Conveyor Belts, Pedagogy and Pandemic

COVID-19 has kept us farther apart, physically, but has the potential to bring us together to work through new challenges, sharing our successes and failures. That will only work, though, if we are all willing to authentically say what is working and what isn't. It won't help if every teacher, school, county, state, and country around the world is silent or tries to say "everything is great" even if it's not.

I find, the more I talk with people, quietly, one-on-one, sometimes behind closed doors (when we did meet in person), that even some of the most beautiful designs aren't refined yet. But there's not transparency to describe the questions and intentions for improvement. Unfortunately, this leads other teachers, schools, states, and countries to assume someone else has it all figured out. If someone tells you they do, it likely means they aren't thinking though all aspects of the challenge or they want to hide the flaws.

We need to ask hard questions and keep asking them.

I've been spending a lot of time watching, listening, and looking at questions, hearing frustrations and things that aren't going well among educator and leader groups right now.

I found this conversation particularly interesting as it was based on an EDSurge article inspired by a series of tweets. It referenced choices made by Washington State to stop education.

This is an article from the Seattle Times on the question of school closures. You can click the heading below to access the article.

I'm from Washington State and I get to hear internal thoughts about this topic from people on the ground. There are a lot of mixed opinions and emotions surrounding the decisions. Click the headline to access the article.

Here's the original article from EdSurge:

The Case For Shutting Schools Down Instead of Moving Classes Online

My response to the educator who asked in response to the article, "Thoughts?"

"I have every expectation that if schools attempt rapid, unplanned transitions, things will be much worse for vulnerable students."

I agree with this. I also agree that top priority should be to connect on a human level.

Our school has been researching and applying technology through training and application since 2007 and remote enabled since 2009. Even though we have the tools down and have been part of a continuous improvement model, there are still differences between using technology in education in person and going 100% remote learning. We care deeply about human connection as part of our education with technology. Click on the image to read the Renton Reporter article as one example.

Yes, there have been things in over a decade of training and research that have made our transition to remote learning much smoother, everything from legal policies with digital content to training on tools to project based learning. You can follow what we're doing here: https://www.instagram.com/rentonprep/

That doesn't mean we have it all figured out. If one of our goals was to balance human-computer interaction to emphasize the art of human connection, moving to entirely remote learning changes those possibilities. We never wanted young people entirely behind electronic devices. We wanted them interacting with people, the world around them and innovating. The bigger question becomes:

How do we still support learners, trying to simulate human connection in person as much as possible, while coping with unknowns?

We have framed our learning for years to prepare students for unknowns, helping build resilience to help them become anti-fragile when conflict or change comes. Now it's here for real. This is not a test. COVID-19 is beyond our control.

Asynchronous Learning

While a very commonly accepted method for transitioning to online learning is to create videos for asynchronous teaching and learning, allowing for self-pacing, and this is done often for college-level settings, this model for younger students risks losing vulnerable students if it is the only method.

There was original disagreement among our faculty who weren’t sure about my firm request to have live video calls with students, rather than only a set of pre-recorded lessons given at the beginning of the week and let students work at their own pace. There is nothing wrong with that model, but that can't be the only method for students. While it is true that this is the most common model with the goal of allowing students to work at their own pace, it doesn't allow for a real-time human connection.

Though the option exists, it removes any chance of response and adaptation to students pace and process. I see a lot of people talking about having all content on a tight schedule and giving students access to it all at once. That may work for self-motivated students or students with parents to support that progression or process.

I disagree with that method if it’s the first time a school is attempting remote learning, especially if students have not already been using technology. It doesn’t take into account any social and emotional learning that may need to alter the way content is deployed. It doesn’t take into account a continuous improvement model. It doesn’t take into account Design Thinking that begins with empathy, defining, ideation, prototyping, testing and revising. It locks content in and blazes forward, leaving those behind who are vulnerable. Click the photo to read more about 5 Stages in the Design Thinking Process.

Moving Forward or Standing Still

I agree that schools should move forward. I also agree with the article that if people don’t think through important aspects, things could be worse for teachers and students.

