Updates on the Fight for Quality Public Education in Brevard County, FL
0:00 Let’s get started!
0:06 I’m going to show you how to play the game.
0:08 I’m going to show you how to play the game!
5:40 Again, if you go on to the red line version, what you’ll see is
5:44 that there have been a number
5:46 of things that have been taken out that are no longer applicable
5:51 since it’s no longer temporary
5:53 and a few additions that were added.
5:59 Juanita also took the opportunity to make this like the other
6:02 policies that we have updated
6:04 recently and put in the outlining format so that we can refer to
6:08 paragraphs easily.
6:10 You’ll see in paragraph G there was some input there.
6:12 It’s actually highlighted as well as underlined those parts that
6:18 were stricken.
6:22 That part was provided by Cabinet as a slight addition to some
6:27 information about face shields.
6:30 And then after that you’ll see a clean version of the proposed
6:34 policy.
6:34 This is a work session and whatever other input that you have,
6:38 we’ll make those changes
6:40 for the next time around at the workshop.
6:43 Thank you, Mr. Novelli.
6:48 Any board members have questions, comments, or requests?
6:54 Ms. Campbell.
6:56 So first of all, just because, for those who are watching, I don’t
7:00 want people to get
7:01 the idea because you just said the word permanent.
7:03 That means we’re making facial coverings permanent, but we are
7:06 having a permanent policy to deal
7:08 with when we need to have temporary use of face coverings.
7:12 Excellent point.
7:13 Bad choice of words on my part.
7:14 I apologize.
7:15 That’s right.
7:16 Because if you see it towards the end of that, there’s language
7:19 about how the superintendent
7:20 and or board would conclude that type of a policy if it had to
7:27 be put again in place.
7:30 Right.
7:31 So the one point in here that I would love for us to, maybe I
7:36 could get some clarification
7:39 on why we’re using this particular wording or maybe we can make
7:42 it a little clearer, is
7:46 in, let me get my letters right, F1C, all student face coverings
7:52 shall comply with the school’s
7:53 dress code for shirts.
7:55 I’ve already seen that come up in a few emails or concerns, and
8:00 I understand the idea behind
8:02 it is that if we have a rule that you can’t have a shirt that
8:05 says, you know, that advertises
8:08 drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, whatever, then you also can’t have a
8:11 face mask or if it has obscenity.
8:13 But I think that’s maybe a little confusing.
8:15 I think maybe we can, if we could we be more clear with that or
8:18 because the other thing is
8:20 some schools are like our district dress code doesn’t say shirts.
8:23 It says upper garments, but we also have that like you can’t
8:26 wear pants with that on there
8:27 either.
8:27 So I’m just not sure if that’s the right wording for that.
8:31 And I had a note to bring that up to Ms. Campbell.
8:33 So thank you for, for calling attention to that.
8:35 I looked at our student code of conduct this morning and
8:38 actually it is the accessories portion
8:40 of our student code of conduct that addresses any inappropriate
8:44 advertising statements, those sorts
8:47 of things.
8:47 So I think if we, with the school’s dress code for accessories,
8:52 I think would.
8:53 And actually incorporate the language that we’re meaning to
8:55 incorporate.
8:56 Right.
8:56 Okay.
8:56 Because if the point is that it, the wording or the imagery that’s
9:02 on, that’s, you know,
9:04 the way that it looks, it’s not a matter of how thick the straps
9:08 are or anything like that
9:09 that would relate to.
9:10 Right, good point.
9:10 Well, then we’ll go back and study those exact words in the
9:15 student conduct and we’ll use the
9:16 same wording here.
9:17 Okay.
9:18 Perfect.
9:18 Thank you, Mr. Novelli.
9:19 Any other word members have any other items to discuss on the
9:24 policy language?
9:25 I have just a couple.
9:33 And this might actually be a question for Mr. Gibbs, but on item
9:36 C, it says that the superintendent
9:41 working with the DOH may activate the policy by notifying the
9:43 school community of the implementation
9:45 and then he will place the measure on the next available board
9:48 meeting agenda.
9:49 So my question is, does that mean that activation of the policy
9:52 is pending board approval
9:54 or can the superintendent go ahead and activate the policy kind
9:57 of like when we hire, right?
10:00 We put people into their position and then the board doesn’t
10:03 approve them until later.
10:05 Right.
10:06 Yeah.
10:06 The intent was that if in conjunction with the DOH, they say we
10:11 need the policy in place,
10:12 he can activate it immediately.
10:14 And then he brings it to the next meeting for board approval to
10:18 continue it.
10:20 So can we stick in immediately after may activate this policy?
10:24 Yeah.
10:26 I just don’t want it to be perceived that the superintendent has
10:29 to bring it to the board
10:30 before we can put it in place if it’s in the best interest of
10:32 our students to go ahead and do that.
