JULY2024

WORKINGPAPER#187.2

SPARKSWORKINGPAPERII

MOVINGAWAYFROM

“BESTPRACTICES”

TOWARDSRELEVANTPEDAGOGICAL

APPROACHESANDREFORMS

GHULAMOMARQARGHA

RACHELDYL

MovingAwayfrom“BestPractices”:

TowardsRelevantPedagogicalApproachesandReforms

GhulamOmarQarghaandRachelDyl

July2024

WorkingPaper#187.2SPARKSWorkingPaperII

AbouttheCenterforUniversalEducation

Foundedin2002,theCenterforUniversalEducation(CUE)isaleadingpolicycenterfocusedon

universalqualityeducationandskillsdevelopmentaroundtheworld.CUEcollaboratescloselywith

networksofinternationalpartnerstoaccelerateeducationalprogressandsystemschangesothatall

learners–especiallythemostmarginalized–candevelopabreadthofskillstothriveinarapidlychanging

world.

Acknowledgements

WewouldliketoexpressourgratitudetoGabrielleArengeandJimWilliams,whorevieweddraft

reports,andBradOlsenfromtheCenterforUniversalEducationattheBrookingsInstitutionforhis

editorialreview.WealsothankRachaelGrahamTinforherinvaluablefeedbackduringthewriting

process.

1

TheBrookingsInstitutionisanonprofitorganizationbasedinWashington,D.C.Ourmissionistoconduct

in-depth,nonpartisanresearchtoimprovepolicyandgovernanceatlocal,national,andgloballevels.

TheconclusionsandrecommendationsofanyBrookingspublicationaresolelythoseofitsauthor(s),and

donotreflecttheviewsorpoliciesoftheInstitution,itsmanagement,itsotherscholars,orthefunders

mentionedbelow.

TheLEGOFoundationisadonortotheBrookingsInstitution.Brookingsrecognizesthatthevalueit

providesisintheabsolutecommitmenttoquality,independence,andimpact.Thefindings,

interpretations,andconclusionsinthisreportarenotinfluencedbyanydonation.

2

TableofContents

A.Innovativepedagogical“bestpractices”aregenerally“student-centered”butlack

contextualization5

1.Thereisconfusionoverwhichinnovativepedagogicalapproacheswillimproveclassroom

practice.5

2.Thereisnoconsensusonhowtodescribestudent-centeredpedagogies.5

3.“Student-centeredpedagogy”inherentlyimpliesaneedforcontextualization6

B.Manypedagogicalreformsfailbecauseinnovativepedagogicalapproachesaretreatedasstandaloneinterventions7

1.Competency-basedcurriculumreformsdonotalwaystranslatetoclassroompractice7

2.Decontextualizedandisolatedteacherprofessionaldevelopmentreformshavefailedtobring

aboutchangesinclassroompractice8

3.Technologyisapowerfultoolifusedcorrectly,butitisnotasilverbullettosolveteachingand

learningchallenges.9

4.Successfulimplementationofpedagogicalapproachesintheclassroomrequires

contextualization.10

C.Innovativepedagogicalapproachesneedtobevettedandcuratedforeachcontext.11

1.Alignpedagogicalapproacheswiththemultiplepurposesofeducationineachcontext12

2.Alignpedagogicalreformswithlocalepistemologies—thedifferentwaysofknowingandlearningthatarevalued13

3.Alignpedagogicalreformswithteachers’understanding,expertise,values,andlivedexperience.

14

Conclusion14

AppendixI:WorkingDefinitionsofKeyConcepts16

AppendixII:CategorizingInnovativePedagogicalApproaches19

AppendixIII:Standards,Characteristics,andDimensionsofStudent-CenteredPedagogies21

References23

3

Summary

Inmanylow-andmedium-incomecountries(LMICs),student-centeredpedagogiesareoftenimplicitlyor

explicitlyattheheartofinnovativepedagogicalreforms(Bremner,2021).Inrecentyears,therehasbeen

agrowingemphasisonstudent-centeredpedagogies,whichaimtoshiftpowerdynamics,increase

interaction,andprioritizetheneedsoflearners.Manyinternationalagencies,governments,and

educationexpertsviewthesepedagogiesas"bestpractices"orapedagogical"silverbullet"toimprove

classroompractice.Despitepopularity,thereisalackofagreementonwhatstudent-centeredpedagogies

meaninpractice(Bremner,2021;Brittonetal.,2019;Schweisfurth,2013).

