As longtime supporters and users of Floop in our own classrooms, we’ve witnessed firsthand the transformative power it has on facilitating authentic learning that students can be proud of. We’re excited to move Floop forward into its next chapter, and are committed to expanding its impact and making it even more accessible to educators around the world.

Floop allows us to foster a culture of continuous improvement in our classrooms. We aim to build on this foundation, incorporating new features, resources, and best practices to help educators empower their students to become active learners and reflective thinkers.

We are dedicated to preserving Floop’s core values while innovating to meet the evolving needs of teachers and students alike. Floop will continue to be a free platform where educators can inspire, nurture, and guide their students towards excellence.

What is it?

From research papers to multimedia projects, Floop makes the feedback process easy and purposeful.

With their peers, Floop’s system allows students to not only receive valuable insights but also get to appreciate the quality work their peers are doing. It’s a win-win that enhances feedback literacy and fosters a collaborative learning environment.

For teachers, Floop offers an array of tools like comment banks and multiple feedback formats (typed, drawn, audio) to make the guidance process smooth. And don’t overlook the “growth portfolios” — a straightforward way to track and celebrate student progress.

For reflection, self-assessment is also a breeze with Floop’s custom prompts and structured guidance.

It’s designed for ease-of-use: whether you’re using an LMS or not, getting started is simple and quick. (It’s also free!) Floop aims to support well-rounded learning experiences, mastery, and social-emotional growth. It’s not just another educational tool; it’s a pathway to a more engaging and effective classroom.

Why HRP x Floop?

I’ve (Chris) extensively used Floop in our social studies and digital design courses and can attest to its efficacy as a learning tool.

Floop stands out for its intentional support of ungrading or going “gradeless.” It allows for alternative forms of assessment, such as emojis and symbols, making it a practical solution for those who wish to implement the ungrading philosophy espoused by HRP. We firmly believe that transitioning to a feedback-forward model ensures more learning, as students are continually improving and submitting their best possible assignments. It’s not “one and done”, but meaningful and iterative. It also allows us to differentiate objectives to students of different skill levels — pushing students who excel at certain assignments to go further, while ensuring no one is foundationally left behind.

Moreover, the platform excels in facilitating peer review sessions. I still remember how much students were genuinely engaged, navigating through their peers’ assignments at their own pace, offering feedback, and taking pride in the collaborative projects we undertook.

What’s next?

HRP is extremely excited to begin reaching out to new teachers to show off Floop, integrate Floop in our ongoing partnerships with schools, and expand Floop’s capabilities. We are exploring many ways to support the project with new activities, features, and capabilities on the way. Most importantly, the existing features of Floop will remain free. Be on the lookout for upcoming announcements.

In the meantime, sign-up and try out the platform! Unlimited classes and students can be added to the free plan which includes everything listed above, with extra features unlocked at the paid tier ($120/year/teacher).

Human Restoration Project Acquires Floop Edu was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

In the 1960s, educator and founder of critical pedagogy, Paulo Freire, established an inventive literacy program for the marginalized working class of Brazil. His “cultural circles” were unique as they weren’t solely spaces to learn how to read and write but spaces of political awareness and democratic thinking. Freire resented the idea that knowledge transmission — rote facts and skills — was the sole means of education, but acknowledged that literacy was paramount to fighting for a better future. As he wrote in Pedagogy of the Oppressed,

True generosity consists precisely in fighting to destroy the causes which nourish false charity. False charity constrains the fearful and subdued, the “rejects of life,” to extend their trembling hands. True generosity lies in striving so that these hands — whether of individuals or entire peoples — need be extended less and less in supplication, so that more and more they become human hands which work and, working, transform the world.

Literacy is one of the most important skills to navigate the world. We don’t want students to simply be literate enough to make ends meet, but understand the context, perspectives, and critical dialogues that are shaping society around them. A critical consciousness (conscientização) is paramount. Without it, our world faces an immense threat of easily propagandized people who are subjected to the latest exploitative market trends and nefarious political opportunists.

Over the past decades, Freire’s critical literacy has expanded to a critical digital media literacy. Just as fundamental as reading and writing, using and browsing the Internet is a central part of our society. Everyday, people are accessing biased news reports, YouTube videos, memes, advertisements, and more which shape their worldview. There’s, of course, nothing wrong with any of this media having a perspective, but young people need the skills to recognize these perspectives, have nuanced opinions, and know how to spot misinformation and propaganda.

ChatGPT (and other large language learning models, often broadly referred to as “AI”) is now a ubiquitous topic across education workshops and conferences. From fears of the end of education as we know it, to adopting policies to quickly supplant or ban it, to finding easy ways to lesson plan — a pedagogy-for-AI has been interpreted in myriad ways. We must recognize like any other literacy that AI is a skill students must know how to use, while taking a critical lens to the implications of AI on our classroom and the world more broadly. As Dr. Meredith Broussard, data journalist and author of More Than a Glitch: Confronting Race, Gender, and Ability Bias in Tech writes,

Tech is racist and sexist and ableist because the world is so. Computers just reflect the existing reality and suggest that things will stay the same — they predict the status quo. By adopting a more critical view of technology, and by being choosier about the tech we allow into our lives and our society, we can employ technology to stop reproducing the world as it is, and get us closer to a world that is truly more just.

Artificial Intelligence & Large Language Models

Before we outline our suggestions for AI in the classroom, we want to preface what large language models (henceforth referred to as “ChatGPT”, as it’s the primary tool driving AI conversations) and image generation software actually do.

First off, ChatGPT and image generators are examples of narrow AI. They only understand how to do one specific task. They are not sentient machines, they do not understand what they’re doing — they are complex computational statistics that predict best answers. They are extremely far away from WALL-E or HAL 9000.

Wolfram Alpha has produced an in-depth analysis of how ChatGPT functions. Models are trained (sourced) from hundreds of thousands of data points (e.g. Wikipedia, digital archives, Reddit) which are cross-referenced to determine a best probable answer.

To break this down into simple terms, we can start with a basic probability question. If we ask a language model: “The best animal to own is…” — we may receive a series of responses depending on the most probable outcome of various sources. For example: Dog (30%), Cat (25%), Bird (5%), and so on. The AI will respond with the most probable information from its dataset unless told otherwise by the user.

In this case, we have a simple question -> answer formula. If user requests X, then say Y, a linear formula:

However, AI models run prompts through a mass of different computational statistics to cross-reference grammar, phrasing, themes, and multiple types of answers, well beyond what any single person could do on their own — in mere seconds. The final product could be visualized as a 3D graph with many axis and networks that synthesizes into an answer:

A basic understanding of this process is important for educators and students because it demystifies the “black box” of how AI models operate, helping us recognize that AI doesn’t actually understand what it’s doing. When we acknowledge this, it’s much easier to dissect how and why AI should and can be used, while knowing its limitations.

Tools, Not Systems

ChatGPT has been making headlines and dominating social media, with entrepreneurs touting “10 NEW and AMAZING ChatGPT prompts to REVOLUTIONIZE your LIFE.” While recent advancements in artificial intelligence are undeniably impressive and awe-inspiring, it’s crucial to recognize that AI is a tool intended to enhance our lives, rather than a substitute for the systemic changes that are necessary.

Numerous innovative tools have been introduced into classrooms, including calculators, the Internet, tablets/smartphones, e-books, video conferencing, and online Learning Management Systems (LMS).

A calculator serves as a valuable aid in mathematics, but it does not render mathematics obsolete, nor can it singularly address the pedagogical challenges inherent in a math class. Similarly, Wikipedia is an excellent resource for research, yet it cannot replace all other forms of online research. The core nature of math classes and school research assignments remain mostly unchanged. To tackle significant concerns — such as curricular standards, student assessment, adequate school and teacher funding, children’s rights, and disciplinary policies — systemic changes are still imperative.

And despite the introduction of these tools, the fundamental structure of education remains largely the same. (Not to mention that debates persist about whether students should be permitted to use calculators and Wikipedia, let alone AI in the classroom.)

Likewise, we can’t outsource strong content or pedagogy to tools themselves. Technology is often placed on a pedestal as the way to make education more efficient, but efficiency is often at the expense of student learning. We could simply put kids on computers and have them learn from an AI tutor all day, and students may in-turn learn facts much more productively. But they will not have the critical consciousness to navigate the world with this knowledge alone. There is immense value in having a democratic classroom filled with peers and a professional teacher guiding the way. The edu-tech arms race toward making the perfect AI tool cannot make us lose sight of the purpose of education.

Proactive, not Reactive

Channeling the spirit of Paulo Freire, we must ensure that students are able to understand and wield AI to navigate today’s world, while simultaneously using it to make the world a better place. There is no doubt that young people are already using AI in school (whether it’s banned or not) and nearly all facets of media and enterprise will incorporate AI in some way.

Merely prohibiting the use of tools does not address the crucial need for instructing students on how to responsibly and appropriately utilize these technologies. Again taking Wikipedia, for instance; it is often the initial online point of reference for most people. However, many lack guidance on when, how, and why to employ Wikipedia as opposed to other sources, especially since it is frequently barred as a valid citation. Because many have not been provided the necessary contextual information for the proper use of it, many people simply presume that academics are disconnected from reality and use Wikipedia unquestioningly. This practice persists, despite the very real risks associated with relying solely on it. The same proactive versus reactive line of thinking could be said for posting personal information on TikTok or critically evaluating the claims of an Instagram post.

Therefore, our goal is to provide a list of ways to get started using AI in the classroom while not losing our humanity in the process. AI is not meant to replace people, but — like Desmos or Wikipedia — is a tool that expands our capabilities. If our students are to understand a future with AI, we need to see through the exaggerated hype and look past the doom-and-gloom to see these tools for what they are. We must be proactive in teaching students how and when to use AI while taking a critical lens to how it works and its potential pitfalls.

Interested in learning more? Check out our free Edufuturism Series, where we dive into many use-cases of AI, or schedule a quick call about HRP workshops on AI at your school/institution.

Using AI Without Losing Ourselves: A Critical Media Literacy for the 21st Century was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The Issue

Young people are struggling. The vast majority of students spend their days “tired” “stressed” or “bored.” (1) Nearly all teenagers report that school is a somewhat or significant source of stress. (2) Teenagers face an unprecedented mental health crisis: feeling sad, helpless, depressed, and anxious. (3) This crisis has gotten worse over the last two decades, especially in middle school and high school — a problem before the pandemic which was exacerbated after 2020. (4) The APA has written that, “We are facing a national mental health crisis that could yield serious health and social consequences for years to come.” (5)

When surveyed, 96% of teenagers report that anxiety and depression are a problem their peers face, with 70% identifying them as major problems. (6) And horrifically, the suicide rate of students increases between 30 to 43% during the school year. (7)

Gallup scientists categorized 1 in 10 students as both disengaged and discouraged, and reported that older students “feel less cared for by adults and see less value in their own work.” (8)

Alongside these mental health statistics, we find a crisis of engagement. Children ask fewer questions as they proceed through school. Children aged 14mo to 5 years old have been found to ask an average of 107 questions an hour, but by the time those children reach elementary school they may only ask 2 to 5 questions over 2-hours. (9)

In what is described as the “school engagement cliff”, a steep drop in engagement occurs from 5th to 6th grade (8 points); 6th to 7th grade (12 points); and 7th to 8th grade (9 points). In total, engagement drops from 74% prior to the typical middle school years (5th grade) to 40% after these years (9th grade). A 34% decrease. (10)

‍

Likewise, test scores and absenteeism (shown below) worsen in middle school as engagement plummets. (11) Similar studies have found the same findings. (12, 13, 14, 15, 16)

These crises has been compounded by the devastating impact of COVID-19, where more than 140,000 US children lost a primary or secondary caregiver to the pandemic. (17) Although disparities in engagement and mental health among race, gender, gender identity, disability, and other demographics existed prior to the pandemic, these disparities were made worse, leading to drastic mental health disparities facing BIPOC students (18, 19) , LGBTQIA+ students (20, 21) , Latinx EL students (22, 23) , Disabled students (24, 25) , and underserved students generally. (26, 27, 28, 29)

This mirrors how schools have always inequitably served youth, causing many cited instances of racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination (30) , leading to less engagement and participation in schools. (31, 32, 33, 34, 35)

What Can We Do?

Incorporating interdisciplinary project-based learning, designed to take action within communities and act for the social good, leads to more involved and engaged youth (with specific impact for those who have been historically disenfranchised from education). (36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44) Study after study, it is completely clear that designing for those at the margins leads to greater learning experiences for all.