10:34 All right.
10:35 I will certainly stick it in there and I’ll add the word
10:38 immediately after may activate.
10:40 Or after the word policy.
10:43 Yeah.
10:45 May activate this policy immediately by notifying.
10:47 Yep.
10:47 Okay.
10:48 Perfect.
10:49 And then on item G, I love that we are clarifying that face
10:56 shield should not be used in lieu of masks,
10:59 except in situations where instruction is needed for effective
11:02 instruction, I guess.
11:04 But I’m wondering if it would not be more efficient for us to
11:10 say face shields may be used by persons to
11:12 comply with this policy when the instruction requires
11:19 the ability to see the face of the student and/or teacher.
11:21 Because I think the current confusion around face shields is
11:27 that first sentence.
11:28 The ability to see the face of the face of the face of the face
11:31 of the face of the student and/or teacher.
11:35 All right.
11:36 So you said when the instruction requires.
11:38 The ability to see the, like the rest of that last sentence.
11:41 Okay.
11:41 The ability to see the face of the student and/or teacher.
11:43 Okay.
11:44 So are you saying you don’t want to include the first sentence?
11:51 You don’t want to allow face shields to be used to comply with
11:54 this policy?
11:57 Yes.
11:58 So the, the point of the, the face, face shields act technically
12:02 can be used as an accommodation for
12:04 someone who has medical restriction as well.
12:07 Right.
12:07 But the perception, just because people see this first sentence
12:11 is,
12:11 I just don’t feel like wearing a mask and so I’m just going to
12:15 wear a face shield.
12:16 And I think that’s where a lot of the confusion has come from.
12:22 Because we know that masks do not provide the same level of
12:24 protection.
12:25 They, masks provide a different, I’m sorry, face shields provide
12:28 a different level of protection.
12:30 So face shields provide additional protection for the person
12:33 wearing them to provide eye protection.
12:35 But they are not as effective at stopping droplet spread.
12:38 So ideally you wear a face mask for your protection to keep your
12:43 eyes and you wear a
12:43 mask to prevent spread to others.
12:45 And I think there’s been an enormous amount of confusion around
12:49 that portion of the policy.
12:54 So are you just striking the very first sentence?
13:05 I mean, certainly we can talk about it.
13:07 My recommendation would be to take the part of the first
13:11 sentence and part of the second sentence.
13:13 So in the first sentence, face shields may be used by persons to
13:17 comply with this policy.
13:18 And then move down to the second sentence when the instruction,
13:24 and I’m not sure why we have
13:25 supports, it seems like requires would be more appropriate, the
13:31 ability to see the face of the
13:32 student and/or the teacher.
13:35 So we’re actually taking out the first part of the second
13:38 sentence.
13:39 I think she was proposing the change to clear up that confusion
13:40 because I know we’ve gotten a lot of
13:41 feedback on that.
13:41 A lot of feedback on that.
13:47 So I think that’s one of the things that we have to do.
13:49 And I think that’s one of the things that we have to do.
14:05 And that’s one of the things that we have to do.
14:12 So I’m just thinking about current practice. I mean, I have an
14:19 elementary school student
14:20 right now who we provided face shields for every elementary
14:23 school student up through
14:25 sixth grade so that they can use, and he uses his interchange. I
14:31 mean, he has his mask.
14:32 He gets on with the mask, but he has a shield, and he can use
14:35 that in certain circumstances
14:36 throughout the day, and he just kind of swaps them out as needed.
14:41 You know, face shields, I understand and agree, you know, it’s a
14:48 different kind of protection,
14:49 but I, you know, when I’ve, what I’ve heard from even some of
14:53 our pediatric infectious disease
14:55 specialists over, and the one who did the presentation for the
14:58 school nurses in Orange County, he talked
15:01 about, you know, we have to look at good, better, best. I think
15:04 about some of our primary students
15:06 whose parents, who we have said, right, it’s strongly encouraged,
15:09 it’s not the same requirement
15:10 for our pre-K through second grade students. But some of them
15:15 are using face shields because
15:17 they’re, at a young age, it’s easier for, something easier for
15:19 them to do. If we take this out,
15:24 we, I don’t know, I kind of like the way that it is, because we’re
15:30 able to, we’re able to
15:32 make it a broader, it’s giving more people the ability to comply
15:39 with the policy who are having
15:40 a hard time with it, just to be completely honest.
15:44 So I, I think the, I understand where you’re coming from. I, I
15:49 think it’s confusing to say
15:50 that they meet the requirement and then they only meet the
15:55 requirement in this situation.
15:57 Because that’s basically what it says is they’re allowed to be
16:01 warned when instruction warrants
16:02 it, right?
