It's hard to imagine the Christensen Institute proposing any sort of government-led support, but that what seems to be the case here as it cites former Massachusetts commissioner of education Paul Reville in saying, “Establish systems of child development and education that meet children where they are … and provide them with what they need, inside and outside of school, in order to be successful.” But we should be clear - this should be done in addition to real reforms that address poverty directly, not instead of them.Having said that - yes, I agree with the proposal; I remember in-school vaccination programs, nutrition programs, dental hygine and and more publicly-funded support (at least while I was in Montreal - a lot of this disappeared when we moved to rural Ontario in 1968).
According to the authors, "Lockdown and the concurrent dependence on technology for communication raises the danger of a further narrowing of student voice." I don't see why that should be the case, especially when we see that in technology everywhere has increased everyone's voice, sometimes to excess. Why should the opposite effect take hold in schools? Anyhow, Helen Young and Lee Jerome are concerned that the online student opinion would be collected mostly from surveys that promote a "narrow ‘consumer’ version of student voice" and areguer that it is important instead to encourage "dialogue among students and among students and staff in responding to the challenges." Of course, these academics could simply go to places like Reddit and Facebook and even Twitter, etc., where these dialogues are already taking place. True, the academics would lose control of the narrative. But that would be better than a survey, wouldn't it?
For many this is a reasonable proposition: "If schools systematically combine digital and face-to-face activities, in the event of a crisis they will only have to adjust the relative amounts of in-person and distance learning, instead of having to implement radical changes." Quite so. What we need to be careful about is that, as we return some degree of face-to-face activities in schooling, that we don't recreate the inequalities and disadvantages that became so glaring over the last few weeks.
This is a quick and breezy sampling of views related to the new online reality. Some of the best bits:
It would obviously be really irresponsible to open college campuses in the U.S. this fall, particularly given the expected second wave of the pandemic. But many colleges are announcing that they're going to do it anyways. So of course they are taking the utmost precautions in order to... avoid lawsuits.
Some aspects of care, which I would argue can be practiced both online and off. From Maha Bali (quoted):
All of these are ways to behave better generally, not just as teachers, and all of these should characterize our online behaviour perhaps even more than offline.
Here are the five ways (quoted):
I find it interesting that it is often along these axes that criticisms of online learning take form, saying (for example) it is not accessible enough, it is not clear enough, etc., while leaving out the analagous criticism of traditional education.
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter? Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2020 Stephen Downes Contact: firstname.lastname@example.orgThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.