Education Week - August 18, 2021 - 19

Some are coping with more limitations
on their safety strategies than
others.
Emilie Knisley, the superintendent
of the East Orange Supervisory
Union district, which serves 1,800
students on the Eastern edge of Vermont,
has something powerful going
for her in her bid to keep everyone
safe: 71 percent of those 12 and older
in her county have been vaccinated.
Local superintendents have not yet
decided whether to require masks,
but Knisley feels confident about
handling the ever-changing dynamics
in her district.
" Compared to last August, we've
done a total redesign of how we do
school, " she said. " We've learned a
lot. We went to remote for a period of
time. We quarantined. We know how
to do this. "
Utah has banned local mask mandates,
so Rae Garrison, the principal
of West Jordan Middle School, just
south of Salt Lake City, is feeling uneasy
as she prepares to welcome her
1,200 7th, 8th, and 9th graders back
to school Aug. 16.
Social distancing is challenging
with an average of 30 kids per class,
and principals have been told they
can't ask which of their students and
staff are vaccinated because doing so
might make some feel unwelcome in
school, Garrison said.
" It's taking me back to where I was
last fall, really nervous, the worst, "
she said. " We're going to have to rely
heavily on contact tracing, which is
a full-time job for my vice principals.
We're going to have to quarantine
students who don't want to be
quarantined, and do [simultaneous]
online and in-person [instruction],
which is the last thing my teachers
want to be doing. "
Cynthia Lamkin oversees Otken
Elementary, a K-3 school in southern
Mississippi, a state with one of
the lowest vaccination rates in the
country. And she's in a district that's
not offering virtual learning options
this fall.
But Lamkin's district does require
masks, and she believes that, in combination
with hand-washing, social
distancing where possible, and lots of
cleaning, will keep her school population
as safe as possible.
" Nothing is 100 percent, " she said.
" We're going to do all the things we
did last spring. It worked for us. We
didn't have a lot of cases. "
To enforce a mask mandate,
or not?
California requires schools to enforce
a mask mandate, and offer independent-study
options, including
virtual learning, for those students
who can't or won't mask. But school
leaders are juggling a host of conflicting
questions as they plan for reopening.
Tom
O'Malley, the superintendent
of Modoc Joint Unified School
District, a small, rural district on the
Oregon border, said his community's
vaccination rate is only about 40 percent,
but families there will not tolerate
a mask requirement. His five
schools stayed open last year and
people masked up, but students and
staff still got sick, usually from parents
or other off-campus adults.
" Our families saw that our kids
wore masks all year long and it didn't
matter. People still got it, " O'Malley
said. " I'm not going to kick a kid off
campus if they show up without a
mask. "
Helio Brasil sees things differently.
The superintendent of Keyes Union,
a small K-12 district in California's agricultural
Central Valley, will enforce
the state's mask mandate. His liability
insurance carrier told him " flatout "
that if he doesn't, it won't cover
claims arising from COVID-19, Brasil
said. That could expose the district to
expenses that could hamper his ability
to serve his students, he said.
" I am feeling caged and frustrated, "
Brasil said. " If a kid comes
to school without a mask, do we call
law enforcement? Every decision has
legal repercussions. I feel I have no
choice but to enforce it. But how will
this go over with my parents? "
Many school and district leaders
said they feel they can't ask which
students and staff members have
been vaccinated, because they'd
violate privacy rules or create an unwelcoming
environment. Legal experts
say individual inquiries aren't
advisable, but getting an aggregate
sense of people's vaccination status-through
an anonymous survey,
for instance-could yield valuable
insights that could inform schools'
strategies.
Educators universally said they'd
be uneasy cohorting students by
vaccination status, something the
CDC specifically warned against
in its guidance. But some said they
might consider creating options for
staff or students who-for whatever
reason-aren't comfortable in group
settings.
Paul Kelly, the principal of Elk
Grove High School in Illinois, anticipates
a mixed bag of masked and
unmasked, vaccinated and unvaccinated
students when school reopens.
Illinois had embraced the CDC's July
9 guidance that only unvaccinated
people need to wear masks, and his
district isn't offering a virtual option.
Since he won't know how much
of his school community is vaccinated,
Kelly is considering creating
safe places for those who feel vulnerable-either
because they're unvaccinated,
at high risk for COVID19,
or can't wear masks for various
reasons.
In assemblies or in the cafeteria,
for instance, he might create zones
where six feet of social distancing
is guaranteed, and allow students
and staff to choose them if they're
more comfortable. Likewise, a staff
member who is uneasy in a face-toface
group meeting might be able to
Zoom in from a nearby classroom,
Kelly said.
None of this is set in stone yet. Everything
around him keeps changing,
and he's figuring out how to handle
the shifting picture. Even without a
fully formed strategy in place yet,
Kelly knows that one thing will be
crucial to getting through the year.
" We're going to need trusting relationships
between staff and students
to make this work, " he said.
