After the April 6 MSAD 51 Board of Directors Meeting in which board members voted 9-0 to not return to 100 percent in-person learning for the spring, several parents noted that that Mabel I Wilson School could accommodate all kindergarten and first grade students in the Cohort C, thereby bringing back those two grades 100 percent.
Superintendent Porter ended this discussion with an e-mail to the board on April 9.
“I want to apologize to the Board for any unnecessary confusion or indications that there was any circumventing of the process when I sent out information yesterday about possibly bringing K and 1 back full time this spring. This was a hold-over topic from the Getting to Green advisory group and it was raised during public comment at the Board meeting this week, so we had continued to explore the possibility.
After talking with Tyler this morning, we agreed that it is important that this does not go forward.”
Porter said a 100 percent return for grades kindergarten and first would create confusion among the staff and parents and stall progress for other Cohort C planning.
The North Yarmouth Free Voice wanted to learn more about Porter’s considerations behind this decision and also more information about the Cohort C model. The Free Voice sent Porter a list of questions to which he responded below:
North Yarmouth FreeVoice: Was the school able to bring back all students identified as Cohort C eligible?
Superintendent: A total of 186 students joined Cohort C in grades K-12 or nine percent more of our total student population. This includes 75 students at GHS, 42 students at GMS 6-8, 22 at GMS 4-5, and 47 students at MIW.
FreeVoice: What was the number returned versus total eligible students per school?
SP: MIW discussed having 91 students join Cohort C. We invited 53 students. Four families declined and we brought back 47 total students.
GMS 4-5 brought back all 22 students who were identified for Cohort C. We have 42 students in Cohort C at GMS 6-8. That is all we can accommodate. It accounts for all of the students to whom we offered Cohort C programming.
GHS brought back 75 students over several weeks, beginning with seniors most in need and then other students in need of academic and socio-emotional needs.
FV: Why were 91 discussed at MIW but only 47 returned?
SP: As has been the situation throughout the school year, MIW is short-staffed. The plan for Cohort C students was limited by the staff available to provide programming for them.
In our first group of identified Cohort C students this spring, we focused on identifying those students with IEPs, 504s, or Tier 3 RTI with the highest need who could benefit from the programming capacity we have to offer.
In our second group of identified Cohort C students, we focused on identifying those students who would most benefit from repeating the two days of in person instruction.
FV: Did the basic "model" vary significantly between the buildings? For example were the schools able to get all Cohort C students into actual classrooms for the 4 days or were there different scenarios for each building, etc.
SP: Each student in Cohort C has an individualized schedule. Cohort C programming includes attending special education or Tier 3 RTI sessions, joining the classroom for repeat instruction, receiving support for remote assignment completion and/or in some cases engaging in alternative programming to fill out a full day schedule.
FV: For MIW - during the ad hoc meeting, it was noted that all K-1 could return 4 days and remain within state spacing guidelines. But this option was not implemented. Can you explain why?
SP: As was presented at the Ad Hoc meeting, the issue with K-1 was staffing to address 6 foot social distancing for breakfast, snack and lunches. Since our ed techs provide both RTI instruction and coverage for breaks K-3, if K-1 were to return to school, it would impact programming and coverage across the school. We were directed to focus on increasing the amount of students who were in Cohort C and all available staff focused on those students. We could not increase Cohort C and bring back K and 1. Currently, MIW is way over capacity for space as there are 8 classrooms in a modular building outside the main building for enrollment reasons. Next year, there will be 10 classrooms outside the building for enrollment reasons.
FV: How many additional K-1 students not identified as eligible for Cohort C were able to return 4 days with Cohort C?
SP: 10 kindergarten students joined Cohort C during the month of May
10 first grade students joined Cohort C during the month of May
FV: Have you or how will schools measure the impact of Cohort C?
SP: It will be difficult to measure student growth from Cohort C because it is such a short time interval, and the reasons why students were invited to join Cohort C are highly individualized. For example, some students were invited for purely academic reasons, while others were invited because of poor attendance data. That said, we are monitoring attendance, work completion, and work performance. Work performance also will be reviewed in the fall with our universal academic screening tool for literacy and math known as iReady. We use this to assess continuing needs for Response to Intervention services and was the way that we identified students for cohort C as well.
FV: What key learning have you identified based on observation of Cohort C that has been integrated into the "Fall Return to School Plan" to ensure a successful learning transition this fall?
SP: The challenge of keeping students 3' distanced in the classroom, especially at the elementary level. So much of what in-person learning entails in the modern school is built on collaborative learning opportunities. Pooled testing would have allowed us to move ahead without having to observe the 3' distance in classrooms, but survey results returned by parents showed minimal support for moving ahead with pooled testing.
(Responses were received prior to Maine DOE announcement on June 9, 2021, to eliminate distancing requirements for fall.)