Dear Editor:

It has been brought to our attention that some readers have felt that our Op-Ed was malicious and mean spirited. People felt that we were attacking directly the principal at Warren and DUSD overall as being malicious. It has also been generalized as a critique of the overall response that the district had to COVID. It is none of these. In fact, we think that the response overall has been quite positive from DUSD including their feeding of students and decisive movement to online learning, to name a few.

The Op-Ed was not meant to be insulting and hurtful but it very much was written to be controversial. The Op-Ed’s thesis is concerned over miscommunication to the seniors about the real likelihood of a graduation and the severity of the situation.

Our biggest concern that motivated the piece was the result of disappointment through promises that were simply unattainable. We have no doubt that the district, and especially Cari White personally did/do their best to accommodate their students, and we apologize for coming across as unkind directly at her or any one individual personally. We used her statements as an example and not as blaming her directly. 

It is important to realize that the thesis of the paper is to bring forward: “There is a fine line between being hopeful and being misleading. Through their actions, DUSD has planted a false narrative that things will be back to normal soon. There just isn't evidence for this.” We want to make sure that going forward we are more realistic with the severity of the situation and the real changes that need to occur.

It is understandable the emotional response that is viscerally felt and we understand where it is coming from, but we cannot let this critique of a singular aspect of the response to COVID begin to be a case for us to only bring the successes. We need to accept where things could have gone better and use the critique to find places to improve. 

Ernesto J. Rojas and Chloe Jane Reyes