In 2015 (and updated most recently in 2024) I wrote a publication about Help students learn more than “others” than you (The teacher).
The general assumption is that modern training is largely for access, networks, spaces and personalization – and there is simply no way for a teacher to “do” this. In fact, it is important to note that teaching, as it is, has never been sustainable. Public education promises too much and puts too much weight for classroom teachers who do everything they can to fulfill these “promises” while protecting and raising children and that just doesn’t work It For everyone.
I guess it can be argued that it actually works well, but we just have to agree to disagree at this point – which is good. It takes a mosaic of perspectives to make the world go.
I recently updated this post and shared it on social media and I was surprised that I immediately received an urgent, tough discounts.
Karl Marx (nickname? He is a history teacher, after all, if his username can be decoded) uses Emoji to convey his disagreement.
Lian came to the point with the complete dismissal of both the idea and the teachings as an organization-and ended with a drip sarcasm on the exit.
The one from Anthony Jones was not sinister, but the concise denied the publication.
This response from Sunne of York was less even:
Below Brendan asked research and evidence to support the ideas in the publication:
Fair enough. I cannot support every element with recent, reviewed and reliable studies. This is true. But the general prerequisite that teachers are too processed and that children (in general) have incredible access to more information than ever and that the latter could help improve the former, we hope that it does not need research support.
The whole idea here is to connect students with an ecosystem of information, inspiration, people and ideas. And that these ideas and opportunities and places and people and ideas must be more “impactful” and “compelling” than a teacher.
This cannot be contradictory, right?
Are they “difficult” or “overworked” and what is the difference?
In the introduction I set the context:
“Who or what is the most constant catalyst in the learning process? Often, you are probably you (the teacher). You are an expert in both content and pedagogy. Do you know what is learned and how you can learn best. Giving students complete autonomy can be good for motivation, but it can be a problem for different reasons for different reasons.
But here’s where I approach my “point”: “The big idea here is sustainability, creating a training ecosystem based on creativity, interest and opportunity brought by students on topics, problems and opportunities that interest them.”
Are teachers important?
Of course they are.
I suppose that either some have not really read the publication, or focused on the consequences that teachers should not be the center of the study universe and that it is not ideal for it not to be ideal if, every day outside, the most fascinating and dynamic “reason” for learning for 35 children is an adult (often for five or more hours).
I suppose it is tempting to twist this statement about a little and believe that I say that teachers are not as effective as other sources of learning, maybe? Or are they not absolutely important to the learning process? Or that textbooks and applications are more effective than teachers?
Regardless of the source of the misunderstanding (for which I will accept responsibility), I think that the teacher will enjoy the children the best: the best environments for learning with the best opportunities to become their best.
Why get upset with who helps to make it easier or who assigns what percentage in all bits and pieces of all this?
And even if the idea was a criticism of teachers, as professionals are not due and deserve criticism – perfect self -criticism?
The education we have and the education they need
As I am emotionally interested in the nature of digital interactions – how seamless people become terrible to each other when the agreement is on social media of some kind – I will respond more widespread instead of clarifying my position.
I am more than a willingness to have big segments from any audience not to agree with the things I say. In principle, I believe that the way we (included ourselves) is not our best thinking, which means that what we do and who is responsible for these actions and how we could improve them, all are inherently insufficient.
This means that each of us is to some extent responsible and because it is interesting to me to do what I can to improve these systems, I will sometimes criticize organizational systems and principles and policies that are triggered by people and some of these people can accept it personally. And get upset. I understand it.
I also understand that teaching is not difficult enough, the last 12 months have raised the challenge ten times. The work of “teaching” is academic and psychological and scientific at once and each of these domains has been exposed by global events (ie, Covid and its innumerable social -cultural pulsations). Teachers are stressed, pushed to their borders in many cases, and there are no support, respect, gratitude, funding and countless other areas.
But this only enhances the key moment: teaching, as it is, is neither sustainable nor in the best interest of the majority of children. As much as we work, what we have and do is not the education they deserve and need.
How teachers think about themselves and their role in classroom issues (see here, for example). As a teacher I would want help. I would like automation and human networks and live streaming algorithms and adaptive teaching algorithms. To facilitate training in any form.
Although I hope to personally influence the life of students, I hope it happens through proxy.
After helping my students discover syntax and folk and tone and Tony Morrison and Emily Dickinson and themed development and Shakespeare, I would be more than a little disappointed if the most durable impression of their time in my classroom – through all authors and concepts and projects and questions and conversations.
