A System Frozen in Time

Our education system hasn’t changed much since the 1920s really. We’ve just added different subjects or incorporated slightly different techniques, tweaking around the edges while the fundamental structure remains intact. Research highlights that students learn more through workshops and activities, through the actual experience of learning, but instead we teach in a didactic way. Not because teachers want to, but because the sector wants everything standardised, measured, and controlled.

AI could give teachers back so much time, freeing them from administrative burdens to focus on what actually matters in education. Instead, schools are aiming to make the system more homogeneous, more efficient at doing exactly what we’ve always done. This isn’t all schools, you have some great teachers and great schools doing brilliant work, but this is the system at large, the dominant pattern that shapes educational practice across the country.

The Deeper Problem

Honestly, education at all levels has faced these challenges for decades before AI arrived on the scene. Over-commodification has diminished learning, reducing teaching to a mere shell of what it should be. Standardisation has prioritised bureaucracy over creativity, leading many teachers to leave not for lower pay but for less favourable conditions, for environments where they can no longer actually teach in ways they know are effective.

This mirrors a broader trend in how we approach complex problems. We favour quick fixes over substantial investments that yield long-term benefits, choosing the path that looks efficient on a spreadsheet over the one that actually works. Industry shapes learning not for individual benefit but to reduce their own training costs, treating education as a pipeline for pre-trained workers rather than a space for human development. CPD often functions more as a marketing tool than an educational one, box-ticking rather than genuine professional growth.

Schools focus on cost-cutting rather than improving student experience or learning outcomes. The shift from student-focused to accountancy-focused education shows up everywhere, in every teaching method, every policy decision, every strategic priority. We’ve moved from asking what helps students learn to asking what costs less to deliver.

We talk about the next generation critically, pointing to their lack of attention and declining standards, but the system they’re being taught in just doesn’t prepare them adequately for the future as it stands. We blame students for failing to thrive in conditions designed to produce compliance rather than understanding.

What Real Change Looks Like

To change it we need fundamental shifts in how we assess learning. Rather than looking for recall and comprehension, testing whether students can repeat back what we’ve told them, we need to evaluate thoughtfulness and genuine understanding. What questions did they ask in approaching a problem? What was their method for investigating it? How did they evaluate their approach? What did they recognise as missing from their analysis?

We should assess core skills through competency exercises that demonstrate actual ability rather than memorised knowledge. Embed project and group activities more thoroughly throughout curricula, making collaborative learning the norm rather than the exception. See thoughtfulness, those building blocks of philosophical inquiry, and critical thinking, the practices of evaluation and reflection, as two halves of a whole rather than separate skills to be tested independently.

The textbook as a resource should still be valid, but the method of teaching it should have died a death a long time ago. We need to move toward a more facilitative model of education that guides rather than instructs, that informs students why the resources are valuable and doesn’t expect everything to be memorised and regurgitated on command.

Because unfortunately many people weren’t able to memorise information before, but they could understand it when given the chance to engage with it properly. We haven’t really considered understanding in this process, only comprehension, treating these as interchangeable when they represent fundamentally different ways of knowing. That distinction matters enormously for how we think about what education should accomplish.

The Real Question

We need the system to evolve to really incorporate AI in meaningful ways. And honestly, we needed this evolution before AI even arrived.

The question isn’t whether students should use ChatGPT for their essays. The question is whether we’ll finally build an education system that prepares humans for meaningful lives, for genuine participation in a complex world, or whether we’ll just automate the inadequacies of 1920 with the efficiency of 2025, doing the wrong thing faster and more consistently than ever before.

We have all been there: cramming facts for an exam, highlighting endless pages of textbooks, drilling vocabulary words until our eyes glaze over. For many students, ‘revision’ becomes a dreaded word (the antithesis of their academic journey). Some seem naturally gifted at memorising information, others develop the dedication to push through, but countless students struggl with this traditional approach to learning.

The uncomfortable truth? Raw information and isolated facts are not how humans naturally learn best.

