The future of schools with no teachers: kids in a hall on screens

[noblegiraffe]

This just came up on twitter as a laudable story of a school saving on supply teachers by herding kids into the hall, logging them into laptops and having them teach themselves from videos or websites, while kept in order by a non-teacher who won't be able to help them.

As we have fewer and fewer teachers and more and more lessons that need supply, this will probably be the future of schooling. We know from lockdown how utterly inadequate it is. No discussions, no practicals, no personal relationships. Even with the best AI tailoring the content (which is isn't right now) it is a grim and sterile scenario.

And now we know why the only thing that the government has put significant funding into in recent years is Oak Academy. This is what they want. This is why they have slashed teacher training providers during a recruitment crisis. This is why they are playing silly buggers with pay negotiations during a retention crisis. They don't care that kids don't have teachers.

schoolsweek.co.uk/solutions-how-an-academy-trust-slashed-its-supply-costs/

I can see teachers being told to align their lesson planning with Oak as a school policy to make this sort of thing easier. Oh it’s Tuesday 21st, that means it’s this lesson in maths, that one in English.

Part of the great reset

The oak academy has downloadable resources for teachers, also homeschoolers can access it. I think it's a good idea - why reinvent the wheel, obs teacher (employed by the government) can lesson plan for thousands of teachers thus freeing up time to teach, especially useful when inevitably the curriculum course content changes.

Teachers are always say they don't have enough planning time.

One teacher cannot lesson plan for thousands of teachers, centralised lesson plans and resources need customising for individual classes.

And centralised resources certainly cannot be delivered as effectively by non-specialists (where this is headed).

The initial offering was obviously rushed, kids needed something with schools closed, but a well resourced, comprehensive service could be exactly what hard pressed teachers need

We had this. It was called "textbooks". Then ofsted slated textbooks...

@noblegiraffe

But that's where teachers come in - take resources off the shelf to use for their setting.

This isn’t for hard-pressed teachers in the OP, it’s for the absence of teachers.

Also the kids with SN which may or may not be already identified who find laptop work immeasurably hard.

I haven't looked at the English offering recently but certainly during its original version, it was error strewn. Actually embarrassing.

Anyone who suggests that method of mass teaching is effective clearly has no understanding of how learning actually happens.

It makes me so sad how politically undervalued children are. It is because they cannot vote and because a political term of 4 years will never see the benefits of investment in children.

As a result, we are squandering our greatest resource. Children could become anything for us and themselves. We need them to become teachers, scientists, artists, skilled labourers, carers etc you name it. How many children's futures are wasted as they will become disordered, unhappy adults perpetuating more of the same. If we fully invested in children, all children, our society would become healthier, more productive, less criminal etc. Investment in children pays hundredfold.

They should be cherished and nurtured, each of them as much as possible because A) every child deserves this, B) they are the future of our society. That they are a diminishing resource on a demographic level makes the lack of care and attention paid to children even more tragic and shocking.

To underinvest in schools and teachers is so short sighted it's painful. Ideally teaching, which is literally the nurturing of children's future opportunities, would be the among the most respected and well rewarded professions, imo. For the record I'm not a teacher (my username should make that obvious!).

I so hope the Tories are out at the next GE so that they do not get another 4 years of destroying our society. Even so, recovery will be difficult and other political parties are themselves disappointing. As a parent I seriously consider leaving for another country where children are more valued as these are surely the countries that will have the brightest futures.

Well said @KidsDr

It's an interesting one.
In lockdown I babysat a bubble of 12 who worked on the VLE.
A mix of teams, set tasks and Oak academy.
As they were all doing different things, I was there to facilitate, not teach.
They got on with it in the main, with very variable outcomes.
I don't think virtual learning, even teams, is a replacement for face-to-face in the classroom. Some unis were/are/have still adopted it for lectures.
That said, I am a cover supervisor. I am paid peanuts.
I am meant to facilitate learning by giving instructions and managing behaviour.
With some classes, this is what I do do - literally put the instructions up, turn to page... With others, I deliver the PowerPoint. With others, I teach (am QTS).
I have on occasion been given an Oak Academy lesson to play i.e. babysitting while OA teacher talks from the screen. This has happened on supply also. Likewise, supply has consisted of classes with tablets out and emailed instructions from teachers. The invigilated hall concept wouldn't surprise me at all and, in fairness, there will be some outcomes from it better than from a poorly behaved class, who are hell to manage.
It does come down to what we perceive education to be in a society that is heading towards automation/industry 4.0 at least, until post global warming apocalypse but the question a pp posed What is school for? is fair. I'd like to think we are shaping minds and creating independent, critical thinkers where I work, as well as responsible, fair-minded, decent humans.
I am also aware that I ask them to listen to me, comply and behave on a daily basis. Seth Godin has an interesting take on this.

Back to the future of schools - I cannot see the hall method becoming a replacement for teachers but I do see it as a replacement for my job/cover/supply. In that scenario, I become a very bored, low paid invigilator.

Ex teacher here. This is why so many new schools are being built with a central atrium space ~ lessons will be delivered lecture theatre style in groups of 60/90 with a few adults around for crowd control. Who needs teachers? If you can’t understand or engage, who cares?