Scholarshavereferredtostudent-centeredpedagogiesasa“hoorayterm”—somethingthatsoundsgood

butisdifficulttoidentifyanddescribeinpractice(Bremner,2021;Harber&Davies,1997;Schweisfurth,

2013).Thelanguageusedtopromoteinnovativestudent-centeredpedagogicalapproachesdoesnotalign

withclassroompractice.Studiesshowthatmostattemptstointroducestudent-centeredpedagogical

approacheshavenotsignificantlychangedclassroompractice.Teacherscontinuetousepedagogical

approachesresponsivetotheirexistingeducationecosystemsandstructures(Luetal.,2017;Tabulawa,

2013).

Thispaperisthesecondinaseriesofthreeworkingpapersmeanttoserveasreferencesandconversation

startersforpolicymakersandresearchersastheynavigatepedagogicalreformforeducationsystem

transformationintheirlocalcontexts.Together,thethreeworkingpapersemphasizetheneedformore

locallydrivencollaborativeresearchonhowtheinteractionofculture,localeducationecosystems,and

learningtheories—collectivelycalledInvisiblePedagogicalMindsets—influencesteachers’pedagogical

choicesintheclassroom.

1.WorkingPaperIexploreswhatdifferentdefinitionsof“pedagogy”promote,emphasizesthe

importanceofInvisiblePedagogicalMindsetsforpedagogicalreforms,andsetsthestagefor

WorkingPapersIIandIII.

2.WorkingPaperIIexplainswhyitisimportanttoexamineInvisiblePedagogicalMindsetstoinform

localpedagogicalreformagendas.Specifically,itoutlinesthechallengesofa“bestpractices”

approach,asseenwiththegeneralizedimplementationofstudent-centeredpedagogies.

3.WorkingPaperIIIdetailshowcollaborativeresearchmethodologiescanhelpensurepedagogical

researchconsidersInvisiblePedagogicalMindsetsandrespondstolocalcontexts.

WorkingPaperIIdetailswhywerecommendpolicymakersexamineInvisiblePedagogicalMindsetsin

theirlocalcontexttoinformpedagogicalreforms.Wediscussthereasonswhygeneralized“best

practices”—namely“student-centeredpedagogies”ascurrentlyimplemented—donotoftensuccessfully

transfertonewcultures,countries,andcontextsandarguethatmanypedagogicalreformsdonot

adequatelyconsidertheInvisiblePedagogicalMindsetsembeddedineachlocalcontext.AppendixI

providesworkingdefinitionsofkeyconceptsfromthethreeWorkingPapers.

4

A.Innovativepedagogical“bestpractices”aregenerally“student-centered”

butlackcontextualization.

AsmentionedinWorkingPaperI,thereisconfusionaroundwhat“pedagogy”isandhowtodefineit.

Thereisfurtherconfusionaboutwhichpedagogicalapproachesmaximizelearningintheclassroom.The

term“innovativepedagogies”hasbeenusedtodescribepedagogicalapproachesthatcontributeto

transformativeshiftsinlearningandthatbreakawayfromstandardwaysofteachingandlearning(Istance

&Paniagua,2019).Animportantthemeofmanypedagogicalreformsdesignatedas“innovative”isashift

infocustoviewstudentsasactive,curious,andindependentlearners.Asaresult,manyLMICshave

championedstudent-centeredpedagogiesasinnovative“bestpractices”despiteconfusiononwhatthese

approacheslooklikeinpractice.

Inthissection,weoutlinesomeattemptstodescribestudent-centeredpedagogies,whichhaveonly

increasedconfusionaboutterminologyandimplementation.

