Category: student

Measuring student global competency learning using direct peer connections
Key points:

Our students are coming of age in a world that demands global competency. From economic interdependence to the accelerating effects of climate change and mass migration, students need to develop the knowledge and skills to engage and succeed in this diverse and interconnected world. Consequently, the need for global competency education is more important than ever.

“Being born into a global world does not make people global citizens,” Andreas Schleicher of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has said. “We must deliberately and systematically educate our children in global competence.”

Here at Global Cities, we regularly talk with educators eager to bring global competency into their classrooms in ways that engage and excite students to learn. Educators recognize the need, but ask a vital question: How do we teach something we can’t measure?

It’s clear that in today’s competitive and data-driven education environment, we need to expand and evaluate what students need to know to be globally competent adults. Global competency education requires evaluation tools to determine what and whether students are learning.

The good news is that two recent independent research studies found that educators can use a new tool, the Global Cities’ Codebook for Global Student Learning Outcomes, to identify what global competency learning looks like and to assess whether students are learning by examining student writing. The research successfully used the evaluation tool for global competency programs with different models and curricula and across different student populations.

Global Cities developed the Codebook to help researchers, program designers, and educators identify, teach, and measure global competency in their own classrooms. Created in partnership with Harvard Graduate School of Education’s The Open Canopy, the Codebook captures 55 observable indicators across four core global learning outcomes: Appreciation for Diversity, Cultural Understanding, Global Knowledge, and Global Engagement. The Codebook was developed using data from our own Global Scholars virtual exchange program, which since 2014 has connected more than 139,000 students in 126 cities worldwide to teach global competency.

In Global Scholars, we’ve seen firsthand the excitement of directly connecting students with their international peers and sparking meaningful discussions about culture, community, and shared challenges. We know how teachers can effectively use the Codebook and how Global Cities workshops extend the reach of this approach to a larger audience of K-12 teachers. This research was designed to determine whether the same tool could be used to assess global competency learning in other virtual exchange programs, not only Global Cities’ Global Scholars program.

These studies make clear that the Codebook can reliably identify global learning in diverse contexts and help educators see where and how their students are developing global competency skills in virtual exchange curricula. You can examine the tool (the Codebook) here. You can explore the full research findings here.

The first study looked at two AFS Intercultural Programs curricula, Global You Changemaker and Global Up Teen. The second study analyzed student work from The Open Canopy‘s Planetary Health and Remembering the Past learning journeys.

In the AFS Intercultural Programs data, researchers found clear examples of students from across the globe showing Appreciation for Diversity and Cultural Understanding. In these AFS online discussion boards, students showed evidence they were learning about their own and other cultures, expressed positive attitudes about one another’s cultures, and demonstrated tolerance for different backgrounds and points of view. Additionally, the discussion boards offered opportunities for students to interact with each other virtually, and there were many examples of students from different parts of the world listening to one another and interacting in positive and respectful ways. When the curriculum invited students to design projects addressing community or global issues, they demonstrated strong evidence of Global Engagement as well.

Students in The Open Canopy program demonstrated the three most prevalent indicators of global learning that reflect core skills essential to effective virtual exchange: listening to others and discussing issues in a respectful and unbiased way; interacting with people of different backgrounds positively and respectfully; and using digital tools to learn from and communicate with peers around the world. Many of the Remembering the Past posts were especially rich and coded for multiple indicators of global learning.

Together, these studies show that global competency can be taught–and measured. They also highlight simple, but powerful strategies educators everywhere can use:
- Structured opportunities for exchange help students listen and interact respectfully with one another
- Virtual exchange prompts students to share their cultures and experiences across lines of difference in positive, curious ways
- Assignments that include reflection questions–why something matters, not just what it is–help students think critically about culture and global issues
- Opportunities for students to give their opinion and to decide to take action, even hypothetically, builds their sense of agency in addressing global challenges
The Codebook is available free to all educators, along with hands-on professional development workshops that guide teachers in using the tool to design curriculum, teach intentionally, and assess learning. Its comprehensive set of indicators gives educators and curriculum designers a menu of options–some they might not have initially considered–that can enrich students’ global learning experiences.

Our message to educators is simple: A community of educators (Global Ed Lab), a research-supported framework, and practical tools can help you teach students global competency and evaluate their work.

The question is no longer whether we need more global competency education. We clearly do. Now with the Codebook and the Global Ed Lab, teachers can learn how to teach this subject matter effectively and use tools to assess student learning.

Marjorie B. Tiven, Global Cities, Inc.

