OpEd: Is Remote Learning Model Safer And Does It Reflect Our Aspirations As A Community?

By 2 Comments

Photo: Remote learning

By: Jamal Saeh, Maysoun Shomali, Kelly Chiu

Advocates for reopening schools believe that Belmont is ready to open school per the Department of Elementary & Secondary Education guidance.  The majority of Belmont parents voted for the hybrid model.  A number of us have worked on solutions to improve the air circulation in Belmont school buildings, and proposed strategies for surveillance testing, and daily symptom reporting & temperature checks as tools to further reduce the risk of coronavirus infection for students and staff.  

Public schools should provide remote learning as an option for those families who have risk factors requiring them to keep their children at home.  It must not however limit the opportunities for the rest of the Belmont community who, in trusting the experts, believe that what is best for their families is a meaningful return to school. Similarly, remote learning cannot become the default option through measures that handicap the hybrid models, limiting in-person instructional time to six hour a week despite having initiatives like surveillance testing that can help increase the number of hours students can safely spend with their teachers and peers.  Advocates for remote learning say “remote is an extreme action to an extreme situation;” we say solutions built on extreme fear beget extreme policies, and are rarely effective.  

The Boston Globe reported on how state emergency child care centers managed the COVID-19 infection risks. By following the state guided risk mitigation countermeasures, only nine out of the 550 centers had more than a single infection between March and May 2020. Remarkably, this was both during a time when the state was practically in lockdown, and at centers that were catering to children of essential workers, who are perceived to be at the highest risk of infection. This good news suggests that the state guided risk mitigation plans enable the safe reopening of Belmont schools.  

A recent publication in Science questioned the effectiveness of school closures. Researchers observed that “given the near universal closing of schools in conjunction with other lockdown measures, it has been difficult to determine what benefit, if any, closing schools have over other interventions.” Further, they conclude “[t]here is now an evidence base on which to make decisions, and school closure should be undertaken with trepidation given the indirect harms that they incur. Pandemic mitigation measures that affect children’s wellbeing should only happen if evidence exists that they help because there is plenty of evidence that they do harm.”

Some claim that remote learning options are the safest option for families and teachers, but what does the evidence tell us?  Scientists at Stanford University analyzed real-world-evidence of Covid-19 infections after schools reopened around the country.  Data collected over a two week period from 598 schools in 46 states, 353,311 students, and 41,628 staff show that the risk of infection to students and teachers is low across all school opening plans.  The data were reported by 64% of public schools, the rest were by private or independent schools.  To a large degree, the mitigation plans implemented in these schools were similar to Belmont Public Schools (BPS).  Mitigation strategies reported included less than 90 percent of students and staff masking, 79 percent of schools reported increased ventilation and 72 percent reported cohorting. Only 8 percent of schools had staff tested before the start of school. The summary in Figure 1 shows that the risk to teachers and students are not too dissimilar across models. The suspected and confirmed COVID-19 infections among staff in Remote and “All In Person Full Capacity” was 0.37 percent and 0.31 percent respectively.  Said differently, staying at home does not appear to reduce the staff risk of infection to zero and is likely similar to the risk of going to school in person.  Risk mitigation measures at schools are effective in reducing the risk.  Further, it suggests that children are not vectors of community infection, consistent with a body of evidence that indicates that infection rate in K-12 schools reflects the prevalence in the community. This is reassuring data and supports the reopening of Belmont schools. It also invites the Belmont School Committee, the administration and the community to examine other risks and issues specific to the remote learning model.

Figure 1: Incidence of Covid-19 infection published in  National COVID-19 School Response Data Dashboard accessed 27Sep20.

It will take years to fully assess the impact of remote learning on children’s emotional and physical wellbeing.  The American Academy of Pediatrics led a push for students to be physically present in classrooms rather than continue in remote learning and was reflected in the CDC recommendation.  A CDC report revealed that as of late June 2020, anxiety disorders had tripled compared to 2019.  A survey of case studies in local hospitals and schools suggest that “Boston has a looming public health crisis” and that “children are not OK”. There is published data that support the AAP position to send kids back to school.  One study showed the risk of depression and suicide in children decreased when schools reopened. Another study showed that during quarantine, home had become more dangerous than schools.  More domestic accidents were reported requiring emergency visits, with a higher incidence of accidents than in the previous three years.  With the Covid-19 infection risk being so low to both children and teachers, the school committee and the administration must confront how their school opening plans are compromising the mission of public education.