1.Thereisconfusionoverwhichinnovativepedagogicalapproacheswillimproveclassroom

practice.

Whendiscussinginnovativepedagogicalapproaches—manyofwhicharestudent-centered—muchofthe

literaturegroupsthemintotheoreticalcategories,suchasconstructivist,inquiry-based,andcollaborative.

Thesecategorizationsarehelpfulfortheoreticaldiscussionsbutnotforpolicydecision-making,because

theydonotidentifywhatisandisnotaninnovativestudent-centeredpedagogicalapproach.

Morerecently,therehavebeenattemptstocategorizeinnovativestudent-centeredpedagogical

approachesbasedonhowteachersimplementtheapproachesintheirclassroom.Thesecategorization

effortsrangefromcatalogingindividualpedagogicalapproachestogroupingclassroompracticesinto

frameworks,clusters,andtaxonomies.Forexample,theOECDproposes6clustersofInnovative

Pedagogies,connectingdiscretepedagogicalapproacheswithbroadertheoreticalmodelsrelatedto

innovationintheclassroom.SomeoftheOECD’ssuggestedclusters,suchasblendedlearning,

gamification,orexperientiallearning,havebeenusedinclassroomstopromotemorehorizontal

relationshipsbetweenteachersandstudents.TheEightIntegratedPedagogies,proposedbytheLego

Foundation,areapproachesfocusedonplay.TheEightIntegratedPedagogiesusebroadertheoretical

categories,includingcooperative,collaborative,andinquiry-basedpedagogicalapproachesinthe

classroom.SeeAppendixIIforasummaryofcategorizationsofinnovativepedagogicalapproaches.

Despitetheseeffortstocategorizeinnovations,thereremainsconfusionandalackofconsensusaround

pedagogicalinnovationstoimproveclassroompractice.However,acommonthemeamongstinnovations

istheimplicitorexplicitcenteringofthestudentexperience,oftencalled“student-centeredpedagogy.”

2.Thereisnoconsensusonhowtodescribestudent-centeredpedagogies.

Scholarshavesuggesteddimensions,characteristics,andminimumstandardstospecificallydescribe

student-centeredpedagogies.Forexample,Schweisfurth(2013)definesstudent-centeredpedagogiesas

“apedagogicalapproachwhichgiveslearners,anddemandsfromthem,arelativelyhighlevelofactive

controloverthecontextandprocessoflearning,”andsheproposessevenminimumstandardsfor

student-centeredpedagogies.However,Bremner(2021)arguesthathavingminimumstandardsis

5

impossiblebecausethereisnoagreed-upondefinitionofstudent-centeredpedagogies.Instead,he

proposessixgeneralcategoriessynthesizedfrompreviousliterature.Starkey(2017),ontheotherhand,

offersayetbroaderconceptualizationofstudent-centeredpedagogieswiththreegeneraldimensions

thatdescribetheintendedgoalsofstudent-centeredpedagogies.

Starkey’sthreedimensionscanbeseenasencompassingoneormoreofthestandardsandcategoriesby

SchweisfurthandBremner.Forexample,Starkey’s(2017)“agenticdimension,”whichfocuseson

empoweringstudentsasactiveparticipantsintheirlearning,correspondswithBremner’s(2021)

categories“adaptingtostudent’sneeds”and“autonomy,”whichacknowledgetheimportanceof

students’independenceandactiveparticipationincreatingknowledge.Additionally,Starkey’s(2017)

“cognitivedimension,”focusedontheprocessofstudentlearning,canencompassSchweisfurth’s(2013)

standards“buildingonlearners’existingknowledge”and“contentrelevanttolearners’lives,”whichfocus

oncuratingrelevantcontentforstudentsbasedontheirpriorlearning.AppendixIIIprovidesasummary

ofSchweisfurth’s,Bremner’s,andStarkey’sstandards,categories,anddimensionsofstudent-centered

pedagogies.

