After 7 years of service with a great team, I’ve been laid off from Duke, like many of my colleagues.
I’m taking some time to consider what I want to do next. This includes any of my areas of expertise, from learning design and libraries to visual art and journalism. I’m also keeping my eye out for roles that combine my experience in new ways.
If you have 5 minutes, could you please share this post, connect me with someone you think I should talk to, or share any relevant job openings?
I’m looking for hybrid roles in the Triad and Triangle of NC and remote roles anywhere (willing to travel some, too).
I saw Heather’s post, read all the supportive comments the post generated and had two questions: 1) Which university or organization will be smart and lucky enough to recruit Heather? 2) Would Heather be willing to share her story in this space for this community?
On my second question, Heather graciously agreed to participate in this Q&A.
Q: Tell us about your professional and educational background. What are the projects, initiatives and services that you have contributed to and led? What are your superpowers that potential employers should know about?
A: I’m an art major who worked in journalism for five years after college, doing writing and editing. Then I pursued my master’s in library and information studies and worked for several years as an academic librarian focused on teaching and learning. I moved into instructional design for online learning at UNC Chapel Hill and then worked at Duke University for seven years, most recently as a senior learning experience designer.
My recent accomplishments include:
Establishing digital education strategies with five professional schools and developing certificate programs in UAS (Drones) Applications and Operations in Environmental Science, Church Administration and Human Resources, and Healthcare Leadership for Climate Science.
Leading continuous improvement initiatives to develop new or updated workflows, create standard operating procedures and update team roles and responsibilities.
Mentoring and coaching newer designers in project leadership and advanced learning design skills, like creating assessments and drafting course content.
Developing team AI guidelines that set expectations for how generative AI is used in course development work.
My superpowers are empathy, strategy and creativity. I excel at building relationships, collaborating and coaching, whether that be to design an online course for the first time or to grow as a professional. I think analytically and strategically about work processes, projects and goals. I generate a lot of ideas, and I enjoy figuring out how to take an idea or vision and implement it successfully.
Q: In thinking about your next role, what is the organizational culture and institutional priorities that you are looking for in determining the fit with your strengths and values?
A: As I look for roles, I keep going back to the idea of work being human-centered. Does the organization value its people and its impact more than its profits? Does it genuinely want to improve educational access for everyone? How has it shown that it keeps humans centered in discussions of technology and AI? Further, is it continuing to prioritize equity and inclusivity, and does it ask, “Who needs a seat at the table?” when embarking on new projects and initiatives?
Like people, organizations are works in progress—ultimately, what I care about is follow-through. Do you set human-centered intentions and see them through? I want a workplace where leaders embrace empathy and difficult conversations while encouraging healthy collaboration and boundaries. Finally, I want a workplace where workers have agency to think deeply and creatively.
Q: From your experience navigating the fallout of the federal attack on higher education, what advice do you have for all of us also dealing with job uncertainty and professional stress?
A: I’ve been asking everyone else this question! What I’ve learned so far is that we are a community of educators that is much bigger than any particular institution or organization. How can we help each other and continue to do the important work we care about?
I wasn’t expecting the outpouring of support I received, and it reminded me that it’s okay to reach out and ask for help. It also strengthened my resolve to help others when I can.
Finally, remember that you are much more than your role and your organization–you can figure it out, and you contain multitudes that may end up surprising you.
For students with special needs, learning can often resemble a trek through dense woods along a narrow, rigid path–one that leaves little to no room for individual exploration. But the educational landscape is evolving. Picture classrooms as adventurous hunts, where every learner charts their own journey, overcomes unique challenges, and progresses at a pace that matches their strengths. This vision is becoming reality through gamification, a powerful force that is reshaping how students learn and how teachers teach in K–12 special education.
Personalized learning paths: Tailoring the adventure
Traditional classrooms often require students to adapt one method of instruction, which can be limiting–especially for neurodiverse learners. Gamified learning platforms provide an alternative by offering adaptive, personalized learning experiences that honor each student’s profile and pace.
Many of these platforms use real-time data and algorithms to adjust content based on performance. A student with reading difficulties might receive simplified text with audio support, while a math-savvy learner can engage in increasingly complex logic puzzles. This flexibility allows students to move forward without fear of being left behind, or without being bored waiting for others to catch up.
Accessibility features such as customizable avatars, voice commands, and adjustable visual settings also create space for students with ADHD, autism, or sensory sensitivities to learn comfortably. A student sensitive to bright colors can use a softer palette; another who struggles with reading can use text-to-speech features. And when students can replay challenges without stigma, repetition becomes practice, not punishment.
In these environments, progress is measured individually. The ability to choose which goals to tackle and how to approach them gives learners both agency and confidence–two things often missing in traditional special education settings.
Building social and emotional skills: The power of play
Play is a break from traditional learning and a powerful way to build essential social and emotional skills. For students with special needs who may face challenges with communication, emotional regulation, or peer interaction, gamified environments provide a structured yet flexible space to develop these abilities.
In cooperative hunts and team challenges, students practice empathy, communication, and collaboration in ways that feel engaging and low-stakes. A group mission might involve solving a puzzle together, requiring students to share ideas, encourage one another, and work toward a common goal.
Gamified platforms also provide real-time, constructive feedback, transforming setbacks into teachable moments. Instead of pointing out what a student did wrong, a game might offer a helpful hint: “Try checking the clues again!” This kind of support teaches resilience and persistence in a way that lectures or punitive grading rarely do.
As students earn badges or level up, they experience tangible success. These moments highlight the connection between effort and achievement. Over time, these small wins raise a greater willingness to engage with the material and with peers and the classroom community.
Fostering independence and motivation
Students with learning differences often carry the weight of repeated academic failure, which can chip away at their motivation. Gamification helps reverse this by reframing challenges as opportunities and effort as progress.
Badges, points, and levels make achievements visible and meaningful. A student might earn a “Problem Solver” badge after tackling a tricky math puzzle or receive “Teamwork Tokens” for helping a classmate. These systems expand the definition of success and highlight personal strengths.
