how can we solve education problems

• Yale University
• About Yale Insights
• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility

What Will It Take to Fix Public Education?

The last two presidents have introduced major education reform efforts. Are we making progress toward a better and more equitable education system? Yale Insights talked with former secretary of education John King, now president and CEO of the Education Trust, about the challenges that remain, and the impact of the Trump Administration.

• John B. King President and CEO, The Education Trust

This interview was conducted at the Yale Higher Education Leadership Summit , hosted by Yale SOM’s Chief Executive Leadership Institute on January 30, 2018.

On January 8, 2002, President George W. Bush traveled to Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Ohio, to sign the No Child Left Behind Act , a bipartisan bill (Senator Edward Kennedy was a co-sponsor) requiring, among other things, that states test students for proficiency in reading and math and track their progress. Schools that failed to reach their goals would be overhauled or even shut down.

“No longer is it acceptable to hide poor performance,” Bush said. “[W]hen we find poor performance, a school will be given time and incentives and resources to correct their problems.… If, however, schools don’t perform, if, however, given the new resources, focused resources, they are unable to solve the problem of not educating their children, there must be real consequences.”

Did No Child Left Behind make a difference? In 2015, Monty Neil of the anti-standardized testing group FairTest argued that while students made progress after the law was passed, it was slower than in the period before the law . And the No Child Left Behind was the focus of criticism for increasing federal control over schools and an emphasis on standardized testing. Its successor, the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, shifted power back to the states.

President Barack Obama had his own signature education law: the grant program Race to the Top, originally part of the 2009 stimulus package, which offered funds to states that undertook various reforms, including expanding charter schools, adopting the Common Core curriculum standards, and reforming teacher evaluation.

One study showed that Race to the Top had a dramatic effect on state practices : even states that didn’t receive the grants adopted reforms. But another said that the actual impact on outcomes were limited —and that there were overly high expectations given the scope of the reforms. “Heightened pressure on districts to produce impossible gains from an overly narrow policy agenda has made implementation difficult and often counterproductive,” wrote Elaine Weiss.

Are we making progress toward a better and more equitable education system? And how will the Trump Administration’s policies alter the trajectory? Yale Insights talked with John King, the secretary of education in the latter years of the Obama administration, who is now president and CEO of the nonprofit Education Trust .

Q: The last two presidents have introduced major education reform efforts. Do you think we’re getting closer to a consensus on the systematic changes that are needed in education?

Well, I’d say we’ve made progress in some important areas over the last couple of decades. We have highest graduation from high school we’ve ever had as a country. Over the last eight years, we had a million African-American and Latino students go on to college. S0 there are signs of progress.

That said, I’m very worried about the current moment. I think there’s a lack of a clear vision from the current administration, the Trump administration, about what direction education should head. And to the extent that they have an articulate vision, I think it’s actually counter to the interests of low-income students and students of color: a dismantling of federal protection of civil rights, a backing-away from the federal commitment to provide aid for students to go to higher education, and undermining of the public commitment to public schools.

That’s a departure. Over the last couple of decades, we’ve had a bipartisan consensus, whether it was in the Bush administration or the Obama administration, that the job of the Department of Education was to advance education equity and to protect student civil rights. The current administration is walking away from both of those things.

I don’t see that as a partisan issue. That’s about this administration and their priorities. Among the first things they did was to reduce civil rights protections for transgender students, to withdraw civil rights protections for victims of sexual assault on higher education campuses. They proposed a budget that cuts funding for students to go to higher education, eliminates all federal support for teacher professional development, and eliminates federal funding for after-school and summer programs.

Q: Some aspects of education reform have focused on improving performance in traditional public schools and others prioritize options like charter schools and private school vouchers. Do you think both of those are needed?

I distinguish between different types of school choice. The vast majority of kids are in traditional, district public schools. We’ve got to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to strengthen those schools and ensure their success.

Then I think there is an important role that high-quality public charters can play if there’s rigorous oversight. And if you think about, say, Massachusetts or New York, there’s a high bar to get a charter, there’s rigorous supervision of the academics and operations of the schools and a willingness to close schools that are low-performing. So for me, those high-quality public charters can contribute as a laboratory for innovation and work in partnership with the broader traditional system.

There’s something very different going on in a place like Michigan, where you’ve got a proliferation of low-quality, for-profit charters run by for-profit companies. Their poorly regulated schools are allowed to continue operating that are doing a terrible job, that are taking advantage of students and families. That’s not what we need. And my view is that states that have those kinds of weak charter laws need to change them and move toward something like Massachusetts where there’s a high bar and meaningful accountability for charters.

And then there’s a whole other category of vouchers, which is using public money for students to go to private school, and to my mind, that is a mistake. We ought to have public dollars going to public schools with public accountability.

Q: When you have a state like Michigan in which you’ve got a lot of very poor charter schools, does that hurt a particular type of student more than others?

It has a disproportionate negative effect on low-income students and students of color. Many of those schools are concentrated in high-needs communities and, unfortunately, it’s really presenting a false choice to parents, a mirage, if you will, because they’re told, “Oh, come to this school, it will be different” or, “it will be better,” and actually it’s not. Ed Trust has an office in Michigan, where we have spent a long time trying to make the case to elected officials that they need to strengthen their charter law and charter accountability.

Unfortunately, there’s a very high level of spending by the for-profit charter industry and their supporters on political campaigns. And so far there’s not been a lot of traction to try to strengthen the charter oversight in Michigan. We see that problem in other states around the country, but at the same time we know there are models that work. We know that in Massachusetts, where there’s a high standard for charters, their Boston charters are some of the highest performing charters in the country, getting great outcomes for high-need students. So it’s possible to do chartering well, but it requires thoughtful leadership from governors and legislators.

Q: What’s your view on how students should be evaluated?

Well, I think we have to have a holistic view. The goal ought to be to prepare students for success in college, in careers, and as citizens. So we want students to have the core academic skills, like English and math, but they also need the knowledge that you gain from science and social studies. They need the experiences that they have in art and music and physical education and health. They need that well-rounded education to be prepared to succeed at what’s next after high school. They also need to be prepared to be critical readers, critical thinkers, to debate ideas with their fellow citizens, to advocate for their ideas in a thoughtful, constructive way—all the tools that you need to be a good citizen.

In order to evaluate all of that, you need multiple measures; you can’t just look at test scores. Obviously you want students to gain reading and math skills, but you also need to look at what courses they’re taking. Are they taking a wide range of courses that will prepare them for success? Do they have access to things like AP courses or International Baccalaureate courses that will prepare them for college-level work? Do they acquire socio-emotional skills? Are they able to navigate when they have a conflict with a peer? Are they able to work collaboratively with peers to solve problems?

So you want to look at grades; you want to look at teachers’ perceptions of students. You want to look at the work that they’re doing in class: is it rigorous, is it really preparing them for life after high school? And one of the challenges in education is, to have those kinds of multiple measures, you need very thoughtful leadership at every level—at state level, district level, and at the school level.

Q: How should we be evaluating teachers?

I started out as a high school social studies teacher, and I thought a lot about this question of what’s the right evaluation method. I think the key is this: you want, as a teacher, to get feedback on how you’re doing and what’s happening in your classroom. Too often teaching can feel very isolated, where it’s just you and the students. It’s important to have systems in place where a mentor teacher, a master teacher, a principal, a department chair is in the classroom observing and giving feedback to teachers and having a continuous conversation about how to improve teaching. That should be a part of an evaluation system.

But so too should be how students are doing, whether or not students are making progress. I know folks worry that that could be reduced to just looking at test scores. I think that would be a mistake, but we ought to ask, if you’re a seventh-grade math teacher, if students are making progress in seventh-grade math.

Now, as we look at that, we have to take into consideration the skills the students brought with them to the classroom, the challenges they face outside of the classroom. But I think what you see in schools that are succeeding is that they have a thoughtful, multiple-measures approach to giving teachers feedback on how they’re doing and see it as a tool for continuous improvement to ensure that everybody is constantly learning.

Q: Do you think the core issue in improving schools is funding? Or are there separate systemic issues that need to be solved?

It varies a lot state to state, but the Education Trust has done extensive analysis of school spending, and what we see is that on average, districts serving low-income students are spending significantly less than more affluent districts across the country, about $1,200 less per student. And in some states, that can be $3,000 less, $5,000 less, $10,000 less per student for the highest-needs kids. We also see a gap around funding for communities that serve large numbers of students of color. Actually, the average gap nationally is larger for districts serving large numbers of students of color—it’s about $2,000 less than those districts that serve fewer students of color.

So we do have a gap in terms of resources coming in, but it’s not just about money; it’s also how you use the money. And we know that, sadly, in many places, the dollars aren’t getting to the highest needs, even within a district. And then once they get to the school level, the question is, are they being spent on teachers and teacher professional development, and things that are going to serve students directly, or are they being spent on central office needs that actually aren’t serving students? So we’ve got to make sure they have more resources for the highest-needs kids, but we’ve also got to make sure that the resources are well-used.

Q: Does it make it significantly harder that so much of the decisions are made on the local level or the state level when you’re trying to create a change across the country?

It’s certainly a challenge. You want to try to balance local leadership with common goals. And you want, as a country, to be able to say, look, you may choose different books to read in class, you may choose different experiments to do in science, but we need all students to have the fundamental skills that they’ll need for success in college and careers and we ought to all be able to agree that all schools should be focused on those skills. Even that can be politically challenging.

We also know that from a funding standpoint, having funding decided mostly on the local level can actually create greater inequality, particularly when you’re relying on local property taxes. You’ll have a very wealthy community that’s spending dramatically more than a neighboring community that has many more low-income families. One of the ways to get around that is to have the state or the federal government account for a larger share of funding so that you can have an equalizing role. That was the original goal of Title I funding at the federal level—to try to get resources to the highest-needs kids.

The other challenge we see is around race and income diversity or isolation. And sadly, in many states, Connecticut included, you have very sharp divisions along race and class lines between districts and so kids may go to school and never see someone different from them. That is a significant problem. We know there are places that are trying to solve that. Hartford, Connecticut, for example, has, because of a court decision, a very extensive effort to get kids from Hartford to go out to suburban schools and suburban kids to come to Hartford schools. And they’ve designed programs that will attract folks across community lines, programs that focus on Montessori or art or early college programs. We can do better, but we need leadership around that.

Q: Are you seeing concrete results from programs like Hartford?

What we know is that low-income students who have the opportunity to go to schools that serve a mixed-income population do better academically. And we also know that all students in schools that are socioeconomically and racially diverse gain additional skills outside the purely academic skills around how to work with peers, cross-racial understanding, empathy.

So, yes, we are seeing those results. The sad thing is, it’s not fast enough; it’s not happening at enough places. We in the Obama administration had proposed a $120 million grant program to school diversity initiatives around the country. We couldn’t get Congress to fund it. We had a small planning grant program that we created at the Education Department that was one of the first things the Trump administration undid when they came into office. So we’re going backwards at the federal level, but there’s a lot of energy around school diversity initiatives at the community level. And that’s where we’re seeing progress around the country.

Q: Do you think the education system should aim to send as many people to college as possible? Should we think of it as being necessary for everyone or should we find ways to prepare students for a wider range of careers?

What’s clear is that everybody going into the 21st-century economy needs some level of post-secondary training. That may be a four-year degree. It could also be a two-year community college degree, or it could be some meaningful career credential that actually leads to a job that provides a family-sustaining wage. But there are very, very few jobs that are going to provide that family-sustaining wage that don’t require some level of post-secondary training. My view is, we have a public responsibility to make sure folks have access to those post-secondary training opportunities. That’s why the Pell Grant program is so important, because it provides funding for low-income students to be able to pursue higher education.

We also need to do a better job in the connection between high school and post-secondary opportunities. A lot of times students leave high school unclear on what they’re going to do and where they should go. We can do a much better job having students have college experiences while in high school and then prepare them to transition into meaningful post-secondary career training.

Q: What’s the one policy change you would made to help students of color and students in poverty, if you had to choose one thing?

There’s no one single silver bullet for sure, but one of the highest return investments we know we can make as a country is in early learning. We know, for example, that high quality pre-K can have an eight-to-one, nine-to-one return on investment. President Obama proposed something called Preschool for All, which would have gotten us toward universal access to quality pre-K for low- and middle-income four-year olds. That’s something we ought to do because if we can give kids a good foundation, that puts them in a better place to succeed in K-12 and to go on to college.

But I have a long list of policy changes I would want to make. I think, fundamentally, we haven’t made that commitment as a country, at the federal level, state level, or local level, to ensuring equitable opportunity for low-income students and students of color. And if we made that commitment, then there’s a series of policy changes that would flow from that.

Interviewed and edited by Ben Mattison.

Visit edtrust.org to learn more about the Education Trust. Follow John B. King Jr. on Twitter: @JohnBKing .

• Public Policy

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

current events conversation

What Students Are Saying About How to Improve American Education

An international exam shows that American 15-year-olds are stagnant in reading and math. Teenagers told us what’s working and what’s not in the American education system.

By The Learning Network

Earlier this month, the Program for International Student Assessment announced that the performance of American teenagers in reading and math has been stagnant since 2000 . Other recent studies revealed that two-thirds of American children were not proficient readers , and that the achievement gap in reading between high and low performers is widening.

We asked students to weigh in on these findings and to tell us their suggestions for how they would improve the American education system.

Our prompt received nearly 300 comments. This was clearly a subject that many teenagers were passionate about. They offered a variety of suggestions on how they felt schools could be improved to better teach and prepare students for life after graduation.

While we usually highlight three of our most popular writing prompts in our Current Events Conversation , this week we are only rounding up comments for this one prompt so we can honor the many students who wrote in.

Please note: Student comments have been lightly edited for length, but otherwise appear as they were originally submitted.

Put less pressure on students.

One of the biggest flaws in the American education system is the amount of pressure that students have on them to do well in school, so they can get into a good college. Because students have this kind of pressure on them they purely focus on doing well rather than actually learning and taking something valuable away from what they are being taught.

— Jordan Brodsky, Danvers, MA

As a Freshman and someone who has a tough home life, I can agree that this is one of the main causes as to why I do poorly on some things in school. I have been frustrated about a lot that I am expected to learn in school because they expect us to learn so much information in such little time that we end up forgetting about half of it anyway. The expectations that I wish that my teachers and school have of me is that I am only human and that I make mistakes. Don’t make me feel even worse than I already am with telling me my low test scores and how poorly I’m doing in classes.

— Stephanie Cueva, King Of Prussia, PA

I stay up well after midnight every night working on homework because it is insanely difficult to balance school life, social life, and extracurriculars while making time for family traditions. While I don’t feel like making school easier is the one true solution to the stress students are placed under, I do feel like a transition to a year-round schedule would be a step in the right direction. That way, teachers won’t be pressured into stuffing a large amount of content into a small amount of time, and students won’t feel pressured to keep up with ungodly pacing.

— Jacob Jarrett, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

In my school, we don’t have the best things, there are holes in the walls, mice, and cockroaches everywhere. We also have a lot of stress so there is rarely time for us to study and prepare for our tests because we constantly have work to do and there isn’t time for us to relax and do the things that we enjoy. We sleep late and can’t ever focus, but yet that’s our fault and that we are doing something wrong. School has become a place where we just do work, stress, and repeat but there has been nothing changed. We can’t learn what we need to learn because we are constantly occupied with unnecessary work that just pulls us back.

— Theodore Loshi, Masterman School

As a student of an American educational center let me tell you, it is horrible. The books are out dated, the bathrooms are hideous, stress is ever prevalent, homework seems never ending, and worst of all, the seemingly impossible feat of balancing school life, social life, and family life is abominable. The only way you could fix it would be to lessen the load dumped on students and give us a break.

— Henry Alley, Hoggard High School, Wilmington NC

Use less technology in the classroom (…or more).

People my age have smaller vocabularies, and if they don’t know a word, they just quickly look it up online instead of learning and internalizing it. The same goes for facts and figures in other subjects; don’t know who someone was in history class? Just look ‘em up and read their bio. Don’t know how to balance a chemical equation? The internet knows. Can’t solve a math problem by hand? Just sneak out the phone calculator.

My largest grievance with technology and learning has more to do with the social and psychological aspects, though. We’ve decreased ability to meaningfully communicate, and we want everything — things, experiences, gratification — delivered to us at Amazon Prime speed. Interactions and experiences have become cheap and 2D because we see life through a screen.

— Grace Robertson, Hoggard High School Wilmington, NC

Kids now a days are always on technology because they are heavily dependent on it- for the purpose of entertainment and education. Instead of pondering or thinking for ourselves, our first instinct is to google and search for the answers without giving it any thought. This is a major factor in why I think American students tests scores haven’t been improving because no one wants to take time and think about questions, instead they want to find answers as fast as they can just so they can get the assignment/ project over with.

— Ema Thorakkal, Glenbard West HS IL

There needs to be a healthier balance between pen and paper work and internet work and that balance may not even be 50:50. I personally find myself growing as a student more when I am writing down my assignments and planning out my day on paper instead of relying on my phone for it. Students now are being taught from preschool about technology and that is damaging their growth and reading ability. In my opinion as well as many of my peers, a computer can never beat a book in terms of comprehension.

— Ethan, Pinkey, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

Learning needs to be more interesting. Not many people like to study from their textbooks because there’s not much to interact with. I think that instead of studying from textbooks, more interactive activities should be used instead. Videos, websites, games, whatever might interest students more. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t use textbooks, I’m just saying that we should have a combination of both textbooks and technology to make learning more interesting in order for students to learn more.

— Vivina Dong, J. R. Masterman

Prepare students for real life.

At this point, it’s not even the grades I’m worried about. It feels like once we’ve graduated high school, we’ll be sent out into the world clueless and unprepared. I know many college students who have no idea what they’re doing, as though they left home to become an adult but don’t actually know how to be one.

The most I’ve gotten out of school so far was my Civics & Economics class, which hardly even touched what I’d actually need to know for the real world. I barely understand credit and they expect me to be perfectly fine living alone a year from now. We need to learn about real life, things that can actually benefit us. An art student isn’t going to use Biology and Trigonometry in life. Exams just seem so pointless in the long run. Why do we have to dedicate our high school lives studying equations we’ll never use? Why do exams focusing on pointless topics end up determining our entire future?

— Eliana D, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

I think that the American education system can be improved my allowing students to choose the classes that they wish to take or classes that are beneficial for their future. Students aren’t really learning things that can help them in the future such as basic reading and math.

— Skye Williams, Sarasota, Florida

I am frustrated about what I’m supposed to learn in school. Most of the time, I feel like what I’m learning will not help me in life. I am also frustrated about how my teachers teach me and what they expect from me. Often, teachers will give me information and expect me to memorize it for a test without teaching me any real application.

— Bella Perrotta, Kent Roosevelt High School

We divide school time as though the class itself is the appetizer and the homework is the main course. Students get into the habit of preparing exclusively for the homework, further separating the main ideas of school from the real world. At this point, homework is given out to prepare the students for … more homework, rather than helping students apply their knowledge to the real world.

— Daniel Capobianco, Danvers High School

Eliminate standardized tests.

Standardized testing should honestly be another word for stress. I know that I stress over every standardized test I have taken and so have most of my peers. I mean they are scary, it’s like when you take these tests you bring your No. 2 pencil and an impending fail.

— Brennan Stabler, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

Personally, for me I think standardized tests have a negative impact on my education, taking test does not actually test my knowledge — instead it forces me to memorize facts that I will soon forget.

— Aleena Khan, Glenbard West HS Glen Ellyn, IL

Teachers will revolve their whole days on teaching a student how to do well on a standardized test, one that could potentially impact the final score a student receives. That is not learning. That is learning how to memorize and become a robot that regurgitates answers instead of explaining “Why?” or “How?” that answer was found. If we spent more time in school learning the answers to those types of questions, we would become a nation where students are humans instead of a number.

— Carter Osborn, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

In private school, students have smaller class sizes and more resources for field trips, computers, books, and lab equipment. They also get more “hand holding” to guarantee success, because parents who pay tuition expect results. In public school, the learning is up to you. You have to figure stuff out yourself, solve problems, and advocate for yourself. If you fail, nobody cares. It takes grit to do well. None of this is reflected in a standardized test score.

