Coronavirus has forced us to try new things which were previously dismissed as impossible. I'm certainly hoping to wfh more, even when this is all over.
I wonder whether the government should be looking at making remote schooling - properly planned, supported, and resourced - a long-term option.
Effective remote schooling is possible: my DD's (private) school has been amazing at providing a really good remote learning experience. They have a full timetable using Teams on their school ipads, with taught real-time lessons and teachers available for support. They also have form time for discussion at the start and end of the day, which keeps the kids connected to the school and each other, and includes daily activities to help them process what's going on.
Don't get me wrong, it's a hard thing to do well. The teachers are very obviously working incredibly hard, and it's more difficult for them to gauge how kids are doing and help them than in person. A lot of important parts of the school experience are missing. It does still need significant support from parents for the kids to benefit fully (although I think this would lessen with time, as everyone figures it out). And it certainly isn't for all kids: they need to be reasonably self-motivated, able to focus and keen to work.
In most cases, physical school will be a far better choice for children. I can't wait for DD to be able to go back safely!
But for a minority of kids - eg living in remote locations, army parents moving around lots, schools within reach haven't worked for the child, health issues that put them at risk in a school environment - it could be the best option. I'd probably choose it over boarding school for DD, if I had to make that choice. I expect that many of the parents who choose home-schooling would find this a good alternative. And many kids who just don't thrive at school might find this a better option.
The neat thing about it is that the children who would benefit from it can be geographically dispersed, which makes it much more achievable than other specialist educational provision. Even a tiny proportion of children adds up to a significant number across the whole country.
And without the cost of running an expensive physical school, there would be more money available for the technology, other physical support (books and resources sent to each child) and smaller class sizes necessary for it to work.
It would work well for teachers too. You could recruit them anywhere, so hugely opening the pool of possible applicants. In the short term, this would be great for teachers who have health conditions which make coronavirus exposure dangerous.
And finally, it would be really easy to assess the provision (which would be important). Unlike normal ofsted assessments which are done in one not-very-representative day, all lessons and interactions can be recorded and assessed.
Like I said, it's not easy. It would require some pretty serious thought and work to set it up in a way that works well. And it would only be the right choice for a small proportion of children, perhaps only for a limited amount of time. But I think creating that option could really enrich our state educational provision, solving significant problems for some children.
What do you think?