BCETF

Berkshire County Education Task Force William Cameron, Chair

Andrea Wadsworth, Vice-Chair
H. Jake Eberwein, Project Manager
April 2020
BERC: Online/Remote Learning proposal FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES
j.eberwein

Intro & Purpose:

BCETF has historically - and is currently - focused on research, planning and modeling efforts. Additional
functions have included advocacy and information sharing through public outreach & engagement. To date,
BCETF has not operationalized (implemented and/or managed) specific strategies and solutions – although we
assert our efforts have influenced several regional collaborative efforts.

The purpose of this short memo is to lay out an initial concept for advancing an operational arm of BCETF, the
Berkshire Educational Resource Center (BERC). The ultimate aim of BERC would be to implement solutions
towards regional partnerships, shared-services, collaboration, and consolidation across a variety of functional
domains from professional development to systems alignment. Rather than describe the full range of
possibilities (detailed in a longer memo), this proposal focuses on an initial target project – launching an
online/remote learning platform across the Berkshires.

Problem & Solution:

There are several pressing considerations that inspire the need to operationalize BCETF efforts including:

• current absence of a formal (Berkshire) regional collaborative,

• turbulent context of the COVID-19 crisis, that will demand coordinated shorter and longer-term
response and recovery efforts, and
• rising interest among BCETF members to act, while continuing to plan.

Regional solutions are needed to support our students, our districts, and our communities in the near and
longer-term as we collectively navigate these turbulent times – recognizing the uncertainty of future
timelines/strategies as relate to social-distancing and lasting shutdowns. While the list of need (from food
insecurity, to economic constraints) rises each day, of highest priority is the responsibility to ensure our
children’s education (at high-quality levels) continues. This can be best accomplished by securing and aligning a
regional online learning platform, equipping staff with the necessary tools and training, and ensuring equitable
access to our students through differentiated supports and resources.

While this moment in time arrives with quite daunting challenges, it also presents a unique opportunity to come
together as a region. We can build new connections, share and learn from each other, and innovate in new,
unexpected ways.

Proposal:
That BERC (operational arm of BCETF) explore and advance the development of county-wide learning
management system (LMS) platform to be launched in the summer/fall of 2020.
Background:
Most Berkshire schools closed on/around March 16, 2020 due to concerns regarding COVID-19 transmission and
health risks. Shortly thereafter, schools implemented a range of enrichment programming (lists of resources,
paper-and-pencil packets, websites, and modest online instruction). About two weeks later, Governor Baker’s
announced school closures through May 4, 2020, and shortly thereafter the DESE released guidance (March 26)
for “Remote Learning,” with districts charged to develop and deliver a remote learning plan by early April.
Many districts across the Commonwealth (and the Berkshires) used online tools (such as Google Classroom,
email, phone, and Zoom) to deliver educational experiences, as well as lower tech solutions – reflecting DESE
guidelines such as length of school day, feedback/grading, and components of remote learning.

It should be noted that on March 19, 2020 – with the support of the BCETF Executive Committee - a short online
proposal was drafted and shared with county districts. The intent of the proposal then (and now) was to
support regional online solutions. Parts of that memo are captured in this proposal.

Remote Learning Proposal (Details):

It is proposed that BCETF (under the auspices of BERC) research, develop, and deliver a uniform online learning
management system (LMS) platform for course delivery, shared teacher commons, training, and ongoing
support. The following broad elements and tasks are described below:

• Develop countywide remote learning platforms, such as CANVAS, that guarantees a common learning
management system (LMS) platform across the county
• Clarify and identify the best practices in online/remote education from reliable, validated resources
• Access expertise at regional colleges in the remote/distance learning space and among K12 districts
• Build a teacher ‘Commons’ that allows the free exchange of content across district and role type
• Support high quality professional development opportunities for remote learning for county educators
• Provide opportunities for local districts to partner together to offer remote courses and offerings
• Empower district-specific technology ‘champions’ who are positioned within each school to coach and
support peers in their building
• Access private/public partnerships to fund these remote learning options
• Continue to partner with local elected officials and organizations to strengthen and expand technology
networks throughout the county
• Work with the business community to provide technology options to rural districts and low-income
populations within the county

Funding:
Funding would occur through BCETF (pilot project funds), K12 district contributions, state grants and earmarks,
private sector/philanthropic grants, regional COVID recovery and planning funds, and contributions from
partners (private, higher education, etc.). Funding scenarios (initial proposal from CANVAS) as such:

Online learning management system (see 3 options below) $20,000 - $100,000

Personnel (potentially) to support
Online Learning System Liaison/Manager: $40,000
Web champions in each school ($5,000 per) $230,000

Option 1: A county-wide PD space (sandbox) would be hosted by BCETF and afford access to training modules,
shared resources and materials. Includes instructional design services, 500 licenses. $20,000

Option 2: District-by-district purchase. Includes access, some training, implementation. $12-15,000/district

