Category: education

  • Chronic absenteeism could derail K-12 education

    Chronic absenteeism could derail K-12 education

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #9 focuses on chronic absenteeism.

    Key points:

    The biggest problem in education is that kids aren’t showing up to school. Last year, 26 percent of students missed a month of class or more, leading to dramatic declines in academic performance. Chronic absenteeism accounted for 27 percent of the drop in math scores and 45 percent of the decline in reading scores from 2019 to 2022. Students who are chronically absent are 7x more likely to drop out before graduating, and while state and district leaders are scrambling for solutions, kids are falling further behind.

    Why chronic absenteeism is hard to solve

    In 2019, only 13 percent of students in the U.S. were chronically absent. Typically, these students missed school because of significant personal reasons–long-term illness, gang involvement, clinical depression, working jobs to support their families, lacking transportation, drug use, unplanned pregnancy, etc.–that aren’t easily fixed.

    However, since the pandemic, the rate of chronic absenteeism has doubled from 13 percent to 26 percent.

    The change is cultural. For the last hundred years, it was drilled into the American psyche that “school is important.” A great effort was made to provide bussing to any child who lived too far to walk, and the expectation was that every child should come to school every day. Cutting class was sure to land you in the principal’s office or potentially even lead to police showing up at your door.

    During the Covid-19 pandemic, this narrative flipped. As parents began working from home, their kids sat beside them. With lectures recorded and assignments posted online, attending class began to feel optional. When school doors reopened, many families didn’t fully come back. Common excuses like being tired, missing the bus, or simply not feeling like going were validated and excused rather than admonished. While students who skip school were once seen as delinquent, for many families it has become culturally acceptable–almost even expected–for kids to stay home whenever they or their parents want.

    Overwhelmed by the drastic rise in absenteeism, school staff are unable to revert cultural norms about attendance. And it’s not their fault.

    The root of the problem

    Each student’s situation is unique. Some students may struggle with reliable transportation, while others skip certain classes they don’t like, and others still are disengaged with school entirely. Without knowing why students are missing school, staff cannot make progress addressing the root cause of chronic absenteeism.

    Today, nearly 75 percent of student absences are “unexplained,” meaning that no authorized parent called or emailed the school to say where their children are and why they aren’t in class. This lack of clarity makes it impossible for schools to offer personalized solutions and keep students engaged. Unexplained absences only deepen the disconnect and limit schools’ ability to tackle absenteeism effectively.

    Knowing why students are missing school is critical, but also very difficult to uncover. At a high school of 2,000 students with 85 percent average daily attendance, 225 students will be absent each day without providing any explanation. In an ideal world, schools would speak with every parent to find out the reason their child wasn’t in class–but schools can’t possibly make 225 additional phone calls without 3-5 additional staff. Instead, they rely on robocalls and absence letters, and those methods don’t work nearly well enough.

    Normalize attendance again: It takes a village

    Improving attendance is about more than just allocating additional resources. It’s about shifting the mindset and fostering a culture that prioritizes presence. This starts with schools and communities making attendance a shared responsibility, not just a policy.

    First, schools must take the initiative to understand why students are missing school. Whether through modern AI-driven attendance systems or with more traditional methods like phone calls, understanding the root causes is critical to addressing the issue.

    Next, categorize and recognize patterns. Small adjustments can have big impacts. One district noticed that students who were 0.9 miles away from school were much more likely to not show up because their bussing policy was for families living 1 mile away from school or further. By changing their policy, they saw a surge in attendance. Similarly, pinpointing specific classes that students are skipping can help tailor interventions, whether through teacher engagement or offering additional support.

    Lastly, schools should focus resources on students facing the most severe challenges. These students often require personalized solutions, such as home visits for unresponsive parents or help with transportation. Targeted efforts like these create a direct impact on reducing absenteeism and improving overall attendance.

    When communities unite to make school attendance a priority, students receive the support they need to succeed. Tackling chronic absenteeism is not an easy task, but with focused effort and a culture of engagement, we can reverse this troubling trend and give students the foundation they deserve for future success.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • The Science of Attention for Better Teaching

    The Science of Attention for Better Teaching

    Myriam Da Silva, CEO of CheckIT Learning, discusses the complexities of attention in education, emphasizing realistic expectations for student engagement. Through research and practical examples, she highlights how teachers can create engaging environments. The episode also shares a poignant story about the impact of a teacher’s attention on a young girl in the 1960s.

    We want kids to “pay attention” But is it realistic that they could actually pay attention all the time? How about the attention at the beginning of class? Or multiple peaks of attention?

    Myriam Da Silva, CEO of CheckITLearning and author of the first AI neuroscience lesson planning tool, Cleo, talks today about the aspects of attention that can help us be better teachers. She dives into practical examples, research, and we share lots of ideas for helping our classroom students learn while having an engaging, exciting environment (and realistic expectations.)

    This show is sponsored by CheckIT Learning. All opinions are that of the respective person.

    The, I share a story of Sue and Mrs. Scruggs about the power of 20 minutes of a teacher’s attention of a young girl living in Alabama in the 1960’s. This is a special story and I hope you enjoy how we’ve retold and remastered it just for high quality radio.

    I hope you enjoy this show. The content is so great, I’m going to also be sharing a full blog post with the ideas in written form, but in the meantime, I hope you enjoy the show.

    This infographic was created using the transcript of this episode and Google Notebook LM’s infographic feature based on the content shared in the show.

    Listen to the Show

    The Science of Attention: How One Teacher Changed Everything

    Myriam Da Silva – Bio as Submitted

    Myriam Da Silva, CheckIT Learning CEO

    Myriam Da Silva is a visionary, entrepreneur, AI ethicist, speaker, and artist driven by a singular mission: to inspire people to believe in themselves. Through her work and her story, she empowers audiences to embrace their unique gifts as a force for contribution, leading lives filled with meaning, purpose, and fulfillment.

    As the CEO of CheckIT Learning and President of the CheckIT Foundation, Myriam is pioneering a new vision for education grounded in human development. She is the creator of Cleo, the world’s first AI neuro-mentor designed to support teachers and students through the science of learning, and she developed a widely adopted Science of Learning micro-course that helps educators bring neuroeducation into daily practice.

    Myriam works with global organizations on AI ethics and child-centered design, including UNESCO, iRAISE, and international coalitions shaping responsible AI in education. She will also be featured on Women in Power, an Inside Success TV series highlighting female leaders who are redefining impact and innovation.

    She is the author of the forthcoming book The Black Sheep (2026), a powerful call to reimagine education so that every student’s uniqueness becomes their strength, empowering them to live, lead, and contribute with lasting impact. 

    Blog: www.checkitlearning.com

    Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/myriamdasilva

    Disclosure of Material Connection: This is a “sponsored podcast episode.” The company who sponsored it compensated me via cash payment, gift, or something else of value to include a reference to their product. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I believe will be good for my readers and are from companies I can recommend. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

    You Might Be Interested In

    Never miss an episode

    Get the 10-minute Teacher Show delivered to your inbox.


    Source link

  • To fight climate change, begin in the classroom

    To fight climate change, begin in the classroom

    A good teacher stays with you. For me it was my Grade 9 English teacher, Mrs. Renshaw, who was an eagle in a smart skirt suit, her beak always pointed in your direction, her eyes sharp and seeing. She scared us.

    The highest value, she often said, was “self discipline”. You would not be late to Mrs. Renshaw’s class.

    She stays with me not because some students cried under her screech, but because of the way she taught. We would begin every class by writing a caption to a funny image — a bicycle with square wheels or a whale breathing on land.

    We would then read, all together, one student out loud at a time, before discussing the themes of the story and its meaning.

    We didn’t have to wait for social science or psychology class to discuss such things as war, power structures, human instinct or violence because in Mrs. Renshaw’s class, we read and discussed “Lord of the Flies”. She thrived on hearing our interpretations of an author’s intentional and unintentional meaning and on hearing the stories we would come up with ourselves.

    She passed away a few years after I left high school, but Mrs. Renshaw left something powerful with me: A passion for stories as a way of understanding our world.

    Learning through stories

    For all teachers out there, Mrs. Renshaw left this lesson: Stories could be the main vessel through which we teach and through which we can empower youth.

    This is the heart of the EYES project.

    It started as an idea, almost precisely two years ago, driven by the bright headlights of two organisations: News Decoder and the The Environment and Human Rights Academy.

    The goal? Combine authoritative climate education and journalism to create a pathway for youth to deep knowledge.

    We would design a climate change curriculum with a systems approach and justice lens, grounded in storytelling, to provide teachers with an innovative and flexible way of teaching something multifaceted and vital — and to provide students with the agency to take action.

    The curriculum wouldn’t prescribe shorter showers or fewer beef burgers. It would instead shine light on the systems that keep the climate crisis in a relentless spiral and the injustices that have come as a result. And it would give students this fundamental task: Find the stories of the people and systems at the heart of climate change, but in their own communities and circumstances. We would guide them in communicating these stories to the world.

    Seeing the small parts that make a big problem

    They could start, maybe, with saving water if they have water to save and eating a plant-based diet if that’s available and affordable to them, but they should understand those are just pieces of a giant problem.

