Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Virtual Learning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charles County board hears plan for virtual instruction during severe weather; staff flag device, equity and cost gaps
Summary
School leaders outlined legal requirements and tradeoffs for a possible virtual‑education plan for inclement weather, reporting device and broadband gaps, an estimated $7.3 million near‑term replacement need for 9,500 devices, and that a live, four‑hour synchronous requirement would apply.
The Charles County Board of Education on May 8 heard staff detail what a virtual education plan for inclement weather would require and the practical obstacles to implementing one across the district.
Superintendent Dr. Ryan Navarro introduced the presentation and asked staff to gather community input before any formal board direction. "The district must ensure all students have the necessary devices and home internet access," said Charmaine Thompson, the district's chief technology officer, summarizing statutory requirements she cited as "command code 7-103.2" that authorize local boards to implement virtual education days but require published plans and equity safeguards.
Staff described the district's current device model as mixed by grade level: shared iPads in pre‑K and kindergarten, cart‑based devices for grades 3–8, and 1:1 take‑home devices only for grades 9–12. Laura Bennett, executive director of I.T. strategy, said hotspots purchased under COVID grants are coming to term and that county broadband work left roughly 550 addresses unconnected, meaning some families would need cellular service or other alternatives.
Officials provided cost estimates if the district were to move back toward a full 1:1 take‑home program. Thompson said roughly 9,500 laptops purchased in summer 2020 would need replacement at an estimated $7.3 million, and that a district‑wide five‑year replacement cycle for 28,000+ students would carry approximately $4 million in annual costs.
Kevin Lounds, chief of teaching and learning, outlined instructional tradeoffs: while virtual days "would be less interruption to learning" after built‑in days are exhausted, Maryland rules would require four hours of synchronous instruction during a virtual day. Lounds warned that synchronous requirements and screen‑time guidance present challenges for pre‑K and early elementary students, that some special‑education therapies need in‑person delivery, and that teachers and families would need robust training and tech support.
Staff noted a March 2026 survey of about 1,200 respondents showing roughly 83% of students reported access to a dedicated device at home and 91% reported internet access; 3% reported unreliable internet. Bennett cautioned the sample size and representativeness and recommended further surveying if the board directs the superintendent to develop a plan.
During a live poll of meeting participants, about 62–63% indicated support for the district developing a virtual education plan; roughly 27% preferred traditional closures and about 11% were undecided.
There was no formal motion or vote at the town hall. Board members and staff repeatedly framed next steps as research and public engagement: if the board asks the superintendent to prepare a plan, staff said they would return with a proposal and additional data on costs, equity strategies (devices and hotspots), and operational requirements.
What happens next: staff will continue to gather feedback, refine cost estimates and equity mitigation ideas, and would post any proposed virtual education plan publicly as required by state regulation. The board did not take a vote at the town hall.
