by Lynn Barendsen

At work, when and how do you consider questions about excellence? Some further questions that might come to mind about excellence at work are:

• Do you have time to reflect and consider the quality of your work?

• Do you answer to an immediate supervisor, and does their opinion impact your understanding of excellence at work?  

• Do you supervise others, and do you regularly discuss what is and isn’t quality work with them?

• How do you do your “best” work?

• Does your current work allow you to make the most of your skills?

• What is the relationship between high quality work and “good work”?

At The Good Project, “good work” is about three “Es”: ethics (contributing to the world in a positive way and doing no harm), engagement (meaningful, fulfilling), and excellence (high quality). This blog focuses on excellence: what we mean by this term, how it has evolved since our research began, and particular contexts to take into account when reflecting upon and discussing excellence in today’s climate.

During our original research of the nature of “good work” in the mid 1990s, we identified practitioners to interview via a process of recommendations, based predominantly on excellence. Each time we began to study a new profession (genetics, journalism, medicine or law, for example), we would conduct a series of informant interviews, talking with experts in that field. These “gatekeepers” would help us to identify emerging issues in that particular profession; they also helped us to identify established or emerging leaders. When we asked about leaders in the field, we asked only about excellent, or high quality, work; we didn’t ask for the most ethical leaders, nor did we ask about those who found meaning in their work. In other words, when we first began our research, “excellence” meant expertise: high-achieving, well-known, respected work. We wanted to talk with those who were leaders in their various professions in terms of high quality work (the other two “Es” were identified as a result of the data gathered through conversations with “excellent” workers).

In the decades since this research, our understandings of excellence in work have evolved in multiple ways. Today, we believe that it’s critical to take into account how personal standards for excellence may differ from one another. For example, someone who has been working in a particular field for decades will have developed a level of expertise not possible for a novice; someone raised with wealth and privilege will have a different approach to work than someone struggling with food insecurity and lack of housing. There are many other examples of difference with respect to the factors that impact how individuals approach their work. If we truly want to encourage excellence in work (not to mention ethics, engagement and other elements of good work we have yet to identify), everyone must feel motivated and supported, and we must recognize that what works for some doesn’t work for others. Often, excellence is our individual “best” effort, determined by any number of factors, at a particular moment in time.

Although an individual “best” on any given day can shift, what’s important are the standards to which we hold ourselves. We bring varied notions of excellence to the table based on a number of factors, including cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, neurological and other differences. That said, there are of course standards of “excellence” that are important to keep in mind. For example, a surgeon’s “personal best” on a given day is not enough if it puts a patient’s life at risk. If she is tired and not able to meet her profession’s standards, perhaps her personal best on that day involves rest and recuperation rather than work in the operating room. Importantly, this is why we also have professional standards that must be met, so that is not just up to individual, personal judgment.

On The Good Project, we have come to believe that the concept of excellence - like the full good work framework - is:

• attentive to the particular qualities and behaviors we want to cultivate in ourselves and others; 

• more than meeting a particular benchmark (like a grade) and is attentive to complexity;

• regularly reflected upon for insight and growth; 

• guided by personal values and is context specific but open to flexibility (e.g., excellence as a nurse looks different than it does for a journalist, a restaurant worker, or a teacher)

An additional important question, especially considering the current mental health crisis: is striving for the “best” necessarily a good thing? As Jennifer Breheny Wallace has highlighted in her bestselling book, Never Enough, optimizing performance has become toxic and dangerous in an achievement culture within a particular subset of the population. (Some solutions to this toxicity are suggested in this interview with the author.) Also crucial to any conversation about excellence is an understanding about difficulty and even, at times, failure: how do individuals respond to obstacles in their work? As a recent article on Failing Well explains, “intelligent” failure is common with innovation, and if learning happens as a result of a failed experience, the net result may in fact be positive.

When we work with high school students, we have had to make clear that we are not insisting that every student be “excellent” every day and in every way. But where and how these lines are drawn are important topics of conversation, for educators, for students, for school communities as a whole and of course, for families.

Some questions we continue to ponder:

• Does all work have to be “excellent,” or can it be really good or great? Does this vary by the work carried out? What is the relationship between “perfection” and high quality work? Do you need to be an expert to do excellent work? What is the relationship between competence and high quality work?

• How are our expectations of “excellence” connected to the number of people impacted by the work carried out? Is there a difference, for example, in what we expect of a rocket scientist or an architect because the work they do can potentially help or harm a large number of people?

• Do we consider the years of training required to do a particular type of work, or the number of years someone has been in a particular position, in our expectations about excellence? In other words, do we expect more in some ways of a lawyer than a school bus driver, or more of a chef who has been in the kitchen for 15 years than one who has been working for 5?

• How are our understandings of excellence connected to the responsibilities of a particular type of work?

• What are the differences between the process of excellence and the product of the work? Consider, for example, the “journey” towards excellence versus the actual product of “being” excellent. Sometimes failing along the way is a positive process, as it allows for innovation. What are the important distinctions between the process of work and the end result of those efforts?

Below are some resources from The Good Project that you might use to explore excellence:

• A video describing the three Es of excellence, ethics and engagement

• “The Meaning of Grades” Dilemma

• “When In Doubt, Make it Excellent” Dilemma

• Famous Failures Activity

• What is Excellent Work Activity

by Danny Mucinskas

Throughout our lives, we will meet countless individuals and be exposed to the stories of thousands of other people through mass media. The relationships that we develop, whether direct interpersonal relationships (such as a deep friendship or family bond) or parasocial relationships (such as being a fan of a celebrity) can have profound effects on our values, identity development, decisions, and actions. Consider:

• What types of relationships in your life have influenced you in positive and negative ways? 

• Is there a particular person or persons who shaped who you are today? 

• Have you held this role for someone else in your life? Do you think you’ve helped shape who they are in positive ways? 

In various lines of qualitative work carried out by The Good Project, related to both the way that adolescents navigate the world and how adults conduct their professional lives, we have often focused on two specific types of influential relationships. Research participants have spoken about:

1. Role models. These are people who others often seek to imitate or emulate based on some characteristic, behavior, or set of achievements in a particular field. People often find them to be inspiring and to represent something that they seek to accomplish themselves and are described as “looked up to.” While people often have a direct relationship with their role models (e.g., an older sibling), it is also frequently the case that role models are widely recognized individuals who may not know the people who are emulating them (e.g., a widely known author).