It is important that we reflect on less technocratic critiques of remote learning that are fundamental to our aspirations as a public school system and a country. Remote learning rewards the economically privileged and disadvantages the rest, particularly people of color.  Consider the solutions that are at the disposal of those more able to manage the negative aspects of remote learning: the formation of “pandemic pods,” hiring professionals to quarterback their children’s remote education, and staying at home to supervise their children’s learning are just a few examples.  While we may want to consider these as personal and benign in nature, they exclude the people that public education was designed to support, and worse, have the potential to perpetuate racial inequities.  In an era when, rightly, Belmont Public Schools has championed a focus on equity and restorative justice, we must consider the placement of remote learning in the troubled history of public schooling in this country: It is part of a continuum of “white flight” that weakens public schools and presents obstacles to integration efforts and equity.  

By choosing hybrid, Belmont is saying we’re better than this.

Jamal Saeh, PhD is the Executive Director and Global Program Leader in early clinical oncology group at Astrazeneca. He is a Belmont parent to two Belmont High students.

Maysoun Shomali is a principal scientist and lab head at Sanofi. She is a Belmont parent to two kids in the public schools.

Kelly Chiu, MD FAAP is Assistant in Medicine, Division of General Pediatrics and Instructor in Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School.  She is a parent to two school aged kids.

Positive COVID Case Detected At Winn Brook

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The Winn Brook Elementary School

A member of the Winn Brook Elementary community tested positive with COVID-19, according to the Belmont Department of Health.

The Health Department confirmed on Monday, Sept. 28 that either a student or staff member at the school located at the corner of Waterhouse Road and Cross Street has been diagnosed with the coronavirus, according to Belmont Superintendent John Phelan.

“I am grateful for the proactive, swift, and responsive measures that have been taken to ensure the safety of everyone in the Belmont Public Schools community, and I thank you for your partnership,” said Phelan in an email to the district and community

According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health guidelines, the infectious period for COVID-19 is two days prior to becoming symptomatic or, if asymptomatic, two days prior to testing. Beth Rumley, Belmont Public School’s director of nursing determined the school community member was not present at school during their infectious period. Therefore, no close contacts were identified among the school community in this situation.

Phelan said the district has taken the following steps after the notification:

  • The Belmont Department of Health and Rumley immediately began case investigations.
  • The district has planned for such a scenario during its reopening planning process and have a comprehensive plan in place. All of those protocols have been implemented.
  • To further prevent transmission of the virus to other staff and students, the district sanitized the school with a focus on the areas frequented by the community member that tested positive.
  • The Winn Brook student body and staff that are in school have been closely adhering to the safety protocols, including mask wearing, hand washing, and physical distancing. 

“We are grateful to our families for their continued efforts to keep students at home at the first sign of symptoms.  These measures, taken in combination, greatly reduce the risk of additional transmission.

Spit, ‘Poop’ Or Both: School Committee Explores Testing Options In Push Towards In-School Learning

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Mirimus Labs image

The Belmont School Committee took the first steps in implementing a testing regime that could spur students to return full-time to the classroom.

Promoted by School Committee Chair Andrea Prestwich and a group of parents acting as ad hoc advisors, testing would provide students and teachers the necessary “peace of mind” as they prepare to reenter schools.

“One thing that will add considerably to the safety of in-person learning is surveillance testing,” said Prestwich, as the committee unanimously supported a proposal for the school administration to look at the feasibility and logistics of surveillance testing at Belmont Public Schools.

The School Committee will update the testing proposals at its Tuesday meeting, Sept. 29.

Kate Jeffrey, a Harvard-affiliated academic scientist and the parent of a Burbank first grader, presented a plan created by fellow parents, Jamal Saeh and Larry Schmidt, that recommends the district continue its safety and health protocol such as proper social distancing and wearing masks with weekly surveillance tests and contract tracing through the town’s Health Department.

Both Jeffrey and Prestwich said the lack of guidance by the state and the federal government on the use and type of surveillance testing has forced Belmont’s hand on moving on its own to establish its own standards.

Unlike diagnostic tests that are performed on individuals who have symptoms, surveillance testing seeks out the infection within a population which in Belmont’s case will be the school district.

While the CDC does not promote its use, “surveillance testing is the only way to bring [the school district] back to normalcy,” said Jeffrey.

Not that Belmont is that far from putting students back into the classrooms. With biweekly community data showing a less than one percent infection rate per 100,000 residents and school-age rates less than a half of one percent, Jeffrey said the anticipated current number of positive COVID-19 cases of the 5,000 students in the district would be three.

