NYC Parents Oppose Remote Learning and the Digital Divide, File Lawsuit

A teacher works with students over Zoom in her classroom. A new lawsuit claims that New York state and city officials failed to provide adequate access to internet and devices during remote learning in the wake of the pandemic.

 Michael Appleton / Mayoral Photography Office

Parents of color and/or who are low-income in New York City know that the computer technology handed out by the Department was not given to all children equally and/or did not have an educational value to their children. These parents are particularly upset with what they call the digital divide where the Department of Education neglected to give adequate resources to their children and have filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court. The lawsuit states a claim that the city violated state and city law by not providing a “sound, basic education,” resulting in a disparate impact on low-income children and those of color and is calling for academic services to help affected students catch up."

NYC Mayor Eric Adams agrees with this and is keeping schools open.

See here:

Teachers union pushes for remote ‘learning’ — as in Chicago’s walkout — hurt minority kids most

Now, due to the hysteria of teachers who do not want to work during COVID, children city-wide are being denied their education because classes are being canceled. 

Bottom line: parents want technological equality for every child and a rigorous plan with high standards to cover remote learning or full, rigorous educational programs in every class.

They are getting neither.

 Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ Blog

Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

NYC schools failed to provide students with adequate remote learning access: lawsuit

By Reema Amin, Chalkbeat, Jan 6, 2022

When the coronavirus pandemic forced schools to go remote in March 2020, Queens mom Marie struggled to help her then-seventh grader access coursework using her phone or computer.

Because her daughter had fallen so far behind, she was mandated to go to virtual summer school. Despite obtaining an internet-enabled iPad for summer classes, the seventh-grader could not get Zoom or other applications to complete assignments. School officials repeatedly told the family there was nothing they could do, she said.

Ultimately, her daughter had to repeat seventh grade, said Marie, who asked to use her middle name for privacy reasons and is one of five families suing state and city officials over their failure to provide adequate internet access and working devices to city students, particularly low-income children of color.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in New York State Supreme Court, alleges that top state and city officials knew the scope of the digital divide as the pandemic progressed, but failed to properly address it. It claims that the city violated state and city law by not providing a “sound, basic education,” resulting in a disparate impact on low-income children and those of color and is calling for academic services to help affected students catch up.

Marie’s daughter continued to learn at home during the 2020-2021 school year with a faulty device and still had trouble accessing websites or certain assignments, Marie said. The school gave her a new device in October 2020, but that one didn’t work well, so Marie purchased high-speed internet from Spectrum hoping that would solve the problem. It didn’t, she said. According to the lawsuit, she still pays more than $100 a month for that service, which she said she cannot afford.

Marie said her daughter became depressed — she struggled both with school and with being held back a grade as her friends moved on. At one point, Marie said she took her daughter to the emergency room because she had attempted suicide.

“You have no idea psychologically what this did to my child,” Marie said through tears. “As a mother, this broke me. I did everything I could. I did everything I did to try to help her.”

‘Falling behind’

Many children were left without a connection to their teachers and classes, the suit said, which names Gov. Kathy Hochul, State Education Commissioner Betty Rosa, former Mayor Bill de Blasio and former schools chancellor Meisha Porter as defendants.

When the families in the lawsuit, as well as others, reached out to their schools or the education department for help with getting or paying for internet, they were instructed to reach out to local internet providers and request discounts, the complaint said.

A basic internet plan costs an average $40 a month in New York City, where about 45% of low-income families don’t have a connection, and 100,000 city children live in homes without internet, according to a 2020 analysis from former Comptroller Scott Stringer.

Even though this lawsuit comes nearly two years after the pandemic started, attorneys from Legal Services along with Arnold & Porter said they only filed it after repeated attempts to contact the education department and find solutions for their clients. Additionally, they said, remote learning in some form will likely persist as children may have to go remote and quarantine if they test positive for COVID as the city experiences another massive surge. (Classes are also remote on Election Day as well as snow days.)

“It’s our hope that the city will act quickly to fix this and not choose to litigate for years before addressing these problems,” said Lucy S. McMillan, one of the attorneys behind the suit. “The point is that these students have missed so much, and they are falling behind. If it takes years to assess this and implement some sort of remediation, that’s not going to be helpful for these students, who are getting older every year. Our hope is that the city will take this on now.”

