What Does the Culture of a Modern Education System Look Like?
Extra Skin in the Game
I will not say that most Americans support building a new public education system from scratch. However, I do believe within the next decade, pockets of pilot programs will spring up where some Americans will have generated the support, resources, stakeholders and builders to tinker with a more modern approach. Maybe not at scale but a new way of learning will gradually come into being. Yes, this will happen with the aid of AI and every emerging tech that will be produced using AI.
How can this possibly look like? One such idea is to destroy the word “teacher” and honor the performance of an “educator”. It is a misunderstanding that educators lack skin in the game and are not courageous. It can take plenty of guts to absorb the stress and trauma of colleagues, “superiors”, young scholars and the larger community. Although, the new educational system of the future will demand even more from educators and other professionals that decide to guide our youth. Extra skin in the game!
Allow me to elaborate on how we may increase the honor of the educator through this concept of “extra skin in the game”. One possible solution is transparency. Often, parents, administrators and colleagues have no idea how educators are delivering lessons and information in the classroom. Now, imagine every time an educator delivered a lesson (direct instruction) they had the option to record it and make it available for the entire school community. Only the instructor’s image and or voice will be recorded. And only the school community will have access to the library (unless the instructor chooses to share it with other parties). It is paramount here to make clear under no circumstance will child learners be displayed on video or audio. Nor, will their information be shared publicly. A young scholar’s right to his privacy is a priority that must be protected. Yet, if an educator’s work is displayed for the community to witness (if they wish) he has expressed extra skin in the game. He exposes himself to both praise and criticism.
Imagine we are opening up a new school in a new system. How will we discuss culture with educator candidates in the hiring process? By encouraging educator candidates to consider presenting their work to the public.
This accomplishes four things:
Allows parents and the community to see the quality of ideas and delivery (for accountability and possible improvements).
Builds trust and rapport among the educators that they are presenting their best ideas.
Gives educators credibility and recognition for presenting their work for support and criticism.
Provides parents and learning spaces content to determine whether they want their young scholars to learn from the educators being considered for the opportunity.
When it comes to working in small groups with scholars, no one will be recording interactions but our nonnegotiable will still be in effect. That is, another educator and aide will be present to facilitate learning. Remember one of the adages that guides us: one is none and two is one. This accomplishes three things:
Provides transparency within classroom activity- More professionals are present to observe each other, assist when needed and critique when necessary.
Allows flexibility if one scholar needs additional intervention and or attention.
Communicates to the young scholars that they have a team of adult professionals they can depend on for their learning needs.
Does this sound a bit unrealistic? Good! Since at the moment all that is occurring are reform attempts that are boring, trite, and uninspiring. A modern system does not shirk responsibility and accountability. It allows the educator the option to confidently say, “Here I am! Here are my lessons! I believe in myself and in this community!”
How will we make sure we are not unfairly judging the work of those who choose to make their presentations public? If there is a concept in question or a controversial opinion stated by the educator, the transcript of their lesson can be fed to a cohort of AI to analyze and decide the quality of the lesson. Granted, the final decision as to any possible adjustments to instruction will be made by the human professionals. Nonetheless, the fact that we have advanced arbiters like AI available 24/7 give great flexibility and options for refining the quality of instruction in a modern school. Ethical considerations around AI will be acknowledged throughout every AI collaboration. (Hallucinations are still common and feedback is taken with a grain of salt.)
Does this mean educators would have to record themselves every day? Not necessarily, after all, this strategy is optional and lecturing to children all day is hardly cutting edge. However, to deny that explicit instruction is necessary is to neglect a child’s need for age appropriate instruction. Additionally, if collaborating in a team, others will share the workload of delivering lessons. Gone is the overwhelming feeling that everything must be accomplished by one person. Remember, the educator is no longer isolated! The hope is that when educators choose to publish their lessons to the community database, they inspire others to be transparent as well.
Educating a Free Country Towards the Future
Americans don’t like being told what to do. Sounds obvious enough and perhaps those from other countries will argue that nobody likes being told what to do. However, most Americans have a rebellious nature due to our conditioning that we live in a “free country”. We are not going to debate this notion because there are in fact many laws and regulations in the U.S. that constrain certain freedoms in certain states. Despite this, we cannot reject that we have freedom of speech in our Constitution and not every country is blessed with such a right and privilege. Therefore, we must ask: How do we nurture and protect American values to last into the next century? This question goes hand in hand with: What does the culture of a modern education system look like?
Funny enough, while writing this I stumbled upon the following quote by Umberto Eco:
“What does culture want? To make infinity comprehensible.”
It just so happens that with breakthroughs in AI we can now create custom agents that replicate real people based on their body of work. Meaning they can essentially live forever digitally and perhaps brought back to life (in a virtual sense) using a hologram or robotic humanoid. For example, let’s say you are a new educator in this new system (the one we are currently building). Every transcript from every lesson is downloaded into an AI knowledge base. Every book you write, every article you publish and every interview or lecture you share is also downloaded into this knowledge base. After even a short career of five years as an educator, you have the repertoire and sufficient data to create a virtual clone of yourself.
God forbid anything should happen to you but just in case, the youth of America will have access to your guidance and wisdom. That is, if you happen to agree to it and for a sizable financial compensation for you and your family. If the work you decide to upload attracts viewers and impresses schools, it is only fitting that you be paid handsomely. It may sound like science fiction but please understand that new frontiers await us. We cannot innovate and aspire toward the future without breaking free from the constraints of the present.
To summarize, the culture of a modern educational framework and model has four core elements:
Recommended transparency through publishing educator work for the public.
