The same argument could be made of every point in their post. But you’re missing the main point. You’re seeking perfection and ignoring progress in the search of.
I’m the last person to ever ask for perfection. The problem is that educators are being told that video is so great. Then their schedules are crammed full by administration with hundreds of hours of video to show the kids. Leaving them with no time for reading, discussion, or project work. Time that is already taken by tests. So in the end, good educators who are probably way better than some of the awful standardized slop shown to children, have to waste hours showing mandated videos. Bad educators sit on their hands knowing they don’t have to become better because the video is babysitting the kids. This dulls the kids to learning and sends them into a false impression that learning is 100% passive. Sorry, but this way of using video is a net negative to education.
The better option is to recognize that just like everything in education, you need diversity and play to each strategy’s strengths according to the group being taught. Video is good to show things that cannot be demonstrated in class or to showcase highly specialized topics. But it has to be mixed with other strategies to be truly effective. What you must not do is pretend that video is always the better option for everything. Because that is absolutely not true. Specially since OP’s assumptions are wrong.
watch the most engaging individuals instead of the average ones
This has no impact on education. If the teacher present in the class is average, a better instructor on the video has a marginal effect, if any at all.
presenting the content in a way designed by entire teams of top teachers
This has not happened and it’s mostly unnecessary. Specially as the mythical “team of top teachers” has never existed, it is not a thing that exists anywhere. Education all over the world is usually designed by committee, with all the associated flaws and setbacks.
falling back on the average ones only for the interactive parts of education
The worst person for the most important part of the process doesn’t sound good to me.
We have the science, we know that in order to have a positive effect videos must be short, display things that cannot be ordinarily experience in everyday life, and present concrete single topic lectures that can feed interaction and discussion in the classroom, or provide guidance to project work and problem solving. They are a tool that makes good educators better, but for average educators who don’t know how to take advantage of it, it won’t have much impact.
The same argument could be made of every point in their post. But you’re missing the main point. You’re seeking perfection and ignoring progress in the search of.
I’m the last person to ever ask for perfection. The problem is that educators are being told that video is so great. Then their schedules are crammed full by administration with hundreds of hours of video to show the kids. Leaving them with no time for reading, discussion, or project work. Time that is already taken by tests. So in the end, good educators who are probably way better than some of the awful standardized slop shown to children, have to waste hours showing mandated videos. Bad educators sit on their hands knowing they don’t have to become better because the video is babysitting the kids. This dulls the kids to learning and sends them into a false impression that learning is 100% passive. Sorry, but this way of using video is a net negative to education.
The better option is to recognize that just like everything in education, you need diversity and play to each strategy’s strengths according to the group being taught. Video is good to show things that cannot be demonstrated in class or to showcase highly specialized topics. But it has to be mixed with other strategies to be truly effective. What you must not do is pretend that video is always the better option for everything. Because that is absolutely not true. Specially since OP’s assumptions are wrong.
This has no impact on education. If the teacher present in the class is average, a better instructor on the video has a marginal effect, if any at all.
This has not happened and it’s mostly unnecessary. Specially as the mythical “team of top teachers” has never existed, it is not a thing that exists anywhere. Education all over the world is usually designed by committee, with all the associated flaws and setbacks.
The worst person for the most important part of the process doesn’t sound good to me.
We have the science, we know that in order to have a positive effect videos must be short, display things that cannot be ordinarily experience in everyday life, and present concrete single topic lectures that can feed interaction and discussion in the classroom, or provide guidance to project work and problem solving. They are a tool that makes good educators better, but for average educators who don’t know how to take advantage of it, it won’t have much impact.