When the pandemic first shuttered schools, city officials had to quickly distribute hundreds of thousands of devices to students across the nation’s largest school system. The city would go on to spend nearly $260 million on 511,000 internet-enabled iPads that were purchased from the 2019-2020 school year through last school year, plus $4 million a month for data plans, according to an audit by Stringer.

But that massive task took months to carry out. Five weeks after schools closed, 19,000 children were still waiting for devices, the lawsuit noted.

Many families struggled to get online, sometimes barred from discounts offered by internet companies aimed at helping school children. Even with internet-connected iPads in hand, families still ran into spotty connectivity, could not get their devices to work, and weren’t able to get timely help from their schools or the education department, the lawsuit said. Internet access was a particular problem for children who lived in homeless shelters, where WiFi wasn’t available and cell phone connection was poor.

When it was time to return for the 2020-2021 school year, most children had still chosen to learn remotely full-time, while others were going into their schools part-time. Even then, the lawsuit claims, the city didn’t ensure every family had working devices and internet access before classes began.

By October 2020, one month after school started, 77,000 students were still without a device, city officials said at the time. Reliable internet access was also still an issue, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit also claims that the education department did not have a consistent system to fix or replace broken devices, especially for families who primarily spoke a language other than English.

Calls for reimbursement

Another plaintiff, a mother who primarily speaks Bengali, had repeatedly asked her then-kindergartener’s school for assistance with navigating remote learning, their city-issued iPad, and internet connectivity, according to the lawsuit. However, she was not provided with a Bengali interpreter, and any written information on how to navigate remote learning was provided in English.

As a result, her family had to purchase internet service, but her son’s device still did not work some days. Now in second grade, her son has struggled with school so far this year, the lawsuit claims.

All five plaintiffs, with children ranging from elementary to middle school, say that they failed to get help from their schools or the education department to troubleshoot technology issues, the lawsuit said.

Among their demands, they are asking the city to fix remote learning so that it doesn’t force families to pay for anything out-of-pocket. They also want city officials to develop a claims process so that families can be reimbursed for any out-of-pocket costs related to remote learning since March 2020.

Additionally, they want the city to assess what sort of academic recovery services are owed to children who struggled with remote learning, as well as other damages and attorneys fees. The education department created a $635 million academic recovery plan this year, including a plan to ensure all students have access to a device with internet service and extra services for students with disabilities.

Neither city officials nor the governor’s office immediately responded to requests for comment. A spokesperson for the state education department said it does not comment on ongoing litigation.

A new lawsuit is speaking up for families struggling to cope with remote learning.

Families struggle with faulty DOE computers

By 

Kathianne Boniello, NY POST, January 8, 2022

Remote learning has been a failure for low-income kids relying on faulty laptops and iPads from the city Department of Education — which offered no technical support to the struggling families, according to a lawsuit.

Five parents, who say they’re too poor to pay for high-speed Internet or quality computers for their kids, claim in the court papers their children have been academically left behind when they were forced to use the malfunctioning equipment.

And while the city DOE says all families who have requested devices for remote learning have gotten them, the parents who are suing in Manhattan Supreme Court say poor kids and those who don’t speak English are still not getting “free and reliable Internet service or reliable, working iPads and laptops.”

“Untold numbers of low-income students, and especially low-income students of color, in New York City have been deprived and continue to be deprived, of the sound basic education that is their right,” the group of anonymous parents claim in the litigation.

Some of the children whose parents are fighting in court did not receive any devices for months into remote learning, according to the court papers.

One mom of three, identified only as S.M. in court papers, said when her kids’ devices finally did show up, they couldn’t access the Internet.

Other families in the suit said they were falsely told Internet companies would connect the laptops and iPads online for free — only to be asked to pay monthly fees they couldn’t afford.

A July audit by the City Comptroller’s office found that as of March, the DOE was still reviewing 19,425 student requests for tablets, 16,000 of which dated to 2020, while 3,045 students were mistakenly sent more than one remote learning device.

Even with the city sticking to in-person learning in the 2021-2022 school year, remote classes — such as for some snow days, or Election Day — have now been baked into the academic calendar, the anonymous parents said in court papers.

“Many students continue to struggle with device and Internet issues on this day,” according to the lawsuit.

