I don't like weighing in on politics and my job here, but something needs to be said about today's announcements. I'm going to say my piece and then be done with it.

When we moved to emergency distance learning after the school closures, we were told to keep in mind student

wellness, issues of equity and opportunities for student academic growth. This makes sense, of course, and teachers were more than happy to provide learning opportunities while reaching out to discern the challenges faced by families in pursuing education via distance learning

(e.g. one-device household, intermittent wifi, students working essential grocery jobs at increased hours to supplement a family's income impacted by job loss, etc). We were conscious of the fact that students, like the rest of us, would be filled with anxieties about uncertain

futures - that they would miss their friends, question their post-secondary opportunities, lament their lost proms. In worst-case scenarios, some might even mourn family members.

We were also told -with some sound reasoning - that posting our week's work on one day (e.g. Monday)

was the best approach, as it would allow students with varying demands and schedules to tackle their various class tasks in an order that made sense for their individual needs. One student might tackle English work on Monday and then Chemistry on Wednesday, for example.

Meanwhile, teachers continued to respond to emails and even reached out via personal phone to follow up with those who seemed disconnected from the process, often more concerned about mental health than anything academic.

Speaking of academics, after weeks of back-and-forth messaging, the Ministry finally asserted that student marks could NOT go down from what they were at March 13th (last day before the break) and could ONLY go up. There is some logic here, in that students should not be unfairly

penalized for struggles with the current model of learning and the struggles all families are facing. But the reality is that - for students who rocked some of the early semester tasks due to their relative ease (when looked at as stepping-stones or scaffolded assignments in

terms of course difficulty) - the 'not lower than March 13th' model resulted in even less incentive for some kids to continue with the courses. Teachers still follow up with people dropping off the radar and encourage continued work, of course,

but it also means some parents get contacted multiple times for a disengaged child (and trying to explain to them the importance of a kid with a permanent 94% continuing to do the work for the course). Frustration abounds on all sides.

I’ve been relatively lucky in all of this. I am not ignorant to the fact that pure chance has meant that Monika is still home on maternity, able to help with the kids, allowing me to focus my efforts on providing the best ‘classroom’ experience possible for my students. This

allows me to tinker with different ways of delivering content, from traditional lessons I’d give in class to screencastify video lessons where I walk kids through the activity takeup and new concepts. It allows me to create Google Forms as check-in snapshots for how kids are

doing. It allowed me to hold book discussions and to provide real-time essay feedback via Google Meet video conferences. It’s allowed me to hold drop-in office hours to connect with the faces and voices I’ve missed so much. But if this situation persists, what about when Monika

goes back to work in the fall? What about those teachers - single parents or with one person working at an essential service - with young kids at home? Even with our current setup, we’ve failed spectacularly to deliver Luke’s JK-age lessons,

focused instead on supporting Luke’s immediate and basic needs while monitoring the increasingly mobile Sophie.

Add to all of this the Minister of Education’s announcement today that teachers are expected to provide ‘synchronous learning’ to students moving forward.

In other words, lessons delivered in real-time to the whole class on an ongoing basis. This assumes:

1) That students can attend a class at a specific time on specific days, from home (what about their jobs? Their need to help with younger siblings while parents work?)

2) That students have devices suitable for such a method of learning (what about families with multiple kids and limited devices? What happens if their school schedules overlap? Which kid gets priority for that device? What about their wifi capacity?)

3) That there is a safe way for 30 kids and a teacher to congregate in a Google Meet-style class (what about concerns of being recorded? Privacy rights for students? Privacy rights for teachers?)

4) That parents can support their kids’ shift to a new scheduled system (what about

those working from home and needing a single device?)

There are too many assumptions being made here.

I have been hesitant to speak out about these issues in a public forum as I know that people in all professions are facing unusual circumstances and hardships.

I am especially sensitive to coming off as whiny given that I count myself blessed to even have the stability of a paying job in such a situation. Even though I’ve been working harder than ever these last weeks, I’ve felt very guilty about my relative luck when compared to those

around me. I can stay home and work while friends go to manage their grocery store, work at the LCBO or support those in long-term care, exposed to the public and possibly the virus. I can afford to pay for groceries to be delivered when some are forced to venture out and buy

necessities using emergency relief cheques. In many ways I’m very lucky and I feel badly for it. It is because of this - and my ongoing desire to contribute to my students’ opportunities for success and to try to support their mental health - that I continue to look for ways to

improve emergency education approaches.

But mandated ‘synchronous’ learning in the current climate is not the answer - not for students, parents or teachers. It is inequitable, ill-conceived and inconsistent with messages suggesting flexibility as paramount to successfully

navigating a pandemic. Add to this the government’s implication that teachers have been failing their students - despite their current best efforts - and you have a most hurtful, harmful message.

#education #onteducation #oneducation #osstf