What’s in the education news as the school year begins in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere? This week, in part 2 of IEN’s annual back-to-school scan, we share the headlines from across the US and around the world that touch on issues like the costs of supplies and other materials for parents as well as teachers; hot weather and other disruptions; shortages – particularly of bus drivers in the US; and a variety of other topics. In Part 3, we will gather together some of the many stories discussing cell phone bans, particularly in the US and Canada. Last week, Part 1 of this year’s scan provided an overview of some of the many election-related education stories that have appeared in the press as students return to school Politics, Policies, and Polarization: Scanning the 2024-25 Back-To-School Headlines in the US (Part 1).This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on September 12, 2024.
Back to school could mean back to the hot seat for Big Tech.Social media platforms TikTok, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat spent last school year embroiled in a lawsuit accusing them of disrupting learning, contributing to a mental health crisis among youth and leaving teachers to manage the fallout.When students return to class this September, experts say the clash between tech and textbooks will be reignited
Families with multiple children, in particular, are struggling to balance their budgets as they manage not only the cost of school supplies but also additional needs such as furniture and other essentials for their children.
Legislation going into effect this school year will bring changes to California campuses. One new law requires elementary schools to offer free menstrual products in some bathrooms and another requires that all students, beginning in first grade, learn about climate change.
Each of the district’s high schools was allocated at least two metal detectors to screen their students, with larger schools getting four, like Cypress Bay High School in suburban Weston, which has more than 4,700 students. But even at smaller schools, kids were stuck waiting — leaving students and parents with more than the usual first-day nerves.
For some historical perspective on how the issues have evolved since the school closures of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore the back-to-school headlines from previous years:
As students in many parts of the northern hemisphere start a new school year, IEN begins our annual scan of the back-to-school headlines. This year, with the surge of interest in the presidential election since Kamala Harris became the democratic nominee, a number of news stories have focused on the election, the candidates, and their education policies. Harris’ choice of Tim Walz – a former teacher – to be her candidate for Vice-President contributed to a wave of stories about Walz and his record and even spawned stories about his wife Gwen Walz – also a former teacher – and other educators who are running for office. Several stories, most from Education Week, also explore whether and how teachers might try to address in their classrooms the election and the many controversial issues that divide and polarize Americans today. Part 1 of our 2024-25 Back-to-School scan pulls together some of these election-related stories. Next week’s scan will provide a round-up of stories about many of the other issues that are in the news in the education sources that we follow as classes resume.This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on September 4, 2024.
For some historical perspective on how the issues have evolved since the school closures of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore the back-to-school headlines from previous years:
From transgender student rights to ‘woke’ curriculum, Harris and Trump offer two starkly different views on the federal government’s role in education.
Kamala Harris’s presidential race is taking on a life of its own on social media, particularly with Gen Z followers, who are responding to her perceived energy and authenticity with viral videos of her dancing, laughing and recounting her mother’s lessons.
A technocrat’s dream, the Child Tax Credit isn’t a subject you’d expect would receive much attention in the middle of a heated presidential race. But both the Harris and Trump campaigns have recently embraced proposals to expand the program, which offers relief to parents of kids under 17 years old. Democrats and Republicans both see the credit’s political appeal, but depending on the election outcome, neither party may hold enough power to enact its vision.
Tim Walz was a high school teacher and football coach from southern Minnesota. He had no political experience whatsoever, but he didn’t like the choices being made on Capitol Hill, and struggled to explain them to his social studies students.So Walz made a decision: He would run for Congress as a Democrat.
Tim Walz isn’t the only former educator running for elected office this year. In fact, a number of current teachers and school leaders will be on the ballot in November.
What’s changing in the China’s education system? What might change in the future? Those are some of the questions that Thomas Hatch asked Yong Zhao about in preparation for a visit to China last month. Zhao was born in China and now works all over the world, including in China, exploring the implications of globalization and technology on education. In part two of this interview, Zhao offers his impressions of recent changes in addressing students’ mental health and discusses the broader context of the Chinese education system and some of the challenges and opportunities for changes in the future. In the first part of the interview, Zhao shared his observations about some of the educational innovations he’s seen, and he’s been involved in China. This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on June 20, 2024.
Thomas Hatch (TH): In the first part of our conversation, you shared a number of examples some new schools and educational developments in China. In other places like Finland, the US, and even in places like Vietnam and Singapore, I’ve also seen more attention to students’ mental health. Have you seen any initiatives related to supporting students’ healthy development or mental health and well-being in China?
Yong Zhao (YZ): I think that is happening because they’re adding more psychiatrists, more psychologists or “psychological teachers” to schools. Those never existed in China until recent years. So that’s a beginning. But also, traditionally, teachers of Chinese have had a responsibility for psychological support, though they may not have specific training for it. But the approach in Chinese culture is also different from the western way of constructing psychological and mental well-being. In the West, I think we sometimes misunderstand psychological issues because we just describe them, we measure them, we test them. And we have a handbook that defines what’s considered mental health. I’m quite worried about this. Is this a good thing to do?
It’s similar with what’s considered special education in China. Asian countries definitely have a very different definition. There the term applies primarily to those who have a major disability. But now the Western movement of attending to ADHD and learning differences is slowly spreading, though they are not being addressed in schools.
TH: When you say you think that the approach to psychological well-being and health is different in China, how would you describe it?
YZ: First, I’m not a researcher in that area, so I cannot describe it, but I’m very worried about the Western definition going into China and getting applied in that cultural context. I’ve always worried about what is China and what is the Western way of doing things? I’m struggling with this.
Yong Zhao
But one thing I want to emphasize is people always think I’m critical of China, but I’ve said, “I’m critical of everybody.” This is very important. I don’t think anyone has got it right. If someone had it right, we could retire. And some people say, “you’re pro- America.” And the truth is, I’m more critical of American education than other places. I think there is an interesting question about whether the Western way is the right way of doing this. when you think about well-being, I’m not sure because when you look you can see there is widespread misuse of special education, misuse of mental health issues, and I think there are a lot of problems that arise with psychiatrists and psychoanalysts. Many things are happening
“I’m critical of everybody. This is very important. I don’t think anyone has got it right. If someone had it right, we could retire.“
TH: One of my goals is to understand what’s changing within a Chinese context and to think about the cultural, economic, and geographical conditions or “affordances” and what they can tell us about the possibilities of educational change. Can you give us your sense of the Chinese conception of development overall and the purposes and aims that underlie Chinese education?
YZ: Right now, I think China is quite misunderstood. People are easily influenced by media stories. You and I started this conversation talking about how schools don’t change, but like Larry Cuban has said, changes are like a breath on the window in the wintertime. You breathe on the window, and something happens, but then you’re gone, and it’s gone. We need to keep that in mind. Schools do not change, but they’re always changing. This is what I love about it. It’s happening all the time. Every week, for example, I receive emails from someone who is discussing innovation somewhere. Innovation is still there. But how come most schools don’t change? But schools actually do change because they do little things. When you refer back to the grammar of schooling, the grammar in schools hasn’t changed in a long time. But at the same time, there are activities that are changing. So, we need to consider how big a change is a change. That’s another thing to think about.
“Schools don’t change, but they’re always changing. This is what I love about it. It’s happening all the time. Every week, for example, I receive emails from someone who is discussing innovation somewhere. Innovation is still there. But how come massive schools don’t change?“
We also have to think about the diversity of the student population and who is benefiting from doing what. That’s another thing we normally don’t talk about. We talk about education innovation for all students, but not necessarily everybody benefits from the same allocation of time. I’ve not written this yet, but I’m working on this now. Another reason education doesn’t change is that whenever you change a school, you change the entire school, but the needs of the local community are always diverse. Whatever you change it into becomes a monopoly, so you never meet everyone’s needs. What I’m trying to do is to say schools should build many schools within a school, so you actually have diversity, allowing certain schools to grow within your school to meet the needs of the community. That’s my recent theory; trying to go in that direction.
TH: Your comments about change and the grammar of schooling are fascinating because the “grammar” hasn’t changed, but only if you look back within the modern, industrial era. Because if you think back beyond 100 or 120 years — if you go back far enough – some key aspects of schooling have definitely changed. So, it’s a question of perspective. If today, instead of trying to produce changes that we’re going to see tomorrow, we’re actually looking ahead to 40 or 50 years, we might be much more successful if we can be strategic in terms of enabling schools to shift over the long-term. As you look ahead and think about what could or what might happen in terms of Chinese education, do you see ways that it is changing or that it could change in the future?
YZ: What is going to happen in China? First of all, in any foreseeable future, China will not drop the Gaokao, the national exam to select students for university. The Chinese people value college credentials very much. I used to joke about how much Chinese love credentials. Even if they don’t know how to drive, they want to buy a driver’s license, they just want that damn thing. So that will not change. But the Chinese government has been trying very hard to adjust the numbers of students going to high schools and universities and to vocational high schools. Now, at the end of 9th grade, the students are divided into two groups by the Gaokao. It’s like the German system used to be. The highest scorers on the test go to the general high school and then they go to college. Another group goes to the vocational, technical high school, and then you go to the workforce. There’s a lot of problems with that, and right now they’ve changed the quotas so that more students are supposed to be sent to vocational schools. So, they’re trying to adjust that.
But my view is this. I think I wrote in my book “Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon” that in China, the big problem is that no matter what you do, people will think there is always one best college – for example, Tsinghua or Peking University – and you can only take in so many kids no matter what you do. So, no matter how you change the exam, there are only so many kids who can go in. That is a huge problem. So, the Gaokao will dominate for a long time, and you will have a lot of kids dropping out of the education system before 9th grade if they’re not getting on the path to the best universities. It’s just that, basically, there’s no point to stay in the system. So, that’s not going to change.
What is going to change? Is after school, weekends. I also think that because of the access to technology and the quick spread of AI, you will have a group of students who, in a sense, are already pre-selected to get into general high schools and to prepare for the colleges. But you will also have a lot of students who have decided “I’m not going to college. I can’t go to college.” Those places with those students might see some changes, and those schools that have those students are not visited and are not understood by people. You know, if you go to a county level, they have high schools, and those high schools don’t have the best students because the best students have been sent to the provincial capital. I don’t think people understand the experiences of those kids who aren’t going to college, what their life is, and you might see some significant changes in those places.
“If you go to a county level, they have high schools, and those high schools don’t have the best students because the best students have been sent to the provincial capital. I don’t think people understand the experiences of those kids who aren’t going to college, what their life is, and you might see some significant changes in those places.”
TH: That’s fascinating, and it connects with Clayton Christensen’s notion that disruptive innovation emerges when there are people who are unserved, and I think you’re identifying in China that there are students who in a sense are not served by their schools or colleges. It could be fascinating to see what might develop there, particularly given the development of technologies and the spread of internet and AI.
YZ: There’s another thing that will affect China a lot, and that’s the drop-in birth rate. Right now, China is graduating over 11,000,000 college students, but the birth rate last year in China was closer to 9 million. As a result, a lot of elementary schools and kindergartens are closing because they don’t have enough students. But now there are groups of private colleges, smaller colleges, and they’re actually trying very hard to get kids in because that’s how they make money. Imagine what would happen if you opened all those places and take in every kid into college?
Dr. Yong Zhao is a Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas and a professor in Educational Leadership at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne in Australia. He previously served as the Presidential Chair, Associate Dean, and Director of the Institute for Global and Online Education in the College of Education, University of Oregon, where he was also a Professor in the Department of Educational Measurement, Policy, and Leadership. Prior to Oregon, Yong Zhao was University Distinguished Professor at the College of Education, Michigan State University, where he also served as the founding director of the Center for Teaching and Technology, executive director of the Confucius Institute, as well as the US-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Education and a fellow of the International Academy of Education.
What’s changing in China’s education system? What might change in the future? Those are some of the questions that led Thomas Hatch to spend almost a month in China this spring. In preparation for that visit, he talked with Yong Zhao to get his perspective on what’s been happening in education in China in the past few years. Zhao was born in China and now works all over the world, including in China, exploring the implications of globalization and technology on education. In the first part of this two-part post, Zhao shares his observations about some of the educational innovations he’s seen in China and about some of the work he’s been involved in there. In part two, Zhao offers his impressions of recent changes in addressing students’ mental health and discusses the broader context of the Chinese education system and some of the challenges and opportunities for changes in the future. This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on June 12, 2024.