Marjorie B. Tiven is the Founder and President of Global Cities, Inc., a program of Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Source link
January 22, 2026
Imagining otherwise: how students practise political agency

by Anu Lainio and Anna Sofia Salonen

“I also feel that the sense of hopefulness…is essential. Without it there isn’t much concrete to hold on to. At least I see that this kind of outlandish dreaming and utopian imagining is, in a certain way, also reflected in the actions taken toward it. Or that nothing moves anywhere if you don’t envision it.”

This quotation illustrates how a group of higher education students understood outlandish dreaming as essential for social and political change. It also connects directly to our main argument: that political imagination is a form of political agency. The shared recognition in the quote, that imagining itself matters, shows how utopianising is potentially already a political act.

Political imagination can be characterised as a collective and open-ended process of envisioning how the world and ourselves could be otherwise. Utopias, in turn, are tools for political imagination. Together, political imagination and utopias expand the horizon of what can be thought of as possible and desirable.

The scholarship on students’ political agency has mainly explored traditional and conventional forms of political participation, such as protests, student governance, and voting behaviour. Yet, political agency is not limited to these forms of participation; it also takes place in various everyday practices. By studying political imagination, we can explore how students relate to politics in everyday life: how they think, feel, speak, and act politically.

We explored higher education students’ political imagination as part of an ongoing project, Breadline Utopias. We invited students from social sciences, education, social services, and healthcare to participate in workshops on alternative futures of food assistance. These students are likely to work in roles connected to food assistance (directly and indirectly), which makes their perspectives especially relevant. Altogether, 86 students participated in seven workshops across four higher education institutions. Our analysis draws on 21 small-group discussions in which students discussed the current state of food assistance and imagined alternative futures for it.

Food assistance in Finland is a contested practice that sits between Nordic welfare state ideals and charity-based logics. Over the last 30 years, it has become an institutionalised part of Finnish society. Because food assistance is intertwined with broader societal issues, such as poverty, justice, food, and social policy, it offers a rich site for examining how students navigate and relate to political questions.

Constraints, conditions and cracks of political imagination

Our research shows that political imagination is shaped by a dynamic between three elements: constraints, conditions and cracks. This dynamic suggests that political imagination is a fragile yet meaningful mode of political agency.

Constraints block imagination

Constraints are moments where students’ political imagination becomes blocked. They act as barriers for imagination – like the dead-end of a labyrinth. Constraints relate to who is seen as able to imagine and what legitimate imagining should look like. For example, some students felt that they don’t have the “right” knowledge or experience to envision alternative futures for food assistance. As one student put it:

“Since I’m not an expert on the issue at all, it’s [difficult] to predict it or to develop it in general, because I’ve never been part of it myself.”

This lack of perceived expertise reduces students’ sense of agency, leading them to position themselves outside the political sphere. Another constraint, solution-orientation, also blocks political imagination. With this mindset, societal questions are approached as technical problems to be fixed, reflecting an internalised sense of what kinds of discussions are acceptable and meaningful.

Conditions limit imagination

Conditions shape what students imagine by acting as boundaries that limit how far imagination can extend toward contesting taken-for-granted logics of the topic in question. We identified three conditions: the ethos of helping, resource efficiency, and market-drivenness. All three stem from the charity economy frame, which means that students’ visions focused on improving helping practices, maximising existing resources (volunteers, surplus food and money) or finding market-compatible solutions. Within these boundaries, both food assistance and poverty are depoliticised, as imagination remains anchored to the existing system rather than questioning or transforming it.

Cracks reveal fractures and open up alternatives

Cracks are moments that reveal fractures in the current system and in students’ experiential worlds: openings through which alternative futures become visible or thinkable. Cracks took different forms in students’ discussions. At times, conversations drifted onto sidetracks that disrupted linear and solution-oriented talk, allowing new questions and possibilities to surface. In other moments, students paused to consider the perspectives of food assistance recipients. Such reflexive stumbles invited empathy, vulnerability and relational awareness, opening space for politicisation. There were also critical pushes in which seemingly neutral features of the system were recognised as politically constructed. These instances opened cracks through which alternative social and institutional arrangements were imagined. Finally, as the quotation in the beginning shows, outlandish dreams are moments when students collectively affirm that hope and utopias themselves matter, even though the process of imagining alternatives is difficult and involves constraints and conditions.

