With only nine shopping months to go before Christmas, the School Committee again pondered its controversial decision to hold a half-day of school on Dec. 24. At last Monday’s meeting, committee members expressed their views, as did members of the public. But no decision emerged from the discussion.
During the public comment period, school parent Kate Squire of Oak Hill Road asked about several rumors she had heard, including that teachers would not be allowed to take the day as either a personal day or a religious holiday. Superintendent Joe Connelly said the rumors were untrue and “each request would be considered on an individual basis.”
Squire, who is a teacher in another school system, noted that the district has a limited pool of substitute teachers. She suggested that too few might be available on Dec. 24 to meet the legal requirements for holding school.
Later in the meeting, Bromfield junior Emma Ritter told the committee that, far from getting a day for travel or family time before the major Jewish holidays, she was often unable even to attend religious services because of homework.
“Every year on the Jewish holidays, I have to miss the night service …, which is part of the holiday because in the Jewish religion the holiday begins at sundown,” she said. “And I have missed that for the past–I don’t know–years because teachers do not understand that homework does not just take the two hours before sundown. … Something needs to be said to the teachers about giving work. So many emails have been sent out … [but] they disregard them.”
“On the day before Christmas,” Ritter said, “I can tell you right now, we’re just going to be watching movies. … But on the days I miss, we’re having a lesson.” Missing a lesson, she said, was far more difficult to make up than missing a test.
School Committee members were clearly conflicted on the issue. All expressed support for the effort at fairness that had gone into the making of the current policy back in 2010, when the committee voted to hold school on religious holidays unless they were also federal holidays. At the same time, the committee set a policy that students should not be penalized for taking off religious holidays, by missing either important tests or major extracurricular events.
Committee has heard
conflicting opinions
Both Chairwoman SusanMary Redinger and member Bob Sullebarger expressed concern about the practicality of holding school Dec. 24. Redinger said that adequate staffing for safety was her overriding issue. Sullebarger reported that not one person had called him in favor of having school the day before Christmas. “As a practical matter … it may not be a good use of resources,” he said.
Committee members Patricia Wenger and Kirsten Wright, however, had both heard from people with the opposite point of view. Wright said, “I have had people let me know that the right thing to do is go through this year [with school open on Dec. 24] and see what happens,” she said. “This is more than about a day.”
Committee member Keith Cheveralls reminded the group that he had cast the deciding vote on the issue in 2010. “We knew then that Dec. 24 this year was going to be a problem,” he said. “Our teachers knew then that this would be a problem, and they were part of the decision-making process.” He said the policy was aimed at bringing “a sense of equality and evenness” to the community and he would not want to betray those principles. Cheveralls urged the committee to focus on the larger issue of “our commitment to time on learning,” rather than on the question of religious holidays.
Chairwoman Redinger commented, “I see a subcommittee forming” to look at the larger issues about the school calendar. She asked Superintendent Connelly to evaluate the question of practicality and staffing on Dec. 24 and report back to the committee in two weeks.