16:03 So if they’re receiving speech therapy or if they’re working on
16:06 phonics or if they’re working
16:07 on any of those things, that’s what the second sentence says,
16:10 basically.
16:11 Okay.
16:12 But I, I think the confusion is coming in with the first
16:15 sentence. So our, our primary kids
16:17 who are K pre K to two, we have just a strong recommendation for
16:22 them for three through six.
16:26 If it’s instructionally warranted for them to do the shields,
16:29 absolutely. I think I don’t,
16:32 I personally don’t see that we’re really changing the, yeah, I
16:36 don’t think we’re changing practice.
16:37 But I think we’re just clearing up confusion because we have, I’ll
16:42 tell you, we have a lot
16:43 of teachers that are walking around just wearing face shields.
16:46 And that I think is concerning
16:53 unless it’s an accommodation.
16:55 So the, the cloth section isn’t clear on the level of cloth. I
17:04 mean, if we’re going to start
17:06 getting down in the nitty gritty and micromanaging, we’ve got
17:12 people using spandex over their face.
17:14 I mean, if you really want to be severe, I’m willing to bet that
17:20 spandex is doing less than
17:22 a face shield. And yet we’re not going to get into the nitty gritty
17:26 and say, what kind
17:26 of cloth do you need? So it just, so much of this doesn’t make
17:30 sense to me. It’s like,
17:32 we grab this, we grab that, we don’t care about this. So we feel
17:35 like we’re doing something.
17:36 If we care, we care. If we don’t, we don’t. And if we’re now
17:39 going to, the few people that
17:41 are left and, and able to deal with this by using a face shield
17:44 to calm their anxieties,
17:45 we’re now going to say, no, you have to have something touching
17:47 your face, which may do less
17:49 than the face shield because it makes somebody else feel better.
17:52 Super frustrating to me.
17:53 So I get your frustration, Ms. Duskovich. And I, I, you know, I
17:58 would just remind that we’ve
17:59 got, we still have the exceptions where people can certainly
18:03 wear a face shield if they are
18:05 more comfortable with that. And they have except, you know,
18:08 documented exceptions, all of, I mean,
18:11 there are a through I of, of exceptions there. So I’m, I don’t
18:17 think at least, and it’s not my
18:20 interpretation. If it, if someone else has a different
18:23 interpretation, I certainly would
18:25 love to hear. Um, I don’t think that G applies excluding the
18:33 exceptions. So I don’t think the
18:37 G is saying, well, even though you have an exception, you have
18:39 to follow this, the exceptions are there.
18:41 But where we have an enormous amount of confusion is the
18:44 expectation that people wear masks, except
18:50 when the instructional need is there for them to be able to see
18:54 mouth, or if the exceptions
18:56 are there for, for medical, psychological, all of those issues,
19:00 I think still apply.
19:02 So we don’t include just, we don’t include face shields in F,
19:08 which is the types of face
19:09 covering. But then we have G that says, oh, and you can have
19:12 these too. So I, I get why it’s confusing.
19:15 Paul, you have any, um, my, uh, what I recall from, what I
19:22 recall from the, uh, emergency adoption
19:27 hearings on this policy is that the majority of the board wanted
19:32 to allow face shields. That’s why it was
19:36 worded the way it was. Cause if you look at, if you take the red
19:39 line out, we were saying faculty are encouraged to use a face
19:42 shield in lieu of a map.
19:42 When instruction required the students to see the teacher’s face.
19:46 So that was kind of the exception for math for teachers.
19:54 The rest of it, from what I recall was we were okay with
19:59 students being able to wear face shields to comply. If the board
20:03 wants to change it to say, we don’t want to allow face shields
20:04 to comply with it unless that circumstance there, then that’s
20:04 fine.
20:04 It’s up to the board. It’s your policy. So this is going to be
20:12 here longterm. If this ever crops up for another illness comes
20:19 out and we need to impose it, this is what we’re going to be
20:22 using.
20:23 And without getting too much in the weeds, let me give you
20:26 another example of a time when the face shields are being used
20:29 on our playground.
20:30 Sometimes outside the kids are using the facials instead of a
20:32 mask. Personally, I don’t have a problem with that because we’re
20:35 outdoors.
20:35 It’s frustrating for many parents that they have to be wearing
20:38 them at all when it’s so hot and they’re outdoors and they’re
20:41 socially distanced.
20:42 And so schools are doing different things depending on how
20:45 socially distanced they are. Um, but some of them are going
20:48 ahead and using a face shield because then it’s at least you’re
20:51 not quite so sweaty.
20:52 You still have some air circulation, but you’ve got something on,
20:54 um, that if we take this first sentence out or we change it,
20:59 then we’re not allowing that anymore.
21:01 So just because that wouldn’t, there’s not really an ability as
21:05 there’s not necessarily an instructional reason to have a face
21:09 shield on at the time, you’re out on the playground.
