Once upon a time, educators worried about the dangers of CliffsNotes — study guides that rendered great works of literature as a series of bullet points that many students used as a replacement for actually doing the reading.

Today, that sure seems quaint.

Suddenly, new consumer AI tools have hit the market that can take any piece of text, audio or video and provide that same kind of simplified summary. And those summaries aren’t just a series of quippy text in bullet points. These days students can have tools like Google’s NotebookLM turn their lecture notes into a podcast, where sunny-sounding AI bots banter and riff on key points. Most of the tools are free, and do their work in seconds with the click of a button.

Naturally, all this is causing concern among some educators, who see students off-loading the hard work of synthesizing information to AI at a pace never before possible.

But the overall picture is more complicated, especially as these tools become more mainstream and their use starts to become standard in business and other contexts beyond the classroom.

And the tools serve as a particular lifeline for neurodivergent students, who suddenly have access to services that can help them get organized and support their reading comprehension, teaching experts say.

“There’s no universal answer,” says Alexis Peirce Caudell, a lecturer in informatics at Indiana University at Bloomington who recently did an assignment where many students shared their experience and concerns about AI tools. “Students in biology are going to be using it in one way, chemistry students are going to be using it in another. My students are all using it in different ways.”

It’s not as simple as assuming that students are all cheaters, the instructor stresses.

“Some students were concerned about pressure to engage with tools — if all of their peers were doing it that they should be doing it even if they felt it was getting in the way of their authentically learning,” she says. They are asking themselves questions like, “Is this helping me get through this specific assignment or this specific test because I’m trying to navigate five classes and applications for internships” — but at the cost of learning?

It all adds new challenges to schools and colleges as they attempt to set boundaries and policies for AI use in their classrooms.

Need for ‘Friction’

It seems like just about every week -— or even every day — tech companies announce new features that students are adopting in their studies.

Just last week, for instance, Apple released Apple Intelligence features for iPhones, and one of the features can recraft any piece of text to different tones, such as casual or professional. And last month ChatGPT-maker OpenAI released a feature called Canvas that includes slider bars for users to instantly change the reading level of a text.

Marc Watkins, a lecturer of writing and rhetoric at the University of Mississippi, says he is worried that students are lured by the time-saving promises of these tools and may not realize that using them can mean skipping the actual work it takes to internalize and remember the material.

---

Get EdSurge journalism delivered free to your inbox. Sign up for our newsletters.

---

“From a teaching, learning standpoint, that's pretty concerning to me,” he says. “Because we want our students to struggle a little bit, to have a little bit of friction, because that's important for their learning.”

And he says new features are making it harder for teachers to encourage students to use AI in helpful ways — like teaching them how to craft prompts to change the writing level of something: “It removes that last level of desirable difficulty when they can just button mash and get a final draft and get feedback on the final draft, too.”

Even professors and colleges that have adopted AI policies may need to rethink them in light of these new types of capabilities.

As two professors put it in a recent op-ed, “Your AI Policy Is Already Obsolete.”

“A student who reads an article you uploaded, but who cannot remember a key point, uses the AI assistant to summarize or remind them where they read something. Has this person used AI when there was a ban in the class?” ask the authors, Zach Justus, director of faculty development at California State University, Chico, and Nik Janos, a professor of sociology there. They note that popular tools like Adobe Acrobat now have “AI assistant” features that can summarize documents with the push of a button. “Even when we are evaluating our colleagues in tenure and promotion files,” the professors write, “do you need to promise not to hit the button when you are plowing through hundreds of pages of student evaluations of teaching?”

Instead of drafting and redrafting AI policies, the professors argue that educators should work out broad frameworks for what is acceptable help from chatbots.

But Watkins calls on the makers of AI tools to do more to mitigate the misuse of their systems in academic settings, or as he put it when EdSurge talked with him, “to make sure that this tool that is being used so prominently by students [is] actually effective for their learning and not just as a tool to offload it.”

Uneven Accuracy

These new AI tools raise a host of new challenges beyond those at play when printed CliffsNotes were the study tool du jour.

One is that AI summarizing tools don’t always provide accurate information, due to a phenomenon of large language models known as “hallucinations,” when chatbots guess at facts but present them to users as sure things.

When Bonni Stachowiak first tried the podcast feature on Google’s NotebookLM, for instance, she said she was blown away by how lifelike the robot voices sounded and how well they seemed to summarize the documents she fed it. Stachowiak is the host of the long-running podcast, Teaching in Higher Ed, and dean of teaching and learning at Vanguard University of Southern California, and she regularly experiments with new AI tools in her teaching.

But as she tried the tool more, and put in documents on complex subjects that she knew well, she noticed occasional errors or misunderstandings. “It just flattens it — it misses all of this nuance,” she says. “It sounds so intimate because it’s a voice and audio is such an intimate medium. But as soon as it was something that you knew a lot about it’s going to fall flat.”

Even so, she says she has found the podcasting feature of NotebookLM useful in helping her understand and communicate bureaucratic issues at her university — such as turning part of the faculty handbook into a podcast summary. When she checked it with colleagues who knew the policies well, she says they felt it did a “perfectly good job.” “It is very good at making two-dimensional bureaucracy more approachable,” she says.

Peirce Caudell, of Indiana University, says her students have raised ethical issues with using AI tools as well.

“Some say they’re really concerned about the environmental costs of generative AI and the usage,” she says, noting that ChatGPT and other AI models require large amounts of computing power and electricity.

Others, she adds, worry about how much data users end up giving AI companies, especially when students use free versions of the tools.

“We're not having that conversation,” she says. “We're not having conversations about what does it mean to actively resist the use of generative AI?”

Even so, the instructor is seeing positive impacts for students, such as when they use a tool to help make flashcards to study.

And she heard about a student with ADHD who had always found reading a large text “overwhelming,” but was using ChatGPT “to get over the hurdle of that initial engagement with the reading and then they were checking their understanding with the use of ChatGPT.”

And Stachowiak says she has heard of other AI tools that students with intellectual disabilities are using, such as one that helps users break down large tasks into smaller, more manageable sub-tasks.

“This is not cheating,” she stresses. “It’s breaking things down and estimating how long something is going to take. That is not something that comes naturally for a lot of people.”

© art.em.po / Shutterstock

How often do you come in contact with a conspiracy theory?

Maybe on occasion, when you flip through TV channels and land on an episode of “Ancient Aliens.” Or perhaps when a friend from high school shares a questionable meme on Facebook.

How confident are you in your ability to tell fact from fiction?

If you’re a teen, you could be exposed to conspiracy theories and a host of other pieces of misinformation as frequently as every day while scrolling through your social media feeds.

That’s according to a new study by the News Literacy Project, which also found that teens struggle with identifying false information online. This comes at a time when media literacy education isn’t available to most students, the report finds, and their ability to distinguish between objective and biased information sources is weak. The findings are based on responses from more than 1,000 teens ages 13 to 18.

“News literacy is fundamental to preparing students to become active, critically thinking members of our civic life — which should be one of the primary goals of a public education,” Kim Bowman, News Literacy Project senior research manager and author of the report, said in an email interview. “If we don’t teach young people the skills they need to evaluate information, they will be left at a civic and personal disadvantage their entire lives. News literacy instruction is as important as core subjects like reading and math.”

Telling Fact from Fiction

About 80 percent of teens who use social media say they see content about conspiracy theories in their online feeds, with 20 percent seeing conspiracy content every day.

“They include narratives such as the Earth being flat, the 2020 election being rigged or stolen, and COVID-19 vaccines being dangerous,” the News Literacy Project’s report found.

While teens don’t believe every conspiracy theory they see, 81 percent who see such content online said they believe one or more.

---

Get EdSurge journalism delivered free to your inbox. Sign up for our newsletters.

---

Bowman noted, “As dangerous or harmful as they can be, these narratives are designed to be engaging and satisfy deep psychological needs, such as the need for community and understanding. Being a conspiracy theorist or believing in a conspiracy theory can become a part of someone’s identity. It’s not necessarily a label an individual is going to shy away from sharing with others.”

At the same time, the report found that the bar for offering media literacy is low. Just six states have guidelines for how to teach media literacy, and only three make it a requirement in public schools.

Less than 40 percent of teens surveyed reported having any media literacy instruction during the 2023-24 school year, according to the analysis.

Credible Sources

As part of gathering data for the report, teens were asked to try their hand at distinguishing between different types of information they might encounter online. They were also challenged to identify real or fake photos and judge whether an information source is credible.

The study asked participants to identify a series of articles as advertisements, opinion or news pieces.

More than half of teens failed to identify branded content — a newsy-looking piece on plant-based meat in the Washington Post news app — as an advertisement. About the same amount didn’t realize that an article with “commentary” in the headline was about the author’s opinion.

They did better at recognizing Google’s “sponsored” results as ads, but about 40 percent of teens said they thought it meant those results were popular or of high quality. Only 8 percent of teens correctly categorized the information in all three examples.

In another exercise, teens were asked to identify which of two pieces of content about Coca-Cola’s plastic waste was more credible: a press release from Coca-Cola or an article from Reuters. The results were too close for comfort for the report, with only 56 percent of teens choosing the Reuters article as more trustworthy.

Brand recognition could have played a role in teens’ decision to choose Coca-Cola over Reuters, Bowman says, a feeling that a more-recognizable company was more credible.

“Whatever the reason, I do think news organizations engaging young people on social media and building up trust and recognition there could have the potential to move the needle on a question like this in the future,” Bowman said.

Checking the Facts

Where teens did feel confident spotting hoaxes was with visuals.

Two-thirds of study participants said they could do a reverse Google image search to find the original source of an image. About 70 percent of teens could correctly distinguish between an AI-generated image and a real photograph.

To test teens’ ability to spot misinformation, they were asked whether a social media photo of a melting traffic light was “strong evidence that hot temperatures in Texas melted traffic lights in July 2023.”

Most teens answered correctly, but about one-third still believed the photo alone was strong evidence that the claim about melting traffic lights was true.

Bowman said that the fact that there was no difference in students’ performance when results were analyzed by their age leaves her wondering if teens “of all ages have received the message that they can’t always believe their eyes when it comes to the images they see online.”

“Their radars seem to be up when it comes to identifying manipulated, misrepresented, or completely fabricated images,” Bowman continued. “Especially with the recent advancements and availability of generative AI technologies, I wonder if it may be harder to convince them of the authenticity of a photo that is actually real and verified than to convince them that an image is false in some way.”

When it came to sharing on social media, teens expressed a strong desire to make sure their posts contained correct information. So how are they fact-checking themselves, given a minority of teens actively follow news or have taken media literacy classes?

Among teens who said they verify news before sharing, Bowman said they’re engaged in lateral reading, which she described as “a quick internet search to investigate the post’s source” and a method employed by professional fact-checkers.

Given a random group of teens, Bowman posited they would most likely use much less effective ways of judging a source’s credibility, based on factors like a website’s design or URL.

“In other words, previous research shows that young people tend to rely on outdated techniques or surface-level criteria to determine a source’s credibility,” Bowman explained. “If schools across the country implemented high-quality news literacy instruction, I am confident we can debunk old notions of how to determine credibility that are no longer effective in today’s information landscape and, instead, teach young people research-backed verification techniques that we know work.”

Actively Staying Informed

While conspiracy theories surface commonly for teens, they’re not necessarily arming themselves with information to stave them off.

Teens are split on whether they trust the news. Just over half of teens said that journalists do more to protect society than to harm it. Nearly 70 percent said news organizations are biased, and 80 percent believe news organizations are either more biased or about the same as other online content creators.

A minority of teens — just 15 percent — actively seek out news to stay informed.

The study also asked teens to list news sources they trusted to provide accurate and fair information.

CNN and Fox News received the most endorsements, with 178 and 133 mentions respectively. TMZ, NPR and the Associated Press were equally matched with 12 mentions each.

Local TV news was the most trusted news medium, followed by TikTok.

Teens agree on at least one thing: A whopping 94 percent said schools should be required to offer some degree of media literacy.

“Young people know better than anyone how much they are expected to learn before graduation so, for so many teens to say they would welcome yet another requirement to their already overfull plate, is a huge deal and a big endorsement for the importance of a media literacy education,” Bowman said.

Throughout the study, students who had any amount of media literacy education did better on the study’s test questions than their peers. They were more likely to be active news seekers, trust news outlets and feel more confident in their ability to fact-check what they see online.

And, in a strange twist, students who get media literacy in school report seeing more conspiracy theories on social media — perhaps precisely because they have sharper media literacy skills.

“Teens with at least some media literacy instruction, who keep up with news, and who have high

trust in news media are all more likely to report seeing conspiracy theory posts on social media at least once a week,” according to the report. “These differences could indicate that teens in these subgroups are more adept at spotting these kinds of posts or that their social media algorithms are more likely to serve them these kinds of posts, or both.”