The focus shifts from comparison to self-improvement. Some platforms even allow for private progress tracking, letting students set and meet personal goals without the anxiety of public rankings. Instead of competing, students build a personal narrative of growth.
Gamification also encourages self-directed learning. As student complete tasks, they develop skills like planning, time management, and self-assessment, skills that extend beyond academics and into real life. The result is a deeper sense of ownership and independence.
Teachers as learning guides
Gamification doesn’t replace teachers, but it can help teach more effectively. With access to real-time analytics, educators can see exactly where a student is excelling or struggling and adjust instruction accordingly.
Dashboards might reveal that a group of students is thriving in reading comprehension but needs help with number sense, prompting immediate, targeted intervention. This data-driven insight allows for proactive, personalized support.
Teachers in gamified classrooms also take on a new role, both of a mentor and facilitator. They curate learning experiences, encourage exploration, and create opportunities for creativity and curiosity to thrive. Instead of managing behavior or delivering lectures, they support students on individualized learning journeys.
Inclusion reimagined
Gamification is not a gimmick; it’s a framework for true inclusion. It aligns with the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), offering multiple ways for students to engage, process information, and show what they know. It recognizes that every learner is different, and builds that into the design.
Of course, not every gamified tool is created equal. Thoughtful implementation, equity in access, and alignment with student goals are essential. But when used intentionally, gamification can turn classrooms into places where students with diverse needs feel seen, supported, and excited to learn.
Are we ready to level up?
Gamification is a step toward classrooms that work for everyone. For students with special needs, it means learning at their own pace, discovering their strengths, and building confidence through meaningful challenges.
For teachers, it’s a shift from directing traffic to guiding adventurers.
If we want education to be truly inclusive, we must go beyond accommodations and build systems where diversity is accepted and celebrated. And maybe, just maybe, that journey begins with a game.
Aditya Prakash, SKIDOS
Aditya Prakash is the founder and CEO of SKIDOS, a Copenhagen-based edtech leader transforming mobile gaming into learning, drawing on two decades of innovation, investment, and mentorship in technology-driven education.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Education is undergoing a profound digital transformation. From immersive AR/VR learning in science labs to hybrid classrooms, real-time collaboration platforms, and remote learning at scale, how students learn and educators teach is changing rapidly. These modern, data-intensive applications require far more than basic connectivity. They demand high bandwidth, ultra-low latency, and rock-solid reliability across every corner of the campus.
In other words, the minimum requirement today is maximal connectivity. And this is where Optical LAN (OLAN) becomes a game changer.
The challenge with traditional LANs
Most schools and universities still rely on traditional copper-based local area networks (LANs). But these aging systems are increasingly unable to meet the demands of today’s digital education environments. Copper cabling comes with inherent speed and distance limitations, requiring rip-and-replace upgrades every 5 to 7 years to keep up with evolving needs.
To increase network capacity, institutions must replace in-wall cables, switches, and other infrastructure–an expensive, time-consuming and highly disruptive process. Traditional LANs also come with large physical footprints, high maintenance requirements, and significant energy consumption, all of which add to their total cost of ownership (TCO).
In a world that’s demanding smarter, faster, and greener networks, it’s clear that copper no longer makes the grade.
Built for the campus of the future
Optical LAN is a purpose-built solution for both in-campus and in-building connectivity, leveraging the superior performance of fiber optic infrastructure. It addresses the limitations of copper LANs head-on and offers significant improvements in scalability, energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
Here’s why it’s such a compelling option for education networks:
1. Massive capacity and seamless scalability
Fiber offers virtually unlimited bandwidth. Today’s OLAN systems can easily support speeds of 10G and 25G, with future-readiness for 50G and even 100G. And unlike copper networks, education IT managers and operators don’t need to replace the cabling to upgrade; they simply add new wavelengths (light signals) to increase speed or capacity. This means educational institutions can scale up without disruptive overhauls.
Better yet, fiber allows for differentiated quality of service on a single line. For example, a school can use a 1G wavelength to connect classrooms and dormitories, while allocating 10G bandwidth to high-performance labs. This flexibility is ideal for delivering customized connectivity across complex campus environments.
New School Safety Resources
2. Extended reach across the entire campus
One of the standout features of OLAN is its extended reach. Fiber can deliver high-speed connections over distances up to 20–30 km without needing signal boosters or additional switches. This makes it perfect for large campuses where buildings like lecture halls, research centers, dorms, and libraries are spread out over wide areas. In contrast, copper LANs typically max out at a few dozen meters, requiring more switches, patch panels and costly infrastructure.
With OLAN, a single centralized network can serve the entire campus, reducing complexity and improving performance.
3. Energy efficiency and sustainability
Sustainability is top-of-mind for many educational institutions, and OLAN is a clear winner here. Fiber technology is up to 8 times more energy-efficient than other wired or wireless options. It requires fewer active components, generates less heat and significantly reduces the need for cooling.
Studies show that OLAN uses up to 40 percent less power than traditional LAN systems. This translates into lower electricity bills and a reduced carbon footprint–important factors for schools pursuing green building certifications.
In fact, a BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) assessment conducted by ENCON found that deploying OLAN improved BREEAM scores by 7.7 percent, particularly in categories like management, energy, health and materials. For perspective, adding solar panels typically improves BREEAM scores by 5-8 percent.
4. Simpler, smarter architecture
Optical LAN significantly simplifies the network design. Instead of multiple layers of LAN switches and complex cabling, OLAN relies on a single centralized switch and slim, passive optical network terminals (ONTs). A single fiber cable can serve up to 128 endpoints, using a fraction of the physical space required by copper bundles.
This lean architecture means:
Smaller cable trays and no heavy-duty racks
Faster installation and easier maintenance
Fewer points of failure and lower IT footprint
The result? A network that’s easier to manage, more reliable, and built to grow with an education institution’s needs.