When we incorporate alternative assessment metrics — such as portfolios, narrative-based grading, learning labor contracts, and other forms of moving away from grades (e.g. “ungrading”) — we engage youth. (45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52)

When young people and educators learn together, moving away from sit-and-get content and toward a framework of social emotional justice, they emerge with greater self-actualization, more purposeful lives, and greater engagement in their communities. (53, 54, 55, 56, 57)

Experiential learning, such as high quality project-based learning, is associated with higher academic outcomes and interest across all subject areas, including science (58, 59, 60, 61, 62) , mathematics (63, 64, 65, 66, 67) , social studies (68, 69, 70), and English language arts/language learning (71, 72). PBL has been associated with improved equitable outcomes (73, 74, 75) , improved social-emotional health (76, 77, 78, 79) , and more agency, self-efficacy — a generally better overall experience. (80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87)

Implementing community-driven, project-based learning shifts the roles of educators and young people. Instead of reinforcing teacher-driven control that is typical in most schools, these systemic shifts require a movement toward self-determination theory (SDT). Instead of the pursuit of rewards, punishments, and other mechanisms for compliance, SDT adopts instruction and assessment methods that lead to greater motivation, purpose, and autonomy. (88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94)

As could be assumed, designing learning environments and experiences that bring people together, which celebrate peer relationships and academic success, directly correlates to less engagement drop-off and better well-being. (95, 96) When we design relevant coursework where students choose what matters most to them, they are more engaged. (97) The more student-centered our practices (and the more teachers/schools provide direct support to students), the more students academically achieve in coursework and in test scores. (98, 99, 100) (Albeit, test scores are not necessarily a great indicator of academic success to begin with…(101))

Of course, this is all common sense. Shifting to a “doing with” from a “doing to” model that involves hands-on, meaningful, authentic projects that value all learners (as opposed to simply completing entirely fact-driven worksheets and tests all day) is going to be more engaging. And it’s not that we don’t know better — hundreds to thousands more of these studies exist dating back more than one hundred years ago — It’s just the will to change. We need to recognize that youth and educators are in crises — and that schools need to change. It’s no longer warning bells — we are in a state of emergency. We need educators who are willing to push beyond the bureaucratic “tow the line” systems that most districts tend to reinforce every day. It’s going to take mitigated risk-taking of thousands of educators and young people who have the willingness to take actionable hope. It’s only then that we’ll truly start to restore humanity to education.

(Human Restoration Project works with schools to reimagine systems and build systems alongside students. Learn more here!)

References

1. Moeller, J., Brackett, M. A., Ivcevic, Z., & White, A. E. (2019). High school students’ feelings: Discoveries from a large national survey and an experience sampling study. Center for Open Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/f3k87
2. Stress in America 2013: Are teens adopting adults’ stress habits? (2013). PsycTESTS Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/t55072-000 This data has been highlighted in further Stress in America reports more broadly.
3. Jones, S. E., Ethier, K. A., Hertz, M., DeGue, S., Le, V. D., Thornton, J., Lim, C., Dittus, P. J., & Geda, S. (2022). Mental health, suicidality, and connectedness among high school students during the COVID-19 pandemic — adolescent behaviors and experiences survey, united states, january–june 2021. MMWR Supplements, 71(3), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.su7103a3
4. CDC. (2020, December 2). Anxiety and depression in children: Get the facts. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/childrensmentalhealth/features/anxiety-depression-children.html
5. Stress in america 2020: Stress in the time of COVID-19. (2020). PsycEXTRA Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/e504282020-001
6. Horowitz, J & Graf, N. Most U.S. Teens See Anxiety and Depression as a Major Problem Among Their Peers. (2019). https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/02/20/most-u-s-teens-see-anxiety-and-depression-as-a-major-problem-among-their-peers/
7. Black, T. (2022, August 22). Children’s risk of suicide increases on school days. Scientific American.
8. Brenneman, R. (2016, March 23). Gallup student poll finds engagement in school dropping by grade level. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/gallup-student-poll-finds-engagement-in-school-dropping-by-grade-level/2016/03
9. Chouinard, M. M., Harris, P. L., & Maratsos, M. P. (2007). Children’s questions: A mechanism for cognitive development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 72(1), i–129. 10.1111/j.1540–5834.2007.00412.x
10. Brenneman, R. (2016, March 23). Gallup student poll finds engagement in school dropping by grade level. Education Week.
11. Rockoff, J. E. (2010). Stuck in the Middle: Impacts of grade configuration in public schools. Journal of Public Economics.
12. Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J., & Pagani, L. S. (2008). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
13. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
14. Martin, A. J., Way, J., Bobis, J., & Anderson, J. (2014). Exploring the ups and downs of mathematics engagement in the middle years of school. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 35(2), 199–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431614529365
15. Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038002437
16. Schwerdt, G., & West, M. R. (2012). The impact of alternative grade configurations on student outcomes through middle and high school. Journal of Public Economics.
17. Hillis, S. D., Blenkinsop, A., Villaveces, A., Annor, F. B., Liburd, L., Massetti, G. M., Demissie, Z., Mercy, J. A., Nelson III, C. A., Cluver, L., Flaxman, S., Sherr, L., Donnelly, C. A., Ratmann, O., & Unwin, H. J. T. (2021). COVID-19–Associated Orphanhood and Caregiver Death in the United States. Pediatrics, 148(6). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-053760
18. Chen, J. A., Stevens, C., Wong, S. H. M., & Liu, C. H. (2019). Psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses among U.S. college students: A comparison by race and ethnicity. Psychiatric Services, 70(6), 442–449. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201800388
19. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (2021). National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) releases. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/release/2021-national-survey-drug-use-and-health-nsduh-releases
20. The Trevor Project. 2022 national survey on LGBTQ youth mental health. (2022). The Trevor Project. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2022/
21. YouthTruth. (2022, October 18). Insights from the student experience: Emotional & mental health — YouthTruth. YouthTruth Student Survey. https://youthtruthsurvey.org/emh/
22. Polo, A. J., Solano-Martinez, J. E., Saldana, L., Ramos, A. D., Herrera, M., Ullrich, T., & DeMario, M. (2023). The epidemic of internalizing problems among latinx adolescents before and during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic. Journal of Clinical Child; Adolescent Psychology, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2023.2169925
23. Roche, K. M., Huebner, D. M., Lambert, S. F., & Little, T. D. (2022). COVID-19 stressors and latinx adolescents’ mental health symptomology and school performance: A prospective study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51(6), 1031–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01603-7
24. Stelitano, L., Ekin, S., & Rhim, L. M. (2022). How has the pandemic affected students with disabilities? An update on the evidence: Fall 2022. Center on Reinventing Public Education.
25. Zhang, H., Morris, M., Nurius, P., Mack, K., Brown, J., Kuehn, K., Sefidgar, Y., Xu, X., Riskin, E., Dey, A., & Mankoff, J. (2022). Impact of online learning in the context of COVID-19 on undergraduates with disabilities and mental health concerns. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 15(4), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3538514
26. Kurtz, H., Lloyd, S., Harwin, A., Chen, V., & Furuya, Y. (2022). Student Mental Health During the Pandemic: Educator and Teen Perspectives. EdWeek Research Center.
27. Camara, C., Surkan, P. J., Van Der Waerden, J., Tortelli, A., Downes, N., Vuillermoz, C., & Melchior, M. (2022). COVID-19-related mental health difficulties among marginalised populations: A literature review. Cambridge Prisms: Global Mental Health, 10. https://doi.org/10.1017/gmh.2022.56
28. Hamilton, L. S., & Ercikan, K. (2021). COVID-19 and U.S. Schools: Using data to understand and mitigate inequities in instruction and learning. In Primary and Secondary Education During Covid-19 (pp. 327–351). Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81500-4_13
29. Murthy, V. H. (2022). The mental health of minority and marginalized young people: An opportunity for action. Public Health Reports, 137(4), 613–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549221102390
30. Kohli, R., Pizarro, M., & Nevárez, A. (2017). The “New Racism” of K–12 Schools: Centering Critical Research on Racism. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 182–202.
31. Kohli, R., & Solórzano, D. G. (2012). Teachers, please learn our names!: Racial microagressions and the K-12 classroom. Race Ethnicity and Education, 15(4), 441–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.674026
32. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Status Dropout Rates. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved July 6, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/coj
33. Riddle, S., Howell, A., McGregor, G., & Mills, M. (2021). Student engagement in schools serving marginalised communities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1956605
34. Wang, M.-T., & Fredricks, J. A. (2013). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child Development, 85(2), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12138
35. Wood, L., Kiperman, S., Esch, R. C., Leroux, A. J., & Truscott, S. D. (2017). Predicting dropout using student- and school-level factors: An ecological perspective. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000152
36. Creghan, C., & Adair-Creghan, K. (2015). The positive impact of project-based learning on attendance of an economically disadvantaged student population: A multiyear study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1496
37. Eldiva, F. T., & Azizah, N. (2019). Project based learning in improving critical thinking skill of children with special needs. Proceedings of the International Conference on Special and Inclusive Education (ICSIE 2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.2991/icsie-18.2019.64
38. Farber, K., & Moore, M. (2020). Projects for Hope. In Educating for Social Justice (pp. 235–261). BRILL. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004432864_015
39. Filippatou, D., & Kaldi, S. (2010). The Effectiveness of Project-Based Learning on Pupils with Learning Difficulties Regarding Academic Performance, Group Work and Motivation. International Journal of Special Education.
40. Han, S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project based learning affects high-need students in the U.S. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.045
41. Heberle, A. E., Rapa, L. J., & Farago, F. (2020). Critical consciousness in children and adolescents: A systematic review, critical assessment, and recommendations for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 146(6), 525–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000230
42. Ikeda, R. (2021). Designing for Liberation: A case study in antiracism instructional design. Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.51869/104/rik
43. Kanter, D. E., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2010). The impact of a project-based science curriculum on minority student achievement, attitudes, and careers: The effects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and inquiry-based practices. Science Education, 94(5), 855–887. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20391
44. Leggett, G., & Harrington, I. (2019). The impact of Project Based Learning (PBL) on students from low socio economic statuses: A review. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(11), 1270–1286. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1609101
45. Feldman, J. (2019). Beyond standards-based grading: Why equity must be part of grading reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(8), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721719846890
46. Garvey, G. (2022). Perspective chapter: Ungrading, grading contracts, gamification and game-based learning. In Active Learning — Research and Practice for STEAM and Social Sciences Education. IntechOpen. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105967
47. Ko, M. E. (2021, July), Revolutionizing Grading: Implications on Power, Agency, and Equity Paper presented at 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference. https://peer.asee.org/37687
48. Rapchak, M., Hands, A. S., & Hensley, M. K. (2023). Moving toward equity: Experiences with ungrading. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 64(1), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2021-0062
49. Spurlock, S. (2023, March 2). Improving student motivation by ungrading. Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569747
50. Supovitz, J., & Brennan, R. (1997). Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest test of all? An examination of the equitability of portfolio assessment relative to standardized tests. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 472–507. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.3.66v546274672g154
51. Taylor, K. L. (2022). The pandemic and pedagogy experimentation: The benefits of ungrading. In Active Learning in Political Science for a Post-Pandemic World (pp. 79–93). Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94713-2_6
52. Torres, J. T., Higheagle Strong, Z., & Adesope, O. O. (2020). Reflection through assessment: A systematic narrative review of teacher feedback and student self-perception. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 64, 100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100814
53. Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Williams, B. (2019). Transformative social and emotional learning (SEL): Toward SEL in service of educational equity and excellence. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 162–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1623032
54. Jagers, R. J., Skoog-Hoffman, A., Barthelus, B., & Schlund, J. (2021, June 22). Transformative social and emotional learning. American Federation of Teachers. https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2021/jagers_skoog-hoffman_barthelus_schlund
55. Litmanen, T., Lonka, K., Inkinen, M., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). Capturing teacher students’ emotional experiences in context: Does inquiry-based learning make a difference? Instructional Science, 40(6), 1083–1101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9203-4
56. Allen, J. P., Narr, R. K., Nagel, A. G., Costello, M. A., & Guskin, K. (2021). The connection project: Changing the peer environment to improve outcomes for marginalized adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 33(2). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579419001731
57. McMain, E. (2021). Transformative education against oppression: An emergent framework of social emotional learning for social emotional justice. Proceedings of the 2021 AERA Annual Meeting. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/1683210
58. Andriyani, R., Shimizu, K., & Widiyatmoko, A. (2019). The effectiveness of Project-based Learning on students’ science process skills: A literature review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series.
59. Fogleman, J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Examining the effect of teachers’ adaptations of a middle school science inquiry-oriented curriculum unit on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
60. Balemen, N., & Keskin, M. O. (2018). The Effectiveness of Project-Based Learning on Science Education: A Meta-Analysis Search. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching.
61. Evans, C. (2019). Student Outcomes from High-Quality Project-Based Learning: A Case Study for PBLWorks. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
62. Rivet, A., & Krajcik, J. (2008, January 4). Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students’ prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding. Wiley. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30858226_Contextualizing_instruction_Leveraging_students%27_prior_knowledge_and_experiences_to_foster_understanding_of_middle_school_science
63. Branch, L. J. (2015, January 1). The impact of project-based learning and technology on student achievement in mathematics. Springer Singapore. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-287-209-8_24
64. Gerhana, M. T. C., Mardiyana, M., & Pramudya, I. (2017). The effectiveness of project based learning in trigonometry. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012027
65. Han, S., Rosli, R., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. (2016). The effect of Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) project based learning (PBL) on students’ Achievement in four mathematics topics.
66. Koparan, T., & Güven, B. (2014). The effect of project based learning on the statistical literacy levels of student 8th grade, European Journal of Educational Research, 2014. European Journal of Educational Research, 3(3), 145–157.
67. Nurbavliyev, O., Kaymak, S., & Almas, A. (2020). The impact of project-based learning on students’ achievement in mathematics.
68. Hernandez-Ramos, P., & Paz, S. D. L. (2009). Learning history in middle school by designing multimedia in a project-based learning experience, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 2009. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 151–173.
69. Memişoğlu, H., & Baysal, A. (2011). The effect of project based learning approach in social sciences class on the student success and memorability.
70. Summers, E. J. , & Dickinson, G. (2012). A longitudinal investigation of project–based instruction and student achievement in high school social studies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning.
71. Castañeda, R. (2014). English teaching through project based learning method, in rural area. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica.
72. Parsons, S. A., Metzger, S. R., Askew, J., & Carswell, A. R. (2010). Teaching Against the Grain: One title I school’s journey toward project-based literacy instruction. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070903318413
73. Cervantes, B., Cervantes, L., & Cervantes, K. (2015). The Impact of Project-Based Learning on Minority Student Achievement: Implications for School Redesign. National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.
74. Cheng, B., Clark, T. L., Allen, C. D., Garcia, A. G., & Scipio, D. (2021). Equity-Centered Project-Based Learning. [White Paper].
75. Kee, T., & Lai, A. (2022). Learning motivation and psychological empowerment of socioeconomically disadvantaged learners — an empirical study on inclusive project-based learning during Covid-19. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2112771
76. Culclasure, B. T., Longest, K. C., & Terry, T. M. (2019). Project-Based learning (pjbl) in three southeastern public schools: Academic, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1842
77. Fitzgerald, M. S. (2020). Overlapping opportunities for social-emotional and literacy learning in elementary-grade project-based instruction. American Journal of Education, 126(4), 573–601. https://doi.org/10.1086/709545
78. Freitas, A. M. M., Rossi, B. C., Pereira, S. G., Dos Santos, M. R., Dos Santos, C. A. M., & Pereira, M. A. C. (2019). Project-Based learning as a tool for sounding perception and developing socio-emotional skills in 4th-grade students. Creative Education, 10(07), 1444–1455. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.107106
79. Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Williams, B. (2019). Transformative social and emotional learning (SEL): Toward SEL in service of educational equity and excellence. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 162–184.
80. Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas.
81. Bradley-Levine, J., & Mosier, G. (2022). Literature review of project-based learning. Journal of Educational Research and Policies.
82. Brandt, W. C. (2020). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on self-direction. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
83. Evans, C. (2020a). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on collaboration. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
84. Evans, C. (2020b). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on critical thinking. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
85. Thompson, J. (2020). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on complex communication. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
86. Turcotte, N., Rodriguez-Meehan, M., & Stork, M. G. (2022). This School is Made for Students: Students’ Perspectives on PBL. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00066-0
87. Surr, W., Zeiser, K. L., Briggs, O., & Kendziora, K. (2018). Learning with others: A study exploring the relationship between collaboration, personalization, and equity. Final report, American Institutes for Research, 2018-oct. American Institutes for Research.
88. Burton, K. D., Lydon, J. E., D’Alessandro, D. U., & Koestner, R. (2006). The differential effects of intrinsic and identified motivation on well-being and performance: Prospective, experimental, and implicit approaches to self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 750–762. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.750
89. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55(1). https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68
90. Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038002437
91. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
92. Ryan, R. M., & Weinstein, N. (2009). Undermining quality teaching and learning. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 224–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104327
93. Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318
94. Reeve, J., & Cheon, S. H. (2021). Autonomy-supportive teaching: Its malleability, benefits, and potential to improve educational practice. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1862657
95. Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J., & Pagani, L. S. (2008). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
96. Upadyaya, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2013). Development of school engagement in association with academic success and well-being in varying social contexts. European Psychologist, 18(2), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000143
97. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002
98. Brennan, M. B. (2015). Exploring a complex model of student engagement in middle school: Academic self-efficacy beliefs and achievement. Wayne State University Dissertation.
99. Fredricks, J. A., Parr, A. K., Amemiya, J. L., Wang, M.-T., & Brauer, S. (2019). What matters for urban adolescents’ engagement and disengagement in school: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(5), 491–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558419830638
100. Scheidler, M. J. (2012). The relationship between student engagement and standardized test scores of middle school students: does student engagement increase academic achievement? University of Minnesota Ed.D. Dissertation.
101. There are so many citations that could be included here. Here’s a summary of research and findings from the Human Restoration Project research database: https://www.humanrestorationproject.org/research?categories-research=eliminating-standardized-testing

