/w=3840,quality=80,fit=scale-down)
/w=640,quality=80,fit=scale-down)
đź’—Â Introduction
Emerson Collective and XQ Institute collaborated with Mesh Ed and Betaworks to host a two-day advisory event. The event culminated in a workshop, which we share here. The gathering aimed to highlight the transformative impact of AI in education, focusing specifically on "High School Redesign" during the second day. The XQ team presented strategic insights that guide their work, ranging from an introduction to Project-Based Learning to the benefits of a new Student Performance Framework and learner competencies. The objective of the event was to foster meaningful connections between pioneering AI innovators and seasoned educators and to disseminate these insights across the educational field.
To check out our team’s work continue scrolling and view each sections’ “team notes (for notetaker only)” To see our final product, click here
Strategic Framing
While AI is already revolutionizing various sectors, our high school education system remains stagnant, intensifying social inequalities and hindering the full realization of students' potential. This summit aims to pivot from mere theoretical discourse to actionable solutions, emphasizing AI's capacity to redefine high school education, particularly through initiatives like Project-Based Learning and competency-based frameworks. In a landscape cluttered with well-intentioned but often overwhelming discussions on both the transformative promise and ethical dilemmas of AI, our one-day generative session stands out. Its goal is not to unearth a single, flawless solution but to identify areas of mutual agreement and shared enthusiasm among a diverse group of participants, thereby refining our collective direction.
We employed a core framework anchored in an Impact-Effort Matrix—a straightforward yet effective tool for prioritizing tasks based on their potential impact and required effort. This matrix is instrumental in facilitating consensus on which initiatives offer the highest impact for the least effort, guiding our collective decision-making process.
Moreover, we strategically assembled a cross-functional team of experts, deliberately curating a mix of individuals both from within the educational sector and beyond. This included thought leaders in broader AI and design thinking spheres, as well as actual practicing educators and administrators from high schools across America. The intent was to foster a multidisciplinary dialogue that enriches our collective understanding and propels us toward meaningful, actionable solutions."
Problem Statement
How can AI, help make High School more relevant to both the educator and the learner?
High schools are at a crucial juncture, responsible for preparing students for an uncertain future. As XQ Institute's work reveals, high schools face an array of challenges—educational, ethical, and developmental. Artificial Intelligence (AI) introduces an additional layer of complexity to this landscape. While AI has the potential to revolutionize teaching methods and enable personalized learning experiences, it also raises ethical concerns, including data privacy and algorithmic bias.
Beyond the ethical considerations, the introduction of AI into the educational space could have far-reaching implications for the cognitive and emotional development of adolescents. The technology could alter the traditional student-teacher relationship, perhaps reducing human interaction in favor of machine-led tutoring. We need to ask hard questions: What is the role of a teacher in this AI-influenced educational landscape? How will AI affect the critical interpersonal skills and emotional intelligence that students typically develop through human interaction in the classroom?
The summit aims to create a focused discussion among career educators, design thinkers, ed tech specialists, and AI technologists. The objective is not to provide a one-size-fits-all solution, but rather to identify overlapping areas of interest and concern. By doing this, we hope to narrow down the scope of our collective focus in the application of AI in education. Additionally, we will perform sentiment analysis to capture the room's collective opinions and emotional responses concerning the state of AI in education as of October 2023.
This gathering is not just about problem-solving but also about understanding where we stand at this particular historical moment. Our aim is to harness this multi-disciplinary knowledge to navigate the challenges and opportunities that AI presents in the context of high school education.
Objectives
- Our primary objective is to foster a focused approach towards integrating AI in education, with an emphasis on Project-Based Learning and the New Competencies Framework for high school stakeholders. Unlike previous discussions that have often been broad and theoretical, this initiative aims to differentiate by honing in on actionable, impactful strategies. Through our engagements with tech leaders and academic peers, we've identified a pressing need for tangible pathways in AI's educational application.
- The event's uniqueness lies in its commitment to deriving practical insights, especially in areas like PBL. On Day 2, our goal is to discern where collective enthusiasm and consensus lie, particularly in solutions that participants rank from "Low Effort / High Impact," to "High Effort/ Low Impact". Instead of chasing a singular solution, we aim to pinpoint where opportunities align with genuine, collective ENERGY and a freshly cultivated group of collaborators who may NOT otherwise have come into orbit on this topic.
Advisors Attendees
Why this workshop structure?