    By finding and telling stories, by being a journalist in one’s own community, students can start to connect the different pieces of climate change to their own circumstances and to feel a different sense of agency.

    Producing the climate storytelling curriculum was one thing. The challenge was getting it into schools. We ended up piloting it in ten countries — five in the European Union, five outside Europe — to gather feedback and refine the materials into a curriculum that can be added to any educator’s repertoire.

    We soon collided with reality. Tight school curricula leave little room for innovation. Teachers are busy. How to present something both complex and innovative in a way that is engaging, tangible and accessible to all students between the ages of 15 and 18?

    We built up a team of pilot teachers — springboarding from our networks -– and gave them a set of seven modules that explored such things as fossil fuel emissions, the carbon budget, climate justice and reasons to focus away from individual carbon footprints.

    Reporting climate change

    The modules included a project for students. They would pick a topic and report on it as journalists. That meant conducting interviews, gathering data and presenting it in a multimedia format.

    We imagined deep investigations, groundbreaking documentaries, enlivened youth.

    We organised in-person events to see how this curriculum would empower students in real time. In Brussels, we spoke with students about how emitting fossil fuels stays profitable and about how one area in Mumbai can be six degrees hotter than its immediate — and wealthier -– neighbouring area.

    In Paris, students pitched stories about climate injustice, and in Pristina, Kosovo, Roma students drew images of their own lived reality of climate change. We were in Romania and Serbia, and in two alternative education spaces in Portugal, where all modules were delivered to students who came from complex social backgrounds.

    We supported our pilot teachers in Cameroon, Colombia and Kenya from afar and connected students in Colombia, Kenya and Slovenia by making them “pen pals” so they could exchange letters on their differing lived experiences of climate change.

    Change doesn’t come easy.

    But we kept falling back onto the same challenges: time is squeezed at schools and climate injustice — a reality often experienced “elsewhere” — is hard to convey to young people.

    We get it. The economic system that climate change is rooted in is a hard one to grasp when you’re trying to figure out whether to go to university or how to get a job or what career to train for.

    It was disheartening. Was anyone really being empowered? There was little pick up and a whole lot of resistance, despite the innovative social science research that was at the heart of our program.

    And so again, we came back to the thread of the project — storytelling. After all, as author and organizational consultant Peg Neuhauser said: “No tribal chief or elder has ever handed out statistical reports, charts, graphs or lists to explain where the group is headed or what it must do.”

    It was in a conference room just south of Brussels, over three days in crisp October, that the wick of the project’s candle was finally lit. Educators from across Europe gathered around a large table to revitalise their teaching and, as the project was coming to a close, they opened a door I’d turned a blind eye to.

    Inspiring teachers to empower youth

    They listened, they contributed and they gave us a sense that we’d done it. We had laid down the soil. We had planted the seeds. All we needed were enthusiastic and present teachers to find the time and space to be together. This was the bright and warm spring we were waiting for.

    We saw that our curriculum was not a rigid product but a set of concepts, pedagogies and ideas that could be adapted by skilled and passionate teachers. And we could trust them to do that. The magic wasn’t in what we gave them, but in feeding the fire they already had for teaching climate change.

    The EYES curriculum is now as follows: 16 standalone classroom units each dealing with one concept — from tipping points to systemic change, from human–nature connection to green extractivism — and each including a bite-size storytelling activity such as come up with a pitch, explain a concept, make a connection. It includes six journalism guides from the principles of journalism and how to spot greenwashing, to how to interview and write an article.

    There’s an Educators’ Guide produced from the brainstorming of that workshop in Brussels, a blog written by educators and students and a podcast series featuring brilliant thinkers. All materials are freely available to educators wherever they teach.

    Ultimately, the success of EYES comes down to people: The educators; the advisory board; the students who were enlightened and empowered; the brilliance, strength and kindness of Andreea Pletea at The Environment and Human Rights Academy and her intimidatingly intelligent colleagues Anka Stankovic and Sebastien Kaye; the team at Young Educators European Association who bolstered the project when it was needed by helping to reach more students; Matthew and Jules Pye of The Climate Academy for transforming my way of seeing this global challenge; and my fantastic, curious and creative colleagues at News Decoder.

    Empowering Youth through Environmental Storytelling comes to an end on 31 December. And as I close my laptop on EYES for the final time, I am assured that I leave behind something that will continue to spread in classrooms and help teachers and students find the climate stories yet to be told.

    As Mrs. Renshaw taught me: A story does not end on the last page. It lives on in those it touches.

    Questions to consider:

    1. How can storytelling help students learn?

    2. What does it mean to look at a problem at the systems level?

    3. If you were going to explore a topic related to climate change, what would you tackle?

    Source link

  • Are you aware of your level of climate ignorance?

    Are you aware of your level of climate ignorance?

    Do you know which country emits the most greenhouse gases per capita? If not, you aren’t alone.

    I’m a student at The Climate Academy, an international organization founded by philosopher and climate activist Matthew Pye who teaches students about climate change from a systems point of view.

    This year, we surveyed almost 500 people in Brussels, Varese and Milan to analyse the level of climate literacy among populations across Europe. Many people we surveyed pointed at large emitters such as the United States, China and India.

    Yes, these are big emitters in quantity, but when it comes to per capita emissions — the amount divided by the population of the country — the top three are smaller, wealthy countries: Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and Belgium.

    These numbers can be explained by the extremely consumeristic, luxury lifestyle of the overwhelming majority of their citizens and the over-reliance on fossil fuels for generating energy. Yet, in our survey, 378 people out of 468 — 81% — named the United States, China or India.

    We must refocus the lens.

    What does this mean? That the media attention is on the wrong players. As stated by the World Economic Forum:

    “When India surpassed the European Union in total annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2019 becoming the third largest emitting country after China and the United States, that statistic only told part of the story. India’s population is nearly three times larger than that of the EU, so based on emissions per person, India ranks much lower among the world’s national emitters.”

    It is crucial to look at per capita emissions. That’s the conclusion of the Global Change Data Lab, a nonprofit organization that produces Our World in Data. It argues that annual national emissions do not take population size into account.

    “All else being equal, we might expect that a country with more people would have higher emissions,” it reported. “Emissions per person are often seen as a fairer way of comparing. Historically — and as is still true in low- and middle-income countries today — CO2 emissions and incomes have been tightly coupled. That means that low per capita emissions have been an indicator of low incomes and high poverty levels.”

    Europe often points at big emitters, but the comfortable lifestyles Europeans have due to their higher living standards aren’t sustainable.

    Who to blame for climate change?

    There’s a misconception that the more a country emits, the more responsible the country is for climate change.

    This is the result of intense lobbying and voluntary misdirection by the richest. The wealthiest individuals are undoubtedly responsible for a considerably higher share of global emissions. But we’re often told that countries like China and India are the most responsible, as they are some of the world’s biggest polluters, a fact which is widely recognized.

    Pye said it isn’t a surprise that the focus is on numbers at the macro level, as international organizations like the United Nations were created by the main global powers and they are still funded mainly by them.

    “Keeping the language and the numbers about the problem general and global masks the fact that the majority of our [per capita] emissions are still from these rich nations,” he said. “This lack of clarity about who is responsible is reflected right across global media coverage. It is not by chance that we don’t have a clear view of the vital statistics, it is by subtle and powerful design.”

    The UN is founded on the principle of human rights, he said.

    “Should it not think and act on climate change with everyone having an equal right to the air?” Pye said. “When you look at per capita and consumption emissions the whole landscape of responsibility is radically different.”

    Surveying people about greenhouse gases

    I conducted my part of the survey in a middle-class neighborhood of Brussels.

    When I asked a 20-year-old, “What would the consequences of a two degree increase in global temperature be?” I got this answer: “More meteorites.” When I put the same question to someone 50 years of age, the answer was, “It’s going to be cold.”

    A 75-year old told me: “I don’t believe in climate change. There were examples of extreme heat in the 17th century, it is natural. Climate change is a tool of the government to control us.”

    All of these are misconceptions about weather events, temperature patterns and the source and type of climate change we experience.

    Now, this survey included only a small sample of the population. But it already shows that the misconceptions in education about climate change are real and existent across every generation and in many ways. Many other surveys made by reputable organizations have supported this conclusion.

    What people don’t know

    A 2010 report by the Yale University Program on Climate Change Education found that 63% of Americans believed that global warming was happening, but many did not understand why. In this assessment, only 8% of Americans had knowledge equivalent to an A or B, 40% would receive a C or D, and 52% would get an F.

    A report by King’s College in London, based on a 2019 survey, found a similar level of ignorance.

    Misconceptions are still here, waiting to be tackled. It starts in schools, where new, fresh generations without bias or misconceptions are formed. It starts at home, where parents should adapt and teach their kids the basics. Proper educational programs should be set up by governments.

    This seems natural. But just a few months ago, in the United States, the Trump administration cut funding for schools that hold educational programs on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions reduction.

    Educational systems, too, spread misconceptions about climate change. Because we never stop learning, educational systems shouldn’t have such flaws and should provide accurate information.