And while it would be optimum that there would be no risk, Jeffrey said that is simply unrealistic so the best can be done is to reduce the overall risk with surveillance testing to increase the amount of time students can stay in class.

While most people will associate COVID-19 testing with a swab rammed into the nasal cavity, methods have advanced where saliva – drawn into a straw than placed into a container – is used to extract the RNA that are highly specific pinpointing the virus. While there are false positives at about 3 percent – Jeffrey noted half of peanut allergy tests produce false positive results – they can be detected when the individual goes to their physician.

The recommended affective options available would be fast test produced by Mirimus Labs which will analyze a pool of 25 saliva samples, about the size of a classroom, with the ability to identifying a positive case within 12 hours. The Brooklyn-based firm can breakdown the large sample into pairs and determine which students will need to seek treatment.

Jeffrey said Mirimus can begin sample testing within two days after being selected. It would need two volunteers to collect the saliva and fill out the data forms for every grouping of 250 students.

After the first week in which all students and teachers would take the test to establish a baseline number, each subsequent week 10 percent of students – approximately 500 students – and all educators would be tested. The baseline test will cost $80,000 and the subsequent cost for the school year will be approximately $500,000.

Fundraising, possible federal or state expenditures and future lower cost testing could fund the proposal.

Jeffrey’s recommends the district start with the available Mirimus lab-based technology, than switching to a cheaper point-of-care approach when one becomes available likely by the end of the year.

While this new testing remains important for the community by supplying information on COVID, its greatest benefit “really has to be in returning students to the classroom,” said Jeffrey.

A second testing scheme – reviewed by Prestwich and Dr. Kate Rodriguez-Clark – is to sample the wastewater at the six school buildings. COVID is present in fecal matter so testing would involve the weekly collection of sewage from each school. The samples would be tested by a company like Biobot Analytics that can identify a single infection from the samples. The cost would be $8,500 a week for all buildings.

The advantage of using wastewater testing is it works well in tandem with the saliva testing in tracking the virus and it is easier to collect a sample. One negative is a person with the coronavirus must use the restroom at the school for the sample to register a positive case. Describing the dilemma resulted in Prestwich likely uttering the first mention of the slang definition of solid waste from the body in a future school committee minutes.

“The bottom line is that if the person who was infected with COVID doesn’t poop at school then we will not detect it … and that’s a drawback,” said Prestwich.

While calling the overall testing proposal “an exciting opportunity” to increase the peace of mind of educators and the public, Belmont Superintendent John Phelan said it will be a challenge to see how the district “operationalize” testing with the knowledge that the district has 4,500 student and 625 staff member between the ages of 3 and well past 60.

School Committee member Kate Bowen wondered aloud how necessary a costly surveillance testing regiment is for Belmont after the school district had “taken great steps in improving the buildings” including increasing the air flow in all school rooms and as the community has a very low rate of infection.

Prestwich noted that while the town’s “rates are low at this point … COVID increases exponentially if you don’t keep a lid on it.”

“Hopefully the precautions that we can take will prevent the numbers from shooting up,” she said.

Hybrid Learning For K-4 Pushed Up To Oct. 5; Calls For Grades 5-12 To Follow

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Hybrid plans accelerated

The Belmont School Committee approved moving up the date kindergarteners and elementary students will begin full hybrid learning by two weeks to Monday, Oct. 5, allowing nearly 2,000 students to start partial in-school learning.

“Two weeks is tight but we’re committed to hearing the feedback and responding to the school committee’s desire to have this happen sooner than later,” said Belmont School Superintendent John Phelan.

At another marathon committee meeting held remotely on Tuesday, Sept. 22, Phelan told the six member board the district accelerated the start date for K-4 students “reacting and responding to the community feedback that has asked to tightened up” the time between entering each new phase.

Earlier in the meeting, the committee approved the kindergarten and elementary school hybrid schedule which will be used by students. It consists of two cohorts of students attending school three half dsfdays the first week while spending two other days online.

Phelan said the school district is now following a newly redesigned four phase approach, removing the recently installed “bridge” phase and beefing up Phase 2 to include full K-4 hybrid learning. Middle and high school students will remain learning remotely.

While not yet approved by the school committee, the district showed on a PowerPoint slide that grades 5-12 could anticipate entering their hybrid phase on Monday, Oct. 22.