2. Mentors. These are people who others look to for guidance. Unlike role models, mentors (e.g., a teacher or a close colleague in a leadership position) are by necessity always known well to those they are advising, who are often seeking to follow in their footsteps. Mentors are often people who have experience or knowledge of a particular domain and can provide their mentees with support or feedback that can be actively used towards achieving the goals or ambitions of the mentee.

From research, we know that having role models is important for a variety of reasons. For example, role models are often responsible for increasing motivation towards goal achievement (Morgenroth et al., 2015), for setting examples of how one wants to work (particularly in parental role modeling; Wiese & Freunde, 2011), and can even inspire others to make bold decisions like starting a company (Bosma et al., 2012). Role modeling is also potentially associated with the development of character strengths (Johnson et al., 2016), with advancement of values like multicultural harmony (Onyekwuluje, 2000) and has been found to influence certain health outcomes (Yancey et al., 2011). 

Similarly, mentorship is also tied to a variety of positive outcomes and is often important in directly transmitting interpersonal support. In the health professions, mentorship models are relied upon for the sharing of knowledge, values, and emotional encouragement between older and younger members of the workforce (Henry-Noel et al., 2018), while mentors who embodied a “Close Connector” relationship model were found in one study to be most beneficial for youth outcomes (Austin et al., 2020). In the business world, 75% of executives say that having a mentor has been important to their careers, and 90% of workers with professional mentors are happy at work. It is clear, then, that across the lifespan, a relationship with a mentor can assist people in growing their skills and reaching their potential.

The demonstrated benefits of finding role models and mentors prompts all of us working in education to help young people to cultivate and maintain these types of relationships. From The Good Project’s years of investigating and speaking to individuals about these relationships, we have developed several insights which may not only be helpful for educators but also for adults as they do their work across the lifespan.

• We are all members of a multitude of communities, whether the city or town where we live, schools, families, workplaces, hobby groups, and more. We can each find and connect with mentors or role models in any one of these environments or circumstances. In an educational context, by allowing students to choose personally meaningful role models or mentors from any arena of life, the likelihood increases that students will make choices that represent a diversity of voices and identities. Thinking expansively about who might be a role model or mentor reduces the reliance on easy answers or moral paragons who might often be held up as exemplars but who may seem one-dimensional or out of reach (e.g., Mother Teresa, George Washington).

• No mentor or role model is perfect, and there may be a temptation for all of us to find one singular individual who possesses a multitude of admirable qualities or who is in exactly the right position to provide future career advice. Instead of looking for one individual, we have learned that it is possible for people to engage in “frag-mentoring.” Frag-mentoring is the concept that we can have several mentors at once, dependent on their qualities and their areas of expertise. For example, one might choose a senior colleague at work as a mentor for their tenacity and wisdom, even if they aren’t always someone who displays warmth as a friend, and also have a religious leader as a mentor for their spiritual devotion and community leadership, even if they aren’t always organized. The counsel or example of each one of these individuals might serve different purposes in particular circumstances, dependent upon one’s needs.

• Negative examples can be equally as powerful as positive ones. While the definitions of role models and mentors we offered above presuppose positive interactions or a desire to mirror, the opposite may also be true. People who don’t embody the expectations or qualities we value in others, such as a micromanaging boss or a noncommittal family member, can still be instructive from an opposite vantage point. What is it about these individuals that encapsulates what we don’t want to be like, and could their example serve as an “anti-mentor”?

• Concrete and direct action can come from mentorship or role model imitation with planning. Identifying individuals worth emulating as role models or interacting with as mentors is a first step, but the qualities or goals that make these people inspiring and worthwhile exemplars should be specifically named. Naming the qualities of a role model specifically or the goals that a mentor can support can be a tool for intention-setting and getting down to the particulars of what might be productive and life-changing about these relationships. For institutions like schools and workplaces, defined programs can also make mentoring concrete, such as a guest speaker series or a peer mentoring program.

While these insights may help a general audience think about mentors and role models, it can simultaneously be difficult to identify boundaries on who is a suitable individual to fulfill those roles. Notably, in forthcoming data collected by The Good Project, students (primarily secondary schoolers) were asked in an at-home reflection activity to identify multiple exemplars of “good work.” Analysis of their responses revealed that youth are already drawing on both close (e.g., family) and distant (e.g., celebrity) role models and that the qualities they admire in these individuals also cross a variety of complex dimensions of character strengths, including intellectual, moral, and performance character. Yet while these findings are encouraging, students often spoke of business leaders who have questionable scruples (e.g., Elon Musk) as people worthy of imitation as role models. 

While we believe in the idea identified above (that no mentor or role model candidate is perfect), every individual represents a complicated totality of decisions, experiences, and interactions with others and the world. As a project that believes in excellence, engagement, and ethics in human pursuits, The Good Project’s stance is to encourage the choice of mentors and role models who embody convictions and virtues with universal appeal, including common good, equity, empathy, perspective-taking, and sustainability. To complete the three-dimension framework of “good work” that is at the center of our project, leaders who are excellent and engaged in their pursuits must also be ethical.

Some further resources related to role models and mentors that you could explore are:

• Our sets of activities related to mentors and role models.

• Nobel Prize in Mentorship?, a blog post by Lynn Barendsen about the power of mentoring relationships.

• The Making of a Professional, a blog post by Howard Gardner that touches upon the way that models can assist professional development.

• Good Work and How It Happens, a blog post by Arlene Pang about becoming a teacher and how mentorship played a role in her experience.

• This list of role model resources compiled after conversation with teachers. 

• Two dilemmas touching on mentorship: Mentorship at a Distance and What’s a Mentor?. 

by Lynn Barendsen

One of the key three “Es” of “good work”, “ethics” is often the most fraught. Excellence is fairly straightforward: excellence means doing high quality work, or putting in your best effort. Engagement also seems relatively easy to understand because many of us feel it as we work: it’s what keeps us going when work gets hard, and can involve some combination of finding meaning, purpose or enjoyment in our work. But ethics - and doing ethical work - are more complicated. Ethics involve more than questions of “right” or “wrong” because sometimes there can be multiple “right” answers, no “good” answers or sometimes, very few if any positive choices. Ask yourself:

• Have you ever been conflicted about a difficult decision at work? 

• Have you perceived something that seems unfair, been unsure about whether or not to speak up, or doubtful about whether anything will change if you do? 