Our generative workshop was a carefully designed blend of many of our facilitator’s experiences, as well as methodologies drawn from AJ & Smart(source for AJ & Smart) and Jake Knapp's Crazy 8s exercise (source for Crazy 8s), adapted to fit the time constraints and specific strategic objectives we faced. We further refined these ideas with input from colleagues and attendees, with an emphasis on quality, engagement, and fun. The goal was to generate a meaningful array of actionable artifacts that could serve as a foundation for ourselves and others in the educational field.
Procedures
- Review materials
- Announce roles:
- 1 Facilitator: guides the exercise
- 1 Note-taker: captures real-time notes and takes photos of the output
- 6-7 Advisors: Provide domain expertise
- Encourage Advisors to log into the Team’s Notion to contribute, especially to add links/resources in the “Notepad” sections
- Conduct icebreaker
- Establish norms for the rest of this day
- Focus, to the fullest extent possible.
- We each have a voice at this table.
- This is our opportunity to take risks. Embrace wild ideas.
Timer [seated]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain white rectangular)
- Sharpies (writing material)
- Rolling easel
- Personal mat to place Post-its
- Sticker dots for voting
- Virtual and physical timer
Outcomes
- Teams are familiar with each other
- Teams understand the exercise and materials they will be using
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 10 min - Overview: 5 min - Ice breaker: 5 min Icebreaker format: - State your name - What do you do for work / where do you work?
Norms:
- Surface all questions
- See all problems
- Be mindful of each other’s experiences
- Be respectful of others in the room
Procedures
- Within 10 minutes, each Advisor writes down as many problems or challenges they perceive:
- INSIDE OF THE HIGH SCHOOL CLASSROOM or IN HIGH SCHOOLÂ EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
- Example: “High schools are failing our students in math, they can’t relate and it is boring for them.”
Notes:
- Use one Post-it for each problem/challenge
- You will select up to 5 problems/challenges to share with the Team
Timer [seated]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain rectangular)
- Sharpies (writing material)
- Rolling easel
- Personal mat to place Post-its
- Virtual and physical timer
Outcomes
- Each Advisor has at least five problems/challenges written down on Post-its
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 5 min Note-taker will take a photo of each advisor’s board of post-its 📷 and upload all of them to this section of the Notion section.
Procedures
- Each Advisor selects up to 2-3 problems/challenges to share with the Team, spending ~30 seconds on each problem/challenge (3 mins max per Advisor)
- After each Advisor shares, Facilitator takes the Post-its and attaches them to the rolling easel, grouping common problems/challenges together
/w=3840,quality=80,fit=scale-down)
Timer [seated]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain rectangular)
- Sharpies (writing material)
- Rolling easel
- Personal mat to place Post-its
- Virtual and physical timer
Outcomes
- The team has an idea of all problems/challenges inside high school classrooms or the high school educational system
- Problems/challenges are grouped by commonality
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 30 min - Each Advisor: 3 min max Reminders Facilitator should: - Remind others to respect the time constraint and to listen to the shared problems/challenges - Track the time for each Advisor - Collect the Post-its from each Advisor - Group common post-its together Note-taker should: Summarize each Advisor’s conversation on the shared problems/challenges
Notes on Shareout:
1) Here's the full list of Team Pink's problem brainstorm:
— tech walls and bans that limit student exposure to responsible use and practice
— Not enough TIME (to plan, engage, learn, create inside and outside of the classroom)
— No adequate tools for parents to helps their students
— inadequate support for students without grade level literacy
— defacto segregation
— pathways/support for non college bound
— monolithic curriculur schemes
— pre-occupation with safety (tech! lowest common denom)
— teacher agency, hard to experiment! less prescribes stuff (PDs)
— lack of voice for students
— teachers and admin are afraid of AI
— leaders are not well prepared to lead (coaching, ops, longevity)
— (intl perspective!!) students are stress
— school is boring (ENGAGEMENT)
— traditional assessment that aligns to content standards
— teacher planning time
— standardized district level policies that reduce the opps for innovation
— limited feedback for teachers
— too much screen time impacting attention spans
— parents and kids are living in stressful communities w lower support networks
— teachers working for big systemized agencies, whcih impacts the use of time and tools
2) Here are Team Pink's three common themes used to cluster our problems:
Student
- low engagement
- too much screentime impacting attention spans
- lack of voice for students
Teacher
- Limited time and capacity to…
- give meaningful feedback
- design and plan engaging lesson plans
Family
- stressful home environments, lacking support
System + Society
- standardized policies that reduce opportunity for innovation and personalizing classroom experiences
- teachers working for big systemized agencies, which impacts the use of time and tools
Procedures
- Each Advisor receives two red dots to vote on the most pressing problems, doing so silently
- Facilitator moves the top 3 problems/challenges based on the number of votes to the middle of the easel
Notes:
- If there is a tie-breaker, Advisors will vote for the top problem/challenge by using their hand
Timer [standing]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain rectangular)
- Rolling easel
- Virtual and physical timer
- ÂĽ inch dot stickers (round and red color)
Outcomes
- Advisors vote
- Top 3 problems/challenges are identified
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 5 min Facilitator reminds Advisors to vote silently
Notes on discussion
General Vote Trends:
- Educators and teachers have aversion to AI
- Votes towards tech walls
- Perhaps these two are related
- Anything that disrupts the current work systems and workflows may be threatening to teachers
- leads to an acceptance of standards that may not be personalized
- a disregard of student needs, more just general conversation around it
- Votes towards standardized curriculum strength: the idea that someone outside the classroom knows how the student learns best ??