The district’s discussion to accelerate the move to hybrid learning is due to a pair of good news on the health and safety front. Despite a recent uptick in positive COVID-19 cases in the past week, Belmont remains on the “good side” of the state’s health metric. The district is also nearly complete with its project to increase the air flow to all rooms in each of the six school buildings. By meeting these two measures, the district can now move towards hiring the needed teaching staff to handle remote learners and create schedules for children who require transportation.

Current K-4 teachers will use the next two weeks to prepare their classrooms for learning, said Phelan.

Since the start of schools last Wednesday, between 120-130 pre-kindergarteners, students designated as having “high needs” and English language learners are being taught in the four elementary schools with full day instruction, said Phelan.

Under Phase 2, an additional 100 students with special needs and English learners who will be attending both the Chenery and the High School. “This next phase is a real scaling up not just for the elementary schools in full but also for another layer of student at the middle school and high school,” said Phelan.

While praising the work the district has done in getting “our K through 12 students in the door,” School Committee member Michael Crowley asked if there was some possibility to bring the remaining students back into the classrooms “a little bit earlier.”

Saying he might be receiving emails that “won’t be happy with what I’m about say,” Phelan said the scaling up behind the scenes what needs to be done for the middle and high schools – placing students and siblings in cohorts, making sure transportation can be done safely, hiring teachers for remote learners – “is infinitely more complex” compared to the elementary schools.

“We’ve accelerated [the date to enter hybrid learning] twice already and the educators are already very concerned about their ability to complete this task to the satisfaction that everybody would like so we are trying to meet in the middle and respond accordingly,” said Phelan.

Free Breakfast, Lunch For ALL Belmont Public School Students

By 2 Comments

Dustin O’Brien, the food service director for the Belmont Public Schools, announced on Tuesday, Sept. 22 that the US DA has extended a waiver that allows schools to serve free breakfast and lunch to ALL students, as late as Dec. 31, 2020 or as long as funding is available. 

“We are thrilled with this news as it means that we will be able to provide all Belmont students with nutritious and nourishing food for free that will support them, both in school and at home,” said O’Brien.

What this means for your family and for Belmont Public Schools?

  • Your children, from birth to 21, will receive a healthy breakfast and lunch to cover the week, at no cost. 
  • This allows Belmont to provide the most nourishing and appetizing meals possible for your children. When your children eat school meals, it helps the school system by providing federal funds to the district. The more meals we serve, the more funding we receive, allowing us to focus on meal quality, variety and innovative practices (new recipes, frozen take home meals, etc.). If your children have never before participated in school meals, consider trying the program this year!
  • It helps you save time and money. By allowing us to prepare meals for your children you don’t have to plan and shop for your children’s breakfast and lunch each school day. 

Here are the multiple methods in which meals will be available.  

OPTION ONE: WEDNESDAY MEAL PICK UP 

You may pick up meals for your children who are remote learners at the designated school below. Each meal kit will have a total of 7 breakfast and 7 lunch meals. You will need to provide your student’s name/s for record keeping purposes. 

DATE/TIME: Every Wednesday from 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

LOCATION: Belmont High School (Loading Dock), 221 Concord Ave.

OPTION TWO: HOME DELIVERED MEALS 

FREE AND REDUCED MEAL BENEFITS: Starting this week, meal kits will be delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 9AM to 3PM. This will be a no-contact delivery where we will ring the doorbell or callbox to let you know meals have arrived. Once you receive your first delivery (ex. Tuesday), that will be delivery day each week (pending no holidays). 

You are welcome to opt out of this service by emailing Assistant Food Service Director, Gail Mulani, at gmualni@belmont.k12.ma.us . Please include the names of your student/s and home address. 

FULL PAID: For families not receiving free or reduced meal benefits but would like to take part in the weekly meal kits, we encourage you to utilize the Wednesday meal pick up.

If you cannot attend the meal pick up hours, you can request a weekly meal delivery by filling out this survey. Surveys will be reviewed on a weekly basis and delivery lists will be adjusted. Please note we will do our best to accommodate all requests. 

NON-BELMONT RESIDENTS: If you are currently receiving meals delivered to your home from Belmont Food Service, this will continue through remote learning and will be reassessed at the next phase. 

If you cannot attend the meal pick up hours, you can request a weekly meal delivery by filling out this survey. Surveys will be reviewed on a weekly basis and delivery lists will be adjusted. Please note we will do our best to accommodate all requests. 

Please visit this website for emergency meal sites around Boston and/or contact the Project Bread FoodSource Hotline at 1-800-645-8333.