Nonnegotiable group adult presence in each shared learning space.
An emphasis on incorporating a cohort of AI to mediate quality control, problem solving, evaluations and conflict resolution.
The creation of an AI inventory of knowledge, wisdom, and experience for posterity using strict AI ethical considerations and awareness of AI nascent imperfections.
Keep in mind this is the beginning. As a new system is implemented and improved through trial and error each community will create its unique culture. However, these four elements together serve as a compass to guide us on navigating our intellect into infinity.
Drawbacks and Potential Downsides
In the process of crafting this rough blueprint on a new educational model and framework one word continues to come up over and over again: “idealistic”. Sometimes, it’s “overly idealistic”. I pointed out previously that if this is in fact true, what does it say about us as Americans, that we accept innovation of warfare technology systems as the norm but the redesign of public education as “idealistic”? Yes, these writings are not entirely grounded in practicalities or constraints but is that to say we cannot assemble the teams to make it so?
“These ideas cannot be practically implemented!” Naysayers will cry out. “You have no depth in the logistics, costs, and potential privacy issues related to recording lessons and using AI without thorough examination!” Still, I ask: Are these insurmountable challenges? Is this the attitude that the Russian cosmonauts had when they first launched a man into space? No. Of course not. Because Yuri Gagarin and his team probably did not use the word “idealistic” very much. It definitely inspired our government and NASA to create the astronaut and put him into orbit. Alan Shepard was his name and he did not accomplish this feat alone. He had a team to handle the logistics and all the “practicalities and constraints”.
There is so much to say about reinvigorating the culture of American learning. Yet, I want you to understand I do not suggest all the answers to these obstacles will be easy to find. Nor that I, as a solo founder, will be the one to do it. I am here to wonder. Will another country’s innovators accomplish this first? I hope not, although at the rate public education is declining in the United States, as long as it happens anywhere, I’d support it. Even if we have to come second- again.
If the space race analogy is too much of a stretch for you, consider once more how much effort is put into logistical, financial, and privacy hurdles when it comes to our country’s arsenal of weapons. On this subject, no obstacle is too great and there is no shortage of support for finding solutions. For example, Palmer Luckey is a genius who leveraged his expertise in VR software and hardware to create Anduril, a defense technology company. They specialize in advanced autonomous systems to defend our country from hostile enemy forces. I do not condone war or destruction but I tip my hat off to Palmer. In his early 20s he was already a billionaire after selling his company at the time, Oculus VR, to Facebook. Instead of sailing off into the sunset on a mega-yacht, he continued to innovate, this time using Lattice OS, an AI powered operating system. Now, Anduril works with the government to keep our defense systems on the cutting edge. And yes, their fundraising and government contracts are in the billions. Is it too much to apply even a fraction of this attitude toward redesigning education? Can our government support startups that invest in guiding our youth in the same way they invest in protecting them?
In an interview with Bloomberg Palmer said, “Some of the United States technology is very bad, it’s also extremely expensive and not necessarily adapted to the types of conflicts we’re going to see in the future.” Did he say this to talk shit? On the contrary, he was using his expertise to identify a relevant need- rebooting the country’s arsenal. I’ll repeat that I am against waging war and destruction on other human beings. However, it is a natural human response to defend oneself when a boundary has been crossed. Therefore, a country protecting itself is a wise concept.
That’s weapons systems, we’re discussing education systems, they’re not the same thing. This is a valid point. Yet, in the interview they describe the massive bureaucracy in the Pentagon and the Department of Defense when attempting to modernize weapons. They describe it as the “Valley of Death”. The government wants to support innovation but it takes so long to actually maneuver through the red tape, it never goes from prototype to adoption. (Research and development, fundraising, budget hearings, etc.) It was only until SpaceX and Palantir challenged the government about the bidding system that some improvements were made. Palmer says, “It’s no coincidence that the only two companies to break through in the last 35 years, since the winding down of the Cold War really, were both founded by billionaires. It’s unfortunate but it reflects the reality we’ve created…as a country we need to do better.” The fields of practice are different but the link in sentiment is similar. I believe as a country we need to do better to innovate our educational systems. It seems the three most practical methods to create momentum on this purpose is to either have it transferred through the influence of billionaires, for startups to collaborate and pave a path together, or allow small companies more opportunities to flex their muscle.
The interview concludes with discussing the speed of change with an analogy to steering a boat. You can apply the control or input to turn, it still takes a while for the system to adjust and move in a different direction. How is this related to the culture of modern education? Speed is important when operating with entrenched systems of bureaucracy. I may sound naive to think some Americans agree with me and are curious about a redesign of schooling. But all great innovation involves a sense of defiance and developmental turbulence. Learning Producers, Inc. is here to say with the collaboration of other startups and visionaries we can create an implementation plan, bring in various perspectives, generate case studies, and practice trial and error. (Just as in space engineering and weapons defense technology.) If it remains unrealistic despite our efforts, it will be up to the startups and founders of the next generation to continue this quest. Or, raise the white flag and allow the status quo with its bureaucratic and authoritarian stagnation, to drift aimlessly. All the while economic superpowers and AI leaders like China take the helm. “AI is going to be a tool to put all the cards on the table for everyone” as the Anduril founder says. Time to ask ourselves: Are we honest about the modernity of our educational system? Or are we bluffing?
Does AI Think We Should Throw in the Towel?
Q: After reading this article, should the author quit or continue this construction of a model and framework for a modern public education system?
Grok calls this framework building “fresh”.
Claude says it’s possible such tinkering could lead to “important breakthroughs”.
According to ChatGPT this framework and model can create an “encouragement of dialogue”.