— William Hudson, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

Give teachers more money and support.

I have always been told “Don’t be a teacher, they don’t get paid hardly anything.” or “How do you expect to live off of a teachers salary, don’t go into that profession.” As a young teen I am being told these things, the future generation of potential teachers are being constantly discouraged because of the money they would be getting paid. Education in Americans problems are very complicated, and there is not one big solution that can fix all of them at once, but little by little we can create a change.

— Lilly Smiley, Hoggard High School

We cannot expect our grades to improve when we give teachers a handicap with poor wages and low supplies. It doesn’t allow teachers to unleash their full potential for educating students. Alas, our government makes teachers work with their hands tied. No wonder so many teachers are quitting their jobs for better careers. Teachers will shape the rest of their students’ lives. But as of now, they can only do the bare minimum.

— Jeffery Austin, Hoggard High School

The answer to solving the American education crisis is simple. We need to put education back in the hands of the teachers. The politicians and the government needs to step back and let the people who actually know what they are doing and have spent a lifetime doing it decide how to teach. We wouldn’t let a lawyer perform heart surgery or construction workers do our taxes, so why let the people who win popularity contests run our education systems?

— Anders Olsen, Hoggard High School, Wilmington NC

Make lessons more engaging.

I’m someone who struggles when all the teacher does is say, “Go to page X” and asks you to read it. Simply reading something isn’t as effective for me as a teacher making it interactive, maybe giving a project out or something similar. A textbook doesn’t answer all my questions, but a qualified teacher that takes their time does. When I’m challenged by something, I can always ask a good teacher and I can expect an answer that makes sense to me. But having a teacher that just brushes off questions doesn’t help me. I’ve heard of teachers where all they do is show the class movies. At first, that sounds amazing, but you don’t learn anything that can benefit you on a test.

— Michael Huang, JR Masterman

I’ve struggled in many classes, as of right now it’s government. What is making this class difficult is that my teacher doesn’t really teach us anything, all he does is shows us videos and give us papers that we have to look through a textbook to find. The problem with this is that not everyone has this sort of learning style. Then it doesn’t help that the papers we do, we never go over so we don’t even know if the answers are right.

— S Weatherford, Kent Roosevelt, OH

The classes in which I succeed in most are the ones where the teachers are very funny. I find that I struggle more in classes where the teachers are very strict. I think this is because I love laughing. Two of my favorite teachers are very lenient and willing to follow the classes train of thought.

— Jonah Smith Posner, J.R. Masterman

Create better learning environments.

Whenever they are introduced to school at a young age, they are convinced by others that school is the last place they should want to be. Making school a more welcoming place for students could better help them be attentive and also be more open minded when walking down the halls of their own school, and eventually improve their test scores as well as their attitude while at school.

— Hart P., Bryant High School

Students today feel voiceless because they are punished when they criticize the school system and this is a problem because this allows the school to block out criticism that can be positive leaving it no room to grow. I hope that in the near future students can voice their opinion and one day change the school system for the better.

— Nico Spadavecchia, Glenbard West Highschool Glen Ellyn IL

The big thing that I have struggled with is the class sizes due to overcrowding. It has made it harder to be able to get individual help and be taught so I completely understand what was going on. Especially in math it builds on itself so if you don’t understand the first thing you learn your going to be very lost down the road. I would go to my math teacher in the morning and there would be 12 other kids there.

— Skyla Madison, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

The biggest issue facing our education system is our children’s lack of motivation. People don’t want to learn. Children hate school. We despise homework. We dislike studying. One of the largest indicators of a child’s success academically is whether or not they meet a third grade reading level by the third grade, but children are never encouraged to want to learn. There are a lot of potential remedies for the education system. Paying teachers more, giving schools more funding, removing distractions from the classroom. All of those things are good, but, at the end of the day, the solution is to fundamentally change the way in which we operate.

Support students’ families.

I say one of the biggest problems is the support of families and teachers. I have heard many success stories, and a common element of this story is the unwavering support from their family, teachers, supervisors, etc. Many people need support to be pushed to their full potential, because some people do not have the will power to do it on their own. So, if students lived in an environment where education was supported and encouraged; than their children would be more interested in improving and gaining more success in school, than enacting in other time wasting hobbies that will not help their future education.

— Melanie, Danvers

De-emphasize grades.

I wish that tests were graded based on how much effort you put it and not the grade itself. This would help students with stress and anxiety about tests and it would cause students to put more effort into their work. Anxiety around school has become such a dilemma that students are taking their own life from the stress around schoolwork. You are told that if you don’t make straight A’s your life is over and you won’t have a successful future.

— Lilah Pate, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

I personally think that there are many things wrong with the American education system. Everyone is so worried about grades and test scores. People believe that those are the only thing that represents a student. If you get a bad grade on something you start believing that you’re a bad student. GPA doesn’t measure a students’ intelligence or ability to learn. At young ages students stop wanting to come to school and learn. Standardized testing starts and students start to lose their creativity.

— Andrew Gonthier, Hoggard High School in Wilmington, NC

Praise for great teachers

Currently, I’m in a math class that changed my opinion of math. Math class just used to be a “meh” for me. But now, my teacher teachers in a way that is so educational and at the same time very amusing and phenomenal. I am proud to be in such a class and with such a teacher. She has changed the way I think about math it has definitely improve my math skills. Now, whenever I have math, I am so excited to learn new things!

— Paulie Sobol, J.R Masterman

At the moment, the one class that I really feel supported in is math. My math teachers Mrs. Siu and Ms. Kamiya are very encouraging of mistakes and always are willing to help me when I am struggling. We do lots of classwork and discussions and we have access to amazing online programs and technology. My teacher uses Software called OneNote and she does all the class notes on OneNote so that we can review the class material at home. Ms. Kamiya is very patient and is great at explaining things. Because they are so accepting of mistakes and confusion it makes me feel very comfortable and I am doing very well in math.

— Jayden Vance, J.R. Masterman

One of the classes that made learning easier for me was sixth-grade math. My teacher allowed us to talk to each other while we worked on math problems. Talking to the other students in my class helped me learn a lot quicker. We also didn’t work out of a textbook. I feel like it is harder for me to understand something if I just read it out of a textbook. Seventh-grade math also makes learning a lot easier for me. Just like in sixth-grade math, we get to talk to others while solving a problem. I like that when we don’t understand a question, our teacher walks us through it and helps us solve it.

— Grace Moan, J R Masterman

My 2nd grade class made learning easy because of the way my teacher would teach us. My teacher would give us a song we had to remember to learn nouns, verbs, adjectives, pronouns, etc. which helped me remember their definitions until I could remember it without the song. She had little key things that helped us learn math because we all wanted to be on a harder key than each other. She also sang us our spelling words, and then the selling of that word from the song would help me remember it.

— Brycinea Stratton, J.R. Masterman

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

It’s on Facebook, and it’s complicated

How far has COVID set back students?

What do anti-Jewish hate, anti-Muslim hate have in common?

The costs of inequality: education’s the one key that rules them all.

When there’s inequity in learning, it’s usually baked into life, Harvard analysts say

Corydon Ireland

Harvard Correspondent

Third in a series on what Harvard scholars are doing to identify and understand inequality, in seeking solutions to one of America’s most vexing problems.

Before Deval Patrick ’78, J.D. ’82, was the popular and successful two-term governor of Massachusetts, before he was managing director of high-flying Bain Capital, and long before he was Harvard’s most recent Commencement speaker , he was a poor black schoolchild in the battered housing projects of Chicago’s South Side.

The odds of his escaping a poverty-ridden lifestyle, despite innate intelligence and drive, were long. So how did he help mold his own narrative and triumph over baked-in societal inequality ? Through education.

“Education has been the path to better opportunity for generations of American strivers, no less for me,” Patrick said in an email when asked how getting a solid education, in his case at Milton Academy and at Harvard, changed his life.

“What great teachers gave me was not just the skills to take advantage of new opportunities, but the ability to imagine what those opportunities could be. For a kid from the South Side of Chicago, that’s huge.”

If inequality starts anywhere, many scholars agree, it’s with faulty education. Conversely, a strong education can act as the bejeweled key that opens gates through every other aspect of inequality , whether political, economic , racial, judicial, gender- or health-based.

Simply put, a top-flight education usually changes lives for the better. And yet, in the world’s most prosperous major nation, it remains an elusive goal for millions of children and teenagers.

Plateau on educational gains

The revolutionary concept of free, nonsectarian public schools spread across America in the 19th century. By 1970, America had the world’s leading educational system, and until 1990 the gap between minority and white students, while clear, was narrowing.

But educational gains in this country have plateaued since then, and the gap between white and minority students has proven stubbornly difficult to close, says Ronald Ferguson, adjunct lecturer in public policy at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) and faculty director of Harvard’s Achievement Gap Initiative. That gap extends along class lines as well.

“What great teachers gave me was not just the skills to take advantage of new opportunities, but the ability to imagine what those opportunities could be. For a kid from the South Side of Chicago, that’s huge.” — Deval Patrick

In recent years, scholars such as Ferguson, who is an economist, have puzzled over the ongoing achievement gap and what to do about it, even as other nations’ school systems at first matched and then surpassed their U.S. peers. Among the 34 market-based, democracy-leaning countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the United States ranks around 20th annually, earning average or below-average grades in reading, science, and mathematics.

By eighth grade, Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. noted last year, only 44 percent of American students are proficient in reading and math. The proficiency of African-American students, many of them in underperforming schools, is even lower.

“The position of U.S. black students is truly alarming,” wrote Fryer, the Henry Lee Professor of Economics, who used the OECD rankings as a metaphor for minority standing educationally. “If they were to be considered a country, they would rank just below Mexico in last place.”

Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) Dean James E. Ryan, a former public interest lawyer, says geography has immense power in determining educational opportunity in America. As a scholar, he has studied how policies and the law affect learning, and how conditions are often vastly unequal.

His book “Five Miles Away, A World Apart” (2010) is a case study of the disparity of opportunity in two Richmond, Va., schools, one grimly urban and the other richly suburban. Geography, he says, mirrors achievement levels.

A ZIP code as predictor of success

“Right now, there exists an almost ironclad link between a child’s ZIP code and her chances of success,” said Ryan. “Our education system, traditionally thought of as the chief mechanism to address the opportunity gap, instead too often reflects and entrenches existing societal inequities.”

Urban schools demonstrate the problem. In New York City, for example, only 8 percent of black males graduating from high school in 2014 were prepared for college-level work, according to the CUNY Institute for Education Policy, with Latinos close behind at 11 percent. The preparedness rates for Asians and whites — 48 and 40 percent, respectively — were unimpressive too, but nonetheless were firmly on the other side of the achievement gap.

In some impoverished urban pockets, the racial gap is even larger. In Washington, D.C., 8 percent of black eighth-graders are proficient in math, while 80 percent of their white counterparts are.

Fryer said that in kindergarten black children are already 8 months behind their white peers in learning. By third grade, the gap is bigger, and by eighth grade is larger still.

According to a recent report by the Education Commission of the States, black and Hispanic students in kindergarten through 12th grade perform on a par with the white students who languish in the lowest quartile of achievement.

There was once great faith and hope in America’s school systems. The rise of quality public education a century ago “was probably the best public policy decision Americans have ever made because it simultaneously raised the whole growth rate of the country for most of the 20th century, and it leveled the playing field,” said Robert Putnam, the Peter and Isabel Malkin Professor of Public Policy at HKS, who has written several best-selling books touching on inequality, including “Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of the American Community” and “Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis.”

Historically, upward mobility in America was characterized by each generation becoming better educated than the previous one, said Harvard economist Lawrence Katz. But that trend, a central tenet of the nation’s success mythology, has slackened, particularly for minorities.

“Thirty years ago, the typical American had two more years of schooling than their parents. Today, we have the most educated group of Americans, but they only have about .4 more years of schooling, so that’s one part of mobility not keeping up in the way we’ve invested in education in the past,” Katz said.

As globalization has transformed and sometimes undercut the American economy, “education is not keeping up,” he said. “There’s continuing growth of demand for more abstract, higher-end skills” that schools aren’t delivering, “and then that feeds into a weakening of institutions like unions and minimum-wage protections.”

“The position of U.S. black students is truly alarming.” — Roland G. Fryer Jr.

Fryer is among a diffuse cohort of Harvard faculty and researchers using academic tools to understand the achievement gap and the many reasons behind problematic schools. His venue is the Education Innovation Laboratory , where he is faculty director.

“We use big data and causal methods,” he said of his approach to the issue.

Fryer, who is African-American, grew up poor in a segregated Florida neighborhood. He argues that outright discrimination has lost its power as a primary driver behind inequality, and uses economics as “a rational forum” for discussing social issues.

Better schools to close the gap

Fryer set out in 2004 to use an economist’s data and statistical tools to answer why black students often do poorly in school compared with whites. His years of research have convinced him that good schools would close the education gap faster and better than addressing any other social factor, including curtailing poverty and violence, and he believes that the quality of kindergarten through grade 12 matters above all.

Supporting his belief is research that says the number of schools achieving excellent student outcomes is a large enough sample to prove that much better performance is possible. Despite the poor performance by many U.S. states, some have shown that strong results are possible on a broad scale. For instance, if Massachusetts were a nation, it would rate among the best-performing countries.

At HGSE, where Ferguson is faculty co-chair as well as director of the Achievement Gap Initiative, many factors are probed. In the past 10 years, Ferguson, who is African-American, has studied every identifiable element contributing to unequal educational outcomes. But lately he is looking hardest at improving children’s earliest years, from infancy to age 3.

In addition to an organization he founded called the Tripod Project , which measures student feedback on learning, he launched the Boston Basics project in August, with support from the Black Philanthropy Fund, Boston’s mayor, and others. The first phase of the outreach campaign, a booklet, videos, and spot ads, starts with advice to parents of children age 3 or younger.

“Maximize love, manage stress” is its mantra and its foundational imperative, followed by concepts such as “talk, sing, and point.” (“Talking,” said Ferguson, “is teaching.”) In early childhood, “The difference in life experiences begins at home.”

At age 1, children score similarly

Fryer and Ferguson agree that the achievement gap starts early. At age 1, white, Asian, black, and Hispanic children score virtually the same in what Ferguson called “skill patterns” that measure cognitive ability among toddlers, including examining objects, exploring purposefully, and “expressive jabbering.” But by age 2, gaps are apparent, with black and Hispanic children scoring lower in expressive vocabulary, listening comprehension, and other indicators of acuity. That suggests educational achievement involves more than just schooling, which typically starts at age 5.

Key factors in the gap, researchers say, include poverty rates (which are three times higher for blacks than for whites), diminished teacher and school quality, unsettled neighborhoods, ineffective parenting, personal trauma, and peer group influence, which only strengthens as children grow older.

“Peer beliefs and values,” said Ferguson, get “trapped in culture” and are compounded by the outsized influence of peers and the “pluralistic ignorance” they spawn. Fryer’s research, for instance, says that the reported stigma of “acting white” among many black students is true. The better they do in school, the fewer friends they have — while for whites who are perceived as smarter, there’s an opposite social effect.

The researchers say that family upbringing matters, in all its crisscrossing influences and complexities, and that often undercuts minority children, who can come from poor or troubled homes. “Unequal outcomes,” he said, “are from, to a large degree, inequality in life experiences.”

Trauma also subverts achievement, whether through family turbulence, street violence, bullying, sexual abuse, or intermittent homelessness. Such factors can lead to behaviors in school that reflect a pervasive form of childhood post-traumatic stress disorder.

[gz_sidebar align=”left”]

Possible solutions to educational inequality:

• Access to early learning
• Improved K-12 schools
• More family mealtimes
• Reinforced learning at home
• Data-driven instruction
• Longer school days, years
• Respect for school rules
• Small-group tutoring
• High expectations of students
• Safer neighborhoods

[/gz_sidebar]

At Harvard Law School, both the Trauma and Learning Policy Initiative and the Education Law Clinic marshal legal aid resources for parents and children struggling with trauma-induced school expulsions and discipline issues.

At Harvard Business School, Karim R. Lakhani, an associate professor who is a crowdfunding expert and a champion of open-source software, has studied how unequal racial and economic access to technology has worked to widen the achievement gap.

At Harvard’s Project Zero, a nonprofit called the Family Dinner Project is scraping away at the achievement gap from the ground level by pushing for families to gather around the meal table, which traditionally was a lively and comforting artifact of nuclear families, stable wages, close-knit extended families, and culturally shared values.

Lynn Barendsen, the project’s executive director, believes that shared mealtimes improve reading skills, spur better grades and larger vocabularies, and fuel complex conversations. Interactive mealtimes provide a learning experience of their own, she said, along with structure, emotional support, a sense of safety, and family bonding. Even a modest jump in shared mealtimes could boost a child’s academic performance, she said.

“We’re not saying families have to be perfect,” she said, acknowledging dinnertime impediments like full schedules, rudimentary cooking skills, the lure of technology, and the demands of single parenting. “The perfect is the enemy of the good.”

Whether poring over Fryer’s big data or Barendsen’s family dinner project, there is one commonality for Harvard researchers dealing with inequality in education: the issue’s vast complexity. The achievement gap is a creature of interlocking factors that are hard to unpack constructively.

Going wide, starting early

With help from faculty co-chair and Jesse Climenko Professor of Law Charles J. Ogletree, the Achievement Gap Initiative is analyzing the factors that make educational inequality such a complex puzzle: home and family life, school environments, teacher quality, neighborhood conditions, peer interaction, and the fate of “all those wholesome things,” said Ferguson. The latter include working hard in school, showing respect, having nice friends, and following the rules, traits that can be “elements of a 21st-century movement for equality.”

In the end, best practices to create strong schools will matter most, said Fryer.

He called high-quality education “the new civil rights battleground” in a landmark 2010 working paper for the Handbook of Labor Economics called “Racial Inequality in the 21st Century: The Declining Significance of Discrimination.”

Fryer tapped 10 large data sets on children 8 months to 17 years old. He studied charter schools, scouring for standards that worked. He champions longer school days and school years, data-driven instruction, small-group tutoring, high expectations, and a school culture that prizes human capital — all just “a few simple investments,” he wrote in the working paper. “The challenge for the future is to take these examples to scale” across the country.

How long would closing the gap take with a national commitment to do so? A best-practices experiment that Fryer conducted at low-achieving high schools in Houston closed the gap in math skills within three years, and narrowed the reading achievement gap by a third.

“You don’t need Superman for this,” he said, referring to a film about Geoffrey Canada and his Harlem Children’s Zone, just high-quality schools for everyone, to restore 19th-century educator Horace Mann’s vision of public education as society’s “balance-wheel.”

Last spring, Fryer, still only 38, won the John Bates Clark medal, the most prestigious award in economics after the Nobel Prize. He was a MacArthur Fellow in 2011, became a tenured Harvard professor in 2007, was named to the prestigious Society of Fellows at age 25. He had a classically haphazard childhood, but used school to learn, grow, and prosper. Gradually, he developed a passion for social science that could help him answer what was going wrong in black lives because of educational inequality.

With his background and talent, Fryer has a dramatically unique perspective on inequality and achievement, and he has something else: a seemingly counterintuitive sense that these conditions will improve, once bad schools learn to get better. Discussing the likelihood of closing the achievement gap if Americans have the political and organizational will to do so, Fryer said, “I see nothing but optimism.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story inaccurately portrayed details of Dr. Fryer’s background.

Illustration by Kathleen M.G. Howlett. Harvard staff writer Christina Pazzanese contributed to this report.

Next Tuesday: Inequality in health care

Share this article

You might like.

‘Spermworld’ documentary examines motivations of prospective parents, volunteer donors who connect through private group page 

An economist, a policy expert, and a teacher explain why learning losses are worse than many parents realize

Researchers scrutinize various facets of these types of bias, and note sometimes they both reside within the same person.

Epic science inside a cubic millimeter of brain

Researchers publish largest-ever dataset of neural connections

Excited about new diet drug? This procedure seems better choice.

Study finds minimally invasive treatment more cost-effective over time, brings greater weight loss

How can we fix the learning crisis?

Better education for generations to come means a brighter future for us all. These TED speakers have some great ideas for how we can solve our current education crisis.