Ultimately,weagreewithBremner’s(2021)statementthat,consideringalltheattemptstodescribeand

definestudent-centeredpedagogies,thetermhasbeen“definedtodeath,”withlittletonoclarityabout

whatstudent-centeredpedagogieslooklikeindifferentclassroomcontexts.Inthisworkingpaper,we

adoptaworkingdefinitionofstudent-centeredpedagogiesaspedagogicalapproachesthatcenterthe

studentlearningexperienceandarerelevantandresponsivetothelocalcontext.Wecontendthatmost

oftheteachingandlearningthathappensinclassroomsisneitherfullystudent-norteacher-centered.

Rather,itisamixtureoffacilitation,collaboration,andtransmissionofknowledgebasedonthebroader

societalgoalsofeducation.

3.“Student-centeredpedagogy”inherentlyimpliesaneedforcontextualization.

Oneofthebiggestbarrierstoeffectivepedagogicalreformisassumingthatpedagogicalapproachesare

generalizableandtransferable“bestpractices.”Manyeducationreformsare“travelingpolicies”

(Schweisfurth,2013),meaningthattheyoriginatedprimarilyintheWestandwereeitheradoptedbylocal

educationactorsortransferredbyinternationalactorswithoutathoroughreviewoftheir

appropriatenessinlocalcontexts(Meyeretal.,1997;Ramirez&Boli,1987).

Internationalorganizationspreferaportfolioof“bestpractices”partlybecauseimplementingpre-

packagedreformsiseasierthansupportingprojectsdevelopedlocally.Oftenthesebestpracticesare

supportedbyexperimentalandquasi-experimentaldatapresentedasconclusivebutwhichinfactisrarely

conclusiveormethodologicallysound(Samoff,1999;Steiner-Khamsi,2013;Klees,2008).Inturn,local

policymakersandothereducationactorsoftenadopttherhetoricofstudent-centeredpedagogiesthat

internationalorganizationsutilizeaspartoftheireducationreformeffortstorefertoexistinglocal

practices(Vergeretal.,2016;Steiner-Khamsi,2013).However,traditionalteachingmethodsremainthe

norminmostclassrooms(Bremner,2021;Chafi&Elkhouzai,2017;Tabulawa,2013).

Traditionalteachingmethods,commonlyreferredtoasteacher-centeredpedagogy,generallypromote

lecture-styleclasses,rotememorization,ortransmissionofinformationtostudents.Intraditional

systems,theteacherisanauthoritativeandknowledgeablefigure,andalargepartofateacher’sjobisto

passdowntheirknowledgetostudents(Garrett,2008).Therefore,teachersusepedagogicalapproaches

alignedwithtransmittingknowledge,coveringasetcurriculum,andpreparingstudentsforreligious,

6

moral,ornationalidentities.Changingpedagogicalpracticesfacesresistancewhenthelocaleducation

ecosystemsupportstraditionalmethodsthatteachersarefamiliarwith.Forexample,inTanzania,the

introductionofstudent-centeredpedagogyinsecondaryschoolsandwithinthepre-serviceteacher

educationprogramlargelyfailedasteachersandstudentsalikestruggledtoadapttodifferentmodelsof

power-sharingandinteractionintheclassroom(Vavrus,2009).

Discussionsaboutpedagogicalinnovationsoftendonotconsiderthecultures,localeducation

ecosystems,andlearningtheoriesthatinfluencehowpedagogiestranslatefrompolicytopractice.

Student-centeredpedagogyrequiresafocusonthestudent’slocalcontextbecausethereisno“universal

studentexperience.”Jones(1989)underlinedtheuniqueexperienceofeachstudent,statingthat“we

cannotdiscusswhathappensintheclassroomanditssignificanceforsocialchangewithoutatleastan

understandingofthestructured,collectiveculturalinterpretationsofthepupils”(p.22).

Inrecentyears,theideaof“bestpractices”ineducationhasbeenchallengedtoevolvetomoreof“best

practicesforeachindividualcontext”(Bremner,2021;Schweisfurth,2013).Inthenextsection,we

highlighttheimportanceofcontextualizingstudent-centeredpedagogytocreatemeaningfullearning

experiencesindifferentlocalcontexts.