The city also has no system to repair or replace broken equipment, the parents charge.

The families behind the lawsuit still “have devices that are inadequate,” said Legal Services NYC spokesman Seth Hoy.

“Our clients continue to pay out of pocket for internet service they cannot afford, and their children have not received education services that compensate for their lost education during remote learning days,” he added.

The city has handed out more than 650,000 Internet-enabled devices and more than 27,000 hot spots, and schools have bought more than 400,000 devices, said a DOE spokeswoman who called the city’s distribution of remote learning devices “robust.”

“There are no outstanding device requests at this time,” said spokeswoman Sarah Casasnovas, who said the DOE will review the lawsuit. “Families can continue to request one if they need.”

Federal Judge Frederick Block Rules That NY Statewide Mask Mandate For Public Schools Will Remain

 

Eastern District Judge Frederic Block. Photo: Rick Kopstein/ALM

The "all students come off the same cookie sheet" thinking of the NYC Department of Education just doesn't work for me. Never has, never will. All kids, parents, people are unique and have different needs, ideas, strategies and goals. I know, because I am an identical twin, and we are not at all alike except on first view, and our voices. Our mom never could tell us apart on the phone, bless her.

What I don't yet understand and may never understand, is why the NYC DOE will not give families the chance to have remote learning. Ok, it did not work last in the past school year. That was due to the lack of sufficient training and funding for enough computers to get all students and staff on the same page - making sure that what is learned and how the information gets to the persons who need to know is in place and working successfully.  

Also, kids and teachers who are not on-site cannot be judged or micro-managed, two very important activities for administrators handling budgets. 

Remote learning and teaching strategies do not work and have never worked because the Department does not want them to, and there is no accountability. Budgets are based upon "seat time" - the number of children sitting in class.  

That's why attendance is so important. Oops, I meant "Too important". 

Betsy Combier

President and Founder, ADVOCATZ
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Brooklyn Federal Judge Upholds New York Public School Mask Mandate

A student with asthma filed a lawsuit arguing she should be exempted from the mask mandate.

Jane Wester, Law.com, November 01, 2021 at 11:27 AM

In a 54-page decision, Senior U.S. District Judge Frederic Block of the Eastern District of New York upheld New York’s statewide mask mandate for public schools, though he criticized the “current prolix array of the regulation, recommendations and requirements, guidelines and guidance” that make it challenging to apply.

Block denied a motion from the plaintiff, the parent of a 10-year-old girl with severe asthma, for a preliminary injunction based on alleged violations of her constitutional rights and decided to hold in abeyance the question of preliminary injunctive relief for her state law claims because of ongoing settlement negotiations.

“[S]ince the Court is sensitive to the concerns that parents have for their children, it believes that a full exploration of the national mask mandate dynamics at play and the reach of the [New York State Department of Health Commissioner Howard Zucker]’s actions is warranted,” Block wrote.

The plaintiff filed suit in September after a letter from a doctor saying the student should be exempted from the mask mandate was rejected by school officials, who cited public health guidance saying people with asthma can wear masks.

Block found that rational basis was the appropriate standard for review in the case, rejecting the plaintiff’s arguments that the school district’s rejection violated their fundamental rights.

Block quoted at length from national and state public health guidance, including the state’s guidance for schools, and expressed his “displeasure” with “the complexities and uncertainties” of the school guidance.

The schools’ mask mandate includes a provision for medical exemptions for people with conditions that “prevent them from wearing a mask.”

“The practical upshot of the Commissioner’s regulation, its cryptic adoption of the CDC’s recommendations and its Prevention Strategies, the Health Department’s guidance, and the Education Department’s guidelines is that the school districts and their administrators do not know what precisely they can or cannot do to implement the Mask Mandate. … As shown by this case, all this has left the School District adrift,” Block wrote.

Block also examined the paths taken by states other than New York. He found that New York is one of 16 states with statewide school mask mandates, while 26 other states have left the decision to individual school boards. The remaining eight, including Texas and Florida, had some kind of prohibition on school mask mandates as of the date of Block’s ruling, he found.

The plaintiff submitted several scientific articles as part of the complaint, but Block found that they were “ill-fitted to her arguments,” mostly dealing with environments different from schools. In contrast, he found that the scientific materials submitted by the defendants were well-tailored to the issue at hand.