While the mission needs to remain the same, the vision needs to be continually improving. This image is from our 2016 re-envisioning. It highlights the focus on the student, with an emphasis on social and emotional learning, supported by motivation theory. This research has provided a foundation for choices we make, including something called Self-Determination Theory that suggests all humans have innate psychological needs that need to be met: a sense of relatedness, autonomy, and competence. When those innate psychological needs are met, people are more likely to persist when things get hard and when extrinsic motivators are no longer there. We see this as a major questions schools and educators are facing during this COVID-19 crisis. What happens if we can't stand over students? What if districts remove our ability to grade as normal? What if testing accountability is no longer leverage to get students to study or teachers to make sure content gets across? What will get students and teachers to persist when they don't have to come into a building?

For us, the good news is, motivation has been an ongoing question. COVID-19 changes are not the first time we've considered the implications. In fact, we have intentionally been working to remove extrinsic motivators as the sole purpose for forward movement and student behavior. Behavior that is intrinsically motivated will persist when things get hard or change. Extrinsic motivation requires an outside force to maintain the behavior. If grades are the only motivator, when they are removed, students will stop pursuing learning as they did when the extrinsic motivator was there.

We have been designing curriculum to more highly value a process than a discrete knowledge point. We have also been emphasizing iterations of design, shifting the way we have students demonstrate knowledge. Our criteria for Mastery and Exemplary are intended to encourage the thinking that busts out of a norm or pre-set expectation. It is not equivalent to 100%. It's equivalent to challenging the expectations, going above and beyond, or coming up with a solution or approach that hadn't been thought of before. It requires a level of intrinsic motivation for students to choose to pursue this path on their own. These are ways for students to demonstrate they have met criteria to show they are proficient, and have chosen on their own to transfer that learning or apply it in a novel way.

In the diagram, you can see that assessment and environment play a role in the student experience. For us, learning needs to be outside the walls of the classroom, in the community and applying skills to real-world problems. Assessment also needs to demonstrate that students have learned something by transferring the acquired skills to a new setting, application, or problem set. It is to reinforce that although memorization is important to us to provide a knowledge base, that is not enough.

Of these two topic areas, the first is an easier transition for us with remote learning. We have plans to shift to novel approaches that aim to engage students. We know that if the focus becomes solely achieving a numerical score, there is an increase in cheating behavior - to do anything to attain a numerical final score. When the emphasis becomes a process, it sends a message to students that we care more about their thinking and application. That is not as easy to copy. While we're at a distance, we know students can and will look up discrete knowledge points. That is fine. What we care about more is the process and that they can apply their leaning to produce something unexpected.

The second is much harder to translate to 100% remote learning. Field trips, learning outside the walls of the classroom, and building community is not the same behind a screen in a stay-home-to-stay-healthy model. This is where a major shift needs to come from us as we design learning. Thankfully, there are so many resources out there to bring the world to them, and do our best to simulate these things and remember them while we're apart.

Why We Care about Continuous Improvement: The Trade-offs

Our school has been ridiculed by various people over the years for our continuous improvement model as educators, families, and other schools saw it as: "You're always changing" rather than seeing it as, "You're always improving." We were looking forward to prepare for an unknown future that none of us could see yet. This moment in history is one of those unknowns. We wrote on March 12, 2020 about our readiness to shift to fully remote learning in the event of required school closures.

This transition could happen so quickly because it wasn't the first time we considered the possibility of unknowns. A key component is practicing ongoing flexibility.

We wrote transparently in 2018 about what training for unknowns means for educators on our team. We are clear that we are not a traditional school. We described a process and a unique environment that require a specific mindset of flexibility and interest in continual learning and innovation. The blog post can be accessed by clicking on the diamond image. You will find how it describes that we include educators in designing the vision of our schools. Innovation educators are truly diamonds to be cherished.

Our thought: You either put in the work across the time and look where things need to continually improve, or one day, you’re forced to change and it happens all at once. There’s going to be challenge and stress either way. It either comes across time, or all at once. We know we present a higher level of challenge for our faculty, but also a greater degree of freedom to design, demonstrate creativity, and more opportunities to grow professionally, meet with global educators who visit on campus, and present at local and global events. In this way, our faculty do not have the option to close their doors and keep to themselves. It means they always need to be ready to share their purpose, successes and failures, as people from around the world watch and ask questions.

For education environments that do not have a continuous improvement model, global eyes watching them, and the schools are traditional without new technology, research from University of Washington showed that 59% of teachers in Central Puget Sound leave their schools between 1-5 years of being hired. Only 41% of teachers are still in the Puget Sound Educational Service District by the end of their first 5 years.