Thomas Hatch (TH): You’ve written extensively about China in the past, but I’m particularly interested in what’s happening in the Chinese education system over the last few years. Are you seeing some innovations or changes in classrooms and schools in China since the COVID-19 pandemic and the school closures?
Yong Zhao (YZ): I think there’s a huge hunger for innovation in China. Let me give you an example. I was just talking to a group of school principals and heads of the Education Commission in the Chaoyang District in Beijing. It’s the largest district in Beijing, and it’s where most of the embassies and many foreign companies are located. We were planning to do a summer camp for students from different countries based on my education philosophy, which is very much child-centered, focused on uniqueness, personalization, project-driven instruction, and problem-solving. We wanted to make the camp very big, involving kids from different countries, and they were open to the idea. Alongside the camp, we planned to organize learning festivals to discuss topics like artificial intelligence and what I call “Re-globalization.”
We started this conversation in January, and the issue is that very few schools outside China are willing to send their students and teachers here at the moment, so we’re planning to do it next year. But this kind of summer camp is something I began working on before COVID, in May 2018 in Chongqing. Every year since, we’ve been running similar innovative programs in the summer. Even during COVID, we tried it out. The first year in Chongqing, we had students from US schools, Australian and British schools, with hundreds of students and teachers staying in the same dorms, interacting.
In addition, in the public schools in Chongqing, we have students enrolled in a special course I helped design called ICEE, which stands for innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship education. It’s expanding in the public schools even though students have to pay extra to participate, which shows that parents and schools are interested in it. Beijing Academy is another school that is particularly innovative. I was partially responsible for co-designing that school. We formed a global advisory group, including people like Richard Elmore and Kurt Fischer and Ron Beghetto. It was an international collaboration. They built a brand-new school based on our advice. It just celebrated its 10th anniversary in Beijing. Now they have over 9 or 10 campuses.
I think this shows that many parents and students and teachers actually want change. You cannot make massive changes like, for example, saying, let’s forget about the major policies like the double reduction policy, but many people are still trying to find ways to change. It also shows that working in the Chinese education system might be one of the most difficult things in the world. On the one hand, you have to do this. On the other hand, you have to do that. But ultimately, your school’s reputation matters, and innovation as a school leader in China is crucial.
“I think working in the Chinese education system might be one of the most difficult things in the world. On the one hand, you have to do this. On the other hand, you have to do that. But ultimately, your school’s reputation matters, and innovation as a school leader in China is crucial”
TH: So, on the one hand, you can’t do anything, but on the other hand, you have to do something…
YH: Yes, exactly. It’s fascinating. I’m puzzled by this system, you know? Right now, I’m getting older. When I was younger, I didn’t really think a lot about it, but I cannot think of how human societies can be organized like that. You cannot do anything, but you have to do something. It’s a fascinating way to think about it, isn’t it?
TH: It is! But if we step back for a second and try to characterize what’s happening with educational innovation overall right now, my understanding is that the education ecosystem in China has contracted. There were more innovative schools and smaller schools starting, more tutoring programs, more after-school programs. But now, following the school closures and the double reduction policy, in a sense, this seems to be period of consolidation. People I’ve talked to say it’s not a prime time for innovation. Is that the way you see it? (For more on the double reduction policy see “Surprise, Controversy, and the “Double Reduction Policy” in China” and “China reiterates implementation of ‘double reduction’ policy”)
YZ: Yes, your description is right from a general, outside perspective. You can see the contractions. Even the Gaokao has become more nationalized. It was decentralized, with some differences across regions, but it’s gotten more centralized. Now they’re all saying they are using the national tests and very few provinces use their own. The curriculum has become more centralized too with more centrally required courses and teaching materials. But honestly, I think the beauty of the Chinese ecosystem is that, at the same time, children are children, and parents understand that their children, growing up, need innovative education.
They do see the power of artificial intelligence, and AI is becoming more prevalent. They also see new geopolitical conflicts, or what I call “re-globalization.” China always has this happening, and what’s underground is different. Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there. It’s bubbling up everywhere, but it’s happening. Many local schools have to think about innovation, and even the government, if you look at the most recent speech by the Minister of Education, talks a lot about AI. They are thinking about it in every part of teaching and teacher training. I don’t know how well it’s been implemented, because it’s still very new, but the same is true in the US. China also issued a call last year for schools that were willing to be part of experiments with AI in education. The central government awarded several hundred of these grants to create pilot sites and to spread the message to other places. So, it’s a lot more complex in China than what many people think. The whole system is evolving.
“Yes, some international schools have closed, and private schools are becoming more public. But at the same time, public schools have to become more innovative. The desire for innovation is always there…it’s a lot more complex in China than what many people think. The whole system is evolving.”
TH: Despite that, have you seen some schools or initiatives or afterschool programs or other things that you think are particularly interesting or innovative in the Chinese context?
YZ: In the book Let the Children Play, Pasi Sahlberg and William Doyle described an approach in the Zhejiang Province near Shanghai that developed genuine playhouses for preschool and kindergarten (Anji Play). It was really play-driven, play-based, and it started in one kindergarten and then it spread around the whole province. It wasn’t country-wide, but it was a model recognized by the Chinese Ministry of Education, and they began to promote it across the country. I don’t know how it’s going now, but that is something that I think it’s definitely worth looking at.
There are also a number of schools that are trying to do something different. The Beijing City International School just had me visit for three days. Their student population is over 90% Chinese students, and they are struggling with the fact that parents have invested significant amounts of money, expecting their children to attend prestigious universities like Harvard and Columbia. But they also want to change, so they had me over to discuss transitioning to personalized education. Whenever someone has me presenting, they are willing to be challenged.
The Beijing National Day School and a couple of other public schools are also known for being innovative. Another interesting school is the one called #80 Secondary School in Beijing. I was just there, and I was impressed. If you are a good student in some areas, then you don’t have to take certain courses. They would allow you to explore on your own, which shocked me. It’s a Chinese government high school, and it’s quite powerful.
Thomas Hatch: Coming from Teachers College, where there’s a history of connection with China through John Dewey’s visits, I’m fascinated to see that there has been a long-term interest in China in progressive education. As I began to get ready for my trip, I’ve realized there are a number of educators in China over the years, who have become very well known for being innovative and supporting innovative education. Can you talk about any of those enduring traditions related to alternative education?
Yong Zhao: It’s a very interesting question. But first of all, let’s not underestimate the power of the Gaokao – the college entrance examination. Similar pressure is widespread, happening not only in China but also in Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. Let’s not forget that the Gaokao and the imperial exam tradition, dominates and controls parents’, students’, and teachers’ minds. But continuously, there has been talk about change in China, and I’ve found that the conversation about needing a different kind of student from the “Gaokao type” has never stopped. It’s always been there.
Even in the 1950s, Mao was very against the Gaokao exam. Regardless of who he was or what he is – I’m not debating that – he was actually very innovative in education. Ideologically, he never really wanted exams. During the Cultural Revolution, people think he destroyed the Chinese education system. But on the other hand, he was basically saying education does not need to be so pedantic, does not need to be traditional and academic in an ivory tower. He started education in my village. That’s how I went to school. He said education needs to be shorter. It only has to be 10 years and it can happen in rural villages or in factories. If you think about that, that’s very much the progressive tradition. But the long tradition of using exams to select government officials has also always stayed in the Communist education philosophy, and the tradition of using exams to select and reward people is a long-standing cultural problem.
Next Week: Schools do not Change, But They’re Always Changing: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System (Part 2)
Dr. Yong Zhao is a Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas and a professor in Educational Leadership at the Faculty of Education, University of Melbourne in Australia. He previously served as the Presidential Chair, Associate Dean, and Director of the Institute for Global and Online Education in the College of Education, University of Oregon, where he was also a Professor in the Department of Educational Measurement, Policy, and Leadership. Prior to Oregon, Yong Zhao was University Distinguished Professor at the College of Education, Michigan State University, where he also served as the founding director of the Center for Teaching and Technology, executive director of the Confucius Institute, as well as the US-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Education and a fellow of the International Academy of Education.
In the second part of this conversation,Alma Harris and Carol Campbell talk with IEN Editor Thomas Hatch about what has (and has not) happened since the release of their report “All Learners in Scotland Matter- National Discussion on Education,” from the National Discussion on Scottish Education almost one year ago. They also share lessons for those who might want to pursue a similar large-scale public engagement and explore how this kind of dialogue could offer a new process to support educational change in the future. In part 1, Harris and Campbell discuss their initial steps and the procedure they pursued as facilitators of the dialogue. The interview was edited by Sarah Etzel & Thomas Hatch.This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on June 5, 2024.
TH: Can you give us a quick sense of some of those things that you felt you had to put in the report to make sure that children’s concerns were honored?
CC: We had a large volume of responses, but we wanted to make sure that we honored the children’s voices by ensuring that their views, including the challenges they were experiencing as well as their hopes for the future, were included in the report. Plus, Alma and I were personally involved in lots of events and communications where we either heard children and young people’s voices directly or through adults speaking on their behalf, so there were stories that we carried with us, and they had an impact that we wanted to make sure were included. For example, a major issue is additional support needs. Scotland has a way of identifying additional support needs which is quite encompassing; it includes but extends beyond a medical diagnosis or a specific identification of a special educational need. At the time of the report, over 1/3 of school-aged children in Scotland had an additional support need. That’s increased since then. I was in a school where over 50% of the pupils had an additional support need. This has been brought up in previous reviews but the issue is getting more and more complex. Obviously the COVID-19 recovery has exacerbated some things and resources are not there to fully support all learners. For me, that was one issue we had to be clear about. When it’s almost half of your demographic, it’s no longer an additional support need; it’s the need of pupils in Scotland. We had quite a lot to say about that.
“When it’s almost half of your demographic, it’s no longer an additional support need; it’s the need of pupils in Scotland.”
AH: We gave feedback to the Scottish Government that their core guiding principle of ‘excellence and equity’ was just not being fulfilled on the ground. There are a whole range of complex reasons for that, of course, and responsibility does not just reside within education as inequity is multi-faceted. When talking to parents and those who look after children and young people, one thing was crystal clear, that the ravages of poverty on educational progress and attainment were tangible and were getting worse. The issue of social justice runs right through the National Discussion report. The effect of poverty on the lives and life chances of existing and future generations in Scotland, like so many other countries, is the real issue to be tackled.
In many ways, the whole National Discussion was about inequities in the system, not by design but by default. Most of the anger and frustration we heard, from many groups including teachers and other educational professionals, could be attributed to some sort of injustice or inequity emanating, most usually, from a lack of resource. It was clear that everyone we spoke to wanted to do their level best for children and young people in Scotland. There was a great deal of praise for the Scottish Education system but also a real sense that more could be done. In many ways the National Discussion held a mirror up to the daily reality facing children and young people and the adults that care for and support them. There were many positive things we heard from learners, things they liked, great things about teachers and an excitement about learning. In the report, we talk about the joy of learning and the way in which teachers enthuse and encourage all learners at all levels within the system. In many ways, Scotland is a good education system aiming to be better but to make this jump, as we heard time and time again, some change needs to happen.
CC: Also, the title of the report is, “All Learners in Scotland Matter,” and we were asked to develop a vision. The vision is about all learners in Scotland, which sounds glib, but given what we had heard, to actually realize in practice that all learners in Scotland matter was crucial. So, Scotland’s main education priority is closing the poverty related attainment gap, which is very important. As Alma has indicated, poverty is a serious issue and children’s poverty is a very serious issue, but not all the needs we heard were about this. Some were more about physical disability, some were about mental health, some were about racial or sexual discrimination. Now these intersect, but we were saying you need to look at the full range of inequities and differential treatment.
AH: The thing that struck me most was the fact that there were so many different groups associated with a wide range of issues in education that it was almost impossible to decide who was standing for which specific issue. It was a very crowded landscape. We had the privilege, however, to go beneath the surface, and I think we have a more informed picture of Scottish education because we listened to so many diverse positions and viewpoints.
TH: This does raise the next question, which is, it’s one thing to say truth to power, but then what happens next? Are there ways in which the government has listened and is responding?
CC: The report with the vision, values, and call to action, which gets a bit more into the details of the different things that are being suggested, was released at the end of May last year. There was a parliamentary debate about the report led by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills. All political parties in the Scottish Government have accepted and endorsed the National Discussion and have officially supported it. This is unusual because education is a very political priority in Scotland, so to have all party support was unusual and to have a full parliamentary debate was one way of bringing the report into the public eye. The vision from the report from the National Discussion has been accepted by the Scottish Government and now informs the “National Improvement Framework.”, which is the annual framework for educational improvement in Scotland. The calls to action are intended to inform government decisions and actions moving forward as they align strongly with priorities for attention and implementation.