Research in cognitive psychology shows that our brains are wired for narrative. Stories activate multiple regions simultaneously (language processing, sensory areas, and emotional centres), creating richer neural pathways than isolated facts. Yet most educational systems continue to prioritise information transfer over narrative engagement.

The Story Revolution

Consider what captures attention in any learning environment. A list of historical dates, or the dramatic turning point when one decision changed everything? A chemical formula, or the story of the accidental discovery that revolutionised medicine? A policy statistic, or the human impact that drove legislative change?

Stories work because they provide cognitive scaffolding. They give our minds frameworks to hang information on, making retrieval easier and application more intuitive. This is not just theory. It is observable in everything from medical training (where case studies outperform textbook memorisation) to corporate learning (where scenario-based training improves performance over procedural manuals).

Through my work in educational settings, I have watched this play out repeatedly. Students who struggled with traditional revision methods often excelled when information was embedded in meaningful narratives. The difference was not their ability to memorise. It was their ability to connect.

The Three Pillars of Effective Learning

But not all stories serve learning equally well. Some educate, others entertain, and some (more dangerously) mislead while appearing to inform. After years of examining how information influences decision-making across different contexts, I have identified three critical elements that determine a story’s educational value.

Pillar 1: Content — The Story Structure

Effective educational narratives share specific characteristics:

• Cognitive load management: They introduce complexity gradually, building on familiar concepts
• Conflict and resolution: They present problems and demonstrate solutions, engaging our natural problem-solving instincts
• Concrete specificity: They use detailed examples rather than abstract generalisations
• Emotional resonance: They connect to human experiences that create memorable associations

Research insight: Studies in educational psychology show that students retain 65% of information shared through stories compared to 5% from statistics alone. The narrative structure itself acts as a memory aid.

Pillar 2: Reliability — The Information Source

This pillar presents the greatest challenge in our current information landscape. Engaging storytellers are not necessarily reliable educators, and the most charismatic voices often have the strongest agendas.

Key questions for evaluation:

• What expertise does the storyteller bring to this specific topic?
• Are their methods and sources transparent?
• Do they acknowledge limitations and uncertainty?
• What incentives might influence their narrative choices?
• How do their claims align with broader evidence?

The expertise paradox: Research shows that genuine experts often appear less confident than non-experts because they understand the complexity of their field. The most certain-sounding voices may be the least reliable.

Pillar 3: Context — The Broader Evidence Base

Context transforms isolated stories into systematic understanding. It asks:

• How representative is this narrative of broader patterns?
• What alternative perspectives exist?
• What is the historical and cultural background?
• How does this story fit within established knowledge?
• What evidence supports or challenges this account?

Critical insight: Individual success stories, while inspiring, can obscure systemic issues. A single narrative of educational achievement might mask broader barriers affecting entire communities. Context helps distinguish between individual anecdotes and generalisable insights.

When All Three Align: The Sweet Spot of Learning

The most powerful educational experiences occur when compelling narratives meet reliable sources and rich context. Consider these patterns:

Medical education: Case-based learning combines patient stories (engaging content) with clinical expertise (reliable sources) and research evidence (broader context). This approach produces better diagnostic skills than either pure theory or isolated practice.

Historical understanding: Primary source documents (reliable evidence) presented through human narratives (engaging content) within their cultural and political context (broader understanding) create deeper comprehension than chronological facts alone.

Scientific literacy: Research stories that explain methodology (reliable process), use accessible analogies (engaging content), and connect to existing knowledge (contextual framework) build stronger understanding than abstract principles.

The Information Age Challenge

We face an unprecedented paradox: the most memorable information often comes from the least reliable sources. Entertaining content spreads faster than accurate content. Simple narratives travel further than nuanced explanations. Emotional stories generate more engagement than evidence-based analysis.

Social media algorithms amplify this effect, rewarding content that generates immediate engagement over content that builds genuine understanding. The result is an information ecosystem where compelling but misleading narratives can outcompete accurate but complex explanations.

