Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elearning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board advances eLearning emergency-use plan; staff training and formal hearing planned
Summary
After months of committee work and teacher input, the board discussed an eLearning plan for emergency use that includes live instruction and mandatory office hours; the union has reviewed the plan and the board directed staff to provide training and bring the plan for a formal hearing and vote at a subsequent meeting.
Get email alerts on the Elearning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board members discussed a proposed eLearning policy and instructional model to be used for limited emergency days. The plan, developed by a committee of teachers and staff, emphasizes live instruction, mandatory teacher office hours for student support, and a defined decision timeline for invoking an eLearning day; the board agreed to proceed with staff training and to schedule a formal hearing and vote at a future meeting rather than immediately adopting the plan.
Administrators and staff described the development process: a committee that began work in February included roughly 20 to 25 staff members and teachers, teacher representatives and administrators. Mr. Howe and other staff presented the model and said that the committee designed the plan to ensure eLearning days would be substantive instructional days rather than "check-the-box" asynchronous assignments. The plan calls for live lessons delivered by classroom teachers, required office hours for student follow-up, and preparatory time for teachers (district staff proposed using an upcoming full-day teacher institute to prepare lessons and materials).
Board members expressed a range of views. Board member Heather said she does not support an eLearning program as an ongoing substitute for classroom instruction and raised concerns about its effectiveness for struggling students. Board member James said he supported flexibility and pointed to workforce and higher-education examples where remote options are common; Board member Keith said he could support limited, cautious use but not routine application on the first sign of inclement weather. Administrators noted state rules limit eLearning days to a maximum of five in a school year for emergency use; beyond that the district must make up in-person days or seek other waivers. The plan also specifies an 8 p.m. call deadline the night before for deciding whether a day will convert to eLearning, to give students and staff time to prepare.
Union and staff engagement: the presenter said the district worked with union leadership on the plan and that the union had completed its review as of the Friday before the board meeting. Staff stressed that the eLearning model is intended for emergencies and that traditional emergency days built into the calendar would remain; eLearning does not remove the statutory requirement to make up missed in-person instructional time beyond state allowances.
Board direction and next steps: the board did not adopt the plan at the meeting but directed administration to provide staff training (using the October professional development day) and to place the plan on a future agenda for a formal hearing and vote. Administrators were asked to coordinate with feeder districts and neighboring districts where possible to align eLearning decision-making and communications.
Ending: The board's action was procedural direction to prepare staff and schedule a hearing; no formal adoption vote is recorded in the provided transcript.

