“Most likely to succeed”

Is change in education most likely to succeed? We are such in a hurry to see it happen that we are ready to do almost anything and pay whatever may be needed to change education NOW!
Edtech entrepreneurs, policymakers, thought leaders share the same urgency –  for different reasons – to make change happen. We built over the years strong research evidence that demonstrate why and how change could happen. We got convinced that evidence was enough to engage teachers and principals in the change process. We forgot some basic questions: Why would they change, who would drive the change, what is the change about?
Designing the change is not an easy path. I asked my friend Yishay Mor a very naive question: how do you engage teachers into change? Remember, he said, “the first step in design is empathy”. Understanding who is your target audience, what are their needs, desires, fears, constraints. Finding them “where they are” and taking them to “where they want to go”.
Urgency makes us believe that “teachers are generically at school” and that it is more important to know “where we want them to go” than “where they want to go”.
Unfortunately designing the change has rules that are difficult to change and that we are prompt to forget. The first one is that “designing for anyone i.e. any teacher” is equivalent to “designing for no one”.
To make change in school most likely to succeed, we must take time to understand what are the concerns of the teachers, how do they learn, exchange, construct knowledge. We must build personas, empathy maps, force maps, transition matrices… that will best reflect what teachers are really into. We must identify their learning instruments: Do they meet? Use whatsapp groups? Facebook? Take courses? Register for MOOCs?
To do that, we must enter the schools, listen to teachers, co create the path with them. A new report on Evidence-informed teaching concluded that “most teachers were unlikely to be convinced by research evidence on its own: they needed to have this backed up by observing impact themselves or hearing trusted colleagues discuss how it had improved their practice and outcomes for young people”.
Teachers need informed debate from the inside. And there are multiple ways to initiate it: a documentary like “Most likely to succeed” can launch a debate as it has been proven in hundreds of schools all over the world. But debate only makes sense in a well-designed and timely framework addressing teacher’s attention, passion, information, knowledge, action, habit, identity.


Community learning

What is community learning?

Let’s imagine people with “common needs engaging in shared discussions that will continue and grow over time, leading to complex webs of personal relationships and an increasing sense of identification with the overall community”. This is how John Hagel describes virtual community and this is how we could describe any learning community.

Take a school or a company. Students or employees get together on a daily basis, they share discussions, develop relationships and a common identity.  They build joint ownership, trust, mutual understanding.

I’d like now to take a sideway, sit in a park, enter a metro station or a public library, meet, listen, talk to people, start a dialogue. Another way to explore community learning.

Learning anywhere, anytime… Dismounting learning boundaries… (Re)discovering learning spaces.

Real and virtual worlds collide. Social networks boundaries get blurred. Real people meet in a coffee shop and later in Second Life.

Captura de pantalla 2017-06-25 a las 19.40.13

Can it be sustained?

Social interactions are central to learning. They can grow or disappear as quickly as they grew.

Any learning space, a park or a classroom has to be sustainable.

We use Hagel’s metrics to identify three main sustainability indicators any learning space’s designer should pay attention to:

- Return on Attention (RoA) – a learner has little attention to give and many options from which to chose -;

- Return on Information (RoI) – a learner has to share a lot of information about his aspirations and needs and requires a lot in return -;

- Return on Skills (RoS)– a learner wants to see his/her talent develop quickly.

A learning space is like any transactional space: exposed to harsh competition. Hopefully, this is above all a competition for happiness!

The learner power

One of the conclusions of the “Education and Skills for Life Report” is in words of  Sir Michael Barber, Chief education advisor at Pearson, that ”even the highest-performing countries in The Learning Curve Index are far from providing education that would ensure every single student is prepared for informed citizenship and 21st century employability.”

This may mean that an improvement in the education systems alone will never be sufficient to respond to people’s needs and expectations. Education is increasingly happening outside schools and universities. And the power of education can’t be easily controlled.

The “Learner power” may well be a new descriptor for the revolution that is taking place and the expression of a complex reivindication to learn the way we want. Learners claim for the right to design their own learning path, identify their own learning sources, create their own learning contents. Learning and learners can’t be confined any longer by school’s walls.


Learners see themselves as makers and have the capacity to transform the communities they live in. They may not need the schools we know to but innovative learning spaces where knowledge can flow freely, be used, transformed and reused by others. Learning in the street, in a park, in a public library, at home… explode the boundaries of all education systems.

The transformation that is taking place from the inside of the systems, changing curricula, training teachers, introducing technology are therefore nothing compared to what is happening outside. Instead of strengthening the systems and improving them, it might be more efficient to prioritize the “learner power”, fostering peer learning and mentoring, acknowledging informal learning and creating learning hubs at the community level that will progressively complement then substitute our schools.

Svenia Busson, one of her newest education thoughtleader is starting her edtech tour in Europe. Her journey takes us closer to the “learner power” at the periphery of these education systems that can’t be reinvented from the inside.




