Education & Covid 19

There is an argument among certain circles, that education on line, since the pandemic, is the way of the future for education. It seems, over the last 10 years, that on-line education at the university level has been a success: listen to the lectures, on-line tutorials, and assignments can all be achieved without one-to-one-personal contact between student and teacher. This could well be true at a tertiary level. For primary-secondary levels, on-line education would be a disaster for many reasons.

We have known for a long time, since at least the 19^th century, that physical/social interaction is necessary for human development. Many recent studies have shown that home-schooled students, though academically equivalent, fall short on basic social skills, such as one to one communication, behaving in a group dynamic, and emotional maturity. Human contact, not simply “virtual” contact, is an integral aspect of the basic learning curve for human beings. At the tertiary level, it is expected that we have learned these basic human skills, therefore, specifically learning on-line can be just as worthwhile as living on campus, attending lectures, and visiting a 'bricks and mortar' library.

On the primary-secondary levels, the physical contact between teacher and student is of absolute importance for a variety of reasons. Because of under-funding for public schools particularly, the single teacher with a 100 students, for example, is forced to wear many hats beyond their basic job description. Teachers are educators, social workers, councillors, outreach workers, case managers, washers and food providers.

Back in 2005, I remember having to play all these roles throughout a single school year. In fact, because our school was so severely under-funded, as an English coordinator, teaching time dropped to 30%, while my role a social worker rose to just under 60%. One of my teachers, because she became so distraught that her students were falling asleep in her class, began a breakfast club, donations from the faculty, and after a few weeks, the students remained conscious to learn her lessons. You can ask any teacher working in a lower income school, and they will all have similar stories.

In this case, for many schools, it all comes down to funding.

With adequate funding, our school would have had a full-time social worker, councillor, and case managers to deal with the inevitable problems that arise with individual students under these circumstances. What government under-funding has achieved, is a broken system, where teachers are not only under-paid but over-worked, simply attempting to create an environment where teaching and learning can take place.

In the end, it is the individual students who suffer, but on a macro scale, it is general education that fails, where we are pumping out children without the basic educational levels to succeed in our world.

For those who propose that on-line education for the lower levels is the way of the future, are those people who are lying to themselves or have another agenda in mind.

For many, teaching is a vocation, and like nursing and many of the arts, it is a committed passion. These are the people we need to educate our young.

My advice is the western governments of the planet need to realise these facts, and ensure tax payer dollars go into public education.

To repeat: on-line education for the lower levels would be a disaster, and any person pushing this idea, doesn't have a clue, or has nefarious motives in mind.