OPTION THREE: STUDENTS AT SCHOOL

If you have students in school, both breakfast and lunch will be offered to them during the school day. Each building is accommodating seating inside and outside (breakfast and lunch) of the building to ensure social distancing is maintained while masks are removed. Menu options will vary in each building. 

LABBB Students: As students are not eating lunch on site, please touch base with your building coordinator if interested in grab n’ go lunches to be sent home with your child daily.

FREE AND REDUCED MEAL APPLICATIONS (ONLINE)

The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education have requested that the USDA extend free meals for all students for the entire school year. However, as of now, the USDA has only allowed this as late as December 31, 2020 or as long as funding is available. Therefore, families should still submit a household application to determine eligibility for free and reduced price school meals. This will also allow students to qualify for any additional benefits and ensure a seamless transition when schools move back to a paid program (if the waiver is not extended for January to June 2021).  The free and reduced meal application is available for submission at this link; Free and Reduced Meal Application Form

Please reach out with any questions you might have. Your children are the reason we do our jobs and we are here to make sure that they are fueled with good food!

‘Let’s Make It Work’ COVID-19 Surveillance Testing: Another Parent-led Solution To Re-open Belmont Schools

By 2 Comments

Photo: Testing is around the corner

By Jamal Saeh, Kate Jeffrey, Larry Schmidt

The last academic year left many parents and students full of anxiety. Will remote learning work? Why can’t schools start with hybrid now? How can we help remove obstacles for increased in-person learning?

School started this year a little rocky despite heroic efforts by teachers. Technology did not always cooperate, some kids were in tears, and parents’ work schedules were disrupted. Some were luckier and fared better.  As part of the next phase, the school administration presented a hybrid model that involves approximately six hours of in-person learning per week and trimmed curricula. Little has been presented by BPS leadership about the constraints behind this model or the rationale for the timetable for the hybrid.   

In stark contrast to BPS, multiple K-12 systems have initiated full four to five day in-person models owing to thorough planning geared at removing obstacles such as air quality issues and Covid-19 surveillance. It’s therefore not surprising that many Belmont parents remain worried that their children will continue to fall behind when compared to their peers around the country who will benefit from more robust in-person learning.

All school administrators and committees are grappling with the question: “How do you maximize education while minimizing the risk of infection?” Inherent in this question is an acceptance of risk. While the risk can never be zero, science can help us quantify the risk and guide our strategies for maximizing educational opportunities. 

Recent quantitative analysis of various school opening scenarios, including one similar to the Belmont Public Schools hybrid model, suggests that the risk of infection is very low and supports schools opening in hybrid now.  For example, based on Glanz et al., the risk is low for a BPS student to come to school with the virus. If some do, with current risk mitigation countermeasures, Cohen et al conclude that the cumulative risk is also very low.  

To further reduce the risk and to better enable more in-person learning opportunities, multiple K-12 schools have initiated surveillance testing (e.g. Wellesley, Belmont Hill, Boston Public Schools,  NH, UN Int). A parent-led proposal will be presented at the upcoming School Committee meeting advocating for a cost-effective surveillance strategy. 

Two key barriers preventing routine testing are cost and logistics, and we believe we’ve made progress on both fronts. We’ve identified a promising ready-to-deploy solution from Mirimus labs that couples the gold standard RT-PCR test with a strategy to pool saliva samples from multiple individuals followed by a deconvolution step to identify the infected individual. The saliva collection is easy, results are provided within 12 hours for approximately $15/person. However, the estimate for the often requested weekly testing of the 4,800 BPS community is more than $2 million for the academic year, and more prohibitive for twice weekly.

We propose a pragmatic, scientifically driven solution.  All 4,800 BPS members can be tested ahead of the start of the hybrid phase for approximately $75,000. This will allow the identification and quarantine of infected individuals while students are in remote thus minimizing disruption. Once the hybrid starts, weekly surveillance is possible via random sampling of the BPS population. Random testing is a well-established scientific alternative to testing everyone. Experts recommend(1,2) that, for a district like BPS, a 7.5 percent sampling threshold can be adopted as an effective surveillance metric, a rate consistent with the surveillance plans implemented in independent schools.   We estimate the cost of weekly testing to be $325,000 for the entire year, which ignores the likely possibility that costs will decline going forward. The cost includes testing teachers.

