think future of education

What will education look like in 20 years? Here are 4 scenarios

COVID-19 has shown us we must prepare for uncertainty in our future plans for education Image:  REUTERS/Cindy Liu

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Andreas Schleicher

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Education is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, davos agenda.

• The COVID-19 pandemic shows us we cannot take the future of education for granted.
• By imagining alternative futures for education we can better think through the outcomes, develop agile and responsive systems and plan for future shocks.
• What do the four OECD Scenarios for the Future of Schooling show us about how to transform and future-proof our education systems?

As we begin a new year, it is traditional to take stock of the past in order to look forward, to imagine and plan for a better future.

But the truth is that the future likes to surprise us. Schools open for business, teachers using digital technologies to augment, not replace, traditional face-to face-teaching and, indeed, even students hanging out casually in groups – all things we took for granted this time last year; all things that flew out the window in the first months of 2020.

Have you read?

The covid-19 pandemic has changed education forever. this is how , is this what higher education will look like in 5 years, the evolution of global education and 5 trends emerging amidst covid-19.

To achieve our vision and prepare our education systems for the future, we have to consider not just the changes that appear most probable but also the ones that we are not expecting.

Scenarios for the future of schooling

Imagining alternative futures for education pushes us to think through plausible outcomes and helps agile and responsive systems to develop. The OECD Scenarios for the Future of Schooling depict some possible alternatives:

Rethinking, rewiring, re-envisioning

The underlying question is: to what extent are our current spaces, people, time and technology in schooling helping or hindering our vision? Will modernizing and fine-tuning the current system, the conceptual equivalent of reconfiguring the windows and doors of a house, allow us to achieve our goals? Is an entirely different approach to the organization of people, spaces, time and technology in education needed?

Modernizing and extending current schooling would be more or less what we see now: content and spaces that are largely standardized across the system, primarily school-based (including digital delivery and homework) and focused on individual learning experiences. Digital technology is increasingly present, but, as is currently the case, is primarily used as a delivery method to recreate existing content and pedagogies rather than to revolutionize teaching and learning.

What would transformation look like? It would involve re-envisioning the spaces where learning takes place; not simply by moving chairs and tables, but by using multiple physical and virtual spaces both in and outside of schools. There would be full individual personalization of content and pedagogy enabled by cutting-edge technology, using body information, facial expressions or neural signals.

We’d see flexible individual and group work on academic topics as well as on social and community needs. Reading, writing and calculating would happen as much as debating and reflecting in joint conversations. Students would learn with books and lectures as well as through hands-on work and creative expression. What if schools became learning hubs and used the strength of communities to deliver collaborative learning, building the role of non-formal and informal learning, and shifting time and relationships?

Alternatively, schools could disappear altogether. Built on rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality and the Internet of Things, in this future it is possible to assess and certify knowledge, skills and attitudes instantaneously. As the distinction between formal and informal learning disappears, individual learning advances by taking advantage of collective intelligence to solve real-life problems. While this scenario might seem far-fetched, we have already integrated much of our life into our smartphones, watches and digital personal assistants in a way that would have been unthinkable even a decade ago.

All of these scenarios have important implications for the goals and governance of education, as well as the teaching workforce. Schooling systems in many countries have already opened up to new stakeholders, decentralizing from the national to the local and, increasingly, to the international. Power has become more distributed, processes more inclusive. Consultation is giving way to co-creation.

We can construct an endless range of such scenarios. The future could be any combination of them and is likely to look very different in different places around the world. Despite this, such thinking gives us the tools to explore the consequences for the goals and functions of education, for the organization and structures, the education workforce and for public policies. Ultimately, it makes us think harder about the future we want for education. It often means resolving tensions and dilemmas:

• What is the right balance between modernizing and disruption?
• How do we reconcile new goals with old structures?
• How do we support globally minded and locally rooted students and teachers?
• How do we foster innovation while recognising the socially highly conservative nature of education?
• How do we leverage new potential with existing capacity?
• How do we reconfigure the spaces, the people, the time and the technologies to create powerful learning environments?
• In the case of disagreement, whose voice counts?
• Who is responsible for the most vulnerable members of our society?
• If global digital corporations are the main providers, what kind of regulatory regime is required to solve the already thorny questions of data ownership, democracy and citizen empowerment?

Thinking about the future requires imagination and also rigour. We must guard against the temptation to choose a favourite future and prepare for it alone. In a world where shocks like pandemics and extreme weather events owing to climate change, social unrest and political polarization are expected to be more frequent, we cannot afford to be caught off guard again.

This is not a cry of despair – rather, it is a call to action. Education must be ready. We know the power of humanity and the importance of learning and growing throughout our life. We insist on the importance of education as a public good, regardless of the scenario for the future.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Davos Agenda .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

Building trust amid uncertainty – 3 risk experts on the state of the world in 2024

Andrea Willige

March 27, 2024

Why obesity is rising and how we can live healthy lives

Shyam Bishen

March 20, 2024

Global cooperation is stalling – but new trade pacts show collaboration is still possible. Here are 6 to know about

Simon Torkington

March 15, 2024

How messages of hope, diversity and representation are being used to inspire changemakers to act

Miranda Barker

March 7, 2024

AI, leadership, and the art of persuasion – Forum  podcasts you should hear this month

Robin Pomeroy

March 1, 2024

This is how AI is impacting – and shaping – the creative industries, according to experts at Davos

Kate Whiting

February 28, 2024

What the Future of Education Looks Like from Here

• Posted December 11, 2020
• By Emily Boudreau

After a year that involved a global pandemic, school closures, nationwide remote instruction, protests for racial justice, and an election, the role of education has never been more critical or more uncertain. When the dust settles from this year, what will education look like — and what should it aspire to?

To mark the end of its centennial year, HGSE convened a faculty-led discussion to explore those questions. The Future of Education panel, moderated by Dean Bridget Long and hosted by HGSE’s Askwith Forums , focused on hopes for education going forward, as well as HGSE’s role. “The story of HGSE is the story of pivotal decisions, meeting challenges, and tremendous growth,” Long said. “We have a long history of empowering our students and partners to be innovators in a constantly changing world. And that is needed now more than ever.”

Joining Long were Associate Professor Karen Brennan , Senior Lecturer Jennifer Cheatham , Assistant Professor Anthony Jack, and Professors Adriana Umaña-Taylor and Martin West , as they looked forward to what the future could hold for schools, educators, and communities:

… After the pandemic subsides

The pandemic heightened existing gaps and disparities and exposed a need to rethink how systems leaders design schools, instruction, and who they put at the center of that design. “As a leader, in the years before the pandemic hit, I realized the balance of our work as practitioners was off,” Cheatham said. “If we had been spending time knowing our children and our staff and designing schools for them, we might not be feeling the pain in the way we are. I think we’re learning something about what the real work of school is about.” In the coming years, the panelists hope that a widespread push to recognize the identity and health of the whole-child in K–12 and higher education will help educators design support systems that can reduce inequity on multiple levels.

… For the global community

As much as the pandemic isolated individuals, on the global scale, people have looked to connect with each other to find solutions and share ideas as they faced a common challenge. This year may have brought everyone together and allowed for exchange of ideas, policies, practices, and assessments across boundaries.

… For technological advancements

As educators and leaders create, design, and imagine the future, technology should be used in service of that vision rather than dictating it. As technology becomes a major part of how we communicate and share ideas, educators need to think critically about how to deploy technology strategically. “My stance on technology is that it should always be used in the service of our human purpose and interest,” said Brennan. “We’ve talked about racial equity, building relationships. Our values and purposes and goals need to lead the way, not the tech.”

… For teachers

Human connections and interactions are at the heart of education. At this time, it’s become abundantly clear that the role of the teacher in the school community is irreplaceable. “I think the next few years hinge on how much we’re willing to invest in educators and all of these additional supports in the school which essentially make learning possible,” Umaña-Taylor said, “these are the individuals who are making the future minds of the nation possible.”

Cutting-edge research and new knowledge must become part of the public discussion in order to meaningfully shape the policies and practices that influence the future of education. “I fundamentally believe that we as academics and scholars must be part of the conversation and not limit ourselves to just articles behind paywalls or policy paragraphs at the end of a paper,” Jack said. “We have to engage the larger public.”

… In 25 years

“We shouldn’t underestimate the possibility that the future might look a lot like the present,” West said. “As I think about the potential sources of change in education, and in American education in particular, I tend to think about longer-term trends as the key driver.” Changing student demographics, access to higher education, structural inequality, and the focus of school leaders are all longer-term trends that, according to panelists, will influence the future of education. 

Askwith Education Forum

Bringing innovators and influential leaders to the Harvard Graduate School of Education

Related Articles

Beyond Recovery

Future of Education: Human Development and Psychology – The Long View

Future of Education: Leading for Equity

for Education

• Google Classroom
• Google Workspace Admin
• Google Cloud

The Future of Education

Google for Education collaborated with research partner Canvas8 to conduct a study across 24 countries on the future of education. The result is a three-part global report highlighting insights from around the world.

Global nonprofit American Institutes for Research (AIR) served as an advisor and consultant to this research.

Preparing for a new future

As educators work to equip students with the skills and mindsets they’ll need to navigate massive change, the experts we interviewed discussed how and why they’re rethinking the role of education.

• Download Part 1

What's inside

Rising demand for global problem solvers

Change in the skill sets required for work

Shift to a lifelong learning mindset

Evolving how we teach and learn

Find out how recent technological advances are evolving how we think about teaching and learning from a one-to-many model to a more personal approach to learning.

• Download Part 2

Making learning personal

Reimagining learning design

Elevating the teacher

Reimagining learning ecosystems

Learn how educators are taking a more systemic approach to transformation, by reimagining the education ecosystem around the learner.

• Download Part 3

Upgrading learning environments

Empowering educators with data

Re-evaluating student progress

Building the report

This report contains insights from interviews with education thought leaders from around the world, including experts in policy, academic researchers covering education, district-level representatives, school principals and teachers and edtech leaders.

FROM THE EXPERTS

“There is a need to develop human beings who are internally strong and resilient. The importance of knowledge transmission will decline in order to place a greater emphasis on fundamental and higher thinking skills, including children's socio-affective spheres.”

Sylvia Schmelkes, researcher at Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico

“The education system has to enable young people to be great career navigators, to learn transferable skills that enable them to change fields and not just change jobs. And, to be alert to the changing workforce needs in ways that were probably less apparent previously.”

Valerie Hannon, co-founder, Innovation Unit, United Kingdom

“The power of technology in education [is a major force shaping it], changing learning experiences, changing the role and nature of educators — your work in knowledge transmission is no longer that relevant. You have to instead become a great coach, a great mentor, a social worker, and career advisor.”

Andreas Schleicher, director for education and skills, and special advisor on education policy to the secretary-general at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Global

Teaching for tomorrow

A new Google for Education YouTube series, featuring conversations with thought leaders shaping the future of education.

• See the full playlist

Teaching for tomorrow trailer

What might education look like in the next 5-10 years? Check out the trailer for our new YouTube series, Teaching for tomorrow, which features expert insights on topics from teaching and learning, to digital literacy and more.

• Watch video

Teaching for tomorrow with Tony Wagner

Join Tony Wagner (he/him), Ed.D., Senior Research Fellow at the Learning Policy Institute, to learn about the skills students will need in tomorrow’s workplace, the promise of education technology, and more.

Teaching for tomorrow with Jan Owen

Join Jan Owen (she/her), Co-chair of Learning Creates Australia, for insights on how education can empower students to help solve the global problems of today and tomorrow.

edit form roi

Local reports from around the world.

Explore how education is evolving around the world in each regional report by country.

Australia report

Brazil report in english Australia report Australia report

You're now viewing content for a different region.

For content more relevant to your region, we suggest:

Sign up here for updates, insights, resources, and more.

Exploring the future of education with experts around the world

Nov 17, 2022

[[read-time]] min read

Students and teachers around the world have returned to the classroom, and the familiar signs of school are back: hallways are full, as are social calendars. But a lot has changed, too. Overcoming the challenges of the last few years meant that leaders and educators had to do things differently — and quickly. As the world continues to evolve, driven in part by pressing global issues and the accelerated rate of technological innovation, what should the role of education be, and how might it look?

To begin to answer this question, Google for Education collaborated with research partner Canvas8 and advisor and consultant American Institutes for Research to conduct a global study in 24 countries. Our report uses 94 educational expert interviews, two years of peer-reviewed academic literature and a media narrative analysis across the education sector.

The result is a three-part report on the future of education that brings together a diversity of perspectives from policy experts, academic researchers, district-level representatives, school principals, teachers and education technology leaders. Today we launched Part 1: Preparing for a new future , which discusses the role education plays in equipping students with the skills and mindsets they’ll need to navigate massive change.

We discuss three key trends:

• There’s a rising demand for global problem solvers. As the world faces a new set of global challenges, such as equitable access to education, digital literacy, sustainability and economic volatility, education systems will become a central part of the solution, helping future generations embrace global mindsets and skill sets.
• The skill sets required for work will change. As technology advances, education will focus on equipping students with the high-demand skills they’ll need to thrive in a new world of work.
• We must shift to a lifelong learning mindset. As lifespans increase and societal change accelerates, the idea of lifelong learning is gaining traction, with more tools available for developing skills and advancement.

To hear directly from some of the experts who informed this report, check out Teaching for tomorrow , a new series on the Google for Education YouTube channel. We kick off with the series trailer and insights from Tony Wagner, Ed.D., Senior Research Fellow at the Learning Policy Institute and Jan Owen, Co-chair of Learning Creates Australia. They discuss topics like the future of work, education technology and moving education beyond the classroom.

With the Future of Education, we aim to provide educators and education leaders with insight into the trends shaping the future, and to spark ideas and discussion on how we can work together to help all learners — and those who help them — succeed.

Visit edu.google.com/future-of-education to read Part 1 and preview Parts 2 and 3: Evolving how we teach and learn and Reimagining learning ecosystems.

Related stories

10 Chromebook features teachers will love

Meet the young Canadian innovators of Google’s Code Next program

5 ways Google for Education helps teachers and students stay safer online

New education features to help teachers save time and support students

New Chromebooks, features and controls for educators

How we’re supporting computer science education in Indigenous communities

Let’s stay in touch. Get the latest news from Google in your inbox.

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Anticipate, accommodate, empower

Harvard asks students about sexual assault and misconduct in third survey since 2015

Navigating Harvard with a non-apparent disability

Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer

The future of teaching and learning

Task force envisions harvard experiences after pandemic innovations.