Dar tiempo al tiempo

Education is in a hurry to change. PISA has just been released and ministers all over the work are going crazy to innovate and improve. For them, time is an issue. In other words, they need change NOW! Time has always been an issue: it takes too long to innovate, too long to change the sytem.

Time is certainly the most crucial problem raised by teachers when they are asked about innovation in the classroom. Time is a “scarce good”. Teachers need time to prepare their lessons. They need time to teach. They need time to spend with their students, listen to them, help them. They need time to investigate new methods, new tools. They need time to train. They need time to work with their colleagues on joint projects, time to spend with the headmaster, … Time they simply don’t have.


Students also require time to study, time to do their homework. They need time to team up with their mates and jointly work on projects, time to think and investigate. They need time to relax and play. A time they usually don’t have. They also require time from their teacher to help them learn better, time from their parents to get guidance… time none of them usually have.

The paradox is well known: (good) Education needs time that no one has! Time is a key challenge for education entrepreneurs. Innovation in education should enable teachers and students “buy back” the precious time they need to teach and learn better. Often innovative solutions are too complex and take too long to be implemented in school. Innovative solutions for the classroom should be time efficient, respectful of both teacher’s and student’s time constraints.

“Dar tiempo al tiempo” (give time to time) could very well be the new edtech challenge.

Il faut voter Macron

Il faut voter Macron. Cette phrase peut résonner bizarrement dans un blog rédigé presque exclusivement en anglais et consacré à l’innovation en éducation. Elle est le résultat d’une série de questions posées par ma fille Charlotte sur comment convaincre ses amis de voter Macron sans se fâcher avec eux. L’éducation est un dialogue qui dépasse le cadre de l’école pour embrasser la vie dans son ensemble et donc la politique. Peut-on penser l’innovation en éducation dans un pays fermé sur lui-même et aux autres? Non bien sûr.

Voici ce dialogue.



 “Toi qui a les bons mots et sais les mettre en ordre, aide moi à expliquer à mes amis:

-       Pourquoi c’est une connerie de ne pas voter?

-       Qu’est-ce qu’une dictature économique et capitaliste?

-       Pourquoi Macron il néglige les classes sociales?

Faut que je structure mon discours sinon je ne vais plus avoir aucun ami à Paris.”



Ma fille,

Ce sont des questions bien difficiles pour un entre deux tour. Voici un essai de réponses.

“Pourquoi c’est une connerie de ne pas voter?”

Renvoyer dos à dos Le Pen et Macron revient à refuser les règles du jeu de l’élection présidentielle pourtant connues et acceptées par tous ceux qui sont allés voter: onze candidats au premier tour, deux passent au second tour, le candidat qui obtient la majorité des suffrages est élu. Nous avions le choix entre onze et maintenant nous avons le choix entre deux. Aucun des deux ne nous plaît, alors on ne vote pas ou on vote blanc: trop facile! Il faudrait donc ne voter que pour celui ou celle qui nous plaît et comme les résultats du premier tour ne nous ont pas plu, ne pas voter au second ou voter blanc serait la solution.

Et bien non: Macron n’est pas Le Pen. Entre les promesses de l’une et de l’autre, il faut avoir le courage de trancher et de croire. Au-delà des engagements et des programmes, il reste des valeurs pour lesquelles il vaut encore la peine de se battre: lutter contre l’exclusion, le racisme, l’antisémitisme, défendre l’ouverture vers l’autre, garder l’espoir. Il reste des opinions qu’il faut combattre, négationnisme, haine, homophobie. Les Français regardèrent ailleurs en 1942 pendant la rafle du Vel d’hiv. On ne prenait pas position. On serrait les fesses. On votait “blanc”. Ni pour De Gaulle, ni contre Pétain ou l’inverse. Ni résistant, ni collabo. Et pendant ce temps, on déportait à tour de bras.

Ni blanc, ni noir? Ne refaisons pas encore et toujours le même non choix. Alors votez Macron aujourd’hui pour mieux le critiquer demain! Ne pas voter vous renverrait à la triste position du bystander, celui qui regarde narquois le monde se décomposer et pleure ensuite parce qu’il n’a rien fait…

Qu’est-ce qu’une dictature économique et capitaliste?”

Je n’en sais rien. J’imagine que tu fais référence à la domination absolue du capital,, aux riches qui sont toujours plus riches, aux lois du marché, aux crises économiques et financières qui font toujours les mêmes victimes, à ces inégalités insupportables, à la violence faite aux femmes et aux hommes qui ne vivent pas ou plus de leur travail, à la maltraitance faite aux jeunes qui ne trouvent pas d’emploi à la fin de leurs études, à la mort des villages désertés par leurs habitants, à la fin des exploitations agricoles, à la fermeture des usines, à tous ces gens qui ne rêvent que de bien vivre de leur travail et donner un meilleur avenir à leurs enfants.