In conclusion, our view is that a robust surveillance testing regimen is within reach financially for BPS and can be implemented in days. However, the surveillance testing should not be viewed as a prerequisite for executing BPS’ existing reopening plan given Belmont’s very low rates of community spread. Such a program makes it easier to track conditions in real time and reduces risks of larger outbreaks.  It should be implemented along with a broader set of changes to the BPS reopening plan which enable much more substantial in-person instruction opportunities for our students. If the extra peace of mind this provides enables our students and teachers to have much more robust face-to-face interactions, this will be money very well spent.

Jamal Saeh is the Executive Director and Global Program Leader at a local pharmaceutical company. He is a Belmont parent to two BHS students.

Kate Jeffre is an immunologist at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. She is a Belmont parent to a first grader.

Lawrence Schmidt is the Victor J. Menezes Career Development Professor of Finance at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management. He is a Belmont parent of three children.

Letter To The Editor: School Re-Opening Less Than Ideal But Pandemic Limits What Can Be Done

By 5 Comments

Photo: Return to learning has been less than ideal

Dear Belmont Parents and Community:

As a member of the School Committee, I’m fully aware that many parents are deeply unhappy with the fall reopening plans for our schools. Based on the volume of emails and phone calls, it’s also clear that many people do not think the School Committee is listening. I can assure you that we are.

Many parents want a return to in-person learning as quickly as possible. Rightly, they point to good health metrics and the probability that we could begin using many classrooms in hybrid with safety. Yes, the metrics are good and we probably can begin using many classrooms but it will be a few more weeks before we do that.

I have been a proponent of a quicker move to hybrid reopening for Belmont’s schools. Not everyone agrees on the timetable, and I understand that. It’s not an easy thing to gamble with people’s health, but that’s essentially what we do when we proceed to reopen schools without due caution during a pandemic. Between myself, other members of the School Committee, the Superintendent, and our educators, there are some differences of opinion about what “due caution” means. In every negotiation, there are differences of opinion. When decision making depends on satisfying many different and very reasonable concerns about health and safety, some flexibility is needed. At the end of the day, no one wants to be responsible for opening in a way that leads to anyone getting sick, being hospitalized, or even dying.

We’ve just gotten summary feedback from our consulting engineers who have been evaluating our air handling systems in the school buildings. We’ll get the full reports in days. So far things look pretty good, as long as we plan to open windows in our classrooms or use air purification equipment that we’ve bought. But we’ll be proceeding to in-person learning in our school buildings in a deliberate and orderly manner only after the consultant reports have been received, fully digested, and responded to in a way that mitigates any problems with space that needs to be used. It would be unwise to do otherwise. Because the school buildings are not ready, there has been no other option – to be clear, absolutely no other way to proceed – but to begin the school year in remote mode. We’ll get the schools opened for in-person learning, but it just will take a little more time. 

Apart from getting back to in-person learning, we are getting lots of feedback about the remote school plan, which has been adopted by the School Committee, as well as the hybrid plan, which is still under discussion. Not everyone is happy with the remote schedules, including school start times, lunch breaks, and time between classes. It is a complicated negotiation to build out these schedules, and not all needs can be satisfied. Similarly, to try to undertake school in a hybrid fashion AND provide remote-only for those parents needing that option for their children necessarily means that there will be more asynchronous learning (e.g., taped lessons, students working on their own, etc.). The school district does not have enough resources to do much better than this. 

It is deeply unfortunate that our children will continue to experience school in a less than ideal way this school year. I know that our school administrators and educators – and every member of the School Committee – is deeply regretful for this. We all recognize that this isn’t the way school should be done. But we also know that there are limits to what can be done during a pandemic with the kinds of resources that we have. Everyone, too, is committed to making this the best experience possible for your children.

I know that parents will continue to be concerned about our schools and I hope that you’ll continue to share your concerns with me and other members of the School Committee. At the same time, I hope that we’ll have your patience as we work to change what we can AND your understanding in realizing that there will be limits to what can be done for your children with the resource constraints that our schools operate under.

Best,

Mike Crowley

Member, Belmont School Committee

17 Students From Belmont High And Belmont Hill Named National Merit Semifinalists

By Leave a Comment

Photo: 17 National Merit semifinalists in Belmont

Fourteen Belmont High School students and three who attend The Belmont Hill school were named semifinalists by the National Merit Scholarship Corporation during a presentation on Sept. 9.

At the beginning of each school year, the Evanston, Ill-based NMSC reveals the students who will go on to compete for scholarships in the spring. Approximately 7,600 of the 16,000 semifinalists will win scholarships for 2021.