Over the last 15 months, more than 5,000 faculty members across Harvard have taught online and hybrid classes. The need to transition to digital instruction virtually overnight sparked new ideas and designs and caused faculty to rethink everything about how they taught.

In February, the University convened the Harvard Task Force on the Future of Teaching and Learning to systematically explore how the University can build on the creativity, experiments, and inventions that its faculty applied to remote teaching during the pandemic, and the novel ways they found, during a challenging time, to connect to both its residential and global communities.

Seventeen faculty, leaders, and administrators from across Harvard’s Schools and units comprise the task force, which has been meeting regularly throughout the spring semester, delving into survey data and conducting in-depth interviews to learn more about what kinds of courses, learning platforms, and technological innovations have most effectively reached students. Later this summer the task force will share a report with the University community about their findings, which will address opportunities to enrich teaching and learning, increase equity and access, use digital education to meet learners where they are, and more.

“The pandemic created challenges for teaching and learning that were unprecedented in scope. But it also sparked unprecedented innovation across Harvard,” said Bharat Anand, vice provost for advances in learning at Harvard and Henry R. Byers Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, who chairs the task force. “What have we learned from these innovations? What hasn’t worked? What has? Where can we plant deeper roots? As educators, our response to the pandemic illuminates myriad ways to offer a better experience to our campus students and an expanded population of learners.”

The task force, formed with the support of President Larry Bacow and Provost Alan Garber, has considered: How can we ensure that we use the experience from this past year to think strategically and imaginatively about the transformative opportunities around teaching and learning across the University? And how can we align this thinking with Harvard’s mission and maximize learner potential?

“Our faculty broke long-held assumptions about online teaching,” said Anand. “There were numerous challenges to overcome, but they’ve also shown that meaningful learning can take place remotely, and that Harvard can achieve broad access at high quality. And the vast majority of faculty say in surveys that they want to bring certain elements of the online experience back to residential teaching.”

The task force is developing learnings, principles, and a strategic blueprint into the report for the Harvard community. It will draw particularly on recommendations from its three working groups. One, led by Bridget Long, dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education and Saris Professor of Education and Economics, has focused on reimagining student learning through blended education. “To maximize the learning experience,” argued Long, “we believe Harvard should change from the default that everything is face-to-face. How might we balance a rich set of in-person and virtual experiences to meet the learning goals and varying needs of different kinds of students?”

The second is developing a unified strategy for short-form digital content that “moves beyond the 50-hour-long course as the default format for online learning,” noted Anand, who chairs that group. The third is helmed by Michael D. Smith, John H. Finley, Jr. Professor of Engineering and Applied Sciences and former dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and has concentrated on engaging, reaching, and impacting audiences around the globe.

“If we were to start an institution like Harvard today, we’d put as much emphasis on digital content and practices as physical ones,” Smith asserts. “Because of what our community achieved in 2020‒’21, we can strengthen the Harvard experience and engage a global population in the pursuit of community, knowledge, and truth. What we learned from the pandemic we can share with the world.”

Share this article

You might like.

How to ensure students with disabilities have an equal chance to succeed?

Survey open April 2 through May 2 for degree-seeking students

4 students with conditions ranging from diabetes to narcolepsy describe daily challenges that may not be obvious to their classmates and professors

College accepts 1,937 to Class of 2028

Students represent 94 countries, all 50 states

Pushing back on DEI ‘orthodoxy’

Panelists support diversity efforts but worry that current model is too narrow, denying institutions the benefit of other voices, ideas

So what exactly makes Taylor Swift so great?

Experts weigh in on pop superstar's cultural and financial impact as her tours and albums continue to break records.

• University News
• Faculty & Research
• Health & Medicine
• Science & Technology
• Social Sciences
• Humanities & Arts
• Students & Alumni
• Arts & Culture
• Sports & Athletics
• The Professions
• International
• New England Guide

The Magazine

• Current Issue
• Past Issues

Class Notes & Obituaries

• Browse Class Notes
• Browse Obituaries

Collections

• Commencement
• The Context
• Harvard Squared
• Harvard in the Headlines

Support Harvard Magazine

• Why We Need Your Support
• How We Are Funded
• Ways to Support the Magazine
• Special Gifts
• Behind the Scenes

Classifieds

• Vacation Rentals & Travel
• Real Estate
• Products & Services
• Harvard Authors’ Bookshelf
• Education & Enrichment Resource
• Ad Prices & Information
• Place An Ad

Follow Harvard Magazine:

University News | 3.9.2022

An Expansive Vision for the Future of Teaching and Learning

Post-pandemic, what harvard might try in classrooms, course design, and global education.

A hybrid classroom at Harvard Business School, created to enable in-person and remote instruction during the pandemic. The new task force report assesses innovations like this, and their application to residential, hybrid, and remote teaching and learning in Harvard’s future. Photograph by Hensley Carrasco. Courtesy of Harvard Business School

The Harvard Future of Teaching and Learning Task Force (FTL), organized last year to assess what the University and its faculty members had learned from the pandemic pivot to remote instruction in the spring of 2020 and through the following academic year, released its report today. An ambitious effort, it is meant to spark conversation among professors, deans, and Harvard leaders concerning three overarching subjects, a sort of pedagogical hat trick:

•sustaining and building upon perceived gains in residential, classroom-based teaching and learning;  •accelerating the creation and use of “short-form digital content”—learning units, exercises, and assessments that differ from traditional, semester-long courses, but are useful for both campus-based classes and a broad range of online formats; and •exploring Harvard’s prospects for becoming a global educator, using its faculty expertise, pedagogies, and technology to “engage 5 percent of the global population in the shared pursuit of community and learning”—an “aspirational vision” that goes  way  beyond the 1,650 or so undergraduates enrolled in each new class, or the 22,500 students enrolled in all degree programs of late.

The  task force , chaired by Bharat Anand, the vice provost for advances in learning, defined its work in terms of capturing systematically the effects of the changes in teaching and learning forced by the pandemic, applying those to further enhancements, and determining the implications for Harvard’s mission and future learners more broadly.

In fact, he said in a conversation, faculty members’ online and technologically enabled teaching extended back more than a decade to the  Harvard-MIT edX venture . The first part of the new report distills what was learned from that initial foray into translating full courses for free online distribution; subsequent,  more focused efforts aimed at smaller learner cohorts and different phases of their education ; and extensive, successful online operations at the Extension School.

Together, those efforts familiarized many faculty members with new ways of teaching, even before the pandemic forced all classes off campus. And the more recent experiments brought forth important discoveries about using online tools to engage students, test their command of material frequently, enable them to learn from one another, and form their own learner communities (albeit online): a new form of the collaborative experiences that enrich residential, campus-based learning, for people who do not have the opportunity to access those options.

Finley professor of engineering and applied sciences Michael D. Smith, dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences when edX was launched and now a task force member, said that the pandemic forced  all  faculty members, students, and staff to think creatively and more explicitly about teaching: “We had to!” Even as that experience recedes, he continued, it has sparked continuing conversations among professors across the University, making this “an incredibly generative time for us if we grab this opportunity” to improve the classroom experience and “set up Harvard’s digital footprint.”

The task force divided its work roughly into three parts, including “blended learning” (in classrooms with online elements, and online with in-person elements), led by Harvard Graduate School of Education dean Bridget Terry Long; content, led by Anand; and global reach, led by Smith.

Reimagining the “Classroom”

Anand emphasized that technology’s educational role is as “an enabler. Pedagogy is at the heart of what makes the magic in classrooms.” That said, faculty members suddenly learned a great deal about what actually works when their courses transitioned from the classroom to Zoom.

It had been generally known, from edX and other formats, that a full-length lecture, transmitted and disseminated to a screen (what Anand calls sending the class out like a PDF), results in passive experiences. Most learners haven’t the attention span to stay focused on what is transpiring. As the report puts it, “Long lectures that were familiar in the residential classroom, or to which faculty and students had become accustomed, did not work well online.”

Smith said he and colleagues quickly realized that via Zoom, they had to teach different kinds of content, and less than they would try to convey in a class session. So they broke up their courses into smaller chunks and exercises, and began to use the interactive and communication utilities online to make discussion and problem-solving the focus of class sessions. Overnight, large numbers of faculty members discovered the virtues of  “flipping” their classes  (with lectures taped for student viewing at any time, “asynchronously,” and active-learning-focused classes live, or “synchronous”). From the student perspective, the direct engagement on Zoom forced them really to engage, and in fact, many reported that  the lessened live class content translated, in the flipped, online format, into more demanding courses and more learning .

More broadly, Anand said, “active learning” had become widespread. Professors encouraged students to use the Zoom chat function to pose questions about material as it arose in a lecture or seminar discussion—and teaching assistants or fellow students could pose answers in real time. Technologically-enabled breakout sessions, organized in seconds, can force students to mingle with one another for fresh perspectives, rather than self-selecting the same cohort repeatedly. Students who prefer not to raise their hands, Smith said, were far more likely to engage using these tools. Faculty members and students could collaborate on Google documents or other shared tools, enabling what Anand calls “simultaneous multi-person conversations.”

In some cases, he quickly acknowledged, teachers “don’t need technology” to effect such active engagement—but now they know how to use it when they want to. (Those who do, of course, know that even as they speak, their multitasking students might be conducting a chat. But, on the other hand, students have long emailed and scrolled through websites during in-person classes; the chat exchanges may have the virtue of focusing their split attention on the course material.) 

And the technology does enable classes to import other faculty experts, alumni, or speakers from around the world—all without the bother and expense of a subway ride or an airplane flight. Finally, Anand said, the online experiences for Harvard classes “brought to the forefront for all of us as faculty the lives of our students,” and led to widely popular innovations such as virtual office hours.

The common thread, he said, is “the ability of these technologies to bridge space and time.” And that virtue is now reciprocal. When applied in the context of virtual, non-degree courses, such as those Anand developed for Harvard Business School Online, the same tools—exercises, pop-up assessments, “cold calls,” break-out sessions, built-in tools for peer interaction—bring a new dimension of active learning to what was a much more passive experience a decade ago. The result is the holy grail of online education—what the report calls “engagement at scale”: the promise of teaching vast student cohorts without sacrificing the elements of active, participatory learning.

Those inclusive effects are important and large, and are emphasized throughout the report. Dean Long said separately, “One of the biggest takeaways for HGSE from the past two years was that there’s talent everywhere, and we actually have the tools—and the opportunity—to meet talented learners where they are and engage them in our programs. For instance, when our Ed.M. program had to go online for 2020-2021, in response to the pandemic, we decided to open a new round of admissions to that year’s online program—and we drew learners into our classrooms who might otherwise have never come to Harvard. We increased access for them, and they enriched our classroom conversations with new perspectives and experiences grounded in communities around the world.”

The task force report describes all these efforts as “reimagining the classroom,” incorporating “the best of online into residential settings and bringing a residential component to online programs. Blended experiences can offer new ways of teaching, learning, and meeting students where they are. At their fullest, they represent a fundamental shift in mindset beyond the binary alternatives of entirely in-person or entirely online offerings and learning experiences.” The advantages include livelier, more effective residential classes  and  more effective online ones, with the promise of including learners who cannot afford the time or expense of residential experiences. As Long put it, “We’ve seen that learning does not have to be confined in a traditional residential classroom. We’ve seen the value of community and meaningful connections, and know how powerful it’s been to give students different ways to connect with their instructors and peers and to contribute their ideas. It’s been wonderful to nurture a commitment to meeting students where they are and incorporating technologies that make learning more flexible.” Either way, the result is a focus on learning and education , not on the format of a course, the venue or where it is taught, or the mode of teaching.

Locally, there is something to celebrate here. The report acknowledges forthrightly “the current bifurcations between residential and online courses at Harvard. Consider, for instance, the minimal connections Harvard’s edX courses have with residential learning and campus dynamics.” One aim of edX was to prompt better campus teaching and learning—something the technology and large-format lecture courses proved ill-suited to achieve. But now, a decade on, the gap is closing, in ways faculty members and students both appear to be embracing. (edX courses were also found not to promote engagement among their much larger learner cohorts; the gap between enrollment and completion was vast for most courses.)

Happily, the report concludes, most of these gains can be sustained and more widely adopted through current practices, including informal conversations among teachers, formal gatherings to share pedagogical practices, instructional support, and continuing school and University investments in training, software, and classroom technology. 

Enriching Content and Expanding Community

The report’s second and third pillars represent, respectively, a heavier lift and an overarching aspiration. Anand, who has lots of experience from the Business School’s online program, is a champion of what the task force calls “short-form digital content and learning experiences.” Compared to the traditional “unit of analysis for almost every Harvard residential degree program offering and online certificate offering,” the semester-long course, shorter instructional units present two opportunities., according to the report. Such “modular, impactful online learning experiences” can enrich residential, long-form (semester) classes and “meaningfully expand the impact of Harvard’s teaching beyond our physical campus.” (One beneficiary group might be Harvard alumni, who have demonstrated strong interest in maintaining connected to faculty members and academic offerings. If one imagines linking the task force recommendations with  Business School dean Srikant Datar’s ambition to develop access to HBS courses, libraries, and research  via recommendation tools hosted by Amazon Web Services, one sees the makings of truly lifelong learning in the not-impossibly-distant future.)

What the task force has in mind is strategy for bringing uniformity to the creation and distribution of such chunks of learning, so they can be archived, searched, and plugged into classes or online courses as needed. Such short-form contents might involve multiple media (texts, audio, video), forms (podcasts, for instance), and approaches (asynchronous/synchronous mixed classes, hybrid classes, online classes with occasional residential components), and so on.

To keep from overwhelming busy faculty members, presumably, and to make the material available to interested users, the task force sees the need for “curation, ensuring that content is discoverable, personalizing its use to learners’ needs, and making technology seamless.”

To that end, the task force sees the need for partnerships—including “services such as marketing, distribution, and translation”; incentives for faculty members to participate, especially where outreach “to learners beyond Harvard” is involved; and a new University-wide technological platform for asynchronous learning (development of which is under way).

Being in position to create and deliver such contents matters not only for Harvard’s own educational purposes, but defensively. As the report notes, amidst huge private investments in educational technology and new media, “the demand for short-form content   and learning experiences from Harvard faculty has also exploded. Other educational institutions, third-party online learning platforms, training companies, and other organizations are all expressing interest in short-form content from Harvard faculty including masterclasses, executive programs, and podcasts. Serving learners and our faculty well will require leveraging this inbound interest consistently and strategically. Without a coherent Harvard strategy for enabling such activities, Harvard runs the risk of fragmenting its core teaching and learning mission, accelerating brand incoherence, and creating increased competition for our own internal efforts.”

