the reduction of enrollment on any given day, the process of scanning should be manageable under this new practice of morning entry.
which is ridiculous, insulting, and a little bit threatening to the principal of the scanning school, who needs to “check off” that any problems were caused by that principal’s incompetence, not by a problem in the design imposed by DoE Central.
The NYCDOE’s Reopening Playbook for Principals
This is the playbook Carranza gave principals.
Think getting your opponent’s playbook might give you some insight, help you defeat them?
I’d like to believe that – but I don’t see much here. Please though, take a look, and share what you find. I’ll take a look too, and get back to you.
Without further comment at this time: playbook-for-principals-2020-2021-school-reopening
How many NYC parents chose “blended learning”?
This is easy.
There are 1.1 million students in New York City.
The mayor and Chancellor want blended learning (hybrid) to take place in September. The Mayor has been boasting about it. The Chancellor has been boasting about. The Mayor and Chancellor have been pushing hard. There is not a strong, centrally organized resistance*.
.Which means the Mayor and the Chancellor have been able to rig things.
June Survey Results
| How comfortable are you going to in-person school every day this fall, if there are health and safety measures like social distancing? | Citywide Average |
| Very comfortable | 25% |
| Mostly comfortable | 31% |
| A little comfortable | 27% |
| Not at all comfortable | 17% |
Does the chart look unfamiliar? Yes – I have easy access to 6 – 12 data. The k – 12 data I believe is even more wary.
You probably know, the Mayor and Chancellor dishonestly added the first three categories to claim a very high rate wanted to go back. They included “A little comfortable” – how is that honest?
We could also add the bottom three, and claim that the vast majority have questions.
Or we could do what most math-y people do, and make Very comfortable = 3, Mostly comfortable = 2, A little comfortable = 1, and Not at all comfortable = 0, and take the average. The citywide 6 – 12 average was 1.64. My school’s average was 1.79.
Why do I write “was”? Because these surveys were filled out in June. People are more nervous today.
Every Family Selected Hybrid!
Well, that’s obviously false. Some want remote. But the Mayor and the Chancellor rigged the results. By making hybrid the “default” they could claim a high number of parents are choosing hybrid.
Why didn’t they report 100%? Because they knew you wouldn’t believe them.
Has anyone selected hybrid?
Yes. 109,000 families have selected hybrid. That is about 10% of the total.
We could add to them the other million parents – that’s kind of what de Blasio and Carranza did – claiming that the default was a choice. But that’s not honest.
When do parents select remote?
Any time they want. So far 212,000 have chosen remote. That’s almost 20%.
What about the 70% of parents who have not yet spoken?
We do not know what they will do. The Mayor and Chancellor have dishonestly claimed they are choosing hybrid. They have not made a choice. We can’t say that they are choosing remote either.
Here’s part of an email I received the other day:
And FYI, from a parent’s perspective (albeit elementary school child), we chose hybrid for now, because at any time we can switch to remote, but only at specified times can you move from remote to hybrid. We’ll be … making our decision most likely in early September.
How did they get just 30% return on a survey?
It was not a survey. There was not a deadline.
The DoE kept changing what they said it was. Safer that way to make any claim they wanted to after the fact.
This was an opt-in to blended learning.
Opt-in to remote learning can happen at any time.
So how will we know what the actual number of families opting for remote is?
Keep looking for updates. The number will rise every week. The biggest jump will happen at the start of September, right before school.
That is, if the Mayor and Chancellor’s really dumb plan to try to open is still in play. With some luck and hard work we have switched to full-remote well before then.
(* The UFT president also wants blended learning to take place in September – at least that is what he said in a message to members, and has not retracted or contradicted that. However the UFT president has been expressing doubts based on safety. This needs to be the subject of a longer post.)
Six thousand school doors
That might be the number of public school doors in New York City. There are over 1800 schools, but some are in leased buildings, and some are “campuses” which in New York means one building shared by several schools. In the rest of the country a campus is one school spread into several buildings. The New York City Department of Education claims 1557 buildings. That’s from a survey from last year, the number is probably pretty close to reality.
My first school had eight doors. Or was it six? My current is a leased building, but has two doors. I’m guessing four might be near the average, which is how I get 6000. If you told me I was wrong, that it was actually 5000, or 9000, I would not be shocked. But we get the idea. The NYCDOE has in the neighborhood of 6000 doors to the streets.
It’s a good thing that we do not need a separate hybrid plan for every door. That would be a lot of plans. But we do need a separate hybrid plan for each school. And at nearly 2000, that’s still a lot of plans.
You know what every plan needs? Every plan needs to include doors. Let’s talk about that for a moment. Let’s talk about morning entry.
Friday July 31 New York City had an outline, not a plan, as one of Cuomo’s aides accurately pointed out. Then Friday they submitted a new plan. Last Friday they turned in 32 pages. Small towns were turning in over 50. Yonkers was over 100. This Friday the NYCDoE turned in 109 pages.
Are there any English teachers reading this? Let me know if you’ve heard this story before. This one is 109 pages – but 33 are a list of every school in New York City, and another 18 are title pages and index – sound familiar? – large font, generous margins, most sections end with 5 lines eating up a full page?
But there is enough content this time that just maybe it will be considered a Citywide plan. OK, so what does it say about doors? Hmm. Check that. What does it say about “entry”? The word shows up five times:
- Every school will be required to ensure that all individuals stay at least six feet apart at all times, including at building entry…
- Students and staff will need to thoroughly clean their hands as soon as possible upon entry to the school building.
- Afterschool program staff who work at a location or school other than where they are supervising afterschool activities/coaching are required to follow daily entry protocols upon arrival to the afterschool site.
- The BRT will be responsible for managing and supporting the school’s response to any incidents related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes collaborating with the principal to plan
and execute morning entry plans. - When BRT is activated to address COVID-19 related incidents (“COVID-19 activation”), team members will assume the following additional responsibilities: BRT Leader: serves as the point of contact for all team members during entry, dismissal,… Special Needs Coordinator: For the purpose of COVID-19 activation, manages the school staff assigned to conduct temperature screening at each point of entry.
