Teachers at risk from USA's DIY approach to reopenings
Experts need to guide school reopenings but, at present, across the US teachers and school officials are being left to make decisions themselves
Both of us are affected by complex problems with potentially serious consequences for our lives, but we possess little of the knowledge required to form valid opinions on the subject.
That is not to say, however, that the polar bear and I are without expertise.
If you want to teach a first-grader to read, ask me. If you want to pull an animal out of the Arctic Ocean and devour it raw, the polar bear is your creature.
But outside of our respective wheelhouses, you’ll need to find epidemiologists or atmospheric scientists who spend their careers studying pandemics and climate change for useful, insightful advice.
A DIY approach
Yet, as I write this in the middle of July, it appears – in the US at least – that educators are the ones being left to make the decisions on how they will reopen schools in September.
Los Angeles and San Diego both appear to be planning for remote learning through the fall.
New York City, Philadelphia and Honolulu are all implementing a hybrid model, with students splitting their week between in-school and remote learning.
No doubt others are hoping to reopen as normal without incident.
In short, confronted with the same virus and no vaccine, school districts across the country are taking different approaches that we can only assume will have different public health impacts on the communities they serve.
For teachers, this is a tough place to be – without expert-driven recommendations at the national level – and there are two key fears.
A failure of leadership
The first is my own government.
The world has long known that the Trump administration has an abusive relationship with science. Recently, our president tweeted that schools should reopen.
He may well be correct, but that would be the product of coincidence and not a scientific method.
It takes fairly earnest credulity to believe that someone with deep expertise on viruses, pandemics or children had any role in crafting that recommendation.
With a failure of leadership at the top of the federal government, reopening decisions devolve to individual states, whose governments further devolve decision-making to local municipalities.
Deferred responsibility
Oklahoma recently released a framework for reopening schools called Return to Learn.
In the introduction to that document, the state superintendent of public instruction essentially asks local school districts to make their own epidemiologically sound decisions for their students:
“It is not necessary to act on every consideration in this comprehensive framework. Rather, in keeping with the guidance we have received from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Oklahoma health officials, districts should take a layered approach to Covid-19 mitigation, adopting those policies and practices that are feasible, practical and acceptable within their school community.”
When our national and state governments disempower themselves, decision-making falls to the local level, with every recommendation merely an option that can be accepted or rejected by a school community with no experts in sight.
A lack of knowledge
My second fear, as I think about returning to school, is my own colleagues.
In the vacuum created by an absence of leadership, teachers and administrators, as well as parents and students, are participating in the process for determining when and how to reopen schools.
In Columbus, Ohio, a task force of school district staff members helped to craft reopening recommendations. Parents and students were also surveyed on how they would prefer to attend school in the fall.
On its face, that might seem reasonable: democratise the process by involving as many stakeholders as possible in this immeasurably impactful decision.
But it's an idea with clear shortcomings.
I have never been to Columbus, but I will assume that few, if any, of the educators and administrators there are epidemiologists, which means they lack the background needed to make valid recommendations on what is, at its core, a public health issue.
When the wrong people try to do the right things, it can be pretty scary.
Why we need answers
It’s understandable there is this desire to find a solution, though, as being back in school would clearly be best for everyone – if it can be done safely.
It's clear online learning can only get us so far: In a recent remote lesson, I showed the students a picture of a square as part of a unit on geometry. “What shape is this?” I asked.
One responded, “It’s a trapezoid!” Surprised, I asked if she could see what I was showing her. “Nope,” she confirmed enthusiastically. Her internet connection was too slow to stream video.
As a teacher, I know that remote learning is a grotesque approximation of real school and desperately want to turn the lights back on in my classroom.
But as a non-epidemiologist, I am like a polar bear discussing carbon emissions.
I have no informed opinion to contribute on whether returning to school this fall is a good idea: I just wish someone would tell me.
The DIY approach helps no one.
Josh Benjamin teaches first grade (Year 2) in Boston, Massachusetts
No comments:
Post a Comment