As already outlined in Part 1 of the article , the performance of teachers was very heterogeneous and perceptions of the school situation during the lockdown diverged strongly between teachers and parents. From the point of view of the headmasters, there was much positive change in their teachers (which is factually true!), while from the point of view of many parents, too many teachers behaved as if they were no longer responsible for the child’s welfare Some teachers even explicitly communicated their abdication, or rejection, of responsibility. In the sense of: It’s your problem, Mummy! It’s a scoundrel who (doesn’t) see in such behaviour a payback for the loss of reputation of the teaching staff and decades of making parents feel important.

The desirable but unlikely new school consensus

The subliminal conflicts – the suppressed anger and indignation on both sides – invite us to quickly forget everything and carry on after the crisis as before the crisis. The best thing to do is to talk about it in a politically correct way, right? Of course, that would mean: nothing but damage: a damaged generation and no benefit at all! It would be better to learn lessons from the health crisis, to continue with the positive and to remedy the negative. For this to be effective in the long term, the relationship between teachers and parents should be renegotiated, with both sides approaching each other. The perpetual gaining of small advantages, which inhibits cooperation throughout Switzerland in many areas, would have to be overcome in the case of the digital school. We would have to leave the tactics behind and enhance the role and reputation of teachers. At the same time, however, we should also make them responsible for acquiring the new digital tools and for helping to develop digital forms of teaching. Of course, this seems illusory, because it would reverse a long-standing trend. But it is conceivable. Because what everyone can hopefully agree on is that good teachers make a big difference. Or is there already dissent on this issue? Are we really hoping for the teaching machines? Being a good teacher today also means being able to teach in a digitally effective way. It also means maintaining social contact with students in times of physical separation and helping them to keep their bearings and receive adequate feedback. And it involves active participation in the further development of one’s own profession in terms of digital transformation. If we could agree on this, then it should go without saying that such qualities deserve high esteem – and that esteem worthy of the name also includes all who aspire to these qualities. All the more so as there is some evidence that a higher reputation of teachers also leads to higher teaching effectiveness. If – as expected – a new basic consensus of this kind on the future of the school is not found, then school leaders and teachers should nevertheless try to prepare themselves for the digital future. Out of a sense of responsibility for the future of the country! And hopefully even more out of a sense of joy in their responsibility for children and young people!

The ten pillars for the digital school

Admittedly, the gap between the analogue and digital worlds is very wide. It is even wider in the school sector than in the economy or in public administration. But it can be overcome if schools and their teachers build a bridge that they place on sustainable pillars. These pillars include

1. Positive framing of the challenges by the school management and knowledge of the problems, as well as high commitment and desire for their own learning among the teachers
2. Digital skills/skills in using digital tools and good technical infrastructure among all stakeholders – including students (and parents)
3. Support and coaching for teachers and students in case of technical or usage problems
4. Teachers should be able to use digital tools to fulfil their own tasks – not only to teach the material, but also for social contact, which is even more important in crisis situations
5. Willingness to and creative design of co-production of teaching – at university the “production partners” of the teachers are the students themselves, at primary and secondary school it is primarily the parents
6. Study of the practical challenges of digital teaching and the context in which it takes place – based on a big picture of what tasks and special abilities schools have or should have
7. Consistent learning of good practices through trial and error, observation and reflection on the effects
8. Sharing knowledge and experiences within and across schools – including copying/adapting the good practices of others and sharing one’s own strategies and tricks so that others can adopt them
9. Open collaboration with all in developing better digital learning tools to actively shape technological developments in the field
10. Researching effective practices and sharing the new knowledge and know-how on digital schooling through training and professional development at teacher training colleges

7. and 8. are central to this. Unfortunately, the schools tried to build the bridge from the analogue world to the digital world on their own, and the cantons added to this with different framework conditions (not to mention the lack of a view across the border). Thus, in only a few places did enough knowledge come together to successfully realise a digital school in the health crisis. Not all of the pillars outlined need to be similarly stable, but in sum they must be sufficiently resilient to enable the creation of new digital options for action in schools. These are not only needed if a second or third wave forces new lockdowns. They can also be used to catch up on what has been missed (which is too often omitted in the Swiss school system), to reduce the differences in educational classes (which in some cantons correlate strongly with the income classes of the parents) and to create more equal educational opportunities for children from educationally disadvantaged families.

The false counterargument

The counter-argument against such plans is very often the same: It is not comprehensively possible. Digital schools will never be as successful as analogue offline schools. Not all school tasks and core competences can be digitised. Many things have not yet been digitally successful (for example, teaching reading). And: the disadvantage of children from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds cannot be eliminated. The loss of contact with some children during a crisis cannot be prevented. And so on and so forth. All true, but thought according to the exclusive only-zero-or-one principle. It is not about an either-or between analogue and digital teaching. It is not about creating a perfect educational landscape, i.e. one that is the same for everyone. Rather, it is about developing and learning, trying out possibilities and striving for improvement. Besides all the negative and terrible things, crises almost always offer an opportunity for development. This – one can confidently say in the case – has always been the case.

