Virtual School Meanderings

May 28, 2020

NCAA Response To COVID-19

An item from a US-based K-12 digital learning organization.

View this email in your browser

NCAA Response to COVID-19

BY SARAH OVERPECK
Sarah is the Director of High School Review at the NCAA.

In the United States, we recently celebrated Teacher Appreciation Week. This year, the recognition took on greater meaning and stirred even more heartfelt gratitude for the selfless work of educators. Schools around the country and abroad have made adjustments over the past few months in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These adjustments resulted in myriad educational scenarios, including cancellations, emergency remote instruction, and pass/fail grading. Meanwhile family members, parents and friends are facing their own upheavals of school, work and life.

My NCAA Eligibility Center colleagues and I began tracking these changes to the educational landscape in mid-March. We initiated a multifaceted but nimble process of determining which issues were local and could be managed directly with high school administrators, and which issues were broad national or international trends that would require adjustments to our own policies to remain consistent with K-12 and higher education practices. Simultaneously, the NCAA research staff worked closely with the association’s member schools using data from past initial eligibility certification cycles to identify adjustments that would mitigate potential negative regulatory outcomes as a result of COVID-19, while preserving college readiness. While these changes may not capture all potential scenarios, they provide additional pathways for prospective student-athletes to meet initial eligibility requirements.

Four of these adjustments are outlined below, explaining what changed, why we made the change, and related notes.

COVID-19 Waiver Standard

What changed: Students with expected Spring/Summer 2020 graduation dates will be academically eligible for athletics aid, practice and competition at a Division I school by earning at least a 2.3 GPA in 10 NCAA-approved core courses, with a combined seven courses in English, math and natural/physical science, by the start of their seventh semester in high school. The Division II standard requires at least a 2.2 GPA in 10 NCAA-approved core courses by the start of the seventh semester in high school, without a stipulation about the distribution of those core courses across certain subject areas. These criteria do not require a standardized test score. This is a temporary alternative to typical Division I and Division II requirements.*

Why it changed: The uncertainty surrounding not only schooling but also SAT and ACT testing called for decisive action to provide reassurance to students and their families. NCAA staff and member schools reviewed academic certification data from previous cycles to determine a temporary alternative standard that would maintain a trajectory toward college success while considering disruptions to secondary education and testing.

Other notes: Uncertainty remains for the coming academic term and year (2020-2021). We will continue to monitor the situation as it evolves to determine if alternative requirements will be developed for future graduating classes.

*Students also could qualify for athletics aid, practice and competition using the typical Division I requirements (16 core courses, including certain progression and distribution, with at least a 2.3 GPA and an SAT or ACT test score that aligns to their core-course GPA on a sliding scale) or Division II requirements (16 core courses with at least a 2.2 GPA and an SAT or ACT score that aligns to their core-course GPA on a sliding scale).

Additional Course Usage

What changed: Students with expected Spring/Summer 2020 graduation dates will be allowed up to six additional core-course units for initial eligibility between the start of their seventh semester and the date they enroll full time at a Division I school, regardless of whether they graduate on time or when they enroll. This is a temporary change to typical NCAA legislation for Division I, which allows up to one additional core-course unit (or up to three core-course units if a student has a documented education-impacting disability) between on-time graduation and full-time enrollment.

Why it changed: We recognize that students may be impacted by school closures or other circumstances that inhibit their ability to complete courses. This adjustment provides an option for students who need additional time to meet core-course requirements.

Other notes: Division II legislation already allows for an uncapped number of additional core-course units prior to full-time enrollment.

Pass/Fail Grading Usage

What changed: High school students earning credit for “Pass” grades in NCAA-approved core courses completed during Spring/Summer 2020 will have those grades applied to their initial eligibility academic certification GPA calculations with 2.3 quality points for Division I (2.2 quality points for Division II).  However, if the use of 2.3 (or 2.2) quality points would lower the student’s core-course GPA, the credit(s) would be applied toward the required core course units only and excluded from the core-course GPA calculation. This is a temporary change to typical NCAA legislation, which stipulates that “Pass” grades be applied using the lowest passing grade at the high school.

Why it changed: One of the first concerns that began as a low rumble but quickly demanded attention was the discussion among schools and districts to move to pass/fail or similar alternative grading systems for this academic term. Many administrators and teachers expressed concerns about the fairness of issuing standard grades during a time when there is such variation in students’ abilities to complete coursework due to internet access, availability of resources, family circumstance and fundamental student wellbeing. We paralleled this “hold harmless” philosophy while aligning to a data-driven and membership-supported core-course GPA threshold.

