write essay on education without boundaries

Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Students are often asked to write an essay on Education Without Boundaries in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Introduction.

Education without boundaries refers to a learning system where knowledge is not limited by physical, social, or economic barriers. It is a concept that promotes access to education for everyone, everywhere.

This approach is important as it ensures equal opportunities for all. It breaks down walls of discrimination and promotes inclusivity. It allows every individual, regardless of their background, to learn and grow.

Online learning, open educational resources, and inclusive policies are some methods that facilitate education without boundaries. They make education accessible and flexible for everyone.

In conclusion, education without boundaries is a powerful concept. It promotes equality, inclusivity, and lifelong learning, making the world a better place.

250 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

The concept of education without boundaries, the role of technology.

Technology plays a pivotal role in realizing education without boundaries. Digital platforms, online courses, and virtual classrooms have democratized education, making it accessible to all. They break down geographical barriers, allowing learners to access knowledge from anywhere, anytime.

Implications for Learners

For learners, boundaryless education means freedom to explore and learn according to their interests and pace. It also fosters cross-cultural understanding as learners engage with peers from different backgrounds. Moreover, it prepares students for the globalized world, equipping them with skills to navigate diverse work environments.

Challenges and Opportunities

While the idea of education without boundaries presents numerous opportunities, it also poses challenges. The digital divide, language barriers, and the lack of personalized guidance can hinder effective learning. However, these challenges can be mitigated through collaborative efforts and innovative solutions.

In conclusion, education without boundaries is an empowering concept that can revolutionize the learning landscape. It is the key to creating a globally competent generation that can thrive in an interconnected world. As we move forward, it is crucial to embrace this concept and work towards making education truly boundaryless.

500 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Education is the cornerstone of societal progress and personal development. However, traditional education systems have often been criticized for their rigid structures and boundaries. The concept of “Education Without Boundaries” is an innovative approach that breaks away from these constraints, fostering a more diverse, inclusive, and holistic learning environment.

Breaking Down Physical Boundaries

Overcoming socio-economic barriers.

Education without boundaries also addresses socio-economic barriers. Open-source learning materials, scholarships, and financial aid programs have made quality education affordable to a broader audience. This inclusivity allows a diverse pool of learners to contribute unique perspectives, fostering a rich, multicultural learning environment.

Transcending Traditional Disciplinary Boundaries

Traditional education often compartmentalizes knowledge into rigid disciplines. However, real-world problems are interdisciplinary, requiring a blend of knowledge from different fields. Education without boundaries promotes interdisciplinary learning, encouraging students to make connections across various domains. This approach fosters critical thinking and problem-solving skills, equipping students to tackle complex, real-world challenges.

Shifting from Teacher-Centered to Learner-Centered Approach

Embracing lifelong learning.

In a world where knowledge is continuously evolving, the concept of education cannot be confined to a set number of years in an institution. Education without boundaries embraces the notion of lifelong learning. It encourages individuals to continuously seek knowledge, adapt to changes, and remain relevant in their respective fields.

Challenges and Future Prospects

Despite its benefits, education without boundaries faces challenges. These include digital divide, quality control of online content, and the need for a paradigm shift in traditional education systems. However, with concerted efforts from educators, policymakers, and technologists, these challenges can be overcome.

In conclusion, education without boundaries is a powerful concept that breaks away from the constraints of traditional education. It promotes accessibility, inclusivity, interdisciplinary learning, and lifelong learning. Despite the challenges, its future prospects are promising, offering a transformative approach to education in the 21st century.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Happy studying!

Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Essay on Education Without Boundaries: In today’s rapidly evolving world, the traditional boundaries of education are being challenged and redefined. The concept of education without boundaries is gaining momentum, as technology enables learning to take place anytime, anywhere. This essay will explore the benefits and challenges of this new approach to education, and how it is reshaping the way we think about teaching and learning. Join us as we delve into the exciting possibilities of education without boundaries.

Table of Contents

Education Without Boundaries Essay Writing Tips

1. Start by introducing the concept of education without boundaries. Explain what it means and why it is important in today’s globalized world.

2. Provide examples of how education without boundaries can be achieved. This could include online learning platforms, international exchange programs, and collaborative research projects.

3. Discuss the benefits of education without boundaries. These may include increased cultural understanding, improved access to education for marginalized communities, and the fostering of innovation and creativity.

4. Address potential challenges and obstacles to achieving education without boundaries. This could include issues such as language barriers, unequal access to technology, and political or social barriers.

5. Offer solutions and strategies for overcoming these challenges. This could involve advocating for policies that promote international collaboration in education, investing in technology infrastructure in underserved communities, and promoting diversity and inclusion in educational settings.

6. Share personal anecdotes or examples of how education without boundaries has impacted your own life or the lives of others. This could help to illustrate the importance of this concept in a more relatable way.

7. Conclude by emphasizing the importance of education without boundaries in creating a more inclusive and interconnected world. Encourage readers to support initiatives that promote this vision and to actively engage in breaking down barriers to education.

8. Proofread and edit your essay to ensure clarity and coherence. Make sure to check for any grammatical errors or awkward phrasing that may detract from your message.

9. Consider seeking feedback from peers or mentors to further refine your essay and ensure that your ideas are effectively communicated.

10. Remember to cite any sources or references used in your essay to give credit to the original authors and to support the credibility of your arguments.

Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 10 Lines – Examples

1. Education Without Boundaries is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing educational opportunities to underserved communities. 2. The organization believes that education is a fundamental human right and should be accessible to all. 3. Education Without Boundaries offers a variety of programs, including tutoring, mentorship, and scholarship opportunities. 4. The organization partners with schools, community centers, and other organizations to reach as many students as possible. 5. Education Without Boundaries focuses on empowering students to reach their full potential and achieve their academic goals. 6. The organization also provides resources and support for parents and families to help them navigate the education system. 7. Education Without Boundaries is committed to promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in education. 8. The organization relies on volunteers and donations to support its programs and initiatives. 9. Education Without Boundaries has made a positive impact on countless students and families in need. 10. Through its work, Education Without Boundaries is helping to break down barriers to education and create a more equitable society.

Sample Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 100-180 Words

Education without boundaries refers to the idea of breaking down traditional barriers in learning and providing access to education for all individuals, regardless of their background or circumstances. This concept emphasizes the importance of inclusive and equitable education that is accessible to everyone, regardless of their socio-economic status, geographical location, or physical abilities.

By removing boundaries in education, we can create a more diverse and inclusive learning environment that fosters creativity, critical thinking, and collaboration. This approach allows individuals to pursue their interests and passions, regardless of societal expectations or limitations.

Education without boundaries also promotes lifelong learning and continuous personal growth, as individuals are encouraged to explore new ideas and perspectives beyond the confines of traditional educational institutions. By embracing this philosophy, we can empower individuals to reach their full potential and contribute positively to society as a whole.

Short Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 200-500 Words

Education is a fundamental human right that should be accessible to all individuals, regardless of their background, location, or circumstances. In today’s interconnected world, the concept of education without boundaries has become increasingly important as technology has made it possible for individuals to access learning opportunities from anywhere in the world.

One of the key benefits of education without boundaries is the ability for individuals to access a wide range of educational resources and opportunities that may not be available in their local communities. Through online learning platforms, individuals can enroll in courses offered by prestigious universities, participate in virtual classrooms with students from around the world, and access educational materials that cover a diverse range of topics. This allows individuals to tailor their educational experiences to their specific interests and goals, and to access high-quality education regardless of their geographic location.

Furthermore, education without boundaries can help to bridge the gap between individuals from different socio-economic backgrounds. In traditional educational settings, individuals from disadvantaged communities may face barriers to accessing quality education, such as limited resources, inadequate infrastructure, or a lack of qualified teachers. By leveraging technology to provide education without boundaries, these barriers can be overcome, allowing individuals from all backgrounds to access the same educational opportunities and resources.

Another important aspect of education without boundaries is the ability for individuals to learn at their own pace and on their own terms. Traditional educational settings often follow a rigid structure that may not be conducive to all learners, leading to disengagement and a lack of motivation. With education without boundaries, individuals have the flexibility to learn at a pace that suits their needs, to explore topics that interest them, and to engage with educational materials in a way that is meaningful to them. This personalized approach to learning can help to foster a love of learning and a sense of empowerment in individuals, leading to improved educational outcomes and increased motivation to continue learning.

In conclusion, education without boundaries has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach education and to make quality learning opportunities accessible to individuals around the world. By leveraging technology and breaking down traditional barriers to education, we can create a more inclusive and equitable educational system that empowers individuals to reach their full potential. As we continue to embrace the concept of education without boundaries, we can work towards a future where all individuals have the opportunity to access high-quality education and to pursue their dreams, regardless of the boundaries that may exist in their physical environment.

Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 1000-1500 Words

Education Without Boundaries

Education is often seen as the key to unlocking opportunities and achieving success in life. It is a fundamental human right that should be accessible to all individuals, regardless of their background or circumstances. However, traditional education systems often come with boundaries and limitations that can hinder the learning process for many students. In recent years, there has been a growing movement towards education without boundaries, which aims to break down these barriers and provide a more inclusive and flexible approach to learning.

Education without boundaries is a concept that seeks to remove the constraints of traditional education systems and create a more open and accessible learning environment for all students. This approach recognizes that every individual has unique learning needs and preferences, and that these needs may not always be met within the confines of a traditional classroom setting. By embracing a more flexible and personalized approach to education, students are able to learn in a way that works best for them, regardless of their age, background, or location.

One of the key principles of education without boundaries is the idea of personalized learning. This approach recognizes that every student is different and has their own strengths, weaknesses, and interests. By tailoring the learning experience to meet the individual needs of each student, educators can help them reach their full potential and achieve academic success. Personalized learning can take many forms, from allowing students to work at their own pace to providing them with opportunities to explore topics that interest them. By giving students more control over their learning experience, education without boundaries can help them develop a deeper understanding of the material and a greater sense of ownership over their education.

Another important aspect of education without boundaries is the idea of accessibility. Traditional education systems often come with barriers that can prevent certain students from fully participating in the learning process. These barriers can include financial constraints, physical disabilities, or geographic limitations. Education without boundaries seeks to remove these barriers and provide all students with equal access to high-quality education. This can be achieved through the use of technology, which allows students to learn from anywhere at any time, or through the creation of more inclusive learning environments that cater to the needs of all students.

In addition to personalized learning and accessibility, education without boundaries also emphasizes the importance of collaboration and community. Traditional education systems often focus on individual achievement and competition, which can create a sense of isolation among students. Education without boundaries, on the other hand, encourages collaboration and teamwork, allowing students to learn from each other and support one another in their learning journey. By fostering a sense of community and belonging, education without boundaries can help students develop important social and emotional skills that are essential for success in the modern world.

One of the key benefits of education without boundaries is its ability to prepare students for the challenges of the 21st century. In today’s rapidly changing world, students need to be adaptable, creative, and resilient in order to succeed. Education without boundaries helps students develop these skills by encouraging them to think critically, solve problems, and work collaboratively with others. By providing students with a more flexible and personalized learning experience, education without boundaries can help them develop the skills they need to thrive in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.

Despite its many benefits, education without boundaries also comes with its own set of challenges. One of the biggest challenges is ensuring that all students have access to the resources and support they need to succeed. This can be particularly difficult for students from disadvantaged backgrounds or marginalized communities, who may not have access to the same opportunities as their more privileged peers. In order to truly achieve education without boundaries, educators and policymakers must work to address these inequities and ensure that all students have equal access to high-quality education.

Another challenge of education without boundaries is the need for educators to adapt to new teaching methods and technologies. In order to provide students with a personalized and flexible learning experience, educators must be willing to embrace new approaches to teaching and learning. This can be a daunting task for many educators, who may be more comfortable with traditional teaching methods. However, by providing educators with the training and support they need to succeed, education without boundaries can help them develop the skills and knowledge they need to effectively engage with students in a more personalized and inclusive way.

In conclusion, education without boundaries is a powerful concept that has the potential to transform the way we think about education. By breaking down the barriers and limitations of traditional education systems, education without boundaries can provide all students with equal access to high-quality education that meets their unique needs and preferences. By embracing personalized learning, accessibility, collaboration, and community, education without boundaries can help students develop the skills they need to succeed in the 21st century and beyond. While there are challenges to overcome, the benefits of education without boundaries far outweigh the obstacles. By working together to create a more inclusive and flexible approach to education, we can ensure that all students have the opportunity to reach their full potential and achieve success in life.

Related Essays

Essay on A Visit To A Fair – 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Value of Games And Sports – Essay in 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Essay on Importance of Teacher – 100, 200, 500, 1000 Words

Essay on A Visit To A Museum – 100, 200, 500, 1000 Words

Essay on Effect of Social Media On Youth

Essay on Shri Guru Nanak Dev Ji – Short & Long Essay Examples

Essay on Nuclear Family – Short Essay & Long Essay upto 1500 Words

Essay on Anudeep Durishetty – 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Essay on Non Violence – Samples, 10 Lines to 1500 Words

Covid 19 Responsive School – Essay in 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Education Without Boundaries

Defining education is a perilious task. But the writer undertakes this job, explaining how education as a concept lies beyond the boundaries of books and schools.

By Sheetal Bhopal

Edited by Anandita Malhotra, Senior Editor, The Indian Economist

�Vishva Guru��This was how ancient Bharat, that is, today�s modern India was known to the world. It was from here that the Vedas, Puranas, Unani, Ayurveda, Airthmetic, Astrology and the other sciences conceived and spread to the rest of the parts of the globe. It was here that the zero was invented. India is the land of world renowned scientists like Ramanuja and Aryabhatta. There was a time when India was the focal point of the world education, students from all over came to receive education in our revered institutions like the Nalanda University, Rajgiri and Vikramshila. What was it that attracted the aliens to our land? What was it that gave Indian education a universal recognition? Apparently, it was the intensive and the practical knowledge that this realm believed in and practiced. Over the time, we were influenced by the global scenario and hence started imbibing the western style of education. But somewhere along adopting the global trends we started adopting them wholly and had to part with our roots. If today we are ready to practice the practical approach that ancient Bharat tread on, merged with the ideals of the Western education, we are certainly bound to succeed.

Education. What does the word mean? Does it only refer to reading and writing skills? Does it only refer to attending school? Or for that matter does it refer to mugging up the textbook and vomiting it out on the paper? In my perception, education involves the holistic growth of an individual. It teaches about the past and prepares us for the inevitable future. In other words, education is experience.

What is it that keeps Indian education bound in chains? India is a nation with diversities in each and every aspect, which may be culture, folk, mores, cuisines, language and for that matter even education. It is because of this need to cater to these diversities that we have several boards and institutions � CBSE, ICSE, NCERT, STATE BOARDS, IB, open schools and vocational training. But it is this vast diversity that keeps us unified. If ICSE deals in traditional and intensive approach of learning, CBSE prepares us to face the competitive exams.

The Right to Education Act under the 86 th Amendment Act says that education is neither a privilege nor a favour, it is now a basic human right. The government might have made the effort on its behalf but a question is � Are all the people in the society aware that they are born with this right? Somewhere down the lane, there is lack of awareness towards this fundamental right. And even those who are aware, especially the economically weaker sections of society are unwilling to send their children their school citing the basis that their child supplementing their income was more important than him receiving education. A panacea to this ill can be making these people realize the indispensable use of education. An initiative can be taken by the NGOs and other private institutions to work for this cause.

The district authorities of the state can look after the basic standard of the education provided both in the private and the governments run institutions. They should especially see to the provision of the average level of infrastructure facilities. A healthy competition can even be organized amongst the various districts and will as well instill a sense of self-pride in the district officials. These district authorities should be answerable to the state authorities and the state authorities should be answerable to the central authorities. Stringent rules should be followed on behalf of the government and transparency should also be maintained.

Today everyone seems to be involved in rat race where every one wants to surpass the others. Our eyes are glued on giving competition to others and becoming a part of this vicious cut-throat competition. This has certainly received an upper hand over human satisfaction and happiness. Somewhere, our education system stresses on grades and marks that we hardly bother understanding the concept. Teachers are more concerned with finishing the syllabus rather than pay attention to the student�s understands of the basic notion. �In this way, we give boost to rote learning and spoon feeding. Preference is hardly given to the individuality of a person, creative thinking or understanding something to apply it in our actual lives.

Our population roughly consists of 200 million youth i.e. 200 million ignited minds. Economists believe that in the forthcoming years India will be a superpower as we will have the largest number of young people in our nation. But are we ready to provide them with elementary education, good employment, and a job and health security? On the one hand we have the booming economy and increase in our GDP rates; on the other hand we have more than 60% of our population residing in villages who are dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. If on one hand, we are the biggest outsourcing nation in the world, on the other hand, a major portion of our population is still illiterate. Somewhere we have lost the balance between the development and the provisions of basic amenities to all the strata of the society, education being an imperative part of it.

Sheetal is a Political Science (H) student in her third year of graduation. An avid reader and photographer, she aims to join active politics. She has been organising events at her college level through discussion forums like The Symposium Society, known in the University for its Mock Indian Parliament simulations. She is also actively engaged in the National Service Scheme (NSS) of her college where she reads out to blind students. �Elevation of humanity through the smallest efforts� is what guides her day to day actions.

Stay updated with all the insights. Navigate news, 1 email day. Subscribe to Qrius

what is qrius

Qrius reduces complexity. We explain the most important issues of our time, answering the question: "What does this mean for me?"

write essay on education without boundaries

Featured articles

Before Christ

Extreme sports

adventure sports

Ciencias de la Educación

Cuestiones Educativas

13 de noviembre de 2020

Education without boundaries: setting an inclusive classroom.

Astrid Natalia Rojas Torres

One of the most challenging situations we have currently faced in the world has to do with the pandemic of COVID-19. We could realize the inequality and barriers we have in the world in terms of accessing to quality education based on the diversity we have in our classrooms. Also, it is believed that the way we are educating students is not the same for all the population. Regarding this, it is crucial to start involving all students in a friendly environment as well as providing teachers with tips to face obstacles, due to the lack of information and training on this issue since they do not know how to manage an inclusive class based on series of circumstances that differ from the face to face classroom.

Over time, there has been a reflection on the importance of inclusive education, which must guarantee education and learning for everyone. According to Dash (2006), inclusive education is a “worldwide movement with the aiming to create one education system that values all children and to devise a classroom that welcome all children irrespective of disability, community background, gender or ethnic background” (p. 6). At present, there is a new concept of children with special needs. Within this new concept, it is not acceptable to consider children as disabled. By the same token, UNICEF (2017) asserts that inclusive education ‘‘includes all students, and welcomes and supports them to learn, whoever they are and whatever their abilities or requirements’’ (p. 1).We must break inaccurate concepts like less fortunate or children with mental impediment retarded and change it into uniqueness and diversity of individuals.

By the same token, according to UNESCO (1994), “children with special educational needs should be accommodated within an inclusive educational framework that celebrated differences, supported learning, responded to individual needs and urged governments, throughout the world, to implement inclusive educational practices” (p. 5). In this article, we will consider some principles and strategies addressed to English language teachers to assure the education for everyone.

There is a wide range of authors who suggest some principles to set an inclusive education in schools; some experts from Monash University, specially O´toole (2019) proposed some guidelines such as ‘‘diversity, personalised curriculum, students engagement [and ] assessment processes’’ (p. 2)

In regard to diversity, it represents the key of the education process. Laktionova (as cited in O’toole 2019) highlights that “every student is unique and every group of students is different” (p. 1). On this subject, it is essential that teachers understand that classrooms show a piece of the world’s reality, and students who interact there, have different beliefs and belong to varied cultural backgrounds even if they are from the same country. The personalised curriculum is built on the students’ weaknesses and strengths. Laletas (as cited in O´toole 2019) affirms that [the purpose of this is to] “recognise each student” (p. 2) [as unique]. Since students are unique, they have the right to be engaged and considered as such in our classes. They cannot be excluded since they are part of the classroom, Núñez-Pardo (2020) affirms that “students’ life projects are unique subjects” (p. v). Regarding this, it does not matter if they are not working the same topics. We can include them by assigning task based approach on their level and give them the option to interact with others. Finally, the stage of assessment process the teacher must have a constant interaction with parents to give them clear instructions of what students will be doing during the academic term. This part is essential to anticipate what students will be doing during the classes.

In line with these principles, it is pertinent to start from the premise that all students have their own learning style. The following excerpts portray some strategies to consider in an inclusive classroom:

Think on different ways to teach a lesson: you can teach a new concept by using different ways of representation. Besides, you should consider multiple intelligences to let students accomplish their goals. For instance, you may teach by having students creating a mind map or a drawing (visual); another way is with a reading including images (visual) or by giving a lecture to explain the topic (auditory) or having students acting out what they have learnt (kinesthetic) if you include methodological approaches to explain a concept, students will increase their learning/understanding.
Build community with your colleagues : have contact with your colleagues or other institutions’ experiences, asking them what they suggest or the way they work. You will enhance your pedagogical practices.
Listen to your students being aware of their background: teaching and learning is a communicative process. Besides, it encourages students to participate actively by giving suggestions, making questions, or asking questions to activate their prior knowledge. Likewise, their life experiences will make them enjoy their learning process. From Núñez-Pardo and Téllez-Téllez’ (2020) view, ‘‘It is time for English teachers to critically undertake the scholarly activity of developing ELT materials by creating contextualised ones that respond to the local needs, interests, and life experiences of the learners in their own context’’ (p. 23). The result we could get from this process will improve our pedagogical practice and our class performance as well.
Create or choose the appropriate materials: it is vital to choose the correct materials for our students that include diverse people, aimed at making students feel identified and aware of all our diversity; besides, teachers must verify that the chosen materials selected let students talk about their context, and what they find in the activities assigned. Include sensorial activities in your class. When students use their senses, they learn better and retain what you have taught to them. According to Thompson (2011), “multisensory learning is effective because it keeps children more engaged and focussed on their learning” (p. 2) Additionally, when materials are created with and for the students, they are more motivated to learn a second language. On this matter, Vargas (2020) asserts that “one way to motivate students and engage them in learning activities is the performance of games and interactive activities, in which students do not feel like having an academic activity” (par.3). Then, contextualized materials for your students make feel them identified and more motivated when learning a second language.
Create a safe environment: A language must be learnt in a fun way, students should enjoy their classes, to make a psychologically and physically safe environment it is necessary to stablish rules with students. Also, it is acceptable to use the first language when pupils do not get a concept since it helps them to transfer that concept into their first language. It means that they keep receiving their input into the English language, but they could transmit their understanding in the first language at the beginning of the process since it will make them feel more confident.

