Is this a college? How could I tell?
It's been a while. Blogging angrily about teaching isn't good for my mental health. But neither is a global pandemic and silence so here we are.
Words, words, words. I'll try and keep it brief and to the point.
I was struck by Grant Shapps' announcement today that people must conform to social distancing otherwise there would be a second wave of death. This was a surprise after absorbing a lot of material around June/July which confidently proclaimed social distancing was an optional extra in education.
Still, this isn't a time for churlishness. It's a time for clarity. Which again, I could do a riff upon at the expense of our dear leaders, but I won't.
The simple fact is thus. I work in a post 16 education setting. It is a large one with significant numbers attending daily. 'Obeying social distancing' in any meaningful way is somewhat difficult. It varies across the buildings and classrooms but it's extremely challenging as a whole - Here's some basic reasons why.
1) Classrooms are simply not designed for students at 2m+ distances.
2) Class sizes are not designed for students at 2m+ distances
3) Many subjects are not designed to be taught in neat rows with everyone facing forward and listening or writing. Try teaching sewing from a PowerPoint.
Colleges have 3 basic options to respond:
1) Continue as normal or a variation of 'normal' - i.e. all learners on site and clean as much as they can and distance as much as they can. This is clearly and demonstrably not going to square with 'social distancing at 2m+' (which is the widely agreed upon effective range)
2) Provide a blended approach. This reduces class sizes but increases workload as teachers are delivering physical lessons and also preparing online lessons for students who aren't present. This will give 2m+ but it won't always provide the level of experience that learners would hope to get and also presents significant problems for vocational or practical classes who clearly can't access equipment or spaces they need to work. To achieve this, colleges need funding in technology, staffing and training. Some colleges barely have satisfactory computer and WiFi facilities for teachers, let alone machines to plug the gaps in students home provision and access.
3) Provide remote learning. This will solve social distancing completely and arguably provide a more manageable workload but it's got the clearest implications for learning. All the issues of model 2 are exacerbated and funding for technology and training become even more important.
Complicating the issue are a number of factors (these are not exhaustive)
1) Colleges educate the most virulent group of all - the 17-20 yr olds. Unlike primary schools, this group are also in work much of the time (and bearing a significant load in covering for older staff in part time work) and are also generally more social, have wider friendship groups and finally, travel from a much bigger catchment area. Colleges typically serve an area stretching up to 10 or 15 miles in any given direction and sometimes much more in rural areas.
2) Colleges don't have meaningful options to create bubbles outside of purely vocational courses where students study a single subject. A typical student will be in different classes each day and thus the primary model of 'small class bubbles' collapses. A year group bubble can consist of thousands of learners. This is not really a bubble. It's more like the air outside the bubble.
3) Colleges sit uniquely between schools and universities. They have an intense programme of study and a significant amount of information to impart. Their learners are there, almost entirely, to 'get qualifications' - Primary schools have much more freedom (as do secondary schools for some year groups) to adapt curriculum to address changing circumstances. Universities effectively set their own assessments and thus can adapt as well. Colleges have to deliver a crammed post Gove curriculum from day 1 and have no input into the assessment process.
It is therefore the case that the friction between 'Health and Safety' and 'Learning' is at a high point within colleges.
What therefore must colleges do?
1) Ensure that they are not treated as magic places where Covid19 doesn't transmit, or treated 'the same' as a primary school. Colleges are more akin to the largest workplaces than they are to a primary school.
2) Measure costs of providing effective learning, be it through additional staff and reduced class sizes or through significant investment in technology. That is currently extremely challenging for budgets as they are. Either route requires external funding.
3) Pressure exam boards and Ofqual to reflect further on exam content. There needs to be a reduction in content and a clear plan B. As it stands, learners are receiving and have received a wider range of delivery methods than at any point in the living memory of State education in the UK. Students have faced and are facing disruption. Simply saying 'no changes' is not good enough.
The result of carrying on regardless is conflict between guidance. Stay distant but teach everything. Less contact but catch up. The instructions cannot resolve. It's not a case of reframing or attitude. You can't make 2+2 equal 5.
Why do exams matter so much?
The pressure this puts on learners is the biggest issue. Some students may have had continuous input from creative, tech adept and well resourced teachers. Some may have very little input from teachers who have not had the resources or experience to provide quality online learning. Some learners will have faced significant disruption, some may even have been forced to work to support families. Some will have had access to technology to receive input, some may not. Some may have been ill themselves and others not.
In essence, we're facing a lottery with regards to students preparation and a lottery that the chances become slimmer of winning, the lower down the economic scale we go.
The very group for whom education has the most potentially transformational effect is the very group who loses out most by charging on regardless and paying no heed to the situation because they are most likely to be under prepared and under resourced.
Our students need to know 'what if?' - they need reassurance and clarity. They need to know their grades will not be subject to the contrived and ultimately calamitous circumstances of the previous set. They need to know that the system 'has got this' - come what may.
And?
We've had a dress rehearsal. Now the system needs to step up.
To achieve that, we need to put aside the notions of competition and speak as one about how we get through what is to come. We need to unite and make clear that without structure and clear, timely communication, without targeted funding to solve problems, unless a structure of support and openness replaces a structure of guarded secrecy and punitive inspection, then we will let down the young people in our colleges and potentially place our wider communities at needless risk.
We need to share answers, resources, and ideas. We need to be honest and forget about 'reputation' and 'marketing' as these factors simply muddy the situation and prevent us from making the right choices. As a sector and as a country, we should be able to deliver high quality education. We should be able to do better than scrabble around constantly reacting to change with cheap solutions and half measures. We should be able to make educated guesses about the future and plan different strategies that then get followed through. We should be able to include different voices in this process.
We should be doing better than back of the fag packet responses and pretending it's 'normal'
This is the duty of us all but currently, I'm looking at the DfE with my glasses on the end of my nose and a hard stare.
Keep safe x