According to NMSC, semifinalists are determined by the results of pre-SAT tests taken by about 1.5 million high school juniors nationwide during the previous school year. Semifinalists are the highest scorers in each of the 50 states and represent fewer than one percent of each state’s high school seniors. 

Those students named finalists will then apply to obtain scholarships up to $2,500.

The Belmont semifinalists are:

Belmont High School

  • Isabel T. Burger
  • Katarina L. Chen
  • Charlotte E. Conroy
  • Alexander W. Fick
  • Sarah A. Firth
  • David A. Jen
  • Edward P. Lee
  • Alicia A. Lugovskoy
  • William J. Mann
  • Timothy J. Minicozzi
  • Jessica D. Peng
  • Jason Tang
  • Howell Xia
  • Yao Xiao

The Belmont Hill School

  • Aaron W. Belluck
  • Sreetej Digumarthi
  • Max D. Hall

Opinion: An Open Letter To School Committee On Delaying A Vote On Proposed Hybrid Learning Option

By 1 Comment

Photo: Wait on voting for a hybrid model

To Andrea Prestwich, Chair, Belmont School Committee

I understand the Belmont School Committee needs to ratify the Belmont Public School’s remote learning plan in some form or fashion before school starts. Prior to voting, I would urge you and the other members of the committee to address the following aspects of the proposed Remote Learning plan in a clear and concise manner:

1) There has been no clear and precise estimate given by the BPS for the amount and types of family support that will be required for students at different levels to be successful in remote learning, nor has there been any assessment that I am aware of that gauges the degree to which the required and expected levels of support are feasible for families at the outset of this Phase or sustainable for any duration of time.

2)  There has been no clear and compelling rationale that has been offered to explain why start times can’t be later in remote learning. Belmont Schools Superintendent John Phelan has spoken a few times to the complexities of transportation, but as far as I’m aware there are no transportation issues during Phase 1 and very few parents and caregivers representing less than 500 out of 4,000 students indicated an interest in or reliance on bus transportation when asked. One of your core campaign issues when you originally ran for BSC was for a later start time. If we are ever going to explore and experiment with later start times, which the vast majority of families and students support, this would appear to be the moment. If we are not going to start later, especially at Chenery Middle School, I would expect that the particulars of why we cannot do so would need to be presented to the committee and the public before a vote on the remote schedule.

3) There has been no clear and compelling reason for why lunch schedules can’t be adjusted to accommodate family lunch at the same time both within Chenery and across school levels. Doing so would be the most convenient thing for families and would be best for the social-emotional wellbeing of students and families during Phase 1.

All of these issues relate in some form or fashion to the degree of responsiveness of the BPS and BSC to core concerns of and feedback from Belmont families, especially given the shift in the degree of responsibility for students’ education that families will bear in Phase 1 and all of the proposed phases until full in-person learning resumes.

Regarding the proposed hybrid plan, I strongly oppose and do not understand the idea that we need to rush to a vote next week given that the proposed hybrid plan, which is radically different from all previous models of hybrid learning that have been presented to the BSC and the public, has not been properly vetted by the public nor the BSC and given that hybrid learning is not likely to start in whatever form it takes until October at the earliest. 

To understand this issue more deeply from the perspective of Belmont parents and caregivers, it is useful to review the timeline of the process of exploring hybrid models so far:

  • June 29: of the 900 survey respondents, only 42 percent of respondents indicated support for a hybrid when the idea of the hybrid model was fairly abstract and when families might have conceived of the question as being in distinction to the possibility of a full in-person return to school.
  • July 16: though the total number of survey respondents is not clear from the slide deck from the BSC meeting, only 9 percent of families preferred full remote learning; 91 percent of respondents preferred full in-person learning or hybrid.
  • Aug. 4:  Superintendent Phelan presented 7 hybrid models to the public, all of which have significantly more in-person learning opportunities for students than the current proposed hybrid plan, which offers far fewer in-person options for many fewer students.
  • Aug. 6: the current “Return to Learning” phased plan is reviewed for the first time, marking a sudden and significant reversal in the direction of the public discussion about options for returning to school without a very clear rationale for why we are moving in this direction.
  • Aug. 11: at a BSC presentation representing the perspectives of approximately 3,000 of the 4,000 Belmont Public School students and the last time families were invited to express a point of view about hybrid learning, there was overwhelming support (2,138 of 3,152) for more and more frequent in-person learning opportunities (hybrid + full in-person) than is currently proposed.
  • Sept. 2: the current proposed hybrid models are presented to the public for the first time along with information about the “remote-only” option; the proposed models for students allow for significantly less in-person learning (2-3 mornings a week for most students) than had been previously discussed, not in keeping with expectations of families. In addition, the concept of a “Bridge” phase (“Phase 1.5”) is introduced for the first time to BSC but not voted upon.
  • Sept. 3: a survey is distributed to BPS families to choose between the current proposed hybrid model and the proposed remote model with the expectation that families will choose by Sept. 17 between these two models, neither of which approximates families’ expectations or resembles previous hybrid models under consideration. The survey does not contain a “none of the above” option or an option to indicate support for a different hybrid model if one would be available.  In the meantime, families are asked to articulate questions they have about the proposed models vs. feedback and there is a precipitous drop in family engagement as represented by the steep decline in the number of families who respond to surveys.