© Liana Nagieva / Shutterstock

Do new AI tools like ChatGPT actually understand language the same way that humans do?

It turns out that even the inventors of these new large language models are debating that very question — and the answer will have huge implications for education and for all aspects of society if this technology can get to a point where it achieves what is known as Artificial General Intelligence, or AGI.

A new book by one of those AI pioneers digs into the origins of ChatGPT and the intersection of research on how the brain works and building new large language models for AI. It’s called “ChatGPT and the Future of AI,” and the author is Terrence Sejnowski, a professor of biology at the University of California, San Diego, where he co-directs the Institute for Neural Computation and the NSF Temporal Dynamics of Learning Center. He is also the Francis Crick Chair at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies.

---

Get EdSurge journalism delivered free to your inbox. Sign up for our newsletters.

---

Sejnowski started out as a physicist working on the origins of black holes, but early in his career he says he realized that it would be decades before new instruments could be built that could adequately measure the kinds of gravitational waves he was studying. So he switched to neuroscience, hoping to “pop the hood” on the human brain to better understand how it works.

“It seemed to me that the brain was just as mysterious as the cosmos,” he tells EdSurge. “And the advantage is you can do experiments in your own lab, and you don’t have to have a satellite.”

“What has really been revealed is that we don't understand what ‘understanding’ is,”

— Terrence Sejnowski

For decades, Sejnowski has focused on applying findings from brain science to building computer models, working closely at times with the two researchers who just won the Nobel Prize this year for their work on AI, John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton.

These days, computing power and algorithms have advanced to the level where neuroscience and AI are helping to inform each other, and even challenge our traditional understanding of what thinking is all about, he says.

“What has really been revealed is that we don't understand what ‘understanding’ is,” says Sejnowski. “We use the word, and we think we understand what it means, but we don't know how the brain understands something. We can record from neurons, but that doesn't really tell you how it functions and what’s really going on when you’re thinking.”

He says that new chatbots have the potential to revolutionize learning if they can deliver on the promise of being personal tutors to students. One drawback of the current approach, he says, is that LLMs focus on only one aspect of how the human brain organizes information, whereas “there are a hundred brain parts that are left out that are important for survival, autonomy for being able to maintain activity and awareness.” And it’s possible that those other parts of what makes us human may need to be simulated as well for something like tutoring to be most effective, he suggests.

The researcher warns that there are likely to be negative unintended consequences to ChatGPT and other technologies, just as social media led to the rise of misinformation and other challenges. He says there will need to be regulation, but that “we won't really know what to regulate until it really is out there and it's being used and we see what the impact is, how it's used.”

But he predicts that soon most of us will no longer use keyboards to interact with computers, instead using voice commands to have dialogues with all kinds of devices in our lives. “You’ll be able to go into your car and talk to the car and say, ‘How are you feeling today?’ [and it might say,] ‘Well, we're running low on gas.’ Oh, OK, where's the nearest gas station? Here, let me take you there.”

Listen to our conversation with Sejnowski on this week’s EdSurge Podcast, where he describes research to more fully simulate human brains. He also talks about his previous project in education, a free online course he co-teaches called “Learning How to Learn,” which is one of the most popular courses ever made, with more than 4 million students signed up over the past 10 years.

© K illustrator Photo / Shutterstock

Coming out of the pandemic, students had a hard time returning to in-person classes, and they found themselves struggling to tread water academically as declining test scores made many in the country worry that students were drowning.

For school districts desperate to find a life vest for students, one response was to rely on tutoring services. These services — particularly high-dose tutoring, an evidence-backed form of small group, intensive tutoring — had been identified as a way to fight against declining student performance. But at first, in the rush to jump-start tutoring programs, schools plunked federal relief dollars down on less-researched tutoring models and created a cash-grab for companies in the tutoring space. Since then, educators have reputedly gotten more sophisticated when evaluating tutoring programs, focusing their attention on evidence-backed options like high-dose services.

Yet, it’s also unclear that the ample spending of federal funds on tutors has effectively countered learning declines. Plus, schools have had to turn to alternative funding sources to pay for tutors as relief funding fizzles out. Some programs, for instance, have started creatively using federal work placement dollars to grow their tutoring forces, even conscripting college students in the hopes that it would both bolster the outcomes for K-12 students and create the next generation of teachers from today’s college cohort at the same time.

---

Get EdSurge journalism delivered free to your inbox. Sign up for our newsletters.

---

Some hoped that presidential involvement would help. During the 2022 State of the Union address, President Joe Biden called for hundreds of thousands of new tutors, coaches and mentors for programs around the country. And seemingly, this use of the bully pulpit was a success. Now, two years later, an analysis from Johns Hopkins and the RAND Corporation suggests that schools and organizations around the country have surpassed that goal a year early. The Biden plea asked for an additional 250,000 tutors by the summer of 2025. In all, around 323,000 new tutors, mentors or coaches have already joined.

At an event for the White House this month — only weeks before an election where education has seemed a relatively quiet campaign issue — the administration pitched it as a coup for their “laser-focus” on student success. Student support organizations also took it as an encouraging sign for students. “The surpassing of President Biden’s call is a clear indicator of the strength of the American spirit and our collective dedication to the future of our youth,” said Michael D. Smith, CEO of AmeriCorps, one of the organizations involved, in a written statement.

Those volunteers will provide extra muscle for districts trying to support students. But given slumping test scores and vanishing federal relief dollars, is a surge in volunteers enough to stabilize learning?

A Small Victory?

The administration was able to steer a lot of volunteers to tutoring organizations, says Antonio Gutierrez, co-founder of Saga Education, a nonprofit organization focused on high-dose tutoring. It’s a big part of meeting the urgent need of schools post-pandemic and it’s encouraging, he adds.

But what have been the outcomes?

The Johns Hopkins report notes that 12,700 schools increased high-intensity tutoring, suggesting that the administration’s plea helped. Thousands of schools also reported an increase in other support for students. What’s more, 34 percent of principals surveyed reported that more students had access to tutoring in 2023-2024 than in the previous year. Relatedly, 24 percent reported that more students had access to mentors.

But how much of a dent does that actually make in the country? It’s hard to say, according to Gutierrez. But there has been recent evidence concerning “high-impact” tutoring in general, which he thinks might speak to how useful this approach could be for supporting students.

For instance: Preliminary findings from the University of Chicago “Personalized Learning Initiative,” meant to stimulate attempts to expand tutoring in the country, found that high-dose tutoring is effective. According to the study, which inspected a couple thousand K-12 students in Chicago and Fulton County, these tutoring programs inspired gains in math learning. The study was meant to assess how effective tutoring programs are when schools design them on their own, in Gutierrez’s summary. Gutierrez’s organization, Saga Education, has tried to support schools in those efforts by spelling out the best practices districts should follow. The study also found that making sure tutoring occurs during the school day, rather than “on demand” after school or on weekends, was important for getting large increases in student performance.

But there are reasons to slightly tamper that enthusiasm. A meta-analysis from Brown University’s Annenberg Institute looked at 265 randomized controlled trials and found that as tutoring programs get larger, they get notably less effective. While they still helped lift student learning, the benefits of tutoring appeared smaller in large-scale programs, according to this study. To Gutierrez, who notes that the study still noted a positive effect, that’s not really surprising. In other words, because schools are experimenting with these programs themselves, how well any particular program boosts student achievement will vary.

For the movement to make personalized learning a permanent feature of American education, there have been other developments as well.

The most flashy has been AI. This year, the Los Angeles School District, the second largest in the country, launched a high-profile $6 million chatbot called “Ed,” a talking sun that was supposed to boost personalized instruction. But the company behind that chatbot collapsed this summer, raising concerns about what would happen to the student data it collected. Some have suggested the project had been simply too ambitious, and the company has become a cautionary tale.

That’s a good example of what not to do with these programs, according to observers like Gutierrez. But more promising, he says, are efforts like Khanmigo, the personalized instruction tool from Sal Khan, and other chat-based tutoring programs. Those sorts of chatbots should be developed because they could add value, Gutierrez says.

They likely won’t replace human tutors, Gutierrez says. Because of how students learn, tutoring is highly reliant on the relationship between tutor and student, he adds. That’s how tutors can nudge students in the right direction, pushing them to learn. Still, these tech products hold the promise of translating into any language and also fine-tuning to a district’s needs, though there are questions about engagement from students with these tools, he says. But so long as districts don’t depend entirely on these technologies for personalized instruction, it’s probably useful to explore how human and bot tutors can work together to assist students, Gutierrez says.

Ultimately, the drove of tutors from the Biden-Harris administration push was a step in the right direction, but there’s a lot more work ahead, Gutierrez admits.

© Photo By fast-stock/Shutterstock

Angela Fleck says this was the typical scene last year in the sixth grade social studies classes she teaches at Glover Middle School in Spokane, Washington: Nearly every student had a smartphone, and many of them would regularly sneak glances at the devices, which they kept tucked behind a book or just under their desks.

“They're pretty sneaky, so you wouldn't always know that that was the reason,” says Fleck. “But over time, I'd realize no matter how engaging my lesson was, when it was time to turn and do the group activity or the assignment — something that wasn't totally me directing the class — there would be a large number of students that had no idea what we were doing.”

What students were doing with their phones, she says, was most often using Snapchat or other social media or texting with students in other classrooms, which she described as creating drama: “And then it would just spread rapid-fire, whatever the situation was, and it would sometimes result in altercations — meeting up at a certain place, and they'd arrange it all day on the phone.”

---

Get EdSurge journalism delivered free to your inbox. Sign up for our newsletters.

---

This year, though, the vibe has changed. Spokane Public Schools issued a new districtwide policy that bans the use of smartphones or smartwatches in classrooms during instructional time. So now students in elementary and middle schools have to keep devices off and put away during the school day, though high school students can use their smartphones or watches between classes and at lunch.

Now, she says, she feels like she has most students’ attention during classes since she no longer has to compete with buzzing devices. “In general, students are ready to learn,” she says. “As a teacher, I need to make sure that I have an engaging lesson that will keep their attention and help them to learn and help them to continue to want to be engaged.” And she says there are fewer fights at the school, too.

The district is one of many across the country that have instituted new smartphone bans this year, in the name of increasing student engagement and counteracting the negative effects that social media has on youth mental health. And at least four states — Indiana, Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida — have enacted statewide bans limiting school smartphone access.

For this week’s EdSurge Podcast, we set out to get a sense of how the bans are going. To do that, we talked with Fleck, as well as a high school teacher in Indiana, where a new statewide law bans smartphones and other wireless devices in schools during instructional time.

Fleck is a fan of the ban, and says she hopes the school never goes back to the old approach. But she admits that she misses some aspects of having phones available to integrate in a lesson when needed.

In the past, for instance, she allowed students to take pictures with their phones of the slides she was showing. And she would often designate a student as a researcher during lessons who could look up related material online and share with the group. Now she’s finding ways to adapt to keep those positive aspects of online access, she says, such as having student researchers use a computer in the classroom, or to make more use of the school-issued laptops for some lessons.

Adam Swinyard, the superintendent of Spokane Public Schools, acknowledges that there are trade-offs to the new ban when it comes to the use of tech in instruction.

“We absolutely have lost some power of the opportunity that those devices provide, whether that's, ‘I can really quickly look something up,’ or ‘I can quickly participate in a class poll’ or ‘I can tune my music instrument,’” he told EdSurge. “But I think where we landed in our community, for our schools and for our kids, is what we gain in their level of engagement and ability to focus far outweighs what we're losing in a device being a powerful pedagogical tool inside of the classroom. But I think it's important to acknowledge.”

What they end up teaching students, he argues, is more important. The mantra for the district is that there is a “time and place” for smartphone use, says Swinyard, and that a classroom is not the right setting or occasion, just as he wouldn’t pull out his phone and write a text while he was being interviewed for this article, or sitting in an important meeting.

Some schools with new bans have faced pushback from students, especially where there has been a zero-tolerance for phones even during social time. At a Jasper High School in Plano, Texas, for instance, more than 250 people signed a petition calling on the principal to revise a new ban on smartphones, which forbids use of devices all day, even during lunch and in the halls between classes. “Before the restricted use of cellphones was prohibited, they were a social link, connecting students during lunch and hallway breaks,” the petition reads.

And some parents have complained about the new bans, out of concerns that they would not be able to reach their children in the event of an emergency, such as a school shooting. A new survey by the Pew Research Center found that about 7 in 10 Americans support cellphone bans during class, while only about a third favor an all-day ban.

So one takeaway is that how schools design their smartphone restrictions — and how they communicate the policies to students and parents — are important for how well they work in practice.

Hear more about the pros and cons of new smartphone bans on this week’s EdSurge Podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or on the player below.