The global learning crisis -- and what to do about it

Let's teach for mastery -- not test scores

Our failing schools. Enough is enough!

How to escape education's death valley

Can a robot pass a university entrance exam?

The Education Crisis: Being in School Is Not the Same as Learning

First grade students in Pakistan’s Balochistan Province are learning the alphabet through child-friendly flash cards. Their learning materials help educators teach through interactive and engaging activities and are provided free of charge through a student’s first learning backpack. © World Bank 

THE NAME OF THE DOG IS PUPPY. This seems like a simple sentence. But did you know that in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, three out of four third grade students do not understand it? The world is facing a learning crisis . Worldwide, hundreds of millions of children reach young adulthood without even the most basic skills like calculating the correct change from a transaction, reading a doctor’s instructions, or understanding a bus schedule—let alone building a fulfilling career or educating their children. Education is at the center of building human capital. The latest World Bank research shows that the productivity of 56 percent of the world’s children will be less than half of what it could be if they enjoyed complete education and full health. For individuals, education raises self-esteem and furthers opportunities for employment and earnings. And for a country, it helps strengthen institutions within societies, drives long-term economic growth, reduces poverty, and spurs innovation.

One of the most interesting, large scale educational technology efforts is being led by EkStep , a philanthropic effort in India. EkStep created an open digital infrastructure which provides access to learning opportunities for 200 million children, as well as professional development opportunities for 12 million teachers and 4.5 million school leaders. Both teachers and children are accessing content which ranges from teaching materials, explanatory videos, interactive content, stories, practice worksheets, and formative assessments. By monitoring which content is used most frequently—and most beneficially—informed decisions can be made around future content.

In the Dominican Republic, a World Bank supported pilot study shows how adaptive technologies can generate great interest among 21st century students and present a path to supporting the learning and teaching of future generations. Yudeisy, a sixth grader participating in the study, says that what she likes doing the most during the day is watching videos and tutorials on her computer and cell phone. Taking childhood curiosity as a starting point, the study aimed to channel it towards math learning in a way that interests Yudeisy and her classmates.

Yudeisy, along with her classmates in a public elementary school in Santo Domingo, is part of a four-month pilot to reinforce mathematics using software that adapts to the math level of each student. © World Bank

Adaptive technology was used to evaluate students’ initial learning level to then walk them through math exercises in a dynamic, personalized way, based on artificial intelligence and what the student is ready to learn. After three months, students with the lowest initial performance achieved substantial improvements. This shows the potential of technology to increase learning outcomes, especially among students lagging behind their peers. In a field that is developing at dizzying speeds, innovative solutions to educational challenges are springing up everywhere. Our challenge is to make technology a driver of equity and inclusion and not a source of greater inequality of opportunity. We are working with partners worldwide to support the effective and appropriate use of educational technologies to strengthen learning.

When schools and educations systems are managed well, learning happens

Successful education reforms require good policy design, strong political commitment, and effective implementation capacity . Of course, this is extremely challenging. Many countries struggle to make efficient use of resources and very often increased education spending does not translate into more learning and improved human capital. Overcoming such challenges involves working at all levels of the system.

At the central level, ministries of education need to attract the best experts to design and implement evidence-based and country-specific programs. District or regional offices need the capacity and the tools to monitor learning and support schools. At the school level, principals need to be trained and prepared to manage and lead schools, from planning the use of resources to supervising and nurturing their teachers. However difficult, change is possible. Supported by the World Bank, public schools across Punjab in Pakistan have been part of major reforms over the past few years to address these challenges. Through improved school-level accountability by monitoring and limiting teacher and student absenteeism, and the introduction of a merit-based teacher recruitment system, where only the most talented and motivated teachers were selected, they were able to increase enrollment and retention of students and significantly improve the quality of education. "The government schools have become very good now, even better than private ones," said Mr. Ahmed, a local villager.

The World Bank, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the UK’s Department for International Development, is developing the Global Education Policy Dashboard . This new initiative will provide governments with a system for monitoring how their education systems are functioning, from learning data to policy plans, so they are better able to make timely and evidence-based decisions.

Education reform: The long game is worth it

In fact, it will take a generation to realize the full benefits of high-quality teachers, the effective use of technology, improved management of education systems, and engaged and prepared learners. However, global experience shows us that countries that have rapidly accelerated development and prosperity all share the common characteristic of taking education seriously and investing appropriately. As we mark the first-ever International Day of Education on January 24, we must do all we can to equip our youth with the skills to keep learning, adapt to changing realities, and thrive in an increasingly competitive global economy and a rapidly changing world of work.

The schools of the future are being built today. These are schools where all teachers have the right competencies and motivation, where technology empowers them to deliver quality learning, and where all students learn fundamental skills, including socio-emotional, and digital skills. These schools are safe and affordable to everyone and are places where children and young people learn with joy, rigor, and purpose. Governments, teachers, parents, and the international community must do their homework to realize the promise of education for all students, in every village, in every city, and in every country. 

The Bigger Picture: In-depth stories on ending poverty

Seven Solutions for Education Inequality

Giving compass' take:.

•  Jermeelah Martin shares seven solutions that can reduce and help to eliminate education inequality in the United States.
• What role are you ready to take on to address education inequality? What does education inequality look like in your community?
• Read about comprehensive strategies for promoting educational equity .

What is Giving Compass?

We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us .

Systemic issues in funding drives education inequality and has detrimental effects primarily on low-income Black and Brown students. These students receive lower quality of education which is reflected through less qualified teachers,not enough books, technologies and special support like counselors and disability services. The lack of access to fair, quality education creates the broader income and wealth gaps in the U.S. Black and brown students face more hurdles to going to college and will be three times more likely to experience poverty as a American with only a highschool degree than an American with a college degree. Income inequality worsens the opportunity for building wealth for Black and Brown families because home and asset ownership will be more difficult to attain.

• Concretely, the first solution would be to reduce class distinctions among students by doing away with the property tax as a primary funding source. This is a significant driver for education inequality because low-income students, by default, will receive less. Instead, the state government should create more significant initiatives and budgets for equitable funding.
• Stop the expansion of charter and private schools as it is not affordable for all students and creates segregation.
• Deprioritize test based funding because it discriminates against disadvantaged students.
• Support teachers financially, as in offering higher salaries and benefits for teachers to improve retention.
• Invest more resources for support in low-income, underfunded schools such as, increased special education specialists and counselors.
• Dismantle the school to prison pipeline for students by adopting more restorative justice efforts and fewer funds for cops in schools. This will create more funds for education justice initiatives and work to end the over policing of minority students.
• More broadly, supporting efforts to dismantle the influence of capitalism in our social sector and supporting an economy that taxes the wealthy at a higher rate will allow for adequate support and funding of public sectors like public education and support for low-income families.

Read the full article about solutions for education inequality  by Jermeelah Martin at United for a Fair Economy.

More Articles

Our education funding system is broken. we can fix it., learning policy institute, nov 21, 2022, the funding gap between charter schools and traditional public schools, may 22, 2019.

Become a newsletter subscriber to stay up-to-date on the latest Giving Compass news.

Giving Compass Network

Partnerships & services.

We are a nonprofit too. Donate to Giving Compass to help us guide donors toward practices that advance equity.

Trending Issues

Copyright © 2024, Giving Compass Network

A 501(c)(3) organization. EIN: 85-1311683

Four of the biggest problems facing education—and four trends that could make a difference

Eduardo velez bustillo, harry a. patrinos.

In 2022, we published, Lessons for the education sector from the COVID-19 pandemic , which was a follow up to,  Four Education Trends that Countries Everywhere Should Know About , which summarized views of education experts around the world on how to handle the most pressing issues facing the education sector then. We focused on neuroscience, the role of the private sector, education technology, inequality, and pedagogy.

Unfortunately, we think the four biggest problems facing education today in developing countries are the same ones we have identified in the last decades .

1. The learning crisis was made worse by COVID-19 school closures

Low quality instruction is a major constraint and prior to COVID-19, the learning poverty rate in low- and middle-income countries was 57% (6 out of 10 children could not read and understand basic texts by age 10). More dramatic is the case of Sub-Saharan Africa with a rate even higher at 86%. Several analyses show that the impact of the pandemic on student learning was significant, leaving students in low- and middle-income countries way behind in mathematics, reading and other subjects.  Some argue that learning poverty may be close to 70% after the pandemic , with a substantial long-term negative effect in future earnings. This generation could lose around $21 trillion in future salaries, with the vulnerable students affected the most.

2. Countries are not paying enough attention to early childhood care and education (ECCE)

At the pre-school level about two-thirds of countries do not have a proper legal framework to provide free and compulsory pre-primary education. According to UNESCO, only a minority of countries, mostly high-income, were making timely progress towards SDG4 benchmarks on early childhood indicators prior to the onset of COVID-19. And remember that ECCE is not only preparation for primary school. It can be the foundation for emotional wellbeing and learning throughout life; one of the best investments a country can make.

3. There is an inadequate supply of high-quality teachers

Low quality teaching is a huge problem and getting worse in many low- and middle-income countries.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, the percentage of trained teachers fell from 84% in 2000 to 69% in 2019 . In addition, in many countries teachers are formally trained and as such qualified, but do not have the minimum pedagogical training. Globally, teachers for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects are the biggest shortfalls.

4. Decision-makers are not implementing evidence-based or pro-equity policies that guarantee solid foundations

It is difficult to understand the continued focus on non-evidence-based policies when there is so much that we know now about what works. Two factors contribute to this problem. One is the short tenure that top officials have when leading education systems. Examples of countries where ministers last less than one year on average are plentiful. The second and more worrisome deals with the fact that there is little attention given to empirical evidence when designing education policies.

To help improve on these four fronts, we see four supporting trends:

1. Neuroscience should be integrated into education policies

Policies considering neuroscience can help ensure that students get proper attention early to support brain development in the first 2-3 years of life. It can also help ensure that children learn to read at the proper age so that they will be able to acquire foundational skills to learn during the primary education cycle and from there on. Inputs like micronutrients, early child stimulation for gross and fine motor skills, speech and language and playing with other children before the age of three are cost-effective ways to get proper development. Early grade reading, using the pedagogical suggestion by the Early Grade Reading Assessment model, has improved learning outcomes in many low- and middle-income countries. We now have the tools to incorporate these advances into the teaching and learning system with AI , ChatGPT , MOOCs and online tutoring.

2. Reversing learning losses at home and at school

There is a real need to address the remaining and lingering losses due to school closures because of COVID-19.  Most students living in households with incomes under the poverty line in the developing world, roughly the bottom 80% in low-income countries and the bottom 50% in middle-income countries, do not have the minimum conditions to learn at home . These students do not have access to the internet, and, often, their parents or guardians do not have the necessary schooling level or the time to help them in their learning process. Connectivity for poor households is a priority. But learning continuity also requires the presence of an adult as a facilitator—a parent, guardian, instructor, or community worker assisting the student during the learning process while schools are closed or e-learning is used.

To recover from the negative impact of the pandemic, the school system will need to develop at the student level: (i) active and reflective learning; (ii) analytical and applied skills; (iii) strong self-esteem; (iv) attitudes supportive of cooperation and solidarity; and (v) a good knowledge of the curriculum areas. At the teacher (instructor, facilitator, parent) level, the system should aim to develop a new disposition toward the role of teacher as a guide and facilitator. And finally, the system also needs to increase parental involvement in the education of their children and be active part in the solution of the children’s problems. The Escuela Nueva Learning Circles or the Pratham Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL) are models that can be used.

3. Use of evidence to improve teaching and learning

We now know more about what works at scale to address the learning crisis. To help countries improve teaching and learning and make teaching an attractive profession, based on available empirical world-wide evidence , we need to improve its status, compensation policies and career progression structures; ensure pre-service education includes a strong practicum component so teachers are well equipped to transition and perform effectively in the classroom; and provide high-quality in-service professional development to ensure they keep teaching in an effective way. We also have the tools to address learning issues cost-effectively. The returns to schooling are high and increasing post-pandemic. But we also have the cost-benefit tools to make good decisions, and these suggest that structured pedagogy, teaching according to learning levels (with and without technology use) are proven effective and cost-effective .

4. The role of the private sector

When properly regulated the private sector can be an effective education provider, and it can help address the specific needs of countries. Most of the pedagogical models that have received international recognition come from the private sector. For example, the recipients of the Yidan Prize on education development are from the non-state sector experiences (Escuela Nueva, BRAC, edX, Pratham, CAMFED and New Education Initiative). In the context of the Artificial Intelligence movement, most of the tools that will revolutionize teaching and learning come from the private sector (i.e., big data, machine learning, electronic pedagogies like OER-Open Educational Resources, MOOCs, etc.). Around the world education technology start-ups are developing AI tools that may have a good potential to help improve quality of education .

After decades asking the same questions on how to improve the education systems of countries, we, finally, are finding answers that are very promising.  Governments need to be aware of this fact.

To receive weekly articles,  sign-up here  

Consultant, Education Sector, World Bank

Senior Adviser, Education

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

• Chronicle Conversations
• Article archives
• Issue archives
• Join our mailing list

Recognizing and Overcoming Inequity in Education

About the author, sylvia schmelkes.

Sylvia Schmelkes is Provost of the Universidad Iberoamericana in Mexico City.

22 January 2020 Introduction

I nequity is perhaps the most serious problem in education worldwide. It has multiple causes, and its consequences include differences in access to schooling, retention and, more importantly, learning. Globally, these differences correlate with the level of development of various countries and regions. In individual States, access to school is tied to, among other things, students' overall well-being, their social origins and cultural backgrounds, the language their families speak, whether or not they work outside of the home and, in some countries, their sex. Although the world has made progress in both absolute and relative numbers of enrolled students, the differences between the richest and the poorest, as well as those living in rural and urban areas, have not diminished. 1

These correlations do not occur naturally. They are the result of the lack of policies that consider equity in education as a principal vehicle for achieving more just societies. The pandemic has exacerbated these differences mainly due to the fact that technology, which is the means of access to distance schooling, presents one more layer of inequality, among many others.

The dimension of educational inequity

Around the world, 258 million, or 17 per cent of the world’s children, adolescents and youth, are out of school. The proportion is much larger in developing countries: 31 per cent in sub-Saharan Africa and 21 per cent in Central Asia, vs. 3 per cent in Europe and North America. 2  Learning, which is the purpose of schooling, fares even worse. For example, it would take 15-year-old Brazilian students 75 years, at their current rate of improvement, to reach wealthier countries’ average scores in math, and more than 260 years in reading. 3 Within countries, learning results, as measured through standardized tests, are almost always much lower for those living in poverty. In Mexico, for example, 80 per cent of indigenous children at the end of primary school don’t achieve basic levels in reading and math, scoring far below the average for primary school students. 4

The causes of educational inequity

There are many explanations for educational inequity. In my view, the most important ones are the following:

• Equity and equality are not the same thing. Equality means providing the same resources to everyone. Equity signifies giving more to those most in need. Countries with greater inequity in education results are also those in which governments distribute resources according to the political pressure they experience in providing education. Such pressures come from families in which the parents attended school, that reside in urban areas, belong to cultural majorities and who have a clear appreciation of the benefits of education. Much less pressure comes from rural areas and indigenous populations, or from impoverished urban areas. In these countries, fewer resources, including infrastructure, equipment, teachers, supervision and funding, are allocated to the disadvantaged, the poor and cultural minorities.
• Teachers are key agents for learning. Their training is crucial.  When insufficient priority is given to either initial or in-service teacher training, or to both, one can expect learning deficits. Teachers in poorer areas tend to have less training and to receive less in-service support.
• Most countries are very diverse. When a curriculum is overloaded and is the same for everyone, some students, generally those from rural areas, cultural minorities or living in poverty find little meaning in what is taught. When the language of instruction is different from their native tongue, students learn much less and drop out of school earlier.
• Disadvantaged students frequently encounter unfriendly or overtly offensive attitudes from both teachers and classmates. Such attitudes are derived from prejudices, stereotypes, outright racism and sexism. Students in hostile environments are affected in their disposition to learn, and many drop out early.

It doesn’t have to be like this

When left to inertial decision-making, education systems seem to be doomed to reproduce social and economic inequity. The commitment of both governments and societies to equity in education is both necessary and possible. There are several examples of more equitable educational systems in the world, and there are many subnational examples of successful policies fostering equity in education.

Why is equity in education important?

Education is a basic human right. More than that, it is an enabling right in the sense that, when respected, allows for the fulfillment of other human rights. Education has proven to affect general well-being, productivity, social capital, responsible citizenship and sustainable behaviour. Its equitable distribution allows for the creation of permeable societies and equity. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes Sustainable Development Goal 4, which aims to ensure “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”. One hundred eighty-four countries are committed to achieving this goal over the next decade. 5  The process of walking this road together has begun and requires impetus to continue, especially now that we must face the devastating consequences of a long-lasting pandemic. Further progress is crucial for humanity.

Notes  1 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization , Inclusive Education. All Means All , Global Education Monitoring Report 2020 (Paris, 2020), p.8. Available at https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2020/inclusion . 2 Ibid., p. 4, 7. 3 World Bank Group, World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education's Promise (Washington, DC, 2018), p. 3. Available at https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2018 .  4 Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación, "La educación obligatoria en México", Informe 2018 (Ciudad de México, 2018), p. 72. Available online at https://www.inee.edu.mx/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/P1I243.pdf . 5 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization , “Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4” (2015), p. 23. Available at  https://iite.unesco.org/publications/education-2030-incheon-declaration-framework-action-towards-inclusive-equitable-quality-education-lifelong-learning/   The UN Chronicle  is not an official record. It is privileged to host senior United Nations officials as well as distinguished contributors from outside the United Nations system whose views are not necessarily those of the United Nations. Similarly, the boundaries and names shown, and the designations used, in maps or articles do not necessarily imply endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.   

Thirty Years On, Leaders Need to Recommit to the International Conference on Population and Development Agenda

With the gains from the Cairo conference now in peril, the population and development framework is more relevant than ever. At the end of April 2024, countries will convene to review the progress made on the ICPD agenda during the annual session of the Commission on Population and Development.

The LDC Future Forum: Accelerating the Attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals in the Least Developed Countries

The desired outcome of the LDC Future Forums is the dissemination of practical and evidence-based case studies, solutions and policy recommendations for achieving sustainable development.

From Local Moments to Global Movement: Reparation Mechanisms and a Development Framework

For two centuries, emancipated Black people have been calling for reparations for the crimes committed against them. 

Documents and publications

• Yearbook of the United Nations 
• Basic Facts About the United Nations
• Journal of the United Nations
• Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
• United Nations Official Document System (ODS)
• Africa Renewal

Libraries and Archives

• Dag Hammarskjöld Library
• UN Audiovisual Library
• UN Archives and Records Management 
• Audiovisual Library of International Law
• UN iLibrary 

News and media

• UN News Centre 
• UN Chronicle on Twitter
• UN Chronicle on Facebook

The UN at Work

• 17 Goals to Transform Our World
• Official observances
• United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI)
• Protecting Human Rights
• Maintaining International Peace and Security
• The Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth
• United Nations Careers

• Our Mission

3 Simple Strategies to Improve Students’ Problem-Solving Skills

These strategies are designed to make sure students have a good understanding of problems before attempting to solve them.

Research provides a striking revelation about problem solvers. The best problem solvers approach problems much differently than novices. For instance, one meta-study showed that when experts evaluate graphs , they tend to spend less time on tasks and answer choices and more time on evaluating the axes’ labels and the relationships of variables within the graphs. In other words, they spend more time up front making sense of the data before moving to addressing the task.

While slower in solving problems, experts use this additional up-front time to more efficiently and effectively solve the problem. In one study, researchers found that experts were much better at “information extraction” or pulling the information they needed to solve the problem later in the problem than novices. This was due to the fact that they started a problem-solving process by evaluating specific assumptions within problems, asking predictive questions, and then comparing and contrasting their predictions with results. For example, expert problem solvers look at the problem context and ask a number of questions:

• What do we know about the context of the problem?
• What assumptions are underlying the problem? What’s the story here?
• What qualitative and quantitative information is pertinent?
• What might the problem context be telling us? What questions arise from the information we are reading or reviewing?
• What are important trends and patterns?

