Thread by @AaronSitze

Time travel -- view of American education from 2030: a thread

Education has shifted considerably since the pandemic of 2020, but the writing was on the wall…

(1/25)

The source of the shift was economic: employers valued agile, creative minds that could communicate with professionalism and nuance. Bloated resumes lacked authenticity. (2/25)

Therefore, a new form of interview, simple and to the point: “What can you do? What have you done?”

The first question required a list of skills: digital, mechanical, professional, interpersonal.

The second question required proof. (3/25)

Before, the proof was in the degree itself – it assumed that graduates had developed the necessary skills to work effectively on teams.

But when new hires couldn’t adapt to the fast-changing environment, employers looked for more tangible proof, regardless of degrees. (4/25)

Digital portfolios, press clippings, and personal projects competed with academic honors:

“I led a team to change an empty lot into a garden Here’s the article.”

“I created a marketing campaign for a local business. Here’s the impact.” (5/25)

Ex: bit.ly/35TSYEK

Young people, wary of the high debt load of college, looked for alternatives to compete. “Boot Camps” increased: taught by professionals, not professors, these fast-paced programs became customized training pipelines. bit.ly/2Wmw2KQ @FutureFounders @1871Chicago (6/25)

Larger and more specialized organizations, those that required more than Boot Camps, established multi-year programs – free for students provided that they worked in that organization for X years. (7/25)

Young people found it attractive: why pay for a degree and compete for a job? Instead, compete for entry into a free program that guarantees employment. (8/25)

Some colleges doubled down on the importance of a rounded liberal arts education (while strengthening their job placement network), while other colleges offered “adaptive programs” and fast-track “micro-credentials” that mimicked the Boot Camp philosophy. bit.ly/2xW0LoY

Noticing this shift, high schools were pressured to adjust as well.

Larger districts, like larger corporations, were slow to change to the landscape, relying on a “return to normal” philosophy that had worked for them pre-COVID. (10/25)

Districts with high test scores and AP offerings returned to touting these as “preparing students for their future.”

But 5-year post-graduate surveys indicated that these students felt less prepared for the new world. bit.ly/2LlxQxm @Jshy816 (11/25)

Thus, it was small districts who were best positioned for change.

Work-from-home parents traded expensive urban apts for Main Street USA towns (with fiber optic subdivisions like this: bit.ly/2xPOOkr), joined school boards, and green-lit innovation @wzeller42 (12/25)

Without large bureaucracies to mire them, small schools realigned quickly to support students in making change in their specific communities.

A few examples...

(13/25)

1) Community-based #changemaker learning gave students the opportunity to lead local initiatives and solve problems. This increased intergenerational communication and eased the burden of local government officials.

bit.ly/2YRTfqf @Changemakers
(14/25)

2) #Socialentrepreneurship programs gave HS students real-life experience in owning and operating a small business with a “triple bottom line” – benefiting the economic, social, and environmental ecosystem.
bit.ly/3fGoEle
@TheRenewalProj (15/25)

3) Science departments led local action-research projects and history departments led oral history collection, encouraging students to publish. As a result, many students left high school with publication credits. (16/25)

4) The fine arts, predicted to suffer cuts as “non-essential”, instead became central: mastery of graphic communication (digital media, design and layout, visual editing) and performance (public speaking, pitching, collaboration) were highly sought-after skills (17/25)

5) Eng depts transitioned from “lit analysis” to “communication.” Lit did not disappear but instead functioned as case studies – students discussed empathy, diversity, interpersonal conflict, lessons for the real-life scenarios acting out in their community projects (18/25)

6) “Creativity/innovation” became full courses – rooted in theory, taught explicitly, assessed by experts like @josephfatheree. Students grew in curiosity & problem-solving, & made wildly entertaining projects that delighted classmates and community, fueling future participation

Public-private gamification recruited high school STEM student superstars: high-stakes engineering, robotics, computer science competitions hosted by @elonmusk and @gatesfoundation became the basis for entire high school courses, outpacing enrollment in AP courses (20/25)

Sports, briefly wavering, held sway in districts – not because of tradition but because employers found the general skills translated: team captain = leadership qualities; Sectional Champs = experience with pressure; multi-sport athlete = adaptable bit.ly/2LizVKB (21/25)

At the end of all of these experiences, high school students from innovative districts could answer the two most important questions of the 2020s:

(22/25)

1) “What can you do?”

What can I do? I can analyze, collaborate, communicate, create, design, empathize, innovate, lead a team, network with other professionals, present my ideas convincingly, problem-solve. And I’m multilingual. (23/25)

2) “What have you done?”

What have I done? I've partnered with community organizers, argued to government officials, published a white paper, self-funded my small social enterprise, worked with admin to address school inequality. And I’m 18. (24/25)

The educational shift in short:
passive --> active;
content --> experience;
silos --> community partnerships;
academic courses --> change makers

(25/25)