Why we need to change schools (right now). was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Root Problems

The widespread adoption of public education began at nearly the same time as F.W. Taylor’s scientific management theory, or Taylorism, which focuses on hyper-standardization toward hyper-productivity. It encouraged managers to simplify jobs to basic tasks, having workers repeat those tasks, then issuing rewards as tasks were completed. Beginning in the early 1900s, The Principles of Scientific Management became the typical toolkit for managing workplaces.

Psychology was in its infancy, with famed psychologist Sigmund Freud publishing The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, the basis of psychoanalysis in 1901. Freud believed that people were driven by conflict and instinctual urges which were often unseen — the id, ego, and superego. At this point, psychology was rarely linked to economic principles and focused on internal thoughts and ideas.

Psychology and business began to merge when B.F. Skinner popularized behaviorism. In the 1940s, Skinner theorized that simple reinforced rewards and punishments were key to training people to perform tasks. But unlike Taylor, Skinner believed that these rewards weren’t just monetary: a manager needed to account for other forms of motivation (time off, positive messages, pizza parties) as well as punishments (reprimands, demotions).

Connections Across Business and Education

Taylorism and behaviorism are arguably the most impactful force on past and present workplace management. B.F. Skinner’s work on operant conditioning and reinforcement scheduling had a significant impact on understanding employee motivation. His ideas on positive and negative reinforcement influenced the development of various motivational strategies in business, such as incentive systems, performance-based rewards, and employee training programs. By applying behaviorist principles, businesses sought to shape and reinforce desirable employee behaviors to improve overall performance.

One of the most famous business management books of all time, still recommended to virtually every aspiring entrepreneur, is Dale Cargenie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People (1936). Carnegie wrote in the first chapter:

“B. F. Skinner, the world-famous psychologist, proved through his experiments that an animal rewarded for good behavior will learn much more rapidly and retain what it learns far more effectively than an animal punished for bad behavior. Later studies have shown that the same applies to humans. By criticizing, we do not make lasting changes and often incur resentment.”

Adding,

“This great contemporary psychology has shown…the good things people do will be reinforced and the poorer things will atrophy for lack of attention.”

Modern management books like How to Be a Great Boss (2016) call for managers to issue clear praise, set 3 strike rules for negative behavior, and adhere to a “right seat, right person” mentality.

Side by side, as public schools grew in number and began to serve a broader population, there was a call to standardize the curriculum and teaching methods. Behaviorism led to the development of standardized teaching techniques that aimed to efficiently modify students’ behaviors and facilitate learning. These principles emphasized efficiency and the application of scientific methods to management and organization. Building upon the standardized right-or-wrong approach introduced by Edward Thorndike, these tests aimed to objectively measure students’ learning and performance. This led to an emphasis on test-based accountability and data-driven decision-making in education — simple reward and punishment measures on students, educators, schools, and districts.

Further, behaviorism is sometimes clumped with behavioral economics in school management, techniques, professional development, and under the label of “cognitive science.” Economists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman found that individuals are economically irrational, often acting against their own best interests due to bias, incompetence, or impulse. One of the most popular professional development books, Teach Like a Champion, is a behaviorist guidebook for popular reward & punishment systems, such as cold calling, targeted praise, and mandatory eye-tracking. The author Doug Lemov wrote that,

“Often when I visit an organization in the sport sector, I’ll make reference to some key concept or text in cognitive science and find that almost everyone in the room has read it. I’ve worked with coaches at a couple of MLB franchises. You mention Daniel Kahneman in that setting and it seems like everyone knows who you’re talking about…

Few people are pulling their copy of Kahneman out of their bag. You only see that in some parts of the high performing entrepreneurial schools sector, where people are serious about proving a concept, but not in the average school…

Instead you often find people carrying around the baggage of unfounded or discredited ideas: Dewey, multiple intelligences and vague platitudes about learning by doing or teaching your peers being the best form of learning. Vygotsky’s writings from 1918 count as science.”

As schools are under constant threat of “never before seen” low test scores, entrepreneurial PD authors propagate messages of going “back to basics”, utilizing these simple stand-and-deliver behaviorist models to “fix” schools. The problem is twofold:

1. Behaviorism is a dehumanizing mechanism of learning that reduces human beings to simple inputs and outputs. There is an ever-growing body of research suggesting that behaviorism is not only harmful to how we learn, but is also oppressive, ableist, and racist.
2. Capitalism, classrooms, and scientific management are multifaceted, connected pieces. Therefore, behaviorism is the assumed and dominant mechanism in which educators are taught to manage their classroom.

Although many social, political, and economic changes have occurred since the early 1900s, radical behaviorism is still mainstream in classroom management strategies. Here’s a short list of behaviorist (often problematic) practices that are commonplace in nearly all schools:

• Cold calling
• Forcing eye contact
• No opting out
• Individual rewards/punishments
• Regimented drill and practice
• Tight transitions
• Short, repetitive timed tests
• “Everyone writes”
• “Do Now’s”
• Behavior charts
• Behavior contracts
• Hand signals (e.g. going to the bathroom, needing a pencil)
• “No warnings”
• Providing tangible rewards (e.g. candy, grades)
• Positive/negative praise phone calls
• Classroom behavior dollars/points with special rewards
• Weekly reward charts and prizes (e.g. for reading, math problems)
• ClassDojo points
• Not smiling until Christmas
• Bell-to-bell teaching

In many of these cases, young people routinely tell us this makes school feel like prison. And in practice, it essentially is. Behaviorism normalizes controls people’s minds and bodies. It regiments them like tools to be manufactured and output.

This is well documented in journalist Joanne Golann’s Scripting the Moves, where Golann spent a year and a half in a “high performing” charter school. She observed teachers creating a prison-like system with silent hallways, infractions for every minor “violation” such as chewing gum or being a minute late, direct instruction every second of every period, and extraordinarily levels of compliance-driven learning. As she writes in a summary of the work,

“Because teachers constantly narrated expectations for behavior and scanned classrooms for compliance, students felt as if they were always under surveillance. Even the best-behaved students felt pressure. One mother told me that she kept her daughter home for two weeks because her daughter could not handle the pressure of being set up as a positive example for her classmates.”

(Our full interview with Golann highlights how just one school gave 15,423 infractions for 250 students over 188 days. Only 6 students did not receive an infraction.)

Incorporating Humanistic Psychology

Soon after behaviorism became mainstream, humanistic psychology emerged as its antithesis. Abraham Maslow, who co-developed the theory, pointed out that humans are not just a list of components to be improved or rejected, but people with creative, value-driven lives. Maslow believed there were two types of existence: Deficiency and Being. When you control people through rewards and punishments, you automatically destroy human expression as people are reduced to tools — the Deficiency model (e.g. behaviorism). Instead of manipulating people, he wanted to bring about people’s intentionality and individual uniqueness — their Being.

The overall impact of behaviorism on teaching and learning has warped the way educators understand humanistic psychology. Maslow’s famous Hierarchy of Needs stated that people needed their basic needs met, along with safety, love, security, and acceptance, and then finally people would give the world their authentic self: unique traits and gifts they offered the world. Importantly, Maslow believed that people were constantly shifting between each level of the hierarchy, able to reach the pinnacle at multiple points, as well as improve within multiple levels at the same time. He never displayed his thoughts as the often cited pyramid:

The reason why Maslow’s hierarchy appears as a pyramid is due to how industry interpreted humanistic psychology. Douglas McGregor, a business management professor in the 1950s/60s, simplified Maslow’s hierarchy into a series of steps to make the theory applicable to entrepreneurship. McGregor created the management style “Theory X” and “Theory Y”:

• Theory X had managers who saw their employees as not liking their work. It is centered on rewards and direct supervision.
• Theory Y had managers who saw their employees as wanting to further a specific mission or vision. It is centered on self-motivation and fulfilling work.

Although McGregor believed that only incorporating Theory X wouldn’t work in the long term, he believed both theories were necessary to be a great manager — which is quintessential behaviorism. This is no different than B.F. Skinner’s critique of Taylorism — that people need praise and other forms of motivation to be successful — and Theory X & Y are essentially the table of contents for business management technique books.

Charles McDermid, a psychologist, translated the simplified version of Maslow’s hierarchy into a pyramid in the 1960 issue of Business Horizons: “How money motivates men”, which argued that the pyramid can be used to “maximize motivation at the lowest cost.” Professors Todd Bridgman, Stephan Cummings, and John Ballard found that much criticism of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs was/is directly associated with McGregor’s interpretation and McDermid’s accompanying illustration of the pyramid. Because it was such a simple graphic to easily include on PowerPoints and in textbooks, the pyramid became the defining force of Maslow’s legacy.

Schools have embraced behaviorism and limited their incorporation of humanistic psychology. Pedagogy and teaching practices that utilize humanistic ideas are warped through managerial mindsets that are dominated by radical behaviorism and dehumanizing practice. It’s difficult to find resources that aren’t shaped by a business management approach.

Famed linguist Noam Chomsky believed that freedom and creativity were central to learning and life, sponsoring a humanistic approach to education. In the 1950/60s, he famously refuted B.F. Skinner’s behaviorist theory in a series of back-and-forth debates. In part he wrote,

“..the insights that have been achieved in the laboratories of the reinforcement theorist, though quite genuine, can be applied to complex human behavior only in the most gross and superficial way, and that speculative attempts to discuss linguistic behavior in these terms alone omit from consideration factors of fundamental importance that are, no doubt, amenable to scientific study, although their specific character cannot at present be precisely formulated.”

In what became one of the most famous arguments in the history of psychology, Chomsky was widely considered to “win” the debate. Yet behaviorism remained the mainstream psychology adapted by corporations. After all, it is a much easier method of managing workers who rely on a paycheck. Although many leaders encourage creativity from their employees, creativity often involves intentionally bending the rigid systems already in place. Rewards and punishments have a more direct, controllable relationship to outcomes than creativity and purpose.