Political imagination as a democratic capacity

The dynamic between constraints, cracks and conditions highlights that ‘the political’ in political imagination appears unevenly – sometimes blocked, sometimes strengthened, sometimes catalysed. Thus, political imagination is not a linear process but unfolds within the dynamics of these three elements (see Picture 1). Despite its fragility, we suggest that political imagination is a meaningful mode of political agency: it is visible in how students critique existing conditions, propose alternative futures and reposition themselves in relation to the political. Political imagination makes the openness of the future visible. It is precisely this openness that gives imagination its value as a form of agency: it keeps the alternative futures alive.

Picture 1. Constraints, conditions and cracks of political imagination

Recognising these everyday acts of imagining as political practices expands our understanding of what counts as students’ political agency. In doing so, it points to political imagination as a capacity for democratic citizenship, as the ability to envision alternatives is integral to democratic life. This capacity is all the more important given reports of young people’s reduced hope for the future and the global challenges we are facing (e.g., polarisation and climate change). Cultivating such capacity should be part of higher education’s democratic mission. In other words, outlandish dreaming is not trivial or escapism – it is a fragile, necessary political act.

Dr Anu Lainio works as a Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Eastern Finland. Her research focuses on higher education students’ political imagination and utopias, as part of the project ‘Utopias from the breadline’. Before her current position, she completed her doctoral research at the University of Surrey, UK, where she explored higher education students’ identities and media representations across different European countries. Her research interests include political imagination; media and higher education; and student identities, agency, and (in)equalities in the context of marketised higher education and a changing welfare state.

Dr Anna Sofia Salonen is a University Lecturer in Practical Theology at the University of Eastern Finland. Her research combines sociological and theological perspectives to explore issues related to food, religion, ethics, inequality and the food system. She is the principal investigator of the research project “Utopias from the breadline” (Kone Foundation 2023-2025) and leads a work package on nonreligion in research project “Religion, Meaning and Masculinity” (Research Council of Finland 2024-2028).

Like this:

Like Loading…

Categories: Higher Education, Student Experience | Tags: imagination, participation, political agency, political discourse, political engagement, student, student attitudes, student politics | Permalink.

Author: SRHE News Blog

An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

Source link

January 16, 2026
Reimagining teacher preparation to include student mental health supports

Key points:

Teacher preparation programs have long emphasized curriculum, instruction, and assessment. However, they often fall short in one critical area: social-emotional and mental health needs of students.

We work daily with students whose academic success is inseparable from their psychological well-being. Nonetheless, we witness new educators wishing they were trained in not just behavior management, but, nowadays, the non-academic needs of children. If preservice programs are going to meet the demands of today’s classrooms, they must include deeper coursework in counseling, psychology, and trauma-informed teaching practices.

Students today are carrying heavier emotional burdens than ever before. Anxiety, bullying, depression, grief, trauma exposure (including complex trauma), and chronic stress are unfortunately quite common. The fallout rarely appears in uniform, typical, or recognizable ways. Instead, it shows up as behaviors teachers must interpret and address (i.e., withdrawal, defiance, irritability, avoidance, conflict, aggression and violence, or inconsistent work).

Without formal training, it is easy to label these actions as simple “misbehaviors” instead of asking why. However, seasoned educators and mental health professionals know that behaviors (including misbehaviors) are a means of communication, and understanding the root cause of a student’s actions is essential to creating a supportive and effective classroom.

Oftentimes, adults fall into a pattern of describing misbehaviors by children as “manipulative” as opposed to a need not being met. As such, adults (including educators) need to shift their mindsets. This belief is supported by research. Jean Piaget reminds us that children’s cognitive and emotional regulation skills are still developing and naturally are imperfect. Lev Vygotsky reminds us that learning and behavior are shaped by the quality of a child’s social interactions, including with the adults (such as teachers) in their lives. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy further reinforces that psychological safety and belonging must be met before meaningful learning or self-control can occur, and teachers need to initiate psychological safety.

Traditional classroom management training is often sparse in traditional preservice teacher training. It often emphasizes rules, procedures, and consequences. They absolutely matter, but the reality is far more nuanced. Behavior management and behavior recognition are not the same. A student who shuts down may be experiencing anxiety. A child who blurts out or becomes agitated may be reacting to trauma triggers in the environment. A student who frequently acts out may be seeking connection or stability in the only way they know how. Trauma-informed teaching (rooted in predictability, emotional safety, de-escalation, and relationship-building) is not just helpful, but is foundational in modern schools. Yet, many new teachers enter the profession with little to no formal preparation in these practices.

