Assembling Teams for Vertical or Intensive Progress in Education
Rhetoric or Revival?
Peter Thiel, beyond being a phenomenal entrepreneur, investor, scholar, and chess master, is also a great communicator of brave ideas. In his book Zero to One he mentions a question he likes to ask in the job interview process: “What important truth do very few people agree with you on?” Peter goes on to say that among the most common answers are those like the following: “Our educational system is broken and urgently needs to be fixed” and “America is exceptional”. He says these are bad answers. The reason being that although these statements are true, most people already agree with them. If asked this question today I would answer: “Our educational system needs a complete innovative redesign and I believe it’s actually possible to accomplish this within the next decade.”
Allow me to repeat what sets my response apart from his example; I actually believe it’s possible (even if it takes a decade or more). Although I’m willing to tinker and generate momentum on my own with the help of my AI buddies, one thing is for certain- in order for this concept to actualize my startup will need human teammates. “This is all rhetoric!” “Why didn’t you just stay in the classroom? You were making a decent salary with benefits, you had tenure, what else did you want you big crybaby!” Sure, I’ve heard this before. But let’s quote Mr. Thiel:
“Bureaucratic hierarchies move slowly, and entrenched interests shy away from risk. In the most dysfunctional organizations, signaling that work is being done becomes a better strategy for career advancement than actually doing work (if this describes your company, you should quit now). At the other extreme, a lone genius might create a classic work of art or literature, but he could never create an entire industry. Startups operate on the principle that you need to work with other people to get stuff done, but you also need to stay small enough so that you actually can.”
This reminds me of a few exchanges I had with a newly hired administrator about my lesson plans. After four years at that particular school with no mention of my lesson plans, suddenly I needed to clarify goals, procedures, and assessments. Why the abrupt change? The new hire needed proof he was “working” with me on something! It was fine, after all my days as a bureaucrat were numbered. Nevertheless, this exemplifies what Peter means when he says bureaucracies prioritize the “signaling that work is being done” as opposed to actually doing work. I recall my cordial but frustrating debates with this new vice principal about lessons vividly. I remember the time spent intellectualizing lesson plans could have been better spent discussing specific learners and their needs. Eventually I just said, “Sure, I’ll make these lesson plans top notch. But writing lesson plans and managing scholars to accomplish the tasks in the lesson plans are two separate things.”
Again, people will say that attempting to innovate public education in America, especially from scratch is not practical or as we mentioned, “just rhetoric”. Yet, if we managed to establish our current public school system, we surely can create another one. And in all honesty, given our country’s violent history and greedy capitalistic system, it’s had its successes in allowing us to reach this privileged position. One, in which we have the choice to incorporate emerging tech, the most advanced ever known to mankind.
Personally, my grammar school experience as a young boy was one I look back on fondly. I listened to my instructors. I loved my friends. Most importantly, I learned to just have fun being a kid. High school was a bit different. (Who wasn’t a bit rebellious in HS?) From the perspective of an adult educator, it was for the most part, also enjoyable. However, in my final few years, I noticed academic practices becoming compromised. (Fs were unofficially phasing out, over-testing at the expense of skill practice, increase in work for work’s sake and so on.) Still, what struck me the most (and made me hang up the gloves after 15 years), was how adults and children felt drained instead of nourished intellectually. It was a lingering malaise from the lockdown and pandemic aftermath. Something that really wasn’t so much about the education “system” as it was about human adversity and trauma. And, our inability to meet the needs of the children and adults learning in the same school. Thus, we arrive to my call to action, a reminder that our time to upgrade is now. We must prepare to meet the needs of all learners for the next pandemic or potential crisis. Let’s accept our survival as a species is not a guarantee and will need our resourcefulness in problem solving.
Real World Application
People like to joke by saying, “Who isn’t trying an AI startup nowadays?” Which is funny but as a new founder, what’s sometimes awkward is when others shut you down by saying, “This sounds cool and all but how is this going to make us any money?” I’m constantly reminded: this is America- if you don’t make money, the impression is you’re a piece of shit. (This coming from someone who since graduating university in 2008 has always had a comfortable salary.) However, I’m going to challenge my fellow Americans to relish in the complexity and challenges of building a new public education system. Despite the fact that it may not immediately yield monetary gains, the intangible benefits may make it worthwhile. Let’s return to our boy PT (just made up that nickname on the spot I hope Peter doesn’t mind):
“Positively defined, a startup is the largest group of people you can convince of a plan to build a different future. A new company’s most important strength is new thinking…[Zero to One] is an exercise in thinking. Because that is what a startup has to do: question received ideas and rethink business from scratch.”
In other words, a redesign of education is a ripe opportunity for those in the health sector, justice reform space, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and so on to invest their products, services, and own vision of elevating schooling. My gaps of understanding and blind spots are rich chances for other startups or bold founders to truly say, “Fuck it, let’s give American scholars the best of the best. Let’s at least give it our best shot.” Once a rough framework and model has been built, legal counsel, policy makers, engineers, and other industry experts can refine it to make it a blueprint that we can continue to build upon. One that is flexible and continuously evolving and improving, not the rigid and outdated system we have today. Eventually, a pilot program of one or two schools will be the trial and error for actualizing this vision for modern learning.
We’ve only just scratched the surface of how people might team up under such a system but please bear with me while I give one heuristic and example. The first heuristic of our model and framework is that all our actions surround what we don’t want instead of what we do want. (Or what we want less of as opposed to more of.) We want less bureaucracy, not more, so firstly there will be no expensive administrators. Instead, those funds would go into increasing energy in the classrooms via human nurturing and expertise.
Currently for example, in a Chicago school, a fourth grade team typically has four educators, each with their own classroom of around 25-30 scholars. Now, imagine a similar set up, except for each class there are two full time educators and one full time aide. And instead of being confined in one space with cinderblock walls and fluorescent lights, classes share large open collaborative spaces. The school is designed as a hybrid indoor and outdoor learning space where the classroom seamlessly merges with the outside natural world. “That’s a utopia! How dare you envision a cool future for those little squirts you bastard!” I know, I know! Trust me, I’ve experienced push back and will continue to; it’s part of having skin in the game.
Why two educators and an aide? Because like camping or surviving in challenging situations, one is none and two is one. I understand people will read this and mumble, “wishful thinking”. It may sound as if I’m advocating for spending billions of dollars to provide weapons to a foreign country engaged in war but I assure you I’m not. If we’re going to spend our money, might as well reinvest it in the future of Earth’s most valuable resource: human potential.
How Israel? How will you carry this out? I’m figuring it out as I gradually build this framework and model in public. It is fuel to foster discussion and problem solving. More than anything it is a reference to share with others so that I may not only ask how but who? Who will join forces with me to modernize our country’s approach to public education?
Are My AI Buddies Optimistic?
Q: After reading this article, do you believe it's possible to redesign America's public education system to make it modern and prioritize the well being of its citizens?
Grok saying there will be a need for stakeholders; who is going to step up to the plate?
cont.
Claude says this ambitious vision will without a doubt face challenges.
cont.
Shout out to ChatGPT for saying I provided a "hopeful and strategic blueprint".