Block found that the plaintiff’s situation was different in key respects from past cases involving abortion and, separately, the right to refuse medical treatment because mask mandates implicate public health as well as individual health.

“While the Mask Mandate was obviously intended as a health measure, it no more requires a ‘medical treatment’ than laws requiring shoes in public places … or helmets while riding a motorcycle,” he wrote.

Block praised the Franklin Square Union Free School District for its willingness to grapple with the various guidance and requirements involved in the case and expressed hope that the next iteration of the school mask mandate takes a “simpler, more manageable format.”

Sujata Sidhu Gibson of the Gibson Law Firm, who represents the plaintiff, did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

Adam Kleinberg, a partner at Sokoloff Stern representing the school district, said he and his colleagues were pleased that Block recognized the efforts made by the school district.

“We recognize this is a difficult situation for all involved and look forward to a resolution,” Kleinberg said.

Judge Valerie Caproni

Federal judge denies NYC teachers' request for injunction on vaccine mandate

By Crystal Cranmore, ABC News, October 12, 2021

NEW YORK CITY (WABC) -- A federal judge in Manhattan on Tuesday declined to block enforcement of New York City's vaccine mandate for public school employees, denying a request for a preliminary injunction from a group of 10 teachers, at least one of whom was denied a religious exemption from the policy.

"Plaintiffs have not shown they are entitled to this extraordinary remedy," Judge Valerie Caproni said in reading her ruling from the bench.

The judge said she found not "even a whiff" of animus toward religion in statements made by New York Mayor Bill de Blasio in enacting the policy, as argued by the plaintiffs.

The group of 10 teachers lost their bid for a temporary injunction last week, but a three-judge federal appeals court granted the Tuesday hearing.

Caproni also faulted the teachers for waiting to file for an injunction until three days after the mandate took effect.

"I'm baffled by the plaintiffs delay in seeking a preliminary injunction," the judge said, adding such "gamesmanship" does nothing to help the cause.

The teachers had accused the city of being "openly hostile" toward certain religious beliefs.

"Nobody's religious beliefs contrary to the pope's would be valid," plaintiffs' attorney Sujata Gibson said, referencing a September newspaper article: "De Blasio said Thursday that only Christian Scientists and Jehovah's Witnesses have any prayer for a religious exemption."

"I believe that shows animus," Gibson said.

"Why does that show animus?" Judge Caproni asked. "I'm having difficulty getting from that to hostility to religion."

"In nearly every appeal the Department of Education was asking that they be denied on the basis that the pope has been vaccinated," Gibson answered.

An attorney for the city, Laura Manicucci, argued there's no problem with how the mandate is enforced. The plaintiffs were denied because there was something about their claims the arbitrator who evaluates them did not buy.

"Each person's personal religious beliefs would require different kinds of evidence and different kinds of statements and it's up to an arbitrator to determine whether those beliefs apply to vaccination," Manicucci said, adding that more than 20 religions have been represented in exemptions granted so far.

"The mandate is not unconstitutional because it doesn't favor one religion over another and it doesn't give any religion an advantage," Manicucci said.

Toward the end of the hearing the judge appeared exasperated by doubts the plaintiffs expressed about the effectiveness of the vaccines, citing purported experts consulted by the plaintiffs.

"You're losing credibility," Caproni said.

A Law Department spokesperson issued a response from the city.

"Every court that has considered a challenge to the DOE's vaccine mandate has found it to be lawful," the statement read. "What we heard from Judge Caproni today was a resounding confirmation that DOE's vaccine policy is lawful and in the public interest and that there was not a shred of evidence of religious animus by the city in implementing the mandate."

Meanwhile, a federal judge ruled Tuesday that New York must continue to allow health care workers to seek exemptions from a statewide vaccine mandate on religious grounds as a lawsuit challenging the requirement proceeds.

Judge David Hurd in Utica had issued a temporary restraining order a month ago after 17 doctors, nurses and other health professionals claimed in a lawsuit that their rights would be violated with a vaccine mandate that disallowed the exemptions.
Hurd's preliminary injunction Tuesday means New York will continue to be barred from enforcing any requirement that employers deny religious exemptions.

