The Latest on Learning: Taking Stock of the Education Headlines

This is the future of education. Welcome to the future of education. Those tuning in live. We're trying something new today. We'll see how it goes. Sort of a throwback to the past, but. I'm Michael Horne. You're joining the show where we're dedicated to creating a world. A world in which all individuals can build their passions, fulfill their potential and live lives of purpose. And to help us think through that today, thrilled to welcome back Danny Curtis who head of All Things Digital for the work that I do and wears a number of other hats as well. Danny, good to see you.

It's great to see you too, Michael. Excited to talk some shop today.

I'm looking forward to it as well. We'll keep an eye on viewer comments if we're able to. But I know that there's been basically we text a fair bit, we're always in touch on different things. A few articles that have bubbled up that caught both of our eyes. I think it's fair to say that we thought let's do one of these, riff on it, catch up on some of the headlines that may be driving the school year ahead. No matter where you are at this point, schools either started or lurking for K12 students in colleges. Those with traditional calendars are back to school. So this is like a hot topic right now. What's on your mind? Where should we, where should we go? I'm going to let you sort of run the show.

Yeah. So first headline to cover today is an article out of the 74 the race to Redefine the High School Learning. Learning Experience is On is the title. And this is one that covers the efforts of the Future of High School Network, which is a network of schools led by the Carnegie foundation for the Advancement of Teaching that are transforming how we do high school in America. And it's part of sort of a larger effort by the organization to move away from our education system based on seat time requirements towards more competency based approach. And so it gives a close up look at how this type of shift is allowing students in one Houston area district to engage in much richer work based learning through a partnership with a local hospital there. And so obviously some of your favorite themes in there. Michael, what did you take away from this story?

Yeah, well, a few things. One, obviously we've had Tim Knowles on class disrupted right before the head of the Carnegie foundation and Diane's obviously on the board. So this is a group that pay a lot of attention to, in many ways they're making up for what at the time was a big innovation and now they're cardinal sin, right, of creating seat time as the measure of learning against which students progress and so forth. What I think is interesting about this is that we've seen a lot of, I think, reinvention efforts around K8 learning, right. But now high school redesign, that was sort of a theme 15 years ago with the Gates Foundation. But this seems, Danny, to me at least, like really interesting for how connected it is to work based learning experiences. And you and I have both been hypothesizing a lot that sort of a career connected learning for all we've written about this, right, is a critical thrust. And so the way that they're actually creating real partnerships seems to me really interesting. And then obviously there's a competency based element of this where they're actually looking at progress. I'm curious your take on this, but I thought it was interesting that they started with the health system as that employer partner, which I think makes sense because healthcare is one of those places where there's like clear board exams, Gates, right. That like, if you can pass those and have clinical hours and practicums, you can go practice. And so competencies that perhaps tie to an industry standard are maybe more likely to get liftoff, maybe more likely to get traction than say competency based or skills based hiring in a space where we don't even really know what the skills are. There's not like an agreed upon set of competencies or definitions or even how to measure them. And I guess that last thought, Danny, and then I'm curious, yours is like really exciting to see this work go through and to see work based learning pulled into the high school experience. Sort of flip that high school day. I think that's a really cool trend that I would like to see. Every district in America, I think. What did you take away from it?

Yeah, a lot of similar thoughts. I'm excited about competency based learning for a number of reasons in a number of applications, including more traditional academic pathways and what it opens up for personalized learning. But I was really excited about the use case that they chose here, the work based learning use case, because a lot more districts and states are taking the career part of college and career readiness more seriously these days and are making moves to make that happen. But the seat time requirements that are still the status quo in most places are a serious barrier to that. Because in this day and age, in this technology landscape, with technology moving faster than most schools can keep up with work based learning is sort of a requirement for true Career readiness in order to have the skills that you need to be job ready. In my opinion, shifting to that competency based approach not only creates the latitude for students to be off campus and on the job site and working, but so much of the assessment of ability that happens on the job sort of defies these traditional modes of assessment and requires more of a competency based assessment mechanism. And I agree with you. I think that the healthcare selection of a healthcare example in particular is especially valuable because within that field there are already some of those more competency based signals baked in that you mentioned.

And you brought up an interesting point, I think on the assessment piece, which is to say in some ways we don't have to assess like granular knowledge and skills that sit below an experience. Like to your point, if someone's working in a hospital, you know, behind a desk, doing whatever it might be, allied health work of some nature, we can assess like, did you do that particular job? Well, right, like literally more macro, if you will, competencies which could be more widely agreed upon rather than trying to break them down into lots of granular skills and trying to figure out what transfers and whatnot. Like that gets very technocratic quickly. This seems very interesting. Like could you check someone into a health system? Could you help, you know, take their vitals in the beginning, whatever it might be? That seems like something you can measure in a much more authentic way. And it's like authentically valued as well, I would think.