• Have you been placed in an uncomfortable position when a colleague confides in you, feeling that you need to cover or bend the truth to protect that confidence?

On The Good Project, we are not philosophers by training. Nonetheless, we recognize the roots of moral philosophy in ethical considerations. The study of ethics addresses conceptions of right and wrong, of good versus evil but is also about weighing choices while considering values. Ethical thinking provides a framework with which we can consider our decisions and our actions. In terms of good work, we ask if and how individuals consider the impact of their work beyond themselves. 

In previous writings, and relevant to this discussion, are the concepts of “neighborly morality” and the “ethics of roles.” Neighborly morality might also be understood as the Golden Rule, or treating others as you would like to be treated. Most of us make decisions on an almost daily basis taking this type of consideration into account: keeping sidewalks shoveled during the winter, or helping strangers at the grocery store with hard-to-reach goods. Whereas these types of actions typically occur in our everyday, non-working lives, the ethics of roles involve the standards by which we measure work. They may be as formal as the Hippocratic oath taken by all physicians or more informal, such as ethical codes developed and carried out within a particular business or workplace. Ideally, ethical work takes into account the standards of that particular workplace or profession, asking workers to take responsibility for their efforts.

Most often, we’re made aware of ethics when we’re faced with a difficult decision. During the original good work research, carried out in the mid 1990s, we asked participants a wide variety of questions about their work, their beliefs and values, and the influences that were most formative in their lives. When we first began interviews, we would ask, “Have you ever been faced with an ethical dilemma?” We quickly realized that this question did not solicit interesting responses; typically, we’d be met with blank stares. But this changed when we reframed the question to, “Have you ever been in a situation where you weren’t sure about the best course of action, or where you weren’t sure what to do?” As long as we didn’t ask specifically about “ethics,” we heard multiple stories about individuals faced with difficult decisions. Many of these stories are now in our dilemmas database.

As we have deepened our work in school settings, we have developed more detailed tools to support educators. Tackling ethical dilemmas can be difficult for all of us; it can be even more difficult to help students navigate their decision-making, especially in increasingly polarized, sometimes politically fraught classroom settings. As a result, we now offer a variety of resources to help educators, students and individuals navigate ethical choices.

For example, we offer a few basic frames to explain how individuals often approach ethical dilemmas. Consider, for example, a classic trolley problem, where an individual is faced with an impossible choice. A trolley is barrelling towards 5 people who are tied down across the tracks. If you pull a switch the trolley will be diverted to a track where there is only one person tied down. What do you do? Here are three approaches to unpacking this decision:

1. Utilitarianism, or ends-based thinking would argue that you should do the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. You should consider the end result and how the greatest number of people might be helped by your decision, and consider any associated costs. In this scenario, you should pull the lever, save five people, and sacrifice one.

2. Deontological thinking is a rule-based perspective, based on principles, do as you would want others to do, ends do not justify the means. In other words, it is wrong to take part in any action that would hurt another human being. This perspective would argue for taking no action at all.

3. Virtue-based thinking involves a perspective that relies on particular character strengths, such as bravery, curiosity, or open-mindedness. The “right” decision is the decision that someone with strong character strengths would do. A classic “thinking outside the box” example, this perspective would argue for trying to free or untie the individual or individuals, to jump on the trolley or try to stop it in some way, to demonstrate selflessness and bravery.

We often think of virtue-based thinking as the most complex of the three, or put another way, the least straightforward. It’s also the frame we mostly closely adhere to on The Good Project. We have developed additional frames useful to approaching ethical dilemmas, including responsibility, roles, alignment, and, in particular, values.

Ethics are in fact informed by our personal values, which serve as a foundation for ethical decision-making, influencing the choices we make in both our personal and professional lives. Exploring and understanding our own values are essential for cultivating a strong ethical framework. Similar to “virtue-based thinking,” we encourage the exploration of values via our Value Sort tool. Ideally, individuals are aware of and cultivating values in support of good work long before they are faced with difficult ethical decisions. 

When we first began our study of “good work” in the mid 1990s, we often had to explain why we were studying what was then referred to as “Humane Creativity.” Why was it necessary to understand why some creative leaders were more “humane” than others? At that time, ethical lapses were not a daily newsworthy occurrence. Through the decades, and through large breaking stories such as Enron (depicted in the film “The Smartest Guys in the Room”) and Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, gradually the need for ethical workers became more and more clear. Over time, discussions of “good work,” have come to elicit quick nods from the audience and questions about how to make it happen, rather than questions about why it’s necessary. Ethics violations at Facebook (as identified by whistleblower Frances Haugen), Theranos, the admissions scandal “Varsity Blues,” doping in sports and luxuries provided to Supreme Court justices provide just a handful of many, wide-ranging examples.

We need ethical workers. We also need ethical leaders. For better or for worse, leaders are role models for our youth and are constantly in the public eye. As we have seen over and over again, if unethical leaders are successful, they will be imitated. Although “ethics” may be the most complex of the three “Es” in many ways it feels the most urgent and threatened component. Below are some additional resources to draw upon to continue to encourage and support ethical good work.

Resources:

A professional development video on ethics 

An activity about making a difficult choice

A blog on discussing ethical dilemmas 

Advice on leading difficult discussions 

Dilemmas database

by The Good Project Team

It’s that time of year again when many students on Northern Hemisphere schedules are going back to school after a summer break. The start of the academic year brings with it new routines, opportunities, and pressures for teachers, young people, and families. Whether you’re working behind the scenes to prepare your classroom, wondering about how best to support your child through the transition, or moving on to new education adventures yourself, we wish you the best of luck with the start of the new academic year. 

Here are five articles that have recently come across our desks that might be of interest, especially in this time of transition.

1. 4 Ways to Start Connecting With Students in the First Week Back

   This research-based video from Edutopia focuses on the importance of building strong relationships and asking students to be metacognitive about their worries and needs at the beginning of the school year. A classroom that is welcoming and reflective of students’ own experiences and backgrounds, as well as shared classroom responsibilities, can enable young people to feel connected and seen.

2. How to invite introverted students to share their thinking in class

   While extroverts may thrive by getting energy from traditional forms of participation in a classroom, like talking in front of groups, introverts may feel drained or want to avoid raising their hands. This quick NPR broadcast spotlights one teacher who has tried to implement more introvert-friendly modes of participation in his ninth-grade classroom, such as prioritizing partner/small group sharing.