5. Unmatched cost efficiency
While fiber was once seen as expensive, the economics have shifted. The Association for Passive Optical LAN (APOLAN) found that POL saved 40 percent of the cost for a four-story building in 2022. Even more, Optical LAN now delivers up to 50 percent lower TCO over a 5-year period compared to traditional LAN systems, according to multiple industry studies.
Cost savings are achieved through:
Up to 70 percent less cabling
Fewer switches and active components
Reduced energy and cooling costs
Longer lifecycle as fiber lasts more than 50 years
In essence, OLAN delivers more value for less money, which is a compelling equation for budget-conscious education institutions.
The future is fiber
With the rise of Wi-Fi 7 and ever-increasing demands on network infrastructure, even wireless connectivity depends on robust wired backhaul. Optical LAN ensures that Wi-Fi access points have the bandwidth they need to deliver high-speed, uninterrupted service.
And as educational institutions continue to adopt smart building technologies, video surveillance, IoT devices, and remote learning platforms, only fiber can keep up with the pace of change.
Optical LAN empowers educational institutions to build networks that are faster, greener, simpler, and future-proof. With growing expectations from students, faculty, and administrators, now is the perfect time to leave legacy limitations behind and invest in a fiber-powered future.
After all, why keep replacing copper every few years when operators can build it right once?
Ana Pesovic, Nokia
Ana Pesovic heads the Fiber Access marketing in in Nokia. She built up extensive international telecom experience, with positions in sales, pre-sales and R&D in Germany, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, and India. As member of various industry organizations, she’s a strong advocate of Fiber.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Learning in contemporary higher education is rooted deeply in calendars and time rather than mastery of the topic of the learning. With an inflexible semester or quarter calendar and an often-inflexible schedule and length of meeting times, learners are marched through the system in the orderly method of an assembly line.
As long as I have taught at the university level, beginning in the early 1970s, I have questioned this approach that puts time scheduling ahead of depth of learning. It seems to put teaching schedules ahead of learning outcomes. I must confess that over the decades, I have been an easy touch for an incomplete for a student who encountered some unforeseen life disruption or simply took on more than she or he could handle during the semester. My philosophy has been and still is that what is learned is more important than whether it was accomplished in eight weeks, 16 weeks or even longer.
I am not alone in that view. Back in the 1960s, one of learning’s highly recognized scholars, Benjamin Bloom, probed this very issue: “Bloom’s Learning for Mastery (LFM) strategy evolved and was later on implemented in primary and secondary school settings.” Meanwhile, psychologist Fred Keller developed his Personalized System of Instruction focused on five key principles:
Students should be allowed to work at their own pace.
Lessons should be considered as “vehicles of motivation.”
Teachers and students should consider using written communication in textbooks and study guides.
Teachers and students should get closer through repeated testing, immediate scoring, continuous tutoring and progress tracking.
These five principles cannot be easily integrated into classes that march forward with a rigid class calendar based on three 50-minute class meetings for 15 weeks! However, recent technological developments have opened the door to reinventing higher education from the assembly-line model to an online, asynchronous, tutor-enhanced, mastery-based learning model.
To understand the differences between traditional teaching and mastery learning, one can best describe that our current practices place an emphasis on time-based teaching, while in mastery learning, the emphasis is, as the name suggests, on learning. Note that in Keller’s PSI approach, the goal is 90 percent or better learning as evidenced through frequent assessments required to move forward to the next module in the class.
The PSI stresses personalized scaffolding of learning and evidence of mastery throughout the course, whereas our current common mode of delivery views the class as a whole rather than recognizing differences in background and learning by individuals. Inevitably, the current approach penalizes students for unintended, unrecognized shortcomings in understanding caused by any of a number of circumstances, such as prior knowledge deficits in some aspect of that which they are studying, poorly taught prerequisite or assumed previously taken classes, unanticipated life interventions, or some other inability to learn essential class concepts that had not been anticipated in the development and design of the class.
If, instead, we were to create personalized learning intervention opportunities at every step of the way that are designed to be responsive to the needs of individual learners on a minimum of learning 90 percent of every module, we could ensure a minimum of mastery of 90 percent of the materials in every class.
Artificial intelligence employed in an asynchronous or blended online class opens the pathway to mastery learning. An instructor can experiment with this process by folding this prompt into one or two modules of a class. Released by There’s an AI for That (TAAFT) it is a free and openly available prompt that can be inserted into any of the major frontier models, such as Gemini, ChatGPT or Claude. Titled Precision Learning Companion, the prompt is introduced:
“This prompt turns AI into an ultra-detailed, dynamic personal tutor that doesn’t just quiz, it teaches deeply, layer by layer, until the user genuinely masters the material. It’s built to adapt in real time, constantly diagnosing knowledge gaps, and never moving forward without full comprehension. Every answer, right or wrong, triggers a structured, narrative-style breakdown explaining the what, why, how, and broader context, ensuring true understanding. The AI is designed to feel like having a supportive but meticulous mentor who scaffolds learning: progressively challenging the user if they perform well, slowing down and simplifying if they struggle, and always reinforcing psychological safety through encouragement. It uses textually described visual aids, memory tricks, real-world examples, and step-by-step remediation when needed. Mastery, not speed, is the goal.”
I encourage readers to test this out, to examine more closely the impact of using AI to deliver learning opportunities. It took me less than two minutes to get my module up and running:
I copied and pasted the page-long prompt from the TAAFT.Notion site into Claude 4 for test purposes and pressed enter.
I entered the topic as “human eye anatomy” (of course you can enter any topic that you might cover in a week or so in your current class schedule).
I was then launched into a congenial conversation with the AI module that probed deeply into my knowledge of the topic in a pleasant and reinforcing way.
I must admit that I was so engaged that I didn’t stop for more than an hour.
You can begin by testing it on yourself and perhaps a colleague, teaching assistant or another willing participant. Choose a relevant topic. I chose “physiology of the human eye,” which was a basic module in all of the many Communication Technology classes I offered. I found the AI module to be accurate, comprehensive, reinforcing and clear. If you find that it shows promise, you might choose to use it in one of your classes. Invite your instructional designer to join in a discussion of how this might best be used in your classes. Note how it personalizes instruction for learners by sharing additional information, readings and related learning opportunities to backfill areas that learners who may be deficient in background and need context to relate to the course. You can ask learners to share a copy of the exchanges. They may also share brief reactions on the quality and usefulness of the interaction with AI.