Just like authentic learning, humanistic psychology is messy. It’s organized chaos. James Bugental, Maslow’s contemporary, built a three pronged humanistic model. He wrote that this psychology meant:

• Full awareness in the moment.
• Choosing to invest in one’s life with intentionality.
• Taking full responsibility for such choices with existential awareness of the consequences, including the potential tragedy that might be inevitable for any given choice.

Adding that there are five basic principles:

1. Humans are more important than the sum of their parts. They can’t be reduced to individual components.
2. Humans have a unique human context as well as cosmic ecology. They investigate the world through cultures, societies, spirituality, faith, and more.
3. Humans are aware and are aware of being aware. They have consciousness of themselves and of those around them.
4. Humans can make choices and therefore have responsibility.
5. Humans have goals and know that these shape future events. They seek meaning, value, and creativity.

What does this look like in the classroom? Here’s a short list of humanistic teaching practices:

• Self-expression, such as poetry and creative writing
• Mindfulness and social-emotional learning
• Community connections, belonging, and co-created norms
• Open dialogue and conversation protocols
• Active listening skills
• Cooperative learning strategies and group projects
• Role-playing toward empathy and understanding
• Self-reflection strategies
• Experiential learning, including field trips and service learning
• Open-ended, critical thinking without specific steps or outcomes
• Strengths-based approaches that center the uniqueness of individuals
• Safe and supportive environments that focus on the physical and mental well-being of each individual learner
• Positive, proactive risk-taking
• Democratic dialogue

Unlike the behaviorist list, humanistic values are complicated. When we don’t reduce people to simple rule-obeyers, it requires educators to have nuanced, creative approaches to their teaching — a system without specific step-by-step strategies. It’s an art, not a technical role. Teachers cannot manage their classrooms like Amazon warehouses or a call center. Just as workers must fight back against the egregious dehumanization of labor, educators must create spaces that bring human flourishing to their community.

In response to McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, Maslow proposed Theory Z. He believed that McGregor’s Theory X was dehumanizing and Theory Y lacked greater purpose. It kept people from becoming truly fulfilled. Theory Z outlined transcendence, a concept that went beyond Maslow’s initial goal of self-actualization. He believed that reaching the pinnacles of prosocial values was the ultimate course for human beings. It had many components, all much more complex than the straightforward management of X or Y:

• Transcenders were more free, natural, and consciously & unconsciously connected to the world around them.
• They are deliberately meta-motivated toward unity, goodness, and truth.
• They care about all living and nonliving things.
• They transcend competition, finding synergy in all forms: intrapsychic, interpersonal, intraculturally and internationally.
• They don’t care much about money, status, power, or luxury, instead opting for purpose, social good, and love.

“Transcendence refers to the very highest and most inclusive or holistic levels of human consciousness, behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos.”

Maslow, 1971, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature

Maslow’s transcended values run counter to managerial mindsets because they operate outside of a framework of producing goods for managers. How can someone manage employees if they don’t value money or success? What would it mean to reward or punish a laborer who has moved beyond competition?

Humanistic psychologists didn’t care about the business community because they weren’t focused on it. Being human doesn’t have anything to do with finances or production — it is about creativity, personal growth, expression, and fulfillment. These weren’t ideas to be cooperated by business toward controlling employees but concepts to aim for as we build proactive societies.

And now, humanistic psychology has been expanded upon with social justice and more holistic methods, ensuring that our questioning of humanity isn’t limited in scope or perspective. It’s an evolving study that is necessary for pedagogy and practice. It isn’t that Maslow had solely figured out the answers to a better education paradigm — but that we must expand upon our thinking from the behaviorist, capitalist framework.

Teachers must understand that teaching is dominated by entrepreneurial mindsets that are in dated pedagogy and problematic strategies. By changing the narrative, we can approach each new idea with a critical lens. We can analyze each new development through a deep understanding of what it means to be human. If what it means to be human is to be controlled, regimented, and worked for capital — then we’re doing a fairly good job. But if what it means to be human is recognizing who we are, connecting deeply to those around us, and finding greater purpose, then we have a long way to go.

When humanistic psychologist James Bugental passed away in 2008, he repeated his last words over and over to his friends who sat by his side. In a sentiment that must echo across our classrooms and workplaces if we are to build a better future:

“We need more kindness. We need more kindness. We need more kindness.”

Writing: More Human Than a Ladder or Pyramid: Psychology, Behaviorism, and Better Schools was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Although understanding trends and modern research are integral to staying up to date, educators are inundated with conference and professional development opportunities that seem to all say the same thing.

As a result, workshops can feel banal or pointless. How many times do we need to hear about data-driven assessment? About the importance of hands-on learning? On why social-emotional health is key to student success? At a certain point, we’re just confirming what we already know (which has value to an extent, but quickly becomes repetitious).

At the turn of the millennium, the education non-profit ASCD announced its five major strands for its innovative 2000 conference:

• Assessment/Achievement/Accountability;
• Improvement of Teaching and Learning;
• Designing Tomorrow’s Classrooms;
• Emerging Trends Affecting Education in a Global Society; and
• Leadership in the 21st Century.

In 2023, a similar program line-up includes

• Using Data;
• Equitable Learning;
• Personalized Instruction;
• Lead through Change;
• Developing Cultural Competency; and
• Advocating for Marginalized Families.

By simply repeating the same learning over and over again, we’re not necessarily becoming any better at it. Teachers have limited time and energy and it’s important that attending professional development is deliberate practice: where one has a specified goal, some way to showcase what they’ve done, and feedback on how they’re progressing. Over time, “using data to drive assessment” has diminishing returns.

Typically, the latest trends in education are rehashes of older concepts. “Project-based learning” has had various spin-offs: challenge-based learning, problem-based learning, inquiry-driven learning, place-based learning, and more. Each of these approaches has its own novel spin, but they’re all virtually identical in practice. Experiential learning — no matter how it’s worded — has a general set of practices that have been followed over the last century. As a result, attending sessions based on new acronyms and educational buzzwords quickly leads to cynicism as it’s something we’ve already seen before.

This is especially true when so many workshops have turned into avenues for self-promotion and marketing. Rather than pitch innovative ideas, edtech companies and professional development services use sessions for hour-long timeshare presentations. There is an economic incentive to selling a new magic potion that solves all of a teacher’s problems, and those solutions are almost entirely spun out of existing pedagogical frameworks. There’s extremely little change to fundamental practice and it feels like we’re changing just for the sake of following a fad. Further, as the education market for conferences grows, some have even developed their own line of merchandise. In these ways, brands are superseding content in the same way that most fast-fashion clothing manufacturers focus on labels over quality, with deleterious results.

It isn’t that education conferences aren’t needed, but “I’ve heard this already” workshops and marketing ploys are a waste of time. Instead, our resources could be better spent expanding our professional understanding of related concepts to what we’ve already mastered.

Semiotic Domains

Semiotic domains are defined by linguist and video game enthusiast James Paul Gee as a set of practices that utilize multiple modalities to convey meaning. In other words, a semiotic domain contains multiple signs — such as words, practices, experiences and more — in order to create meaning. For example, a teacher may be familiar with terms such as project-based learning, multimodal literacy, Maslow’s & Bloom’s, an “LMS”, or blended learning, but these same terms may have a different meaning outside of the teaching field.

What’s intriguing about semiotic domains is that by immersing ourselves in a new, related domain, we can gain a better understanding of our current domain. For example, learning about video game design can help teachers to think more critically and creatively when it comes to designing lessons.

Interestingly, this is the same way that natural language processing is built into ChatGPT and other AI services. For teachers, if we know how to teach high school students, it’s a relatively small leap to teach middle school students. But if we attempted to become a professional blacksmith that would (likely) be extremely difficult. Obviously, our skills transfer based on things we already know. In AI, this is called transfer learning, where an AI is fed information from a related domain to build upon its knowledge more quickly and efficiently than simply scavenging for as much information as possible in a singular domain.

‍

In other words, just like AI — it’s a lot easier for us to become better at something by learning about related things rather than the same thing over and over again, especially after we’ve been at it for a while.

Breaking Algorithms

It’s never been easier to discover new things. Whether it be music, art, blogs, or the latest educational trend — our digital tools provide us with a constant drip feed of new information. This information is dictated by our personal algorithm, a combination of our interests, demographic background, and previous experiences, all combined to give us the “best possible” option at any given time.

Yet, algorithms have their limitations. Spotify seems to always play the same five artists in “Discover New”, Google News displays a bunch of articles on something that I already know, and social media feeds reinforce existing viewpoints. It is incredibly difficult (and frustrating) to escape the algorithm: there’s so much information out there that we rely on these tools to tailor it for us. This information is also inherently biased — as algorithms are created by programmers with their own perspectives and purposes in mind. (See Masked by Trust: Bias in Library Discovery on how academic research is warped through algorithmic biases).

In this way, algorithms ironically inhibit true discovery. Instead, we become trapped in a supervised loop of commonly recommended options that algorithmically align with our tastes, demographics, and search history. We are fit into narrow boxes, unable to find something entirely new. (Which will only get worse as AI is improved and “personalized.”) Conferences, like markets, shift based on whatever the algorithm promotes, offering workshops based on what everyone else is doing as opposed to something entirely new.

Breaking the algorithm requires going analog — escaping the recommendations of online services. Just as walking through a vinyl record store allows us to find new, never-before-seen artists, exposing ourselves to new potential artists, venturing into unknown topics gives us a fresh perspective on learning. This doesn’t mean we must find everything new in physical spaces, but that we must be hyper-aware of how much our digital habits shape what we see online.

Finding Better Ways to Conference

In the late 1990s, the loosely organized and participant-led “unconference” model became the solution to overly formal, workshop-driven conferences. Over the last twenty years, unconferences and edcamps have waxed and waned in popularity for many of the same reasons as traditional conferences. There’s nuggets of fantastic, new information that people share, but for the most part we’re all sharing information about teaching and learning that has been relatively mainstream for decades.

What would it look like to embrace semiotic domains as a “new form” of conferencing? Instead of attending educational conferences, what if teachers were sent to learn from community planners, documentary producers, board game creators, or graphic designers? What would it look like to take our expertise as educators, pair it with the expertise of other fields, then connect-the-dots between our fields? This is teaching-as-artistry: being able to flourish in our domain. Consider:

• How does the design of sidewalks and green spaces in communities change the way people interact? How do community planners encourage people to interact with one another without congesting too much space?
• How do documentarians tell stories? How can we present critical information that grips the viewer and keeps them interested?
• How do board game creators design games that keep players at the table? After all, if someone loses too quickly — they’ll just be standing there while their friends play.
• How does the way we design our resources communicate our message? How do we fight for aesthetic justice so that we can appreciate, and live among, beauty?

Each of these is tangentially related to teaching: sidewalks mirror school hallways, documentaries change our presentation skills, board games alter our course planning, and graphic design makes us rethink our resources. The experts in these fields don’t need to know anything about teaching. Instead, that’s where we come in. As experts in our field, we will intrinsically see these connections and learn experientially through these related domains.

And more importantly, these connections allow us to discover concepts that we may have never known before. Although some shifts are universal across all domains (e.g. the growth of incorporating artificial intelligence), most have their own ecosystems filled with new content to learn and grow from. This helps us escape our singular bubble of teaching and learning — akin to removing ourselves from a social media algorithm that only promotes certain content that echoes our worldview.

Similarly, these conference gatherings could have educators present on what they find in teaching and learning, offering new connections to be made for professionals in related fields.

If you’re an educator looking to expand your knowledge and try out new classroom practices, now is the time to seek out and participate in creative learning opportunities that offer unique learning experiences. Start exploring random concepts and embrace the chaos that is learning something new. By participating in these creative learning opportunities, you’ll not only enhance your skills but also connect with other passionate educators who share your desire to innovate and improve. So, try something new!

A New Era of Learning: Reimagining Conferences for Inspired Teaching was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

I’ll summarize four main reasons why homework just flat out doesn’t make sense.

1. Achievement, whether that be measured through standardized tests or general academic knowledge, isn’t correlated to assigning or completing homework.
2. Homework is an inequitable practice that harms certain individuals more than others, to the detriment of those with less resources and to minor, if any, improvement for those with resources.
3. It contributes to negative impacts at home with one’s family, peer relationships, and just general school-life balance, which causes far more problems than homework is meant to solve.
4. And finally, it highlights and exacerbates our obsession with ultra-competitive college admissions and job opportunities, and other detrimental faults of making everything about getting ahead.

Does Homework Make Us Learn More?

Homework is such a ubiquitous part of school that it’s considered radical to even suggest that lessening it could be good teaching. It’s completely normal for families to spend extra hours each night, even on weekends, completing projects, reports, and worksheets. On average, teenagers spend about an hour a day completing homework, which is up 30–45 minutes from decades past. Kindergartners, who are usually saved from completing a lot of after school work, average about 25 minutes of homework a night (which to note, is 25 minutes too much than is recommended by child development experts).

The “10-minute rule”, endorsed by the National Parent Teacher Association and National Education Association, is incorporated into most school policies: there’s 10 minutes of homework per day per grade level — as in 20 minutes a day in second grade or 2 hours a day in 12th grade.

It’s so normalized that it was odd, when seemingly out of nowhere the President of Ireland recently suggested that homework should be banned. (And many experts were shocked at this suggestion.)

Numerous studies on homework reflect inconsistent results on what it exactly achieves. Homework is rarely shown to have any impact on achievement, whether that be measured through standardized testing or otherwise. As I’ll talk about later, the amount of marginal gains homework may lead to aren’t worth its negative trade-offs.