    As we dive deeper into the climate crisis, proper knowledge and understanding will be key to systemic change and governmental response.

    Until information on climate change becomes a public good, we will continue to “debate what kind of swimming costume we will wear as the tsunami comes.” Those are the words of then-U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson before the 2008 financial crisis.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why is it important to consider the size of a population when considering responsibility for climate change?

    2. What is meant by “climate ignorance”?

    3. How can you learn more about climate change?

     

    Source link

  • Why every middle school student deserves a second chance to learn to read

    Why every middle school student deserves a second chance to learn to read

    Key points:

    Between kindergarten and second grade, much of the school day is dedicated to helping our youngest students master phonics, syllabication, and letter-sound correspondence–the essential building blocks to lifelong learning.

    Unfortunately, this foundational reading instruction has been stamped with an arbitrary expiration date. Students who miss that critical learning window, including our English Language Learners (ELL), children with learning disabilities, and those who find reading comprehension challenging, are pushed forward through middle and high school without the tools they need. In the race to catch up to classmates, they struggle academically, emotionally, and in extreme cases, eventually disengage or drop out.

    Thirteen-year-old Alma, for instance, was still learning the English language during those first three years of school. She grappled with literacy for years, watching her peers breeze through assignments while she stumbled over basic decoding. However, by participating in a phonetics-first foundational literacy program in sixth grade, she is now reading at grade level.

    “I am more comfortable when I read,” she shared. “And can I speak more fluently.”

    Alma’s words represent a transformation that American education typically says is impossible after second grade–that every child can become a successful reader if given a second chance.

    Lifting up the learners left behind 

    At Southwestern Jefferson County Consolidated School in Hanover, Ind., I teach middle-school students like Alma who are learning English as their second language. Many spent their formative school years building oral language proficiency and, as a result, lost out on systematic instruction grounded in English phonics patterns. 

    These bright and ambitious students lack basic foundational skills, but are expected to keep up with their classmates. To help ELL students access the same rigorous content as their peers while simultaneously building the decoding skills they missed, we had to give them a do-over without dragging them a step back. 

    Last year, we introduced our students to Readable English, a research-backed phonetic system that makes English decoding visible and teachable at any age. The platform embeds foundational language instruction into grade-level content, including the textbooks, novels, and worksheets all students are using, but with phonetic scaffolding that makes decoding explicit and systematic.

    To help my students unlock the code behind complicated English language rules, we centered our classroom intervention on three core components:

    • Rhyming: The ability to rhyme, typically mastered by age five, is a key early literacy indicator. However, almost every ELL student in my class was missing this vital skill. Changing even one letter can alter the sound of a word, and homographic words like “tear” have completely different sounds and meanings. By embedding a pronunciation guide into classroom content, glyphs–or visual diacritical marks–indicate irregular sounds in common words and provide key information about the sound a particular letter makes.
    • Syllabication patterns: Because our ELL students were busy learning conversational English during the critical K-2 years, systematic syllable division, an essential decoding strategy, was never practiced. Through the platform, visual syllable breaks organize words into simple, readable chunks that make patterns explicit and teachable.
    • Silent letter patterns: With our new phonics platform, students can quickly “hear” different sounds. Unmarked letters make their usual sound while grayed-out letters indicate those with a silent sound. For students frustrated with pronunciation, pulling back the curtain on language rules provided them with that “a-ha” moment.

    The impact on our students’ reading proficiency has been immediate and measurable, creating a cognitive energy shift from decoding to comprehension. Eleven-year-old Rodrigo, who has been in the U.S. for only two years, reports he’s “better at my other classes now” and is seeing boosts in his science, social studies, and math grades.

    Taking a new step on a nationwide level

    The middle-school reading crisis in the U.S. is devastating for our students. One-third of eighth-graders failed to hit the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) benchmark in reading, the largest percentage ever. In addition, students who fail to build literacy skills exhibit lower levels of achievement and are more likely to drop out of school. 

    The state of Indiana has recognized the crisis and, this fall, launched a new reading initiative for middle-school students. While this effort is a celebrated first step, every school needs the right tools to make intervention a success, especially for our ELL students. 

    Educators can no longer expect students to access grade-level content without giving them grade-level decoding skills. Middle-school students need foundational literacy instruction that respects their age, cognitive development, and dignity. Revisiting primary-grade phonics curriculum isn’t the right answer–educators must empower kids with phonetic scaffolding embedded in the same content their classmates are learning. 

    To help all students excel and embrace a love of reading, it’s time to reject the idea that literacy instruction expires in second grade. Instead, all of us can provide every child, at any age, the chance to become a successful lifelong reader who finds joy in the written word.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Can we use AI intelligently?

    Can we use AI intelligently?

    Artificial intelligence apps are too useful to avoid. But can schools use them in ways that won’t harm creativity or turn students into robots?

    Source link

  • What Does AI Readiness Mean for Schools? – The 74

    What Does AI Readiness Mean for Schools? – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Class Disrupted is an education podcast featuring author Michael Horn and Futre’s Diane Tavenner in conversation with educators, school leaders, students and other members of school communities as they investigate the challenges facing the education system in the aftermath of the pandemic — and where we should go from here. Find every episode by bookmarking our Class Disrupted page or subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Play or Spotify.

    Michael and Diane sit down with Alex Kotran, founder and CEO of the AI Education Project (AIEDU), to dive into what true “AI readiness” means for today’s students, educators and schools. They explore the difference between basic AI literacy and the broader, more dynamic goal of preparing young people to thrive in a world fundamentally changed by technology. The conversation ranged from the challenges schools face in adapting assessments and teaching practices for the age of AI, to the uncertainties surrounding the future of work. The episode asks key questions about the role of education, the need for adaptable skills, and how we can collectively steer the education system toward a future where all students can benefit from the rise of AI.

    Listen to the episode below. A full transcript follows.

    *Correction: At 17:40, Michael attributes an idea to Andy Rotherham, The idea should have been attributed to Andy Smarick.

    Diane Tavenner: Hey, Michael.

    Michael Horn: Hey, Diane. It is good to see you as always. Looking forward to this conversation today.

    AI Education and Literacy Insights

    Diane Tavenner: Me, too. You know what I’m noticing, first of all, I’m loving that we’re doing a whole season on AI because I felt like the short one was really crowded. And now we get to be very expansive in our exploration, which is fun. And that means we’ve opened ourselves up. And so there’s so much going on behind the scenes of us constantly pinging each other and reading things and sending things and trying to make sense of all the noise. And just this morning, you opened it up super big. And so it works out perfectly with our guest today. So I’m very excited to be here.

    Michael Horn: No, I think that’s right. And we’re having similar feelings as we go through the series. And I’m, I’m really excited for today’s guest and because I think, you know, there are a lot of headlines right now around executive actions with regards to AI or, you know, different countries making quote, unquote, bold moves, whether it’s South Korea or Singapore or China and how much they’re using AI in education or not. We’re going to learn a lot more today, I suspect, from our guest, and he’s going to help put it all in the context, hopefully, because we’ve got Alex Kotran, excuse me, joining us. He’s the founder and CEO of the AI Education Project, or AIEDU. And AIEDU is a nonprofit that is designed to make sure that every single student, not just a select few, understands and can benefit from the rise of artificial intelligence. Alex is working to build a national movement to bring AI literacy and readiness into K12 classrooms, help educators and students explore what AI means for their lives, their work, and their futures.

    And so with all that, I’m really excited because, as I said, I think he’s going to shed a little bit of light on these topics for us today. I’m sure we’re only going to get to scratch the surface with him because he knows so much, but he’s really got his pulse on the currents at play with AI and education, and perhaps he can help us separate some of the hype from reality, or at least the very real questions that we ought to be asking. So, Alex, with all that said, no pressure, but welcome. We’re excited to have you.

    Alex Kotran: I’ll do my best.

    Michael Horn: Sounds good. Well, let’s start maybe just your personal story right into this work and what motivates you around this topic in particular, to spend your time on it.

    Alex Kotran: I’ve been in the AI space for about 10 years. But you know, besides being sort of proximate to all these conversations about AI, you know, I don’t have a background in software, computer science. I don’t think I have ever written a line of code. I mean, my dad was a software engineer. He teaches CS now. No background in technology or CS, no background in education. And so I actually, I had funders ask me this when I first launched AIEDU like, well like, why are you here? Like, what’s, what’s your role in all of this? You know, my background is in really political organizing. I started my career working on a presidential campaign, went and worked for the White House for the Obama administration, doing outreach for the Affordable Care act and other stuff like Ebola and Medicare and, and then found myself in D.C.

    and after I just kind of got burned out of politics for reasons people probably don’t need to hear and can completely understand. And so it wasn’t that I was so smart to like, oh, I knew AI was the next thing. I just was like, I really want to move to San Francisco. I visited there, visited the city like twice and just fell in love and sort of fell into tech and an AI company that was working in cleantech. And so I was sort of doing AI work before it was really cool. It was like back in 2015, 2016. And then I ended up getting like what at the time was a kind of a really random job that I had a lot of mentors who were like, I don’t know, Alex, like AI, like this is just like a fringe, you know, emerging technology kind of like, you know, 3D printing and VR and XR and the Metaverse, you know, is that really like what you should do? And I just had like, nah, I just want to learn.