I would submit to you and other members of the committee that neither you nor Belmont families have had the opportunity to vet properly the details of the proposed hybrid model such that families would have a basis for making a choice on the one hand and that you would be informed enough about the perspectives of families on the other to vote next week.  Indeed, I would go further and say that, notwithstanding the very real need that the BPS has to engage in staffing projections, families should not have been asked to indicate a “choice” between two models they mostly do not want without further examination by BSC and BPS of whether adjustments can be made to the proposed hybrid model that would be in keeping our recently agreed-upon metrics for each Phase and more aligned with what families want and expect for their children.

Under those circumstances, I urge you to delay a vote of the hybrid model, to encourage BPS leadership to add more in-person learning opportunities whenever we move to Phase 3 and to extend the deadline for families to submit their preference sheets until modifications to the hybrid model can be more fully explored and articulated.  

Jeff Liberty

Worcester Street

Fall Sports: Modified Rules, Modified Fees As Seasons To Start By Month’s End

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont High Field Hockey will be playing this fall

There will be a fall sports season for Belmont High School student athletes as the Belmont School Committee voted unanimously on Tuesday night, Sept. 8, to approve an agreement by the Middlesex League which Belmont is a member on rules and safety.

With each sport – field hockey, golf, boys and girls soccer, boys and girls cross country – having to undergo a number of modifications to limit contact and potentially unhealthy actions on the field, the School Committee modified the participation fee each players pays.

“We are entering into a very unique school year, not only academically Burt for our student athletes,” said Jim Davis, Belmont’s athletic director, who told the committee the fee will be cut by $150 to $300 due in not small part to the major changes each sport will undo.

For example, heading the ball in soccer is disallowed, penalty corners will be discontinued in field hockey and cross country will likely be a timed race rather than the traditional group event. In addition, sport teams will be playing a third of the usually number of games in recent season and there will be no post-season tournament.

Davis said he, Belmont Superintendent John Phelan and the high school coaches reviewed the modifications and the potential impact on each sport “and that’s why we are moving forward with the ask this evening to bring those sports … back into our school and allowing our student athletes the opportunity to compare in those activities.”

While the cut in the fees will reduce revenue from athletic activities to an estimated $86,000, expenses due to less games and personnel will fall to $98,000 for the fall sports season. Phelan said that an $11,000 deficit would have been seen as reasonable when the district was initially forecasting the impact on the bottom line.

The Middlesex agreement – which is following guidance from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and the high school’s governing body the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association – is providing guidelines on pre-workout and pre-contest screening, social distancing in practices, and protocols for equipment use, hydration and the cleaning of gym bags.

There are also measures to increase physical distancing – keeping players six feet apart for the majority of games and practices – and incorporating protective equipment to reduce the spread of respiratory particles.

Under the agreement approved, fall sports in the Middlesex League will start Monday Sept. 21. Golf will kick off the season during the week of Sept. 28.

Sports will have three teams – varsity, junior varsity and freshmen – limited to 25 participants. Due to restrictions on the number of students on buses, away games will be restricted to 22 players. There will be three varsity and two sub-varsity practices each week.

Field hockey and boys and girls soccer will play 10 games on Saturdays through October and November including Columbus Day and Veteran Day. Belmont teams will play the five opponents in the Middlesex Liberty division on back to back Saturdays, home and away. The season for these sports will start Oct. 3. Games postponed will not be rescheduled.

Cross country will have five dual meets over this time.

Spectators will be limited to one per player who will be provided a season badge. Face masks will be mandatory at each contest.

The School Committee is continuing to discuss if athletes will be reimbursed their participation fee if a sports season is cancelled due to health concerns including a spike in COVID-19 infection rates. That debate will be voted before the season begins next week.