B.Manypedagogicalreformsfailbecauseinnovativepedagogical

approachesaretreatedasstandaloneinterventions.

Innovativestudent-centeredpedagogicalapproachesareintertwinedwithotheraspectsofeffective

teachingandthebroadereducationecosystem.Therefore,whileisolatedapproachesmayseemeasierto

implementandmoreefficientinitially,theyoftenproveineffectiveinthelongrunandwasteresources.

Selectivelyintroducingorimprovingpedagogicalapproachesresponsivetothecontextisdifficultbut

oftenmoreproductive(Burdenetal.,2019,Steiner-Khamsi,2013).

Threeofthemostcommonmechanismsforimplementingstudent-centeredinnovativepedagogical

approachesarecurriculumreform,teacherprofessionaldevelopment,andeducationtechnology

(EdTech).Thesemechanismscanbebeneficialwhenintegratedintoacomprehensive,context-specific

educationecosystemreformagenda.However,manyreformsrelyingononeormoreofthese

mechanismshaveclashedwithculture,localeducationecosystems,andlearningtheories,limiting

possibilitiesforeffectiveimplementation.

1.Competency-basedcurriculumreformsdonotalwaystranslatetoclassroompractice.

Curriculumreformoftenprecedesothertypesofpedagogicalreformsbecausechangingclassroom

practicerequiresfirstreimaginingtheguidelinesandoverarchinggoalsofeducationinthelocalcontext.

Acurriculum,orplanforlearning,setsthestagefortheknowledgeandskillsstudentsareexpectedto

learnthrougheducation(NAEYC,nd).Associetiesevolve,curriculumreformisnecessarytoreimagine

whatstudentsshouldlearnandhowandwhycertaincontentandskillswillbeprioritized.Inthisway,

curriculumreformcanbecomeahighlypoliticalprocess,wherequestionsofjustice,power,andpolitics

aresometimeschallenged(Giroux,1994).Thesechangesrequireasystems-basedapproachtoconsider

theconstraintsandopportunitieswithintheexistingeducationecosystemandtopromotedialogue

amongsteducationactorsregardinghowcurriculumchangesaffectclassroompractice.However,

7

internationaldonorsoftenselectivelyfundonlyaspectsofthecurriculumthatsupporttheirownpackage

of“bestpractices,”withouttakingasystemsperspective.Thiscausesamismatchbetweenstandards,

curriculumframework,teachereducation,andstudentassessment(Steiner-Khamsi,2013)

Basedonthechangestocurriculum,teachersmustthenfigureouthowtoadapt,replace,orintroduce

newpedagogicalapproachesintheirclassroompractice.However,curriculumchangesoftenoccur

withoutteacherconsultationandwithoutasystemsapproachtoplanthechangesneededtoenactthe

newproposedcurriculuminthelocalcontext(Gou?dardetal.,2020).Additionally,teachersoftenlack

sufficientpre-serviceandin-serviceprofessionaldevelopment,resources,andclearguidelinesforhowto

implementnewpedagogicalapproacheswithinthelocaleducationecosystemconstraints.Therefore,it

isoftenchallenging,ifnotimpossible,forteacherstoenacttherequiredcurriculumchanges.

Despiteashifttowardscompetency-basedcurricula(Gou?dardetal.,2020),thereisoftenagapbetween

curriculumchangesandimplementationintheclassroom.Forexample,newcurricularpoliciesinVietnam

aimedtoshiftpedagogicalpracticetowardsamorecompetency-basedcurriculumtoincorporate21st

centuryskillsintothenationalcurriculum.However,challengesaroseduetoalackoftrainingand

understandingaroundthenewpolicy.Manyteachersdidnotfeelcomfortableimplementingthenew

curriculumstrategiesandstruggledwithresourceshortagesandovercrowdedclassrooms(Ho&