Academic Triathlon: Becoming Antifragile

I’ve been using the analogy of a triathlon.

We've been asking our faculty to train and experience teaching and learning in more than one domain, and practice flexibility. Traditionally, teachers can say: "I only teach English" or "I only teach Biology" or "I only teach Kindergarten." By training teachers to be flexible in teaching different ages, collaborating together, and working through challenges for pedagogy, assessment, and curriculum design, we were preparing them for a time when our control as teachers is removed and we don't have that choice. COVID-19 has made flexibility become essential to moving forward. It doesn't mean this is easy for us, now that this triathlon has begun. It means we're prepared to make it through without giving up, for all those who chose to stick with it.

We know along the way there have been teachers who decided this continuous improvement approach was not what they wanted. There is comfort in what was known, traditional methods, and not practicing flexibility, identifying places for improvement, accountability that is visible, along with new tools and approaches.

You either put in the hard work across time and feel the discomfort to become anti-fragile when the race begins, or you put it off and try to start the race without any preparation. I would prefer to start a race with preparation. I would prefer to know I could finish the race and come out alive on the other side. I would prefer to have the knowledge that I have trained and practiced in flexibility, unexpected scenarios, and challenges, and built strength through those smaller trials, so I know I can make it through a larger one. Dealing with smaller unknowns and shifts in control across time helps build antifragility so we don't shatter when larger unknowns occur and remove control we thought we had with our own classrooms. As educators, we often pride ourselves in being able to know what's coming next and being prepared for everything, at least on step ahead of our students. But what happens when that is no longer an option? If pride or identity are wrapped up in that thought or false sense of control, control being removed and a series of unknowns can absolutely shatter an educator and bring more discomfort than anticipated. We need to gain from disorder, not shatter from it.

Yes, we asked things of our educators that did not allow them to do the same thing day in and day out, never questioning method or interaction. We have asked them to train and challenge themselves and each other. Some have thrived under that training. Others have preferred more traditional models, more perceived control with well-established known outcomes and pre-created curriculum and all answer keys ready. Those types of control no longer exist when the world is trying to figure out how to educate young people amidst social distancing.

Some called us crazy (or worse) for intentional choices we have made in shaping our school. But we have been working though things across time from legal with data and media, to types of tools that more likely support human connection and creativity, to practice in revising when something didn’t result in the intended outcome. Those practices prepared us for this time.

Now, rather than focusing on, “What tech do we use?” We can direct our team to go though the next iteration of challenge, creatively working on ways to connect with individuals as humans, how to maintain relationship across distance; build in social and emotional components into learning, cohesiveness across grades, cross-age mentoring across distance, and work though creative constraints. It won’t work well to deploy content that is only like worksheets and multiple choice and tell kids to figure it out.

It also won't work well for families if each of us set off on our own path, leaving them to catch up with each child who is on a different trail following a different teacher. If we are serving families, we also need to provide a simplified user experience when we can't be right there to guide them. We need to be on the same path, running the same race, together.

If Schools Choose To Stay Closed and Not Engage Online

I'm from Washington. I'm hearing the inside challenges and impacts to teachers, students, and families and the weight of the difficult decisions. It's not so simple to stay open and shift to remote learning or close and ensure equitable "non-learning" for everyone. That still increases equity gaps. Those with initiative and the means are finding resources for their children. Some children with technology, are finding resources for themselves. Those who have the capacity to teach their children are trying to homeschool. Schools who are choosing to not provide educational content for fear of equity gaps have not mentioned that those gaps will still occur with or without them. But choosing to provide direction could directly support families and students. If schools have not considered or prepared for any unknowns, however, it may feel nearly impossible to make a quick shift. It would require buy-in from educators, a willingness to be flexible, and a willingness to do things they may never have done before in service of young people, their families and communities.

Local news stations are trying to fill the gap where public hasn't been able to.

If schools choose to stay closed for equitable reasons, they need to consider it won't stop some from acquiring resources and getting them. The gap will still continue to widen, with or without the support of educators. It will make it harder when schools do resume.