One positive aspect that I find noteworthy is that the groups we’ve engaged with have embraced certain topics from the National Discussion to advance their own advocacy agendas. Professional organizations, for instance, are highlighting issues such as valuing and developing the profession, while parents are also echoing concerns we’ve addressed, such as support for early learners. This reflects the alignment with the broader national discourse, wherein groups are leveraging specific statements or discussions to push for action. Local authorities, akin to school districts, have integrated elements from the National Discussion into their strategic plans and work.
While progress has been made, it’s fair to say that we would like to see further explicit action and rapid implementation linked to the National Discussion calls to action. The challenge lies in seamlessly integrating these discussions into existing frameworks and plans. This can be particularly frustrating for parents, as they inquire about the fate of their input. We will be asked directly what happened to something a parent or other person told us directly during the National Discussion. While the calls to action are being integrated into governmental work stream, this is not a satisfactory response for people who want explicit and visible responses to their input.
AH: A couple of reflections on the follow-up. I think responding to a large and complex report based on a huge public engagement exercise is inevitably challenging. Looking at the report, you might think “where to start and what to privilege when everything is so important?“ In reality, also everything costs money. Hence it is perfectly possible that there are just too many things that need attending to in the ‘Call to Action’ section of the National Discussion Report. We accept this but we represented what we heard, faithfully and accurately.
Possibly there is a sense of disappointment that the National Discussion did not point to any one definitive thing that needed to be introduced or changed. If this had been the outcome it would have certainly been neat but also fundamentally unrepresentative of what we heard. On reflection, this public engagement approach to education reform is worthy of consideration by other education systems, primarily because it offers an alternative to the top-down processes that tend to dominate policy formation and so often fail to deliver.
As a recent Times Educational Supplement article about the National Discussion noted: “This is a model that could be built on and replicated in future reform. It is crucial that the potential here is not lost-the future of Scottish Education depends on it.”
“’This is a model that could be built on and replicated in future reform. It is crucial that the potential here is not lost-the future of Scottish Education depends on it.’”
CC: To build on that, over 38,000 people are engaged now. Yes, the scale of data was overwhelming. The range of possibilities is overwhelming. But as Alma said, our advice would be to choose one thing, choose three things. There are clearly some things that need attention. Another generation is going through our education system and there’s an argument about the system being overstretched and not wanting to make wrong decisions on reform, but we can’t leave the status quo either, we heard about urgent and needed changes. For example, workload, violence, equity, all of these things are issues which requires some change.
What came through to me was that people wanted to be heard, and they wanted to make a difference. It wasn’t a case of “please don’t change everything, we’re tired, please go away.” They actually were willing when they were asked. But that quickly turns into frustration and cynicism if you’ve taken your time and effort to engage and you don’t feel appropriate follow through has happened. While we did try to do this differently, it is one of many reviews of Scottish education. Now, the other ones are more specific about curriculum or assessment. But for some people and groups, they’ve now given their advice many times. That’s kind of a tipping point. The government needs to listen and use the evidence to inform decisions.
“People wanted to be heard, and they wanted to make a difference…. The government needs to listen use the evidence to inform decisions .”
One of the calls to action is called “Human-centered Educational Improvement”. We’re thinking about this as a new way of making educational changes. A lot of the previous reviews have ended up being very structural in terms of recommendations – abolishing organizations, introducing new qualifications. These all matter, but what we actually heard was people wanted to focus on the people: the children, the young people, the carers, the educators. For them, that was the guiding purpose. The other stuff was important, but they didn’t want another set of structural reforms. They wanted to get the focus back to people and relationships in education.
TH: Let’s delve into that further. If you had the opportunity to do this again or were advising others looking to engage in a similar process, how would you approach it differently? What additional steps would you take to steer it in the direction of being a novel process and form of support for educational change?
CC: There’s interest in Scotland in making sure this is not a one-off event, but we’ve also had international interest. There’s a team in Germany who would like to do something similar, so we’ve been talking about it. I do think the team that’s involved is crucial because it’s a huge amount of work, involving logistics, strategy, research, analysis, and communication. The individuals leading it, whether independent facilitators, senior government figures or some form of ambassadorial role, set the tone, and that matters. It’s important to encourage people from various backgrounds and experiences to lead their own discussions, aligning with our vision that these conversations would take place across different settings, with participants then submitting their insights. Having a clear and compelling question or purpose is essential; otherwise, people may struggle to understand the initiative’s intent. It’s crucial not to overwhelm with too many questions.
In hindsight, I think perhaps we asked too many questions. Don’t try to be too clever about the questions. What do you want? Why? Because people were struggling with any question that seemed complex or abstract. We were asking them to look 20 years into the future, but people were talking about what happened yesterday or what was happening on Monday. I think some of that future thinking is just difficult for people when they’re dealing with their day-to-day.
“We were asking them to look 20 years into the future, but people were talking about what happened yesterday or what was happening on Monday. I think some of that future thinking is just difficult for people when they’re dealing with their day-to-day.”
People were much more comfortable expressing challenges and concerns but articulated less suggestions for practical alternatives. So, perhaps after these large public engagements, you need a slightly different approach to reaching the next steps. As we were working on our final report, we revisited the key groups and tested out the vision and values. This involved another round of iteration to ensure that the wording and content resonated and connected with participants. Mostly, we received positive feedback, but there were some suggestions for improvement. I also think if you say you’re going to listen, you need to genuinely listen.
As independent facilitators, there’s also an expectation that we remain independent, facilitate the discussion, and present the report. But for some countries or systems, I think we should have considered advocacy and action more thoroughly – moving from presenting the report to instigating change. It’s essential to encourage people not to rely solely on the government for all changes. Some require government action, but others relate to cultural shifts within the education system or how people interact with each other. The calls to action from the National Discussion are for everyone involved in Scottish education.
“The calls to action from the National Discussion are for everyone involved in Scottish education.”
AH: In terms of additional steps, three things come to mind. The first is starting with the end in mind. I think being clearer about exactly what the end point should look like, in terms of action, would have been helpful. In other words, a deep commitment to some change that would follow the National Discussion. The second thing is about policy churn. Inevitably, things change quickly in politics and often policy attention moves on simply because that is just the way that policy works, not because it is a reflection on the nature or importance of the work undertaken.
The third thing I’d say is that the National Discussion remains a good example of flipping the system, shifting power relationships so that ideas flow from a broader base to inform policy making and shape the discourse of education reform. The National Discussion succeeded in providing a broad range of views, in that sense it was an achievement as a genuine broad-based listening exercise. It is important to see the National Discussion therefore not as an event but as on ongoing process of dialogue within the system.
“The National Discussion is a good example of flipping the system, shifting power relationships so that ideas flow from a broader base that inform policy making and shape the discourse of education reform…It is important to see the National Discussion therefore not as an event but as on ongoing process of dialogue within the system.”
TH: To me, it sounds almost like you’ve described a new and powerful process for engaging many people in sharing their concerns and hopes. But it seems like the mechanisms and routines for continuing that conversation and engaging in advocacy and decision-making at a local and national level have not been fully established yet. Can you imagine some mechanisms or routines that you would like to see put in place to help sustain the conversation and support responses that would address the priorities that surfaced?
CC: There’s a current fear, if we’re honest, in doing anything that might be unpopular or destabilizing. But the National Discussion includes the voices of a lot of people. If I were the political leader or an educational leader, there’s material there to support bringing about changes. It’s not just an idea from the government or from the civil service or from one particular interest group; there’s evidence and voices from thousands of people. The National Discussion needed resources, as we’ve discussed, but an ongoing conversation in Scotland doesn’t. Social media continues, parents’ groups continue to meet, teachers continue to meet, educational organizations continue to advocate.
To pursue transformation, some of the challenges lie in the existing established practices for example linked to the improvement framework and data requirements. However, we would encourage school and system leaders to have the courage to recognize that the status quo needs changes. While they can’t change everything, they can make a difference in their own spheres, whether it’s their classroom, organization, or local authority. I will say that there are some local authorities and schools that have embraced this mindset. It’s about instilling a cultural shift. It doesn’t mean changing everything, but it should mean changing something.
AH: My hope is that the National Discussion shows that an alternative, inclusive approach to educational change and reform is perfectly possible. Very few countries have undertaken such a discussion on education on such a large scale, so in many ways Scotland is ahead of the game. My hope is that this model of change will be embraced by other countries and that in Scotland the National Discussion continues, as a process, in some way.
TH: Is there anything else you want to add that you haven’t mentioned or anything that you learned from the process that you wanted to share at this point?
AH: I have been working in the field of educational change for over three decades and my observation is that I don’t think much has changed in terms of our approaches to reform at scale. I think we know that top-down approaches don’t always work yet there is still an over-reliance on approaches to educational change that are tightly controlled and not creative. Without question, the National Discussion was a creative approach to educational change that generated a great deal of buy-in. I think it offers an alternative approach to reform at scale but only if concrete, meaningful and informed change follows from it. If change does not happen, it is quite simply, a lost opportunity.
CC: It’s of course extremely important to engage and listen with all the formal representative groups in education, teachers, school leaders, etcetera. But by doing this in a broader sense, and we aimed our best to be inclusive and to listen, we heard different things, and we heard important things. Sometimes we hear about student voices or parent engagement, but we heard things I don’t think would have come through the same way. So, I think there are times when a genuinely public engagement matters. I wouldn’t say for something that’s very technical or specific, but this was about what we want for the future of Scottish education. I think that matters. I think that inevitably, and rightly, much of the conversation right now is about digital and artificial intelligence, but we kept hearing about people and relationships, so let’s not lose the priority importance of human-centered educational improvements as we have these other conversations.
“There are times when a genuinely public engagement matters. I wouldn’t say for something that’s very technical or specific, but this was about what we want for the future of Scottish education.”
Almost one year ago, Professors Alma Harris and Carol Campbell released the report “All Learners in Scotland Matter- National Discussion on Education,” a summary of the recommendations that came out of the National Discussion on Scottish Education that they facilitated from September to December 2022. This week, Harris and Campbell discuss withThomas Hatchthe initial steps they took and the overall process they pursued to engage as many people as possible, particularly youth and marginalized populations who are often left out of these conversations. Next week, Part 2 of the conversation considers lessons for others who might want to pursue a similar public engagement and explores how this kind of dialogue could offer a new process to support educational change. This article was originally posted on internationalednews.com on May 29, 2024.
The interview was edited by Sarah Etzel & Thomas Hatch
Thomas Hatch (TH): Can you set the stage for us and give us a sense of what the problem was that led the Scottish Government to ask you to develop this National Discussion on Education?
Carol Campbell (CC): Specifically, in Scotland over 20 years ago, there was a national debate about the purpose of education and what people wanted for the Scottish education system. This led to the development of the Curriculum for Excellence, which became the main curriculum for primary through early high school. However, in 2021, the Scottish government commissioned Professor Ken Muir to review the education system. Among his many recommendations, his first recommendation was to initiate a new large-scale public engagement conversation in Scotland about the future of the education system. His second recommendation emphasized the importance of inclusivity in this discussion, particularly involving children, young people, educators, and parents, and not to give “narrative privilege” to established voices.
TH: What was the source of those recommendations? Why did those things come to the top of the list?
CC: For one thing, with any curriculum that’s been in existence for about 20 years, there’s a question of whether it remains fit for purpose? But, more broadly, I think Professor Muir was thinking about the challenges not only in Scotland, but what was happening globally. For example, the sustainable development goals about access to education for all had been developed but require further attention to be achieved. Scotland has a well-developed education system, but there are still some children and young people who are not being well served. Scotland decided to incorporate the United Nations for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), and if you take that seriously – to support every child to reach their full potential, to value human rights, to value diversity, to care about peace, to care about the planet – that has major implications for education. These are new challenges for our world, and then there was the impact of COVID-19 as well. It was a really big move to go beyond individual reviews of specific things to say, “Okay overall, where are we going as an education system?”
“It was a really big move to go beyond individual reviews of specific things to say, ‘Okay overall, where are we going as an education system?’”