Other notes: This policy applies to all high school students who successfully complete Pass/Fail-graded core courses during the Spring/Summer 2020 term, regardless of expected graduation date.

Distance or e-Learning Program Reviews

What changed: The NCAA Eligibility Center will not require a separate review of distance or e-learning programs utilized during Spring/Summer 2020. This is a temporary change to standard NCAA legislation, which requires a review of each nontraditional program that doesn’t already have a status with the Eligibility Center.

Why it changed: We recognize that in many situations, school closures have resulted in emergency remote instruction, rather than a robust preparation of a digital learning environment. Schools and districts have guided students to alternatives that attempt to best meet their learning needs for the remainder of the academic year, but what those alternatives look like in practice varies widely based on internet access or other individual and family circumstances. Education groups like the Digital Learning Collaborative have made countless resources available to support teachers and families for whom this is sudden and new, but everyone is now facing unforeseen challenges from minor distractions to life-altering circumstances.

Other notes: This policy applies to all high school students who successfully complete core courses during the Spring/Summer 2020 term, regardless of expected graduation date.

What the Future Holds

The best-laid plans for how this academic year would progress went awry, and teachers responded by reaffirming the foundation of education. They adapted to the reality in front of them and met students where they are, both academically and emotionally. I believe the NCAA response also reiterated a commitment to wellbeing and fairness through support of prospective student-athletes in their pursuit of the collegiate experience. But our work is not finished. As we approach the upcoming academic year, we will continue to monitor ongoing developments in education and testing both nationally and globally to determine if further adjustments to initial eligibility requirements are needed. Please stay tuned here for updates.

Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Evergreen Education Group, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DLAC website.

Our mailing address is:

Evergreen Education Group

700 Main Ave Ste E

Durango, CO 81301-5437

May 22, 2020

What Will The Fall Semester Look Like For K-12 Schools?

An item from a US-based K-12 digital learning organization.

View this email in your browser

What will the fall semester look like for
K-12 schools?

BY JOHN WATSON
Among the striking aspects of Covid-19 has been the speed at which the pandemic has developed, creating a “new normal” of closed schools and shuttered shops. Now, just as we are getting to the point where teachers and students are better adapting to remote learning, schools are shifting focus to what they will do in the fall. The widespread expectation appears to be that schools will re-open, but it’s not yet clear what onsite school may look like in the fall.

Colleges and universities can often move more quickly than K-12 districts, so it’s potentially informative to look at their planning. Currently, however, they appear to be planning everything from being fully online to being back to pre-pandemic normal. The California State University system has announced that it will be mostly online, while Purdue has announced that it will return to something approaching normal. As Phil Hill has noted, both these examples (which I took from his blog post) and others are actually a bit more hybrid, in that they are planning both onsite and online activities in response to the current Covid-19 situation, as well as the possibility of a resurgence. Due to the possible resurgence, in fact, some universities are planning to go back to on-campus instruction early in the fall (or late summer), but end on-campus activities earlier than usual in the late fall/early winter.

We are seeing a similar range of planning in the K-12 districts we are hearing from and seeing referenced in media reports. I have not heard of any that are planning to continue entirely remote learning in the fall. I am also not familiar with any that are not at least considering contingencies to be remote, for some time and/or some students, in the fall. Most commonly, we are hearing that districts feel they need to be ready for one or both of two scenarios:

  1. “Rolling closures,” meaning that although the district may open in August, schools may need to close or shift to remote again for a period sometime during the fall semester.
  2. The possibility that some parents will feel uncomfortable sending their children to school, and may expect to continue remote learning even if schools are open in the fall.

This second issue is particularly acute in states that don’t currently have a range of online and hybrid schools. Students in one of the 32 states that allow fully online schools have the option to shift to online learning regardless of whether their districts offer an online option. Students in the other 18 states do not, unfortunately, have that option. Similarly, students who live within relatively close proximity of a hybrid school have the opportunity for day-to-day flexibility in whether they will attend school onsite or learn remotely.

Two related issues are gaining some attention as schools consider re-opening. The first is whether schools can implement some form of social distancing, or limiting large gatherings. Will all-school assemblies continue? Friday night football games? It’s too early to tell for sure, and most likely that we will see differences by state and by district.

Second is the growing recognition across society—not just schools—of the vulnerable populations that may be most affected by re-openings. It’s well understood that young people are generally less affected than the elderly (although that’s not to say there is no risk for them). But certain people have underlying conditions that make them more vulnerable, regardless of age. And, how to think about students who live with an elderly relative? All of these issues apply to teachers and school staff as well.