The teacher shortage only heightens this need. Potential educators are often intimidated not by teaching content, but by the emotional and behavioral demands that they feel unprepared to address. Meanwhile, experienced teachers often cite burnout stemming from managing complex behaviors without adequate support. Courses focused on child development, counseling skills, and trauma-informed pedagogy would significantly improve both teacher confidence and retention. It would also be beneficial if subject-area experts (such as the counseling or clinical psychology departments of the higher education institution) taught these courses.

Of note, we are not suggesting that teachers become counselors. School counselors, social workers, psychologists, and psychometrists play essential and irreplaceable roles. However, teachers are the first adults to observe subtle shifts in their students’ behaviors or emotional well-being. Oftentimes, traditional behavior management techniques and strategies can make matters worse in situations where trauma is the root cause of the behavior. When teachers are trained in the fundamentals of trauma-informed practice and creating emotionally safe learning environments, they can respond skillfully. They can collaborate with or refer students to clinical mental-health professionals for more intensive support.

Teacher preparation programs must evolve to reflect the emotional realities of today’s classrooms. Embedding several clinically grounded courses in counseling, psychology, and trauma-informed teaching (taught by certified and/or practicing mental-health professionals) would transform the way novice educators understand and support their students. This would also allow for more studies and research to take place on the effectiveness of various psychologically saturated teaching practices, accounting for the ever-changing psychosocial atmosphere. Students deserve teachers who can see beyond behaviors and understand the rationale beneath it. Being aware of behavior management techniques (which is often pretty minimal as teacher-prep programs stand now) is quite different than understanding behaviors. Teachers deserve to be equipped with both academic and emotional tools to help every learner thrive.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

January 14, 2026
What school leaders need to know
Key points:

Special education is at a breaking point. Across the country, more children than ever are being referred for evaluations to determine whether they qualify for special education services. But there aren’t enough school psychologists or specialists on staff to help schools meet the demand, leaving some families with lengthy wait times for answers and children missing critical support.

The growing gap between need and capacity has inspired districts to get creative. One of the most debated solutions? Remote psychoeducational testing, or conducting evaluations virtually rather than face-to-face.

Can a remote evaluation accurately capture what a child needs? Will the results hold up if challenged in a legal dispute? Is remote assessment equivalent to in-person?

As a school psychologist and educational consultant, I hear these questions every week. And now, thanks to research and data released this summer, I can answer with confidence: Remote psychoeducational testing can produce equivalent results to traditional in-person assessment.

What the research shows

In July 2025, a large-scale national study compared in-person and remote administration of the Woodcock-Johnson V Tests of Cognitive Abilities and Achievement (WJ V), the latest version of one of the most widely-used and comprehensive assessment systems for evaluating students’ intellectual abilities, academic achievement, and oral language skills. Using a matched case-control design with 300 participants and 44 licensed school psychologists from across the U.S., the study found no statistically or practically significant difference in student scores between in-person and remote formats.

In other words: When conducted with fidelity, remote WJ V testing produces equivalent results to traditional in-person assessment.

This study builds on nearly a decade of prior research that also found score equivalency for remote administrations of the most widely used evaluations including WJ IV COG and ACH, RIAS-2, and WISC-V assessments, respectively.

The findings of the newest study are as important as they are urgent. They show remote testing isn’t just a novelty–it’s a practical, scalable solution that is rooted in evidence.

Why it matters now

School psychology has been facing a workforce shortage for over a decade. A 2014 national study predicted this crunch, and today districts are relying on contracting agencies and remote service providers to stay afloat. At the same time, referrals for evaluations are climbing, driven by pandemic-related learning loss, growing behavioral challenges, and increased awareness of neurodiversity.

The result: More children and families waiting longer for answers, while school psychologists are facing mounting caseloads and experiencing burnout.

Remote testing offers a way out of this cycle and embraces changes. It allows districts to bring in licensed psychologists from outside their area, without relocating staff or asking families to travel. It helps schools move through backlogs more efficiently, ensuring students get the services they need sooner. And it gives on-site staff space to do the broader preventative work that too often gets sidelined. Additionally, it offers a way to support those students who are choosing alternate educational settings, such as virtual schools.

Addressing the concerns

Skepticism remains, and that’s healthy. Leaders wonder: Will a hearing officer accept remote scores in a due process case? Are students disadvantaged by the digital format? Can we trust the results to guide placement and services?

These are valid questions, but research shows that when remote testing is done right, the results are valid and reliable.

