By Lynn Binnie
Whitewater Banner staff
whitewaterbanner.com
In a virtual meeting on Monday evening, July 27, the Whitewater Unified School District School Board heard a complicated report from District Administrator Caroline Pate-Hefty and several associates regarding their recommendation for the “fall instructional model.” Although the leadership team suggested using the plan for the first four weeks, an amended motion by Board President Casey Judd ultimately passed on a 5-2 vote, with Jennifer Kienbaum and Jim Stewart in the minority. The meeting ran from 7 p.m. to 10:18 p.m.
The meeting was preceded by a protest by approximately 30 people at the District Administration building parking lot. A leader of the informal group, Samantha Allan, told the Banner that, “We are strictly a group of parents brought together by our concerns over the school district’s listening abilities to our families. We have attended in person meetings, filled out surveys, sent emails to school board members. Many school board members have not responded at all, or sent a formal generic response. We believe that families should have a choice when it comes to what is happening with our children’s education for the coming year. Last year, 3 months of completely failing our children is not a pattern we wish to continue.” Members at the protest indicated that they believed that online learning is not effective for a number of students, and although they recognize that some parents would not choose to send their children to in-person classes due to the pandemic, they felt that the option for full-time in-person learning should be made available to those who prefer it.
Dr. Pate-Hefty indicated that there were three primary goals in making plans for the re-opening: safety, parental choice, and high flex instruction. Over 1000 parents responded to the survey that inquired about the learning model that parents preferred for the start of the 2020-21 school year as well as conditions that they felt would have to be met in order for them to feel comfortable for their children to attend in-person school. 51.7% indicated a preference for in-person, 28.1% for a hybrid model, and 20.2% for an entirely virtual model. Among the 183 staff members who responded, 44.8% preferred in-person, with 35% expressing a preference for a hybrid model, and 20.2% for virtual instruction. Dr. Pate-Hefty stated that a number of parents and staff had recently asked to change their answers, but that it was felt that this would not be appropriate. She indicated that 215/277 of the district’s staff live in either Walworth or Jefferson Counties, and consequently the current COVID-19 trends in those counties, which are stated to be at a high trajectory, had significant influence on the recommendation. The current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance indicates that in areas with substantive and uncontrolled spread, closure should be an important consideration. 88.1% of parents indicated that State Department of Health Services and CDC protocols would have to be in place in order for them to support a return to in-person school. A majority also called for daily symptom checks of staff and students, as well as for well cleaned buildings.
Per the recommendation, from September 1-29, students in 4K through 5th grade would be offered virtual learning with small group face-to-face rotations. One of the factors that argued against returning initially to full-time in-person instruction was that it would be impossible to provide for the required physical distancing even if student participation was only in the 50-70% range. It was stated that the plan for online learning is entirely different than that which was hurriedly implemented after the Safer at Home order was issued. Students would be provided synchronous (simultaneously live) instruction, as well as asynchronous (e.g. videos, directions). The district will be using a new standards based curriculum, and grading will return to the previous approach. Attendance will be recorded. Pate-Hefty emphasized the amount of time that has gone into preparation for online teaching, including teacher training, and indicated that “we are ready.”
Under the plan, 1/4 of the elementary students will each attend in-person learning with 4-8 students on the days of Tuesday – Friday from 12:30 – 3:00 p.m. 4K students would be in school two mornings or afternoons per week. Middle School and High School students would only attend a single orientation session during the first week of September, and then be online for the rest of the month. Special arrangements would be made for ELL students, those who are at risk, and those who are unengaged by online learning. All students from 4K through high school will be provided a Chromebook. Families without Internet would be provided a hotspot. Meals will also be provided for those students needing them on days when they are not present in school.
Each Friday the district would report on data such as cases in the counties. On September 28 the Board would make a decision about whether to proceed to a second step in the plan for the month of October. If a student or staff member tests positive for the virus, that classroom would be closed for at least one day, and depending upon the circumstances the entire school could be closed for a time.
Over fifteen people spoke during the public comment period, most of them indicating that they have children in the district. Most were respectful, though one was cut off for using vulgar language and another alleged that she had not been given her full three minutes, but was being cut off because of the vocal comments she was making. President Judd indicated that he was using a timer and the content of a speaker’s comments had no bearing on enforcing the time limit. A couple of staff members were among the public speakers. The vast majority of the speakers spoke against the recommendation and in favor of allowing parents the choice of their children returning to the classroom fulltime. (Editor note: Henri Kinson’s remarks have been moved to the bottom of the article for clarification.) Some speakers stated that many districts in the area, such as Janesville, Delavan-Darien, Fort Atkinson, Edgerton, Mukwonago, and East Troy have already announced their decision to at least offer in-person learning as an option. One person indicated that they know teachers in some of those districts, who indicate that their districts “do not have a plan,” are responding to pressure from parents, and figure they’ll just see how things go. Many concerns were raised regarding the challenges of single parents as well as dual earner households in terms of childcare, supervision of the online learning, and transportation to school. It was indicated that although bus transportation will still be offered, taking one’s one children to school is the safest option. Bus capacity will be limited due to physical distancing requirements. In addition, some parents stated that their older children (e.g. a 13 year old) should not be expected to provide oversight and educational assistance to younger siblings. It was indicated that the district is working with the city Parks and Recreation Department to ascertain whether they may be able to provide child care during times when children are not attending school.
School Board members expressed understanding of the challenges faced by parents, but most indicated that they felt that the health and safety of the students and teachers was the primary concern. Ultimately the majority felt that it was appropriate to adopt the recommendation but only for the first two weeks, with the hope that if things go well the district will be able to begin increasing the degree of in-person instruction that is offered. A motion to require facial coverings to be worn in all buildings by staff and students passed unanimously.
Clarification/addition to Henri Kinson’s remarks: Previously we stated, “Henri Kinson indicated that he felt that the default position should be a return to school without masks.” Mr. Kinson told the Banner that he did not recall making the reference to masks. The Banner has listened to the record and has confirmed that he is correct. Our apologies for this error. Kinson also felt that the main thrust of his discussion, which was not mentioned, was that his kids learned nothing during the previous virtual learning and there were no metrics in place for the school board to know whether or not continued virtual learning would hurt the children. This is also true.
The entire meeting may be viewed, courtesy of Whitewater Community TV, at this link.