Point of entry! Those are doors. They mention doors! Not 6000 times, but they mention them. And what is the plan for the doors? “Every school will be required to ensure…” “Students and staff will need to thoroughly clean their hands…” But how do we maintain 6 foot separation? How do we line kids up to use the bathroom to wash hands before going to class?
The DoE still has an outline! They have guidelines! It’s not a plan.
This matters. A solid entry plan does not guarantee that a school can operate just fine (I doubt many will be able to), but lack of a solid entry plan guarantees that social distancing will be massively violated before a single student has planted their behind in a socially distanced classroom chair.
What needs to be in an entry plan?
Time; Number
An entry plan must include time that each entry begins, and how many students are entering. For example, a 6 – 8 school of 1350 students, might be operating in three cohorts, of 450 each. Bringing in 450 all at once would likely cause the crowd to smoosh together. Perhaps the school brings in 150 7th graders at 8, 150 8th graders at 8:30, 150 6th graders at 9:00. That’s the beginning of a plan. Has your school begun a discussion that looks like that? No? Probably very few have.
Doors
Will your school be using one entry door? More doors would allow quicker entry, but see “Post-Entry” below for complications. Also, multiple doors require more staff.
Gathering Location
An entry plan must include where the children are prior to entry. What if your school always had kids come hang out in the playground or school yard? Issue, right? Ever try to keep middle schoolers from touching each other? Who will keep them socially distanced in a school yard? Or perhaps they should be lined up from the moment they arrive? (I was getting to that). A six foot distanced line for 150 students is about 900 feet (almost 0.2 mile). That’s approximately one full avenue block in Manhattan, or 3 1/2 short street blocks. Is there adequate sidewalk space? Are there issues with driveways? Perhaps the street could be shut off from 7:30 – 10:00 for entry, and a zigzag Disneyland-style (but with much more space) line could be constructed. Maybe there is a nearby parking lot? The least of the problems are putting down marks and cones.
Line mechanics
A sidewalk line with markings doesn’t have to be reset each day. Blocking off driveways does. Blocking off a street and putting up cones or stanchions and ropes does. That’s not the hard part, but it’s part. Much more challenging, as students arrive, moving them to the right spot, and getting them to stay there. Assume our 900 foot line has been folded so that it is 150 feet, zigzagging about 25 feet in the street (making a rectangle). There is work to do monitoring the line (from outside the line), maintaining spacing, moving students forward. These are serious assignments. If a person assigned is a teacher, this is not prep time.
Entry duration
I have no idea how long it takes to bring 150 students into a building while maintaining social distancing. I am here assuming that 30 minutes is more than enough time – but do I know that? No. And see “Post-entry” below, which could slow things down. If 30 minutes are insufficient, the “stagger” might need to be greater. I can’t imagine that less than 15 minutes is possible.
Post-Entry
As a student enters the building, the DoE requires they wash hands. Where are your bathrooms? How will the student reach the bathroom? How long will hand washing take? Will you create a line outside each bathroom? How long can the line be before you cause crowding / lose control? Remember, social distancing must be maintained in the hallways and lines and bathrooms, not just the classroom. The answers to some of these questions may lead you to slow entry, to keep the numbers under control. Also, if you are using multiple entries, how will you coordinate to prevent pile-up in the hallway?
Wrong Day Richard
Students will arrive on the wrong day. It will happen by mistake. It will happen intentionally. The student might miss school. The parent might seek to drop off the child because there is no one to watch her. How will the school verify that the correct students have arrived? What will happen to the student who arrives on the wrong day? And here, I’m sorry, the answer can’t just be “call the parent to come pick him up” – where will the child stay in the meantime? One option in regular times that is not an option today: no mass preps in the auditorium without violating social distancing.
Takeaway?
Maybe a school could use my list, or a better one, and answer these questions and be completely ready. Maybe they could write it up and put it in the NYCDoE’s actual plan that eventually gets submitted to New York State (because their 109 pages, actually 58, large margins, lots of half pages, big font, – it’s still an outline/guideline, not a plan). But coming up with the entry plan for each school is not enough. There are logistics issues, and few schools have even started. There is a real space problem with Wrong Day Richard. And there are staffing issues, and staffing is already a problem. Even with a good entry plan, this hybrid approach is wrong. And we do not have 1800 good entry plans for 6000 doors.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Oh! There’s the first day! What were you going to do the first day? We can talk about that another time.
6 in 10 with Kids at Home are not Confident that Schools Can Safely Reopen
I get commercial pieces in my in-box. I usually don’t reprint them (maybe I never have?) but this one is from a fairly reliable source – Consumer Reports – and it is highly relevant.
Pay close attention to the section on the “racial divide” – the New York Times would have you believe that getting Black and Brown children back into school is a civil rights issue – the Times, that great self-appointed voice for justice. Actually, Black and Hispanic families with children are most OPPOSED to sending kids in today.
Majority of Americans “Very Concerned” About Spread of Virus in Their Communities
YONKERS, NY — The dawn of the new school year finds Americans sharply divided on how K-12 schools should best reopen, according to a new nationally representative survey from Consumer Reports, the nonprofit consumer research, testing, and advocacy organization. A majority of Americans with school-aged children in their homes (62 percent) say they are “not too confident” (30 percent) or “not confident at all” (32 percent) that schools can prevent the spread of COVID-19 among students, teachers, and staff if they reopen for in-person classes.
The CR American Experiences Survey was fielded between July 9 and 20, following the surge in cases being reported across the nation. It included questions on the pandemic’s impact on consumers’ attitudes, behaviors, and finances. In broad terms, respondents are growing increasingly concerned about the potential threat posed by COVID-19 to their communities, and many reported taking some sort of action in response to the growing number of cases, and deaths, across the U.S.
Among all Americans, about a third (35 percent) of Americans think schools in their local area should remain closed with students taking all classes online, another third (33 percent) think they should open partially with students splitting time between in-person and online classes, about two in ten (19 percent) think they should reopen fully for in-person instruction, and the remaining 13 percent are unsure. When comparing the 35 percent of respondents who have preschool or K-12 aged children living in their household to those without, there are no significant differences in opinion on school reopenings.
