By Aviva Y. Gordon

My parents were born in the early 1930s – the end of the Greatest Generation. My children were born in the early 2000s – in what I fear will be known as a Lost Generation. The losses to our children now are exacerbated by the deficiencies in the current Clark County School District plan for the academic year of 2020-2021.  It appears that the district took a considerable amount of time to achieve the worst of all possible responses. The proposed plan endangers our children, adversely will affect our economy and will lead to a further disparity of educational success.

Under the current proposal, students will have face-to-face instruction two days each week and will learn online through the balance of the week. Regardless of the age or ability of the child, educational achievement will suffer. For younger children, the ability to grasp the fundamental concepts, or reading, writing and math (not even taking into consideration the other expectations in those years, simply cannot be achieved in such a limited fashion. Furthermore, younger children do not have the maturity or skills to be able to learn these fundamental skills in front of a screen without constant supervision. For children of differing learning abilities or where English is not their first language, there is simply no way for their needs to be met. Not only does the plan fail to address their unique needs, it also violates federal law concerning educational access.  

Education is our greatest weapon to combat income and opportunity inequality. The most certain way to ensure the health of our community and the health of our economy is to provide consistent educational opportunities. The children who rely on education the most are the ones who will suffer the greatest damage under the current plan. Even if the school district can fulfill the technological needs of enough Chromebooks and WiFi, how is a single parent, who must work in order to enable the survival of his or her family, going to adapt to having children home for sixty percent of the week? In such families, the effects of unemployment have already had a disproportionate effect. We are now placing a further burden, which will have generational impacts. 

Similarly, those children who suffer with food insecurity, and for whom schools provide a primary source of nutrition, will need to eat more than two days a week.  Although there will be nutritional centers still available, it does not meaningfully address the problem of ensuring healthy children to achieve healthy education.  

Finally, in review of the anticipated costs, a mere $3 million of $84.6 million will go to Professional Learning for the educators upon whom we will rely to deliver comprehensive education within two different platforms among two different cohorts.  Even if the funding were appropriate, the timing is not.  Under the current proposal, the return date for teachers is Aug. 5, and classes begin on Aug. 24. This gives 13 days for teachers to fundamentally adapt a unique method of teaching on a dual platform.  While I truly believe that teachers are remarkable, I do not believe that this scant amount of time (particularly while many teachers are attempting to navigate their own child care challenges) is remotely adequate.

CCSD has had since the middle of March (not a mere 13 days, as it expects from its teachers) to get this right. The current proposal misses on all marks — and the harm to our children, community and economy will be long-lasting and, for many children, irreparable.

Aviva Y. Gordon is a business lawyer and the Managing Member of Gordon Law.  She has devoted time to community organizations and advocated on behalf of business organizations before the Nevada Legislature.  Most importantly, she is the mother of three children – two of whom are current CCSD students.