© Spokane Public Schools website

On a bright, sunny day, a group of first-graders eagerly begins a science investigation called “Shadow Town.” The teacher gathers them in a circle and asks, “What causes shadows?” It’s a good question. The students are all familiar with shadows, have had fun with them and no doubt played shadow puppets, but that’s different from being able to explain them. Many suggestions are shouted out as students’ imaginations get fired up by the mystery of light and darkness.

The teacher takes the students outside to test their ideas. “Can I run away from my shadow?” one student wonders. Another asks, “Can I trick my shadow into disappearing?” As they experiment with shadows, predict their movements, explore how light interacts with different materials, and discuss what they see with their partners, the students learn not just about the mechanics of shadows but also about the scientific process of inquiry and investigation. Through this exploration, they begin to apply their newfound knowledge to solve a real-world problem: why the town of Rjukan, Norway, spends much of the year in shadow and how different solutions could work.

Combining phenomena-based learning with 3D science standards helps students see science as a way to make sense of the world around them. They become more motivated to learn and more capable of thinking critically about the challenges they will face in the future.

“Shadow Town,” a module in the K-8 curriculum Twig Science, is an example of phenomena-based learning in action, an approach that taps into students' natural curiosity to make sense of the world around them. In this context, phenomena are simply observable events or situations. They play a crucial role in science education because they provide students with concrete, engaging examples of scientific concepts in the real world. They provide great opportunities to develop student inquiry — students see something happening, ask questions about it and conduct research to learn more about it.

---

In "Shadow Town," students investigate why the town of Rjukan, Norway, spends much of the year in shadow.
Image credit: Imagine Learning

---

Phenomena in the Context of 3D Science

Phenomena-based learning also aligns with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and other three-dimensional (3D) science standards that emphasize a comprehensive, integrated understanding of science. These standards were designed to move science education away from rote memorization and toward engaging students in practices real scientists use to explore and model the world, fostering deeper understanding of scientific concepts and developing skills like critical thinking, collaboration and communication.

The NGSS and other 3D science standards are structured around three dimensions of science learning:

1. Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs): These involve the skills and behaviors that scientists and engineers engage in, such as asking questions, developing and using models, planning and carrying out investigations, analyzing and interpreting data, and constructing explanations.
2. Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs): These overarching concepts bridge disciplinary boundaries, such as patterns, cause and effect, energy and matter, structure and function, and stability and change.
3. Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCIs): These are fundamental ideas in science that students should understand, divided into four domains — physical sciences, life sciences, Earth and space sciences, and engineering, technology and applications of science.

The integration of these three dimensions helps students develop a holistic understanding of science, moving beyond memorizing isolated facts to actively engaging in scientific practices and understanding the broader concepts that connect different areas of science.

---

3D Learning with Twig Science

---

A Motivation to Engage

Phenomena-based learning and 3D science standards naturally complement each other. Phenomena-based learning provides the context and motivation for students to engage in the practices, concepts and core ideas outlined in the standards. For example, in investigating “Shadow Town,” students engage in Science and Engineering Practices by asking questions and planning investigations to understand why shadows change. They use the Crosscutting Concept of “patterns” to observe how shadows behave at different times of the day and the Disciplinary Core Idea of Earth’s movements to explain these patterns. Through this process, they’re not just learning scientific facts but experiencing science as a dynamic, integrated discipline that helps them make sense of the world.

Recommended Resources:

• Twig Science: A comprehensive, NGSS-aligned science program full of exciting, real-world STEM challenges that spark student engagement and a long-lasting love of science.
• Unlocking Success with Phenomena-Based Science Instruction: In Twig Science, students investigate and make sense of phenomena through multiple modalities, empowering them to connect with science in the world around them.
• The Ultimate Guide to Three-Dimensional Learning: Teach real-world skills with 3D science and find resources including practical approaches, printable posters and a podcast episode.
• The Ultimate Guide to Phenomena: A guide to sparking student inquiry and discovery, including a podcast episode, a breakdown of anchor phenomena in Twig Science, and downloadable phenomena trackers.
• Open Any Door with Critical Thinking, Collaboration, Communication, and Creativity: A series of blog posts exploring the 4Cs of STEM.
• Practical Approaches to 3D Science: A foundations paper exploring Crosscutting Concepts, Science and Engineering Practices, and Disciplinary Core Ideas.

---

Multimedia resources in Twig Science bring phenomena to life that students might not otherwise have access to.
Image credit: Imagine Learning

---

Creating opportunities for such investigations requires thoughtful design and alignment with educational standards. In designing high-quality instructional materials and even entire curricula that support phenomena-based learning, several key areas demand attention:

• Rich, real-world phenomena: Across grades K-8, effective curricula feature carefully chosen phenomena — such as the passing of the seasons, light reflecting in a mirror or the erosion of mountains — that are relevant, observable and meaningful to students. They’re complex enough to require students to engage deeply with the dimensions of science but accessible enough to be explored through student-led inquiry and investigation.
• High-quality multimedia resources: Videos, interactive simulations and virtual labs bring phenomena to life that students might not otherwise have access to, providing dynamic, visual experiences that enhance understanding.
• Engaging and clear learning materials: Learning materials should be engaging and aligned to 3D science standards. They should guide students through the inquiry process, provide opportunities for reflection and discussion, and scaffold learning to include all students in investigations.
• An innovative assessment system: Assessment systems should help teachers evaluate student understanding of the three dimensions of the NGSS. These systems include a range of assessment strategies, from pre-exploration activities that gauge prior knowledge to formative and summative tasks, plus built-in data-reporting tools to help track student progress throughout their learning journeys.

Combining phenomena-based learning with 3D science standards helps students see science as a way to make sense of the world around them. They become more motivated to learn and more capable of thinking critically about the challenges they will face in the future. As students engage with real-world phenomena, they not only learn about science but also begin to think and act like scientists, developing a lifelong sense of wonder and inquiry that will help them deal with all kinds of challenges they will face throughout their lives, in education and beyond.

© Image Credit: Imagine Learning

When Meta held its annual conference at the end of September, the tech giant announced it is betting that the next wave of computing will come in the form of smart eyeglasses.

Mark Zuckberberg, Meta’s founder and CEO, held up what he described as the first working prototype of Orion, which lets wearers see both the physical world and a computer display hovering in the field of vision.

“They’re not a headset,” he said on stage as he announced the device, which looked like a set of unusually chunky eyeglasses. “This is the physical world with holograms overlaid on it.”

For educators, this might not come as welcome news.

After all, one of the hottest topics in edtech these days is the growing practice of banning smartphones in schools, after teachers have reported that the devices distract students from classroom activities and socializing in person with others. And a growing body of research, popularized by the Jonathan Haidt book “The Anxious Generation,” argues that smartphone and social media use harms the mental health of teenagers.

When it’s proving hard enough to regulate the appropriate use of smartphones, what will it be like to manage a rush of kids wearing computers on their faces?

Some edtech experts see upsides, though, when the technology is ready to be used for educational activities.

The idea of using VR headsets to enter an educational multiverse — the last big idea Meta was touting when it changed its corporate name three years ago from Facebook — hasn’t caught on widely, in part because getting a classroom full of students fitted with headsets and holding controllers can be difficult for teachers (not to mention expensive to obtain all that gear). But if smart glasses become cheap enough for a cart to be wheeled in with enough pairs for each student, so they can all do some activity together that blends the virtual world with in-person interactions, they could be a better fit.

“Augmented reality allows for more sharing and collaborative work than VR,” says Maya Georgieva, who runs an innovation center for VR and AR at The New School in New York City. “Lots of these augmented reality applications build on the notion of active learning and experiential learning naturally.”

And there is some initial research that has found that augmented reality experiences in education can lead to improvements in learning outcomes since, as one recent research paper put it, “they transform the learning process into a full-body experience.”

Cheating Glasses?

The Orion glasses that Zuckerberg previewed last week are not ready for prime time — in fact the Meta CEO said they won’t be released to the general public until 2027.

(EdSurge receives philanthropic support from the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative, which is co-owned by Meta’s CEO. Learn more about EdSurge ethics and policies here and supporters here.)

But the company already sells smart eyeglasses through a partnership with sunglass-maker Ray-Ban, which are now retailing for around $300. And other companies make similar products as well.

These gadgets, which have been on the market for a couple of years in some form, don’t have a display. But they do have a small built-in computer, a camera, a microphone and speakers. And recent advances in AI mean that newer models can serve as a talking version of a chatbot that users can access when they’re away from their computer or smartphone.

While so far the number of students who own smart glasses appears low, there have already been some reports of students using smart glasses to try to cheat.

This year in Tokyo, for instance, an 18-year-old allegedly used smart glasses to try to cheat on a university entrance exam. He apparently took pictures of his exam questions, posted them online during the test, and users on X, formerly Twitter, gave him the answers (which he could presumably hear read to him on his smart glasses). He was detected and his test scores were invalidated.

Meanwhile, students are sharing videos on TikTok where they explain how to use smart glasses to cheat, even low-end models that have few “smart” features.

“Using these blue light smart glasses on a test would be absolutely diabolical,” says one TikTok user’s video, describing a pair of glasses that can simply pair with a smartphone by bluetooth and cost only about $30. “They look like regular glasses, but they have speakers and microphones in them so you can cheat on a test. So just prerecord your test or your answers or watch a video while you're at the test and just listen to it and no one can tell that you’re looking or listening to anything.”

On Reddit discussions, professors have been wondering whether this technology will make it even harder to know whether the work students are doing is their own, compounding the problems caused by ChatGPT and other new AI tools that have given students new ways to cheat on homework that are difficult to detect.

One commenter even suggested just giving up on doing tests and assignments and trying to find new ways of assessing student knowledge. “I think we have too many assessments that have limited benefit and no one here wants to run a police state to check if students actually did what they say they did,” the user wrote. “I would appreciate if anyone has a functional viable alternative to the current standard. The old way will benefit the well off and dishonest, while the underprivileged and moral will suffer (not that this is new either).”

Some of the school and state policies that ban smartphones might also apply to these new smart glasses. A state law in Florida, for instance, restricts the use of “wireless communication devices,” which could include glasses, watches, or any new gadget that gets invented that connects electronically.

“I would compare it very much to when smartphones really came on the scene and became a regular part of our everyday lives,” says Kyle Bowen, a longtime edtech expert who is now deputy chief information officer at Arizona State University, noting that these glasses might impact a range of activities if they catch on, including education.

There could be upsides in college classrooms, he predicts.

The benefit he sees for smart glasses is the pairing of AI and the devices, so that students might be able to get real-time feedback about, say a lab exercise, by asking the chatbot to weigh in on what it sees through the camera of the glasses as students go about the task.

© Screenshot from Meta video

We’re halfway through “Parable of the Sower” by Octavia Butler, and we’ve arrived at a crucial turning point in the plot. The main character, Lauren Olamina, loses her family and home to an arson attack. I wanted my students to fully experience the severity of this loss, so instead of continuing with a workshop model I’d been using throughout the unit thus far, I decided to read to the class:

I sat where I was for three weary, terrifying hours. Nothing happened to me, but I could see and hear things happening. There were people moving around the hills, sometimes silhouetting themselves against the sky as they ran or walked over the hills…I heard a lot of gunfire--individual shots and short bursts of automatic weapons fire…

“Why are we reading this?” a student interrupts. The class remains quiet. I look up to see most resting their hands against their heads. They look bored and glance up at me with their faces downcast. I see some of them begin to turn their phones over, and others reach into their pockets.

“Because it’s important. This world isn’t that far off from ours,” I say.

Another student responds, “But it’s not that bad.”

“But what if one day it is?” I ask. “Don’t you think that matters to you?”

Another student shrugs. Another stares at me blankly.

Parable of the Sower was written in 1993, yet some would argue Butler’s predictions are bone-chillingly accurate. Unfortunately, none of that matters if the only thing students want to do is go back to their phones.

For many of my students, reading is not a precursor to revolutionary action, but a cumbersome task that is always a preamble to another tedious assessment. Even if this is the case, reading has been shown to be a tool for building empathy. Empathy is how we learn to care for people we will never meet. In this case, the expediency of technology has created a sense of immediate gratification that stands opposite to the empathy that reading can cultivate.

When I talk to my coworkers about the apathy I notice in my classroom, we realize that the large chunks of writing, the big words and the complexity of Butler’s ideas are all turnoffs for our students. When students are simply met with a page that has a lot of words on it, disinterest is immediate.

I recognize it is not my place to mirror their complacency but to model what it would look like to care. But how do I get them to care when I can’t even get them to see the value of a book that clearly shows us the effects of our collective negligence? It’s impossible to reach this empathy that reading can provide without first helping students gain tools to build the mental and emotional stamina to engage with complex texts.

Building Boredom and Executive Functioning

While people are not yet roaming the streets en masse scavenging for food and water, around the world, people are doing just that as I write this. In our country, our democracy is at stake as well. Despite all this, Generation Alpha cares less and less.