    It seems really interesting. And that’s why I joined this AI company essentially working for the family office for the CEO. It was like, sort of a hybrid family office, corporate job, doing CSR, corporate social responsibility in the legal sector. This is the first company to build AI tools for use in the law. And so I was sort of charged with how do we advance the governance of AI and sort of like the safe and ethical use of AI and the rule of law. And so I basically had a blank canvas and ended up building the world’s first AI literacy program for judges. I worked with the National Judicial College in Stanford and NYU Law, trained thousands of judges around the world in partnership, by the way, with non profits like the Future Society and organizations like UNESCO. And because my parents are educators, I, you know, and my parents are foreign immigrants as well.

    And so they always ask me about my job and really trying to convince me to go back, to go to law school or get a PhD or something. And I was like, well, no, but, you know, I actually, I’m, I don’t need to go to law school. I’m actually training judges. Like, they’re, they’re coming to learn from me about this thing called AI. And my mom was like, oh, like, well, that sounds so interesting. You know, have you thought about coming, you should come to my school and teach my kids about AI. And she teaches high school math in Akron, Ohio. And I was just like, surely your kids are learning about AI.

    That’s, you know, my assumption is that we’re at a minimum talking to the future workers about the future of work. I just assume that, you know, like, you know, judges who tend to be older, like, they kind of need to be caught up. And after I started looking around to see, like, is there other curriculum that I could share with my mom’s school, I found that there really wasn’t anything. And that was back in 2019. 2018/2019. So way before ChatGPT and thus AIEDU was born when I realized, OK, this doesn’t exist. This actually seems like a really big problem because even as, even as early as 2018, frankly, as early as 2013, people in the know, technologists, people in Silicon Valley, labor economists, were sounding the alarms, like, AI is, you know, automation is going to replace like tens of millions of jobs.

    This is going to be one of the huge disruptors. You had the World Economic Forum talking about the fourth Industrial Revolution. Really, this wasn’t much of a secret. It was just, you know, like, esoteric and like, you know, in the realm of like certain nerdy wonky circles. And it just, there wasn’t a bridge between those, the people that were meeting at the AI conferences and the people in education. And I would really say, like, our work now is still anchored in this question of, like, how do you make sure that there is a bridge between the cutting edge of technology and the leadership and decision makers who are trying to chart a course not over the next two years, which is sort of like how a lot of, I think Silicon Valley is thinking in the sort of like, very immediate reward system where they’re just, you know, like, they’re, they’re looking at the next fundraise. But in education, you’re thinking about the next 10 years. These are huge tanker ships that we’re trying to navigate now and we’re entering.

    I think this is such a trope, but, like, we are really entering uncharted waters. And so, like, steering that. That supertanker is hard and I suppose to really belabor it as maybe AIEDU is sort of like the nimble tugboat, you know, that’s trying to just sort of like, nudge everybody along and sort of like guide folks into the future. And that demands answering some of this core question of the future of work, which hopefully we’ll get some more time to talk about.

    Michael Horn: Yeah, I want to, I want to move there in a moment, but I, but first, like, I maybe I don’t know that all of our audience will be caught up with all the, you know, sort of this macro environment right where. Where we sit right now in terms of the national policy, executive actions as it pertains to AI and education. They’ve probably heard about it, but don’t know what it actually means, if anything. And so maybe sort of set the scene around where we are today nationally on these actions? What if it is actually meaningful or impactful? What if it is maybe more lip service around the necessity of having the conversation rather than moving the ball, just sort of set the stage for us where we are right now.

    Alex Kotran: It’s really hard to say. I mean, there’s been a lot of action at the federal level and at state levels and schools have implemented AI strategies. The education space is inundated with, like, discussion and initiatives at working groups and bills and, you know, like, pushes for, like, AI and education. I think the challenge now is, like, we really haven’t agreed on, like, to what end? Like, is this, you know, are we talking about using AI to advance education as a tool? So, like, can AI allow us to personalize learning and address learning gaps and help teachers save time, or are we talking about the future of work and how do we make sure kids are ready to thrive? And there are some that say, well, they. We just need to get them really good at using tools. Which is a conversation I literally had earlier today where there was like a college to career nonprofit and they were like, well, we’re trying to figure out what tools that help kids learn because we want them to be able to get jobs.

    I think like AIEDU, like, our work is actually, we don’t build tools. We don’t even have a software engineer on our team, which we’re trying to fix, like, if there’s a funder out there that would like to help fund an engineer, we’d love to have one. But our work is really systems change. Because if you like, zoom out and like, this is, I think, where I do have this skill set. And it’s kind of like, again, it’s a bit niche.

    The education system is not. It’s not one thing. It’s like, it’s sort of like an organism. The same way that like redwood trees are organisms. Like, they’re kind of all connected, the root structure. But it’s actually like you’re looking at a forest that looks very different, you know, that’s not centralized. You know, every state kind of has their own strategy. And frankly, every district, in many cases, you’re talking about, you know, in some cases, like government scale, procurement, discussion, bureaucracy involved.

    Advancing AI Readiness in Education

    Alex Kotran: So if you’re trying to do systems change, this is really a project of like, how do you move a really heterogeneous group of humans and different audiences and stakeholders with different motivations and different priorities? And so our work is all about, OK, like, setting a North Star for everybody, which is like defining where we’re actually trying to go, what. And we use the word AI readiness, not AI literacy. Because what we’re, what we care about is kind of irrespective of whether kids are really good at using AI. Like, are they thriving in the world? And then like, how do you get there? Like, like most of our budget goes to delivering that work, you know, doing actual services, where we’re building the human, basically building the human capital and like, the content. So like training teachers, building curriculum, adapting existing curriculum, more so than building new curriculum, but like integrating learning experiences into core subjects that build the skills that students are going to need. And those skills, by the way, are not just AI literacy, but durable skills like problem solving, communication, and core content knowledge frankly, like being able to read and write and do math, we think is actually really important still, if not more important. And then sort of the third pillar to our work is really catalyzing the ecosystem.

    And because the only way to do this is by building a movement, right? Like, sure, there. There’s an opportunity for someone to build a successful nonprofit that’s delivering services today. But if you actually want to change the world and really solve this problem on the timescale required, you have to somehow rally the entire, there’s like a million K12 nonprofits. We need all of them. This is like an all hands on deck moment. And so our organization is really obsessed with, like, how do we stay small and almost like operate as the intel inside to empower, like, the existing nonprofits so that they don’t have to all pivot and, like, become AI because, like, there’s just not enough AI experts to go around. If every school and every nonprofit wanted to hire an AI transformation officer.

    Like, there just wouldn’t be enough people for them to hire.

    Diane Tavenner: Yeah, they’re still trying to hire a good tech lead in schools. We’re definitely not getting an AI expert in every school soon. So you’re, you’re speaking my language, you know, sort of change management, vision, leadership 101, etc. I’m wondering, you know, sort of not necessarily the place we were thinking we’d go in this conversation, but I think it’d be fun to go, like, really deep for a moment that I think is related to your North Star comment. What does school look like in the age of AI? When kids are flourishing, when young people are flourishing, and when they’re successfully launching? I think that’s what the North Star has to describe.

    And you just started naming a whole bunch of things that are still important in school, which feel very familiar to me. They’re all parts of the schools that I’ve built and designed and whatnot. And so I think one of the interesting things is maybe we’ll then build back up to policy and whatnot. But, like, what does it look like if we succeed, if there is this national movement, we’re successful. We have schools or whatever they are that are enabling young people to flourish. What do you think that that looks like?

    Alex Kotran: Yeah, this is the question of our day. Right. I mean, I think this is where, I mean, just to go back to this, like, state of play. I think, like, we’re kind of. It’s very clear that we are in the age of AI, right? This is no longer some future state. And frankly, like, ignore all the talk about AI bubbles because it kind of doesn’t matter. I mean, there was, there was like, there’s always a bubble. There was a bubble when we had railroads.

    There was a bubble when we had, like, in the oil boom. There was a bubble with the Internet. You know, there probably will be some kind of a bubble with AI, but that’s kind of like part and parcel with transformational technologies. Nobody who’s really spent time digging these technologies believes that there’s not going to be AI sort of totally proliferated throughout our work in society in like, 10 years, which is, again, the timeframe that we’re thinking about. The key question is, though, like, what is it? Like, what does it mean to thrive? And so there’s more than just getting a job. But I think most people would admit that, like, having a job is really important. So maybe we start there and we can also talk about, you know, the, the social, emotional components of just sort of like, being able, being resilient to some of like, the onslaught of synthetic media and like, AI companions as other stuff. One of, if not the most important thing is, like, how do you get a job and like, have like, you know, be able to support yourself and, and that question is really unanswered right now.

