As we reach the midway point of summer along with the first quarter of the 21st century, I’m reminded of the reflection time I enjoyed as an educator; contemplating what did and didn’t work the previous academic year and integrating it into my planning for the next. I always liked to come up with a guiding question to think about and given the overarching AI discussion, my 2026 question is, ‘When it comes to teaching , learning, educational structures and change, are we reforming or transforming our schools?’
Whether it’s the traditional school most of us grew up with; or perhaps ones offering extended blended opportunities using technology; or the array of choices ranging from private and public charters to home school to fully virtual schools; transforming rather than reforming should be the primary pathway for school change. As technology offers increasing flexibility for teaching and student learning, the impact on educational related relationships is challenged. A few transformation questions I’m thinking about while considering the daunting possibilities include:
- As technology accelerates its integration into schools, how can social interaction be enhanced to develop better social skills for students?
- How is “traditional learning” evolving and what might a ‘new normal’ be to insure that face-to-face feedback and support doesn’t diminish?
- Does the increase of technology and analytics place the student/teacher or parent/teacher connection at risk?
There are certainly a host of questions to consider along with the critical relationship factors in schools. I would argue that even before technology weighed into educational decision-making, school and organizational mission statements leaned into the notion of relationships and engagement for all school and community stakeholders. Ideally, technology should support a school’s mission, facilitating more face to face school learning experiences rather than reducing them. While examining what ideal engagement might look like, I’d like to tease apart the questions posed above from my own experience and research:
- As technology continues to integrate into schools, how can social interaction be enhanced to develop better social skills for students?
The question can assume the virtual nature of online learning experiences is inferior to face-to face classroom experiences that may promote more social interaction and learning engagement. The online skepticism needs to be balanced with the quality of social interactions in face-to face classrooms… is full participation expected or required from all; or is the social interaction is exercised by a few? It is also fair to question the online experience a student may have and the amount of interaction facilitated by and between teachers and students. There are some online experiences, especially delivered by private, for profit online schools, where a teacher has 200 or more students, and parent concerns about a school’s social development value are validated. There are online experiences though where teacher/student experiences quite interactive, requiring full participation. However, blended models including both a face-to face and online environments tend to offer a higher degree of personalized opportunities for social interaction both inside and outside of traditional brick and mortar schools.
Another assumption is that socialization and social development primarily happens in schools. Yes, there are experiences beyond the classroom like athletics and student activities. But there’s also increased chances for developing social skills outside of school using the flexible time opportunities technology can provide for internships and other experiences or activities to integrate and interconnect with the community at large. Ideally all brick and mortar schools would leverage technology to create flexibilities allowing for time, pace and place opportunities for all students…taking advantage of the proverb from last century that ‘it takes a village to raise a child.’
- How is “traditional learning” evolving and what might a ‘new normal’ be to insure face-to-face feedback and support doesn’t diminish?
An exchange of views about “traditional learning” and the assumed relational value between teacher and student would be a great place to start community discussions about what traditional schools have provided and what can be included with a wider scope of 21st century options. Quality feedback in any learning environment is key to motivating students, and by way of the statement above, feedback is structured to be potentially greater in a blended environment from multiple sources. Whether one looks at a face-to face or virtual option, quality feedback can largely depend on student-teacher ratios, class sizes and extended resources.
The context of “traditional learning” also needs to be examined since most people reading this post had a traditional K-12 experience with a three season 180 day school year that required individual students of all ability levels to start and stop a shared learning experience at the same time. An examination and a co-constructed meaning of a traditional learning environment should start with accommodating both students who need more time to demonstrate an applicable understanding of core curriculum areas; and accommodating students who can move more quickly with demonstrating an understanding of the same. The topics of ‘traditional learning’, ‘schooling’, or even ‘why students come to school’ requires a significant investment of community engagement to move change from a reform to transform mode. Ideally, available technology leveraged to accommodate students, teachers and community can open multiple possibilities and resolve issues that curtail transformation. These discussions can also shed light on solutions to issues that have stymied change…think scheduling conflicts, school start/stop times, expanded offerings, etc.
- Does the increase of technology and analytics place the student/teacher or parent/teacher connection at risk?
Needing to be considered is what one means by “connection.” Technology has certainly provided enhanced opportunities for parents to be communicating with their child’s school whenever necessary through a variety of means ranging from email to text messaging and multiple forms of social media. Additionally, schools have student information systems allowing parents to access student progress, grades, and other issues anytime from anyplace. These options are the same whether a student is in a face-to face or virtual classroom. But have the varied types of communication between teachers, students and parents improved given the amount of available data; or has better knowing the personal learning interests creating passion for learning by individual students been compromised?
The question then becomes, “What is the quality of the connections between one teacher and 20-25+ students in an elementary school classroom? Or a middle school or high school teacher who interacts with 80-100+ students a day?” There are a various levels of connection, some of high quality; some more cursory. What systems or expectations are in place given the available technology that create more equity for personal connections with and deeper understandings for all students? Answering that question can create a shared understanding for how schools measure meaningful connections for students, teachers, parents and community beyond the analytics of test scores and associated data points that tend to get our hyper focused attention.
Our public schools are working hard at adapting and creating levels of change that accommodate a rapidly changing world, driven more by technology every day. We’re all running the race to keep up, trying to adapt to 21st century opportunities on the fly…building the plane as we fly it… However, at the quarter mark of the 21st century, our underlying classrooms still largely mimic 20th century models. Ideally, we can transform our schools’ structures(time & flexibility), and our classrooms(pace and place) by leveraging technology to maintain the face-to-face benefits schools provide to communities at large. Change is constant; school reform efforts tend to tip possibilities into 20th century mindsets, shortchanging students. Thinking with a transformational mindset is the pathway to creating opportunities for students to better meet the world in which they’ll live.