Lately, it appears that students are more interested in rapidly scrolling through their friends’ stories, checking their likes and direct messages and uploading stories with filters on social media apps. Their impulses are wired to do this and, in my opinion, focus too much on the self, the immediacy of tasks and the imminent gratification from likes — it does not allow students to sit deeply and meaningfully in someone else’s emotions and experiences.

Students will reach for their phones during transitions, in between reading passages, whole-group discussions and during moments of boredom. While taking phones away is a first step, this doesn’t address the problem — the immediate withdrawal in front of a dense, complex text. Reversing these trends requires students to lean into the practice of boredom.

Boredom, despite the negative connotations, is a discipline that frees the mind from the perceived need for constant activity, and research shows that doing nothing can lead to inspiration, imagination and presence. Boredom is a feeling that students need to learn to befriend to tackle a complex text — because being bored should not be a reason to miss out on a thought-provoking reading experience, such as the one “Parable of the Sower” provides.

Boredom should be practiced daily and explicitly in classrooms. Set a timer and just sit there with your students. Put phones away and leave nothing on the desk. Sit there. Do nothing. This trains the mind to refuse any impulses and reach for distractions from the present moment.

In my classroom, I’ve implemented sustained silent reading (SSR) with no comprehension assessments to build reading stamina and help students find a genuine love for reading. Like boredom, this practice also requires silence and presence. Although a student’s mind might wander during this time, the expectation that they are silent and interfacing with words demands self-regulation.

Boredom and SSR are also connected to executive functioning because they demand that students be present, focused and control their impulses. When students are only allowed to sit in class and think about their thoughts or look at a book, it is a necessary first step to reading dense texts because reading requires focus. With time, the impulse to pull out a phone or withdraw from difficult tasks will hopefully be mitigated when students have learned that being bored or still is not such a bad thing.

Going Down Reading

To be honest, on most days, I feel helpless. Even when phones are away, the disconnect remains. And in a sense, the disconnect is incredibly valid: despite all the activism, there is little change that students can cling to. If a young person is looking at the gaps between social movements and the continued fracturing of our world, it makes sense to give up and focus on the self.

Some of my solutions have been to couple parts of “Parable of the Sower” with current and local events. In the Bay Area, poverty rates are extremely high with the soaring cost of living. In San Francisco, homelessness has long been a crisis. The wealth gap is immense and we’ve seen the effects of climate change with extreme heat in parts of the Bay. Through my efforts, I have gotten students to see the correlations between these harsh realities and the circumstances of Lauren’s world. But even then, the apathy remains.

“What’s the point? The world is going to end anyway,” they tell me.

And if it were true that the world would end, there would still be a period after the collapse of society where all we’ll have left is each other. Then, it’ll come down to empathy and community. When Lauren finally succeeds at building her community, she tells them:

...If we’re willing to work, our chances are good here. I’ve got some seed in my pack…What we have to do at this point is more like gardening than farming. Everything will have to be done by hand--composting, watering, weeding, picking worms or slugs…We work together, we can defend ourselves, and we can protect the kids. A community’s first responsibility is to protect its children--the ones we have now and the one we will have…

Although the work of building community is daunting, as Lauren says, we must protect our children. They will bear the brunt of a broken world. We protect them by empowering them with the tools needed to survive. Empathy is the tool for survival in a world shaped by individualism, but empathy cannot be practiced with poor impulse control. Empathy requires discipline, and discipline comes from facing and befriending discomfort.

In my ideal classroom, students are present, reading the words and forming connections with themselves and the world. They push themselves to engage with dense paragraphs. They annotate. They may struggle, but they appreciate the long process of learning and understanding. They walk away thinking about the world with expanded horizons because they’ve just experienced a life that is not theirs. But the presence that leads to this empathy will only come if a student is self-regulated enough to manage the impulses that create disengagement. If a student thinks all answers should come immediately from a single tool in their hand — their phones — disengagement is inevitable.

But I know that as long as I am in the classroom, my duty as a teacher is to model care and empathy, regardless of my frustrations. I am still comforted by that one student who will see the value of reading a novel that tells us who we will become if we forget about each other, for if we do not have each other, we have nothing.

© PrinceOfLove / Shutterstock

When Robert Ubell first applied for a job at a university's online program back in the late ’90s, he had no experience with online education. But then again, hardly anyone else did either.

First of all, the web was still relatively new back then (something like the way AI chatbots are new today), and only a few colleges and universities were even trying to deliver courses on it. Ubell’s experience was in academic publishing, and he had recently finished a stint as the American publisher of Nature magazine and was looking for something different. He happened to have some friends at Stanford University who had shown him what the university was doing using the web to train workers at local factories and high-tech businesses, and he was intrigued by the potential.

So when he saw that Stevens Institute of Technology had an opening to build online programs, he applied, citing the weekend he spent observing Stanford’s program.

“That was my only background, my only experience,” he says, “and I got the job.”

And as at many college campuses at the time, Ubell faced resistance from the faculty.

“Professors were totally opposed,” he says, fearing that the quality would never be as good as in-person teaching.

The story of how higher ed went from a reluctant innovator to today — when more than half of American college students take at least one online course — offers plenty of lessons for how to try to bring new teaching practices to colleges.

One big challenge that has long faced online learning is who will pay the costs of building something new, like a virtual campus.

Ubell points to philanthropic foundations as key to helping many colleges, including Stevens, take their first steps into online offerings.

And it turns out that the most successful teachers in the new online format weren’t ones who were the best with computers or the most techy, says Frank Mayadas, who spent 17 years at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation giving out grants hoping to spark adoptions of online learning.

“It was the faculty who had a great conviction to be good teachers who were going to be good no matter how they did it,” says Mayadas. “If they were good in the classroom, they were usually good online.”

We dig into the bumpy history of online higher education on this week’s EdSurge Podcast. And we hear what advice online pioneers have for those trying the latest classroom innovations.

Check out the episode on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or on the player below.

© KELENY / Shutterstock

Miguel Quinteros spent over a decade as something of a tech-savvy teacher — one not afraid to try new things in the classroom, in hopes that they would make learning more interesting, more intuitive and more engaging for his students.

He took that proclivity to the next level a few years ago, when he accepted a position as a K-12 technology coach in a small school district in western Michigan.

Quinteros loves the work he gets to do, trying to solve problems for teachers, students and administrators in his rural farming community, removing obstacles that come their way and generally continuing in his pursuit of looking for ways to make learning more fun and approachable to students.

And he hasn’t had to abandon teaching. In 2022, Quinteros’ district, Mason County Central School District, opened a first-of-its-kind immersive room that, with augmented and virtual reality advanced technology, allows students to deepen their learning with interactive, sensory-oriented lessons — from the World War I trenches to erupting volcanoes to ancient Greece. Quinteros manages the immersive room for the district and helps bring lessons to life for children of all ages.

“I just get to do the fun part now: teach,” he shares. “I don't do the grading and the discipline anymore.”

In any given school, a robust school staff is quietly working behind the scenes to help shape the day for kids. In our Role Call series, we spotlight staff members who sometimes go unnoticed, but whose work is integral in transforming a school into a lively community. For this installment, we’re featuring Miguel Quinteros.

The following interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

---

Name: Miguel Quinteros

Age: 51

Location: Scottville, Michigan

Role: K-12 technology coach

Years in the field: Three in current role, after 11 as a teacher

---

EdSurge: How did you get here? What brought you to your role as a technology coach?

Miguel Quinteros: Well, I'm originally from El Salvador. I came when I was 25 for medical treatment, and then I had to stay in the country and find something to do. So I became a youth minister with the Catholic Church. Then I thought, ‘Oh, I like to work with young people,’ so I decided to become a teacher. When I was studying to become a teacher, I had to choose a major and a minor, and I picked social studies as my major and computer science as my minor. With my minor being computer science, I focused a lot on how to use technology in the classroom, how to do things that we would not be able to do otherwise.

Once I became a teacher, even though I was teaching Spanish, computer science and social studies to middle and high school students, I was always using technology in the classroom. It was a small town, and word got out. After the pandemic, I think a lot of school districts realized that teachers needed more support with technology, and a lot of tech coach positions came up. So then the district where I work now actually recruited me to come take this position.

When people outside of school ask you what you do, like at a social event, how do you describe your work to them?

Most of the time, I don't like to tell people what I do. I feel like, especially being Hispanic, when people see me in social [settings], they assume that I work in the fields doing migrant work, agriculture. And the moment they know what I do, it’s almost like they give me more importance. I like people to see me for who I am as a person, not for what I do.

But if I meet somebody, and I can see that they genuinely accept me for who I am, then I open up more with them. Otherwise, I guess I'm kind of guarded with this topic. It's sad, but that's the reality, and I have to live in my skin every day.

Let’s say you met someone who was genuinely interested in you. How would you describe to them what your work entails, if you were feeling really talkative and generous that day?

I’d tell them I am a technology coach, and most people are like, ‘What is that?’ Because these are kind of new positions that have emerged. And then I explain that I go into classrooms and help teachers use technology, to make classrooms more engaging. I also order technology for the teachers and for the students — physical technology as well as learning apps. I provide teachers with training on how to use that technology.

And then they ask more questions. If they said, ‘So you don't teach kids anymore?’ then I tell them about what I do with teaching young kids, too. My position is really unique because we have, in our district, an AR/VR immersive room, which I run and I create content for when I have downtime. It’s the first of its kind in a K-12 building in the whole country, and it's open for our K-12 students. It’s this room with three big walls with projectors that become interactive to the touch and with surround sound. The floor is also interactive. It's like virtual reality without the goggles.

If I didn’t have that immersive room, I would probably miss being in the classroom, because I went to school to be a teacher. And I like that part, the teaching aspect.

When did the immersive room open in your district? And what are you teaching kids in that setting? What does that look like?

The immersive room was an initiative for the district right after the pandemic. They were brainstorming ideas on how to get kids to come back to school after such a long period of time away.

So far it has accomplished that goal. We’re a rural community. We don't have that much funding, and our kids come from very poor homes and backgrounds. A lot of children have never been to a museum, never been to cool places in the big city. With the immersive room, basically we can recreate any of that.

We can take a field trip to the deepest part of the ocean, for example. I have this one immersive experience that starts on the surface of the ocean and then lowers depending on what part of the ocean you want to visit. If you want to go to the part where the coral reefs are, or if you want to go to the deep part of the ocean where it's dark and no light gets through, you can do that. And then once we are there, in the ocean, the buttons are interactive in the walls and the children take turns touching those buttons, which gives them information about the specific aspect of the ocean. So the kids come and they get to touch the walls and interact and learn that way. And the room also has this four-dimensional aspect. If I want to bring a seashore scent into this experience, I can upload that so they can smell like they're right there in the ocean. And there's also fans that can activate and recreate different wind variance.

So that's what makes the lesson more interactive. We have other lessons to go to the moon, where we play with the gravity of the moon. There's bricks that they pull with their hands, and they fall and it simulates gravity. And then we talk about gravity. ‘What happens if we throw this brick right here on earth? How fast would that go? And look what happens if we throw this brick on the moon and how much slower it goes down.’ Then we’ll learn about the phases of the moon, how the moon interacts with the oceans and how that influences us and our daily lives on earth. This is what makes it really cool for the students.

That sounds incredible. I've never heard of anything like that. And you’re saying you teach all grade levels in the immersive room?

Yes, right now, but the way it works is the teachers schedule time with me and they bring the kids. The teachers are there in the classroom with me also. When they sign up, they give me an idea of what they expect to see in the immersive room. And then when they come, I have the lesson ready and the moment they walk in, boom, they are immersed in the lesson. That's what I like about the system.

What does a hard day look like in your role?

Sometimes, I have to make sure that rostering is OK. That means I have to spend the whole day fixing data and correcting names of students and making sure that everything is properly entered in the system and that students have access to their devices. And I have literally spent days repetitively deleting duplicate students. I guess that would be a hard day, just the monotonous work. I like variety.

What does a really good day look like?

A great day for me is when I get to do a little bit of everything: when I get to see the students, when I get to teach at least one class, when I get to interact with the teachers, helping them brainstorm ideas on how can we include students in this learning process with an app, and when I get to do some purchases too on that day, for some things that the teachers really need.

It just fills my heart when I am able to advocate for them because I tell them, ‘I like to do for you what nobody did for me when I was a teacher.’ Nobody will come and say, ‘What do you need? How are things going?’ I like to do that on a daily basis. If I find myself with the downtime, I don't stay here at my desk. I walk and I go to the other buildings, and it’s like, ‘Oh, Miguel, by the way,’ and then they need me for something. I get to interact with the principal. I get lots of hugs when I go to the lower elementary with the younger kids, like kindergarten to second grade.