As such, expert problem solvers don’t jump to the presented problem or rush to solutions. They invest the time necessary to make sense of the problem.

Now, think about your own students: Do they immediately jump to the question, or do they take time to understand the problem context? Do they identify the relevant variables, look for patterns, and then focus on the specific tasks?

If your students are struggling to develop the habit of sense-making in a problem- solving context, this is a perfect time to incorporate a few short and sharp strategies to support them.

3 Ways to Improve Student Problem-Solving

1. Slow reveal graphs: The brilliant strategy crafted by K–8 math specialist Jenna Laib and her colleagues provides teachers with an opportunity to gradually display complex graphical information and build students’ questioning, sense-making, and evaluating predictions.

For instance, in one third-grade class, students are given a bar graph without any labels or identifying information except for bars emerging from a horizontal line on the bottom of the slide. Over time, students learn about the categories on the x -axis (types of animals) and the quantities specified on the y -axis (number of baby teeth).

The graphs and the topics range in complexity from studying the standard deviation of temperatures in Antarctica to the use of scatterplots to compare working hours across OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries. The website offers a number of graphs on Google Slides and suggests questions that teachers may ask students. Furthermore, this site allows teachers to search by type of graph (e.g., scatterplot) or topic (e.g., social justice).

2. Three reads: The three-reads strategy tasks students with evaluating a word problem in three different ways . First, students encounter a problem without having access to the question—for instance, “There are 20 kangaroos on the grassland. Three hop away.” Students are expected to discuss the context of the problem without emphasizing the quantities. For instance, a student may say, “We know that there are a total amount of kangaroos, and the total shrinks because some kangaroos hop away.”

Next, students discuss the important quantities and what questions may be generated. Finally, students receive and address the actual problem. Here they can both evaluate how close their predicted questions were from the actual questions and solve the actual problem.

To get started, consider using the numberless word problems on educator Brian Bushart’s site . For those teaching high school, consider using your own textbook word problems for this activity. Simply create three slides to present to students that include context (e.g., on the first slide state, “A salesman sold twice as much pears in the afternoon as in the morning”). The second slide would include quantities (e.g., “He sold 360 kilograms of pears”), and the third slide would include the actual question (e.g., “How many kilograms did he sell in the morning and how many in the afternoon?”). One additional suggestion for teams to consider is to have students solve the questions they generated before revealing the actual question.

3. Three-Act Tasks: Originally created by Dan Meyer, three-act tasks follow the three acts of a story . The first act is typically called the “setup,” followed by the “confrontation” and then the “resolution.”

This storyline process can be used in mathematics in which students encounter a contextual problem (e.g., a pool is being filled with soda). Here students work to identify the important aspects of the problem. During the second act, students build knowledge and skill to solve the problem (e.g., they learn how to calculate the volume of particular spaces). Finally, students solve the problem and evaluate their answers (e.g., how close were their calculations to the actual specifications of the pool and the amount of liquid that filled it).

Often, teachers add a fourth act (i.e., “the sequel”), in which students encounter a similar problem but in a different context (e.g., they have to estimate the volume of a lava lamp). There are also a number of elementary examples that have been developed by math teachers including GFletchy , which offers pre-kindergarten to middle school activities including counting squares , peas in a pod , and shark bait .

Students need to learn how to slow down and think through a problem context. The aforementioned strategies are quick ways teachers can begin to support students in developing the habits needed to effectively and efficiently tackle complex problem-solving.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

6 things to know about U.S. teacher shortages and how to solve them

Cory Turner

Nicole Cohen

First-grade teacher Kimberly Pate is 52 and worked for nearly two decades as a classroom assistant. She is a student in the Mississippi Teacher Residency where she'll get a master's degree plus dual certification in elementary and special education, all for free. Imani Khayyam for NPR hide caption

First-grade teacher Kimberly Pate is 52 and worked for nearly two decades as a classroom assistant. She is a student in the Mississippi Teacher Residency where she'll get a master's degree plus dual certification in elementary and special education, all for free.

As of October 2022, after the school year had already begun, 45% of U.S. public schools had at least one teacher vacancy. That's according to limited federal data .

For several months, NPR has been exploring the forces at work behind these local teacher shortages. Interviews with more than 70 experts and educators across the country, including teachers both aspiring and retiring, offer several explanations. Here's what to know:

There are more teachers now than before the pandemic – but certain kinds of teachers are still in short supply.

Nationally, "we have more teachers on a numeric basis than we did before the pandemic, and we have fewer students" due to enrollment drops, says Chad Aldeman, a researcher who studies teacher shortages.

What we do (and don't) know about teacher shortages, and what can be done about them

But according to a deep-dive into the available data , "The biggest issue districts face in staffing schools with qualified teachers is... a chronic and perpetual misalignment of teacher supply and demand."

Qualified special education, science and math teachers are among the hardest to find, according to federal data.

High-poverty and high-minority school districts are often hit harder by teacher shortages.

Schools that serve high-poverty neighborhoods and/or a "high-minority student body" were more likely to have reported vacancies in October 2022, federal data show.

Many districts "have dozens of teachers applying for the same positions," education researcher Tuan Nguyen explains. "But in a nearby district that is more economically-disadvantaged or has a higher proportion of minority students, they have difficulty attracting teachers."

It turns out, shortages are a lot like school districts themselves. They often begin and end at arbitrary lines that have more to do with privilege and zip code than the needs of children.

Teacher pay has stagnated, while the cost of a four-year degree has nearly doubled.

According to federal data , teachers in the U.S. earned an average of $66,397 in 2021-22. But that number hides enormous variation in school funding and teacher pay from state to state. (The average salary in Connecticut is $81,185, while the average in Mississippi is just $47,162.)

At the same time, most school districts still require at least four years of college to be a teacher. And while federal data show inflation-adjusted teacher pay has been stagnant since 1990, the inflation-adjusted cost of college has nearly doubled , from about $15,000 a year in 1990 to $29,000 in 2020.

For nearly a decade, fewer people have been going to school to become teachers.

The rising cost of college is forcing an uncomfortable cost-benefit analysis on aspiring teachers. Ominously, between 2010 and 2018, enrollment in traditional teacher preparation programs dropped by roughly a third .

One important caveat to that decline, and an early sign of good news, is that since 2018 "the data suggest that [enrollment numbers] are getting better, not worse," says Aldeman.

There's been a decline in Americans' esteem for teaching.

Perceptions of teacher prestige have fallen in the last decade. Those are the findings of the aptly-titled paper " The Rise and Fall of the Teaching Profession ," written by two education policy researchers. Among the researchers' findings:

• Interest in teaching has fallen among high school seniors and college freshmen to the lowest level in the last 50 years.
• "Teachers' job satisfaction is also at the lowest level in five decades," the authors write.
• These drops aren't simply the result of pandemic stress. "Most of these declines occurred steadily throughout the last decade suggesting they are a function of larger, long-standing structural issues with the profession," the authors say. "In our view, these findings should be cause for serious national concern." 

There's a lot states and school districts can do to better support teachers, and invest in the next generation.

Schools can offer big hiring bonuses for teachers in hard-to-staff subject areas, like special education and math. They can also provide support through mentorship programs that pair new teachers with veteran educators.

There's also a national movement around Grow Your Own (GYO) programs, in which teacher candidates are cultivated from the local community. The hope is a community member will be more personally invested in the school system, and more likely to stick around. Drawing teachers from the community also makes it easier for students to see themselves and their life experiences reflected in their teachers.

Schools in Jackson, Miss., have partnered with the Mississippi Department of Education to provide candidates with a no-cost master's degree and dual certification in elementary and special education. In return, the new teachers promise to stay and teach in Jackson for three years.

"It's really a no-cost pathway. It is a Cadillac package," says Courtney Van Cleve, who heads teacher talent acquisition for the Mississippi Department of Education.

According to New America , at least 35 states have some sort of GYO policy on the books and/or fund a GYO program.

The challenge is these programs cost money, and in many places, that money won't come — or keep coming — unless lawmakers on both sides of the aisle understand the urgency of the teacher shortage problem.

A future we can all live with: How education can address and eradicate racism

by  Cecilia Barbieri & Martha K. Ferede

Today, against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic that has exposed stark socio-economic inequalities and exacerbated hate speech, the world is also witnessing a global uprising against systemic, institutionalized and structural racism and discrimination.

Prejudice is a burden that confuses the past, threatens the future, and renders the present inaccessible

These words spoken by Maya Angelou more than 30 years ago echo the injustices of the past, add gravitas to our turbulent present and show clearly that prejudice runs counter to what is needed, at the core, for us to become global citizens who promote and develop just and peaceful futures.

Today, against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic that has exposed stark socio-economic inequalities and exacerbated hate speech, the world is also witnessing a global uprising against systemic, institutionalized and structural racism and discrimination. Protests are unfolding in nearly every continent – from North and South America to Europe and Australia. This is not only about yet one more senseless killing of an unarmed African-American man. It is about the senseless killing of millions over many centuries, the unequal and unjust treatment, the different forms of violence, the economic and social inequality, the lack of opportunity, the racial profiling, the marginalization, the micro-agressions and the countless daily indignities. 

Systemic racism and discrimination are rooted in the structure of society itself, in governments, the workplace, courts, police and education institutions. Racism can be explicit but often exists in implicit, subtle and insidious forms that can be hard to pin down. 

Global data on education points to the malignancy of racism:  

School disciplinary policies disproportionately impact Black students . In some settings, starting as early as preschool, Black children are 3.6 times more likely to receive out-of-school suspensions than White children, increasing to 4 times as likely in grades K-12. Black students are also more than twice as likely to face school-related arrests and be referred to law enforcement ( US Department Office for Civil Rights, 2016 ;  Fabello et al., 2011 ). 

Teachers’ expectations differ by students’ race . Many studies have found a correlation between teachers’ expectations and students’ educational outcomes including academic achievement and completion of higher education ( Boser et al., 2014 ). However, teachers’ expectations differ by students’ race, economic status and national origin. For instance, Eastern European students have experienced various forms of racism and low expectations in the UK school system ( Tereschenko et al., 2018 ).

Students from ethnic and racial minority groups are more likely to be labelled ‘at risk’ . For example, in Quebec, Canada, students with Caribbean backgrounds are three times more likely to be identified as SHSMLD (students with handicaps, social maladjustments, or learning difficulties) and placed in separate classes for “at-risk” students ( Maynard, 2017 ).

Education attendance and attainment correlate with race . According to the  2020 Global Education Monitoring Report , although there have been advances towards increasing access in recent decades,  enduring racial inequality remains in educational attendance and attainment in Latin American countries. For example, compared to their non-Afrodescendant peers, attendance rates are lower for Afrodescendants aged 12-17 ( ECLAC, 2019 ). Based on World Bank data ( 2018 ), Afrodescendants in Uruguay and Peru are also reported as less likely to complete secondary school than non-Afrodescendants. 

Racial discrimination takes place among students . In Australia, a study of primary and secondary Anglo-Celtic/European, East or Southeast Asian, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island, Middle Eastern, Pacific Islander and African students’ backgrounds, found that one in three reported being the victim of racial discrimination by their peers ( Priest et al., 2019 ).

The returns to education differ by race .  In post-Apartheid South Africa, although opportunities for education have improved, there has been a divergence in the valuation of that education. In 2004, differences in the returns to education accounted for about 40% of the White-African wage differential ( Keswell, 2010 ). By 2018, the average Black South African earned five times less than the average White South-African ( Syed & Ozbilgin, 2019 ).

Racism is a violation of the  Universal Declaration of Human Rights  (1948) and it goes against UNESCO’s  Convention Against Discrimination in Education  (1960), the  International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination  (1965), the  International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights  (1966) and the  Convention on the Rights of the Child  (1989).

Systemic racism and discrimination are rooted in the structure of society itself, in governments, workplaces, courts, police and education institutions.

Education systems and educational institutions have an important role and responsibility in addressing and eliminating racism through: 

Supporting schools to implement education policies that support racially integrated schools . Such schools have been found to promote greater social cohesion and cross-race relationships ( Eaton & Chirichigno, 2011 ).  

Training and recruiting teachers that reflect the diversity of students . Studies show that when teachers reflect the student body, there are improved learning outcomes, higher expectations and fewer disciplinary actions ( Egamit et al. 2015 ). 

Examining the curriculum from multiple vantage points . First, schools should give history, social memory and human rights – as well as indigenous forms of knowledge – a place at the core of teaching.  This helps us to fully understand the past and its relation to the present and to break the perpetuation of stereotypes. Second, educators should reexamine and revise curriculum, and textbooks in particular, to eliminate racist depictions, misrepresentation, and historical exclusions. 

Addressing implicit bias .  All actors in education institutions from policy-makers, leaders, teachers, staff and students should receive training to become aware of their implicit bias – their unconscious bias and beliefs. Reflective teaching, fair discipline policies based on data and use of external feedback are some strategies schools can use to reduce implicit bias ( Staats, 2015 ). 

The injustice of systemic racism is a significant barrier to the type of education that is needed for preferred alternative futures for all - for a world where people are able to live together peacefully as global citizens in strong and just societies that value diversity. As educators, citizens and as a global community, we have much work to do to ensure that the solutions proposed to defeat systemic racism do not remain mired in the system that is being critiqued, so that the roots of oppression and inequality can be removed. 

And for that, a frank and bold approach is needed as affirmed in the recent message from the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, “The position of the United Nations on racism is crystal clear: this scourge violates the United Nations Charter and debases our core values. Every day, in our work across the world, we strive to do our part to promote inclusion, justice, dignity and combat racism in all its manifestations.” 

It is time for essential conversations and inspired and informed action. 

Our future depends on it. 

The ideas expressed here are those of the authors; they are not necessarily the official position of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.

Cecilia Barbieri is the Chief of Section of Global Citizenship and Peace Education at UNESCO, coming from the UNESCO Regional Bureau for Education in Latin America and the Caribbean, where she was in charge of the Education 2030 Section. She has worked as an Education Specialist with UNESCO since 1999, mainly in Africa and Asia.

Martha K. Ferede is a Project Officer in the section of Global Citizenship and Peace Education at UNESCO. She is a former school teacher, researcher at Harvard University and lecturer at Sciences-po.

Futures of Education

Find out more about our work on the Futures of Education

Related items

• Future of education

More on this subject

Other recent idea

World leading higher education information and services Home News Blogs Courses Jobs function vqTrackId(){return'0a14b8cb-e32a-4bc4-ab7d-ff2b3cfe7090';}(function(d,e){var el=d.createElement(e);el.sa=function(an,av){this.setAttribute(an,av);return this;};el.sa('id','vq_tracking').sa('src','//t.visitorqueue.com/p/tracking.min.js?id='+vqTrackId()).sa('async',1).sa('data-id',vqTrackId());d.getElementsByTagName(e)[0].parentNode.appendChild(el);})(document,'script'); function vqTrackPc(){return 1;} (function(d,e){var el=d.createElement(e);el.sa=function(an,av){this.setAttribute(an,av);return this;};el.sa('id','vq_personalisation').sa('src','//personalisation.visitorqueue.com/p/personalisation.min.js?id='+vqTrackId()).sa('async',1).sa('data-id',vqTrackId());d.getElementsByTagName(e)[0].parentNode.appendChild(el);})(document,'script');

Top 8 modern education problems and ways to solve them.

| September 15, 2017 | 0 responses

In many ways, today’s system is better than the traditional one. Technology is the biggest change and the greatest advantage at the same time. Various devices, such as computers, projectors, tablets and smartphones, make the process of learning simpler and more fun. The Internet gives both students and teachers access to limitless knowledge.

However, this is not the perfect educational system. It has several problems, so we have to try to improve it.

•  Problem: The Individual Needs of Low-Achievers Are Not Being Addressed

Personalized learning is the most popular trend in education. The educators are doing their best to identify the learning style of each student and provide training that corresponds to their needs.

However, many students are at risk of falling behind, especially children who are learning mathematics and reading. In the USA, in particular, there are large gaps in science achievements by middle school.

Solution: Address the Needs of Low-Achievers

The educators must try harder to reduce the number of students who are getting low results on long-term trajectories. If we identify these students at an early age, we can provide additional training to help them improve the results.

• Problem: Overcrowded Classrooms

In 2016, there were over 17,000 state secondary school children in the UK being taught in classes of 36+ pupils.

Solution: Reduce the Number of Students in the Classroom

Only a smaller class can enable an active role for the student and improve the level of individual attention they get from the teacher.

• Problem: The Teachers Are Expected to Entertain

Today’s generations of students love technology, so the teachers started using technology just to keep them engaged. That imposes a serious issue: education is becoming an entertainment rather than a learning process.

Solution: Set Some Limits

We don’t have to see education as opposed to entertainment. However, we have to make the students aware of the purpose of technology and games in the classroom. It’s all about learning.

• Problem: Not Having Enough Time for Volunteering in University

The students are overwhelmed with projects and assignments. There is absolutely no space for internships and volunteering in college .

Solution: Make Internships and Volunteering Part of Education

When students graduate, a volunteering activity can make a great difference during the hiring process. In addition, these experiences help them develop into complete persons. If the students start getting credits for volunteering and internships, they will be willing to make the effort.

• Problem: The Parents Are Too Involved

Due to the fact that technology became part of the early educational process, it’s necessary for the parents to observe the way their children use the Internet at home. They have to help the students to complete assignments involving technology.

What about those parents who don’t have enough time for that? What if they have time, but want to use it in a different way?

Solution: Stop Expecting Parents to Act Like Teachers at Home

The parent should definitely support their child throughout the schooling process. However, we mustn’t turn this into a mandatory role. The teachers should stop assigning homework that demands parental assistance.

• Problem: Outdated Curriculum

Although we transformed the educational system, many features of the curriculum remained unchanged.

Solution: Eliminate Standardised Exams

This is a radical suggestion. However, standardised exams are a big problem. We want the students to learn at their own pace. We are personalizing the process of education. Then why do we expect them to compete with each other and meet the same standards as everyone else? The teacher should be the one responsible of grading.

• Problem: Not All Teachers Can Meet the Standards of the New Educational System

Can we really expect all teachers to use technology? Some of them are near the end of their teaching careers and they have never used tablets in the lecturing process before.

Solution: Provide Better Training for the Teachers

If we want all students to receive high-quality education based on the standards of the system, we have to prepare the teachers first. They need more training, preparation, and even tests that prove they can teach today’s generations of students.

• Problem: Graduates Are Not Ready for What Follows

A third of the employers in the UK are not happy with the performance of recent graduates. That means the system is not preparing them well for the challenges that follow.

Solution: More Internships, More Realistic Education

Practical education – that’s a challenge we still haven’t met. We have to get more practical.

The evolution of the educational system is an important process. Currently, we have a system that’s more suitable to the needs of generations when compared to the traditional system. However, it’s still not perfect. The evolution never stops.

Author Bio:   Chris Richardson is a journalist, editor, and a blogger. He loves to write, learn new things, and meet new outgoing people. Chris is also fond of traveling, sports, and playing the guitar. Follow him on Facebook and Google+ .

Tags: solutions

Advertisement

Educational leaders’ problem-solving for educational improvement: Belief validity testing in conversations

• Open access
• Published: 01 October 2021
• Volume 24 , pages 133–181, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Claire Sinnema   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6707-6726 1 ,
• Frauke Meyer 1 ,
• Deidre Le Fevre 1 ,
• Hamish Chalmers 1 &
• Viviane Robinson 1  

13k Accesses

8 Citations

21 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Educational leaders’ effectiveness in solving problems is vital to school and system-level efforts to address macrosystem problems of educational inequity and social injustice. Leaders’ problem-solving conversation attempts are typically influenced by three types of beliefs—beliefs about the nature of the problem, about what causes it, and about how to solve it. Effective problem solving demands testing the validity of these beliefs—the focus of our investigation. We analyzed 43 conversations between leaders and staff about equity related problems including teaching effectiveness. We first determined the types of beliefs held and the validity testing behaviors employed drawing on fine-grained coding frameworks. The quantification of these allowed us to use cross tabs and chi-square tests of independence to explore the relationship between leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors (those identified as more routine or more robust, and those relating to both advocacy and inquiry) and belief type. Leaders tended to avoid discussion of problem causes, advocate more than inquire, bypass disagreements, and rarely explore logic between solutions and problem causes. There was a significant relationship between belief type and the likelihood that leaders will test the validity of those beliefs—beliefs about problem causes were the least likely to be tested. The patterns found here are likely to impact whether micro and mesosystem problems, and ultimately exo and macrosystem problems, are solved. Capability building in belief validity testing is vital for leadership professional learning to ensure curriculum, social justice and equity policy aspirations are realized in practice.

