I want to pick up on the idea of school on a dial that I introduced in my last blog post – The End of Snow Days?
School for a long time has been something you turn on or off. School is turned off on the weekends, during Christmas, Spring Break and the summer. And it is turned on from 9-3 Monday to Friday from September to June. It is a switch. The day after Labour Day we turn the switch on and across British Columbia hundreds of thousands of students arrive in buildings joined by tens of thousands of teachers and other staff.
Unlike most jurisdictions in the world, British Columbia did not turn off the switch for in-person schooling when the pandemic hit in the middle of March. We changed this switch to a dial and introduced five different settings on this dial. Here is one recent image describing the five stages:
Since spring break, and up until this week we had been in Stage 4. There were a limited number of students attending school – these were largely the children of Essential Service Workers and vulnerable and special needs students. The vast majority of students were learning remotely. This week, we moved to Stage 3 and saw thousands of student returning to schools part-time and on a voluntary basis.
Of course, with it already being June, many are turning their attention to September. We all would hope to be at Stage 1 – and stay in Stage 1 – but we also need to plan for other eventualities. So, back to this notion of school as a dial and not a switch. If we think of it as a dial, if there is a second-wave of Covid-19, we can dial-down the in-person instruction, and if BC continues to plank the curve, we can dial-up the in-person instruction. The challenge for a school system is how do you design learning and schooling that lets you move between the various stages on a dial and not get caught thinking of it as a switch (models are for another post).
This also raises a larger question about the future of education and the idea of in-person instruction being on a dial. Right now, the dial is being controlled by the virus. The virus threat is lower in BC, so the dial for in-person instruction goes up. And this will be the pattern in the short term.
But I have heard from both staff and students that they have found more success with partial remote learning than they were finding in the traditional classroom, particularly at high school. So post-virus, how might we let students control their own dial? Or staff? How could we design structures that allowed some students and staff to attend in-person everyday, some only a few days a week, and maybe others vary rarely? It makes my head hurt – but it is a conversation worth having.
I think of Alan November’s question that has long inspired me when he speaks of the classroom, “Who owns the learning?”, the teacher or the student, in the post virus world, I think as we look at structures, we may want to ask, “Who owns the dial?”
More to come . . .
cultureofyes.ca 
Interesting question. I think most schools already operate in a “variable attendance” model, where some students attend regularly, and others more sporadically for a variety of personal, social or family reasons. Perhaps shifting to a more blended distance/in-person model could have benefits for those students who struggle to be in school regularly for these variety of reasons. It could also create a mindset shift where irregular attenders are not seen as “deviating” in a negative way, but rather in need of a more flexible model for learning.
Yes for sure. There are a number of high schoolers with anxiety challenges and for a variety of other reasons do not attend in-person school regularly. Of course, crucial in this is that supports are put in place to support the social-emotional needs of students which tends to be something done far more easily in-person than online.
Excellent points, as always, Chris. The same can probably be applied to the post secondary world. We need to be responsive and adaptable to the challenges ahead – from COVID to snow days. Maybe the pandemic has shown us that we can. The ability to pivot to remote delivery and perhaps a combination of this with some students in class and some students online at the same time is something to anticipate (per UVic. colleague Valerie Irvine). The challenge due to time zones and offering asynchronous delivery as a solution provides another optional, but problematic approach for some. The experiential component of learning (hands on) is somewhat limited in a remote teaching environment. As well, the social aspect of schooling cannot be forgotten and in this, I am reminded of John Goodlad’s A Place Called School. Above all, equity of access and opportunity in our public education system is paramount.
Thanks Steve. You nicely add even further complexity to this work. You rightly point out the key experiential component of learning which is far more difficult to do remotely. If we live in a world where we need to reduce densities at schools, how could we focus on the experiential parts for all students when students are in-session. Of course, some courses lend themselves more to hands-on than others. Part of the challenge is taking how we currently construct school with students taking 8 unique courses each year and then trying to fit them into a model where they all are given the same amount of time, and where some of them require far more in-person connections than others.
To the equity challenge – I have been heartened to see that we are finally addressing the digital divide and access to devices and internet access in our schools – something we should have done a decade ago. If we know that devices and internet access is a huge advantage for some, we need to ensure it is available for all.
The more we think about next year – it is more exciting and anxiety raising.
Hi Chris,
Today I was using the dial metaphor to speak with our EA’s and then when I went back to my Office, someone had shared your post. Our staff has been immersed in this very conversation about our educational service delivery. We are a middle school with significant need and have seen more engagement online with our most vulnerable students. This itself has lead to a fabulous dialogue around providing hybrid learning opportunities for students who don’t fit in a bricks and mortar structure. The Teams platform that Chilliwack has been using has also allowed all staff and students to connect and communicate more effectively. It is our hope that this silver lining will have a lasting, positive impact on our learning environment.
On old friend,
Scott Wallace
Hi Scott – so nice to hear from you and connect. So great that people are finding these silver linings in the work we are doing right now. Your comment is one I keep hearing, that some want to dismiss, that many are seeing “more engagement online with our most vulnerable learners.” These students, who are not finding success in our traditional system are ones that often have no voice. Hopefully we keep telling these stories and that it does lead to some permanent changes.
I miss not working with you but glad you are doing such important work.
We are now in August, and it looks like Covid-19 cases in B.C. are on the rise, and the entry date for students has been modified from September 8th. I wonder how many students and parents are feeling nervous about September, and if attending school in person is the right decision for their family. One has to wonder going forward if there could be an opportunity for students to continue in some sort of hybrid situation beyond Covid-19. Like you mentioned in your post, it can make your head hurt to think of all the permutations of on-line and in person schooling, and the flexibility for teachers and support staff to control their own dial. How can we keep students from falling through the cracks and is there room for flexibility if students or staff change their mind on their mode of instruction or teaching? Hopefully, in the future, we can see the day when student voice controls the dial rather than the virus.