    Uncertainty in AI and Future Jobs

    Alex Kotran: And so everybody in the education system is trying to figure out, like, well, what is our strategy? But we don’t know where we’re going? Like, we really do not know what the jobs of the future are. And like, I’ve, like, you hear platitudes like, well, it’s not that AI is going to take your job, it’s that somebody using AI is going to take your job. Which is a kind of a dumb thing to say because it’s, it’s correct. I mean, it’s like, it’s like, basically like, okay, either AI is going to do all the jobs, which I don’t like, like, that actually may happen, some people say, sooner than later. I just assume it’s going to be a long, long time if it ever, if we ever get there. And so until we get there, that means that there are humans doing jobs and AI and technology doing other aspects of work. So, like, what are the humans doing is really the important question. Not just like, are they using AI? But like, how are they using AI? How aren’t they using AI? Until we get more fidelity about what the future of work looks like, what are the skills you should be teaching? Because, like, you know, like, I think a lot about, like, cell phones.

    And you go back to 2005 and you can imagine a conversation where it’s like, and all this is completely true, right? In 2005, it would be correct to say that, you know, you will not be able to get a job if you don’t know how to use a cell phone. You will be using a cell phone every single day, whether you’re a plumber or a mathematician or an engineer or an astrophysicist. And yet I think most of us would agree that, like, we shouldn’t have, like, totally pivoted education to focus on, like, cell phone literacy because, like, nobody’s going to hire you because you know how to use a phone and AI like, probably is going to some degree get there. I mean, it’s already sort of there, right? Like, sure, there are people who will charge you money to teach you prompt engineering, but you could also just open up Gemini and say, help me write a prompt. Here’s what I want to do. And it will basically tell you how to do it.

    Diane Tavenner: I mean, we. You’ve seen this. You might not be old enough to remember this, but I was a teacher when everyone thought it was a really good idea to teach keyboarding in school. It’s like a class. What we discovered is actually if you just have people using technology, they learn how to use the keyboard. Right? Like, it happens in the natural course of things and you don’t have a class for it. So what I hear you saying is like, your approach is not about this sort of, you know, there’s some finite set of information or skill, you know, not even skills in many ways that we’re going to teach kids. But it’s like, what does it look like to have them ready for the world that honestly is here to today and then keeps evolving and changing over the next 10 years? And so where to even go with that, Michael because.

    Michael Horn: I mean, part of me wonders, Alex, like, if I start to name the things that remain relevant, what, like, maybe the conversation to have is like, what’s less relevant in your view, based on what the world of work and society is going to look like?

    What’s the stuff that we do today that you know, will feel quaint? Right, that we should be pruning from?

    Diane Tavenner: Yeah, cursive handwriting. That is still hotly debated by, by the way.

    Alex Kotran: But, you know, although you get like Deerfield Prep and they’re going back to pen and paper.

    Michael Horn: Right. So that, I mean, that’s kind of where I’m curious. Like, what practices would you lean into? What would you pull away from? Because, I mean, that’s part of the debate as well. Like our friend Andy Rotherham, I believe at the time we’re recording it, just had a post around how it’s time for a, you know, a pause on AI in all schools. Right. Not sure that’s possible for a variety of reasons. But, like, what would you pull back on? What would you lean into? What would you stop doing that’s in schools today, as you think about that readiness for the world that will be here in your, we’re all guessing, but 10 years from now.

    Alex Kotran: Now, what to pull back on? I mean, look, take home essays are dead. Don’t assign take-home essays like the detectors are imperfect. It’s like, and as a teacher, do you really want to be like an, you know, a cyber forensics specialist? Like that’s not the right use of your time. And also you’re using AI. So it’s a bit weird to the dissonance of like, oh, like empowering teachers with AI, but then like, we need to prevent kids from using it. But I think they’re like low hanging fruit. Like, OK, don’t assign take-home essays.

    The way to abstract, that is students are. You can call it cheating, let’s just call it shortcuts. What we do need to do is figure out, OK, how can AI, how is AI being used as a shortcut? And whether you ban it in schools, kids are going to use it out of school. And so teachers need to figure out how to create assessments and homework and projects that design such that you can’t just use AI as a shortcut. And there’s like, this is a whole separate conversation. But just like to give one example, having students demonstrate learning by coming into the class and presenting and importantly having to answer questions in real time about a topic. You can use all the AI you want, but if you’re going to be on the spot and you don’t understand whatever the thing is that you’re presenting about and you’re being asked questions like, you know, that’s the kind of thing where sure, use all the AI. If it’s helpful, you might just.

    But ultimately you just need to learn the thing. But like the more important question is like, I don’t know if school changes as much as people might think. I think it does change. I think there’s a lot that we know needs to change that is kind of irrespective of AI. Like we need learning to be more engaging. We need more project based learning. We need to shift away from just sort of like pure content knowledge, memorization. But that’s not necessarily new or novel because of AI.

    I think it is more urgent than ever before.

    Michael Horn: I’m curious, like what’s. Because I do think this is also hotly debated, right? Like in terms of the role of knowledge and being able to develop skills and things of that nature. And so I’m just sort of curious, like what’s the thin layer of knowledge you think we need to have? Or, or like Steven Pinker’s phrase, common knowledge Right

    And what’s the stuff we don’t have? Like we don’t have to memorize state capitals, right? Maybe.

    Diane Tavenner: No. Yeah, I don’t think we need to memorize the state capital, because, yeah, but keep going.

    Michael Horn: Yeah, yeah, I’m curious now. It’s like, right, like as we think about, because we do have this powerful assistant serving us now and we think about what that means for work. And I, but I guess I’m just curious, like, what does that really mean in terms of that balance, right? Like, what is all knowledge learned through the project or this, you know, how do we think about, you know, and it’s a lot of just in time learning perhaps, which is more motivating. I’m curious, like, how you think about that.

    Alex Kotran: I think this needs to be like, backed by, like research, right? Like, sure, it probably is, right, that you don’t need to memorize all the state capitals. But then I think you, you start to get to a place where like, OK, well, but do you even need to learn math? Because AI is really good at math and I think math is actually a good analog because I don’t really use math very much or I use relatively simplistic math day to day. I, I think it was really valuable for me to like, have spent the time building computational thinking skills and logic. And also just math was really hard for me and it was challenging. And like the process of learning a new abstract, hard thing. I do use that skill, even some of the rote memorization stuff. You know, my brother went to med school and like they spent a lot of time just memorizing like completely just like every tiny aspect of the human body.

    They like have to learn it. It’s actually like, I think doctors are really interesting, a great way to kind of double click on this because if doctors don’t go through all of that and don’t understand the body and go through all of the rote process of literally taking like thousand question tests where they have to know like random things about blood vessels. And even if they’re never going to deal with that specific aspect of the human body, doctors kind of like build this sort of like generalized set of knowledge and then also they spend all this time like interacting with real world cases. And you, you start to build instincts based on that and, and you talk to hospitals about like, oh, what about, you know, AI to help with diagnosis? And one of the things I hear a lot of is, well, we’re worried about doctors losing the capacity to be a check on the AI because ultimately we hear a lot about the human in the loop. The human in the loop is only relevant if they understand the thing that they’re looped into. So, yeah, so like, I don’t know, I mean, maybe we.

    Diane Tavenner: Yeah, you’re onto something. You’re spurring something for me that I, I actually think is the new thing to do and haven’t been doing and aren’t talking about. And that is this, let me see if I can describe it as I’m understanding it, unfold the way you’re talking about it. So I had a reaction to the idea of memorizing the state capitals because memorizing them is pretty old school, right? It calls back to a time where you aren’t going to be able to go get your encyclopedia off the shelf and look up the capitals. Like you have to have that working knowledge in your mind, if you will, to have any sense of geography and, you know, whatever you might be doing. And it was pretty binary.

    Like it really wasn’t easy to access knowledge like that. So you really did have to like memorize these things. Math, multiplication tables get cited often and whatnot for fluency in thinking and whatnot. So I don’t think that goes away. But it’s different because we have such easy access to AI and so there isn’t this like dependency on, you’re the only source of that knowledge, otherwise you’re not going to be able to go get it. But it doesn’t take away the need to have that working understanding of the world and so many things in order to do the heavier lifting thinking that we’re talking about and the big skills. And I think that, I don’t think there’s a lot of research on that in between pieces, like, how do you teach for that level of knowledge acquisition and internalization and whatnot? And how do you then have a, you know, a more seamless integration with the use of that knowledge in the age of AI when it’s so easily accessible? So that feels like a really interesting frontier to me. That doesn’t look exactly the same as what we’ve been doing, but isn’t totally in a different world either.

    It is restricted, responsive and reflective of the technology we have and how it will get used now.

    Rethinking Assessments and Learning Strategies

    Alex Kotran: Yeah, it’s, it’s a helpful push because like, what I’m not saying is that I know everything in school is fine. I don’t think I’ve ever talked to a superintendent who would say, oh, I’m feeling good about our assessment strategy. Like, we’ve known that and because really what you’re describing is assessments like what, like what are we assessing in terms of knowledge, which becomes the driver and incentive structure for teachers to like, you know, because to your point. Are you spending five weeks just memorizing capitals or are you spending two weeks and then also then saying, OK, now that you’ve learned that, I want you to actually apply that knowledge and like come up with a political campaign for governor of, you know, a state that you learned about and like, tell us about like why you’re going to be picking those. You know, tell us about your campaign platform. Right. And you know, like, how is it connected to what you learned about the geography of that state? So it’s like adapting, integrating project based learning and more engaging and relevant learning experiences. And then like the mix and the balance of what, what’s happening in the classroom is sort of, and this is the, the challenging thing because it’s like the assessments will inform that, but it’s also there the assessments are downstream of sort of like it’s not just about getting the assessments right, but it’s like, why are we assessing these things? And so that you very quickly get to like, well like, what is the future of work? And because like, yeah, I mean like, you probably don’t need to learn the Dewey Decimal system anymore.