Similar content being viewed by others

Teachers’ Beliefs Shift Across Year-Long Professional Development: ENA Graphs Transformation of Privately Held Beliefs Over Time

Addressing inequity and underachievement: Intervening to improve middle leaders’problem-solving conversations

Teaching Testable Explanations and Putting Them into Practice

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

This study examines the extent to which leaders, in their conversations with others, test rather than assume the validity of their own and others’ beliefs about the nature, causes of, and solutions to problems of teaching and learning that arise in their sphere of responsibility. We define a problem as a gap between the current and desired state, plus the demand that the gap be reduced (Robinson, 1993 ). We position this focus within the broader context of educational change, and educational improvement in particular, since effective discussion of such problems is central to improvement and vital for addressing issues of educational equity and social justice.

Educational improvement and leaders’ role in problem solving

Educational leaders work in a discretionary problem-solving space. Ball ( 2018 ) describes discretionary spaces as the micro level practices of the teacher. It is imperative to attend to what happens in these spaces because the specific talk and actions that occur in particular moments (for example, what the teacher says or does when one student responds in a particular way to his or her question) impact all participants in the classroom and shape macro level educational issues including legacies of racism, oppression, and marginalization of particular groups of students. A parallel exists, we argue, for leaders’ problem solving—how capable leaders are at dealing with micro-level problems in the conversational moment impacts whether a school or network achieves its improvement goals. For example, how a leader deals with problems with a particular teacher or with a particular student or group of students is subtly but strongly related to the solving of equity problems at the exo and macro levels. Problem solving effectiveness is also related to challenges in the realization of curriculum reform aspirations, including curriculum reform depth, spread, reach, and pace (Sinnema & Stoll, 2020b ).

The conversations leaders have with others in their schools in their efforts to solve educational problems are situated in a broader environment which they both influence and are influenced by. We draw here on Bronfonbrenner’s ( 1992 ) ecological systems theory to construct a nested model of educational problem solving (see Fig.  1 ). Bronfenbrenner focused on the environment around children, and set out five interrelated systems that he professed influence a child’s development. We propose that these systems can also be used to understand another type of learner—educators, including leaders and teachers—in the context of educational problem solving.

Nested model of educational problem solving

Bronfenbrenner’s ( 1977 ) microsystem sets out the immediate environment, parents, siblings, teachers, and peers as influencers of and influenced by children. We propose the micro system for educators to include those they have direct contact with including their students, other teachers in their classroom and school, the school board, and the parent community. Bronfenbrenner’s meso system referred to the interactions between a child’s microsystems. In the same way, when foregrounding the ecological system around educators, we suggest attention to the problems that occur in the interactions between students, teachers, school leaders, their boards, and communities. In the exo system, Bronfenbrenner directs attention to other social structures (formal and informal), which do not themselves contain the child, but indirectly influence them as they affect one of the microsystems. In the same way, we suggest educational ministries, departments and agencies function to influence educators. The macro system as theorized by Bronfenbrenner focuses on how child development is influenced by cultural elements established in society, including prevalent beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions. In our model, we recognise how such cultural elements of Bronfenbrenner’s macro system also relate to educators in that dominant and pervasive beliefs, attitudes and perceptions create and perpetuate educational problems, including those relating to educational inequity, bias, racism, social injustice, and underachievement. The chronosystem, as Bronfenbrenner describes, shows the role of environmental changes across a lifetime, which influences development. In a similar way, educators′ professional transitions and professional milestones influence and are influenced by other system levels, and in the context of our work, their problem solving approaches.

Leaders’ effectiveness in discussions about problems related to the micro and mesosystem contributes greatly to the success of exosystem reform efforts, and those efforts, in turn, influence the beliefs, attitudes, and ideologies of the macrosystem. As Fig.  1 shows, improvement goals (indicated by the arrows moving from the current to a desired state) in the exo or macrosystem are unlikely to be achieved without associated improvement in the micro and mesosystem involving students, teachers, and groups of teachers, schools and their boards and parent communities. Similarly, the level of improvement in the macro and exosystems is limited by the extent to which more improvement goals at the micro and mesosystem are achieved through solving problems relating to students’ experience and school and classroom practices including curriculum, teaching, and assessment. As well as drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, our nested model of problem solving draws on problem solving theory to draw attention to how gaps between current and desired states at each of the system levels also influence each other (Newell & Simon, 1972 ). Efforts to solve problems in any one system (to move from current state toward a more desired state) are supported by similar moves at other interrelated systems. For example, the success of a teacher seeking to solve a curriculum problem (demand from parents to focus on core knowledge in traditional learning domains, for example)—a problem related to the microsystem and mesosystem—will be influenced by how similar problems are recognised, attended to, and solved by those in the ministries, departments and agencies in the exosystem.

In considering the role of educational leaders in this nested model of problem solving, we take a capability perspective (Mumford et al., 2000 ) rather than a leadership style perspective (Bedell-Avers et al., 2008 ). School leaders (including those with formal and informal leadership positions) require particular capabilities if they are to enact ambitious policies and solve complex problems related to enhancing equity for marginalized and disadvantaged groups of students (Mavrogordato & White, 2020 ). Too often, micro and mesosystem problems remain unsolved which is problematic not only for those directly involved, but also for the resolution of the related exo and macrosystem problems. The ill-structured nature of the problems school leaders face, and the social nature of the problem-solving process, contribute to the ineffectiveness of leaders’ problem-solving efforts and the persistence of important microsystem and mesosystem problems in schools.

Ill-structured problems

The problems that leaders need to solve are typically ill-structured rather than clearly defined, complex rather that than straight-forward, and adaptive rather than routine challenges (Bedell-Avers et al., 2008 ; Heifetz et al., 2009 ; Leithwood & Stager, 1989 ; Leithwood & Steinbach, 1992 , 1995 ; Mumford & Connelly, 1991 ; Mumford et al., 2000 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ). As Mumford and Connelly explain, “even if their problems are not totally unprecedented, leaders are, […] likely to be grappling with unique problems for which there is no clear-cut predefined solution” (Mumford & Connelly, 1991 , p. 294). Most such problems are difficult to solve because they can be construed in various ways and lack clear criteria for what counts as a good solution. Mumford et al. ( 2000 ) highlight the particular difficulties in solving ill-structured problems with regard to accessing, evaluating and using relevant information:

Not only is it difficult in many organizational settings for leaders to say exactly what the problem is, it may not be clear exactly what information should be brought to bear on the problem. There is a plethora of available information in complex organizational systems, only some of which is relevant to the problem. Further, it may be difficult to obtain accurate, timely information and identify key diagnostic information. As a result, leaders must actively seek and carefully evaluate information bearing on potential problems and goal attainment. (p. 14)

Problems in schools are complex. Each single problem can comprise multiple educational dimensions (learners, learning, curriculum, teaching, assessment) as well as relational, organizational, psychological, social, cultural, and political dimensions. In response to a teaching problem, for example, a single right or wrong answer is almost never at play; there are typically countless possible ‘responses’ to the problem of how to teach effectively in any given situation.

Problem solving as socially situated

Educational leaders’ problem solving is typically social because multiple people are usually involved in defining, explaining, and solving any given problem (Mumford et al., 2000 ). When there are multiple parties invested in addressing a problem, they typically hold diverse perspectives on how to describe (frame, perceive, and communicate about problems), explain (identify causes which lead to the problem), and solve the problem. Argyris and Schön ( 1974 ) argue that effective leaders must manage the complexity of integrating multiple and diverse perspectives, not only because all parties need to be internally committed to solutions, but also because quality solutions rely on a wide range of perspectives and evidence. Somewhat paradoxically, while the multiple perspectives involved in social problem solving add to their inherent complexity, these perspectives are a resource for educational change, and for the development of more effective solutions (Argyris & Schön, 1974 ). The social nature of problem solving requires high trust so participants can provide relevant, accurate, and timely information (rather than distort or withhold it), recognize their interdependence, and avoid controlling others. In high trust relationships, as Zand’s early work in this field established, “there is less socially generated uncertainty and problems are solved more effectively” (Zand, 1972 , p. 238).

Leaders’ capabilities in problem solving

Leadership research has established the centrality of capability in problem solving to leadership effectiveness generally (Marcy & Mumford, 2010 ; Mumford et al., 2000 , 2007 ) and to educational leadership in particular. Leithwood and Stager ( 1989 ), for example, consider “administrator’s problem-solving processes as crucial to an understanding of why principals act as they do and why some principals are more effective than others” (p. 127). Similarly, Robinson ( 1995 , 2001 , 2010 ) positions the ability to solve complex problems as central to all other dimensions of effective educational leadership. Unsurprisingly, problem solving is often prominent in standards for school leaders/leadership and is included in tools for the assessment of school leadership (Goldring et al., 2009 ). Furthermore, its importance is heightened given the increasing demand and complexity in standards for teaching (Sinnema, Meyer & Aitken, 2016) and the trend toward leadership across networks of schools (Sinnema, Daly, Liou, & Rodway, 2020a ) and the added complexity of such problem solving where a system perspective is necessary.

Empirical research on leaders’ practice has revealed that there is a need for capability building in problem solving (Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Sinnema et al., 2013 ; Sinnema et al., 2016 ; Smith, 1997 ; Spillane et al., 2009 ; Timperley & Robinson, 1998 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ). Some studies have compared the capability of leaders with varying experience. For example, Leithwood and Stager ( 1989 ) noted differences in problem solving approaches between novice and expert principals when responding to problem scenarios, particularly when the scenarios described ill-structured problems. Principals classified as ‘experts’ were more likely to collect information rather than make assumptions, and perceived unstructured problems to be manageable, whereas typical principals found these problems stressful. Expert principals also consulted extensively to get relevant information and find ways to deal with constraints. In contrast, novice principals consulted less frequently and tended to see constraints as obstacles (Leithwood & Stager, 1989 ). Allison and Allison ( 1993 ) reported that while experienced principals were better than novices at developing abstract problem-solving goals, they were less interested in the detail of how they would pursue these goals. Similar differences were found in Spillane et al.’s ( 2009 ) work that found expert principals to be better at interpreting problems and reflecting on their own actions compared with aspiring principals. More recent work (Sinnema et al., 2021 ) highlights that educators perceptions of discussion quality is positively associated with both new learning for the educator (learning that influences their practice) and improved practice (practices that reach students)—the more robust and helpful educators report their professional discussion to be, the more likely they are to report improvement in their practice. This supports the demand for quality conversation in educational teams.

Solving problems related to teaching and learning that occur in the micro or mesosystem usually requires conversations that demand high levels of interpersonal skill. Skill development is important because leaders tend to have difficulty inquiring deeply into the viewpoints of others (Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015 ; Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ). In a close analysis of 43 conversation transcripts, Le Fevre et al. ( 2015 ) showed that when leaders anticipated or encountered diverse views, they tended to ask leading or loaded rather than genuine questions. This pattern was explained by their judgmental thinking, and their desire to avoid negative emotion and stay in control of the conversation. In a related study of leaders’ conversations, a considerable difference was found between the way educational leaders described their problem before and during the conversation with those involved (Sinnema et al., 2013 ). Prior to the conversation, privately, they tended to describe their problem as more serious and more urgent than they did in the conversation they held later with the person concerned.

One of the reasons for the mismatch between their private descriptions and public disclosures was the judgmental framing of their beliefs about the other party’s intentions, attitudes, and/or motivations (Peeters & Robinson, 2015 ). If leaders are not willing or able to reframe such privately-held beliefs in a more respectful manner, they will avoid addressing problems through fear of provoking negative emotion, and neither party will be able to critique the reasoning that leads to the belief in question (Robinson et al., 2020 ). When that happens, beliefs based on faulty reasoning may prevail, problem solutions may be based only on that which is discussable, and the problem may persist.

A model of effective problem-solving conversations

We present below a normative model of effective problem-solving conversations (Fig.  2 ) in which testing the validity of relevant beliefs plays a central role. Leaders test their beliefs about a problem when they draw on a set of validity testing behaviors and enact those behaviors, through their inquiry and advocacy, in ways that are consistent with the three interpersonal values included in the model. The model proposes that these processes increase the effectiveness of social problem solving, with effectiveness understood as progressing the task of solving the problem while maintaining or improving the leader’s relationship with those involved. In formulating this model, we drew on the previously discussed research on problem solving and theories of interpersonal and organisational effectiveness.

Model of effective problem-solving conversations

The role of beliefs in problem solving

Beliefs are important in the context of problem solving because they shape decisions about what constitutes a problem and how it can be explained and resolved. Beliefs link the object of the belief (e.g., a teacher’s planning) to some attribute (e.g., copied from the internet). In the context of school problems these attributes are usually tightly linked to a negative evaluation of the object of the belief (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975 ). Problem solving, therefore, requires explicit attention by leaders to the validity of the information on which their own and others’ beliefs are based. The model draws on the work of Mumford et al. ( 2000 ) by highlighting three types of beliefs that are central to how people solve problems—beliefs about whether and why a situation is problematic (we refer to these as problem description beliefs); beliefs about the precursors of the problem situation (we refer to these as problem explanation beliefs); and beliefs about strategies which could, would, or should improve the situation (we refer to these as problem solution beliefs). With regard to problem explanation beliefs, it is important that attention is not limited to surface level factors, but also encompasses consideration of deeper related issues in the broader social context and how they contribute to any given problem.

The role of values in problem-solving conversations

Figure  2 proposes that problem solving effectiveness is increased when leaders’ validity testing behaviors are consistent with three values—respecting the views of others, seeking to maximize validity of their own and others’ beliefs, and building internal commitment to decisions reached. The inclusion of these three values in the model means that our validity testing behaviors must be conceptualized and measured in ways that capture their interpersonal (respect and internal commitment) and epistemic (valid information) underpinnings. Without this conceptual underpinning, it is likely to be difficult to identify the validity testing behaviors that are associated with effectiveness. For example, the act of seeking agreement can be done in a coercive or a respectful manner, so it is important to define and measure this behavior in ways that distinguish between the two. How this and similar distinctions were accomplished is described in the subsequent section on the five validity testing behaviors.

The three values in Fig.  2 are based on the theories and practice of interpersonal and organizational effectiveness developed by Argyris and Schön ( 1974 , 1978 , 1996 ) and applied more recently in a range of educational leadership research contexts (Hannah et al., 2018 ; Patuawa et al., 2021 ; Sinnema et al., 2021a ). We have drawn on the work of Argyris and Schön because their theories explain the dilemma many leaders experience between the two components of problem solving effectiveness and indicate how that dilemma can be avoided or resolved.

Seeking to maximize the validity of information is important because leaders’ beliefs have powerful consequences for the lives and learning of teachers and students and can limit or support educational change efforts. Leaders who behave consistently with the validity of information value are truth seekers rather than truth claimers in that they are open-minded and thus more attentive to the information that disconfirms rather than confirms their beliefs. Rather than assuming the validity of their beliefs and trying to impose them on others, their stance is one of seeking to detect and correct errors in their own and others′ thinking (Robinson, 2017 ).

The value of respect is closely linked to the value of maximizing the validity of information. Leaders increase validity by listening carefully to the views of others, especially if those views differ from their own. Listening carefully requires the accordance of worth and respect, rather than private or public dismissal of views that diverge from or challenge one’s own. If leaders’ conversations are guided by the two values of valid information and respect, then the third value of fostering internal commitment is also likely to be present. Teachers become internally committed to courses of action when their concerns have been listened to and directly addressed as part of the problem-solving process.

The role of validity testing behaviors in problem solving

Figure  2 includes five behaviors designed to test the validity of the three types of belief involved in problem solving. They are: 1) disclosing beliefs; 2) providing grounds; 3) exploring difference; 4) examining logic; and 5) seeking agreement. These behaviors enable leaders to check the validity of their beliefs by engaging in open minded disclosure and discussion of their thinking. While these behaviors are most closely linked to the value of maximizing valid information, the values of respect and internal commitment are also involved in these behaviors. For example, it is respectful to honestly and clearly disclose one’s beliefs about a problem to the other person concerned (advocacy), and to do so in ways that make the grounds for the belief testable and open to revision. It is also respectful to combine advocacy of one’s own beliefs with inquiry into others’ reactions to those beliefs and with inquiry into their own beliefs. When leaders encounter doubts and disagreements, they build internal rather than external commitment by being open minded and genuinely interested in understanding the grounds for them (Spiegel, 2012 ). By listening to and responding directly to others’ concerns, they build internal commitment to the process and outcomes of the problem solving.

Advocacy and inquiry dimensions

Each of the five validity testing behaviors can take the form of a statement (advocacy) or a question (inquiry). A leader’s advocacy contributes to problem solving effectiveness when it communicates his or her beliefs and the grounds for them, in a manner that is consistent with the three values. Such disclosure enables others to understand and critically evaluate the leader’s thinking (Tompkins, 2013 ). Respectful inquiry is equally important, as it invites the other person into the conversation, builds the trust they need for frank disclosure of their views, and signals that diverse views are welcomed. Explicit inquiry for others’ views is particularly important when there is a power imbalance between the parties, and when silence suggests that some are reluctant to disclose their views. Across their careers, leaders tend to rely more heavily on advocating their own views than on genuinely inquiring into the views of others (Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ). It is the combination of advocacy and inquiry behaviors, that enables all parties to collaborate in formulating a more valid understanding of the nature of the problem and of how it may be solved.

The five validity testing behaviors

Disclosing beliefs is the first and most essential validity testing behavior because beliefs cannot be publicly tested, using the subsequent four behaviors, if they are not disclosed. This behavior includes leaders’ advocacy of their own beliefs and their inquiry into others’ beliefs, including reactions to their own beliefs (Peeters & Robinson, 2015 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ).

Honest and respectful disclosure ensures that all the information that is believed to be relevant to the problem, including that which might trigger an emotional reaction, is shared and available for validity testing (Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Respectful disclosure has been linked with follower trust. The empirical work of Norman et al. ( 2010 ), for example, showed that leaders who disclose more, and are more transparent in their communication, instill higher levels of trust in those they work with.

Providing grounds , the second validity testing behavior, is concerned with leaders expressing their beliefs in a way that makes the reasoning that led to them testable (advocacy) and invites others to do the same (inquiry). When leaders clearly explain the grounds for their beliefs and invite the other party to critique their relevance or accuracy, the validity or otherwise of the belief becomes more apparent. Both advocacy and inquiry about the grounds for beliefs can lead to a strengthening, revision, or abandonment of the beliefs for either or both parties (Myran & Sutherland, 2016 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ).

Exploring difference is the third validity testing behavior. It is essential because two parties simply disclosing beliefs and the grounds for them is insufficient for arriving at a joint solution, particularly when such disclosure reveals that there are differences in beliefs about the accuracy and implications of the evidence or differences about the soundness of arguments. Exploring difference through advocacy is seen in such behaviors as identifying and signaling differing beliefs and evaluating contrary evidence that underpins those differing beliefs. An inquiry approach to exploring difference (Timperley & Parr, 2005 ) occurs when a leader inquires into the other party’s beliefs about difference, or their response to the leaders’ beliefs about difference.

Exploring differences in beliefs is key to increasing validity in problem solving efforts (Mumford et al., 2007 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ) because it can lead to more integrative solutions and enhance the commitment from both parties to work with each other in the future (Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Leaders who are able to engage with diverse beliefs are more likely to detect and challenge any faulty reasoning and consequently improve solution development (Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015 ). In contrast, when leaders do not engage with different beliefs, either by not recognizing or by intentionally ignoring them, validity testing is more limited. Such disengagement may be the result of negative attributions about the other person, such as that they are resistant, stubborn, or lazy. Such attributions reduce opportunities for the rigorous public testing that is afforded by the exchange and critical examination of competing views.