3. University Departures Put Student Journalists in Spotlight

   Young journalists have been in the spotlight recently as college newspapers have brought down prominent figures. As described by The New York Times, Theo Baker, a Stanford student reporter, amplified claims that Stanford’s president had forged research data. Baker’s actions exemplify “good work” in action by standing up for what is ethical, even when it might be hard (Baker was reportedly threatened with legal action).

4. AI Can Make Education More Personal (Yes, Really)

   Much of the coverage of AI tools like ChatGPT has focused on their disruptive capabilities that threaten to make traditional educational tasks like writing essays or work tasks like writing code obsolete. However, an EducationWeek op-ed argues that AI technology can free up time for teachers to build more meaningful student relationships and also provide real-time, personalized feedback that will prepare teachers for success.

5. How to Help Kids Become Skilled Citizens

   The Harvard Graduate School of Education’s Usable Knowledge published the results of research into the capacities needed for good citizens, finding that experts and non-experts discussed the most critical aspects of citizenship as “political engagement, interpersonal tasks, building an informed community, and volunteering.” For educators, there are big and small ways to embed experiences into schools to encourage students to be engaged citizens in their communities.

What is Harkness, and How Do You Teach It? 

Shelby Clark

I started my first day at the GCI Summit and Seminar for Educators observing the Seminar for Educators– nine educators from all over the world who had come together to learn more about the "GCI Method." GCI– Global Citizens Initiative– brings together student fellows and educators from all over the world each summer for a week to learn more about Design Thinking, student-centered learning (the Harkness Method), and intercultural citizenship and human connectivity. Student fellows leave the week prepared to engage in a nine-month "glocal" project oriented around making changes on a UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG). As some of you might not be familiar with this pedagogy, I wanted to share some reflections for you to think about as you consider bringing Harkness pedagogy into your classrooms. 

Educators spent their first day at the Summit learning about Design Thinking and, on the second day, engaged in learning about Harkness as a student-centered discussion pedagogy. What were some take-aways? 

How is Harkness different from a Socratic Seminar? 

Figure 1.

Schrodt, K., Smith, L., FitzPatrick, E., & Liu, J. (2023). Facilitating Critical Discussion of Picturebooks Through Socratic Seminars in a Kindergarten Classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-18. Retrieved here. 

In a Socratic Seminar, students may speak to one another. However, more often than not, the teacher is still in charge of the discussion and has an end goal in mind for where they want the conversation to go. For the most part, students still look to the teacher to guide the discussion. 

In a Harkness discussion, teachers do not have a content-related end goal in mind– students should be the leaders of the conversation. They should not be looking at the teacher but should instead be looking at each other. 

See the image above. In the first, a more traditional Socratic Seminar, the discussion is continually guided by the teacher. In contrast, in the second, the kindergarten class has moved towards a Harkness discussion, wherein the conversation is equally distributed among all class members. 

Facilitator Molly Simmons noted that teachers should think of Harkness as "learning as play." 

What's happening at the table? What are students discussing? 

Students are analyzing a text, whether a book, an article, a podcast, a media clip, etc. Molly Simmons noted that you, as the teacher, must be "VERY intentional about the texts that you choose." Preparation for a Harkness teacher is:

• Finding useful and evocative texts for the table.

• Annotating the texts.

• Figuring out what questions you have about the texts as a teacher.

• Determining your questions for students. 

Students should be prepared for class by reviewing and annotating this text. Ms. Simmons noted that students often learn how to annotate a text through Harkness. Anytime they make a point and do not provide evidence to back it up, teachers can ask, "Where do you SEE that in the text?" Through such questions, students begin to mark the evidence they need in their texts. 

Ms. Simmons also noted that there were several other ways that she prompted students to annotate their texts, including asking students: 

• "What are words you don't get? Note those"

• "Show me the page where you talked to the text the most."

• To "Note questions in the margins." 

• "Show me how you're preparing, and I'll give you an 'in' tomorrow in the conversation." 

She stated that this last prompt was particularly useful for quieter students who have not yet figured out how to enter the conversation.  

Notably, Ms. Simmons commented that, above all, it is about letting students bring to the table what they are noticing and what will help the students come to a deeper understanding of the text. She noted, "What you get curious about is what you remember,"-- reiterating that Harkness is about the teacher putting their ego aside and allowing students to come to their own realizations. 

How do you involve students who are not participating? What about students who talk too much? 

The idea of tracking the Harkness discussion was discussed several times throughout the day (learn more here). During a discussion, Harkness teachers often draw a Harkness table on a sheet of paper, mark the students around the table, and then draw lines across the table to indicate who is talking when to whom. Teachers sometimes include reference letters to tell if a student has referenced the text, asked a question, brought someone else into the conversation, and more. 

At the Harkness table, students who talk too much are often called "Harkness warriors." Ms. Simmons observed that these students often need to practice their listening skills and tend to "LOVE tracking the conversation." 

The tracking strategy can also work well for larger classes, where not all students can participate in a Harkness discussion simultaneously. Seminar Educators discussed using a fishbowl strategy with 12 students engaged in the Harkness discussion, while another eight students tracked the conversation from the outside. Then, if time permits, the teacher could "flip flop" so the other students could discuss – or, if not, they could periodically pause until the next class for the other students to contribute. 

How do you start a Harkness class? 

Do students sit down and start discussing? Ms. Simmons shared that perhaps in older grades (11th & 12th), she might sit down and ask, "Where do you guys want to start?" Otherwise, Ms. Simmons and the other Harkness instructors at the Seminar all shared ways to help open classes with icebreakers or additional ways to "ground" their students in their texts. 

These included: 

• Pair and share, then share out with the table 

• Read the line of the text that impacted you the most 

• Put up a quote on the board that we should dive into 

• Do a quick reading quiz 

• Draw your favorite scene on the board 

How do you assess Harkness? 

Ms. Simmons was clear that "if part of your grade is discussion, it needs to be explicit." One way to create an assessment for Harkness discussed was to develop a clear rubric, such as using the 22 traits of a Harkness classroom to outline student expectations. 

In particular, it was noted that teachers often need to be explicit with younger grade students (e.g., 9th graders), such as stating that they must speak 3 times per class. While this might encourage statements such as "I agree," Ms. Simmons noted that it's often okay for students to start this way as it gets them normalized towards speaking at the table. 