So I guess a fulfilling day for me would be when I get to serve all of my clients — and in my job, my clients are students, teachers, admin, and anyone who is walking through this building — and when I get to make their lives better, a little bit lighter.

What is an unexpected way that your role shapes the day for kids?

One way is all the educational apps that they use on a daily basis. If something goes wrong with it, they call me. But if everything is running smoothly, it’s because of the job I do. I guess that's where my job gets taken for granted, when everything is running smoothly, everything is in place. We use tons of different learning apps — from Google Classroom to Clever — and I'm the person responsible for rostering them and then training the teachers.

What do you wish you could change about your school or the education system today?

I wish that the teaching profession would be more respected, that teachers would be able to get all the resources they need and the support that they need. I wish the politicians would put more money where their mouth is. Teachers are underappreciated. I wish that our society would realize that without teachers, there are no other careers. There's no doctors, there's no lawyers, there's no politicians — without teachers.

Also one of the things that I wish we could change is that we expect all students to have the same credits. In Michigan, if you want to graduate high school, you have to have three science credits, four social studies credits, four ELA. Everyone has to have the same. And I think that's seriously wrong because not all kids are the same. Everybody has different needs, everybody has different dreams, everybody has different backgrounds. We should provide students with a variety of choices.

Like OK, imagine this kid who is terrible at reading and he hates social studies, but he's a hands-on kind of kid and he likes to take things apart. Why not provide a path for this kid where he will get to graduate with a high school diploma and with skills on how to do the particular job that the kid wants?

Your role gives you unique access and insight to today's young people. What's one thing you've learned about them through your work?

I’ve learned about how life is a lot simpler in a kid’s mind, and they know the joy of living day to day. When a kid comes and gives you a hug, they really mean it. When they give you a high five, it's because they want to do that. I am touched by the sincerity of the kids and how many times they teach us that life can be fun, life is fun.

Before I became a teacher, I was doing youth ministry and I was recruiting this kid, this young man, and I was like, ‘Hey, I have some fun programs at the church. Come and join us.’ He looked at me and said, ‘What kind of fun? Your kind of fun, or my kind of fun?’ I said, ‘That is an absolutely great question.’

That kid kind of changed my life because when I became a teacher, I always kept that in mind. Still to this day, that echoes in my head: ‘What kind of fun? Is it your kind of fun, or my kind of fun?’ Learning does not have to be boring. It should be fun. And that was my passion, to make learning fun for the students, to the point that they don't realize that they are learning because they're having too much fun.

That's what I like about students. Sometimes they can challenge you, they can ask you questions, and if you listen to them, we can learn a lot from young kids. I have learned a lot from them.

© Bibadash / Shutterstock

Today’s students will enter careers that haven’t even been imagined yet. With AI and automation reshaping entire industries, the skills employers once valued are being overtaken by the need for creativity, adaptability and technological fluency. But how can schools equip students with these essential competencies?

Brian Johnsrud
Director of Education Learning and Advocacy, Adobe

To explore this challenge, EdSurge sat down with Brian Johnsrud, the director of education learning and advocacy at Adobe. He shares insights into how schools can leverage creative tools to equip students with the skills they’ll need to thrive in a world where the only constant is change. Adobe, known for its cutting-edge creative and digital literacy tools, is paving the way for a new approach to education — one that blends technical expertise with the soft skills that will define the workforce of tomorrow.

EdSurge: How can educators prepare students for the future workforce and foster in-demand skills such as creativity and adaptability?

Johnsrud: Educators can stay informed about future workforce trends, including emerging jobs and highly sought-after skills. School leaders are increasingly turning to organizations like the World Economic Forum and analyzing data on the most in-demand skills for the next five years. This allows them to prepare students for future needs, even if the current curriculum doesn't yet demand those skills.

Employers increasingly recognize that, while hiring someone with the exact skills needed for a job today is great, those needs will change in a couple of years. The real question is whether the person is a lifelong learner — someone who can self-learn and adapt when the landscape shifts — and whether they possess the resilience, flexibility and agility to thrive in a world and industry that is constantly evolving.

— Brian Johnsrud

The latest World Economic Forum Jobs Report highlights the top skills that will rise in importance by 2027. Creative thinking leads the list, followed by analytical or critical thinking. The third most important skill is technological literacy, which includes AI and other technologies. Interestingly, the fourth is curiosity and lifelong learning, and the fifth is resilience, flexibility and agility.

What does this shift in skill demands mean for employers and job seekers?

These skills really highlight the skilling revolution we’re facing. Employers increasingly recognize that, while hiring someone with the exact skills needed for a job today is great, those needs will change in a couple of years. The real question is whether the person is a lifelong learner — someone who can self-learn and adapt when the landscape shifts — and whether they possess the resilience, flexibility and agility to thrive in a world and industry that is constantly evolving.

How can creative tools help students develop both technical and soft skills needed for future careers?

One approach is training students on industry-standard tools to familiarize them with what they'll use in the workplace. It’s also important to equip them with professional-quality templates and assets so that the projects they’re creating actually look like professional outputs. Pedagogically, this approach is real-world, authentic, project-based learning. Instead of creating something that only makes sense in a classroom, let’s give them real, authentic projects to work on.

Collaboration is also the future of work, and any creative tool that has built-in collaboration features provides opportunities for students to not just create but to co-create with others, share feedback and exchange ideas.

How can educators choose the right tools to foster creativity in the classroom?

Choose tools that offer both a low floor and a high ceiling, like Adobe Express for Education. This means providing entry points that allow anyone to begin creating, regardless of their starting point. The high ceiling comes into play as you move from Adobe Express all the way to Creative Cloud; you never outgrow our creative tools.

It’s all about giving teachers the tools to teach effectively and students the means to show off their skills to colleges and employers. That’s what makes a creative tool truly valuable in education.

— Johnsrud

Also, addressing creative confidence is essential, as it often poses a significant barrier for students. Many students think, “I’m not creative; I don’t know if I can design something that looks great.” The fear of the blank canvas is real and can be daunting. Teachers can help by providing professional-looking templates that allow students to focus on content rather than starting from scratch.

What makes a tool truly valuable in education?

A tool’s real value in the classroom goes way beyond its features. It’s about having the right content, support and resources to help everyone use it effectively. Take Adobe Express for Education, for example. We’ve loaded it with free lesson plans and resources for teachers, plus a learn tab with videos and guided activities for students to practice on their own. And when it comes to proving what they’ve learned, students can take Adobe Certified Professional exams — we’ve been offering these for 17 years and have issued over 1.8 million certifications.

It’s all about giving teachers the tools to teach effectively and students the means to show off their skills to colleges and employers. That’s what makes a creative tool truly valuable in education.

How does AI factor into creative education?

AI plays a significant role in enhancing this creativity. It can assist in brainstorming and rapid iteration, helping students quickly generate various ideas and alternatives. AI also helps students step back from routine tasks to see the bigger picture.

Traditional education has often taught students to swim in a controlled pool. With AI, we’re teaching them to surf in an ever-changing ocean. It’s not just about repetition and efficiency; it’s about adapting to shifting conditions and engaging in creative thinking. AI acts as a surfboard, enabling students to navigate change and thrive in an unpredictable world.

— Johnsrud

In this sense, traditional education has often taught students to swim in a controlled pool. With AI, we’re teaching them to surf in an ever-changing ocean. It’s not just about repetition and efficiency; it’s about adapting to shifting conditions and engaging in creative thinking. AI acts as a surfboard, enabling students to navigate change and thrive in an unpredictable world.

How is AI changing teaching and learning strategies?

Traditionally, education has focused on teaching students to perform specific tasks. However, as AI increasingly automates many of these tasks, our educational focus needs to shift. I believe the next focus should be on understanding context — knowing which tasks to perform, when to perform them and why.

As task execution becomes easier, grasping the broader context of these tasks will be increasingly valuable. Understanding context is a crucial human skill that is best taught through storytelling and real-world applications.

English language arts and history teachers have long excelled at teaching context by helping students understand the background and culture surrounding texts or historical events. This broader perspective, while not commonly emphasized outside these subjects, is becoming essential across all disciplines.

By mastering storytelling and contextual understanding, students can see the bigger picture in complex situations, understand how individual tasks contribute to larger goals, develop creative solutions to multifaceted problems and adapt more readily to changing circumstances in their future careers.

© Image Credit: ImageFlow / Shutterstock

Encouraging students to complete work outside of class has always been a struggle.

But many college professors say it has gotten even harder in recent years as students prioritize their mental health, have trouble adhering to deadlines and are more skeptical of the purpose of homework.

One cause is the pandemic, and how it disrupted middle and high school for today’s traditional-aged college students. Students who spent formative years learning online may be too nervous to raise a hand in class or have trouble paying attention. With the flexibility that came with pandemic-era school, they’re not used to firm deadlines or strict grading.

Today’s students also report greater mental health struggles, which some experts attribute to excessive social media use.

Then there’s the sudden temptation of ChatGPT and other new AI tools, which can make cheating on assignments easy and often undetectable.

Together, these factors have brewed a “perfect storm” of challenges keeping students from doing homework, says Jenae Cohn, the executive director of the Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of California at Berkeley.

“Maybe 20 years ago or 15 years ago, students were kind of like, ‘Oh, yeah, I'm doing a thing because she told me to do it. I think there's less willingness to just do the thing because somebody told you to do it.”

— Sarah Z. Johnson, a writing instructor and chair of the writing center at Madison Colleg

“It all sort of feels bundled together,” Cohn says. “This is a sequence of events where learning and environments for learning just feel harder and harder to cultivate.”

But complaining about students isn’t the answer, Cohn and other teaching experts say.

Instead, college instructors need to change how they assign and communicate their homework assignments. And they argue that teachers at the college level should now essentially teach the study skills that students might not have learned in school before arriving on campuses.

Teaching The Why

Sarah Z. Johnson, a writing instructor and chair of the writing center at Madison College, has noticed that many of her students have a much lower tolerance for routine assignments, some of which they see as busy work.

She often has to explain to students that her assignments will build the skills for the work they’ll do later in the year. She says that helps convince students that doing the work now will help them later. And if a student doesn’t think an assignment is worth doing, they’re much less likely to do it at all, she says.

“Maybe 20 years ago or 15 years ago, students were kind of like, ‘Oh, yeah, I'm doing a thing because she told me to do it,’” Johnson says. “I think there's less willingness to just do the thing because somebody told you to do it.”

As more students focus on prioritizing their mental health, they’re intentionally choosing not to complete work if it keeps them from taking care of themselves, says Jessie Beckett, the director of Radford University’s learning center, otherwise they won’t feel motivated to get it done. A student may think an assignment isn’t as important, and choose to get more sleep or spend time with friends instead, she says.

While Beckett is glad students are making their health a priority, she adds that they still need to learn to find a balance. Some students don’t understand how important assignments are, Beckett says. If an instructor doesn’t explain the outcomes of a homework task, many students will assume that it’s not as important, she argues, and miss out on learning a skill they’ll need later on.

“They don't necessarily understand what the value of something is, how it translates to a grade, how it translates to their success in that class, how it translates to a skill that will impact their success in future classes or in their major,” Beckett says.

Lily Martens, an undergraduate at Madison College, recalls an assignment in her environmental science class when students were asked to go to a park and take notes about the nature in the area. A few weeks later, the students went back to the same park and noted the difference in the animals and plant life.

That kind of assignment feels more purposeful than completing a worksheet or answering questions from a textbook, she says. “Not only was I learning about what species might be in the local area,” she adds, “but it was also teaching me how to record that and that was really awesome.”

Instructors need to show their students how an assignment will help them grow, says Darren Minarik, an associate professor at Radford University focused on special education and social studies education.

In his classes, Minarik often teaches his students, who are studying to become K-12 educators, to model the purpose of an assignment in class. For instance, they could assign a quiz that allows students to use their homework to see how the skills they’re learning will translate into class objectives.

This will “show that there's a direct connection between the assignment that you're asking to do outside of class and then how they're going to be graded in class,” Minarik says. “So being open about ‘this is why I'm asking you to do it.’”

Many professors don’t go through the same training in how to teach that K-12 classroom teachers get, Minarik says, so they don’t realize how important it is to explain to students the purpose of doing their work. In some cases college instructors assign multiple readings about the same idea, which can feel redundant to students. From the perspective of the faculty expert, it might all be fascinating, Cohn says, but to students it can feel gratuitous.

Cohn encourages instructors to determine what skills they want their students to gain from a class and then review their assignments to consider how each one will help reach those goals. Often, instructors will realize that instead of assigning three long texts, they may only need to give students one key reading, she says.

“I've tried to help faculty think about, ‘What are you gonna have students do with this? Are they gonna need this assignment to be able to solve a problem down the road? Is it essential by the end of the term? Are they going to need to do this reading in order to write something later or conduct research later?’” Cohn says. Faculty need to clearly answer these questions in their syllabi so students will know, “here's what you do with this information and here's why it'll matter to you in your class,” she adds.

