Tag: discovery

  • Search Everywhere Optimization: Reinventing Student Discovery for the AI Era

    Search Everywhere Optimization: Reinventing Student Discovery for the AI Era

    For decades, the enrollment funnel followed a familiar script: search, click, visit, inquire. That script no longer describes how decisions are made. Strategies that still treat traffic to your school’s .edu domain as the main measure of success are increasingly invisible to the Modern Learner.

    That is because search has broken free from the constraints of the search bar.

    Modern Learners operate in a search everywhere ecosystem, investigating institutions on social platforms, querying AI chatbots, cross-referencing video and scanning third-party sites. The traditional results page has shifted from a static stack of blue links to a verified, AI-driven dialogue. Visibility is no longer about ranking first on a list. It is about being the answer wherever the question is asked.

    This shift demands a new strategic operating system: Search Everywhere Optimization.

    From Search Engine Optimization to Search Everywhere Optimization 

    Website marketing experts at EducationDynamics define Search Everywhere Optimization as a holistic strategy that treats every discovery surface—search engines, AI answers, institutional sites and social media—as one integrated system. It aligns brand, media and experience around a single imperative: remain visible, credible and compelling wherever students ask questions.

    Standing on its own, traditional search engine optimization is now obsolete. Where SEO focused narrowly on technical tactics to rank a specific URL and drive a click, search everywhere optimization manages a decentralized web of signals to influence an answer. SEO chased algorithms to feed a crawler; search everywhere optimization builds reputation to inform a decision.

    This is more than a shift in tactics. It is a shift in mindset.

    In an AI-first environment, institutions that cling to yesterday’s search habits are already falling behind.

    The question is no longer whether to evolve. It is how fast an institution can reinvent its approach to discovery. The next era of enrollment is not about clicks. It is about credibility, visibility and being the trusted answer wherever the question is asked.

    Winning AI Overviews in higher ed with AI Density 

    Google’s AI Overviews. These experiences have rewritten the rules of search in higher ed. They do not just sit above traditional results. In many cases, they replace them. Prospective students now see a single synthesized answer that decides which institutions and programs show up first, frames expectations for cost and outcomes and often ends the search before a site visit ever happens. 

    When an institution is not shaping that answer, AI is shaping it based on everyone else’s signals. 

    EducationDynamics built AI Density to change that equation. 

    AI Density is EducationDynamics’ proprietary metric for AI visibility. It measures how often an institution is cited or referenced inside AI Overviews and related AI answers across a defined set of high-intent queries. Traditional search reports show where a page ranks. AI Density shows whether the institution has a voice in the answer that shapes a student’s decision. 

    High AI Density means AI systems treat the institution as a trusted source. The brand appears more often in AI-generated summaries, carries more weight in organic results and influences more prospects even when no click is recorded. 

    That influence does not live on the .edu domain alone. AI Overviews pull signals from across the ecosystem, including: 

    • Institutional pages and academic catalogs
    • Rankings sites and program directories
    • Student reviews and Q&A forums
    • Reddit threads and other social communities
    • News coverage and employer-linked stories

    Reputation now moves through this full network. Search Everywhere Optimization treats these external surfaces as extensions of institutional storytelling so AI systems encounter a consistent, credible picture of programs and outcomes. 

    In this context, AI Density is not a metric to be sidelined—it is a growth lever. It reveals how deeply institutional signals penetrate AI ecosystems, where gaps exist and which content and reputation investments actually move visibility. Institutions that ignore AI Density allow the AI ecosystem to define their market position without input. Institutions that embrace it begin to control the narrative where decisions are made. 

    Zero-click Search Strategy for a No-Click World   

    The behavior around those AI-shaped answers has its own name. In a search environment increasingly resolved without a website visit, more interactions begin and end on the results page itself. That pattern is zero-click search. 

    A zero-click search strategy starts from that reality. It assumes that visibility and influence must carry real weight even when analytics platforms never record a session. When decisions are shaped inside the search results page (SERP), traffic alone becomes a lagging, partial signal. 

    Across institutions, the same zero-click behaviors keep showing up. Prospective students collect program, cost and outcome basics directly from snippets and AI answers. Calls, map actions and clicks to third-party directories or application portals divert attention away from primary landing pages. Traditional volume metrics then underrepresent how often institutions appear in meaningful moments because the most important interactions never show up as traffic. 