The urgency: This is not just about academic learning. It affects everything from health decisions to political choices. The ability to evaluate narrative quality becomes a fundamental life skill.

Practical Applications Across Contexts

For Students and Lifelong Learners:

• Diversify sources: Seek the same story from multiple perspectives
• Question certainty: Be suspicious of narratives that seem too clean or simple
• Look for methodology: Ask how the storyteller knows what they claim to know
• Seek disconfirming evidence: Actively search for information that challenges attractive narratives

For Educators and Communicators:

• Story with transparency: Use narratives but show your working
• Acknowledge complexity: Resist the temptation to oversimplify for engagement
• Provide scaffolding: Help learners connect stories to broader frameworks
• Encourage critical evaluation: Teach the skills to question any narrative, including your own

For Organisations and Institutions:

• Audit your narratives: Examine what stories your organisation tells and promotes
• Reward accuracy over engagement: Structure incentives to value truth over virility
• Invest in context: Provide the background information that helps people evaluate claims
• Model critical thinking: Demonstrate how to evaluate information quality publicly

The Stakes for Society

Understanding this framework matters beyond individual learning outcomes. In democracies, citizens make decisions based on the stories they hear about policy, economics, and social issues. In workplaces, decisions flow from narratives about market trends, organisational culture, and strategic direction. In communities, social cohesion depends partly on shared stories about identity and purpose.

When compelling but unreliable narratives dominate these conversations, the consequences extend far beyond individual misunderstanding. They can undermine institutional trust, polarise communities, and lead to policies based on appealing fiction rather than complex reality.

Building Better Information Habits

The solution is not to abandon storytelling. It is to become more sophisticated consumers and creators of educational narratives. This means:

Developing narrative literacy: Understanding how stories work, why they are persuasive, and how to evaluate their educational value.

Embracing productive uncertainty: Recognising that the most honest answer is often “it is complicated” and learning to be comfortable with ambiguity.

Seeking compound evidence: Looking for patterns across multiple reliable sources rather than being convinced by single compelling accounts.

Practising intellectual humility: Remaining open to changing our minds when better evidence emerges, even about stories we find personally meaningful.

The Path Forward

The question is not whether to learn through stories. We already do, and we always will. The question is whether we will develop the skills to distinguish between stories that educate and those that merely persuade.

This framework offers a practical starting point: every time we encounter a compelling narrative, we can ask about its content structure, source reliability, and contextual accuracy. Over time, this evaluation process becomes intuitive, helping us build understanding rather than just collecting information.

The ultimate goal is not cynicism about all narratives, but sophistication in how we process them. When we can recognise and create stories that combine engagement with accuracy, entertainment with education, and inspiration with evidence, we unlock the full potential of narrative learning.

In an age where information abundance meets attention scarcity, the ability to learn effectively from stories is not just an academic skill. It is a superpower for navigating modern life.

Scientists such as Bill Nye, the science guy, influenced generations, but what about the current generation?
We know social media often gets criticised for brain rot and doom scrolling, but is there an alternative for the next generation?

Social media also has a wealth of content for educators to share their stories and subjects. The likes of Hank Green and other scientists share not only their academic knowledge but also the areas of research that represent their discipline.
So why is this so important?
As a social scientist, people often say there is little to no benefit from certain types of research, whether within the formal sciences, especially in the humanities and less formal sciences. Yet why is this?
Part of it is recognition most people view particular disciplines as easier than others, and sometimes this is where we can have a false dichotomy of the work; therefore, it is not challenging. It’s not rocket science, after all…

However, when we think about research, much of the work is alien to most of us. We do not understand it, but we can appreciate its application, the utility of engineering, the discovery of healthcare treatments, and the invention of new products. We do not see the same in other subjects, and this is where I get back to my original point about content education. Fundamentally, research has three problems outside of academia: accessibility, communication, and representation.