Let’s look at a quick summary of various studies:

• ‍First off, the book National Differences, Global Similarities: World Culture and the Future of Schooling by David P. Baker and Gerald K. LeTendre draws on a 4 year investigation of schools in 47 countries. It’s the largest study of its type: looking at how schools operate, their pedagogy, their procedures, and the like. They made a shocking discovery: countries that assigned the least amount of homework: Denmark and the Czech Republic, had much higher test scores than those who assigned the most amount of homework: Iran and Thailand.
• The same work indicated that there was no correlation between academic achievement and homework with elementary students, and any moderate positive correlation in middle or high school diminished as more and more homework was assigned.‍
• A study in Contemporary Educational Psychology of 28,051 high school seniors concluded that quality of instruction, motivation, and ability are all correlated to a student’s academic success. However, homework’s effectiveness was marginal or perhaps even counterproductive: leading to more academic problems than it hoped to solve.‍
• The Teachers College Record published that homework added academic pressure and societal stress to those already experiencing pressures from other forces at home. This caused a further divide in academic performance from those with more privileged backgrounds. We’ll talk about this more later.‍
• A study in the Journal of Educational Psychology examined 2,342 student attitudes toward homework in foreign language classes. They found that time spent on homework had a significant negative impact on grades and standardized test scores. The researchers concluded that this may be because participants had to spend their time completing worksheets rather than spend time practicing skills on their own time.
• Some studies are more positive. In fact, a meta-analysis of 32 homework studies in the Review of Educational Research found that most studies indicated a positive correlation between achievement and doing homework. However, the researchers noted that generally these studies made it hard to draw causal conclusions due to how they were set up and conducted. There was so much variance that it was difficult to make a claim one way or another, even though the net result seemed positive.
• This often cited report led by Dr. Harris Cooper at Duke University is the most commonly used by proponents of the practice. But popular education critic Alfie Kohn believes that this study fails to establish, ironically, causation among other factors.‍
• And that said in a later published study in The High School Journal, researchers concluded that in all homework assigned, there were only modest linkages to improved math and science standardized test scores, with no difference in other subjects between those who were assigned homework and those who were not. None of the homework assigned had any bearing on grades. The only difference was for a few points on those particular subject’s standardized test scores.

All in all, the data is relatively inconclusive. Some educational experts suggest that there should be hours of homework in high school, some homework in middle school, and none in elementary school. Some call for the 10-minute rule. Others say that homework doesn’t work at all. It’s still fairly unstudied how achievement is impacted as a result of homework. But as Alfie Kohn says, “The better the research, the less likely one is to find any benefits from homework.” That said, when we couple this data with the other negative impacts of assigning homework: how it impacts those at the margins, leads to anxiety and stress, and takes away from important family time — it really makes us question why this is such a ubiquitous practice.

Or as Etta Kralovec and John Buell write in The End of Homework: How Homework Disrupts Families, Overburdens Children, and Limits Learning,

‘Extensive classroom research of ‘time on task’ and international comparisons of year-round time for study suggest that additional homework might promote U.S. students’ achievement.’ This written statement by some of the top professionals in the field of homework research raises some difficult questions. More homework might promote student achievement? Are all our blood, sweat, and tears at the kitchen table over homework based on something that merely might be true? Our belief in the value of homework is akin to faith. We assume that it fosters a love of learning, better study habits, improved attitudes toward school, and greater self-discipline; we believe that better teachers assign more homework and that one sign of a good school is a good, enforced homework policy.

Our obsession with homework is likely rooted in select studies that imply it leads to higher test scores. The authors continue by deciphering this phenomena:

“[this is] a problem that routinely bedevils all the sciences: the relationship between correlation and causality. If A and B happen simultaneously, we do not know whether A causes B or B causes A, or whether both phenomena occur casually together or are individually determined by another set of variables…Thus far, most studies in this area have amounted to little more than crude correlations that cannot justify the sweeping conclusions some have derived from them.”

Alfie Kohn adds that even the correlation between achievement and homework doesn’t really matter. Saying,

“If all you want is to cram kids’ heads with facts for tomorrow’s tests that they’re going to forget by next week, yeah, if you give them more time and make them do the cramming at night, that could raise the scores…But if you’re interested in kids who know how to think or enjoy learning, then homework isn’t merely ineffective, but counterproductive…

The practice of homework assumes that only academic growth matters, to the point that having kids work on that most of the school day isn’t enough…”

Ramping Up Inequity

Many justify the practice of assigning homework with the well-intentioned belief that we’ll make a more equitable society through high standards. However, it seems to be that these practices actually add to inequity. “Rigorous” private and preparatory schools — whether they be “no excuses” charters in marginalized communities or “college ready” elite suburban institutions, are notorious for extreme levels of homework assignment. Yet, many progressive schools who focus on holistic learning and self-actualization assign no homework and achieve the same levels of college and career success.

Perhaps this is because the largest predictor of college success has nothing to do with rigorous preparation, and everything to do with family income levels. 77% of students from high income families graduated from a highly competitive college, whereas 9% of students from low income families did the same.

It seems like by loading students up with mountains of homework each night in an attempt to get them into these colleges, we actually make their chances of success worse.

When assigning homework, it is common practice to recommend that families provide a quiet, well-lit place for the child to study. After all, it’s often difficult to complete assignments after a long day. Having this space, time, and energy must always be considered in the context of the family’s education, income, available time, and job security. For many people, jobs have become less secure and less well paid over the course of the last two decades.

In a United States context, we work the longest hours of any nation. Individuals in 2006 worked 11 hours longer than their counterparts in 1979. In 2020, 70% of children lived in households where both parents work. We are the only country in the industrial world without guaranteed family leave. And the results are staggering: 90% of women and 95% of men report work-family conflict. According to the Center for American Progress, “the United States today has the most family-hostile public policy in the developed world due to a long-standing political impasse.”

As a result, parents have much less time to connect with their children. This is not a call to a return to traditional family roles or to have stay-at-home parents — rather, our occupation-oriented society is structured inadequately which causes problems with how homework is meant to function.

For those who work in entry level positions, such as customer service and cashiers, there is an average 240% turnover per year due to lack of pay, poor conditions, work-life balance, and mismanagement. Family incomes continue to decline for lower- and middle-class Americans, leaving more families to work increased hours or multiple jobs. In other words, families, especially poor families, have less opportunities to spend time with their children, let alone foster academic “gains” via homework.

Even for students with ample resources who attend “elite schools”, the amount of homework is stressful. In a 2013 study in The Journal of Experiential Education, researchers conducted a survey of 4,317 students in 10 high-performing upper middle class high schools. These students had an average of more than 3 hours of homework a night. In comparison to their peers, they had more academic stress, notable physical health problems, and spent a worrying amount of time focused entirely on school and nothing else. Competitive advantage came at the cost of well-being and just being a kid.

A similar study in Frontiers of Psychology found that students pressured in the competitive college admissions process, who attended schools assigning hours of homework each night and promoting college-level courses and resume building extracurriculars, felt extreme stress. Two-thirds of the surveyed students reported turning to alcohol and drugs to cope.

In fact, a paper published by Dr. Suniya Luthar and her colleagues concluded that upper middle-class youth are actually more likely to be troubled than their middle class peers. There is an extreme problem with academic stress, where young people are engaging in a rat race toward the best possible educational future as determined by Ivy League colleges and scholarships. To add fuel to the fire, schools continue to add more and more homework to have students get ahead — which has a massively negative impact on both ends of the economic spectrum.

A 2012 study by Dr. Jonathan Daw indicated that their results,

“…imply that increases in the amount of homework assigned may increase the socioeconomic achievement gap in math, science, and reading in secondary school.”

In an effort to increase engagement with homework, teachers have been encouraged to create interesting, creative assignments. In fact, most researchers seem to agree that the quality of assignments matters a whole lot. After all, maybe assigning all of this homework won’t matter as long as it’s interesting and relevant to students? Although this has good intentions, rigorous homework with increased complexity places more impetus on parents. As researcher and author Gary Natrillo, an initial proponent of creative homework, stated later:

…not only was homework being assigned as suggested by all the ‘experts,’ but the teacher was obviously taking the homework seriously, making it challenging instead of routine and checking it each day and giving feedback. We were enveloped by the nightmare of near total implementation of the reform recommendations pertaining to homework…More creative homework tasks are a mixed blessing on the receiving end. On the one hand, they, of course, lead to higher engagement and interest for children and their parents. On the other hand, they require one to be well rested, a special condition of mind not often available to working parents…

Time is a luxury to most people. With increased working hours, in conjunction with extreme levels of stress, many people don’t have the necessary mindset to adequately supply children with the attention to detail for complex homework. As Kralovec and Buell state,

To put it plainly, I have discovered that after a day at work, the commute home, dinner preparations, and the prospect of baths, goodnight stories, and my own work ahead, there comes a time beyond which I cannot sustain my enthusiasm for the math brain teaser or the creative story task.

Americans are some of the most stressed people in the world. Mass shootings, health care affordability, discrimination, racism, sexual harassment, climate change, the presidential elections, and literally: staying informed on current events have caused roughly 70% of people to report moderate or extreme stress, with increased rates for people of color, LGBTQIA Americans, and other discriminated groups. 90% of high schoolers and college students report moderate or higher stress, with half reporting depression and a lack of energy and motivation.

In 2015, 1,100 parents were surveyed on the impact of homework on family life. Fights over homework were 200% more likely in families where parents didn’t have a college degree. Generally, these families believed that if their children didn’t understand a homework assignment then they must have been not paying attention at school. This led to young people feeling dumb or upset, and parents feeling like their child was lying or goofing off. The lead researcher noted,

All of our results indicate that homework as it is now being assigned discriminates against children whose parents don’t have a college degree, against parents who have English as a second language, against, essentially, parents who are poor.

Schooling is so integrated into family life that a group of researchers noted that “…homework tended to recreate the problems of school, such as status degradation.” An online survey of over 2,000 students and families found that 90% of students reported additional stress from homework, and 40% of families saw it as nothing more than busy work. Authors Sara Bennett and Nancy Kalish wrote the aptly titled The Case Against Homework which conducted interviews across the mid-2000s with families and children, citing just how many people are burdened with overscheduling homework featuring over-the-top assignments and constant work. One parent remarked,

I sit on Amy’s bed until 11 p.m. quizzing her, knowing she’s never going to use this later, and it feels like abuse,” says Nina of Menlo Park, California, whose eleven-year-old goes to a Blue Ribbon public school and does at least three-and-a-half hours of homework each night. Nina also questions the amount of time spent on “creative” projects. “Amy had to visit the Mission in San Francisco and then make a model of it out of cardboard, penne pasta, and paint. But what was she supposed to be learning from this? All my daughter will remember is how tense we were in the garage making this thing. Then when she handed it in, the teacher dropped it and all the penne pasta flew off.” These days, says Nina, “Amy’s attitude about school has really soured.” Nina’s has, too. “Everything is an emergency and you feel like you’re always at battle stations.”

1/3rd of the families interviewed felt “crushed by the workload.” It didn’t matter if they lived in rural or suburban areas, or if they were rich or poor.

Learning this way is also simply ineffective because well, that’s just not how kids learn! Young people build upon prior knowledge. They use what they know to make what they’re currently doing easier. Adding more and more content to a student’s plate — having to connect the dots and build upon more information — especially with the distractions of home life is unrealistic. Plus, simply put…it’s just not fun! Why would I want to spend all of my free time on homework rather than hanging out with my friends or playing video games?

Even with all that said — if other countries demonstrate educational success on standardized testing with little to no assigned homework and limited school hours (nevermind the fact that this is measured through the questionable method of standardized testing), shouldn’t we take a step back and analyze the system as a whole, rather than figure out better homework policies? If other countries do this with limited to no homework, why can’t everyone else?

Investigating Systemic Problems

Perhaps the solution to academic achievement in America isn’t doubling down on increasing the work students do at home, but solving the underlying systemic inequities: the economic and discriminatory problems that plague our society. Yes, the United States tends to fall behind other countries on math and reading scores. Many countries impose increased workloads on students because they are afraid that they will fall behind economically with the standard of living to the rest of the world. But perhaps the problem with education doesn’t lie in not having enough “rigorous” methods, but with how easy it is for a family to simply live and be content.

Finland, frequently cited as a model education system which grew to prominence during the 2000s through popular scholars like Pasi Sahlberg, enjoys some of the highest standards of living in the world:

• Finland’s life expectancy is 81.8 years, compared to the US’ 78.7 years. Unlike Finland, there’s a notable difference between the richest and poorest Americans. The richest Americans are expected to live, on average, nearly 15 years longer than the poorest. Further, America’s life expectancy is declining, the only industrialized country with this statistic.
• Finland’s health care is rated best in the world and only spends $3,078 per capita, compared to $8,047 in the US.
• Finland has virtually no homelessness, compared to the 500,000 (and growing) homeless population in the United States.
• Finland has the lowest inequality levels in the EU, compared to the United States with one of the highest inequality levels in the world. Research has demonstrated that countries with lower inequality levels are happier and healthier.

These statistics reflect that potentially — instead of investing hundreds of millions of dollars in initiatives to increase national test scores, such as homework strategies, curriculum changes, and nationwide “raising the bar” initiatives — that we should invest in programs that improve our standard of living, such as universal healthcare and housing. The solution to test scores is rooted in solving underlying inequities in our societies — shining a light on our core issues — rather than making teachers solve all of our community’s problems.

This doesn’t mean that there’s no space for improving pedagogy, schooling, or curriculums, but at the end of the day the solution cannot solely be by improving education.

