Victoria Theisen Homer writes in Salon about the ways that remote learning distorts and devalues human relationships.
She writes:
Think of your favorite teacher. Whenever I ask people to do this, they usually tell me about a teacher who saw them: the one who took them aside and encouraged them to pursue art or computer science, who helped counsel them through a personal issue, who attended their Quinceañera — who, ultimately, just cared. By connecting with us in meaningful ways, these teachers not only earned a permanent place in our memories, they also engaged, challenged, and inspired us. Today, our nation’s 56.6 million elementary and secondary students could all use teachers like this, to help shepherd them through the pandemic and into a better future. But even in the best of times, school structures are more conducive to punitive discipline than meaningful teacher-student relationships, especially in our least-resourced schools. Today, with the challenges of virtual learning and the urgent messaging around “COVID slide” – the learning loss students may have suffered while they were out of school – relationships in schools are under further threat, just when students need them most.
Across the U.S., the pandemic has put a strain on families and children, many of whom continue to suffer from food insecurity, job loss, or the death of loved ones to COVID-19. So as kids begin school this year, they require connection, understanding, and nurturance from their teachers. While positive relationships with significant adult figures like teachers help children cope with trauma, such relationships also facilitate better learning. When students have meaningful relationships with their teachers, they are more likely to engage in class, more likely to feel like they can complete their school work, more likely to grow and achieve academically and personally. This is because learning is profoundly social.
But the pandemic has turned everything upside down.
Homer has prepared teachers. She studied some that entered affluent progressive schools where encouragement was the norm, and another group that taught in “no excuses” public school where conformity and obedience were customary.
The pandemic has extended “no-excuses” discipline into many schools that rely on remote learning.
She writes:
Schools across the country that primarily serve students of color and those from low-income backgrounds often adopt an approach to learning that centers on standardized test scores and control. For example, the other teacher education program in my study was situated in a “no excuses” charter school, the most prominent type of urban charter school (think KIPP or Success Academy), which aim to efficiently improve the academic achievement of children of color from low income backgrounds by eliminating anything they feel might distract students from learning (e.g. colorful socks, poor posture, indirect eye contact, talking in hallways).
At schools like this, educators maintain that there is no valid excuse for children’s failure to learn or behave. The teacher education program grounded in this context approached relationships like a formula: applying a series of discrete moves to accumulate “professional relationship capital” with students to increase their behavioral compliance and academic achievement. The director explained, “I think the foundation of the relationship is that my job is to try to generate maximum effort in thinking from you. That’s my job. It’s not to be your friend.”
Again, I followed graduates of this program into their first year of teaching at no excuses middle schools that primarily served students of color. These teachers also began the year by faithfully applying what they had learned about connecting with and disciplining students. They walked around their classrooms with timers in hand, smoothly assigned merits and demerits for behavior, integrated “little nuggets” they had recalled about students into brief interactions with them, and conducted “rebuilding conversations” after removing students from their class for infractions. It was all very efficient and controlled. Students were often silent, and hoped this approach would help them “succeed.” But they did not feel truly seen or understood as human beings by their teachers. One student explained, “I don’t think any of the teachers [know us].” And by the end of the year, one of these teachers admitted, “I think a lot of the kids sort of feel like it’s run like a jail…They’re very smart kids, and they understand that some of our rules are unnecessary, and overly strict, and un-empathetic.” The urgent insistence on academic achievement and behavioral conformity in these schools not only eroded opportunities for nurturing teacher-student relationships, it also conditioned students for subservience. This might be why some research indicates no excuses schools improve student test scores, but not life outcomes.
No excuses schools are not alone in this approach, though, and it now seems to be extending to virtual school. Desperate to counteract COVID-slide, educators are implementing plans to monitor and control student behavior during virtual class, including their attire, location, camera-use, attentiveness, and snacking. This is unfortunate but not surprising, because whenever the focus of schooling turns to quantifiable educational outcomes like standardized test scores or budgetary efficiencies, students are treated like products that must be regulated. Of course, humans are not products, and we all have very good excuses not to be performing as others may want us to right now, but the forces that govern schools don’t seem to get that. Because affluent and white students are more likely to attend schools with the resources to support meaningful relationships and less likely to be penalized for virtual or in-person violations, students of color will bear the brunt of this coming “discipline crisis,” which is really a crisis for relationships. For while relationships connect children to teachers and schools, harsh discipline severs ties.
Efforts to close the academic “gaps” that grew wider during COVID have facilitated the worst kinds of teaching.
Well, but schools are just “buildings” in ed reform. Education is educational services provided by an endlessly rotating cast of contractors and the human connections students develop with teachers and other students don’t matter at all.
That this is contrary to everything we know about “people” let alone “students” doesn’t slow them down at all. They even invented a whole new category of people – “digital natives”- in this theory young people were so vastly different than every other person, ever, that they could ONLY be taught using technology.
The whole ed reform echo chamber swallowed “digital natives” whole and repeated it as fact, although it was obviously marketing cooked up by the people selling the products.
The heartening thing to me is not that the adults all swallowed it- it’s that the students themselves didn’t- they’ve never been as impressed with ed tech as adult ed reformers are.
One of the many never-questioned education cliches these days that are drilled into our heads by conformity-demanding education professors: learning is “profoundly social” (and always profoundly). This is boilerplate orthodoxy from John Dewey, but is it true? If so, is it true for some kids and not others? Growing up, I loved school and liked most of my teachers, but I had few “relationships” with them. Nor did I crave them. In fact I was quite shy around my teachers outside the context of the lesson. I see this with many of my own students –they like me and my class, but their positive experience doesn’t seem to depend on my knowing their hobbies and paying them special attention. Of course these things can help, but are they essential? For most kids, I think, they’re not. What is essential, on the other hand, is an orderly classroom, something the education school professors downplay, and for which their weak cure, unproven, is “relationship building”.