If teachers need more objective assessments, Ms. Simmons suggested reading quizzes or creating precise 1-5 rating scales on your rubrics (such as ratings for how students move the discussion forward). 

Summing Up

Ultimately, Ms. Simmons noted that Harkness "comes down to being an exercise in listening." She will call out students for repeating something another student says and does not want students to think that "loud is right." She similarly remains firm that Harkness is rooted in texts. She noted, "It's debate when no one is analyzing the text"-- not Harkness. Finally, Harkness means finding ways to create the psychological safety students need to participate at the table. Ms. Simmons spoke about "giving inroads" at the table for quieter students, teaching students not to call one another out but instead focus on learning how to help one another, doing warm-ups together, learning phrases such as "What I'm really interested in…" or "What I'm really curious about…" to respond to one another and more. 

Later on my first day at the Summit, I watched student fellows engage in a Harkness warm-up with another Harkness teacher. The goal was for the student fellows to get through the entire alphabet with a fellow saying one letter and passing it off to another fellow without calling on one another; they needed to use body language or other means to indicate who could go next. If fellows spoke at the same time, they had to restart. These fellows had only known each other for a few days, yet just through this brief warm-up, I could see the magic of Harkness beginning to happen. Students laughed; they attended to each other's body language carefully; they listened intently. They didn't want to stop, sure that they just needed one more time to get it right. They were already joined as a group in search of a common goal. By the time they actually pulled out their texts for their Harkness discussion, they were ready to go.

by Lynn Barendsen 

Values are principles or beliefs that we find important, that can guide us in our attitudes, and can influence our actions and our decision-making. They help to direct us, shape who we are and how we interact with the world around us, and do so across many areas of our personal and professional lives. Ask yourself: 

• What are your personal beliefs? 

• Do they support you in your work, or do they create obstacles for you? 

• Have your values contributed to or hindered your accomplishments?

• Do you feel that your values are the same as or different from those of your colleagues?

• Think about times in your life when you were happy, most proud or fulfilled. What were you doing, and what values might have contributed to you feeling this way? 

Sometimes, when we’ve asked young people “What do you value?”, they’ve told us about particular possessions or family members; in fact, we’re actually asking instead about the personal beliefs that they hold most dear. So, if an individual were to mention “a laptop” as a “value,” we might press a bit and ask what that laptop makes possible: is it efficiency in work, enjoyment, independence? If someone were to mention a particular family member (“I value my mom”) we might ask instead what about that relationship is most valued. Are there particular characteristics about their mother (e.g. her humor, her curiosity, her courage) that are most valued, or is it the close and loving relationship they share? In other words, when we discuss “values,” we’re not referring to possessions or particular individuals, but rather concepts. Notably, while values drive peoples’ goals and serve as “guiding principles” in peoples’ lives, character strengths and virtues are how people express and pursue moral values via their thoughts, feelings, and actions. Values help motivate us to have experiences that will deepen our character strengths and virtues (Crossan et al., 2013; Lavy & Benish-Weisman, 2021).  

Values are formed by a variety of influences and experiences, including but not limited to family, culture, religion, education, other personal experiences, and more. ;Although many of the values people tend to hold remain stable as time passes, many also evolve or shift slightly with time, or in different contexts. While we are still developing our beliefs and opinions (for example, in youth), values are more likely to shift slightly. Several studies nonetheless point to the stability of values, even in younger years, including an 8-year longitudinal study of young adults (Vecchione et al., 2016). Additionally, an extensive review of values research argues that values formed early in life remain reliably steady in future years (Sagiv and Schwarz, 2022). 

Knowing what we value most and least in our personal and work lives—being aware of our values—makes it easier to react when opportunities arise and when conflicts happen. And yet, taking the time to pause and consider our values is the exception rather than the norm. On The Good Project, we believe the process of reflection is a key component of “good work,” and the consideration of our values is especially important. The value sort exercise is a way to reflect about what is most and least important to us personally and may also offer a great starting point for conversations amongst students, family members, or colleagues. 

Interestingly, the value sort is far and away our most popular resource on our website: at this writing, over 107,000 people have completed the online version of this activity. What is it that most people value? The top five values selected are: 1) personal growth and learning; 2) honesty and integrity; 3) rewarding and supportive relationships; 4) creating balance in one’s life; and 5) understanding, helping and serving others. It is important to note that the sample of individuals using this tool is not necessarily representative of the general public; they have of course found this resource because they are interested in the concept of “good work.” Nonetheless, some of these values remain consistent with values selected as most important during our original good work study of professionals in the mid 1990s, including honesty and integrity and rewarding and supportive relationships. 

Whereas the value sort enables conversation about individual values (what we ourselves value), of course none of us lives in a vacuum, and it’s important to also consider how our values may differ from those around us, whether they be family members, work colleagues, or members of other communities to which we belong. When our values differ from those around us, we may find ourselves in conflict with colleagues or supervisors, family or friends. In other writing we outlined the key good work concept of alignment (when the various stakeholders in a particular profession share goals) and misalignment (when their goals are in conflict). We may also be aligned or misaligned in terms of values; clearly, what we value in work (and in life) impacts our goals. For example: someone who values creating balance may seek a professional position that enables clear boundary-setting; someone who values independence may look for work that offers opportunities for autonomy. 

Some values are readily connected to the framework of the three Es of excellence, ethics and engagement. Excellent, or high quality work, might be accomplished by an individual with a strong work ethic, or someone who is diligent. Ethical work is often associated with honesty and integrity. Someone who values gaining knowledge would be engaged in work that allows them to continually learn.  

And yet, the relationship between values and good work is not as straightforward as it might seem. Imagine two co-workers tasked with completing a shared project; one values curiosity, the other diligence. It’s not difficult to envision a conflict of interest, even if both were determined to do “good work.” This is one example of how our values may come into conflict with the values of others. There is not necessarily one “right” answer in this situation; however, if these two colleagues were able to realize why they were in conflict with one another, resolving the conflict might be a bit easier. 

Values are one frame to approach ethical dilemmas—we have developed additional frames useful in these circumstances, including responsibility, roles and alignment. Of course, our value sort is not the only readily available resource to help individuals consider what’s most important to them and help them to navigate their decision-making process. See, for example, the Valued Living Questionnaire, The 4 Values Framework, or Schwartz’s Theory of Values. There are also more historical considerations (see, for example, Benjamin Franklin’s virtues), as well as numerous examples of important non-Western perspectives (such as the Japanese concept of Ikigai). 