“Like many other issues involving COVID-19, we see deep divides among Americans on the question of if and how schools should reopen, reflected in the difficulty school administrators are facing finding consensus among local parents on the best path forward,” said Consumer Reports’ Chief Research Officer Kristen Purcell. “And this does not just affect families with school-aged children, it’s a community health issue. Americans without school-aged children at home are also divided on how schools should reopen.”
Racial Divide on School Reopenings
White Americans are more likely than Blacks and Hispanics to prefer full school reopenings with in-person classes (24 percent white versus 7 percent Black and 10 percent Hispanic), whereas Black and Hispanic Americans are more likely than whites to prefer that schools remain closed with students taking all classes online (57 percent Black and 52 percent Hispanic versus 25 percent white). Among whites, the most commonly chosen option for school reopening, selected by 37 percent, is a partial or hybrid model blending some in-person learning with classes taken online.
Rising Level of Concern Over COVID-19
Most Americans continue to be concerned about the spread of COVID-19 in their communities, and the percentage of those who are “very concerned” has spiked. A majority of Americans (82 percent) remain concerned about the continued spread of the disease in their local area, including 53 percent who are “very concerned.”
While the portion of Americans “very concerned” was unchanged from the survey findings for the May to June timeframe, the July survey results show a dramatic increase—up 12 percentage points from 41 percent in June. July’s survey results continue to show levels of concern varying significantly across different racial/ethnic groups, with Black (73 percent) and Hispanic (64 percent) adults more likely than white adults (47 percent) to say they are “very concerned” COVID will continue to spread in their communities.
The rising level of concern might explain why more Americans say they personally are following recommended safety measures most or all of the time compared with last month. For example, 72 percent now say they “always” wear a mask at indoor public spaces (up 18 percentage points, from 54 percent in June). The change was largely driven by people in the Western states, the Midwest, and the South (up 31 percentage points, 20 percentage points, and 16 percentage points, respectively), which have reported an uptick in cases. Black and Hispanic adults are more likely than whites to report wearing a mask most of the time or always when in an indoor public space (93 percent and 93 percent versus 81 percent, respectively).
Financial and Emotional Impacts of Pandemic
Early in the pandemic, lost wages hit Hispanics particularly hard, as shown in our April results. While more Hispanic Americans still say they’ve lost wages during the pandemic compared to whites, July’s survey results indicate that racial and ethnic gaps on this financial impact measure have narrowed to some degree (lost wages were reported by 26 percent among whites, 27 percent among Blacks, and 34 percent among Hispanics). However, both Black and Hispanic adults are more likely than white adults to report cutting expenses to pay their mortgage, rent or other expenses (26 percent and 28 percent versus 16 percent, respectively). Black adults are more likely than whites to report falling behind on their rent or mortgage (14 percent versus 6 percent), with Hispanics landing in between (9 percent). Similarly, while the percentage of adults reporting experiencing anxiety or depression held steady in July at 38 percent, reports of depression and anxiety continue to be especially high among women (45 percent) and the lowest-income Americans (43 percent).
About Consumer Reports American Experiences Survey
Consumer Reports’ American Experiences Survey (AES) is conducted monthly to track consumer attitudes and behaviors over time. It was fielded by NORC at the University of Chicago to a nationally representative sample of 2,031 US adults. The margin of error for the sample of 2,031 is +/-2.95 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level. The survey was conducted from July 9 to 20, 2020. Interviews were conducted online and by telephone, in English and in Spanish.
About Consumer Reports
Consumer Reports is a nonprofit advocacy organization that works side by side with consumers to create a fairer, safer, and healthier world. For 80 years, CR has provided evidence-based product testing and ratings, rigorous research, hard-hitting investigative journalism, public education, and steadfast policy action on behalf of consumers’ interests. Unconstrained by advertising or other commercial influences, CR has exposed landmark public health and safety issues and strives to be a catalyst for pro-consumer changes in the marketplace. From championing responsible auto safety standards, to winning food and water protections, to enhancing healthcare quality, to fighting back against predatory lenders in the financial markets, Consumer Reports has always been on the front lines, raising the voices of consumers.
AUGUST 2020
© 2020 Consumer Reports. The material above is intended for legitimate news entities only; it may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes. Consumer Reports® is an expert, independent, nonprofit organization whose mission is to work side by side with consumers to create a fairer, safer, and healthier world. We accept no advertising and pay for all the products we test. We are not beholden to any commercial interest. Our income is derived from the sale of Consumer Reports® magazine, ConsumerReports.org® and our other publications and information products, services, fees, and noncommercial contributions and grants. Our ratings and reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the ratings nor the reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose without our prior written permission. Consumer Reports will take all steps open to it to prevent unauthorized commercial use of its content and trademarks.
Some District 75 Concerns
A (different) teacher contributed these words. He prefers to remain anonymous)
It is nearly impossible to practice social distancing when most, if not all, of our students require hand over hand prompting with everything from washing their hands, to wiping their bottoms to completing classwork. These children unfortunately won’t wear masks so the classroom is going to be extremely unsafe; yet D75 is telling parents they can come to school 5 days per week. Many of our students are in diapers and paraprofessionals are required to change their diapers in unventilated bathrooms.
Like many community schools, our classrooms are also unventilated but they are much (much!) smaller than any regular DOE classroom.
A very challenging part of our day as D75 educators is when a child is going into crisis; we often get bit, spit on, kicked…you name it! The scary behaviors not are spitting and biting; that is so unsanitary for everyone in the classroom (reminder: they don’t only spit on the teachers who will be provided some sort of PPE).
During fire drills our students need their hands held at all times and they need to be in close proximity to an adult. The same goes for shelter in place drills/lockdowns. Since we will be hybrid we will be having twice the amount (at least) of fire drills and lockdowns since a certain number need to be conducted every single year and the kids of course need to participate so this means we will be in extremely close quarters with our students very often.
“Mr. Mulgrew, please walk this back” – letter from a teacher
Dear Mr. Mulgrew,
Today is my birthday. My 53rd. I woke with the confidence that you are fighting for our safety and for our quality of life as NYC teachers. I believed you when you said in our town hall a few weeks ago that because remote and in-person teachers must be in “lockstep”, we would need extra co-planning time and that you were advocating for four periods of instruction and then to send the kids home, giving teachers the rest of the day for co-planning. If there must be mask-to-mask teaching, that made some sense. But today I woke up to this letter from you and all I can feel is bereft; abandoned; hopeless.