Option 3: Delivery to all Berkshire districts (access, tier 1 support, implementation). Is assumed more intensive
training and implementation may be needed and would add to cost. $75,000

2
Inherent challenges (starting list):
• Buy in from districts (are they interested)?
• Hardware (do students have a reliable device?)
• Internet access (do student have reliable internet access?)
• Age appropriateness (is online/remote age appropriate for younger students, how could a balanced
approach be applied?)
• Oversight/management of students – for some households this may be a gap – particularly among age
groups that won’t be able to navigate on their own – (how can we support at-risk students?)
• Some students need specialized support including special education, English Language Learners,
students with 504 plans (how do we support students with specialized needs?)
• Teachers will need to be trained and (ongoing) supported - and must buy into this model (what is
method and timeline for training?)
• Varying technology directors/systems, student info platforms and attitudes towards working across
districts (how do we align technology given variations currently across districts?)
• Approval by DESE as meeting time-on-learning standards and emerging expectations as closures are
extended (will ESE approve this delivery system, will they have alternative expectations?)
• What happens if we reopen in September and don’t need the online system we’ve built? Other re-
purpose could include: snow days, intermittent closures, flipped classrooms, instructional resource for
classroom teachers, alternative education delivery, home school delivery, course sharing across district,
etc.

Important assertions:
• Teachers know their students (and their craft) best. Our aim is to provide them with the tools, training
and support to engage their students remotely, and deliver a high-quality experiences.
• Teachers are best equipped (with support personnel) to develop group and individualized remote
learning plans for their students assigned to their case load, based on intended content and learning
standards.
• Online/remote learning is not a replacement for the learning functions schools have and will continue to
do in person. This proposal is a near-term response to a unique/acute crisis. As such, all standards,
supports, and experiences (academic, social, and otherwise) cannot be duplicated. Target is 75-80%
saturation.
• Online/remote learning will not reach all students (the 20-25% gap). Thus, alternative planning will be
needed to address gaps such as technology and access through lower-tech strategies and by teams of
educators who are able to concentrate attention on these highest risk cases.
• There will be a continuum of technological expertise and comfort levels, thus local (trusted) support and
coaching will be needed to successfully deliver online.
• We will be stronger as a region, than as a set of individual districts. Structures such as the
Superintendents Roundtable and Berkshire County Education Task Force can be leveraged to plan,
coordinate and support.
• Locally, we have expertise in our three area colleges that actively use online learning systems. We can
leverage this expertise.
• We should plan for asynchronous (not time bound) delivery rather than synchronous (time bound) as
more flexible models in facilitating student access.
• Not all districts will sign on, don’t let this deter action.
• As we extend remote learning into the next school year, alternative models (such as predeveloped,
stand-alone courses via sources such as K12 or VHS) should be explored.

3
Future steps:
Below, very broad starting points are offered to think about timelines as pertain to this proposal.

By end-of-May:
1. Confirm interest in moving forward with BCTEF members
2. Share with Superintendents for reaction, early interest
3. Share with School Committees for reaction, early interest
4. Mobilize a team of regional educators (tech. directors, principals, lead teachers) for input and feedback
5. Additional research and proposal of tools (Canvas, Blackboard, Google Classroom – etc.)
6. Asset mapping (what regional districts have, or are lacking – tools and people)
7. Write prospectus for funding solicitations
8. Outreach to funding sources
9. Secure project lead and LMS
10. Secure building champions
11. Build verified repository of online resources, tools, and verified best practices

June:
12. System goes live for training and course building
13. Training of web champions
14. Develop course architecture (starter templates) for teachers with reduced options to simplify course
development and launch (intro, text, assignments, discussion, announcements – etc.)
15. Teachers grades 5-12 participate in LMS training. This will include development of their courses and
tips/techniques to support basic delivery of course content, learning activities, and assessment – etc.
16. Assemble grade level teams K-4 to participate in remote common planning related to learning activities
delivered through a combination of hybrid/low tech online tools and activities, traditional paper and
pencil activities (via transport system), and video delivery (local cable access). Teachers will curate
activities, assignments and calendar.
17. Systems set-up work, course and student assignment, etc.
18. Purchase of hardware needed to close start-of-school gap
19. Assemble special education, ELL and specialists to identify unique needs of students. Consider
mechanisms to integrate and/or supplement the 5-12 online courses and the K-4 hybrid learning
materials. Each liaison will communicate with grade level/content teacher per IEP as in place

July:
20. Local grading and use policies adopted,
21. CBAs & MOAs adopted
22. Training of general staff, organize by grade spans

August:
23. Ongoing professional support for course builds
24. Team planning for high risk students (individualized planning)

September:
25. Launch of remote school year
26. Monitoring, evaluation, problem solving and continuous improvement

Ongoing:
27. Work with local stakeholders (gov’t. & private sector) to close broadband gap
28. Assemble steering committee to respond to unexpected and unanticipated challenges and issues
29. Assess alternatives (pre-developed courses and/or vendors) if closures are extended