Dimmock,2023).CurriculumreforminIrelandalsohighlightedtheneedtothinkmoredeeplyabouthow

policychangesaffectteachersintheirclassrooms.ProjectMathsinIrelandisthesecondaryschool

mathematicscurriculumpilotedbetween2008and2010.MuchlikeinVietnam,thiscurriculumpolicy

reformaimedtoshiftthefocustowardsreal-lifeapplicationofcontent.However,evaluationsofthe

reformrevealedthatdespitesomepositiveeffects(namely,students’morepositiveattitudestowards

math),manyteachersfoundthelengthofthecurriculumunrealisticandstruggledtomeettheestablished

expectationsforcompletion(O’Meara&Milinkovic,2023).

Asmanygovernmentsmovetochangecurriculumprioritiesandguidelines,teachersandschoolleaders

needsupporttoeffectpositivechangeintheclassroom(Kane&Steiner,2019).Toenactacompetency-

basedcurriculumsuccessfully,educationactorsmustconsidertheotherpartsoftheeducationecosystem

thataffectandwillbeaffectedbythechange.

2.Decontextualizedandisolatedteacherprofessionaldevelopmentreformshavefailedto

bringaboutchangesinclassroompractice.

Oneofthemostimportantmechanismsofpedagogicalreformisteacherprofessionaldevelopment.As

researchcontinuestoshowthecrucialroleofteachersinaffectingstudentoutcomes(Chuetal.,2015;

Hattie,2003;Istance&Paniagua,2019;Metzler&Woessmann,2010),manycountriesareinvesting

significantlyinpre-serviceandin-serviceteacherprofessionaldevelopmentaspartofeducationreform

efforts.Forinstance,Chinaallocatedapproximately$84millionforteacherprofessionaldevelopmentin

itsNationalTrainingPlanforGrades1–12(Zhao,2020),theUnitedStatesspendsaround$18,000per

teacherannually(TNTP,2015),in25oftheOECDcountriesparticipationinprofessionaldevelopmentis

mandatoryforteachersatalllevelsofeducation(OECD,2022),andin-servicetrainingisoneofthemajor

elementsofspendingineducationintheLatinAmericaandCaribbeanregion(Bruns&Luque,2014).

Additionally,between2000and2012,nearly114of171WorldBankeducationprojectsincludedteacher

professionaldevelopment(Popovaetal.2016).

8

However,teacherprofessionaldevelopmentforinnovativestudent-centeredpedagogicalapproachesis

noteffectiveifteacherslackthetraining,guidance,andmaterialsforclassroomimplementation,andif

teacherprofessionaldevelopmentisastandaloneinterventionwithoutconsideringtheentireeducation

ecosystem(Popovaetal.,2016).Forexample,astudyofanin-serviceteacherprograminSouthAfrica

revealedthatalackofresourcesandothersituationalconstraintscreatedchallengesforteacherswho

triedtoadoptmorestudent-centeredapproachesintheirclassroompractice(Brodieetal.,2002).InChile,

theNationalTeacherPolicy(PolíticaNacionalDocente)includedmentoringfornewteachersandmore

structuredprofessionaldevelopmentandcareeradvancement.Whilesomepositivechangesinteacher

behaviorhavebeennoted,evaluationsoftheteacherprofessionaldevelopmentfocusedreformhave

highlightedtheneedtoconsiderhowthereformfitsintothelargereducationecosystemtoassesslong

termimpactonclassroompractice(Mizala&Schneider,2019).

Eveniftheteacheragreeswiththepurposeandgoalsofteacherprofessionaldevelopment,effectively

incorporatingnewstrategiesintoclassroompracticeisnotstraightforward.Thelocaleducation

ecosystemmustsupportreform,andtheteachermustfigureouthowthenewstrategyfitswithspecific

contentanddevelopmentneedsoftheirstudents.Theyneedtofigureouthowthenewstrategyaffects

theirteachingplans,pace,organization,andassessmentstrategiesthatareallpartofaneffective

teachingpractice.Allofthisrequirescontinuousprofessionaldevelopmentforteacherstolearn,practice,

andfamiliarizethemselveswiththeinnovativestudent-centeredapproachesandengageinreflection

abouttheirclassroompractice.Luetal.(2017)emphasizethatalthoughteacherprofessional

developmentcanbeeffective,teachers’beliefs,motivations,andskillsarecriticalinapplyingthe

knowledgegainedfromprofessionaldevelopmentprogramstotheireverydaypractices.