Alma Harris (AH): Within Scotland, there have been a series of reviews undertaken by various specialists, but this was the first time in recent history when Scottish Government were prompted, by the Muir Report, to listen to those within the system about the future direction of education. At its heart, the National Discussion meant going beyond those who are normally consulted in reviews and listening to those who are not usually heard, especially children and young people. I think the prospect of doing something different, and at scale, was particularly exciting because it was a significant challenge to deliver a public engagement process. Despite its challenges, the National Discussion was a real chance to do something very different in terms of informing and shaping future education reform in Scotland.
“At its heart, the National Discussion meant going beyond those who are normally consulted in reviews and listening to those who are not usually heard, especially children and young people.”
TH: That’s a great foundation and framing for our conversation. What was your initial response, and what actions did you take?
AH: My initial response was to suggest to Scottish Government that Carol needed to be involved because I realized I couldn’t facilitate a discussion on this scale alone. It was clear from the outset that undertaking this National Discussion would require a lot of support and expertise. To their credit, the Scottish Government provided us immediately with a substantial expert team. Various civil servants and administrators covered all the logistical aspects, which was crucial to ensure we touched as many parts of the system as possible. One important lesson I learned is that to undertake a National Discussion or any public engagement exercise effectively, you need a supportive infrastructure to make sure that many different voices are heard, and varying perspectives are taken on board.
TH: Could you describe a bit about the nature of that team, especially the aspects that were most helpful to you in the process?
AH One critical aspect was the lead civil servant on the National Discussion team. Lorraine Davidson was our ‘go to’ person throughout the process and was simply outstanding. Lorraine provided much needed continuity and reassurance as well as high level problem solving when we needed it. Having a team of specialists, particularly those who could swiftly access schools and other specialist groups was invaluable. There were so many moving parts in this collaborative work that it truly was a huge team effort. Inevitably there were challenges along the way but having Lorraine and the team available to assist us at any time (day or night) was crucial to the success of the National Discussion. Do you agree, Carol?
CC: Yes, the team director was somebody who was very experienced in navigating government; she also had a background in communications. She’s a former political news reporter and that was important because, obviously for a public engagement, you have to think about different ways of communicating and engaging. Alma and I were hired as independent facilitators. We have backgrounds in education, we have connections to Scotland, but our job was actually to listen and to engage. We had to be quite creative about what that engagement might look like.
Our job was actually to listen and to engage. We had to be quite creative about what that engagement might look like.
As one of the very early steps our team reached out to organizations that represent children and young people, that represent marginalized groups and parents, as well as education groups. Before we even officially started, we said to them, “there’s going to be this national discussion, what do you want to talk about?” With children and young people, we had to think about the tone and language to convey a National Discussion in a way that was interesting and meaningful to them. We had to have some advice and support in developing child friendly age-appropriate materials, and multilingual documents in community languages.
We also spent a lot of time going through different iterations and getting feedback on what’s going to be the framing question of this discussion. It ended up being “what kind of education will be needed by children and young people in Scotland in the future, and how do we make that a reality?”
Then it was a very extensive engagement strategy. We had the #TalkScottishEducation and we had a social media specialist on our team. We were super active on social media, but then we had more traditional meetings and focus groups and events as well. I think a key thing was that we didn’t always have to be personally in the room. We encouraged parents’ groups to have their own conversations; teachers to lead conversations in their classrooms; young people to have their own conversations. Then we asked them to submit some feedback along the way in whatever form best suited them.
I think that was important and that’s the only way we got over 38,000 people engaged, some online, some written submissions, some surveys, some open responses in different formats, but that scale of response in a country the size of Scotland couldn’t have been done in a top-down way. It genuinely became a movement where people were hosting their own events, having their own conversations, in addition to the official forums.
“That scale of response in a country the size of Scotland couldn’t have been done in a top-down way. It genuinely became a movement where people were hosting their own events, having their own conversations, as well as the official forums that they could use.”
TH: This is fascinating to me. What I hear is that there was a lot of work that started even before the “official” conversation began. But I also heard you saying that it was crucial to have this team of experts along with you. Were those all from the Education Ministry or were they in other parts of the civil service?
CC: They were mostly from the Scottish Government Education Department, they were civil servants from Education and people were also pulled in across government and from other key organizations, including the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (CoSLA), at different times to work on the project. Somebody had a background in social research with an understanding of researching vulnerable people, not specific to education, and they were really helpful in navigating the laws about engaging with children and respecting protected characteristics. It was a case of drawing on people as and when needed, but officially the core team were all drawn from within the Education Department of the government.
TH: The initial work was around shaping the process. You began with engaging people rather than starting with the questions predefined. But how did you put this whole plan and process together? And were there any things that you had in the plan, but you weren’t able to do or things that you tried that didn’t work?
AH: Ahead of planning for the National Discussion came three core principles. The first principle focused on our positionality. Carol and I spent a lot of time reassuring people that we were truly independent facilitators and that we were genuinely interested in listening to all views. The second principle concerned transparency. We clearly communicated, at every opportunity exactly how the National Discussion would be undertaken, so that the same messages were being shared throughout the system and there could be no misunderstanding about our intentions.
The third principle focused on inclusivity. We were clear from the outset, that we intended to listen to the views of as many children and young people as we could, especially but not exclusively. With the support of our brilliant team, we actively sought to include the voices that are not normally heard. We deliberately and relentlessly contacted a wide variety of groups, organizations, and support agencies so we could include such voices.
Our efforts to reach marginalized or vulnerable children and young people so they could be heard was one of the main successes of the National Discussion. We were really keen that we didn’t just restate what various reports and reviews were already saying, so our methodology really pushed the boundaries and extended the reach of our data collection by using multiple and quite novel approaches. Inevitably, by pushing the boundaries we heard some challenging views, but it was important that we captured those views authentically and with respect.
The third principle focused on inclusivity. We were clear from the outset, that we intended to listen to the views of as many children and young people as we could, especially but not exclusively. With the support of our brilliant team, we actively sought to include the voices that are not normally heard.
The very first step Carol and I took, even before the entire process began, was to publicly share a personal piece outlining our stance and our commitment to the process. We wanted those within the system to understand that we were truly independent and personally committed to listening to all voices in the system.
TH: That’s very powerful. Were there any specific strategies or approaches that were particularly effective in reaching and hearing from people, especially those with challenging perspectives?
CC: If you take the principles that Alma has outlined, we had to honor those in our methods. We decided from quite early on that if we were going to do this, we did not want a typical government consultation – there’s lots of those. It had to look and feel different. Alma and I wrote personally; we did videos where we spoke to people; and we would engage in social media directly with #TalkScottishEducation. Governments are typically wary of social media, because obviously you can receive bots and trolls and criticism, but if you genuinely want to engage a large number of people, that’s how some people engage.
We did have a survey and we also received written submissions. Many of the professional organizations submitted their reports, too. But we also accepted submissions in any format that encouraged the person to contribute. We had videos and pictures, we had a song, and we had a poem. With the help of Education Scotland and what’s called e-Sgoil, which is an online learning platform, there were lessons designed at primary school level and secondary school level, so teachers could have a class discussion and the pupils and students, even young children, could contribute to the National Discussion. Analyzing that range of data was challenging, but it let people participate.
With the most vulnerable groups, we created focus groups with relevant children and young people’s organizations who knew how to work closely with, represent, and appropriately involve marginalized or disadvantaged children and young people. We made sure that either Alma or I was part of the focus group. These were online, but there were people there who really knew the population and knew how to work with them, how to approach them to engage young people in the focus groups too. We were very conscious that, as two professors with our own lived experiences, we don’t know everybody’s experience. That’s why we used mediators as well as encouraging groups to host their own events in ways that worked for them. There were discussion guides produced that people could use should they want to, with materials adapted for different age levels, different languages, and different accessibility requirements. For some people it became clear they would not go to a meeting in a school if somebody from the government was there, while for other people they wanted that. So, if you’re genuine about listening to all voices, you have to think about, “how do we actually listen to all voices?”
“If you’re genuine about listening to all voices, you have to think about, ‘how do we actually listen to all voices?’”
TH: That raises the data analysis challenge that you just mentioned. You’ve succeeded in getting this diversity of responses and you’re still two white women who are trying to honor this complexity. So how did you handle that?
AH: The volume of data was quite staggering. Scottish Government commissioned a company to help us manage and interpret the data in its various forms and to offer some initial thematic analysis. Carol and I also engaged with the data sets to ensure we were familiar with the themes and issues that were emerging. It was important to us that we were not far removed from the data. We felt passionately about representing the views we heard accurately, so we engaged with the data from the National Discussion.
Both of us personally facilitated many discussions both face to face and online which was important as it allowed us to be close to the action. In the final report, we represent what we heard, and some of the issues we raise in the final report are challenging. Our promise to all who participated in the National Discussion was that we would try and encapsulate all views and opinions. We were very clear that this wasn’t about us or about the government; this was about the learners in the Scottish education system and those who educate and support them. In the report, we ensured that the voices of children and young people were front and center and we also made sure the report was about the future of education in Scotland for every learner, not just some.
We hear such a lot about the importance of student voice in educational change and reform but to listen – to really listen – is incredibly hard. The lesson I’ve learned is that you can say you will listen to children and young people but to do it on the ground requires a deep humility and expert brokerage. Without people mediating conversations for us, some children and young people would simply not have spoken to us. I think that the most powerful interviews we engaged in were with those with vulnerable, marginalized, disaffected children and young people who didn’t think the system was for them. Inevitably the volume of data was overwhelming and at times bewildering. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so much data in so many different forms. But I think we stayed true to our principles and our initial purpose by producing an independent final report that did not lose the detail or the nuances of what we heard.
“I think that the most powerful interviews we engaged in were with vulnerable, marginalized, disaffected children and young people who didn’t think the system was for them.”
CC: Being independent facilitators, our job was to represent what we heard as best we could. It wasn’t to pass judgment on it or add our interpretation to it. We ended up setting out quite a range of experiences. However, that was also very challenging because, of course, we have our own views and our own opinions. Some of what Alma I heard was heartbreaking, some of it was inspiring. There were some meetings where I came out, and it was just fantastic. There were other ones that were truly difficult and unsettling to listen to. We had to honor that range of experiences. It’s a different task from being a typical academic expert or government reviewer, to really place people’s voices at the heart of this and to take their experiences from what they have said to you. It was, we will say, probably one of the best experiences of our lives. But it was also very, very, very challenging because there’s a huge responsibility that comes with that.
TH: Could you share one or two examples that produced those feelings of elation as well as those that were challenging and heartbreaking?
AH: You do elation, I’ll do challenging.
CC: We were doing this in the context of a pay dispute between the largest teachers’ union in Scotland and the government. In that context, it could have been extremely challenging, but we personally made sure that we met with key people and all the key stakeholder organizations, and we said: “Please, we need you. Please engage in the National Discussion. This isn’t a typical government review, we need you, your insights and expertise, and the voices and experiences of your members.” On a Saturday during a pay dispute, over 100 teachers came together, supported by their union. They spoke about the joy of teaching, and they wanted to return to that joy of teaching and the love of learning. Obviously, that involved all of the real concerns and issues about workload and working conditions, but there was an understanding that was only part of the conversation. Whereas the National Discussion was about: “what do we want for children and young people and for education in Scotland?” That involved shifting to a different conversation about learners and learning. Trying to get to that conversation is a hard one when people are having difficult day-to-day experiences, but people went back to what it was that brought them into education, why they wanted to make a difference, and what their hopes were for the future of Scottish education and especially for learners. For me, those were the conversations that were genuinely joyful, but there were also some challenging ones.
AH: In terms of elation, it was wonderful when we saw on Twitter the videos that children and young people had put together in schools across Scotland, based upon their views of what needs to happen in the future for education. That was very uplifting, and it also signaled that the tone of the National Discussion was truly invitational.
For me personally, the issue within the National Discussion that I found most challenging was inequity. In summary, there are some children in Scotland right now who are getting a rough deal. There are three examples that immediately spring to mind. First, I spoke with a group of young people who care for a sick or disabled parent or family member. Heartbreaking just doesn’t go near it. Imagine you are a 7-year-old looking after your mum, and then going to school worrying if she will be okay and then getting told off for not concentrating or listening in class or being late (again) for school. As one young carer told me, “Why don’t they understand? I’m caring for my mum and that’s my full-time job. I have to be the adult in the house but at school they treat me like a naughty child.”