Key phrase: Done right. Remote assessment isn’t just a Zoom call with a stopwatch. In the most recent study, the setup included specific safeguards:
- Touchscreen laptops with screens 13” or larger;
- A secure platform with embedded digital materials;
- Dual cameras to capture the student’s face and workspace;
- A guided proctor in-room with the student; and
- Standardized examiner and proctor training protocols.
This carefully structured environment replicates traditional testing conditions as closely as possible. All four of the existing equivalency studies utilized the Presence Platform, as it already meets with established criteria.

When those fidelity conditions are met, the results hold up. Findings showed p-values above .05 and effect sizes below .03 across all tested subtests, indicating statistical equivalence. This means schools can confidently use WJ V scores from remote testing, provided the setup adheres to best practices.

What district leaders can do

For remote testing to succeed, schools need to take a thoughtful, structured approach. Here are three steps districts can take now.
1. Vet providers carefully. Ask about their platform, equipment, training, and how they align with published research standards.
2. Clarify device requirements. Ensure schools have the right technology in place before testing begins.
3. Build clear policies. Set district-wide expectations for how remote testing should be conducted so everyone–staff and contractors alike–are on the same page.
A path forward

Remote assessment won’t solve every challenge in special education, but it can close one critical gap: timely, accurate evaluations. For students in rural districts, schools with unfilled psychologist positions, virtual school settings, or families tired of waiting for answers, it can be a lifeline.

The research is clear. Remote psychoeducational testing works when we treat it with the same care and rigor as in-person assessment. The opportunity now is to use this tool strategically–not as a last resort, but as part of a smarter, more sustainable approach to serving students.

At its best, remote testing is not a compromise; it’s a path toward expanded access and stronger support for the students who need it most.

Stephanie Taylor, Ed.S., NCSP, Taylored Education Solutions

Stephanie Taylor, Ed.S., NCSP is a school psychologist, researcher, and founder of Taylored Education Solutions.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Source link
January 6, 2026
DEI in education: Pros and cons

eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #6 focuses on DEI in education.

Key points:

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become integral to educational institutions across the United States. DEI aims to foster environments where all students can thrive regardless of their backgrounds. The programs are designed to address systemic inequalities, promote representation, and create inclusive spaces for learning. However, as DEI becomes more prevalent, it also faces scrutiny and debate regarding its effectiveness, implementation, and impact on educational outcomes.

One of the main advantages of DEI in education is the promotion of a more inclusive and representative curriculum. Students gain a broader understanding of the world by integrating diverse perspectives into course materials. This enhances critical thinking and empathy. Furthermore, the approach prepares students to navigate and contribute to our increasingly globalized society. Moreover, exposure to diverse viewpoints encourages students to challenge their assumptions and develop a more nuanced perspective on complex issues.

DEI initiatives also contribute to improved academic outcomes by fostering a sense of belongingness amongst students. When students see themselves reflected in their educators and curricula, they are more likely to feel valued and supported. This leads to increased engagement and motivation. This sense of inclusion can result in higher retention and graduation rates (particularly among historically marginalized groups). Furthermore, diverse learning environments encourage collaboration and communication skills because students learn to work effectively with peers from different backgrounds.

In addition to benefiting students, DEI programs can enhance faculty satisfaction and retention. Institutions that prioritize diversity in hiring and promotion practices create more equitable workplaces. This can lead to increased job satisfaction among faculty members. Mentorship programs and professional development opportunities focused on DEI can also support faculty in creating inclusive classroom environments, which further benefits students.

Despite these benefits, DEI initiatives are not without challenges. One significant concern is the potential for resistance and backlash from individuals who perceive DEI efforts as a threat to traditional values (in other words, a form of reverse discrimination). This resistance can manifest in various ways (opposition to DEI policies, legal challenges, and political pressure). Such opposition can hinder the implementation and effectiveness of DEI programs, thereby creating a contentious atmosphere within educational institutions.

Another challenge is the difficulty in measuring the success of DEI initiatives. Without clear metrics, it can be challenging to assess the impact of these programs on student outcomes, faculty satisfaction, or institutional culture. The lack of quantifiable data can lead to skepticism about the efficiency of DEI efforts, thus resulting in reduced support or funding for such programs. Additionally, the absence of standardized definitions and goals for DEI can lead to inconsistent implementation across institutions.

Resource allocation is also a critical issue in the execution of DEI initiatives. Implementing comprehensive DEI programs often requires significant financial investment (funding for specialized staff, training, and support services). In times of budget constraints, institutions may struggle to prioritize DEI efforts. This may lead to inadequate support for students and faculty. Without sufficient resources, DEI programs may fail to achieve their intended outcomes thus further fueling criticism and skepticism.