Government Accountability Office Report Shows That Students With Disabilities Struggle With Remote Learning

 

A student works on a distance learning assignment in his kitchen. Investigators with the Government Accountability Office
found that schools had a hard time providing all of the services called for in students' special education plans when they
shifted to distance learning in the spring as a result of COVID-19. (James Borchuck/Tampa Bay Times/TNS)

Schools Have Struggled To Fulfill IEPs Amid Pandemic, Government Report Finds

by Shaun Heasley, Disability Scoop, November 30, 2020

Government investigators are offering up some of the first details about how schools fared in addressing the needs of students with disabilities when they shuttered at the start of the pandemic.

A report out this month from the Government Accountability Office dives into how schools managed special education and services for English learners during the switch to distance learning in the spring of the 2019-2020 academic year, finding that by and large, they struggled.

The investigation was conducted as part of GAO’s oversight responsibilities under the CARES Act, a federal COVID-19 relief package passed earlier this year.

For the report, government investigators reviewed distance learning plans from 15 school districts that have high proportions of either students with disabilities or English learners. Officials with four of the districts were interviewed as were advocates, researchers, and representatives from national organizations of school administrators and other service providers.

“The rapid shift to distance learning in spring 2020, after nearly all U.S. school buildings were closed to prevent the spread of the virus, laid bare both the logistical and instructional challenges of educating students via distance learning, particularly certain subgroups of students with additional needs, such as English learners and students with disabilities,” wrote Jacqueline M. Nowicki, director of education, workforce and income security issues at GAO, and her colleagues in the report.

Investigators found that “a variety of factors complicated the delivery of special education services during distance learning.” In particular, the broad range of needs among students with disabilities as well as the variety of services called for in their individualized education programs posed a significant challenge. What’s more, the ability of parents and caregivers to help students with disabilities played a role.

“Delivering related services — such as occupational therapy, physical therapy or speech therapy — for students with complex needs was particularly difficult to do remotely,” GAO noted.

School officials told investigators that they were able to meet some of the challenges by altering instruction, having virtual meetings with parents and promoting more collaboration between educators and with families. In some cases, they said that children’s goals and services were modified through temporary distance learning plans.

Some changes, like the use of virtual meetings, could continue even when children return to in-person classes, GAO said.

In the interim, advocates told government investigators that “providing students with the services they need remains an ongoing challenge.”

Families Say Mask Policy Discriminates Against Students In Special Ed

by Kristen Taketa, The San Diego Union-Tribune/TNS | November 17, 2020

SAN DIEGO — Erin Coller’s 5-year-old son, who has an intellectual disability and autism, is not allowed to go to school because he can’t wear a mask.

Cadman has sensory defensiveness, which means he is hypersensitive and overreacts to certain stimuli. He especially doesn’t tolerate anything on his head or face, not even a hat, and he rips off masks in seconds, Coller said.

Cadman’s school, Hawthorne Elementary in San Diego Unified, has invited him to come to school to work with a teacher for up to 30 minutes a week. It’s part of San Diego Unified’s Phase One reopening, which so far has provided about 3,000 students with in-person support sessions.

But his teacher and principal told Coller that Cadman can’t come indoors if he won’t wear a mask — no exceptions, Coller said. Instead they could do a socially distanced greeting in the parking lot, Coller was told.

Coller said she is desperate for Cadman to get in-person instruction because he is learning little to nothing through distance learning at home and is failing to meet the academic goals in his special education plan. Coller said she feels frustrated and helpless.

“The lack of flexibility from the school district is making a challenging situation even more difficult,” she said.

San Diego Unified’s mask policy, which does not provide in-person learning accommodations for students who are unable to wear a face covering, is raising alarm among parents and attorneys who believe the policy may violate federal laws that outline rights for people with disabilities.

“It’s blatant discrimination,” said Gabriela Torres, senior staff attorney at nonprofit Disability Rights California, who said she has received two dozen calls and emails from families since last week about the mask issue.

San Diego Unified officials say their strict universal mask policy is based on guidance they received from University of California San Diego health and science experts and is crucial for preventing COVID-19 transmission.

The district is not allowing anyone without a face covering onto school campuses — even though county guidance says students who are medically exempt from wearing a face covering cannot legally be excluded from campus.

State public health guidelines specifically provide mask exemptions for people with a disability, mental health conditions or medical conditions that prevent mask-wearing.