Over time, with the help of your instructional designer, you may want to go fully into mastery learning, ensuring that every student in your classes masters the material at a 90 percent level. In some cases, you may need to be flexible with offering incompletes to provide time for those who need to complete the additional material triggered by submission of wrong answers.
I always had an uncomfortable feeling in the pit of my stomach when I submitted a C, D or F as a final grade. I felt that I had failed my student. However, I had a full classroom and there was not enough time or opportunity to provide individualized attention to each student. Perhaps the new generation of university instructors who partner with AI assistants will enjoy the confidence that all their learners will master the topic of the class with the help of AI. No learner will be left behind, and none will be victims of the assembly-line model of teaching in higher education.
Every educator hopes to instill a lifelong love of learning within their students. We strive to make each lesson engaging, while igniting a sense of curiosity, wonder, and discovery in every child.
Unfortunately, we don’t always succeed, and recent reports suggest that today’s students are struggling to connect with the material they’re taught in school–particularly when it comes to STEM. While there are many potential culprits behind these numbers (shortened attention spans, the presence of phones, dependency on AI, etc.), educators should still take a moment to reflect and strategize when preparing a new lesson for their class. If we truly want to foster a growth mindset within our students, we need to provide lessons that invite them to embrace the learning process itself.
One way to accomplish this is through gamification. Gamification brings the motivational elements of games into your everyday lessons. It increases student engagement, builds perseverance, and promotes a growth mindset. When used strategically, it helps learners take ownership of their progress and encourages creativity and collaboration without sacrificing academic rigor.
Here are just 4 ways that educators can transform their classroom through playful gamification:
Introduce points and badges: Modern video games like Pokémon and Minecraft frequently use achievements to guide new players through the gaming process. Teachers can do the same by assigning points to different activities that students can acquire throughout the week. These experience points can also double as currency that students can exchange for small rewards, such as extra free time or an end-of-year pizza party.
Create choice boards: Choice boards provide students with a range of task options, each with a point value or challenge level. You can assign themes or badges for completing tasks in a certain sequence (e.g., “complete a column” or “complete one of each difficulty level”). This allows students to take ownership of their learning path and pace, while still hitting key learning targets.
Host a digital breakout: Virtual escape rooms and digital breakouts are great for fostering engagement and getting students to think outside the box. By challenging students to solve content-based puzzles to unlock “locks” or progress through scenarios, they’re encouraged to think creatively while also collaborating with their peers. They’re the ideal activity for reviewing classwork and reinforcing key concepts across subjects.
Boss battle assessments: This gamified review activity has students “battle” a fictional character by answering questions or completing tasks. Each correct response helps them defeat the boss, which can be tracked with points, health bars, or progress meters. This engaging format turns practice into a collaborative challenge, building excitement and reinforcing content mastery.
When implemented correctly, gamification can be incredibly fun and rewarding for our students. With the fall semester drawing closer, there has never been a better time to prepare lessons that will spark student curiosity, creativity, and critical thinking.
We can show our students that STEM learning is not a chore, but a gateway to discovery and excitement. So, get your pencils ready, and let the games begin.
Cory Kavanagh, Van Andel Institute for Education
Cory Kavanagh is a Learning Specialist at Van Andel Institute for Education, a Michigan-based education nonprofit dedicated to creating classrooms where curiosity, creativity, and critical thinking thrive.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
As generative AI continues to gain momentum in education each year, both its adoption and the attitudes toward its use have steadily grown more positive, according to a new report from Quizlet.
The How America Learns report explores U.S. student, teacher, and parent perspectives on AI implementation, digital learning and engagement, and success beyond the classroom.
“At Quizlet, we’ve spent nearly two decades putting students at the center of everything we do,” said Quizlet CEO Kurt Beidler. “We fielded this research to better understand the evolving study habits of today’s students and ensure we’re building tools that not only help our tens of millions of monthly learners succeed, but also reflect what they truly need from their learning experience.”
AI becomes ubiquitous in education As generative AI solutions gain traction in education year over year, adoption and attitudes towards the technology have increased and improved. Quizlet’s survey found that 85 percent of respondents–including high school and college teachers, as well as students aged 14-22–said they used AI technology, a significant increase from 66 percent in 2024. Of those respondents using AI, teachers now outpace students in AI adoption (87 percent vs 84 percent), compared to 2024 findings when students slightly outpaced teachers.
Among the 89 percent of all students who say they use AI technology for school (up from 77 percent in 2024), the top three use cases are summarizing or synthesizing information (56%), research (46 percent), and generating study guides or materials (45 percent). The top uses of AI technology among teachers remained the same but saw significant growth YoY: research (54 percent vs. 33 percent), summarizing or synthesizing information (48 percent vs. 30 percent), and generating classroom materials like tests and assignments (45 percent vs. 31 percent).
While the emergence of AI has presented new challenges related to academic integrity, 40 percent of respondents believe that AI is used ethically and effectively in the classroom. However, students are significantly less likely to feel this way (29 percent) compared to parents (46 percent) and teachers (57 percent), signaling a continued need for education and guidelines on responsible use of AI technology for learning.
“Like any new technology, AI brings incredible opportunities, but also a responsibility to use it thoughtfully,” said Maureen Lamb, AI Task Force Chair and Language Department Chair at Miss Porter’s School. “As adoption in education grows, we need clear guidelines that help mitigate risk and unlock the full potential of AI. Everyone–students, educators, and parents–has a role to play in understanding not just how to use AI, but when and why it should be used.”
Digital learning demands growth while equity gap persists Just as AI is becoming a staple in education, survey results also found that digital learning is growing in popularity, with 64 percent of respondents expressing that digital learning methods should be equal or greater than traditional education methods, especially teachers (71 percent).