    In this environment, a strategy that still equates “success” with a click-through to a deep program page has fundamentally shifted. 

    In practice, zero-click search strategy within Search Everywhere Optimization comes down to three core moves. 

    • Answer design. Program and outcome content is written in short, self-contained statements that search systems can lift into snippets, quick facts and AI answers without losing meaning. Language mirrors the way Modern Learners actually ask about value, flexibility, support and price clarity, not internal taglines.  
    • Structured data discipline. Key facts – degree type, modality, tuition ranges, locations and application timelines – carry schema markup that supports rich results and quick information panels. Technical health becomes part of the visibility strategy, not a back-end checklist. 
    • Consistency across surfaces. On-site copy, catalogs, Google Business Profiles, marketplaces, ratings sites and partner listings present the same story. In a system where AI reconciles conflicting inputs, inconsistency is a signal to downgrade trust. 

    Under this model, success expands beyond traffic counts. The objective is to shape the decision at the point of the question, click or no click. Institutions that still optimize only for visits are chasing what is left over while the real competition plays out in zero-click moments. 

    Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) and AI-native discovery

    Zero-click moments describe where decisions are resolved. Generative Engine Optimization focuses on how those answers are created. AI is no longer a side feature in search. It sits in the middle of how prospective students evaluate options. They use conversational tools and answer-first interfaces to compare programs, pressure-test timelines and translate affordability into real life. Large language models and answer engines now stand beside traditional SERPs as core discovery channels. 

    Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) is how Search Everywhere Optimization shows up in that layer. Institutional content can no longer speak only to crawlers and rank-based algorithms. It has to feed models that synthesize answers directly on the results page. Program pages, FAQs and resource content carry more weight when they read like direct responses to questions about outcomes, format, pace and support. Differentiators and proof points win when they condense cleanly into a sentence or two, because that is what answer engines lift. 

    Within GEO, Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) targets the experiences where the entire interaction happens inside the result. AI Overviews, featured snippets, people also ask modules and knowledge panels do not wait for a click. They resolve the question on the spot. In that environment, institutional content either fuels the answer or disappears from the conversation. 

    GEO, executed through strong AEO, demands: 

    • Clear question-and-answer structures in program and outcome content 
    • Consistent details across the main site, catalogs, news releases, directories and partner listings 
    • Markup and formatting that help systems recognize and elevate accurate responses

    Generative Engine Optimization does not replace technical SEO. It raises the bar. Content now has to work simultaneously for human readers, search crawlers and answer engines across both click and zero-click interactions. In an AI-shaped discovery landscape, GEO is not an experiment at the margins. It is the standard for institutions that expect visibility to translate into real enrollment performance. 

    What leadership-level execution looks like 

    Zero-Collectively, Search Everywhere Optimization, AI Density, zero-click strategy and Generative Engine Optimization define how visibility works in this market — leadership determines whether that visibility becomes an advantage. 

     Thriving in this environment isn’t about stacking one more tactic on top of yesterday’s strategy. It is about building a presence that students and systems can understand, trust and choose. 

    Institutions gaining ground are not tweaking the old search playbook. They are changing how the institution shows up, how AI interprets it and how teams respond when students lean in. Four execution patterns consistently separate institutions built for this new search-everywhere environment from those still operating on legacy assumptions. 

    Anchor content in real student questions 

    Leading institutions organize program pages, FAQs, blogs and resource hubs around the questions students actually ask. Language centers on outcomes, time to completion, flexibility, support and price clarity, not internal jargon or slogan-heavy copy. Content that answers real questions travels farther in search, performs better in AI Overviews and converts faster once students engage. 

    Treat external platforms as brand-defining spaces 

    Reddit threads, Google Business Profiles, degree marketplaces, review sites, YouTube channels and TikTok feeds all power the same discovery engine. When tuition details, program formats or admissions timelines conflict across those surfaces, trust erodes and AI systems notice. Institutions that treat external platforms as extensions of their site build stronger credibility in AI-driven answers and in traditional results. 

