Keynote speakers this year include Monica J. Sutton, creator and host of the children’s education series Circle Time with Ms. Monica, Yale psychology professor and Happiness Lab podcast host Dr. Laurie Santos, appearing alongside Common Sense Media’s Bruce Reed, and bestselling author Jennifer B. Wallace, whose work centers on the human need to feel valued — and to add value. 

Also featured: former Presidential Science Advisor Arati Prabhakar, who will join a panel on “moonshot” thinking and the future of AI-driven learning. And a new documentary traces the career of longtime Sesame Street star Sonia Manzano.

Artificial intelligence this year plays a bigger role than ever. Dozens of sessions examine AI’s expanding role in classrooms, from adaptive tutoring and authentic assessment to teacher burnout, algorithmic bias and what it means to be literate in an age when machines can write, reason and create.

This year, the Austin Convention Center, which typically hosts the event, is under construction. So sessions will be held at four venues around downtown Austin. Organizers are also planning a “SXSW EDU Clubhouse” at the historic , which will host daily performances, keynote livestreams and social events each night.

Because of the event’s multiple venues, space may be limited, so organizers recommend booking reservations for keynotes, featured sessions and workshops. They’ve provided an with details. 

To help guide attendees, we’ve scoured the 2026 to highlight 26 of the most significant presenters, topics and panels:

Monday, March 9: 

9 a.m. — : Researchers, district leaders and family engagement specialists examine the chronic absenteeism epidemic that has left millions of American students disconnected from school since the COVID pandemic. This panel presents the latest data on what is actually driving absenteeism — from housing instability and health crises to school climate and whether students feel they matter. It’ll explore which interventions are producing genuine, sustained improvement.

11 a.m. — : This panel presents evidence that score inflation on standardized tests, state-level proficiency standards and the federal retreat from accountability are making it harder than ever for families to get an accurate picture of their child’s true academic standing — and what policymakers can do about it.

1:30 p.m. — : This Opening Keynote features Monica J. Sutton, educator, entrepreneur and creator of Circle Time with Ms. Monica, who traces her journey from preschool classroom to digital learning spaces reaching millions of families worldwide. Sutton challenges educators to evaluate every innovation through a developmental lens, asking: Does this technology honor how young children learn, grow and thrive, while protecting curiosity and connection?

2 p.m. — : What do real students think about AI? How do they want to learn about it? This session, by MIT Media Lab’s Jaleesa Trapp and LEGO Education’s Jenny Nash, explores strategies for building AI literacy through hands-on computer science that fosters critical thinking and ensures safe, responsible AI use.

2 p.m. — : Civics teachers, researchers and policy advocates will examine how teachers are navigating the nearly impossible task of teaching democracy, elections and civic participation in classrooms where students and families often hold deeply opposed political views. The panel shares new findings from America’s Promise Alliance’s State of Young People research and explores strategies for creating classrooms where hard but evidence-based conversations happen productively — and where students develop the civic skills needed to participate in and repair a fractured democratic system.

4 p.m. — : Child development experts offer a science-backed framework for evaluating AI for young learners without compromising the play, exploration and human attachment that are foundational to healthy development. This session offers an “urgent exploration” of AI’s impact on brain architecture and what educators, parents and policymakers must know to protect young minds.

4 p.m. — : A panel of educators explores the causes of low student engagement, absenteeism and cheating, sharing classroom-tested solutions for creating assignments that are cheat-resistant by design. Rather than relying on cheat-detection software and pedagogy that punishes students for cheating, panelists will share how to foster a culture of academic integrity based on student agency, purpose and ownership of learning.

4 p.m. — : In this featured panel, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Chef Ann Foundation CEO Mara Fleishman, University of Pennsylvania student Maya Miller and Duke World Food Policy Center Director Norbert Wilson make an evidence-based case that school nutrition is an educational issue, not merely a logistical one. Panelists connect chronic hunger and poor nutrition directly to cognitive function, attendance, behavior and academic performance, and present district-level models that have transformed school meals into assets for learning.

Tuesday, March 10:

9 a.m. — : This featured session stars Roya Mahboob, CEO of the Digital Citizen Fund, who will draw on her experience growing up in Afghanistan to trace how exclusion compounds across the pipeline from K–12 classrooms to corporate boardrooms. Mahboob offers evidence-based interventions that have demonstrated real impact on girls’ participation and persistence in tech, as well as a vision for education that is inclusive, practical and full of possibility.

9 a.m. — : A candid discussion on the science, ethical considerations and implementation challenges of using Voice AI for assessment in K–12 classrooms. Learn what’s promising, what’s problematic and what’s on the horizon as experts explore how Voice AI differs from other AI tools such as large language models (LLMs), and how it can be integrated in ways that truly support students and educators.

12:30 p.m. — : In this keynote, Bruce Reed, Head of AI at Common Sense Media, and Dr. Laurie Santos, Yale psychology professor and host of The Happiness Lab podcast, examine how rapidly evolving AI technologies and social media are shaping young people’s mental health — and how families, educators and policymakers can respond. They explore the science of well-being, the risks of algorithm-driven systems and common-sense guardrails to protect young minds. 

2 p.m. — : This panel challenges the deficit framing that has long defined how schools, families and students themselves understand dyslexia. In an interactive session, a think tank-style panel will present a strength-based model of dyslexia support and examine how AI tools are beginning to unlock academic access for students whose abilities have been systematically undervalued.

3 p.m. — : Director Anna Toomey’s feature documentary tells the story of five mothers determined to establish the first public school in New York City for children with dyslexia. Toomey follows their battle to open the South Bronx Literacy Academy, addressing a learning disability that affects about 20% of the public. A post-screening discussion connects the film’s themes to national debates about reading instruction and equitable access.

4 p.m. — : As chronic absenteeism reaches historic highs, schools are doubling down on academics, interventions and incentives. But they may be missing underlying emotional and psychological factors driving absenteeism: stress, anxiety and lack of belonging. This session looks at how rest, youth voice/choice and emotionally safe environments can re-engage students.

5:30 p.m. — : Director Ernie Bustamante’s feature-length documentary offers a portrait of Sonia Manzano, the trailblazing actress who played Maria on Sesame Street for 44 years. A conversation with Manzano herself follows the screening, exploring how public media can reach children when formal schooling often fails, and what Sesame Street’s legacy means in the age of AI-generated children’s content.

Wednesday, March 11: 

10 a.m. — : This performance offers an early look at a show in development that began as a teacher performance at a school meeting. In this Hamilton-meets-The Sound of Music-meets-Good Night and Good Luck story, set against today’s culture wars, three high school students and their teachers navigate questions of identity, purpose and what school can and cannot teach. A Q&A with Peter Nilsson, the show’s creator, follows the performance.

11 a.m. — : This solo session by Toby Fischer, an Ohio educator, offers a sweeping reimagination of literacy for the 21st century, arguing that reading and writing instruction must now encompass the ability to critically evaluate AI-generated text, recognize the hallmarks of synthetic content, prompt AI systems effectively and to understand the social and ethical contexts in which AI-generated language circulates.

12:30 p.m. — : This keynote by Adeel Khan, Founder & CEO of MagicSchool AI, makes the case that teacher expertise, relationships and professional judgment must guide technological change. Drawing on his experience building the popular platform, Khan will share unfiltered insights on what’s working and what’s not, offering a framework for evaluating AI tools through the lens of educator agency.  

2 p.m. — : This panel examines why so many school AI initiatives rely on tools that “just aren’t there yet.” Panelists share case studies of implementations that stumbled, the lessons of those failures and the educator-driven, grassroots efforts that can move schools from dabbling with AI tools to using them for real instructional transformation. 

Thursday, March 12:

10 a.m. — : This featured panel convenes former Presidential Science Advisor Arati Prabhakar, Renaissance Philanthropy President Kumar Garg, Carnegie Learning VP of R&D Jamie Sterling and Bezos Family Foundation Chief of Staff Eden Xenakis to explore how bold learning goals can accelerate AI-driven innovation in education. They’ll examine how “moonshot-centered” models can rally diverse innovators around a shared outcome and catalyze the funding needed to scale breakthroughs.

10 a.m. — : Dubbed the “toolbelt generation,” more than half of Gen Z respondents in a recent survey said they’re considering a skilled trade career. And schools are working to modernize career preparation, including by tapping immersive technology to expose students to in-demand skilled trades. This panel, moderated by The74’s Greg Toppo, will discuss how we can harness tech to engage students in learning while preparing them to successfully meet workforce demands.

11:30 a.m. — : This session offers a ground-level counternarrative to AI anxiety, presenting a community college and workforce development partnership in Cleveland that is using AI-powered tools and training to open new economic pathways for adults who were left behind by earlier rounds of technological change. Speakers will examine what equitable AI adoption looks like in a post-industrial city and what conditions made the initiative work.

11:30 a.m. — : Leaders from higher education, industry and workforce policy examine whether universities are structured to produce graduates who can thrive in a labor market being remade by AI. The panel will ask which degrees and credential pathways are producing AI-ready graduates, where institutions are falling behind, and what structural changes will move the needle most.

11:30 a.m. — : Directed by Scott Barnett, this feature-length documentary follows bestselling author James Patterson to the front lines of America’s reading crisis to examine how the Science of Reading — a vast body of evidence-based research — is changing how children are taught to read. A post-screening discussion with literacy researchers and classroom teachers will examine what the film gets right and what systemic change will actually require.

2 p.m. — : This workshop, conducted by two top officials with the Illinois-based Education Research and Development Institute, will offer practical AI tools that automate routine tasks, generate content, analyze data and simplify communication, freeing teachers to focus on students and strategy and reducing the risk of burnout.

2:30 p.m. — : This featured panel, with Martin McKay of Everway, Hello Sunshine CEO Maureen Polo and the Brookings Institution’s Rebecca Winthrop, draws on a landmark report spanning 50 countries to explore what it means to protect children’s cognitive, social and emotional development in an AI-saturated world. Speakers will move beyond the question of whether AI should be used in schools to ask how it can be designed to strengthen young people’s capacity to think, relate and thrive.

When SXSW EDU launched in 2011, digital learning was on the rise. Computers were becoming commonplace in the classroom, not just in labs down the hall. Digital resources like tutoring videos and edtech platforms were expanding what education could offer. Connection meant accessing tools, people and expertise outside of the classroom.  

The value of technology in education can’t be understated. Even before the COVID pandemic forced schools into fully remote learning, digital platforms were optimizing outcomes. According to a , 81% of educators saw value in digital learning tools. They could accentuate lessons with research, customize projects for student needs, connect students with learnings for potential careers and so much more.

At the same time, digital connection has its downsides, including the harms of excessive screen time and . Some districts are enacting policies to restrict phone use in the classroom, while edtech companies are offering solutions to increase digital wellness and screen value.

Education needs new ways of connecting — approaches to bring people together for in-person wonder and discovery — since meaningful interactions remain at the core of what students need. found that 85% of teachers reported active student engagement and strong relationships with students are top factors in academic success, and 72% of educators engage in practices to build meaningful connections.

— taking place March 9 to 12 in Austin, Texas — is bringing together the brightest minds in education to explore this theme, among other . The event is looking into the future of education to find a path toward stronger relationships for more effective learning.

When we asked participants to pick their favorite panels, the most popular tracks were Teaching & Learning and Equity & Belonging. From workshops to keynotes, sessions are aimed at providing practical advice for supporting students and strategies for balancing the benefits of technology with positive in-person relationships.

This is made clear by one of our selections for , who will take the stage in March. As the CEO and founder of Magicschool AI, a tool that amplifies educator impact, Khan understands how to balance digital and human connection for the biggest impact. He will share how to harness tools to center teachers and connections.

Featured sessions will focus on social health, to ensure students are forming positive relationships with each other. In one session, , panelists will dive into a Brookings Institution report to better understand the impact of digital platforms on cognitive, social and emotional development. In another, author will present research on trends and predictions for the future of community.

Connection isn’t just for students. Teachers benefit from stronger relationships and interactions with peers. Educator burnout can put schools at risk, and a found that teachers experience less burnout when they have mentorship and collaboration.

That is why SXSW EDU is doubling the amount of . There are over 120 opportunities to connect in one-on-one sessions and roundtable discussions. More than 30 meet-ups planned for March give attendees an opportunity to talk to others and expand their community. And there are more opportunities to network at pop-up dinners, walking tours and socials.

Bridging different roles and focus areas has always been at the core of the mission for SXSW EDU. It is a chance for educators to come together to learn across the learning life cycle, from Pre-K to continuing education, but also learn across roles and disciplines. Professionals from every walk of life — educators, filmmakers, researchers, policy makers, nonprofit leaders and edtech founders — all attend the conference and festival for a holistic view of education.

On Thursday, March 12, Crossover Day adds even more programming for educators to connect outside of their discipline. Attendees at SXSW EDU and SXSW get together to engage with music, film and innovation and to discover new ways to spark connection in the classroom.

It’s time for education professionals to explore new approaches to connect. SXSW EDU provides a chance to come together and discover what’s next in teaching and learning. Visit to learn more.

returns to Austin, Texas, running March 3-6. As always, it’ll offer a huge number of panels, discussions, film screenings, musical performances and workshops exploring education, innovation and the future of schooling.

Keynote speakers this year include neuroscientist , founder of Ness Labs, an online educational platform for knowledge workers; astronaut, author and TV host , and , CEO of Search for Common Ground, an international non-profit. Idriss will speak about what it means to be strong in the face of opposition — and how to turn conflict into cooperation. Also featured: indy musical artist Jill Sobule, from her musical F*ck 7th Grade.

