Photo Caption: Teaching is a tough job! And so is babysitting. But they aren't the same thing. Have you ever worried that you could be replaced by computers? That all the tasks you complete on a daily basis could be better accomplished by a machine? If you answered “yes” to these, then you are probably NOT a teacher. Or if you are, then I have some harsh words for you (but don’t worry, they aren’t until later, so you can stop reading now and save yourself).
With the incredible pace of technological innovation that our world and our systems find themselves immersed in, it seems natural that we might start to question whether teachers will eventually be “outsourced” to mechanized or automated service providers. Blended learning is one venue in which we see computer-based learning beginning to integrate itself into the face to face classroom. In this article from the Star Tribune, a Minnesota school district is not replacing teachers who are away with a substitute, and they’re finding that they “haven’t heard it’s not working.” This doesn’t point to a resounding success, but it does raise interesting questions about the value of a teacher on call and the true purpose of a teacher. The students would head to a staffed common area within the school, take out their internet-connected device, and continue working on their course. What are the downsides? First, providing supervision is one of the primary functions of a school. I find it impossible to believe this would work in an elementary school, where students rarely have online content they can access, and where schools are not set up as often with a common area that would have staff there to supervise the children. Second, I can’t see the Union being ok with this development -- TTOCs have been fighting for equal regard from school districts for decades, and have been making real progress in recent years, as evident in the pay scale increases resulting from our last strike. Perhaps most importantly, working as a teacher on call is often the first experience beginning teachers have in the classroom, and it offers a tremendous opportunity for learning and exposure to a variety of classrooms and teaching styles. There are benefits of course, such as the freedom for teachers to just “take a sick day” without the added stress of creating TOC plans - which can actually bring sick teachers into the classroom rather than taking the time they need to get healthy. It would also open the door for students to develop important self-regulation and independent learning skills, and allow districts to use TOC money to fund different innovations that directly benefit students. It would also address some of the difficulties districts have hiring and retaining enough TOCs. This isn’t the only example of how teachers can be “replaced” by technology (or not replaced, as this case may be). In this article from Edutopia, Don Wettrick explores the ways that innovation is leaving some occupations and industries behind, and how school systems need to change in order to avoid being “creatively destroyed.” He states that teachers can no longer be the content purveyors for students, as we have access to more content at our fingertips than ever before. Well, duh. This is really not breaking news, and as much as I appreciate the content in this article, I don’t think that any teachers who are keeping up with current pedagogy believe that it is their sole job to transfer information (harsh words perhaps…). However, unless the current format of reporting changes significantly (baby steps are happening), then teachers really ARE supposed to report on a student’s proficiency within the confines of the mandated learning outcomes, and there will need to be continuous change in how school measures success before students no longer feel the need to memorize content for regurgitation. I would argue that most teachers don’t really want to deliver the content. We want to have the critical conversations, the deep learning opportunities, and the excited students that accompany these. Switching the focus of teaching away from content delivery puts it onto deeper learning and allows for more personalization and individual choice - all great things that fit really neatly into my credo for education. The potential to turn schools into “idea factories” is a really exciting idea that could certainly benefit kids. Wettrick lists a number of really exciting ways we can harness technology to make learning more relevant for students. Examples such as selling 3D printed items on Etsy and participating in bigger conversations on the Web are incredible ways to engage learners and connect to real-world venues. On the other hand, given what I know about privacy legislation in BC (FIPPA), I know that the reality of using all these services that include trans-border data flow and creating user accounts for minors is prohibitively complicated. For most teachers, creating FIPPA compliant consent forms seems like an overwhelming task, and would keep most of us using the services that are tried and true - and that we know we have time for. Ultimately, I don’t think that teachers will ever be replaced by technology because the actual job of a teacher isn’t simple. We aren’t “babysitters” and we aren’t just delivering the content - we’re designing the learning experiences, we’re creating relationships, and we’re helping our students reach their potential in ways that Skynet (err. A.I.? Our robot overlords?) hasn’t even thought of yet. However, my experience teaches me that schools could save a lot of money by “outsourcing” TOCs. I gained invaluable experience as a TOC, but I also know that it isn’t always necessary - such as in my DL/Blended program where there is another teacher in the room most of the time anyway and the content is largely housed online. I wonder what school culture would need to exist in order to have this ‘no sub’ plan work effectively. My DL school with independent superkids works well, but we have all known kids who hear that there’s a TOC and skip class because “nothing is going to happen anyway” or who feel that this is an opportunity to bully an adult instead of just their peers for a change. It would be revealing of deeper problems in school culture around attendance and behaviour to see how the children do when largely left to themselves. This absolutely fits with my credo - teachers shouldn’t just be telling kids what to learn - we should be creating the environment that allows them to explore their passions and learn deeply about the content areas that are both mandated and of personal interest. (Insert report card rant here). IF you create the school culture of collaboration and self-direction and IF you have the relationships and expectations solidified and IF you have taught the children how to learn on their own, then absolutely you can go without an instructor for a day, because the norms will be there to carry the students through their learning without you. The teachers who worry about innovation ‘stealing their jobs’ need to stop stalling and make some changes of their own. Creative destruction and innovation are opportunities we need to embrace.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Leslie McCurrachEnthusiastic Learner. Avid Gardener. DL Teacher. Archives
March 2018
Categories |