Mind the Gap
Part 2 of 5 in a series exploring the discomfort of a widening learning gap and a culture of "impossible goal setting" that saddles teachers with the burden of execution and offers meager results
The zone of proximal development (ZPD) refers to the difference between what a learner can do without help and what he or she can achieve with guidance and encouragement from a skilled partner.” 1
That difference, or gap, isn’t the gap we refer to in learning loss, but it’s closely related. Let’s define working definitions for both gaps, then get to work circumventing the broken systems to find solutions.
First, up “learning gap”.
We’ll start at the highest level view, continue to zoom in, and then synthesize for a wide working definition.
National
From a US DOE perspective, the gap is two part. First, between expected performance based on historical data2 (this is also called learning loss) and second, between groups of students (more often called the learning gap).3
This conversation is exceedingly complicated because the two gaps really can’t be separated. The learning gap was already widening at an alarming rate pre-pandemic and was exasperated by so many comorbidities it's nearly impossible to piece out causation.
Learning loss is muddy as well. We’ve modified what we track (see graduation rates4, shifting high-stakes testing requirements5, and state-by-state variations in data collection), so any comparison requires dedicated data scientists, and that takes a maddening amount of time.
However, we don’t need to wait to summarize observations from all over the nation. Our kids are slipping. Struggling. The places they’re thriving are proud of the work but struggle to define what can be replicated in other places.6
District
From a district perspective, it depends on what your state tracks and publishes. Year-over-year (YOY) performance on standardized tests seems to be winning out as the measure, and by that measure, every state had a gap between pre and post-pandemic learning.7
District outcomes are mixed, and if you rolled your eyes and said, “Well, of course they are,” PBS agrees with you.8
…new research shows that even with that extra money, school districts are still struggling to close the gaps in reading, writing and math.
This is another instance where the success stories struggle to define what worked, either because they are blinded by their own biases or because comorbidities make it impossible to piece it out without talented data scientists.
School and Classroom
It gets gritty when we reach the school level. The gap may be defined on paper in similar ways to the district, but here there is also classroom practice.
Practice is where we’ll find the intersection with ZPD and explore why a mis-definition of the concept is preventing real solutions. The two-pronged problem is that grade level content is no longer grade level, and students are striving at disparate levels.
Considering all of these parts,
let’s set our definition of the learning gap as the negative interval between expectation and performance
and let the expectations and performance standards remain flexible.
Onward to Vygotsky.
When my last born was using sippy cups, I was finishing up a Master's degree in Instructional Design. I bought a new sippy, and on the back of the package, it said, “Growth through the zone of proximal development.”
Let’s consider a sippy cup as an MKO (more knowledgeable other) in Vygotsky’s theory.
As an aside, if you feel familiar with the term ZPD but haven't heard of the MKO, you're not the only one, and that’s a problem in itself.
It seems clear from Vygotsky’s publications9 that he envisioned the ideal MKO to be a peer or group of peers, but any more knowledgeable person could help to close the distance between “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential.” He had not explored the ideas of technology or nonhuman entities as candidates. He did consider communities or collections of humans as potential MKOs.
I’d argue the cup was a tool that allowed my daughter to mimic the MKOs, the adults at the table, with more success than she might have had with a regular cup.
But the cup didn’t teach her anything. No feedback for dropping or tipping the cup too far, no need to set it down carefully, etc. She still needed to see someone using an adult cup and mimic it or learn through feedback and assessment how a real cup works.
Assessment, feedback and the MKO are not a part of ZPD, they are what makes the ZPD possible. Without a more knowledgeable companion, there is no growth and the gap remains.
Taking all of this into account, we’ll use Vygotsky’s working definition
“the difference between what a learner can do without help and what they can achieve with guidance and encouragement from a More Knowledgeable Other (MKO)”.
A way forward within rigid, broken systems
These two definitions collide in the classroom.
When I encounter a negative interval between expectation and performance,
I recognize
the difference between what a learner can do without help and what they can achieve with guidance and encouragement from a More Knowledgeable Other (MKO).
Pop quiz!
To solve this problem, I need a:
a) Test
b) Program
c) Framework
d) PD
e) Product
f) System
e) AI
Answer:
Maybe.
The critical question to ask is:
how does this tool function to provide access to an MKO, or make the experience with the MKO more effective?
Not a Vygotsyk stan (and yeah, my daughter made me a custom hoodie that says “Vydotsky stan” - DM if you’d like one for real) you should do this same work in your framework of choosing and move on to the next step.
If the gap remains a gap without an MKO what action can we take?
With an MKO, we can begin to close the gap by entering the ZPD. This space is time intensive.
There are digital tools that claim to guide a student through what they are ready to learn with an MKO. There are frameworks and interventions that do the same.
There is much focus on what the MKO should do, but woefully little focus on what makes a qualified MKO. And the answer is pretty simple. Know more than the learner about the topic at hand.
I believe we’d see a radical acceleration in the efficacy of all of these tools if we shifted our focus from the outcome of the intervention to the appropriateness of the MKO being provided.
Shift this focus mentally, and tell me what happens in the curriculum you’re writing, the classroom you’re conducting, or the district you’re running. It’s a way forward while we wait for systemic solutions.
Next week, we will cover applying proven, rather than feel-good, change management planning against this effort. Until then, tell me if you hear about MKOs in your gap discussions.
By, Mcleod, S., on, U., & 16, N. (2023, November 16). Vygotsky’s zone of Proximal Development & Scaffolding Theory in Psychology. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/zone-of-proximal-development.html
NAEP long-term trend assessment results: Reading and Mathematics. The Nation’s Report Card. (n.d.). https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/ltt/2022/#section-recent-student-performance-trends
New data show how the pandemic affected learning across whole communities. Harvard Graduate School of Education. (n.d.). https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/news/23/05/new-data-show-how-pandemic-affected-learning-across-whole-communities
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/coi/high-school-graduation-rates
https://www.educationnext.org/common-core-changed-standardized-testing/
https://kslnewsradio.com/2014697/nations-report-card-shows-scores-fell-but-utah-fares-better-than-most-states/
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/education/our-insights/covid-19-learning-delay-and-recovery-where-do-us-states-stand
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/schools-and-students-face-difficult-battle-to-close-learning-gaps-worsened-by-pandemic
Mind in society. by L. S. Vygotsky. (pp. 160; £3.00.) Harvard University Press: London. 1981. (1981). Psychological Medicine, 11(4), 866–866. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291700041507