Read on Twitter
The 'live class' debate is far more complex than the commentariat might suggest.
There isn’t a one-size-fits-all for schools, but nor is there a blanket solution for families or parents either.
There isn’t a one-size-fits-all for schools, but nor is there a blanket solution for families or parents either.
Criticising schools for not using live classes presumes that school leaders haven’t considered it. But it may be a deliberate choice. School leaders make conscious choices to cater to their community as best they can.
Device poverty is something schools consciously factor in. A school will know that a family might have a number of pupils of primary school age. So there's a few questions: Do they have a good enough internet connection to run one Zoom? Or two or three? Do they have the devices?
Even if they had the devices, might they have the space?
Even if you had good enough internet and enough devices, can you run three Zooms in the house? Can you expect children to use headphones or do you need to put them into different rooms?
Even if you had good enough internet and enough devices, can you run three Zooms in the house? Can you expect children to use headphones or do you need to put them into different rooms?
Can one or two parents, or maybe only one, “supervise” three children in three different rooms while working from home too? If they miss the 'live' recording (for any of the very legitimate reasons above), how will the child feel?
There are also some people suddenly obsessed with teacher productivity. Keeping tabs, etc. There is a misunderstanding that live Zooms mean a teacher is working 'harder' which isn't always the case. Trust me, it takes far more time to produce content you can consume 'on demand'.
I would urge people to understand that while we are all (rightly) concerned about our own children and our own homes, schools must accommodate the marginalised few in every single decision that they make. Equity of access will always trump any counter argument.
