Policy committee reopens remote instruction debate; directs staff to draft state-approved plan

The Wake County Public Schools Policy Committee reopened discussion about whether the district should develop a state‑approved remote instruction plan that would permit the district to use up to five remote learning days (30 instructional hours) in lieu of in‑person make‑up days. Committee members did not take formal action to change policy but directed staff to draft a plan for board consideration.

Staff noted that state law and guidance set a limit (five days or 30 instructional hours) and require districts that use remote instruction to submit an approved Remote Instruction Plan (RIP) to the state by July 1. Committee members and staff said the core question before the committee was whether the district should pursue a RIP and whether, if approved, remote days could be used earlier in the calendar (rather than after exhausting banked make‑up days and work days).

Discussion points included equity and access, curricular expectations, and operational readiness. Board members raised the following concerns: - Connectivity and access: Several members said students and families vary widely in home Internet access and power reliability; staff noted some students lack hotspots or other devices and acknowledged the district would need to address those gaps before relying on remote days. - Grade-level differences: Members stressed that remote teaching for kindergarten and early elementary students is substantially different from middle- and high-school remote instruction; plans should allow differentiated approaches (synchronous for older students, asynchronous/module‑based options for younger grades) where appropriate. - Teacher expectations and implementation: Committee members asked how teachers would shift from in‑person to remote instruction on short notice and whether the district would require emergency lesson modules or expect synchronous instruction. - Non-digital options: Several members suggested the district include non‑digital materials (paper modules or printed packets) as an alternative when power or connectivity are unavailable. - Timeline and approvals: Staff warned that any district plan must be submitted to and approved by the state; while staff said they would pursue a plan if the board desires, they were cautious about the feasibility of completing a robust plan by July 1.

Board members expressed a range of positions: some favored giving staff authority to pursue and develop a plan for state review, while others urged caution based on lessons from pandemic remote learning experiences. The committee agreed there was sufficient interest to have staff build a proposal that addresses the issues discussed and return to the board or committee for further review.

No formal change to district policy was adopted at the meeting. Instead, the committee directed staff to draft a remote instruction plan that would meet state requirements (including reporting requirements for days used and hours missed), to consider a mix of synchronous and asynchronous approaches by grade level, and to include contingency approaches for students without reliable digital access. Staff said they would return with a recommended plan and with any recommended changes to the district's Remote Instruction Plan (RIP) or related administrative procedures.

Committee members stressed that any plan should avoid "checking the box" — staff should build a thoughtful, intentional program that addresses equity and instructional quality rather than a minimal compliance document. The committee concluded the discussion by asking staff to proceed and to return with a draft plan and implementation recommendations.