    Balance broad reach with precision presence 

    National campaigns are resurging, rebuilding brand presence across fragmented markets. At the same time, leading institutions layer precision media that targets local, adult and career-focused learners at moments of high intent. Search Everywhere Optimization depends on both: consistent brand framing at scale and targeted visibility where high-yield audiences search, scroll and ask questions. 

    Turn visibility into decisive action

    Search visibility only creates advantage when institutions respond with speed and clarity. Prospects move from consideration to inquiry quickly, often expect admissions decisions in days and frequently enroll at the first institution that meets their needs. When enrollment teams move slowly or inconsistently, the lift from Search Everywhere Optimization and Generative Engine Optimization evaporates and informed students choose institutions that move faster.

    Taken together, these moves separate leaders from the pack. They treat Search Everywhere Optimization as core operating strategy, not a marketing experiment. Institutions that build around real student questions, coherent signals across every surface, smart reach and fast follow-through are not just visible in a search-everywhere world — they are the ones shaping which options feel possible in the first place. 

    Competing in a Search-Everywhere world 

    These leadership patterns sit against a larger reality that will not reverse. Modern Learners have already left the old funnel behind. They are making choices inside AI Overviews, zero-click results, marketplaces and social feeds long before webpage appears. Search will not revert to ten blue links. AI-driven answers will not move back to the margins.

    In that reality, clinging to Search Engine Optimization as a stand-alone strategy means optimizing for a shrinking slice of how decisions are made. Search Everywhere Optimization reflects the environment that actually exists: decentralized signals, AI-shaped discovery and students who expect clear, consistent answers wherever they look. Institutions that build around that reality are not just keeping up with change. They are defining the terms on which students compare their options.

    The next cycle belongs to those who act now. The AI-first, zero-click era won’t wait—and neither should institutions serious about growth. EducationDynamics is committed to helping institutions navigate this evolving landscape and put Search Everywhere Optimization at the center. Contact us to assess your AI Density and build a Search Everywhere Optimization strategy aligned to how students actually decide.

    Source link

  • Why empowering students sets the best course for future success

    Why empowering students sets the best course for future success

    Key points:

    When middle school students make the leap to high school, they are expected to have a career path in mind so their classes and goals align with their future plans. That’s a tremendous ask of a teenager who is unaware of the opportunities that await them–and emerging careers that have yet to exist.

    Mentors, parents, and educators spend so much time urging students to focus on their future that we do them a disservice by distracting them from their present–their passions, their interests, their hobbies. This self-discovery, combined with exposure to various career fields, fuels students’ motivation and serves as a guidebook for their professional journey.

    To meet their mission of directing every student toward an individualized post-secondary plan, schools need to prioritize recognizing each student’s lifestyle goals. That way, our kids can find their best-fit career and develop greater self-awareness of their own identity.

    Give students greater autonomy over their career exploration

    The most problematic aspect of traditional career-readiness programs is that they’re bound so tightly to the classes in which a student excels.

    For example, a high schooler on a technology track might be assigned an engineer as a mentor. However, that same student may also possess a love for writing, but because their core classes are science-based, they may never learn how to turn that passion into a career in the engineering field, whether as a UX writer, technical editor, or tech journalist. 

    Schools have the opportunity to help students identify their desired lifestyle, existing strengths, and possible career paths. In Aurora Public Schools in Nebraska, the district partnered with our company, Find Your Grind, an ESSA Tier 2 validated career exploration program, to guide students through a Lifestyle Assessment, enabling them to discover who they are now and who they want to become. Through this approach, teachers helped surface personalized careers, mentors, and pathway courses that aligned with students’ lifestyle goals.

    Meanwhile, in Ohio, school districts launched Lifestyle Fairs, immersive, future-ready events designed to introduce students to real-world career experiences, industry mentors, and interactive learning grounded in self-discovery. Hilliard City Schools, for example, welcomed more than seventh-grade students to a Lifestyle Fair this past May. 

    Rather than rely on a conventional booth-style setup, Hilliard offered interactive activations that centered on 16 lifestyle archetypes, including Competitor, Explorer, Connector, and Entrepreneur. The stations allowed students to engage with various industry leaders and participate in hands-on activities, including rocket launch simulations and creative design challenges, to ignite their curiosity. Following the Fair, educators reported increased student engagement and a renewed enthusiasm for learning about potential career paths.