The potential for tokenism is another concern associated with DEI initiatives. When institutions focus on meeting diversity quotas without fostering genuine inclusion, individuals from underrepresented groups may feel marginalized or exploited. Tokenism may undermine the goals of DEI by creating superficial diversity that does not translate into meaningful change or equity. To avoid this, institutions must commit to creating inclusive environments where all individuals feel valued and empowered to contribute fully.

Furthermore, DEI programs can sometimes inadvertently reinforce stereotypes or create division among student populations. For example, emphasizing differences without promoting commonalities may lead to increased social fragmentation or feelings of isolation among certain groups. Educators must carefully balance the celebration of diversity with the promotion of unity and shared values to foster cohesive learning communities.

In summary, DEI initiatives in education offer numerous benefits, but these programs also face significant challenges. To maximize the positive impact of DEI efforts, educational institutions must commit to thoughtful, well-resourced, and inclusive implementation strategies that promote genuine equity and inclusion for all members.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

December 24, 2025
What we lose when AI replaces teachers

eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #8 focuses on the debate around teachers vs. AI.

Key points:

A colleague of ours recently attended an AI training where the opening slide featured a list of all the ways AI can revolutionize our classrooms. Grading was listed at the top. Sure, AI can grade papers in mere seconds, but should it?

As one of our students, Jane, stated: “It has a rubric and can quantify it. It has benchmarks. But that is not what actually goes into writing.” Our students recognize that AI cannot replace the empathy and deep understanding that recognizes the growth, effort, and development of their voice. What concerns us most about grading our students’ written work with AI is the transformation of their audience from human to robot.

If we teach our students throughout their writing lives that what the grading robot says matters most, then we are teaching them that their audience doesn’t matter. As Wyatt, another student, put it: “If you can use AI to grade me, I can use AI to write.” NCTE, in its position statements for Generative AI, reminds us that writing is a human act, not a mechanical one. Reducing it to automated scores undermines its value and teaches students, like Wyatt and Jane, that the only time we write is for a grade. That is a future of teaching writing we hope to never see.

We need to pause when tech companies tout AI as the grader of student writing. This isn’t a question of capability. AI can score essays. It can be calibrated to rubrics. It can, as Jane said, provide students with encouragement and feedback specific to their developing skills. And we have no doubt it has the potential to make a teacher’s grading life easier. But just because we can outsource some educational functions to technology doesn’t mean we should.

It is bad enough how many students already see their teacher as their only audience. Or worse, when students are writing for teachers who see their written work strictly through the lens of a rubric, their audience is limited to the rubric. Even those options are better than writing for a bot. Instead, let’s question how often our students write to a broader audience of their peers, parents, community, or a panel of judges for a writing contest. We need to reengage with writing as a process and implement AI as a guide or aide rather than a judge with the last word on an essay score.

Our best foot forward is to put AI in its place. The use of AI in the writing process is better served in the developing stages of writing. AI is excellent as a guide for brainstorming. It can help in a variety of ways when a student is struggling and looking for five alternatives to their current ending or an idea for a metaphor. And if you or your students like AI’s grading feature, they can paste their work into a bot for feedback prior to handing it in as a final draft.

We need to recognize that there are grave consequences if we let a bot do all the grading. As teachers, we should recognize bot grading for what it is: automated education. We can and should leave the promises of hundreds of essays graded in an hour for the standardized test providers. Our classrooms are alive with people who have stories to tell, arguments to make, and research to conduct. We see our students beyond the raw data of their work. We recognize that the poem our student has written for their sick grandparent might be a little flawed, but it matters a whole lot to the person writing it and to the person they are writing it for. We see the excitement or determination in our students’ eyes when they’ve chosen a research topic that is important to them. They want their cause to be known and understood by others, not processed and graded by a bot.

The adoption of AI into education should be conducted with caution. Many educators are experimenting with using AI tools in thoughtful and student-centered ways. In a recent article, David Cutler describes his experience using an AI-assisted platform to provide feedback on his students’ essays. While Cutler found the tool surprisingly accurate and helpful, the true value lies in the feedback being used as part of the revision process. As this article reinforces, the role of a teacher is not just to grade, but to support and guide learning. When used intentionally (and we emphasize, as in-process feedback) AI can enhance that learning, but the final word, and the relationship behind it, must still come from a human being.