For example, some people may have a facial deformity that prevents wearing a mask. Some people with disabilities drool and would collect drool in their mask if they wore one. In certain cases, people could suffocate or choke if they wore a mask.

For others with sensory issues, like Cadman, wearing a mask has an emotional or psychological impact, and they don’t tolerate it.

Schools are supposed to accommodate students with disabilities if they can’t wear a mask, county officials say. Students with disabilities cannot be automatically excluded from school if they can’t wear a mask, according to legal counsel with the San Diego County Office of Education.

“The school has to find other solutions to address contact concerns,” county office spokeswoman Music Watson said in an email.

For example, county officials suggest schools work with a student’s parents to use a mask alternative, such as a face shield with a drape or a plexiglass barrier between the student and teacher. If a student can’t wear any kind of face covering, the teacher should wear a face shield and mask or an N95 mask, if the school has a plan for proper use of N95 masks.

Not wearing a mask indoors significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 spread, said Dr. Howard Taras, a University of California San Diego pediatrician who is a consultant for schools in the area including San Diego Unified.

Taras sees the mask dilemma as a situation of opposing rights: the right of children to attend school safely and the right of children who can’t wear a mask to be in school.

“My struggle as a doctor and what I am working on is to be able to satisfy both of those rights,” he said.

For students who can’t wear a mask due to disability, San Diego Unified is looking at having them wear other face coverings that are farther away from the face, said Sarah Ott, district special education executive director, at a meeting earlier this month of the Community Advisory Committee that advises the district on special education.

The bottom line is students have to wear some kind of face covering so the air they breathe out goes through a cloth, Taras said.

When a parent asked district officials to confirm that San Diego Unified is not offering accommodations for students who can’t wear a face covering, Ott replied: “The accommodation is online learning.”

Torres and Moira Allbritton, an executive member of the Community Advisory Committee, said online learning is not an appropriate education or accommodation for many students with disabilities.

“It’s so offensive, especially for our students with moderate to severe disabilities who are just gaining next to nothing,” Allbritton said in an interview. “I think some families could make the case that (online learning) is actually harming their children.”

Cadman still is struggling with distance learning. He doesn’t sit down at the computer unless somebody is constantly watching him and giving him tokens for accomplishments such as making eye contact with the computer screen, Coller said.

Coller has to keep the computer away from Cadman so that he can’t close or throw it, she said, and she feeds him meals during distance learning sessions, which helps him stay seated longer.

According to federal education law, student special education plans must be tailored to meet the student’s specific needs, and schools must revise those plans if students fail to make expected progress.

Depending on the student, state guidance says schools may need to serve students with disabilities in-person for the sake of their mental or physical health and to help students access distance learning.

Taras said last week that he recommends that San Diego Unified teach students who can’t wear masks in outdoor classrooms, with physical distancing, because the risk of transmission is lower outside than indoors. It’s unclear how much San Diego schools will use outdoor classrooms when they reopen in Phase Two, which is planned for January.

In the meantime, Taras said, parents can and should be teaching their children how to tolerate masks, gradually increasing the time they wear a mask. Because the pandemic could be around for the next two years or so, Taras said, mask-wearing is as essential as other life skills that parents teach their children with developmental disabilities, such as fastening buttons.

“We want them to have that skill for the next two years … because we want them to have richer lives also, and not just in school,” Taras said.

© 2020 The San Diego Union-Tribune
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

P.S. 128 Parents Protest Lack of Live Streaming For Students In Blended Learning

Parents at PS 128 and throughout the New York City school district are furious with the fake news coming from the Department of Education.

Here is a quote from an anonymous parent in the QNS.com article posted today: 

"...we don’t know why they aren’t able to do a live stream of the in-person classes for the students in blended learning..."

Chancellor, or Mayor, what's the answer?

Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ Blog

Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Middle Village parents protest outside of P.S. 128 over lack of live instruction for blended learning students

By Angélica Acevedo, QNS, October 1, 2020

Approximately three dozen parents and kids gathered outside of P.S./I.S. 128 in Middle Village on Thursday, Oct. 1, to demand the school give students the live instruction they were promised with the blended learning model.

Parents of the K-8 public school, located at 69-10 65th Drive, who enrolled their children in blended learning said they’ve gone days without teachers giving virtual classes — and they’ve had enough.