Respondents indicated that flexibility (56 percent), personalized learning (53 percent), and accessibility (49 percent) were the most beneficial aspects of digital learning. And with 77 percent of students making sacrifices, including loss of sleep, personal time, and missed extracurriculars due to homework, digital learning offers a promising path toward a more accommodating approach.
While the majority of respondents agreed on the importance and benefits of digital learning, results also pointed to a disparity in access to these tools. Despite nearly half (49 percent) of respondents agreeing that all students in their community have equal access to learning materials, technology, and support to succeed academically, that percentage drops to 43 percent for respondents with diagnosed or self-identified learning differences, neurodivergent traits, or accessibility needs.
Maximizing success for academic and real-world learning While discussion around AI and education has largely focused on use cases for academic learning, the report also uncovered an opportunity for greater support to help drive success beyond the classroom and provide needed resources for real-world learning.
Nearly 60 percent of respondents believe a four-year college degree is of high importance for achieving professional success (58 percent). However, more than one-third of students, teachers, and parents surveyed believe schools are not adequately preparing students for success beyond the classroom.
“As we drive the next era of AI-powered learning, it’s our mission to give every student and lifelong learner the tools and confidence to succeed, no matter their motivation or what they’re striving to achieve,” said Beidler. “As we’ve seen in the data, there’s immense opportunity when it comes to career-connected learning, from life skills development to improving job readiness, that goes well beyond the classroom and addresses what we’re hearing from students and teachers alike.”
The top five skills respondents indicated should be prioritized more in schools are critical thinking and problem solving (66 percent), financial literacy (64 percent), mental health management (58 percent), leadership skills (52 percent), and creativity and innovation (50 percent).
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.
Not surprisingly, jobs in AI are the fastest growing of any in the country, with a 59 percent increase in job postings between January 2024 and November 2024. Yet we continue to struggle with growing a workforce that is proficient in STEM.
To fill the AI talent pipeline, we need to interest kids in STEM early, particularly in math, which is critical to AI. But that’s proven difficult. One reason is that math is a stumbling block. Whether because of math anxiety, attitudes they’ve absorbed from the community, inadequate curricular materials, or traditional teaching methods, U.S. students either avoid or are not proficient in math.
A recent Gallup report on Math Matters reveals that the U.S. public greatly values math but also experiences significant gaps in learning and confidence, finding that:
95 percent of U.S. adults say that math is very or somewhat important in their work life
43 percent of U.S. adults wish they had learned more math skills in middle or high school.
24 percent of U.S. adults say that math makes them feel confused
Yet this need not be the case. Creative instruction in math can change the equation, and it is available now. The following three examples from respected researchers in STEM education demonstrate this fact.
The first is a recently published book by Susan Jo Russell and Deborah Schifter, Interweaving Equitable Participation and Deep Mathematics. The book provides practical tools and a fresh vision to help educators create math classrooms where all students can thrive. It tackles a critical challenge: How do teachers ensure that all students engage deeply with rigorous mathematics? The authors pose and successfully answer key questions: What does a mathematical community look like in an elementary classroom? How do teachers engage young mathematicians in deep and challenging mathematical content? How do we ensure that every student contributes their voice to this community?
Through classroom videos, teacher reflections, and clear instructional frameworks, Russell and Schifter bring readers inside real elementary classrooms where all students’ ideas and voices matter. They provide vivid examples, insightful commentary, and ready-to-use resources for teachers, coaches, and school leaders working to make math a subject where every student sees themselves as capable and connected.
Next is a set of projects devoted to early algebra. Significantly, research shows that how well students perform in Algebra 2 is a leading indicator of whether they’ll get into college, graduate from college, or become a top income earner. But introducing algebra in middle school, as is the common practice, is too late, according to researchers Maria Blanton and Angela Gardiner of TERC, a STEM education research nonprofit. Instead, learning algebra must begin in K-5, they believe.
Students would be introduced to algebraic concepts rather than algebra itself, becoming familiar with ways of thinking using pattern and structure. For example, when students understand that whenever they add two odd numbers together, they get an even number, they’re recognizing important mathematical relationships that are critical to algebra.
Blanton and Gardiner, along with colleagues at Tufts University, University of Wisconsin Madison, University of Texas at Austin, Merrimack College, and City College of New York, have already demonstrated the success of an early algebra approach through Project LEAP, the first early algebra curriculum of its kind for grades K–5, funded in part by the National Science Foundation.
If students haven’t been introduced to algebra early on, the ramp-up from arithmetic to algebra can be uniquely difficult. TERC researcher Jennifer Knudsen told me that elementary to middle school is an important time for students’ mathematical growth.
Knudsen’s project, MPACT, the third example of creative math teaching, engages middle school students in 3D making with everything from quick-dry clay and cardboard to digital tools for 3D modeling and printing. The project gets students involved in designing objects, helping them develop understanding of important mathematical topics in addition to spatial reasoning and computational thinking skills closely related to math. Students learn concepts and solve problems with real objects they can hold in their hands, not just with words and diagrams on paper.
So far, the evidence is encouraging: A two-year study shows that 4th–5th graders demonstrated significant learning gains on an assessment of math, computational thinking, and spatial reasoning. These creative design-and-making units are free and ready to download.
Math is critical for success in STEM and AI, yet too many kids either avoid or do not succeed in it. Well-researched interventions in grade school and middle school can go a long way toward teaching essential math skills. Curricula for creating a math community for deep learning, as well as projects for Early Algebra and MPACT, have shown success and are readily available for school systems to use.
We owe it to our students to take creative approaches to math so they can prepare for future AI and STEM professions. We owe it to ourselves to help develop a skilled STEM and AI workforce, which the nation needs to stay competitive.