And also on the continent and in the US, it is common to teach ‘by the book’ in a similar way to Oak Academy. If it’s the third week in March, every student in the year 10 is doing exactly the same maths/science/history etc lesson. This means if students have to move schools, they’ve done the same course/lessons; if a teacher is absent cover can step in and deliver exactly the same PowerPoint; and everyone has the same body of knowledge. Of course, it also means teachers don’t have to do the prep. Disadvantages: teacher pay is often much less, teachers are ‘deskilled’ and students don’t get those ‘wow’ moments when teachers create something special that links to their cohort. And I really don’t know how SEN fits into this other than some countries make students repeat the year when they can’t hit the academic milestones.

I honestly think this is how the govt sees the future of education ~ get rid of those pesky teachers and replace them with unqualified supervisors. ‘No one wanted to be teachers anyway! We’ve solved the recruitment crisis’.

Oak Academy is the beginning.

Oak Academy will have to improve massively. My son had to use for some lessons during lockdowns. The yr 4 lessons were dire, nobody enjoyed them and they were very basic.

@SequinsandStilettos
what percentage of the children if any did you think did reasonably on this approach (nothing can replaced differentiated tailored learning)? Were some subjects more suited than others?

We need a properly funded school system with teachers, support staff and others such as Ed Psych valued. I do wonder though if there were off the shelf lesson plans could a good teacher not the amend to that class rather than re- invent the wheel?

This has been happening for the last 2 years. There have been periods of weeks or months where DS hasn’t had a maths teacher and along with a couple of other classes sit in the school gym supervised by office staff whilst they work their way through a computer based maths curriculum.

I recall , around 15 years ago , taking my 10 yr old to visit a secondary school on it's Open Day.

This school prided itself on its innovative teaching at certain times during the day/week in a giant room where three classes would sit at long tables with partitions and each 'pod' had a pc and each pupil had headphones. They would 'learn' from a screen.

Basically, a virtual classroom.

There were two or three TAs supervising and the students were left to it.

Whilst walking around, a few parents noticed that a number of students had clearly not got learning material on their screens and after this tour of that room, parents expressed their concerns regarding what the students were able to access.
The response was that it was difficult to monitor every pupil!

Now this was during a Labour government and I'm of the opinion that this school was piloting a scheme that maybe is a cross-party /'the inner sanctum of the powers that be' idea that was intended for future use.

Given that most schools buy into subject planning schemes and that supporting resources are available from Oaks Academy and the likes of Twinkl then the future of teaching does look a bit precarious but it also raises the question of why teachers need so much planning time.
TAs and HLTAs are now routinely used to take classes in Primaries.

Food for thought.

but it also raises the question of why teachers need so much planning time.

We barely get any planning time? 6 minutes to plan, prepare and assess an hour's lesson. Even with centralised resources it takes longer than 6 minutes per lesson.

TAs and HLTAs are now routinely used to take classes in Primaries.

Yes, and they shouldn't be.

Now this was during a Labour government and I'm of the opinion that this school was piloting a scheme that maybe is a cross-party /'the inner sanctum of the powers that be' idea that was intended for future use.

I doubt it's any cross-party conspiracy theory, just that since time immemorial schools and governments have flirted with the idea that kids can teach themselves. Back when I was at school it was the old SMP booklets that kids were supposed to work through 'at their own pace', and those boxes of reading comprehension booklets.

None of those 'kids teach themselves' approaches have ever really lasted though. Because kids can't teach themselves.

A lot of government time and money has been put into Oak Academy since lockdown. A lot of the original founders refuse to have anything to do with it now because they think it's going to become the curriculum for schools. Ofsted are now involved.

As in, the curriculum will be 'Ofsted approved'.

If the government can get Ofsted into one of the schools in the OP article and get them to wax lyrical about its wonderful cover lessons, we'll see an awful lot of other schools dutifully falling in line.

What percentage of the children if any did you think did reasonably on this approach (nothing can replaced differentiated tailored learning)? Were some subjects more suited than others?
This was Lockdown 2 and all twelve did better than they would have/were doing at home - that's why they were there; to be nagged(!), given computer access/help logging in for teams and fed by yours truly on occasion. The outcomes were always going to be variable (as when used with mixed ability, differentiation by outcome sometimes feels like it pays lip service).
When I cover lessons and deliver PowerPoints, more often than not there is more extension than scaffolding. It often feels like one size fits all/throwing glue at the wall and seeing how much sticks.
Given the nature of the job and absence, I do not get to see tailored lessons and am rarely given differentiation by task, even for known absences. Maths give me red/amber/green sheets occasionally and mfl have read/amber/green "do nows."
We were told the all/most/some method was not teaching to the top.
I still don't think secondary differentiates or tailors as well as primary, even though class sizes are smaller than they used to be.
VLE learning - Hegarty maths lent/lends itself well.
They managed to follow PowerPoints across the curriculum but the live lessons were better, they were more engaged.
The Oak Academy videos on supply tend to be KS3 English. History has set online exercises before.
My own daughter only ever gets VLE work on Seneca, Educake and Sparx for home learning/homework. She can access it perfectly well but it becomes repetitive.

I wonder if it it be like the phonics schemes you have to buy into. With an approved list and all the training and resources you have buy that match even if your phonics results were above national average before the scheme.

Given that most schools buy into subject planning schemes and that supporting resources are available from Oaks Academy and the likes of Twinkl then the future of teaching does look a bit precarious but it also raises the question of why teachers need so much planning time

I know a lot of secondary teachers in a lot of schools and none buy into schemes.
As for planning time, it's not my planning that takes the time... it's the marking.