When we hand over grading to AI, we risk handing over something much bigger–our students’ belief that their words matter and deserve an audience. Our students don’t write to impress a rubric, they write to be heard. And when we replace the reader with a robot, we risk teaching our students that their voices only matter to the machine. We need to let AI support the writing process, not define the product. Let it offer ideas, not deliver grades. When we use it at the right moments and for the right reasons, it can make us better teachers and help our students grow. But let’s never confuse efficiency with empathy. Or algorithms with understanding.

Dennis Magliozzi & Kristina Peterson, University of New Hampshire’s Writers Academy

Kristina Peterson and Dennis Magliozzi have been teaching English since 2008. Kristina has a master’s degree in teaching and over a decade of experience mentoring teachers. Dennis holds an MFA in poetry and a PhD from the University of New Hampshire. Together, they co-teach in the University of New Hampshire’s Writers Academy and Learning Through Teaching program. Their work on generative AI’s impact in the classroom is highlighted on Heinemann’s blog, and in their forthcoming book, AI in the Writing Workshop: Finding the Write Balance.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

December 22, 2025
3 threats putting student safety at risk

Key points:

In today’s schools, whether K-12 or higher education, AI is powering smarter classrooms. There’s more personalized learning and faster administrative tasks. And students themselves are engaging with AI more than ever before, as 70 percent say they’ve used an AI tool to alter or create completely new images. But while educators and students are embracing the promise of AI, cybercriminals are exploiting it.

In 2025, the U.S. Department of Education reported that nearly 150,000 suspect identities were flagged in recent federal student-aid forms, contributing to $90 million in financial aid losses tied to ineligible applicants. From deepfakes in admissions to synthetic students infiltrating online portals and threatening high-value research information, AI-powered identity fraud is rising fast, and our educational institutions are alarmingly underprepared.

As identity fraud tactics become more scalable and convincing, districts are now racing to deploy modern tools to catch fake students before they slip through the cracks. Three fraud trends keep IT and security leaders in education up at night–and AI is supercharging their impact.

1. Fraud rings targeting education

Here’s the hard truth: Fraudsters operate in networks, but most schools fight fraud alone.

Coordinated rings can deploy hundreds of synthetic identities across schools or districts. These groups recycle biometric data, reuse fake documents, and share attack methods on dark web forums.

To stand a fair chance in the fight, educational institutions must work with identity verification experts that enable a holistic view of the threat landscape through cross-transactional risk assessments. These assessments spot risk patterns across devices, IP addresses, and user behavior, helping institutions uncover fraud clusters that would be invisible in isolation.

2. Deepfakes and injected selfies in remote enrollment

Facial recognition was once a trusted line of defense for remote learning and test proctoring. But fraudsters can now use emulators and virtual cameras to bypass those checks, inserting AI-generated faces into the stream to impersonate students. In education, where student data is a goldmine and systems are increasingly remote, the risk is even more pronounced.

In virtual work environments, for example, enterprises are already seeing an uptick in the use of deepfakes during job interviews. By 2028, Gartner predicts 1 in 4 job candidates worldwide will be fake. The same applies to the education sector. We’re now seeing fake students, complete with forged government IDs and a convincing selfie, slide past systems and into financial aid pipelines.

So, what’s the fix? Biometric identity intelligence, trusted by a growing number of students, can verify micro-movements, lighting, and facial depth, and confirm whether a real human is behind the screen. Multimodal checks (combining visual, motion, and even audio data) are critical for stopping AI-powered identity fraud.

3. Synthetic students in your systems

Unlike stolen identities, synthetic identities are crafted from real–and fake–fragments, such as a legit SSN combined with a fake name. These “students” can pass enrollment checks, get campus credentials, and even apply for financial aid.

Traditional document checks aren’t enough to catch them. Today’s identity verification tools must use AI to detect missing elements, like holograms or watermarks, and flag patterns including identical document backgrounds, which is a key sign of industrial-scale fraud.

AI-powered identity intelligence for education

As digital learning becomes the norm and AI accelerates, identity fraud will only get more sophisticated. However, AI also offers educators a solution.

By layering biometrics, behavioral analytics, and cross-platform data, schools can verify student identities at scale and in real time, keeping pace with advancing threats, and even staying one step ahead.