Dr. Nadine Bonda, TERC
Dr. Nadine Bonda has worked in education for over 40 years, holding positions of Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Principal, Mathematics Department Chair, Mathematics Teacher, and Head of a school for students with dyslexia and language processing problems. Most recently she was an Assistant Professor at American International College. Dr. Bonda holds a PhD in Curriculum and Instruction from the University of British Columbia, a C.A.G.S. in Leadership from Boston University, an MEd in Mathematics from Boston University, and a BA in Mathematics from Regis College. She is chairman of the board of directors at TERC.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
On a recent vacation in the southwest portion of Ireland, as I was slogging away, trying to get the bicycle I was peddling up a reasonably daunting hill, I started thinking about generative AI.
I was thinking about generative AI because my wife, who is quite fit, but historically not as a strong a biker as I am, had disappeared into the distance, visible only because we were on twisting roads and she was several switchbacks ahead.
She also powered past my older brother, who competes in triathlons, and (I was told later) a French couple that muttered some apparent swears in their native language. Ultimately, she arrived only three or four minutes ahead of me at the top-of-the-hill way station, but as I huffed and puffed the final couple hundred yards, down to my next-to-lowest gear, moving at a just-above-walking pace, the gap felt enormous.
If you haven’t figured it out, my wife was riding an e-bike, while I was on a conventional (though very nice) bike. For the most part, the biking was very doable, but there were moments where I was not entirely sure I could or should keep peddling.
But I made it! Because we were touring with Backroads, an active vacation company, there was a delicious snack waiting for me at the top, which I enjoyed with great relish, knowing that I’d burned quite a few calories with many more to come that day.
I believe those French riders might’ve said something about “cheating” by using an e-bike, but this is obviously a case where what is cheating is in the eye of the beholder and significantly dependent on what you’re valuing about the experience.
If the point of our Ireland cycling vacation was to expend maximum effort on physical activities while cycling around the southwestern Ireland countryside, using an e-bike would prevent you from achieving your objective. But this is not the point of these kinds of trips. Yes, we have a desire to be active, outside and engaged, but the point is to use these methods to experience the place we’ve traveled to, and if—as happened to me a different day—you are perspiring so hard that the sweat dripping into your eyes has temporarily blinded you, it is tough to say that you are maximizing the experience.
Having the “best” vacation on this kind of trip is often a matter of balance. At times, I actively wished for the boost an e-bike could’ve given me. Other times, particularly on a day where we did 60 miles, and my brother and I were the only ones doing the whole itinerary, and we managed to go fast enough on the closing stretch to beat the Backroads van back to the hotel, I was thrilled with what it felt like to put my full physical effort behind the task.
I think my body paid for that big effort for a couple of days afterward, but I don’t regret it.
Like I said, it’s a matter of balance and values.
The e-bikes are great because they made it easier for my wife and me to ride together. The bottom-level boost had her toasting me up the hills, but on the flats, we were essentially the same speed, with us both working at levels we were comfortable with. The e-bike isn’t a motorcycle. You are still working plenty hard at the lower levels of boost.
But at the higher levels, you might find yourself speeding through the itinerary, as a group of four gentlemen in our group seemed to do, frequently arriving at our stopping points 20 minutes ahead of the rest of us.
I was thinking of generative AI because of the different lenses through which you can look at the use of an e-bike in the context of a bike-touring vacation.
You could see it as supplementary, allowing someone to experience something (like the view from a particular peak) that they wouldn’t otherwise unless they substituted something entirely nonbiking, like a car.
You could see it as substitutive, removing effort in exchange for feeling less tired and taxed at the end of the day.
You could see it as cheating, as those French riders did.
Because I don’t bike all that often at home, my primary “training” for the trip has been my regular Peloton rides, and for sure, those helped. My metrics on the stationary bike suggested I was well prepared. And I was, but well prepared doesn’t mean you aren’t going to face some very challenging moments.
There were several times—like that sweat-pouring-down-my-face period—where I would have gladly kicked in an e-bike boost in order to reduce my effort to conserve something for a different aspect of the trip, e.g., not being exhausted over dinner. But at no point did I need the boost to continue or finish the route, and if I was so inclined, Backroads is happy for you to hop in the van and get a ride the rest of the way.
I’m stubborn enough to not do that, but knowing myself, there were many times when an e-bike boost wouldn’t have been necessary or even desirable, when I would’ve switched it on in order to alleviate some measure of present discomfort. If it’s available, why not use it?
This would have signaled a shift in the values I initially brought to the trip. Whether or not it should be viewed as a betrayal or merely a change with its own benefits is a more complicated question, but at least for this trip, I was glad to not have the temptation.
I like to look at my opportunities to travel through the lens of experience. We aren’t going somewhere to check a box, but instead to literally spend time in a different place doing different things than our regular routines. I often know that I’ve had a good trip by the number of pictures I take—the fewer the better, because it means I was too absorbed in the experience to bother reaching for my phone to document something.
As we consider how to teach in a world where students have a superpowered e-bike instantly and constantly available, I’ve found looking at learning through the lens of experience is helpful, because focusing on the experience is a good way of identifying the things we should most value.
For my focus, writing, it seems almost irrefutable that if we want students to develop their writing practices, they should be doing the work without the assistance. The work must be purposeful and focused on what’s important in a given experience, but if that’s been achieved, any use of a boost is to miss out on something important. Learning is about riding up that hill under your own steam.
For writing especially, it’s axiomatic that the more you can do without the boost, the more you could potentially do with the boost.
Perhaps more importantly, the more you do without the boost, the greater knowledge you will gain about when the boost is truly an aid or when it is a way to dodge responsibility.
Figuring out where these lines must be drawn isn’t easy, and ultimately, because of the nature of school and the fact that students should be viewed as free and independent actors, the final choice must reside with them.
But we can act in ways that make the consequences of these choices and the benefits to opting for unboosted ride as apparent and inviting as possible.
In Alpine School District, we serve a wide range of students, from Title I to highly affluent communities. While our population has traditionally been predominantly white and middle income, that’s changing. In response to this growing diversity and shifting needs, one of my missions as professional learning and curriculum director for secondary schools has been to provide needs-based professional learning, just in time for educators, and to give them a real voice in what that looks and feels like.
