All school districts in Michigan faced uncertainty in the budget, state testing, and pupil accounting as they planned for the 20-21 school year.  Rochester Community School’s (RCS) challenge was to provide a quality form of education to all students, with an online option for the families uncomfortable having their students back in the buildings. 

While RCS faced the same uncertainty as other districts as they planned for the 20-21 school year, they had some advantages over other districts.  They had a superintendent selected to multiple state-wide committees by Governor Whitmer. Additionally, they operate with an annual budget of just over $200 million, which, when used appropriately, could have been utilized to make decisions in the best interest of the students during this difficult time. Despite having these advantages, our community has grown very divided, tension has risen, and an overall sense of frustration is rampant among district stakeholders. The question is, why? 

RCS Had Time And Resources

As RCS started to plan for the 20-21 school year, district leadership needed to set one clear objective for all district employees: to safely provide quality education to all students.  It was clear based on the science and data that the virus presented a much higher risk to particular populations.  This should have resulted in two sub-objectives: a plan to safely return to in-person instruction and provide an online option that offers the same course selections.

As the district put its plan in place to achieve the above-listed objectives, it should have reviewed all spending and suspended any expenditure that did not directly lead to successfully meeting the goal.  By stopping all spending not tied to delivering quality education to all students, it would ensure with the budget uncertainty that all funds are directed to the district’s primary responsibility first.  Step two would have focused all resources on making the buildings safe for in-person instruction and creating an online platform.

What did the district leadership do?

RCS decided to build a Virtual Campus (VC) from scratch, which had been part of the strategic plan before COVID-19.  They seized the opportunity that COVID-19 presented to pull the trigger on it.  They decided that the curriculum had to be built in-house, cost-effectively. In order to be cost-effective, the VC could not offer the same course selection that the in-person students would have access to. 

Due to the decision to build the VC, teachers and support staff were not developing the processes needed to return to in-person instruction.  The most prominent example of the misallocation of resources is that over 100 teachers and support staff worked on the VC, and only two were assigned to changing air filters.  Changing air filters was an action item for returning to in-person instruction as the CDC identified air circulation to reduce the virus’s risk.     

The VC offered a flexible schedule with minimal direct instruction time.  The VC’s structure is one best suited for students who can learn independently or have parents at home to make up for a teacher’s lack of instruction time.  The majority of students do not fall into these two categories.  

Where did the district look to save money?

As they decided what classes the VC would offer, they did a cost analysis.  This analysis was pretty straightforward; would there be enough students enrolled to make the course worth offering (did not release the math).  Unfortunately, this analysis excluded many AP classes from being provided at the VC because they only apply to a small percentage of the student population. With the exclusion of coursing offerings such as AP classes, the district directly contradicted what should have been one of their key objectives, to provide the same courses, whether in-person or online.  

The VC took resources away from developing and implementing a plan to return to in-person instruction safely.  It was an ideal fit for a small population of students but the only option for students that did not want to be in person.  The VC might be the best example of what not to do when confronted with uncertainty with your budget and modify the learning environment for all students.

Where was the oversight from the Board of Education?

During the July 2020 BOE meeting, one BOE Trustee pointed out that by choosing to build the VC, the district took a complex situation and made it more complicated.   Did that Trustee voice the need to avoid making things more complex?  No, he praised the district’s leadership for their decisions to offer choice.  Unfortunately, the VC took options away from the majority of parents.  

Has the district leadership and the BOE been open to discussing the VC?

NO, they have sent cease and desist letters to parents.  The BOE has ignored the calls for a parent survey for over 300 days.  They pitted the two groups of parents that had their options taken away by the VC against each other.  They resorted to misleading information and played to the fears some in the community had of the virus.

There is little question that if district leadership had challenged the district employees to prepare the building for a safe return to in-person instruction and a way for students to learn from home, they would have met that challenge.  

The past year has been challenging for everyone, and while the district leadership may believe they made the right decisions, the facts show they did not.  The VC’s launch consumed too many resources and neglected far too many students.  When these facts became apparent to the community, they did not accept responsibility or admit their mistakes; instead, they became defensive and ultimately attacked stakeholders in an effort to protect their public image.

The Board of Educations not only allowed the district to make their decisions without honest public discussion; they endorsed the decisions.  The board lost its place as the checks and balances for the district. That is why Michelle, Kevin, Andrea, and Barb need to be recalled and replaced.  

One Response

  1. No wonder virtual has been so difficult. They spent time and money creating a whole new curriculum. Plus, in our house, we had to switch between Moodle and Google platforms. Very confusing for kids and parents. Thank you Andrew for getting this information out.