    Create a fluidity path for future success

    According to the World Economic Forum, by 2030, 97 million jobs will be displaced by AI, significantly impacting lower-wage earners and workers of color. At the same time, 170 million new jobs are expected to be created, especially in emerging fields. By providing students more freedom in their career exploration, educators can help them adapt to this ever-changing 21st-century job market.

    Now is the time for school districts to ensure all students have access to equitable career planning programs and work to close societal disparities that hinder professional opportunities. Instead of setting students on a predetermined pathway toward a particular field–which may or may not exist a decade from now–educators must equip them with future-proof and transferable core skills, including flexibility, initiative, and productivity, in addition to job-specific skills. As the job market shifts, students will be prepared to change direction, switch jobs, and pivot between careers. 

    In Hawaii, students are taking advantage of career exploration curriculum that aligns with 21st-century career and technical education (CTE) frameworks. They are better prepared to complete their Personal Transition Plans, which are required for graduation by the state, and have access to micro-credentials that give them real-world experience in different industries rather than one particular field.

    For decades, career planning has placed students in boxes, based on what the adults in their lives expect of them. Ensuring every child reaches their full professional potential means breaking down the barriers that have been set up around them and allowing them to be at the center of their own career journey. When students are empowered to discover who they are and where they want to be, they are excited to explore all the incredible opportunities available to them. 

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Reading time: discovery, meaning-making and resistance in the accelerated academy

    Reading time: discovery, meaning-making and resistance in the accelerated academy

    by Fadia Dakka

    The increasing exposure of higher education sectors worldwide to market mechanisms (eg privatisation in and of higher education, platformisation and assetization) generates market-making pressures, technologies and relations that are changing university missions and academic practices in both research and teaching, altering not only forms of knowledge production but also academic identities (Lewis et al, 2022).  These corporate, competitive systems operate in and through regimes of time acceleration and compression (Rosa & Trejo-Mathys, 2013; Wajcman & Dodd (eds), 2017) that enable capitalist accumulation via a proliferation of calculative practices and surveillance techniques driven by instrumental logics. In essence, the timescapes of the ‘accelerated academy’ (Vostal, 2016) have come to be not just dominated but defined by the linear rhythms of knowledge production, accumulation, consumption, and distribution.

    In this context, ever-present tensions continue to pit institutional time scarcity/pressure against the often non-linear times, rhythms and practices that characterise the craft of intellectual work. These are acutely visible in doctoral education, which is considered both a liminal space-time of profound transformation for students and a rite of passage through which doctoral candidates enter the academic community.

    Doctoral students in the accelerated academy experience tremendous institutional pressures to complete their research projects within tight timeframes punctuated by developmental milestones. At the same time, they are pressed to publish and participate in externally funded projects before completing their course of studies, to secure a positional advantage in a hyper-competitive, precarious job market.

    In such a climate, pressures to develop core academic skills such as academic writing abound, as a quick glance at the vast literature available to both novice and accomplished researchers to help them improve the quality and quantity of writing reveals (eg Sword, 2017, 2023; Murray, 2025; Wyse, 2017; Moran, 2019; Young & Ferguson, 2021; Thomson, 2023; Sternad & Power, 2023). 

    Much less attention is devoted to reading as an autonomous practice in relation to educational research. Reading is generally approached instrumentally for research and mostly equated with a strategic, extractive process whereby academics retrieve, survey or review the information needed for writing to maximise efficiency and speed (Fulford & Hodgson (eds) 2016; Boulous Walker, 2017).