The situation remains uncertain, and is likely to keep shifting as the summer unfolds. We will keep watching, commenting in blog posts, and adding information to the DLC Covid pages.

Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Evergreen Education Group, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DLAC website.

Our mailing address is:

Evergreen Education Group

700 Main Ave Ste E

Durango, CO 81301-5437

May 20, 2020

10 Tips On Using Tele-Practice For Students With Disabilities

An item from a US-based K-12 digital learning organization.

View this email in your browser

10 Tips on Using Tele-practice for Students with Disabilities

BY KELSEY ORTIZKelsey Ortiz supports state efforts to have deeper policy discussions around digital learning and equal access for all students. Her work with state education agencies includes IDEA policy development in online learning environments, IEP compliance and training in virtual schools, and advocacy for parents seeking equitable school choice options.  She is the founder and director of the Inclusive Digital Era Collaborative (iDEC).

Precautionary response to circumvent the impact of COVID-19 has displaced K-12 students nationwide from normal school activities. As a result, millions of families and students were expected to quickly adjust to home-based continuous learning opportunities.

The U.S. Department of Education provided guidance stating if schools choose to provide learning opportunities that those must be fully extended to all students including those with disabilities. The guidance further reiterated that regardless of the type of continuous learning opportunity offered by districts, students with disabilities must still be afforded a free appropriate public education (FAPE). This includes any related service deemed necessary to help students with disabilities benefit from special education and ultimately, to access a FAPE. These services, provided to the student at no cost, may include transportation, speech-language pathology, audiology services, occupational therapy (OT), physical therapy (PT), counseling services including rehabilitation counseling, interpreting services, psychological services, recreation, and several other services as defined IDEA §300.34(c).  During these times of school closure, special education teams may turn to tele-practice as one of the only methods available to provide much needed therapies

What is Tele-Practice?
Using telecommunications technology, students can meet with their service providers during a scheduled session via an audio or video connection without either party needing to travel to another location if they have reliable access to the Internet. The two main mechanisms for tele-practice are commonly referred to as synchronous and asynchronous (also known as “store and forward”). Although virtual schools have used tele-practice for students for quite some time, brick and mortar special education teams may be new to this approach.

10 Tips to determine if tele-practice is appropriate for the provision of related services to students with special needs.
To make tele-practice safe, effective, and appropriate based on the student’s needs and condition the IEP Team needs to KNOW:

  • Requirements of the practice setting.
  • Student’s context and environment.
  • Nature and complexity of the intervention/therapy.
  • Training required for in-home aide.

Additionally, the IEP Team needs to CONFIRM:

  • The tele-service provider adheres to all professional tele-practice ethics, standards, policies, and positions.
  • The provider adheres to licensure and certification requirements (state by state).
  • There will be access and expertise with high quality appropriate (and accessible) technology in the home environment.
  • Assessment tools and methods are valid and can be successfully applied online.
  • Thorough documentation practices and legal, professional record-keeping practices will be maintained and made available for IEP Team meetings.
  • A high degree of privacy, confidentiality, and security will be ensured through the use of secure videoconference platforms.

Two additional sources of information from the U.S. Department of Education are:

Fact Sheet: Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Schools While Protecting the Civil Rights of Students

Supplemental Fact Sheet: Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Preschool, Elementary and Secondary Schools While Serving Children with Disabilities

*****
DLC virtual happy hour reminder
We are continuing our virtual happy hours, this week on Thursday at 7ET/6CT/5MT/4PT. These are informal, free-form, small group discussions. If you’re interested please RSVP at www.digitallearningcollab.com/dlc-happy-hour-registration.

Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Evergreen Education Group, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DLAC website.

Our mailing address is:

Evergreen Education Group

700 Main Ave Ste E

Durango, CO 81301-5437

May 16, 2020

Thoughts On COVID-19 From The Front Lines Of Teaching

An item from the Digital Learning Collaborative.

View this email in your browser

Thoughts on COVID-19 from the
front lines of teaching

By Alexandra Griffith

(Editors note: We asked Alex–our opening speaker at the inaugural Digital Learning Annual Conference–to write about her experience as a teacher in a brick-and-mortar school during the transition to remote learning. Alex is a high school English teacher working for the past six years in a traditional public high school within the Oshkosh Area School District (Wi). Throughout her career, Alex has sought to integrate technology seamlessly within her classroom and personalize instruction to maximize student outcomes.