Yeah. And one thought I have coming out of that is like, when you are preparing people for these workplace competencies, the need to put everything on that 4.0 GPA scale is also reduced. And so yeah, these different types of signals and different ways of measuring that that unlocks, I think creates a lot of opportunity in these types of partnerships.

Perfect. All right, well, let's leave that one there. What else is on your mind as we go through the carousel? And we'll link to all these in the show notes. So folks getting this as a substack email, they can check out the original source articles as well. But go ahead, what's next on your mind?

So the next headline we have here is how some Texas teachers are earning six figures without leaving classroom. This is another one from the 74. These salaries are kind of comprised of two pay bumps. There's a new multi classroom teaching model where teams of classroom teachers are led by one lead teacher who has demonstrated excellent outcomes typically and they offer coaching, planning and curriculum development support. And for that, for taking on those increased responsibilities, they receive a Pretty big pay bump, $13.5K on average. And then the other source of the increased pay is a Texas state fund that awards additional state funding to districts for each of their high performing teachers. And so this one comes to mind or stood out as important one to be talking about because in an education system where teacher recruitment and retention is a persistent problem year over year, it seems like there's a pretty broad consensus that we need to do some rethinking of the teaching profession and teacher compensation, but maybe less agreement on the best way to go about that. And so I'm curious, what's your your read on this innovation out of Texas?

Michael yeah, we'll love it. Look, it's from Opportunity Culture Group, Brian Hassell's group in North Carolina, the Public Impact. They do some great work there. The author of the story is with Public Impact as well. So it's an op ed, but I think it's a great example, right when you start to have team teaching environments, teachers taking on different roles, they don't have to leave the classroom completely. So we're not moving the talent out. As you know, that was an entire chapter in my book from Reopen to Reinvent that the T and teaching is for team. I think this is a really important part of rethinking schools is really thinking of teams of teachers that are working together with lots of students and able to bounce off each other. And then there's a really other, you know, this other cool perk of it, right, which is that you can actually raise salaries as well for the really experienced veterans, teachers that are doing great stuff with kids. I think it's all positives here, I guess is my take.

Danny yeah, I agree. A lot of the focus of the article was around the benefits of keeping more senior teachers in the classroom and allowing them a role that they can sort of grow into that matches their level of expertise. And obviously there are all sorts of benefits that come with that. But I'm also really excited about what this means for younger teachers and teachers that are earlier in their career. The teacher turnover rate within the first two years of beginning the profession is way too high. And as a former beginning teacher myself, I know it's hard to get in front of the class when you're just figuring it out and kind of learn the craft in front of an audience and requires a lot of support. And so the idea of having a master teacher who's kind of rotating throughout these classes and providing the support in all of these really important, meaningful ways and having some really clear structure around that. I'm really excited about what that means for supporting these teachers into getting to that point where they're the lead teacher and they're the expert.

So you were teaching in the Bay Area, right, as a. When you first got your start. Would this sort of structure have kept you in longer in your. In your view?

Yeah, you know, there was a lot of factors at play, but certainly would have made my first year in the classroom more productive and probably a little bit more enjoyable. That first year of teaching, I think is notoriously difficult on a lot of teachers. And so having a person that can be in your classroom there to provide support on short notice is really important. I was through Teach for American, so I had more resources available to me than most. But having someone designated to be there for you, that's actually in the building, I think makes a world of difference. I'm also really excited about what this might mean for teacher training models. We were talking earlier about sort of work based learning, and I think schools is one area where there's a lot of potential here, specifically in teacher apprenticeship programs. Obviously apprenticeship programs are really dependent on having this type of mentor, mentee model. And so I'm excited about what this means, sort of structuring teaching teams where you already sort of have that system in place, what it could mean for the flourishing of teacher apprenticeship programs and how that and following an earn and learn model can also help defray the costs of getting into this profession. Because for many, it's the salary considerations that can serve as an obstacle to getting into teaching. But for many others, it's also the upfront costs of education. Yeah. Just structuring it in this way, I think will do a lot to open up avenues to teacher apprenticeship in a lot of districts and states.

Great point. And Reach University, obviously, and others that could pop up to fill that and create space in the structure. Right. For those sorts of teachers. That's a really great observation.

Next article we have here is on play based learning. It covers how play based learning can be leveraged to enhance evidence based reading instruction and covers the positive outcomes that guided play can have, not only on the academic side of things, but also soft skills, durable skills like self regulation, social skills. And it profiles some programs, including one near you, Michael, in Boston. And so this feels like a really exciting development. Learning's more fun and students learn more. Is there a catch?

