Fort Worth ISD delays optional, in-person learning at schools 2 more weeks to Oct. 19
Students in the Fort Worth Independent School District will have to wait an additional two weeks before they can fully transition to in-person classes.
The Fort Worth ISD school board voted to delay optional, in-person learning during a marathon meeting that lasted over 10 hours Tuesday night into Wednesday morning, pushing the district’s start date from Oct. 5 to Oct. 19.
In a 6-3 vote, the board voted down a motion to delay in-person learning by four weeks, but voted in favor of the two-week extension in a subsequent motion. During that transition period, the district has the option to send some children back to in-person classes.
The motion to push back the start date by two weeks passed with a 5-4 vote.
Trustees Tobi Jackson, Daphne Brookins, C.J. Evans and Norman Robbins voted against the measure. Board members Anne Darr, Quinton Phillips, Anael Luebanos, Ashley Paz, and President Jacinto Ramos Jr. were in favor.
Jackson said she could not support the measure because she felt that children should get back to the classroom as soon as possible.
Paz said she did not think the two weeks was long enough, but it was better than nothing.
“The city of Fort Worth closed down too late and opened back up too soon,” Paz said. “And now FWISD is going to be the scapegoat when people die.”
Darr said she liked the two-week plan because “it prioritizes the most vulnerable populations” during the coronavirus pandemic. She said that those who do not have access to the internet or remote learning can possibly start in-person learning during the transition period.
Trustees Darr, Jackson, Brookins, Evans, Luebanos and Robbins voted against the measure to push back the start date by four weeks, while Phillips, Paz, and Ramos voted in favor.
The meeting, which was live streamed on YouTube, lasted until almost 4 a.m.
The board also discussed various safety and learning plans. They approved a Texas Agency of Education waiver to implement a hybrid learning model at the high school level. The plan would split student populations to allow in-person students to go to campus on some days, but not all. The other cohort of in-person students would then attend class on the remaining days, when the first group would be in online classes. That hybrid model can go into effect whenever students return to in-person school.
The motion passed with a vote of 8-1. Evans voted no, saying she was concerned about the “open-endedness” of the hybrid model.
Per guidelines from the TEA, school systems are automatically able to limit on-campus instruction for the first four weeks of the school year, called the start-of-year transition period. For FWISD, the end of the first four weeks is on Oct. 5. To add up to an additional four weeks to the transition period, a school board has to approve a waiver from TEA.
During the transition period, the district could allow some students to return to in-person learning, but the district does not have to, according to TEA guidelines.
Tuesday night’s meeting was preceded by a protest outside the FWISD building on Shotts Street. A rally planned for staff and teachers in support of virtual learning drew both supporters and opponents to the extension of online learning.
More than 100 people stood on the sidewalk or parking lot demanding either the extension of virtual learning or the start of in-person instruction. The protest was mostly divided between parents who want the choice to send their children to school and teachers who do not feel it is safe for anyone to be in the classroom yet.
Parents and children chanted, “We want choice!” while teachers shouted, “Keep us safe!” Cars drove through the street with signs. One had the words, “Masks are disposable. Teachers aren’t!” written in orange marker on the window.
After the meeting began at 5:30 p.m., trustees heard over three hours of public comment from members of the community. While the protest outside the building was mostly divided between teachers and parents, public comments reflected an array of opinions about the back-to-school debate. Some teachers called to say they wanted to return to the classroom, while some parents said they supported the extension of virtual learning.
Teachers for virtual learning
Michelle Adams is a early childhood teacher and has been teaching 12 children virtually. She loves teaching and wants to return to the classroom, especially because young children are difficult to teach online. However, she is the primary caretaker for her mother, who has underlying health conditions.
“I can’t guarantee they’re not going to come to school with a fever or be asymptomatic,” she said. “I don’t want to feel responsible for my mom getting something and something happening because of me.”
If the district allows optional in-person learning, Adams would have to teach children virtually and in the classroom, she said. That workload would be overwhelming, especially with young children.
Windy and Adam Desmond are married and both work at FWISD schools; Windy teaches reading at International Newcomer Academy and Adam teaches theater at McClung Middle School. Windy held a sign with a photo of Tarrant County’s School Dashboard that read, “The data-driven classroom is virtual.”
