As a hot first week of school swept over Pittsburgh Public Schools, many questions arose about how the district would react. The district has an Extreme Heat Protocol, which states: “The health and safety of our students and staff is our top priority.” Thus, when it’s 85℉ or a heat index of 90℉ or higher, “The District will monitor the temperatures inside each school,” and then “The District will determine if a temporary shift to remote learning or other action is necessary.”

Logically, as temperatures soared above 85, many thought the protocol would take effect. While students did have two heat-induced half days in the first week, schools stayed open, with in-person attendance during the rest of the week. Since temperatures remained consistently high throughout the week, why did students only see a change on those two days?

On Monday, August 26, Pittsburgh Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Wayne N. Walters sent a letter home to parents regarding the situation. He started this letter by reinforcing that “as always, the health and safety of our students and staff is our top priority.” He followed that up by announcing that the upcoming Wednesday would be a half day, but not Tuesday. Explaining his decision to keep schools running normally on Tuesday, he said, “We recognize that while temperatures on Tuesday may also be high, it is essential for the District to ensure all students receive their back-to-school materials and devices on Tuesday.” While it is legitimate for the district to want to distribute materials, the protocol says that safety should be the driving factor for these decisions. Additionally, the district did not explain why schools operated normally for the rest of the week.

The protocol, filled with ambiguous wording, was not enacted on Tuesday because the district prioritized handing out back-to-school materials. The protocol does not promise to change the status of schools when temperatures get above 85℉ but instead promises to “monitor the temperatures inside each school “ and then make a decision. The wording allows the district to make decisions based on other priorities rather than on health and safety.  Further, there is no explanation of what will cause a school to stop operating as usual. Thus, even if it was too hot to be in school on Tuesday safely, the protocol does not force the district to change a school's status. The ambiguity means that the district is not forced to prioritize health and safety but can selectively prioritize health and safety. Between the letter sent home and the ambiguous wording of the policy, it is possible that the district’s decision to keep schools functioning as normal was not truly in the best interest of health and safety. The district must solidify and adhere to the wording of the protocol to protect staff and students.