For the four months we were teaching remotely, I spent close to an hour a day contacting families and several hours a day tracking down students who for myriad reasons were not attending my office hours or synchronized classes. Now I have 20 minutes. I will have 30 minutes of “prep” to co-plan with colleagues in the morning. 30 minutes is barely enough to set an agenda, as you may recall. It certainly is not enough to plan in “lockstep”. I will be expected to teach straight through the day, and if I am an art teacher or something similar, I am expected to teach in a classroom full of kids without masks who are focused on their lunches and their friends. If I am not one of the unlucky teachers trying to instruct while kids eat, then I get to walk back into a room where aerosols are hanging in the air, as per the University of Minnesota research. Then I get to bring home all of the droplets I have walked through and breathed through my NOT N-95 MASK, risking everyone in my household, and use my other 30 minutes of prep (plus countless hours) to actually plan, grade, co-plan, and prepare.
Even in New York, adults can’t wear masks consistently. We know kids won’t. But now we’re giving them time without masks. Don’t you see how that will undermine everything else? If they can have masks off while eating while we teach, then there is zero reason for them to wear masks the rest of the time when we teach.
In short, my teaching day is longer, my preps are shorter, and I AM NOT SAFE. No day is safe when there is time spent with people who are not wearing masks. It’s that simple.
Please, this is not acceptable. Not even close. Please walk this back. Save our lives and those of our families and our students’ families.
Sincerely,
An Alternative Approach – Skip the Backroom Deals
The custodians union president advised his members to suck up the unsafe conditions, but they could leave 30 minutes early.
Actually, no. Here’s what the custodians got from their president. Seems like a real president:
h/t Jessica Klonsky
High School Students Implore Cuomo – Move NYC to Remote for September
This letter was signed by a bunch of student government leaders, representing about 15% of NYC high schools, and then by about 1300 more students and parents. They sent it off to Cuomo on Wednesday August 5, because of the August 7 deadline. That’s a shame. While the letter makes good points, the authors managed to make a different one: they excluded the majority of NYC high schools that are majority Black/Brown. I don’t think it was intentional – I’m almost certain that it was not. But this is a reminder that it is not good enough not to be racist, we need to be actively anti-racist.
In any case, here’s the letter. I hope different leadership, inclusive leadership, takes up the mantle. Being inclusive takes work. It is a pretty gross display of privilege to say “we don’t have time to include Black and Brown voices.” And there is time – when NYC failed to submit an actual plan last Friday (it was an outline, not a plan) the deadlines got pushed back.
Dear Governor Cuomo,
Over the past few weeks, Mayor de Blasio, Chancellor Carranza, and the NYC Department of Education have created a blended learning model, under which at least 33% of students are expected to attend each day and no school is permitted to conduct fully remote learning. However, this “one size fits all” model is not suitable for NYC high schools specifically. We believe that each NYC high school should be fully remote during this fall, especially schools with over 2,000 students, regardless of how other schools operate.
First, New York City high school students have longer and riskier school commutes. While most elementary and middle school students in NYC attend schools within their own districts, high school students apply to and end up in schools all over the city. As a result, over 300,000 high school students consistently commute on crowded buses and trains, thus increasing chances of contracting and transmitting the virus to their families, schools, and communities. This is especially dangerous because students between ages 10 and 19 contract and transmit the virus as well as adults do.
Second, blended learning intensifies the inequity in our education system. In this model, schools will be required to spend valuable resources on actions such as power washing and PPE replenishment, instead of ensuring that every student has access to a laptop and the internet— a necessity for students in any scenario. Seeing as current DOE guidelines call for a school to close if it reports just two positive cases, there is no feasible way for NYC’s largest high schools to go even a few weeks without reverting back to a fully remote model with no time to prepare. This will force schools to repeat the problem-ridden asynchronous remote learning experience that occurred in the spring, preventing low-income students from gaining access to whatever online learning experience is rolled out. If schools inevitably close down, we must prioritize a remote learning model from the beginning to give teachers and schools the most amount of time possible to prepare.
Even if schools manage to stay open, having both remote and in-person classes creates a two-tiered system of education. By not prioritizing funding and resources for online learning, the DOE is preventing students who attend school remotely from accessing the same quality of education or even the same teachers as their peers. In their own plan, there is not even a mention of how remote learning will work for these students. This especially impacts immunocompromised and other medically-vulnerable students, who will be forced into this inferior second tier. As a result, the DOE’s proposed model runs afoul of Title II of the ADA. A fully remote model ensures equal education for not only these students, but also District 75 students, IEP students, and students with other learning disabilities, for whom in-person learning is a necessity. The empty high school buildings in a remote model can be used to teach these students, ensuring that they can practice safe social distancing measures while not sacrificing any of their critical in-person instruction, as they would have to do in a blended model.
As you and your Administration are well aware, the COVID-19 crisis is far from over. With the threat of a second wave looming and a vaccine unlikely by the end of 2020, every policy action can determine whether New York continues on a positive trajectory, or we re-experience the horrors of April and May. If we proceed with the blended learning model, we make a massive second wave more likely. If that happens, schools across the state will be forced to quickly put together a remote learning model that lowers the quality of education and wastes the numerous resources already utilized. The virus will spread throughout the city, with us high schoolers as the carriers, and more students, teachers, and parents could suffer and die. Fortunately, over the next month, there is ample time to put together a coherent, cohesive, and comprehensive remote learning model for schools, improving upon the model used in the spring and avoiding the negative consequences of a hasty reopening. The health and educational harms of a second wave far outweigh any of the short-term learning losses that may accompany another few months of remote high school learning. As your constituents and soon-to-be voters, we urge you to supersede the dangerous order put in place by Mayor de Blasio. By doing so, you have the ability to prevent NYC from becoming what would be the definitive epicenter of any second wave in New York State.