Good morning Diane and everyone,
My friend’s 6 year old son is expected to be online or “watched” by a camera for 6 hours a day. He’s livid. Is this healthy?
That’s disgusting. Will the school ask him to read “Brave NewWorld”?
The Gods are tricksters. They throw a wrench into the whole thing knowing full well that mankind will use their own sledgehammer (technology) to destroy themselves. Poor humans lack the careful reflection and wisdom with which to use their powerful technology. The Gods laugh. 🙂 🙂
My ten year old grandson is also learning remotely and disliking it. My daughter is home with him, and she has sent me screen shots of some of the math. Her comment was ,”This is truly stupid. When I sit down and explain it to him, he gets it in about ten seconds.” Relationships enhance learning.
A little boy up the street is starting Kindergarten today. His mom told me it’s 4 hours online. I told her that was ridiculous and she should just “homeschool” the child until next year. He can already read and knows basic math, but he is a very active boy (as he should be!!!) and sitting in front of a computer screen for 4 hrs is just child abuse IMHO.
perhaps a more legal question, Is this child abuse?
For the first week I asked my seventh graders to keep the camera on them the whole period. But now I let them choose. My students have more freedom now than they did in the regular classroom. That some of them may be abusing that freedom is something I have resigned myself to. They can go get a snack, use the bathroom, go pet the dog…all good. But I’m sure there is a fair amount of video game playing, texting, Facetiming for answers, etc. But I’m not sure what I can do short of becoming Big Brother, a role I’m happy not to play.
My career as an ESL or ENL teacher was built on relationships. I taught very vulnerable students from poor, often war torn countries. Some of my students were victims of trauma. The only way to reach these students is through building relationships. In fact, my class was like a safe haven for students that were going through a difficult transition in an American school while learning a new language and culture. Their families were going through the same difficult transition. Our school district had community liaisons to help families access social services and supports to ease their adjustment. One of the reasons so many of our students thrived in our schools is because we did outreach to students and their families, and it was all built on relationships and trust.
I have no doubt that a handful of my students have experienced genuine trauma. But we overdo trauma these days. All misbehavior stems from trauma, they tell us. Discipline causes trauma. Our SEL curriculum assumes all kids are traumatized all the time. Lessons are premised on this idea. I suspect some of these lessons cause more trauma than they heal. It’s ridiculous. It’s anti-intellectualism in new guise. Teachers who disdain knowledge and content feel more comfortable in the realm of emotions. So they redefine education as ministering to emotional needs.
I am not talking about touchy, feely “trauma.” Some of my students were raped and saw families members murdered in Haiti, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, El Savador, etc. This is hard core trauma that has nothing to do with trying to avoid content. If we start these students off with adequate support while still teaching content, they will emerge ready, willing and able to tackle plenty of content.
What you describe is real trauma. My gripe is with the overuse and abuse of the term “trauma”.
Contrary to the author’s thesis, distance learning has increased my ability to form relationships with students. Because I can send the whole class off to work on their own, I can pull kids in individually and address their needs one–on-one, something I was almost never able to do with a classroom full of 12 year olds. Also kids are able to send me private chat messages that the rest of the class can’t read. They’re able to express things to me that they wouldn’t in front of the whole class; distance learning removes the tyranny of peer pressure.
Ponderosa,
I think you have hit on the great problem with the internet. Everything is ether terrible or wonderful, black or white. The actual world is grey, with some students doing better with distance learning, others doing worse. Sometimes folks here recognize that, often not.
The big promotion for this Covid-19 era is how to mitigate a “slide in learning.”
The so-called COVID-slide is made up by bean counters who think that the be-all and end-all of education is captured in test scores for reading and math.
Among these high profile bean counters is the Rand Corporation. I have linked you to the following article for their solutions to the slide problem. They think it is fine to just “recruit top teachers, with grade-level experience, and equip them with rigorous academic curriculums. They will operate for five or six weeks of the summer, with three or four hours of academics every day, as well as time for enrichment activities.” In addition they “they will establish a clear attendance policy.” https://www.rand.org/blog/rand-review/2020/07/the-covid-slide-how-to-help-students-recover-learning.html
Then there is the Brookings Institution, and like all test-centered promoters of a “Covid Slide” their experts rely on test scores in reading and math to make graphs and dire predictions about ” the slide,” as if the whole of education depends on test scores in two subjects. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2020/05/27/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-student-achievement-and-what-it-may-mean-for-educators/
One more example is a widely cited “white paper” from Illuminate Education. The white paper is nothing more than a sales pitch for FastBridge, which claims to be “the only assessment system to combine Computer-Adaptive Tests (CAT) and Curriculum-Based Measures (CBM) for screening and progress monitoring across reading, math and social-emotional behavior (SEB) so you get data surrounding the whole child.”
You can sign up to receive Illuminate Education’s playbook prepared by experts who “offer actionable advice for supporting students’ social-emotional and behavioral (SEB) functioning. Implement these tips to prepare students, mentally and emotionally, to learn after a spring and summer spent social distancing.” The white paper
Click to access covid-19-slide-whitepaper.pdf
In other words, if there were no test scores, especially in reading and math, the slide metaphor would not exist and the experts in test-centric instruction would have to be more thorough in thinking about the unfolding complexities of teaching and learning. They would have to think about the support students, teachers, and parents/caregivers really need. Those supports have nothing to do with testing.
Another great article today for sharing. Thank you. Convincing no-excuses test preppers to let students learn like humans is a constant challenge.
Just saw this short. Riveting.