Bad Habits

Aside from questioning the purpose of homework, many students also have more difficulty keeping up with deadlines.

In the past, Amanda Flint, a math instructor at Madison College, assigned her students homework that would be due at the end of each week. But many students began waiting until the day it was due, and then they couldn’t get everything done on time, she says.

Students picked up those habits during the pandemic, when teachers tended to be more relaxed about deadlines, allowing students to have extensions or not enforcing them at all, says Beckett. When those students got to college, they assumed they’d be able to finish all of their work late without any consequences.

In many K-12 schools, “students have regular check-ins around how they're doing and opportunities to quickly submit all of the work before that grading period ends, even if that work was assigned or was considered due weeks prior,” Beckett says. While the effort to be more flexible has good intentions, making the switch to stricter rules is challenging for students when they get to college, she adds.

Martens, the Madison student, says the flexibility also makes assignments seem less important, leading students to feel less inclined to do them. Often routine textbook readings aren’t graded, she says, so a student likely won’t prioritize it. Even though she feels like this can put her behind in class, it’s difficult to be motivated to complete an assignment that feels like busy work and won’t impact her grade.

In high school, her teachers often graded students’ notes from the textbook to ensure they were doing the reading, Martens says. Now, her instructors “just give it to you and they're like you should be reading, but they're not checking,” she says. “I miss things I’ve noticed in some classes, especially where it’s hard to cover everything in class.”

The issue seems especially pronounced at community colleges, where instructors may be teaching students who have to work multiple jobs and need to take up an extra shift instead of completing an assignment. Or, as the number of students in dual enrollment programs skyrockets, some instructors, like Flint, find themselves teaching mainly high school students who haven’t experienced a college workload yet.

To encourage better time management, Flint has begun adding multiple deadlines throughout the week. Instead of expecting students to complete all of their work by Friday, she assigns two or three sub-deadlines on smaller pieces of the work to help them get everything done in time.

She also gives each student 100 “late passes” per semester, which averages out to about two per assignment. Each late pass extends the deadline by 24 hours, so a student could hand in an assignment up to two days after the due date, she says. Or, if students save their late passes they could get even longer extensions on certain assignments. Students are then able to choose when during the semester they may need more time without falling too far behind, she says.

“Instead of assuming that the student's gonna do that scheduling on their own,” Flint says, “I turned it into the other direction, which is ‘You've got due dates, but you've got the wiggle room to move it if you need to.’”

Johnson has also noticed that students are more likely these days to simply give up on assignments they find difficult.

In the past, she would assign works by Geoffrey Chaucer in her British literature classes. Now students would likely find his writing too difficult to understand on their own. “I think they figure if they're struggling this much, they must be doing it wrong,” Johnson adds. “So they quit.”

Since K-12 schools are required to follow standardized curriculums, Beckett says students start to think there is only one way to learn something, and if they aren’t good at it, they must not be good at that subject.

As a writing instructor, “I saw a lot of students who would dread coming to a writing class and would put off their work for a writing class readily because they had so much fear or anxiety around being able to do it well,” she says. Those issues aren’t unique to the pandemic or this generation of students, though, Beckett says. “Any student who has had a negative experience around their abilities or confidence in a particular subject is going to be less likely to prioritize that subject,” she adds.

College professors often don’t realize how complicated their assignments can be, Cohn says, or they don’t remember what it was like to first learn the material. Textbooks may use jargon that an expert in the field will understand, but a student new to the topic wouldn’t, she says. She encourages instructors to guide students through a reading by having them answer questions about specific concepts they most need to understand.

Minarik also teaches his students to craft lessons that will demonstrate how to be a good learner.

If a teacher expects students to take copious notes in class, they need to teach their students optimal note-taking practices, he says. They also need to teach how to study, and how to complete homework assignments, he says. They can’t expect students to know any of that right away, he adds.

“If you want an outcome, you need to model how to get to that outcome for your students,” he says.

From the student perspective, Martens says she has a tough time completing assignments when she starts them at home and realizes she didn’t understand what she learned in class as well as she thought. Offering multiple deadlines is helpful, she says — especially with essays — since she can get help on her rough draft and feel more confident about the final one. She also appreciates when a professor leaves time near the end of class for students to start their homework and ask questions if they need help.

The classes Martens is often most engaged in, though, are the ones where she can tell the professor cares deeply about a subject and is engaged with the class, she says. Despite not enjoying English much, when Martens took one of Johnson’s classes, she could tell how excited the professor was to teach the subject, something she says she saw less of in her high school classes after the pandemic.

“All of a sudden I was excited to write essays because Sarah was just like, so excited to talk about writing essays,” Martens says. “That was one of my favorite classes.”

© Tim Gouw, Unsplash

There’s a push among AI developers to create an AI tutor, and some see that as a key use case for tools like ChatGPT. But one longtime edtech expert sees an even better fit for new AI chatbots in education: helping educators design course materials for their students.

So all year Michael Feldstein has been leading a project to build an AI assistant that’s focused on learning design.

After all, these days colleges and other education institutions are hiring a growing number of human instructional designers to help create or improve teaching materials — especially as colleges have developed more online classes and programs. And people in those roles follow a playbook for helping subject-matter experts (the teachers they work with) organize their material into a series of compelling learning activities that will get students the required knowledge and skills on a given subject. Feldstein thinks new AI chatbots might be uniquely suited to guiding instructors through the early stages of that learning-design process.

He calls his system the AI Learning Design Assistant, or ALDA. And for months he has been leading a series of workshops through which more than 70 educators have tried versions of the tool and given feedback. He says he’s built a new version of the system about every month for the past five months incorporating the input he’s received. He argues that if AI could serve as an effective instructional design assistant, it could help colleges significantly reduce the time it takes to create courses.

Feldstein is not completely convinced it will work, though, so he says he has invited plenty of people to test it who are skeptical of the idea.

“The question is, can AI do that?” he says. “Can we create an AI learning design assistant that interviews the human educator, asks the questions and gathers the information that the educator has in their heads about the important elements of the teaching interaction and then generates a first draft?”

EdSurge has been checking in with Feldstein over the past few months as he’s gone through this design process. And he’s shared what has gone well — and where early ideas fell flat. You can hear highlights of those conversations on this week’s EdSurge Podcast.

Even if it turns out that AI isn’t a fit to help build courses, Feldstein says the project is yielding lessons about where generative AI tools can help educators do their jobs better.

Check it out on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or on the player below.

© Nichcha / Shutterstock

The rise of AI promises new solutions to long-standing challenges. It also introduces some challenges of its own. In addition to concerns over privacy, bias and reliability, AI is driving a flood of new products in a broad range of sectors, including education. As options pile up, districts and schools struggle to identify effective solutions amid clever marketing and bold promises.

As a member of the LEARN Network, a federally funded initiative dedicated to supporting the development and scaling of quality educational products and programs, I've collaborated with researchers, developers, practitioners and educational leaders from across the country. Over the years, our team has gained unique insights into why some products succeed, why others fail, and what districts and schools may consider when selecting new tools and programs.

Effective edtech has never — and should never — be designed to replace human relationships with students.

One lesson we’ve learned is that the current wave of AI-powered edtech is not all that different from the products and programs we are used to. Some products show promise; others fall flat. Though options are more plentiful and technology advanced, schools must remain diligent in their selection processes. Based on our work and our conversations with leaders in this space, here are some important questions to ask while searching for an edtech solution in the age of AI.

What Does It Do?

Effective edtech has never — and should never — be designed to replace human relationships with students. In response to the rise of school-based AI programs, policymakers in states like California and Minnesota and organizations like the National Education Association are pushing to ensure that educators remain at the center of education. Quality edtech, whether powered by AI or not, should work to enhance educational effectiveness and efficiency.

One key differentiator decision-makers may consider is between student-facing AI, which students interact with directly, and products and programs designed for practitioners, administrators and other staff. Both uses require unique considerations. For example, for student-facing products, it is essential that developers use guardrails to prevent bias, protect privacy, and ensure reliability. For administrative applications, considerations will likely focus more on whether the edtech increases efficiency while leveraging the expertise of humans.

Does It Have a Solid Evidence Base?

The most critical factor in selecting edtech is its evidence base. Is there research to back its claims? If so, how reliable is that research? As we’ve found in our work, these can be difficult questions to answer.

Edtech only works if it can be implemented effectively. Products can fail if they are too cumbersome, don't fit into staff workflows or don't align with existing programs.

The Every Student Succeeds Act’s (ESSA) tiers of evidence can provide a useful framework for evaluating edtech, describing the varying degrees of research that can underlie a product. Simply meeting an ESSA tier of evidence, however, does not guarantee effectiveness. Products or programs that meet ESSA’s lowest tier, for example, may only be based on evidence-backed strategies or practices. The products themselves may never have been tested. Researchers Mary Bratsch-Hines and Heather Aiken, leaders behind the TRI-Reading App, expanded on the importance of comprehensive evaluation in a recent episode of The SRI Homeroom podcast.

“Sometimes people can claim that they are following the science of reading purely because they are covering the five elements from the National Reading Panel… But how they packaged it together, we don’t necessarily know that the program as a whole will work.” — Mary Bratsch-Hines, Senior Manager for Research and Evaluation at the University of Florida Lastinger Center for Learning.

Edtech that meets ESSA’s highest tiers of evidence, Tiers 1 and 2, have been more rigorously evaluated, with findings cited in repositories like the What Works Clearinghouse.

However, a lack of evidence does not necessarily mean a product is ineffective. Some edtech, particularly in the age of AI, may be too new to boast an extensive research base. In these instances, products should at least present a compelling case and meet a priority need.

Schools may also consider compiling their own body of evidence. Examine developer briefs, speak with peers in similar contexts and, if you decide to move forward, conduct a pilot to generate real, localized evidence. H. Alix Gallagher, director of strategic partnerships for Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE), recently wrote about the piloting process for the LEARN Network blog.

Does It Really Meet Your Needs?

While evidence is crucial, it’s not the only factor that can influence the success or failure of a new product or program. Schools and districts should also carefully consider their goals. Is there a specific challenge you are attempting to address or a set of outcomes you hope to improve? Take some time to investigate your needs, speak with team members and ensure you fully understand the scope of your challenges and their root causes.

Some products claim to offer broad, generalized benefits and improvements for schools, faculty and students. In our conversations with educational leaders, however, we've found that teachers are often unlikely to adopt solutions to problems if they don't perceive them as significant. Ensuring that the technology addresses a recognized need is critical for successful implementation.

Does It Fit Your School Context?

Edtech should be designed to meet the needs of all students, fostering growth and equity through education. When products or programs aren't relevant or accessible to members of the communities they serve, they can inadvertently cause harm.

Edtech only works if it can be implemented effectively. Products can fail if they are too cumbersome, don't fit into staff workflows or don't align with existing programs. Examine your current systems, staff capabilities and capacity to determine if a product is a proper fit.

For example, the developers of A2i, an impactful, broadly scaled tool designed to improve literacy outcomes for young students, partly attributed its success to its integration with various learning management systems. Implementation can suffer when a product requires a radical departure from established processes, duties or expectations.

Districts and schools may also consider the unique needs of their community. Are there any structural, cultural or environmental factors that might limit some members’ access to a new product or limit its effectiveness for the community as a whole? Ensuring that the product fits your specific environment is crucial for its success.

How Was the Product Developed?

Effective edtech often results from extensive discussions, collaborations, revisions and iterations involving a diverse range of stakeholders. At the LEARN Network, we encourage researchers and developers to involve school and district leaders, educators and community members in the design phase of their work. Products that lack sufficient input can struggle with unforeseen challenges upon implementation.

In our recent webinar focused on rural schools and communities, a panel of researchers, practitioners and educational leaders cautioned against “drive-through approaches” to product design, encouraging developers to employ a more inclusive, community-focused approach to development.

Does It Prioritize Equity?

Edtech should be designed to meet the needs of all students, fostering growth and equity through education. When products or programs aren't relevant or accessible to members of the communities they serve, they can inadvertently cause harm.

The rise of AI-powered edtech offers districts and schools a unique opportunity to seek out new tools and programs that are accessible, equitable, and responsive to the needs of diverse learners. In a recent LEARN Network blog, we spoke with leading voices from the Strategic Education Research Partnership (SERP) Institute and SRI about this opportunity and some potential paths forward.

Free LEARN Network resources for researchers, developers and educators:

• The LEARN to Scale Toolkit: a comprehensive resource for researchers and developers based on the Invent-Apply-Transition framework
• Stories of Scaling: a profile series highlighting impactful researchers, entrepreneurs and evidence-based products
• The LEARN Network Blog: articles, podcasts and Q&As featuring experts and thought leaders from across the U.S.
• LEARN Network Research: action-oriented research briefs focused on product development, procurement and more

An effective method for centering equity in the edtech search process is by elevating student voice. Students are self-aware, highly technologically competent and carry unique experiences and perspectives on learning. By involving students in their piloting and procurement processes, districts and schools can help ensure they’re adopting technology that will serve all members of their community.