Sincerely,
Gov, Mayor, Chanc., Pres. – keep us all alive: shut us down now
Today’s letter to Cuomo
(this is not by me, as you can tell from the opening line. The author is a teacher who raises important questions. She wrote similar letters to de Blasio, Carranza, and Mulgrew)
(The biggest question? Why not remote? Why not start work on it today? – jd)
Dear Governor Cuomo,
I have admired and respected your leadership during this pandemic, despite serious disagreements with many of your education policies, and I was counting on your reliance on science and good sense to prevail over plans for reopening school buildings. I was very disappointed by your message yesterday, which sounded much like an abdication of your responsibility, leaving to parents and schools the task of keeping COVID numbers down and people alive.
I have sent you numerous letters citing flaws and unresolved questions in NYC’s opening plans and begging you to allow teachers to do the best by our students and staff by spending August preparing to teach fully remotely. No plan put forward has begun to reassure teachers or parents that students and staff will be safe, or that hybrid mask-to-mask learning, which is FAR from face-to-face learning, is any better than fully remote instruction.
Schools have been reopening around the country and within days students and staff are sick. The University of Minnesota has demonstrated the lack of efficacy of open windows for ventilation. And ALL plans for safety go out the window when you have students taking off masks to eat together in classrooms or lunchrooms.
Not only is instruction while students are eating lunch ineffective (and no, it is not the same as grab and go breakfast which is also disruptive, because students are accustomed to and will need a reprieve during lunch), but it is inequitable and DANGEROUS to any staff in the room. Spending the day trying to teach fully masked students is risky enough, but spending time in a room with students without masks, who will be yelling across the room at each other to socialize, is simply the epitome of danger and to ask any staff member to be in such unsafe conditions is completely unacceptable.
Please, keep us all alive: shut us down now and let us use the month we have to focus on making fully remote instruction as effective as possible.
Sincerely,
Contact tracing is hard – harder if you don’t know how high school works
The NYC DoE wrote this about contact tracing:
Tracing: In the event of a confirmed COVID-19 case in a school, NYC Test + Trace and NYC Health will investigate to determine close contacts within the school. All students and teachers in the classroom with the confirmed case are assumed close contacts and will be instructed to self-quarantine for 14 days since their last exposure to that case. In older grades where students may travel between classes, this applies to all classes that the confirmed case was in.
In older grades where students may travel between classes, this applies to all classes that the confirmed case was in.
Help me out here. “all classes that the confirmed case was in” – what do they mean? The rooms? Did they mean to say “all students who shared a class with the person with a confirmed case?” + “all teachers who taught that person?”
Why am I convinced that no one working on the NYCDoE plans has ever been to a high school?
Teachers need real prep time, not release time
The New York City Department of Education has scheduling guidance. But nothing to get excited about.
A new DoE document is floating around – I’ll get my hands on a copy tomorrow. It is called “Instructional Principals and Programming Guidance.”
People are focusing on the model schedules. Since I only have screen shots, that’s what I will start with.
In the Programmer’s Group, first comment? “I love how non-programmers program” So, no, not good. Not usable for most of us.
Preparation Tiime
The worst part? Teacher prep is 30 minutes per day, moved to the end of the day, with the expectation that teachers can prep at home.
We know we never get enough time for preparation. It would have been nice, you know, pandemic, remote learning, that sort of stuff, if they had actually given us a tiny bit more prep time, since it takes about twice as long to do everything. But ok, we can save that for another day.
So instead of more prep, they are going to generously allow us to prep, for half an hour, at home?
Do these people think we are so dumb that we will overlook the serious safety problems if we can leave half an hour early? What insulting garbage.
Message for your UFT Reps
Mulgrew did good on Friday, telling the DoE and us, no we are not going to return to schools without real safety in place:
“the city’s safety proposals fall far short of anything we would agree to.”
Tell him he needs to do it again. We want plans that work, we want safety to really be dealt with. We are not sure the DoE can pull it off. But we’re sure as hell not going to smile and say ok and forget about safety in the face of this pandemic because they let us leave a few minutes early.
Email your chapter leader, your district rep, your borough rep, your VP, and Mulgrew. Let them know:
We will not trade our safety and the safety of our students for anything. We will not trade safety for time.
And
It is time for the DoE to stop insulting teachers’ intelligence, and get to work preparing for September. They are way behind.
New York City Department of Education has scheduling guidance. But nothing to get excited about.
A new DoE document is floating around – I’ll get my hands on a copy tomorrow. It is called “Instructional Principals and Programming Guidance.”
People are focusing on the model schedules. Since I only have screen shots, that’s what I will start with.
In the Programmer’s Group, first comment? “I love how non-programmers program” So, no, not good. Not usable for most of us.
Preparation Time
The worst part? Teacher prep is 30 minutes per day, moved to the end of the day, with the expectation that teachers can prep at home.
We know we never get enough time for preparation. It would have been nice, you know, pandemic, remote learning, that sort of stuff, if they had actually given us a tiny bit more prep time, since it takes about twice as long to do everything. But ok, we can save that for another day.
So instead of more prep, they are going to generously allow us to prep, for half an hour, at home?
Do these people think we are so dumb that we will overlook the serious safety problems if we can leave half an hour early? What insulting garbage.
Message for your UFT Reps
Mulgrew did good on Friday, telling the DoE and us, no we are not going to return to schools without real safety in place:
“the city’s safety proposals fall far short of anything we would agree to.”
Tell him he needs to do it again. We want plans that work, we want safety to really be dealt with. We are not sure the DoE can pull it off. But we’re sure as hell not going to smile and say ok and forget about safety in the face of this pandemic because they let us leave a few minutes early.
Email your chapter leader, your district rep, your borough rep, your VP, and Mulgrew. Let them know:
We will not trade our safety and the safety of our students for anything. We will not trade safety for time.
And
It is time for the DoE to stop insulting teachers’ intelligence, and get to work preparing for September. They are way behind.
Top 13 NYC’s School Reopening “Plan” Problems
These are my first notes on the New York City Department of Education’s September 2020 School Reopening Plan. It has glaring problems.
I am referring to the 32 page plan that the DoE submitted to NY State Friday evening. I am referring to the Entry/Exit policy, and the Health. And I’m referring to the School Building Reopening preliminary plans, guiding questions, and FAQs from July.