We’ve left behind the bells of the school house, the pressures of standardized testing, and the demands of 1-to 30 student-teacher ratios.

We’ve left behind lectures, endless standards, and educator effectiveness measures.

But we’ve also left behind human connection, social and emotional supports, counseling, and guaranteed meals.

In a system characterized by continuous attempts to reform, the Corona Virus has been a force to be reckoned with, shifting our schools more than all reform efforts combined.

The pandemic is compounding issues that have long existed, illuminating the burdens of poverty and deep-seated systemic inequity plaguing our public educational system, problems we can no longer ignore.

People rarely choose poverty. Kids never say, “I sure hope I am poor when I am older.” Poverty often works in a vicious cycle, as students living in poverty have a harder time achieving educational outcomes that will lift them into a higher socioeconomic status. Too often, our schools carry the brunt of addressing economic inequality, continuously seeking innovative ways to ensure all kids learn despite their background.

The closing of our schools has revealed a reality educators across the nation have known for decades. For so many students and families, schools provide the means for physical and emotional survival.

Daycare. Meals. Safety. Emotional support. Counseling. These are students’ basic, survival needs, and they have to be achieved before learning will occur.

Once those needs are met, schools and students can focus on learning (the original purpose of public education) the chance for a future, and a potential chance to escape cyclical and situational poverty.

Our society is finally recognizing how important schools are for serving our communities. The entire nation has its eye on education right now. We need to capitalize on this and demand change.

Technology access was a critical component to student success well before the pandemic hit. All students deserve the right to learn using current modes and methods, no matter their background. With the shift to remote learning, education has discovered that technology use in the classroom is a non-negotiable. Lacking the money to pay for the internet or purchase a computer should not be a barrier for a student’s success. Receiving a grade should not be a privilege provided to those who have the money to access technology in all spheres of their life. Physical impairments should not limit one’s capabilities when we have the technology to reduce these barriers. When technology is our future, we need to ensure that all groups of people have access to that future. It is imperative that we ensure school provides equitable access to technology in the form of 1:1 devices and mobile hotspots.

We have two ways we can go in terms of equity in education. We can either unite and actively fight it by investing in our students, or we can exacerbate the disparities existing for already disadvantaged populations.

To me, it would be grossly irresponsible not to use this epidemic as an opportunity for systemic change.

Like I mentioned, a key tool in fighting inequity is technological access. It is not the magical silver bullet, but it sure makes learning a whole lot easier, and we will see change in our public schools in regards to accessibility.

The schools that have had a strong technological infrastructure are experiencing the most success right now. My district, Oshkosh Area School District, coincidentally piloted our first trial digital learning day the first week in March, and I know the seemingly serendipitous coincidence benefited our high school immensely. Teachers were at least familiar with our LMS and strategies for engaging students when using technology. They had been provided with professional development for weeks prior to creating an entirely digital lesson. Curating course content into a LMS was an act that most could manage. Although for teachers who had rarely used our LMS managing their course well is an entirely different conversation, they are in a relatively stronger situation because of our district’s prior work on technology.

Schools that have yet to jump on the 1:1 trend are definitely going to feel the pressure to do so because the schools succeeding now are the schools who had strong technological infrastructure in conjunction with strong pedagogical practice prior to COVID. Schools are also realizing that students can have meaningful learning experiences without physically being present in the classroom, and this is going to push more schools to strengthen the technology within their districts. This situation may shift more schools to hybrid learning. Schools recognize that they have the capacity for hybridity, and all of our experiences with digital learning may make traditional schools think less about seat time and minutes in classrooms and more about delivering quality learning that promotes mastery. Current legislation requires a certain amount of seat time prior to seeking intervention methods. I believe, or at least, I hope, we will be re-examining seat time policy and emphasizing personalized mastery of skill sets necessary for success in modern society. We have been trying to push personalized learning in the world of education for years. I think we might just see it take off!

Although this shift to digital learning has possessed myriad challenges, I have been trying to find the silver linings. The most blatant silver lining I have seen is a better ability to personalize the curriculum I am teaching and more opportunities to offer voice, choice, and pacing options through the use of formative assessment. Technology is certainly making this shift easier, so I am leaning in to technology right now and using the incredibly innovative programs to my advantage.

