The Gilmer County Board of Education voted 3-2 in favor of adopting an academic calendar that received 14.3 percent fewer votes than the preferred choice of its stakeholders.
A survey containing three calendar options for the 2021-2022 school year was sent to parents and staff March 8. Out of 772 responses, calendar one garnered 295 votes (38.22 percent), calendar two received 71 (9.2), while calendar three was the favorite with 406 (52.59).
At March’s regular meeting last Thursday, option one was adopted.
Board chairman Ronald Watkins nominated calendar one, which received a motion from Michael Parks and a second by Joe Pflueger. The trio then voted in favor of calendar one while board vice chairman Doug Pritchett and Michael Bramlett voted against.
Charter calendar formation
Gilmer Schools are a charter system. An integral part its processes are governance teams at each of the county’s five schools that provide input on matters such as the academic calendar, per its contract with the state.
The county’s public schools “Operate as a charter system under the terms of a contract between the local board of education and the Georgia State Board of Education as provided by the Charter Systems Act,” the district website states.
“A charter system provides the opportunity for teachers, administrators, parents and school boards to have greater flexibility to determine the educational needs of students within their district and requires a certain degree of school level governance in the system.”
Before the three calendars were presented, voted upon and selected, they were cultivated at Gilmer schools. Grade-level teachers were asked for input before school leadership teams met and transmitted information to administrations.
Calendars were then presented to school governance teams (SGT) where parents were able to provide input. The finalized options were submitted to superintendent Dr. Shanna Downs’ office, and surveys were emailed to parents and staff.
Public calendar discussion began last month
Prior to last Thursday’s deciding vote, much of the discussion surrounding the ’21-’22 calendar took place at the board of education’s Feb. 22 work session.
At that time, Watkins stated his desire to set parameters for the upcoming calendar’s bookend dates.
“Nobody should be going back to school in July, period,” Watkins said. “Post-planning needs to end by May.”
He added, “I feel like we’re going toward year-round school. I will vote against anything that starts in July.”
Both Parks and Pflueger voiced their support for the desire to limit when staffs return to schools following summer vacation.
Downs inquired if any principals in attendance had received feedback, as the current (’20-’21) academic calendar — that closely resembles the aforementioned favorable calender three — started with pre-planning in the final week of July.
Ellijay Elementary principal Lauree Pierce spoke up first.
“The consensus from the teachers was they would go back in July gladly to have that (fall) break in September/October and that February (winter) break. What they said is they plan things around those breaks. They said, ‘I like to plan vacation in those off times,’” Pierce shared.
“I met with 15 people today (Feb. 22) and not one of them had the slightest hesitation about going back to school in July because of that time off. The summers are slightly shorter, but they get that break in October and the ability to go skiing in February and all those things.”
Watkins interrupted Pierce and said, “Let’s stop right there. The only people this calendar is good for is if you got a spouse that can take off with you. There’s like 10 percent of the teachers in Gilmer County who can do this. It’s nice to take 10 vacations a year, but most people in Gilmer County can’t take 10 vacations a year.
“You’re messing my vacation up by starting back in July. You mess up my vacation.”
Pierce responded, “I work all year long, Ronald, so it (starting in July) is not messing up my vacation.”
GHS principal Carla Foley shared her feedback from its SGT and students.
“My SGT parents said they really didn’t think they were going to like the calendar we had this year, but they absolutely loved it. The students talked about the breaks that were coming up and how much they needed that break.”
Mountain View Elementary principal Charles Walker mentioned he had yet to speak with as many people as he intended to, but so far the praise was glowing.
“This is my eighth year as principal, and the feedback on this calendar is the best I have received. Because we go ‘x’ amount of weeks and get a week off. There’s consistency and a schedule, and it’s not choppy and it allows you to plan.”
Clear Creek Elementary principal Stephanie Burnette added, “Both SGT and leadership said, ‘If we have any input at all, we’d love to have a similar calendar for next year (’21-’22).’”
Watkins reiterated his desire to not have anyone in schools prior to Aug. 1. The board and Downs opted to limit the upcoming calendar vote to school staff and parents. In years prior, students voted on the calendar as well.
Barnes, West address board
Board members were shown the three calendar options and the voting results at last Monday’s March work session.
Upon seeing that calendar three was the most popular by 111 votes yet contained four days of pre-planning in July, Watkins said, “I will vote ‘no’ on calendar three because I thought we set a precedent that no calendar will start before August.”
Word quickly spread, and Lynne Barnes and Kayann West addressed the board ahead of its vote at last Thursday’s regular March meeting.
Barnes has taught in Gilmer for 26 years and is a third grade teacher at EES. She said she had never been compelled to address the board until this time.
“A school calendar directly affects parents’ and teachers’ lives, and we should be able to choose through a democratic process without interference from the board,” she said. “In previous years, the majority vote by the stakeholders was recognized by the board and that calendar would be approved. In this year, in my opinion, should be no different.”
She added, “The only requirement calender three did not meet was a suggestion by a board member that gained a nod from two other board members; that suggestion being there should be no starting date for students before Aug. 1. Our leadership team did not take this as a requirement because it was not agreed upon by all board members and it was not voted upon.”
Barnes noted that even calendar one contains at least one flex day where teachers would have to report prior to Aug. 1 as one of the required 10 staff days. Calendar one also offers three days for fall break while calendar three contains five.
West is a local attorney, member of the SGT at CCES and a parent of a student at the school.
“The idea that the board might not support the calendar that the majority of the citizens in the community voted upon would be an injustice to the citizens of this community,” West said. “As a member of SGT, a parent, a taxpayer and a voter here in Gilmer County, when we’re given an opportunity to voice our opinions and to have those opinions considered and voted on, to not have those taken to an affirmative vote by the board is very disheartening.
“As Mrs. Barnes said, calendar three meets the criteria it needs to meet other than starting next school year before the first of August. Frankly, that’s just not a good enough reason not to vote for calendar three.”
West voiced her concern that teachers will not have enough time to set up classrooms with calendar one’s three days of pre-planning. Calender three offers five alloted days of pre-planning ahead of the first day of school.
“We are asking that you guys respect the majority vote of the citizens in this community to vote on calendar three this evening. Should you guys choose not to, then I look forward to seeing you guys all out there at Clear Creek Elementary School on August 1 as we help those teachers and staff get moved into that (new) building. They’ll have a lot of long hours in trying to get ready for the start of the school year.”
Shortly after West’s time to speak expired, the board voted to approve calendar one.