What might work if schools stay closed

I think there is a chance that this could shake school systems of a traditional start and end date if they choose to restart in summer. There have been proponents for year round school for years. There may be the same amount of time off, it’s just distributed throughout the year. There is a potential of resurgence of COVID-19 in new waves before a vaccine is found. This may require extended periods of social distancing even when schools do reopen. If schools aren’t ready to thoughtfully go online, they might do better to shifting to a year-round model, positioning breaks during required social distancing. That would require schools and unions to be willing to adjust calendars from traditional models if they want those away times to be work- and school-free. Do-able, but just not the traditional break schedule. It would have implications for traditional sports schedules and other programming.

Different Type of Chasms

This is a time where I’m starting to see a huge chasm between teachers who’s first thought is:

How can I make sure my students are safe and still learning?

and those who’s first thought is:

I shouldn’t have to figure this out. It’s not my job.

Or

We should just have a break. Don't we deserve it?

I wonder what would happen if medical professionals and first responders around the world said that to all of us now:

We need a break. You all figure it out on your own. We deserve it. If things take a downhill turn without my assistance, well...

There’s not much I’m seeing in the middle. There’s a polarization happening in opinions about what to do for kids. There are the teachers with a first responder mindset. There are teachers who think it’s time to take a break or that it's unfair to ask for a shift or pivot.

There are, of course, varying degrees in both of these broad schools of thought.

Why We Chose this Profession

I believe these different schools of thought go back to what inspired a teacher to choose education as a profession in the first place. Those who see themselves as change-makers, people who shape a community and a country, educating as public service, and first responders on the front lines fighting for the hearts, safety, and minds of children daily are seeing the absolutely crucial role they play in this moment.

Those who went into teaching because they felt it would be easy, that it was a job with time off in the summer, or a chance to stay in control of their own space and own classroom, have had those perks taken away when COVID-19 hit and are now being presented with a challenge to engage in something much bigger than themselves. What remains is the gritty, raw reality of a world with more unknowns than before and it is our job to prepare young people for those unknowns. We have a chance to model how we cope with stress, unknowns, control removed from us, and when our world changes. Security in known expertise in an academic field may not be a top priority when survival is more important. Memorizing a date in history may not take precedence over how many days we have been isolated from each other or family without work. It's not an easy place to be. But each of those things can inspire learning and application to content - whether tests count this year or not.

For educators looking toward the future, the question should always be front and center:

How do I prepare these young people for a world full of unknowns.

How do I help them learn to care about others and contribute to solutions?

How do I help them to become antifragile - not just resilient, but become better through unknowns and stress, the way bones get stronger with opposition and force through training.

Whatever existed before is being amplified now. Inequities, motivations (intrinsic vs. extrinsic), passion to help, fears of unknowns and instability, a willingness to practice flexibility and antifragility.

If a student didn't pay attention or listen to you sitting right next to your desk, the mute feature on video conferencing or turning your audio off is just a more efficient way to accomplish what they had to put more effort into before - how to tune you out. They are just using the tools to accomplish their goals. Instead of getting angry at them for not complying, find out what is going on in their life.

If a student lashes out with very public language in chat for everyone to see, find out how to help them.

It's true that all of us who are educations are part of the front line of this, but what we choose to do with that responsibility we’ve been trusted with could change the course of a generation of young people. If we throw up our hands and say:

"We can’t. It’s impossible. Pick up as normal in fall,”

we are essentially telling kids, that we are allowing gaps in their education, expecting them to leap over a fissure and land on the other side and keep running. OR, we are telling teachers, whatever level you planned to teach in the fall, you’ll need to change your curriculum to first address the gaps and missed learning. We’re going to inconvenience someone. Will it be the teachers or the learning process of the students?

Teachers, if you choose to give up on your students, your are speaking loudly to them. Ask yourself what message you are sending in silence in words and in action. They are watching whether you realize it or not.

When schools are built on a conveyor belt model that keeps going no matter what, and something stops that conveyor belt, what things do we need to consider?

In the classic video comedy clip below, Lucy couldn't keep up with the conveyor belt. She had a choice to make. If you haven't felt those choices yet, days like this will be coming. But, young people are far more important than chocolate.

I'm looking to forward to see what we can do in the wake of these traumas. There is enormous potential for education for Post Traumatic Growth. We can let this break us, or help us become more anti-fragile for the next unknown the world hands us. We can model what antifragility looks like in action for the people who are watching.

A glimpse into shared successes ending the second week of remote learning