Yeah, I don't think so. I know the authors of this piece as well, big fans of theirs, Carly Roberts and Megan McCormick. What I would say on this is a couple things. One, this article sort of gets at one of my boogeymen, if you will, Danny. And so it gets a little under my craw for a different reason, which is I think you have this world that has popped up where people have said, quote unquote, science of reading important, right? Phonics, phonemic awareness, like build those building blocks, right? And then as they get older, content knowledge becomes really important to help them be good readers. I totally buy that. And then their next statement is direct instruction is the best way to do it. And when they say direct instruction they mean like a whole class, one to many model as they're doing that regardless of the fact of like I've mastered maybe you know, some set of phonics and I'm struggling with something else and you're like racing ahead and I'm holding you back or vice, or you know, vice versa and not acknowledging that like if actually I accelerate past certain competencies without actually having mastered them, that's going to be a huge problem in later years, right, when I'm trying to read and so forth. Then you have this moniker and sort of their point would be, well look, it's pretty clear you shouldn't have open ended exploration without like clear lessons. And I would agree with that, right? But I think you can agree with that and reject the notion that it has to be whole class and so on. The playbase thing on the other hand, I'm not sure play based learning is like the best way to describe what I suspect is going on here. And I don't know, there's nothing quite enough information. But I guess the way I would put it is if you dropped into a Montessori school, you would often call reading instruction or instruction there in general, people often call it play based. But I actually think it mirrors what we know from direct instruction but in very small groups, as few as one kid to, you know, four or five kids. And what happens is that the teacher, you know, takes out the materials you're going to be playing with, quote, unquote, shows you what they are used for. So like these are not just for anything. This is how we use them. This is the purpose, right? And actually does the lesson. There's a worked example, right, where the kid goes along with the teacher, actually like working together through a worked example and then the kid practices on the concept or whatever's being learned right through the materials and quote unquote plays with it. And there's often in Montessori anyway some self correcting mechanism so you don't actually, like, you can't just skate by and not master it. There's like a way to check the work, if you will, to make sure that you're really mastering it. And then you can build in repetitions till you really show mastery of that competency standard, whatever it is that you're trying to learn. And so in some ways, I guess, like, what caught me about the piece was there's like a. We have these labels that we use in education and we try to pit them against each other where if like we peeled the onion back a couple layers, we might see like, we're not having the fight I think we think we're having. And there's a lot more common ground. But there is like some nuance and some difference that I believe can create the personalization and, and yes, play. Right. Like agency ownership by a kid that can really engage them and follow like what we've learned about that works well from direct instruction and quote unquote, science of reading and so forth. And so I guess I'm struggling a little bit how to capture this Danny in a soundbite. But I think the article is really onto something and like, we should take it as a pause to peel back the onion and get below these buzz phrases maybe that have become such lightning rods in different directions in the education space. Does that make sense? Your thoughts?

Yeah. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. This is in reality a best of both worlds situation. It's important that people understand that and don't take this bifurcated view of it. I want to latch onto one piece of what you said around the potential for engagement. And I think that that is a really important word in the education world right now as we are in this continued challenge of chronic absenteeism. There's more numbers that came out saying, yeah, the absenteeism problem has gotten slightly better in the last year or so, but it still remains way below or way higher than pre pandemic numbers. And so it's an issue that we continue to struggle with in the education world. You can't start too early. In fact, I think that relying on or finding strategies like play based learning that fan the flames of curiosity and fun and engagement in students in the early years. It can be a much more effective and probably easier than trying to reignite that spark in that love of learning later on. I'm really excited to hear that this is kind of taking hold in the younger grades. Yeah.

And it's interesting, right? Like, I think the folks that would be like Full whole class, core knowledge, science of reading. They would say, like, actually learning how to read is engaging and exciting in its own right. And so maybe you don't need, like, the play and so forth. And to them, I might say, like, I actually agree with you. And why not make it even more engaging with agency around those principles that we know are proving to work more and more for learners. And like, you know, to your point, like, this can be a both and conversation. And I'll tell you what is disengaging to someone when they feel like there's no chance that they have any concept of what's being talked about at the front of the class. And they have complete, like, I get it, and I'm all for raising expectations, but they, they're just like, I've concluded I am worthless. I can't get this. I can't figure it out. They've checked out completely. Or the opposite that I've quite frankly seen quite a bit as well, where the kids like, are you kidding? We're doing this again. Like, I mastered this a year ago. Maybe it was at home. Like, I don't know where they learned it, but they're like, this is. I'm bored out of my mind. School stinks. Like, I'm disengaging from that. Why would we even play with that? Like, we don't have to, is the thing. I think that you're saying, like, we, we can take the elements of what we're learning from the research and put them into really engaging environments that engage small groups, individuals, where they can really be part of the learning process. And we know that learning is work and you have to be actively engaged to do it. So, like, why would. Why would we ignore that? I think, is your point.