As in 2024, artificial intelligence remains a major focus, with dozens of sessions exploring AI’s potential and pitfalls. But other topics are on tap as well, including sessions on playful learning, book bans and the benefits of prison journalism. 

To help guide the way, we’ve scoured the to highlight 25 of the most significant presenters, topics and panels: 

Monday, March 3:

A new independent film features a Seattle school counselor who builds a world-class Ultimate Frisbee team with a group of immigrant children at Hazel Wolf K-8 School. 

Generative AI is accelerating the adoption of a skills-based economy, but many are skeptical about its value, impact and the pace of growth. Will AI spark meaningful change and a new economic order, or is it just another overhyped trend? Meena Naik of Jobs for the Future leads a discussion with Colorado Community College System Associate Vice Chancellor Michael Macklin, Nick Moore, an education advisor to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, and Best Buy’s Ryan Hanson.

The Clayton Christensen Institute’s Julia Freeland Fisher headlines a panel that looks at how generative AI can help students access 24/7 help in navigating pathways to college. As new models take root, the panel will explore what entrepreneurs are learning about what students want from these systems. Will AI level the playing field or perpetuate inequality? 

New research shows students who are engaged in schoolwork not only do better in school but are happier and more confident in life. And educators say they’d be happier at work and less likely to leave the profession if students engaged more deeply. In this session, LEGO Education’s Bo Stjerne Thomsen will explore the science behind playful learning and how it can get students and teachers excited again.

Mike Yates of The Reinvention Lab at Teach for America leads an interactive session offering participants the chance to build their own AI tools to solve real problems they face at work, school or home. The session is for AI novices as well as those simply curious about how the technology works. Participants will get free access to .

Join Charlotte West of Open Campus, Lawrence Bartley of The Marshall Project and Yukari Kane of the Prison Journalism Project to explore real-life stories from behind bars. Journalism training is transforming the lives of a few of the more than 1.9 million people incarcerated in the U.S., teaching skills from time management to communication and allowing inmates to feel connected to society while building job skills. 

Tuesday, March 4:

Amid the hand-wringing about what AI means for the future of education, there’s been little conversation about how a few smart educators are already employing it to shift possibilities for student engagement and classroom instruction. In this workshop, attendees will learn how to leverage promising practices emerging from research with real educators using AI in writing, creating their own chatbots and differentiating support plans. 

AI-enabled tools can be helpful for students conducting research, outlining written work, or proofing and editing submissions. But there’s a fine line between using AI appropriately and taking advantage of it, leaving many students wondering, “How much AI is too much?” This session, led by Turnitin’s Annie Chechitelli, will discuss the rise of GenAI, its intersection with academia and academic integrity, and how to determine appropriate usage.  

Explore the real-world impact of AI in education during this interactive session hosted by Zhuo Chen, a text analysis instructor at the nonprofit education startup Constellate, and Dylan Ruediger of the research and consulting group Ithaka S+R. Chen and Ruediger will share successes and challenges in using AI to advance student learning, engagement and skills. 

In 2025, authors face unprecedented challenges. This session, which features Scholastic editor and young adult novelist David Levithan, as well as Emily Kirkpatrick, executive director of the National Council of Teachers of English, will explore the battle for freedom of expression and the importance of defending reading in the face of censorship attempts and book bans.

Kate Arend and Kim Lessing, the co-presidents of Amy Poehler’s production company Paper Kite Productions, will be live to record their workplace and career advice podcast “Million Dollar Advice.” The pair will tackle topics such as setting and maintaining boundaries, learning from Gen Z, dealing with complicated work dynamics, and more. They will also take live audience questions.

With rising recognition of neurodivergent students, advocates say AI can revolutionize how schools support them by streamlining tasks, optimizing resources and enhancing personalized learning. In the process, schools can overcome challenges in mainstreaming students with learning differences. This panel features educators and advocates as well as Alex Kotran, co-founder and CEO of The AI Education Project.

Assessments are often disruptive, cumbersome or disconnected from classroom learning. But a few advocates and developers say AI-powered assessment tools offer an easier, more streamlined way for students to demonstrate learning — and for educators to adapt instruction to meet their needs. This session, moderated by ����Ӱ��’s Greg Toppo, features Khan Academy’s Kristen DiCerbo, Curriculum Associates’ Kristen Huff and Akisha Osei Sarfo, director of research at the Council of the Great City Schools.

Wednesday, March 5:

Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for American children and teens, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, yet coverage of gun violence’s impact on youth is usually reported by adults. Run, Hide, Fight: Growing Up Under the Gun is a 30-minute documentary by student journalists about how gun violence affects young Americans. Produced by PBS News Student Reporting Labs in collaboration with 14 student journalists in five cities, it centers the perspectives of young people who live their lives in the shadow of this threat. 

Educators are at the forefront of testing, using artificial intelligence and teaching their communities about it. In this interactive session, participants will hear from educators and ed tech specialists on the ground working to support the use of AI to improve learning. The session includes Stacie Johnson, director of professional learning at Khan Academy, and Dina Neyman, Khan Academy’s director of district success. 

As AI becomes increasingly present in the classroom, educators are understandably concerned about how it might disrupt their teaching. An expert panel featuring Jake Baskin, executive director of the Computer Science Teachers Association andKarim Meghji of Code.org, will look at how teaching will change in an age of AI, exploring frameworks for teaching AI skills and sharing best practices for integrating AI literacy across disciplines.

Generation Alpha is the first to experience generative artificial intelligence from the start of their educational journeys. To thrive in a world featuring AI requires educators helping them tap into their natural creativity, navigating unique opportunities and challenges. In this session, a cross-industry panel of experts discuss strategies to integrate AI into learning, allowing critical thinking and curiosity to flourish while enabling early learners to become architects of AI, not just users.

Join a panel of educators, tech leaders and nonprofit officials as they discuss AI’s ethical complexities and its impact on the education of Black children. This panel will address historical disparities, biases in technology, and the critical need for ethical AI in education. It will also offer unique perspectives into the benefits and challenges of AI in Black children’s education, sharing best practices to promote the safe, ethical and legal use of AI in classrooms.

Is teacher morale shaped by where teachers work? Find out as Education Week releases its annual State of Teaching survey. States and school districts drive how teachers are prepared, paid and promoted, and the findings will raise new questions about what leaders and policymakers should consider as they work to support an essential profession. The session features Holly Kurtz, director of EdWeek Research Center, Stephen Sawchuk, EdWeek assistant managing editor, and assistant editor Sarah D. Sparks.

While most students in U.S. public schools are now young people of color, more than 80% of their teachers are white. How do white educators understand and address these dynamics? Join a live recording of a podcast that brings together white educators with Christopher Emdin and sam seidel, co-editors of From White Folks Who Teach in the Hood: Reflections on Race, Culture, and Identity (Beacon, 2024).

Schools are locked in a battle with students over fears they’re using generative artificial intelligence to plagiarize existing work. In this session, join Elliott Hedman, a “customer obsession engineer” with mPath, who with colleagues and students co-designed a GenAI writing tool to reframe AI use. Hedman will share three strategies that not only prevent plagiarism but also teach students how to use GenAI more productively.  

Thursday, March 6:

Join futurists Sinead Bovell and Natalie Monbiot for a fireside discussion about how we prepare kids for a future we cannot yet see but know will be radically transformed by technology. Bovell and Monbiot will discuss the impact of artificial intelligence on our world and the workforce, as well as its implications for education. 

Young children spend 80% of their time outside of school, but too many lack access to experiences that encourage learning through hands-on activities and play. While these opportunities exist in middle-class and upper-income neighborhoods, they’re often inaccessible to families in low-income communities. In this session, a panel of designers and educators featuring Sarah Lytle, who leads the Playful Learning Landscapes Action Network, will look at how communities are transforming overlooked spaces such as sidewalks, shelters and even jails into nurturing learning environments accessible to all kids.

In this session, participants will build an AI chatbot alongside designers and engineers from Stanford University and Stanford’s d.school, getting to the core of how AI works. Participants will conceptualize, outline and create conversation flows for their own AI assistant and explore methods that technical teams use to infuse warmth and adaptability into interactions and develop reliable chatbots.  

In this session, participants will learn how educators, technologists and policymakers work to develop AI responsibly. Panelists include Isabelle Hau of the Stanford Accelerator for Learning, Amelia Kelly, chief technology officer of the Irish AI startup SoapBox Labs, and Merlyn Mind CEO Levi Belnap. They’ll talk about how policymakers and educators can work with developers to ensure transparency and accuracy of AI tools. 

STEM-focused education startup wants high schoolers to have access to accurate, interactive 3D scientific models. And with its newly released, award-winning app, students can explore, learn and discuss the parts of the body and other biological subjects in a wholly immersive way.

The app contains more than 1,000 3D models created specifically for the company. So if, for example, students are exploring the respiratory system, the app’s 3D model of lungs, trachea and alveoli can be virtually rotated and be pulled apart. Students can click on different points of the model to answer questions and learn biological functions. By answering questions correctly, they earn a score and pass levels.

“Our hope is to eventually cover all of STEM,” says co-founder Amrutha Vasan. “Biology is just the launching point for thousands of models of the human body and plants. So many 3D models just aren’t accurate, but we have a content team of teachers that note down exactly what models need to look like.”

Vasan describes the app as Duolingo meeting Minecraft, allowing students to both learn processes and experiment. Students can download and explore the 3D models for free, choosing sections that interest them or support in-school learning. Teachers can also access them through any web browser.

“Our goal is to improve accessibility and increase curiosity in STEM education,” Vasan says. “So many students drop STEM, and there is a group unable to visualize certain topics. Teachers and students don’t have the tools they need. We found something accessible, solving the students’ problems first.”

The app’s April debut came on the heels of Inspirit winning the , opening the potential for new funding sources. The Atlanta-based company started after founders Vasan and Aditya Vishwanath met as undergraduates at Georgia Tech, studying the best ways to bring immersive technology into the classroom.

Vasan says that as she worked with local students, she realized even simple 360-degree videos increased their educational engagement and interest. And as Vishwanath moved to work on his Ph.D. in Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab, the pair decided that no good solution existed for video-based interactive STEM education, as many products were taking a 2D concept and simply tweaking it to call it 360-degree content. Vasan then formed a team in India to create the biology-focused 3D animations.

In an effort to grow the company and bring students into the fold, Vasan has opened internship opportunities for high schoolers. “We think high school students have some of the best ideas,” she says. “This is an app for them, so we think it should be built by them.”

Bella Monsalve, a junior at Castilleja High School in Palo Alto, California, is one of those summer interns. “By shifting to online learning all year, it has been hard to fully experience subjects like science because labs make the learning experience much more effective,” she says. “Inspirit allows students to really dive deep into topics.”

Vasan says they want to also create a community where students interested in stem can come together. A “discord community” exists on the company’s website, a place for students to ask questions about STEM. She hopes to create workshops, study sessions and in-person events, and “bring back that summer camp feel into biology for high school students.” Eventually, new app features include allowing students into the same virtual lab at the same time, teaching each other.

Disclosure: 2021 SXSW EDU Online Launch competition is presented by the Walton Family Foundation, which provides financial support to ����Ӱ��.

The panel discussion, “Mothers Stand Up; The Rising Voice of the Black Mother,” took place March 10 as part of this year’s SXSW EDU virtual conference. It can now be viewed .

The event brought together four Black mothers who are leading parent movements across the nation: Alisha Thomas Morgan, author, entrepreneur and former Georgia state representative; Deirdra Reed, policy and advocacy partner at The New Teachers Project; Education Freestyle founder Ashley Virden and Lakisha Young, founder and CEO of The Oakland Reach. The conversation was moderated by Mimi Woldeyohannes, ����Ӱ��’s special projects and community manager.

The women shared their vision for parent organizing and what it looks like when Black parents have a meaningful voice in how education decisions are made. They also addressed what the learning landscape should be post-pandemic.

“Honestly, too much of this conversation is focused on getting “back to normal” as the answer. Our parents don’t want to go back to normal,” Young said. “Going back to a system where less than 30 percent of Black and brown students are reading on grade level is not a solution — and it’s certainly not a win. If the system wants to earn our trust, they need to show us a real plan for getting our kids access to high-quality instruction.”

Since the late 19th century, Black women have taken a more active role in leading organizing efforts in their communities. From churches to beauty shops, to bus stops and schools, they carried out coalition-building efforts that drove change and, as a result, helped shape some of our most notable social movements.

More recently, we witnessed Black women, such as Georgia voting rights powerhouse Stacey Abrams, become the backbone of political organizing, proving to our nation that when they lead, communities at large benefit.

Building on the collective organizing efforts of parent choice pioneer Annette “Polly Williams” or civil and women’s rights champion Fannie Lou Hamer, Black mothers in the educational equity movement have refused to accept the status quo and are actively leading organizing efforts in their communities to ensure that all students have access to quality educational opportunities.

“Without the voice of parents in education and education policy, we will never see the gains our students deserve. More than educators, the delivery system, policies or laws, it is parents who know what’s best for our children,” says parent activist, Alisha Thomas Morgan.

Morgan, author, entrepreneur and former Georgia state representative, will join Deirdra Reed, policy and advocacy partner at The New Teachers Project; Education Freestyle founder Ashley Virden and Lakisha Young, founder and CEO of The Oakland Reach, to discuss these issues at a SXSW EDU panel titled, “Mothers Stand Up: The Rising Voice of the Black Mother.” Their session will air

Mimi Woldeyohannes, ����Ӱ��’s special projects and community manager, moderated the panel and had the chance to go deeper with these four women on the future of parent activism and the role of Black parents in the educational equity movement in a post-pandemic world.