I lead a team of full-time educator equivalents across every discipline: math, science, social studies, ELA, the arts, health, and PE. Together, we guide professional learning and instructional support. Over the past several years, we’ve had to take a hard look at how we teach, how we engage students, and how we prepare educators for long-term success.
Where we started: Tier 1 challenges and high turnover
When I first became curriculum director, I noticed in our data that our schools were not making much progress, and in some cases had stagnated in growth scores. We were leaning heavily on Tier 2 interventions, which told us that we needed to shore up our Tier 1 instruction.
At the same time, we were hiring between 400 and 500 teachers each year. We’re located near several universities, so we see a continuous flow of new educators come and go. They get married, they relocate, or a spouse gets into medical school, which translates to a constant onboarding cycle for our district. To meet these challenges, we needed professional learning that was sound, sustainable, and meaningful, especially early in a teacher’s career, so they could lay a strong foundation for everything that would come after.
Teacher clarity and engagement by design
Several years ago, we joined the Utah State Cohort, doing a deep dive into the Teacher Clarity Playbook. That experience was a real turning point. We were the only team there from a district office, and we took a train-the-trainer approach, investing in our strongest educators so they could return and lead professional learning in their content areas. Since then, we’ve used Engagement by Design as the framework behind much of our PD, our classroom walkthroughs, and our peer observations. It helped us think differently: How do we support teachers in crafting learning intentions and success criteria that are actually meaningful? How do we align resources to support that clarity? We’ve embedded that mindset into everything.
Coming out of the pandemic, Alpine, like many districts around the country, saw decreased student engagement. To focus deeply on that challenge, we launched the Student Engagement Academy, or SEA. I co-designed the Academy alongside two of our content specialists, Anna Davis and Korryn Coates. They’re both part-time teacher leaders at the district office and part-time visual arts teachers in schools, so they live in both worlds. That was important because we believe professional learning should always be contextualized. We don’t want teachers burning extra bandwidth trying to translate strategies across subject areas.
SEA is a yearlong, job-embedded learning experience. Teachers participate in PLCs, conduct peer observations, and complete a personalized learning project that showcases their growth. Our PLC+ coaches work directly with our lead coach, Melissa Gibbons, to gather and analyze data that shapes each new round of learning. We also included classroom observations, not for evaluation, but to help teachers see each other’s practice in action. Before observations, Anna and Korryn meet with teachers in small groups to talk through what to look for. Afterward, they debrief with the teachers: What did we see? What evidence did we see of student engagement? What did we learn? What are we still wondering? As we answer these questions about teaching, we’re also asking students about their experience of learning.
Learning from student surveys
Hearing from our students has been one of the most powerful parts of this journey. With the support of our Director of Student and Educator Well-eing, we created a student survey. We asked a random group of students questions such as:
What are you learning?
How are you learning it?
How do you know how you’re doing?
Why does it matter?
The responses were eye-opening. Many students didn’t know why they were learning something. That told us our teachers weren’t being as clear or as intentional as they thought they were. One specific question we asked was based on the fact that attendance in world language classes stayed high during the pandemic, while it dropped in other subjects. We asked students why. The answer? Relationships, expectations, and clarity. They said their world language teachers were clear, and they knew what was expected of them. That led other disciplines to reflect and recalibrate.
Today, teachers across subjects like ELA, math, and social studies have participated in a SEA cohort or aligned learning. We’re seeing them plan more intentionally, better target skills, and align instruction with assessment in thoughtful ways. They’re starting to see how mirroring instruction with how learning is measured can shift outcomes. It’s been truly exciting to witness that change. Engaging students through improved teacher clarity, positive classroom relationships (with each other, the teacher, and the content), and providing the students with appropriate levels of rigor has been a game changer.
Building teacher leadership teams
Next year, we’re focusing on developing teacher leadership skills, knowledge, and dispositions across the full geographic area of our district. We’re building professional capacity through leadership teams using the PLC+ model, with an emphasis on facilitation skills, research-based practice, and advocacy for strong instruction in every discipline.
If you’re a district leader looking to boost student engagement through professional development, my advice is simple: You can’t do it alone. You need a team that shares your values and your commitment to the work. You also have to be guided by research–there’s too much at stake to invest in strategies that don’t hold water. Finally, this is a marathon, not a sprint. Aim for small, incremental changes. There’s no silver bullet, but if you stay the course, you’ll see real transformation.
Dr. Mari Braithwaite, Alpine School District
Dr. Mari Braithwaite is the professional learning & curriculum director at Alpine School District in American Fork, Utah. She can be reached at [email protected].
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Whenever I write something halfway decent (sometimes) or astoundingly dumb (often), I can count on a thoughtful response from Bob Ubell. Our conversation took place during the period when Bob published two books,Going Online(2017) and Staying Online(2021), as well as numerous articles in EdSurge, IHE, The Evollution and other publications.
Bob’s online education career goes at least back to 1999, where he was the dean of online learning at Stevens Institute of Technology. Subsequent leadership roles include vice dean of online learning at New York University Tandon School of Engineering and vice dean emeritus, online learning, at NYU Tandon.
In a profession where many of us are making things up as we go, Bob stands out for his long-term experience thinking about and leading online learning initiatives. I asked Bob if he would answer my questions about his career and the future of online learning, and he graciously agreed.
Q: According to your Wikipedia page, you have been working at the intersection of higher education, technology and publishing since you graduated from Brooklyn College in 1961. What does the next decade hold for you as you think about your contributions to our online learning community?
A: I’m not optimistic about what’s ahead, not only for digital education, but also for the nation’s wider academic enterprise. It’s impossible to answer your question in isolation without reckoning with the ugly scene now taking place in higher ed. Challenged by the federal government’s attacks, early this spring, 600 higher ed leaders warned about “unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.” Since then, the present administration has continued to follow a treacherous path, destabilizing campuses across the country, targeting faculty and student academic freedom, and, in a new Supreme Court decision, ultimately dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.
In an opinion column inthis publication earlier this year, I predicted that American colleges and universities faced a terrifying cascade of autocratic moves “set by leaders in Hungary, Turkey and elsewhere … selecting college presidents, controlling faculty hiring and advancement, punishing academic dissent and imposing travel restrictions.” Many of these despotic actions have already been implemented and continue to be imposed on schools in this country.