When we share values with those around us, our communities tend to be more harmonious. We should be mindful, however, of the potential for creating “echo chambers” when we work (or live) without a diversity of perspectives. Although it may be more straightforward to work alongside colleagues who share our values, it is important to seek out those who offer alternative viewpoints. When individuals feel that their values are not shared by the majority, they often feel excluded and lack a sense of belonging. An inclusive workplace - indeed, any inclusive community - seeks out and honors multiple points of view. Our values may link us to our cultural heritage, give us a sense of purpose, guide our decision-making and more. Whether or not we realize their influence, our values play a significant role in defining us as individuals, as members of our communities, and as part of the wider world.  

Resources

Blogs: 

Changing Values in the Pandemic

Family Ties and Differing Values

A Consideration of Free Speech and the Role of Values

Value Sort Professional Development video

Activities:

The Value Sort Tool

Identifying Mission (shared values)

Howard Gardner © 2023

How will ChatGPT—and other Large Language Instruments—affect our educational system—and our broader society? How should they?

I’m frequently asked questions like these—and they are much on my mind.

Something akin to ChatGPT—human or super-human levels of performance—has long been portrayed in science fiction: I’m familiar with the American, British, French, and Russian varieties. But few observers expected such excellent performance so fast, so impressively, so threatening (or enabling)—depending on your stance.

As suggested by historian Yuval Harari, we may be approaching the end of the Anthropocene era.

We can anticipate that large language instruments—like Open AI’s ChatGPT and DALL-E—will continually improve.

They will be able to do anything that can be described, captured in some kind of notation. Already they are able to conduct psychotherapy with patients, write credible college application essays, and create works of visual art or pieces of music in the style of well-known human creators as well as in newly invented styles. Soon one of their creations may be considered for the Nobel Prize in physics or literature, the Pulitzer Prize for musical composition or journalism.

Of course, superior AI performance does not—and need not—prevent human beings from engaging in such activities. We humans can still paint, compose music, sculpt, compete in chess, conduct psychotherapy sessions—even if AI systems turn out to outperform us in some or most ways.

Open AI introduced ChatGPT 3 in 2020 and DALL-E in 2021

We can also work in conjunction with AI programs. A painter may ask DALL-E to create something, after which the painter may alter what the program has furnished. A researcher may present ChatGPT with a hypothesis and ask the system to come up with ways to test that hypothesis—after which the researcher can carry out one or more of these approaches herself. Such activities can alternate, going back and forth between the human provision and the computational program.

We fear what could go wrong—and rightly so. AI systems like ChatGPT have not undergone a million-plus years of evolutionary history (including near extinction or sudden vaults in skill); such recently devised systems do not inhabit our planet in the same way that the hominid species has. They are not necessarily—and certainly not existentially—afraid of cataclysmic climate change, or nuclear war, or viruses that prove fatal to homo sapiens. Indeed, such systems could spread misinformation rapidly and thereby contribute to destructive climate change and the probability of nuclear war (recall “The Doomsday Machine” featured in the dystopic movie Dr. Strangelove). These destructive outcomes are certainly possible, although (admittedly) such calamities might happen even had there been no digital revolution.

And what about the effects of Large Language Instruments on our schools, our broader educational system?

Many fear that systems like ChatGPT will make it unnecessary for students to learn anything, since ChatGPT can tell them everything they might want or need to know—almost instantaneously and almost always accurately (or at least as accurately as an 20th century encyclopedia or today’s “edition” of Wikipedia!). I think that AI will have a huge impact on education, but not in that way.

Now that machines are rivalling or even surpassing us in so many ways, I have an ambitious and perhaps radical recommendation. What education of members of our species should do—increasingly and thoughtfully—is to focus on the human condition: what it means to be human, what our strengths and frailties are, what we have accomplished (for good or evil) over many centuries of biological and cultural evolution, what opportunities are afforded by our stature and our status, what we should avoid, what we should pursue, in what ways, and with what indices of success...or of concern.

But to forestall an immediate and appropriate reservation: I don’t intend to be homo sapiens centric. Rather, I want us to focus on our species as part of the wider world, indeed the wider universe. That universe includes the biological and geological worlds that are known to us.

Psychologist-turned-educator (and my teacher) Jerome Bruner inspired me. His curriculum for middle school children, developed nearly sixty years ago, centered on three questions:

Bruner in the Chanticleer 1936, Duke University (Source: Wikipedia)

• What makes human beings human?

• How did they get to be that way?

• How can they be made more so?

To approach these framing topics intelligently, we need disciplinary knowledge, rigor, and tools. We may not need to completely scuttle earlier curricular frameworks (e.g., those posed in the United States in the 1890s by the “Committee of Ten” or the more recent “Common Core”); but we need to rethink how they can be taught, modelled, and activated to address such over-arching questions.

We need to understand our human nature—biologically, psychologically, culturally, historically, and pre-historically. That’s the way to preserve the planet, all of us on it. It’s also the optimal way to launch joint human-computational ventures—ranging from robots that construct or re-construct environments to programs dedicated (as examples) to economic planning, political positioning, military strategies and decisions.

To emphasize: this approach is not intended to glorify; homo sapiens has done much that is regrettable, and lamentable. Rather, it is to explain and to understand —so that, as a species, we can do better as we move forward in a human-computer era.

Against this background, how have I re-considered or re-conceptualized the three issues that, as a scholar, I’ve long pondered?

1. Synthesizing is the most straightforward. Anything that can be laid out and formulated—by humans or machines—will be synthesized well by ChatGPT and its ilk. It’s hard to imagine that a human being—or even a large team of well-educated human beings—will do better synthesis than ChatGPT4, 5, or n.

   We could imagine a “Howard Gardner ChatGPT”—one that synthesizes the way that I do, only better—it would be like an ever-improving chess program in that way. Whether ChatGPT-HG is a dream or a nightmare I leave to your (human) judgment.

2. Good work and good citizenship pose different challenges. Our aspirational conceptions of work and of membership in a community have emerged in the course of human history over the last several thousand years—within and across hundreds of cultures. Looking ahead, these aspirations indicate what we are likely to have to do if we want to survive as a planet and as a species.