‍Creating Future Workers

Education often equates learning with work. As a teacher, I had to stop myself from behaving like an economics analyst: telling students to quit “wasting time”, stating that the purpose of the lesson is useful for securing a high salary career, seeing everything as prep for college and career (and college’s purpose as just for more earnings in a career), and making blanket assumptions that those who aren’t motivated will ultimately never contribute to society, taking on “low levels” of work that “aren’t as important” as other positions.

A common argument exists that the pressure of homework mirrors the real world — that we should assign homework because that’s “just the way things are.” If we want kids to succeed in the “real world”, they need to have this pressure.

But this mentality is unhealthy and unjust. The purpose of education should be to develop purpose. People live happier and healthier lives as a result of pursuing and developing a core purpose. Some people’s purpose is related to their line of work, but there is not necessarily a connection. However, the primary goal for education stated by districts, states, and the national government is to make “productive members of society” — those who are “prepared for the future” through “college and career readiness.” When we double down on economic principles, rather than look to developmental psychology and holistic care, to raise young people, it’s no wonder we’re seeing such horrific statistics related to childhood.

Further, the consistent pressure to solely learn for future economic gain raises generations of young people to believe that wealth is a measurement of success, and that specific lines of work create happiness. Teachers and parents are told to make their children “work hard” for future success and develop “grit.” Although grit is an important indicator of overcoming obstacles, it is not developed by enforcing grit through authoritarian classrooms or meaningless, long tasks like homework. In fact, an argument could be made that many Americans accept their dramatically poor work-life balance and lack of access to needs such as affordable health care by being brought up in a society that rewards tasks of “working through it” to “eventually achieve happiness.”

Many families have shifted from having children participate in common household chores and activities to have them exclusively focus on their school work. Americans have more difficulty than ever raising children, with increasing demands of time and rising childcare costs. When teachers provide more and more homework, they take away from the parents’ ability to structure their household according to their needs. In fact, children with chores show completely positive universal growth across the board, from time management skills to responsibility to managing a healthy work-life balance.

Of course, this is not to say that it is all the teacher’s fault. Educators face immense pressure to carry out governmental/school policies that place test scores at the forefront. Plus, most families had homework themselves — so continuing the practice only makes sense. Many of these policies require homework, and an educator’s employment is centered on enacting these changes. Barbara Stengel, an education professor, noted that the reason why so much homework isn’t necessarily interesting or applicable to a student’s lived experience is because “some of the people who would really have pushed the limits of that are no longer in teaching.” The constant pressure on teachers to raise test scores while simultaneously being overworked and underpaid is making many leave the profession. Etta Kralovec and John Buell add:

As more academic demands are placed on teachers, homework can help lengthen the school day and thus ensure ‘coverage’ — that is, the completion of the full curriculum that each teacher is supposed to cover during the school year…This in itself places pressure on teachers to create meaningful homework and often to assign large amounts of it so that the students’ parents will think the teacher is rigorous and the school has high academic standards. Extensive homework is frequently linked in our minds to high standards.

Therefore, there’s a connection to be made between the school- or work-life balance of children and the people who are tasked with teaching them. 8% of the teacher workforce leaves every year, with one of the primary reasons being poor work-life balance. Perhaps teachers see an increased desire to “work” students in their class and at home due to the pressures they face in their own occupation?

The more we equate work with learning, and the more we accept that a school’s primary purpose is to prepare workers, the less we actually succeed at promoting academics. Instead, we bolster the neoliberal tendencies of the United States (and others like it) to work hard, yet comparably to other countries’ lifestyle gains, achieve little.

This is why so many families demand that their children have ample amounts of homework. In fact, the majority of parents believe their students have just the right amount. They’re afraid that their kids are going to fall behind, doomed to a life within an increasingly hostile and inequitable society. They want the best for their children, and taking the risk of not assigning homework means that someone else may take that top slot. The same could be said for many parts of the “tracks toward college and career readiness” that professor William Deresiewicz refers to as “zombication” — lurching through each stage of the rat race in competitive admissions: a lot of assignments, difficult courses, sports, clubs, forced volunteerism, internships, and other things to pack our schedules.

Conclusion

The United States must examine the underlying inequities of peoples’ lives, rather than focus on increasing schools’ workloads and lessening children’s free time for mythical academic gains that lead to little change. Teacher preparation programs and popular authors need to stop promoting “interesting and fun ways to teach ‘x’!” and propose systemic changes that radically change the way education is done, including systemic changes to society at large. Only then will the United States actually see improved livelihoods and a better education system for all.

And what could be done instead? Much of the research and writing on homework tends to conclude that we should find a “happy middle ground” to continue the practice of homework, just in case it does indeed work. However, based on the decades of studies we have on this issue…I’m not really sure. It seems the best practice, by far, is to eliminate homework altogether outside of incredibly niche and rare scenarios. If a student asks for more things to do at home because they want to explore something that interests them, great! But that doesn’t need to be mandated homework.

Human Restoration Project believes that the four recommendations of the late educator and scholar Ken Robinson allows young people to learn for themselves and make the most of their lives:

1. Let children spend time with their families. The single strongest predictor of academic success and fewer behavioral problems for a child, 3–12 years old, is eating as a family. Make planned time during the day to catch up with children, talking to them about what they’re learning, and encouraging them to achieve.
2. Give children time to play outside or create something, preferably not always with a screen. Let them dive into their passions and plan a trip to a library, park, or museum. Explore free online resources to discover new skills and interests.
3. Give children opportunities to read by themselves or with their family. One of the best ways to learn about the world is developing a lifelong love of reading. Children who prioritize reading are more motivated to learn and see drastically improved academic outcomes.
4. Let children sleep! Elementary students should sleep at least 10 hours each night and adolescents, 9 hours. Being awake and ready to tackle each day keeps us energized and healthy.

If you’re interested in learning more, see The Case Against Homework by Nancy Kalish and Sara Bennett, The Homework Myth by Alfie Kohn, The End of Homework by Etta Kralovec and John Muelle, or one of the many citations linked in the show notes.

Citations

Anderson, J. (2019, December 3). Finland has the most efficient education system in the world. Quartz. https://qz.com/1759598/finland-has-the-most-efficient-education-system-in-the-world

APA. (2019a). Stress in America. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2019/stress-america-2019.pdf

APA. (2019b). Stress in AmericaTM 2019: Interactive Graphics. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2019/interactive-graphics

Baker, D., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World culture and the future of schooling. Stanford University Press.

Balingit, M. (2022, September 13). Wanted: Teachers. No training necessary. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/09/13/teacher-requirements-shortage-jobs/

Bennett, S., & Kalish, N. (2007). The Case Against Homework: How homework is hurting children and what parents can do about it. Harmony.

Byrnes, H. (2019a, April 11). U.S. leads among countries that spend the most on public health care. WLST. https://www.coloradoan.com/story/money/2019/04/11/countries-that-spend-the-most-on-public-health/39307147/

CDC. (2022, June 3). Data and statistics on children’s mental health. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/childrensmentalhealth/data.html

Chang, C. B., Wall, D., Tare, M., Golonka, E., & Vatz, K. (2014). Relationships of attitudes toward homework and time spent on homework to course outcomes: The case of foreign language learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 1049–1065. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036497

Chetty, R., Stepner, M., Abraham, S., Lin, S., Scuderi, B., Turner, N., Bergeron, A., & Cutler, D. (2016). The Association Between Income and Life Expectancy in the United States, 2001–2014: Association Between Income and Life Expectancy in the United States. JAMA, 315(16). https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.4226

Chores and children. (2018). https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Chores_and_Children-125.aspx

Cool, V. A., & Keith, T. Z. (1991). Testing a model of school learning: Direct and indirect effects on academic achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16(1), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476x(91)90004-5

Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076001001

Costa, P. N. da. (2019, May 29). America’s humongous wealth gap is widening further. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pedrodacosta/2019/05/29/americas-humungous-wealth-gap-is-widening-further/?sh=327f1ac342ee

Costley, K. (2013). Does Homework Really Improve Achievement? Arkansas Tech University.

Covington, N. (2020, January 31). A progressive response to “Ed. Reform’s Lost Decade.” Human Restoration Project. https://medium.com/human-restoration-project/a-progressive-response-to-ed-reforms-lost-decade-fb640c16d893

Daniels, E., & Steres, M. (2011). Examining the effects of a school-wide reading culture on the engagement of middle school students. RMLE Online, 35(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2011.11462085

Deresiewicz, W. (2015). Excellent sheep: The miseducation of the American elite and the way to a meaningful life. Simon and Schuster.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

Esdal, L. Teacher turnover: An overview of the problem and why it matters. (2019, February 28). Education Evolving. https://www.educationevolving.org/blog/2019/02/teacher-turnover-overview-of-problem-and-why-it-matters

Finland — WID — World inequality database. (2016, June 23). WID — Wealth and Income Database. https://wid.world/country/finland/

Galloway, M., Conner, J., & Pope, D. (2013). Nonacademic effects of homework in privileged, high-performing high schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81(4), 490–510. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2012.745469

Henly, J. R., Shaefer, H. L., & Waxman, E. (2006). Nonstandard work schedules: Employer‐ and employee‐driven flexibility in retail jobs. Social Service Review, 80(4), 609–634. https://doi.org/10.1086/508478

Hofferth, S. L., & Sandberg, J. F. (2001). How American children spend their time. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00295.x

Human Restoration Project. (n.d.). Research. Retrieved January 24, 2023, from https://www.humanrestorationproject.org/research

Indicators of Higher Education: Equity in the US. (2018). http://pellinstitute.org/downloads/publications-Indicators_of_Higher_Education_Equity_in_the_US_2018_Historical_Trend_Report.pdf&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1674598544982744&usg=AOvVaw3EdEhMRi9luOuJm0IKhMSF

Ken Robinson, TED. (2007). Do schools kill creativity? [Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

Kohn, A. (2007). The homework myth: Why our kids get too much of a bad thing. Da Capo Lifelong Books.

Kralovec, E., & Buell, J. (2001). The End of Homework: How homework disrupts families, overburdens children, and limits learning. Beacon Press.

Leonard, N. R., Gwadz, M. V., Ritchie, A., Linick, J. L., Cleland, C. M., Elliott, L., & Grethel, M. (2015). A multi-method exploratory study of stress, coping, and substance use among high school youth in private schools. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01028

Livingston, G. (2019, February 20). The way U.S. teens spend their time is changing, but differences between boys and girls persist. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/20/the-way-u-s-teens-spend-their-time-is-changing-but-differences-between-boys-and-girls-persist/

Luthar, S. S., Barkin, S. H., & Crossman, E. J. (2013). “I can, therefore I must”: Fragility in the upper-middle classes. Development and Psychopathology, 25(4pt2), 1529–1549. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579413000758

Lynch, R. The economic and fiscal consequences of improving U.S. educational outcomes — Equitable growth. (2015, February 2). Washington Center for Equitable Growth. https://equitablegrowth.org/achievement-gap/

Mcdermott, R. P., Goldman, S. V., & Varenne, H. (1984a). When school goes home: Some problems in the organization of homework. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 85(3), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146818408500310

McGuire, J. (2023). The President Of Ireland Wants To Get Rid Of Homework & Honestly, He’s Onto Something. Romper. https://www.romper.com/life/president-of-ireland-michael-d-higgins-homework

Miller, C. C. (2018, December 25). The relentlessness of modern parenting. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/25/upshot/the-relentlessness-of-modern-parenting.html

Natriello, G., & McDill, E. L. (1986). Performance standards, student effort on homework, and academic achievement. Sociology of Education, 59(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112483

PBS NewsHour : Biggest Predictor of College Success is Family Income. (2015). America’s Promise. https://web.archive.org/web/20220807230624/americaspromise.org/news/pbs-newshour-biggest-predictor-college-success-family-income

Plante, T. (2018, December 3). Americans are stressed out, and it is getting worse. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/do-the-right-thing/201812/americans-are-stressed-out-and-it-is-getting-worse

Pinsker, J. (2019, March 28). Does homework work? The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/03/homework-research-how-much/585889/

Pressman, R. M., Sugarman, D. B., Nemon, M. L., Desjarlais, J., Owens, J. A., & Schettini-Evans, A. (2015). Homework and family stress: With consideration of parents’ self confidence, educational level, and cultural background. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 43(4), 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2015.1061407

Sander, G. F. (2018). Finland’s homeless crisis nearly solved. How? By giving homes to all who need. The Christian Science Monitor. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2018/0321/Finland-s-homeless-crisis-nearly-solved.-How-By-giving-homes-to-all-who-need

Smurthwaite, D. (2018, April 27). Why Overworking is Made in America and Work-Life Balance Lives in Europe. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-overworking-made-america-work-life-balance-lives-dave-smurthwaite/

Taras, H., & Potts-Datema, W. (2005). Sleep and student performance at school. Journal of School Health, 75(7), 248–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2005.00033.x

The State of Homelessness in America. (2019). https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/The-State-of-Homelessness-in-America.pdf

The three faces of work-family conflict. (2010, January 25). Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-three-faces-of-work-family-conflict/

Walker, T. (2015). The great homework debate: What’s getting lost in the hype. NEA. https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/great-homework-debate-whats-getting-lost-hype

Wallace, K. (2015, August 12). Kids have three times too much homework, study finds; what’s the cost? CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/12/health/homework-elementary-school-study/index.html

Weir, K. (2016). Is homework a necessary evil? https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/03/homework

Wilkinson, R. G. (2002). Unhealthy societies: The afflictions of inequality. Routledge.

Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2020). The inner level: How more equal societies reduce stress, restore sanity and improve everyone’s well-being. Penguin.