In Mulgrew’s email to members, he identified turnaround-time for tests and contact tracing, lack of randomized testing, and lack of a nurse in each school as big problems. They are indeed big problems. He added:
“Even if there are stronger safety standards in place, we still have grave concerns about the city’s ability to effectively enforce them in every school to protect students and staff.”
Here are some serious problems with what the DoE has proposed.
Where’s the plans?
These are not plans. They are outlines of ideas. Jim Malatras, Empire State College President, said so (he’s right) and compared the 32 pages unfavorably to far more detailed, longer plans for far smaller districts. Almost nothing has been fleshed out.
1800 plans?
There are over 1800 public schools in New York City. That’s over 1800 principals. That’s a lot of bell schedules. A lot of entry procedures. A lot of isolation rooms. A lot of procedures for moving in the buildings.
There need to be 1800 plans. In detail. Take just the morning entry portion. It is not good enough to write “staff will ensure that students wear masks and maintain social distancing during entry” – there has to be a plan for how that will be done. A school of two thousand that brings in 650 students each day. Hmm. Stagger entry (how? how long will each cycle take?) Say three entry times, 8, 8:30, 9. 200 – 250 kids each cycle. Six foot distanced. 400-500 yards. Is there enough sidewalk space? Driveways? Intersections? How many staff members will be needed to supervise each line? Is half an hour per cycle really enough? Hmm. And that’s just entry…
And then we have to believe we have 1800+ principals who will faithfully execute these plans. It is true, I have met some talented, conscientious NYCDOE principals. But I have met others, as well.
If you have any idea how many principals violate good and fair programming guidelines when they are not being watched, you would have some idea why I think this whole idea is such a very, very bad idea for students and staff.
3%
The DoE says that they are using 3% positive citywide as their threshold for reopening. But some of us work or live in neighborhoods that have much higher rates, and are concerned. It should be by zip code or neighborhood
Testing/Closing procedures
As Mulgrew spelled out (and Cuomo as well) the City does not have a plan for contact tracing, and testing turnaround time is too long. Way too long. Teachers are concerned with quarantining procedures, and with closures. The city claims that it can close classrooms, not schools. We are skeptical. The city wants to keep classrooms open when a case is reported, but not yet confirmed.
Look at that for a moment. Say there are ten unconfirmed reports, and nine of them are false. This means that Bill de Blasio has continued hybrid learning for about 100 kids, while getting 10 of them sick, with a chance to infect family members. Not right.
On quarantining, there’s a question that should be easy to resolve, but it hasn’t been yet. A teacher exhibits symptoms. Stays home, gets tested. Tests negative. Comes back. Do those days come out of their sick bank?
On closures, the City failed to follow its own procedures in March. They were willing to put staff and students in harm’s way. The closure procedures in the plan have way too much wiggle room to be executed by those people. Read this:
If two or more confirmed cases present within seven days of each other, NYC Test + Trace Corps and DOHMH begins investigation immediately and makes every attempt to conclude the investigation within 24 hours.
If the final plan says “makes every attempt” I will urge my union to keep 100% of teachers out. That is completely unacceptable. It asks students and staff to trust the good will and competence of a department that has given us reason to question both.
Ventilation
I think the DoE has agreed to upgrade some ventilation systems – but I know of nowhere where the work is going on today. I am in a leased building, and of course we have heard nothing from the DoE. I got a 2-day old message today from MS324 in Washington Heights, terrified about bad ventilation. I hear that the DoE is inspecting interior, windowless rooms, trying to get them “okayed.” I hear that they are recommending open windows in most schools, no matter the weather, which seems nuts – and the letter I published yesterday cites a University of Minnesota source saying this is a bad idea.
The feeling I get is that the DoE cares about approved ventilation, not adequate ventilation. Roll that around – they care about approvals, not whether the air is healthy. And for a counterpoint, try this Atlantic article. We believe airborne transmission is the greatest threat, but the DoE is acting as if getting approval for their ventilation plans is an inconvenience.
Self checks
This is huge. The DoE wants staff and students to check their temperature each day before they come to school. However, on any given day, pre-pandemic, some parents would lower their child’s fever and drop them off at school. I understand the motivation. We all do. How can we ask children and families to temperature screen at home when everybody’s safety is at risk? And don’t forget, teenagers forget…
Nurses
We should have a nurse in every school. The DoE plan says that’s unnecessary. Honestly, we should have a nurse in every school even without Covid. But that has not been a DoE priority, and the pandemic has apparently not changed their minds.
Isolation Rooms
Without nurses in every building, they are assigning teachers? This is not okay. We are not health professionals. I am very worried for colleagues who are afraid to say “no” or even “I am very uncomfortable with this.”
And in the event that a cluster occurs, and this is a “1, 2, many” situation what happens? These isolation rooms, we are planning space for just 2 people in most schools.
And on the planning side, the space for the isolation room… that reduces, properly, available space in the building, and must be taken into account.
Lunch
Lunch in the classroom? Masks off? Indoor dining is not ok in NYC. And we share space with other diners for a limited time. Spending a full day in a classroom with the same group of people, including a maskless lunch, seems like a really good way to guarantee that if a positive gets into the room (asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic) that it will be spread to the entire room.
High Schools
Beginning to end, these plans have been written (poorly, incompletely) for elementary schools, and for middle schools where kids stay with their class all day. The scheduling options – none of them fit high schools. The safety planning – all are written (very badly and incompletely) for elementary school. Our kids change classes, and mix. There goes closing a classroom instead of a school, right out the (open for ventilation) window. Or, maybe we could keep a group of 10 kids bubbled in a single room, and rotate teachers. So in case of a case, you could shut that classroom and send 8 teachers home for two weeks? Schools can’t function with that sort of unpredictable high level of teacher absence.
D75
There’s barely a word about our special education schools – but detailed plans are critical. Some children will require closer contact than in other schools – making the need for proper protective equipment even more critical. And if the need is so high that teachers need to be suited up like emergency room workers…
Transportation
Where the hell are they on busing? What accommodations? What spacing? Why haven’t they said? (Unaddressed)
Faculty and students who commute on public transportation – what steps are being taken to keep them safe during their commutes? (Unaddressed)
And a combined quarantine/transportation question: since the DoE cannot enforce social distancing at a child’s home, each child is potentially in contact with friends and family members who do not attend the same school. While there is still community spread, our transport system and schools provide a large network of contacts to further that spread. There is nothing here for the DoE to address. It’s just a general statement about what a horrid idea this is.