    Doctoral students are taught to tackle the volume of readings by deploying selective, skim and speed-reading techniques that ‘teach’ them a practical method to ‘fillet’ publications (Silverman, 2010 p323) or ‘gut(ting) an article or book for the material you need’ (Thomas, 2013 p67). Without dismissing the validity of these outcome-oriented techniques, I argue that reading should be approached and investigated as research, which is to say as a philosophical orientation whose intimate relation with thinking (meditation and contemplation) and writing (as a method of inquiry) constitutes a conjuncture with transformative potential for both the reader and the text (Hoveid & Hoveid, 2013; Dakka & Wade, 2018). [RC1] [FD2] 

    In 2024, I was awarded a BA/Leverhulme grant that allowed me to examine, in collaboration with Norwegian colleagues, the under-researched area of reading habits, rhythms and practices among doctoral students in two countries, the UK and Norway, characterised by a markedly different cultural political economy of higher education. The project set out to explore how a diverse group of doctoral students related to, made sense of, and engaged with reading as a practice, intellectually and emotionally. Through such exploration, the team intended to examine pedagogical and philosophical implications for doctoral education, supervision, and, more generally, higher education through a distinct spatiotemporal lens.

    The project experimented with slow reading (Boulous Walker, 2017) as an ethico-political countermovement that invites us to dwell with the text and reflect on the transformations it can produce within the self and the educational experience tout-court. Examining the practice of reading is, therefore, vital to foster the development of the criticality and creativity that inform the students’ thinking and, ultimately, their writing, helping to create better conditions for meaningful educational engagement.

    As briefly mentioned earlier, there is a dearth of literature in educational research focused explicitly and directly on reading as a research practice. Conversely, Reading Theory and Reader-Response criticism (Bennett, 1995) are well-established strands in literary studies.

    Two contributions inspired the project in the cognate fields of philosophy, pedagogy, and education ethics, underpinning the theoretical and methodological framework adopted: Aldridge (2019), exploring the association between reading, higher education and educational engagement through the phenomenological literary theorisations of Rita Felski (2015) and Marielle Macé (2013). Reading here is considered as a phenomenological ‘orientation’ with ontological character: the entanglement of body, thought, and sense makes reading an ‘embodied mode of attentiveness’  with ‘rhythms of rapprochement and distancing, relaxation and suspense, movement and hesitation’ (Felski 2015, p176). Lastly, Boulous Walker (2017) introduces the concept of ‘slow reading’, or reading philosophically against the institution. This practice stands in opposition to the institutional time, efficiency, and productivity pressures that prevent the intense, contemplative attitude toward research that is typical of active educational engagement. The author calls, therefore, for slow reading, careful reading, and re-reading as antidotes against institutional contexts dominated by speed and the cult of efficiency.

    Bridging cultural sociology and philosophy of education, the project combined Hermeneutic Phenomenology (Schutz, 1972; Ricoeur, 1984) and Rhythmanalysis (Lefebvre, 2004) to gain insight into the lived experiences, embodied and cognitive processes of meaning-making, and spatiotemporal (rhythmic) dimensions of reading among doctoral students.

    The complementarity of these frameworks enabled a richer and deeper understanding of the phenomenon from a socio-cultural and philosophical perspective. The rhythmanalytical dimension drew on the oeuvre of the French philosopher and sociologist Henri Lefebvre. Conceived as both a sensory method and a philosophical disposition, Rhythmanalysis (2004) foregrounds the question of the everyday and its rhythms, offering insightful takes on repetition, difference, appropriation and dwelling. Lefebvre’s analysis of the conflicting rhythms of the social and the critical moments that revive/subvert the humdrum of the quotidian pivot on the experience and resonance of bodies in space-time, their imbrication with the fabric of the social and the multiplicity of their perceptual interrelations with human and more-than-human environments. Methodologically, Rhythmanalysis enabled a closer look at the students’ reading habits, rhythms and practices in relation to their doctoral studies. The emphasis on spatio-temporality and (auto-)ethnographic observations made it possible to register and grasp the tensions that derive from clashes between meso institutional constraints and demands (eg set timeframes for completion; developmental milestones), micro individual responses and circumstances (eg different modes of study, private and/or professional commitments) and macro societal context (eg cognitive, extractive capitalism).

    The phenomenological facet of the project drew on the hermeneutic, existential, and ontological dimensions found in Ricoeur’s and Schutz’s philosophy, which are concerned with grasping experiential meanings and understanding the complexity of human lifeworld.  Acknowledging the entanglement of being and Dasein as an ontological standpoint, human lived experiences are situated within a contingent spatiotemporality and understood through an interpretivist epistemology founded on intersubjectivity, intentionality and hermeneutics.