Since I am not serving student needs physically or being pulled in twenty different directions, I have been able to shift my teaching to promoting mastery more frequently throughout my units and focus further on pacing options. I can use formative assessment strategically, stopping students from moving forward in the curriculum if they do not achieve mastery—redirecting them to video lessons and individualized and small group video meetings if their first attempt on a formative assessment does not demonstrate proficiency. I can also publish enough of the curriculum to enable students to keep moving forward if they can master a skill on their first attempt. I feel more equipped to provide help for students who need extra help while further pushing students who have already mastered essential skills, especially since I am not trying to manage behavioral issues while teaching. Remote learning is forcing teachers to design units that focus on skills rather than units that depend on teacher-driven content.

Additionally, I am able to provide feedback in many different forms. I can provide written feedback, video feedback, auditory comments and a combination of these formats for students who need information explained in multiple ways. Again, the fact that I am not trying to keep students on task while providing feedback, answering questions, and teaching lessons has allowed me to make feedback more meaningful. We have really been focusing on skills rather than content, and I think that has been helping with student participation.

I truly hope this situation changes grading as well. We should have less penalties for the lack of brain development among students (we penalize kids because they have yet to fully develop their executive function…what makes sense about that?). Since so many districts are focusing on essential standards and removing penalties for late work, we are actually seeing our grades reflect skill level.

As a teacher of SPED populations, I am definitely seeing two sides to the issue: some kids are really finding success in being able to take their time when completing assignments. The pressures and constraints of the school bell have been alleviated, and some of our students with IEPs are turning in higher quality work that is more reflective of their skill sets and less reflective of the problems of the traditional schoolhouse. For some of these kids, they are seeing their strengths for the first time in their schooling career. On the other hand, some students are struggling with the lack of their physical support systems. We have so many great technological supports, but nothing can truly replace the impact of a caring teacher that can physically work through materials with students. Access to video and text platforms have truly been a blessing though. Being able to work with a student individually, sharing your screen, and walking through lessons makes a huge difference for so many students, not just those with IEPs.

We do have an incredible advantage in front of us, despite the numerous obstacles that seem to drown out any bright spots in our current teaching reality. For years, numerous educators have recognized the problems of the public school system. This teaching shift is allowing us to abandon some of the outdated pedagogical practices that cannot be sustained in an online learning environment and fail to prepare our students for their future: entire class period lectures, teacher-driven content and an emphasis on content over skills, completion over mastery, reliance on worksheets. The list goes on and on.

For once, our world has slowed down, paused, and given us time to truly reflect on what needs to change in our schools and our society. To waste this time of reflection and continue with business as usual would be the worst injustice public education has seen in several decades.

Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Evergreen Education Group, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DLAC website.Our mailing address is:

Evergreen Education Group

700 Main Ave Ste E

Durango, CO 81301-5437

May 14, 2020

State Budget Shortfalls Are Coming – Are The Stimulus Funds Enough?

An item from the Digital Learning Collaborative.

View this email in your browser

State Budget Shortfalls are Coming – Are the Stimulus Funds Enough?

BY SUSAN GENTZ
Susan Gentz works on education policy, funding, and implementation strategies with districts across the nation to promote student-centered learning. She is the founder of BSG Strategies and Vice-President of K20Connect. Twitter: @shoing

Every state is facing the realization that budgets are going to take a big hit in FY2021. Although pandemic-related budget impacts across states are often portrayed as similar to one another, there are many variables that differ in each state and will affect the extent of budget impacts. For example, Alaska estimates an $815 million decline in general funds as a total of 81 percent of Alaska’s revenue is from taxes levied on the oil industry. New York projects a FY 2021 $13.3 billion shortfall, or 14% decline in revenue from January estimates, in part due to tourism impacts. States’ main economic drivers vary, and we could go through state-by-state and identify how each state’s backbone for revenue has been hit. (The National Conference of State Legislatures is keeping an up-to-date list on state-by-state estimated budget shortfalls here.)

What does this mean for education budgets?
Every state does things a little differently, but on average federal funding only accounts for approximately 8% of education budgets. The rest of the funds come from state and local monies. Education funding is always a major item in the state budget and often the single biggest item. On the high end of budgets is Vermont, with 90% of its state budget going to education, and on the low end is South Dakota with almost a third of its state budget funding education. The other states fall somewhere in between. With this much funding coming from the state level, education funding to districts will be hit hard in the next year and beyond.