Accessibility is sometimes a blessing and a curse for particular subjects. They can seem so complex that they are often inaccessible, which creates a safeguard for the field. You may be right in thinking because I don’t understand it wholly, but that person who does clearly knows their stuff, and I can see its application. Now, this is where the accessibility needs to change for all disciplines. How would you explain the subject to a teen or child if it is complex? What core elements must they know to understand it, and how can you take this core knowledge and help them apply it to your work? What are the takeaways they need outside of the outcomes?
Do you need all the jargonistic language?
When we think about accessibility, explaining it is one challenge, but making sure others can either access the means to pursue the discipline or that it is explained in a way they can digest it is so important. Now, most academic content is disseminated in journals, which are often complex articles that are heavy in jargonistic language and are inaccessible to most. This is coupled with paywalls that those outside of academia are often unable to access, putting a general audience at a stark disadvantage regarding the original content. Yes, some of these articles are cherry-picked and circulated in wider media, but these are very few. This is where the videos and blogs of content educators fill a gap that anyone can generally access. The information is broken down, often explained in bitesize snippets that people can learn about over a series of discussions or inspire them to find out more.
This brings us to communication; academia is historically bad at communicating its message about what certain disciplines do, their wider research impact or even how the studies found out what they did. Yet this is because of whom the articles are aimed at, other academics of the same or often interdisciplinary interests. With Artificial Intelligence, we have easier tools for summarising a general dive into the information or often highlighting key research findings. Yet, whilst an excellent tool, the subtext, the background of interconnected research, or the areas that this could take the discipline are nuanced. Different individuals may interpret this differently, and it should get this presentation. Yet, whilst AI is evolving, there is still space for a different type of discussion that provides another resource.

Lastly, we have representation and explain why this last element is often underappreciated. It is not just the message but the messenger, the range of faces representing different fields, ethnicities, backgrounds and experiences. The impact of seeing someone with a similar journey at the same stage as you or who is further ahead can be transformative on that individual, and seeing the content from that person can be profound. It may push them to pursue the field, providing a sense of belonging or, in some cases, confidence in the research being presented, particularly if it impacts that community.

These areas highlight the potential impact that content educators have on the wider public. This is where I have a request for any content educators describing their journey or research area. Let’s collaborate and see what audiences think of content education. By collaborating on a paper looking at the perspectives of individuals who engage with the various forms of content we create, we provide our own case studies of why we do what we do. If you’re interested in this collaboration and understanding the impact of content educators, please get in touch.

Jordon Millward on Substack

https://youtu.be/uhjJk0R_Yo0

#education #student #stem #science #podcast

Why politics is a poor pantomime, you did not pay to see.

Filled with backgrounds and mishaps, clear to all except a devotee.

A life of riches and privileges your constant sphere, with their benefit and wages, the haves are so clear.

Childcare, meals, at work — we subsidise your dream,

Even in job loss, you still reign supreme.

But what of our lives, our daily strife?

Improving our world, what’s your plan for life?

For those in the shadows, poverty’s grip tight, excluded from learning’s empowering light.

Our health, our well-being, what are your measures?

Not smoke and mirrors, but real, lasting treasures.

We seek clear policies, transparency in your mission, no spectres of fear; we want a clear vision.

For individuals, for families, communities, the nation,

we demand some imagination.

Living to work, a cycle so drear,

Promise us to change; give use something to inspire.

Our homes, environment, a nation’s hope, security in resources, do not take the electorate for a joke.

Corporate greed, our ecosystems ravaged, as shareholders profit, from companies mismanaged.

Hope for our children, a path less trodden,

With burdens to bear there dreams forgotten.

We ask not for empty promises, sound bites so hollow,

but honesty, integrity, and a future to follow.

Be guardians of values and principle, trust restored,

Protect us, uplift us with the unanimous accord.

Remember our votes, our echoes past,

Respect our choices, steadfast and vast.

Why then your obsession with a downward race? Is it staged behaviour or a mask of disgrace.

Politics, a pantomime, a population under your heel,

But beneath your masks, what is real?

Stand for us, with us, make clear your stance,

In this political theatre, give hope a chance.