In a broader perspective, how far might the University go in serving wider learner communities? Smith, recalling his earlier experience with edX, said he was particularly interested in “the evolution from getting our educational materials available to a larger part of the world then, to really  engaging ” with such learners now. Within the task force, he was an evangelist for beginning a Harvard conversation about how the University can perceive itself participating, digitally, in a “world community.”

In that perspective, Anand said, everything Harvard has learned about teaching and education in the digital era applies: courses are not exclusively residential or online, but both; they are not exclusively long-form or short, but both; and they are driven not by course content but by learner engagement and communities. The Business School’s online courses, he said, incorporated student participation and peer engagement—but did not envision what happened next. The students sustained their relationships, online, beyond and after courses ended, assembling their own learning and “alumni” communities on social-media channels. 

The vision for Harvard Global Learning 2.0, as Smith outlined it, is among the longest-range of the report recommendations.

The Challenges Ahead

The report raises, or touches on, matters of University policy and culture that will shape, or even determine, the conversation the task force has now introduced. 

• Non-residential degrees.  Apart from the Extension School,  Harvard requires at least a year in residence for degree programs . Two exceptions have been granted: a hybrid public-health program, approved in 2014-2015; and the Graduate School of Education’s 2020-2021 M.Ed. program (its core degree), when instruction was all online. In both cases, the caliber of applicants, their learning gains, and their subsequent trajectories have proven as satisfactory as those of resident learners. A strategy of promulgating Harvard teaching much more widely will likely involve a reassessment of this policy, if only for a limited number of degrees or degree candidates.

• Outside activities.  As the task force noted, many of the new enterprises and instructional channels focusing on online learning have an interest in accessing Harvard faculty members’ expertise. Whether professors wish to participate directly, or through University partnerships, “Many of these activities are restricted by Harvard’s outside activities policies, which were designed to create guidelines for when faculty can teach outside the University and include restrictions on teaching ‘courses’ outside of Harvard. As the lines between outside activities and residential obligations blur, and as organizations sometimes obfuscate the difference between a series of short-form content and long-form courses, the need for Harvard to judiciously implement existing policies while recognizing and facilitating new possibilities for Harvard’s faculty to innovate in teaching is paramount.” And in fact, among the long-term recommendations is pursuing a “faculty-led review of the University’s outside activities policies to modernize guidance for faculty eager to reach audiences beyond academia and to share their expertise through short-form and other innovative formats.” That review is being sponsored by the provost’s office.

• New conceptions of the economics of learning.  The report notes that with technologically enabled learning, programs can be designed and targeted to different kinds of learners at different price points, presumably by melding personal instruction with the archived short-form course units. This has certain implications that almost anyone would endorse: for example, training an organization’s leaders in a new skill or strategy, and then introducing managers and other workers to the concepts (something that might not be economic with in-person, residential executive-education classes as the sole option.) The reach and impact are accordingly greater, but the differential pricing of these “cascading learning experiences” may feel strange, at least initially. As the report puts it:

Virtual teaching made it possible to reach people who could not physically come to Harvard because of time, policy, or financial constraints. That has significant implications for workforce learning after the pandemic. For example, although senior-most executives continue to attend traditional in-person sessions, our digital platforms now allow for many layers of managers to attend remote synchronous sessions to economize on time and cost, while large numbers of other staff benefit from entirely asynchronous materials. Combining delivery mechanisms in this way promises greater scale in learning, lower costs, and—perhaps most important—greater alignment of learnings across an organization.

Certainly it is an educational virtue that “As ‘future of learning’ strategies are being rethought everywhere, Harvard has enormous potential to address managerial and workforce reskilling needs through its faculty, online library, and state-of-art platforms.” But the University will need to be careful about how it presents the range of offerings, and the prices it charges, as it enters such markets.

• Defining the University.  In the widest perspective, faculty members, as educators, want to teach people. But within the context of a research university, of course, they also want to spend a lot of their time on discovery and creating new knowledge. Increasing demands to teach learners who are not present will not be universally appealing to Harvard faculty members, and opportunities to teach nondegree learners may also be of varying interest. So the market logic of expanding outreach to these new kinds of students—no matter the gains in educating the world, or including more learners—may be at odds with some, or many, faculty members’ professional goals and motivations (and therefore conceptions about what they ought to be paid, or have the opportunity to earn under Harvard auspices).

It will be interesting to see whether the conversation spurred by the task force report proceeds along similar paths within, say, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the home to the liberal arts, and the professional schools. Will there be differences among the humanities faculty and those in engineering and applied sciences, whose HarvardX courses, for example, have attracted very different kinds of followings?

There is plenty to discuss. The task force has taken the experience of the pandemic and used it as a fulcrum to prompt a high-profile, and perhaps high-stakes, conversation—if the faculties are willing to engage. As the introduction to the report notes, “Our lessons draw from our residential teaching experiences, accumulated over 375 years, along with the past decade of online learning experiences.” Indeed they do. Let the conversation begin.

Read a  Harvard Gazette  Q&A with Bharat Anand, Bridget Terry Long, and Michael Smith  here. 

Read the task force report  here. 

You might also like

Paying Student-Athletes?

As NIL money flows, Harvard’s approach remains unchanged.

Harvard, Ivies to Join Big Ten

“Superconference” play to begin in 2025-26; features relegation.

Harvard College Admits Class of 2028

A smaller undergraduate applicant cohort—the first since Supreme Court ended affirmative action 

Most popular

The World’s Costliest Health Care

Administrative costs, greed, overutilization—can these drivers of U.S. medical costs be curbed?

AWOL from Academics

Behind students' increasing pull toward extracurriculars

More to explore

The College Pump

Darker Days

The current disquiets compared to Harvard’s Vietnam-era traumas

Making Space

The natural history of Junko Yamamoto’s art and architecture

Spellbound on Stage

Actor and young adult novelist Aislinn Brophy

Transforming education systems: Why, what, and how

• Download the full policy brief
• Download the executive summary
• Baixe o resumo executivo
• Baixar o resumo da política

تنزيل موجز السياسة

تنزيل الملخص التنفيذي

• Descargar el PDF en Español
• Descargar el resumen de políticas

Subscribe to the Center for Universal Education Bulletin

Rebecca winthrop and rebecca winthrop director - center for universal education , senior fellow - global economy and development @rebeccawinthrop the hon. minister david sengeh the hon. minister david sengeh minister of education and chief innovation officer - government of sierra leone, chief innovation officer - directorate of science, technology and innovation in sierra leone @dsengeh.

June 23, 2022

Today, the topic of education system transformation is front of mind for many leaders. Ministers of education around the world are seeking to build back better as they emerge from COVID-19-school closures to a new normal of living with a pandemic. The U.N. secretary general is convening the Transforming Education Summit (TES) at this year’s general assembly meeting (United Nations, n.d.). Students around the world continue to demand transformation on climate and not finding voice to do this through their schools are regularly leaving class to test out their civic action skills.      

It is with this moment in mind that we have developed this shared vision of education system transformation. Collectively we offer insights on transformation from the perspective of a global think tank and a national government: the Center for Universal Education (CUE) at Brookings brings years of global research on education change and transformation, and the Ministry of Education of Sierra Leone brings on-the-ground lessons from designing and implementing system-wide educational rebuilding.   

This brief is for any education leader or stakeholder who is interested in charting a transformation journey in their country or education jurisdiction such as a state or district. It is also for civil society organizations, funders, researchers, and anyone interested in the topic of national development through education. In it, we answer the following three questions and argue for a participatory approach to transformation:  

• Why is education system transformation urgent now? We argue that the world is at an inflection point. Climate change, the changing nature of work, increasing conflict and authoritarianism together with the urgency of COVID recovery has made the transformation agenda more critical than ever. 
• What is education system transformation? We argue that education system transformation must entail a fresh review of the goals of your system – are they meeting the moment that we are in, are they tackling inequality and building resilience for a changing world, are they fully context aware, are they owned broadly across society – and then fundamentally positioning all components of your education system to coherently contribute to this shared purpose.  
• How can education system transformation advance in your country or jurisdiction? We argue that three steps are crucial: Purpose (developing a broadly shared vision and purpose), Pedagogy (redesigning the pedagogical core), and Position (positioning and aligning all components of the system to support the pedagogical core and purpose). Deep engagement of educators, families, communities, students, ministry staff, and partners is essential across each of these “3 P” steps.    

Related Content

Rebecca Winthrop, Adam Barton, Mahsa Ershadi, Lauren Ziegler

September 30, 2021

Jenny Perlman Robinson, Molly Curtiss Wyss, Patrick Hannahan

July 7, 2021

Emiliana Vegas, Rebecca Winthrop

September 8, 2020

Our aim is not to provide “the answer” — we are also on a journey and continually learning about what it takes to transform systems — but to help others interested in pursuing system transformation benefit from our collective reflections to date. The goal is to complement and put in perspective — not replace — detailed guidance from other actors on education sector on system strengthening, reform, and redesign. In essence, we want to broaden the conversation and debate.

Download the full policy brief»

Download the executive summary»

Baixe o resumo executivo»

Baixar o resumo da política»

Descargar el PDF en Español»

Descargar el resumen de políticas»

Global Education

Global Economy and Development

Center for Universal Education

Darcy Hutchins, Emily Markovich Morris, Laura Nora, Carolina Campos, Adelaida Gómez Vergara, Nancy G. Gordon, Esmeralda Macana, Karen Robertson

March 28, 2024

Larry Cooley, Jenny Perlman Robinson

March 8, 2024

The Brookings Institution, Washington DC

9:00 am - 5:00 pm EDT

• Why Choose USC Rossier online programs?
• Scholarships
• Accreditation
• Career Outcomes
• California Teaching Credential
• How To Become a School Counselor in California
• Master of Education in Learning Design and Technology online
• Master of Education in Enrollment Management and Policy online
• On-Campus and Hybrid Programs
• What is an EdD?
• Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership online
• USC Rossier Blog
• The Guide to Pinterest for Educators
• Toolkit for Digitally Literate Teachers
• Students and Gender Identity Guide for Schools

USC Rossier / Inside USC Rossier Blog

What Will Education Look Like in 20 Years?

There are many factors influencing what schools may look like in 20 years: unprecedented global forces and unforeseen technologies and paradigm shifts in the ways students want to learn and teachers want  to instruct . I predict that the future of education will require educators to be more entrepreneurial, collaborative, creative and  innovative . Additionally, learners will be even more tech savvy, demanding, confident and focused as consumers of education.

It’s important to think about what we can do to prepare for the future, so we can improve areas of need today. Here are a few areas schools should focus on evolving to create a bright future for education.

Personalization and Customization

Today’s learners are digital natives. They are accustomed to getting information and meeting their needs with a click of a button in a user-friendly, personal and customizable way. Future educators will have to face the fact that students will need (and want) to learn in a flexible, personalized format — for some, this may mean having a more technology-focused classroom. Students will want their learning experience to meet their interests, time constraints and academic needs. Check out Education Week’s recent article “ What Is ‘Personalized Learning’? Educators Seek Clarity .”

Student Ownership

In addition to personalization, students want to have a greater voice in their education instead of simply listening to a lecture. Since higher levels of thinking and learning require more student ownership, education will become more project based — a pivotal theme moving forward. Schools will need to allow students to choose what they learn, how they learn and what projects they participate in. For more information, go to the  Buck Institute for Education .

Improved Curricula

In addition to having more project-based instructional models, schools will need to examine their core curriculum. Contrary to the old-school traditions housed in English, math, social studies and science, we’ll need to redesign curricula and courses to reflect the skills mandated by emerging economies and technologies. Skills such as coding, design, sustainability and financial literacy — to name a few — will have to be integrated and taught in classroom curricula.

Innovative Learning Spaces and Environments

Schools will need to  rethink  the classroom learning environment to better suit students’ needs. The environment should be conducive to innovative and creative learning. An important question to ask is: Where do people go to get their creative juices flowing? For example, coffee shops are common spaces that groups go to meet up for creative projects or test prep.

I was fortunate to open a 21st century high school in 2008 called Minarets High School, where we created a Media Lounge rather than a library. There were still shelves filled with books, but the space also had wireless Internet, flat-screen TVs, coffee, food, community events, a sofa and soft chairs. Can classrooms be more flexible, social, comfortable and interactive in this way? For more ideas, check out David Thornburg’s book From the  Campfire to the Holodeck: Creating Engaging and Powerful 21st Century Learning Environments .

Interconnectivity

In 20 years, students will expect more of a mentoring relationship from their teachers, which is not the norm in schools today. Since more students will be learning and gathering information without attending school in person, future teachers will have to embrace various ways of staying connected and engaging with their students via social media, online communities, Google Hangouts,  Twitter chats  and more to stay connected with students.

Real-World Application Plus Project-Based Learning (PBL)

Schools will have to offer more ways for students to gain real-world experience that is applicable to their future careers. Schools should provide opportunities for students to intern at companies, mentor marginalized youth or collaborate in large groups, for example. Rather than limiting students inside a classroom, schools can create more opportunities for students to gain useful technical skills through real-world application.

Many schools now have one-to-one devices or are heading in that direction. Our future challenge relates to students using technology — if we look at technology as just a better tool to administer and grade tests, then we’ll have missed the boat. Presently, cell phones and social media are still frowned upon in the classroom in some areas of the country. In 20 years, schools will have advanced technology in the classroom to complement teachers’ lessons. For example, a science class may cover 3D printing and how it can be used to replicate prosthetic limbs to change someone’s life.

The technology is here now, but will we have the culture and pedagogy that optimizes the true impact of student technology use? In 20 years, I say yes. Hopefully, our pedagogy changes sooner.

Further Examination

Learn more about how schools may evolve in the future at  Edutopia .

Get More Information

More From Forbes

The 2 Biggest Future Trends In Education

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Our world is changing fast. The pace of change, particularly when it comes to new technologies, means the half-life of skills is shrinking fast. The days of a “job for life” are gone forever.

The education sector must adapt in line with this shift and reflect the fact that the essential, in-demand skills of the future will be very different from what has been taught in the past. In other words, what we teach has to change. Furthermore, how we teach must also change to reflect the rapid digitization that is taking place across all industries, not just education.

Let's explore these two major themes in a little more detail to see how what we teach and how we teach it is likely to be transformed over the next few years.