Concerning the use of the strategies already mentioned, we would enhance the teaching and learning process. Our classroom will be friendly and inclusive bearing in mind that a classroom is a mini multicultural and diverse world in which teachers must reassure accessible learning to each student.

___________________________

Dash, N. (2006). Inclusive education for children with special needs . New –Delhi: Atlantic Publishers.

Grové, C., & Laletas, S. (in press, 2019). Educational Psychology: A critical part of inclusive education. In C. Boyle & K. Allen (Eds.), Inclusive education: perspectives, practices, and challenges. Inclusive Education: Perspectives, Practices and Challenges . Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Núñez-Pardo, A., & Téllez-Téllez, M.F. (2020). Tracing the cultural component in teacher-generated EFL materials. In A. Núñez-Pardo, & M.F. Téllez-Téllez (Eds.) Research on teacher-generated materials for language learning (pp.19-103). Bogotá, Colombia: Departamento de Publicaciones Universidad Externado de Colombia.

Núñez-Pardo, A. (2020c). Decolonizar el libro de texto de inglés: una apuesta desde la interculturalidad crítica (Doctoral dissertation). Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Tunja, Boyacá, Colombia.

O’Toole, T. (7 de Noviembre de 2019). Monash University. Obtenido de https://www.monash.edu/education/teachspace/articles/five-principles-of-inclusive-education

Thompson, C. J. (2011). Multi-Sensory Intervention Observational Research. International Journal of Special Education , 26 (1), 202-214.

UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca declaration and framework for action . Paris: Author.

UNICEF(2017). Including children with disabilities in quality learning: what needs to be done? Author.

Vargas, A. (2020). Supporting Children’s English Learning at Home .Universidad

Externado de Colombia. Retrieved August 17th, 2020 from Cuestiones Educativas: https://cuestioneseducativas.uexternado.edu.co/supporting-childrens-english-learning-at-home/

The turning point: Why we must transform education now

Global warming. Accelerated digital revolution. Growing inequalities. Democratic backsliding. Loss of biodiversity. Devastating pandemics. And the list goes on. These are just some of the most pressing challenges that we are facing today in our interconnected world.

The diagnosis is clear: Our current global education system is failing to address these alarming challenges and provide quality learning for everyone throughout life. We know that education today is not fulfilling its promise to help us shape peaceful, just, and sustainable societies. These findings were detailed in UNESCO’s Futures of Education Report in November 2021 which called for a new social contract for education.

That is why it has never been more crucial to reimagine the way we learn, what we learn and how we learn. The turning point is now. It’s time to transform education. How do we make that happen?

Here’s what you need to know.

Why do we need to transform education?

The current state of the world calls for a major transformation in education to repair past injustices and enhance our capacity to act together for a more sustainable and just future. We must ensure the right to lifelong learning by providing all learners - of all ages in all contexts - the knowledge and skills they need to realize their full potential and live with dignity. Education can no longer be limited to a single period of one’s lifetime. Everyone, starting with the most marginalized and disadvantaged in our societies, must be entitled to learning opportunities throughout life both for employment and personal agency. A new social contract for education must unite us around collective endeavours and provide the knowledge and innovation needed to shape a better world anchored in social, economic, and environmental justice.

What are the key areas that need to be transformed?

Inclusive, equitable, safe and healthy schools

Education is in crisis. High rates of poverty, exclusion and gender inequality continue to hold millions back from learning. Moreover, COVID-19 further exposed the inequities in education access and quality, and violence, armed conflict, disasters and reversal of women’s rights have increased insecurity. Inclusive, transformative education must ensure that all learners have unhindered access to and participation in education, that they are safe and healthy, free from violence and discrimination, and are supported with comprehensive care services within school settings. Transforming education requires a significant increase in investment in quality education, a strong foundation in comprehensive early childhood development and education, and must be underpinned by strong political commitment, sound planning, and a robust evidence base.

Learning and skills for life, work and sustainable development

There is a crisis in foundational learning, of literacy and numeracy skills among young learners. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, learning poverty has increased by a third in low- and middle-income countries, with an estimated 70% of 10-year-olds unable to understand a simple written text. Children with disabilities are 42% less likely to have foundational reading and numeracy skills compared to their peers. More than 771 million people still lack basic literacy skills, two-thirds of whom are women. Transforming education means empowering learners with knowledge, skills, values and attitudes to be resilient, adaptable and prepared for the uncertain future while contributing to human and planetary well-being and sustainable development. To do so, there must be emphasis on foundational learning for basic literacy and numeracy; education for sustainable development, which encompasses environmental and climate change education; and skills for employment and entrepreneurship.

Teachers, teaching and the teaching profession

Teachers are essential for achieving learning outcomes, and for achieving SDG 4 and the transformation of education. But teachers and education personnel are confronted by four major challenges: Teacher shortages; lack of professional development opportunities; low status and working conditions; and lack of capacity to develop teacher leadership, autonomy and innovation. Accelerating progress toward SDG 4 and transforming education require that there is an adequate number of teachers to meet learners’ needs, and all education personnel are trained, motivated, and supported. This can only be possible when education is adequately funded, and policies recognize and support the teaching profession, to improve their status and working conditions.

Digital learning and transformation

The COVID-19 crisis drove unprecedented innovations in remote learning through harnessing digital technologies. At the same time, the digital divide excluded many from learning, with nearly one-third of school-age children (463 million) without access to distance learning. These inequities in access meant some groups, such as young women and girls, were left out of learning opportunities. Digital transformation requires harnessing technology as part of larger systemic efforts to transform education, making it more inclusive, equitable, effective, relevant, and sustainable. Investments and action in digital learning should be guided by the three core principles: Center the most marginalized; Free, high-quality digital education content; and Pedagogical innovation and change.

Financing of education

While global education spending has grown overall, it has been thwarted by high population growth, the surmounting costs of managing education during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the diversion of aid to other emergencies, leaving a massive global education financial gap amounting to US$ 148 billion annually. In this context, the first step toward transformation is to urge funders to redirect resources back to education to close the funding gap. Following that, countries must have significantly increased and sustainable financing for achieving SDG 4 and that these resources must be equitably and effectively allocated and monitored. Addressing the gaps in education financing requires policy actions in three key areas: Mobilizing more resources, especially domestic; increasing efficiency and equity of allocations and expenditures; and improving education financing data. Finally, determining which areas needs to be financed, and how, will be informed by recommendations from each of the other four action tracks .

What is the Transforming Education Summit?

UNESCO is hosting the Transforming Education Pre-Summit on 28-30 June 2022, a meeting of over 140 Ministers of Education, as well as policy and business leaders and youth activists, who are coming together to build a roadmap to transform education globally. This meeting is a precursor to the Transforming Education Summit to be held on 19 September 2022 at the UN General Assembly in New York. This high-level summit is convened by the UN Secretary General to radically change our approach to education systems. Focusing on 5 key areas of transformation, the meeting seeks to mobilize political ambition, action, solutions and solidarity to transform education: to take stock of efforts to recover pandemic-related learning losses; to reimagine education systems for the world of today and tomorrow; and to revitalize national and global efforts to achieve SDG-4.

More on the Transforming Education Summit
More on the Pre-Summit

More on this subject

Sixth International Conference on Learning Cities

Other recent news

UNESCO, UNICEF co-host panel on Data & Accountability during East African Community Education Conference in Arusha

Employability

Student Services

International Guide

Student Payment Portal

Start typing to see suggestions...

Education without Boundaries

Focus of our research.

Global Education and Society is researching contextualised and comprehensive internationalised education that enables a local-global perspective on teaching and learning practices, strategies, pedagogies, and policies, importantly including universities’ connected engagement with society (Hudzik, 2011).

We recognise the importance of cultural humility, co-creation, equity, and creativity in partnership work for mutual understanding and promotion of mutual learning which requires reflecting on our practices, positionalities, situatedness and concerns.

Our values include being aspirational, inclusive, and ethical.

Drawing on our research plans, we aim to embed impact throughout our work, that is:

Enriching: research that serves to influence education practices, cultural enrichment, quality of life and wellbeing; improving educational experiences, equalities, and inclusion for diverse and marginalised communities.
Conceptual: transforming evidence-based policy in practice and influencing practitioners and professional practice, contributing to increasing public awareness and understanding of social and cultural educational issues.
Influential: contributing towards evidence-based educational policy making and influencing public policies at a local, national, and international level, supporting positive change within organisational cultures and educational practices.

If you wish to find out more about this theme, please get in contact with Professor Katherine Wimpenny .

Our research has three distinct clusters:

Respecting cultures, and identities, creating Third Spaces for dialogue, and forging collaborations between local and global communities, this subtheme will explore how universities use local as well as (virtual) cross-border learning spaces to enable transformative engagement between students, faculty, and communities as part of inter/cross/transdisciplinary educational practices for comprehensive internationalisation.

The use of the concept ‘border’ not only refers to geo-political borders, but also (territorial) borders linked to disciplinary, research and pedagogical knowledge.

Areas of focus include:

Macro level: What are we learning about contextualised and comprehensive internationalisation at the interface of decolonization and cross-border thinking in education practices, embedded in the broader context of curriculum transformation?
Meso level: What are we learning about building equitable partnerships with institutions in the Global South; including advocating for a politically and culturally ethical approach to be adopted in developing North-South, South-South and North-South-South teaching and research collaborations?
Access Mark Dawson , postgraduate researcher's, co-authored book ' Success in Groupwork ', which uses examples of real students' successful group projects, to offer a succinct and supportive guide, helping students tackle group assignments with confidence.

Oriented towards justice, solidarity, and human rights, this subtheme will focus on enhancing universities’ responsiveness to local and global societies and the development of new approaches for challenge-led, transdisciplinary education for sustainable development (ESD).

Macro level: How can higher education institutions maximize the potential of inclusive cross-border learning spaces to enable transformative engagement involving students, faculty, and communities, especially at grassroots level, towards enhanced responsiveness to local and global societies and the development of new approaches for achieving ESD?
Meso level: What pedagogical and research approaches are being used / developed for integrating transdisciplinary perspectives in HE?
Micro level: How might collaborative enquiry be used as emancipatory education/transformative teaching and learning practices in HE?

Examining new social imaginaries that shape alternative education policy making processes and possible higher education futures in different contexts (e.g., Ron Barnett’s discussion of “Feasible Utopias”), this subtheme/research cluster will focus on awareness-raising of alternative conditions for knowledge co-creation and critique of competing and complex structures and issues driving contemporary HE practices.

Macro level: Examining multi-level policy making[1] in transnational higher education, such as regional cooperation frameworks in Europe, Africa, Asia, Latin America, global policy travel/ policy mobility, supranational/ regional, national, and institutional actors, their interactions and influences (soft power, knowledge diplomacy) on shaping HE policies and practices in the global North and South; Examining the relationship between the knowledge economy and HE practices including the critique of regulatory and competitive frameworks, such as TEF, REF, KEF; The EU definition of research as opposed to what the African union would consider research; How universities prioritise funding schemes and funders, e.g. EU Horizon, UK RI vs another funder?
Meso level: Exploring alternative ways of conceptualising academic practices at the institutional level; how HEIs navigate different contexts and negotiate different priorities to construct international partnerships that are simultaneously cultural, political and economic projects. For example, the process of establishing collaborative doctoral programmes and pushing the boundaries of national doctorate regulations and institutional practices, and ways of (re)orientating research themes towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Micro level: New imaginaries and alternative practices at individual level, for example in building international supervisory capacity, doctoral learning ecologies and pedagogies; mutual learning and access to sharing facilities, resources and perspectives. New imaginaries are pluriversal, emergent, and processual in nature and aim to make envisaging futures possible.

Key researchers

Name	Title	Email
	Theme Lead
	Assistant Professor
	Associate
	Assistant Professor
	Research Fellow
	Research Fellow
	Assistant Professor
	Professor
	Assistant Professor

Project spotlight

The interest of our research goes beyond the influence of the classroom to consider a diversity of learning spaces which interweave to impact on educational opportunities and outcomes.

Current projects

Project partners from Walter Sisulu, Stellenbosch, and Coventry University

British Council UK-SA Project

In collaboration with Walter Sisulu University and Stellenbosch University, this project focuses on enhancing staff doctoral capacity training and expertise for underrepresented groups in South Africa.

UK-SEA Partnerships and Exchanges Baseline Research (UK-SEA PEER)

Developing a greater understanding of policies, practices, emerging priorities and concepts of higher education internationalisation in the UK and East Asia.

Transforming curricula in South Africa through internationalisation and virtual exchange.

Archive projects

Engineering teacher and student looking at plans

Enhancing Engineering Education Project

Enhancing staff capacity building for knowledge exchange in engineering education, with Walter Sisulu University and University of Stellenbosch.

Offering virtual innovative teaching and learning opportunities to university students and marginalised groups in Jordan.

Girl with headphones watching webinar on laptop

Teaching educators how to produce digitally-supported learning experiences, with a focus on fostering collaborative learning and enhanced student engagement.

Exploring intercultural learning through open education practices across the Mediterranean.

PhD opportunities

Our research team represents colleagues from across diverse disciplines with a united focus on education. Our collective research areas consider issues of the local and the global; digital, face2face, blended formal and informal learning; social justice frameworks; (inter-cross and trans) disciplinarity; cultural diversity; peace education; planetary citizenship; and policies and practical implications for education reform.

We invite self-funded or sponsored applications in the following areas:

International curriculum transformation, bringing together comprehensive internationalisation at the interface of decolonisation of education practices [inc. decolonising epistemologies, methodologies, spaces; examining coloniality in educational practice].
Digital learning ecologies; the impact of digital technologies on education; examining and reimagining educational spaces including Third Space learning and Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL).
Global (graduate) citizenship education facilitated by higher education, not only focused on students and staff, but involving broader societal stakeholders
Collaborative transnational pedagogies and research methodologies including co-design and co-creation.
The “Post-pandemic University” with focus on academic/professional staff experiences, particularly those newly recruited during the pandemic, and those initiating doctoral study during the pandemic with pre-existing academic/professional roles.

Coventry University

Priory Street Coventry CV1 5FB United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)24 7765 7688

Our locations

Coventry University London

CU Coventry

CU London

CU Scarborough

Coventry University Wrocław

Useful links

Safeguarding
Our organisation

Student portal

Staff portal

K–12 Without Borders: Public School Students, Families, and Teachers Shut in by Education Boundaries

The U.S. is crisscrossed with unseen boundaries that can boost or bust the future of every student, can affect purchasing decisions about many Americans’ most important asset—their home—and can force teachers to lose years of retirement wealth for moving, even if they remain educators.

American schools look the way they do because of these boundaries, especially school district borders. We do not need to eliminate school districts to transform U.S. education for the better, but we do need to make America’s educational borders more permeable.

For students, access to high-quality schools often depends on their family’s wealth or income, which determines how likely it is that a family can afford a home within a desirable school district. This access can have generational effects on socioeconomic status and racial stratification of educational attainment. Intra- and interdistrict choice programs, magnet schools, open enrollment, and other school choice programs can reduce the negative impacts of these borders, but questions remain. Taxation, transportation, and school funding all need to be addressed to implement choice policies that involve students crossing educational barriers.

For homeowners, severing or weakening the link between homes and school assignment is a fraught proposition. School choice could be considered a form of wealth redistribution, as the research is starting to reveal that, depending on the program on offer, housing price disparities across school districts narrow when these school choice programs are implemented. Some homeowners who invested in a more expensive home for the sake of the in-district public school could see their property value decrease; but wealthier families would also face strong incentives to move into lower-quality school districts in order to take advantage of lower housing prices, boosting incomes, prices, and population in low-quality districts.

Teachers are affected by borders, as well: their pension border. Most retirement plans incentivize teachers to spend their entire career within one system; if teachers traverse sectors (for instance, if they move from a public school to a nonpublic school) or change states, they lose years of pension wealth.

The current pension model is not serving teachers as they live and work today. Better pensions for teachers would have three key features. First, they would work well for full-career as well as non-full-career teachers. Second, they would not have the arbitrary pull-and-push incentives of the current system. Finally, and most importantly, they would be more portable.

School districts are useful, and we do not suggest that they should be eliminated. But districts force students, teachers, and homeowners to settle or lose opportunities for something better. There would be challenges, but a borderless K–12 education system would mean that students would no longer be stuck in schools that are lower quality, or just not the right fit, simply because they live in the school’s catchment area. Teachers would have much more flexibility in where, and for how long, they work, without worrying about losing valuable pension wealth. Homeowners could worry less about school quality as an element of their household value.

DOWNLOAD PDF

Introduction

If you’re driving south on Dielman Road in northwestern St. Louis County, Missouri, right after you pass the Primm Place Apartments on your right and the Williams-James Mortuary on your left—but before you cross over the River Des Peres—you will trundle over an unassuming set of train tracks. If you don’t get stuck waiting there, you might hardly recognize crossing them. But those tracks represent something substantial: the border between the Ritenour and Ladue School Districts. Ladue is one of the highest-performing school districts in the state of Missouri. In 2019, 72.4% of its students were deemed proficient or advanced in English language arts by the state of Missouri, as were 70.6% of students in math and 65.8% in science.[ 1 ] Ritenour did not do so well: that year, only 34.2% of its students scored proficient or advanced in English language arts, 28.1% did so in math, and 26% did so in science.[ 2 ]

If you live on the north side of those tracks, you go to Ritenour. If you live on the south side, you go to Ladue.

Ladue’s borders do not correspond to the borders of other municipalities. The school district’s website states: “The Ladue School District is made up of all or part of ten different municipalities, including: Creve Coeur, Crystal Lake Park, Frontenac, Huntleigh Village, Ladue, Olivette, Richmond Heights, Town & Country, Westwood and Unincorporated St. Louis County.”[ 3 ] The fact that the borders of the district are jagged, undulating, and seemingly arbitrary doesn’t diminish the fact that they are important.

This report is about the educational borders that have sprung up across our nation. Some, like the border between Ladue and Ritenour, are school district boundaries. They can form an invisible barrier between students and the schools that they might want to attend. Other borders, often aligned with the municipal boundaries of cities, counties, and states, restrict who can teach where, how much teachers are paid, and what their retirement looks like. Working on one side of a border or another can represent tens of thousands of dollars over a lifetime of work. Still others demarcate lines between different policy environments, where some states or regions of states allow for students and teachers to move more freely, while others do not.

The story of the American education system is a story of boundaries: school district boundaries; state boundaries; city boundaries; school catchment areas. All have profoundly shaped the way that American schools look.

It is difficult to argue against the notion that many of these boundaries are harmful to disadvantaged members of our communities. They harm students, who are often restricted in their options because they happen to live on one side or another of an invisible border. They harm homeowners, who have part of the value of their house tied up in the quality of local schools, something over which they have little control. And boundaries hurt teachers, whose pensions face a penalty if they move.

This situation needs to change. However, as G. K. Chesterton advised a century ago, before we tear down a fence, we should know why it was put there in the first place.[ 4 ] State, county, and municipal boundaries are necessary and create the space for a shared civic life. Different cities will have different policies, from how they tax property to how they fill potholes. Competition for residents between localities pushes civic leaders to offer more efficient and effective government—but this competition works only because borders are porous. People can live in one city, work in another, and go for a meal or catch a ballgame in a third. The same is not true for education. Students and teachers are not able to move as easily, and students must attend schools linked to where they live, creating a stickiness that thwarts the healthy movement of democratic competition.

Breaking down or circumventing the barriers between where students live and where they go to school, where teachers work from year to year, and where tax dollars collected from homeowners go is key to a more fair and higher-quality school system.

In this report, we will explain how school district boundaries, which limit where children can attend school, can have negative impacts on students and homeowners, especially the most disadvantaged. We will also explain how boundaries, in the form of pension rules, negatively affect teachers.

We propose an alternative: a system with fewer boundaries—one that allows students to access a wide array of schools, regardless of where they live, and one that does not punish teachers for moving between public, charter, or private sectors, or between states (or even within states, in some instances)—will improve outcomes for students, increase equity among homeowners, and promote retirement security for teachers.

The year 2021 became a banner year for educational choice, with 18 states passing 28 bills to create new choice programs or expanding currently operating programs, including seven new programs introduced in Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, and West Virginia.[ 5 ] With respect to the scope and quality of programs being passed, 2022 is much different from previous years, including 2011, which the Wall Street Journal dubbed “The Year of School Choice.”[ 6 ]

Recent bills are more expansive in terms of program eligibility and funding. Consider Indiana: in 2011, it made national news by passing a school voucher bill that funded families making up to 150% of the federal poverty level. In 2021, Indiana expanded eligibility for that program to 300% of the poverty level, making almost 80% of families eligible.[ 7 ] It also increased the voucher amount. Under the 2011 bill, families were funded at 50%, 70%, or 90% of state per-pupil funding, based on their income. The 2021 bill moved all families to 90% funding.[ 8 ] This development is significant because while targeted programs may fill empty seats in nonpublic educational settings, much more expansive programs are more likely to invite educational innovation and create new seats. Americans recently got a taste of this entrepreneurial activity with the Covid-era explosion of hybrid homeschools and educational pods.

As states continue to move toward providing more educational opportunities for families, teachers will need to fill some of the demands for a diverse set of options. The way that educational systems compensate teachers, however, is outdated and ill-equipped to facilitate a dynamic teacher labor market to meet families’ needs.

Part I: Students

In 1940, the U.S. had a population of just over 131 million, and its 25.4 million children attended school in one of 117,108 school districts. By 2018, even though the national population had almost tripled, to 323 million, and the student population had doubled, to 50.6 million children, the number of school districts had dropped to 13,551.[ 9 ] In the process of 10-fold consolidation of school districts, civic leaders drew and redrew boundaries. Sometimes, these boundaries were contiguous with natural boundaries like rivers or streams; other times, they aligned with political boundaries like state, county, or city borders.

After school district borders are drawn, they are further subdivided into school catchment areas. The majority of American schoolchildren, in fact, attend schools based on where they live.