Ashwin Sugavanam, Jumio Corporation

Ashwin Sugavanam is currently the VP, AI & Identity Analytics at Jumio Corporation. Ashwin is a visionary Data and Analytics leader with two decades of overall experience out of which he has spent the last decade in helping organizations incubate and scale Data & AI practices. Over the last couple of years Ashwin has helped organizations drive measurable business outcomes by responsibly scaling Data and AI initiatives, implementing modern concepts like Data Mesh and MLOps, and leveraging tools such as the Data Scientist Co-Pilot to accelerate impact. He can be reached on LinkedIn and at the company website https://www.jumio.com/ .

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

December 17, 2025
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.

Kim Hicks, Southwestern Jefferson County Consolidated School

Kim Hicks is the Director ESL Program at Southwestern Jefferson County Consolidated School in Hanover, Indiana.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Source link
December 15, 2025
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 Media staff cover education technology in all its aspects–from legislation and litigation, to best practices, to lessons learned and new products. First published in March of 1998 as a monthly print and digital newspaper, eSchool Media provides the news and information necessary to help K-20 decision-makers successfully use technology and innovation to transform schools and colleges and achieve their educational goals.

Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)
Source link
December 9, 2025
Teaching might be synchronous, but learning is always happening asynchronously

Key points:

The bell rings at 10:00 a.m. A teacher begins explaining quadratic equations. Some students lean forward, pencils ready. Others stare at the clock. A few are still turning yesterday’s lesson over in their minds. On the surface, it’s a standard, well‑planned class period. But here’s the catch: Learning doesn’t always happen on schedule.

Think about your own class last week. Did every student learn exactly what you were teaching? Or did some of them circle back a day or two later with new questions, fresh insights, or sudden understanding?

Across the country, laws and regulations attempt to define and balance synchronous and asynchronous instruction. Some states fund schools based on seat time, measuring how long students sit in classrooms or log into live online sessions. Here in Indiana, recent legislation even limits the number of e‑learning days that can be asynchronous, as if too many days without live teaching would somehow shortchange students. These rules were written with the best of intentions–ensuring students are engaged, teachers are available, and learning doesn’t slip through the cracks.

Over time, “asynchronous instruction” has picked up a troubling reputation, often equated with the idea of no teaching at all–just kids simply poking through a computer on their own. But the truth is far more nuanced. The work of teaching is so difficult precisely because all learning is, at its core, asynchronous. The best teachers understand the enormous variance in readiness within any group of students. They know some learners grasp a concept immediately while others need more time, multiple exposures, or a completely different entry point. Giving them space beyond the live moment is often exactly what allows learning to take hold.

Devoting resources to well-designed asynchronous learning, such as recorded lectures available for rewatch, self-paced learning modules, project-based activities, and educational games, allows students to immerse themselves in instructional materials and gain a better understanding of content on their terms. Instead of helping students catch up during class time, teachers can focus on whole-group instruction and a deeper analysis of curriculum content.

When we’re measuring butts in seats or time in front of a screen with an instructor on the other end, live, we’re measuring what’s easy to measure, not what’s important. Real student engagement happens in the head of the learner, and that is far harder to quantify.

That’s why I can’t help but wonder if some of these mandates, while well‑intentioned, actually get in the way of real learning, pushing schools to comply with a regulation rather than focus on the conditions that actually help students grow.

What if, instead of focusing so much on the ratio of synchronous to asynchronous minutes, we asked a better question: Are students being given the time, space, and support to truly learn? Are we creating systems that allow them to circle back and show growth when they’re ready, not just when the bell rings? As an administrator, I know our district is still figuring out the complexities of putting these goals into practice.

Instead of tying funding and accountability to time in a seat, imagine tying it to evidence of growth. Imagine policies that encourage schools to document when and how students show understanding, no matter when it happens. Imagine giving educators the freedom to design opportunities for students to revisit, rethink, and re‑engage until the learning truly sticks.

The teaching might be synchronous. But the learning is always happening asynchronously, and if we can shift our policies, practices, and mindsets to honor that truth, we can move beyond compliance and toward classrooms where students have every chance to succeed.

George Philhower, Ed.D., Eastern Hancock Schools

Dr. George Philhower is the superintendent of Eastern Hancock Schools, a rural district located just east of Indianapolis. With five years of experience as a superintendent, George is driven by a vision where every student and staff member wakes up eager to go to school each day. He believes this is possible when everyone feels safe and valued, has opportunities for success, engages in meaningful work, plays and learns with friends, and is supported by caring adults. George holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary and Special Education from Cardinal Stritch University, a Master’s in Instructional Leadership from the University of Indianapolis, and both an Ed.S. and Ph.D. from Indiana State University.

Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

Source link

December 8, 2025