   All cultures have views, conceptions, of these “goods,” but of course—and understandably, these views are not the same. What is good—and what is bad, or evil, or neutral—in 2023 is not the same as in 1723. What is valued today in China is not necessarily what is admired in Scandinavia or Brazil. And there are different versions of “the good” in the US—just think of the deep south compared to the East and West coasts.

   ChatGPT could synthesize different senses of “good,” in the realms of both “work” and “citizenship.” But there’s little reason to think that human beings will necessarily abide by such syntheses—the League of Nations, the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva convention were certainly created with good will by human beings—but they have been honored as much in the breach as in the observance.

A Personal Perspective

We won’t survive as a planet unless we institute and subscribe to some kind of world belief system. It needs the prevalence of Christianity in the Occident a millennium ago, or of Confucianism or Buddhism over the centuries in Asia, and it should incorporate tactics like “peaceful disobedience” in the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, or Nelson Mandela. This form of faith needs to be constructed so as to enable the survival and thriving of the planet, and the entities on it, including plants, non-human animals, and the range of chemical elements and compounds.

Personally, I do not have reservations about terming this a “world religion”—so long as it does not posit a specific view of an Almighty Figure—and require allegiance to that entity. But a better analogy might be a “world language”—one that could be like Esperanto or a string of bits 00010101111….

And if such a school of thought is akin to a religion, it can’t be one that favors one culture over others—it needs to be catholic, rather than Catholic, judicious rather than Jewish. Such a belief-and-action system needs to center on the recognition and the resolution of challenges—in the spirit of controlling climate change, or conquering illness, or combatting a comet directed at earth from outer space, or a variety of ChatGPT that threatens to “do us in” from within….Of the philosophical or epistemological choices known to me, I resonate most to humanism—as described well by Sarah Bakewell in her recent book Humanly Possible.

Multiple Intelligences (MI)

And, finally, I turn to MI. Without question, any work by any intelligence, or combination of intelligences, that can be specified with clarity will soon be mastered by Large Language Instruments—indeed, such performances by now constitute a trivial achievement with respect to linguistic, logical, musical, spatial intelligences—at least as we know them, via their human instantiations.

How—or even whether —such computational instruments can display bodily intelligences or the personal intelligences is a different matter. The answer depends on how broad a formulation one is willing to accept.

To be specific:

Taylor Swift at 2019 American Music Awards (Source: Wikipedia)

• Does a robotic version of ChatGPT need to be able to perform ballet à la Rudolf Nureyev and Margot Fonteyn? And must it also show how these performers might dance in 2023 rather than in 1963?

• Does it need to inspire people, the way Joan of Arc or Martin Luther King did?

• Should it be able to conduct successful psychotherapy in the manner of Erik Erikson or Carl Rogers ?

• Or are non-human attempts to instantiate these intelligences seen as category errors— the way that we would likely dismiss a chimpanzee that purported to create poetry on a keyboard?

The answers, in turn, are determined by what we mean by a human intelligence—is it certain behavioral outputs alone (the proverbial monkey that types out Shakespeare, or the songbird that can emulate Maria Callas or Luciano Pavarotti, Mick Jagger or Taylor Swift)? Or is it what a human or group of humans can express through that intelligence to other human beings—the meanings that can be created. conveyed, comprehended among members of the species.

I’m reminded of Thomas Nagel’s question: “What is it like to be a bat?” ChatGPT can certainly simulate human beings. But perhaps only human beings can realize—feel, experience, dream—what it’s like to be a human being. And perhaps only human beings can and will care—existentially—about that question. And this is what I believe education in our post-ChatGPT world should focus on.

For comments on earlier versions of this far-ranging blog, I am grateful to Shinri Furuzawa, Jay Gardner, Annie Stachura, and Ellen Winner.

REFERENCES:

Bakewell, S. (2024). Humanly possible: Seven hundred years of humanist freethinking, inquiry, and hope. Vintage Canada.

Nagel, T. (1974). what is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674594623.c15

Wikimedia Foundation. (2023, August 21). Man: A course of study. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man:_A_Course_of_Study

We would like to introduce our readers to the QUESTion Project!

Howard Gardner interviewed founder, Gerard Senehi, to get a sense of what this important project is all about. Their conversation below will give you an outline, but please read this paper (Education's Role in Shaping the Future) to learn more about the QUESTion Project’s view on the promise of whole child education and social-emotional learning.

What is your goal with this paper, who are you trying to reach, and what do you want them to take away?

I propose to prepare students in two ways: for their own future lives—and for becoming citizens who are engaged and care for the common good. I’m trying to reach educators, policy makers, and others who care about the future of education. I hope to heighten awareness of what is possible, outline the methods to achieve it, and make more room in education for this important work.

Why is this important?

We are failing to address the whole child, to strengthen the core of what makes us human. We are also failing to prepare our youth for a rapidly changing and unpredictable future, as well as some of the challenges they and society will experience. I want to convey urgency but also introduce new possibilities. I think it’s only by bringing light to concrete possibilities that we can expand our approach with students in thoughtful and healthy ways.

We must provide students with an outlet and method to make sense out of life. Otherwise, students can easily feel disconnected from themselves and from others—depressed, anxious, with a feeling that something is wrong while not having a way of knowing what that might be. The consequences of not having this support are evidenced in the current mental health crisis of our youth.

As for the broader society, we must create a space where students from all walks of life can see and experience this idea: we all are on a common human journey together, even as we each have our unique path. Otherwise, we will not overcome the false barriers that too often separate youth from one another and that they then carry into their adult lives. The result: a depressingly divided citizenry.

How have you addressed this in your own work in education?  

For a long time, I felt there was something fundamental missing in education. Twelve years ago (in 2011), my wife Francesca and I went on a quest to identify and tackle this missing piece. Our intention was to empower students’ authentic identity (or identities), their confidence in their agency to express and pursue who they are, and their identification of purpose in their lives and future. We wanted to go beyond teaching social-emotional skills and support students with the core of what makes us all human.

Over five years, we worked closely with many groups of students and teachers; we sought to identify some of the most important questions/topics about life and design the best ways to engage with them. In doing so, we co-created the QUESTion Project (a program of the nonprofit Open Future Institute). This is a semester/year-long daily class where high school students engage together with questions about who they are and how they can shape their lives with meaning and purpose. The class is delivered as a credit-bearing elective, advisory, or part of the health class. Teachers go through a training regimen that focuses on the understanding, methods, and dispositions that can engage students’ humanity and empower students’ agency on a shared learning journey.