- teacher pds need to be stronger, guiding teachers to be able to personalize
- we need to equip teachers w agency
- drop a teacher in the classroom (who aligns w basic standards, perhaps relating to safety) could potentially
Final Trend Categories:
An issue of taking curriculum that exists and connecting it to the teacher's ability to customize and enable student voice in that
TIME— who needs the most time and how can we get it to them?
PD and COACHING— equipping teachers the fundamental training to be effective
- Reinvention of PD— narrative/mindset
Voted Problems:
Time crunch: teachers are overburdened— teacher role is broken
- Lack of sufficient quality PD for teachers (PD in coaching and professional learning)
- delegate work differently
PDs for Teacher Role + Preparation:
- low teacher agency
- to prepare for that, re-invent the role. how do we prepare the PDs?
Student Engagement
- how students and teachers plan for class, its one problem
Synthesized/rephrased FINAL PROBLEM STATEMENTS:
- TEACHER roles and time expectations don't allow for sufficient planning and creation
- STUDENT agency is lost in monolithic curriculum and inadequate teaching prep time and agency to add
- PD and coaching is misaligned from teacher need and what is being delivered
Procedure
- The top 3 problems/challenges are rephrased by the original author outloud to the Team. The team works to reframe the problem into a "How might we...?" statement.
Example:
Problem: “We have no means of measuring the efficacy of these AI tools my students are using."
Reframed: "How might we create means of measurement and efficacy of AI products?"
Timer [standing]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain rectangular)
- Rolling easel
- Virtual and physical timer
Outcomes
- There are 3 “How might we…” statements and they are captured in the Team Notes section
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 5 min Note-taker captures the “How might we...” statements
How Might We Statements:
Procedure
- Brainstorm. Allowing 5 mins for each of the top problems/challenges, each Advisor writes down as many solutions they have for the specific problem/challenge
- The format for Solutions on a Post-it should be no more than 3 sentences, which sounds similar to an “elevator pitch”
- Given the current landscape of companies and AI products, hold space for how technology may play a role in each solution Post-it
- Example solution: “Build the most dynamic curriculum on becoming an Entrepreneur; using AI co-pilot trained on insights from world-famous business leaders.”
- This process will be repeated for the problem/challenge, totaling 15 mins
- Shareout. Each Advisor selects up to 3 solutions to share with the Team, spending 1:30 min max per advisor on sharing solutions (~30 secs on each solution). Limit to three sentences “elevator pitch.”
- Sorting. After each Advisor shares, Facilitator takes all solution Post-its from the Advisor and attaches them to the rolling easel. Team reads all solutions and [if applicable] Team supports in sorting common solutions under each problem/challenge
Timer [seated]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain blue rectangular)
- Sharpies (writing material)
- Rolling easel
- Personal mat to place Post-its
- Virtual and physical timer
Outcomes
- All solutions are sorted and presented under each of the top 3 problems/challenges
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 40 min - Solutions for each problem/challenge (total 3): 5 mins - Solutions discussion (1:30 min each): ~15 mins Reminders Facilitator should: - Encourage as many solutions to be written. No pressure on “over” designing - Reminder others to respect the time constraint and to listen to the shared problems/challenges - Track the time for each Advisor - Collect the Post-its from each Advisor Note-taker should: Summarize each Advisor’s conversation on the solutions
Blue Sky Discussion:
- Team decides to create a single AI voice-activated solution that addresses all three problem statements: teacher time, student engagement, and ineffective professional developments for educators
Brainstorm:
The disagreement:
- we need to have standards and trainings for teachers so that they are prepared for the classroom
- sometimes we over-engineer that
- solution: provide enough resources, dont over engineer
- interjection: students are not teated like the users of the school
- we can enable student agency by creating time
- underlying roots of PD issues
- systemic problem
- who owns the PD?