The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

����Ӱ��: Can you tell us more about how you got involved in the parent activism movement and what is your vision for parent organizing work in your respective regions? 

Ashley: I got involved in parent activism because I got fed up with the fact that my son was getting suspended frequently while he was only in pre-K. Since then, I’ve worked hard to figure out what the issue was and how I could be a part of the solution. I stay in the fight because I realize how the public school system failed me and I don’t want my children to have the same outcomes. Our ultimate goal is to build a community of families and educators to bridge the gap between the home, school and community, so that we can work together to create realistic expectations that we can hold each other accountable for.

Lakisha: The Oakland REACH is made up of the mamas, grandmamas and fathers who the system has failed — and who refuse to let that reality be the reality of our children and grandchildren. And through our work, we show what is possible when the system listens to parents — when leaders trust parents about what our kids need. Over the past five years, our team has poured our lived and career experiences into different levers to advocate for quality education. We have conducted over 5,000 one-on-ones with parents in Oakland’s most underserved communities and trained almost 400 families through our family fellowship program to create a team of informed and organized parent advocates fighting for quality schools. Through this mobilization, we were able to pass legislation, The Opportunity Ticket, to fight for priority enrollment. We built a citywide literacy coalition with 30-plus partner organizations focusing our city and the country on literacy for the whole family. When COVID hit, we moved urgently to build a Citywide Virtual Family Hub to provide high-quality instruction and wraparound supports for the whole family. As we build each phase of this work on the ground, we’re also building our influence in local and national conversations about what a quality education looks like.

Alisha: I got involved first as a state legislator wanting to see kids in my district have access to the highest quality schools in our area regardless of their zip code. It became even more real for me when I became a mother. Having access to the school that works best for your child is one of the most important rights we must have. It was my parents exercising choice that changed my life’s trajectory. I want that opportunity and access for all kids, including my own.

Deirdra: I am a single mom that has navigated the public education system for myself, my siblings and my own children. Early on, my lived experience taught me that the system of education was broken and intentionally demonized the role of families and community in supporting the educational outcomes of our own children. So, I am an organizer from WAY back and now, I’m working with TNTP to create powerful spaces for parents and community to engage around the issues within this broken system. My vision is for parent organizing centers and addresses the concerns of parents in real time. It asks the question: How do we change schools right now? Yes, there are issues that parents may or may not be aware of, but true democracy allows for parents to critique the system from their vantage point while offering them alternative thought around “what is possible”. Through TNTP, we are working to provide resources to parents who are concerned about their child’s educational experience. Individual parents, students and parent organizations can visit to read our reports on how schools could better support student learning and download our advocacy tools.

����Ӱ��: What do you think the ultimate purpose of education is right now? What do you think it should be?

Ashley: Being in a complete state of turmoil, I believe that the ultimate purpose of education is to support the kids and families in whatever ways are needed, not only for academic support, but for social-emotional support as well.

Lakisha: All we are asking for is a shot — a shot to compete in college, compete for a career. But even before COVID-19 hit, less than 30 percent of Black and brown students in Oakland schools were reading on grade level. That means the kids growing up with Silicon Valley in their backyard have no chance to compete for a good job there. That’s a horrific failure. We shouldn’t have to fight this hard to access quality. We shouldn’t have to fight this hard for a shot.

Alisha: Right now, the ultimate purpose of education seems to be to perpetuate a system created decades ago for a different era. It is creating employees who learn material to take tests. The ultimate purpose of education is to create thinkers, innovators, problem solvers, and good humans who will lead our communities and nation into the future. It is my hope that our current education system will become more relevant, teach our students both the core subject areas and about the world around them. To also teach them to be citizens of the world who make great gains in science, industry, technology and humanity. I also envision a day when schools expose our students to practical life lessons, such as homebuying, credit, taxes, and management. We will help develop them into more responsible adults who will be equipped to navigate the world more effectively.

Deirdra: Paola Freire sums it up: There’s no such thing as neutral education. Education either functions as an instrument to bring about conformity or freedom. From my perspective, the purpose of the K-12 experience has been reduced to lessons of conformity. We have not, at scale, reimagined education in ways that aren’t about creating workers and/or inmates. For those students who, by design, have been denied the access to information and skills but still face the choice of conformity or freedom. Only those elite are exposed to information that calls for critical analysis of the world that we have inherited. That is the definition of a caste system. So, I am forced to grapple with our education system’s purpose is to uphold the American caste system. My hope for the educational system is that it lives into the power of children and community! Education is EVERYWHERE and the pandemic and TikTok proves that daily! For me, education is social and political. It is about getting information to young people so that they can grapple with the world and find their place in it. It is rooted in love and justice. So, that we are intentionally addressing systemic “isms” and bias while creating space for students to learn and ideate on what they are learning.

����Ӱ��: What are your thoughts regarding parent activism gaining more visibility in education policy spaces, such as the creation of Powerful Parent Network and how do you think the pandemic has affected parent empowerment as parents took a front row seat in their children’s education? 

Ashley: I am so thankful that parent activism is gaining more visibility in education policy spaces. The Powerful Parent Network and other parent groups have done a great job of showing other parents what’s possible if we come together to demand better and how we can begin to reimagine what education can look like for our children.

Lakisha: I’ve been leading this work in Oakland for half a decade, and now we are leading through a pandemic. Through all of this, my vision around parent organizing for The Oakland REACH is centered around building solutions and leveraging advocacy to bust barriers on that pathway. We have too long demanded and shouted at systems that either never change or change is unacceptably slow. It’s important that we push systems to “do this” and not just “do something.” We know they are failing our students, so let’s show them how to stop failing our students and then hold them accountable for doing it! We’re doing exactly that with our Virtual Hub. Now they have no excuse.

Alisha: Without the voice of parents in education and education policy, we will never see the gains our students deserve. More than educators, the delivery system, policies or laws, it is parents who know what’s best for our children. We know what they need, what makes them thrive, and no system will have higher aspirations than parents. We ought to have the strongest and most powerful voice in efforts to create change. I think the pandemic created the perfect storm to help parents have an even greater appreciation for teachers, for education, and how our children learn. Too often parents feel intimidated by the system, thus making them afraid to advocate or they simply accept what is handed to them. The pandemic has caused us all to become more expert in the needs of our children and better understand their learning needs. It has also afforded us the opportunity to engage even more in their learning and within the schools. It is my hope we only get stronger and more powerful post the pandemic.

Deirdra: I do not want to romanticize the pandemic or parents, especially working and low-wealth parents who are fighting every day to survive this economy, racism and bad/uniformed policies, both in school and in life. Yes, parents have a better view of where schools are failing their children. And yes, in places like Oakland and Memphis, where there are organized parents — this is an opportunity for them to show their power! But for the majority of parents who are primarily unorganized, there is work to do to get them connected and supported both with their “basic needs” as well as helping them navigate an education system that was ill-prepared to respond to this crisis. My hope, however, lies in families ability to “vote with their feet”. Districts and school leadership are feeling the real-time effects of keeping parents at arm’s length. If districts want to see those students and families return, they will have to meet them where they are!

����Ӱ��: When it comes to decisions being made on whether or not to reopen schools anytime soon, many of our parents are caught in between a rock and a hard place. As we know, school closures have hit the mental health and academic achievement of Black and brown children the hardest, but many of the families that are in need of in-person education are the most wary of returning. In particular, Black parents have expressed their concern about schools reopening for in-person learning because of the lack of trust in public school systems. And the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 62 percent of white parents strongly or somewhat agreed schools should reopen in the fall, compared with 46 percent of Black parents. What are some ways that districts and networks can help gain the trust of Black families in the midst of the pandemic? 

Ashley: Many of us really like that we have a voice in what is going on right now. Districts need to increase communication before decisions are being made on how to proceed. Parents have to become true partners in education by having districts and networks be more intentional about bringing them to the table to not only listen to them, but by finding meaningful ways to implement their suggestions. This is also a great time for districts and networks to be more transparent about what’s happening in the educational landscape.

Lakisha: Honestly, too much of this conversation is focused on getting “back to normal” as the answer. Our parents don’t want to go back to normal. Going back to a system where less than 30 percent of Black and brown students are reading on grade level is not a solution — and it’s certainly not a win. If the system wants to earn our trust, they need to show us a real plan for getting our kids access to high-quality instruction. We showed that it’s possible — virtually or in person — with our Citywide Hub. Last summer, we kicked off our Hub offering high-quality, live academic instruction remotely for 200 students kindergarten through 8th grade. We delivered real, academic gains: 60 percent of the students in the REACH’s K-2 summer literacy programming moved two or more levels on the district-wide reading assessment; 30 percent of students moved three or more. We have continued running our Hub, doubling our enrollment, and tripling our academic enrichment offerings, while also piloting our model within our school district. We are increasing our impact from 200 to 1,000 students in less than a year. If the system wants our trust, they must match — better yet, exceed — what we have been able to build on our own!

Alisha: This is a complex issue. Decisions need to be made based on the federal, state, and local resources available to provide a safe and healthy environment for all students, teachers, and school personnel. That decision needs to be made at the local level. Some parents have real reason to distrust schools and systems that may not be taking this pandemic seriously and don’t want to put their children in danger. As a parent, I have the privilege of working from home as well as the choice in my school district to select virtual while some parents have selected face to face. Choice is the key factor. For those parents who prefer face-to-face because they have to go to work, have concerns about learning loss, or believe in-person is the best option, they should have that option. Schools and systems have to do the hard work to hear from parents, secure resources to serve all families that wish to be served, and rebuild trust where trust is an issue. What we can’t do is fault parents or even systems who make different choices based on the circumstances of their district.

Deirdra: More than “trust”, parents and families need “power” and seats at the tables of decision-making at the district and school level. If districts continue to hoard power and create “strategies” in isolated spaces that don’t include parents then, there is no real dialogue and therefore, no trust. If district leaders truly want Black students and families at school, then they need to be invited as equals and not as “consumers”.

����Ӱ��: What are you hearing from Black families right now in regards to how they would like to approach educating their children moving forward? 

Ashley: It’s funny hearing stories about Megyn Kelly removing her children from their private school because they are moving too far left and taking a social justice approach to education. For Black families, it’s extremely important for us to approach educating our children through a social justice lens.

Lakisha: Our families are rightfully worried that going back to school is accepting failure. We have lived through a global crisis that totally disrupted the education system — but it still feels like nothing will change. They want to know how they can continue to access high-quality instruction, like they got from our Hub, for their kids when schools reopen. And they want hybrid options available to be able to determine the best option for their kids. They also know that for any education model to be successful, it must integrate the academic needs of families, along with the socio-economic ones. You can’t just throw a laptop at a kid and assume it will work. That laptop needs to include tech support and computer training for families. That’s what our Hub was all about — computers for each student, hotspots for households that needed it, family liaisons, tech trainings and support, family workshops and stipends. And it worked! During the summer, The hub had 83 percent attendance compared to the district’s 35 percent attendance that spring. We also had a 90 percent parent satisfaction rate.

Alisha: According to a survey conducted by the Coalition for Parent School options, 70 percent of Black parents across the country want to see a virtual option offered post-pandemic. More than 70 percent want to have a choice for their children’s educational experience regardless of their zip codes. For those parents who were able to immerse their children in non-traditional experiences, they are realizing that we no longer have to accept the one-size-fits-all model. It’s critical that we take the lessons we’ve learned during the pandemic and vow to never to return to business as usual in education.

Deirdra: Oh! The movement for Black Lives is leaving an indelible mark on the world and in particular, the Black community. The cry “Do Black Lives Matter” is making its way into the school setting. First, around school discipline and police presence in schools, but also in school curriculum and in teacher/faculty representation. The internet has provided a backdrop for “what they haven’t taught you in school” … so, “Who is teaching?” and “What are they teaching and from whose perspective?” This framework has opened the door for students and families to question the dominant culture’s narrative and what is expected from school. The notion that school can go back to “normal” will remain to be seen. At TNTP, we are launching a project called “Elevating the Voices of the Community” that will focus on giving parents and students of color a platform to talk about their lived
educational experience. We want to hear MORE from those families and community members and help them to navigate their collective educational concerns. If you are interested in connecting with us or know a parent or student that could benefit from this project, please have them reach out by texting “SPEAK” to 797979.

����Ӱ��: What advice would you give to Black parents right now? 

Ashley: Parents don’t be afraid to ask for the support that you need. We don’t have to pretend like everything is OK and that we have it all under control, 100 percent of the time. We must remember that our kids are watching and now is a great time to show them how to build resiliency as a community, so that we can work collectively to make it through this double pandemic.

Lakisha: 1) No one is coming to save us—we need to build the solutions our families need; 2) You deserve to be trusted—you know what your kids need after all; and 3) Self-determination is liberation.

Alisha: Keep pushing. Keep asking questions. Follow your gut and know that YOU are the expert when it comes to your child. Don’t be intimidated by the acronyms or all of the “data” used. Those are important, but you know what’s best for your child. We only get one shot to get this right for our kids. Be fearless in going for what you know is best for them. You and they are worthy!

Deirdra: Don’t give up! I truly believe that we have the ability to change these broken systems, but it will take a two-pronged approach of creating new structures that prove that change can happen and fighting for policy shifts that help to anchor the changes we seek.

At the time of our founding, it was hard to get people to take us seriously. “Civics? Really? There’s so much else out there that’s more important,” people would tell me. We were a bit player in the broader education and democracy reform arena.

Fast forward a little more than 10 years, and the conversations have changed dramatically. “How can we get civics education into every classroom in this country?” is now a common refrain. In a country in which we cannot agree on anything at all, it seems there is near-consensus on the importance of civics education for improving our education system and our democracy. While we attempt to be a nonpartisan organization, the reality is that the vitriolic, turbulent and increasingly unequal politics of the moment make clear the need for a revival of civics education. Our political process is not working the way it should, and it is incumbent on the next generation of citizens to lead us toward a better democracy.

The need for renewed civics education is overwhelming. Only 17 percent of Americans trust the government to do what is right. Polarization continues to increase, with individuals demonizing those who do not think like them. A recent Pew poll showed that 45 percent of Republicans and 41 percent of Democrats felt that the other party’s policies and politics posed an existential threat to the nation. These trends are only worsening as we collectively fail to ensure that the next generation of Americans is engaged and informed. Less than 30 percent of young people think democracy is the best form of governance; young people do not believe in our form of government right now.

Despite the desperate need, only nine states require a full year of civics instruction, and only eight have a stand-alone assessment in civics. As a country, we spend 5 cents per student on civic instruction, versus $54 per student on STEM education. As I get ready to transition out of leadership at Generation Citizen, after 11 years as CEO, I’ve begun to about some of the more pressing issues to address as we seek to expand civics education across the country:

What is civics education?

While there is growing consensus that young people need more civics education, there is no agreement on what exactly that means. There is often an implicit belief that civics education must transcend political beliefs. But a discipline that is fundamentally predicated on teaching young people to understand and engage in the political is itself fundamentally political.

To posit two poles: Some believe civics education should focus on how government work — how a bill becomes a law, say, and our constitutional structures. Others say effective civics education should focus on action, including formal and informal methods of political participation, which means acknowledging the oppression and exclusion that have defined our democracy since its inception. Civic education thus becomes one way to challenge traditional structures and redistribute political power.

To take the definitional challenge to another level, some believe civics should be a subject, like math or science, that teaches students basic political structures. Others think civics should be an organizing principle and pedagogy for an entire school, pervading its culture. In such a democracy school, learning about public issues would stream into every subject. Science classes would include measuring the pH levels of school fountains, math class would involve analyzing local traffic patterns and English class would include writing persuasive opinion articles.

When I mention these ideological challenges to others in the field, I often receive pushback that we are focusing on what divides rather than what can unite us. But civics education that focuses on a goal of civility looks much different than one focused on equity. There isn’t necessarily one correct definition, but defining, describing and understanding the full spectrum of civics education approaches is necessary for truly understanding whether some merit more attention than others.

How do we diversify the field?

Most organizations that promote and conduct civics education programming are staffed predominantly by white leaders who have held those positions for a long time. This has numerous and deep ramifications, including the perception that civics education fails to create space for diverse leadership and has extensive blind spots that come from leaders with strong values but who are directing organizations without a nuanced, ever-evolving understanding of the experiences of students and communities of color who have historically had to fight the hardest for a seat at the table in our democracy.

While Generation Citizen has strived to prioritize this value internally, and have indeed made significant strides, we also recognize that we may not have always gotten this right, or attained our highest aspirations. There is an urgent need to diversify leadership in the field.

How do we scale civics?

Even if we can agree upon a set of definitions for civics education and begin to diversify the ranks, determining how to scale the discipline is an entirely different challenge. Some have argued for a need for a technological solution, through online platforms or training. Others have pushed for a national curriculum that could be used by any school or educator. The challenge with scaling the discipline is how localized effective civics education often becomes. Understanding how local town councils work in rural Oklahoma is appreciably different than working with the City Council in New York City. Thus, rather than focusing on a unified approach to civics education, we should elevate best practices and ensure that local districts have the resources they need to focus on the discipline.

This is a moment for civics education. Meeting it will not be easy, but it is necessary — for the sake of our young people and for the sake of our democracy.

Scott Warren is the founding chief executive officer of . 

This naturally raised the questions: Why are there so few low-income students at these schools, and what can be done about it?

Last month, we started to answer these questions in a that examines whether the difference in the types of colleges that children from low- versus high-income families attend is explained by differences in their qualifications. We also analyzed the extent to which changes in the college application and attendance process could reduce income segregation across colleges and increase intergenerational income mobility. We did so using data on students’ ACT and SAT scores as a proxy for their pre-college qualifications. Although test scores do not capture all aspects of students’ qualifications, they are strong predictors of future earnings, even for students from the same socioeconomic background attending the same college, and therefore serve as a simple summary measure of pre-college credentials.

We found that low- and middle-income students attend selective schools at lower rates than their peers from richer families, even when they have the same qualifications. Despite having the same test scores, high-income students are 34 percent more likely to attend selective colleges than low-income students.

The picture is slightly different among the most selective schools — the Ivy League, plus Chicago, Duke, MIT and Stanford — where middle-class students are most heavily underrepresented relative to other students with the same test scores. In contrast with recent research, we found that low-income students attend these Ivy-plus schools at lower rates than high-income students but at significantly higher rates than middle-class students. Overall, low-income students are only slightly underrepresented relative to all others with the same test score; for instance, the percentage of students from the bottom 20 percent of family income would increase only from 3.8 to 4.4 if one eliminated differences in attendance between students with the same test score. There is thus a “missing middle” in the distribution of Ivy-plus students, which reflects how middle-class students are especially underrepresented at these schools.

Broadly, our results suggest that one could achieve major changes in economic diversity at selective schools, even taking as given students’ academic preparation at the end of high school, simply by equalizing attendance rates at each school among students with the same level of academic qualification. But because high-income students on average score higher on standardized tests, the student bodies at selective schools would have a smaller share of low-income students than at less selective schools.

What would it take to fully equalize the representation of low-income students so that the student body at each college reflected the composition of all college undergraduates in the U.S.? Intuitively, the attendance rate for low-income students would need to match that for high-income students with higher test scores. We calculate that this would require matching the attendance rates of high-income students with SAT scores 160 points higher. This is a large differential, but it is similar to the well-documented boost in admissions processes at many (especially private) schools for legacy students, minority students and recruited athletes. A direct admissions boost is not necessarily the best way to achieve these attendance gains — for instance, one could also increase application rates or yield rates among low-income students — but it does suggest that it would not necessarily require policies at a different scale than those already in practice for other groups.

Increasing the representation of low- and middle-income students at selective colleges would have a dramatic effect on intergenerational income mobility in the United States. Ensuring that students with the same qualifications had the same opportunities to attend college, regardless of their family income, would reduce the intergenerational mobility gap between high- and low-income students by 15 percent. If students attended colleges in a fully representative way, using the 160-point boost discussed above, this would reduce the gap by 25 percent. Although this would not close the entire gap, it would represent significant progress, given that children’s outcomes in adulthood are shaped by an accumulation of environmental factors starting from birth.

Overall, our findings suggest that changing the colleges that students attend could increase intergenerational mobility, even without changing college curricula or addressing disparities before students apply to college. We now aim to understand how to change which colleges students from low- and middle-income families attend and to identify scalable solutions.

To turn this research into action, we formed the (CLIMB) Initiative, partnering with a diverse array of colleges and universities across the country that currently enroll 30 percent of the entire U.S. undergraduate population. These partnerships are critical, since the best policies for enrolling more low-income students or promoting their success at one school may be very different than at another; what works in New York City may not work best in rural Texas. All of us benefit if society tries new ways to lift more children out of poverty.

is co-director of Opportunity Insights at Harvard University. 

Atlanta native Kimberly Dukes had volunteered at her children’s schools for over 10 years, but she never knew that the schools she sent her children to were categorized as failing by the Atlanta Public Schools. After absorbing that news, she quickly realized that the district wasn’t willing to work with families to provide them with better educational opportunities. Dukes refused to accept the status quo, instead taking it upon herself to begin advocating on behalf of her children and many others from similar backgrounds.

Fast-forward to spring 2019, when Dukes co-founded , a parent advocacy group with a mission to empower parents to disrupt inequities in education. The group was immediately tasked with working to improve the district’s turnaround strategy so that all students would have access to a better education.

Nowadays, when she isn’t tending to her 10 children, who all currently attend Atlanta public schools, or spearheading her organization’s parent fellowship training program, you can find Dukes and many other parent advocates sitting down with the Democratic presidential candidates to discuss their education plans and press them on the need to offer sufficient solutions for families with children in failing schools.

This week, Dukes will be speaking on a panel at the SXSW EDU conference in Austin titled The March 11 session, which also features Deirdra Reed of The New Teachers Project, Marilyn Rhames of Teachers Who Pray and Ashley Virden of The Mind Trust, is sponsored by EdChoice.

The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

����Ӱ��: So, we know that this work is very personal for you. You mentioned that you have 10 kids who attend Atlanta public schools. So can you tell us a little bit about what sparked your interest in parent advocacy and what ultimately compelled you to start Atlanta Thrive?

Dukes: I’ve always been a mother that has volunteered in schools. My oldest daughter is 17 years old, and I’ve volunteered at her elementary school since she was in first grade. What sparked my advocacy work is when the turnaround strategy happened. The parents at Thomasville Heights Elementary School were initially pleased with the school culture and the staff, but we never knew the school was actually graded and we eventually found out that Thomasville Heights Elementary School was categorized as a failing school. One day, I came to the school only to find out that all of the teachers had staged a walkout and I didn’t understand why, and then that’s when I began to learn and dig into what was actually happening on a local and state level.

After I began to ask questions and engage in these policy issues, I became a target for the big unions. I specifically remember when I was targeted by a …. [union employee] who tried to use me to work with him by also mentioning that the mega-churches would also offer their support, all so he could use me to say the things that he wanted to say. I eventually told him that I couldn’t do it because I’m not dishonest and I’m going to always represent my families and my parents with integrity. So, I separated myself from their efforts, and I eventually went to speak at a board meeting alone. I spoke on behalf of my children, saying that it’s not fair that children growing up in low-income communities are still in failing schools all while parents aren’t informed. Furthermore, the district wasn’t willing to work with parents and families to help them pick and choose what’s best for their children. So, what ultimately got me involved in leading the work for Atlanta Thrive was the turnaround strategy and parents not understanding what’s going on in a system that constantly intimidates them or talks over their heads.

How do you engage and empower parents to get involved in education advocacy efforts not only in your local community but also across the country? 

Monday through Friday, I go door to door in the lowest-performing neighborhoods in Atlanta, and we are currently targeting the 12 schools that are on the state takeover list. I make a significant effort to meet parents in their comfort zone and hear their stories to figure out how we can help and address their concerns with the hopes of eventually drawing them into a larger movement of parents who are willing to stand together to say, “I’ll fight for your child and you will fight for mine.” We also offer a five-week fellowship, where parents come and learn about the history of APS along with the current campaigns that we’re running. The fellows learn how to go out into the community, organize and mobilize, and they also learn how to read data and to tell their personal stories. … We also bring the fellows together once a month and we have conversations that we like to call Straight Talk. This month’s Straight Talk will consist of us convening parents to watch the movie Miss Virginia and getting their overall perspectives around the movie with the hopes of getting everyone to share out their next steps of how they plan to move forward.

Additionally, I’ve knocked on over 10,000 doors — and counting — and I’ve helped 45 of our parents graduate from our fellowship program. The goal is to have 100 parents graduate from our fellowship program by the end of the year.

Can you talk about some of the challenges and lessons learned throughout your work so far?

One of the most challenging aspects of this work that actually breaks my heart the most is that schools are not open to working with parents. Parents are the experts when it comes to our children. Parents are the only people that don’t reap any benefits by sending their children to these failing schools. The other challenging piece that also breaks my heart is that parents don’t know much about how to navigate the education systems. Parents don’t know schools have grades; parents don’t know that our schools are failing. Parents often believe that because their kids come home with A’s and B’s on their report card, that means that their kids are excelling in school, which we know not to be true.

So this is where I found an opportunity to go out into the community every day to talk to parents. If I just get one or two parents that are receptive to what I have to say or express interest in participating in my organization’s fellowship program, it makes my heart smile. In the instance that parents are going through things or they’re just too busy to attend an event we’re hosting, I completely empathize because I am a mother with 10 kids, so when those things happen, I just tell them to keep my number on file and let them know that they can reach out to me about things related to their children’s education or even unrelated items, such as self care, etc. I really appreciate it when parents reach out to me just to have a conversation because I really believe we have to be a friend before we need a friend. And I learned that from the mother of our movement, Ms. Sarah Carpenter. We cannot expect parents to show up until we invest in parents, and I’ve realized that this work is about building relationships. This is something that we can teach the schools, administration staff and even the school board. We can also teach them how to deepen relationships with the hopes of having communities and schools that want to work in tandem to support the whole child.

If you had the power to change one thing, one thing about your school district, what would it be?

I would change the current composure of the school board by replacing it with parents who are willing and have the mindset or the learning curve to actually do the work. The board is responsible for decision-making and making things happen. Therefore, parents who have children in struggling schools similar to many other parents in the district won’t be compelled to make decisions based on politics or what their next move will be. Instead, they will make decisions on what’s best for their children because they would presumably also have children in the district. Also, a lot of times, they try to pit parents against the teachers or our neighborhoods against other neighborhoods, but that’s not the fight we should be fighting. The fight we should all be fighting should be against the system because the system is broken. A lot of us accept the status quo, and until we stop doing so, it won’t ever stop.