Tu penses aussi peut-être à ces artisans qui se battent pour conserver les traditions, à ces créateurs de startups qui réinventent les transports ou l’éducation, à ces agriculteurs qui protègent la planète, à ces entrepreneurs sociaux qui cherchent à rendre la vie meilleure pour les plus pauvres, à ces travailleurs sociaux qui combattent la précarité.

La France n’est pas (encore) une dictature. La France n’a jamais été une dictature économique et capitaliste. La France est un Etat de droit qui n’a pas réussi à donner à tous les mêmes chances de réussir. La France est un grand pays qui doit se réinventer.

Macron a travaillé chez Rothschild? C’est donc un banquier juif! Vieille rengaine antisémite qui a la vie longue en France. Macron a bien travaillé en classe? C’est donc un nanti! Macron est bien habillé? Il méprise les ouvriers! Un peu court quand même! Luttons contre les préjugés, contre TOUS les préjugés.

Le Pen propose une dictature “populaire” refermant la France sur un passé que tes amis n’ont pas connu, parlant du franc comme d’une relique alors que vous n’avez connu que l’euro, parlant de l’Europe comme du mal absolu alors que vous avez grandi entouré d’européens.

Que leur faut-il à tes amis? Vivre dans une vraie dictature pour se rendre compte de ce que résister veut dire? Dis leur de se battre avec les armes de la démocratie pour un monde meilleur. Et cela commence par voter pour Macron même s’il ne leur plaît pas, surtout s’il ne leur plaît pas, car se limiter à voter contre Le Pen ne veut rien dire.

“Pourquoi Macron il néglige les classes sociales?”

Je ne sais pas s’il les néglige. Les classes sociales existent. Les plus pauvres souffrent. Les plus riches s’enrichissent toujours plus. Est-ce une fatalité? Non!

L’avenir appartient à la jeunesse. L’avenir appartient à la fraternité. Macron n’en a pas l’exclusivité. À quoi pensez vous au moment d’élire un président? Pensez vous élire un sauveteur, un magicien? Soyez réalistes et faîtes de vos rêves des réalités. C’est à vous d’inventer les clés d’un nouveau “vivre ensemble”.

Macron ne fera peut-être rien pour vos rêves mais il ne les empêchera pas et c’est énorme. Pour avoir le droit de vous opposer à Macron, votez pour lui! C’est ce paradoxe qu’il faut expliquer encore et encore.


Alors pesez bien vos bulletins de vote à l’aune de vos valeurs, de vos rêves, de votre avenir. Il ne peut y avoir de doute. Votez d’abord pour votre avenir. Il passe aujourd’hui par Macron. C’est le jeu de la démocratie. Et on ne peut que l’aimer.

Voilà ma fille quelques réflexions d’un “vieux” démocrate… qui votera Macron.

This is the end?

The conference “Shaping the Future 4” organized by our colleagues from Mindcet in Tel Aviv provided stimulating thoughts on the future of education.

Could we envisage the future of education without teachers? Rose Luckin raised the conflictive issue of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education. Will AI eventually substitute teachers? Is this the end of education?

Her latest publication ”Intelligence Unleashed” cowritten with Wayne Holmes identifies instead several scenarios under which teachers’ expertise will be strengthened thanks to AI. In a nutshell, AI should help “developing teacher expertise, addressing teacher retention, and providing respite where teacher shortages are acute”. Even more importantly, AI should help understand the learners better.

Rose and Wayne address a crucial topic: teachers’ time. Time shortage comes always as the first item to explain teachers’ resistance to change. AI could help overcome time shortage by for instance reducing time needed for grading or time needed to identify the adequate learning resources. More time should enable teachers to teach better, pay more individual attention to learners. AI could help freeing up teachers from daily bureaucratic constraints to help them concentrate on teaching. When writing this piece, I realize how absurd it may seem to think of teachers doing anything else than teaching… But this is the reality!

Captura de pantalla 2017-04-16 a las 19.38.32

Freeing up the teachers is only part of the debate on innovation in education. Turning education into a continuous conversation is even more challenging.

David Weinberger insists on the growing role of knowledge networks. In a recent MOOC he reminded us of the importance of conversation as an innovative learning model. The network model enables learner to engage fruitfully in network conversation, instead for instance of learning together as part of a collaborative model. As networks question the meaning of knowledge, learners are challenged to acquire new skills of problem solving and critical thinking.

Learning will therefore experiment a drastic change departing the private sphere towards the public one and resulting in a gigantic network where we are all learners and teachers.

Opening up the classroom will mean for all teachers and students joining public conversations that will ultimately make everyone smarter.

Is this the end of education or a new beginning?

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Subscribe now

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers