Last week, I had the pleasure of moderating a C21 Canada webinar entitled, “The A, B, Cs of High School Programming.” The webinar featured five Superintendents/Directors from across Canada. The two main questions that framed the discussion were:
- What pandemic opportunities have occurred in high school/secondary program models that encourage a deeper look at pedagogy?
- What challenges or barriers need to be overcome to further implementation?
There were a few common themes from all of the speakers with the first being the implementation of a blended learning strategy. While we’ve highlighted for years the importance of technology in the classroom (virtual or not), the pandemic has acted as an accelerator to infuse its use into current pedagogy. High quality digital resources and platforms throughout this pandemic have been essential in continuing the learning journey of students. Pedagogy that leverages effective education technology cannot be seen going forward simply as “nice to have” but for the sake of future generations, it must be a “NEED TO HAVE.”
This need or the equity issue was another theme that crisscrossed through the country. When students are in school and in class, the equity issue is somewhat addressed. It is not perfect because most public schools do not have the ability to offer 1 to 1 continually, but until ALL students have access to a device during ALL hours of school, it won’t be. However, the inequities became blatantly obvious when students weren’t in the school. Marginalized populations without devices or internet access or both were highly disadvantaged when schools went to at home learning. One province, had the leadership (with some cajoling) to implement a full BYOD program for all high school students. While connectivity may still be an issue, having devices in all students’ hands is certainly a great move forward. The bottom line however, is that governments need to support this type of approach if we truly want equity throughout our systems. Where you live should not define high quality learning!
The last theme that was prevalent might be best described as an increase in flexibility in programming and for student voice and choice. The increase of outdoor learning activities was music to my ears. Real life and practical experiences amplifies student engagement and improves learning results. Many divisions have also altered schedules to better fit student needs with structural changes like alternate day attendance or quarter system timetabling. One concern that I’m well aware of is that just because you change the structure doesn’t necessarily mean that innovation is automatic. What this flexibility is truly about is increased student voice and choice and improved pedagogy with the assistance of technology. All of these moves supports the work of Daniel Pink who suggested that motivation comes from increased autonomy, mastery and purpose. Many of the approaches to high school programming are now addressing these three characteristics in one form or another.
We know, or at least we should know, that returning to what we used to do in high school programming post pandemic is not acceptable. As I’ve suggested in an earlier post, the window for change will only be open during this time and one of the challenges all of the leaders shared is the fear that we go back to the “normal” when the pandemic is over. The gains made during this pandemic in regards to modern learning and digital platforms cannot be lost. It would be extremely disheartening if the way we used to do things returns and the lessons learned are lessons lost.
Continuous improvement is always a goal of systems, schools and professionals and what I saw and heard from these leaders, it is certainly occurring in their areas. Well done!