Residential-Based Segregation

Many factors affect one’s economic opportunity in life, and the neighborhood one grows up in is an important factor. Raj Chetty, an economist at Harvard University, heads the Equality of Opportunity Project and studied the effect that neighborhood characteristics have on upward economic mobility. Chetty and Nathaniel Hendren studied 5 million children whose families moved between counties between 1996 and 2012, and they identified characteristics of areas with higher rates of upward economic mobility: less racial and income segregation, less income inequality, better schools, lower crime rates, and more two-parent households.[ 10 ] Children growing up in low-income households exposed to better areas experienced increases in income in adulthood, compared with similar children growing up in less favorable areas.

Because access to high-quality schools depends on a family’s wealth or income, boundaries in the current system of public schooling create a major obstacle for low-income families to access better schools for their children. For instance, an analysis by Bellwether Education Partners demonstrates that many low-income families in highly sought school districts are often priced out of those districts and consequently cannot move to access those public schools.[ 11 ]

The current residential-based assignment system all but determines the life trajectory of children because catchment areas affect neighborhood characteristics such as racial and income segregation, income inequality, and school quality, all of which are related to upward economic mobility. The roots of these problems run deep. New Deal–era housing programs like the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC), which was formed to help mortgage owners in default, baked the racial composition of neighborhoods into their eligibility for support.[ 12 ] That situation, along with the actions of private homeowners’ associations that used residential covenants to exclude racial and ethnic minorities from the burgeoning middle-class neighborhoods proliferating around American cities, locked black Americans, primarily, into particular neighborhoods. When local governments aligned school attendance to where people live, they exacerbated the segregative effects of these decisions.

Unfortunately, the consequences of these decisions remain today. In a 2021 study for the Urban Institute, Tomás Monarrez and Carina Chien examined contemporary school district boundaries and found that a huge number still align with the redlined HOLC maps from nearly a century ago. They conclude: “Persistent school segregation is the legacy of racist housing policy and the product of intentional decisions by the local governments that determine school attendance zones.”[ 13 ]

Boundaries for public schools have led to significant stratification across income and racial lines among districts, especially in metropolitan areas where racial segregation is heavy in areas that comprise a greater number of school districts, compared with areas with fewer districts.[ 14 ] Economists documented the same pattern of stratification along lines of educational attainment.[ 15 ]

Lingering Racial Achievement Gaps

These segregation patterns are important for policymakers to address, given that public school quality is highly correlated with the racial makeup and wealth of the communities they serve. Consequently, the public K–12 model exacerbates majority-minority and socioeconomic achievement gaps.

Some researchers report narrowing of racial gaps to varying degrees over different study periods.[ 16 ] Research on socioeconomic achievement gaps is more mixed, with studies finding no clear trend, a flat trend, or widening gaps.[ 17 ] Still others report that socioeconomic achievement gaps have grown over the last 25 years.[ 18 ]

M. Danish Shakeel and Paul E. Peterson examined 7 million national norm-referenced tests in math and reading from 160 survey waves comprising cohorts born between 1954 and 2007. They report that young minority students progress at a greater rate than white students, though these differences lessen as students get older. They also report that income gaps among young students narrow, but widen as students get older. The researchers attribute the overall positive progress to a variety of education reform policies, including school choice, school desegregation, school accountability, finance equity, and English language learners (ELL) policies, noting that these policies had their greatest impact on cohorts born after 1990.[ 19 ]

While there is some evidence that racial achievement gaps, as measured by nationally norm-referenced exams, have narrowed, Eric Hanushek notes that minority-majority gaps in college completion have widened. Furthermore, although the present achievement gaps are smaller than for previous decades, they remain substantial. Hanushek estimates that these gaps translate to 10%–13% in lost lifetime earnings and notes that they may be as high as 50% after factoring in the indirect effects of achievement.[ 20 ] Likewise, Bailey and Dynarski report widening socioeconomic gaps in college entry, persistence in college, and college graduation.[ 21 ] The American residential-based system of assigning public schools is an important contributing factor to these gaps, which translates into lost opportunity, and is in direct conflict with the principle of equality of opportunity.[ 22 ]

Intra- and Interdistrict Mobility

Thinking about ways to make school district boundaries less determinative of a child’s educational options would be a good idea—if for no other reason than to try to right these historical wrongs. But there is more to it than that. The story that was told at the beginning of this report, about the Ritenour and Ladue School Districts, could be repeated thousands of times within and between school districts. Getting zoned for a higher-performing school, or just a school that is a better fit for a child and his or her family, can be a great opportunity for a better education. Falling on the wrong side of that zoning line can produce the opposite result.

There have been efforts, if not to eliminate these educational borders, to at least make them more porous. These include intra- and interdistrict choice programs. Intra-district choice allows students to choose among schools within their school district. The most popular iteration of this policy is magnet schools, which, as the name implies, are designed to attract students based on unique offerings. Some magnet schools focus on rigorous academics; others focus on performing arts, science and technology, workforce development, or other specialized offerings. Students have occasionally even been able to cross district lines to attend magnet schools; more commonly, magnet schools are limited to students within a particular school district. Magnet schooling has grown over the past three decades: according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in 1990 there were 1,469 magnet schools across the country, enrolling 1.2 million students. By 2014, that number had increased to 3,285 schools enrolling 2.6 million students.[ 23 ]

Unlike charter schools or traditional public schools, magnet schools are able to set admissions requirements. Sometimes these requirements are formal tests, like the famous Specialized High School Admissions Test to get into one of New York City’s elite academic high schools. Other times, districts have grade-point average (GPA) and behavior requirements—for example, they require that students have not been suspended or subject to serious disciplinary issues before they are admitted. In many magnet schools, applications are considered on a first-come basis, with applications opening on a particular day and motivated parents jockeying to get to the front of the queue. Still others require interviews or parent meetings to ensure that the student is a good fit for the school.

Interdistrict choice, as the name implies, allows students to attend schools outside their traditional district. Historically, interdistrict transfer programs were created to comply with desegregation orders. In districts that were segregated, there were often not enough children of different races to desegregate the schools, so policymakers had to create plans to bring students in from other districts and send students out from the segregated schools. Milwaukee’s Chapter 220 plan is a good example: starting in 1975, it provided for black students in the city to transfer to predominantly white suburban school districts and for white students from the suburbs to transfer into the city’s schools. At its peak in the early 1990s, some 6,000 black students and 1,000 white students availed themselves of the program. It was eventually eclipsed by a broader open enrollment policy without explicit racial qualifications, and the program closed to new students in 2015.[ 24 ]

General open enrollment programs have been growing, and not only in Wisconsin. Arizona, already a hotbed of many forms of school choice, has seen thousands of students take advantage of a state law that allows students to apply for admission to any public school in the state, regardless of where they live. The state does not have data on the total number of students who participate in open enrollment; but in one district alone—Scottsdale Unified—more than 3,800 out-of-district students attend schools, and more than 5,500 Scottsdale students enroll outside their neighborhood school.[ 25 ]

Note the phrase “apply for admission.” As with most open enrollment programs across the country, students are not guaranteed a seat in their school of choice in the way they are in their local zoned school. In most programs, schools and districts have a lot of say in how many students they admit and how easy or difficult it will be for those students to attend. In a 2020 EdChoice report, Michael McShane and Michael Shaw investigated the transportation statutes of every state in the nation and found that while 30 states have some provision for funding interdistrict choice students, most have conditions for receiving that funding. In some states, it is available only for students leaving “failing” schools; in others, it is only for students with special needs. Some require the sending school district to cover the cost; others place that burden on the receiving district. It is a confusing patchwork.[ 26 ]

Limitations and Logistics: What Could Be for Students

Have efforts to poke holes in the borders and barriers that separate children from opportunity been sufficient? It is hard to muster an answer of yes.

Magnet schools and other intra-district programs have been wonderful additions to the offerings of school districts. Because of these programs, millions of children have had the opportunity to attend schools better attuned to their needs and aptitudes. This is a good thing. However, given that these programs purposely put up barriers to admission, they are not a solution for all students. That doesn’t mean that school districts should get rid of magnet schools; quite the contrary. But we do recognize their limitation as a tool for increasing educational opportunity.

It is much the same with open enrollment. Schools and school districts have been able to place restrictions and requirements that have limited who has been able to participate in open enrollment programs, and not all these requirements are unreasonable. For example, providing transportation for students all over a far-flung metro area would be a logistical nightmare. Local communities should have some say in who gets to attend their schools, given that they are largely funded by the community’s property taxes. But all these reasonable considerations conspire to lock out students from opportunities.

In both intra- and interdistrict choice, the district is taken as the foundation and organizing unit for policy, and a series of workarounds are created to try to minimize the role of districts. As we have stated, school districts emerged for good reasons. And, given the heterogeneity of the American landscape, having a lot of school districts is not necessarily bad. School districts can teach differently and learn from one another’s experimentation. Local communities can emphasize what is important to them in their local schools. The problem is that, along with those benefits derived from a district, students suffer from the negative effects of borders. The primary problems have already been identified—especially a lack of exit options for students or teachers (elaborated on below) who are not thriving. Thus, states must create policies to allow some students to transfer between districts and must work out the logistics to make that happen.

That is a clunky way to solve the problem. If we want to diminish the effects of borders, we need to think of organizational structures that don’t have the borders in the first place. These include charter schools, school vouchers, education savings accounts, and the like.

But then comes the question of funding. The real rubber-meets-the-road question of intra- and interdistrict choice comes down to who pays for what and what money goes where. Does the home district of a child pay for the student to attend the out-of-boundary school? Or does the district the child is actually being educated in pay? Who covers transportation? Does a child leaving a traditional school to attend a magnet school mean that the traditional school loses funding? Since a large portion of district budgets comes from locally produced property taxes, citizens want to know what is happening: Why are we paying taxes to a school district if all its students are leaving?

For practical, political, and fairness reasons, trying to move property-tax dollars across taxing jurisdictions should be avoided. Realistically, choice policies that involve students crossing educational barriers should be funded less by locally raised dollars and more by tax revenue collected at the state level. This could look different in different locations, but it could be achieved in a neutral way—for example, a decrease in local property taxes and a concomitant increase in state property taxes. The local property taxes would stay local, but the state property taxes could follow children.

Part II: Homeowners

Despite the increase in schooling choices in the last few decades, American K–12 public education remains a predominantly residential-based assignment system. Under this system, the housing market rations access to high-quality schooling to families who can afford to live in those areas. Homes in areas with more desirable (high-quality) schools tend to have higher values than homes in areas with less desirable (lower-quality) schools. In the lingo of economists, school quality is capitalized into housing values.[ 27 ] This arrangement has led to households sorting across communities based on willingness and ability to pay for school quality.[ 28 ]

Severing (or at least weakening) the link between homes and school assignment is a fraught proposition. School choice could represent widespread wealth redistribution, with homes currently zoned for lower-quality schools becoming more valuable, as the lower-quality schools no longer act as a drag on their value, and those currently zoned for better schools becoming less valuable, as they no longer represent a place in that school. Perhaps some people not currently interested in the idea of choice would become interested if it became a tool for wealth distribution. Those zoned in currently low-performing schools could see a direct financial benefit (assuming that they own their home). On the other hand, many homeowners who might be interested in the idea of choice would surely balk if they heard that doing so might shave value off their house.

But first, it is important to try to determine what, if any, effect school choice has on home prices. For that, we will need to address the academic literature.

Housing Prices and Public School Quality

For most children who attend public schools, the specific school they attend is determined by where they live. Based on the 2019 Parent and Family Involvement in Education Survey of the National Household Education Surveys (NHES) Program, 20% of respondents with K–12-age children indicated that they specifically moved to their current residence so that their child could attend a public school there.[ 29 ] Of parents with a child attending their residentially assigned school, about 80% said that the school was their first choice.[ 30 ] For many families with children, public schools appear central to their decisions on where to live.

The notion that people decide where to live based (at least in part) on the quality and variety of services offered by local governments can be traced back to Charles Tiebout’s 1956 seminal paper.[ 31 ] The phrase “Tiebout choice” is commonly used in education policy to refer to voting with one’s feet. The quality of public schools is grounded in the Tiebout model, where people sort into the communities that provide the bundle of services and taxes that matches their preferences, school quality being a dominant service.

Wallace E. Oates identified the link in Tiebout’s model between housing prices and public school quality.[ 32 ] Schools deemed high quality tend to be in wealthier neighborhoods, while poor-quality schools tend to be in poorer areas. That is, prices for two identical homes can significantly differ based on the homes’ assigned public schools if the quality of those schools differs significantly. The current residential-based assignment system enables this arrangement.

Many factors enter into families’ decisions about where they live and where their children attend school. Determining the potential effects of voucher programs on property values and how families sort after more choice is introduced is complex. Families make these decisions for financial and nonfinancial reasons. Economists have studied the potential effects of weakening the link between residential location and school assignment on income and residential sorting by developing general equilibrium models.[ 33 ] They then calibrate these models to real-world data to simulate the effect of introducing private school voucher programs into the residential-based assignment system.

By weakening the link between home address and school quality, results from these simulations suggest that private school choice programs have the potential to significantly diminish income differences and housing price differences across public school districts. Eric Brunner describes this effect: “By decoupling the link between residential location and school quality, vouchers create an incentive for middle- and high-income families to move to less affluent districts in order to take advantage of lower housing values. As a result, residential income segregation declines, while housing values in low-quality districts rise and housing values in high-quality school districts fall.”[ 34 ]

A growing body of research examines the effects of school choice policies on housing values and confirms the predictions from the general equilibrium simulation studies discussed above. Below, we summarize research that examines the impact of private school voucher programs, public charter schools, intra- and interdistrict choice programs, and magnet schools on housing values.

Housing Prices and Boundary-Breaking Education Programs

Several empirical studies examined the effects of private school voucher programs on property values. Merrifield et al. studied a privately funded voucher program in Texas that operated for 10 years (1998–2008).[ 35 ] They found that the program made the district in which it operated more attractive to homeowners, raising housing prices by up to 9.7% in the program’s first year. These results attenuated in subsequent years, when the program became more restrictive.

A paper by Cannon, Danielsen, and Harrison studied the relationship between Vermont’s town tuition program and property values.[ 36 ] The program is the nation’s oldest voucher program and provides public funding for children living in areas that do not have an assigned public school serving their grade. The researchers examined three years of home sales data (2009–12) and estimated that living in an area that qualified for the program increased home values by 3%–16%.

Empirical studies on the effects of charter school entry on housing prices are somewhat more mixed, compared with the literature on private school choice programs. Buerger examined the effects of charter openings in three urban school districts in upstate New York:[ 37 ] in Syracuse, housing price gaps narrowed between wealthier and poorer areas; in contrast, housing value gaps in Niagara Falls and Ithaca between wealthier and poorer areas increased after charter entry.

Brehm, Imberman, and Naretta studied the effect of charter schools in the Los Angeles metropolitan area and found little evidence that increasing the number of charter schools or expanding charter school enrollment affected housing values.[ 38 ] They found some evidence that housing values in districts outside the Los Angeles Unified school district decreased by 2%.

Andreyeva and Patrick studied charter schools in the Atlanta metropolitan area to discern the impact of charter entry on property values.[ 39 ] Each charter school has at least two priority zones, and because students in priority-one zones have a higher probability of admission to a charter school than students in priority-two zones, they were able to compare the effect between the two areas. The researchers found that after a new charter school opens, housing prices increase by 6%–8% for homes in a priority-one zone, compared with homes in a priority-two zone.

They also found larger gains in areas with lower-quality traditional public schools, suggesting that charter schools weaken the link between home address and school quality and mitigate income stratification.

The various forms of choice within the public school system (interdistrict, intra-district, and magnet programs) appear to affect housing prices. Randall Reback’s study of Minnesota’s interdistrict choice program found that property values increased in districts that sent more students to other districts and decreased in districts that received more transfer students.[ 40 ] Michael Walden’s study of magnet schools in Wake County, North Carolina, found similar results.[ 41 ] In grades with more magnet options, there was less of a local school-quality premium in house prices. Brunner, Cho, and Reback’s study of 12 states with mandatory interdistrict choice programs between 1989 and 1998 also confirmed these results. Their empirical models showed that interdistrict choice programs, on average, increased home values and average income by 5.2% and 3.0%, respectively, for districts that sent students to other districts. Moreover, interdistrict choice induces about 3.2% of households to move.[ 42 ]

Researchers have recently examined the effects of school choice policies on how families sort across neighborhoods. Francis Pearman and Walker Swain studied the effects of open enrollment programs, voucher programs, charter schools, and magnet schools on the likelihood of neighborhood gentrification between 1999 and 2012. The authors found that “the expansion of school choice substantially weakens the relationship between a neighborhood’s racial composition and its likelihood of gentrification, such that the likelihood of gentrification in racially isolated neighborhoods of color increases by up to 22 percentage points—roughly twice the baseline likelihood for such communities—after the expansion of school choice.”[ 43 ]

School Spending Will Not Solve Stratification

Following the California school finance case Serrano v. Priest in 1971, states passed a slate of school finance reforms (SFRs) over the ensuing decades in an attempt to equalize school funding. The logic at the time was that school spending varied considerably across districts because it was heavily determined by a district’s local property wealth, and families sorted in ways that led to considerable segregation in schools, based on income, such that children from wealthy families could access higher-quality schools while less wealthy families enrolled their children in lower-quality schools. SFRs would reduce funding disparities across districts and therefore weaken incentives for families to sort across districts by income.

Researchers have studied this area and found weak evidence that SFRs equalize school quality and mitigate stratification of households by income.[ 44 ] Results of these studies suggest that equalizing school funding is unlikely to equalize school quality and therefore unlikely to mitigate residential stratification. School spending is just one of several factors of school quality that correlate with income.[ 45 ] More importantly, SFRs appear not to have had their desired effect because they failed to change the current system of residential-based school assignment. Therefore, states wanting to mitigate these patterns and equalize opportunity have considered other policies that weaken or sever the link between residence and school quality. For example, states have considered policies to expand educational options for families via various school choice programs, such as private school choice policies, intra- and interdistrict choice, charter schools, and magnet schools.

Reform Can Raise All Households: What Could Be for Homeowners

Under the current model of public schooling based on residential location, racial and socioeconomic segregation has increased, racial and socioeconomic achievement gaps have increased, and inequity of opportunity has increased for more disadvantaged families. These trends would likely reverse in a world without educational borders. Economic theory and empirical research suggest that removing borders will weaken the link between housing values and school quality. Thus, housing price disparities across school districts would narrow. Wealthier families would face stronger incentives to move into lower-quality school districts in order to take advantage of lower housing prices. This would lead to an increase in overall income, housing prices, and population in low-quality districts.[ 46 ]

That said, research shows that the availability of choice programs increases housing values in general. Looking at the various studies of private school choice programs, it is clear that offering a wider set of choices to families can make a state or district more attractive to potential homeowners.[ 47 ] If moving to a particular state or district means that families would have the opportunity to choose between traditional public, charter, and private schools with state support, that would have an overall positive impact on home values, regardless of what parents end up choosing.

Part III: Teachers

Most people do not realize that teachers are affected by borders, as well, though not in quite the same way as students or homeowners. Teacher pension systems are typically statewide, except in cases such as Missouri, where St. Louis and Kansas City have their own pension systems. Teachers can typically move among districts within a system without facing a financial penalty; but if they move across a pension border (such as from St. Louis [city] to St. Louis County), across state lines, or to a private sector, they face a stiff financial penalty. Pensions are a huge, but underdiscussed, element of teacher compensation.

Pensions: Good for the Teacher, or Good for the System?

Most pension plans favor teachers who remain in a single system for a full career (until they reach retirement eligibility) and penalize teachers who don’t remain in a system long enough to reach key retirement eligibility landmarks (because they leave the system early or because they enter too late).

If the policy goal for teacher retirement systems is to ensure that all teachers who teach under a single retirement system for an entire career are on a path to a secure retirement, then most public school teacher pension plans are meeting the objective.[ 48 ] If the goal, however, is to ensure that all teachers are on a path to a secure retirement, then most pension plans for public school teachers are missing the mark.

Equable Institute created the “Retirement Security Report” to assess the quality of retirement benefits provided to public-sector workers nationwide. If we focus only on findings for public school teachers, who constitute the largest group of the public-sector worker population, we can assess whether they meet the goal of providing a secure retirement. Equable measured certain components and parameters of retirement plans against widely accepted benchmarks, standards, and best practices.[ 49 ] It scored each retirement plan (there are 63 plans) for different types of workers: short-term workers, medium-term workers, and full-career workers. Short-term workers are those who remain in a single retirement plan for 10 years or less. Medium-term workers remain in single retirement plan for 10–20 years. Full-career workers work under a retirement plan until they reach normal retirement eligibility.

Most retirement plans that cover public school teachers (55 plans of 63) serve all teachers who remain in the plan for a full career well ( Figure 1 ). For teachers who remain in a retirement plan for 10–20 years, only five plans serve those members well, while 33 plans serve these members moderately well and 25 plans do not serve them well. For teachers who leave before staying 10 years with the plan, a mere two plans out of 63 serve teachers well, while 49 plans do not serve these members well.

How Well State-Sponsored Public Pension Plans Serve Teachers, by Career Duration

How can so many teachers be so poorly served? One major reason is pension borders. Pension borders imply entry and exit from a single retirement system. One way these borders manifest is as physical boundaries, such as state or district borders. Every state provides a retirement plan for its public school teachers; thus, when teachers cross a state to teach in another public school, they cross a pension border. Cities in some states have their own retirement systems for public school employees, such as the separate systems in Missouri, mentioned above.

Pension borders may also be invisible, such as when teachers traverse sectors. For instance, whenever teachers move from a public school to any nonpublic school setting or vice versa, they cross a pension border because they enter or leave a public retirement system.

Most educators don’t remain in a single system long enough to reach normal retirement eligibility, but most pension plans are antiquated and designed to benefit workers who do remain in a single retirement system for a full career. Full-career teachers represent a minority of all educators who enter these systems. For most teachers (i.e., those who are not full-career teachers), most retirement plans don’t serve them well.

Financial Penalties on Teachers

Pension borders place a wedge in the labor market for teachers and other K–12 workers. By design, typical pension plans, called defined-benefit (DB) plans, create strong incentives for workers to remain in a single system for an entire career and to leave after a certain point.