Rethinking what we teach

Education – at all levels – must evolve to teach children the skills they need to thrive in our changing world. Many of the jobs today’s schoolchildren will work in don’t even exist yet. LinkedIn predicts 150 million new technology jobs in the next five years, and almost all of the roles in  LinkedIn’s “Jobs on the Rise” report  for 2022 can already be done remotely.

So, what sort of skills will be essential for success? In its Schools of the Future paper , the World Economic Forum outlined essential characteristics that will define high-quality learning in the future. Skills such as:

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of September 2023

Best 5% interest savings accounts of september 2023.

·        Global citizenship skills (including awareness of the wider world, and sustainability).

·        Innovation and creativity skills (including problem-solving and analytical thinking).

·        Technology skills (including data science and programming, which I believe should be offered as a language option as standard).

·        Interpersonal skills (including emotional intelligence, empathy, cooperation and social awareness).

I was pleased to see “soft” skills like creativity and interpersonal communication make it onto the list. As machines are able to automate more and more workplace tasks, our inherently human social and emotional skills will become hard currency in the workplaces of the future. With that in mind, I would add the following to the list of essential skills:

·        Ethics – as an example, AI ethicist is a job title that’s beginning to gain traction as more companies look to deploy AI in an ethical way.

·        Diversity (cultural diversity and diversity of thinking) – did you know the number of people being hired as workplace diversity experts increased 64 percent in 2020? This could be a significant career path for the future.

Rethinking how we teach it

Formal education originated around the time of the first industrial revolution, and it’s telling that our general approach to education has changed little since then. In classrooms and lecture halls around the world, students still mostly sit facing the front, listening to the teacher deliver content that they’re expected to memorize.

This isn't to criticize teachers and lecturers, far from it. I'm married to a teacher and am filled with admiration and respect for the work that educators do. But in order to teach the skills that are necessary to thrive in the 21 st century, and create the leaders that our world needs, the way in which education is delivered must adapt.

In particular, I believe the teachers of the future will become facilitators rather than content deliverers. Some of the key enablers of this change are:

·        More digitized content and online learning – a trend that has drastically been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

·        More personalized, self-paced, and self-directed learning – in which learning becomes much more flexible and is paced to suit the needs of each student.

·        More collaborative, project-based and problem-based learning – which better reflects the 21 st century workplace.

·        More bite-sized learning – because, according to a study by Microsoft , humans now have an attention span of around eight seconds. (That’s less than a goldfish!) In the future, more education will have to be delivered as bite-sized, snackable content.

·        More immersive learning – harnessing technologies like virtual reality and augmented reality to bring topics to life and immerse students in a subject.

South Tapiola High School, Finland

If you’re wondering what these shifts will look like in practice, look no further than South Tapiola High School (also known as ETIS). This school is ranked as one of the best schools in Finland, a country that consistently ranks as one of the best-performing education systems in the world.

ETIS offers a curriculum that seeks to develop skills such as collaboration, entrepreneurship, active citizenship, and social awareness through real-world application. For example, the school has a Young Entrepreneurship Program, where students work in groups to design and create their own business and then compete in national competitions against other young entrepreneurs. Or there's the school’s European Parliament for Young People Program, which provides a hands-on experience for learning civic duty. Here, students participate in national and regional sessions with students of different backgrounds to discuss current challenges in the European Union. The school also partners with tech companies such as Microsoft and Dell to integrate technology into the curriculum.

In case you’re wondering whether “traditional” subjects suffer at the expense of these 21 st -century skills, rest assured that ETIS is no slouch when it comes to core curriculum subjects. ETIS students outperform national averages in math and chemistry by more than double! 

There’s no doubt that rethinking what we teach and how we teach it is a huge task. But I believe it’s essential if our education systems are to meet the needs of 21 st -century students and to prepare young people for success in our rapidly changing world. Read more about these and other future trends in my new book, Business Trends in Practice: The 25+ Trends That are Redefining Organizations . Packed with real-world examples, it cuts through the hype to present the key trends that will shape the businesses of the future.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

The future of science education: Cultivating critical thinkers

Bad science is a big problem for society, says guest Jonathan Osborne , an expert in science education, but we don’t have to surrender to it. Beating bad science requires young people to learn three skills, Osborne says. First is an ability to size up conflicts of interest. Second, to evaluate a source’s qualifications. And third, to more rigorously question those who go against consensus. The whole goal of science is consensus , Osborne tells host Russ Altman on this episode of Stanford Engineering’s The Future of Everything podcast.

[00:00:00] Jonathan Osborne: If you say to any of your non-scientific friends, what do you remember of value from your school science education? Now, I'd guarantee that most of them will mention some sort of funny flash, bang- bang experiment or whatever it is. But then you say to them, uh, but what idea do you remember that really changed how you think about the world?

And I think you're gonna get a lot of them, hesitate Now. That to me, is a tragedy. And it's a tragedy because science is one of the great [00:00:30] intellectual achievements of our contemporary societies.

[00:00:39] Russ Altman: This is Stanford Engineering's The Future of Everything, and I'm your host, Russ Altman. If you enjoy The Future of Everything podcast, please subscribe or follow it on whatever app you listen to your podcasts on.

Today, Jonathan Osborne will tell us that misinformation is something we need to train young people to detect. Starting at a very young age, especially with science education. [00:01:00] There's a lot of fake science out on the internet, and we need to teach young people how to tell the difference between what's true and what's false. It's the future of science education .

Before we jump into this episode, a reminder to please rate and review it on your favorite podcast app. It'll help us grow and it'll help other listeners figure out what this is all about.

Science education is absolutely critical, and these days the internet is filled with bad science, and yet [00:01:30] science is wonderful. It's like a miracle. It gives us insight into how life evolved, how the planet started, how the world works. So even in grammar school and in middle school, we need to give students tools to be suspicious about things that they hear and to figure out if what they're listening to is from a reliable source, an expert, and something that they can take to the bank.

Jonathan Osborne is a professor of education at Stanford University and he studies science education. He's worried about misinformation and he'll [00:02:00] tell us that the situation is a pretty dire, and we need to act soon to make sure that we outfit the future generations with the tools they need to navigate truth and falsehoods in science.

Jonathan, you're an expert in science education, but we're also in the midst of an era of misinformation. The internet and other news sources, uh, especially in the area of science, can be very misleading. So what is the state of our [00:02:30] educational practices for young people in preparing them for this world?

[00:02:34] Jonathan Osborne: The short answer to that, which I will elaborate on is not good.

[00:02:39] Russ Altman: Please go on.

[00:02:40] Jonathan Osborne: And it's not good really. I think for fun, two fundamental reasons really. One is there's a kind of delusion out there, uh, by people involved in educating people about science that uh, by the time they get to the end of, uh, high school, they'll have enough knowledge to evaluate the evidence for [00:03:00] themselves.

  Uh, and this means that they don't need to rely on experts. Uh, and the internet reinforces that in that kind of way because you've got access to this unlimited information. You think, well, why do I need to go an expert? I can look it up for myself. And the answer is, you don't understand what they're talking about is one of the reasons. So that you need. To generate what I would call more epistemic humility in people, which is to recognize that our knowledge is bounded and there are [00:03:30] times when we have to call on experts. But what you notice with a lot of the misinformation sites is they understand this and they appeal to your ego in the sense of evaluate the evidence for yourself.

You know, you go on 9 -1 -11 truth the whole instance, and you'll see up in the top left, okay, evaluate the facts for yourself. Well, the facts have actually been cherry picked and you don't actually have the ability to evaluate the facts for yourself. So that's one of the reasons I think really we've got it the wrong way around. We actually [00:04:00] have to start by saying, We have to prepare students to interact with scientific expertise. The question that invites is.

[00:04:08] Russ Altman: Yes, okay. So we are gonna get to how to do that, uh, in a moment. I just, I was hoping, in preparing for our interview that you were gonna tell me that because these young people are growing up in the era of the internet, they have received a special pre inoculation to misinformation and that therefore they're in much better shape.

And that actually it's our [00:04:30] generation who grew up way more trustworthy, who is having trouble with the internet, but they are having less trouble. It sounds like that's not your message today.

[00:04:38] Jonathan Osborne: That's certainly not my message. Okay. It's not the message, uh, it's not particularly my research. But it's the research of all my graduate students is research of my colleague Sam Weinberg.

It shows that actually they are really poor because they are deluded to thinking that they can work out the evidence for themselves in time and time again. When you show them a, you know, a [00:05:00] dodgy website from the

[00:05:01] Russ Altman: Yes.

[00:05:01] Jonathan Osborne: Harvard Institute about climate change or something else, they will stay on the page and try and evaluate the arguments on the page, which they don't have the expertise to do.

What they should be doing is not saying, is this correct, which they can't work out the answer to. They should be saying, is this credible? And they are not good at doing that. In fact, they're probably worse than our generation because we've been around long enough to think, eh, this looks a bit dodgy.

[00:05:29] Russ Altman: Yes, [00:05:30] okay. So, okay, so what do we do about this? I mean, this is your area of expertise, science, education, especially in grammar and middle school, when you know the minds are being formed and the intellectual habits. So to speak will be created. Um, what do we need to do?

[00:05:46] Jonathan Osborne: Well, you really need to do three things, I would say, but one of them is pretty immediate from that point of view, which is that if you're confronted by any scientific claim, there are really three things that you need to do.

[00:06:00] One is you need to ask, is the person or the institution putting this forward, do they have a conflict of interest? So if it's an institute who funds it, for instance, in that sense, and, uh, if you open another tab and you put in the name of the institute, you can pretty rapidly find out who's funding it.

For instance, say the Heartland Institute or CO2 science.org from that point of view, uh, you can do that. And so if there's a counter of interest that raises a red flag, right? If there isn't a [00:06:30] conflict of interest, then you've gotta say, well, okay, is the person making this claim a credible card carrying scientist in that discipline?

It's no good having an evolutionary biologist making claims about cosmology or vice versa. Yeah. They don't do that in that, uh, kind of way. And this is the kind of stuff that's not taught to students. What makes somebody being a scientist doesn't mean very much. It's a scientist in the discipline. [00:07:00] Is it a credible institution? What are the credible institutions, uh, in that way?

And then the third question you've gotta ask is, the goal of science is the achievement of consensus. Right? And so if there is a consensus and somebody is going against that consensus, for instance, like Robert Kennedy Jr. on vaccines, they better be an expert and they better have pretty good evidence for what, uh, they're questioning the consensus.

I mean, again, these kind of purveyors of misinformation, know [00:07:30] this. On climate change, you've got these fake consensuses, the Leipzig Declaration of non-experts. None of them are experts in climate change. Now, somebody might say, oh, that's all bit dull. How are you gonna teach all that? You're gonna teach.

[00:07:41] Russ Altman: That's exactly what I was gonna ask, I was gonna say. It's so fun to read the conspiracy theories about science and what you've just outlined sounds so reasonable and I can't imagine getting a 12 year old to take the time to do that.

[00:07:55] Jonathan Osborne: No, you get them to do it by giving them a challenge or a problem. Okay. And saying, [00:08:00] okay. Should we believe this website? Okay. Okay. You group of three can look at it and see if you can think of arguments, believing it. You group of three can look at it and see if you can find out arguments or not, but, believing it. So you learn this by doing it in that kind of way. And then, you know, once you've engaged in it, I think the messages can be built on saying, well, why didn't we believe in this? This person, yeah, he had a PhD, but what was the PhD in this way? It's kind of a detective [00:08:30] story for them in that way.

[00:08:31] Russ Altman: When are young people cognitively able to kind of understand the challenge that you just outlined and start implementing it?

Like I can imagine. You know, you talked about credentials. I'm thinking about my five-year-old grandson. Credentials are not a thing in his life yet, but they will become a thing, you know, at some point. So how do we developmentally do appropriate things at the various stages of schooling?

[00:08:54] Jonathan Osborne: Yeah, that's a good question. Uh, I'm gonna have to be honest and say, uh, at the moment, it's all kind of [00:09:00] based on a hunch of what we can do. All I know is that we produced this report last year about science education, misinformation, and one of the, um, significant contributors to it was a guy from Finland who's been working on developing a Finnish curriculum in media literacy, and they start in elementary school.

I mean, obviously about grade three and four. That gives them simple kind of exercises, trying to check whether this is factually correct, and then they keep building on this and building in more complex issues as they go up. [00:09:30] So, uh, I, and I think to be quite honest, the answer is, well, what you're really asking for is a kind of developmental learning progression.

What are the basic competencies? What are the higher order competencies? And I don't think we've really mapped that out yet from that point of view. Um, uh, but I think the kinds of things you're asking about, Uh, we are asking about our conflict of interest. I would've thought you can easily do that in middle school in that way, uh, because they're [00:10:00] starting to get a sense of, well, is this funded by the tobacco industry? Is this funded by the oil industry? Who's paying for this?

[00:10:07] Russ Altman: So, okay. So this is very good. And I know that this touches many of the other things that you've looked at. One of the things you've published a lot about is student attitudes towards science and towards learning science that has to be intimately involved with this because they have to care and they have to have some sort of model of science.

So, separate from the issue of misinformation, how are we doing at [00:10:30] giving, especially students who are not gonna be scientists, the fundamentals to be a citizen in 2023? And by the way, I should say, let's take a moment to say the reason this podcast exists is because I perceived in 2016 that maybe I could make a small contribution in increasing the understanding of science and technology, uh, and engineering by bringing it, uh, and letting people tell their stories so that people could see that these scientists are people motivated [00:11:00] by passion, uh, and also motivated by the search for truth. So I'm very interested in your thoughts about where we are and how well we've prepared people to even engage with these issues.

[00:11:10] Jonathan Osborne: Again, uh, I think the history of science education, uh, really ever since it's sort of formal inception is not very good. Uh, the simple reason for that is if you look at the rationales people give for science education, ever since they insisted that everybody must learn science is they say, oh, well, it'll enable you to be a critical consumer of science, of scientific information. [00:11:30]

It'll introduce you to the beauty, awe and wonder of science. Uh, and the intellectual and creative achievement that it is. The answer is it doesn't. And why doesn't it do that? Because it's the final goal which they sort of add on at the end, which is the preparation of the next generation of scientists, which predominates. And the form of education you've got for that, as you yourself probably know, and I've been through it, is you have to go take the long slog through the dark kitchen before you get to the hall of awe and wonder. [00:12:00] And most people lose interest long before then. And another way I think of testing this is you say to any of your non-scientific friends, what do you remember of value from your school science education? Now, I'd guarantee that most of them will mention some sort of funny flash, bang- bang experiment or whatever it is.

