One of the things I observed watching the kids during "online school" during C-19 (long story, I have very good broadband and my house became a hub for several neighborhood kids and their access) is that the poor teachers did worse and the good teachers did better.
Since the mid-2010s a few co-workers (now former) and I had been kicking around the idea of the great inversion of the staff curve. Namely, that if you look at a distribution you might see a bell curve. A few junior staff that you can absorb for training, a large amount of regular workers, and a small amount of senior to management level staff. Over time, with the advancement of technology/knowledge/etc, we were seeing that to truly be effective that curve was inverting. In other words, we needed LESS mid level people. Senior level staff were in higher demand as well as more entry level staff functioning as "go-fers". The former mids were either people that couldn't keep up and falling back over time that would eventually either attrition out or become entry due to stagnation, or were entry level that were crossing the gulf as they grew and expanded their skills.
I note your comment about educators keenly right now. I turn 57 this month and am currently back in University switching from my former career in Engineering and pursuing new degree combinations for a second career in new field that will yield a BA/MA combination. I see professors younger than myself with almost zero tech background that are SCARED (emphasis for a reason) of technology. And after observing them, guess what? They SHOULD be. They can easily be replaced. Much of what they are imparting could be "optimized", to say it nicely. There are however a small amount of professors that seem to be clued in and are capable of seeing beyond, and it shows.
I do agree with your broad thoughts, Tim, I think the nuance as I allude is we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. In the long term the benefits are there if we can curate this carefully.
Warm Regards,
Scott