Can you talk to us a little bit about your organization’s plans? What’s most important to you this year? Over the next five years? 

Right now, one of our priorities is to educate at least 100 parents this year by having them go through our fellowship program and to have at least 50 powerful parents by the end of each year [a “powerful parent” is a parent who attends four or more events within six months]. Ideally, the powerful parent advocates will keep on consistently attending events afterwards and eventually influence the board to vote to change policies based on black and brown kids to make sure that the equity is in everything that the board decides upon. We’re also hoping to influence the decision-making around the next superintendent appointment because that person will ultimately determine what else can happen in the future.

On Tuesday, March 3, APS is holding a school board meeting to vote on a five-year plan, which is something Atlanta Thrive has been rallying behind, and I will be speaking in favor of implementing the plan. For the next year or two, we plan on holding the board accountable to implementing the measurements and the other items they voted on in this plan. (Dukes testified before the APS school board on March 3, advocating for increased accountability metrics for black and brown students in the district’s five-year plan.)

What are your thoughts regarding parent activism gaining more traction on the national stage, such as the creation of Powerful Parent Network, and do you believe it may be at a tipping point in terms of political influence? 

This is really important because we can’t just fight on the school, local or state level. The overall state of literacy in our country and the fact that many black and brown kids are not reading on grade level is a serious national problem. The presidential candidates have been discussing their latest education plans for our kids, and we have to make sure that whoever gets elected has a great plan that will ensure our kids aren’t locked in these failing schools.

As a parent activist, I think parents can help influence the presidential election process. For example, a lot of people, including myself, initially really liked EIizabeth Warren’s campaign and believed she had a lot to offer. However, after some of the parent activists and myself sat down with Warren at Clark Atlanta University to discuss her education plan, we realized she was no longer the highlight of this election season because her plan didn’t provide sufficient solutions for families with children in failing schools. Our only opportunity shouldn’t have to be to stay in a neighborhood school. Now, if that ended up being our only option, then we would need to know what the candidate’s plans are to fix our failing neighborhood schools. For example, among the 88 functioning schools in APS, 54 schools have received a D or F, and that’s a serious problem.

We believe that families living in poverty or parents with kids in failing schools should have the opportunity to have a choice on where they would prefer to send their kids to school. As long as we’re exposing each candidate’s educational plans and talking to as many parents as possible, we’ll have an opportunity to influence the vote. A lot of people often vote because they think the candidate is a good person, but I think we should be talking more about the candidate’s education plans because that’s the key for anybody to be successful, and everyone in the world will be impacted by the educational plan, whether it may be your children, your grandchildren, another member of your family or even your neighbor.

As we know, parenting alone can be incredibly taxing and demanding, and so can this work. How do you find time to take care of yourself?

Self-care is really hard for me primarily because Atlanta Thrive is so new and I’m building a team. But self-care for me right now means getting up around 4:30 a.m. to meditate and getting in bed at least by 9:30 p.m. to have an hour of silence to think, take my medication for my blood pressure, etc. I also make sure I’m drinking water and exercising. These are the small and necessary things that I do for self-care right now.

There is a reason that many of us working to improve economic mobility also focus on higher education. consistently that postsecondary education is still one of the surest bets for increasing earnings and improving access to jobs that pay a family-sustaining wage.

Leading experts and thinkers planned to gather at this week to discuss the big, bold ideas that will guide the field, especially as the future of work shifts what society expects from higher education. Although this year’s conference was canceled, the topics that filled the event’s program will still be the focus of important discussions in the months and years ahead. To ensure that the future of work and learning we are shaping now creates greater economic mobility, we should focus the innovative energy sparked by these field-shaping conversations on the needs of student parents.

make up more than 1 in 5 undergraduate students in the United States. They are more likely to live below the poverty line and have higher student debt than students without children. They are disproportionately women, students of color and first-generation students. They also have higher grade-point averages and the connection among their degree, the jobs they can get and their family’s economic security. But due to the compounding financial and time pressures they face, graduate on time.

In short, student parents represent the intersection of many of the populations our systems aim to support, but their needs too often go unaddressed, slipping through the cracks between where one system ends and the other begins.

The philanthropic sector can play a significant role in ensuring that the futures of work and higher education are both grounded in equity by investing now in solutions that bridge these gaps. As funders focused on economic mobility, we have found that investments in student parents benefit everyone.

This moment represents a tremendous opportunity for innovation that can achieve large-scale systems change in how we learn, work and support families. Recent policy momentum at the and levels indicates that there are policymakers primed to champion new proposals to support student parents. At the same time, technological innovation has opened up new avenues for streamlining and improving systems at a rapid pace.

By harnessing the innovative energy sparked by the changing future of work to support the success of parenting students, the philanthropic community can better arm changemakers with 21st century solutions to improving economic mobility.

Here are a few ways philanthropy’s investments in student parents now can pay off for everyone in the future.

Beyond Systemic: Thinking Ecosystemically

From public transportation to housing, students, especially student parents, do not interact with systems in a vacuum. Take child care, for instance. Access to affordable, reliable child care helps parents , but availability of on-campus child care has been declining for years. Research has shown that partnerships between , the largest early childhood education program in the country, offers a promising — and largely untapped — solution to addressing students’ child care needs. So, as one of the Kresge Foundation’s partnerships, Portland Community College and Albina Head Start in Oregon are their collaboration to serve more students and create tools for other colleges to launch their own partnerships. When more students are able to complete their degrees, local workforces and communities benefit.

Addressing Gender Equity in Higher Ed and the Workforce

Community colleges play a key role in preparing the workforce for jobs of the future. Student parents at these schools are single mothers, who, as the sole provider for their families, often pursue higher education to unlock access to better paying jobs. But just of single mothers graduate on time.

That’s why the Women’s Foundation of Southern Arizona, with support from ECMC Foundation, launched a program that provides child care, coaching and other support that is targeted to the specific needs of single mothers pursuing a certificate for jobs in such high-demand fields as logistics or computer-aided design at Tucson’s Pima Community College. Aligning investments with an eye toward gender equity not only addresses persistently high poverty rates among single mothers, but also strengthens the skills of local workforces.

Building a Movement for Future Generations

In addition to supporting the expansion of promising programs to more areas and fostering new approaches, philanthropy can and must make investments that build a sustainable movement of organizations, researchers, policymakers, college administrators and faculty, and, crucially, student parents to activate and achieve systems change over the long term. This is why , a venture of The Omidyar Group, focuses on a “whole family” two-generation approach, seeking to drive both littlest learners’ and adult learners’ educational success, economic mobility and overall family well-being. The goal is to specifically champion solutions for student parents to unlock their abilities to create change for themselves as well as their families and communities, improving outcomes across generations.

Imaginable Futures recently partnered with Lumina Foundation and leading higher education organizations to launch the , which will make 10 awards totaling $1 million to innovative solutions driving economic mobility and well-being for student parents. An investment in student parents today is a down payment on economic mobility for future generations.

Investing in Innovations that Will Shape the Future of Work and Higher Ed

By measuring learning in credit hours and on-campus classes, traditional models of higher education leave out many adult students, particularly those with family and work demands. As technology changes how and where we work and learn, , a subsidiary of the Corporation of Western Governors University, has explored how to re-envision traditional degree program models by focusing on workforce transitioning, skills training, and online-based approaches to college readiness and learning. Its goal is to work with education technology companies that can have an impact on hundreds of thousands of students beyond WGU by removing the time and geographic barriers of traditional programs that require on-campus learning and minimum credit hours and can prevent students, especially student parents, from accessing the education they need to secure the jobs of the future.

The systems of tomorrow are being shaped today. By focusing on equity-centered solutions that support student parent success, philanthropy can help public- and private-sector leaders bridge the gaps between systems so many more students can succeed for themselves and their children.

is the managing partner at NewU Venture Partners. is a partner at Imaginable Futures. is a senior program officer at The Kresge Foundation. is senior program director for career readiness at ECMC Foundation. 

Since its first year in 2011, the has grown from 800 to 8,000-plus registered attendees, who gather each March in Austin to celebrate diversity and share perspectives on how to advance teaching and learning.

As we look back, we reflected on 10 areas in education that have evolved over the past 10 years. The changes in the landscape of learning over the past decade have been striking.

1. Standardized vs. Personalized Learning

In the past 10 years, the conversation has morphed from a focus on school structures and systems to the needs of the learner. Slowly but surely, there has been a transition from high-stakes testing to student-centered teaching to better support and engage children.

2. Learning as a Lifestyle

Whereas learning once principally occurred in the confines of school, the move to continuous learning throughout one’s career and life has expanded where and when learning occurs, to everywhere and all the time. We no longer view learning as limited to institutions and degrees, but as a lifelong pursuit.

3. Student Voice

More than ever before, youth of today are becoming leaders of their own learning, lives and the world in which they live. Their level of engagement signals a shift from passively receiving their education to being more active in creating their own futures. Back in 2015, we partnered with to host a problem-solving session to help the organization build out the that lives on today as a testament to students’ role in driving their own learning.

4. Learning From Educators

For as long as we can remember, teachers stood in the front of the class and taught lessons whether students were listening or not. Similarly, SXSW EDU initially modeled most of its program with an expert at the front of the room. Thanks to our passionate, engaged and vocal community, we quickly discovered — like all learners — that they value a very different, more personalized, interactive experience.

5. Hardware to Software

During the first few years, the program was full of sessions focused on bringing devices into the classroom and how best to implement 1-to-1 initiatives. Now, after the success of getting technology into schools, organizations are turning to software and experiential platforms to empower educators to be more personally connected to their students and their learning.

6. Fueling Learning Through Design

From schools and libraries to informal community learning centers, the drive to create meaningfully designed spaces for learning has become a priority. Physical space and classroom design impact learners’ creativity and motivation in unique ways, which led to the creation of the competition in 2017.

7. STEM to STEAM

What was once a discussion of teaching science, technology, engineering and math has grown to embrace the arts as an integral part of the learning process. The arts are enjoying a renaissance after decades of being overshadowed by assessed core subjects, and the conference reflects this by including more performances, films and a special that highlights immersive experiences at the event. There is an appreciation that interdisciplinary learning makes these subjects more accessible and inviting to everyone, regardless of background, gender or comfort level.

8. Wellness and Self-Care

Whether talking about students or educators, there has been a shift toward supporting the whole child and the whole educator, and building a balance among work, learning and life. It’s no surprise, then, that the programming track has been one of fastest-growing over the past five years; expanded offerings range from meditation and yoga to hikes and runs and more.

9. Future of Work 

Rapid changes in the workplace are forcing educators to revisit the skill sets and tools that students need to succeed. These weren’t at the forefront of the discussion 10 years ago. But today, to prepare youth for jobs that don’t exist yet, schools and businesses are partnering to share insights, address challenges and create new opportunities in both K-12 and higher education. In an effort to build a stronger bridge between these communities, we launched a on the final day of SXSW EDU to bring tech leaders into the conversation.

10. Intersection of Culture and Learning 

For SXSW EDU, education sits squarely at the intersection of culture and learning. It is there that our community gains its inspiration and insights from diverse voices and varied perspectives. As a tool for empowerment and economic mobility, world-class learning systems embrace the fundamental imperative that such opportunities be accessible and available to all learners — an aspiration that SXSW EDU embraces and champions.

What we know for certain, after a decade of SXSW EDU, is that we are stronger because of our community, with its diversity and shared vision for supporting teaching and learning. At the end of the day, we will continue to push for more human connectedness, compassion and inclusion.

Ron Reed is founder and executive producer of SXSW EDU. Greg Rosenbaum is head of SXSW EDU.

In the mix of daily keynote sessions alone, attendees will find a diverse lineup of voices addressing a wide spectrum of issues: Sir Ken Robinson is set to ruminate on on March 10, Carol Dweck will speak March 12 on , and Jennifer Eberhardt takes the stage March 11 for her talk on . The kickoff keynote will spotlight five National Teachers of the Year peering ahead to on March 9. All SXSW EDU keynotes .

One special series we’re looking forward to: , a marathon of monologues that gives emerging leaders 20 minutes to discuss their latest projects, ideas or passions in a TED Talk-like format. This year’s lineup spotlights such topics as , , and .

Elsewhere, the will spotlight an elite circle of education innovators with a Shark Tank-like pitch competition. The following companies will appear to present their products, competing for both $2,500 in cash and $20,000 Google Cloud credits:

● , an online learning platform for young children.

● , which makes a “screenless smart toy” that helps kids learn languages and STEM subjects.

● , a learning app that provides personalized support to chronically absent students.

● , an AI-driven platform that helps users improve their public speaking.

● , an app created in Finland that uses a daily student survey to recommend tips to students and educators for improving student well-being.