Although state and local education agencies are still largely working through what this means for their budgets, (and many have extended dates for when a budget needs to be approved by the board) there are several districts who have already estimated how large their shortfalls will be. Loudoun County, VA is estimating a $73m shortfall for schools, Spokane Public Schools (WA) is estimating an $8m deficit (and discussing the declaration of a financial emergency which would invoke a hiring freeze and suspension of workload provisions.) Clark County School District (NV) is estimating a 14% budget shortfall and there will inevitably be many more districts that are facing shortfalls of this magnitude or more.

What has Congress Done to Fill the Gap?
It’s clear that the already appropriated stimulus funds will not fill the gap for these large shortfalls- but many are holding out hope that these are just preliminary funds and actions. Here’s a quick rundown of K-12 education specific funds and waivers available through the federal government so far. (Congress & United States Department of Education.)

Funding:

  • $13.5B for K-12 Education the Elementary and Secondary School emergency Relief Fund (ESSER) This formula grant from the CARES Act to be used for:
    • SEAs and LEAs with emergency relief funds to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the Nation.
    • The restrictions on these funds are few and the application is intended to be a streamlined process for districts to address their most challenging needs as quickly as possible.
  • $3B for Governor’s Emergency Education Relief Fund (GEER Fund). Every Governor has received funds from the USDE to spend on the following:
    • Providing emergency support through grants to the LEAs that the state educational agency (SEA) deems to have been most significantly impacted by COVID-19 to support the ability of such LEAs to continue to provide educational services to public and non-public school students and to support the on-going functionality of the LEA
    • Providing support to any other IHE, LEA, or education-related entity within the State that the Governor deems essential for carrying out emergency educational services to students
  • $180M for the Rethink K-12 School Models & Continue to Learn Microgrants

Waivers
The USDE worked with districts across the country to identify waivers that would be most helpful with the implementation of distance learning quickly. The waivers are not in the CARES Act, but are another way the federal government is working to allow districts flexibility to get teachers teaching and students learning.

  • Section 1127(b) of Title I, Part A of the ESEA to waive the 15% carryover limitation for Title I, Part A funds; (This is huge for supplementing funds for the coming year.)
  • Section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) to extend the period of availability of prior fiscal year funds, for Title I, Parts A-D, Title II, Title III, Part A, Title IV, Parts A-B, and Title V, Part B programs, and the McKinney-Vento Homeless Children and Youth program;
  • Section 4106(d) of Title IV, Part A of the ESEA to waive a needs assessment to justify the use of funds;
  • Section 4106(e)(2)(C), (D), and (E) of Title IV, Part A of the ESEA to waive content-specific spending requirements;
  • Section 4109(b) of Title IV, Part A of the ESEA to waive spending restrictions on technology infrastructure; and
  • Section 8101(42) of the ESEA to waive the definition of “professional development,” which might otherwise limit the ability to quickly train school leaders and teachers on topics like effective distance learning techniques.

What’s Next?
Congress acted quickly to get the first round of funds passed so states and districts could start accessing these funds to address immediate needs. Already, after the passage of phase 1, each step has taken a little longer as House and Senate members have their own interests in mind and more negotiations need to take place for the passage of another funding package. Advocates are hard at work to attain more funds after what they call “a down payment” for the crisis was made with the first round of education funding.

In fact, 62 superintendents signed on to a letter urging Congress for additional funding.. There has been speculation and advocacy for a “phase 4” of stimulus funds. This letter from district leaders specifically advocates for:

  • $175 billion in Educational Stabilization Funds distributed via the Title I formula
  • $13 billion for IDEA
  • $12 billion in additional Title I program funding, and
  • $2 billion for E-Rate.

It’s important to note that just because these numbers are suggested to Congress, it certainly does not guarantee success and additional funding. There has, however, been consensus that connecting homes with appropriate infrastructure and connectivity is of the highest importance from the Senate, House and White House.

The budget shortfalls will create many challenges for education leaders in the coming months and likely even years. What is to be seen is how districts will keep digital opportunities going in the fall once students are allowed back on campus. Although districts will return to brick-and-mortar schools, there seems to be a consensus that, at a minimum, blended learning will be the new model. It is critical that the funds districts are receiving now be used to create a strong foundation to build on in the coming months, knowing full well that resources will be limited moving forward.

*****
DLC virtual happy hour reminder
We are continuing our virtual happy hours, this week on Thursday at 7ET/6CT/5MT/4PT. These are informal, free-form, small group discussions. If you’re interested please RSVP at www.digitallearningcollab.com/dlc-happy-hour-registration.

Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Evergreen Education Group, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at the DLAC website.

Our mailing address is:

Evergreen Education Group

700 Main Ave Ste E

Durango, CO 81301-5437

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.