Chatham reacts to BOE’s Plan C exemptions, to begin Oct. 19

Posted
Updated:

SILER CITY — Every time Holly Rohaly’s 8-year-old daughter even hears the word, “school,” she cries.

Her daughter, a 3rd-grader at Silk Hope Elementary School, usually loves learning, Rohaly said. But now, every day she grows more frustrated by all the platforms she must navigate for her classes and the work she still can’t quite keep track of, despite having nearly nine weeks of remote learning under her belt.

Remote schooling is so emotionally challenging, Rohaly said, that she worries it’s ruining her daughter’s educational experience.

“I feel like there’s so much uncertainty, there’s no good answer,” she said. “We’re in a no-win situation trying to pick the best of the worst, as far as a solution. But we were so disappointed with the decision of pushing the kids out until January. I mean… that was devastating for us.”

Two weeks ago, the Chatham County Schools Board of Education voted 4-1 to extend the fully remote Plan C option through the end of the semester, which ends Jan. 15, 2021. Rohaly and her daughter were not alone in their disappointment with the decision, or their fear for how students would be impacted — even the most ardent supporters of schools remaining in fully remote learning acquiesce that it creates myriad challenges for students and teachers alike.

Still, as disappointed as Rohaly was with the board’s decision to extend Plan C, others parents and residents were equally as disappointed with the board’s unanimous decision last week allowing the resumption of extracurricular activities and approved in-person instruction under Plan B starting Oct. 19 for Extended Content Standard E.C. students, Pre-K students and K-2 students.

Some people thought the decision was unsafe, opening county schools up too quickly; others felt the decision did not open schools up quickly enough. This reality is one that’s been emphasized by several board members.

“The painful part of this decision-making is that there is no answer which is the good or perfect answer,” board member Jane Allen Wilson said in an email to the News + Record following the board’s Sept. 29 decision. “We know we want to focus on the immediate safety and health and well-being of all our county’s children and all who serve them, along with the long-range well-being of students in their brain and scholastic development too, and not create irreparable inequities.”

One of these main inequities, Wilson said, is students falling behind due to lack of reliable internet access, phone service or support from a parent or guardian to stay on task in their work.

Even for older students, the adjustment to remote learning is a challenge, particularly for those facing additional responsibilities such as working or caring for younger siblings. Learning under Plan C has brought some Latinx students in Chatham a sense of heightened stress, the News + Record’s La Voz de Chatham Project reported in September, often in part because of such extra responsibilities.

Wilson emphasized that the information presented at the board’s Sept. 17 COVID-19 update meeting by ABC Science Collaborative, a project which analyzes COVID-related data in partnership with Duke, UNC and surrounding school districts, including CCS, was crucial in her personal comfort with small populations of students returning under Plan B. That report highlighted several key findings: the importance of social distancing, wearing masks at all points of exposure and limiting the capacity of indoor school locations through hybrid models. The group found that no surges had occurred in N.C. public schools, though that was a different case for schools in other states not opening under a hybrid model.

Throughout their discussions surrounding possible exceptions to Plan C, board members mentioned several times that parent choice would still be a priority. According to state mandates for public schools, all districts must continue offering a remote learning option for families uncomfortable with their student returning to any form of in-person learning. This remote option is in addition to Chatham’s Virtual Academy, which enrolls students in a different virtual teacher and course rotation from the one they’d be in at their base school with a semester-long commitment.

Still, the same level of choice does not extend to teachers, who technically can only request to teach remotely under very specific circumstances, such as an authorized medical reason.

At the board’s Sept. 23 meeting, concern over CCS employees’ feelings of readiness to return to in-person instruction dominated much of the board’s discussion. Members referenced a district-wide survey which showed nearly early 30% of respondents felt comfortable returning to in-person learning; 41% did not feel comfortable and 30% said they were unsure.

“I think those numbers are really glaring,” board member David Hamm said at the time. Later, Hamm told the News + Record that the “key component between the two votes was the fact that critical information on protocols was shared with the CCS employees.” Prior to voting to approve Plan B for certain student groups, Hamm and Wilson questioned whether district employees had seen the same information as board members.