Decision makers can also prioritize student voice in their edtech search, considering products that have been designed and developed in collaboration with students. LEARN Network researcher Ela Joshi expanded on the value of student voice in this recent podcast.

Artificial intelligence has the potential to power effective new tools and approaches, reducing burdens on schools, fostering equity and inclusion, and helping students overcome long-standing barriers. As we’re seeing in other sectors, however, the letters “AI” are not always indicative of quality.

In their search for the next generation of edtech solutions, we must all avoid flash and continue focusing on fundamentals. By prioritizing evidence, understanding specific needs, ensuring contextual fit, examining how products are developed, emphasizing equity and including diverse voices in the search and selection processes, educational leaders can navigate the complexities of AI-powered edtech and find products that truly lead to better outcomes.

---

The information reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305N220012 to SRI International. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

© Image Credit: Family Stock / Shutterstock

Each fall, every teacher must wage a few key wars with a new class of students. In my classroom, one battle is around bathroom usage. Another is assigned seats. A third is side conversations—especially during our first few weeks of class community building. Increasingly, though, the biggest fight that never seems to end is around phone usage.
This year, the Pew Research Center reported that 9 in 10 American adults own a smartphone. While most of us can recall what life was like before our national smartphone addiction, most of today’s adolescents are too young to remember such a time; however, smartphone ownership among 13 to 17-year-olds almost mirrors adults. Furthermore, smartphone use among teenagers has been a growing obstacle to learning.

My colleague and I teach the same group of 11th grade students in our Title I high school in Oakland; she teaches history, and I teach them science. Given the size of this group, we are able to build strong relationships with these 60 students during our 40 weeks together.
Early in the year, we noticed most students were extremely attached to their phones. So, about halfway through last year, we decided to investigate how much screen time our students consumed. While not unexpected, the results of our investigation baffled us. Kids were reading off figures like “8 hours and 43 minutes daily” with no shame. The highest across the group? Just under 12 hours per day. The lowest? An admirable 2 hours and 50 minutes. Weekly? The vast majority totaled over 40 hours — more than an entire workweek spent staring at a screen.

As teachers, this is not only exhausting but demoralizing. While 77% of public schools have some type of cellphone regulation during classroom time, our high school does not. This is an extremely controversial issue at my school site and in other schools across the country. As school safety concerns rise with campus shootings, parents are also worried about not being able to contact their children. However, while this is a valid concern for many parents, teachers are also battling signs of poor mental health, decreased engagement and overall general lack of socialization with peers in our students.

As a teacher standing in front of an audience who simply cannot put their phones down, the diminishing attention span of my students takes a toll. When I talk to other staff at my school, the majority of people want a phone usage policy across the school. Many academic cohorts in my school have their own policies with varying degrees of success, but some teachers are adamant about policy implementation. Teachers who don’t want policies often cite lack of support as a major reason; this could be due to unresponsive or unsupportive administration, lack of clear consequences on a school-wide basis or lack of consistency across classrooms.

Each of these factors leads to teachers having to fight the same battles every day. Not only does it take away from our overall teaching time, but it impacts our relationships with students—the only thing keeping many of us in the classroom in one of the lowest-paying but most difficult-to-teach districts in the Bay Area.

Even if you uphold clear structures in your classroom, they must be retaught each day because your students enter seven different spaces throughout the day with varying policies and expectations before you see them again. Without a school-wide policy, it’s not only confusing for students but there’s no real buy-in without a chain of consequences that reaches outside one specific classroom.

Shifted Landscape

In my experience as a teacher, the classroom landscape was distinctly different before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the notorious Zoom Year, phones were a minor issue; students were generally receptive to being redirected and there was an overall culture of understanding of how to act in a classroom. Often, when students were finished with their work or needed a break, they’d chat with me about their weekends, telling me about events in their lives such as a morning spent fishing with their dad or their little sister’s upcoming quinceañera. Sometimes, they’d pull out a book or talk to their classmates. These moments were priceless to me as their teacher, and these small check-ins made going to work a joy.

Now, the entire landscape has shifted. I’ve noticed that students generally lack the mental fortitude and self-regulation to put their phones down. Each day, I battle against social media, online gambling, sports games, texting friends and everything else that the internet provides, and for the most part, it’s me versus my group of 28 students. Most of them seem to understand that it’s an expectation I have in my classroom, but the same general understanding of smartphone etiquette is no longer ingrained in the school culture or this generation of students.

Instead, kids see phone usage as a non-issue; it’s simply something that everyone does. This creates a barrier between my students and me and highlights so many factors that are pushing teachers out of the field, such as increased workload and mental health. Additionally, because of the controversy around smartphones, we feel unappreciated and invalidated in our efforts to encourage kids to engage in our classrooms and create a positive learning community.

Managing Expectations

Because of the combined inconsistency in school policy and significant overuse of smartphones among my students, navigating this issue has made my teaching experience incredibly difficult — especially since I often go hours on campus without interacting with another adult. When an issue plagues the way you teach and has become an accepted norm among students, it can be hard to continue pouring energy into the effort when you feel alone in a losing battle.

Though there is clear progress in policy around smartphone regulation in states like California, there is not yet clarity on how these policies will look in schools with varying access to resources. Current political movements, like All4Ed, raise questions about funding provided to Title I schools to uphold such policies.

As I settle into this school year, I’m hopeful that my school will make some progress in developing a sound, consistent policy that applies to every classroom. However, as our budget has been cut significantly, further reducing resources and staff available to address phone use in classrooms and around the school, I’ve adjusted my expectations in hopes of future movement on this issue.

Yet again, teachers are tasked with solving society’s issues without resources or support. Smartphone use is an issue that needs to be addressed sooner than later in schools so that this generation of kids can build and focus on the skills they need to succeed in the world.

© Drazen Zigic / Shutterstock

The need was becoming dire.

A school district in Brighton, in the Denver metro area of Colorado, was having a hard time keeping teachers. The salaries in the district, 27J Schools, were low for the region. And in Colorado, voters have to approve higher property taxes to send additional dollars to schools, including for salary bumps, but by 2018 voters had refused six straight times.

So, strapped for cash, the district decided to switch to a four-day school week.

Chris Fiedler, then the superintendent of 27J Schools, had previously worked in a rural district on a shortened schedule, and he hoped it would help attract teachers in the absence of better pay. Frustrated and eager for solutions, everyone seemed ready to try a new approach, Fiedler says.

“You just get tired of being kind of the minor league team in the Denver metro area, in terms of teacher and adult talent, working with kids — and not just teachers, but administrators as well. So how do you find a way to encourage them to stay and encourage them to join you in the first place?” he says.

In his eyes, the experiment was a success. The district now punches above its weight in teacher retention and the policy has proven consistently popular with students and teachers in the years since it was introduced, he argues.

Fiedler isn’t solitary in his enthusiasm for this model of schooling, and the four-day school week has, in some ways, taken off. When many schools are suffering staffing shortages and tight budgets, districts like 27J Schools have turned to shorter school weeks to attract and retain teachers. As many as 900 districts have embraced these abridged weeks, according to a 2023 estimate from the Associated Press. (There are about 13,000 districts in the country.) Colorado, where 27J is located, has proven a particularly fertile ground for four-day school weeks, and more districts in the state have moved to a four-day school week than any other state except Missouri, according to one estimate.

But though educators like Fiedler trumpet these shortened weeks, others worry that they do little to attract teachers — and may even harm students and voters.

‘Slightly Negative’

Interest in four-day weeks usually stems from the need to recruit or retain teachers in the absence of funding. Supporters also value it for giving students and teachers time that enables a better school-life balance. But the evidence paints an ambiguous to slightly negative picture, according to researchers like Van Schoales, senior policy director for the nonprofit Keystone Policy Center, which published a recent report on the four-day school week in Colorado. In fact, the data from the state doesn’t give supporters or detractors a clear victory, according to the report.

Schoales says he became interested in four-day weeks after noting that his colleagues from within Colorado were talking about it more post-pandemic. While there was some national research, there wasn’t much within the state yet, he says.

Some national studies link four-day school weeks to slumping academic performance for students. For instance, one analysis from the Annenberg Institute found that the available data shows a “relatively small, negative average” in standardized test scores for reading and math in districts that adopt four-day policies. The Annenberg analysis also noted that the negative effects of four-day weeks are disproportionately larger in non-rural schools and may compound over time.

Still, the Colorado Department of Education was “rubber-stamping” all of the proposals from districts looking to change over to a four-day school week, even though some superintendents and school board members were “quietly raising concerns,” Schoales says.

What did the Keystone researchers learn? Universally, superintendents report that they are motivated to try this because they don't have enough money to pay teachers, Schoales says. But even if some districts were bullish on the policy, the Keystone study found that truncated school weeks were not effective for keeping teachers. It may have worked for some districts, Schoales says, but overall the districts that adopted these policies had higher turnover rates.

Previous studies show the effect of this policy ranges from neutral to negative on students, with most national studies showing it has a small but negative impact on learning, he says. If true, the differences could stack up over time academically, and many of the districts adopting these policies, at least within Colorado, are far from reaching state standards already, he adds.

So, he asks, why not figure out how to solve the pay issue rather than cut days of instruction?

What Are Students Doing?

Plus, there’s another possible problem. How are students spending that fifth day, if not in school?

By one estimate, more than 60 percent of districts in Colorado have a four-day schedule, though these tend to be small and rural districts, meaning they only account for around 14 percent of the state’s students. But four-day school weeks are spreading to larger and more urban areas. It’s not clear how well-attended after-school programs are in these regions, Schoales says, adding that it was difficult to perform a thorough analysis on attendance because these programs are being run outside of the district. But, he says, at least one person they interviewed for the report suggested they were having a hard time engaging lower-income families on the fifth day.

When asked, Schoales identified Brighton, which has more than 22,000 students and is comparatively large and urban, as the place with some of the most robust outside-of-school programming.

So what does it look like there?

Since adopting the four-day week, there are no classes on Mondays in the district, and the remaining days were lengthened to avoid lost instruction time. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t students at school even on Mondays, Fiedler, the former superintendent of 27J Schools, says: Extracurriculars such as athletics, students council meetings and choir practices still happen on Mondays. City and community programs including the Boys & Girls Club also pitched in when the district made the switch, beefing up staff to make programs more available on those days, he adds. An orchestra program started up as well.

But after the first year, the city stepped back from its expanded programs, in part because they were not being used, Fiedler says.

The district also expanded a preexisting program — where parents pay a fee for day care — to cover Mondays, he says. Initially, around 1,000 parents expressed interest in the program. But when it actually started, there were more like 300 to 400 students enrolled, he says. Fiedler suspects that many families who had expressed interest in the program didn’t end up using it because they figured out ways to “share caregiver duties” — relying on neighborhood members, or older siblings or family members to step in and watch younger students on Mondays.

Because of the lower-than-expected interest, the district had to pivot from its plan to run these care programs in all elementary schools, instead running them in regional "centers" around the city.

‘The Second-Best Option’

When compared to other methods of attracting teachers, policy analysts recommend districts weigh their options for shortened school weeks carefully.

Some have suggested the practice may even be counterproductive for taxpayers reluctant to increase school budgets. For instance, voters in Brighton had shot down additional funding for schools repeatedly. But by denying the school district enough funding to adequately compensate teachers, voters ended up lowering their own property values, says Frank James Perrone, an associate professor at Indiana University Bloomington’s School of Education. That’s because the district felt backed into a corner, as if it really didn't have a choice but to embrace four-day school weeks, he says. An analysis, coauthored by Perrone, found that the four-day school week policy actually lowered property values there by 2 to 4 percent, purportedly showing that homebuyers preferred to avoid the area.

But 27J Schools, the Brighton school district, is one of the largest districts in Colorado to adopt a four-day week. And Fiedler, the superintendent of the district who retired this year, isn’t swayed by the arguments against the four-day school week.

The district lost staff the first year it moved over to the four-day schedule. But in the years since, Fiedler says, it hasn’t had the turnover rate one would expect for one of the lowest-paying districts in the area. Data that Fiedler sent to EdSurge suggests that 27J had a 13.61 percent turnover rate in 2023 to 2024 with a $52,002 base teacher salary. That puts it in the lower third for teacher turnover in the area, despite offering the sixth-lowest base salary.

Plus, Fiedler adds, the graduation rates have lifted, including for disadvantaged students. Data from Fiedler shows a steady incline in graduation rates for the district between 2017 and 2022. That increase may not be because of the shortened weeks specifically, but he says that it happened at the same time, meaning that the policy didn’t prevent the district from improving academically.