Second, there were lots of parents we talked to who were frustrated that their child’s additional learning needs were not being fully met. These parents were concerned that their child was just languishing in the system with no one actively helping them. Sometimes we heard anger, despair, and raw emotion from those adults just trying to navigate the system to get the best for their child.
Third, we heard a lot from children and young people about bullying and the way this made them feel about school. Some children and young people talked about being unsafe at school. These were the stories that kept me awake at night, the conversations with children and young people, who were afraid to go to school or didn’t have money to pay the electricity bill for their mum or get her medication for her.
Many of the young children and young people I spoke to found crucial support in a variety of forms, from specialist groups, from youth workers, from teachers, from after school clubs which they all said helped them cope. But it was still staggering just how many children and young people said (in their own way) that they felt lost or abandoned within the system.
One common frustration that children and young people often felt that no one was listening, so they said to us, “can you make them listen please?” There was one point at the end of the conversation where a young person said to me, “Okay, you’ve listened to us. But will you truly tell them what we think?” That was always the question from children and young people. Will you be honest for us? Will you speak truth to power? We always said that we would, and we always did.
“There was one point at the end of the conversation where a young person said to me, ‘Okay, you’ve listened to us. But will you truly tell them what we think?’ That was always the question from children and young people, will you be honest, for us?”
Next week: A process not an event: A Conversation with Alma Harris & Carol Campbell about the National Dialogue on Scottish Education One Year Later (Part 2)
To learn more about how Vietnam has achieved almost universal education at a relatively high level of quality in a developing country of over 100 million people, I visited Hanoi last year and talked to a variety of Vietnamese educators, policymakers and researchers. My conversation with Phương Lương Minh and Lân Đỗ Đức at the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences (VNIES) was especially instructive in providing insights into how schooling in Vietnam has improved in rural areas with ethnic minority students. The second part of this conversation looks ahead and discusses what might happen in the future as Vietnam rolls out a new competency-based curriculum and related textbooks. The first part discussed the efforts to improve education in Vietnam over the past thirty years, particularly in ethnic minority areas.For related posts, see the Lead the Change Interview with Phương Minh Lươngand A Conversation with Chi Hieu Nguyenabout Vietnam’s responses to the COVID-19 school closures
Lân Đỗ Đức is the Vice Director, The Department of Scientific Management, Training, and International Cooperation at The Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences. Phương Lương Minh is a lecturer and coordinator of the Master Program of Global Leadership, Vietnam Japan University (Vietnam National University), and a collaborating researcher at the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences. I am indebted to President Mai Lan and colleagues at VinUniversity for making this trip possible, and to Dr. Le Anh Vinh, Director General of the Vietnam Institute of Educational Sciences (VNIES) and his colleagues for their support.
– Thomas Hatch
Looking toward the future of educational improvement in Vietnam
Thomas Hatch (TH): “High-performing” education systems like those in Finland and Singapore have struggled to move to a system that is less exam-driven and that embraces a more active, student-centered pedagogy. Research in Singapore suggests that a kind of hybrid pedagogy has emerged that maintains some traditional practices but has some of the features of active methods as well. What do you expect will happen in classrooms as Vietnam implements the new competency-based curriculum?
Lân Đỗ Đức(LDD): Good question! Asian countries have a Confucian tradition where learning is the top priority. We have great respect for teachers. The traditional teaching style is common across countries. Now in Vietnam, as of 2021-22, we have 1.4 million teachers. Although the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) allocated a lot of resources and carries out professional development programs like the Enhancing Teacher Education Program (ETEP – funded by the World Bank) it’s likely not all are fully able to adopt new methods well. Professional development is a huge, ongoing effort. We hope most Vietnamese teachers are willing to change, but we lack evidence.
Phương Lương Minh (PML): I can share some findings from our report on technology in education conducted for UNESCO. After COVID, there was actually a positive impact on teacher professional development. We have seen that there are now substantial open resources for teachers, even in remote areas there are online learning systems and open resource centers available to them. The teachers now can learn from all the lesson plans already uploaded into the network and shared. We have heard from teachers who think this is really amazing. Even with over 1 million teachers, many can access these platforms. Some of these platforms are controlled by the Ministry of Education, but some are also from private providers. Of course, if creators want official approval, they need to propose learning materials for verification by the Ministry.
TH: Are people in ethnic minority and rural areas aware of the competency-based curriculum change and the change in textbooks? Will it be easier to make this change in rural areas?
PML: I have not had the chance to see this from my own observations, but I have seen that in remote areas parents often are not close enough to see their children’s education or to know what they are learning or what textbooks they are using. For preschool and primary school, until grade 3, children attend satellite village schools and live at home. But after grade 3, they go to boarding schools located in larger communities, far from their home villages. In some villages that are big enough, they may have schools that go through 4th or 5th grade before children move to boarding schools. The boarding schools are usually far from the villages, in the commune center. The students stay there all week, and they only go home on the weekends so then the parents have no chance to know about the curriculum and the textbooks in the higher grades.
“in remote areas parents often are not close enough to see their children’s education or to know what they are learning or what textbooks they are using.”
LDD: Depending on the population and number of students in an area, there might be two or three primary schools. When students complete 3rd grade, they transfer to boarding schools that serve as centers for the higher grades. When students transition to secondary school, they may attend boarding schools at that level as well.When boarding schools start depends on the population density in the area. Some places have boarding schools from 4th grade onwards. Others may start at 6th grade or even later.Boarding schools could potentially start as late as 10th grade at the upper secondary level, but not all students continue to 10th grade.
TH: I wonder what you predict might happen as Vietnam rolls-out the shift to a competency-based curriculum and textbooks. In ethnic minority areas, do you think teachers might resist or parents might worry their children won’t succeed? Or might it actually be easier to make that shift in rural schools?
LDD: This is something that we hope to study, but I expect there will be varying levels of challenge in different areas. However, I think the willingness of the Vietnamese people to change is high. We really want to change because we that see that many students now don’t have the skills they need for higher education or for vocational education, so we hope the new competency-based curriculum will better prepare students. From 2022-2025 MOET will assign provinces to conduct research on implementation and outcomes. We are very interested in understanding local perspectives on coordination and real impacts, especially in rural and ethnic minority areas. The willingness for change gives me optimism, but we also need to closely study results on the ground.
“Vietnam: Poor and ethnic minority students face persistent lower education performance” by Chau Doan/World Bank is licenced under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
PML: In our research with the RISE Programme we planned to explore how the new competency-based curriculum was implemented in schools, but because of COVID, the implementation of the new textbooks was delayed. However, in our earlier qualitative longitudinal study we looked at teachers’ and headmasters’ understanding and perspectives on competency-based teaching. The majority have a very clear understanding the objectives of the lessons and the knowledge and skills when asked about the competencies they don’t have a very clear distinction between skills and competencies. Actually, when we looked at in practice, some teachers were doing competency-based teaching in their classroom, but they did not realize it.
“when we looked at in practice, some teachers were doing competency-based teaching in their classroom, but they did not realize it.”
TH: Help me understand what that looks like. How could you tell they were already teaching competencies without realizing it?
PML: We collected video recordings of lessons along with the lesson plan and an interview with the teacher before the class and an interview afterward where they watch the recording and reflect afterwards. We ask them what were the competencies that they were teaching. The lesson plans they were designing were still based on the old knowledge-based textbooks not the new curriculum, and we recorded this and had the post-interview, and we could see the teachers were teaching some competencies like creativity and critical thinking in their teaching activities. They still followed the textbook but they changed the pedagogy. They designed the teaching by themselves.
TH: But what led them to change their pedagogy? Was it the professional development?
PML: It depends on the individual. Usually, the government’s training is common, but the pedagogy for each lesson depends on each teacher, and the teaching method of the teachers from the rural provinces is different from that of those in the central region so we have to see what are the reasons for these differences: Why can’t the teachers from the Northern provinces teach the competencies as well as those from the central region? From that maybe we can get back to the professional development training delivered by the government and whether that was different or not. Or whether the networking in one school or region is different.
LDD: These videos were collected before COVID around 2017, and the government has had strong, continuous professional development training every year, and they have had a focus on “active pedagogy” even before they began the comprehensive renovation of the curriculum. The Ministry of Education actually promoted active teaching methods since the 2000s when we conducted the previous education reform. A lot of the civil society organizations in Vietnam also supported the educators in all the provinces to promote active teaching methods. It is not new. It is not that we changed to the competency-based curriculum, and then we promoted active teaching. Active teaching existed in the previous education reform.
It is not that we changed to the competency-based curriculum, and then we promoted active teaching. Active teaching existed in the previous education reform.
Next steps?
TH: What do you see as the next step Vietnam needs to take to continue improving its education for all students?
PML: For me, the most important thing is still teachers. We cannot wait for support from the government or Ministry. What happens in the classroom still comes down to each teacher and child. Supporting training for teachers is critically important so that they enjoy their job and have the inspiration to improve their teaching. That’s why it’s good that we have open resources for them and now, with the Internet, they can easily learn and share with their colleagues from all corners of the country. I think we will be able to make changes very quickly if we can promote this online platform and provide open resources.
LDD: Along with teachers and human resources overall, I think in the coming years Vietnam has to deal with a number of economic issues so at the macro level we need to maintain enough investment in education. But we need to define the top priorities because we have limited resources, and we cannot do everything at once. In recent years, we have focused on changing the preschool. We have a plan, , and VNIES is charged with writing the new preschool curriculum, and it is going to be introduced next year, and we are going to have a pilot from 2025 to 2027. But, for me, for the next 10 years, I think higher education should be a priority. I don’t see many colleges or universities in Vietnam at a high rank.
Vietnam demonstrates that schooling can improve at a large scale, even in a country with a developing economy and over 15 million students. The majority of the Vietnamese population (nearly 86%) are from the Kinh ethnic group, but there 53 other ethnic groups. Some of these ethnic groups have long had high levels of literacy and education, but the Vietnamese government has also made a concerted effort to support the education of students from ethnic minority groups who live in rural areas and mountainous & remote regions and who experience higher levels of poverty. These efforts have contributed to near universal access to education at a relatively high level of quality. To learn more about how Vietnam’s education system has achieved this success, I visited Hanoi last year and talked to a variety of Vietnamese educators, policymakers and researchers. My conversation with Phương Lương Minh and Lân Đỗ Đứcat the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences (VNIES) was especially instructive in providing insights into how schooling in Vietnam has improved in rural areas with ethnic minority students. The first part of this conversation centers on the efforts to improve education over the past thirty years, particularly in these ethnic minority areas. The second part looks ahead and discusses what might happen in the future as Vietnam rolls out a new competency-based curriculum and related textbooks.For related posts, see the Lead the Change Interview with Phương Minh Lươngand A Conversation with Chi Hieu Nguyenabout Vietnam’s responses to the COVID-19 school closures.
Lân Đỗ Đức is Vice Director of the Department of Scientific Management, Training, and International Cooperation at the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences. Dr. Phương Lương Minh is a lecturer and coordinator of the Master Program of Global Leadership, Vietnam Japan University (Vietnam National University), and a collaborating researcher at the Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences. I am indebted to President Mai Lan and colleagues at VinUniversity for making this trip to Hanoi possible and to Dr. Le Anh Vinh, Director General of the Vietnam Institute of Educational Sciences (VNIES) and his colleagues for their support.
– Thomas Hatch
Policies for supporting access and quality of education in Vietnam
Thomas Hatch (TH): How has Vietnam managed to develop an education system that has almost universal access to education at a relatively high level of quality in a developing country of almost 100 million people?
Lân Đỗ Đức(LDD): After the war, the Vietnamese government realized education should be the key to changing human resources and economy, and we tried to maintain almost 20% of national expenditure on education. We also have policies supporting the general education sector, and then we have policies supporting minority education through financial aid. That can include support in some remote areas for secondary students to go to boarding schools. In the remote areas, especially in mountainous areas where ethnic minority communities live, beside the funding from local authorities, one key thing is support from village heads. They are not under the power of the local authorities, but they work with local authorities to support bringing students to school. The provincial and district authorities also provide instructions to lower levels, including villages, to work closely with the education agencies. Under the coordination of the People’s Committee, there is also close cooperation between government authorities and education agencies across provincial, district, and village levels.
TH: I understand that to support quality education in ethnic minority areas, the Vietnamese government is also trying to encourage students from those areas to train to be teachers. What steps have they taken to create a pathway into teaching for these students?
