Technolandy

Day 33 (of SOL 2025) Dear @shanesafir & @sjeducate 2/10 “spoilers” of education toxins in Pedagogy of Voice – binary thinking

Dear Shane and Sawsan… in Pedagogies of Voice, you bring up “10 Toxins” carried in the form of signature practices and dscourses – here is a thought on:

2. Binary thinking

When we think of students as good or bad… high and low… with answers being right or wrong… we get signature practices like:

Closed-ended quizzes

Behaviour charts

Good/Bad kid labeling in class meetings 

Leads to statements like:

This student can’t learn

I can’t help this student – they’re low reader/mather/etc

Here is the answer – copy it down

These kids are just different. Nothing I do works with them.

People and learning are not two dimensional… and binary thinking is a barrier to understanding nuance, ambiguity and the complexities that each individual exists with. %s are useful data points, but not really good communicators of the authentic learning (did the student already know the material? Unfamiliar and making great gains? Is pass/fail commonality fair or Can one student pass with a 20% while another needs 90%?)

I know my own practice improved when I focused more on how the learner was doing on the journey based on the curricular big ideas more than based on a task or standard and instead used those as assessments for descriptive formative feedback for individual growth!