References (chronological order)

• Dominik Petko, Beat Döbeli Honegger and Doreen Prasse: Digital transformation in education and schools: facets, lines of development and challenges for teacher education, Contributions to Teacher Education, 36 (2), 2018
• Sabine Seufert, Josef Guggemos and Eric Tarantini: Digital transformation in schools – competence requirements for teachers, Contributions to Teacher Education, 36 (2), 2018
• Ulrike Cress, Ira Diethelm, Birgit Eickelmann, Olaf Köller, Reinhold Nickolaus, Hans Anand Pant, Kristina Reiss: School in the digital transformation – Perspectives of digital educational sciences, acatech discussion, 2018
• Gabriele Glaube: Digital education as socio-technical basic education, bildung+ schuledigital, 1/2019
• Office for Elementary School, Canton St- Gallen: Volksschule im Kontext der digitalen Transformation, February 2019
• Rahel Tschopp: Advancing the digitalisation process in schools (presentation slides), edubs.ch, 21.2.2019
• SRF Kulturplatz: Die Schule – Aufbruch ins digitale Zeit alter (Video), 13.3.2019
• Susanne Gokus, Luise Ortloff & Thomas Lange: Bildung in der digitalen Transformation – Playdoyer für einen Bewusstseinswandel, in: Alexander Franz Koch, Stefan Kruse. Peter Labudde (editors): On the Importance of Technical Education in Subject Alliances, Springer Spektrum 2019
• Barbara Geier and Manfred Brinkmann: Teachers and digital education in times of Covid-19, gew.de, 2.4.2020
• Nils Pfändler: The Corona crisis gives the digitalisation of schools a long overdue boost, NZZ-Online, 7.4.2020
• Bernhard Gaul: Was that all? Or: Where is the digital school actually?, Kurier Online, 22.4.2020
• Kronen Zeitung: Corona makes it clear: Schools are lagging behind digitally, krone.at, 24.4.2020
• Susanne Klein, Henrike Rossbach and Kai Strittmatter: Im digitalen Dickicht – Unterricht in der Corona-Krise, Süddeutsche Online, 24.4.2020
• Edith Meinhardt: Corona und Schule – “Der Staat hat in unseren vier Wänden nichts verloren”, Profil Online, 27.4.2020
• Flavio Razzino: When it comes to digital teaching, Switzerland has to do some detention – Schools were ill-prepared for e-schooling, Blick Online, 29.4.2020
• Heinz Moser: How Corona is accelerating the digitalisation of schools, Infosperber, 29.4.2020
• Johanna Kiesler: Still at the very beginning – digitisation of schools, MDR Medien 360g, 30.4.2020
• Antonia Beckermann: Why German schools are failing in digital work, Welt Online, 30.4.2020
• Vera Linss and Marcus Richter: Homeschooling in the corona crisis – How schools can improve digital learning, Deutschlandfunk Kultur Online, 2.5.2020
• Julia Barthel: Digital teaching in times of Corona – Direct communication is missing, Netzpolitik.org, 12.5.2020
• Schulgschichtn.com: How Corona can change schools, derstandard.at, 13.5.2020
• Bob Blume: From frontal teaching to digital learning companions, ZeitOnline, 15.5.2020
• Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.: Offensive digitale Schultransformation – 7 recommendations for action (press release, 18.5.2020)
• Pierre Gigon: School, distance learning and ESD, 19.5.2020
• Stephan Gerhard Huber, Paula Sophie Günther, Nadine Schneider, Christoph Helm, Marius Schwander, Julia Schneider, Jane Pruitt: COVID-19 and Current Challenges in Schools and Education
• First findings of the School Barometer in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (an in-depth study based on a survey of over 7000 people from 24 March to 5 April 2020), Waxmann-Verlag 2020 (Open Access Publication)
• Nils Landolt: For families, distance learning is a prospect for the future, eduport.ch, 4.6.2020
• Melina Maerten / VSLCH: Corona crisis as a fresh cell cure for schools, blog.phzh.ch, 5.6.2020
• Julian Nida-Rümelin and Klaus Zierer: Digital Education – Reason and Empiricism as an Answer to a Derailed Debate, NZZ-Online, 8.6.2020

Acknowledgements

Nada Endrissat, Thomas Gees, Martin Halter, Christoph Luchsinger, Tine Melzer, Thomas Jarchow – von Büren, Reinhard Starka and Anne-Careen Stoltze-Siebmann played a major role in the creation of this article (including the other parts). We would also like to thank Alain Gut and our colleagues in the ICT-Switzerland Education Commission, as well as colleagues from Parldigi, with whom we were able to exchange ideas. The series “Lessons from the Covid19 crisis” was initiated by Ingrid Kissling-Näf. It is supervised by Anne-Careen Stoltze-Siebmann.

The “Lessons from the Covid19 Crisis” series

Part 1: A Situation Analysis was published on 5 June. Part 3: Concrete recommendations will be published on 19 June.