Districts mull over online classes for fall
After more than a year of offering remote learning, public schools across Connecticut are calling it quits on the still widespread practice.
The state education department told school districts last month they will not be required to provide a remote option this fall, leading some to announce they will not offer it, while others continue to mull it over.
Many districts in the Bridgeport and Danbury areas, as well as New Haven and West Haven, have decided not to offer distance learning, while schools in Stamford and Greenwich are still weighing their options.
But some experts question whether there might be a missed opportunity to embrace virtual enrichment and new technology — not only in reactive, crisis mode, but as part of a larger change in approaches to learning.
“Teachers have new fluency with technology,” said Michael Young, who coordinates the educational technology program at UConn’s Neag School of Education. “Students have new fluency. Society and legislatures have a sense that this is doable now, because we did it for a year.”
The education department’s April guidance said it does not anticipate needing to mandate remote learning models and to prepare for returning to classrooms.
“Access to in- person learning opportunities is a priority, particularly due to the significance of the social- emotional environment
provided through student and adult interactions during the school day,” the guidance read.
But officials signaled they plan to support districts using virtual learning “judiciously,” such as for high- level or specialized classes, supplementary learning and emergency situations. The department also plans to draft standards for future use.
The pandemic forced educators to get creative with online classes and education technology, and added urgency to closing the digital divide so that more students can access these tools. Some experts would like to see the positive aspects of this widespread experiment in multimodal education carry into the future.
“We’ve learned some things, what the limits ( of virtual learning) are and what the value is,” said Young, the UConn professor. “It’s not for everybody, but it’s definitely for some kids.”
Young said researchers are still working through what they saw in education’s emergency response to COVID- 19, but that virtual learning and technology could be valuable parts of the school experience. It can also be used to meet the needs of certain students, including those with interests not met by the district’s current offerings or who for whatever reason can’t take advantage of the classroom experience, such as due to medical conditions or suspension.
The state’s guidance comes as more than 75 percent of school districts in Connecticut offer fully in- person learning, according to the state data. But the data does not represent the share of students taking advantage of that option: Even when schools reopen, many families opt to keep students home.
Districts responded to the issuance with a flurry of memos, many of which stated their intent not to offer online programs going forward.
“We must return back to full in- person teaching and learning in order to provide children with the care and support they so desperately need to grow and succeed in life,” Bridgeport Superintendent Michael Testani wrote in an April 30 memo.
For now, Testani estimated roughly 60 percent of
Bridgeport students attend in- person classes.
Neighboring school districts reached similar conclusions.
In Stratford, Superintendent Janet Robinson alerted families there will be no remote option this fall. Almost a quarter of the district’s students are still learning remotely, with most of them in high school, she said at a Board of Education meeting.
“This will be a great relief to our teachers, who have been teaching on two platforms for more than a year,” said Robinson. “It has become very, very exhausting.”
Shelton Superintendent Ken Saranich announced that it too will not be providing a distance option — a decision applauded by the local teachers’ union.
“In- school learning is the most effective way to learn,” said Deb Keller, Perry Hill music teacher who heads the union.
“There may be situations that will require a virtual opportunity,” said Board of Education Chair Kathy Yolish, a veteran teacher of 35 years. “But that may have to be provided on a case- by- case basis.”
In Fairfield, Superintendent Michael Cummings told families the district will not offer daily remote classes. However, officials are monitoring state standards for long- term uses of virtual learning and will provide more information following the release of those details.
Trumbull Superintendent Martin Semmel told the school board in- person is superior to remote, and he expects that with more vaccines the COVID- 19 crisis will be under control by September — though that could change at any time, he cautioned.
At the meeting, a board member questioned what would happen to unvaccinated students if they could not attend remotely.
“You have some options like home schooling, or some other options,” said Semmel. “But my understanding is public school would not be an option.”
Danbury Superintendent Sal Pascarella recommended against distance learning to promote student wellbeing and avoid staffing challenges.
The local school board will vote on a proposal for socially distanced, in- person learning on Wednesday. Remote learning would likely be available for students who need to quarantine due to COVID exposures.
One board member suggested the district keep distance learning for students who want it and to address overcrowding.
“We have the technology,” said Rachel Chaleski. “We have the platform. We have the wherewithal for distance learning. We talked about this pre- COVID as a possible way of address overcrowding and now we’re just going to shut the door on that option?”
Bethel and Brookfield do not anticipate offering distance learning but would work with students with certain medical conditions. New Fairfield voted not to offer online classes but could have a teacher dedicated to temporary distance learners with medical exemptions or who need to quarantine, according to
Superintendent Pat Cosentino.
In Stamford, officials had talked earlier in the school year about likely offering remote classes in the future, but the district has since welcomed back more students to school buildings. For now, the district is still evaluating its options.
“Just because the state doesn’t require us to, doesn’t mean that we won’t if we feel that there is a certain population of families that still feel like that’s the choice they want to make,” said Amy Beldotti, associate superintendent for teaching and learning.
Greenwich, too, is in the decision- making process. “We will be evaluating, as a district, how to address our future planning here in Greenwich,” said Superintendent Toni Jones.
New Haven and West Haven have told all families to prepare for in- person school next school year.
“Our expectation is that all students will return to the classroom in the fall,” said West Haven Superintendent Neil Cavallaro. “Given our experience with remote learning and the investment this district has made in technology, the board should develop a policy as to when it can be used.
“Some examples could include snow days, students recovering from an illness or injury, or possibly cooperating with other districts to create classes of interest that would not have enough students if offered individually,” he said.