Readers react to San Marcos CISD's reopening plan
Dear Editor,
I am writing this letter to you as a resident of San Marcos and a proud parent of a rising 2nd grader at Hernandez Elementary School. My family and I watched the school board meeting on July 20 and participated in the Town Hall meeting on July 28 where the plans for reopening were reviewed and parent and teacher questions were addressed. Overall, we are very pleased with the district’s plan to delay the start of school followed with remote learning for all students once the school year begins. These decisions are clearly in the best interest of the children in our community.
But what about the teachers? Under the current plan for Phase 2, teachers would be required to teach from their empty classrooms.
Many employers in the private sector are continuing to allow their employees to work from home when able in order to slow the spread of COVID-19 and to be able to better support their family’s unique needs during this unprecedented time. As an employer, SMCISD should follow suit in supporting their employees in this seemingly simple way. The rationale of mandating all teachers teach from their classrooms due to internet issues is a poor one and not applicable to the majority of teachers. This can be easily addressed by giving teachers the option of working in their classroom to access internet or other materials, but to make it mandatory appears inconsiderate, especially considering the guidance from TEA that allows for, “staff, including teachers, who may fulfill their work duties remotely to do so.”
I am one of many community members that would like SMCISD to give teachers the option of where they work from during Phase 2 of the district’s plan in order to best support their individual needs.
Best,
Emily McKinney
San Marcos
Dear Editor,
Last week, I watched the San Marcos CISD board meeting with great anticipation to find out the reopening plan. I appreciate the actions made for the safety of our students and I hope that the situation will continue to be monitored with safety above all in mind. However, I am concerned that teachers are being forced to be on campus while classes are being held virtually. Staff being forced on campus poses an unnecessary risk and adds stress to an already difficult situation. I believe teachers should be able to make the choice based on what works best for their families like other nearby districts have. Learning environments thrive when the safety, health, and emotional needs of students AND staff are being met. It does not benefit students if teachers are uncomfortable and stressed. I hope the district decides to fully support our teachers by meeting their needs during these unusual times.
Thanks,
Megan Osborne
SMCISD Parent
Editor,
As parents of two San Marcos High School students, we are pleased with the San Marcos CISD’s thoughtful plan to keep our children safe by starting the school year with distance learning and reevaluate after the first four weeks. In watching the live board meeting July 21, we have, however, become concerned about the safety of our students’ teachers. The district’s plan to require the teachers to be physically present on campus to conduct the online classes would appear to put many instructors unnecessarily at risk of contracting COVID-19 As a current college instructor and a former school instructor, if we were teaching for the district, we certainly would want to option to teach our classes from home rather than risk our own health and potentially that of our children if we daily visited a campus staffed with instructors, custodians, and administrators.
We hope that the district officers will re-think this policy as in the least it could affect the morale of the instructors and with that, the morale of their students.
Sincerely,
Gene Browning and Shiang Shiang Chen
San Marcos
Editor,
Why can’t SMCISD teachers work from home?
Superintendent Cardona is forcing teachers back to schools too early. SMCISD is asking teachers to make an impossible choice. The district has put out a thorough, detailed, well-branded plan for getting students back to school.
Now, where’s the plan for keeping teachers alive? Or the plan for what they are supposed to do with their own kids while they are teaching from a classroom? This isn’t an HR issue, it’s basic decency.
And why does asynchronous, virtual learning for the first 8 weeks need to be done from campus classrooms? This is risky! Neither Texas Public Health nor TEA has direct mandates for how teachers should provide virtual education, and the most recent indication from leadership, though confusing, is that schools will be funded as long as they are providing remote instruction.
Schools must take into consideration the health, safety, and academic concerns of teachers too. Giving the community and your employees the option to learn/work virtually is the only way you can assure all of those points.
Let’s be clear: Keeping schools closed indefinitely is not an option. The longer schools are closed, the harder it is for children to stay engaged and the greater the risk that the poorest and most marginalized will drop out altogether. This moment in time will have lifelong consequences for this generation. I commend the administration, the school board, and teachers who are working tirelessly right now to make sure the road to rattler reopening, as it’s been branded, is a calming one.
SMCISD has left teachers out of this conversation entirely though. If this administration doesn’t follow the example of Austin ISD and Hays in giving teachers a CHOICE, this road is doomed to fail.
Jennifer Oswalt Kneese
San Marcos
