3 things to fix - Get students back to school, stop using grades as a measure of quality, and sort out what digitalization is

Since I’m between two jobs right now, I thought I’d bring up three things I would have continued working on if I’d stayed at Årstaskolan. Things that in my role were of absolute highest priority. Things I think are especially important regarding school right now and for quite some time to come. I don’t know if there’s a solution, but I really hope there is.

Please comment and add if you think I’m completely off base or if you have solutions or just want to say hi. Even though my employment was at Årstaskolan, I’ve always seen my role in a broader perspective where Sweden AB must come first. Someone has to look after me when I retire and we need well-educated people for this to keep running and for us to remain competitive.

1. Student absence - getting students back to school after the pandemic

Since 2018 I’ve analyzed and kept track of student absence at Årstaskolan. In 2020 it shot up significantly, for understandable reasons. The problem as I see it is that the numbers haven’t come down now after the pandemic. Absence remains very high. Other schools I’ve talked to have the same problem. Are you monitoring your school and what it looks like? Photo by Vitolda Klein from Unsplash

Unfortunately I’ve found very few nationwide Swedish figures on this, but Skolverket released a national survey in 2021. Why is this worrying? In 2019, before COVID-19, about 1 in 7 students had a total absence of at least 15% (which is a lot). In 2020 that figure was up to 1 in 4 students. And everything indicates that this is an underestimation of the actual absence. Also worrying is that absence has increased a lot among the very young students. Far too many students miss far too much teaching where the foundations for their reading and writing skills are set. I don’t see the numbers going down, but rather perhaps even increasing. What should we do? Go through your numbers and see what it looks like at your school. Think about what has happened and why. Strong measures are needed here before these year groups fall too far behind. This can’t continue forever. Collaboration is needed between different professions, schools and parents. Nationell kartläggning av elevfrånvaro - Skolverket

2. Stop using grades alone as a measure of quality, a basis for decision-making, or for measuring/comparing schools

If we truly want to be able to analyze what works/doesn’t work in school, all politicians, school authorities, schools, parents and others must stop pretending that grades are an absolute measure of students’ knowledge and thereby the quality of teaching and school. Besides the fact that schooling is a market, grades are an assessment sport.

We wouldn’t take it seriously if only judges from Sweden were allowed to judge Sweden’s divers at the Olympics — and in the same way a school cannot claim to have developed/improved its operations, teaching and results solely by showing its grades (assessments) and talking about merit scores.

Photo by UX Indonesia from Unsplash

If we are to have a school that rests, among other things, on a “scientific basis” we must take in and analyze all the data points we already have. We cannot just choose one of them. Grades are important for students because they are a sorting mechanism, but grades differ far too much between schools and even within schools to be used for analysis alone. Why that is we can leave aside in this post.
But problems arise when politicians, school operators, companies and others highlight miracle schools, miracle people, miracle methods, digitalization or similar to be spread to other schools because these schools, methods or similar have raised grades or merit scores.

For many years I’ve amused myself by checking anomalies in the national tests when I see these miracles. Unfortunately it’s often the case that they’re rarely miracles, but something else. Not always. But far too often. In the worst case a lot of resources, in the form of time, energy and the like, will be spent on something that gives nothing, or even worse leads to a deterioration of the operation. If we instead want to work data-driven and try to make a real difference in our organization, we should see grades as one data point among many data points we already have and that teachers dutifully already record but seldom get access to, such as: national tests, teacher assessments, stanine, assessment tools, absence, extra adaptations, action plans, special education teacher support, user surveys, screenings and more.

Your school might not look as good externally, but it’s about all of us having to do everything, not just for our school’s and our children’s sake — but for the good of all of Sweden first and foremost. Since a colleague of mine (one of my absolute favorite teachers) and I took our first steps to combine several data points around 2018, we’ve found a lot of interesting things. We’ve been able to foresee problems that proved true the following term, found development areas for teachers and school leaders, and identified students who may have fallen between the cracks and need extra help. Being able to give a more nuanced picture for teachers who take over at stage transitions, such as from year 3 to 4 and year 6 to 7, will give a lot in terms of the incoming teachers’ planning of upcoming teaching — and the ability to place that upcoming teaching at the right level.

I think a school could get an incredible amount of help from really starting to analyze all the data it has. But then the tools must also be there. That school platforms haven’t developed more over the past 20 years is a little sad, but for now I think it’s worth you putting in the extra time to do it yourselves. Important to point out is that data should not be used to blame anyone, but to find ways to improve the operation.

3. Agree on what we mean when we talk about digitalization in school — or stop talking about digitalization

Student at Årstaskolan

Another thing I’ve long meant to write a longer post about — maybe even give a short lecture about — is this misuse of the word digitalization in school. Now that politicians are making comments and pausing “digitalization” in schools it’s even more relevant. Don’t say digitalization. Speak plainly! This applies to everyone. Politicians, school authorities, media, schools, people. Speak concretely about what you mean when you talk about digitalization. If I’d stayed working at the school I would still have wanted my salary paid directly into my account instead of a check. I would still have wanted to communicate via email, chat or mobile phone. I would still have wanted to schedule in digital systems. But that’s probably not what you mean when you want to point out problems with “digitalization” in school. So speak plainly.

There’s lots of poor “digitalization” in school, both regarding the pedagogical side as well as the administrative. I’m the first to sign that we spend far too much money on digitalization compared with what we get out of it from the students’ perspective. The important thing here is the signaling value that those who speak out know what they are talking about. If you think students use computers too much during lesson time, say that. But then make sure you have arguments for why you say it and that you have facts to support it and that it’s not anecdotal. I’ve long worked at a school that has been seen as a forerunner in digitalization, where people from all over the world have come to learn from our experiences. We have our own “YouTube”, our own e-library for students’ self-published books, our own apps, blogs, and a lot of other sites and things, one device for every student, but… also our own school library, a lot of focus on reading (analog) and completely “regular” teaching. Nothing is black and white. Most things are a lovely gray scale and most teachers know which tool is best for the different learning situations.

However… as with everything new, it can of course happen that people sometimes go astray. That’s okay. It’s part of developing and the digitalization of school is still something new. It needs to be explored. Experiences need to be created and tried out. If we speak more plainly and stop trying to score points, we can probably find a way forward where both analog and digital can work together. In the picture above you see one of (all) the students in year 3 at Årstaskolan who, with cardboard, scissors, glue, pencils, paper and other materials, created a gaming room where they also programmed lighting that automatically turns on when it gets dark with a Micro:bit. Here they have, among other things, worked with scale and measurement in mathematics. In the technology subject construction and documentation have been the focus together with programming. But they have also written about their rooms in English. As I said… few things are black and white. Most things are probably some form of gray scale. Oh, and one of the main purposes of the technology subject according to the curriculum is “that pupils shall develop interest in and knowledge about the technology that surrounds us.” Something tells me there’s a fair bit of digitalization in that.