Examining logic , the fourth validity testing behavior, highlights the importance of devising a solution that adequately addresses the nature of the problem at hand and its causes. To develop an effective solution both parties must be able to evaluate the logic that links problems to their assumed causes and solutions. This behavior is present when the leader suggests or critiques the relationship between possible causes of and solutions to the identified problem. In its inquiry form, the leader seeks such information from the other party. As Zaccaro et al. ( 2000 ) explain, good problem solvers have skills and expertise in selecting the information to attend to in their effort to “understand the parameters of problems and therefore the dimensions and characteristics of a likely solution” (p. 44–45). These characteristics may include solution timeframes, resource capacities, an emphasis on organizational versus personal goals, and navigation of the degree of risk allowed by the problem approach. Explicitly exploring beliefs is key to ensuring the logic linking problem causes and any proposed solution. Taking account of a potentially complex set of contributing factors when crafting logical solutions, and testing the validity of beliefs about them, is likely to support effective problem solving. This requires what Copland ( 2010 ) describes as a creative process with similarities to clinical reasoning in medicine, in which “the initial framing of the problem is fundamental to the development of a useful solution” (p. 587).

Seeking agreement , the fifth validity testing behavior, signals the importance of warranted agreement about problem beliefs. We use the term ‘warranted’ to make clear that the goal is not merely getting the other party to agree (either that something is a problem, that a particular cause is involved, or that particular actions should be carried out to solve it)—mere agreement is insufficient. Rather, the goal is for warranted agreement whereby both parties have explored and critiqued the beliefs (and their grounds) of the other party in ways that provide a strong basis for the agreement. Both parties must come to some form of agreement on beliefs because successful solution implementation occurs in a social context, in that it relies on the commitment of all parties to carry it out (Mumford et al., 2000 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Where full agreement does not occur, the parties must at least be clear about where agreement/disagreement lies and why.

Testing the validity of beliefs using these five behaviors, and underpinned by the values described earlier is, we argue, necessary if conversations are to lead to two types of improvement—progress on the task (i.e., solving the problem) and improving the relationship between those involved in the conversation (i.e., ensuring those relationship between the problem-solvers is intact and enhanced through the process). We draw attention here to those improvement purposes as distinct from those underpinning work in the educational leadership field that takes a neo-managerialist perspective. The rise of neo-managerialism is argued to redefine school management and leadership along managerial lines and hence contribute to schools that are inequitable, reductionist, and inauthentic (Thrupp & Willmott, 2003 ). School leaders, when impacted by neo-managerialism, need to be (and are seen as) “self-interested, opportunistic innovators and risk-takers who exploit information and situations to produce radical change.” In contrast, the model we propose rejects self-interest. Our model emphasizes on deep respect for the views of others and the relentless pursuit of genuine shared commitment to understanding and solving problems that impact on children and young people through collaborative engagement in joint problem solving. Rather than permitting leaders to exploit others, our model requires leaders to be adept at using both inquiry and advocacy together with listening to both progress the task (solving problems) and simultaneously enhance the relationship between those involved. We position this model of social problem solving effectiveness as a tool for addressing social justice concerns—it intentionally dismisses problem solving approaches that privilege organizational efficiency indicators and ignore the wellbeing of learners and issues of inequity, racism, bias, and social injustice within and beyond educational contexts.

Methodology

The following section outlines the purpose of the study, the participants, and the mixed methods approach to data collection and analysis.

Research purpose

Our prior qualitative research (Robinson et al., 2020 ) involving in-depth case studies of three educational leaders revealed problematic patterns in leaders’ approach to problem-solving conversations: little disclosure of causal beliefs, little public testing of beliefs that might trigger negative emotions, and agreement on solutions that were misaligned with causal beliefs. The present investigation sought to understand if a quantitative methodological approach would reveal similar patterns and examine the relationship between belief types and leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors. Thus, our overarching research question was: to what extent do leaders test the validity of their beliefs in conversations with those directly involved in the analysis and resolution of the problem? Our argument is that while new experiences might motivate change in beliefs (Bonner et al., 2020 ), new insights gained through testing the validity of beliefs is also imperative to change. The sub-questions were:

What is the relative frequency in the types of beliefs leaders hold about problems involving others?

To what extent do leaders employ validity testing behaviors in conversations about those problems?

Are there differential patterns in leaders’ validity testing of the different belief types?

Participants

The participants were 43 students in a graduate course on educational leadership in New Zealand who identified an important on the job problem that they intended to discuss with the person directly involved.

The mixed methods approach

The study took a mixed methods approach using a partially mixed sequential equal status design; (QUAL → QUAN) (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009 ). The five stages of sourcing and analyzing data and making interpretations are summarised in Fig.  3 below and outlined in more detail in the following sections (with reference in brackets to the numbered phases in the figure). We describe the study as partially mixed because, as Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009 explain, in partially mixed methods “both the quantitative and qualitative elements are conducted either concurrently or sequentially in their entirety before being mixed at the data interpretation stage” (p. 267).

Overview of mixed methods approach

Stage 1: Qualitative data collection

Three data sources were used to reveal participants’ beliefs about the problem they were seeking to address. The first source was their response to nine open ended items in a questionnaire focused on a real problem the participant had attempted to address but that still required attention (1a). The items were about: the nature and history of the problem; its importance; their own and others’ contribution to it; the causes of the problem; and the approach to and effectiveness of prior attempts to resolve it.

The second source (1b) was the transcript of a real conversation (typically between 5 and 10 minutes duration) the leaders held with the other person involved in the problem, and the third was the leaders’ own annotations of their unspoken thoughts and feelings during the course of the conversation (1c). The transcription was placed in the right-hand column (RHC) of a split page with the annotations recorded at the appropriate place in the left-hand column (LHC). The LHC method was originally developed by Argyris and Schön ( 1974 ) as a way of examining discrepancies between people’s espoused and enacted interpersonal values. Referring to data about each leader’s behavior (as recorded in the transcript of the conversation) and their thoughts (as indicated in the LHC) was important since the model specifies validity testing behaviors that are motivated by the values of respect, valid information, and internal commitment. Since motives cannot be revealed by speech alone, we also needed access to the thoughts that drove their behavior, hence our use of the LHC data collection technique. This approach allowed us to respond to Leithwood and Stager’s ( 1989 ) criticism that much research on effective problem solving gives results that “reveal little or nothing about how actions were selected or created and treat the administrator’s mind as a ‘black box’” (p. 127).

Stage 2: Qualitative analysis

The three stages of qualitative analysis focused on identifying discrete beliefs in the three qualitative data sources, distilling those discrete beliefs into key beliefs, and identifying leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors.

Stage 2a: Analyzing types of beliefs about problems

For this stage, we developed and applied coding rules (see Table 1 ) for the identification of the three types of beliefs in the three sources described earlier—leaders’ questionnaire responses, conversation transcript (RHC), and unexpressed thoughts (LHC). We identified 903 discrete beliefs (utterances or thoughts) from the 43 transcripts, annotations, and questionnaires and recorded these on a spreadsheet (2a). While our model proposes that leaders’ inquiry will surface and test the beliefs of others, we quantify in this study only the leaders’ beliefs.

Stage 2b: Distilling discrete beliefs into key beliefs

Next, we distilled the 903 discrete beliefs into key beliefs (KBs) (2b). This was a complex process and involved multiple iterations across the research team to determine, check, and test the coding rules. The final set of rules for distilling key beliefs were:

Beliefs should be made more succinct in the key belief statement, and key words should be retained as much as possible

Judgment quality (i.e., negative or positive) of the belief needs to be retained in the key belief

Key beliefs should use overarching terms where possible

The meaning and the object of the belief need to stay constant in the key belief

When reducing overlap, the key idea of both beliefs need to be captured in the key beliefs

Distinctive beliefs need to be summarized on their own and not combined with other beliefs

The subject of the belief must be retained in the key belief—own belief versus restated belief of other

All belief statements must be accounted for in key beliefs

These rules were applied to the process of distilling multiple related beliefs into statements of key beliefs as illustrated by the example in the table below (Table 2 ).

Further examples of how the rules were applied are outlined in ' Appendix A '. The number of discrete beliefs for each leader ranged from 7 to 35, with an average of 21, and the number of key beliefs for each leader ranged between 4 and 14, with an average of eight key beliefs. Frequency counts were used to identify any patterns in the types of key beliefs which were held privately (not revealed in the conversation but signalled in the left hand column or questionnaire) or conveyed publicly (in conversation with the other party).

Stage 2c: Analyzing leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors

We then developed and applied coding rules for the five validity testing behaviors (VTB) outlined in our model (disclosing beliefs, providing grounds, exploring difference, examining logic, and seeking agreement). Separate rules were established for the inquiry and advocacy aspects of each VTB, generating ten coding rules in all (Table 3 ).

These rules, summarised in the table below, and outlined more fully in ' Appendix A ', encompassed inclusion and exclusion criteria for the advocacy and inquiry dimensions of each validity testing behavior. For example, the inclusion rule for the VTB of ‘Disclosing Beliefs’ required leaders to disclose their beliefs about the nature, and/or causes, and/or possible solutions to the problem, in ways that were consistent with the three values included in the model. The associated exclusion rule signalled that this criterion was not met if, for example, the leader asked a question in order to steer the other person toward their own views without having ever disclosed their own views, or if they distorted the urgency or seriousness of the problem related to what they had expressed privately. The exclusion rules also noted how thoughts expressed in the left hand column would exclude the verbal utterance from being treated as disclosure—for example if there were contradictions between the right hand (spoken) and left hand column (thoughts), or if the thoughts indicated that the disclosure had been distorted in order to minimise negative emotion.

The coding rules reflected the values of respect and internal commitment in addition to the valid information value that was foregrounded in the analysis. The emphasis on inquiry, for example (into others’ beliefs and/or responses to the beliefs already expressed by the leader), recognised that internal commitment would be impossible if the other party held contrary views that had not been disclosed and discussed. Similarly, the focus on leaders advocating their beliefs, grounds for those beliefs and views about the logic linking solutions to problem causes recognise that it is respectful to make those transparent to another party rather than impose a solution in the absence of such disclosure.

The coding rules were applied to all 43 transcripts and the qualitative analysis was carried out using NVivo 10. A random sample of 10% of the utterances coded to a VTB category was checked independently by two members of the research team following the initial analysis by a third member. Any discrepancies in the coding were resolved, and data were recoded if needed. Descriptive analyses then enabled us to compare the frequency of leaders’ use of the five validity testing behaviors.

Stage 3: Data transformation: From qualitative to quantitative data

We carried out transformation of our data set (Burke et al., 2004 ), from qualitative to quantitative, to allow us to carry out statistical analysis to answer our research questions. The databases that resulted from our data transformation, with text from the qualitative coding along with numeric codes, are detailed next. In database 1, key beliefs were all entered as cases with indications in adjacent columns as to the belief type category they related to, and the source/s of the belief (questionnaire, transcript or unspoken thoughts/feelings). A unique identifier was created for each key belief.

In database 2, each utterance identified as meeting the VTB coding rules were entered in column 1. The broader context of the utterance from the original transcript was then examined to establish the type of belief (description, explanation, or solution) the VTB was being applied to, with this recorded numerically alongside the VTB utterance itself. For example, the following utterance had been coded to indicate that it met the ‘providing grounds’ coding rule, and in this phase it was also coded to indicate that it was in relation to a ‘problem description’ belief type:

“I noticed on the feedback form that a number of students, if I’ve got the numbers right here, um, seven out of ten students in your class said that you don’t normally start the lesson with a ‘Do Now’ or a starter activity.” (case 21)

A third database listed all of the unique identifiers for each leader’s key beliefs (KB) in the first column. Subsequent columns were set up for each of the 10 validity testing codes (the five validity testing behaviors for both inquiry and advocacy). The NVivo coding for the VTBs was then examined, one piece of coding at a time, to identify which key belief the utterance was associated with. Each cell that intersected the appropriate key belief and VTB was increased by one as a VTB utterance was associated with a key belief. Our database included variables for both the frequency of each VTB (the number of instances the behavior was used) and a parallel version with just a dichotomous variable indicating the presence or absence or each VTB. The dichotomous variable was used for our subsequent analysis because multiple utterances indicating a certain validity testing behavior were not deemed to necessarily constitute better quality belief validity testing than one utterance.

Stage 4: Quantitative analysis

The first phase of quantitative analysis involved the calculation of frequency counts for the three belief types (4a). Next, frequencies were calculated for the five validity testing behaviors, and for those behaviors in relation to each belief type (4b).

The final and most complex stage of the quantitative analysis, stages 4c through 4f, involved looking for patterns across the two sets of data created through the prior analyses (belief type and validity testing behaviors) to investigate whether leaders might be more inclined to use certain validity testing behaviors in conjunction with a particular belief type.

Stage 4a: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and VTB

We investigated the relationship between belief type and VTB, first, for all key beliefs. Given initial findings about variability in the frequency of the VTBs, we chose not to use all five VTBs separately in our analysis, but rather the three categories of: 1) None (key beliefs that had no VTB applied to them); 2) VTB—Routine (the sum of VTBs 1 and 2; given those were much more prevalent than others in the case of both advocacy and inquiry); and 3) VTB—Robust (the sum of the VTBs 3, 4 and 5 given these were all much less prevalent than VTBs 1 and 2, again including both advocacy and/or inquiry). Cross tabs were prepared and a chi-square test of independence was performed on the data from all 331 key beliefs.

Stage 4b: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and VTB

Next, because more than half (54.7%, 181) of the 331 key beliefs were not tested by leaders using any one of the VTBs, we analyzed a sub-set of the database, selecting only those key beliefs where leaders had disclosed the belief (using advocacy and/or inquiry). The reason for this was to ensure that any relationships established statistically were not unduly influenced by the data collection procedure which limited the time for the conversation to 10 minutes, during which it would not be feasible to fully disclose and address all key beliefs held by the leader. For this subset we prepared cross tabs and carried out chi-square tests of independence for the 145 key beliefs that leaders had disclosed. We again investigated the relationship between key belief type and VTBs, this time using a VTB variable with two categories: 1) More routine only and 2) More routine and robust.

Stage 4c: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and advocacy/inquiry dimensions of validity testing

Next, we investigated the relationship between key belief type and the advocacy and inquiry dimensions of validity testing. This analysis was to provide insight into whether leaders might be more or less inclined to use certain VTBs for certain types of belief. Specifically, we compared the frequency of utterances about beliefs of all three types for the categories of 1) No advocacy or inquiry, 2) Advocacy only, 3) Inquiry only, and 4) Advocacy and inquiry (4e). Cross tabs were prepared, and a chi-square test of independence was performed on the data from all 331 key beliefs. Finally, we again worked with the subset of 145 key beliefs that had been disclosed, comparing the frequency of utterances coded to 1) Advocacy or inquiry only, or 2) Both advocacy and inquiry (4f).

Below, we highlight findings in relation to the research questions guiding our analysis about: the relative frequency in the types of beliefs leaders hold about problems involving others; the extent to which leaders employ validity testing behaviors in conversations about those problems; and differential patterns in leaders’ validity testing of the different belief types. We make our interpretations based on the statistical analysis and draw on insights from the qualitative analysis to illustrate those results.

Belief types

Leaders’ key beliefs about the problem were evenly distributed between the three belief types, suggesting that when they think about a problem, leaders think, though not necessarily in a systematic way, about the nature of, explanation for, and solutions to their problem (see Table 4 ). These numbers include beliefs that were communicated and also those recorded privately in the questionnaire or in writing on the conversation transcripts.

Patterns in validity testing

The majority of the 331 key beliefs (54.7%, 181) were not tested by leaders using any one of the VTBs, not even the behavior of disclosing the belief. Our analysis of the VTBs that leaders did use (see Table 5 ) shows the wide variation in frequency of use with some, arguably the more robust ones, hardly used at all.

The first pattern was more frequent disclosure of key beliefs than provision of the grounds for them. The lower levels of providing grounds is concerning because it has implications for the likelihood of those in the conversation subsequently reaching agreement and being able to develop solutions logically aligned to the problem (VTB4). The logical solution if it is the time that guided reading takes that is preventing a teacher doing ‘shared book reading’ (as Leader 20 believed to be the case) is quite different to the solution that is logical if in fact the reason is something different, for example uncertainty about how to go about ‘shared book reading’, lack of shared book resources, or a misunderstanding that school policy requires greater time on shared reading.

The second pattern was a tendency for leaders to advocate much more than they inquire— there was more than double the proportion of advocacy than inquiry overall and for some behaviors the difference between advocacy and inquiry was up to seven times greater. This suggests that leaders were more comfortable disclosing their own beliefs, providing the grounds for their own beliefs and expressing their own assumptions about agreement, and less comfortable in inquiring in ways that created space and invited the other person in the conversation to reveal their beliefs.

A third pattern revealed in this analysis was the difference in the ratio of inquiry to advocacy between VTB1 (disclosing beliefs)—a ratio of close to 1:2 and VTB2 (providing grounds)—a ratio of close to 1:7. Leaders are more likely to seek others’ reactions when they disclose their beliefs than when they give their grounds for those beliefs. This might suggest that leaders assume the validity of their own beliefs (and therefore do not see the need to inquire into grounds) or that they do not have the skills to share the grounds associated with the beliefs they hold.

Fourthly, there was an absence of attention to three of the VTBs outlined in our model—in only very few of the 329 validity testing utterances the 43 leaders used were they exploring difference (11 instances), examining logic (4 instances) or seeking agreement (22 instances). In Case 22, for example, the leader claimed that learning intentions should be displayed and understood by children and expressed concern that the teacher was not displaying them, and that her students thus did not understand the purpose of the activities they were doing. While the teacher signaled her disagreement with both of those claims—“I do learning intentions, it’s all in my modelling books I can show them to you if you want” and “I think the children know why they are learning what they are learning”—the fact that there were differences in their beliefs was not explicitly signaled, and the differences were not explored. The conversation went on, with each continuing to assume the accuracy of their own beliefs. They were unable to reach agreement on a solution to the problem because they had not established and explored the lack of agreement about the nature of the problem itself. We presume from these findings, and from our prior qualitative work in this field, that those VTBs are much more difficult, and therefore much less likely to be used than the behaviors of disclosing beliefs and providing grounds.

The relationship between belief type and validity testing behaviors

The relationship between belief type and category of validity testing behavior was significant ( Χ 2 (4) = 61.96,  p  < 0.001). It was notable that problem explanation beliefs were far less likely than problem description or problem solution beliefs to be subject to any validity testing (the validity of more than 80% of PEBs was not tested) and, when they were tested, it was typically with the more routine rather than robust VTBs (see Table 6 ).

Problem explanation beliefs were also most likely to not be tested at all; more than 80% of the problem explanation beliefs were not the focus of any validity testing. Further, problem description beliefs were less likely than problem solution beliefs to be the target of both routine and robust validity testing behaviors—12% of PDBs and 18% of PSBs were tested using both routine and robust VTBs.

Two important assumptions underpin the study reported here. The first is that problems of equity must be solved, not only in the macrosystem and exosystem, but also as they occur in the day to day practices of leaders and teachers in micro and mesosystems. The second is that conversations are the key practice in which problem solving occurs in the micro and mesosystems, and that is why we focused on conversation quality. We focused on validity testing as an indicator of quality by closely analyzing transcripts of conversations between 43 individual leaders and a teacher they were discussing problems with.

Our findings suggest a considerable gap between our normative model of effective problem solving conversations and the practices of our sample of leaders. While beliefs about what problems are, and proposed solutions to them are shared relatively often, rarely is attention given to beliefs about the causes of problems. Further, while leaders do seem to be able to disclose and provide grounds for their beliefs about problems, they do so less often for beliefs about problem cause than other belief types. In addition, the critical validity testing behaviors of exploring difference, examining logic, and seeking agreement are very rare. Learning how to test the validity of beliefs is, therefore, a relevant focus for educational leaders’ goals (Bendikson et al., 2020 ; Meyer et al., 2019 ; Sinnema & Robinson, 2012 ) as well as a means for achieving other goals.