Fact Check: After Furor Over
1619 Project, Feds Adjust History
And Civics Grant Plans
A previously obscure history and civics program has weathered
a political controversy, but what exactly has changed?
By Andrew Ujifusa
The U.S. Department of Education has backed off
plans to prioritize projects funded by grants that focus
on systemic bias and marginalization in history and civics
instruction, following an uproar in the spring. But
they haven't signaled a total retreat. And what lessons
observers should draw from the controversy over the
small grant program are less than clear.
In Federal Register notices published last month, the
department said that it would invite grant proposals for
the American History and Civics program " that reflect
the diversity, identities, histories, contributions, and
experiences of all students into teaching and learning, "
but it would not give such proposals a competitive
edge. The same goes for the department's invitation for
grants to " foster information literacy skills. "
That's a departure from the department's plans in
April to prioritize those approaches when doling out
grant money. Yet key elements of the agency's philosophy
about teaching history and civics survive in
the new notice, and the department says the issues it
highlighted four months ago remain important to the
agency.
In the notice, the agency did not mention the 1619
Project, the New York Times Magazine series that put
the legacy of slavery and racism at the heart of the
American experience, and the self-described anti-racist
writer Ibram X. Kendi. That marks a departure from the
department's original proposal, which included references
to the 1619 Project and Kendi in its background
material.
Such references did not in any way require those
seeking the grant money to incorporate the 1619 Project
or Kendi into their proposals. But the mention of
them helped spark a backlash from conservative groups
and politicians; Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the top
Republican in the Senate, denounced the proposal as
" divisive nonsense. "
Conservatives hail the department's shift as a victory.
For example, Parents Defending Education, a group
that helped coordinate thousands of comments opposed
to the grant priorities, celebrated the news as a
win.
The department's preliminary plans from April did
not mention critical race theory. Yet the proposed grant
priorities also fed into the national political brawl over
the academic concept that says racism is embedded
in American policies and laws far beyond individuals'
prejudices.
As part of this backlash, at least 11 states this year
have enacted bans on teaching critical race theory or
restricted how schools address racism and sexism.
At least 4,600 of the public comments submitted to
the department about the grant plans referenced critical
race theory.
One theme of the comments critical of the department's
proposal was that it would create unnecessary
division and indoctrinate students with harmful ideologies.
Yet supporters said such approaches would
help foster an accurate and inclusive understanding of
American history. (The 1619 Project is the basis for a curriculum
developed by the Pulitzer Center.)
Here's more of what you need to know about this
controversy
The grants, which involve a little more than $5 million
this year, do not involve the creation of a curriculum endorsed
by the department. By law, the federal governONLINE
EXCLUSIVE:
Related stories appeared online recently.
Who Decides What History We Teach? An
Explainer
TIMELINE: See how schools have debated
U.S. history throughout the centuries.
edw.link/SchoolHistoryDebates
EDUCATION WEEK | August 18, 2021 | www.edweek.org | 19
ment is prohibited from telling schools what curriculum
to use or not use, a point the department stresses in its
Federal Register notice. The grants fund two distinct
programs: academies for history and civics teachers, as
well as " national activities. "
The shift by the department means that someone
seeking the grant funding wouldn't be any more or less
likely to get an award by focusing on the priorities in
question, and don't have to include them.
In addition, the sheer volume of comments, not necessarily
what the general tone of those comments are,
appears to have played a key role in the department's
shift. In Monday's notice, the agency says it is continuing
to process and respond to the " significant number " of
public comments about the grants.
" As a result, it is not possible to issue a notice of final
priorities in time to use the priorities " to give certain applicants
a competitive edge for fiscal 2021, the department's
notice says.
A federal website has logged more than 35,000 comments
about the department's proposal.
Despite dropping mentions of the 1619 Project and
Kendi, it's also clear the department's overall view about
what the grants should support hasn't fundamentally
changed.
For example, the April proposal for these grants highlights
instructional approaches that " take into account
systemic marginalization, biases, inequities, and discriminatory
policy and practice in American history, " as
well as those that " contribute to inclusive, supportive,
and identity-safe learning environments. "
The department's notice repeats that and other language
verbatim from four months ago. Such language
about systemic bias and identity-safe environments has
helped fuel strife about how schools should approach
classes about racism and sexism in America.
All that underscores the fact that while grant proposals
stressing such approaches won't officially get an edge
in the process, they could still end up winning funding.
In a blog post on the department's website, U.S. Secretary
of Education Miguel Cardona reiterated this philosophy
with respect to the grants.
" The Department recognizes the value of supporting
teaching and learning that reflects the rich diversity,
identities, histories, contributions, and experiences of
all students, " Cardona wrote. " As every parent knows,
when students can make personal connections to their
learning experiences, there are greater opportunities for
them to stay engaged in their education and see pathways
for their own futures. "
The department has yet to respond to a question by
Education Week as to whether it would try to revive
the proposed competitive priorities in some way for the
grants in future years, when the agency might be better
prepared for a high volume of public comments.
http://www.edweek.org
Education Week - August 18, 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - August 18, 2021