“The issue is that we don’t know why they aren’t able to do a live stream of the in-person classes for the students in blended learning,” said one parent who asked to remain anonymous.

Some parents told QNS that with the blended model, their children have in-person schooling once or twice a week and the rest of the week they are completing assignments with minimal to no teacher-student virtual interaction.

They worry their kids aren’t getting the education they deserve.

“My child’s a sixth-grader, preparing for high school … there are other parents who have-eighth graders with the same situation. How are they being graded? When it comes time to apply to high school, do they just give up?” the parent said. “Nothing is shared with us.”

Some of the parents at the protest questioned why P.S. 128 was having the issue, saying they haven’t heard of other nearby schools going through the same situation.

P.S. 128, which has 900 students and served as an REC this summer, has a stellar reputation in the surrounding community. But during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and the closure of schools in March, some parents said their children weren’t receiving live instruction then either.

During the hour-long protest, parents and kids gathered on the side of the school to talk about their concerns. Several school safety officers and an NYPD van were standing by.

A few minutes into the protest, a parent coordinator came out to speak with the group of parents.

“We have people here that are listening. You have to be patient,” they said, before leaving promptly.

The protest was organized by a concerned parent, who asked to remain anonymous, with a post that quickly gained traction on local Facebook groups.

Shortly after the post made the rounds on social media, parents received a letter from the school’s administration that afternoon saying they are working to remedy the concerns.

But parents said they’re only getting answers because of the protest, that there has been minimal communication from the school and that even the models they were presented with — blended, remote and in-person — weren’t clearly described to them.

“Why didn’t they organize this better? Be truthful to the parents,” one parent, who is an essential worker and asked to remain anonymous, told QNS. “If you decided blended, the rest of the week your child would not have a live instruction. Explain it first, then we could have organized this differently. I had no idea … My son is calling me, home alone, waiting for my 84-year-old mother to come — she has to take two buses to get over here and she doesn’t know how to work the computer.”

The parent, who had their child at the REC at P.S. 128 during the summer, said that if they knew remote learning would mean five days of live instruction, they would have opted for that instead. But childcare during their work day remained a concern.

This week, the Department of Education reported that 48 percent of public school students opted for fully remote learning this fall.

John Pastor, who has a seventh-grader at P.S. 128 doing remote learning, said the school’s principal, Camillo Turriciano, “needs to do a better job.”

“The principal has to voice our concerns to the Board of Ed, he is our liaison, not the teachers. The teachers are our liaisons in learning,” Pastor said. “If the principal comes to me and says, ‘Look John, I went to the Board of Ed and they said no,’ guess what we’re going to do? We’re going to go to the Board of Ed, but he doesn’t tell us anything.”

Pastor and a group of parents will be sending a letter to the city and meeting with local Councilman Robert Holden this week.

Jonathan Kingston, who has two children at P.S. 128 doing blended learning, believes the issue stems from the DOE and UFT.

“I think the fish stinks from the head,” said Kingston. “I don’t think it’s appropriate, the way they’re going about this. This notion that we can jump between a live teacher some days and then some different teacher remotely sending instructions different days. There’s no reason why they can’t live stream the actual class with the same teacher, same day, and have it be seamless.”

Kingston added that while he understands that the argument that schools need more funding, he asks if the DOE is appropriately using the resources they currently have.

“More funding is not always the answer,” he said. “If you’re going to now have one teacher doing the job of what one teacher can and should do, then I would respectfully submit that more funding is not the way to go. I think the teachers union might do a great job of looking out for teachers, [but] I think that the interest of the students always should supersede the concerns of the teachers union.”

The Community Education Council for District 24 sent an email Thursday morning to encourage parents to complete a survey about their concerns and join their Parent To Parent Zoom meeting taking place next week. A date has not yet been announced.

DOE spokesperson Danielle Filson said they are working on ramping up live instruction for blended learners.

“We appreciate everyone’s flexibility and patience at the start of this unprecedented school year and our goal is to have in-person instruction for our blended students on their in-person days, and to ramp up live instruction for blended learners on their remote days,” Filson said. “P.S. 128 was excited to welcome the school community back this week and is offering students rich courses using both in-person and remote methods. The Executive Superintendent and Superintendent are working closely with the principal to add additional staff as quickly as possible.”