But then you say something, uh, but what idea do you remember that really changed how you think about the world? And I think you're gonna get a lot of them hesitate in that sense. [00:12:30] Now that to me, is a tragedy. And it's a tragedy because science is one of the great intellectual achievements of our contemporary societies, and that has not been explained to them in that kind of way.

And it's not explained to them because it starts with doing all this kind of detailed stuff. About forces, interactions, cells, and their function. Now, I'm not gonna say you don't need to know some of that. I'm going to say that we are doing it from the wrong end of the telescope. What I want is the big [00:13:00] idea first of all. Look, you know, you live on a ,you're one of, I don't know. I think it's 8 billion people, one of 8 billion people living on a tiny planet circulating a sun, which is actually a star, which is part of millions and billions of stars, which is part of millions and billions of galaxies. How do you think we know that, that's crazy from that point of view?

[00:13:21] Russ Altman: Yes.

[00:13:21] Jonathan Osborne: Or, you know, the obvious idea, explanation for day and night is that the sun moves. I mean, after all, you get up in the morning. [00:13:30] Okay. And it's in the east and it goes to the west. I got a crazy idea to tell you now I'm sorry. Okay, we're on spinning Earth. And how do I know that? Or even what about all these people who think the earth is flat?

Okay, why should we believe that the earth, uh, then I think you sort of start to engage people. And I'm not saying everybody from that point there, some of a lot of it's about applications. Some people really wanna know about the applications of science. How does, how does your TV work? How does your computer work? Uh, and there's that kind of story to be explained as well. And [00:14:00] that's fine. But if you, as I say, you know, if you concentrate on the bricks of the edifice and you never show what the edifice is about. They're not surprisingly, a lot of people think, well, what's this? There was a science, uh, um, a science educator in the, um, 1952 wrote a paper about this and you said, well, most people end up with a miscellaneous facts.

I mean, some of those facts are useful undoubtedly if you go to the doctor. It does help to know some facts about the structural function of the human body. But I do [00:14:30] think we really ought to say, what are the big ideas, uh, that people should carry away from their science education so that when you ask my question, what do you remember that changed your thinking about the material world people and how do we know that's true to people?

[00:14:44] Russ Altman: Yeah.

[00:14:45] Jonathan Osborne: You put that question to people, they would give you some decent answer and a don't.

[00:14:50] Russ Altman: So that is ever you've made a compelling case for that. Um, and let's just go down to the nuts and bolts because as a professor of education, I think you'll know this. Who do we have to [00:15:00] convince to change things like, because I don't think many of us know who holds the keys to the curricular practices at all different stages.

I know as a faculty member, I have some say in how my discipline is taught at Stanford University, but really before that, at the grammar school is this boards of education, is this textbook writers? Who do we have to appeal to to make these changes?

[00:15:21] Jonathan Osborne: You're asking the really important question, I think. And, um, I'm, uh, reflecting on a career of trying to make these kinds [00:15:30] of changes for the past 25 years and what I've seen time and time again is when you make the convincing argument. We had a report in 1998 called Beyond 2000 Science Education For the Future. We needed a different form of science education in the UK.

We managed to convince a lot of people. We managed to convince the people, the equivalent of the Board of Education, who set the curriculum. There was a curriculum written and it was all put into place. But there's resistance. Okay? [00:16:00] There's resistance from what I might call institutional conservatism. And then there's a change of government and with an emphasis simply on knowledge and not knowing of these other features of how science works in that sense, um, or ideas about science.

So it got killed and actually there's a similar thing going on at in California with Algebra II, which is in 20, if you read about this, but in 2019, It was agreed that this course on data science done by my colleague Jo Boaler, would be an alternative [00:16:30] to Algebra II.

But it's currently being killed by the complaints from various people. And the California Board of Education is about to say, well, it's not rigorous enough, so that's gonna get killed. So I've kind of reluctantly come to the conclusion that people like me or people like you or, uh, trying to to write curriculum and change, it is unlikely to happen.

The problem we've got at the moment is a system where, there are not enough gaps or opportunities for teachers to pursue their [00:17:00] interests and their student interests. So I think actually, uh, the best thing that we can do at the moment is say that if you impose this curriculum, which is supposed to be for science, uh, for all, and then you insist that 99% of the time is devoted to that minority, this is wrong.

You have to cut that back significantly. So the current standards, for instance, there's 200 performance expectations they're not all the same level. Cut it to a hundred, give that teacher [00:17:30] freedom, respect their autonomy, respect them as a professional, give them agency to do some of the things which they think matter to their kids here and now and into that space obviously, people like me, people like you can say, have you thought about doing this? Have you thought about doing this? Have you thought about, uh, doing this? And I think I got more chance of changing the education because after all, and you probably know this well, my motivation from science I think was just came from an [00:18:00] early age. I was just fascinated by things and I kept going through the long dart classical electrodynamics being the one that really nearly kills it all, but, Interest is what carries you a long way. And interest is generated by the teacher and the teacher has to have enthusiasm. And they have enthusiasm if they've got agency in that sense.

So that's my current take on it, but I haven't got any proof of that, but that's just my reflections of now.

[00:18:28] Russ Altman: This is The Future of Everything with Russ [00:18:30] Altman more with Jonathan Osborne next.

Welcome back to The Future of Everything. I'm Russ Altman and I'm speaking with Professor Jonathan Osborne from Stanford University.

In the last segment, Jonathan told us some of the concerns he has about misinformation, about science and some of the tools that he believes we need to give young people, even grammar school and middle school [00:19:00] students, to make sure that they can learn to vet the information they're presented with.

In this segment, he'll tell us that there are different forms of scientific argumentation, and they don't all get the same attention from the press and from teachers. He's gonna argue that we need to give teachers more freedom to introduce scientific arguments of a wide variety and ways to check that they're all sound.

So, Jonathan, in your work, you discuss argumentation and teaching scientific argumentation. [00:19:30] You made a little bit of a reference to maybe we should set up teams of middle schoolers who figure out if a website is good or bad, or reliable or not reliable. But more generally, tell me what is this idea of scientific argumentation and where do we want to get students in terms of their ability to understand or even implement argumentation?

[00:19:48] Jonathan Osborne: Yeah, I mean, I think basically, okay, argument is core to science. Uh, I mean, that's what you and I are doing. Okay. If we write any kind of paper, we're not an evidence-based argument on the whole. Or a theoretically [00:20:00] based argument based on scholarship to convince people that some of the claims we're making are true.

And the trouble with a lot of the teaching of science is that, uh, students are introduced to a lot of entities and what you might call an ontological zoo of rather strange entities, irons, atoms, molecules and stuff they can't see. Uh, and they have to really accept it on faith because they're taught it by their teacher. So in some senses, often, always from a lot of students acquires the aura of a religion in that sense. Now it's not a religion, [00:20:30] it's an evidence-based argument and you can illustrate that with all kinds of arguments, any kind of age from that, uh, that point of view. So for instance, one of the ones we were talking about is how do we know that the earth is a sphere rather than flat?

After it looks flat, why should we believe that it's as severe? What's the evidence that convinces us of that? I had a wonderful one in my own education, for instance, which is that we spent, I think this is again in middle school, we spent about three weeks growing [00:21:00] copper sulfate crystals that was great fun. We had a big competition. Who's got the biggest one? Okay.

And then the teacher said to us at the end, he said, oh, well what do you nice about these copper sulfate crystals?

And we looked at, said, well, they're all blue. Okay.

I said, no, I mean, you know something else? What is that? He said.

Oh, well. Well, yeah. They're all the same shape.

Yeah, they're all the same shape.

Yeah, but they're different sizes.

How could that be? He said, okay.

And we said, oh, scratching.

And he said, have you ever been to the green grasses?

And we [00:21:30] thought, yeah, what's this gotta do with that? Okay.

You notice the stacks of oranges? Yes. Okay.

You see? Okay.

Have you noticed it doesn't matter if it's a big stack or a small stack. Okay. They've all got the same lines and shapes. Okay. But they're made out all particles, which we call oranges. It's just like that with your cup of sulfate. It's made out of particles in the same kind of way. And it was a wonderful, elegant argument for particle theory of matter in that sense, which has stuck in my brain ever since because I tend to react to good arguments and think that's good in that. Now I'm just [00:22:00] asking for more examples of that. I mean, for instance, what's the evidence that we believe in the theory, what led, and there are stories to be told about that and kids like stories. Because stories are the things that you and I use to communicate all the time. We use them as evidence in that way, and we don't tell enough stories about science. Now, part of that actually is the problem that actually a lot of us don't know the stories about science. 'cause we were never told the stories about [00:22:30] science.

So how do we get out of that kind of, uh, cycle? But if you want Yeah.

[00:22:35] Russ Altman: It's funny that you say that about, um, people, uh, because I'm very aware, one of the early scientific mentors I had said, one, you know, science is a great career but one of the things you have to become comfortable with is that your discoveries may be remembered long after you are forgotten.

And so, uh, and there is truth to that because the discoveries are kind of the goal. On the other hand, as you just pointed out, the stories are very [00:23:00] important in order to keep people engaged and thinking about. That this is a human endeavor. It's not, we're not robots, we're not chat GPT and that we we're deciding what questions to ask and then we're trying to answer them and we're doing the best that we can.

And it's an imperfect, you know, approximation. But, so I'm really struck by the, your statement about stories because I agree with you. And yet we were told as young scientists that it's not about your story, it's about the knowledge that you create and that might have been wrong.

[00:23:29] Jonathan Osborne: [00:23:30] Yeah, that might be wrong, but also it's a story about how that knowledge was created in the first place.

[00:23:34] Russ Altman: Right.

[00:23:35] Jonathan Osborne: In that case. Uh, and it's often of quite a complicated story in that way. I mean, just take if something simple. Okay. I mean, well maybe they're not so simple, but vaccines, what's the story behind vaccine?

Okay. How did people first have this crazy idea of putting a disease into somebody in order to prevent them being infected? It just sounds wrong in that [00:24:00] kind of, uh, kind of way. So where did they get that idea from and what was the path that led them to it? It wasn't something that was instantaneous. It wasn't one lone genius working on their own. It was a succession of work done by different people. Certain names have stand out in that process. Uh, obviously general Pasteur, but there, there is a story.

[00:24:25] Russ Altman: As you look at scientific argumentation, is it different across [00:24:30] fields? Do physicists and biologists make similar arguments or have you seen differences? Are those differences important?

[00:24:36] Jonathan Osborne: Basically, three forms of argument that are made in science, so okay. One is the hypothetical and reductive argument, which is predominates a lot in physics, particularly when mathematics is involved or increasingly there's quite a lot of that in biology. Uh, as well with some of the models that people are developing and making predictions on the back of models.

Uh, um, but the second form of argument, which we often forget about is the [00:25:00] abductive argument, which is the inference to best possible explanation. That's the form of argument that I just illustrated for you with the story about argument from atoms. This is an inference of the best possible, best possible form of explanation. It's a form of argument that Darwin used with the finches, it's the formal argument that Wegener used for continental drift in that kind of way. And it's quite common, we are confronted with complexity and we have to look at it and think, well possibly this is happening. This is the best fit with the evidence.

And then there's [00:25:30] obviously the inductive argument that you make. For instance, that all metal oxides are bases, is the obvious kind of one all mammals are warm blooded. Uh, those our inductive generalizations, which we have to make because we've gotta make the world simpler than it appears in that way. So they do vary across the, I mean, I don't, I couldn't go through all the arguments using all the sciences. But I would say I think there's [00:26:00] more use of, uh, inference in biology than there is in physics or the physical sciences.

[00:26:06] Russ Altman: Yes. And it, I, that makes sense. And I like that because what as you were describing, these three different modes of reasoning, they're all present in all fields, but I think some of them are used more in one field than the other.

The physicists have their mathematics and they like the deductive mathematical approaches. The biologists are overwhelmed with observations, don't have much theory. And so they wind up doing, you know, [00:26:30] um, inference from observations with, without too much of a deductive theory. So, yeah, this actually makes sense.

So do you think that this needs to be made, uh, explicit or is it best for students to learn this a little bit more in a subtle way by example? I'm not sure you would want to give those three. You would maybe in high school or college, but for the middle schoolers in the grammar school is you probably want them to experience those logics before you name them., But I'm asking.

[00:26:58] Jonathan Osborne: Oh, no, no. I think you definitely wanna [00:27:00] experience them for, uh, name them, but I just think, I mean, the problem with the description of science, you know, the standard introduction to the scientific methods, it just tells you about the hypothetically and deductive method. And so it makes, it really, it's an insult to science because it makes it seem like it's some kind of algorithm.

You just turn the wheels and you get this. Yeah. Okay. There's no creativity or intelligence that goes into it, or imagination that goes into it.

[00:27:20] Russ Altman: Right.

[00:27:21] Jonathan Osborne: Actually, It's, if you look at all I have this thesis that basically most of what you're teaching in science is a set of crazy ideas [00:27:30] from that point of view.

The idea that the air, has maps the idea that you look like your parents, because every cell in your body carries a chemically coded blueprint about how to reproduce you. Who would ever have conceived these ideas?

[00:27:42] Russ Altman: It's crazy. Okay.

[00:27:46] Jonathan Osborne: And so once you see yourself as a teacher of crazy ideas, you start to be.

Hey, I've gotta convince people to believe in basically what they're gonna say is, well would not believe that. Uh, and then you've gotta make, use evidence to convince [00:28:00] them of that, and then you start to see the richness of the story.

[00:28:04] Russ Altman: So that's very good. And in our last minute, I just wanted to get to this issue of, uh, timing.

[00:28:09] Jonathan Osborne: Yeah.

[00:28:09] Russ Altman: Uh, and in your comments and in your writings you've talked about, we should have a sense of urgency. The rate at which teaching standards are updated, may not be ideal at a time when the world is moving very quickly. So talk to me about this sense of the timescale at which science education should evolve.

[00:28:27] Jonathan Osborne: Basically, the problem with the most [00:28:30] current set of standards, I would say, uh, internationally in the moment are the US ones a framework which are the framework for K to 12 science education. Uh, I was on that group, we wrote that in 2011. Uh, looking back now, I think we made all kinds of mistakes.

Uh, this is inevitable and, uh, the, what's really happened is the context has changed enormously because all of a sudden you have the rise of Web 2.0, the rise of misinformation and we have no capacity to adjust for that because the next set of standards will not be written for 10 years.