The patterns we found are problematic from the point of view of problem solving in schools generally but are particularly problematic from the point of view of macrosystem problems relating to equity. In New Zealand, for example, the underachievement and attendance issues of Pasifika students is a macrosystem problem that has been the target of many attempts to address through a range of policies and initiatives. Those efforts include a Pasifika Education Plan (Ministry of Education, 2013 ) and a cultural competencies framework for teachers of Pasifika learners—‘Tapasa’ (Ministry of Education, 2018 ) At the level of the mesosystem, many schools have strategic plans and school-wide programmes for interactions seeking to address those issues.

Resolving such equity issues demands that macro and exosystem initiatives are also reflected in the interactions of educators—hence our investigation of leaders’ problem-solving conversations and attention to whether leaders have the skills required to solve problems in conversations that contribute to aspirations in the exo and macrosystem, include of excellence and equity in new and demanding national curricula (Sinnema et al., 2020a ; Sinnema, Stoll, 2020a ). An example of an exosystem framework—the competencies framework for teachers of Pacific students in New Zealand—is useful here. It requires that teachers “establish and maintain collaborative and respectful relationships and professional behaviors that enhance learning and wellbeing for Pasifika learners” (Ministry of Education, 2018 , p. 12). The success of this national framework is influenced by and also influences the success that leaders in school settings have at solving problems in the conversations they have about related micro and mesosystem problems.

To illustrate this point, we draw here on the example of one case from our sample that showed how problem-solving conversation capability is related to the success or otherwise of system level aspirations of this type. In the case of Leader 36, under-developed skill in problem solving talk likely stymied the success of the equity-focused system initiatives. Leader 36 had been alerted by the parents of a Pasifika student that their daughter “feels that she is being unfairly treated, picked on and being made to feel very uncomfortable in the teacher’s class.” In the conversation with Leader 36, the teacher described having established a good relationship with the student, but also having had a range of issues with her including that she was too talkative, that led the teacher to treat her in ways the teacher acknowledged could have made her feel picked on and consequently reluctant to come to school.

The teacher also told the leader that there were issues with uniform irregularities (which the teacher picked on) and general non conformity—“No, she doesn’t [conform]. She often comes with improper footwear, incorrect jacket, comes late to school, she puts make up on, there are quite a few things that aren’t going on correctly….”. The teacher suggested that the student was “drawing the wrong type of attention from me as a teacher, which has had a negative effect on her.” The teacher described to the leader a recent incident:

[The student] had come to class with her hair looking quite shabby so I quietly asked [the student] “Did you wake up late this morning?” and then she but I can’t remember, I made a comment like “it looks like you didn’t take too much interest in yourself.” To me, I thought there was nothing wrong with the comment as it did not happen publicly; it happened in class and I had walked up to her. Following that, [her] Mum sends another email about girls and image and [says] that I am picking on her again. I’m quite baffled as to what is happening here. (case 36)

This troubling example represented a critical discretionary moment. The pattern of belief validity testing identified through our analysis of this case (see Table 7 ), however, mirrors some of the patterns evident in the wider sample.

The leader, like the student’s parents, believed that the teacher had been offensive in her communication with the student and also that the relationship between the teacher and student would be negatively impacted as a result. These two problem description beliefs were disclosed by the leader during her conversation with the teacher. However, while her disclosure of her belief about the problem description involved both advocating the belief, and inquiring into the other’s perception of it, the provision of grounds for the belief involved advocacy only. She reported the basis of the concern (the email from the student’s parents about their daughter feeling unfairly treated, picked on, and uncomfortable in class) but did not explicitly inquire into the grounds. This may be explained in this case through the teacher offering her own account of the situation that matched the parent’s report. Leader 36 also disclosed in her conversation with the teacher, her problem solution key belief that they should hold a restorative meeting between the teacher, the student, and herself.

What Leader 36 did not disclose was her belief about the explanation for the problem—that the teacher did not adequately understand the student personally, or their culture. The problem explanation belief (KB4) that she did inquire into was one the teacher raised—suggesting that the student has “compliance issues” that led the teacher to respond negatively to the student’s communication style—and that the teacher agreed with. The leader did not use any of the more robust but important validity testing behaviors for any of the key beliefs they held, either about problem description, explanation or solutions. And most importantly, this conversation highlights how policies and initiatives developed by those in the macrosystem, aimed at addressing equity issues, can be thwarted through well-intentioned but ultimately unsuccessful efforts of educators as they operate in the micro and mesosystem in what we referred to earlier as a discretionary problem solving space. The teacher’s treatment of the Pasifika student in our example was in stark contrast to the respectful and strong relationships demanded by the exosystem policy, the framework for teachers of Pasifika students. Furthermore, while the leader recognized the problem, issues of culture were avoided—they were not skilled enough in disclosing and testing their beliefs in the course of the conversation to contribute to broader equity concerns. The skill gap resonates with the findings of much prior work in this field (Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Sinnema et al., 2013 ; Smith, 1997 ; Spillane et al., 2009 ; Timperley & Robinson, 1998 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ), and highlights the importance of leaders, and those working with them in leadership development efforts, to recognize the interactions between the eco-systems outlined in the nested model of problem solving detailed in Fig.  1 .

The reluctance of Leader 36 to disclose and discuss her belief that the teacher misunderstands the student and her culture is important given the wider research evidence about the nature of the beliefs teachers may hold about indigenous and minority learners. The expectations teachers hold for these groups are typically lower and more negative than for white students (Gay, 2005 ; Meissel et al., 2017 ). In evidence from the New Zealand context, Turner et al. ( 2015 ), for example, found expectations to differ according to ethnicity with higher expectations for Asian and European students than for Māori and Pasifika students, even when controlling for achievement, due to troubling teacher beliefs about students’ home backgrounds, motivations, and aspirations. These are just the kind of beliefs that leaders must be able to confront in conversations with their teachers.

We use this example to illustrate both the interrelatedness of problems across the ecosystem, and the urgency of leadership development intervention in this area. Our normative model of effective problem solving conversations (Fig.  2 ), we suggest, provides a useful framework for the design of educational leadership intervention in this area. It shows how validity testing behaviors should embody both advocacy and inquiry and be used to explore not only perceptions of problem descriptions and solutions, but also problem causes. In this way, we hope to offer insights into how the dilemma between trust and accountability (Ehren et al., 2020 ) might be solved through increased interpersonal effectiveness. The combination of inquiry with advocacy also marks this approach out from neo-liberal approaches that emphasize leaders staying in control and predominantly advocating authoritarian perspectives of educational leadership. The interpersonal effectiveness theory that we draw on (Argyris & Schön, 1974 ) positions such unilateral control as ineffective, arguing for a mutual learning alternative. The work of problem solving is, we argue, joint work, requiring shared commitment and control.

Our findings also call for more research explicitly designed to investigate linkages between the systems. Case studies are needed, of macro and exosystem inequity problems backward mapped to initiatives and interactions that occur in schools related to those problems and initiatives. Such research could capture the complex ways in which power plays out “in relation to structural inequalities (of class, disability, ethnicity, gender, nationality, race, sexuality, and so forth)” and in relation to “more shifting and fluid inequalities that play out at the symbolic and cultural levels (for example, in ways that construct who “has” potential)” (Burke & Whitty, 2018 , p. 274).

Leadership development in problem solving should be approached in ways that surface and test the validity of leaders’ beliefs, so that they similarly learn to surface and test others’ beliefs in their leadership work. That is important not only from a workforce development point of view, but also from a social justice point of view since leaders’ capabilities in this area are inextricably linked to the success of educational systems in tackling urgent equity concerns.

Allison, D., & Allison, P. (1993). Both ends of a telescope: Experience and expertise in principal problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 29 (3), 302–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x93029003005

Article   Google Scholar  

Argyris, C., Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness . Jossey-Bass.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective Addison-Wesley.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice . Addison-Wesley.

Google Scholar  

Ball, D. L. (2018). Just dreams and imperatives: the power of teaching in the struggle for public education . New York, NYC: Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

Bedell-Avers, E., Hunter, S., & Mumford, M. (2008). Conditions of problem-solving and the performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: A comparative experimental study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19 , 89–106.

Bendikson, L., Broadwith, M., Zhu, T., & Meyer, F. (2020). Goal pursuit practices in high schools: hitting the target?. Journal of Educational Administration , 56 (6), 713–728. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2020-0020

Bonner, S. M., Diehl, K., & Trachtman, R. (2020). Teacher belief and agency development in bringing change to scale. Journal of Educational Change, 21 (2), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09360-4

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta, Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues. Jessica Kingsley Publishers

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32 (7), 513–531.

Burke Johnson, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Mixed methods research; a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26.

Burke, P. J., & Whitty, G. (2018). Equity issues in teaching and teacher education. Peabody Journal of Education, 93 (3), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1449800

Copland, F. (2010). Causes of tension in post-observation feedback in pre-service teacher training: An alternative view. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (3), 466–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.001

Ehren, M., Paterson, A., & Baxter, J. (2020). Accountability and Trust: Two sides of the same coin? Journal of Educational Change, 21 (1), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09352-4

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief An Introduction to Theory and Research. Attitude, Intention and Behavior . Addison-Wesley.

Gay, G. (2005). Politics of multicultural teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 56 (3), 221–228.

Goldring, E., Cravens, X., Murphy, J., Porter, A., Elliott, S., & Carson, B. (2009). The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban disrticts assess leadership? The Elementary School Journal, 110 (1), 19–36.

Hannah, D., Sinnema, C., & Robinson. V. (2018). Theory of action accounts of problem-solving: How a Japanese school communicates student incidents to parents. Management in Education, 33 (2), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020618783809 .

Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world . Harvard Business Press.

Le Fevre, D., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2015). The interpersonal challenges of instructional leadership: Principals’ effectiveness in conversations about performance issues. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51 (1), 58–95.

Le Fevre, D., Robinson, V. M. J., & Sinnema, C. (2015). Genuine inquiry: Widely espoused yet rarely enacted. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43 (6), 883–899.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43 (2), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3

Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1995). Expert problem solving: Evidence from school and district leaders . State University of New York Press.

Leithwood, K., & Stager, M. (1989). Expertise in Principals’ Problem Solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25 (2), 126–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x89025002003

Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1992). Improving the problem solving expertise of school administrators. Education and Urban Society, 24 (3), 317–345.

Marcy, R., & Mumford, M. (2010). Leader cognition: Improving leader performance through causal analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 21 (1), 1–19.

Mavrogordato, M., & White, R. (2020). Leveraging policy implementation for social justice: How school leaders shape educational opportunity when implementing policy for English learners. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56 (1), 3–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18821364

Meissel, K., Meyer, F., Yao, E. S., & Rubie-Davies, C. (2017). Subjectivity of Teacher Judgments: Exploring student characteristics that influence teacher judgments of student ability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65 , 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.021

Meyer, F., Sinnema, C., & Patuawa, J. (2019). Novice principals setting goals for school improvement in New Zealand. School Leadership & Management , 39 (2), 198−221. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1473358

Ministry of Education. (2013). Pasifika education plan 2013–2017 Retrieved 9 July from https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Strategies-and-policies/PEPImplementationPlan20132017V2.pdf

Ministry of Education. (2018). Tapasā cultural competencies framework for teachers of Pacific learners . Ministry of Education.

Mumford, M., & Connelly, M. (1991). Leaders as creators: Leaders performance and problem solving in ill-defined domains. Leadership Quarterly, 2 (4), 289–315.

Mumford, M., Friedrich, T., Caughron, J., & Byrne, C. (2007). Leader cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership Quarterly, 18 , 515–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002

Mumford, M., Zaccaro, S., Harding, F., Jacobs, T., & Fleishman, E. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 11–35.

Myran, S., & Sutherland, I. (2016). Problem posing in leadership education: using case study to foster more effective problem solving. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 19 (4), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555458916664763

Newell, A., & Simon. (1972). Human problem solving . Prentice-Hall.

Norman, S., Avolio, B., & Luthans, B. (2010). The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 21 , 350–364.

Patuawa, J., Robinson, V., Sinnema, C., & Zhu, T. (2021). Addressing inequity and underachievement: Middle leaders’ effectiveness in problem solving. Leading and Managing , 27 (1), 51–78. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.925220205986712

Peeters, A., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2015). A teacher educator learns how to learn from mistakes: Single and double-loop learning for facilitators of in-service teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 11 (3), 213–227.

Robinson, V. M. J., Meyer, F., Le Fevre, D., & Sinnema, C. (2020). The Quality of Leaders’ Problem-Solving Conversations: truth-seeking or truth-claiming? Leadership and Policy in Schools , 1–22.

Robinson, V. M. J. (1993). Problem-based methodology: Research for the improvement of practice . Pergamon Press.

Robinson, V. M. J. (1995). Organisational learning as organisational problem-solving. Leading & Managing, 1 (1), 63–78.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2001). Organizational learning, organizational problem solving and models of mind. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. Kluwer Academic.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2010). From instructional leadership to leadership capabilities: Empirical findings and methodological challenges. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9 (1), 1–26.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2017). Reduce change to increase improvement . Corwin Press.

Robinson, V. M. J., & Le Fevre, D. (2011). Principals’ capability in challenging conversations: The case of parental complaints. Journal of Educational Administration, 49 (3), 227–255. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111129046

Sinnema, C., Robinson, V. (2012). Goal setting in principal evaluation: Goal quality and predictors of achievement. Leadership and Policy in schools . 11 (2), 135–167, https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2011.629767

Sinnema, C., Le Fevre, D., Robinson, V. M. J., & Pope, D. (2013). When others’ performance just isn’t good enough: Educational leaders’ framing of concerns in private and public. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 12 (4), 301–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2013.857419

Sinnema, C., Ludlow, L. H., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2016a). Educational leadership effectiveness: A rasch analysis. Journal of Educational Administration , 54 (3), 305–339. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2014-0140

Sinnema, C., Meyer, F., & Aitken, G. (2016b). Capturing the complex, situated, and sctive nature of teaching through inquiry-oriented standards for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education , 68 (1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116668017

Sinnema, C., Daly, A. J., Liou, Y.-h Sinnema, C., Daly, A. J., Liou, Y.-H., & Rodway, J. (2020a). Exploring the communities of learning policy in New Zealand using social network analysis: A case study of leadership, expertise, and networks. International Journal of Educational Research , 99 , 101492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.10.002

Sinnema, C., & Stoll, L. (2020b). Learning for and realising curriculum aspirations through schools as learning organisations. European Journal of Education, 55 , 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12381

Sinnema, C., Nieveen, N., & Priestley, M. (2020c). Successful futures, successful curriculum: What can Wales learn from international curriculum reforms? The Curriculum Journal . https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.17

Sinnema, C., Hannah, D., Finnerty, A., & Daly, A. J. (2021a). A theory of action account of within and across school collaboration: The role of relational trust in collaboration actions and impacts. Journal of Educational Change .

Sinnema, C., Hannah, D., Finnerty, A. et al. (2021b). A theory of action account of an across-school collaboration policy in practice. Journal of Educational Change . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-020-09408-w

Sinnema, C., Liou, Y.-H., Daly, A., Cann, R., & Rodway, J. (2021c). When seekers reap rewards and providers pay a price: The role of relationships and discussion in improving practice in a community of learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 107 , 103474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103474

Smith, G. (1997). Managerial problem solving: A problem-centered approach. In C. E. Zsambok & G. Klein (Eds.), Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 371–380). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Spiegel, J. (2012). Open-mindedness and intellectual humility. School Field, 10 (1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878512437472

Spillane, J., Weitz White, K., & Stephan, J. (2009). School principal expertise: Putting expert aspiring principal differences in problem solving to the test. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8 , 128–151.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2006). A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13 , 12–28.

Thrupp, M., & Willmott, R. (2003). Education management in managerialist times: Beyond the textual apologists . Open University Press.

Timperley, H., & Parr, J. M. (2005). Theory competition and the process of change. Journal of Educational Change, 6 (3), 227–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-5065-3

Timperley, H. S., & Robinson, V. M. J. (1998). Collegiality in schools: Its nature and implications for problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34 (1), 608–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X980341003

Tjosvold, D., Sun, H., & Wan, P. (2005). Effects of openness, problem solving, and blaming on learning: An experiment in China. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145 (6), 629–644. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.145.6.629-644

Tompkins, T. (2013). Groupthink and the Ladder of Inference : Increasing Effective Decision Making. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning , 8 (2), 84–90.

Turner, H., Rubie-Davies, C. M., & Webber, M. (2015). Teacher expectations, ethnicity and the achievement gap. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 50 (1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-015-0004-1

Zaccaro, S., Mumford, M., Connelly, M., Marks, M., & Gilbert, J. (2000). Assessment of leader problem-solving capabilities. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 37–64.

Zand, D. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17 , 229–239.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Claire Sinnema, Frauke Meyer, Deidre Le Fevre, Hamish Chalmers & Viviane Robinson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claire Sinnema .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

See Table 8 .

See Table 9 .

See Table 10 .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Sinnema, C., Meyer, F., Le Fevre, D. et al. Educational leaders’ problem-solving for educational improvement: Belief validity testing in conversations. J Educ Change 24 , 133–181 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09437-z

Download citation

Accepted : 29 August 2021

Published : 01 October 2021

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09437-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Educational Change
• Educational improvement
• Problem solving
• Problem-solving conversations
• Educational leadership
• Validity testing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Learning to live together: How education can help fight systemic racism

Subscribe to the center for universal education bulletin, rebecca winthrop rebecca winthrop director - center for universal education , senior fellow - global economy and development @rebeccawinthrop.

June 5, 2020

The protests raging across the United States in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death all call for an end to systemic racism and inequality, which have been alive and well since the very founding of the United States. There is much that needs to be done to address systemic racism from police reform to opening ladders of economic opportunity. Education too has a role to play.

The strategy of “divide and conquer” has been used for literally thousands of years to expand empires and extend control of authoritarian leaders. The military strategy of Nazi Germany was, as former Secretary of Defense James Mattis recently so eloquently reminded us, to divide and conquer, and the American response was “in unity there is strength.” This applies not only to military strategy and morale but also to the fabric of society and our ability as Americans to bridge our differences and connect with each other. It is why after World War II, a U.N. organization dedicated to education was founded, stating “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed.”

This remains true to this day and it is why education in its broadest sense must be a part of the solution to build unity across our country. Education does play a crucial role in social mobility and ensuring economic opportunity and it is why so many school districts across the U.S. are concerned with helping all young people develop academic mastery and 21st century job skills such as digital literacy, creativity, and teamwork. This is why there are such deep concerns about equity of access to quality schools and the disturbing legacy of tracking African American students into less prestigious avenues of study.

But education also plays a powerful role in shaping worldviews, connecting members of a community who might have never met before, and imagining the world we want. It is this power to shape values and beliefs that has made education susceptible to manipulation by those who want to divide and conquer (e.g., why extremists such as the Taliban in Afghanistan prioritized interfering in education as a top priority for achieving their agenda). Hence it is this power that we must turn to in an effort to fight inequality and racism. In 1996, a UNESCO global commission chaired by Jacques De Lors released a report—now affectionately known in education circles as the “ De Lors Report” —and spelled out the four purposes of education:

• Learning to know . A broad general knowledge with the opportunity to work in depth on a small number of subjects.
• Learning to do . To acquire not only occupational skills but also the competence to deal with many situations and to work in teams.
• Learning to be . To develop one’s personality and to be able to act with growing autonomy, judgment, and personal responsibility.
• Learning to live together . By developing an understanding of other people and an appreciation of interdependence.

These four purposes all remain urgent and relevant today but it is the fourth, learning to live together, that we must as a country pay more attention to. Luckily there are many in the education community that have for years been working on helping young people develop the mindsets and skills to live together. A number of organizations have long included fighting systemic racism in this effort, working tirelessly and more often than not with little visibility and recognition. Some of the best places to begin exploring this work include the nonprofit education organization Facing History, Facing Ourselves , which has been working for the past 45 years with teachers and schools across the United States to combat bigotry and hate and help build understanding across difference. Education International, a federation of the world’s teacher organizations and unions, has put forward the top 25 lessons from the teaching profession for delivering education that supports democracy for all and hence must foster inclusion and fight racism. More well-known to most Americans is Sesame Street, the children’s media organization that has for generations modeled tolerance to America’s youngest children.