    Even though being able to navigate knowledge is maybe one of the most important things, certainly something I use every day.

    Diane Tavenner: One of the things we tend to do in US Education, Alex, is be so US centric and we forget that other people on the planet might be grappling with some of these things. I know you track a lot of what happens around the globe. What can we look at as models or interesting, you know, experiments or explorations. Everything from like big system change work, which I know we have different systems across the world, so that’s different. It’s a little bit, it’s not groundswell, it’s a top down but like anything from policy, big system all the way down to like who, who might be doing interesting things in the classroom. Where are you looking for inspiration or models across the globe?

    Alex Kotran: I mean, South Korea is a really interesting case study. You mentioned South Korea. I think at the beginning of this, during the intro they were just in headlines because they had done this big push. They would like roll out personalized learning nationwide. And then they announced that they were rolling back or sort of slowing down or pausing on the strategy. I forget if it was a rollback or a pause, but they’re basically like, wait, this isn’t working. And what they found is that they hadn’t made a requisite investment in the teacher capacity. And that was clear.

    And so part of the reason I’m tracking that is because I don’t know that there’s very much for us to learn from what any school is doing right now, beyond, like, there’s a lot for us to learn in the sense of like, how can we empower teacher, like, how do we empower teachers to run with this stuff? Because they are doing that. You know, like, I think there’s a lot to learn from a, like a mechanical standpoint of like, implementation strategies. But I don’t know that anybody has figured this out because like, nobody can yet describe what the future of work looks like. And I know this because the AI companies can’t even describe what the future of work looks like. You know, you had like Dario Amodei at Anthropic seven months ago, saying in six months, 90% of code is going to be written by AI, which is not the case. Not even close.

    Diane Tavenner: And Amazon’s going to lay off 30,000 white collar workers this week,

    Alex Kotran: Which they did.. Yes. And so you have. But is that really because of AI or is that because of overhiring from interest rates? I mean there’s like, so, so until we answer this question of like, what is like. And really the way to say what is the future of work is like, to put it in educational terms, how are you going to add value to the labor market? Like, David Otter has this like, example which I think is really important. It’s like, you know, the crosswalk coordinator versus the air traffic controller. And then, like, we pay the air traffic controller four times as much because any one of us could go, be a crosswalk coordinator like today, just give us a vest and a stop sign. I don’t, I assume you’re not moonlighting as an air traffic controller. I’m certainly not.

    It would take us, I think, I don’t know what the process is, but I think years to acquire the expertise. And so there is this barrier of expertise to do certain things. And what AI will do is lower the barriers to entry for certain types of expertise, things like writing, things like math. And so in those environments where AI is increasingly going to be automating certain types of expertise, then, well, for people to still get wages that are good or to be employed, they have to be adding something additional. And so the question of like, what are the humans adding? Again, we get to stuff like durable skills. We get to stuff like a human in the loop. But I think it’s much more nuanced than that. And the reason I know that is because there’s the MIT study.

    I think it was a survey, but let’s call it a study. I think they called it a study. So there’s a study from MIT that found that 95% of businesses, AI implementations failed, have not been successful. So really what we’re seeing is, yes, AI is blowing up, but for the most part, most organizations have not actually cracked the code on like, how to like, unlock productivity and like. And so I think that there’s actually quite a lot of business change management and organizational change that’s coming. And so actually kind of trying to hone in on what does that look like, I think is maybe the key, because that will take 10 years if you look at computers. Computers, like, could have revolutionized businesses long before, but they ended up getting adopted. I mean, it took like decades actually for, you know, spreadsheets and things like that to become ubiquitous.

    And like Excel is a great example of something. I was just talking to this, this expert from the mobile industry who was talking about, like, the interesting thing about spreadsheets was it didn’t just automate because there were people who literally would hand write, you know, ledgers before Excel. And so obviously that work got automated. But the other thing that spreadsheets did, where they created a new category of work, which is like the business analysts, because. Because before spreadsheets there was really the only way to get that information was to like, call somebody and sort of like compile it manually. And now you had a new way to look at information which actually unlocked a new sort of function that didn’t exist. And that meant, like, businesses now have teams of people that are like, doing layers of analysis that they didn’t realize that they could do before. And so

    Diane Tavenner: I wonder, what you’re saying is sparking two things for me. And again, we could talk probably all day, but we don’t have all day. So sadly, I think this might be bringing us to a close here for the moment. But I’m curious what both of you think on this because you brought up air traffic controllers. And in my new life and work, I’m very obsessed with careers and how people get into them and whatnot. I’ve done deep dives on air traffic controllers. And it’s, my macro point here is going to be.

    I do wonder if this moment of AI is also just extreme, exposing existing challenges and problems and bringing them to the forefront. Because let me be clear, training air traffic controllers in the US was a massive problem before AI came around, before any of this happened. It’s a really messed up system. It is so constrained. It’s not set up for success. Like, it’s just such a disaster and a mess and it’s such a critical role that we have. And it’s probably going to change with AI. Like, so you’ve just got all these things going on.

    And I’m wondering, Michael, from your perspective, is that what happens in these, you know, moments of disruption and is that all predictable and how do we get out of it? And then, Alex, you’re talking about. I was having a conversation this morning about this idea that all these companies no longer are hiring sort of those entry level analysts, or they’re hiring far fewer of them. And my wondering is no one can seem to answer this question yet. Great. Where’s your manager coming from? Because if you don’t employ any people at that level and they haven’t sort of learned the business and learned things, what do you think they’re just sitting on the sidelines for seven, eight years and then they’re ready to slide in there into, you know, the roles that you are keeping? And so are these just problems that already existed that are now just being exposed, you know, what’s going on? What do you all think?

    Job Market Trends and AI

    Alex Kotran: So, first of all, we really don’t know if the, like, I’m not convinced that the reason that there’s high unemployment among college grads is because of AI. I mean, I think there was overhiring because of interest, low interest rates. I think that companies are trying to free up cash flow to pay for the inference costs of these tools. And, and I think in general, like, you know, we’re, there’s going to be like, sort of like boom, bust cycles in terms of hiring in general. And we’ve been in a really good period of high employment for a long time. I think what, what is clear is if you talk to like earlier stage companies, you know, I was talking to a friend of mine at Cursor, which is like one of the big vibe coding companies, like blowing up, worth lots and lots of money. And I asked them about, like, oh, like I keep hearing about like, you know, companies aren’t hiring entry level engineers anymore because like, you’re better off having someone with experience.

    And he’s like, all of our engineers are in like their early 20s. Huh. OK, that’s interesting. Well, yeah, because actually it’s a lot faster and easier to train somebody who’s an AI native who learned software engineering while vibe coding. But he’s like, but we’re a small organization that’s like basically building out our structure as we go so we don’t have to like operate within sort of like the confines. I think there’s going to be this idea of like incumbent organizations. They have the existing hierarchy because ultimately you’re looking for people who are like really fast learners who can like learn new technology, who are adaptable and who are good at like doing hard stuff. If you’re a small organization, you’re probably better off just like hiring young people that like, you know, have those instincts.

    If you’re a large organization, what you might do is just maybe you’re laying off some of the really slow movers and then retaining and promoting the people that are already in place and have those characteristics. And then your point about like training the next generation, like law firms are thinking about this a lot because like you could, maybe you could automate all the entry level associates, but you do need a pipeline. But then you get to do you need middle managers? I mean like if the business models are less hierarchical because you just don’t need all those layers, then maybe you don’t worry so much about whether you need middle management and it’s more about do you need more. I think what companies are going to realize is they actually need more systems thinkers and technology native employees that are integrated into other verticals of knowledge work that outside of tech. So like, if you think about marketing and like business and customer success and you know, like non profit world fundraising and policy analysts, like all of these teams that generally have like people from the humanities. You know, I think companies are going to say, OK, how do we actually get people that like can do some vibe coding and have a little bit of like CS chops to build out some, you know, much more efficient and productive ways for these teams to operate. But like nobody knows. Nobody knows.

    I don’t know. Michael?

    Michael Horn: I love this point, Alex, where you’re ending and that like, and I like the humility frankly in a lot of the guests that we’ve had around. This is like the honesty that we’re all guessing a little bit at this future and we’re looking at different signals right. As we do. I think my quick take off this and I’ll try to give my version of it, I guess is you mentioned David Otter earlier at mit, Alex. Right. And part of his contention is that actually, right, it levels expertise between jobs that we’ve paid a lot for and jobs that we haven’t and more people like, as opposed to technology that is increasing inequality. This may be a technology that actually decreases inequality. And I guess it goes to my second thing, Diane, around what the question you asked and air traffic control training is a great example.