Twice per month, the district also uses those free Mondays for teacher training, which has been good for morale, he adds.

But even if he isn’t convinced shortened weeks are a bad policy, Fiedler seems to agree that it’s not the ideal situation.

And he rejects the notion that four-day weeks save substantial money. It saved the district around $800,000 or so during the first year, Fiedler estimates, mostly in transportation costs but also in salaries for food service and electricity. In his view, that's such a small amount when compared to the overall budget that it's "not worth the heartache."

The “mill levy” override — that would provide additional money to boost teacher salaries — finally passed for 27J Schools in 2022. They still offer salaries at the lower end of the range, and the district likely won’t transition back. “Nobody called my office and said, ‘Now that you have money, you have to go back to a five-day school week,’” Fiedler says.

Even so, he says it feels “like the second-best option.” If the district had been able to find enough money to pay teachers what they are worth, it would have never tried the four-day school week, he says: “But absent that, you've got to try something new and different to be competitive.”

Now, when other districts ask about four-day school weeks, he tells them that he doesn’t want them to change over, because he doesn’t want the district to lose its “competitive edge.”

© Photo By wavebreakmedia/ Shutterstock

One of the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic was that many families didn’t have reliable internet access at home. As schools closed and classes moved online, educators rushed to improvise solutions for families without robust connections, setting up mobile Wi-Fi access points in school buses, sending home portable hot spots to those who needed it and more.

And even before the pandemic, educators were working to close the “homework gap,” the divide between students who can easily log on at home to access critical school materials and those who lack reliable home internet.

Now that schools are back open and pandemic relief funds are expiring, there’s a risk this gap will quickly widen unless policymakers take a fresh look at the nation’s connectivity. And it’s one that disproportionately affects students of color and those in underserved communities.

That’s the argument made by Nicol Turner Lee, director of the Brookings Institution’s Center for Technology Innovation, in her new book, “Digitally Invisible: How the Internet Is Creating the New Underclass.”

“The truth is that most of these programs created during the pandemic relied on philanthropic and private sector support and continue to do so,” she writes of efforts to make sure students have online access for schoolwork. She calls for new federal legislation to “make these programs less vulnerable to political changes.”

The largest federal program offering support for school districts and libraries for internet connections, the E-rate, was created nearly 30 years ago. Back then much of today’s crucial technology for living and learning had not yet been invented — including smartphones, social media and AI chatbots. “It's been too long that we've kept these same policies in place,” Turner Lee told EdSurge. “We need ways we can guarantee support to schools for the type of infrastructure they need.”

EdSurge connected with Turner Lee for this week’s EdSurge Podcast. The sociologist shared her experiences traveling around the country — to stops including Marion, Alabama, West Phoenix, Arizona, and Hartford, Connecticut — asking people to share how they get connected and the challenges to digital access they face.

Check it out on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or on the player below.

© Darko 1981 / Shutterstock

“Don’t do that.”

Those were the words out of Dr. Richard DuFour’s mouth more than a decade ago as I was excitedly and passionately explaining how my district was going about our work.

DuFour and Dr. Robert Eaker are the two co-founders of the Professional Learning Communities (PLC) at Work movement. Needless to say, I was taken aback, disappointed and a bit hurt.

And yet, he was right.

Approaching Professional Learning Communities — In Theory

What I shared with DuFour was our plan to implement the four critical questions of a PLC, as detailed by Solution Tree, systematically throughout the district.

Year One: What do we want students to know and be able to do?

We weren’t getting to action fast enough. We were taking too much time planning — too much time in the realm of theory instead of practice and too much time not directly impacting student learning through implementing all four critical questions of a professional learning community.

We had forms and processes to ensure that, over the course of the year, every teacher identified eight to 10 essentials per course, per semester. This meant teams would also have to come to a common understanding of what those essentials meant, when they would be taught and what resources they would be using to teach them.

Year Two: How will we know when they know or can do it?

We dubbed our summer training “PLC Q2 Boot Camp,” and the focus for the year was to develop high-quality end-of-unit or formative common assessments. Length didn’t matter, nor did assessment type. Student results on any of those assessments didn’t matter either. The emphasis was on simply creating assessments where the targets and evidence matched each other.

Then, after two years of work, we finally arrived at Critical Questions 3 and 4: “What will we do when students don’t know or can’t do it?” and “What will we do when students do know it or can do it?” Two full years later, with hours and hours of training and team meetings, the district began helping teams adjust their instructional practices.

DuFour quickly identified the problem with our plan: We weren’t getting to action fast enough. We were taking too much time planning — too much time in the realm of theory instead of practice and too much time not directly impacting student learning through implementing all four critical questions of a professional learning community.

While ultimately, the work we did led to significant improvements in student learning — five of seven school buildings were identified as Model PLC at Work schools — the results could have come faster, positively influencing even more students. The process would likely have gained momentum more quickly than what we experienced.

Moving Quickly to Action in a Professional Learning Community

What was DuFour’s alternative? Recurring cycles of inquiry and action research.

This means that educators should work on all four critical questions within the span of a single unit and that this cycle should repeat itself four or five times during the course of a single year.

As a fun example, in one district I was working with recently, the team was hesitant to jump into the work. You may be familiar with some of the common refrains: “Everything we teach is essential for students to know” and “We are dumbing down the curriculum if we eliminate content for students” were just a couple.

Despite their hesitation, they agreed to clarify what students truly needed to learn in their next unit, what was important for students to learn in that same unit, and what was nice to know in that upcoming unit.

To be clear, we focused only on the next unit and not an entire year’s study. The standard they were focused on had to do with students evaluating the impact of the people, places, events and symbols of the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Russians, etc. As you can imagine, there was no shortage of content embedded in that one standard, and as we all subconsciously know and unfortunately don’t frequently acknowledge out loud, there was — and often is in any single unit — far too much content for students to master everything. So we started with one civilization and tried to narrow down the specific people, places, events, and symbols that students needed to learn, those that were important to teach, and those that were nice to know.

What's taught versus what's learned: The most important differences

The result was a chart like below. It was, of course, filled in with the content the teachers would teach. The difference between this practice and past practices, however, was that the need row was what the team was committing to ensuring that students learn. Everything else was not considered essential and, therefore, would be taught but not guaranteed. In other words, a chart like this distinguishes the difference between what was going to be taught and what was going to be learned.

---

---

Turning a Professional Learning Community Around to Try Again

Need help turning your professional learning community efforts around? Check out these resources to learn more about repairing or improving your PLC:

• PLC-Focused Learning Path
• Don’t Stop at PLC Lite
• Repairing the Process: How to Fix a Dysfunctional PLC
• 4 Reasons Why PLCs Fail

Just six weeks later, I returned to work with the team. The results of that one activity from September? A reduction in the failure rate on their end-of-unit exam from a typical 15 to 20 students to just two. Quite frankly, all they did was clarify the targets students needed to learn. From there, they created some graphic organizers to help kids with that content.

The team stated that not only did fewer kids fail, but the understanding of the need-to-know targets was much greater than before. As a bonus, students were actually interested in the important and nice content and made more connections to the need-to-know content than in previous years. It was a total transformation in only a handful of weeks, not years.

Lesson Learned: Getting Better at the Four Questions

DuFour was right, of course. Spending years getting ready to improve our practice without doing something about our work right now doesn’t work. For one, it’s a disservice to our students today. For another, it doesn’t generate momentum. If you’re considering the four critical questions regarding yearlong processes, take DuFour’s advice: “Don’t do that.”

Instead, ensure quick improvement cycles because it only takes a few weeks to see dramatic results and generate momentum for improvement. Move quickly to action.

Get started — and then get better.

© Image Credit: Gorodenkoff / Shutterstock

For many years, educators have envisioned personalized learning as a way to tailor education to each student's unique needs. With advances in artificial intelligence, this vision is becoming a reality. AI has the potential to transform classrooms by offering personalized learning experiences that align with individual strengths, interests and learning needs.

At the same time, there is a growing emphasis on fostering creativity and authenticity in student work. AI can play a pivotal role in supporting the creative process, from generating ideas to refining projects. By making the creative process more explicit and accessible, AI empowers students to overcome obstacles and express their unique perspectives. This approach not only boosts engagement but also prepares students for a future where creative thinking and problem-solving are indispensable skills.

Brian Johnsrud
Director of Education Learning and Advocacy, Adobe

Recently, EdSurge spoke with Brian Johnsrud, the director of education learning and advocacy at Adobe, about using educational tools that not only harness the power of AI but also uphold the creative integrity of students and teachers. He highlights how AI can help personalize learning by allowing students to present their understanding and ideas in diverse and individualized ways. This shift from standardized assignments to personalized projects can make learning more engaging and relevant for each student.

EdSurge: How can educators safely and responsibly leverage AI for more personalized learning?

Johnsrud: The dream of learning personalization has been around for decades. The first phase really focused on getting the right content to the right student at the right time. Now, with AI, we're in the second phase, which isn't just about personalizing content but also about how students present their understanding and share their knowledge. Because a hallmark of creativity is uniqueness. So if we want students to be doing creative thinking, then 30 assignments done by 30 different students should all look different.

As for deploying AI safely and responsibly, schools are paying attention to a number of things right now. The first step is to check if the AI tool is actually designed for education specifically. If it wasn't made for the classroom, it probably wasn't made to improve learning. It won’t necessarily have those pedagogical pieces baked in or the accessibility and other edtech integrations that you need.

Check if the AI tool is actually designed for education specifically. If it wasn't made for the classroom, it probably wasn't made to improve learning. It won’t necessarily have those pedagogical pieces baked in or the accessibility and other edtech integrations that you need.

— Brian Johnsrud

Part of being designed for safety and responsibility includes ensuring that the tools don't train their models on student or teacher projects because the creative work you develop as a teacher or student in the classroom should be respected and protected. If you're using a tool that benefits or takes inspiration from your creative masterpiece, it's not truly aligned with core creative values and academic integrity.

In what ways does AI help foster creativity while ensuring that student work remains authentic?

AI can support any part of the creative process. If a student is stuck in brainstorming, AI can help generate multiple ideas. If another student is good at brainstorming but needs help refining their work, AI can act as a thought partner, providing critique. This is what's exciting about AI designed for creativity! It makes the steps of the creative process explicit and helps students overcome obstacles. It removes that fear of the blank canvas.

I hope AI helps shift the focus from teachers being the content creators to students taking on that role. As an example inspired by my time as a social studies teacher, instead of asking students to write a paragraph about continuity and change in a historical era, you could have them choose an era, pick a topic that shows continuity, and design an imaginary propaganda poster from that period. The benefits of this creative assignment are clear to every educator. But with rigid standards and a packed curriculum, it's challenging to dedicate two weeks to it. The good news is, with AI, you could complete this assignment in just 30 minutes during class.

Interestingly, we crave authenticity more than ever in the age of AI. AI tools are moving beyond the basic prompt-and-result, “grab and go” approach. They're becoming integrated into our creative workflows, allowing us to bring our best ideas to life and express ourselves more genuinely. The goal isn't for AI to do the work for us but to help us create more authentic, meaningful content so we can be impactful storytellers. As a teacher, you should be able to see each student's unique voice in the work they produce.

The goal isn't for AI to do the work for us but to help us create more authentic, meaningful content so we can be impactful storytellers.

— Johnsrud

How do AI literacy and creative thinking equip students for future job market demands?

In just a few years, AI skills have become essential. The 2024 Work Trend Index Report found that 66 percent of industry leaders wouldn't hire someone without AI skills. It's amazing how quickly this has become a hiring dealbreaker. In that same report, 71 percent of leaders said they're more likely to hire a less experienced candidate with AI skills than a more experienced candidate without them. For students, this means having AI skills can level the playing field with more seasoned professionals.

At the same time, creativity and creative thinking are also in high demand. The World Economic Forum's 2023 Future of Jobs Report highlighted creative thinking as a top skill for the future. The creator economy is booming, with 200,000 new creative jobs created in the United States in 2023 alone. Students who can combine AI skills with creative problem-solving are able to seize some pretty incredible opportunities.

Research has shown that the more students are able to create, the more they thrive. And AI opens up more opportunities for student creation. A 2019 Gallup report found that educators who focus on creativity and use technology in transformative ways see significant gains — students are more engaged, demonstrate better critical thinking, retain more, make connections between subjects and achieve deeper learning. For educators, seeing students excited and proud of their work is incredibly rewarding, especially in a time of increased teacher burnout.

How can educators easily incorporate creative thinking into their lessons?

Start by identifying areas in your curriculum where students need to dive deep into a concept or fully demonstrate their understanding. These are the moments where creative activities can replace traditional methods like note-taking or multiple-choice questions and garner a much wider and deeper set of learning outcomes.

© Image Credit: Billion Photos / Shutterstock