SOUTH HADLEY  –   The South Hadley School Committee met for their regularly scheduled meeting on Nov. 16 over Zoom where a variety of topics were discussed, including the return to in-person learning.

The night began first with public comment, where two individuals had signed up to speak. First, Christine Phillips expressed her concerns about the School Committee delaying the return to full in-person learning. “I followed these meetings closely and am disappointed to see the decisions regarding the return to the classroom continue to be driven by the teachers union and not by the guidance from DESE and by science,” she said.

She said School Committee members had “spoken negatively about the state guidelines issued by DESE and did not seem to recognize that these guidelines are formulated by a group of educators advised by public health experts who are tasked with examining the data and make recommendations based on this.

Phillips cited several pieces of data, including a recent article in The Boston Globe that she said “reports learning may be, in fact, more dangerous in spreading the virus as parents are allowing their children to engage in less structured activities with more contact and without masks.” This, she said, is being done as parents “recognize the children’s need for social interaction with other children.”

Since children across the country have returned to school, she said transmission rates in schools have remained below community rates for COVID-19. “In Massachusetts, with 77 percent of school districts having returned to some form of in person learning, and 450,000 students in Massachusetts schools, outbreaks from school transmission are not being seen. Hence the governor’s emphasis on return to in-person education,” she said.

She urged the School Committee to reconsider a recent vote they took to hold off on every student returning to in-person learning until January. “Our students will never make up this year of education that’s being lost, our eldest students are losing critical thinking skills from lack of engagement and our children in the most need are losing out, not only to an education, but on security, food and maybe even a warm and safe place to be,” she said.

“If we value education we must not postpone discussion on bringing our students back to in person education. Any family that chooses to stay remote can do so, but those families who see their children losing ground educationally and emotionally,” we must offer the option of an in-person learning, and every day we delay in doing this is an opportunity lost for our children,” she said.

Next, resident Nicole Sanford then spoke, also expressing concern for the lack of in-person learning. She expressed concern after several individuals had submitted letters to the committee prior to her, voicing similar concerns that the committee had voted to bring back all students to in-person learning until January.

She said she had read a letter sent to the committee from Chris McCarron, who serves as the director of the pediatric intensive care unit at Baystate Hospital and her concerns were only amplified. “I read the letter Chris sent to the committee and my heart sank when I found out that pediatric hospital admissions for overdoses and suicides attempts for this fall across the state is nearly double from the same time period last year, and that these are being noted in children with no prior history of depression or emotional issues,” she said.

She pushed back on the committee’s decision and said, “With evidence of low risk of transmission in the schools and medical experts reporting the mental health concerns surrounding social isolation due to remote learning, I don’t understand how the School Committee can continue to argue that they’re keeping everyone safe,” she said. “Why are you not following the advice of medical experts and DESE guidance?”

Sanford closed by encouraging the committee to consider providing a written response to several questions her husband had submitted as the district had in the past.

As the meeting went on, several committee members commented on the thought that the teachers union was driving the decisions being made. Committee member Allyson Garcia said, “I’m getting really kind of tired of the narrative that teachers are getting everything they want. I don’t actually think that that is true, so I’ve heard it. I heard it a few times in the beginning of this meeting and I’ve heard it in the past, I’ve been hearing it for weeks.

“I think it’s just weighing on my chest, shoulders and I feel like it’s important to say in this meeting that they are, and always have been, the folks that take care of our kids all day and they spend their own money on supplies every year and we don’t bat an eyelash, we expect it of them,” she said. “And it’s okay for them to worry about the safety of themselves and of their families.”

English teacher Amy Foley also had the opportunity to speak and presented some fears teachers had shared with her about returning to a full in-person learning model. “Without special education populations returning and with the numbers in the state going up, I thought I could talk to you about how all the teachers are feeling in the building,” she said, and urged the committee “to continue the course with remote learning.”   