The dashboard suggests various learning scenarios based on the current COVID-19 data metrics within school zones. As of Tuesday, most schools were at a point where they could consider a hybrid learning model, according to the Tarrant County Public Health Department.
Adam Desmond said the scientific evidence “overwhelmingly supports delaying in-person instruction for as long as possible.”
“We want to give the county and all the people in it more time to get the pandemic under control before we start putting 30 kids in the same room,” he said.
Despite the district’s safety plan for children to socially distance and wear masks, Adam is not confident students would follow those rules. He and Windy were also both concerned about how students of color would be affected by in-person learning. People of color are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, according to the Centers for Disease Control, and the Desmonds worried going back to school would cause even more outbreaks.
Reagan Bryant said the district should extend virtual learning until a safe plan is made. She’s seen parents post that they don’t believe in masks and worries children will not wear them.
“I see a lot of our families on social media posting about traveling and playing on sports teams and that’s their right to make that choice that for their family,” she said. “But when we get together, they’re making that choice for my family, too.”
Janet Allen teaches English at Young Men’s Leadership Academy. While parents at the protest yelled they wanted a choice, Allen said she wants the ability to choose, too.
“I’m out here because as teachers, we are not given a choice,” Allen said. “We are told we are going to teach virtual and in-person and it is impossible.”
In her experience, virtual learning works for children, but parents are not open to the idea.
Parents for in-person learning
Katherine Proctor has a second-grader and kindergartner in FWISD; she stood alongside other parents in the parking lot to demand in-person learning start on Oct. 5, as originally planned.
“I’m out here because I just believe that the school board has failed us all,” she said. “They have failed teachers and students. The teachers out here are upset because there is no plan.”
While her husband is immune-suppressed, Proctor said he was able to return to work in May because his company helped make safe accommodations. She demands that FWISD trustees do the same for teachers.
“They need to stop pitting teachers and parents against each other,” she said. “They need to protect those most vulnerable.”
Emily Chandler has five kids at FWISD and is a nurse at two hospitals. She said her hospital has redeployed employees into various roles to deal with coronavirus, and she said the district should do the same. She suggested teachers who want to remain virtual continue teaching online, while those who are comfortable returning to the classroom do so.
“What matters most is choice: we have been talking about choice since Day One,” Chandler said. “They’ve given us survey after survey, dangling the proverbial carrot and saying we’re gonna open, and then pulling it away.”
“I think there’s a way to do both. Virtual teachers can teach virtual class. Virtual learning is tough. I have five kids and I’ve watched them struggle. They’ve almost had to teach themselves with virtual. I don’t think my ZIP code or my school name is important.”
As of Tuesday, about 3,000 people signed a petition to demand in-person instruction start immediately. Joy Brocker and 14 others in the Benbrook area started the petition on Saturday.
Chrisi Petty also lives in Benbrook. At Tuesday’s protest, she held a sign that said, “BMHS demands a plan!” to show her support for in-person learning for her daughter at Benbrook Middle-High School. Petty said she is frustrated by the lack of clarity and explanation from the district on how COVID-19 decisions are being made.
“The facts seem to change daily,” she said. “It seems to be based on opinion.”
A ‘villainized’ neighborhood
She also said Benbrook has been ‘villainized’ and called racist. She referenced an editorial posted in Fort Worth Weekly by Max Krochmal, an associate professor of history at Texas Christian University and volunteer co-chair of the FWISD Board-appointed Racial Equity Committee.
Krochmal wrote that, “The folks in Tanglewood, Benbrook, and — worse — those who have already abandoned FWISD are insulated from the full effects of COVID. They have health insurance. Consider that for a moment. Tens of thousands of FWISD families do not have any health insurance and will not be able to afford treatment if someone gets sick.”
Petty, and others who live in those areas, were outraged by Krochmal’s condemnation that people in favor of in-person learning were often wealthy, privileged and “have a habit of steamrolling other voices and our collective conversations on equity.”
Petty said she has no health insurance and still wants her daughter to return to the classroom, and many people were basing their opinion on emotion and politics alone.
Chandler did not want to say what neighborhood she lives in, but she said her ZIP code should not matter.
“This is about kids,” she said. “This is about children. We all want our kids to get an education, period.”
Several people who called into public comment on Tuesday night also said they were offended by Krochmal’s column.
This story was originally published September 23, 2020 at 4:24 AM.
