Hybrid learning doesn’t work
I'm not a gambler, which is a good thing because my predictions often don't come true. But if I could look ahead to the future of education, I'm confident that remote learning isn't going away any time soon. Schools could and should be fully open by the start of the next school year; the rollout of vaccines will continue through the spring into the summer, and it looks like most students and teachers will be vaccinated by then. However, some students will have a legitimate medical reason to request remote learning next year, and if the option is available, others will want to join that small, but not insignificant, group. The question isn't necessarily if remote learning should continue, but how to make it most effective.
The buzzword at the beginning of this school year for most of us was "hybrid", meaning some students would be in the classroom while others were learning at home, remotely. As great as that sounded, it didn't work well. Teachers were constrained in what they could write on their blackboards / whiteboards so students at home could see it clearly online. Remote students were less engaged, many not required to turn on their cameras, meaning teachers taught to blacked-out rectangles on their computer screens as well as a smaller number of students in the classroom. Some in-classroom learning was simply students staring at their computers while sitting at their desks, instead of looking at the teacher in front of them. Student participation dropped significantly, and teachers didn't know if they were truly reaching those learning from home.
And then the tests. Administering a "fair" test was almost impossible, as there was no way to know if students who were remote-learning from home were using outside resources or not. Let me rephrase that: there was no way to prove that the clever students were in fact cheating on their tests, but they definitely were. As soon as the students in the classroom saw the 'benefits' of taking tests remotely, there was an increase in the number of students who were 'sick' on the day of an exam: too sick to come to the classroom, but not sick enough to stop them from joining the remote-learners and taking the test at home. While newspapers reported on the increase in the number of D or failing grades, there was also a significant increase in the number of A grades given out. And I stand by the phrase 'given out' because they weren't honestly earned. To put it bluntly, having some students take tests at home while others take them in the classroom isn't fair. Either everybody gets the chance to cheat and get an A with little or no studying, or nobody does.
Which brings us to next year. The hybrid solution isn't the answer. Classes should either be in-person or remote. And with the majority of students and teachers vaccinated, it looks like schools should be somewhat back to normal. But what about those who choose to learn remotely? The best solution is to create a separate environment for them, apart from the in-person learners. Let classroom teachers get back to 'hands on' teaching, engaging students in discussion, walking around the room checking students' progress on projects and homework without teaching differently to two disparate groups. Let them teach without the fear of walking out of the camera’s view, talking too quietly, limiting what they can put on the blackboard / whiteboard, engaging too much with those in the classroom because they can work 1-1 with them and not engaging enough with those at home because their cameras are off and they don't share their screens. If students need or prefer remote learning, create a separate remote-learning environment for them, either at the same school or through a Remote Learning Academy, where teachers can focus on the particular needs and teaching styles that work best when not in-person.
Hybrid learning doesn't create a level playing field. Instead, it brings down the level of learning for those who attend school. Don't diminish education for those who show up to classrooms next year.