21:11 There’s not instruction necessarily going on unless you’re in PE.
21:14 Um, so I don’t think though, Ms. Campbell, that the policy reads
21:21 that if they are outside and socially distanced, they’re not
21:26 required to have a mask.
21:27 So I would suggest that if they’re outside and socially distanced
21:30 and they have them wear a face shield, they’re just taking an
21:33 extra layer of protection.
21:34 I don’t think we’re prohibiting them from using face shields in
21:38 that situation if they are socially distanced.
21:41 Do we have something specifically describing what you just
21:50 mentioned?
21:53 Cause I don’t see an exception. Obviously our policy just in
21:56 general says when you can’t maintain social distance or when you
21:59 can mean, you know, that you have to wear a face covering when
22:02 you can’t maintain social distancing or as much as feasible.
22:05 Right.
22:06 Um, but we do have schools that have, they may be changing those
22:11 with a greater understanding of the policy, but we do have
22:13 schools that are requiring their kids to keep their face coverings
22:16 on when they go out on the playground.
22:18 So we do talk about strenuous physical activity, a face covering
22:29 shall not be required for any person inside or outside of any
22:37 school district facility while such person is engaged in strenuous
22:41 physical activity, which would be recessed quite frankly,
22:44 because they run around.
22:45 So yeah, so it’s not required.
22:48 So, and that’s in our emergency policy. I’m assuming it’s in
22:52 this current policy too.
22:52 It is. It’s in there. E1H.
22:59 so i have a question are we concerned that people are abusing
23:11 this is that what your concern is
23:17 because i i i think that i agree with miss campbell with um i
23:21 rather have some people use a face shield
23:26 than nothing um and if that makes them more comfortable our
23:29 students um doesn’t give them
23:32 the best protection it really um they’re more vulnerable but i
23:37 do feel that it allows them that
23:39 choice i’m not uh i’m not concerned that people are abusing it i’m
23:43 concerned that people don’t
23:45 understand the difference okay in the level of protection and um
23:54 as i said i there are i’ve gotten multiple emails from teachers
23:58 who are concerned that their peers
24:00 are just wearing a face shield throughout the day and all
24:03 interactions um and they’re concerned for
24:08 their own safety so i think that just making sure that you know
24:12 yes there are times when it’s
24:13 appropriate if you’re utilizing the face shield as an
24:16 accommodation if you’re utilizing a face shield
24:18 while you’re working on instruction you know that that speech
24:21 therapy or you need to to see phonics
24:24 letter sounds those types of things i think that at least my
24:28 under was my understanding of the original
24:31 intent on the face shields was there are times when it’s
24:33 appropriate but not that it necessarily be used
24:37 in lieu of um mask all the time and that’s true because i know
24:42 we talked about being able to purchase
24:46 masks that had the clear face um face so people could read other
24:52 people’s lips yeah
24:58 so i don’t want to take anything away i mean i like i said we
25:02 have we have the exceptions we have you know
25:05 the i just think it’s incredibly confusing as it’s worded
25:08 if it needs to be more clear we can make it more clear but i
25:17 would not be in favor of making it more
25:19 restrictive so is it your perception that
25:24 that is making it more restrictive by taking out by blending the
25:29 first and second sentence
25:31 yes
25:34 i do think so i i do understand your confusion on the support of
25:43 the support because i
25:45 it seems like it’s the other way around right when it needs to
25:48 be supported by um
25:49 by having a face shield um maybe that’s just not the same way i
25:56 use that word
25:57 but no i go ahead i would agree that uh i would agree that if we
26:03 if we combine those two sentences
26:05 it would be a restrictive use of face shield where you can only
26:09 use them when you’re doing that
26:12 that activity that requires the ability to see the faces
26:15 paul do you know what the origin of the um supports when the
26:24 instruction supports the ability to see
26:26 because i think that was the red line stuff came from ms klein
26:31 okay she read my she redlined all that
26:34 in there if you take that out that was the original i i cut and
26:37 pasted our original emergency
26:39 so i was going to put in under neola’s opening paragraph the the
26:42 first three there at the top abc
26:46 are neola’s i tweaked it a little bit but uh starting with d is
26:51 the meat of our emergency policy okay
27:02 all right so is it consensus from the board then to keep it as
27:06 it is and just change supports to
27:09 requires
27:09 play that again to change when the instruction supports the
27:21 ability to see to change when
27:22 the instruction requires the ability to see i like that better
27:25 yeah does that make more sense
27:28 anyone else want to weigh in
27:35 okay so we’re going to change the word supports to requires and
27:48 leave everything else as it is yes for that
27:51 item g
27:52 okay good anything else anyone else have anything else all right
28:04 uh hearing no further discussion the workshop
28:08 is now adjourned