#BTColumn – Distance in teaching or learning?

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by this author are their own and do not represent the official position of the Barbados Today.

by Michael Rudder

No singular tool or method can be used to transfer information from teacher to students since each student may interpret the information sent in a different way. What therefore is needed is communication. That process basically still involves the sender, the receiver and a response. That response will determine to what extent communication has been successful or even adequate.

The question about online teaching/learning is then, ‘Are teachers able to communicate with students given that there is really no way to accurately judge if the student appears to comprehend or not, in the presence or absence of any response?’ Determining if communication is happening may be easier in face-to-face classrooms, but even this is not an absolute way, although much better.

This leads me to suggest that in the discourse about the future of education – primary and secondary – we have to consider the first prerequisite as face-to-face teaching in spaces that are conducive to teaching and learning. Once that hurdle has been overcome the process shall be more mindful.

At present all around the world teachers, parents and indeed students have been forced to adopt, since early last year, what one might describe as social pedagogy (pedagogy being the theory and practice of education) and social learning. This is different from what obtained before where social learning developed from social interaction; now social learning takes place through social media, for good or ill.

We also have to note that what used to be called distance teaching is now described as distance learning, although surveys suggest that it is moot how much learning takes place at the primary and secondary level.

Curricula

If we agree that appropriate physical space is an essential to the teaching/learning process, then we next have to examine the subject curricula in an effort to parallel subject content with observed, and as far as possible, anticipated societal needs.

Many years ago, I asked about the kind of society we would want or expect in a decade from that time. I don’t recall any responses. Now at least we have goal of being carbon neutral by 2030. Hmmm! When do we stop the importation of petroleum (energy) based vehicles? What shall we do with the thousands which will still be viable for transport in 2030? I know that there has been talk of converting vehicles from petrol to electric. How simple or feasible might that be when all recent vehicles are computer controlled, I wonder? At what level in school or institute shall we place that kind of conversion training – in curriculum or extra-curriculum? And I am noting just one element of our society’s needs which will require matching education input.

In order to suggest what kind of education system evolves in the next few years I believe we shall have to hang the system on a one-word peg – flexible. Indeed, that is what COVID has taught us. In fact, it is clear that every curriculum has become fluid and elements may have had to be flushed not fleshed out. Thus, in every subject, teachers and Heads of Departments may have had to identify the key building blocks in each subject or in discrete portions of the curriculum and focus on those elements to achieve student learning. Of course, such may be easier said than done.

What Now?

New screams calling for the displacement of the ‘Common Entrance’ by a different system of allocation are being heard. In my view there is no simple solution, and to suggest that the slow developers can easily be placed in schools with, as it were, ‘early adopters,’ is hardly a solution at all since the slow ones may be even more disadvantaged and distressed when they are unable to keep up, regardless of how resourceful teachers may be.

I have time and again called for the reinforcement at infants and primary level – first with discrete classrooms – and ensuring that the building blocks are in place such that no child leaves primary without the appropriate age-level skills and knowledge. What this means is that all students taking an in-school test, similar in difficulty to the common entrance plus a practical, shall be able to score a combined total equivalent to a pass mark of the common entrance. Those results shall significantly change our education landscape. Whether we subsequently take those results as equivalent to the ‘common entrance’ shall be part of decisions which modify the landscape.

A lot more matching of what is happening in the world in respect of employment and creative opportunities will have to take place, bearing in mind that word ‘flexible,’ before we settle on curricula from year to year.

This means we still have some distance to go whether teaching or learning to find a new paradigm appropriate to the needs of students in our society.

Michael Rudder is a social commentator and prolific letter writer. This column was offered as a letter to the editor.