You can find . (You can also revisit our roundup of 2019 highlights here.) We’ve combed through the hundreds of sessions in the program; here, in chronological order, are 20 of the most intriguing panels, events and talks that you might want to check out in Austin:

Monday, March 9

9:30 a.m. — : This kickoff keynote session features 2019 National Teacher of the Year Rodney Robinson and four former winners, Sarah Brown Wessling (2010), Jeff Charbonneau (2013), Sydney Chaffee (2017) and Shanna Peeples (2015), who will moderate the conversation. Panelists will discuss what is unique about education today and share their predictions about the future of teaching. (; will begin 9:30 a.m. Monday in Ballroom D at the Austin Convention Center)

● Interview — Rodney Robinson: Juvenile Justice Reform, Equitable Funding Among Priorities for the 2019 Teacher of the Year

11 a.m. — : Educators are increasingly concerned about students’ social-emotional development, but just 1 in 10 teachers say their school has strong SEL initiatives in place. This panel aims to help close the gap by bringing together Steve Arrowood, Stephanie Jones, Weston Kieschnick, Venola Mason and Avis Williams to offer guidance for building an “ecosystem” that will serve every student’s needs. (; will begin 11 a.m. Monday in Room 400 at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

11 a.m. — : Higher education can be a “powerful engine of social mobility,” but often it’s not accessible to students from low-income backgrounds. At this session, Brown University Professor John Friedman, University of Michigan Vice Provost Kedra Ishop and journalist Paul Tough will discuss why that is — and how it could change. Panelists “will analyze the barriers confronting low-income students and propose solutions to help educators, policymakers, parents and students.” (; will begin 11 a.m. Monday in Room 12AB at the Austin Convention Center)

● Our Myths About Mobility — 74 Interview With Paul Tough: Class, Race & the Pursuit of College. Tough Addresses Higher Ed Admissions, Mobility Myths and What His Critics at the College Board Get Wrong

11 a.m. — : From identifying disinformation to creating original content, media literacy is crucial for students today. Leah Clapman of PBS NewsHour and Robin Mencher of KQED are hosting this meetup for educators to discuss best practices for teaching students to produce and critically consume media. (; will begin 11 a.m. Monday at the Austin Convention Center’s Austin Suite)

12:30 p.m. — : In 2019, every governor who delivered a State of the State address mentioned education, and nearly all of them say education is crucial to their state’s success. In this panel discussion, Pennsylvania Education Secretary Pedro Rivera, New Jersey Secretary of Higher Education Zakiya Smith Ellis and other experts will discuss “how issues ranging from early childhood education to workforce development are trending across the states, and what the future holds as we look to the 2020 elections and beyond.” (; will begin 12:30 p.m. in Room 12AB at the Austin Convention Center)

2:30 p.m. — : “America to Me,” the critically acclaimed 2018 docuseries, followed students in a Chicago school for one year, raising questions about equity and race in American education. In this workshop, Mikel Brand Oliver, Afrika Afeni Mills and Lisa Zimble will lead “a facilitated session that uses segments from the [series] to identify structural inequities in our schools.” (; will begin at 2:30 p.m. Monday in Salon F at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

4 p.m. — : This 20-minute “Future20” session features Elliott Hedman, who uses eye tracking and sensors to study why children disengage from reading and how to help them fall in love with it. The key, he’s found, is to make reading more like math by including questions and challenges that encourage kids to read deeply. Hedman is working on tech to make that happen and will have prototypes available to try. (; will begin at 4 p.m. Monday in Room 11AB at the Austin Convention Center)

Tuesday, March 10

11 a.m. — : As our social and political discourse increasingly moves online, how should civics education evolve? During this session, speakers from various backgrounds will “explore the opportunities for educators and civic organizers to meet youth and adults alike where they are already interacting.” Panelists Brianna Carmen of Voto Latino, Shaniqua McClendon of Crooked Media, documentary producer Jyoti Sarda and Scott Warren of Generation Citizen will discuss how civics education can be “reimagined for the 21st century electorate.” (; will begin at 11 a.m. Tuesday in Salon H at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

● Related — Action Civics in School: How Generation Citizen Uses Action Civics to Empower Students, Grow Lifelong Citizens and Combat Inequality

12:30 p.m. — : Students around the country are getting interested in the “wicked” problems of the world, from climate change to the opioid epidemic to income inequality, issues that don’t fit neatly into any academic subject. In this workshop, Patrice Ludwig, Seán McCarthy and Nick Swayne, all of James Madison University, will share insights into “curating problems, building transdisciplinary courses around those problems, creating faculty teams, problem sponsors, and opportunities for students.” (; will begin at 12:30 p.m. Tuesday in Room 8ABC at the Austin Convention Center)

12:30 p.m. — : Soft skills, social capital and career readiness are just a few of the things high school students gain from internships, which are growing in popularity around the country. During this session, Andrew Frishman and Andrea Purcell — who both work for Big Picture Learning, a school network that prioritizes work experience — will join Abja Midha and Tony Monfiletto, who work for nonprofits with similar goals, to discuss their experience coordinating teen internships. (; begins at 12:30 p.m. Tuesday in Salon J at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

1 p.m. — : The importance of early childhood development for later outcomes in education and beyond is well documented. In this panel, Education Trust CEO and former U.S. secretary of education John B. King and policy expert Cynthia Osborne will discuss why intervening and investing early — in the first 1,000 days of a child’s life — works and “how the science and evidence can and should inform early childhood and K-12 policies to improve outcomes and equity for all children.” (; will begin at 1 p.m. Tuesday in Ballroom G at the Austin Convention Center)

2 p.m. — : An “all-star, teacher-only panel of some of the biggest minds in classroom practice” looks at the future of the profession. The conversation will include Esther Wojcicki, an award-winning teacher and mother whose children are successful themselves — one of her daughters is CEO of YouTube, one is CEO of 23andMe, and one is a Stanford professor. Educators Christopher Emdin, Michael Kleba and Jessica Lahey will also be on the panel. (; will begin at 2 p.m. Tuesday in Ballroom EF at the Austin Convention Center)

2 p.m. — : During this live recording of the 8 Black Hands podcast, hosts Raymond Ankrum, Charles Cole III, Sharif El-Mekki and Chris Stewart will discuss the challenges facing America’s more than 17 million black and brown students with an eye toward the effects of negative mindsets and low expectations. The four African-American educators will share “insights and experiences that can address some of these entrenched and pervasive mindsets that lead to negative outcomes.” (; will begin at 2 p.m. Tuesday in Room 406 at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

● Background reading: Stewart: Excuse Me, What Did You Call My Child? When the ‘Belief Gap’ Cuts a Little Too Close to Home

5 p.m. — : Although Brown v. Board of Education legally ended “separate but equal” education in the United States, schools are still segregated and unequal today, more than six decades later. Even in racially integrated classrooms, inequity persists. During this panel, advocates Anurima Bhargava and Phyllis Lockett will join Education Week editor Christina Samuels to explore “how teachers and schools can counter bias and injustice to build pathways to opportunity for all students in the modern classroom.” (; will begin at 5 p.m. Tuesday in Room 18CD at the Austin Convention Center)

Wednesday, March 11 

9:30 a.m. — : In this keynote session, Stanford University professor and researcher Jennifer Eberhardt will use science and stories to explain how racial bias can pervade schools, neighborhoods and other parts of our lives. Best known for her work on implicit racial bias, Eberhardt will also discuss ways to address prejudice. (; will begin at 9:30 a.m. Wednesday in Ballroom D at the Austin Convention Center)

11 a.m. — : Educators are increasingly looking to brain science to inform their lesson plans and teaching strategies, but connecting the research to practice can be difficult. During this panel, neuroscience professor Melina Uncapher, advocate Benjamin Riley and Edutopia editor Youki Terada will talk about the most important brain science principles for teaching and recommend free resources for educators to learn more. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Wednesday in Salon J at the Hilton Austin Downtown)

11 a.m. — : In this 20-minute session, Cristina de Jesus, CEO of Green Dot Public Schools California charter network, will discuss her experience as a principal and organization leader, including the mistakes she’s made and what she learned from them. Green Dot is known for its success in transforming district schools with its turnaround model. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Wednesday in Room 11AB at the Austin Convention Center)

12:30 p.m. — : Advocates have been sounding the alarm about a possible census undercount for months, and children are especially difficult to count. Accurate data is crucial, though, as it’s used to dole out $700 billion in federal funds for programs including free school lunch and support for high-poverty Title I schools. During this session, Lauren Camera, Mohammad Choudhury, Nora Gordon and Beth Lynk will discuss why children are so hard to tally and what the implications of an undercount would be. (; will begin at 12:30 p.m. Wednesday in Room 12AB at the Austin Convention Center)

2 p.m. — : School funding issues dominated Texas state politics in 2019, and a majority of seats on the state board of education . During this policy forum, panelists Laura Yeager, who founded an organization focused on creating a “culture of voting” among Texas educators, Texas Tribune editor Matthew Watkins, and lobbyists Monty Exter and Bill Miller will discuss the role of teachers and school finance in politics and and answer questions such as “How did educator turnout in the November 2018 elections impact legislators’ thinking?” and “What did the March 2020 primaries tell us, and what’s in store for the November 2020 elections and beyond?” (; will begin at 2 p.m. Wednesday in Room 12AB at the Austin Convention Center)

● School Finance Reform in Texas: More Student Funding, Full-Day Pre-K, Teacher Raises & a Longer School Year — Inside Texas’s $11.6 Billion School Finance Reform Law

Thursday, March 12 

12:30 p.m. — : Educators, business leaders and politicians want students to be prepared for the workforce. In this session, panelists with experience in education, government and research will explore questions including: “Is higher education changing fast enough to keep up with the needs of this generation? Will it prepare students to be lifelong learners? Should four-year schools be more like two-year schools?” The speakers will be Danette Howard, Jane Oates, Eloy Ortiz Oakley and Louis Soares. (; will begin at 12:30 p.m. Thursday in Room 18CD at the Austin Convention Center)

Disclosure: The Launch Startup Competition is funded in part by the Walton Family Foundation, which also provides support to ����Ӱ��.

According to recent polls, adults who were born between 1981 and 1996 tend to think favorably about charter schools, vouchers, and other types of education options for parents and students. That could be because millennials were raised in an era saturated with choices, from ride-sharing apps to online shopping retailers to music streaming services.

That was the theory posed by a panel discussion Wednesday at South by Southwest Education called  The panel was presented by the nonprofit advocacy group EdChoice and moderated by ����Ӱ�� Senior Editor Emmeline Zhao, and it included panelists Mendell Grinter of the Campaign for School Equity, Lalla Morris of Families Empowered, and Evy Valencia Jackson of EVJ Consulting.

According to a , nearly three-quarters of millennials across ethnicities support school vouchers — public money that pays for students to attend private school — for low-income children, and about two-thirds support this option for all students. African Americans are the most likely group to support charter schools — which are independently run and publicly funded — with 65 percent in favor. Whites were the least likely, with 55 percent supporting charters. Another poll, from the American Federation for Children, found that 75 percent of millennials support choice, compared with 64 percent of baby boomers. But not everyone is a fan of school choice: Support often depends on how a question is phrased. For example, when a 2016 Education Next poll tried to test support for vouchers, it found that 45 percent of respondents were in favor when the question was framed around giving people choice, but only 29 percent were in favor when it was framed around using public money to fund the program.

While the internet is full of memes that love to hate on how millennials are changing the world (), the conversation becomes more serious when looking at the effect of this demographic on the labor market and government. Zhao noted that these young adults represent the largest segment of the U.S. labor force, with 56 million workers. While millennials made up only 1 percent of the members of the House of Representatives in 2017, that number jumped to .

The panelists argued that without widely available school options, choice is afforded only to those with resources to select which neighborhood they want to live in or the private school they want to send their children to.

“If you are financially constrained, there are lots of choices people make every day that you never have the opportunity to make,” Morris said.

She recalled how her family sent her to several different schools in Texas before she ended up at a middle school where she had access to rigorous academic courses — something not available to many other students of color in her neighborhood. This set her up to attend a prestigious magnet high school in Houston, where she was also one of the few students of color on the Advanced Placement track. This made Morris realize how the choices her parents were able to make set her up for success in ways that many of her black peers without these resources were not.

The U.S. has nearly 7,000 charter schools, enrolling 3.2 million students in 43 states and Washington, D.C. About 500,000 students take advantage of private school choice options such as vouchers or tax-credit scholarships, which exist in 26 states. These numbers are still small compared with the number of K-12 students in public and private schools: 56 million.

The freedom afforded to charter schools gives opportunities for innovation and allows students to focus on topics outside the scope of traditional schools. Panelists praised the creativity of school leaders who they’ve seen start schools framed around everything from farming to fine arts to financial literacy.

“The purpose of education is to create an informed and engaged citizenry that can live independently, live a dignified life, and also be engaged in our community,” Morris said.

Although nationwide, charter schools have produced mixed results for students, Grinter said parents consider many factors in addition to academics and graduation rates when selecting a school. “What defines a good school for a lot of parents is its safety,” he said.

Some members on the panel pointed out that while charters and vouchers remain controversial, some government-funded programs — such as Pell Grants — that provide students money and choice in education do not receive that kind of criticism.

An audience member pointed out that many millennials also support teacher unions, which often butt heads with school choice advocates. A GenForward from 2018 found that three-quarters of millennials say strengthening teacher unions would improve education.

Grinter said that more work could be done to reach out to teachers and have conversations about where their views intersected or differed.

“It’s just talking to them, like, ‘Hey, you have a kid, you want to exercise choice, why is that not OK?’” he said.

But Valencia Jackson disagreed.

“Some of these folks are just not interested in a conversation and haven’t been interested in a while, and that’s OK,” she said. “I think we have to be willing to move on and build new supporters elsewhere that want to be focused on kids.”

Though many leaders in the education reform world are older than millennials, Valencia Jackson encouraged the audience to collaborate across generations so that her peers could also have a voice in the conversations around school choice. “Call me, beep me!” Valencia Jackson said. “Anyone?”

A few people in the room got the . You would have too, if you were a millennial.