- PDs become a burden, silencing innovative teaching
- redefining what a PD is
- teachers get a lot of feedback from the students!
- how to frame student learning style/interest
- Ikigai/Purpose base framework: what they like, are good at, contribute to the world and can get paid for
- what great teacher moves do we want to shortcut and build within this product?
- competing tensions/issues with this solution:
- students interests
- must cover and address the certain standards/learning outcomes for the school
- and the planning capacity of a teacher
- adding student interest doesn’t necessarily strengthen
- To accomplish in one moment in time
- give student a tool to explore interests that aggregates everything learned from the student + what it has learned from the teacher
- tool can reason form these two databases and suggest
- Presenting different interest areas and fields to prompt thinking about their interests
- queueing/prompting these students
Possible solutions that address multiple problems
- Utilize an AI tool that gathers passive interest-driven data from students to inform interest-based discussion/lesson points in class
- An AI tool that captures and transcribes real-time student discussion to provide real-time feedback to whole class, teacher and students to facilitate productive discussion
Why this?
- saves teachers time: combines personal learning data into teacher tools such as lesson planning structure
- Student enagement: This tool can increase student engagement by guiding discussion points to be relevant to students interests, track and support student overall participation
Notes
This is merely a placeholder. Please edit to personalize what was pertinent to YOUR TEAM. Delete if Nothing to add.
Procedure
- Each Advisor receives 5 red dots to vote on the most appealing solutions, doing so silently
Notes:
- If there is a tie-breaker, Advisors will vote for the top problem/challenge by using their hand
- Only 1 vote per solution
Timer [standing]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Post-its (plain rectangular)
- Rolling easel
- Virtual and physical timer
- ÂĽ inch dot stickers (round and red color)
Outcomes
- At least 3 solutions are identified via votes
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 5 min
TOP VOTED SOLUTIONS: Design an AI tool that addresses all top three problem statements
PD, limited teacher time and student engagement are all related
A product that addresses all of these issues:
- A tool to begin and support student exploration, then use these trends in exploration to support and inform a teacher’s lesson plan.
- KEEP all current solutions on board to consider combined nuances when developing product
Procedures
- Facilitator selects at least 3 and at most 5 of the most voted-on solutions and moves them to the top of the matrix side of the easel
- Advisors discuss each of the solutions to determine the feasibility and place the solution on the “Effort vs. Impact” matrix
- Vertical axis: level of impact of the solution
- Horizontal axis: level of effort required to create the solution
- Each Advisor receives 1 green dot to vote on the most appealing solution from the matrix, doing so silently
- By the end of this session, the team has landed on one idea to build a roadmap for.
Notes:
- The objective of this exercise is to gather consensus, if not a majority, on where to place each solution on the matrix
Timer [standing]
Materials
- AV for Note-taker to share Notion on screen
- Rolling easel
- Virtual and physical timer
- ÂĽ inch dot stickers (round and green color)
Outcomes
- Top solutions are on the effort vs. impact matrix with their votes
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 20 min - Placing solutions on matrix: 15 mins - Vote on matrix: 5 mins
We placed all solution suggestions on matrix to visualize nuances of each solution suggestion.
Procedures
- The facilitator rolls the Team’s easel to the general area for viewing.
Side 1: Problems/challenges & solutions
- Grouped problems/challenges
- Voted on top 3 problems/challenges
- All possible solutions under each of the Top 3 problems/challenges
Side 2: Mapped matrix
- Quadrant with at least the top 3 solutions plotted based on effort vs. impact
Timer [walk]
Materials
- Rolling easel
- General area for a break
- Coffee, tea, biscuits break
Outcomes
- Advisors have scanned the problems/challenges, solutions, and mapped matrices from the other Teams
FACILITATOR AND NOTE-TAKER GUIDELINES Total time available: 15 min Facilitator should guide the Team back to workspaces Note-takers should take a photo of all easels
Pink team! Now go Build your Final Team Reports!