Economists Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky demonstrate that these strong pull-and-push incentives stem from the backloading nature of these plans.[ 50 ] Specifically, typical DB plans create strong financial incentives for teachers to remain in a system until arbitrary points in their career. These plans also have strong incentives for teachers to exit at arbitrary points, ignoring or overriding teachers’ actual life circumstances that might cause them to leave teaching earlier or to remain teaching longer.

Since traditional DB plans were originally designed to keep workers in a system for a full career, they weren’t designed with the best interests of mobile teachers in mind. Costrell and Podgursky illustrate how traditional DB plans impose significant fiscal penalties on mobile teachers.[ 51 ] They examined six state-sponsored teacher pension plans and showed that teachers who split their career in two different systems lose, on average, about half the retirement benefits that they would have accrued had they worked under one system for the same number of years.[ 52 ]

Even if a teacher works in a public sector for an entire career, she still faces steep penalties if she crosses a pension border before qualifying for full retirement benefits. For example, a teacher under Missouri’s state pension plan who leaves after 15 years and continues working in a different system until age 55 will lose 65% of the pension wealth that she would have accrued had she stayed in the same system for the same number of years.[ 53 ]

For a typical teacher in the largest school district in each state plus D.C., Martin Lueken compared the value of pension wealth accrual with the value of the teacher’s contributions.[ 54 ] The median crossover point (the point when the value of benefits exceed contributions) for a representative teacher emerges 25 years after starting work in the system. That means that teachers in more than half the 51 districts must wait at least 25 years before their pension benefit is worth more than their own contributions.[ 55 ] For 35 of these districts, nearly 75% of teachers will leave before reaching the crossover point.[ 56 ] Thus, based on how retirement systems valuate benefits, most teachers do not see a return on their contributions for decades.

Pension borders affect all public workers, not just teachers, although teachers represent the largest group and are obviously a critical part of educating students. School leaders represent another important piece of the K–12 education puzzle. Cory Koedel et al. estimate that migration of Missouri public school leaders would increase 97%–163% if pension borders were removed.[ 57 ]

Pension Portability: What Could Be for Teachers

Policymakers can take several steps to break down pension barriers. Better pensions for teachers would have three key features. First, they would work well for both full-career and non-full-career teachers. Second, they would not have the arbitrary pull-and-push incentives that the current system features. Finally, and most importantly, they would be more portable.

Pensions that work well for both full-career and non-full-career teachers would first have to eliminate vesting requirements. If teachers do not qualify for a pension until they reach five years of service, axiomatically every teacher who spends less than five years in service loses. Teachers should earn contributions to their pensions from the day that they start teaching.

But it isn’t just vesting that harms non-full-career teachers. The jagged accumulation of pension wealth that grows slowly at first, only to rapidly accelerate at certain key milestones, and then plateau between them harms teachers who leave at inopportune times. These are the pull-and-push incentives that pull teachers to stay teaching until they hit a key pension-wealth milestone and then push them out immediately afterward by not increasing pension wealth for several years. These incentives need to go. Pension contributions should be smooth throughout a teacher’s time of service.

Retirement plans are arranged in complex and varied ways. From the teacher’s perspective, it is possible to design good as well as bad plans, regardless of type. Most, but not all, DB plans are structured poorly. However, South Dakota and Wisconsin are examples of plans that do work well for most teachers because of the level of portability provided to members. States should introduce more portability in retirement benefits for teachers. The next section suggests options for achieving this portability.

Part IV: Policy Solutions

The argument of this report is not that we should do away with school districts, which offer several useful and important functions for the American education system. Rather, we want to alter the way this schooling system functions, in order to maximize the benefits of the district-centric way of organizing schools and to minimize its downsides.

To show what this solution might look like—at least for students—consider Arizona, one of the most choice-rich states in the union. Arizona recognizes the need for policies within and without the traditional public school sector.

Arizona has led the nation in private school choice. The state has five private school choice programs, including four tax-credit scholarship programs that reward individuals and corporations that donate to organizations that grant scholarships to K–12 students, and an education savings account program that was recently expanded to allow any student in the state to participate.[ 58 ]

Arizona has also led the nation in promoting charter schooling. More than 230,000 students attend more than 550 charter schools in Arizona, and it is the birthplace of several popular charter school networks, such as BASIS and Great Hearts.[ 59 ] It has the largest market share for charter schools of any state in the union (excluding Washington, D.C.).

But its success isn’t only outside the traditional public school system. Arizona is leading the nation in promoting choice within the traditional public school system as well. Students are free to enroll in any school district that they wish, even if they do not live within the district’s boundaries.[ 60 ] Districts are required to educate all the students within their borders, but they are also required to create an open enrollment plan for any schools, grades, or programs that have excess capacity. Schools must be transparent about their capacity and post on their website what grades and programs have available space. Students interested in applying to a grade or program that is full must be placed on a waiting list that has an equitable selection process (like a lottery). Districts are not required to provide transportation. While schools cannot deny students based on academic performance, they do have some ability to restrict enrollment based on a student’s disciplinary record (they do not have to enroll a student who has been expelled from another school, for instance). Arizona does not provide much information on how many students take advantage of this program statewide, but researchers looking at Arizona’s largest county, Maricopa, found that about 37% of students there were taking advantage of the open enrollment program in 2017.[ 61 ]

Arizona school districts are still free to operate as they wish, design schools the way that they want to, compensate teachers as they desire, and perform all the other functions of a typical school district.

What has this meant for Arizona homeowners? According to census data released in 2022, Arizona was home to five of the 15 fastest-growing cities in the nation last year—in a time when almost half the cities in the U.S. with a population greater than 50,000 lost population. Buckeye, a city with fewer than 7,000 people in 2000, now has more than 100,000, and Maricopa County (where Phoenix is located) was the fastest-growing county in the nation.[ 62 ] While we cannot attribute all this growth to changes in school policy, Arizona clearly is an in-demand place to live, which is beneficial for people who own homes there.

Unfortunately, we don’t have a paradigmatic exemplar for more porous teacher policies.

Like the current residential-based assignment system of public schooling, many public-employee retirement systems favor some groups of teachers over others. Historically, pension plans have been designed to reward and prioritize teachers who remain teaching in a single system for a full career over teachers who move across or out of a system. Most states offer one type of plan, and most of those plans lack portability. Only a handful of states offer teachers the option to choose from different types of plans.

Ohio is a good example of a state that offers benefit choice for teachers (rather than simply a DB plan). Ohio teachers can choose to enroll in a final-salary DB plan, a hybrid plan, or a defined-contribution (DC) plan. This allows teachers to choose the plan that best meets their circumstances. Teachers who desire to work in Ohio public schools for their entire career have the option of choosing the DB plan, which is designed to reward long-termers. Some teachers, however, may be uncertain about working in Ohio public schools for a full career. Perhaps, at some time later in their career, they might want to move out of state to be nearer to family. Perhaps they are open to working in other educational sectors, such as in private schools. Perhaps they want to start their own school.[ 63 ] Whatever their circumstances, these teachers may be better served by enrolling in plans that provide greater portability, such as a hybrid plan or DC plan.

Offering several plans is not the only way to provide teachers with greater portability. Plan design matters more than plan type.[ 64 ] South Dakota is a good illustration: teachers hired on or after July 1, 2017, enroll in a hybrid plan.[ 65 ] Teachers who retire at normal or early retirement ages collect a pension benefit plus the balance of their personal Variable Retirement Account (VRA). Teachers who leave before reaching key career retirement ages, on the other hand, usually face the choice of receiving a refund benefit or receiving a deferred benefit in the future. Early leavers in South Dakota are likely to recoup more funds, compared with other early leavers in many other states. This is because South Dakota teachers who opt for a refund benefit have access to a portion of the employer contributions.[ 66 ] Early leavers in most other states can receive a refund of only their contributions. They cannot access any employer contributions.

South Dakota also provides a provision for deferred benefits not seen in many other state-sponsored teacher pension plans. Under the typical DB plan, deferred benefits are based on the final average salary (FAS) when the teacher left. The FAS amount remains frozen from the time of exit. Consequently, the effects of inflation decrease the value of a teacher’s benefit the longer she is out of the system. South Dakota increases the FAS by a cost-of-living adjustment, therefore affording some protection against inflation. This measure allows retirement for early leavers to be on more solid footing, compared with other states.

A borderless K–12 education system—or, at least, a system that allowed for more flexibility for students, homeowners, and teachers—would present a mix of opportunities and challenges. Students would have more opportunities as to where to go to school and would no longer be stuck in schools that are lower quality, or just not the right fit, simply because they live in the school’s catchment area. Teachers would have much more flexibility in where and for how long they work, without worrying about losing valuable pension wealth by moving from system to system or into and out of the education sector. Homeowners would no longer have to worry about school quality as an element of their household value, a major element of household wealth in America.

At the same time, students, teachers, and homeowners would face challenges, and advocates of a less bordered system should be forthcoming about those challenges. Picking a school will become much more complicated. Rather than simply going to the nearby public school, students and their parents would need to research various school options, figure out how to get to and from the schools, and find out how to apply for admission. An administrative burden would be placed on the system as well, as school leaders try to figure out the fairest way to allocate seats in desirable schools. Teachers, too, would be giving up the stability of DB pensions, which, as we have freely admitted, are a great deal for teachers who teach in the same system for their entire career.[ 67 ] For approximately 80% of teachers, the math might work out to a worse deal. Finally, some houses that have capitalized the quality of local schools into their value would possibly lose value as a result of a more porous border into that school. This would most likely be offset by other homes gaining value, since they no longer carry the burden of lower-quality schools in their value; but for those people who have bought houses in order to be assigned to good schools, this could represent a hit to their wealth.

Life is about weighing costs and benefits. There would clearly be costs in moving to a K–12 system with fewer borders. Those costs would, however, be outweighed by the benefits that we have outlined here. In aggregate, a more borderless K–12 system would be better for students, teachers, and homeowners.

About the Authors

Martin F. Lueken is director of EdChoice’s Fiscal Research and Education Center (FREC), where he focuses on research and analysis of issues that pertain to school choice bills, current programs, and school funding. He has provided expert testimony and advice about fiscal issues for numerous states that have introduced education choice legislation. Lueken’s work has been cited in various media and education-specific outlets, including the New York Times , the Wall Street Journal , Education Next , Education Week , and The 74 .

Michael Q. McShane is director of national research at EdChoice. He is the author, coauthor, editor, or coeditor of 11 books on education. His analyses and commentary have been published widely in the media, including in the Wall Street Journal , National Affairs , USA Today , and the Washington Post . McShane has been featured in education-specific outlets such as Teachers College Commentary , Education Week , Phi Delta Kappan , and Education Next . In addition to authoring numerous white papers, he has had academic work published in Education Finance and Policy and Journal of School Choice .

Please see Endnotes in PDF

Are you interested in supporting the Manhattan Institute’s public-interest research and journalism? As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, donations in support of MI and its scholars’ work are fully tax-deductible as provided by law (EIN #13-2912529).

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, education without boundaries: questioning and exploring a values-based culture in a transdisciplinary international postgraduate community.

Worldviews and Values in Higher Education

ISBN : 978-1-80262-898-2 , eISBN : 978-1-80262-897-5

Publication date: 20 March 2024

This chapter discusses the process of initiating and developing an open and ongoing conversation about values within a doctoral community in an education research center located within a British university. To do this, the authors first articulate the local and institutional context of this specific doctoral community and the intersections of values declared by the host institution and the specific research center.

This chapter then moves on to describing the process of building an open conversation with postgraduate researchers (PGRs) and staff supporting them. This open conversation questions and explores the institutionally stated values, starting from collaboratively negotiated guiding questions and prompts. The discussion of responses to those prompts, obtained through an anonymous online platform, grounds then a discussion of how values can become relevant and rooted in everyday experience for PGRs. The authors, as a collective, use the concept of “boundaries,” emerged in the conversations themselves but also relevant in academic literature, as a linking concept for the discussion of the responses.

The discussion then concludes by articulating the broader impact of the engagement in these conversations about values within and beyond the boundaries of the host institution and argues for the importance of such ongoing conversations as fundamental elements of fostering value-based communities and cultures in higher education contexts.

Learning community
Postgraduate studies
Collaboration

Morini, L. , Enderby, J. , Dawson, M. , Gokhool, F. , Johnson, E.E. , Rashid, S. and King, V. (2024), "Education Without Boundaries: Questioning and Exploring a Values-Based Culture in a Transdisciplinary International Postgraduate Community", Rao, M.B. , Singh, A. and Rao, P.M. (Ed.) Worldviews and Values in Higher Education ( Global Perspectives on Higher Education Development ), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 169-183. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-897-520241012

Emerald Publishing Limited

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

Teaching without boundaries: interviews exploring the adaptation of collaborative inquiry to the American context

Olivia G. Carr Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Xiu Cravens Roles: Conceptualization, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing

collaboration, teachers, inquiry, policy adoption, TPEG, lesson study

Described pathways of local adaptation towards building the necessary structure for disciplined collaborative inquiry.

Identified action steps related to instructional leadership central to the implementation and sustainability of school-level initiatives.

Reviewed the essential objectives of building a professional knowledge base for teaching.

Introduction

The past few decades have revealed growing interests in fostering teacher collaboration to improve instruction and student learning ( Achinstein, 2002 ; Bond, 2014 ; Bruce et al. , 2016 ; Goddard et al. , 2007 ). However, too often, collaboration initiatives fail to take root in the day-to-day operation of schools ( Giles & Hargreaves, 2006 ; Sindelar et al. , 2006 ; Zech et al. , 2000 ). This phenomenon has prompted questions about the necessary organizational conditions and decision-making processes for successful local adoption and adaptation of educational reforms over time.

The purpose of this study is to provide insight into the efforts of implementing teacher-led collaborative inquiry – defined as teachers engaging in consistent and critical inquiry of their teaching practice ( Butler & Schnellert, 2012 ; Morris & Hiebert, 2011 ) – as a driving mechanism for instructional improvement in American public schools. We aim to capture the nuances in teaching culture and organizational structure, identify the action steps essential to introducing and sustaining school-level initiatives, understand the role of instructional leadership, and explore how variations in decision-making influence local adoption and adaptation.

We focus on a model called Teacher Peer Excellence Group (TPEG), which was intentionally designed to capture the essence of the Japanese lesson study and Chinese teaching-study groups ( Fujii, 2016 ; Huang & Shimizu, 2016 ; Jensen et al. ; Lewis et al. , 2006 ), and modified for the American educational context ( Cravens & Drake, 2017 ). Teachers in this model lead subject-specific collaborative inquiry cycles. Each cycle involves lesson planning, peer observation, feedback, and revision of lesson plans. Drawn from prior literature on situated learning and communities of practice ( Hiebert et al. , 2002 ; Wenger & Snyder, 2000 ), the TPEG model aims to build a professional knowledge base for teachers that has three key signposts: (1) deprivatized practice, (2) storable and shareable teaching materials, and (3) a mechanism for verification and improvement.

We explore the fertile ground for follow-up research where, five years after the initial implementation of TPEGs in 27 schools from six districts in Tennessee, the pilot schools have taken different paths in how they integrate the model into the existing organizational structures and routines. Specifically, we conduct case studies in three schools that have adopted the TPEG model to varying extents in different settings. We ask two research questions: (1) What action steps were taken by schools to adopt and sustain collaborative inquiry cycles? (2) Compared to the theory of change of how TPEG was intended to work, what local adaptations were made to the TPEG model and why?

Using qualitative analysis, we identify five action steps related to instructional leadership that were central to the implementation and sustainability of collaborative inquiry in these schools: forming collaborative teams; scheduling collaborative time; learning to collaborate; setting expectations for collaboration, and cultivating buy-in. We also describe how teachers and school administrators interpreted and adapted each aspect of the collaborative inquiry process, with particular emphasis on if and how they align with the theoretical framing of collaborative inquiry.

From collaborative inquiry to instructional improvement

Collaborative inquiry cycles.

Studies on teacher practice point to teacher-led collaborative inquiry as a promising form of in-service professional development ( Akiba & Wilkinson, 2016 ; Cravens et al. , 2017 ; Cravens & Hunter, 2021 ; Goddard et al. , 2007 ; Huang & Shimizu, 2016 ; Lewis, 2015 ; Saunders et al. , 2009 ). The conceptualization of collaborative inquiry is grounded in the socio-constructivist model of self-regulated learning ( Butler & Cartier, 2004 ; Butler & Schnellert, 2012 ) and situated learning theory ( Wenger et al. , 2002 ). Applied to teaching, prior research suggests that self-regulation and meaningful change occur when teachers engage in recursive cycles of goal-directed, job-embedded, ongoing, and critical inquiry of practice ( Butler & Schnellert, 2012 ; Bryk et al. , 2015 ; Gallimore et al. , 2009 ; Morris & Hiebert, 2011 ). In inquiry models, teacher teams are trained to participate in iterative cycles that involve setting instructional goals, lesson planning, implementing the lesson plan, observing peers teaching, and monitoring learning results. Furthermore, subsequent cycles of collaborative inquiry are informed by findings from previous cycles.

Collaborative inquiry on instructional practice occurs mostly outside the United States. The Japanese lesson study model was one of the first to be introduced to the United States in the 1990s ( Hiebert et al. , 1999 ) as a model of action research that facilitated teacher enactment of ambitious instruction with the potential to scale up effective teaching aligned with external standards ( Hiebert et al. , 2002 ; Lewis et al. , 2006 ; Lewis, 2015 ). Studies have also associated the “teaching-study groups” in Shanghai with high student achievement while maintaining a low correlation between socioeconomic status and academic proficiency ( Jensen et al. , 2016 ; OECD, 2011 ; Tucker, 2014 ; Wang, 2013 ; Yang, 2008 ).

The theory of change for the collaborative inquiry model (see Figure 1 ) highlights three requirements to transform what teachers gain from day-to-day practice to a professional knowledge base ( Hiebert et al. , 2002 ; Stigler & Hiebert, 2016 ): (1) Teachers make their practice public through collaborative lesson planning, peer observations, and peer feedback; (2) the materials and expertise gathered during inquiry cycles are cumulative, accessible, and shareable to other teachers so that teachers do not have to “reinvent the wheel” for each new teaching assignment; (3) there is a mechanism for validating improvement by experts and peers. To reach these objectives, the teaching-study groups China are typically organized by subject and grade level, led by teachers with content and pedagogical expertise. Teams then engage in weekly inquiry cycles of lesson planning, peer observation, feedback, and lesson revision ( Cravens & Wang, 2017 ; Wang, 2013 ).

Figure 1. the TPEG collaborative inquiry cycle.

Enabling conditions for professional development.

Prior research on in-service professional development highlights several vital organizational conditions that are associated with success and sustainability: instructional leadership, professional community, trust, and teacher efficacy.

Instructional leadership. Leaders are key stakeholders who affect student learning by making numerous daily decisions. They influence the school organization and the people within it, including (re)designing the structure of the school, shaping expectations and school culture, developing teachers’ pedagogical and content knowledge, and cultivating professional communities ( Coburn, 2001 ; Goldring et al. , 2009 ; Leithwood et al. , 2004 ; Printy, 2008 ; ten Bruggencate et al. , 2012 ; Youngs & King, 2002 ). Principals who focus specifically on improving classroom practices are considered ‘instructional leaders’ ( Hallinger & Heck, 2010 ). Instructional leaders can use their influence to shape structural factors, such as time, that are necessary to support collaborative inquiry cycles and direct teacher efforts toward student learning. Using a meta-analysis, Robinson et al. (2008) find that instructional leadership has a stronger influence on student outcomes than do other types of leadership, such as transformational leadership, for which leaders focus on inspiring staff to better engage with their work.

Professional community. A schoolwide professional community consists of teachers who frequently interact using a set of shared norms about improving teaching and learning. More specifically, teachers in professional communities reflect on instructional practices and student learning, observe each other’s teaching practices, problem solve together, and share work through peer collaboration ( Bryk et al. , 1999 ). In a study of 24 schools, Louis et al. (1996) find that professional communities have a positive relationship to teachers taking responsibility for student learning, and Louis and Marks (1998) report that professional communities positively affect classroom organization and student academic performance.

Trust. Bryk and Schneider (2002) and Louis (2006) argue that trust within schools is essential to facilitate daily practice and improvement measures. They write that trust between faculty members in a school is built on respect, competence, a personal regard for other people, integrity, and agreement on issues such as what students should learn and how teachers should instruct and behave. Effective principals can improve their schools by building trust between their teachers ( Hoy & Tschannen-Moran, 2007 ; Youngs & King, 2002 ), or teachers can develop trust themselves over time in a way that allows them to work together well and take full advantage of the benefits that can come from collaborative inquiry cycles.

Teacher efficacy. Teachers who believe they can positively affect student learning are more likely to engage in collaboration for instructional improvement ( Bruce & Ross, 2008 ; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001 ). Pedagogical efficacy means that teachers feel they can successfully integrate new practices, like collaborative inquiry cycles, into their regular practice ( Bandura et al. , 1999 ). Bandura et al. (1999) asserts that teachers use four types of information to shape their efficacy: (a) mastery experience – the perception that their teaching has been successful through their own experiences; (b) vicarious experiences – teaching experiences successfully (or unsuccessfully) modeled by someone else; (c) social persuasion – encouragement and/or specific feedback to teachers about their teaching; (d) affective states – anxiety or excitement related to teaching, perhaps from receiving results on a recent standardized test. Collective efficacy, therefore, is achieved when a group of teachers believe that they have the power to affect and teach students. Goddard et al. (2000) add that teachers analyze the teaching task and assess their collective teaching competence to shape whether they think they will be successful. Collective teacher efficacy leads to teachers more purposefully working to pursue common goals and enhance student learning ( Goddard et al. , 2000 ).

Challenges to implementation

Prior research finds that existing structural and cultural norms in schools can make or break the introduction of change to teacher practices ( Coburn, 2005 ; Huang & Shimizu, 2016 ; Jensen et al. , 2016 ; Rose, 1991 ). Too often implementers of new models fail to garner the buy-in of stakeholders, contextualize imported practices, or weigh tradeoffs in adaptation ( Akiba & Wilkinson, 2016 ; McDonald, 2012 ).

Taking the cognitive approach to study reform implementation, researchers argue that school administrators and teachers draw on their own knowledge to interpret and translate imported approaches and are likely to make modifications and create incremental change – a sensemaking process ( Coburn, 2005 ; Spillane et al. , 2002 ). For example, Roehrig et al. (2007) use mixed methods to examine 27 high school chemistry teachers as they implemented a new curriculum. They report that teachers’ beliefs and preferences for their teaching and the presence or lack of a supportive network within their schools had a strong influence on implementation. In particular, teachers who primarily used inquiry-based teaching made the transition to the new curriculum more smoothly than teachers who primarily used traditional teaching methods (with instructor-directed lessons that focused on lectures and worksheets), and the most effective support for the new curriculum came from school administrators when they met with teachers to discuss student learning.

Groves et al. (2016) examine the lesson study model in three Australian schools. The collaborative teams were tasked with implementing structured problem-solving lessons, and they found success in deep lesson planning, allowing large numbers of participants to observe their classes, and insight from the “knowledgeable other.” However, the teachers had difficulty matching the Japanese problem solving lesson structure with the prescribed Australian curriculum and mirroring the Japanese model because of the Australian teaching culture that emphasizes small group instruction rather than whole class teaching.

Studies also show that stakeholders’ sensemaking about change is influenced by the conditions and organizational structure in their schools ( Ketelaar et al. , 2012 ; Ng & Tan. 2009 ). For example, Akiba and Wilkinson (2016) use extensive mixed method research to describe how the implementation of the lesson study model was limited to shortened and simplified versions in Florida. They find that implementation was hampered by the lack of systemic capacity building for key stakeholders to understand the importance of integrating the new model with the existing organizational structures and routines of teacher professional development.

Intentional and continuous local adaptation is also necessary. McLaughlin (1987) describes implementation as “a process of bargaining or negotiation” (pg. 175), with policies adapting to the local context and the site adapting to the reform, sometimes called mutual adaptation. Adoption of a new practice should therefore include “additional, individual teacher-directed design, fitting, and adaptation for local circumstances” ( Barab & Luehmann, 2003 , p. 464), while still maintaining the integrity of the reform. As an example, Spillane (1999) examines the responses of nine local education agencies (LEAs) to state standards reforms and find that the LEAs adopted the new standards easily but overly adapted the more complex and newer characteristics of the reforms, which led to procedural compliance instead of substantive compliance and change. Local adaptation without losing substance is therefore important to the success and sustainability of new practices.

Teacher peer excellence group (TPEG)

In 2013, researchers from American and Chinese universities designed the TPEG model based on the principles of the Japanese lesson study and Shanghai teaching-study groups ( Jensen et al. , 2016 ; Lewis et al. , 2006 ; Wang, 2013 ) with flexibility for local adaptation. There are four steps to each cycle:

(1) Lesson planning: The TPEG chooses the particular concept or lesson to cover. The teachers pull from resources (including, preferably, a shared repository of lessons) and their own expertise and experiences to plan the lesson collaboratively.

(2) Observation: One or two teachers then teach the lesson for others to observe. Importantly, the teachers are observing to evaluate the lesson, not the teacher. Ideally, a content and pedagogical focus has been identified through lesson planning, and the observers use an agreed-upon rubric that measures instructional quality.

(3) Feedback: Peer feedback focuses specifically on the targeted instructional objectives, the successes and challenges of the lesson, and how to best improve on these.

(4) Revision: The feedback session directly feeds into improving the lesson for future use. If every teacher in the TPEG has not yet taught the lesson, the remaining teachers will teach the revised lesson. This might trigger another round of feedback and revision of the lesson. After multiple trials, teachers then store the lesson and accompanying notes in a way that is accessible by other teachers and in future years.

The TPEG collaboration model was piloted in volunteer schools across six districts (18 schools) in Tennessee in the 2013–2014 school year, and nine additional schools were added for the 2014–2015 year. Principals and teachers in pilot schools received training on TPEGs, protocols for conducting meetings, and a template to plan and document inquiry cycles. To start, principals worked with the research team to identify two TPEGs in each school, preferably organized by subject matter or grade level. The principals then spent a week in Shanghai observing and discussing the local version of the teaching-study groups in a wide variety of schools. Upon their return, principals were encouraged to work with their TPEGs and develop collaborative inquiry cycles to best fit the structure and needs of their own schools.

The research team intentionally designed the implementation of TPEGs to be flexible in how each pilot school would conduct their inquiry cycles, as long the cycles were ongoing, completed with the four key steps, and used the state teacher evaluation rubric as the inquiry focus. During the first two years, the collaborative inquiry cycles varied from one to six weeks in the pilot schools. This loose-tight design, with flexibility in all but a few very important aspects, was chosen to provide sufficient protocol and discipline to the collaborative inquiry while ensuring that it was adaptive to local conditions and needs. Principals and TPEG teachers took the lead in deciding team formations and the logistics for inquiry cycles.

Grant funded technical support for the pilot schools ended in the summer of 2015. Since then, follow-ups by the research team have shown that there had been large variations in how pilot schools engaged in these disciplined collaborative inquiry cycles. For the TPEG model to have a more significant impact on instructional improvement, an in-depth exploration was needed to understand how schools addressed the challenges of structure, culture, and resources to implement the TPEG model. This study seeks to fill that gap by providing a formal examination into these issues.

Study settings

We used purposive sampling to select three schools that had various levels of success in implementing and sustaining collaborative inquiry cycles as prescribed by the TPEG model. These schools also vary by urbanicity, size, and demographics, as shown in Table 1 . These three schools were sufficiently different to provide a range of experiences with and insights into the TPEG pilot, so no further schools were necessary to recruit.

Table 1. School characteristics for sample schools.

Elwood Elementary School	Granville Elementary School	Clark Middle School
Urban	Rural	Rural
Kindergarten to 5 grade	Prekindergarten to 4 grade	5 to 8 grade
50 teachers	20 teachers	35 teachers
1000 students	400 students	800 students
85% white, 10% economically disadvantaged	90% white, 30% economically disadvantaged	90% white, 20% economically disadvantaged
45 minutes per day	50 minutes per day	90 minutes per day
N/A	25 minutes 4x per week	45 minutes per day

Sources: State Report Card (n.d.) and interviews

All three schools are located in Tennessee, where the average student test scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress are average or below average compared to those of other states but are improving quickly over time ( SCORE, 2019 ). 1 Tennessee has also implemented several state initiatives since 2013 that seek to improve teacher performance through stronger in-service development, including one relevant for this study, the Instructional Partnership Initiative (IPI). IPI is a voluntary program that pairs teachers based on their strengths and weaknesses in their teacher evaluations and/or principal recommendations so teachers can learn from each other ( TDOE, 2017 ). The concurrent implementation of an initiative with similar objectives but different approaches from the TPEG model added to the complexity of local implementation.

The first school, Elwood Elementary, is in an urban county, and it was recognized by the state prior to this study for improvements in student achievement, closing achievement gaps, and teacher value added. Starting in the 2013–2014 school year, two grade-level TPEGs were added each year until every grade level had a TPEG. These teams met weekly to complete inquiry cycles lasting two weeks. For five years, official TPEG cycles occurred at various frequencies each year, though TPEG cycles were abandoned during data collection for this study, due to an increase in discipline problems at the school.

The second school, Granville Elementary School, in a different rural County, did not sustain the TPEGs in their original form but had success in modifying the model. The school piloted the TPEGs starting in 2014-2015 with two teams that were vertically aligned, meaning teams spanned grade levels. These teams did TPEG cycles once per semester for two years before the school switched to a collaborative practice that evolved out of TPEG. Granville Elementary had required collaboration, and teachers also participated in IPI, the state peer observation initiative. While IPI observations were not connected to specific lessons, as they were with TPEG, the two models share certain characteristics of collaborative inquiry. It is therefore informative to examine why this observation-focused model has been sustained at Granville for several years, whereas collaborative inquiry observations have not.

The third school, Clark Middle School, fully implemented collaborative planning schoolwide. It is of note that Granville Elementary School and Clark Middle School are within the same county and therefore under the same school system. Spearheaded by an assistant principal, the school started the TPEG model with two subject-specific teams in 2013–2014. In the second year, the principal decided to expand TPEG so it could benefit more students at once. The school leadership team restructured the master schedule to allow for 45 minutes of mandatory collaborative planning time every day, though teachers ceased peer observations. The school frequently hosts educators from across the state who observe and ask questions about their collaborative practices.

Data Collection and Analysis

We employed a case-study design to qualitatively examine these complex and dynamic school settings. Data collection took place from the spring of 2018 to the fall of 2019. After pilot interviews, interviews and observations were conducted in-person at Granville and Clark and by phone 2 at Elwood. A convenience sample of teachers were selected based on their availability before school, after school, or during planning periods. This allowed for some stratification by grade, as each team had common plan times that were used for observations and interviews. Interviews were recorded and lasted from four to 55 minutes, and observations were approximately 30 minutes each. Respondents who participated in shorter interviews seemed comfortable speaking to the interviewer and responded in similar ways to their peers. At Elwood, four teachers declined to be interviewed, though more did not answer a recruitment email. At Granville, two teachers declined to be interviewed, both because they were too busy at the time, and at Clark, only one teacher declined to be interviewed. Overall, we have 48 interviews and 15 observations of collaborative sessions, as described in Table 2 .

Table 2. statistics on the qualitative data collected.

Elwood Elementary School	Granville Elementary School	Clark Middle School
0	2 (100% of total)	3 (100% of total)
7 (~15%)	10 (~50%)	23 (~75%)
0	2 (~50%)	1 (~10%)
10 years	15 years	14 years
40 minutes	13 minutes	12 minutes
0	5	10

A semi-structured interview protocol (see the extended research materials here: Carr & Cravens, 2022 ) was used to ask teachers about collaboration and professional development, particularly the strengths and weaknesses of their collaborative inquiry experiences. We first used skip patterns, which adjust the interview protocol to include only relevant questions, to ask the teachers about their background and experience with collaborative inquiry. We followed with interview questions that aimed to capture their perceptions of TPEG implementation and changes to teachers’ collaborative practices. For instance, we asked teachers to describe a typical collaborative cycle – including who attended collaborative meetings and how the group made decisions – both when TPEG was first introduced and as related to their current practices. The questions also addressed ideal collaborative environments and professional learning opportunities. There was a separate interview guide for principals and instructional coaches that had the same structure but included more specific questions regarding the role of various key stakeholders in decision making around adapting the cycles over time.

The interviewer used the interview protocols as a loose guide for the conversation, in particular by altering the order of questions frequently to help respondents flow from one topic to the next naturally. Between interviews, the researchers updated the interview protocol as needed, primarily to get more specific information on current non-TPEG collaborative practices. For the observations, the researcher attended collaborative team planning sessions for approximately 30 minutes each and focused on time use and the type and quality of interactions between the participants on each collaborative team.

The first author collected all data for this study. As a young, white, educated female who lived in Tennessee, she resembled a typical teacher in the pilot schools, and all participants seemed comfortable and glad to share their experiences. Collaborative teams appeared to use their collaborative time as usual, particularly after being told that the observations focused on the structure of their time and interactions, rather than performance. After the interviews were transcribed by the first author or a transcription service, analyses were conducted using the software Dedoose using open and hierarchical coding to identify details that were salient to participants inductively and deductive coding based on the TPEG conceptual framework. This included identifying enabling conditions that are named in the literature review, how to promote buy-in, other initiatives, and support for collaborative inquiry that allowed it to be continually successful for some teachers and not others. Each step of the TPEG cycle and how it adapted over time were examined next, followed by teacher instructional practices and instructional improvement.

Ethical approval

This study, including all recruitment materials, consent forms, and data storage and privacy decisions, was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Vanderbilt University. Required permissions were given at the district-level and by the school principals. Participants each signed an IRB-approved informed consent form prior to interviews. Participants received a $20 gift card as a thanks for their participation.

What are the key action steps that schools used to adopt and sustain collaborative inquiry cycles?

Our interview data indicate that school leaders created collaborative environments by promoting collaboration to teachers as a positive change, making it mandatory, and supporting teachers while they found ways to make the change work. While the actual processes were more nuanced, lessons from these schools shed light on specific steps to address challenges in organizational structure and teacher sensemaking. Table 3 summarizes the major findings, which are elaborated below.

Table 3. Summary of findings of key action steps for collaborative inquiry cycles.

Action steps	Summary
Forming collaborative teams	Sustained collaborative teams consisted of 2-4 grade-subject matched teachers.
Scheduling collaboration time	Sustained collaborative time was common time embedded in the school day that would occur daily or almost daily.
Learning to collaborate	A difficult part of collaborative inquiry was learning how to collaborate productively, particularly with giving and receiving constructive feedback.
Setting expectations for collaboration	Schools and collaborative teams with high expectations to participate in collaboration and create quality lessons were more successful in sustaining collaboration.
Cultivating buy-in	Principals bought into the TPEG model after seeing it work well and flexibly in Shanghai schools. Teachers bought into the TPEG model after seeing it improve their own instruction and/or time management.

Forming collaborative teams

When TPEG was introduced, the first necessary decision was how to group teachers into collaborative teams. Prior literature on lesson study and teaching-study groups underscore the importance for members of the learning community to have shared interests in solving “problems of practice” that are specific to a focal subject area ( Hiebert et al. , 2002 ; Wang, 2013 ). Studies also find that teachers can learn more about how their practice affects student learning when they focus on a specific teaching or learning issue over a period of time and when teachers repeatedly experiment with different instructional strategies in similar and different settings ( Gallimore et al. , 2009 ). We find that the actual formation of the TPEGs in the pilot schools varied by grade level, school size, and focal subject. As examples, because there were only one or two teachers per grade, Elwood Elementary formed math and reading TPEGs that spanned multiple grades. Teachers at the larger Clark Middle School designated subject-grade teams for math and reading and either subject-specific teams that spanned multiple grades or grade-specific teams that spanned two subjects for the smaller number of teachers who taught science and social studies.

While such variations in TPEG formation were largely due to differences in school size and grade structure, teachers confirmed in interviews the advantages of forming collaborative teams by subject and grade whenever possible. They pointed out that the benefits of “vertical” alignment were often overshadowed by time constraints and student needs from different grades. One Clark Middle School teacher gave an example of why vertical teams did not work well:

“For example, the first [TPEG] one we did was a 5 th grade English lesson. It didn’t seem all that applicable to many of us, because they were focusing so much on fluency and basic comprehension and parts of their standards that we don’t even have those sorts of standards in [grades] 6, 7, 8. So I remember that that was– You really felt like you were helping one other person’s lesson or that 5 th grade group’s lesson, but you didn’t feel like it necessarily applied to you.” – Teacher LC 3

While teachers in cross subject collaborative teams saw the value of diverse perspectives, many shared that they would have preferred to be with teachers who had shared content-specific expertise. We also find that while TPEGs tended to be large – about six people at Clark, up to eight at Elwood – the sustained collaborative teams were smaller with two to four people in each team. The size was not as salient as the composition of the collaborative teams to teachers and principals, however, so larger teams might be appropriate in schools with more teachers per grade or grade-subject.

Scheduling collaborative time

Identifying and setting up shared collaborative time was a major concern in all three schools. We find that sustained collaboration occurred during planning periods embedded in the school day that were made available for all teachers of a collaborative team. The success of this was most evident in Clark Middle. Its assistant principal discussed the tradeoffs inherent to ensuring that teachers had enough collaborative and individual plan time during the school day, namely that administrators were able to give their teachers 90 minutes of daily planning time by increasing class sizes and decreasing the amount of planning time for special area teachers.

Given time restrictions, it is also important to carefully determine the frequency of the collaborative inquiry meetings. TPEGs were asked to meet approximately once per week to focus on one particular lesson over the course of two weeks. One administrator explained why her school decided to shorten the inquiry cycles to one day: “The two week [TPEG] cycle…it took so long, we weren’t getting enough bang for our buck…We were able to arrange our schedule, it worked out where we could impact every single kid every day” (Assistant Principal PC).

Quick cycles allowed teachers to adjust their teaching quickly, but it also meant that teachers could not easily incorporate parts of the inquiry process into their cycles. Collaborative lesson planning also became part of the daily teaching practice, rather than a distinct activity that used research techniques to deliberately focus on creating and testing particularly high-quality lessons. Related, the short cycle length and common planning times did not allow for teachers on a collaborative team to easily observe each other teach.

Learning to collaborate

Between 2013–2015, principals and TPEG leaders attended training sessions that demonstrated best practices in conducting planning sessions and providing constructive feedback with depth and reasoning. These administrators were tasked with explaining and modeling collaborative techniques at their home school and ensuring that their teachers were building a professional community and trust amongst themselves. At Clark Middle School, the leadership team did this by showing videos from her trip to Shanghai, modeling good collaborative practices in front of and with collaborative teams, sharing research on collaboration, and providing a checklist of how to productively collaborate. As the principal explained, “The very first thing is to review the lesson they’d just taught. What was good, what was bad, what needs to be changed, and then where do we need to go from here, and that’s when today’s lesson [planning] begins” (Principal OC).

Establishing Expectations for Collaboration

Our interviews show that principals must cultivate a culture of high expectations for collaboration to maintain fidelity and improve rewards from the collaboration, both of which increase teacher buy-in and ownership over the process. Clark Middle School is the perfect example of this because the principal maintained extremely high expectations for fidelity to his school’s collaboration routine when collaboration was first scaled up to the entire school, and that eventually resulted in a strong culture of productive collaboration. The principal explained,

“They had an hour and a half planning period. The first 45 minutes had to be co-planning, and there were no exceptions to that. Not going to the copy machine. Not having IEP meetings. Not going to get a snack out of the [vending machine] thing. This is co-planning time…If your expectation is that they will be doing this for 45 minutes, and if they’re in the hallway, that it is addressed very quickly and that there’s no doubt about what they’re supposed to be doing for those 45 minutes. And then if you do that a couple of times, everybody has [it].” – Administrator OC

At Granville Elementary, the expectations were not as strict, and the resulting collaborative practices were less cohesive. Elwood Elementary School is a contrasting case in that, at the time of data collection, some teams participated while others did not, as there was not a formal expectation that teams collaborate.

Teachers noted that mandatory collaboration gave them the necessary push to take the “extra” step of collaborating, and that while some teams found intrinsic reasons to sustain collaboration, there were many ways that collaboration could have been derailed. We found that giving teachers more flexibility might allow them to better shape their collaborative practices to their own needs, but if this were to happen, we would expect some teams to scale back collaboration and return to individual planning, as happened at Elwood Elementary.

Cultivating Buy-In

Trust, efficacy, and professional community were important in sustaining collaborative inquiry cycles, largely through establishing buy-in. Participant comments show that it took time to cultivate buy-in for collaboration. The assistant principal at Clark Middle School said that her trip to Shanghai was “vital” to prove to her that it would work, and it took about a year for her teachers to see the fruits of their labor (high-quality lessons stored in a central location) and be convinced that collaboration was a good idea. Principals in all three schools tried to cultivate interest, relate stories to their teachers, and roll out collaboration slowly to promote buy-in, but their eventual success came from teachers seeing improvements in their own practice and workload over time after administration made the collaborative practices mandatory. Only then could the principals turn the TPEG collaboration from an administration-led initiative to a teacher-led initiative.

Buy-in was also developed through the efforts and patience of the teachers themselves. The teachers at Clark Middle and Granville Elementary seemed to have strong shared norms about student learning being at the center of their practice and about their collective responsibility for all the children in their grade. Related, we noticed that teachers at Elwood Elementary who did not like collaboration spoke frequently about their preferred teaching styles, rather than about practices that would most help their students learn.

Many teachers identified personality clashes as the easiest way to disrupt collaborative relationships. In particular, personality clashes tended to happen when teachers on a collaborative team had very different teaching styles or when one teacher attempted to control the decision making in a way that was unwelcome. We saw that while mandatory collaboration urged teachers to learn to work together productively, sometimes an administrator or other neutral party with some authority, like an instructional coach, could mediate relationships. These authority figures would help members of the team align their goals and priorities and follow best practices.

Developing trust among peers was a prevalent theme from the teacher interviews. Teachers listed two reasons that trust is essential to sustaining collaborative inquiry: They could be vulnerable in front of their teammates to make their teaching public, and they had to rely on their peers to produce high-quality work. An assistant principal described the fears of some of her teachers:

“If I open my planning time to you, and you’re the other teacher coming in, and we’re going to plan together, what if your ideas aren’t as good as mine?…So it’s overcoming that and really shifting the mindset from type A personality, I have total control…[to] you have strengths, I have strengths. Let’s combine those, and let’s work on each other’s weaknesses.” – Assistant Principal PC

Compared to the original theory of change, what local adaptations were made to the TPEG model and why?

To answer this question, we first present the findings within the four steps in a collaborative inquiry cycle: lesson planning, observation, feedback, and revision, as shown in Table 4 . We note that while none of the three schools in this study continued to use TPEG in its original form, teachers at each site reported that they still incorporated steps of TPEG into their daily lesson planning.

Table 4. Summary of local adaptations to TPEG theory of action.

Collaborative inquiry step	Major finding
Lesson planning	Three collaborative styles were identified: planning together, sharing lessons, and sharing materials. Each style has its own strengths and weaknesses.
Observations	Peer observations were universally missing as part of the collaborative inquiry process. This is concerning because observations are vital for lesson revision.
Feedback	Teacher conversations during reflection varied from concentrating on emotional states to providing constructive professional support.
Lesson revision	Many teachers relied on their memories to collaboratively refine lessons the following year, though most agreed that those who updated lessons immediately after the reflection appeared to be more successful.

Lesson planning

We found that formally structured TPEGs faded in the schools after the first two years of implementation, and smaller collaborative groups that met daily or almost daily emerged. Some teams were required to use strict county curriculum standards and activities, so much of their collaborative time involved sensemaking to understand and organize the materials from their county or making minor changes to the prior year’s materials. Clark Middle teachers had an advantage when updating lessons because they had virtual access to materials from all teachers in the school. If a standard moved from one grade to another, which happened frequently, then Clark teachers could easily access the materials of the teachers who taught that standard previously. Many Clark teachers stayed close to the original lesson study model by collaboratively anticipating student questions and difficulties and how they might overcome them as instructors. Teachers at all three schools described building off each other’s experiences, pushing each other to try new techniques, and encouraging each other to see problems from new perspectives.

The collaborative teams overall had three preferred collaborative styles, each with different strengths and weaknesses. The first way of collaborating is what we call planning together , for which teachers meet to create identical or nearly identical lessons. This is the intended lesson study method of planning, and it has the distinct advantage that each lesson is created by a group of teachers who, if they communicate effectively and trust each other, can combine their knowledge and experiences to make an excellent lesson.

Another collaborative style is sharing lessons , for which teachers split their work into distinct units that are individually planned and prepared to share with their colleagues, who often do not change anything about that lesson before teaching it. For instance, one teacher described how each teacher on her team planned then shared with each other all the lessons for only one or two days per week. Each lesson is prepared individually, so the lessons mostly do not benefit from collaborative thought. However, it allows each teacher to have more time to devote to his/her portion of the lessons and other responsibilities, including those outside of work. Shared lessons improve the same way they would if the teachers were working alone while adequately storing and referencing materials year to year except that teachers involved in this method of collaboration have more time to spend on each lesson because they only have to work on a portion of the total lessons. One teacher described the process for her team:

“We actually set aside each day. Like I might have Tuesday/Thursday lessons, another teacher will have Monday/Wednesday lessons, and one other teacher will have the Friday lesson or a test that she creates. So, every week, I know I’ve got two lessons that I need to make, and they’re going to be awesome…If it’s an activity that requires worksheets or any kind of supplies, I make sure all of my colleagues have those things. So, all they have to do is show up and teach it.” – Teacher TC

The third style of collaborative lesson planning is what we call “sharing materials”. With this method of collaboration, teachers have a connection (virtual or in person) where they share ideas and techniques with each other that they are not expected to use. One Elwood Elementary teacher attributed her preference for this collaborative style due to her many years of experience teaching and her comfort with her own teaching style. She described this collaboration as a way to get new ideas instead of being boxed into another teacher’s style of teaching:

“I love to get copies of [my teammates’] notes. I love to just share what I’m doing with them, and if they don’t want to do it that way, that’s just fine with me…It’s not that I don’t want different ways or new ways. I just like to take the best of every aspect that I can find and then make it what I want it to be. Rather than everybody agree to say this and this and this and use this worksheet and do these notes on an active board. Some of that I love. But I don’t care for being, kind of, molded into this exact way of doing it…I probably sound like I just want to go off on my own with no collaboration and no teamwork, but that’s not the case at all. I do love to share and love to gain different ideas from other people, but I want to pick which ones I want to use and which ones I don’t.” – Teacher BE

Some teachers preferred this method of collaboration because it allowed them to hear new ideas without deviating from their preferred teaching style. Other teachers can only use this method due to staffing or structural constraints, such as not having a grade-subject collaborative partner. For instance, at Clark Middle School, the single science and single social studies teachers for the 7 th grade collaborated by discussing specific resources that would likely be effective for teaching either subject.

Observation

To observe or not observe was the most salient, discussed, and fretted about action step to the teachers in this study. None of the three schools sustained observations as part of the collaborative inquiry process. Many teachers became nervous when “tall people” came into their rooms or reflected that it was easy to try to put on a show when someone was observing. Teachers also struggled with exactly how they were supposed to conduct the observations. With Japanese lesson study and teaching-study groups in Shanghai, teachers are supposed to evaluate the lesson that was collaboratively planned, not evaluate the teacher him/her/themself. Some, but not all, teachers who had participated in TPEG seemed to understand that distinction, which helped teachers rationalize their way into accepting the observations. However, even those who understood the distinction had a difficult time making it work in practice. Most teachers understood that observations were times to focus on instructional practices, but they struggled to balance between keeping such focus and paying attention to student reactions, engagement, or work.

A few years after TPEG was introduced to Granville Elementary, the administration introduced the state practice called IPI to improve vertical alignment. With IPI at Granville, teachers were paired to observe each other teach and give feedback once each before they moved to another teacher. They did this process approximately twice per semester. The principal said it took about three years of mandatory IPI before teachers became excited about participating in it.

Another major obstacle for both TPEG and IPI observations was finding the time to do them. At each school, teachers of the same grade level shared a plan time, so they could only observe teachers at a different grade level if they were going to observe during that time. This was not a major problem for Clark teachers, who had 45 minutes of individual plan time every day. At Granville, however, plan time was more limited, so frequent observations significantly detracted from teachers’ tolerance of the practice. Administration provided substitutes for TPEG so teachers could observe each other when they otherwise would be teaching a class, though most teachers did not like leaving their students.

Teams at each school talked about or experimented with technology to ease the burden of observations. Granville teachers discussed videoing themselves teaching TPEG lessons, but they did not feel they had the equipment or expertise to do that well. At Elwood, teachers were able to figure out the technology, but they found it to be a “big load,” particularly with finding the time to watch the videos. There were also some teachers who felt uncomfortable being videoed. For all these reasons, virtual observations were not sustained at the three schools, either.

Given that peer observations did not last in any school as part of the lesson planning process, the collaborative teams needed to find new ways of assessing whether students were engaged and learning the material, and how the lesson might be improved. At Clark Middle School, teachers evaluated lessons by paying attention to their own impressions of the lesson, including overheard student comments, and examining student assessment data. The method of remembering and recounting is practical, though it allows room for subjectivity and more importantly, limits the benefit of leveraging peer expertise. The principals noted, however, that with assessments that were standardized across classes, teachers were able to evaluate the strength of their lessons based on how well the students demonstrated their knowledge gain in class and through testing.

Elementary students were less able to express themselves and take frequent assessments, so Granville Elementary teachers had to find different ways of evaluating their lessons. Teachers reported watching students to see if they were “glazed out” or could correctly use new information later. Teachers tracked goals for their students, paid attention to teacher evaluations and their students’ standardized test score growth, and talked to teachers in the grade above to see if their students were adequately prepared. While these might help a teacher evaluate if s/he was a good teacher, most of these methods are not useful for evaluating individual lessons. Teachers used their recollections to debrief casually on many, but not all, individual lessons. Their critiques of the lessons were often based on whether the teacher liked the lesson and its delivery, rather than framing discussions specifically around how much they thought the students learned from it.

Collaborative teams at Clark Middle School, despite having more overall time dedicated to collaborative planning, stayed more focused during lesson reflections on whether and how their students learned and gave each other professional support. In one observed session, the collaborative team was examining the results of a quiz students had taken the prior week. The teachers compared how quickly their students completed the quiz and went over almost every question together. If there were discrepancies between classes, the teachers would compare exactly what they taught and how they taught it, bringing up particular comments or discussion questions that the collaborative group had not discussed before teaching. Other debriefing sessions were similar, with teachers comparing student assessment or assignment data, discussing questions that several students had gotten wrong, why they likely got them wrong, and how the teachers could adjust their next lesson to clarify misconceptions. Despite this level of detail, Clark collaborative teams rarely spent more than 10 minutes of their planning time debriefing on lessons.

Many of the teams at Granville relied on each other for emotional support during lesson reflection. In one collaborative session, teachers shared stories, usually funny or frustrating ones, from their classes. Some of these stories were to prompt a discussion about classroom management or teaching techniques, but many seemed to be about gaining emotional support. Little (1990) calls this storytelling and scanning for ideas, and she regards it primarily as a method for teachers to reveal their knowledge, intentions, and values to his/her peers and shape or reinforce their shared professional community. It is also what Little (1990) calls aid and assistance, where colleagues assist in the practice of teaching only when asked and avoid giving unwarranted advice on the stories. This was prevalent at Granville, where teachers often sympathized with the plight of their peers but only gave advice in moments when the teller was clearly seeking additional professional support.

Meanwhile, some teachers reported that feedback sessions could be nerve-wracking and unhelpful. Teachers could feel attacked when their lesson went poorly, or they might feel the need to keep information private or talk themselves up to colleagues to maintain their image as a competent teacher. One Elwood Elementary teacher exclaimed that she was able to use reflections to brag on her peers about what went well in the “model” lessons, and another felt it encouraged helpful self-reflection. However, others felt they had to give surface-level or biased feedback to avoid hurting people’s feelings. Some Granville Elementary teachers also felt this with their IPI observation feedback and expressed that it was not helpful to spend time on the IPI process if they could not give or receive substantive feedback. Based on Granville and Clark Middle, in particular, giving and receiving constructive feedback seems to be a skill that can be learned, so perhaps more time and training would alleviate potential concerns.

Lesson revision

Many Clark teachers reported that they always immediately updated lessons that needed a revision through a shared database. These changes were immediately helpful for the handful of teachers who taught the same lessons to different students from one day to the next, but many teachers did this simply for their own benefit in the following year. Teachers at the other schools reported reflecting verbally then trying to remember which lessons went well and which did not when lesson planning the following year.

While the four steps for the TPEG cycle provide the necessary structure to conduct disciplined collaborative inquiry, it is important to also examine the extent to which practices at the three schools strive to reach the essential objectives of building a professional knowledge base for teaching.

Public, deprivatized practice

Hiebert et al. (2002) emphasize that knowledge “must be created with the intent of public examination, with the goal of making it shareable among teachers, open for discussion, verification, and refutation or modification” (pg. 7). Teachers in this study who collaborated intended to share their lesson materials with each other, though those who collaborated via sharing materials did not open their creations up to be discussed, verified, or refuted by a group. Even if teachers rarely refuted lessons that were shared by colleagues, they were given the opportunity to do so and could discuss the lesson in depth after teaching it. Using this definition of public, the teachers who planned together or shared lessons were adequately making their teaching public.

Storing/sharing

With TPEG, lesson storage and sharing are supposed happen frequently throughout the process. Teachers pull lessons from storage when they are lesson planning, store lessons before teaching them, and store updated lessons after debriefing and revision. However, storage and sharing were not salient to many of the teachers in this study, and many only commented on them when prompted. Each school had different techniques for lesson storage and sharing. Teachers at Elwood had storage online that allowed them to share materials with each other and the principal for comments. At Clark Middle, teachers were required to use a central lesson repository for storing and sharing materials across the district. School administrators occasionally gave feedback on these stored lessons, and some teachers accessed other grades’ materials to stay informed about vertical alignment and to pull materials when standards changed grades. Teachers at Granville Elementary School often used localized storage techniques that varied by collaborative team. Lessons were usually kept on one teacher’s hard drive and/or in a filing cabinet. The Granville storage methods were therefore often used only as convenient “storage units,” rather than as extended spaces for collaboration.

Hiebert et al. (2002) assert that it is not enough to share locally with a few colleagues; professional knowledge must reach beyond the time and place they were created. Online county-wide repositories allow the lesson materials to reach more teachers than they otherwise would have. The rural county, where both Granville and Clark are located, had curriculum standards that were updated every few years, and teachers closely aligned their lessons with the standards. Perhaps this means that most lessons should only reach so far as the county. School systems that defer instead to other district, state, or even federal standards might want to extend their lesson storage system to those levels instead.

Mechanism for validation and improvement

At first glance, there is a mechanism for lesson validation and improvement embedded in the collaborative inquiry practices explored in this study. Teachers at Clark Middle, in particular, spent time together dissecting their own impressions and student assessment data to reflect on their teaching and improve lessons. The question becomes more complicated when considering whether the teachers could adequately reflect on their teaching, given that they did not observe each other teach the lessons. Lewis et al. (2006) consider live observations to be critical to lesson study as part of the research process.

Additionally, Hiebert et al. (2002) differentiate between local knowledge generated by the teachers themselves, which might not always be accurate, and expert knowledge or repeated evaluation in different contexts. Expert knowledge comes from instructional experts such as instructional coaches, some administrators, and researchers. At Clark Middle School, the instructional coach spent half the day teaching, and her collaborative partners expressed their appreciation of having her on their team to share expertise. All three schools had instructional coaches, but their roles were usually to provide assistance based on requests from the teachers. At Clark Middle and Granville Elementary, teachers had access to materials from other teachers in the county (repeated evaluation), but they mostly relied on their own team’s materials. Because of this, the teachers in these schools primarily relied on local knowledge, which means that they were not guaranteed to be appropriately validating and improving their lessons.

The theory of change behind lesson study is that teachers collaborate by examining and improving lessons together to make themselves higher quality teachers, so their students get better instruction. While teachers and principals from these three schools reported that their lessons and instruction were improving, more evidence is needed to see whether the teachers themselves were learning and improving. Imagine a situation in which two teachers, one novice and one veteran, are collaborating. The veteran teacher brings many years of experience to the partnership, and the novice teacher brings knowledge of new techniques and technologies. If neither teacher goes into depth about why their contributions are important or how to best incorporate them into future lessons, we will not know if their collaboration leads to improved instructional practices and contributes to a shared knowledge base.

This is not a hypothetical problem. Morris and Hiebert (2011) discuss the Japanese lesson study and emphasize that stored lesson plans include rationale for teaching decisions and changes, so that other teachers can later use the lessons in new contexts. One administrator in this study shared that she thought about this potential problem regarding her newer teachers, who had only ever known collaborative planning. She worried that they might leave her school and be unable to plan new high-quality lessons on their own.

Despite the intermediary, the ultimate goal for the collaborative inquiry models is to improve instruction. Teachers and principals stated that collaboration made them grow as teachers by allowing them to learn from their peers, forcing them to detail their thought processes when planning lessons, holding them accountable to do high-quality work, and decreasing total workload. The administration at Clark Middle School, though, expended effort to track concrete changes:

“One, we were a rewards school this year. Our overall student [testing] data has gone up…We have also seen [improvements] in teacher overall observation scores on the TEAM [evaluation] rubric… [The principal] gets evaluated every year just on his ability as an administrator, and he has seen a rise in his scores in this. We have seen a rise in happiness ratings [from approval surveys] from our teachers. And one thing that is always on the evaluation is, “Please don’t stop our collaborative plan.” – Administrator PC

This administrator, and teachers at both Clark Middle School and Granville Elementary School, attributed the increases in student test scores, teacher evaluations, the principal evaluation, and teacher approval ratings directly to their collaborative practices. Collaboration also allowed for teachers to participate in sensemaking and emotional support activities in what is usually an isolated career path.

Our study finds that teachers in three Tennessee schools made strides in becoming collaborative partners to improve their teaching. We come away with five major action steps that support collaborative inquiry cycles at the school level: Form grade-subject collaborative teams; create time that is embedded within the school day for collaborative teams to meet; instruct and model how to productively collaborate, with particular emphasis on how to give constructive feedback; maintain high expectations for participation in collaborative planning (perhaps by making it mandatory) among both administration and the teachers themselves and for creating high quality lessons; and get buy-in through proof that collaborative inquiry cycles will be worth the commitment by observing other schools with successful collaborative practices and/or creating time for teachers to see changes in their own practices.

Our findings also identify four pathways that teachers and school administrators can take to implement or adapt the inquiry cycles into forms that are more successful and/or sustainable in their schools: Using collaborative inquiry to plan lessons multiple times per week, instead of spending multiple weeks examining one lesson; conducting peer observations in-person and scheduled so that teachers do not have to leave their students with a substitute teacher; conducting thorough, though not necessarily lengthy, reflections on every lesson; and using online spaces that are shared among the collaborative team, the administration, and preferably, teachers outside the collaborative team to store lesson plans and reflection notes instead of localized storage units.

Furthermore, our study identifies a few areas in which collaborative teams at these three schools struggled that future research should address. First, many teachers struggled to appropriately gather data to reflect on the success of their lessons. When they observed each other, they did not fully understand or internalize what exactly to observe, and the model teacher often felt uncomfortable in the process. When teachers did not observe each other, they used a variety of techniques to gather information about their lessons, but those sources were likely not as objective and meaningful as they could be. Second, it is still unclear how to move from local knowledge (from the teachers themselves) to incorporating expert knowledge to better validate and improve lessons. Principals or other administrators could participate in collaborative meetings as instructional experts, but the data show that it is often important for administrators to maintain distance from collaborative inquiry practices to ensure that teachers feel ownership over the process. One possible solution would be to embed instructional coaches, perhaps ones who also teach the same content, into teams so they are considered insiders. Other questions that this research opens up are about how to help schools transition from noncollaborative to highly collaborative environments. For instance, can collaborative teams share materials and/or lessons to ease the transition from individual planning to the intensive method of planning together?

This study is distinct from others in the literature because of its focus on decision making and tradeoffs when school administrators and teachers implement and adapt collaborative inquiry cycles in American schools. It helps fill some of the “critical research needs” that Lewis et al. (2006) identify. In particular, it describes a lesson study practice called TPEG and how it was supported and evolved over time in three schools, each with distinct characteristics and ways of practicing lessons study. It also helps explain the mechanism by which collaborative inquiry can improve instruction by improving lesson plans, which is why many teachers in this study decided to collaborate on every lesson instead of focusing on one lesson for several weeks at a time.

This research has several limitations. One is that the primary data source for this research is interviews, as respondents could misremember or miscommunicate activities, actions, and perceptions. Another limitation is the interruption of data collection. At Elwood Elementary, we wanted to do observations and complete more interviews, including ones with the former principal and instructional coach who were instrumental in introducing and supporting TPEG at Elwood. However, we were asked to cease data collection at Elwood after having completed only seven phone interviews due to an uptick in student disciplinary issues that the principal said kept the staff too busy to participate. Some of the plan sessions we observed at Granville Elementary and Clark Middle were apparently slightly more casual than usual sessions. Another major limitation is external validity. While we could identify and analyze patterns and processes in Elwood Elementary School, Granville Elementary School, and Clark Middle School, the findings may not directly translate to other schools. In particular, these were all middle- or high-achieving schools prior to the introduction of TPEG, and the interviews were only conducted during a limited period. We do expect, however, many of the decisions and thought processes around balancing resources and improving instruction will be consistent across many schools.

“The American teaching culture, I think, is very different [from that in Shanghai] in the fact that teachers are not natural sharers. We have always really taught with a closed-door mindset” (Assistant Principal PC).

Despite decades of efforts in building professional communities, the teaching culture and organizational structure in American schools today present challenges to implementing and sustaining collaborative inquiry cycles as a method to improve student learning and teacher working conditions. By describing how three schools navigated the process of conducting collaborative inquiries, our study will help inform future efforts in supporting teacher professional learning and improving instructional practice in schools.

Declaration of source work

The first draft of this work was published as a dissertation thesis ( Carr, 2020 ) and can be found in Vanderbilt University Institutional Repository.

This study was approved by the Behavioral Sciences Committee of the Institutional Review Board at Vanderbilt University (IRB #180759).

Data availability

Source data are not provided because the interviews cannot be effectively de-identified, and the IRB-approved consent forms promise confidentiality and that full interviews would not be released to outside parties.

Extended data

The interview protocols can be found using the following citation:

Carr & Cravens (2022) . Interview Guide for Teaching Without Boundaries: Interviews Exploring the Adaptation of Collaborative Inquiry to the American Context. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7422861

Author information

Olivia G. Carr is presently a consultant based at Education Resource Strategies; however, the research took place at Vanderbilt University in the Department of Leadership, Policy, and Organizations.

Xiu Cravens is a professor of the practice at Vanderbilt University.

1 ‘Elwood Elementary’, ‘Granville Elementary School’ and ‘Clark Middle School’ are pseudonyms used to protect participants’ identities. Any similarity with real school names is purely coincidental.

2 Interviews were conducted by phone at ‘Elwood Elementary’ as part of an extended pilot period, and the principal withdrew the school’s participation in the study before in-person interviews could be set up.

3 The letters after each quotation are confidential, unique identifiers for each respondent. The second letter is the school pseudonym: C (Clark), E (Elwood), and G (Granville); these schools’ pseudonyms are randomly generated and do not correspond to actual schools for the sake of protecting participants identities. The first letter is an alphabetical identifier based on the order of interviews at that school. So, "Teacher LC" was the 12th interview conducted at ‘Clark Middle School’.

Achinstein B: Conflict amid community: The micropolitics of teacher collaboration. Teach Coll Rec. 2002; 104 (3): 421–455. Publisher Full Text
Akiba M, Wilkinson B: Adopting an international innovation for teacher professional development: State and district approaches to lesson study in Florida. J Teacher Educ. 2016; 67 (1): 74–93. Publisher Full Text
Bandura A, Freeman WH, Lightsey R: Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. 1999.
Barab SA, Luehmann AL: Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Sci Educ. 2003; 87 (4): 454–467. Publisher Full Text
Bond N: The power of teacher leaders: Their roles, influence, and impact. Routledge, 2014. Publisher Full Text
Bruce CD, Flynn TC, Bennett S: A focus on exploratory tasks in lesson study: The Canadian 'Math for Young Children' project. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2016; 48 (4): 541–554. Publisher Full Text
Bruce CD, Ross JA: A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy: Teacher peer coaching in grades 3 and 6 mathematics. Can J Educ. 2008; 31 (2): 346–370. Reference Source
Bryk A, Camburn E, Louis KS: Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educ Adm Q. 1999; 35 (5): 751–781. Publisher Full Text
Bryk AS, Gomez LM, Grunow A, et al. : Learning to Improve: How America’s Schools Can Get Better at Getting Better. Harvard Education Press, 2015. Reference Source
Bryk AS, Schneider B: Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation. 2002. Reference Source
Butler DL, Cartier SC: Promoting effective task interpretation as an important work habit: A key to successful teaching and learning. Teach Coll Rec. 2004; 106 (9): 1729–1758. Publisher Full Text
Butler DL, Schnellert L: Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2012; 28 (8): 1206–1220. Publisher Full Text
Carr OG: The Transfer of Educational Policies and Practices Across International Borders. [Doctoral dissertation Vanderbilt University]. Vanderbilt University Institutional Repository, 2020. Reference Source
Carr OG, Cravens X: Interview Guide for Teaching Without Boundaries: Interviews Exploring the Adaptation of Collaborative Inquiry to the American Context. Zenodo. 2022. http://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7422861
Coburn CE: Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2001; 23 (2): 145–170. Publisher Full Text
Coburn CE: Shaping teacher sensemaking: School leaders and the enactment of reading policy. Educational Policy. 2005; 19 (3): 476–509. Publisher Full Text
Cravens X, Drake T, Goldring E, et al. : Teacher Peer Excellence Groups (TPEGs): Building Communities of Practice for Instructional Improvement. J Educ Adm. 2017; 55 (5). Publisher Full Text
Cravens X, Drake T: From Shanghai to Tennessee: Developing instructional leadership through Teacher Peer Excellence Groups. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies. 2017; 6 (4): 348–364. Publisher Full Text
Cravens X, Hunter SB: Assessing the impact of collaborative inquiry on teacher performance and effectiveness. Sch Eff Sch Improv. 2021; 32 (4): 564–606. Publisher Full Text
Cravens X, Wang J: Learning from the masters: Shanghai’s teacher-expertise infusion system. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies. 2017; 6 (4): 306–320. Publisher Full Text
Fujii T: Designing and adapting tasks in lesson planning: a critical process of Lesson Study. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2016; 48 (4): 411–423. Publisher Full Text
Gallimore RE, Ermeling BA, Saunders WM, et al. : Moving the learning of teaching closer to practice: Teacher education implications of school-based inquiry teams. Elem Sch J. 2009; 109 (5): 537–553. Publisher Full Text
Giles C, Hargreaves A: The sustainability of innovative schools as learning organizations and professional learning communities during standardized reform. Educ Adm Q. 2006; 42 (1): 124–156. Publisher Full Text
Goddard RD, Hoy WK, Hoy AW: Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. Am J Educ Res. 2000; 37 (2): 479–507. Publisher Full Text
Goddard Y, Goddard R, Tschannen-Moran M: A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teach Coll Rec. 2007; 109 (4): 877–896. Publisher Full Text
Goldring E, Porter AC, Murphy JE, et al. : Assessing Learning-Centered Leadership: Connections to Research, Professional Standards, and Current Practices. Leadersh Policy Sch. 2009; 8 (1): 1–36. Publisher Full Text
Groves S, Doig B, Vale C, et al. : Critical factors in the adaptation and implementation of Japanese Lesson Study in the Australian context. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2016; 48 (4): 501–512. Publisher Full Text
Hallinger P, Heck RH: Leadership for learning: Does collaborative leadership make a difference in school improvement? Educational Management Administration & Leadership. 2010; 38 (6): 654–678. Publisher Full Text
Hiebert J, Gallimore R, Stigler JW: A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educ Res. 2002; 31 (5): 3–15. Publisher Full Text
Hiebert J, Stigler JW, Manaster AB: Mathematical features of lessons in the TIMSS Video Study. ZDM Mathematics Education. 1999; 31 (6): 196–201. Publisher Full Text
Hoy WK, Tschannen-Moran M: The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools. Essential ideas for the reform of American schools. 2007; 87–114.
Huang R, Shimizu Y: Improving teaching, developing teachers and teacher educators, and linking theory and practice through lesson study in mathematics: an international perspective. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2016; 48 (4): 393–409. Publisher Full Text
Jensen B, Sonnemann J, Roberts-Hull K, et al. : Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning in High-Performing Systems. Washington, DC. 2016. Reference Source
Ketelaar E, Beijaard D, Boshuizen HP, et al. : Teachers’ positioning towards an educational innovation in the light of ownership, sense-making and agency. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2012; 28 (2): 273–282. Publisher Full Text
Leithwood K, Seashore K, Anderson S, et al. : Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. 2004. Reference Source
Lewis C: What is improvement science? Do we need it in education? Educ Res. 2015; 44 (1): 54–61. Publisher Full Text
Lewis C, Perry R, Murata A: How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educ Res. 2006; 35 (3): 3–14. Publisher Full Text
Little JW: The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teach Coll Rec. 1990; 91 (4): 509–536. Publisher Full Text
Louis KS: Changing the culture of schools: Professional community, organizational learning and trust. J Sch Leadersh. 2006; 16 (5): 477–489. Publisher Full Text
Louis KS, Marks HM: Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers’ work and student experiences in restructuring schools. Am J Educ. 1998; 106 (4): 532–575. Publisher Full Text
Louis KS, Marks HM, Kruse S: Teachers’ professional community in restructuring schools. Am Educ Res J. 1996; 33 (4): 757–798. Publisher Full Text
McDonald L: Educational transfer to developing countries: Policy and skill facilitation. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2012; 69 : 1817–1826. Publisher Full Text
McLaughlin MW: Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educ Eval Policy Anal. 1987; 9 (2): 171–178. Publisher Full Text
Morris AK, Hiebert J: Creating shared instructional products: An alternative approach to improving teaching. Educ Res. 2011; 40 (1): 5–14. Publisher Full Text
Ng PT, Tan C: Community of practice for teachers: sensemaking or critical reflective learning? Reflective Practice. 2009; 10 (1): 37–44. Publisher Full Text
OECD: Lessons from PISA for United States. Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education OECD Publishing, 2011. Publisher Full Text
Printy SM: Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educ Adm Q. 2008; 44 (2): 187–226. Publisher Full Text
Robinson VMJ, Lloyd CA, Rowe KJ: The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educ Adm Q. 2008; 44 (5): 635–674. Publisher Full Text
Roehrig GH, Kruse RA, Kern A: Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. J Res Sci Teach. 2007; 44 (7): 883–907. Publisher Full Text
Rose R: What is lesson-drawing? J Public Policy. 1991; 11 (1): 3–30. Publisher Full Text
Saunders WM, Goldenberg CN, Gallimore R: Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I schools. Am Educ Res J. 2009; 46 (4): 1006–1033. Publisher Full Text
SCORE: Priorities for Progress: 2018-19 State of Education in Tennessee. 2019.
Sindelar PT, Shearer DK, Yendol-Hoppey D, et al. : The sustainability of inclusive school reform. Exceptional Children. 2006; 72 (3): 317–331. Publisher Full Text
Spillane JP: State and local government relations in the era of standards-based reform: Standards, state policy instruments, and local instructional policy making. Educ Policy. 1999; 13 (4): 546–572. Publisher Full Text
Spillane JP, Reiser BJ, Reimer T: Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Rev Educ Res. 2002; 72 (3): 387–431. Publisher Full Text
State Report Card (n.d.).
Stigler JW, Hiebert J: Lesson study, improvement, and the importing of cultural routines. ZDM Mathematics Education. 2016; 48 (4): 581–587. Publisher Full Text
TDOE: Every Student Succeeds: Building on Success in Tennessee: ESSA State Plan. 2017. Reference Source
Ten Bruggencate G, Luyten H, Scheerens J, et al. : Modeling the influence of school leaders on student achievement: how can school leaders make a difference? Educ Admin Quarterly. 2012; 48 (4): 699–732. Publisher Full Text
Tschannen-Moran M, Hoy AW: Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2001; 17 (7): 783–805. Publisher Full Text
Tucker MS: Chinese Lessons: Shanghai's Rise to the Top of the PISA League Tables. 2014. Reference Source
Wang J: Introduction of school-based teacher professional development in China. Asia Leadership Roundtable Shanghai. 2013.
Wenger E, McDermott RA, Snyder W: Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press, 2002. Publisher Full Text
Wenger EC, Snyder WM: Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harv Bus Rev. 2000; 78 (1): 139–146. Reference Source
Yang X: School management innovation: Focusing on improving classroom instruction and teacher development. Bureau of Education Shanghai China. 2008.
Youngs P, King MB: Principal leadership for professional development to build school capacity. Educ Admin Quarterly. 2002; 38 (5): 643–670. Publisher Full Text
Zech LK, Gause-Vega CL, Bray MH, et al. : Content-based collaborative inquiry: A professional development model for sustaining educational reform. Educational Psychologist. 2000; 35 (3): 207–217. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

	Views	Downloads
Gates Open Research	-	-
PubMed Central	-	-

Open Peer Review

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No source data required

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Educational leadership and educational development in China

Respond or Comment
COMMENT ON THIS REPORT
Olivia G. Carr and Xiu Cravens describe the action steps which are actually adopted in three schools to promote peer collaborative inquiry: forming collaborative teams, scheduling collaboration, learning to collaborate, setting expectations for collaboration, and cultivating buy-in. This is very impressive since I find that in China, although there are differences among schools and at different stages of history, the "basic steps" that make collaboration between/among teachers possible are always stable. We tend to summarize them as 5Ts: Team, Time, Task of teamwork, Trust, and Take-away (enabling each member to “gain” something from every collaborative action). The findings of this paper suggests that the steps taken by the three Tennessee schools to promote teacher collaboration are generally rather the same, or at least similar, to the their Chinese counterparts. This reinforced my holdings that there is always something common in teachers' collaborative inquiry, regardless of the distinct cultures in which collaboration takes place.
Another of my observations adheres to the findings of Olivia G. Carr and Xiu Cravens is that, most of the problems and troubles we encounter in the process of promoting teacher collaborative inquiry can be attributed to the quality of one or more of the above “action steps”, and the most critical factor is always “Team (or teaming)”. For example, if a group of teachers form a team with shared objectives, responsibilities, resources, and high level of engagement, time becomes more of a trivial problem because team members can always squeeze out or even "create" time to collaborate; and similarly, in such a "real" team, trust and commitment are norms that need not active maintenance.
The authors report that schools have made adaptations upon the original (designed) model of TEPG. For instance, teachers have adopted three different strategies in collaborative lesson planning: planning together, sharing lessons, and sharing materials. Based on my observations, these different strategies (which are also common in China) indicate, again, that there exists a “universal pattern” that deserves more attention and effort onto research in the future.
Scope of collaboration. The rapid development of mobile Internet technology in the past ten years has dramatically impacted, reshaped, and restructured teachers’ peer collaboration in China: When a “team” does not have to be confined to one school (or school district), how can we initiate, support, organize, manage, and evaluate “large-scale-teamwork” and at the same time optimize “local-teamwork”?
Clarity of criteria. During the past two decades in China, almost for every two or three years, the Education Authority will issue a new plan in reforming the curriculum, instruction, learning, or evaluation. Such a ridiculous “culture” makes the criteria for judging the quality of teaching and learning increasingly ambiguous, and causing a growing disagreement among teachers regarding how to decide “what counts as a good lesson”. Teacher peer collaboration is a process of pedagogical reasoning, decision making, and action. When there are no more shared criteria for judgement, how can peers co-planning, co-observing, and co-revising the lesson on hand?
Commonness and differentiation in collaboration. In the past, at least in China, we assumed that any individual teacher is now and in the future will encounter "same problems to be solved", which makes collaboration more valuable than individual endeavor (because it could provide solutions superior to individual struggles). In recent years, however, individual differences among teachers, not only in terms of their personal experience, knowledge bases, personalities, or teaching styles, but also in the professional problems they have to solve (for example, because of individual differences among pupils), becomes a common fact. If the professional duties, tasks and missions are inherently different among individual members of a group, what should teacher collaboration do to benefit each and every one who is involved?

Reviewer Expertise: teacher education, curriculum and instruction, university school collaboration

Reviewer Status

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Reviewer Reports


	1	2
15 May 23	read	read

Jianjun Wang , East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
Haiyan Qian , The Education University of Hong Kong, Tai Po, China

Comments on this article

All Comments (0)

Competing Interests Policy

Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:

Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors.
You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student).
You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission.
You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors.
You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on.

Stay Updated

Already registered? Sign in

Not now, thanks

Are you a Gates-funded researcher?

If you are a previous or current Gates grant holder, sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from Gates Open Research.

We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to Gates Open Research

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here .

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here .

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here .

If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.

If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.

Get the Reddit app

You agree that use of this site constitutes acceptance of Reddit’s User Agreement and acknowledge our Privacy Policy .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Education Beyond Boundaries : A manifestation of the Jesuit tradition of holistic education

Related Papers

Catholic Contribution to the Indian History, Society and Culture 19th and 20th Centuries, Dharmaram Vidya Kshetram, Bangalore

Saumya Varghese

Christians have played a significant role in the field of education in India. The Christian Church’s constant evolution as a Teaching Institution in changing historical periods is well known. Individual Christians, different churches and religious Orders namely the Society of Jesus (SJ), the Congregation of the Religious of Jesus and Mary (RJM), Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (IBVM), Presentation Sisters, Apostolic Carmel (AC), Clarist Franciscan Missionaries of the Blessed Sacrament Sisters (CFMSS) etc have all played a significant role in the growth and development of the modern system of education in India. In this context, female education in India traditionally straitjacketed due to patriarchy, caste and customary practices received a stimulus only after the entry of Catholic nuns in the educational field. The educational enterprise of the Congregation of Jesus and Mary (RJM) that began its India mission in 1842 at Agra created history by being one of the sole pioneers of empowering women through education in this part of North India for about 60 years till the Franciscan sisters came to Agra in 1901. Following the rich Catholic intellectual tradition the JM institutions in India since the very beginning prioritized holistic development of their students—majority being girls—so that they would act as a leaven in their social set up. Irrespective of caste, creed or religion, the RJM orphanages and boarding establishments nurtured and sheltered poor girls and orphans. The paper seeks to unravel the catholic contribution towards women’s education in India through the microcosm of the RJM institutions in North India during the 19th and 20th centuries. It explores how and why the role of RJM was extremely significant given the social prejudices against female education, politico-economic and social turbulence caused by the 1857 revolution, two world wars and the partition of India, and, the lack of fiscal aid by the government both before and after Independence. Concurrently, it recreates the success story of the Catholic order in their mission of creating an enlightened community by both illustrating the meritorious alumni who excel in diverse fields such as politics and leadership, law and journalism, social work, theatre, education, award winning scientists, environmentalists etc; and, the awards and laurels won by the JM administrators.

American Catholic Studies

Peter McDonough

Vincent Sekhar

Leonor Seabra

On 27th February 1540, the Papal Bull Regimini Militantis Eclesiae estabilished the oficial institution of The Society of Jesus, centred on Ignacio de Layola. Its creation marked the begining of a new Order that would accomplish its apostolic mission through education and evangelisation. The Society´s first apostolic activity was in service of the Portuguese Crown. Thus, Jesuits became involdev within the missionary structure of the Portuguese Patronage and ended up preaching massively across non-European spaces and societies

eva fontana castelli

Journal of Peace and Justice Studies

Thomas Kelly

The vow of poverty is essential to many religious orders-as is their relationship to the actual people who are marginalized and poor in their context. This article traces the origin of Ignatius of Loyola's embrace of poverty and its transferal to the Society of Jesus he founded. It follows the challenge of maintaining that commitment considering the principle ministry of the Society in education. Finally, it notes developments in the past 60 years for how "faith and justice" are framed and understood. Ignatius' preference for Jesuits to live in proximity to the poor is certainly challenged in the U.S. context of higher education. When people think of the Jesuits today, ministries recognized as directly and indirectly serving the poor often come to mind. Is this a recent commitment made after Vatican II (1962-65)

Markus Friedrich

Maurice Whitehead

in: Arts, Portraits and Representation in the Reformation Era. Proceedings of the Fourth Reformation Research Consortium Conference, pp. 291-302

Patrizio Foresta

Bradley T Blankemeyer

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Jose Vicente Serrao

Roberto Sani

Beata Topij-Stempińska

Jose Kalapura

Ateneo SALT Institute [SALT]

International Studies in Catholic Education

Joseph Evans

Snehashish Das

Emanuele J Colombo

FRÜHNEUZEITFORSCHUNG IN DER HABSBURGERMONARCHIE. Adel und Wiener Hof – Konfessionalisierung – Siebenbürgen/ KORAÚJKORKUTATÁS A HABSBURG MONARCHIÁBAN. Nemesség és bécsi udvar – konfesszionalizáció – Erdély/ Herausgegeben von ISTVÁN FAZEKAS, MARTIN SCHEUTZ, CSABA SZABÓ UND THOMAS WINKELBAUER

Monika Bizoňová

CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo

Soprang Machiri

Stephen Mckinney

Duncan Wielzen

Maria Patricia Williams

Christine Vogel

Ferdinand Dagmang

Religious Education

Toke Elshof

Theology and Philosophy of Education

Stuart Nicolson

Solidarity the Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics

Tracey Rowland

Bibhuti Biswal

Joseph Varghese Kureethara

Społeczeństwo i Edukacja, Nr2/2009

kiyokazu nakatomi

Lamulani B Ngwenya

Oxford Bibliographies Online Datasets

Robert Aleksander Maryks

Paul Sullins

Education Without Boundaries – New Opportunities, New Challenges

Staff Writer
July 15, 2021

School closures during the pandemic brought about many changes to educational systems. Administrators, teachers, students, and parents each faced significant challenges through the course of the year. In some regards, these changes provided new opportunities for students through remote learning platforms. In other instances, however, some struggled with the lack of in-person support and hands-on learning. But as we emerge from the pandemic, schools will not only be faced with these issues but new ones as well. And one of these may well be dealing with classrooms without borders.

Understandably, students who attend public school systems in the US are required to live within specific school districts. But during the pandemic, the boom of online learning platforms allowed some leniency in this regard. ( Read more about the online learning boom in this Bold story .) Currently enrolled students were allowed to log in remotely in order to perform educational activities. Most did this from home within the school district, but some chose to do this from abroad. In essence, this education without boundaries, at least in a physical sense, offered needed learning opportunities for some students. This raises the possibility of how school systems may to consider classrooms without borders in the future.

“It takes a thirst for education on the part of the student to log in to school from Egypt or Kenya. It takes dedication from the teachers, staff, school board and administration to make that happen.” – Pat Politano Mid-Manhattan School District Spokesperson

A Snapshot of Remote Education without Boundaries

To gain a better understanding of what classrooms without borders looks like, it’s worth examining student behaviors this past year. In many school districts, particularly in urban areas, some immigrant and minority students chose to attend from afar. While residing in countries like the Dominican Republic, Kenya, Honduras, and others, these students accessed school platforms online. In total, as many as 2 to 3% of these individuals periodically attended classes abroad. Given the circumstances surrounding the pandemic, education without boundaries made sense for some.

In many cases, students accessing public school systems from other countries did so out of necessity. Some parents, who were unable to secure childcare at home while working, sought the assistance of foreign relatives. Other students traveled to other countries to care for sick relatives. And others simply took the opportunity that education without boundaries offered to reconnect with relatives living elsewhere. Because all students were essentially participating in classrooms without borders, many students saw this as permissible.

“We of course don’t encourage it. But families here have just faced so many challenges during the pandemic. I’d rather have them learning from wherever they are than not.” – Susana A. Perón, Deputy Superintendent of Paterson Public Schools

Challenges with Classrooms without Borders

In terms of education without boundaries, clear challenges do exist. For one, school districts require that students reside within geographic areas in order to attend both online and in-person sessions. As a result, students logging in remotely can usually only be abroad for a certain amount of time. In addition, classrooms without borders means that students are on different time zones. This means some students may need to access online activities at unusual hours. Notably, this is usually not ideal when trying to create ideal learning environments.

It is also quite clear that students choosing to log in remotely from other countries tend to be immigrants and minorities. It is well recognized that these students already suffer from achievement gaps in traditional classrooms. Therefore, classrooms without borders could exacerbate these problems. The lack of in-person support and inherent technology issues with remote access could make matters worse. This form of education without boundaries enables remote access that can certainly be helpful. But at the same time, it may also create additional obstacles to learning for some students.

“It’s one thing to say kids can log in anytime, anywhere. But if they’ve gone someplace where they need to log in at 2 a.m., that doesn’t seem ideal.” – Mike Magee, Chief Executive of Chiefs for Change

Seizing Potential Opportunities with Remote Learning

If there is one thing that the pandemic taught us, it’s that we are resilient and can rapidly adapt to change. This was certainly true of educational systems as teachers and administrators had to quickly adopt new practices. Notably, one of these practices involved the implementation of online learning systems. Educators scrambled to create new curricula and new learning activities in this new environment. At the same time, they also had to develop new support structures to help both students and parents alike. Though this was challenging, these school systems effectively created classrooms without borders. And now that they are in place, new opportunities for education without boundaries exist.

Understanding this, administrators and teachers together must embrace these opportunities moving forward. Current classrooms without borders have notably given some students and parents a level of support needed amidst a crisis. From this perspective, further developing education without boundaries could result in more effective ways to meet student and parent needs. While these systems should never sacrifice academic quality, it’s evident that many students thrive in remote online learning environments. Therefore, providing such options for learning in a more comprehensive manner could have clear advantages. These are worthwhile pursuits that educational systems should consider in a post-pandemic world.

Borderless Classrooms – Next Steps

Virtual environments are proving to be advantageous in a number of areas. This includes not only virtual entertainment platforms but also those involving telemedicine and telehealth. Beyond public school systems, remote online learning platforms are also on the rise. Therefore, it seems quite logical that public school systems should explore these opportunities as well. Classrooms without borders could potentially better utilize limited educational resources. They could also improve access to learning supports that may otherwise not be available. Creative solutions are needed for education without boundaries to be realized. But as the pandemic has clearly shown, these alternatives do have potential.

Defining diversity, equity and inclusion for business can be difficult – get the free six-page handout that can help put you on the right track!

Don't miss out!

The bold wire delivers our latest global news, exclusive top stories, career opportunities and more..

Thank you for subscribing!

Builds a Better World.

Publications

Project Bold Life
Notes from Ed
Business Process
Digital Marketing
[email protected]

Privacy Overview
Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Associations
Awards & Media
Mandatory Disclosure
Sports School
Holiday & Exam Schedule
Stats & Figures

Daily Schedule

Transfer Certificates
Life at Shivneri
Rules & Regulations
Admission Procedure
Fee Structure
Boarding Kit
Admission Enquiry

Education without Boundaries.

In today's world, textbooks are not enough. Students must widen their horizons and learn about the world outside schools right from a tender age.

Key points from the article -

Self-reliance
Increased social skills
Alternative activities
Character development
Studying made easy
Helpful Relocation
Competitive Exams

Education is an enlightening experience. It’s an unending process. We keep learning new things, gaining new experiences all through our lives. Why should schools be any different? We send our children to school to prepare them for a life as adults. We provide with them with the best tools, best opportunities, we as parents and or guardians can provide. There are many benefits for preparing our children to a life outside of school and most importantly education beyond rote learning and not understanding.

The earlier models of education focused mainly on just textbooks was goal oriented towards a career. There has been a humongous change in the educational system in the past few years. If we just take the example of last year.Living through a pandemic, an ongoing pandemic, we are realizing the importance of being self-reliant. When we were under lockdown, living at home, working, cooking, cleaning, managing the kids, keeping them busy, keeping your sanity and in an atmosphere of uncertainty we truly understood the efforts it takes to managing a home and maintaining a work life balance.

The true meaning of education is not only attending school, it’s not only about your grades and the rank you score in school. Education involves the all-round development of a child. It combines subjects such as gardening along with biology. History along with music or dance.

Education is an experience and it’s preparing us for a life outside school, for a life beyond just crunching numbers. It’s preparing us for a life of self- love, acceptance no matter who we are or of our differences. India is a land of diversity. We are a country of over 22 languages.We are a country of diversity, unity, togetherness and belonging. We at Shivneri boarding school have students who are diverse, different and culturally different. At our school students mingle with each other, learn together, study, grow, share dorms and spend their day learning from a vast variety of subjects. We are devoted towards the all-round development of your child. We are instilling values of confidence, personal growth and independence. To make sure that our students are well looked at and kept busy during the day we have a strict schedule that we adhere to. Students begin their day early in the morning.

Their daily schedule at Shivneri boarding school is: -

Get up -5.30am
Get Ready -5.30-6.00am
Yoga, Exercise, Morning PT 6.00-7.00am
Bathing & getting ready for School -7.00-8.00am
Breakfast -8.00-8.30am
Assembly -8.30am-09.00pm
School Lectures - 09.00am-12.30pm
Lunch -12.30pm-1.10pm
School Lectures -1.10pm-3.30pm
Wash and Snacks -3.30pm-5.00pm
Games and Activities -5.00pm-6.00pm
Reinforcement Classes -6.00pm-7.30pm
Dinner -7.30pm-8.10pm
Extra Classes for IX-XII / HW Time -8.10pm-9.10pm
Internet/ TV/ Phone call / Medicines -9.10-9.30pm
Attendance -9.30pm-9.45pm
Brush & Lights Off -09.45PM-10.00PM

Life is complicated. Who we are as individuals has a lot to do with how we grew up, the kind of experiences we were exposed to as children, what were the values that we believed in?

At Shivneri boarding school , we believe that these are some of the core values that help shape a child and who they will turn out to be in the future: -

Respecting individuals

Instilling these values in children from a tender age is the best way to start your child’s education. These are some of the lessons they will carry all through their life.

Students begin the day with yoga, exercise and PT. There are many benefits to exercising in the morning, some of them are: -

Better Focus
More energy
Better mood
Support weight loss
Improved sleep.

After exercising children then get ready for school and then head for breakfast. At Shivneri boarding school our meal plan changes every fortnightly. Our kitchens are cleaned every day before and every student meals. We ensure that proper hygiene is maintained in the kitchen for our children’s safety.

Sending your child to a CBSC Curriculum boarding school such as Shivneri boarding school can be very beneficial for your children. Listed below are some benefits of boarding schools:

Self-reliance –

Students are responsible for taking care of their own personal belongings. Older students are responsible for keeping their beds clean, their clothes and their personal belongings. Responsibilities like these are what make kids self-reliant. They learn how to take care of themselves and their belongings.

Increased social skills –

With a vast variety of clubs such as the Eco-club, Science club, robotics club and many more such fun learning opportunities for children to learn and socialize. Here they will perform in groups and form teams, talk and spend time with each other every day, they are working better every day.

Alternative activities

The CBSE Curriculum offers a ton of benefits for your child, some of them are as follows:

Studying made easy:

CBSE Follows a scientific approach where students are supposed to appear or only 1 question paper per subject. This relieves children of unnecessary pressure and stress that is usually associated with examinations.

Helpful Relocation:

A large number of schools in India are already affiliated to the CBSE Module of studying. This makes it easier for when parents want to change cities and can easily get their children enrolled in a CBSE Board school in case of work/ personal transfers.

Competitive Exams: -

The CBSE Syllabus is designed to prepare students for various entrance exams such as IIT-JEE, MHT-CET, NATA, AITP (ALPHA INTEGRATED TRAINING PROGRAM) .

Student preparing for competitive exams.

Comprehension and Practice is the key to success in competitive exams. Our skilled faculty and digital learning at Shivneri boarding school helps students to comprehend in a better way. The course does not offer only the entrance exam coaching but also 12th Science (CBSE). Our Junior college is affiliated with CBSE Delhi. This is a residential course of 2 years wherein students stay in the most comfortable environment.

We at Shivneri boarding school want our students to receive the best of everything. The best education at their disposal, the best learning opportunities, better focus and ultimately a happy healthy life. For more information about our school: - https://www.shivnerischool.com/

Essay on Importance of Education for Students

500 words essay on importance of education.

To say Education is important is an understatement. Education is a weapon to improve one’s life. It is probably the most important tool to change one’s life. Education for a child begins at home. It is a lifelong process that ends with death. Education certainly determines the quality of an individual’s life. Education improves one’s knowledge, skills and develops the personality and attitude. Most noteworthy, Education affects the chances of employment for people. A highly educated individual is probably very likely to get a good job. In this essay on importance of education, we will tell you about the value of education in life and society.

Importance of Education in Life

First of all, Education teaches the ability to read and write. Reading and writing is the first step in Education. Most information is done by writing. Hence, the lack of writing skill means missing out on a lot of information. Consequently, Education makes people literate.

Above all, Education is extremely important for employment. It certainly is a great opportunity to make a decent living. This is due to the skills of a high paying job that Education provides. Uneducated people are probably at a huge disadvantage when it comes to jobs. It seems like many poor people improve their lives with the help of Education.

Better Communication is yet another role in Education. Education improves and refines the speech of a person. Furthermore, individuals also improve other means of communication with Education.

Education makes an individual a better user of technology. Education certainly provides the technical skills necessary for using technology . Hence, without Education, it would probably be difficult to handle modern machines.

People become more mature with the help of Education. Sophistication enters the life of educated people. Above all, Education teaches the value of discipline to individuals. Educated people also realize the value of time much more. To educated people, time is equal to money.

Finally, Educations enables individuals to express their views efficiently. Educated individuals can explain their opinions in a clear manner. Hence, educated people are quite likely to convince people to their point of view.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance of Education in Society

First of all, Education helps in spreading knowledge in society. This is perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of Education. There is a quick propagation of knowledge in an educated society. Furthermore, there is a transfer of knowledge from generation to another by Education.

Education helps in the development and innovation of technology. Most noteworthy, the more the education, the more technology will spread. Important developments in war equipment, medicine , computers, take place due to Education.

Education is a ray of light in the darkness. It certainly is a hope for a good life. Education is a basic right of every Human on this Planet. To deny this right is evil. Uneducated youth is the worst thing for Humanity. Above all, the governments of all countries must ensure to spread Education.

FAQs on Essay on Importance of Education

Q.1 How Education helps in Employment?

A.1 Education helps in Employment by providing necessary skills. These skills are important for doing a high paying job.

Q.2 Mention one way in Education helps a society?

A.2 Education helps society by spreading knowledge. This certainly is one excellent contribution to Education.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

Career Advice

How to Listen Less

By Kerry Ann Rockquemore

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

Dear Kerry Ann,

Last week, an essay (“ Thanks for Listening ”) made the rounds on social media about the invisible, unrewarded and time-intensive emotional labor involved in listening, empathizing, problem solving and resource finding. It described how the offices of “nice women” become confessionals where students disclose private information, share secrets, request assistance, present crises, unload emotional problems and cry (a lot).

When I read it, all I could think was: Ugh. That’s me! I understand all the structural reasons why this happens, but I don’t know how to change it. I’m exhausted, and I’m falling behind on my research and writing. I’m ready to make some changes, but I’m not sure what changes to make.

Please advise.

Warm and Fuzzy

Dear Warm and Fuzzy,

Your experience resonates with me personally. I’m 4 feet 10 inches tall, a woman of color, a great listener and definitely perceived as “warm and fuzzy.” Early in my career, my office was an unending stream of emotional disclosure. Part of me felt honored that people feel safe with me. Part of me felt like I wanted to be the professor I never had. And part of me cared so deeply about my students that I want all of them to feel seen, heard and supported in their growth.

Despite my good intentions, I quickly burned out, because there are personal, physical and emotional costs to that level of emotional work. Doing this labor in addition to classroom teaching, service and maintaining a high level of research productivity left me working all the time.

I’ve written elsewhere about how race, class, gender and size shape professors’ daily interactions, so I’ll respect your question by focusing on what you can do to change this pattern. Let me say this with love, compassion and respect: it’s time to talk about boundaries.

Why Boundaries Are Important

At the most basic level, boundaries are the guidelines that we use to set expectations, responsibilities and limits for ourselves and other people. As a faculty member, boundaries determine what is (and what is not) OK in our relationships with students. Because there is a power differential between you and your student, what you create and allow drive the conversational boundaries of what happens in your office. In other words, you are the professor, so you set the boundaries.

It’s helpful to imagine boundaries as Henry Cloud and John Townsend describe in Boundaries : “A personal property line that marks those things for which we are responsible.” But where you draw that personal property line is up to you and depends on how you understand your role as a professor.

To be clear, I don’t believe there’s a right or wrong place to draw your boundaries. But it’s important for you to make conscious, intentional and consistent choices about your boundaries. And because the way faculty members understand their role varies, let me share a few guiding questions you can use to start choosing where you want to create boundaries for yourself.

Where Does Your Responsibility as a Professor Begin and End?

The foundation of creating healthy boundaries between yourself and students is how you understand what you are -- and are not -- responsible for as a professor. At one end of the spectrum, some faculty members imagine that their responsibility is restricted to teaching the material outlined in their course description. Faculty members who have a short list of responsibilities tend to have high boundaries and formal interactions because they don’t feel responsible for solving students’ personal problems, helping them navigate the campus support services or advising them on major life decisions.

At the other end of the spectrum are faculty members who believe that their duty as a professor includes advising, mentoring, role modeling, being on call 24-7 and playing a quasi-parental role in students’ lives. This far more expansive list of responsibilities results in lower boundaries and far more frequent and informal interactions.

I encourage you to spend some time asking yourself: 1) What precisely are my responsibilities as a professor? 2) What are my students’ responsibilities? and 3) Where exactly does my responsibility end and my students’ responsibility begin? This clarity will help you to feel more comfortable defending your boundaries when students cross them, without any guilt whatsoever. Once you’ve written down what your responsibilities are (and are not), then it’s time to take stock of whether your behavior supports (or undermines) those boundaries.

What Nonverbal Cues Are You Sending?

When it comes to your office and the conversations that take place with students in it, you are in charge -- whether your realize it or not. You create the space, you cue students (verbally and nonverbally) about what you will allow, and your responses either give students permission to show up outside of your office hours and start disclosing private information or not.

If you are young, female, underrepresented and/or generally perceived as a nice person, you may find students making assumptions about your boundaries or testing your boundaries in ways that are not aligned with where you have drawn them. I’m not saying it’s fair that you may have to frequently defend your boundaries. I’m saying that’s real and it’s why you have to be extra clear about where your boundaries lie and skillfully push back when students cross them.

To that end, it’s important that you do not unintentionally send mixed messages. In other words, even before you say anything, you nonverbally communicate a wide range of messages. For example, when it comes to your office, pause to ask yourself:

Do you close your door when you’re working? If not, why not?
If someone knocks, do you jump up to answer the door even if you’re in the middle of something?
How do you answer the door when people knock? Do you open the door wide or body block the entry?
Do you keep tissues visible and easily accessible on your desk (silently communicating, “Feel free to cry here”)?
Do you nod and maintain prolonged eye contact when people disclose personal information?
Do you give out your personal cell phone number to undergraduate or graduate students?
Are you Facebook friends with students?
Are you responding to student emails in the evenings and on weekends?
What are your touching practices? (Do you hug crying students, put hands on their shoulders or arms, or grab their hands for reassurance?)

I’m asking you to reflect on these questions as a way to take stock of what messages you are sending to students nonverbally and determine whether those messages support your boundaries or undermine them.

Do You Choose Your Responses or Default to Listening?

When you clarify your boundaries, you can be more assertive in shaping conversations. The problem is that when you lack clarity, it may feel as if you have no options in how to respond to common ramp-up question such as, “This is confidential, right?” So you default to yes (or nod).

In doing so, you are giving a student permission to disclose personal and confidential information. And if saying yes is within your boundaries, great! There’s no problem. But if that question is a clear red flag that somebody is about to cross a boundary for you, then guess what? You have plenty of other ways to respond, including the following:

Hold up your hand in the stop gesture.
Shake your head to indicate no.
Give the time-out gesture and say directly, “Let me stop you for a minute to clarify the boundaries of our relationship as a teacher and student.”
Lean back, cross your arms and say: “Well, I’m your professor, so if this is directly related to your classroom performance you can proceed. But if not, then I don’t need to know.”
Say, “It sounds like you need a space to have a confidential conversation, and I can’t help you because I’m not trained as a _______ (therapist/crisis counselor/financial aid specialist, etc.). Do you know how to connect with the _______ on campus (insert appropriate support service)?”

These are examples of acceptable responses if a student’s disclosure is going beyond what you feel responsible for as a professor. I’m providing examples because, many times, new faculty members don’t know how to defend their boundaries verbally. I encourage you to use these if they are helpful and remind yourself that, in doing so, you are modeling professional boundaries for your students.

What Structures Do You Have in Place to Communicate Your Boundaries?

Since you’re clarifying your boundaries, it’s a great time to review your course policies to see if they support -- or undermine -- your boundaries with students. Have you:

Defined your relationship in your syllabus? (For example, “My responsibilities as your instructor are …. Your responsibilities as a student are ….)
Set up your office-hour time slots to reflect your boundaries? If you have a wide sense of responsibilities, then longer appointments are fine. If you have a narrow sense of responsibilities, 15-minute increments let students know that you have limited time and they need to stay focused.
Explicitly stated who is eligible to attend your office hours in a way that supports your boundaries? Again, if they are wide, anyone is welcome. If they are narrow, clarify that only students currently enrolled in your classes are eligible for office hours.
Put contact information for campus support services (psychological, health, academic, transportation and security) in your syllabus?
Created a flyer with relevant support service information to hand students in your office hours when they present concerns that are outside of your responsibility?
Calibrated the contact information you make available and your email policies to support your boundaries?

All of these questions are important, because the messages you send via your course policies can support the boundaries you want to establish.

What Are the Signs That You Need a Boundary Adjustment?

Finally, I encourage you to notice now how you feel when your boundaries are crossed. You have identified feeling exhausted and frustrated as red flags. I would add that resentment, anger and excessive frustration with others who aren’t doing the same emotional labor are common signs that it’s time for a boundary adjustment. If you know what the emotional signs are, then you can make adjustments whenever they pop up.

I also want to warn you that when you first start to experiment with setting boundaries, it may feel awkward and difficult. For example, you may feel powerful waves of guilt the first time a student (particularly one who is not enrolled in your class) asks, “Do you have time to talk?” and you politely decline. That guilt will be particularly intense if your gender, class, religious or cultural socialization has a strong element of self-sacrifice in it. It may be intensified when others openly express displeasure with your unwillingness to meet their needs. That’s a normal part of the process! So acknowledge the feelings, remind yourself about what you are (and are not) responsible for, and affirm the value of healthy boundaries with your students.

I hope that these questions are received in the spirit they are given: to help those of you who find yourself exhausted from listening too much to feel empowered to listen when, where and under what circumstances you choose to do so -- as opposed to whenever someone wants to unload and considers your office the best place to do that. I’m sure readers will have lots of additional concrete tips and suggestions on setting boundaries, and I encourage everyone to share those freely in the comment section below.

Peace and productivity,

Kerry Ann Rockquemore, Ph.D.

President, National Center for Faculty Development & Diversity

A cartoon man sits slumped over a desk while several hands surround him holding different items, including cellphones, tablets, clocks and papers

Faculty Members Are Burned Out—and Technology Is Partly to Blame

A new report shows instructors feel like they’re always on the clock and that many believe the use of technology, in

Share This Article

How to Mitigate Bias and Hire the Best People

Patrick Arens shares an approach to reviewing candidates that helps you select those most suited to do the job rather

Huge pair of scissors above cuts strings on seven people below sitting in office chairs

The Warning Signs of Academic Layoffs

Ryan Anderson advises on how to tell if your institution is gearing up for them and how you can prepare and protect y

Word “accepted” with asterisk written in white letters on a black background

Legislation Isn’t All That Negatively Impacts DEI Practitioners

Many experience incivility, bullying, belittling and a disregard for their views and feelings on their own campuses,

Become a Member
Sign up for Newsletters
Learning & Assessment
Diversity & Equity
Career Development
Labor & Unionization
Shared Governance
Academic Freedom
Books & Publishing
Financial Aid
Residential Life
Free Speech
Physical & Mental Health
Race & Ethnicity
Sex & Gender
Socioeconomics
Traditional-Age
Adult & Post-Traditional
Teaching & Learning
Artificial Intelligence
Digital Publishing
Data Analytics
Administrative Tech
Alternative Credentials
Financial Health
Cost-Cutting
Revenue Strategies
Academic Programs
Physical Campuses
Mergers & Collaboration
Fundraising
Research Universities
Regional Public Universities
Community Colleges
Private Nonprofit Colleges
Minority-Serving Institutions
Religious Colleges
Women's Colleges
Specialized Colleges
For-Profit Colleges
Executive Leadership
Trustees & Regents
State Oversight
Accreditation
Politics & Elections
Supreme Court
Student Aid Policy
Science & Research Policy
State Policy
Colleges & Localities
Employee Satisfaction
Remote & Flexible Work
Staff Issues
Study Abroad
International Students in U.S.
U.S. Colleges in the World
Intellectual Affairs
Seeking a Faculty Job
Advancing in the Faculty
Seeking an Administrative Job
Advancing as an Administrator
Beyond Transfer
Call to Action
Confessions of a Community College Dean
Higher Ed Gamma
Higher Ed Policy
Just Explain It to Me!
Just Visiting
Law, Policy—and IT?
Leadership & StratEDgy
Leadership in Higher Education
Learning Innovation
Online: Trending Now
Resident Scholar
University of Venus
Student Voice
Academic Life
Health & Wellness
The College Experience
Life After College
Academic Minute
Weekly Wisdom
Reports & Data
Quick Takes
Advertising & Marketing
Consulting Services
Data & Insights
Hiring & Jobs
Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

Youth Break The Boundaries

Inspire The Next

5 Scholarship Without Essay

Hello youth generation!!

In searching for scholarships, many students and college students feel relieved when they find scholarship opportunities that do not require long essays. While writing essays is a common form of scholarship application, there are a variety of interesting scholarships that allow you to obtain funding without having to compose long words.

In this article, we’ll explore five interesting scholarships that don’t require you to write an essay. From academic merit-based opportunities to demographic criteria or specific skills, let’s explore together these scholarships that open the door for eager students to get an education without the burden of essay writing. Discover these opportunities and learn how you can apply without having to face piles of pages of long essays.

Many scholarships do not require an essay as part of the application requirements. Some of them may require you to fill out an application form, provide personal information, or upload certain documents. Here are some examples of scholarships without essays:

Scholarships Based on Academic Criteria : Some scholarships only consider your academic achievements, such as a high grade point average or standardized test results.
Scholarships Based on Social Involvement or Special Skills : These scholarships are awarded to those who have active involvement in social activities, arts, sports, or specific skills without requiring an essay.
Scholarships Based on Demographic Criteria : Some scholarships are aimed at specific groups such as ethnicity, religion, or gender, without requiring an essay.
Financial Criteria Based Scholarship : This scholarship is awarded to those who meet certain financial requirements without the need to write an essay.
Scholarships by Lottery or Drawing : Some scholarships select recipients randomly from among qualified applicants without requiring written contributions.

However, it is important to always read the terms and conditions carefully when applying for a scholarship. Even though it doesn’t require an essay, there may be other requirements you need to meet. Be sure to understand all instructions and deadlines associated with the scholarship application you are interested in.

Important Terms For Overseas Scholarships

Embarking on a journey to secure an overseas scholarship can be both exhilarating and daunting. As you navigate the intricate process of applying for financial aid to pursue your education abroad, understanding the terminology associated with scholarships is crucial. These terms serve as the building blocks of your scholarship application, shaping your path to academic success in a foreign land.

LANGKAH-LANGKAH PENDAFTARAN KIP KULIAH JALUR SNBP & SNBT 2024

Dalam artikel ini, akan diuraikan secara detail langkah-langkah yang perlu Anda ikuti untuk mendaftar dan mengikuti proses seleksi KIP Kuliah…

48 SELF GROWTH

Welcome to the transformative journey of 48 Self Growth, where personal development becomes a daily commitment. In the next 48…

write essay on education without boundaries

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS

Essay on Education Without Boundaries

100 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

250 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Implications for Learners

Challenges and Opportunities

500 Words Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Breaking Down Physical Boundaries

Transcending Traditional Disciplinary Boundaries

Shifting from Teacher-Centered to Learner-Centered Approach

Challenges and Future Prospects

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Essay on Education Without Boundaries

Education Without Boundaries Essay Writing Tips

Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 10 Lines – Examples

Sample Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 100-180 Words

Short Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 200-500 Words

Essay on Education Without Boundaries in 1000-1500 Words

Related Essays

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Education Without Boundaries

what is qrius

Featured articles

Cuestiones Educativas

13 de noviembre de 2020

The turning point: Why we must transform education now

Why do we need to transform education?

What are the key areas that need to be transformed?

What is the Transforming Education Summit?

Related items

More on this subject

Other recent news

Education without Boundaries

Key researchers

Project spotlight

Current projects

British Council UK-SA Project

UK-SEA Partnerships and Exchanges Baseline Research (UK-SEA PEER)

Archive projects

Enhancing Engineering Education Project

PhD opportunities

K–12 Without Borders: Public School Students, Families, and Teachers Shut in by Education Boundaries

Introduction

Part I: Students

Part II: Homeowners

Part III: Teachers

Part IV: Policy Solutions

About the Authors

Further Reading

To read this content please select one of the options below:

All feedback is valuable

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Teaching without boundaries: interviews exploring the adaptation of collaborative inquiry to the American context

Introduction

From collaborative inquiry to instructional improvement

Figure 1. the TPEG collaborative inquiry cycle.

Challenges to implementation

Teacher peer excellence group (TPEG)

Study settings

Table 1. School characteristics for sample schools.

Data Collection and Analysis

Table 2. statistics on the qualitative data collected.

Ethical approval

What are the key action steps that schools used to adopt and sustain collaborative inquiry cycles?

Table 3. Summary of findings of key action steps for collaborative inquiry cycles.

Compared to the original theory of change, what local adaptations were made to the TPEG model and why?

Table 4. Summary of local adaptations to TPEG theory of action.

Declaration of source work

Data availability

Extended data

Author information

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated

Are you a Gates-funded researcher?

Get the Reddit app

Education Beyond Boundaries : A manifestation of the Jesuit tradition of holistic education