    But like, fundamentally, the organizations and processes we have in place have a very scarcity mindset. And I suspect they’re going to fight change and we’re going to need new disruptive organizations, similar to what Alex was just saying, that look very differently to come in. And it gets to a little bit of, I think what everyone says with technology, like the short term predictions are huge. They tend to disappoint on that. The long term change is bigger than we can imagine. And I guess I kind of wonder is the long term change what we. Alex, earlier on this season we had Reed Hastings and you know, he has a very abundant sort of society mindset where the robots plus AI plus probably quantum computing, like, are doing a lot of the things, or is it frankly sort of what you or I think Paul LeBlanc would argue, which is that a lot of these things that require trust and we want people like, yes, you can build an AI that does fundraising for you. But like, do I really trust both sides of that equation? I’d rather interact with someone.

    Right. There’s a lot of social capital that sort of greases these wheels ultimately in society. And I guess that’s a bit of the question. And Diane, I guess part of me thinks, you know, Carlota Perez, who’s written about technology revolutions, right. She says that there will be some very uncomfortable parts of this, right. And a bit of upheaval. Part of me keeps wondering if we can grease the wheels for new orgs to come in organically, can we avoid some of that upheaval because they’ll actually more naturally move to paying people for these jobs in a more organic way.

    And I, right now we have a, I’m not sure we have that mindset in place. That’s a bit of my question.

    Diane Tavenner: More questions than answers. More questions than answers. Really. This has been, wow, really provocative.

    Michael Horn: Yeah. So let’s, let’s, let’s leave. We could go on for a while. Let’s leave the conversation here for the moment. Alex, A segment we have on the show as we wrap up always is things we’re reading, watching, listening to either inside work or we try to be outside of work. You know, podcasts, TV shows, movies, books, whatever it might be. What’s on your night table or in your ear or in front of your eyes right now that you might share with us.

    Alex Kotran: I’m reading a book about salt. It’s called Salt.

    Michael Horn: This came out a few years ago. Yeah. Yeah. My wife read it.

    Alex Kotran: Yeah, I’m actually reading it for the second time. But it is, you know, it’s interesting because we. It’s something that’s, like, now you take for granted. But, you know, there’s a time when, you know, wars were fought. You know, it sort of spurred entire new sorts of technologies around. Like, the Erie Canal was basically, you know, like, salt was a big component of, you know, why we even built the Erie Canal. It’s. It’s actually nicknamed a ditch that salt built, you know, spurring new mining techniques.

    Technology’s Interconnected Conversation

    Alex Kotran: And, you know, I just find it fascinating that, like, you know, there are these, like, technology is so interconnected not to bring it back. I know this is supposed to be outside, but all I read, I only read nonfiction, so it’s going to be connected in some way. I just, like, fascinated by, like, you know, there are these sort of, like, layers behind the scenes that we sometimes take for granted that, you know, can actually be, like, you know, quietly, you know, monumental. I think what’s cool about this moment with technology is it’s like everybody’s a part of this conversation. Like, before, it was, like, much more cloistered. And so I think that’s just, like, good. Even though, yes, there’s a lot of noise and hype and, you know, snake oil and all that stuff, but I think in general, like, we are better off by, like, having folks like you, like, asking folk, asking people for, like, you know, like, driving conversation about this and not just leaving it to a small group of experts to dictate.

    Diane Tavenner: So I think this is cheating, but I’ve done this one before. But I’m gonna cheat anyway because, as you know, Michael, because you hear me talk about it a lot, the. The one news source I religiously read is called Tangle News. It’s a newsletter now and a podcast. It’s grown like crazy since I first started listening. I love it. It’s like a startup.

    It started, I think when I started reading, it was like, under 50,000 subscribers or something. Now up half a million. Executive editor, Isaac Saul, who I’m going to say this about a news person I trust, which I think is just a miracle. And I’m bringing it up this week because he wrote a piece last Friday that, honestly, I had to break over a couple days because it was really brutal to read. That’s just a very honest accounting of where we are in this moment. The best piece I’ve heard, I’ve read or, or heard about it. And then on Monday, he did another piece where, you know, they do what’s the left saying? What’s the right saying? What’s his take? You know, what are dissenting opinions? I just love the format. I love what they’re doing.

    I was getting ready to write them a thank you note slash love letter, which I do periodically. And I thought I’d just say it on here.

    Michael Horn: I was gonna say now you can just excerpt this and send them a video clip.

    Diane Tavenner: So I hope, I hope people will check it out. I love, love, love the work they’re doing, and I think you will too.

    Michael Horn: I’m gonna go historical fiction. Diane, I’m like, surprising you multiple weeks in a row here, I think. Right? Yeah. Because, Alex, I’m like you. I’m normally just nonfiction all the time, but I don’t know. Tracy said you have to read this book, Brother’s Keeper by Julie Lee.

    It’s based on. It’s historical fiction based on a. About a family’s migration from North Korea to South Korea during the Korean War. It is a tear jerker. I was crying like, literally sobbing as I was reading last night. And Tracy was like, you OK? And I was like, I think I won’t get through the book. But I did, and it’s fantastic.

    So we’ll leave it there. But, Alex, huge thanks. You spurred a great conversation. Looking forward to picking up a bunch of these strands as we continue. And for all you listening again, keep the comments, questions coming. It’s spurring us to think through different aspects of this and invite other guests who have good answers or at least the right questions and signals we ought to be paying attention to. So we’ll see you next time on Class Disrupted.


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • Will Financial Aid Cover Summer Classes? How To Know If Your Student Can Use Aid In Summer

    Will Financial Aid Cover Summer Classes? How To Know If Your Student Can Use Aid In Summer

    One of the most common questions we hear from parents and students at The College Planning Center is:
     “Will financial aid cover summer classes?”

    The honest answer is:
     👉 Yes, financial aid can cover summer classes—but not always.

    Whether financial aid for summer classes is available depends on:

    • How much aid the student has already used in fall and spring

       

    • How the college structures its academic year

       

    • Whether the summer classes count toward the degree

       

    • The student’s academic standing (especially SAP)

       

    In this guide, we’ll walk through when financial aid covers summer classes, common myths, real-life student stories, and the steps families should take before signing up.

    The #1 Misconception About Summer Financial Aid

    A huge source of confusion is this assumption:

    “FAFSA automatically gives us new aid for summer.”

    This leads to questions like:

    • Does financial aid cover summer classes the same way it does fall and spring?
    • Will my fall financial aid cover my summer classes if I already used it during the year?
    • Can you get financial aid for summer classes without submitting anything extra?

       

    Most families don’t realize:

    • Summer aid usually comes from the same academic year’s funds, not a brand-new pool.
    • Summer is often attached to the prior academic year, not treated as a fresh start.
    • Federal loans do not “refresh” for summer—annual limits still apply.
    • Colleges do not all treat summer the same. Each school sets its own policies.

       

    This is why families are often surprised when they ask, “Will my financial aid cover summer classes?” and the answer is “maybe—depending on what’s left.”

    Who We See Taking Summer Classes (and Why It Matters for Aid)

    At The College Planning Center, we most often advise:

    • Rising high school juniors and seniors taking dual-enrollment summer classes
    • College freshmen and sophomores who need to catch up, boost GPA, or stay on track
    • Students changing majors who must complete prerequisite courses quickly
    • Transfer students trying to finish missing credits before enrolling at a new school
    • Students targeting competitive programs (nursing, engineering, education, etc.)
    • Students trying to graduate early and reduce overall tuition and housing costs

    Our recommendations always depend on:

    • Academic readiness
    • Financial aid eligibility (including summer)
    • Long-term college goals

    When a family asks us, “Can you get financial aid for summer classes in this situation?”, we don’t just check one box—we look at the entire academic and financial picture.

    What Types of Financial Aid Can Cover Summer Classes?

    So, does financial aid cover summer classes at all? In many cases, yes—but with limits.

    Depending on the school and student, financial aid for summer classes may come from:

    1. Federal Aid (FAFSA-Based)

    • Pell Grants – If the student is Pell-eligible and hasn’t used their full annual amount, some may be available for summer.
    • Federal Direct Loans – If the student has not used their full annual loan limit in fall and spring, remaining eligibility may be applied to summer.

    This is often the real answer behind “Will my financial aid cover summer classes?”
     It depends on what’s left in the federal aid bucket.

    2. Institutional Aid

    Some colleges offer:

    • Summer scholarships or tuition discounts for students who stay on track in their major
    • Limited institutional grants for summer enrollment

    Policies vary widely, so you must ask each school directly.

    3. State Aid & Private Scholarships

    • State grants or scholarships sometimes apply to summer—but not always.
    • Private scholarships may or may not allow funds to be used in summer; this depends on the scholarship rules.

    4. Work-Study

    Some schools offer summer work-study positions, but slots are often limited and may require separate applications.

    Real-Life Example: When Summer Aid Was Approved

    Student A – Rising Sophomore at Clemson University

    Question they came in with:
     “Can you get financial aid for summer classes if you still have some loans left?”