    This phenomenological-rhythmanalytical inquiry was therefore designed to explore students’ cognitive and affective experiences and practices of reading as they unfolded in the spaces and times of their doctoral education. The project involved two groups of doctoral candidates based in the Education department of, respectively, a teaching-intensive university in the West Midlands of England (Birmingham, UK), and a large, research-intensive university in Norway (Trondheim).

    The first phase of data collection involved Focus Groups and Reflective Diaries. It foregrounded the times, places, and rhythms of reading, considering reading modalities and patterns of doctoral students in the context of institutional demands vis-à-vis personal and professional constraints. Rhythmanalysis was employed both as a method (reflective diaries) and as an interpretive, diagnostic tool to uncover and critically reflect on arrhythmias (ruptures) and/or eurythmic pockets in the reading patterns of doctoral students.

    The second data collection phase relied on hermeneutic phenomenological techniques, such as Episodic Narrative Interviews (Mueller, 2019), to delve deeper into the affective, material, and cognitive experience that connects and transforms students and their readings.

    The final stage of data collection involved an experiment in collective slow reading and re-reading against the institution, inspired by Boulous Walker’s philosophical reading and Felman’s description of the interpretative process as a never-ending ‘turn of the screw’ (Felman, 1977) that generates a hermeneutical spiral of subsequent, ever richer, and different textual interpretations.

    Initial findings point to a complex and layered reading time experience, captured in its nuanced articulation by a rhythmic analysis of the students’ everyday practices, habits and affective responses.

    Commonsensical as it may sound, reading takes time. Engaging with a text to interpret and understand it is time-consuming, and most of our respondents in this project discussed this. Reading seems to project an experience of oneself as a slow reader, followed by a feeling of guilt for ‘just’ reading.

    Interestingly, clock time and phenomenological time appear to be juxtaposed in the reading process, creating conflicts and productive tensions for most of the PhD students in the project. For example, the students often welcome writing deadlines, as they create a linear rhythm that provides structure to their reading time. At the same time, the idea that reading should be done quickly and targeted to extract material for their thesis hovers over many participants, generating performance-related pressure and anxiety. Procedural aspects of reading, particularly managing volume and note-taking, are treated as a sign of success or failure, reinstating Rosa’s neoliberal equation of fast-winner, slow-loser in the accelerated, competitive academy (Rosa, Chapter 2 in Wajcman & Dodd (eds), 2017).

    However, a deeper engagement with reading both opposes and coexists with this tendency, evoking the notion of Barthes’ idiorrhythmy (Dakka, 2024) to describe the process of discovering and imposing one’s own rhythm. This rhythm typically resists linearity and dominant structure, requiring slowness as a disposition or a mode of intense attention to oneself and the world through the encounter with text. Even more intriguingly, slowness as heightened focus and immersion often occurs within short and fragmented bursts of reading, strategically or opportunistically carved into the students’ everyday lives, resulting from an incessant act of negotiation over and encroachments with personal, professional, and institutional times.

    The project explored, examined, and interpreted the rhythms and practices of reading in contemporary doctoral education along three axes: times (institutional, personal, inner, tempo, duration); spaces (physical, digital, mental); and affects as ways of relating (joy, guilt, anxiety, surprise, fantasy, etc). Together, these elements combine in unique and shifting configurations of dominant rhythms and idiosyncratic responses (rhuthmόs or idiorrhythmy), exposing the irreducibility of students’ experiences to harmful binaries (eg fast versus slow academia) while revealing the pedagogic affordances of a rhythmic and phenomenological analysis for contemporary universities. Spotlighting different approaches to reading, thinking, and writing enhances awareness of and attunement to developing one’s voice, listening and resisting capacity.

    Fadia Dakka is an Associate Professor in Philosophy and Theory of Higher Education at Birmingham City University. Her interests lie at the intersection of philosophy, sociology and theory of higher education. She is currently working toward theorising Rhythm as a form of ethics underpinning critical pedagogy in higher education. She recently received a BA/Leverhulme small grant (2024-25) to examine doctoral reading habits and practices in the UK and Norway.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

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

    Source link

  • Product Enhancements from Discovery Education Foster Improved Engagement and Personalization

    Product Enhancements from Discovery Education Foster Improved Engagement and Personalization

    Charlotte, NC — Discovery Education, the creators of essential K-12 learning solutions used in classrooms around the world, today announced a host of exciting product updates during a special virtual event led by the company’s Chief Product Officer Pete Weir. Based on feedback from the company’s school-based partners, these updates make teaching and learning even more relevant, engaging, and personalized for users of Discovery Education products.