For many years, Derrell Bradford says, he never understood why his mother and grandmother used to gather at the kitchen table when he was a child, debating whose address they would lie about to get him access to a better public school.

It wasn’t until he began working in education policy later in life that he says he came to fully understand their predicament: For the majority of American families, the quality of their child’s school is tied irrevocably to the affluence of their neighborhood. And while affluent parents can move their families to a better school district if they’re unhappy with their current options, or enroll their child in private school, struggling families are left with few choices.

Bradford relived this personal history onstage Tuesday night at the South By Southwest Education Festival in Austin, Texas. And then he went a step further: asking the gathered audience how many of them either had parents who lied about their address or knew someone’s family that had done so.

As dozens of audience members raised their hands, a moment of silence fell on SXSW. Many attendees stopped looking at the stage for a moment to turn left and right, several visibly surprised by the mass confession.

How access to a quality education, as well as robust educational options, is divided along racial lines was the key topic of discussion at Tuesday’s “” panel at SXSW. The event was organized and sponsored by the nonprofit advocacy group EdChoice; ����Ӱ��’s Mimi Woldeyohannes moderated the panel and was joined by Bradford; Naomi Shelton, the director of K-12 advocacy at UNCF; Gerard Robinson, the executive director of the Center for Advancing Opportunity; and Jacquie Hood Martin, co-founder of J Hood and Associates.

“To me, we are not talking about moving from a system of no choice to a lot of it,” said Bradford, the executive vice president of 50CAN, an education advocacy nonprofit, and a frequent essayist at ����Ӱ��. “We are talking about changing the rules of a system where some people have it and other people don’t.”

The night’s panelists argued in favor of school choice as a mechanism through which families could give their children educational options outside a system that is failing students of color, especially black students. They pointed to statistics such as how only 6 percent of black students are deemed college-ready in math, science, English, and reading on the .

They also noted the financial disparities: A new report found that schools serving students of color receive $23 billion less than schools serving mostly white students.

“One of my colleagues summed it up really well: ‘The way that I see school choice is, why can’t black kids have what rich white kids have?’” recalled Shelton, director of K-12 advocacy at UNCF, which supports African-American college students. “Why can’t they have the full swath of opportunities that are afforded to those who have the money and means to afford [them]?”

Government numbers show that many black families are indeed turning to the choice options that are available: While black children make up of students in public schools, they represent in charter schools (33 percent of students in charters are white and 32 percent are Hispanic).

About 3.2 million students attend the 7,000 charter schools that exist across 43 states and Washington, D.C., according to the . Private school choice options include programs such as vouchers and tax-credit scholarships, and are used by nearly 500,000 students in 26 states.

These choice options aren’t without controversy, as panelists and audience members pointed out, especially when it comes to questions of whether they exacerbate an already segregated school system and impact the finances of struggling school districts. An found that charter schools are among the most segregated, though supporters note that many charters are specifically located in neighborhoods with deeply segregated housing.

But the push for school choice isn’t a recent phenomenon, as evidenced by the voucher and charter programs that began in the 1990s, said Robinson. He sees school choice as part of a pursuit for education that began when it was illegal for black individuals to receive one. “When I think of the term, ‘Why is school choice a black choice?,’ really for me it is: ‘Why is black choice the latest articulation of black people’s quest for education in the United States?’” Robinson said.

Panelists also touched on solutions to support black leaders in this space by cultivating and promoting pipelines for black educators through teacher residency programs, supporting historically black colleges, and embracing charter schools launched by black founders and run by black school leaders.

Parents, ultimately, should be given a voice in their children’s education, said Martin. “How do we advance the conversation and help parents understand that they are their best advocate for their child?” she said.

See the full conversation: 

Tuesday’s event was only one of the sessions being moderated by ����Ӱ�� staffers during South By Southwest Education, which continues through Thursday in Texas. Wednesday afternoon, Senior Editor Emmeline Zhao will moderate “.” We’ve also profiled the panelists leading a unique Wednesday session about how to expand a school district’s data system to better measure social-emotional learning, titled “.” (Read our full feature on how eight large California districts are using data to decode SEL)

SXSWedu is an annual March gathering of educators, school leaders, thinkers, and journalists, with a wide range of topics spanning classroom practice, equity, and innovation. A number of this year’s sessions focused on the newest experiments in personalized learning; a number of presenters penned essays about their efforts and lessons for ����Ӱ��, and you can read all their pieces right here. 2020 will mark the festival’s 10th anniversary.

These educators are helping students develop a growth mindset, a belief that they can improve their skills through effort. A growth mindset is one of four social-emotional learning traits the district — along with others in California — are trying to teach their students.

These schools use surveys and data analysis to track not just how well they are teaching social-emotional traits, but also how they are affecting college and career readiness indicators, such as academic achievement or graduation. So far, they’ve seen some promising findings.

“We’ve had schools that have really focused heavily on growth mindset and have seen some significant gains in … achievement in English language arts and math without significant changes in pedagogy, meaning that by just shifting the mindset of students, you can actually get them to improve in their math skills and their reading skills,” said Christopher Lund, assistant superintendent of research and school improvement in the Long Beach district.

Long Beach is part of the CORE Districts, a group of eight of the largest California districts that have created a partnership to help track how students are growing in both their academic and social-emotional skills. Education Analytics, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit, is helping decipher the data for them and refine their social-emotional measurement tools.

The challenge of measuring this is the topic of at South By Southwest Education on March 6 titled “Integrating SEL into Data Systems for Improvement.” Noah Bookman, chief strategy officer of the CORE Districts, will join Libby Pier and Andrew Rice of Education Analytics for a one-hour conversation.

“We have, we think, the largest instance of a common measure of social-emotional skills that’s ever happened in the field of education. About a half-million students per year participate in this instrument,” Bookman said. “One thing I hope [the SXSW audience] sees is that you can measure social-emotional learning in a meaningful and useful way.”

The discussion will cover the history of the CORE Districts’ interest in social-emotional learning, the development of their survey, and how the data analysis has helped them see how different subgroups of students are learning these skills.

CORE first partnered with Education Analytics in 2014. Together, they created a student growth model to track how well kids were doing over time in subjects like reading and math, as well as other factors like graduation, chronic absenteeism, and suspension rates.

Education Analytics also helped refine and improve a survey that CORE was using to track social-emotional learning. Specifically, CORE measures growth mindset, self-efficacy (believing in one’s ability to succeed), self-management, and social awareness (ability to empathize), in addition to school culture and climate indicators such as support for academic learning, a sense of belonging, knowledge and fairness of rules and discipline, and school safety. These metrics are then displayed on a searchable at the school level.

Through a data collaborative, schools both inside and outside the CORE districts in California are using these social-emotional learning surveys — reaching nearly 500,000 students.

Schools are able to see not just how well their students are performing, but also how well students at other schools are doing, to provide benchmarks and context for their data.

This large collection of student social-emotional data has sparked some interesting research analysis — for example, a recent report found that students who took these surveys improved in their growth mindset from 2014 to 2016 but decreased in social awareness, self-efficacy, and self-management. Specifically, girls’ self-efficacy took a huge dive in middle school compared with their male peers.

In the Long Beach district, there is no mandate that schools implement a specific program or policy to address their social-emotional learning indicators. Instead, Lund said, schools can lead this effort. When educators saw problems they wanted to address in their data, some adopted an additional social-emotional learning curriculum. Others created training nights for parents and teachers to share ways to speak to children that encouraged skills like growth mindset. One high school developed a special two-period math course for struggling students that teaches algebra for one half of the class and social-emotional skills during the other.

Figuring out how to measure whether students are learning social-emotional competencies is still a challenge, and researchers caution against relying on these measures for stringent accountability purposes. Surveys are a common , but other options include assessments, interviews, and observation of students.

“We’re still early in the measurement science behind a lot of this, and there’s a lot to learn, but there’s a lot to do in the meantime,” Rice said.

Pier hopes panel attendees will come away with an open mind for different ways to measure social-emotional learning.

“A student self-report survey can provide some useful information and can provide actionable information for schools as they’re thinking about how to continue to improve,” Pier said.

Disclosure: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provides financial support to the and ����Ӱ��.

Michael Horn will be presenting “” at SXSWedu on Tuesday, March. 5.

Personalized learning remains one of the hottest tickets in today’s education circles. Education technology companies herald its promise. Numerous foundations continue to invest in its potential for transforming schools. I guarantee the phrase will be bellowed through the halls of South By Southwest Education as it commences in Austin, Texas.

Yet it remains a challenge to arrive at a simple definition of personalized learning. Ask any five educators in a room what it is, who’s doing it best, how to implement … and you’re likely to come up with five very different definitions and scenarios.

Some of the more common definitions emphasize students having a voice and choice in what they learn — along with customizing how, when, and where they learn it. Yet other frameworks focus on self-paced learning methods, powered by technology. Still others prescribe that personalized learning must include elements such as competency-based learning or learner profiles.

But when Amplify’s Larry Berger and I to talk through and debate the why, how, and what of so-called “personalized learning,” our primary goal is to cut through the noise to process the promise of personalized learning as well as the guardrails around that hype.

For starters, I’m urging educators to stop trying to define “personalized learning” as a noun, and to start thinking of it as a verb. Educators are personalizing learning for their students, or helping their students personalize their own learning.

The key question right now shouldn’t be about defining “it,” but instead objectively observing, categorizing, and measuring the different ways educators and students are personalizing learning — and understanding which approaches are and are not getting the results they seek.

In other words: Personalizing learning shouldn’t be a goal unto itself, but a means to help students succeed.

That’s one reason I’m so heartened by the work at Digital Promise Global’s Learner Variability Project (LVP), which is helping uncover strategies to meet learners where they are across varied contexts and needs and based on different learning objectives. The in particular is bringing together all the research to help educators and companies move beyond the averages of learning science to tailor learning for students based on known strategies on what moves the dial for learners in different situations.

For example, students in a single English classroom may all struggle with content, but for different reasons. Certain students may struggle with basic phonological awareness that stems from a home literacy environment where English is a second language. Others may lack some basic vocabulary words that prevent them from accessing a more complex text.

Still others may have low working memory, which limits their ability to absorb information and execute complex tasks even if they have the requisite background knowledge.

Personalizing the approach for each of these students is critical to unlocking their continued academic growth. Continuing to just build the knowledge of the student with low working memory but strong background knowledge isn’t going to work. Certain close-reading strategies in that instance could be crucial. Asking these students what topics they want to read about, or whether they’d like to listen to audiobooks rather than interact only with texts, or whether they prefer to study complex sentence structures before phonemes, may result in learning that is tailored to their interests but not necessarily to their needs.

It’s this last point that points to an important guardrail for personalizing learning: Not all personalization will work. It could even backfire.

In fact, giving students unbridled choice over their learning could be disastrous. Students are likely unaware of everything they need to be learning effectively. Although the proverbial example of mastering underwater basket weaving may be important somewhere, it’s likely not the most productive personalized pursuit, no matter how much it interests a particular student. Teacher guidance does matter.

What’s more, there’s substantial evidence that having a coherent curriculum matters. Preparing students to be lifelong learners capable of partaking knowledgeably in both civic life and a rapidly changing workforce requires not just focusing on technology, personalization, or even coding, but the broader content and foundation at the heart of these experiences.

For example, as students learn to read, it is critical that they build a strong and wide foundation of knowledge. A learner’s background knowledge is a key ingredient in her ability to learn and absorb information from what she is reading and consuming. Accordingly, personalizing learning through technology will be most powerful when it is coupled with intentional, coherent, and rigorous instruction.

Yes, tapping into and developing children’s interests and instilling in them a sense of ownership of their education is important. Yet allowing them unbridled choice of what they learn, especially when they are young, means that in certain cases they will miss building that foundation. Despite the  that content knowledge no longer matters in a world where everything is google-able, possessing deep background knowledge remains imperative for students to be able to read across a wide range of subjects and literary genres and be successful learners.

As Larry and I , some metaphors around personalization — like creating the “” — are tired and ought to be replaced. I much prefer to think of it as a “Google Maps of education,” though Larry has responded publicly that the metaphor has some drawbacks, given the “map” doesn’t exist for many subjects.

I agree that that’s a fair point, but I still look forward to debating that a bit deeper at SXSW.

One of my top goals for our session in Austin is that people walk away with the sense that creating school models that allow for more personalization is important — but that the models in and of themselves are not the end of the story, and that the road ahead on this journey toward personalization will be nowhere as straightforward as some seem to think.

Michael B. Horn is chief strategy officer of the Entangled Group, a venture studio focused on helping the education ecosystem transition from supporting an industrial economy to a knowledge one; founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute, a nonprofit think tank; and the author of multiple books on the future of education. He will be presenting “” at SXSWedu on Tuesday, March 5.

Shawn Rubin will be presenting the “” framework at SXSWedu on March 6.

Writing this post from 30,000 feet in the air, somewhere above Ohio en route to Seattle, I am struck by how smooth my trip has been thus far. Seattle is more than 3,000 miles from Providence, a trip that would have required months of travel in the days of the Oregon Trail; however, thanks to innovations like Lyft, Delta Air Lines, and the FAA, I will likely arrive in time for dinner.

When I woke up at home this morning, I knew exactly where I was starting from, broken dishwasher and all. My destination was clearly defined: a West Coast city with a large amount of rain and great coffee. GPS helped my driver find Rhode Island’s T.F. Green Airport, and I’m assuming my pilot is relaxing as we speed on autopilot toward the great Northwest. Three weeks ago, when I booked this trip, I simply determined my preferred route, set it, and forgot about it.