[00:28:58] Russ Altman: Oh.

[00:28:59] Jonathan Osborne: This, I think, is what I'm [00:29:00] gonna argue.

Actually you have to create any set standards. You create, you have to create with space for people to add, adapt them and make them. And that's terribly important for the teachers because they're only going to really teach you with passion if there's a sense of ownership and they only have a sense of ownership if they have a sense of agency.

So you have to give, leave space in standards for that because you cannot predict what's gonna happen in the next 10, 20 years that might need addressing. And that's the problem we've got at the moment.

[00:29:28] Russ Altman: Are there, uh, bright ideas about how to [00:29:30] give the teachers that freedom? I'm sure the teachers are in favor of it. A subset of the parents may be in favor of it.

[00:29:37] Jonathan Osborne: Yeah.

[00:29:37] Russ Altman: Uh, I don't know about the poli, the politicians.

[00:29:41] Jonathan Osborne: Well, I think it's the bright idea is less is more. Okay. The, if you, okay. Just., You look internationally. Okay. And there's clear evidence that the coun, some of the countries that have less time do a better job.

[00:29:56] Russ Altman: Mm-hmm.

[00:29:56] Jonathan Osborne: In that sense, uh, because they have a [00:30:00] clear set, clearer sense of which goals they want to achieve rather than sort them spreading it across where we've gotta do all of these, okay. These are the ones that really matter. And so it's our responsibility as science educators, as scientists to say this is what really matters. The rest of it's up to you if you particularly interested in it.

[00:30:19] Russ Altman: Thanks to Jonathan Osborne. That was the future of science education . You have been listening to The Future of Everything with Russ Altman.

If you enjoyed the podcast, please consider subscribing or following it. So [00:30:30] you'll receive news of the new episodes and you'll never be surprised by the future of anything. Maybe tell your friends about the podcast too, and definitely rate and review it. We have more than 200 episodes in the back catalog, and you might go check out some of those, which are still evergreen and good. You can connect with me on Twitter @RBAltman and follow Stanford Engineering @StanfordENG.

You can also now follow me on Threads @Russ R U S S, B as in [00:31:00] boy, Altman @RussBAltman, all one word.

Related:  Jonathan Osborne , professor of science education, emeritus

Stanford-led research shows how commercial rooftop solar power could bring affordable clean energy to low-income homes

• Technology & Society

The future of computer music

• Artificial Intelligence

Elusive 3D printed nanoparticles could lead to new shapeshifting materials

After DEI bill, this is what Utah’s college presidents fear will be the next target of lawmakers

“there’s deep concern among academics,” said university of utah president taylor randall..

(Chris Samuels | The Salt Lake Tribune) University of Utah President Taylor Randall looks over campus from a balcony on Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2023. Randall said on Thursday, March 21, 2024, that he believes general education curriculum at the state's public colleges and universities will be the next target of the Utah Legislature after the anti-DEI bill.

Utah’s higher education leaders are bracing for what will be “next in the firing line” after the overhaul of campus DEI programs — with several saying they feel that’s just the start of the state trying to assert more control over public colleges and universities.

The target they say is now being locked in: the curriculum that professors teach, mainly around general education classes.

“I think we ought to learn from the DEI thing and get out ahead of it in a meaningful way,” said University of Utah President Taylor Randall. “There’s deep concern among academics.”

Randall and other school presidents shared the same worries during a meeting last month of the Utah Board of Higher Education , as members talked about the recent legislative session and what’s expected to come in the interim.

Geoff Landward, who had serving as the interim commissioner over higher education for the state and was officially named to the post during the meeting — subject to Utah Senate confirmation — said those fears are justified. About state lawmakers, he said: “They are watching.”

The U. was the focus of a bill that came up late in the legislative session — and failed — that would have forced the school to establish an independent School of General Education to instruct all students for their required introductory coursework. Sen. John Johnson, R-North Ogden, who ran the legislation, outlined that he wanted the focus on western civilization, mainly European communities, and to specifically include “the rise of Christianity.”

There were also to be several courses on the “principles, ideals, and institutions of law, liberty and civic virtue that underpin the American constitutional order.”

Randall spoke out about the measure during the one committee hearing, where it didn’t move forward after a 2-5 vote. And the Utah System of Higher Education issued a rare rebuke of the legislation, saying that lawmakers should work directly with university and college presidents to solve issues.

The bill would have been an unprecedented move by the Legislature to dictate specific college curriculum. And officials don’t believe they’ve seen the end of it.

Landward said the idea was to start with the U. and then “it would be expanded to the entire system.”

Randall said the U.’s general education curriculum already includes 85% of what Johnson wanted. The president said there also are broad options available for students that cover “viewpoint diversity” — a large focus of the DEI bill.

But, he said, legislators have told him they would like to see a more unified experience that all students get when completing the general education requirements. And there was some discussion, Randall noted, that the current offerings are indoctrinating students to a certain perspective. Professors at the U. have spoken out against that.

Utah Valley University President Astrid Tuminez also challenged the idea. “I think the characterization that general education is an indoctrination of minority views is wrong,” she said. “The bulk of what we offer is classic.”

(Rick Egan | The Salt Lake Tribune) Astrid Tuminez, president of Utah Valley University, speaks during a news conference on Tuesday, July 13, 2021.

Still, Randall suggested the curriculum focus would follow a similar path as the DEI measure, which is when he called the issue “next in the firing line.” The diversity bill was first brought up late in the 2023 legislative session, and failed, before being resurrected this year, passed and signed into law by Gov. Spencer Cox.

HB261 prohibits the eight public colleges and universities in the state from using the words “diversity, equity and inclusion,” or DEI, in the name of a central campus office; those must be transitioned to “student success and support centers.” They are also required to open any specific race- or gender-based programs to all students. And any questions about diversity or diversity statements are prohibited in the hiring process for faculty and staff.

The measure extends, too, to K-12 schools and government offices.

Both Landward and Randall said the push here came out of national conversations from Republicans.

Landward said higher education staff worked tirelessly behind the scenes to help shape Utah’s bill and soften it. The original draft, he said, was a full ban of anything DEI-related, including eliminating those staff positions. And it included limits on curriculum before those were negotiated out, he said.

But the bill does require faculty over mandatory university courses to publish their syllabi online “on the institution’s website in an online database readily searchable by the public,” according to the text of HB261.

To many, that also signals the start of more rigorous vetting of curriculum by the state.

“The publication of syllabi has some worried,” said Weber State President Brad Mortensen.

The commissioner said he was satisfied with the final version, but he warned college presidents to follow the measure or risk possibly facing more strict DEI requirements next year “because they (lawmakers) are unhappy with our compliance.”

Currently, the Utah System of Higher Education is drafting a document with attorneys to help schools comply with the law; and Landward acknowledged that it would take time to implement the changes.

So far, Utah Valley University has changed the name of its DEI center — the first in the state to do so — to the Office of Institutional Engagement and Effectiveness. Other college presidents said during the meeting that they have started shifting staff around and restructuring their offices.

“We’re pivoting,” said retiring Salt Lake Community College President Deneece Huftalin.

But, she said, the bill and the anticipation of what’s to come is causing stress. She worries that students of color won’t get the message that they are welcome at SLCC. Some faculty are leaving over it.

She added: “There’s a lot of fear still.”

(Chris Samuels | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake Community College President Deneece Huftalin speaks on Thursday, Oct. 20, 2022.

Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible

RELATED STORIES

First university in utah renames dei office after lawmakers ban words. this is what it’s now called., frustrated u. of utah faculty say state’s anti-dei measure is already having a ‘chilling effect’, utah’s governor posted about black history month days after signing anti-dei bill. the backlash was swift., gov. cox signs utah anti-dei bill prohibiting diversity efforts he once championed, gov. cox said he didn’t see evidence dei programs work. here’s the data utah colleges say they’ve given him., justice department sues utah, saying it discriminated against incarcerated transgender woman, new utah state basketball coach jerrod calhoun makes a bold claim on his first day, polygamist leader samuel bateman will get dozens of charges dropped — if followers admit helping him take child ‘brides’, a leading silicon slopes company’s co-founder and ceo is stepping down, bagley cartoon: going green, four years after quake, angel moroni is back on top of the salt lake lds temple. see photos., featured local savings.

• Share full article

Advertisement

​Why School Absences Have ‘Exploded’ Almost Everywhere

The pandemic changed families’ lives and the culture of education: “Our relationship with school became optional.”

By Sarah Mervosh and Francesca Paris

Sarah Mervosh reports on K-12 education, and Francesca Paris is a data reporter.

In Anchorage, affluent families set off on ski trips and other lengthy vacations, with the assumption that their children can keep up with schoolwork online.

In a working-class pocket of Michigan, school administrators have tried almost everything, including pajama day, to boost student attendance.

And across the country, students with heightened anxiety are opting to stay home rather than face the classroom.

In the four years since the pandemic closed schools, U.S. education has struggled to recover on a number of fronts, from learning loss , to enrollment , to student behavior .

But perhaps no issue has been as stubborn and pervasive as a sharp increase in student absenteeism, a problem that cuts across demographics and has continued long after schools reopened.

Nationally, an estimated 26 percent of public school students were considered chronically absent last school year, up from 15 percent before the pandemic, according to the most recent data, from 40 states and Washington, D.C., compiled by the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute . Chronic absence is typically defined as missing at least 10 percent of the school year, or about 18 days, for any reason.

Source: Upshot analysis of data from Nat Malkus, American Enterprise Institute. Districts are grouped into highest, middle and lowest third.

The increases have occurred in districts big and small, and across income and race. For districts in wealthier areas, chronic absenteeism rates have about doubled, to 19 percent in the 2022-23 school year from 10 percent before the pandemic, a New York Times analysis of the data found.

Poor communities, which started with elevated rates of student absenteeism, are facing an even bigger crisis: Around 32 percent of students in the poorest districts were chronically absent in the 2022-23 school year, up from 19 percent before the pandemic.

Even districts that reopened quickly during the pandemic, in fall 2020, have seen vast increases.

“The problem got worse for everybody in the same proportional way,” said Nat Malkus, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, who collected and studied the data.

Victoria, Texas reopened schools in August 2020, earlier than many other districts. Even so, student absenteeism in the district has doubled.

Kaylee Greenlee for The New York Times

The trends suggest that something fundamental has shifted in American childhood and the culture of school, in ways that may be long lasting. What was once a deeply ingrained habit — wake up, catch the bus, report to class — is now something far more tenuous.

“Our relationship with school became optional,” said Katie Rosanbalm, a psychologist and associate research professor with the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University.

The habit of daily attendance — and many families’ trust — was severed when schools shuttered in spring 2020. Even after schools reopened, things hardly snapped back to normal. Districts offered remote options, required Covid-19 quarantines and relaxed policies around attendance and grading .

Source: Nat Malkus, American Enterprise Institute . Includes districts with at least 1,500 students in 2019. Numbers are rounded. U.S. average is estimated.

Today, student absenteeism is a leading factor hindering the nation’s recovery from pandemic learning losses , educational experts say. Students can’t learn if they aren’t in school. And a rotating cast of absent classmates can negatively affect the achievement of even students who do show up, because teachers must slow down and adjust their approach to keep everyone on track.

“If we don’t address the absenteeism, then all is naught,” said Adam Clark, the superintendent of Mt. Diablo Unified, a socioeconomically and racially diverse district of 29,000 students in Northern California, where he said absenteeism has “exploded” to about 25 percent of students. That’s up from 12 percent before the pandemic.

U.S. students, overall, are not caught up from their pandemic losses. Absenteeism is one key reason.

Why Students Are Missing School

Schools everywhere are scrambling to improve attendance, but the new calculus among families is complex and multifaceted.

At South Anchorage High School in Anchorage, where students are largely white and middle-to-upper income, some families now go on ski trips during the school year, or take advantage of off-peak travel deals to vacation for two weeks in Hawaii, said Sara Miller, a counselor at the school.

For a smaller number of students at the school who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, the reasons are different, and more intractable. They often have to stay home to care for younger siblings, Ms. Miller said. On days they miss the bus, their parents are busy working or do not have a car to take them to school.

And because teachers are still expected to post class work online, often nothing more than a skeleton version of an assignment, families incorrectly think students are keeping up, Ms. Miller said.

Sara Miller, a counselor at South Anchorage High School for 20 years, now sees more absences from students across the socioeconomic spectrum.

Ash Adams for The New York Times

Across the country, students are staying home when sick , not only with Covid-19, but also with more routine colds and viruses.

And more students are struggling with their mental health, one reason for increased absenteeism in Mason, Ohio, an affluent suburb of Cincinnati, said Tracey Carson, a district spokeswoman. Because many parents can work remotely, their children can also stay home.

For Ashley Cooper, 31, of San Marcos, Texas, the pandemic fractured her trust in an education system that she said left her daughter to learn online, with little support, and then expected her to perform on grade level upon her return. Her daughter, who fell behind in math, has struggled with anxiety ever since, she said.

“There have been days where she’s been absolutely in tears — ‘Can’t do it. Mom, I don’t want to go,’” said Ms. Cooper, who has worked with the nonprofit Communities in Schools to improve her children’s school attendance. But she added, “as a mom, I feel like it’s OK to have a mental health day, to say, ‘I hear you and I listen. You are important.’”

Experts say missing school is both a symptom of pandemic-related challenges, and also a cause. Students who are behind academically may not want to attend, but being absent sets them further back. Anxious students may avoid school, but hiding out can fuel their anxiety.

And schools have also seen a rise in discipline problems since the pandemic, an issue intertwined with absenteeism.

Dr. Rosanbalm, the Duke psychologist, said both absenteeism and behavioral outbursts are examples of the human stress response, now playing out en masse in schools: fight (verbal or physical aggression) or flight (absenteeism).

“If kids are not here, they are not forming relationships,” said Quintin Shepherd, the superintendent in Victoria, Texas.

Quintin Shepherd, the superintendent in Victoria, Texas, first put his focus on student behavior, which he described as a “fire in the kitchen” after schools reopened in August 2020.

The district, which serves a mostly low-income and Hispanic student body of around 13,000, found success with a one-on-one coaching program that teaches coping strategies to the most disruptive students. In some cases, students went from having 20 classroom outbursts per year to fewer than five, Dr. Shepherd said.

But chronic absenteeism is yet to be conquered. About 30 percent of students are chronically absent this year, roughly double the rate before the pandemic.

Dr. Shepherd, who originally hoped student absenteeism would improve naturally with time, has begun to think that it is, in fact, at the root of many issues.