    Among the enhancements made to Discovery Education Experience, the essential companion for engaged K-12 classrooms that inspires teachers and motivates students, are:  teachers and motivates students, are:

    • Improved Personalized Recommendations for Teachers: With thousands of resources in Experience, there is something for every classroom. The new Core Curriculum Complements feature in Experience automatically surfaces engaging resources handpicked to enhance school systems’ core curriculum, simplifying lesson planning and ensuring tight alignment with district priorities. Additionally, Experience now offers educators Personalized Content Recommendations. These content suggestions made to individual teachers are based on their unique profiles and preferences, or what is frequently used by other educators like them.
    • An Enhanced AI-Powered Assessment Tool: Originally launched in 2024, this tool is the first in a new suite of AI-powered teaching tools currently under development, and it empowers educators to create high-quality assessments using vetted resources right from within Experience. Educators can now more easily customize assessments according to reading level, question type, Bloom’s Taxonomy, and more – ensuring optimal learning experiences for students. Educators can also review and tailor the questions and, once ready, export those questions into a variety of formats.
    • A New Career Exploration Tool for All Discovery Education Experience Users: Career Connect – the award-winning tool that connects K-12 classrooms with real industry professionals – is now accessible to all Discovery Education Experience users. With this new feature, classrooms using Experience can directly connect to the professionals, innovations, and skills of today’s workforce. Furthermore, Experience is now delivering a variety of new career pathway resources, virtual field trips, and career profiles – building career awareness, inviting exploration, and helping students prepare for their future.
    • A newly enhanced Instructional Strategy Library: To elevate instruction and better support teachers, Discovery Education has enhanced its one-stop-spot for strategies supporting more engaging, efficient, and effective teaching. The improved Instructional Strategy Library streamlines the way educators find and use popular, research-backed instructional strategies and professional learning supports and provides connected model lessons and activities.

    Also announced today were a host of improvements to DreamBox Math by Discovery Education. DreamBox Math offers adaptive, engaging, and scaffolded lessons that adjust in real time to personalize learning so that students can build confidence and skills at their own pace. Among the new improvements to DreamBox Math are:

    • Major Lesson Updates: Based on teacher feedback, Discovery Education’s expert curriculum team has updated DreamBox Math’s most popular lessons to make them easier for students to start, play, and complete successfully. Students will now encounter lessons with updated scaffolding, enhanced visuals, greater interactivity, and added context to ground mathematical concepts in the curriculum and the world they live in.
    • A New Look for Middle School: Middle school students will encounter a more vibrantly colored and upgraded user interface featuring a reorganized Lesson Chooser whose intuitive design makes it easy to identify teacher-assigned lessons from their personalized lesson options. Additional updates will follow throughout the year.
    • New Interactive Curriculum Guide: Discovery Education has strengthened the link between DreamBox Math and school systems’ core instruction with an Interactive Curriculum Guide. Educators can now explore the breadth and scope of DreamBox content by grade and standard to locate, preview, and play lessons, increasing familiarity with lessons, and enhancing targeted instruction. The DreamBox Math team will continue to make updates to standards and curriculum alignments throughout the year.

    To watch a replay of today’s special event in its entirety, and to learn about additional updates to Discovery Education’s suite of K-12 solutions, visit this link.

    “Discovery Education understands teachers’ sense of urgency about closing the achievement gaps highlighted by recent NAEP scores,” said Pete Weir, Discovery Education’s Chief Product Officer. “In response, we accelerated the development and deployment of what has traditionally been our ‘Back-to-School’ product enhancements. The stakes for our students have never been higher, and Discovery Education is dedicated to putting the highest-quality, most effective resources into teachers and students’ hands as soon as possible.”

    For more information about Discovery Education’s award-winning digital resources and professional learning solutions, visit www.discoveryeducation.com, and stay connected with Discovery Education on social media through X, LinkedIn, Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook.    

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



    Source link