Blended learning
This is perhaps the biggest problem of all. Not because blended learning is intrinsically horrible, but because the DoE’s approach has made it so.
It was not designed for high schools or middle schools where kids change classes. This is not me moaning because I might have to schedule it (I’m not sure I would), this is the reality of scores of high schools moaning that they can’t see how it could be made to work.
The DoE decided to promise that students would receive instruction on days they were not in class, creating an instant teacher shortage (worse than the one we already have, as the DoE systematically overcrowds schools and classrooms).
The DoE decided to maximize the number of students who would fit in a building. This is their habit. High school class size limit is 34 – do they seek an average of 28, allowing the occasional class to go to the limit? No, they plan for schools to put every class at the limit.
The DoE did not create any model programs and safety plans for other schools to copy. Each principal is on their own (or with their planning team, on their own).
But the DoE, ducking responsibility by saying principals know their own schools best, rejected plans from principals who actually know their schools better than the DoE does.
No matter how well-intentioned the initial idea to created blended learning was, it is now clear that the DoE’s “blended plans” are an impediment to reopening. They will create chaos. They will compromise safety. They should be dropped.
The DOE’s plan fails NYC students and teachers – a Teacher’s Letter to Anyone Listening
I was trying to write something like this, when I stumbled across this letter. The author is a teacher in the Bronx – I got permission to repost but forgot to ask for permission to use their name (I’ll update if they give it) – jd
I read the DOE’s 32 page “plan” this morning. It is abysmal and puts NYC students and staff at risk. A few points which really must be addressed:
1. Does Mr. Carranza know that middle school and high school students can’t remain in single cohort classrooms because they don’t all take the same classes? There is no way for cohorts not to mix.
2. Given #1, there is no way for a teacher and cohort to isolate if someone is suspected or confirmed to have COVID—that teacher would be needed to teach multiple other classes to other cohorts who are in the building. There aren’t enough adults to monitor students in class if the teacher is awaiting test results or becomes ill.
3. Given that teachers will be exposed to multiple cohorts, any exposure for that teacher means that multiple cohorts will need to isolate and be tested; it’s impossible to close one classroom.
4. How is the teacher or staff member in the room supposed to remain safe when students take masks off to eat?
5. Has Mr. Carranza ever met students? They WILL put fingers under their masks; they WILL take masks off to sneeze or even just to breathe; they WILL tease each other or bully each other—or staff—by removing masks and breathing, coughing, and even spitting.
6. What happens during scanning into the building? Our building, the Theodore Roosevelt Campus, holds more than 3,000 students. Even if we divide into thirds, one thousand students will be entering each day. Even if we stagger school entry times so that only a few hundred students are entering at a time, it is impossible for those students to maintain 6’ social distancing, with full masks, and go through scanning…and certainly not in a reasonable amount of time.
7. The plan continues to rely on open windows for ventilation, without regard for temperature. That is unreasonable. it is also inadequate, as per a study released yesterday by the University of Minnesota.
8. No information about the toxicity of the chemicals in the electrostatic sprayers has been provided. That could be a very serious health risk.
9. The Janitorial Union has said that the deep cleaning is impossible to complete without much more money and many more staff. If you are unaware of the inadequacy of cleaning on a regular basis, please be advised that what we are being told will happen is humanly impossible for our janitorial staff.
10. The complete focus on safety will completely preclude effective instruction. We still have a month to focus on improving distance learning for our students. We need PD. We need time to plan. It is impossible to teach well when we never know from one day to the next where we’ll be, and it is impossible to continuously pivot between open and closed classrooms and schools as people become ill. The students will suffer both emotionally and academically far more than if we simply commit to teaching remotely and put all energy and training into doing that as well as humanly possible.
There is much more, but this short list is more than enough to reject the DOE’s failing plan to reopen NYC school buildings.
NYCDOE’s Farcical Plans and Proposal to NYS, w/o further commentary
Commentary will come later. Here are the documents:
This is the 32 page submission to New York State for reopening: nyc-doe-state-doh-reopening-plan-7-31
This is the DoE’s “health and safety” policy: health-safety-policy
This is the NYCDoE’s entry/exit, circulation, common areas doc: entry-dismissal-circulation
How can I write about Carranza’s latest mistake when they come so fast?
The DoE has an idea of what schools should do when there’s a COVID case.
I wasn’t going to write about that. I was going to write about blended learning (‘hybrid schemes”) and remote learning. I was going to compare them. I was going to explain that there was almost no advantage to hybrid, and many disadvantages. I was going to beg, please let us move onto planning remote teaching, let us plan, let us figure out how to do better than the spring, let the schedulers make schedules that work… I was going to demand again that Michael Mulgrew walk back these dumb, counterproductive words: “We believe a blended learning model, with students in class on some days and remote on others, balances our safety concerns with the need to bring students back.”
But no, I’m not going there. Not today. Richard Carranza had other ideas.
He was supposed to have a meeting with principals about the calendar. We don’t have a calendar yet for the year. We don’t even know the first day. September 10? 17? 21? 24? 28? October 1? October 5? I should be selling boxes. Could still do it, since he moved his morning meeting to 4 in the afternoon, and then skipped the calendar issue altogether.
Carranza talked about whaat to do if there were a COVID case. He described a quarantine procedure for elementary schools.
He didn’t actually say elementary schools. But he described described small groups of students, with one teacher. He never addressed high schools.
In a high school where kids change classes, if there is a case, the whole school is exposed.
In a high school where they keep the kids in small groups that don’t move, but the teachers change (this is not normal, but the DoE has implied that they might encourage it??? I really don’t know.) if one group were exposed, that would lead to quarantining ten kids and seven or eight teachers. Think of the mini-school with 500 – 600 kids and 30 – 40 teachers – how do they function with a quarter of the teachers quarantined?
But it doesn’t matter. He was not talking about high schools. He made a huge policy announcement, and he forgot about a third of the schools.