Through this process, students define their identity as they explore their relationship to life. They are helped to take charge of their lives—not just considering what they are going to do, but also who they are going to be. They develop an ongoing relationship with purpose that can inform their lives and futures. And they do all this together, with vulnerability and openness, which allows them to express their own and experience each other’s humanity. When this approach works well, students break down fundamental barriers between them—barriers that otherwise are often carried into adulthood, further perpetuating divisions in society.

A recent study of the QUESTion Project found a significant impact on individual students. They also identified important implications for schools and society: a multi-faceted way to support student wellbeing, overcoming assumptions about others, and engaging with purpose as an individual and for social good.

As the implications of engaging students in this way go beyond our organization, we believe it’s important for us to share our discoveries and test our conclusions.

what are you calling into question, and what are the misunderstandings?

I believe that there is a fuller way to understand what it means to address the whole child and to support educators in doing so. In the paper accompanying this introductory note, I go into detail; I seek to convey how it’s possible to approach the core of what makes us human in very concrete ways, without reducing the approach to something narrow and losing the depth of what it means. This is part of the tremendous potential I see ahead.

I caution against the limitations of addressing only one or a set of social-emotional skills without engaging the underlying layers that define our humanity. I’m also concerned with certain approaches that address aspects of what makes us human—such as identity or purpose— in a way that, regrettably, can sometimes cause more harm than good.

An example: Suppose we reduce deeper elements of who we are, such as identity, to a set of labels or over-simplified ideas to which we “lead” students; this well-intentioned approach can inadvertently make students adopt static labels that limit the ongoing development and discovery of who they are and who they can become. We have to make room for students to embrace areas of life as profound as identity and purpose in a way that holds the depth and complexity of life; otherwise, whatever our laudable intentions, we do students a disservice.

Tell us a bit about your own background and what inspired you to create the QUESTion Project

My education at a first-rate college gave me great skills and knowledge, but it did not provided me with a way to find out who I was, and left me deeply confused about life, without a way to determine how to go forward.

When I became a teacher, the situation became clearer. What had been missing in my own education, particularly in high school, was something missing in the overall school system. Still, I had no idea how to address this lack, this gap, this uncertainty. Only two decades later did the pieces of the puzzle start to come together.

One day the president of my college wrote to all alumni/ae expressing his concern for the development of character and citizenry of his students and asking for advice. In response, I offered the nascent ideas for what is now the QUESTion Project. It took a few more years and the collaboration with my wife, our team, hundreds of students, and teachers for the QUESTion Project to take the full form it has now and that I describe in the accompanying paper.

What challenges do you anticipate and how can you resolve those?

I see two main challenges ahead. The first is for educators, funders, and policy makers to recognize the fundamental need for and importance of this work. There is of course accelerating recognition of the importance of SEL and character development, but that is not enough. We need to make a compelling case for going beyond supporting students with a set of knowledge, skills, or attitudes; we need to support the deeper elements that make us human. We need to implement this approach (or others in the same spirit) with theoretical rigor, demonstrable practices, and research, just as the world of education has been doing with respect to SEL.

The second challenge is anchoring this work during the school day. School leaders are naturally concerned (particularly in this post-COVID time) with shifting student learning time and teacher resources away from addressing learning loss, grades, and graduation. And, understandably, they sometimes see the time needed for programs like the QUESTion Project (a semester/year-long class) as something that competes with those objectives and, since it does not lead directly to higher SAT scores or admission to selective schools, as an extra that can be discarded.

However, after having worked with 18 public schools and 12,000 students for the last 7 years, we have an uplifting message to share. School principals tell us that the development of identity, agency and purpose in students not only contributes to the students’ wellbeing and mental health; our approach also supports their academic achievement, helps their college essays, and gives them a stronger foundation for college preparedness.

What do you most hope to achieve with your work, and how can others carry it on?

The purpose of this work is for students to have structured support and space to engage with some of the core aspects of what makes us human, to do it together with their peers, to have the opportunity to bring out the best in who they are and how they can contribute to others. I see an approach like this as foundational for the creation and maintenance of a thriving society.

Of course, I hope that the QUESTion Project will spread to schools broadly. I also see our work as an important piece to a larger puzzle and need—a new subject field in education that places students’ humanity at the heart of the learning process. Students need this kind of age-appropriate support at every stage of their learning journey. This need is much bigger than a single project like ours. To that end, I hope to bring light to insights that can be foundational to build a new subject field, a new discipline, a new theme and focus in education. My dream is that all teachers in the future will have access to training that includes the understanding, methods, and disposition that can best engage student’s humanity and empower their agency on a collective learning journey. My fondest hope is that the accompanying essay will contribute to that long-term aspiration.

As far as how others can carry it on, this will necessarily and properly continue to be a co-creative process. Neither I nor my close colleagues have all the answers! The best insights, decisions, and paths forward reveal themselves as we engage together and stretch our minds and hearts to consider what is truly going to best serve students and society. Envisioning what’s possible allows us to create innovative approaches and solutions these should enable our youth to engage with the deepest parts of themselves, develop the skills to fully embrace life and contribute to society, while holding room for the mystery and wonder of what life is all about.

How optimistic are you about the possibility you envision?

Every step we (and other organizations who focus on this work) have taken strengthens the foundation for what will be possible.

Some people tell me “The educational system is never going to change.” My sense is that the system won’t change…until it has to! And the way that it will have to change may only become clear when we realize that we have no other choice.

If we continue to fail to prepare students in a substantial way for their lives and future, we will continue to experience a mental health crisis. We will perpetuate barriers that stem from our inability to see our common humanity in our differences. And we will continue to be unprepared to respond to the needs of this moment in history…not to mention the challenges of an even more rapidly changing world.

On the other hand, at a time when the educational system fully supports students to develop their authentic identities, to take their lives into their own hands, and to pursue a life of purpose, we will be standing on completely different ground.

In the end, declaring that the current system will never change limits what is possible. Systems do change and that takes time; therefore, this work requires a long-term mindset. We need to lay the foundations for this change with as much integrity and foresight as we can and fervently strengthen and demonstrate a vision for what is possible, as others have done before us.

We advise our readers to look at Senehi’s paper, Education's Role in Shaping the Future, to learn more.

By Mara Krechevsky on Nov 03, 2020