On Saturday, June 6, Sesame Street and CNN will host a town-hall meeting titled “ Coming Together: Standing Up to Racism .” Finally, the new Smithsonian Museum of African American History and Culture has a host of resources for parents and families, schools and educators, and young people and adults for talking about race .  

As Brookings President John R. Allen so eloquently stated in his recent piece on the need to condemn racism and come together, the leadership for this is not going to come from national political leaders, but every teacher, principal, school superintendent, and parent of students can do their part to make sure education is playing its part and contributing to all of us learning to live together.

Related Content

Global Economy and Development

Center for Universal Education

Katharine Meyer

May 7, 2024

Jamie Klinenberg, Jon Valant, Nicolas Zerbino

Thinley Choden

May 3, 2024

• High contrast
• UNICEF in Montenegro
• Our Representative
• Our Ambassador
• UN Partner portal
• The EU and UNICEF partnership
• Young reporters

Search UNICEF

We will support the overcoming of the challenges in education during the covid-19 pandemic, unicef montenegro representative, juan santander, met with children, teachers and parents to discuss the challenges they face in the organization of a quality, inclusive teaching process.

• Available in:

PODGORICA, 4 NOVEMBER 2020 – The beginning of the new school year brought many challenges to schools, teachers, children and parents, who had to adapt to the new method of teaching and learning in the conditions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the new circumstances, the quality and inclusion of education are at stake and many children are at an increased risk of being left behind.

To become more familiar with the key challenges faced by schools, teachers, parents and children during the COVID-19 pandemic, UNICEF Montenegro’s Representative, Juan Santander, visited Savo Pejanovic Elementary School today.

In order to understand how to support children, schools and parents during the COVID-19 pandemic, we want to hear from children and parents directly about the concerns they have, the challenges they face, but also how they think these issues can be solved. Only through such discussions and consultations can we get to know about the real needs of children, parents and teachers, and UNICEF will make an effort to support the institutions of the system to respond to these needs, so that every child has access to quality, safe and inclusive education. Juan Santander, UNICEF Montenegro Representative

The UNICEF Montenegro representative talked to second- and sixth-grade students, and the students said that it was important for them to go to school both for easier learning and for spending time with other children.

I was looking forward to going back to school because I missed my friends and I missed sitting at my desk, and not waiting for the teacher at home to tell us what we should do. Hana Tuzovic, a second-grade student

Online teaching is much more difficult. It is easier for us to understand in this way when we come to school, because in this way, when something is not clear to us, we can ask, we can go up to the board to complete tasks. Ognjen Vukić, a sixth-grade student

Representatives of Savo Pejanovic Elementary School pointed out that careful planning of classes is one of the key solutions for organizing a quality, inclusive teaching process that takes into account the needs of children from the most vulnerable groups.

The successful organization of teaching is based on careful planning and full understanding of the content of the relevant subjects and needs of the students. Biljana Krivokapić, Director of Savo Pejanović Elementary School

It was important to align the teaching process and return to school with the current characteristics and capacities of children with special educational needs. Milica Pušonjić, a psychologist in Savo Pejanović Elementary School

Our school is also attended by a large number of Roma and Egyptian children, and we are trying to include them in the educational process, as well as other children, in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to helping them to master the material, the goal of our work with them is to promote the values that education brings. Lina Lakić, a teacher in Savo Pejanović Elementary School

The parent Miloš Novović, whose child attends the eighth grade of elementary school, emphasized the importance of direct contact of children with teachers and other students, as well as that more frequent stay of children in school would give better results than exclusively following classes online.

My only comment is that all students who are following lessons from home must attend consultations, which will contribute a lot to them mastering the material. Also, in those few meetings they have with friends every 15 days, they fulfil that social need, which is direct contact. Milos Novovic, a parent

UNICEF, together with the EU, has previously advocated that safe and quality child-friendly education during a pandemic, with a focus on the needs of the most vulnerable, should be a priority of the government and the whole society. UNICEF has also advocated for decisions on school reopening and modalities of work of each school to be made in cooperation with health professionals, the school management and staff, parents, students and the local community.  

A survey conducted in September by Ipsos, with the support of UNICEF and the British Embassy in Podgorica, on a nationally representative sample of parents of school-age children showed that most parents think that, in the long run, distance learning can lead to a decline in children's motivation to learn. They also point out that children miss socializing with their peers and that many parents cannot provide adequate support for their children in learning.

UNICEF will continue to advocate for all institutions of the system to provide support to schools, students and families in overcoming the challenges they face during the organization of classes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Related topics

More to explore, quality education for every child in montenegro.

Development of a new education reform strategy for the period 2025–2035 with the support of UNICEF and the EU

Schools for the 21st century

More than six thousand children and several hundred teachers in the poorest are participating in the transformation of school for the 21st century

The “Prilike” programme – a chance for young people to apply

David is one of 450 secondary school students who has gained first-hand experience of a large business system

Culture for every child's socio-emotional development

Second Montenegro’s Children Symphonic Orchestra tonight at Vladin dom in Cetinje calls for using art to support every child’s socio-emotional development

Peter DeWitt's

Finding common ground.

A former K-5 public school principal turned author, presenter, and leadership coach, DeWitt provides insights and advice for education leaders. He can be found at www.petermdewitt.com . Read more from this blog .

8 Steps to Revolutionize Education

• Share article

Nobody has to be convinced that the education system is broken. In the words of Leonard Cohen “Everybody Knows .” A recent Pew Research article states that half of Americans feel that education is going in the wrong direction. What to do about it is the key question.

Certainly, we have seen solutions come and go over the decades. Why might it be different as we approach 2025? We know it feels like the worst of times, but my argument is that there is reason to believe that there could be forces at work that could cause “new systemness breakthroughs.”

System change is when a new combination of factors occurs that becomes a wedge powerful and attractive enough to begin the transformation of the current system. Systemness itself is the interaction of a small number of powerful factors and the effect of those actions.

What are those actions? Around 1925, management theorist Mary Parker Follett proposed certain management techniques that were against the grain—the goal of management she said was “unity not uniformity"; to have greater integration via “power with,” not “power over"; and the role of leaders is “to produce other leaders.” Additionally, she said, we need “joint determination and problem-solving” in relation to complex problems.

Over the years, Parker Follett’s name faded, but many of her ideas are confirmed by more detailed research and practice. We have a chance now to transform our systems to become places where students belong, thrive, and engage in deeper learning. The reasons for that are as follows:

• We are getting desperate for improvement in our systems;
• We do in fact have decades of further research and practice that has proved Parker Follett right (and above all has given us greater specificity about what the key concepts look like in practice);
• More people are using these ideas;
• Those lower in the power structure (such as the young—indeed the very young) are becoming active change agents; and
• Some of those in power are becoming increasingly worried (either because they know they are increasingly in danger and/or they are finally wanting to do the right thing for humanity).

What is the right thing, either by research, by humanity, or other evidence? The following figure sets us on the new required path.

As you can see, there is a new innovation on the list—artificial intelligence. It’s still too early to decide how impactful AI can be because the research and practice focusing on it is mixed. I predict that AI’s greatest contribution will turn out to be that it is causing humans to think more deeply . The best districts we know are in fact big users and innovators, using AI in the service of the other seven factors. Time will tell.

Research and practice related to factors 1-7 have proved that these seven in concert can cause system transformation. Part and parcel of this development are new purposes linked to new metrics of progress including belongingness, the six Global Competencies (character/compassion, citizenship, collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical thinking), and pedagogy that prepares students for society.

The positive interaction of purpose, belonging, time, autonomy, good leaders, teachers and students together, and community linkage creates system change. There is research evidence that each of the seven key factors independently increases wellness. There are other equally curious hunches we have: It may be comparatively easier to increase well-being than to boost deep learning.

Well-being without learning is impossible to sustain; and learning without well-being depletes the spirit. I don’t mean that getting better wellness is easy, but that we know more about restorative practices, and that such practices are intuitively appealing to humans. On the other hand, deep pedagogy and learning are harder to grasp—and establish.

Systemness, based on well-being and learning, continuously produces people who are good in society and for society! Such development would establish a teaching profession that could have been but never fully evolved over the past two centuries: a partnership between students and teachers integrated in society as an in-built generative force that survives and thrives. Let’s be clear, I am talking about establishing a new teaching profession in partnership with students—something that has eluded us for two centuries and is now feasible and essential to our survival!

We know some of this because we work closely with some districts that are implementing these ideas, such as the Ottawa Catholic School Board with 87 schools and 45,000 students. We know it’s a big success because of its use of the eight factors.

However, we wanted a second opinion, so we commissioned Sarah Fine and Jal Mehta, authors of In Search of Deeper Learning , to do a case study. They were skeptical that a big district could be comprehensively as good as we claimed. They came, they saw, they were convinced and wrote a report: “ A Big Tent” Strategy for System-wide Transformation (Fine & Mehta 2024). They called the phenomenon “emergent systemness,” which is what happens when a district uses the eight factors interactively.

Another district equally impressive that we work with is the Anaheim Union High School District with 20 schools and 26,000 students in a high-poverty district that again testifies to the critical importance of the eight factors in dynamic interaction.

My point is not to “literally follow these districts.” It’s a bigger call: Join a movement to experience systemness change in these times. It is a power move for equity and equality. It is “power with” to quote Parker Follett. It is “belonging and targeted universalism and coming together across the divides” a la John Powell . It is the syndrome of the eight factors working together that makes the difference. It is weird because we have never done it before. Let’s start now!

The opinions expressed in Peter DeWitt’s Finding Common Ground are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Homeschooled kids face unique college challenges − here are 3 ways they can be overcome

Associate Professor of Elementary Education, Mississippi State University

Assistant Professor of School Psychology, Mississippi State University

Disclosure statement

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Mississippi State University provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Homeschooling is the fastest-growing education setting in the United States. More than 3 million students were educated at home in the 2021-22 school year, up from 2.5 million in the spring of 2019. Current estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau indicate that there are 3.62 million students homeschooled in the United States . That’s a meteoric increase from about 1 million in 1997.

Some experts, including Harvard law professor Elizabeth Bartholet , find the increase a cause to call for greater regulation . University of Washington education policy professor David Knight agrees, citing a lack of accountability and measures of student progress. Knight also worries about an absence of certain disciplines such as social studies that public schools are required to teach.

For those of us who have researched the homeschool movement and studied its past, these are not new concerns. So what do we know about homeschooling and preparedness for college?

Data shows homeschooled students fare well

In 2020, we reviewed the evidence about how well homeschooling prepares people for college, career and life and published what we learned in a book chapter titled: “ Life after Homeschool .”

We found evidence that homeschooled students are just as prepared academically for higher education as traditionally schooled peers. In one study, researchers drew a sample of 825,672 students – including 732 students who had been homeschooled – and found the homeschooled group scored higher on several measures of college preparedness, including the SAT and first-year GPA in college.

Ave Maria University education professor Marc Snyder came to similar results in a 2013 study. Snyder compared homeschooled and traditional students at his Catholic university in Florida to find the average ACT scores for homeschooled students was 26. Public school students averaged 24.22, and students who attended Catholic schools averaged 24.53.

Snyder’s study reinforces data from the ACT itself. The testing outlet reported that from 2001-2019, the average ACT scores for homeschooled students trended up , while public school students’ scores declined slightly. In 2023, the national average on the ACT was 19.9 ; the average for homeschoolers was 22.8.

Areas of concern abound as homeschool growth accelerates

Still, calls for regulation persist because of a host of challenges homeschooled students present. The Coalition for Responsible Home Education wants states to require minimal qualifications of a high school diploma or GED for the parent providing primary instruction, instruction for students in the same subjects as in public schools, and annual standardized assessments. In some states, they note, parents don’t even have to tell their local school district of their intent to homeschool.

The pro-regulation side points to studies showing homeschooled students feel less prepared for college and are four times less likely to go to college after high school. Homeschool students also take an average of one fewer math and science course than traditional peers.

Homeschooled students also often lack resources and guidance provided in traditional high schools for college prep. And social challenges abound when these students transition; a study of seven homeschooled graduates in Pennsylvania found students struggling to maintain their existing moral beliefs related to drinking, drug use and sexual norms, with the majority admitting they changed some beliefs and practices.

There’s also data that shows homeschooled students find the more structured academic environment on university campuses to be difficult to adjust to after a more lax experience learning at home.

Still, efforts to regulate homeschooling face opposition from parents as well as advocacy groups such as the Home School Legal Defense Association . In March 2024, for example, these forces defeated an attempt in New Hampshire to require homeschool students to take a statewide exam.

3 ways to improve homeschooling

To help homeschooled students transition to college, we recommend parents take three steps to better prepare their kids.

Prioritize math and science to help address the math and science gap. Parents can use online courses offered through virtual high schools or employ tutors.

Enroll in dual-credit or community college courses to provide a taste of the structure of college life and to interact with peers from diverse backgrounds.

Talk to children about the diversity of perspectives they will encounter at college. This can help prepare them for how to negotiate and respect the opinions of others.

Homeschooled students can successfully transition to college and compete with their peers. The challenges they face are entirely foreseeable, which means they can be addressed easily.

• Mathematics
• US education
• Accountability
• Home schooling
• Home school
• Higher ed attainment
• parental rights

Events and Communications Coordinator

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

AWW Media [US]

16 Problems Stemming From a Poor Education

Posted: May 8, 2024 | Last updated: May 8, 2024

Education is a lifelong journey that equips us with the tools to navigate the world effectively. It fosters critical thinking, communication skills, and a thirst for knowledge. But what happens when someone hasn’t had the opportunity to develop these skills?  What if their schooling didn’t teach these skills?  Here are 16 signs that might indicate someone hasn’t had access to a strong educational foundation.  

16. Poor Problem-Solving Skills:

Education trains us to break down complex situations, analyze information, and develop creative solutions. Someone with limited education might struggle when faced with challenges.  They might jump to the first answer they come up with, or get easily discouraged if the solution isn’t immediately apparent.

15. Struggle with Technology and Digital Literacy:

Technology is an ever-present part of our lives, and education plays a crucial role in teaching us how to use it effectively. Someone who hasn’t had exposure to technology might struggle with basic tasks like using a computer, navigating the internet, or utilizing digital tools.  This can limit their ability to access information and participate fully in the modern world.

14. Difficulty in Understanding Abstract Concepts:

Education helps us develop our critical thinking skills and the ability to grasp complex ideas. Someone with limited education might struggle with abstract concepts like philosophy, scientific theories, or economic principles.  These concepts often require a strong foundation in logic and reasoning, which can be challenging with or without a strong educational background.

13. Inability to Differentiate Between Fact and Opinion:

Discerning fact from opinion is a vital skill in today’s information age. Someone who hasn’t had a strong education in critical thinking might struggle to evaluate the information they encounter. They might readily accept unverified information or take personal opinions as established facts.  This can lead to difficulty forming informed decisions and make you more susceptible to manipulation.

12. Limited Vocabulary and Poor Grammar:

Education exposes us to a wide range of words and teaches us the proper way to use them. Someone with limited education might have a restricted vocabulary, making it difficult for them to express themselves clearly and concisely.  Additionally, they might struggle with grammar rules, making their communication less effective.

11. Lack of General Knowledge:

Education broadens our understanding of the world around us. Without education might have significant gaps in their general knowledge base. They might struggle with basic historical facts, scientific concepts, or current events. This can make it difficult to participate in conversations and engage with the world around them on a deeper level.

10. Closed-Mindedness and Resistance to New Ideas:

Education encourages intellectual curiosity and open-mindedness. Without education, one might be resistant to new ideas or perspectives that challenge their existing beliefs.  They might be unwilling to consider evidence or arguments that contradict their current understanding.

9. Difficulty with Critical Thinking and Analysis:

Education teaches us to analyze information, identify biases, and form well-reasoned arguments. Some might struggle to dissect complex issues or identify logical fallacies.  They might rely on emotions or personal experiences to form their opinions rather than objective reasoning.

8. Poor Communication Skills:

Effective communication goes beyond simply conveying information. It involves listening actively, expressing oneself clearly, and tailoring language for the audience. With limited education one might struggle with these aspects of communication.  They might have difficulty formulating clear arguments, expressing themselves concisely, or understanding nonverbal cues.

7. Short Attention Span and Difficulty with Focused Learning:

Education trains us to concentrate on tasks for extended periods and absorb information from various sources. Without that training, some people might find it difficult to read lengthy texts or participate in in-depth discussions that require sustained attention.

6. Limited Exposure to Different Cultures and Perspectives:

Education broadens our horizons and exposes us to diverse cultures and ways of thinking. Someone with limited education might have a narrow worldview and limited understanding of different customs, beliefs, and perspectives.  This can lead to misunderstandings and difficulty interacting with people from different backgrounds.

5. Lack of Confidence in Learning and Skill Development:

Education fosters a growth mindset and the belief that we can always learn and improve. Without education, one might struggle with a fixed mindset and believe their intelligence or skills are predetermined.  This can make them hesitant to take on new challenges or pursue opportunities for learning and growth.

4. Difficulty with Self-Awareness and Self-Reflection:

Education should help us develop self-awareness and the ability to reflect on our thoughts, behaviors, and emotions.  Without which one might struggle with introspection and understanding their own strengths and weaknesses.  This can make it difficult for them to learn from their mistakes and grow as individuals.

3. Overreliance on Others for Information and Decision-Making:

Education empowers us to think critically and make informed decisions. Without this you might be overly reliant on others for information and decision-making.  Struggling to research topics independently, evaluate options, or trust their own judgment.

2. No Interest in Learning New Things:

A curious mind is a hallmark of a well-educated person. Someone with limited education might display a lack of curiosity or enthusiasm for learning new things. They might see learning as a chore rather than a source of personal growth and enjoyment.

1. Difficulty Adapting to Change:

The world is constantly evolving, and education equips us with the tools to adapt to new situations. Someone with limited education might struggle with change and have difficulty adjusting to new technologies, work environments, or social dynamics.

Remember, this list is not meant to be judgmental. Education comes in many forms, and there are always opportunities to learn and grow. If you recognize these signs in yourself or someone you know, there are many resources available to help bridge the knowledge gap.

Relationship Red Flags: 12 Habits That Push People Away

In the intricate dance of relationships, certain habits can act as warning signs, signaling potential issues that may drive others away. Recognizing these red flags is crucial for fostering healthy and fulfilling connections.

Neighborly Nightmare: 10 Distasteful Habits Revealed

Building a thriving community goes beyond property lines; it’s about fostering an environment where everyone feels appreciated and respected. So, let’s delve into self-reflection and discover the ten reasons you might be considered a bad neighbor .

More for You

Hilary Duff Shares Candid Photos From Her Fourth Child’s Emotional Water Birth

A wargame simulated a 2nd Trump presidency. It concluded NATO would collapse.

Kevin Durant Calls Michael And Deloris Jordan As GOATs After $10 Million Donation To Open Health Clinic

Ukrainian military destroys Russian Su-25

The best high-protein, low-calorie foods for weight loss

NY judge tosses order restricting transgender players from using county-run parks

15 “As Seen On TV” Products That Are Well Worth The Money

‘$8 for a box of cereal?’: This Florida retiree says ‘everyone’s looking for a job’ because many seniors can’t survive on Social Security alone — why they’re ‘nervous’ about their prospects

New 'Dream Team'? USA basketball unveils 2024 Paris Olympics roster

Largest Private Hospital Chain in The U.S. Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

‘We got it wrong:’ WeightWatchers CEO on weight loss

3 New Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) Rules Retirees Need to Know About in 2024

5 foods that help calm anxiety and reduce depression

The Weirdest Marvel Characters in the Marvel Universe

Donald Trump Prosecutors 'Know They've Got a Problem'—Legal Analyst

The museums everyone should go to at least once in Florida, according to reviews

Maple Leafs and Hockey Community Mourn the Loss of Ron Ellis

45 Years Ago, Werner Herzog Made an Iconic Vampire Thriller — And Defied Hollywood Convention

HGTV's Jenny Marrs Shows Us A Gorgeous Way To Bring Texture Into The Kitchen

5 foods people mistakenly think are healthy, according to a doctor