LDD: When there are not enough young teachers willing to go to rural areas, another key strategy is paying higher salaries as an incentive, with the allowance 50%, 70% , sometimes even two times higher. People also highly respect teachers and education. They understand the benefits for children and ethnic minorities. That’s why they strongly support initiatives to encourage and mobilize children to attend school. But one barrier is that teachers from outside areas often cannot speak the local ethnic minority languages when they come to work in rural or mountainous villages so it’s very important to train local minority people to become teachers. We have some policies that can make it a bit easier for minority students to enter teacher training programs. Usually, some ethnic minority students are nominated by their provinces to pursue teaching careers, called “cử tuyển”, and they receive some advantages like lower entrance requirements and financial aid from their provinces. In college, they also receive a lot of support. For example, when I was studying math education at the National University, there was one section of a math class that specifically trained in-service math teachers from ethnic minority areas. But after graduation, the students who receive funding from their provinces must return to work in local schools after graduation. For other students, it is different; they must find schools and jobs themselves after graduating.
TH: Do the provinces provide incentives and support for ethnic minority students wanting to study other fields besides teaching?
Phương Minh Lương (PML): Yes, there is support for ethnic minority students in other areas such as agriculture, medicine, economics, and tourism besides just education.To get into college, local authorities can nominate students to apply to university without entrance exams. We call this “Cử tuyển” – “sending to school” – local authorities select the students based on certain criteria, and, normally, students in this program are offered jobs by local authorities after graduating.But in practice, this is often not true. Not all students receive jobs from local authorities after graduating. So then a lot of the parents from ethnic minority groups see that there is no guarantee for their children to receive a job even though there was a commitment.
The power of the collective and social networks in education improvement
TH: In the US, we only hear about the “miracles,” but in Singapore it took 30-40 years to build an effective education system. In Vietnam, what was successful in the early days in the 1990’s? How were you able to reach people in rural areas and then get them into school and get them learning?
PML: That is the power of the collective that can be known as “power with.” There’s close coordination between authorities at grassroots levels and schools, with monthly meetings between the village or what we call the commune authorities and school leadership and educators. These include school officials like headmaster and representatives of mass organizations like the Women’s Union, Youth Union, and Study Promotion Associations at village level. These meetings are organized by the commune authorities, and they discuss all the problems related to the life of the local people in the village and in the school. Then if there is a problem, like there are children who have dropped out, then the authorities can support the school in that area and they can come to see why these children dropped out and whether there are any solutions to get these children back to school.
That is the power of the collective that can be known as “power with.” There’s close coordination between authorities at grassroots levels and schools, with monthly meetings between the village or what we call the commune authorities and school leadership and educators.
TH: But does that coordination really happen at an individual level – where they meet in a village and say, “These 5 children dropped out, let’s go find out why and get them back in school”?
PML: Yes, the head of the village head works closely with the teachers to find those children. It’s not always easy for teachers to find the children because sometimes the children may be far away in the rice fields or the forests for days helping their families to complete the harvest. But the village head knows how to communicate with those families to discuss the situation. He can mobilize the engagement of police, women’s union, youth’s union and youth in village in this effort. As such, they can quickly find these dropout children and their parents.
TH: Do you have an example or story of a specific student where this happened and a child dropped out and they brought him to school?
PML: In Lao Cai and Ha Giang provinces where I worked, the Hmong have some of the lowest school attendance compared to other ethnic groups. The children of the Hmong group may drop out if there is a marriage festival or another village event. The children also often drop out during the tourist season in the summer because foreign visitors come and the children drop out to act as tour guides so they can earn money. To deal with this, there are two things the school headmaster can propose to the Bureau of Education and Training at the district level. First, if it is a festival for the Hmong people, the authorities can allow the school to close for a few days. In some areas, 100% of the students might be from the Hmong group, so in that case all of the children might stay home. So closing the school is the first option.
Second, when children drop out to earn money, teachers have to work closely with parents and the village head to advocate for the children to attend school rather than earn money. The parents may support education, but some are too poor, or one parent may have died, and there is only one parent to earn money, so in that case, it’s really hard for the children to come to school. But the government of Vietnam actually provides some financial support for children in disadvantaged areas so they can receive nearly $1,000,000 Vietnamese Dong (roughly $40 USD) per month if they attend school. The money is for the children, but the teachers distribute it to the parents according to the regulations. Apart from money, they can receive rice as well.
TH: One of the arguments I’ve made is that one the strengths of the Singaporean and the Finnish systems is that they are both highly connected and socially networked, both formally and also informally. Even though people are spread out in Vietnam, particularly in rural areas, it sounds like people are still relatively well-connected?
PML: Related to communication and connections, I’ll tell you a story from my experience. In 2011, I did fieldwork for my dissertation in Ha Giang province. It is an area with a high proportion of ethnic minorities – over 70% in some villages and 100% ethnic minorities in others. There was a non-governmental organization (namely ActionAid Vietnam that had a medical care program for children, and one day, my colleague went to a school with a doctor to do some health examinations of the primary and lower secondary school students. The doctor found some children that had teeth that needed to be pulled, otherwise, they’d become infected. Unfortunately, a terrible rumor started that the teacher pulled the children’s teeth to sell to the Chinese people for 15 million Vietnamese Dong per tooth! And the next day all the children were gone, and none of them came to school. Of course, this created a real headache for the local authorities, who had to figure out how to convince the children to come back.
We all thought it was strange that all these parents had the same information though they lived very far from each other. The Hmong people are very spread out, with several households on each mountain. That was in 2011 and the Internet connection did not work well yet and mobile phones also weren’t common there. But the Hmong people had an informal channel to communicate and share that information so the next day, no children went to school. The local authorities at the district and commune levels and the headmaster and the healthcare center director had to come to each village and convince the parents the rumor wasn’t true and get them to bring the children back. The village head who is from the Hmong people has a good reputation, so he can gather all the Hmong households and get the teachers and the doctors to explain what happened.
The Hmong people had an informal channel to communicate and share that information so the next day, no children went to school. The local authorities at the district and commune levels and the headmaster and the healthcare center director had to come to the village and convince the parents the rumor wasn’t true and get them to bring the children back.
Community engagement and educational improvement
TH: It seems like you could argue that Vietnam lacked the educational infrastructure and the money that some other systems have had, but it has had the social and cultural infrastructure that connects communities and maybe we have lost some of those connections in many communities in the US. Do you have some other examples of parent or community engagement in schools?
PML: I can talk about another example of parent engagement in ethnic minority areas. In one of my chapters, I wrote about inequities for ethnic minority children in getting access to school. In first grade in primary schools, they have to learn the Vietnamese language, but without good language preparation, and this challenges the enactment of their rights under Article 5 in the Vietnamese Constitution to learn in their mother tongue from an early age – Article 5 of Vietnam’s Constitution states: “Every ethnic group has the right to use its own language and system of writing, to preserve its national identity, to promote its fine customs, habits, traditions and culture.” So we mobilized the ethnic minority parents who are good at the Vietnamese language to come to the school to help the teachers. Most teachers are Kinh people, and they can’t speak the local languages, but the parents can act as translators between children and teachers in those first months until the children understand the teacher and the teacher can understand the Hmong children. That’s a great initiative for bridging education and removing language barriers. Additionally, parents are also willing to contribute their labor to cook for children when schools lack the money to pay for support staff, so these are some good community engagement practices.
Article 5 of Vietnam’s Constitution states: “Every ethnic group has the right to use its own language and system of writing, to preserve its national identity, to promote its fine customs, habits, traditions and culture.” So we mobilized the ethnic minority parents who are good at the Vietnamese language to come to the school to help the teachers.
TH: You used the phrase “we mobilized parents,” but what does that mean? How did you do that?
PML: Most parents are aware that, when children have access to education, they can have better lives and for that they need to know Vietnamese. But as I said, ethnic minority groups often live far from the commune centers, so we sometimes establish satellite schools in the villages. Then the parents can see that when the children come to school, they are having a lot of fun. They can see the children singing and reading stories in Vietnamese, and they can see the children’s happiness. It’s that simple – if children enjoy the class, parents will come to support them.
However, it is not easy for the parents to get access to the classrooms without approval from the school. That’s the reason why this model of parent engagement functions with the support of the NGO’s. The NGO’s see the need to engage the parents to help the teachers. It is not that the community people want to come to the school, and they are warmly welcomed by the school. It is the NGO that says to the school it would be good if you have the support of the parents. Recognition is very important here. When the school recognizes the contribution from the parents, then it works. Otherwise without any recognition, there is no chance for the parent to get involved in the school system, yeah. The same for the NGO as well. If they don’t request that the school recognize the contribution from the parents, then it doesn’t work.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM
The aims of education and the right to mother tongue education
TH: the education system is focused on improving economic opportunity, getting students into higher education and the workforce. But as you have pointed out in some of your research, this comes at a cost if attention is not paid to local culture and history. Does the government understand this problem, or is it more focused on strengthening the overall economy and education system?
LDD: The government wants to preserve the local culture, and that’s why we also developed the bilingual teaching program funded by UNICEF. It ran for almost 10 years from about 2006 to 2015. Several million dollars were provided to develop learning and teaching materials in minority languages, and the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) and VNIES are continuing to work to support teacher training and learning materials for bilingual education and mother tongue instruction in some provinces. But some of these languages don’t have a written form so it is not easy.
PML: It is regulated very beautifully in the policies that all ethnic groups have a right to education in their own language. But in practice, even though the government wants to support them, it is not feasible to do so because of limited resources. For example, without a writing system, we cannot preserve the languages; if we don’t have teachers who are able to teach in the languages and we don’t have the curriculum and textbooks to teach them, it doesn’t work. Right now, there are only three languages that UNICEF has funded for textbooks (including Mong, J’rai and Cham). So we try to promote and implement Article Five in our Constitution, but it depends on the available conditions
“It is regulated very beautifully in the policies that all ethnic groups have a right to education in their own language, but in practice, even though the government wants to support them, it is not feasible to do so because of limited resources”
Next in this series: Looking toward the future and the implementation of a new competency-based curriculum in Vietnam: A Conversation about the evolution of the Vietnamese school system with Phương Lương Minh and Lân Đỗ Đức (Part 2)
“Why don’t schools change?” In this two-part interview, Jón Torfi Jónasson reflects on his work studying educational change in Iceland and other parts of the world. Part 1 explores some of the institutional factors that make it difficult to make changes even in an “undisciplined” system like that in Iceland. In Part 2, Jónasson discusses some of the advice that he has shared with policymakers and education leaders. Jónasson is a Professor Emeritus of the University of Iceland School of Education where he was also Dean of Social Sciences and Dean of the School of Education.
Thomas Hatch: Can you share with us how your ideas about school improvement have evolved?
Jón Torfi Jónasson: For the past 20 to 25 years, I’ve been interested in how education changes or doesn’t change. In the “old days,” I was very interested in the use of computers in education, and I went to a meeting about this in Switzerland in 1980. I came back from that meeting and advised the Ministry of Education here in Iceland, “We must know what’s happening because this is very, very important.” I thought that from now on everything would change very fast, partly or even mainly through the influence of computers. A few years later, the Government set up a committee on the future of all aspects of government, and I was asked to write on what I thought would happen in education in the next 25 years, from 1985 to 2020. Some thought I would, among other things, be able to explain how computers would change everything and, perhaps, how school might not be needed at all, due to the power of computers. But I was very careful and I often claim that this was a particularly boring book because I said, more or less, that very little would change. Computers would be introduced; they would be used – this was before the internet – and they would probably be connected via video link, but not very much else will change. Well, perhaps something, but probably not very much. And my judgment on this, by hindsight, is that I was more or less correct.
Jón Torfi Jónasson
After that, around 2010, I thought I would write another book about the next 25 years, but I didn’t want to write another boring book so I decided to speculate about what might change but more importantly, what actually hindered sensible change. What should change? And why doesn’t it? That led me to become interested in the inertia of educational systems and educational work generally, and with this I’ve been preoccupied in the past decade or more. In one article, “Educational change, inertia and potential futures,” for example, I focused on inertia and the aspects of education that make change difficult. One of my main conclusions is that people erroneously view education as an organization. Thus, many have been interested in developing organizational leadership and thus organizational change, and have perhaps not sufficiently understood that education is more of an institution. (This argument has been most powerfully made by David Labaree in his 2010, book Someone Has to Fail.) You have to focus on institutional changes and how institutions should or can be changed if you want education to develop.
