What constitutes “real professional learning” these days? Some, like Matthew Tower (EdSurge), argue that the pandemic drove all of us toward our conception of normal. What is normal? Less technology, more education:
This past year was a hard one, defined by the exhaustion of trying to return to “normal.” And in the edtech world, normal meant more ed and less tech than in 2020 and 2021.This shift makes sense in a lot of ways—the Zoom classes of the early pandemic stunk. Test scores fell dramatically. Students across the U.S. (and around the world) stopped showing up to school. Young adults stopped working entirely. (source)
For most of us, the glory-filled days of edtech are past. Edtech was a dream, a false hope that integrating technology into instruction would be transform teaching, learning and leading.
 |
| Druss the Legend, Captain of the Axe from David Gemmell’s Legends |
Edtech for many of us meant that our acts of derring-do, like triumphant axe work in the hands of a doughty warrior in the face of numerous spearpoints and sword blades, would catapult us into fame and renown.
And, for some who could ask questions that forced introspection, it did.
Real Professional Learning in Schools
In this Mastodon post, Will Richardson (@willrichardson@mstdn.social) says:
I think what’s most frustrating is that a) we don’t make space for real professional learning in schools. Our focus is on teaching, not learning, and b) therefore teachers get out of the habit of learning, of pursuing their bliss, of staying abreast of changes in the world. I’d actually argue that systems don’t necessarily want teachers to learn new things…it confronts the status quo.
Will’s voice sounds, to me, like the voice in the wilderness…a howl that the wind repeats again and again as people sleep in their homes, locked tight against the storm.
Let’s take each of these points in turn.
Point #1: Our Focus is On Teaching, Not Learning
Will’s point is on the mark, don’t you think? But I disagree with his choice of words.
Our focus in schools today isn’t on teaching OR learning. It’s not teacher-centered or learner-centered. That is, teachers aren’t assessing where they are at, then working towards growth goals. And, the term “learner-centered,” I suspect, means that students are encouraged to take ownership of their own learning, to track their own progress towards learning objectives that they co-create or agree to, guided by a benevolent educator.
What we do have in schools is top-down expectations for what students must do. And, after pandemic teaching, there’s little assistance given to teachers.
We’ve all seen massive professional development programs launched. They are often to keep central office specialists running around so they can’t take a moment to breathe and do what needs to be done. It’s easier to keep them distracted and ineffective.
Does the blame, if that is even the right word, lie with central office, school district administrators? Maybe. I’ve seen it firsthand in my own days as a district tech admin.
Every day is an opportunity to come up with a more convoluted plan to get 10 more points on test scores than before. I asked myself, “What is the real purpose here?” It is to bypass the teachers, to implement programs that are “teacher-proof.”
If teacher-proofing education with edtech is the goal, it’s obvious that teachers don’t get the help and support they need. They are custodians of children, servants of the expensive edtech put into schools. They do not make the decisions about learning, they implement them in ways that best promotes the image of the school organization. District admins ensure compliance, not teaching and learning.
The assistant director of communications for Olentangy Local School District abruptly stopped the reading of the Dr. Seuss book “The Sneetches” to a third-grade classroom during an NPR podcast after students asked about race. [emphasis mine] (source)
I still remember during this previous school year a team of teachers at a local school asking, “How do we do this?” as new initiative after new initiative was rolled out.
No professional development for tech-heavy program being launched, no time made for training. “Just do it” was the answer. How is that type of approach to technology integration effective?
It’s About Indoctrination
The truth is, teaching is an art. What we have in schools isn’t that. It’s a top-down effort to indoctrinate students without getting anyone in trouble, without letting anyone think too much about what’s really happening.
As Principal U. put it to me, “That school district [affluent district] can tell its teachers what to do, and they do it. We tell them and we end up with people going every which way.” The implication was clear…we needed more teachers to simply do what they are told.
A Quick Aside
When my kindergarten son’s teacher spent the morning throwing up in the restroom because she was drunk the night before, I admit to a bit of sympathy with that perspective. Could poorly trained, young and irresponsible teachers really take on the monumental task of educating my son? The answer was, “No. He didn’t learn to read after a year in her care.” A few months later, he was reading. The difference? A teacher who cares, who made the effort.In short, two examples of the teaching available in schools today. One in a public, urban setting. The other in a private, religious school.
The words “teaching” and “learning” don’t describe what’s happening in schools. That’s not the teachers fault, but rather, politicians and school district administrators who are doing whatever they can to push the agenda of higher-ups. That agenda? Indoctrination of societal values, perpetuation of the big lie.
Point #2: No Space for Real PD
Maybe we should ask, “What IS real PD?” To me, “real professional learning” is learning what you need to do and assist young learners convert information into knowledge and apply it in real world situations.
That is, I learn how to work in virtual space (e.g. Minetest, Minecraft) so I can model that for students who have been studying something amazing, and are now ready to try it out to solve a real life problem a la problem-based teaching.
As an educator, I have to know what instructional strategies are useful to build knowledge foundations. I have to know how to support students engaging in self-assessment, and moving towards learning objectives they co-created and decided were relevant. I have to be willing to learn myself so that I can model the vulnerability of being a learner exploring ideas new to me with them. And, invite them to join me in that process.
But, often, we don’t see that “real life” oriented self-chosen professional learning in schools. We’ve moved, if not beyond it, away from it as to time-consuming. It’s easier to say, “Just do it. Make it happen.”
Less Tech, More Education
When Matthew Tower writes in his blog entry, “less technology, more education,” I get the idea he’s acknowledging we need more evidence-based or research-based instructional strategies in classrooms. Less pop-research edtech. Less fads that lead teachers and children to nowhere. We need more coaching that supports teachers who are genuinely struggling with what instructional strategies to use, and when they are most appropriate.
One thing Tower is also saying in his piece is that edtech companies that can plot student growth over time, showing results, are going to make a killing. In this scenario, we’ll see that teachers growing slowly over time can’t win against the $100M plus market seeking to show they can deliver what broken schools, school district admins, and all their “march in lock step approach” troops, er, teachers have failed to do.
What have they failed to do? Implement edtech in a way that shows dramatic increase in student achievement. It makes sense. Cut out the middle people, those archaic hangovers from a bygone era, pre-pandemic, who can’t deliver the big bar chart achievement statistics.
The problem is, edtech can’t deliver either. But politicians and superintendents will throw money in their direction in ever-increasing amounts. Teachers trying to make a living can only hope that space will be found to keep them around.
There are only three answers to a prayer: ‘Yes. Not yet.’ And ‘I have something else in mind for you.’ Man’s great challenge is trusting ‘not yet’ or ‘something else,’ and avoiding the foolish notion of hope; wishing at nothing that your unanswered prayers are granted.
Hope is the surrender of authority to your fate, and trusting it to the whims of the wind. My family does not hope. We fight for what we believe until we have it, or we are destroyed by the pursuit.”Elsa Dutton, 1923 Season 1, Episode 3
Fight for What You Believe, or Be Destroyed
You know, there’s only one answer for this brand of edtech, this octopus extending its tendrils to embrace and extinguish schools as we know them today.
Maybe it is as simple as:
- Learn how to teach better in ways that are evidence-based and research informed
- Use technology that is free, open source when possible
- Continue to be as human as possible in the face of advancing artificial intelligences.
Aside – The Small Print: Haha, this was too much fun to write. Blogging was ever unproven assertions marshaled around opinions, buttressed by pseudoscience, just like edtech.
😉
Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure
Discover more from Another Think Coming
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Another Think Coming 