Last month, to restore about $400 million in federal research funding, Columbia University bowed to tyrannical demands by officials. In an unprecedented agreement, Columbia will pay more than $200 million in fines for dubious accusations of antisemitic student theatrics. It also opened the gates for government intrusion in the school’s academic prerogatives in hiring, admissions and curriculum. Keeping Columbia in academic handcuffs, the deal will be overseen by an outside monitor, reporting to officials every six months.
The midcentury philosopher and cultural critic Hannah Arendt, in her masterful account of totalitarian regimes, revealed that they rely on systematic suppression of individual thought and freedom to maintain control, undermining the very purpose of universities—institutions that encourage critical thinking, open debate and intellectual autonomy, essential in a democracy. Recent power plays against Columbia, Harvard, Brown, Duke—and, just this week, UCLA—show how brutal our government can be in imposing its will.
The noted Columbia genocide scholar Marianne Hirsch, the daughter of Holocaust survivors, who teaches a class on genocide with a book by Arendt, is considering leaving Columbia following its adoption of a new definition of antisemitism, which casts criticism of Israel as hate speech, a provision in the new pact with the federal government. Hirsch fears it may force her to face official sanction for even mentioning Arendt, who criticized Israel’s founding.
“A university that treats criticism of Israel as antisemitic and threatens sanctions for those who disobey is no longer a place of open inquiry,” Hirsch told the Associated Press. “I just don’t see how I can teach about genocide in that environment.” Reactionary governments always find an innocent mark to target. In the 1950s, it was American Communists. Today, it’s pro-Palestinian faculty and students.
The downstream effects on remote learning are already being felt, with the perception overseas—following arrests of foreign students and other threats against students and scholars from abroad—that the U.S. is turning its back on international recruitment, undermining our reputation as a leading destination for higher education and potentially impacting foreign student tuition revenue, face-to-face and online. In the U.S., the demand to shut down DEI programs will surely affect the greatest number of online students—80 percent of whom work and a third [of whom] are first in their families to attend college.
On a personal note, I worry that closing the [Education Department] will cripple and may even end higher ed data collection and reporting, giving us less reliable information on the status of American college students. Over my career in higher ed, I’ve depended on federal government data, especially in supporting findings I’ve disclosed in my writing. “We’ll soon be in the dark,” I warned in a recent IHE column.
Turning to your question, asking what sort of contribution I might make to the remote learning community. Like so many others, I don’t feel my voice possesses much force against what’s happening. Nor do I feel competent to articulate what might make a difference. Academic opposition to what we face has been scattershot and largely ineffective, except for various successful legal maneuvers. More broadly, on a national scale, resistance has been disappointing, with few voices, in and out of electoral politics, with enough momentum to capture our yearning for democratic fresh air. To get us out of this nightmare, I dream that someone will rise in this desperate time to gather all of us together in an inspiring and powerful national movement against tyranny.
Q: There is a growing concern across higher education about the job market for new college graduates, as employers are increasingly utilizing AI to accomplish the work previously done by entry-level workers. What role should online learning leaders be playing at our institutions in evolving and adapting our institutions to the AI revolution?
A: Since the pandemic, it hasn’t been that easy for recent college graduates to find a job in our digital economy–even before the invasion of AI. In March, recent college grad unemployment was at 5.8 percent, the highest in the last decades, excluding the pandemic, and nearly double the rate of all workers with a college degree, now at 2.7 percent, nearly a historic low.
“For the first time in modern history, a bachelor’s degree is failing to deliver on its fundamental promise: access to professional employment,” observes a troubling report from Burning Glass, the big labor market analysis firm. “Young graduates face unemployment rates that are rising faster than any other education or age cohort, while over half of them land into jobs they didn’t need college to get. The traditional pathway from college to career is becoming less reliable.” In addition to other causes, the report singles out AI.
As with all radical technological innovations, the reception of AI is fraught with contradictory predictions on its impact. Touted by champions as an economic miracle, others fear it as a devilish intrusion, disrupting our material well-being, especially for college grads who have historically outpaced the economic success of others. In the postwar years, most American workers found middle-class manufacturing or clerical jobs, but in the last 40 years, new jobs are either in highly paid professional fields or low-wage service industries, a disastrous national calamity that has largely generated our present political trouble.
Sorry, but I don’t have exciting new ways to recommend to recent college grads to extricate themselves from the present dilemma, other than—not a very original idea—encourage them to enhance their knowledge gained in college classrooms with online or in-person nondegree courses in AI and other technical disciplines, giving them a leg up with attractive additional credentials.
Not being knowledgeable about AI, I reached out to Alfred Essa, an insightful colleague and author of the forthcoming Artificial Intelligence: Shaping the Future of Innovation, who advised, “Students must think of themselves as designers, creating AI-powered applications to solve problems, not just in the short-term, but over their careers, positioning themselves in industry, capable of building and changing things with AI.” Essa emphasized that his advice is not only for technically savvy students, but for others who are creative in aesthetics, humanities and other disciplines.
Essa worries that the present higher ed leadership is obsolete. “For colleges to succeed,” he urged, “they must be led by a new generation who will adopt the new AI environment.” In the meantime, for my part, higher ed needs to welcome AI as a technical innovation, in the long tradition of typewriters, calculators, computers and digital education. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you can’t stick it back in. Restrictive, retrograde rules are foolish or punishing—or both.
Q: What advice do you have for folks like me who are thinking about ways to stay active and engaged in online learning and higher education once we retire from our university administrative roles?
A: Cicero found that the way we lived in our youth prepares us for retirement. The choices we made when we were young naturally lead to the life we will live as we age. He argued that preparation for our later years is not a separate phase, but a continuation of the life we led all along. “The harvest of old age is the recollection and abundance of blessings previously secured,” he wrote (Cicero De Senectute, translated with an introduction and notes by Andrew P. Peabody [Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1887]).