One of my main conclusions is that people erroneously view education as an organization. Thus, many have been interested in developing organizational leadership and in organizational change, and have perhaps not sufficiently understood education is more of an institution…. You have to focus on institutional changes and how institutions should or can be changed if you want education to develop.
In order to explain my argument, I’ve concentrated on two main institutional aspects, even though there are more that matter. One is that there are subjects that should be taught, and they’ve been essentially the same for over a century or two, with mathematics as the prime example. The other institutional issue is credentialism. Internationally these are very powerful constraining forces, keeping education in a certain form.
But if you ask about Icelandic education, I think it is actually in good shape. A lot of people are more skeptical than I am, but I claim that the strength of the Icelandic system is its lack of formal discipline or constraints. It’s a system that is not disciplined by examinations; we have no national leaving examination, with stakes, at any level. That may change, but that’s been the case during this century. In the past, at the highest level we have had a formal entrance examination (university entrance examination -ice: stúdentspróf), but it is not the same from different upper secondary (i.e., high) schools and thus not national, they all have their own final examinations. Then, when we had the national examination at the end of compulsory education, it was only indirectly used for tracking. Some high schools would try to select students on that basis, but that was not uniformly so. For most students, at least from the countryside, who in practical terms only had access to one upper secondary school, this examination didn’t matter. The tests in compulsory education will now be re-established in a totally revised form, initially in reading Icelandic and mathematics in 4th, 7th and 9th class (out of 10), but solely as a formative assessment mechanism – even though I claim that nobody knows exactly how to use formative mechanisms, but that is a different story.
[T]he strength of the Icelandic system is its lack of formal discipline or constraints. It’s a system that is not disciplined by examinations as we have no national leaving examination, with stakes, at any level.
Of course, we have problems. The main problems are related to the notion of inclusion, e.g., supporting different groups like those who are having mental health issues or learning difficulties, and we also have an increasing immigrant population, and thus we have problems with language, i.e. teaching young people to speak Icelandic who have a different mother tongue. These are being addressed, though I’m not sure how well we are doing this. But we are doing better in education generally than many people accept. We are doing quite well academically and many of our young people are working all over the world in interesting jobs or doing well at top institutions. We’re doing quite well in sports. We have national teams in both genders that are doing reasonably internationally, e.g., in soccer, handball, gymnastics, and basketball. Our young people are internationally successful in music. PISA’s not the only measure of how well we do, that’s my main point. One of the problems with PISA is that it hijacks the discourse. It may have positive aspects, but it is very damaging when one measure takes over the discourse and tells you what needs to be addressed.
TH: If Iceland has one of the most undisciplined systems, in the sense you have explained – and I’m not aware of many others that are like it – that raises a question: Why hasn’t it been easier to change the Icelandic system? Many people in other countries complain that the tests and examinations make it hard for them to change, but what are the institutional factors that are making it hard for this “undisciplined” system to change? What is producing the inertia that’s making change difficult?
JTJ: It is the institutional character of education. One problem, as I mentioned, is the subject control. There are certain subjects that everyone agrees must be taught; well, many – perhaps most people, seem to agree about this, except me. I’m trying to argue that one problem is the absolute versus relative importance of curricular content. There is nothing that’s absolutely necessary to teach, but there are so many things that are useful to understand (even very useful), and certain things may be relatively more important than others. Many, perhaps most of the things we are now teaching are, in my mind, relatively less important than things we’re not teaching. Take genetics which doesn’t have central role in our curriculum. Why isn’t genetics, or perhaps microbiology, the main focus in the natural sciences rather than physics or chemistry? You could easily suggest still other foci. Why shouldn’t artificial intelligence be addressed with connections to the brain and computer sciences – and even placed in primary focus? Isn’t that more important than some of the mathematics we are teaching? I’m certainly not saying mathematics is not important. I’m only saying other things are possibly more important. Teaching about psychology, particularly related to mental health, is another very important subject. And we could go on. So, I’m suggesting that the current subject hierarchy is actually holding control when it shouldn’t.
Most of the things we are now teaching are, in my mind, relatively less important than things we’re not teaching. Take genetics. Why isn’t genetics or perhaps microbiology, the main focus in the natural sciences rather than physics or chemistry?
The other controlling factor is the credential. You want your exams, and you want your marks; you want your social currency, you want to get on. You want to get ahead based on credentials even though a credential is not so important in Iceland, compared to other systems – it still matters – but probably much less than in most other systems. As I said before, here, there is no standardized university entrance examination. In principle, everybody who finishes high school and takes a high school matriculation exam has access to university. Before there was a hindrance if you pursued the vocational track rather than the academic path; then you weren’t allowed unconditionally to enter university. But now that hindrance has been removed, and if you go through a vocational track and take subjects that are needed – some Icelandic, some mathematics, wherever you want to take them – then you can enter university even without taking the matriculation exam.
TH: But who in Iceland determines the entrance criteria for the universities?
JTJ: It’s to a large extent determined by the individual high school who adopt their own standards, but those are based a general framework set by the ministry. Students leave the school with certain marks in certain subjects. If they have some predefined combination of subjects – they have met the university entrance criteria. It’s somewhat diffuse because it can be different for different universities and in different university subjects. If you ask someone “what is it?” No one can actually give a simple general answer. So it’s amorphous and flexible, which I think is very sensible. There are discussions about changing this, but, for the most part, it’s incredibly open. In the medical professions, programs for nurses and doctors have special entrance examinations, but they are exceptions.
TH: Let’s keep pursuing this. If the system is so undisciplined, in the sense you have explained, and it’s so open, shouldn’t Iceland be the easiest place in the world to make changes and improvements in conventional schooling? What else is holding things back?
JTJ: Again my response is: it is education as an institution. There is curriculum guidance for the preschool, which is very open so, in fact, teachers there can do whatever they think makes sense within that very general frame. This makes sense for the preschool and is easy for most people to accept. But it is in fact similar for compulsory education. There is a national curriculum, but it is very open, and I claim that the schools have more freedom to do what they think makes sense than they actually realize. They have been held back by some very ill-defined constraints set by a “divine” tradition. Many would say, “We will not be allowed to do this or that,” when they actually have the implicit permission.
[S]chools have much more freedom to do what they think makes sense than they actually realize. They have been held back by some very ill-defined constraints set by a “divine” tradition. Many would say, “We will not be allowed to do this or that,” when they have implicit permission.
So it’s quite interesting, why we don’t see more changes? There is one institution I haven’t mentioned, which is the parents. A preschool teacher told me this morning that many parents ask her, “Why are you not teaching reading in preschool? You should be doing that.” The parents are making sure that the “right things” are being done, even though the right things they think of are determined by their own, often narrow perspectives. That’s also a controlling force.
It’s a very important question. Why aren’t we changing more than we are? In my writing on inertia I’ve tried to mention a number of constraints. One of the constraints I talk about related to the control of the subjects is the education of teachers, i.e. what they can and cannot teach. What new material are they able to teach? I thought in the 1980’s and 90’s that we should teach computer programming at school. Definitely not to produce programmers but for the same reason we teach mathematics. It’s reasonable to understand and master some of the things that are happening around us. But that was a futile suggestion to make. Hardly anybody was available to teach programming, so you couldn’t press that point. And it’s the same with some other important topics. If you want to place more emphasis on AI or genetics, or ethics or other important new things, who would be teaching those topics? Then, if we think certain skills are important – like teaching initiative, friendship, or creativity – who’s going to teach those? These are very difficult to teach! It’s easier to teach fractions. Teachers also have to attend to all kinds of important things in school that are rather difficult so they would perhaps prefer to do something more manageable like teaching time honored concrete content. Related to this are vested interests. For instance, in secondary schools, when students in Iceland were given more choice of foreign languages, the pupils started to choose Spanish rather than German. Some of the teachers of German, unfortunately, lost their jobs. This doesn’t happen, of course if we don’t change. There are a lot of things like that keeping the system in place. And it is easy to understand and even to sympathize with many of those. But my main point is that if people don’t understand the various institutional constraints, then they don’t understand why the changes that they think are reasonable, don’t happen.
[I]f people don’t understand the various institutional constraints, they don’t understand why the changes that they think are reasonable, don’t happen.
One of the problems is that education is not being discussed as an idea. When people say, “we should change education,” they’re normally implying “we should change the way we teach, for example, mathematics.” They’re not asking if we should teach mathematics at all or other such fundamental questions. There are many things like that, you’re not “allowed” or expected to question so all the changes discussed and potentially taking place are minor. Another problem is that people have this idea that you have to go through all the basics in a content area, otherwise, you can’t understand complex ideas. That means school must attend to a wide range of curricular basics even though nobody actually knows what these basics need to be. There were basics, perhaps defensible in the 1900’s, but not necessarily now, even if they still retain their curricular place. This is being discussed among other related issues in the recent fascinating book by my colleague Tom Fox on becoming edGe-ucated.
Another content issue is communication. Communication should perhaps be the most important subject in a modern curriculum. There are incredibly many different sides to it. I mention a single example. With whom do you have to communicate, how and about what?
Next Week: “Relish the freedom you have and find the balance”: A Conversation with Jón Torfi Jónasson on Educational Change in Iceland (Part 2)
This week, Mohammad Shefatul Islam describes the recent roll-out of a platform to support the implementation of a new competency-based assessment system in Bangladesh. In the first part of this two-part interview Islam talked about how he first got involved in edtech as a tutor and then describes how his work leading the development of several edtech platforms evolved during the school closures of the COVID-19 pandemic. This interview was conducted in November of 2023, shortly before the rollout of the platform to support the competency-based assessment system.
Islam is a civil service official within the Ministry of Education, with primary responsibilities as a Lecturer in Economics in government colleges. For the past few years, he has been on assignment at the Ministry of ICT and Telecommunication working on a program known as a2i, a collaboration between the Ministry of ICT and the Ministry of Education to help shape the future of education in Bangladesh. Islam has been a leading architect of the development of three different education platforms in Bangladesh: The Teachers Portal was established in 2013 to support blended learning and the development of teachers’ digital skills. Teachers can share presentations and teaching materials on the platform and access an online repository of multimedia materials. With over 600,000 registered, 60% of teachers from around the country have joined the Portal. Following the development of the Teachers Portal, Muktopaath was created as an e-learning platform for education and professional development. In 2018, attention shifted to students and Konnect was founded as an “edutainment platform” to support the development of youth (13 – 18) through access to a safe digital environment that connects them to online and offline activities, educational materials, mentoring, advice, games and competitions. (K stands for Kishore, youth in Bengali.) This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Thomas Hatch (TH): This year, you have been working to create an online platform to support the shift to competency-based assessments. Can you tell me about that shift? When did that work start?
Shefatul Islam (SI): The new curriculum process started in 2017. We reviewed over 100 countries’ curricula and policy documents like the Sustainable Development Goals. We also took into account the government’s National Education Policy, National Development Plan, and the Bangladesh Delta Plan 2100 which addresses the fact that as a flat, low-lying country, only about a meter above sea level, we are extremely vulnerable to climate change. We took all of these things into account – the changes in the environment, in the economy, in the future skills needed – and we conducted several years of integrated research and extensive stakeholder consultations.
We also started piloting project-based learning activities within the existing curriculum, and that was a big part of my work. In 2018, students were assigned to a project called “Banganabdhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Muktijuddho ke Jani” to interview elderly people in their region about our liberation war in 1971. Teachers took student groups to historical sites, homes, even hosted events to honor the war heroes and do the interviews. As a small experiment, we added a way for students to add a recording to their project pages on Konnect. The students could record the interviews on their mobile phones, and they could share their experience: How they found their interviewees, the time, the place. It was like the story of the whole process. We received over 300,000 submissions from different schools, each about 20-25 minutes, all with a different story because each person had unique experiences. Some of them had family members that were murdered or raped. Some of them had lost fingers or eyes. It was very emotional. Students recorded these powerful stories and after completing projects, uploaded them onto Konnect website, YouTube, or Facebook. Teachers assessed the projects and collected the school’s best, and then picked one to send to a committee at the sub-district level. Those committees chose the top 100, that had the best stories, that were also properly recorded; the sound was clear; the image was clear; and then they sent those on to the district. This way, we collected all the content from local level, and finally picked the top 100 content at the national level.
TH: That’s fabulous! When was the new curriculum rolled out?
