Citing rising levels of anxiety and depression in Vermont’s children and teens, state officials on Friday again called on schools to make efforts to expand in-person learning.
The state’s young people are “not OK,” Gov. Phil Scott and several in his administration said repeatedly. More face-to-face instruction is imperative to improve mental health, they added.
Mental Health Commissioner Sarah Squirrell pointed to a study conducted by University of Vermont researchers and the Department of Health, which compared survey results from the fall of 2019 to 2020. Students age 12 to 17 reported higher levels of anxiety and depression in 2020, she said, and the rate of youth mental health visits to emergency departments also increased.
“The two most important factors in helping children cope with anxiety are communication and connection — and children are missing that connection right now,” Squirrell said.
Many school superintendents bristled at the remarks. They said the administration’s rhetoric suggested schools were ignoring viable paths to in-person learning, and they said officials fundamentally misunderstood the reality on the ground.
Scott claimed that 20% of schools were “still fully remote after nearly a year.” According to superintendents, that’s false. Other than schools temporarily going virtual due to Covid-19 cases or outbreaks, no public school they knew of is still remote. All are apparently offering either in-person or hybrid learning as a default.
Jason Maulucci, the governor’s spokesperson, said the figure had come from the Agency of Education. Ted Fisher, a spokesperson for the agency, acknowledged the figure was wrong.
“Apologies for the confusion — we should have caught that nuance on our end,” he wrote VTDigger in an email. Fisher did not answer a question about whether any public school in Vermont was still offering solely remote instruction.
A significant portion of public school students are indeed remote — just shy of 14% in January, according to monthly survey data collected by the Agency of Education. But those students are remote because their families chose virtual options created by their schools, not because in-person or hybrid learning is unavailable.
The administration has not yet said whether those students would be expected to return to school as part of its overall goal to return kids to in-person education. Some school officials have noted that many virtual families will not want to come back until the pandemic is truly under control.
But regardless of how much remote or in-person learning students are or are not currently offered, Maulucci said mental health data presented Friday shows change is clearly needed.
“Vermont’s kids are not doing OK under the status quo, as evidenced by Commissioner Squirrell’s data on the mental health impacts the pandemic and a lack of full in-person learning, engagement and interactions have had,” he said.
School officials acknowledge that many of their students are indeed struggling and say that additional in-person time in school might help. But they say they need help making it safe to do so — not a guilt trip.
“If there had been a superintendent upon that podium, he or she would not have been able to resist providing more detail about what’s actually required in order to fulfill the vision of having kids in school for more days,” said Jeff Francis, executive director of the Vermont Superintendents Association.
Superintendents have spoken to Education Secretary Dan French “ad nauseum” about the main sticking point, Francis said, which largely boils down to distancing requirements in the middle and high school grades.
“This notion that we’re all in it together has to both be spoken and practiced,” he said.
Vermont’s own public health guidelines — as well as those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — currently recommend that students be spaced at least 6 feet apart in the upper grades. Unless that changes, many school officials say there’s basically no room to maneuver in order to have all kids in the building at the same time. (They are also emphatic that these should not change unless in-person staff members are vaccinated.)
“It was not clear to me who the intended audience was of this press conference,” said Jeanne Collins, a superintendent in Rutland County. “The educational community is ready, willing and able to increase student days as soon as the conditions are right. And yet the message seemed to be that educators are not willing to do that.”
Scott hinted Friday he may soon be extending an olive branch to the education community. School workers, like all other essential workers, have not been prioritized for vaccinations, as Vermont instead focuses on those over 65 and with high-risk conditions.
But the agency this week sent school staff a survey about vaccine prioritization. And Scott said that, with the possibility of more vaccines coming into the state, he was open to changing course.
“Challenge remains the supply,” he said. “But I’m optimistic; we’re getting to a good place on that front as well. So you can expect some additions to our vaccine strategy sometime next week.”