She said while she was aware it didn’t work for everyone, it was about being responsible in the decisions they were making. “I know it doesn’t work for everyone, but I think looking to open schools while our coronavirus numbers are skyrocketing is really on some level not responsible,” she said. “We’re putting a lot of people at risk and it’s not just our students, but it’s our staff. We have to be cognizant of that.”

Foley referenced the state data with regard to the spread of the virus among young people, and said no one was saying that they should continue to teach remote forever. “If you also look at the population, the age, which coronavirus is spreading the fastest right now, it’s in the age of zero to 19 years old, which is extremely concerning. And I think that’s where a lot of us are concerned with the guidance of the state, is these numbers are out there, our numbers are going up,” she said. “We’re not saying we want to stay remote forever, we want to say remote until it’s safe for everyone to go back.”

She also spoke about some instances she heard from teachers who were working in the schools struggling to maintain social distancing. She spoke about the staff at Plains Elementary School, who were working with kindergarteners. “We know that five year olds don’t have the best motor skills. Five year olds struggle at times to put their masks back on, to keep their masks on. Staff members are reporting working one to one with students and being unable to keep that six feet social distancing, and they are way beyond the 15 minutes and 24 hours,” she said. “These kids need so much support that they’re sitting with them probably, on average from what I’ve heard described, four hours out of the six hour day.”

She also referenced Mosier Elementary School which, in their first week back to in-person learning, had a confirmed case of COVID-19. This, she said, wasn’t just concerning because of the positive case, but also of the need for consistency for special education students. “My concern is we just had special populations, especially from Mosier School kids, in the age group who were in for four days last week with teachers, now they’re out for two days,” she said. “I don’t think they probably have a well-developed understanding of why they’re out and what that lack of consistency is now.”

Foley, too, said she didn’t feel as though it was “the union against the schools” during negotiations. “I really feel like each of the meetings our communication has gotten better, I really felt as though it was more of a collaborative effort the last meeting, which really gives me hope that we’re moving in the right direction to make the right decision and that’s why we really want to have metrics,” she said.

Next, interim Superintendent Dr. Diana L Bonneville gave an update. She said she had heard from the school physician about their re-entry plans. “He did look at our re-entry plans and it did seem to be a thorough and complete document, trying to cover many areas. And he concentrated on the issues involving viral symptoms transmissions and the protocols and potential exposure of local cohorts,” she said. “It seems to me that we are trying to be as safe as possible, and he believes the community needs to move forward to reopen.”

She also went over the number of students who were learning in person currently and what the total number would be when a new cohort began in person learning on Nov. 30. At the Plains school there were 49 students in person with an additional 80 students planned to return with the next cohort. This, she explained, was due to the fact that the next cohort included all of kindergarten and first grade students.

At Mosier School she said there were 35 students learning in person and another 35 students would join them on Nov. 30. The Michael E. Smith Middle School, she said, had 35 students learning in person with an additional 31 returning with the new cohort. The high school at the time of the meeting and 37 in person learning with six more students returning on Nov. 3.

She said, in total, there were 159 students learning in person at that time in school, and 154 students would be added with the new cohort. “So the total, it would be 313 students, which is roughly 16 percent of our population,” she said.

The committee also spent a significant amount of the meeting planning for the three meetings following their meeting meetings that would serve as individual interviews for the three final candidates for the superintendent. Preparations included reviewing potential questions for the candidates.

The principals for each school also gave an update to how the re-entry into school has been. Each principal agreed that while there were struggles and it was not the typical school that they were used to, the students and staff were doing really well and seemed to be excited to be back in school. However, principals of elementary schools said it had been slightly difficult to adhere to social distancing as many students needed help with everyday tasks such as getting on and off the bus.

The principals also discussed their procedure for distributing personal protective equipment (PPE), and said they were in good standing for the amount of materials they had at the moment.

The School Committee then went on to discuss the Memorandum of Understanding between the district and the teachers union. Member Christine Philips said that while she agreed this was a good starting point, they’d had three meetings with the teachers union at this time and more progress needed to be made towards progress and meeting in the middle. After a small edit to a phrase, the memorandum was approved unanimously.