Richland 2 ‘between a rock and a hard place’ on possibly extending virtual learning

Richland 2 school district is considering extending virtual-only classes beyond Friday amid the coronavirus pandemic.

During a Wednesday emergency school board meeting, school board members were split on whether the district should return students to face-to-face classes, reflecting a larger debate nationally on how best to teach students while protecting teachers.

The board did not hold a vote, and the final decision on whether to extend online-only classes will be made later by Superintendent Baron Davis, board Vice-Chair Teresa Holmes said during the meeting.

Earlier this week, the Richland 1 school district extended online courses until the end of January, according to a previous article from The State.

Four members, a narrow majority of the seven-member board, recommended Richland 2 extend online-only classes because of the threat coronavirus poses to students, teachers and staff. Those four members included Holmes, Monica Elkins, Amelia McKie and Cheryl Caution-Parker.

The members who advised against returning to in-person classes cited information Richland 2 head nurse Dawn McAdams provided earlier in the meeting that said the district was seeing a surge of cases similar to what the district saw after Thanksgiving. Since New Year’s Eve was just two weeks ago — and symptoms can take that long to manifest — it’s unclear whether Richland 2 has reached its post-New Year’s peak or if the surge will further drive up case numbers, McAdams said.

“I don’t see where we should be in such a rush to send our teachers and students back,” Holmes said. “The numbers did spike.”

Holmes advocated waiting until teachers began receiving vaccines, something McAdams said could begin as early as February. Some teachers, such as those with health conditions or who teach elementary school students (elementary schools have more face-to-face classes than middle or high schools), are closer in line to the vaccine than others, McAdams said.

“Safety is our No. 1 priority,” Elkins said.

Manning, the board chair, noted that there have already been delays distributing the vaccine and waiting until many teachers are vaccinated could push the in-person return date down the road indefinitely.

“We have no idea when it’s going to be available... we have no idea how long it will take to roll out to staff because we’re not in charge of delivering it,” Manning said. “Logistically it’s going to take a while to get our staff vaccinated.”

Manning cited information provided by Will Anderson, Richland 2’s chief operations officer, that showed while some employees were quarantined, the school had plenty of teachers, bus drivers, custodians and maintenance workers to continue operating, even if more people became sick or had to quarantine.

Lashonda McFadden and Lindsay Agostini argued in favor of sending students back to in-person classes.

“This is an equity issue” between parents who can and cannot afford to provide child care for their children while they are studying from home, McFadden said.

Agostini argued that Richland 2 should return children to classrooms because children are safest in classrooms, she said.

School districts throughout the country have been facing similar decisions for nearly a full year now. Locally, many parents have been pushing school board members to return children to the classroom while many teachers have fought for virtual-only learning until it is safe.

“We’re between a rock and a hard place,” Caution-Parker said.

This story was originally published January 13, 2021 at 7:54 PM.