Woolf, S. H. (2019). Life expectancy and mortality rates in the United States, 1959–2017. JAMA, 322(20), 1996–2016. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.16932

This is why we should stop giving homework was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Our hero took his bank-book, and gazed on the entry “Five Dollars” with a new sense of importance. He had been accustomed to joke about Erie shares, but now, for the first time, he felt himself a capitalist; on a small scale, to be sure, but still it was no small thing for Dick to have five dollars which he could call his own. He firmly determined that he would lay by every cent he could spare from his earnings towards the fund he hoped to accumulate…

When Dick went home at night he locked up his bank-book in one of the drawers of the bureau. It was wonderful how much more independent he felt whenever he reflected upon the contents of that drawer, and with what an important air of joint ownership he regarded the bank building in which his small savings were deposited.

These stories became increasingly popular as companies gained more power within the United States and workers labored over 60 hours a week. Young boys loved these stories because it offered them hope for the future.

Not as known about Horatio Alger Jr. was his dark upbringing that influenced the themes of his work. Growing up relatively well-off in the middle class, Alger didn’t have a similar story to the fictional characters he wrote about. His early life was briefly spent as a minister until he was ousted for committing pederasty — committing sexual acts with young boys. Alger’s popular works all featured young, gentle, good-mannered, and poor boys who were given opportunities by capitalists to make a name for themselves. Already creepy given Alger’s backstory, the narrator would often point out their good looks and moral decency as the reason they stood out to future employers. Every book after the success of Ragged Dick essentially followed the same aforementioned formula. The patriarchal and eerie selection of hard-working, “good” poor people was ingrained into early corporate culture.

Equally important to the impact of these stories was that Alger wasn’t that popular when he was alive. He was a moderately successful author but his audience didn’t seem to care much about the “moral” part of these stories. Instead, they wanted to dream of a path toward monetary success. Alger didn’t write his stories as simple “rags to riches” narratives, but after his death mass media conglomerates ran cheap reprints that edited out the long winded sections on morals and respectability. These new stories focused solely on amassing a lot of money, and they sold hundreds of millions of copies.

Stories like these have remained incredibly popular across the last century. In 2012, many news outlets ran a story of a young man secretly living at AOL’s headquarters to make his business a success.

Eric Simons, a 19-year-old college dropout, had recently ended a multi-month internship at AOL to incubate his business. Afterwards when the money and training ran out, many of his friends returned to college. But Eric noticed that AOL had not disabled their security badges. So he secretly squatted at the corporation, staying alive on cereal and ramen and working all hours of the day to raise money for his start-up.

Despite being an intriguing story of subterfuge, there’s an underlying belief that it’s worth destroying oneself for the sake of profit. Even after the young entrepreneur was caught, the CEO of AOL said,

Tenacity and commitment are key attributes of a great entrepreneur. Eric has these in spades as demonstrated by his willingness to do whatever it takes to get his company off the ground.

News articles not only celebrated the young man’s dedication and “tirelessness”, but how after receiving funding to rent a place of his own that he quickly subletted the space to earn even more capital.

Teaching Toward Horatio Alger

A worrying attachment between business, success-at-any-cost, and schooling has always existed and continues to press on. As Education Secretary Miguel Cardona tweeted over the last several days:

Every student should have access to an education that aligns with industry demands and evolves to meet the demands of tomorrow’s global workforce.

Every student should have a pathway to a brighter future. Every student should have access to an education that builds their confidence & every student should have a pathway to a successful career.

Teaching isn’t a job you hold. It’s an extension of your life’s purpose.

Our work to transform our schools is crucial to creating a strong economic foundation for our country. It’s time to break down the silos between K-12 systems and college, career, and industry preparation programs. This is how we transform education in this country.

An overwhelming number of schools are investing in career readiness and STEM. And after graduating, students are funneled into the dual economy: separating workers into high paying finance, technology, and electronics careers; or being everyone else. Those in the former are predominately white and male, have wealth, benefits, and often a generous work-life balance compared to their low-wage peers.

“Achievement at any cost” — centered on entering this high echelon that roughly 1/5th of Americans enjoy, drives much of a test-centric schooling system that necessitates greed and corporatism: whoever grows up and holds the most wealth, wins. A modern American mythology paints tech-entrepreneurs as gods with special traits that have allowed them to live lives greater than everyone else. As a result, many working-class people who work long, grueling hours for massively wealthy corporations nearly worship rich CEOs. “Hustle culture” has enthralled hopeful readers to burn themselves out toward “success” — spanning books, documentaries, and social media feeds in the same way as Horatio Alger stories.

Rich people share their success stories through affirmations and “life hacks.” A popular social media template shows entrepreneurs’ weekly calendar. These are meant to demonstrate a strong “work ethic” with extreme motivation, but really most days include substantial breaks and relatively mundane tasks. If a lower class worker, such as a teacher, marked everything they did on a calendar it would be much more packed even into the late evening. Similarly, entrepreneurship self-help books promise to make readers “successful” — or more cynically — not starve in the global marketplace. Author and CTE Conference keynote speaker Brooks Harper writes in the summary of 7 Skills to Make Mill$, “…[it] is NOT about students becoming rich, but rather building the wealth of skill sets necessary to be successful in school, career and life!”

Taking a darker turn, these perpetual messages to push oneself to succeed are patriarchal patronizing. These are messages by rich, often white men, who control much of the wealth. They promise to offer the proper ethics to succeed in life, and they’re praised for their benevolence in sharing how they “got ahead.” Just like the “selection” of poor boys by the rich capitalist class of Alger’s stories, the underclass are given tools to compete toward their potential ascension.

Schools Are Not Career Preparation Centers

When we focus on STEM without the humanities and don’t call for care and belonging, we create a space for exploitation and limit possibilities. Preparing students solely for the jobs of today means to accept that systemic problems of capitalism are just the way things are: The massive wealth inequalities are normal; Discrimination against ignored communities doesn’t exist and instead everyone just needs to “work harder.”; That jobs which pay the most are the most important. It isn’t about purpose-driven fulfillment or social justice but about earning as much money as possible for a multinational corporation (and enjoying personal success through wealth).

This means that the simple act of slowing down and not participating in the rat race is a radical act. To resist an overwhelming call for workforce development and teach issues of social justice is to disrupt the neoliberal order. The elites and their sycophants on the right portray teachers as intentionally limiting a young person’s career possibilities in the name of a “woke agenda.” On the left, teachers are pressured to solve issues of equity by finding ways to raise problematic test scores. At every turn, educators have to resist behaviorist methods: from SLANT to cold-calling which are rooted in business-minded managerial notions of “input, output” learning. Of course drilling content in inhumane ways leads to higher test scores, and perhaps even well-paying careers, but critical thinking and a general love of learning (and life) are lost along the way.

Many students aren’t going to be interested in whatever the latest workforce craze is. Not everyone wants to be a programmer or obtain a specific CTE-licensure. Many students love the arts or even simply just hanging out with their friends. A student who steps out of line in a workforce-centric classroom is sent through a Social Darwinist sorting mechanism. It becomes easy for a teacher to just accept that students who are disengaged from CTE-driven curriculums “won’t achieve as much” and place them on a remedial track. Rather than adapt curriculum or pursue a child’s interests, they are left at the sidelines. Then, many students “on track” begin to believe that those other students “deserve to not be successful.” It’s a numbers game. As long as most students have the right answer on the test review Kahoot, it’s time to move on. No one questions the system itself — and those that want to aren’t given the opportunity or time to speak up for themselves and fight back.

If one believes in a meritocracy and that everyone has the same shot, then rugged individualism is the obvious path forward. Setbacks, exploitation, and self-neglect are simply pinpoints in a quest toward future success. Similar messages are transposed to teachers as they bear low wages and unsustainable working conditions, with edu-celebrity motivational speakers simply calling for more effort, no solidarity:

Similar to rich tech-bros, motivational education speakers are almost always male, patriarchal figures speaking to a female-dominated profession on what they should be doing. Offering obvious and banal platitudes of “working harder for students” mirrors the “work hard for success” methodology of self-help books, which pushes one to succeed as an individual but rarely questions systemic problems that demand collective action.

Framing education as exclusively workforce development restructures classrooms to embark on a “success at any cost” mission. Career technical education (CTE), although useful as a tool within a broader public education system, cannot replace a humane, purpose-driven space that promotes democracy and thriving communities. Only prioritizing CTE to prepare for the jobs of today means to accept the exploitative nature in our world of work: transforming teachers to bosses and students to employees. Providing power to students to shape their own curriculums, learning, and futures are not commonplace in CTE classrooms because that’s not how job sites operate. Dehumanizing conditions and policies are readily incorporated into classroom syllabi as that’s how “the real (corporate) world works.” The focus is on credentialing, getting ahead, and future success through a profitable career. It’s a commitment to a corporate death culture.

We must be skeptical of schools as training facilities. They are much more than that, and are central to preserving democracy. Young people must become critical thinkers that are able to build a better world, which will involve challenging corporations that continually exploit humans, animals, and the environment for profit. If all young people believe that profit is the purpose, then our world will teeter toward collapse. This means we must intentionally develop lessons, curriculum, and student-driven initiatives that critically question the world around us and give us the tools to stand up for ourselves.

As child developmental psychologist Susan Engel writes in The End of the Rainbow: How Educating for Happiness Not Money Would Transform Our Schools,

A close look inside the classroom door suggests that in the past 150 years we have come to think, perhaps without realizing it, that the purpose of education is to make money. Though going to school hugely increases a child’s chance of earning a decent wage in adulthood, that fact need not, and should not, define our thinking about what and how children should learn. Decent wages may be a very desirable outcome of attending school. But that doesn’t mean that money should be the goal of education or the measure of its success. Of course, the skeptic might ask what harm there is in designating money as the purpose of school. As it turns out, plenty.

Schools Can’t Accept the Corporate Status Quo was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Progressive education is in a time of “radical imagination.” Alex Khasnabish & Max Haiven, who coined the term, write,

We are compelled to dedicate our imaginations to daydreams of individualized escape: lonely hopes of winning the lottery to evade our debts, or idle fantasies of revenge visited upon those who oppress us…

Rather than being merely a tool of grim individual survival, the imagination can be the catalyst for collective liberation. But to make it so we need to embrace radical ideas and radical practices. We need to open ourselves to the possibility that our world could be radically different.

Blending the roots of Dewey, Montessori, and Piaget with modern scholarship of Love, hooks, and Hagopian, educators are imagining a modern education system that engages, motivates, and demands justice for all learners. Together, educators are forming online communities that explore each classroom’s potential as a space for transformative learning. They are leaning on each other for hope and as they organize together for action. Radical imagination involves looking past the world of today and building something anew.

The growth of digital technologies has led to new connections and spawned change. From the Arab Spring to Black Lives Matter to #MeToo to March for Our Lives, rapid organizing has become mainstream as online communities come together and share a common goal. This is especially true for younger generations who have grown up through social media. These are spaces of self-reflection, critical thinking, and discourse — where people disagree but push each other forward. It’s an opportunity for educators to bring about a reimagined education system.

The Challenge

Social media is the bedrock for most modern classroom discussions. Whether it be a new lesson idea or a systemic change to assessment, educators connect with one another on Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, and the like. But the same online spaces where educators discuss new possibilities are part of the neoliberal system. An obsessive Internet culture bent on likes, shares, and algorithmic popularity siphons the most dramatic messages to the reader at all times. And with all the terrors of the world, this means there’s a slip stream of negative notifications as people endlessly scroll through the daily news. After a while, it’s easy to accept the fate that “this is just the way the world works.”

Social media has taken neoliberal self-promotion practices to the extreme, highlighting a world that is built for the self. Everything is a hustle, an ad, a time to get ahead, a time to self-promote; breakout rooms serve as elevator pitches rather than times to connect. Posters replicate the trending topics of the day seeking more clicks on their profile for Internet fame. It’s all about getting ahead and moving fast. This distorts how people view movement building: either believing that change must happen all at once or not at all, or by building an “always online” culture where people hold fringe opinions from their algorithmic bubbles. To disagree or critically examine a topic is considered weak juxtaposed against banal, purely hateful, or positively toxic opinions.

It takes away energy from potential community collaboration. Educators worldwide hold positive aspirations about what school could be, but find themselves consistently pushing for their share of recognition and funding to get ahead. After all, without notoriety and financial backing it would be impossible to scale and make change. However, this also means that communities are competing for resources against one another. Operating within this system it’s easy to resort to talking past each other — seeing discussions as an opportunity for self-promotion rather than actual change.

Theorist Mark Fisher believed that it is nearly impossible to imagine a future without capitalism. Our education and communication apparatuses are entirely hinged on the principles of business: it’s not about the humans in the room, it’s about results. Even if educators talk about building spaces of love, hope, and care, the first question is usually, “but what about test scores?” Radically reimagining education systems is met with constant cynicism of “this is just the way the world works.” This is in spite of schools already demonstrating that a different way is possible.

Thinking Differently

Seated within the same online spaces is an opportunity to embrace hope. Critical pedagogue Henry Giroux writes,

Hope married to power, politics, and agency is a political project in which civic literacy, infused with a language of critique and possibility, addresses the notion that there is no democracy without knowledgeable and civically literate citizens. Such a language is necessary to enable the conditions to forge a collective international resistance among educators, youth, artists, and other cultural workers in defence of public goods. Hope begins with dissent, critique, and the idea of social transformation. Militant hope connects memory and lived experience to a sense of reality infused with a sense of possibility. Hope is more than a wish or empty dream, it is a subversive force, an active presence in opening a space for imagining the impossible, evoking not only different stories but also different futures.