SI: The new national curriculum first rolled out in 64 pilot districts in 2022 before we expanded it with one sample school per district. Now in 2023, it has spread across the country for grade 1 and grade 6-7. Next year, we’ll add Grades 2-3 and 8-9. By 2025, it will include all grades with the first public exam from the new curriculum in 10th grade.
TH: Can you tell me about the new app you created to support the new curriculum?
SI: Before talking about that, it can help to have some idea of the old and new curriculum. Before, we had a structured curriculum. At the secondary level, we had about 36 subjects. Some subjects were mandatory and some were optional. This led to some disparities because boys used to take agriculture and girls used to take home science; students from the high levels took sciences and students from the lowest level to humanities. From that curriculum, we have moved to a more comprehensive curriculum so that up to grade 10 there will be only 10 subjects: Language (Bangla and English); Maths; science; social science and history; religion, with four religion textbooks (Islam, Hindu, Christian, and Buddhist). Then four new subjects came up: Digital Technologies, Life & Livelihoods, Arts & Culture, and finally Wellbeing. This includes the most demanded skills and competencies for life and the 21st century across grades 1-10.
Then before launching this curriculum country-wide, we trained our teachers first online through Muktapaath. 100% of the teachers from primary to secondary, received online training to understand the new curriculum and the major changes. After giving the schools all the materials and learning aids, like the teacher guides and the textbooks, the teachers were given five days of face-to-face training. Of course, this training is not sufficient because this is a huge transformation, but in the previous curriculum training took place over one or two or three years. They took lots of time to complete the whole cycle and to train everyone. Now, we can leverage the technology so that we can have 100% training within a very short time.
Another thing we did is that we transformed our schools into training centers. Before, teachers went to the teacher training colleges and stayed at a hotel for five or ten days of training. Instead, this time, we used local schools so the venue is nearby and the teachers don’t need to stay overnight. They can come in the morning and just go back to their home, and we don’t need to spend so much money. Now, the major challenge now is the assessment. Teachers can’t relate it to the previous system that used different percentages, and the parent also were used to exams at different level. From the shift from a summative assessment system to a formative assessment system there is a lot of turbulence. Parents were very anxious about what their kids are learning. Their kids are not coming back with lots of assignment at home. They are not reading out loud. They are not memorizing; they are not going their own personal private tutors. “What are they doing? What are schools doing? Are the students even learning anything? Where are the grades? You are not giving us any transcript. What are their achievements?”
Parents were very anxious about what their kids are learning. Their kids are not coming back with lots of assignment at home. They are not reading out loud. They are not memorizing; they are not going their own personal private tutors. “What are they doing? What are schools doing? Are the students even learning anything? Where are the grades? You are not giving us any transcript. What are their achievements?”
It was also not very easy to develop this this formative assessment strategy because we studied the approaches in a lot of different countries practice, but we never found anything appropriate for us. So we tried to make it our own. There was a huge group involved in the development of this assessment strategy: the universities, the pedagogues, and the assessment specialists within our country, and we created our own solution.
TH: Now what does the app that you’ve developed to support the new curriculum and the new assessments look like?
SI: We actually just started on the platform a few months ago. Although the platform could have done many things easily and automatically, we wanted to make sure the teacher understood the assessment process and the rules and principles behind the design of the platform. So in September of 2023, we did the first assessment training offline and introduced the new materials and tools. We also went through the key steps of the evaluation process: What are the areas teachers have to keep track of and record? How can they collect the evidence and how can they process those performance indicators into differences in students’ performance? We put in place a “three-dimensional” process to break down the different competencies into performance indicators and then levels of performance: Is it good? Is it best? Is support still needed? These are the levels. We moved away from percentages and numbers and now just have these statements. Previously it was one sheet where in Bangla you have got 80%. But what does 80% mean? Does it mean you understand 80% of the subject? But now we can understand a students’ level from the performance indicators.
We developed this assessment strategy for each of the subjects, for each of the grades, and now, as of, September of 2023, I was appointed to develop this online application for it all. It has been a roller coaster ride developing a national level platform within just one or two months. That’s when the Minister said “this has to be done.” But it was a bit lucky for me because I was involved from the very beginning in the development of the curriculum, so I could imagine what I had to do and what I had to deliver. I told them “I understand what I have to do. Let me try. Don’t expect it be perfect the first time. It will be a very comprehensive platform at the end, but I need to have some time.” And I had several conditions that I negotiated with my supervisors. I asked them, “please allow me to hire my own team. I need the experts from this country or from outside the country, no matter what. I need the money to hire them and to engage them. Everyone should be properly incentivized. I don’t care how much they want for this work, I need the best.” And they agreed, and they also gave me a separate office. So for the last two months, I moved away, and I developed a new team of about 70 people. This work includes managing many things from the servers to the transformation of pedagogical information. And the security of the system is very important because this is the information of very young students, and you have to keep in mind that the scale of this product is the whole country: It’s like how can you build a product that is born and then immediately you are walking and running?
The scale of this product is the whole country: It’s like how can you build a product that is born and then immediately you are walking and running?
We also found lots of new things that I’ve never encountered before. Each and every day we’ve found new demands, and everyday we’ve done user tests. Normally, it should take at least 2-3 months to understand the demands and requirements, and then we have to present that to the policymaker so they understand it, and then they can approve our plans. Then the design; then the development; then the testing. But this time there is no “then” at all. We have done everything simultaneously.
We also have a very complex education system and that created other challenges. In the same school, under the same registration, there are different versions of the school, a Bangla and an English version, and there are multiple shifts, in the morning and in the evening. Then there are different boards. We have two boards – Madras Education that is religious education and general education. Then more complexities come if some students change their religion, and we also found that some students in the adolescent period their gender even changed. We never encountered these kinds of issues before. We to address these changes, otherwise how can you produce a transcript for the same person who now has a different identity?
We also encountered that the parents can change. In some cases, the biological parents don’t accept the child, so a different person becomes the child’s guardian. We have to address that because our system uses the national identity number given with the birth certificate, but without the consent of the parents or guardians, how can we identify a child? To address these kinds of things, we have to cooperate with other Ministries like the Ministry of Law and with the municipalities. We never anticipated all these challenges, but luckily, I got the right team, and they produced the app within the timeline. It’s called NOIPUNNO and now teachers can find it in the google play store and use to record students’ performance and progress.
The soft launch was already done with the prime minister, and all the schools in Bangladesh will have to register with the system. They have to put in all the teachers, with each of the subjects and the class sections and then the students. This registration process will run for one week. Then the teachers will get the real time assessment application in three formats: a mobile app in two versions IOS and Android, and there will be an offline version, a desktop version, that they can just download it. Then everything will be updated, so there is also a browser version online. They can use it online everywhere. They can roam anywhere in the world. But we keep the geolocation of the teachers so that we can identify that they are the right person. For that, we have to take the biometrics of the teachers so that they can easily navigate the system and easily log-in every time.
Back in our system, we will be using artificial intelligence because we will have lots of information including basic information about day-to-day learning, like the progression and the achievements of the students. In addition, if students are absent from class, the evidence will be there. Assignments and performance records will also be submitted. We are accepting four different kinds of content from the teachers: images, document, PDF and videos. They can upload their own documents into the system for the evidence of the students’ performance. It will store the materials for at least a students’ life cycle, so there will be 12 years of records. The students can find their learning progression throughout that time.
We are accepting four different kinds of content from the teachers: images, document, PDF and videos. They can upload their own documents into the system for the evidence of the students’ performance. It will store the materials for at least a students’ life cycle, so there will be 12 years of records. The students can find their learning progression throughout that time.
TH: So the teachers are uploading the evidence from the different activities in which the students are involved, but they’re not doing it every day?
SH: Yes, it depends on the design of the learning experience. Completion may be five to ten classes, depending on the intensity of the experience. The teacher will collect all the evidence after the completion of the experience, but they will use this platform for attendance every day begining in 2024. We will also do cross checks to ensure reliability and build trust with the parents. Because if you do not attend a particular class, how can you produce this evidence? So there will be crosschecks like this at different points. Otherwise there will be blame issues. In Bangladesh, parents with powerful families may say “why isn’t my child getting this grade?” – even if they are not in school! That can be happen. So these are some crosschecks so that the teacher can feel safe and so the evidence can support them.
TH: Can parents go on this platform, and see the evidence?
SI: The output will be like a report card for each of the subjects. Each student will get one report card. The teacher can download it and send it to the parents, e-mail it or print it. We are planning to share one ID for each student, but the parents will access it in Konnect where each student will have their own profile where they get the results as per policy guidance from ministry of education. But no one can see it in public; it will be a personalized sharing of the report card, and parents can see it from them there.
TH: How often do the report cards come out?
SI: Twice in a year. Summative assessment usually takes place in June and then the second assessment is after the annual exam in November and December; but meanwhile, there will be lots of continuous or formative assessments in the different subjects. But these summative assessments will be different from the previous ones. There won’t be any sitting and paper pencil -based examinations like before at the secondary level. We have also conceptualized this summative assessment following formative assessment theories. There will be experiences, and each subject will get one day for a performance or they can arrange a fair; or they can arrange a panel discussion. They can showcase their project. There are lots of way they can demonstrate their performance.
TH: So the November, December period is a time when students will be involved in showcasing what they’ve learned in 10 different subjects?
SI: Exactly, but there will also be some preparation days as well for each subject. You might have a demonstration on the next Friday, and there will be two days reserved for preparation. Each of the subject usually gets three days of assessment, with two days of preparation. Those preparation days will also like tracked by the teacher – are the students taking the preparation well? That is part of the assessment as well because the collaboration, problem solving, and participation are also important. It’s not only about the final output. That is about a month for the performances. Before it was thirty to thirty-five days because there were many more subjects.
TH: There’s so much to talk about, but one thing I want to make sure I understand is that this is all obviously very dependent on the teacher, right? What is the situation of teachers in Bangladesh?
SI: The teacher is key. In Bangladesh, I don’t think teaching is the preferred job for everyone. Most of the time, if someone doesn’t find a job, particularly in a decent area, they might come into the teaching profession. probably Its same In most part of the world even In the richest country like Finland! The financial condition and the social status is not very high or low, but it’s in between, and I don’t see many of the teachers who are happy with their profession or their working hours, but as long they are living in their own neighborhood, it can compensate for some of the issues. In some jobs, you have to move from your city or your village, but in teaching, the government has said you can choose your own area where you can live, so you can work where you’re born or where the cost of living may be low. This is the good part. But the motivation is still very low and there are lots of changes coming up that need a higher level of motivation to implement. We can only hope that will happen because otherwise the system will collapse.
Fortunately, I have shared earlier that with the COVID response of our teacher they were like superheroes, so I hope they will embrace the change. Now we’re also developing this application that has been built-in monitoring mechanisms so we can track if any teacher falls behind; if they need support; if they need training; and we’re supporting them with more training online than ever. There are still the challenges in terms of socioeconomic condition that are not in our hands. It depends on lots of things – the politics, the economy, the rate of income, all the externalities –so we can just hope it will be okay in near future. But what is in our hands in the system we are hoping that the teachers will embrace it well. But there are also some social pressures from the parents’ community who are not well aligned so we need to work on different avenues, like promoting awareness, and building the commitment of the parents and community towards the schools. There are lots of trust building issues remaining to work on, so I think the challenge is still there.
One interesting fact, though, is that most of our education institutions in the secondary level are private. 96% of the schools are private. They were established through local community fundraising. So there is a tendency of the community to contribute to the school. I hope if we can properly disseminate our plan and help people understand what the students will get through the curriculum changes, the community will be more involved, more responsible, more cooperative than ever.
TH: But is the platform for the private institutions as well?
SI: Yes! This platform is for all. There are some schools that are not even registered in the government system, and there are some teachers that are not regular teachers, but the school is just taking them in and sending them into the classroom, but our mission is to like include everyone. Our governments provides free textbook for all students until grade 10. So if any student gets any textbook, for any school, they should be evaluated or assessed by a teacher. We shouldn’t care whether this teacher is from government, from private, from NGO or is a regular staff member or not. If schools allow them to take a class, we allow them to be assessed. And the main operation will be done within these schools not above them. The policy level like ministry officials will just get necessary reports. They will have no control over the assessment, only the subject teacher can change or alter the assessment indicators if they want until certain time. This is how the system is developing from the ground up.
Thomas Hatch 