The E.C. and Pre-K teacher survey data presented on Tuesday indicated that 42% (59 responses) felt comfortable “returning to in-person instruction with the students that I serve” while nearly 60% (81 responses) did not feel comfortable. The board did not directly discuss these numbers prior to unanimously approving for subset student groups to start under Plan B on Oct. 19.

“I have, for just about my whole adult life and of course, growing up too, been around fantastic people and many, many of them have been teachers, employees, administrators, staff at these schools” board chairperson Gary Leonard told the News + Record. “I know this will make their job even more difficult, because of the things that are pushed on them. Do I feel like our staff is going to step up to the challenge and do quality work? They’ve been doing quality work, I think they will continue.”

He added that he felt the district’s sanitizing protocol would be followed well and that it would protect teachers and students.

Following the board’s decision last week, a few people commented on the News + Record’s Facebook meeting update with questions about how moving to Plan B would work for the impacted teachers. While the board has heard presentations and thoroughly discussed matters related to sanitization, lunch and bathrooms, it has not discussed very clearly things like classroom social distancing logistics or how teachers are to provide in-person and remote instruction. The board did approve a draft employee guidebook document on safe returning at their Sept. 17 meeting, which is supposed to address such topics.

Near the end of the board’s meeting last week, members indicated that even high school students might begin in-person learning prior to the Jan. 15 date they’d decided on the week prior. For as many people pleased by the board’s decision, others were also confused or upset by it. Some wondered why students could return to sports before all students could return to school for in-person learning.

“This is absurd!” one person commented on the News + Record’s Facebook update from the meeting.

“But they just had a plan…?!?” another posted.

This frustration is reflected in two of this week’s News + Record letter to the editors.

Corbie Hill, a Pittsboro resident and parent of 3rd and 5th-grade students, wrote he had “severe doubts” about the board’s decision-making process.

“As a parent and as the husband of a CCS employee, I found myself blindsided,” Hill wrote. “From the texts other parents sent me the evening of the vote, I know I’m far from alone. We’re frustrated. We’re ticked off. We want to know what’s at all unclear about the words ‘uncontained,’ ‘lethal’ and ‘pandemic?’”

He acknowledged the pitfalls of remote school, but ultimately said the move to in-person learning will stretch teachers thinner and guarantee infections and death within the school system.

“Remote school is imperfect,” he said. “We all know that. What’s getting lost in the drive to reopen, however, is infection risk to staff, students, and the entire community — not to mention the logistical headaches of hybrid remote/in-person learning. The grass is not greener.”

Pittsboro resident Emily Harrison, the parent of a kindergartner and 2nd grader at Pittsboro Elementary School, expressed similar criticism in her letter.

“Members of the board and other stakeholders may be surprised that parents are not accepting this decision,” Harrison wrote. “Personally, I am hearing nothing but dismay and frustration from parents, teachers, and staff. Especially in this tumultuous time, we crave consistency, transparency, and stability from our school system. The challenges of equity exist, albeit differently, at every possible plan.”

She continued: “Join me in urging the board of education to reverse their decision, return to Plan C, and focus on providing the best education possible through a single platform: virtual.”

Chatham resident Kimrey Rhinehardt, a CCS parent, echoed that frustration, saying she felt blindsided by the board’s decision to send K-2 students back to school, as it wasn’t on the agenda released to the public.

“The board’s action this evening does nothing to provide stability for teachers, students, and their families,” she said that night. “It was only six days ago that the board voted to continue remote learning for the remainder of the semester, with two possible exceptions.”

She added: “Students and families deserve better. We need consistency and stability.”

The board will meet next on Oct. 12, which marks one week before the Extended Content Standard E.C. students, Pre-K students and K-2 students are set to begin instruction under Plan B. This decision impacts just over 2,000 students: 98 Pre-K students, 134 E.C. students and 1,853 in K-2, along with their teachers and school staff.

For some, that number is far too high. For others, like Rohaly, it’s not high enough — her 3rd-grader will still be tackling remote learning.

“I’m concerned, I’m not saying I’m not concerned,” Rohaly said, adding that she felt “the damage that we’re doing to the psyche of these little kids” outweighed the risk of returning to school with masks and safety protocols.

“I think parents should be allowed to opt out, teachers should be able to opt out,” she said. “But I think the kids need to go back.”

Reporter Hannah McClellan can be reached at hannah@chathamnr.com.