Yeah, yeah. No, it's spot on. And so, Michael, unless you have more on this. I know we had.

Let's do. Let's do this fourth one. I know you've. You've been interested in this other topic, so why don't you bring us. Why don't you talk us through it?

Recent article in the Inside Higher Ed on the new tutor function from ChatGPT. It's actually called the Study mode, and I quote here. It's intended to provide a more active learning experience, mimicking the type of Socratic dialogue students may expect to encounter in a lecture hall and challenging them to draw on information they already know to form their own nuanced analyses of complex questions. But the article then goes on to point out that students that are using this study mode sometimes need to sort of prod it to ask the right questions. And that actually if you pressure the study tool enough, it will actually just give you the answer.

Oh, interesting.

Okay. And so, you know, I think that there are two questions that come to mind reading this one. The first is, is this a useful tool? And I think whenever an AI tutor like this comes out, you can cue the voices saying, this isn't as good as in person instruction. But to that question, I think that that's a bit off the mark. I think the question that we need to be asking is, is this better than the alternative for many students? Which is nothing at all in many instances. And so the increased availability and accessibility in terms of cost for many students to a tool like this creates a lot of value. And, you know, are there ways that the technology could be improved for now? Certainly, and I'm sure that it will. But on the question of, you know, is it valuable, is it a useful tool for students, I would expect that it already is of value and will only continue to get better.

Yeah, it's a really good point. And like, you're taking the disruptive innovation lens there, right? Which is it's better than the alternative. Nothing at all. Don't judge it by, like, as a final form factor. It's going to get better. And there was a lot of snarkiness on X around this launch because people were saying, like, I mean, who the heck is going to opt for study mode when they could just get the answer from ChatGPT itself? Fair enough. And I confess I piled on a little bit there as well. But I think if I hear you right, maybe what's interesting about it is like, let's offer it in the same way we offer Khanmigo as a specific app almost right? Like, hey, this is going to help you get better at X. It's going to help you get in the reps, it's going to help monitor and so forth, whatever it is, and coach you accordingly. And if it's like, in that constrained environment where I can use this app, as opposed to like broadly going on to ChatGPT's app and like opting for study mode, okay, that's one thing. But if it's an app dedicated, this is something we're giving you as a tool, maybe that produces a different sort of use case or something like that. And to your point, better than the alternative, no tutor at all. Maybe that's the right way to think about it.

Yeah, yeah, that's my general point. And I think you're touching on my second question here, which is, is this the answer to our AI challenge in education, where students are able to just get the answer at the click of a button? And I think that the fact that you can actually pressure the study tool itself to give you the answer really points out the reality that AI at least hasn't yet been the answer to our AI challenges in education and requires really hard thinking about, you know, in this age of AI, what are the skills that students need to know and how can we go about crafting curriculum and assessments that can teach that when they have access to all of this information at the click of a button?

Yeah, well, to be fair, by the way, I can pressure most human tutors to eventually give me the answer as well. But no, I think you're exactly right. You're pointing to the right thing, which is what are we asking of students? And I think the answer is different at different levels. Right. Like a novice learner, you know, I'm not sure the technology is as useful. I want you learning fundamental knowledge skills. Right. Of a particular discipline or whatever it might be, as you move into more of an expert in a particular field, more of a project. Right. Application of that knowledge and skills would be super useful. And there's like, I want you using AI, frankly, to expand the realm of what you're able to do. Like, how do you use AI to do something more? I don't know what we'll call that knowledge and skill base, but to me, AI gets the most interesting, I think, as a force multiplier of what people can do and how it works with them, as opposed to, to your point, like, is it or is it not a hack to cheating or something like that? That's been around forever. We'll find lots of ways to cheat. Let's come up with more interesting assignments where it's not cheating, but it's actually using it to do something more. That mirrors where we started this conversation, where education actually is getting closer to the way we actually, in fact, work. I can't think of an employer right now who would be like, angry at you for bringing AI to better do what you're trying to deliver for them. That's, frankly, the expectation at this point, I think.

Yeah, totally. And that feels like a really good full circle moment to leave it on. What do you think, Michael?

That sounds good. And for those tuning in, if you've offered comments, we apologize. We're not getting them in. The platform that we have chosen to do this in will be better next time.

Still working out the kinks.

Yeah, exactly. We're still working out the kinks. That's what they say, in part in the interruption. Right. We'll do better next time, so we'll keep doing this, but if you've enjoyed the format, let us know. Let us know what you'd like us to comment on or stories you're seeing where you'd love us to just, hey, use some theory, use some experience, pattern recognition, whatever it is, to shine a light on something. We'd love to have that ongoing dialogue with all of you as well. So, Danny, thanks for doing this, and we'll see you all next time on the future of education.

Sam.