“If kids are not here, they are not forming relationships,” he said. “If they are not forming relationships, we should expect there will be behavior and discipline issues. If they are not here, they will not be academically learning and they will struggle. If they struggle with their coursework, you can expect violent behaviors.”

Teacher absences have also increased since the pandemic, and student absences mean less certainty about which friends and classmates will be there. That can lead to more absenteeism, said Michael A. Gottfried, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. His research has found that when 10 percent of a student’s classmates are absent on a given day, that student is more likely to be absent the following day.

Absent classmates can have a negative impact on the achievement and attendance of even the students who do show up.

Is This the New Normal?

In many ways, the challenge facing schools is one felt more broadly in American society: Have the cultural shifts from the pandemic become permanent?

In the work force, U.S. employees are still working from home at a rate that has remained largely unchanged since late 2022 . Companies have managed to “put the genie back in the bottle” to some extent by requiring a return to office a few days a week, said Nicholas Bloom, an economist at Stanford University who studies remote work. But hybrid office culture, he said, appears here to stay.

Some wonder whether it is time for schools to be more pragmatic.

Lakisha Young, the chief executive of the Oakland REACH, a parent advocacy group that works with low-income families in California, suggested a rigorous online option that students could use in emergencies, such as when a student misses the bus or has to care for a family member. “The goal should be, how do I ensure this kid is educated?” she said.

Relationships with adults at school and other classmates are crucial for attendance.

In the corporate world, companies have found some success appealing to a sense of social responsibility, where colleagues rely on each other to show up on the agreed-upon days.

A similar dynamic may be at play in schools, where experts say strong relationships are critical for attendance.

There is a sense of: “If I don’t show up, would people even miss the fact that I’m not there?” said Charlene M. Russell-Tucker, the commissioner of education in Connecticut.

In her state, a home visit program has yielded positive results , in part by working with families to address the specific reasons a student is missing school, but also by establishing a relationship with a caring adult. Other efforts — such as sending text messages or postcards to parents informing them of the number of accumulated absences — can also be effective.

Regina Murff has worked to re-establish the daily habit of school attendance for her sons, who are 6 and 12.

Sylvia Jarrus for The New York Times

In Ypsilanti, Mich., outside of Ann Arbor, a home visit helped Regina Murff, 44, feel less alone when she was struggling to get her children to school each morning.

After working at a nursing home during the pandemic, and later losing her sister to Covid-19, she said, there were days she found it difficult to get out of bed. Ms. Murff was also more willing to keep her children home when they were sick, for fear of accidentally spreading the virus.

But after a visit from her school district, and starting therapy herself, she has settled into a new routine. She helps her sons, 6 and 12, set out their outfits at night and she wakes up at 6 a.m. to ensure they get on the bus. If they are sick, she said, she knows to call the absence into school. “I’ve done a huge turnaround in my life,” she said.

But bringing about meaningful change for large numbers of students remains slow, difficult work .

Nationally, about 26 percent of students were considered chronically absent last school year, up from 15 percent before the pandemic.

The Ypsilanti school district has tried a bit of everything, said the superintendent, Alena Zachery-Ross. In addition to door knocks, officials are looking for ways to make school more appealing for the district’s 3,800 students, including more than 80 percent who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. They held themed dress-up days — ’70s day, pajama day — and gave away warm clothes after noticing a dip in attendance during winter months.

“We wondered, is it because you don’t have a coat, you don’t have boots?” said Dr. Zachery-Ross.

Still, absenteeism overall remains higher than it was before the pandemic. “We haven’t seen an answer,” she said.

Data provided by Nat Malkus, with the American Enterprise Institute. The data was originally published on the Return to Learn tracker and used for the report “ Long COVID for Public Schools: Chronic Absenteeism Before and After the Pandemic .”

The analysis for each year includes all districts with available data for that year, weighted by district size. Data are sourced from states, where available, and the U.S. Department of Education and NCES Common Core of Data.

For the 2018-19 school year, data was available for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. For 2022-23, it was available for 40 states and D.C., due to delays in state reporting.

Closure length status is based on the most in-person learning option available. Poverty is measured using the Census Bureau’s Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates. School size and minority population estimates are from NCES CCD.

How absenteeism is measured can vary state by state, which means comparisons across state lines may not be reliable.

An earlier version of this article misnamed a research center at Duke University. It is the Center for Child and Family Policy, not the Center of Child and Family Policy.

Rick Hess Straight Up

Education policy maven Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute think tank offers straight talk on matters of policy, politics, research, and reform. Read more from this blog.

What Do Leading Edu-Scholars Think About DEI, Reading, and Research?

• Share article

In January, I ran the 2024 RHSU Edu-Scholar Public Influence Rankings , identifying 200 of the nation’s most influential education scholars. In recent years, I’ve followed up by reaching out to the Edu-Scholars with an informal query soliciting some thoughts and insight regarding research, practice, and policy. As always, I found the results instructive and thought I’d share a few highlights.

I asked about the most illuminating academic article they’d read on education last year and the study that had the biggest impact over the past decade. Raj Chetty’s work was the most commonly mentioned; other responses mostly alluded to broad themes, like research on teacher labor markets and reading. Notably, when asked what research had the biggest impact on the past decade, the most common answer was: “nothing.” This either reflects admirable humility on the part of the researchers or constitutes a rather damning indictment of the educational research enterprise today (or perhaps a bit of each).

Asked what advice they might provide to young researchers, one scholar offered a particularly striking bit of advice: “Follow the truth—there are too many ideologues out there and you’ll stand out just by being an honest broker.” That resonates with me. As I’ve noted to Pedro Noguera, our current level of distrust has profound consequences: “People are reluctant to reach out in good faith because they fear that, at best, they’ll be wasting their time and, at worst, they’ll be attacked or vilified.” Pedro and I have called for combating that tendency by extending each other the benefit of the doubt, dealing in good faith, avoiding “whataboutism,” and engaging deliberately and reflectively. “Following the truth” is a terrific addition to that list.

In light of the broiling debates around diversity in education, I asked the Edu-Scholars whether they supported or opposed colleges requiring DEI statements for hiring and promotion. Most respondents endorse the use of DEI statements in principle but say they have concerns about how those have been implemented. Smaller numbers of scholars wholeheartedly endorsed or flatly opposed DEI requirements. Perhaps the modal take was offered by the scholar who wrote, “I support DEI. But the statements are too vague. Plus, stop deferring to a statement. We already get faculty members’ CV, syllabi, and course evaluations. Take some time to actually review those materials. That way, we can see if they actually do work that encourages DEI, not just a statement saying they do.” Articulating the concerns about DEI, one skeptic explained, “In my experience, DEI statements are tools primarily for screening people out of searches using vague criteria. Most colleges don’t require similar statements on other important aspects of higher education, so requiring them implicitly puts DEI on a pedestal as the most important thing we do.”

I also asked the Edu-Scholars about their views on state efforts to adopt “science of reading” laws. Asked whether they supported or opposed these, respondents were pretty evenly split. Several noted either this isn’t their area of expertise or that their views depend on the particulars of the law. Supporters tended to emphasize concerns about academic achievement and current practices, while skeptics pointed to the need for educators to have discretion to address student needs and circumstances. Some of the particular takes were telling. A nominally supportive scholar wryly wrote of the laws, “I support them but will educators implement them? Doubt it.” One skeptic explained, “I just don’t think this is something that state governments should mandate. And I worry about establishing new loyalty oaths around a hotly contested subject!”

I find this annual exercise enlightening, if only to resurface familiar themes and provide a temperature check on where the education professoriate stands. It can be useful to recognize that those regarded as education oracles can be as conflicted and uncertain as the rest of us.

Please note that answers were lightly edited for grammar and spelling.

The opinions expressed in Rick Hess Straight Up are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

New Approach to School Discipline May Change Future of Discipline Practices

Monday, Apr 01, 2024 • Written by Monique Bird :

Dr. Ambra Green , associate professor of special education and interim chair of the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies , has joined a national team of researchers awarded a $3.7 million grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to examine a new approach to discipline that helps districts move beyond suspensions and expulsions. The new model, known as the Inclusive Skill-building Learning Approach , or ISLA, will be tested in 60 middle schools across the country.

To improve the relationships and interactions between teachers and students in ways that positively change student behavior and that reduce the need to separate students from either their classroom or school – a method that creates both short-term and long-term consequences for communities and students, such as increased rates of drug use.

“The project addresses a persistent gap within the substance use field and practices in schools that are exclusionary in nature, by evaluating whether upstream interventions that target and improve adolescents’ social contexts can have meaningful impacts on opioid use prevention and prevention of the use of exclusionary practices,” said Green, who is the recipient of a $520,375 sub-award from the University of Oregon's NIH project entitled, “Preventing School Exclusion and Opioid Misuse: Effectiveness of the Inclusive Skillbuilding Learning Approach (ISLA).”

The Case for Change

The evidence highlighting the negative implications of exclusionary discipline is clear.

Nationally, students lost over 11 million days of learning in school due to out-of-school suspensions in the 2015-16 school year alone. Such suspensions have more than doubled since the 1970s , and “students are more than twice as likely to be arrested in the month they are removed” compared to other months, according to research published in the journal of Addictive Behaviors . The same report connected punitive tactics to drug use and labeled the racial disparities as “profound.” And a report published in the American Institutes for Research in 2021 showed that suspensions are often “ineffective at producing positive behavioral change” and have been linked to negative ripple effects such as poor grades, chronic absenteeism, higher dropout rates, lower graduation rates, and incarceration. One study noted that children who attend schools with high suspension rates are “ significantly more likely to be arrested and jailed as adults – especially for Black and Hispanic boys .”

In some reports, children as young as 5 years old have been suspended.

“It’s known as the preschool to prison pipeline,” said Green, adding that she hopes “districts will see this as an intervention based in science to get to the function or root of a student’s behavior to see what the student is trying to communicate and how the teacher can meet their needs.”

For the six-state study, Green was awarded $500,000 to run the Texas site – helping recruit and support ten middle schools with training and coaching in the Inclusive Skill-building Learning Approach. The method is grounded in positive, preventative classroom strategies for all students. And it layers on additional support to help “promote positive student-teacher relationships, improve student behavior and educator responses, minimize biases in educator responses, and reduce the amount of instructional time lost due to exclusionary discipline,” said Green.

She added that this project aligns with much of her other research – helping to train and support teachers in ways that benefit both teachers and K-12 students alike and district discipline policy development.

Office of the Vice President for Research

Ovpr announces recipients of 2024 discovery and innovation awards.

The Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) is honoring 11 faculty and staff for their exceptional contributions to research, scholarship, and creative activity as part of the 2024 Discovery and Innovation Awards .

“ The winners represent the best and the brightest of our University of Iowa faculty and staff, who are making an impact across a range of disciplines,”  said Marty Scholtz, vice president for research. “Their research and scholarship enhance undergraduate and graduate education on campus, and their efforts to expand the frontiers of discovery betters our community, state, and world.”

The OVPR solicited nominations from across campus for the awards, which include: Scholar of the Year, Early Career Scholar of the Year, Leadership in Research, and awards that recognize achievement in communicating scholarship with public audiences, community engagement, arts and humanities, mentorship, research administration and safety. A campuswide event on April 30 will celebrate the winners.

Faculty Awards

Jun Wang , James E. Ashton Professor and interim departmental executive officer in the College of Engineering’s

 Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, is the 2024 Scholar of the Year . The award celebrates nationally recognized recent achievement in outstanding research, scholarship, and/or creative activities. 

Wang’s research centers on the development of novel remote sensing techniques to characterize aerosols and fires from space. He serves as the University of Iowa’s lead investigator on NASA’s TEMPO, Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring Pollution, which Time magazine named one of its best inventions of 2023. 

“Professor Wang's scholarly endeavors over the past two years stand out as a paradigm of excellence, serving as an exemplary model for both emerging and seasoned faculty members to aspire toward,” said Karim Abdel-Malek, professor of biomedical engineering and director of the Iowa Technology Institute.

James Byrne , assistant professor of radiation oncology in the Carver College of Medicine ( CCOM ), is the 2024 Early Career Scholar of the Year . The award honors assistant professors who are currently involved in research, scholarship, and/or creative activity and show promise of making a significant contribution to their field. 

As a physician scientist, Byrne continues to care for patients while developing novel biomedical therapies for cancer, finding inspiration in everything from latte foam to tardigrades. In his first two years as faculty at the UI, he has earned more that $2.5M in external research funding, including a K08 award from the NIH.

“Dr. Byrne’s scientific creativity stems from both an active and curious mind as well as his ability to bridge diverse fields from engineering to biology to medicine,” said Michael Henry, professor and interim director of the Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center. “These interdisciplinary boundaries are where some of the most interesting and important work is happening today.”

Donna Santillan , research professor and director of the Division of Reproductive Science Research in the CCOM Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, received the Leadership in Research Award , which recognizes research and scholarly accomplishments throughout a career. 

While Santillan’s research has spanned across the field of reproductive science, she has a particular interest in the deadly diseases of pregnancy, including preeclampsia and its intergenerational effects. She designed and directs the Women’s Health Tissue Repository. Santillan’s work has been cited more than 2,700 times, and she has mentored 114 early career scientists and students, a testament to her expansive impact.

“Dr. Santillan has consistently demonstrated an unwavering commitment to fostering the professional and personal development of trainees in research, including myself,” said Banu Gumusoglu, assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology. “Her mentorship extends beyond the confines of traditional academic settings, touching the lives of many aspiring trainees from high school through residency, clinical fellowship, and faculty levels.”

Stephen Warren , professor of history and American studies in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (CLAS), received the Distinguished Achievement in Publicly Engaged Research Award . The award recognizes an individual faculty member who has put addressing public needs and direct engagement with the public, in the service of improving quality of life through research, at the forefront of his or her academic activities.

A prolific scholar of Native American culture, Warren’s research has centered on the Shawnee people of Oklahoma for the past two decades. He has published four books and co-authored the most recent one , Replanting Cultures: Community-Engaged Scholarship in Indian Country, with Chief Benjamin Barnes of the Shawnee Tribe. 

“Over the last two decades, Professor Warren has established himself as a leading community-engaged scholar, and his achievements in research and publishing demonstrate that community engagement and strong scholarship are not mutually exclusive,” said Nick Benson, director of the Office of Community Engagement. “Professor Warren’s work serves as an inspiration for researchers at Iowa and nationally who seek not only to make a difference in academia, but also in our communities.”