All of New York City should be worried. In Carranza’s rush to implement de Blasio’s political-motivated policy, he makes mistake after mistake, passes responsibility to the schools, and prepares to blame the principals.
Eleven Vacuous Truths, and One Lie
The NYC Department of Education falsely claims that Hybrid is easy, but Remote is very tricky.
In reality, they are both tricky. Remote did not go well this past spring. It is imperative that it be improved. But Hybrid if completely untried, and involves complexity beyond what Tweed can handle (which is why the execution is pushed off on principals.)
In the hybrid models they are pushing, one teacher will teach the kids on the days they are in school, and another will teach them when they are home – and these teachers will coordinate. I’m not sure exactly how, or who has the responsibility for overall planning, marking, etc.
In an alternate that is much-discussed, a teacher does both the remote and in-person teaching for a class (probably by not really teaching remotely – just assignments). In that case, four different groups of kids, or three, rotate the in-person class, while nominally continuing their work at home. Let’s say there are three groups, and you and me are in different groups. That means we will each have about 20 in-person classes in the fall – but whatever you learned in person – I didn’t, and whatever I learned in person – you didn’t. Not sure how a teacher can keep a class on one pace this way.
In short, the idea of hybrid teaching is very tricky. And all of that effort – while classes stay two-thirds or three-quarters remote. That’s quite a trade off for very little in-person class. And of course there is more to the trade-off in the form of safety, but this post is not about safety…
Remote, on the other hand, one teacher plans for a full class. Teaches a full class. Grades a full class. It did not go so well in the spring, but the logistics are not complicated.
And with either remote, or “hybrid” – we have to work on improving the remote parts.
Eleven Vacuous Truths, and One Lie
In my last post, I looked at the NYCDOE’s – Academic Policy FAQs for Return to School 2020. Here’s the document: academic-policy-faqs-for-return-to-school-2020
For 11 questions the answers were vacuous. 180 minutes, or something that feels like 180 minutes. Do your best. Make it feel similar to a regular class. And my favorite – we will get back to you. But one question stood out, #3:
Let’s look closely at #3, as they discuss whether a principal can offer a course fully remotely.
Can schools offer fully remote courses?
…
Principals must carefully weigh the decision to provide fully remote courses to ensure that the course can still be delivered with comparable scope and rigor to a traditional course. Considerations for offering fully remote courses must include the following:
- The extent to which the learning experiences required in the course can be readily adapted to a fully remote learning environment,
- The extent to which students have access to materials, technology, and supports needed to be successfully in a fully remote learning environment for an entire course,
- The extent to which the school has prepared students to be successful in a fully remote course, including pre-requisite academic experiences and learning habits, and
- The extent to which each student’s overall academic program incorporates remote learning experience to meet their individual needs.
Did you see what I am referring to? “Principals must carefully weigh the decision to provide fully remote courses to ensure that the course can still be delivered with comparable scope and rigor to a traditional course.” They are comparing a remote course to a traditional course, and saying, if the remote is not comparable, then you have to do hybrid. There is nowhere any attempt to compare a hybrid course to a traditional course, except their refrain of “Schools must ensure that X courses are of comparable scope and rigor to those traditionally offered but are not required to meet the exact instructional time requirements”
The underlying assumption would be hilarious, if we and our students were not being set up to be the victims. They doubt a remote course can match a regular course, but are fully confident that a hybrid course will be fine. That’s one day in person, followed by 1 – 3 days remote, different remote content for each cohort of students. The choreography would challenge a pro – and the people coming up with this at Tweed (remotely) – not pros.
NYCDOE – Academic Policy FAQs (but no real answers)
When the DoE puts out information, I jump on it. Teachers, principals, programmers – we don’t know what the DoE policies will be for September. We want to know their intentions. We need it for planning. Actually, many of us want the DoE to just get it over with and switch us to fully remote. We know they will eventually. But for now we want their interim answers and guidelines.
And so when I found an official NYC Department of Education “Academic Policies for Return to School 2020: Frequently Asked Questions” document in my inbox, I dropped what I was doing and began reading. Carefully. Deeply. Looking, but perplexed. Where were the answers? They asked some wrong questions. But mostly they did not give meaningful answers. Let’s look together.
Proudly publishing questions without answers falls in the same category . They are all equivalent to advertising that someone famous read your book, or watched your movie, without bothering to mention if they said anything about it.
New York City Department of Education – Academic Policy FAQs for Return to School 2020
First, here’s the document: academic-policy-faqs-for-return-to-school-2020
Let’s take a “deep dive” into it. Only, don’t expect to gain much knowledge.
-
- Must schools meet the unit of study requirements for 2020-21?
It takes them two paragraphs to say “yes” and “3 hours per week or equivalent” without defining the equivalent. - How do high schools award course credits in 2020-21?
They take two lines to say “by passing the course” - Can schools offer fully remote courses?
Yes, if the teacher is fully remote, the student is fully remote, or if the principal has determined that remote is best for that course. So “the principal has determined” is a little interesting. But what comes next is mind blowing. They spend a paragraph, 4 bullet points, and one more paragraph implicitly comparing remote courses against fully in-person courses (which of course we are not offering). The dishonesty is palpable. I will say more in a separate post. - Can schools offer fully asynchronous courses?
Nope, there must be some live time. Principal sets how much. - What are the expectations for science labs?
High quality. Principal decides how much hands on and how much virtual. - What are the expectations for meeting physical education requirements?
Compare your course against what you normally offer, and certify that the time and quality are in the same ballpark. - What are the expectations for meeting art requirements?
Compare your course against what you normally offer, and certify that the time and quality are in the same ballpark. - What are the expectations for meeting pEnglish as a New Language requirements?
Compare your ENL and Bilingual courses against what you normally offer, and certify that the time and quality are in the same ballpark. - How will the remote learning programming models be reflected in STARS? We’ll get back to you.
- Which grading policies will apply for the 2020-21 school year?? We’ll get back to you.
- How will schools make promotion decisions in 2020-21? Holistically. We’ll get back to you with actual guidance.
- Will graduation requirements remain the same in 2020-21?? Yes.
- Must schools meet the unit of study requirements for 2020-21?
JD2718 