3.Technologyisapowerfultoolifusedcorrectly,butitisnotasilverbullettosolve

teachingandlearningchallenges.

Technologyisofteneasiertouseoutsidetheclassroomforadministrativetasksthanforassistingthe

teacherandcomplementingpedagogicalapproachesinsidetheclassroom.Inschools,technologycanbe

easilyusedtostreamlineadministrativetasks,implementlarge-scaleeducationassessmentand

evaluations,andassistwithcredentialing,recordkeeping,teachermanagement,andcommunication.

However,theuseoftechnologyforimprovingteachingandlearningintheclassroomischallenging

(Wilichowski&Cobo,2024;UNESCO,2023).

Technologyhasbeenchampionedasanimportantaidtoassistorreplaceteachersinschoolsystemswith

ateachershortage,highratesofabsenteeism,orfewteacherswithpedagogicalexpertise(Ganimianet

al.,2020).Scriptedlessonplans(SLPs)havebecomeprominenttoolstohelpteachersstreamlinelesson

planningandsupplementtheircontentknowledge.However,SLPscanhavebothpositiveandnegative

effectsonteacherautonomydependingonthelevelofexpertiseoftheteacher,theirlessonplanning

style,andtheirexistingcontentknowledge(Narayananetal.,2024).IfSLPsareindividualizedand

contextualizedforteachers,theycanhelpteachersimprovetheirclassroompractice.However,ifSLPsare

toogeneralizedanddonotallowforteacherinput,creativity,andadaptation,thiscanaffectteacher’s

autonomyandcreateafalsesenseofimprovementinclassroompractice.EvaluationsoftheSuccessfor

Allprogram,oneofthemostwidelyimplementedscriptedreadingprogramsintheUnitedStates,show

thatincorporatingtechnologyisusefulwhenitworkstoenhanceratherthanreplaceteacherinstruction.

Insomeschools,theSuccessforAllprogramincorporatedvideolessonsandcomputer-assistedtutoring

9

tosupplementteacherinstruction.Studentswhoreceivedbothtechnologyassistanceandteacher

instructionscoredsignificantlybetterthanthosewhoonlyreceivedteacherinstructionortechnology

support(Chambersetal.,2005).Afollow-upevaluationoftheprogramfoundthatwhileteacherssawthe

benefitsofhavingtechnologysupporttheirinstruction,thereweremanybarriers,suchasinadequate

trainingtoimplementtheprogramandlimitedtimetocoverothersubjects(Quintetal.,2014).This

evaluationshowsthatultimately,withoutasystemsapproachandcarefulexamination,theseinnovations

willlikelyserveasbandagesatbestanddistractfromtherealchallengesofpedagogicalreform.

Becausegoodteachersarethemostimportantactorsforbringingpedagogiestolifeintheirclassrooms

andensuringqualityeducationexperiencesfortheirstudents(Bruns&Luque,2014),itisimportantto

focusnotonreplacingtheteacherbutpairingtechnologyinnovationswithateachers’skillset.Numerous

studies—especiallyduringtheCOVID-19pandemic—haveshownthattechnologycannotreplace

teachers.Teachersareessentialforguidingstudents’intellectual,social,andmoraldevelopmentandfor

understandingandrespondingtostudentemotions,arolethattechnologycannotfulfill(Collinson,2001;

Rifah&Zamahsari,2022).InBrazil,primarypublicschoolsimplementedtheKhanAcademyinSchools

instructionalvideostosupplementregularmathclasses.Whilestudents’attitudestowardsmath

improved,mathproficiencydidnotdrasticallyincrease,