    Situation:
     Student A had worked with The College Planning Center through high school. Strong merit scholarships (thanks to improved SAT scores and a standout application) reduced how much they needed to borrow.

    Summer Goal:
     Take two summer courses to stay ahead in their major.

    Why Summer Aid Was Approved:

    • They did not use their full federal loan eligibility in fall and spring.
    • The summer classes were degree-applicable, which is required for federal aid.
    • They were meeting SAP (Satisfactory Academic Progress) with strong grades.

    Outcome:

    The college approved:

    • A portion of their remaining federal loans for summer
    • A small amount of institutional scholarship aid tied to their major progress

    How CPC Helped:

    • Confirmed remaining loan eligibility
    • Verified that selected classes counted toward the degree
    • Compared the cost of taking those courses in summer vs. fall

    In this case, the answer to “Will financial aid cover summer classes?” was a clear yes—because funds and eligibility were still available.

    Real-Life Example: When Summer Aid Wasn’t Available

    Student B – First-Year at University of South Carolina

    Question their family asked:
     “Will my fall financial aid cover my summer classes if we already used everything we were offered?”

    Situation:
     Student B had some merit aid but needed maximum federal loans during the year to cover tuition and housing.

    Summer Goal:
     Take a required math class in summer to get back on track.

    Why Summer Aid Was Denied:

    • They had no remaining federal loan eligibility for that academic year.
    • Their merit scholarship applied to fall and spring only.
    • Their academic record triggered a SAP review, temporarily blocking federal aid eligibility.

    Outcome:

    • The financial aid office denied summer aid.
    • The student delayed the class until fall and focused on academic recovery.

    How CPC Helped:

    • Guided the family through a SAP appeal
    • Created a study and support plan
    • Restructured the fall course load to protect future aid

    Here, the honest answer to “Does financial aid cover summer classes?” was no—because the student had already used up the year’s resources and lost eligibility temporarily.

    Common Pitfalls That Block Financial Aid for Summer Classes

    We see the same problems over and over when families ask, “Why won’t my financial aid cover summer classes?”

    1. Using 100% of Loan Funds in Fall and Spring

    If a student maxes out their annual loan limit during the regular school year, there may be nothing left to apply toward summer.

    2. Dropping Below Half-Time Enrollment

    Many forms of aid require students to enroll at least half-time.
     If a student drops a class or withdraws, they can fall below half-time and lose summer aid they were counting on.

    3. SAP (Satisfactory Academic Progress) Problems

    Low GPA, too many withdrawals, or not completing enough credits can all cause SAP issues.
     If SAP isn’t met, even summer aid may be blocked.

    4. Assuming Scholarships Automatically Apply in Summer

    Most merit scholarships are fall/spring only, even if the letter doesn’t say “no summer” in big bold letters.

    5. Taking Classes That Don’t Count Toward the Degree

    Federal aid usually only covers degree-applicable courses.
     Random electives or “extra” classes may not qualify.

    6. Missing the Summer Aid Request Deadline

    Some colleges require:

    • A separate summer aid application, or
    • An earlier priority deadline

    Missing this can turn a possible yes into a no.

    When Are Summer Classes Financially Wise?

    • At The College Planning Center, we take a balanced, realistic approach. We don’t just ask, “Can you get financial aid for summer classes?” We ask:

      “Does it make academic and financial sense for your student?”

    Summer Classes Are Often Worth It When They:

    • Help a student graduate early, reducing an entire semester of tuition, housing, and fees
    • Protect or restore FAFSA eligibility by maintaining or improving SAP
    • Make a major change possible without delaying graduation
    • Improve GPA for selective programs

    Reduce fall/spring overload, decreasing burnout and grade risk

    Summer Classes May Not Be Wise When:

    • The student has no remaining aid and summer would mean high out-of-pocket costs
    • Tuition per credit is significantly higher in summer
    • The classes don’t count toward the degree

    The student is struggling academically and needs a break more than another course

    Source link

  • Lerner Publishing Group Launches Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s Genius and Joy Curriculum

    Lerner Publishing Group Launches Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s Genius and Joy Curriculum

    MINNEAPOLIS, MN—Lerner Publishing Group, a leading publisher of K-12 educational materials, is proud to announce the launch of Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s groundbreaking Genius and Joy curriculum in Summer 2026. This new, all-in-one supplemental curriculum for Grades K–5 is grounded in Dr. Muhammad’s Five Pursuits Framework, a research-based educational model that enhances student engagement and intellectual growth.

    Within her research and scholarship in literacy development, English education and writing instruction, and culturally responsive pedagogies, Dr. Muhammad posed the question, “What if the purpose of schools and curriculum was to recognize and elevate the genius and joy of teachers and students?” The result is the Genius and Joy curriculum. This innovative curriculum prioritizes academic rigor by developing literacy skills, building subject area knowledge and centering students’ learning experience on joy. The curriculum is deep in content and thought while also practical and easy for teachers to use.

    Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s Five Pursuits framework of Identity, Skills, Intellect, Criticality, and Joy is a research-based instructional approach that enhances student engagement and achievement by focusing on literacy, identity development, and historical awareness. Its impact is evident in the Lemon Grove School District in California, where implementation of the framework has led to measurable gains: Black and African American students have consistently increased their academic achievement, even surpassing the overall student population in English Language Arts proficiency. Additionally, Multilingual Learners (MLLs) in the district have experienced a tripling in reclassification rates, reflecting the effectiveness of equity-centered, data-informed practices that align with the framework’s core tenets. Schools and districts across forty-three states have implemented the Five Pursuits Framework into their instructional practices, and have been clamoring for an official curriculum.

    “I wanted teachers to see curriculum as the stories we teach and tell, as the world around us, and as the legacy that we leave in the lives of our children,” said Dr. Gholdy Muhammad. “It is my hope that this curriculum is a genius and joy experience for youth and teachers alike. We all deserve a comprehensive curricular experience.”

    The Genius and Joy Curriculum

    • Celebrates Joy in Teaching and Learning: The Genius and Joy Curriculum provides easy-to-implement approaches and strategies that include space within the learning experience where students can live out and discover their fullest potential. Joy is a safe and creative space to be free—free to learn, free to dream, and free to be.
    • Recognizes the Genius Within Every Child: Through powerful stories and dynamic activities, every lesson is designed to spark curiosity, encourage inquiry, and build students’ confidence in their own unique brilliance.
    • Elevates Learning Through the Five Pursuits: Through innovative pedagogy, students explore more than simple skill building. The five pursuits—identity, skills, intellect, criticality, and joy—of the HILL model are intended to teach the whole student and honor the goals of genius and joy.

    “We know that true learning happens when students see themselves in the material, feel their voices are valued, and are encouraged to think critically about the world around them,” said Adam Lerner, Publisher and CEO of Lerner Publishing Group. “We are proud to partner with Dr. Gholdy Muhammad on Genius and Joy to create an environment where students can not only excel academically, but also engage with Lerner’s award-winning books in ways that help them grow as whole individuals.”

    Genius and Joy will be available for purchase through Lerner Publishing Group starting Summer 2026. The curriculum will be accompanied by professional development resources to help educators implement the framework effectively, ensuring that the values of joy and academic excellence reach students in classrooms across the country.

    For more information about Genius and Joy visit geniusandjoycurriculum.com.

    Click here to watch Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s webinar Celebrate the Genius and Joy of Every Student in Your Classroom.

    About Dr. Gholdy Muhammad
    Dr. Gholnecsar (Gholdy) Muhammad is the John Corbally Endowed Professor of Literacy, Language, and Culture at the University of Illinois Chicago. She has previously served as a classroom teacher, literacy specialist, school district administrator, curriculum director, and school board president. She studies Black historical excellence in education, intending to reframe curriculum and instruction today. Dr. Muhammad’s scholarship has appeared in leading academic journals and books. She has also received numerous national awards and is the author of the best-selling books, Cultivating Genius and Unearthing Joy. She also co-authored the book, Black Girls’ Literacies. Her Culturally and Historically Responsive Education Model has been adopted across thousands of U.S. schools and districts across Canada. In 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025, she was named among the top 1% Edu-Scholar Public Influencers due to her impact on policy and practice. She has led a federal grant with the United States Department of Education to study culturally and historically responsive literacy in STEM classrooms. In the fall of 2026, her first curriculum, entitledGenius and Joy, will be available to schools and educators.

    About Lerner Publishing Group™Lerner Publishing Group™ creates high-quality fiction and nonfiction for children and young adults. Founded in 1959, Lerner Publishing Group is one of the nation’s largest independent children’s book publishers with seventeen imprints and divisions: Carolrhoda Books®, Carolrhoda Lab®, Darby Creek™, ediciones Lerner, First Avenue Editions™, Gecko Press™, Graphic Universe™, Kar-Ben Publishing®, Lerner Publications, LernerClassroom™, Lerner Digital™, Millbrook Press™, Soaring Kite Books, Sundance Newbridge, Twenty-First Century Books™, Zest Books™, and Lerner Publisher Services™. For more information, visit www.lernerbooks.com or call 800-328-4929.                                  

    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

    Source link