When social media spaces increasingly harbor far-right and white supremacist forces which seek to divide, radicalize, and cause physical harm, it’s up to organizers to create new spaces to promote their ideas. They need to support each other in building their dreams and aspirations. Unlike the simplistic, propagandistic messages of radical actors, reimaginers must create spaces that foster discussion and critical questioning. These spaces are more than quick algorithmic blips for fame — they’re living communities centered on changing the future.

And it’s important to recognize that there are communities already doing this work. While overarching narratives may assume that all hope is lost and public education must be entirely rebuilt, there are plenty of folks rallying together that have built flourishing communities. (See Disrupt Texts, Clear the Air, Teacher Powered Schools, Ungrading Hub, Institute for Humane Education, Progressive Education Network, Zinn Ed Project, Learning for Justice and of course, Human Restoration Project — among many others.) This is a long, incrementalist fight that requires a positive obsession toward social justice. Author Octavia Butler believed that imagining a new future together was an act of transformative change in-it-of-itself. As co-editor of science fiction analogy Octavia’s Brood Walidah Imarisha writes,

We believe in that right Butler claimed for each of us — the right to dream as ourselves, individually and collectively. But we also think it is a responsibility she handed down: are we brave enough to imagine beyond the boundaries of “the real” and then do the hard work of sculpting reality from our dreams?

Or as philosophers and educators Paulo Freire and Antonia Darder both say, educators need to “fight for love.” It is not enough to benevolently operate a classroom in accordance with school policies. We must stand together to be critical friends of public education and demonstrate progressive education in mainstream settings. This involves leveraging our power and privilege to transform spaces at the smallest level, ushering a snowball effect to neighboring classrooms, the school at large, and through online spaces — the world.

Online spaces give progressive educators tools to continue this fight. These communities…

• Provide practices they can incorporate in their own classrooms.
• House safe spaces for educators to talk through their difficulties and lean on one another.
• Demonstrate talking points against common arguments and misinterpretations of progressive education.
• Allow for discussions that challenge existing beliefs and collectively imagine a different future.
• Enable the opportunity for everyone to share their perspective and join the movement, including young people, families, community members, and activists.

These spaces exist on all platforms: old, crumbling, flourishing, or emerging — wherever people feel comfortable sharing their ideas.

Systemic change has never been more possible than it is now. Unlike the progressive education accomplishments of the past, there’s less reliance on traditional media coverage and more traction for socially-conscious movements. There is space for educators to share their success where they can create their own communities beyond a classroom’s four walls. And for the first time, there’s an accessible space for young people to rally together en masse and demand change. Like Greta Thunberg’s Fridays for Future, young people can rally for themselves to demand better of their classrooms. Like-minded educators can build friendly, hopeful spaces for young people to channel their energy toward creative rebellion against unjust systems, rather than falling prey to grifters and hate manufacturers.

Therefore, in spite of the real threat of the destruction of online spaces through reinstatement of the far right and stochastic terrorism, there cannot be a rise in “doomerism.” To give up the fight and embrace nihilistic futures disregards historic victories and real possibilities. We should embrace the tools we have to continue pressing forward and demonstrate what is possible, even if it’s perceived as minor in the grand scheme of things. We must share what we’re doing and showcase why it matters: our pedagogies and student learning (with permission). Public intellectualism cannot be lost to a call to the void of social media escapism. To transgress the system, we need everyone to contribute what they can to positively change the world.

All that you touch you Change. All that you Change Changes you. The only lasting truth is Change. — Octavia Butler

The Only Lasting Truth is Change was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

As detailed last month in our Human-Centered Interdisciplinary Subject (IDS) update, we are creating a curriculum that features lessons, hands-on learning, and pedagogical understanding to create an interdisciplinary course: one that explores learning how to learn — looking at the intriguing questions that make learning interesting. If you haven’t read that update, we recommend starting there!

In this breakdown, we will be detailing 3 lessons (out of over 40!) that are appearing in the IDS. These lessons are one of two components of the course. The first half of the curriculum centers these lessons, while the second half has students using design thinking to tackle a multi-faceted project inspired by what they’ve learned.

Lesson Design

All lessons in the IDS feature one or both of these principles: wonder and community action. Lessons involving wonder focus on intriguing, inherently interesting elements of our world — the types of things that young people (and adults!) obsess over in the library such as space, dinosaurs, or sailing the seven seas. These are concepts that capture the world around us and awake our natural curiosity.

Lessons on community action center global issues. These are lessons that talk about the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), recognizing local and global challenges our world faces. With plenty of context, these lessons equip students to understand and act on issues.

All lessons follow the same format:

1. A purpose statement that summarizes why the lesson is used.
2. An introduction to frame the lesson for students.
3. Multiple activities, readings & writings, or other media.
4. Reflection questions that check for understanding.
5. A “Take it Further” section with ideas for later design thinking projects, additional media (books, podcasts, YouTube videos), and extension activities for typical core subjects (English, mathematics, science, social studies, art, and physical education).

They are intentionally modular. We know that most teachers will heavily adapt these resources and we’ve sectioned each off so that one could easily modify it. All are available as PDFs or Google Documents. Lessons can be utilized online or as printed resources. Therefore, although the IDS is developed as its own course, it could be easily integrated into an advisory period, as materials for one’s traditional subject-matter class, or extended class time.

The IDS will be released for free later this year and is a partnership between Holistic Think Tank and Human Restoration Project.

*All images are screenshots from the linked facilitation guides.

**All facilitation guides are in draft form and are likely to include spelling, grammatical, and formatting errors. They have not yet been peer reviewed or edited. Full release is later this year!

Example #1: Food Deserts

Draft Facilitation Guide

A large populous of the world is hungry and that number is set to increase year after year. This lesson explores the connections, locally and globally, on access to food by looking at food deserts.

Within, students will explore multiple maps around the world:

After discussing these maps, students are given a hypothetical city map:

In response to flourishing commercial growth, the city invests in additional restaurants and storefronts. To create space, city planners tear down an abandoned building as well as the (city) market, deciding that local residents can use the market on the outskirts of town.

After talking about the potential problems this may create for city residents, students then create their own tiles to place on the city. An example may be:

Students describe, compare & contrast, and offer feedback to each other’s solutions, reflecting on why food deserts exist and how communities can work together to solve these problems.

In the facilitator guide, many extension activities exist including analyzing charts and data to talk about feeding the world by 2050, showing how artists are drawing attention to food sustainability, and looking at the impact of biotechnology on world hunger.

Example #2: From Empathy to Action

Draft Facilitation Guide

This lessons looks at the idea of not “fitting in”, highlighting feeling like one is “standing out” from trivial reasons to something more substantial, like disability or language barriers.

From there, students would brainstorm a common scenario, writing a detailed description of how they’d behave in the scenario. Then, students act out the idea as if they have no idea of what it is. As we write in the IDS, an example may be:

“Entering a building with someone following behind you -

Incomplete model: Open the door, hold it open
Act out these steps exactly as scripted and describe out loud the impact to participants: you’ll never enter the building, you’re standing in the middle of the doorway blocking others from entering, the person behind you could potentially be confused, you may be embarrassed. Then complete the script.

More complete model: Walk up to the door. Facing the door, identify which kind of door it is: push or pull.

If a push door: identify what side the door hinge is on and push on the opposite side, if a pull door: identify the type of handle and use the handle to pull the door open (Which hand?). Once the door is open, decide whether or not to hold the door open for the person behind you (what factors weigh in this decision?). Acknowledge the other person with a pleasantry, “Nice day, isn’t it?” and make brief eye contact. Once the other person has successfully navigated the doorway, wait a few seconds to close the door and follow behind them if you are headed in the same direction. Do not follow too closely.

Act out this model exactly as described, adding any additional regional or local details as are necessary. This activity can be repeated again to perfect the interaction or you can move on to the next part of the activity.”

Students will then look at cultural norms and consider ways these instructions may differ in various communities or countries.

This builds into looking at inclusion vs exclusion with a specific focus on disability inclusion, recognizing that we must design with disability in mind. Students consider how various scripts and circumstances may differ based on someone’s disability, class, race, language, or culture.

Like before, extension activities are included such as considering the accessibility of digital spaces in website design, the usage of audiobooks as reading, and looking at accessible comic book design.

Lesson #3: Artificial Intelligence

Draft Facilitation Guide

Lastly, this lesson explores the growth of artificial intelligence, specifically in writing. As an added twist….the lesson itself was created with AI! Almost every prompt (outside of those written in green text) was generated by OpenAI/GPT-3.

Students, either using OpenAI or one of the provided AI-generated stories, look at how AI can write, discussing how authenticate this writing can be and ways to identify it as AI. Then, they play a game deciding if each of the prompts they are given is generated by AI or not (spoiler: they’re all AI generated).

As previously stated, the “meta” component of this lesson is that the lesson itself is generated by AI. The activities that students perform and the prompts they’re asked are created by this tool. This leads into a discussion on the ethics of AI: is this a tool? a crutch? is it cheating?

We even go as far as writing the extension activities and student example responses with AI. It really brings home the point!

Extensions

Again, a huge part of these lessons is not only their modular nature — being able to pick, pull, and modify everything to meet your needs — but the valuable extension activities to gather more instructional tools for subjects students are interested in.

We look forward to continuing to provide updates about the IDS! Additional lessons we’ve completed include:

• Critiquing and curating works of art, learning about adjectives and the beauty of language, and describing common things — such as pop music, candy, or student artwork.
• Discussing the philosophical concept of being a “good person” by playing a debate game featuring different philosophies from various cultures in various historical times.
• Examining body language, from performing mock interviews to analyzing the impact of code switching.
• Looking at what we know and what we don’t know — knowledge gaps — by playing a game of “categories”, a Pyramid-style game were students name all they can about a specific topic, from “books we read in school” to “parts of an automobile.”
• Imagining our futures and reflecting on hope, then analyzing internal vs. external locuses of control.
• Reflecting on the cross section of money and happiness, considering whether money is required for happiness — and if so, is there a minimum or max?
• Developing an action plan for future success, creating a hopeful picture for the future and beginning to understand the role of planning.
• Highlighting the design thinking process as a way to look at tackling challenges and structuring tasks.
• Looking at how conscious choices can impact the world around us through the lens of “fast fashion.”
• Considering the impact and development of language, considering how language has developed overtime and why descriptive language is useful.
• Analyzing “wicked problems” through the lens of social media regulation, and how complex problems require many connected solutions to solve.

Stay tuned to humanrestorationproject.org as well as updates from Holistic Think Tank for more information!

Lessons Preview: Human-Centered Interdisciplinary Subject was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

In creating an organization for lasting change, it’s vitally important we revisit the values in which we promote a human-centered education. Over the last 2 years as a nonprofit, our practices and thoughts haven’t strayed much from the core philosophy — but certain language and explicit practices have been absent from our values statements. Therefore, we are updating our educational “needs” in the following ways:

Much of our changes are language shifts: being more explicit about the things we cared about. These are systemic changes that have always guided our approach to the classroom, but may not have been self-evident by our documents. First off, we’ve combined and eliminated some actions toward systemic change:

• “Support Multi-Age Classrooms” and “Support Interdisciplinary Learning” have been combined, as many of the benefits of these practices align and are in the same literature.
• “Support A Reflective Space” has been removed, as although this is an important practice and a pinnacle of Dewey’s pedagogy — it is not necessarily an action toward systemic change. This is part of the experiential learning process.
• “Stay “Buzzword” Free” has been removed, as again it is not necessarily an action toward systemic change and can be combined with supporting teachers generally.

Then, we’ve added clarifying remarks to some of our existing actions toward system change. We wanted to ensure the language was clear on what we support as an organization:

• “Adopt Critical Pedagogy” -> “Adopt Critical Pedagogy & Build Democratic Schools”, which both elaborates on the goals of critical pedagogy, expands on an unfamiliar term for many, and adds in specific language for systemic objectives.
• “Demand Inclusive Spaces” -> “Demand Anti-Racist, Inclusive Spaces”, clarifies using specific language that HRP firmly supports anti-bias, anti-racist (ABAR) practices and believes systemic change is necessary for all marginalized groups.

Finally, we’ve added three new actions toward systemic change. These are ideas that frequently appear in our resources, podcasts, and writings:

• “Reimagine Spaces & Promote Free Play”: Play is the fundamental cornerstone of learning, and being able to freely imagine and be a creative individual is the pinnacle of growth and development. To develop a space that promotes free play, rather than only guided play, is the goal.
• “Prioritize Mental Health & Social-Emotional Learning”: Now more than ever, students need the proper supports to cope, channel, and recognize their emotions. Schools need to change systems that not only disengage students, but cause them trauma.
• “Ensure a Thriving Public Education”: Although HRP supports all schools working to promote a human-centered education, we have a firm commitment to public education. Simply stated, a democratic society is not possible without strong public schools, and we know that public schools make a huge difference in many students lives. Our org exists to promote pedagogical shifts to recognize that as it exists, public education is not currently working for everyone, showcasing how we can reimagine the system.

You will see these changes reflected in all of our resources in the coming weeks. It’s our commitment to always be a beacon of what it means to be a progressive educator — and a key part of that process is reflecting on what matters to you and if your values are represented in your work. Being purposeful is one of, if not the most important, concepts. We deeply appreciate everyone’s support of Human Restoration Project and will continue to promote these impactful and lasting cornerstones of the movement.

Human Restoration Project Values Statements Update (2022) was originally published in Human Restoration Project on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.