‘A band-aid on a bleeding wound’: Teachers groups oppose remote learning use change

The Connecticut State Department of Education and the largest teacher unions in the state stand divided over new CSDE guidance that grants districts a green light to offer dual instruction to in-person and remote students in specific, limited situations, despite a state ban on the practice.

Under the guidance, planning and placement or section 504 teams may approve remote learning through a dual instruction model for students with disabilities. The CSDE also permits dual instruction for courses taught in one school and shared virtually with another school or district. Additionally, schools can, but are not required to, offer sick students the option to watch class online during their absence.

Educators and representatives of the Connecticut Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers gathered on the steps of the State Capitol in Hartford Wednesday to call on the CSDE to rescind the guidelines, describing the directive as “illegal” and “inequitable.”

“The new guidance blatantly defies the statutory ban on the inferior practice of dual teaching,” CEA President Kate Dias said. “During the pandemic, we experienced firsthand the disruptions and inequities of dual teaching. Reviving this flawed approach to instruction goes against everything we know about sound educational practice and everything we learned from the pandemic.”

The Connecticut General Assembly passed a ban on dual instruction last legislative session, requiring that learning occur in either all-virtual or all-in-person settings. The CSDE guidance circumvents this state law via the federal Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Connecticut Supreme Court school desegregation case Sheff v. O’Neill.

In a statement Wednesday, the CSDE said that General Assembly members did not intend to eliminate student access to course-sharing and other virtual opportunities when they enacted the dual instruction ban.

“The CEA and the AFT held a press conference [Wednesday] which inferred that the CSDE’s Remote Learning and Dual Instruction Guidance released [Tuesday] is illegal. This is a false narrative,” the CSDE said. “This guidance is about ensuring equitable learning opportunities for all children — particularly those with disabilities and those who are in underserved districts that would otherwise be deprived of the opportunity to access advanced courses.”

Teachers opposing the guidance said that it is impossible for educators to provide quality, engaging instruction to a class of in-person and remote students. They said they are not against virtual learning when it takes place in a dedicated, virtual classroom.

The CEA cited the CSDE’s Statewide Summative Assessment Report that found the greatest pandemic learning loss occurred for students in hybrid and remote instruction models. They say the guidelines, which provide exceptions for students living with disabilities and students from underserved areas, could negatively impact an already vulnerable population.

According to the CSDE, districts successfully implemented course-sharing learning models well before the pandemic. Supporters of the guidelines said that this form of dual instruction opens opportunities for students in underserved or smaller districts to take advanced placement and specialized courses.

Martha Stone, the executive director of the nonprofit law firm Center for Children’s advocacy, said in a CSDE press release Tuesday that inter- and intra-district course sharing is an essential component of the Sheff v. O’Neill school integration case.

“It encourages integrated educational experiences and expands access to advanced and college-level classes among choice programs, particularly for those students who would otherwise be deprived of the opportunity to benefit from them,” Stone said.

Subira Gordon, executive director of the nonprofit education advocacy group ConnCAN, echoed Stone’s sentiment.

“This innovation provides vital pathways for students to learn and thrive. Plus, it helps support educators to teach what they love and stay in a role that would otherwise be financially difficult to maintain by a single district,” Gordon said.

Despite proponents’ claims that course sharing will lead to more equitable access, some educators remain unconvinced.

Faith Sweeney, who teaches in Westport, said that she fears suburban districts will use dual instruction course sharing to maintain a facade of diversity and dodge open choice enrollment of urban students into their district.

“Dual instruction is not a way to provide access that is equitable to all students … [Remote participation] is not the same quality of education that students in the classroom are receiving,” Sweeney said. “Just because students of diverse backgrounds are remotely coming into a classroom it doesn’t mean that they’re building relationships with their teacher or with other students from other communities.”

Carol Gale, president of the Hartford Federation of Teachers, said that the CSDE dual instruction guidance provides no relief for stressed teachers and may exacerbate the state’s educator shortage.

“It’s just one more way that they’re trying to put a band-aid on a bleeding wound,” Gale said. “One of the reasons we have a teacher shortage is that teachers across the nation are feeling overwhelmed and underappreciated, and that is very true for Hartford and many of our districts here in Connecticut. So if you want to get rid of more teachers, ask them to do more and ask them to do instruction that we know as educators does not work.”

Education Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker in a a CSDE press release said her department acknowledges the difficulties dual instruction caused for students and teachers during the pandemic. She said Connecticut schools will not return to a widespread dual instruction model.

“The guidance reiterates the prohibition of dual instruction as legislated while applying the knowledge we gained during the pandemic about remote learning to ensure opportunities remain for all our students,” Russell-Tucker said. “We must continue to emphasize the importance of in-person instruction while ensuring students farthest from educational opportunities are not left behind.”

Alison Cross can be reached at across@courant.com.