Kaveh Akbar , associate professor of English in CLAS, received the Distinguished Achievement in Arts and Humanities Research Award . This award honors distinguished achievement in humanities scholarship and work in the creative, visual and performing arts. 

Akbar joined Iowa in 2022 to serve as the director of the English and creative writing major. In January, his new novel, Martyr!, was published to critical acclaim. Akbar previously published two prize-winning poetry collections and has served as poetry editor for The Nation  since 2021. 

“Akbar’s leadership in the profession and on campus continues: his transformative work in our department not only enriches the academic experiences of 700+ English and creative writing majors, but also enhances the profile of UI as ‘The Writing University,’” said Blaine Greteman, professor and departmental executive officer of the Department of English.

Cara Hamann , associate professor of epidemiology, received the Faculty Communicating ideas Award . This award recognizes excellence in communication about research and scholarship in the sciences and humanities and the study of creative, visual, and performing arts to a general audience directly or via print and electronic media.

Hamann has frequently shared her work on transportation issues, including teen driving, bike and scooter safety, and pedestrian safety, through peer-reviewed journals and extensive media outreach. Her recent op-ed, “The most deadly traffic policy you’ve never heard of leaves you vulnerable, too,” drew widespread attention to a legal loophole in crosswalk laws and appeared in more than 50 news outlets nationwide, including USA Today .

“Dr. Hamann’s work is not only academically rigorous but also accessible and impactful to a

wide audience,” said Diane Rohlman, associate dean for research in the College of Public Health. “Her ability to communicate with clarity, creativity, and passion coupled with her extensive media outreach, exemplifies how she utilizes multiple approaches to address transportation challenges impacting society.”

Bob McMurray , F. Wendell Miller Professor in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, and Caroline Clay , assistant professor of acting in the Department of Theatre Arts, were recipients of the Office of Undergraduate Research (OUR) Distinguished Mentor Awards . The awards honors mentors’ dedication to making their students research experiences successful.

“I can’t imagine my research journey without Bob’s welcoming kindness, thriving lab community, and confident mentorship, and I am so deeply grateful for his impact on me,” said Hannah Franke, a psychology and linguistics major mentored by McMurray.

“I know I am far from the only student whose life has been impacted by Caroline Clay,” said Isabella Hohenadel, a second-year theatre arts major. “She deserves to be recognized of all of the wonderful work she does and how much she cares about us as students. I cannot think of anyone more deserving of recognition than her.”

Staff Awards

Angie Robertson , department administrator for CCOM’s Department of Microbiology and Immunology, received the Distinguished Research Administrator Award . The award recognizes staff members who performed exceptional service in support of research at the UI by exploring funding opportunities, assisting in grant proposal preparation, submission, post-award administration, and operational support. 

In addition to overseeing every aspect of daily operations for the department, Robertson manages nearly 100 research grants for the department and three longstanding NIH T32 training grants. 

“Angie plays a leading role in our department office, inspiring us to achieve all aspects of our missions ,” said Li Wu, professor and department chair. “She is innovative, collaborative, accountable, and respectful  in her daily work. She exceeds any expectations and sets a great example for staff members in the department.”

Min Zhu , research specialist in the Iowa Institute for Oral Health Research (IIOHR) within the College of Dentistry, received the Distinguished Research Professional Award . The award recognizes staff members who performed exceptional service in support of research at the UI by conducting experiments, collecting, and analyzing results and performing operational duties associated with a laboratory or research program. 

Zhu has worked as a lab bench scientist in the College of Dentistry since 2006, executing experimental work for grants and other research, working closely with IIOHR faculty members, overseeing lab maintenance and environmental health and safety efforts. 

“Beyond her research skills, Dr. Zhu has been an exceptional mentor and educator for my students and other junior researchers,” said Liu Hong, professor of prosthodontics. “Her kindness and willingness to share her knowledge have made her a beloved figure among them.”

Curtis Iberg , manager of sterilization services in the College of Dentistry, received the Innovation in Safety Award, which celebrates exceptional and ground-breaking innovations that advance safety at the UI. Iberg led a major renovation of the College of Dentistry’s instrument processing and sterilization area, with the aim of encouraging better workflow and support for future growth. 

“His innovations in workspace are a valuable asset to the greater University and demonstrates that the most important people to be involved in a space renovation are those that use the area because they can see how the facility can better function and how it can be designed for future needs,” said Kecia Leary, associate dean of clinics.

Renewing education to transform the future: Critical perspectives on the Transforming Education Summit

by  Sobhi Tawil and Charlène Camille

There has recently been much reference to the transformation of education in global development discourse. This is undoubtedly related to the Transforming Education Summit convened by the United Nations Secretary-General in New York in September 2022. The process around the Summit arguably represents one of the most significant mobilizations of the international education community in recent years. Bringing together Heads of State and of Government in New York, the Summit was preceded by a Pre-summit at UNESCO in Paris attended by over 150 Ministers and Deputy Ministers of Education. The process also included the mobilization of international expertise around five thematic tracks, the organization of national consultations with over 130 countries submitting national statements of commitment to transform education, and the release of a vision statement by UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

Despite this international mobilization, however, there has been little clarity on why we need to transform education, confounding the short-term need to address the impact of the Covid-19 educational disruption with ambitions to strengthen commitment to the globally agreed education goals and to unlock the transformational potential of teaching and learning for longer-term change. There has also been very little discussion on what transformation in education actually means and how it may be different from reform. In order to provide more clarity, it is useful to go back to the UN Secretary-General’s 2021 report  Our Common Agenda  which first announced the Summit on Transforming Education referencing the report of the International Commission on the Futures of Education as a key framing document for the process. 1

Why transform education?

The 2021 report of the International Commission on the Futures of Education,  Reimagining Our Futures Together: A new social contract for education , proposes a vision for the renewal of education. It begins by looking at the present with a long view towards 2050. Indeed, any effort to reform, renew, or transform education must necessarily begin with a critical re-examination of our present reality shaped both by past trends, as well as by our visions of probable and possible futures.

Any examination of projections based on current development trends make it abundantly clear that probable futures are bleak and even dystopic. Indeed, environmental destruction continues unabated with an acceleration of climate change and biodiversity loss that threatens the future of life on Earth. Unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, exacerbated by demographic pressures, continue to exceed the capacity of replenishment of the natural world. Greater concentration of wealth across the world fuels growing inequalities. Regression of democratic space is undermining hard-won gains in human rights. And while the digital transformation of our societies is offering new possibilities for human development, it is not only ushering in uncertainties about the future of work, but it is also contributing to greater surveillance and the polarization of societies. The new multipolar world continues to be a stage for violent conflict, the destruction and disruption of lives, and the displacement of millions.

We are at a critical historical juncture in global development with threatening prospects of probable futures. It therefore comes as no surprise that the UN Secretary-General, in his 2021 Our Common Agenda report, affirmed that “humanity faces a stark and urgent choice: a breakdown or a breakthrough.” This framing is echoed in the Futures of Education report which states that “the future of humanity and the planet is at risk” and that “we are faced with an existential choice: continue on an unsustainable path or radically change course.” 2

No trend is destiny

But in highlighting that “no trend is destiny”,  Reimagining Our Futures Together  insists, not only on the possibility of shaping alternative futures, but also on the urgency of doing so. It reaffirms that education is key to changing course. As the foundation for human development, knowledge and education are also the basis to transform and shape alternative possible futures. Indeed, education has great potential to help shape more just, inclusive, and sustainable futures by rebalancing our relationships with each other, with the living planet, and with technology. Despite this potential, however, the report argues that current educational models, approaches, and practices will not help us change course and transform the future. This needs to change. Education needs to be renewed if it is to transform the future.

The first rationale to renew education is the persistence of widespread exclusion from educational opportunity despite progress made in expanding access worldwide to educational opportunity over the past several decades. How can current models of education possibly transform the future when over 770 million youth and adults around the world are non-literate? 3  When an estimated one in four youth is excluded from education, employment, or training. 4  How can our models of education transform the future when close to 60% of youth around the world do not possess minimal proficiency levels in reading and mathematics? 5  We are in the third decade of the twenty-first century —how is this possible? We cannot hope to transform the future without addressing these knowledge divides and educational exclusions. Doing so requires addressing the root causes of social exclusion. As argued in the report of the International Commission on the Futures of Education, today’s gaps in access, participation, and outcomes are based on yesterday’s exclusions and oppressions. 6  Past injustices need to be addressed and corrected. This is the necessary condition for the renewal of educational models and approaches that can hope to shape more just and inclusive futures.

Furthermore, we also know that some of our educational approaches, models, and practices are contributing to the socially, economically, and environmentally unsustainable development trends we are witnessing today. The second rationale for renewing education is based on the recognition that education has been part of the problem by sustaining models based on human exceptionalism, individual accomplishment, competition, selection, and exclusion. Our educational models continue to be informed by a utilitarian approach with its imperative on economic growth that all too often overrides the role education can pay in promoting social or environmental justice. Indeed, as has been noted “[t]he world’s most educated countries and people are the ones most accelerating climate change” and that if “educated means living unsustainably, we need to recalibrate our notions of what education should do and what it means to be educated.” 7  The same can be argued about the role of many education systems in perpetuating bias, discrimination, division, and in undermining social cohesion.  More of the same will not do. Maintaining or strengthening political commitment to, and financing of, current education systems cannot take us towards breakthrough. We need a different education. To shape more just and sustainable futures, education itself must be transformed. We need to rethink our models, our approaches, our practices.

Towards transformative teaching and learning

What, then, does transforming education actually mean? And what exactly should be transformed in education? The more than 130 national statements of commitment to transform education submitted as part of the 2022 Transforming Education Summit process is a useful starting point. Unsurprisingly, the analysis of these statements indicates that the vast majority of countries highlight the need to renew how and what we teach and learn.

Indeed, close to 70% of countries cite curriculum reform, and the renewal of content and methods, as key levers to improve the quality and relevance of teaching and learning. 8  Among these countries, over half highlight the need for learning content to center environmental questions, green transitions, and broader sustainable development goals across disciplines. Indeed, if we hope to grow individual and collective capacities to shift away from unsustainable ways of inhabiting the planet, we must re-learn our interdependencies in a more-than-human world.  Reimagining Our Futures Together  insists that we must also learn to unlearn “the human arrogance that has resulted in massive biodiversity loss, the destruction of entire ecosystems, and irreversible climate change”. 9  If education is to help transform the future, it must nurture a culture of care for the planet.

Leveraging the transformational potential of teaching and learning also requires renewed pedagogies that develop learners’ ability to navigate future uncertainties and approach the complex problems and multi-dimensional crises of our times in meaningful ways. As highlighted by more than 40% of the national statements of commitment analyzed, the continued prevalence of rote learning methods will not take us in this direction —we need to renew how we learn. The pedagogical transformations that countries are calling for also resonate strongly with the  Reimagining our Futures Together  report and include interdisciplinary, project-based, and problem-solving teaching and learning methods that are seen as developing capacities for systems thinking beyond disciplinary boundaries. But in transforming how and what we learn, it is also important to re-examine how we assess and validate learning through evaluation methods that reduce competition and value critical thinking and research on contemporary issues.

Recognizing that no transformation of curricula content and methods will be possible without teachers, almost 95% of countries highlight the need to strengthen and revisit pre- and in-service training and professional development of teachers. Paradoxically, however, only a third of countries acknowledge the need to improve the working conditions and social status of teachers, only a quarter address the fundamental issue of teacher shortage, and only a handful reference the question of contract teachers. And yet, we know that 69 million teachers must be recruited globally to reach the 2030 education goals, 10  and a significant proportion of contract teachers is being used to fill the acute gaps in certain regions —in Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, contract teachers represent up to 65% of the teaching workforce. 11  How can we possibly transform education without serious efforts to recruit, train and retain qualified teachers? To what extent can we hope to transform teaching and learning practice without addressing the fundamental social, economic, and political issues that define the teaching profession?

How can we benefit from the digital transformation?

How can we expect to benefit from what the digital transformation of education may have to offer, if we cannot even value our teachers? In parallel, close to 90% of countries reference digital learning as one of the major levers of transformation in education. But how can we expect to benefit from what the digital transformation of education may have to offer, if we cannot even value our teachers as the main drivers of any renewal of education? While we know that teachers remain the most significant factor in educational quality, we also know that their roles must change. There can be no renewal of education without the transformation of the teaching profession. The profession must be both revalued and reimagined as a collaborative endeavor which builds new knowledge and capacity to bring about possible alternative futures. The voice of teachers will remain key in shaping the future of the profession and of education.

Transform? Renew? Reform?

Renewal of education must mean going beyond reform. Rather than better versions of existing systems, renewal implies education systems that are different from today. 12  It implies fundamental changes to educational processes and opportunities. But we are not starting from scratch. Three questions can be considered as we seek to renew education. First, what to do now that we should continue doing; what do we need to maintain, protect, and strengthen within existing educational systems? Second, recognizing that some of our policies and practices are ineffective, outdated, and even harmful, what do we need to abandon? Third, what to reimagine and reinvent? Transforming our futures will require a renewal of education that builds on our collective accomplishments, critically examines our current failings, and reinvents new models.

The ideas expressed here are those of the authors; they are not necessarily the official position of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.

Sobhi Tawil is the Director, and Charlène Camille an Associate Expert, of UNESCO's Future of Learning and Innovation Division.

A shorter version of this Ideas LAB blogpost will be published in the Commonwealth Education Report 2023.

1  United Nations. 2021.  Our Common Agenda . Report of the Secretary-General. Page 40.

2  UNESCO. 2021.  Reimagining our Futures Together: A new social contract for education . Report of the International Commission on the Futures of Education. Page 7.

3  UNESCO Institute of Statistics data.

4  International Labor Organization data.

5  UIS. 2017.  Fact Sheet No 46 .

6  UNESCO (2021: 20).

7  UNESCO (2021: 33).

8  UNESCO. 2022.  Analysis of National Statements of Commitment on Transforming Education .

9  UNESCO (2021: 66).

10  UIS. 2016.  Fact Sheet No 39.

11  UNESCO. 2020.  A review of the use of contract teachers in sub-Saharan Africa.  Report of the International Task Force on Teachers for Education 2030. Page 11.

12  International Commission on the Futures of Education. 2022.  Transforming education together for just and sustainable futures.  Statement from International Commission on the Futures of Education.

Futures of Education

Find out more about our work on the Futures of Education

Related items

• Future of education

More on this subject

Other recent news