Read on Twitter
Earlier today I tweeted something light-hearted about this comment by @GavinWilliamson on live remote lessons, but it's actually not funny. Uninformed comments like this by politicians, especially ministers in charge of the nation's education system, do damage. Here's why. https://twitter.com/tes/status/1351178454339887111
The claim that live teaching is best is not supported by the available evidence. The @EducEndowFoundn report on remote learning makes clear that what research on the subject there is shows 'no clear difference' between live and asynchronous. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Publications/Covid-19_Resources/Remote_learning_evidence_review/Rapid_Evidence_Assessment_summary.pdf
The claim that 'we encourage schools to put as much live provision on as possible' is untrue. The expectations of remote learning published by @educationgovuk recently do no such thing, but recommend practice which can be achieved live or asynchronously. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/952443/210114_School_national_restrictions_guidance_FINAL_14012021.pdf
In another recent report, drawing on research and experiences of remote learning so far, @Ofstednews has classified the idea that live is always best as a myth and made it clear that synchronous lessons have cons as well as pros. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/952443/210114_School_national_restrictions_guidance_FINAL_14012021.pdf
In the absence of a clear, unequivocal conclusion from research, there is legitimate disagreement within the teaching profession. This is because nobody knows for sure what works best for most students. This includes @GavinWilliamson and he should respect this in his remarks.
So what can we say with confidence? We know that some students prefer live lessons. But it does not follow that they necessarily know what is best for learning, or that all students feel the same, or, even if their judgement is sound, that 100% live would be ideal.
On the flip side we also know that live lessons present a challenge for some students, as my recent tweet shows, albeit on a very small scale. Asynchronous teaching has the advantage of being accessible on demand and students can work at their own pace. https://twitter.com/MrMountstevens/status/1349438103497404417?s=20
In a situation like this, schools have to place bets. I lean towards a mixture of live and 'on demand', but I could be wrong, and I would be prepared to acknowledge this if strong evidence emerges. But that evidence could show that synchronous is worse as well as better.
Why does it matter when politicians make comments like this? It undermines the huge strides schools have made to draw on educational research. This is ironic, when Schools Minister @NickGibbUK has repeatedly called for evidence-informed teaching. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/nick-gibb-the-importance-of-an-evidence-informed-profession
It also undermines schools' ability to set clear expectations and establish settled routines which are so valuable for learning. I guarantee that some parents will quote @GavinWilliamson's words to schools this week and that leaders will feel pressure to make knee-jerk changes.
I can see two possible reasons for what @GavinWilliamson said today. One is that he made a mistake. It worries me that the Education Secretary should be so poorly informed about his own department's position, but he should acknowledge it if so. I would think more highly of him.
The other possibility is that he was deliberately saying untruthful things to appeal to those who think teachers are lazy. This is more sinister and, if true, would reveal a great deal about where his priorities lie and how much he really cares about learning.
I suspect I will never know, but I can be sure that this is yet another example of the profession being let down by those in political power. This has happened time and time again during the pandemic, and the losers each time are not just teachers, but students too.