If only school change could be this straightforward.

From Providence to Seattle, educators, families, and especially students are calling for education transformation, but they are struggling to get from where they are to where they want to be. Sometimes preferred routes come in the form of buzzwords like “blended learning,” “personalized learning,” or “deeper learning redesign.” Sometimes these calls to action are driven by poor test scores or a lack of rigorous grade-level curriculum. Many are looking for more equitable models that are able to transcend systemic racism and poverty contributing to opportunity gaps.

Regardless of the impetus for change, we know our system must evolve. Our students deserve a new vision for teaching and learning that breaks the stagnation of our legacy models.

The process for achieving school change is much less like my flight and much more like an unpredictable space mission to a remote galaxy. Too many school and district leaders begin a journey of change without a clearly defined destination because their knowledge consists of word-of-mouth exchanges at conferences or the promises of new ed tech platforms. Even when leaders do the hard work of clearly identifying problems of practice and researching new models to which they can aspire, school change currently offers no established routes for taking teams from point A to point B in an accountable and efficient manner.

When the Highlander Institute team first began supporting schools and districts determined to shift instruction to be more student-centered, we typically overpersonalized our services. Some requests asked for help creating a one-to-one program to provide “21st century learning” for all students. Others asked us to run professional development for teachers around a new learning management system. Sometimes we’d be asked to observe teacher instruction and then implement cycles of embedded coaching support. We listened and obliged each of these requests, many of which led to exciting pockets of innovation — but we rarely saw change take hold across all classrooms in a school or district.

As we studied the many ways in which we were supporting schools and districts and unpacked our efficacy data around classroom shifts and student outcomes, we learned a lot about what levels of implementation and commitment were necessary for a truly transformative change to happen. We determined that what we needed was a change process rooted in research and development that schools and districts could commit to over time. We knew it had to emphasize local voice and agency across all stakeholder groups but still allow for the integration of nationally proven and research-backed practices, products, and strategies. We knew the process must provide leaders with the flexibility to explore and iterate but also account for wrong turns in a way that would not lead to unintended consequences for students and families.

It was with this intention that we developed our Pathway to Personalization Framework, which was just released as a book, Pathways to Personalization: A Framework for School Change, through Harvard Education Press. Our framework lays out a process that consists of five phases, taking teams from planning to scale over a multi-year arc of change. A lead change agent begins the Plan phase with a local design team by organizing a self-study and setting a vision for a pilot. The Pilot phase engages carefully selected teachers to further define how priorities can be operationalized. Once pilot classrooms get up and running, design team members use an established measurement plan to evaluate ongoing successes and challenges, which lead to pilot adjustments that are continually supported, documented, and discussed with a lens toward continuous improvement.

Once pilot classrooms are demonstrating areas of success, design teams switch gears and enter the Refine phase, in which they codify what has worked, including lessons, activities, routines, protocols, tools, and reflections, in order to create a customized road map for replication with a larger base of teachers. At this point, design teams enter the Grow phase, which is focused on strategic scaling and includes an analysis of competing initiatives, current policies and barriers, professional learning models, and current curriculum resources. Once design teams have identified a vision and direction for getting to scale, they can look for external partners to help source solutions to more complex and structural problems as part of our Network phase.

Our framework is not a one-size-fits-all approach in which each school or district moves toward a predetermined definition of personalized learning. Instead, it is a process for understanding current conditions, establishing a common destination and building effective pathways that teachers can use to support their journey.

It took years of exploration, innovation, and iteration to get to the place where one can fly smoothly and safely across the country in an afternoon. While we don’t expect school change will ever be quite this linear or expedient, we do believe that having a process-oriented approach provides the scaffolding necessary for the right stakeholders, with enough structure, to start the journey and stay the course until all students have a more purposeful and equitable learning experience.

Shawn Rubin is chief education officer of the , a nonprofit organization envisioning an equitable, just educational system that meets the needs of all students as it prepares them for success in a complex, rapidly changing world. He will be presenting the “” framework at SXSWedu on Wednesday, March 6, from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. in room 412 of the Hilton in downtown Austin, Texas. He will be signing copies of following his session, at 1:30 p.m. on the Atrium Landing, Level 3, in the Austin Convention Center, 500 E.

Disclosure: Walton Family Foundation and Carnegie Corporation of New York provide financial support to the Highlander Institute and ����Ӱ��.

Susan Patrick will be appearing at SXSWedu at the on March 6.

I regularly visit schools as part of my work at iNACOL, but over the past two years, my 80-plus visits have been part of an investigation on the transformation of instructional practices toward personalized learning in schools across the United States.

We saw classrooms break free of stifling practices like uniform rows of desks, teachers standing and delivering lessons to passive learners, and students being dulled into submission by bells and other traditional cues. In their place at these innovative public and charter schools were teachers and students engaged in inquiry, students acting as active agents in their learning, and teachers working tremendously hard to create settings that catered to all their students’ needs and crafting instruction to shape jointly developed learning experiences.

The level of excitement for personalized learning is high, as we reported in our . Teachers told us they incorporated personalized learning – or aspects of it – because it aligned to “what it means to be a teacher” and why they entered the profession in the first place. Students were blossoming, saying their teachers took time to get to know them personally and they were becoming more confident in voicing their needs and taking action to improve, a lifelong skill we know is required for success in our rapidly changing society.

While these practices grow and thrive in pockets all around the country, we are advocating to scale their efforts, build supports, and evaluate effectiveness – all of which requires redefining education as we know it and getting clear about its purpose. Educators are driving the changes to modernize and transform teaching and learning. They need systemwide support to realize the vision of powerful, personalized learning. It is unrealistic, and unfair, to expect that thousands of educators, working in isolation or in small groups in districts, can carry the weight of whole-system transformation. iNACOL and our partners work to foster the political courage and will to change, bolster the knowledge and skills to lead, and share information about how to innovate education to best prepare all our students for the future.

One persistent part of our mandate is dealing with the tensions around definitions in this movement. In reality, it is simply acting on the need to modernize our education system to prepare students for prosperous, healthy, and productive lives in an era of growing uncertainty.

Here’s the promise of personalized learning embedded in our definition: Personalized learning tailors learning experiences to each student’s strengths, needs, and interests. Students have voice and choice in what, how, when, and where they learn — to provide flexibility and supports to ensure mastery of the highest standards possible. It is a pedagogical strategy that draws on research about the science of learning, motivation, and engagement.

To get a sense of the depth of implementation of personalized learning, we partnered with , , and to expand on our qualitative research and conduct a national survey, sampling more than 3,600 teachers and 1,000 students. We measured the intensity of personalized learning instruction based on LEAP’s along a continuum of three of four categories that describe the emergence and penetration of personalized learning practices, such as the degree to which students understand their needs, strengths, and interests, and how they progress through learning pathways.

It was instructive to get this 30,000-foot view of how personalized learning is taking shape across the country. Naturally, we found a great deal of variation in how deeply it was being implemented in general and across the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Briefly, the teachers leading the way with personalized learning were experts at the art and science of learning: They knew their students and used that knowledge to shape learning experiences. We were encouraged that black, brown, low-income, and other marginalized students tended to have positive experiences with personalized learning. In addition, supports for growing and sustaining personalizing learning, which include technology, were widely available.

However, teachers, members of a , have work to do to become more familiar with students’ communities and to ensure that learning environments reflect all students’ experiences. In addition, teachers expressed reluctance to give more control of pacing, content, and learning activities to students. This is a natural tension, born out of hardwired teaching models and the current system’s bureaucratic demands. Our results show that nationally, most classrooms have a long road to travel to fully realize the promise of personalized, flexible, student-centered learning.

There is opposition, those with underinformed ideas about what exactly personalized learning is and how it supports systems transformation. Also, there is the unfortunate and misguided interchangeable use of the term to refer to software and other education technology tools that support learning. Add to that the risk the term “personalized learning” runs in being regarded as a buzzword to revile, or as yet another reform or fad that could peter out. We intentionally name personalized learning because of its power and simplicity, but also because it encapsulates our intentions to make education equitable. And in so naming, we take ownership and responsibility for ensuring that we say what we mean and mean what we say. Our goals are to close the communication gaps and bridge the gaps among ideas, policy, and practice.

While we are dismayed at the biggest areas of confusion between the big ideas encapsulated in personalized learning and the mistaken beliefs that personalized learning requires technology and/or essentially means computer-led instruction (it doesn’t), we are encouraged by the inroads made by federal and state policy to support the higher ideals we’re promoting. By making space for innovation, dismantling structural barriers to changing learning models, and getting creative in resourcing those changes, we are planting seeds in fertile ground to transform education from what it is to what it could be.

We’re likewise encouraged by the growth in the number of educators and administrators who share their experiences with personalized learning at our annual symposium. All signs point toward K-12 education being at the beginning of what leading voices expect to be a systemic transformation. Across the nation, leaders are changing the way teaching and learning look. They are progressively dipping their toes in the waters of this reimagining of the learning experience (where other countries have been swimming for some time) and courageously seeking ways to make the educational experience meaningful and purposeful.

As much as policy and systems are creating space for personalized learning, we will have to do more to encourage teachers and school leaders to shift the culture in their schools toward personalizing, to take the risk of trying new strategies, and to identify the supports needed to move schools beyond tinkering at the margins. Personalized learning, as an enabling strategy, dovetails into a broader reimagining of school through competency-based education. To meet the needs of all students, we believe the foundational system needs to be competency-based, where all learners need to:

● Advance to the next stage of their learning only when they have demonstrated mastery — not based on a predetermined and often arbitrary model for delivering traditional curricula;

● Learn knowledge, build skills, and demonstrate competencies, which are explicit, measurable, transferable learning objectives that empower students;

● Participate in assessments that are meaningful and positive learning experiences;

● Receive timely, differentiated supports based on their specific needs;

● Achieve competencies that foster application and creation of knowledge along with the development of important skills and dispositions.

Personalized learning, build on a competency-based education system to ensure all students achieve the high levels of mastery, therefore, is intentionally designed to move the entire educational system away from the one-size-fits-all approach to learning with variable outcomes. It places a stronger focus on supports and learning per person — to personalize powerful learning experiences for our youth. Compared with traditional education models, in personalized, competency-based learning environments, students have more flexibility in the pathways they take toward mastery of standards and the ways they use time. Learning is untethered and can happen in communities and in internships anytime, anyplace. Student growth and achievement are not bound by grade level or whole-group content delivery that teaches to the middle.

In addition to changing the way learning is experienced, districts are rethinking qualifications, the definitions of student success, and what it means to earn a high school diploma. They are also considering better ways to dynamically assess students, and they are re-examining accountability as a tool for continuous improvement. They are modernizing teacher preparation and professional learning to adapt to newer learning models, and they are building the will and the capacity of communities for change. What models of education would we create where we lifted the upper boundaries of what students were able to know and be able to do — limitless learning?

These are the stakes. Our economy is changing and evolving. The robots are already here, and more than 50 percent of jobs are moving toward automation — quickly — . Young people’s place in the future requires exactly what personalized, competency-based education delivers: the ability to take agency and learn how to learn new skills, to discern truth and create a more just and prosperous future that everyone takes part in. There is a massive mismatch between what our future requires and what our schools are offering. It is critical to transform K-12 education toward a system that is fit for the purpose of public education in the 21st century: for all students to graduate high school with the academic, core competencies and lifelong learning skills to be leaders in their communities and agents of their own success — in college, career, future workforce, and our communities — as well as navigate the opportunities and uncertainties they will encounter in their lives.

Next week at , I will join Helayne Jones, Dana Borrelli-Murray from , Beth Rabbitt of , and Elisabeth Stock of for a session titled “CEO State of Play in Personalized Learning.” We will share our respective insights about the field, important trends along with challenges and opportunities inherent to movement-building, and erecting a bigger tent for the myriad unheard voices calling for change.

Susan Patrick is president and CEO of iNACOL, whose mission is to drive the transformation of education systems and accelerate the advancement of breakthrough policies and practices to ensure high-quality learning for all. She’ll be appearing at SXSWedu at the “ on March 6.

Beth Rabbitt will be appearing at SXSWedu at The Learning Accelerator’s on March 4 and on March 6.

Interest in personalizing learning continues to grow. A found that 9 out of 10 responding school districts are directing professional development and technology efforts toward personalization. More anecdotally, attendees navigating the convention halls of this year’s SXSWedu have their pick of nearly 30 sessions focusing on the topic.

At the heart of this educator interest is the drive to do a better job of building approaches and systems that put students at the center of learning, recognizing and differentiating instruction to the unique strengths, needs, interests, and goals that individual students bring to the classroom daily. As we navigate the many discussions about personalized learning, what are the most important questions to ask? Here are three conversations I’m eager to have.

1 What are we learning about how digital technology can support our efforts to personalize, and where might it be hurting?

It’s my deeply held belief that technology provides critical support for teachers and students, unlocking new ways of working and bringing new resources to bear. But our efforts to bring in ed tech must live in service of enabling and amplifying the very human work of learning, freeing up capacity for things like , , and . So, as we try to personalize, where are we finding technology most helpful and effective? In our work at The Learning Accelerator, where digital tools are helping teachers and students collect and reflect on formative data, as well as track mastery of learning. They are also offering greater opportunities for student reflection and choice-making. Everyone should be documenting these uses and sharing them.

On the flip side, where might some of our hypotheses about how tech might help have led us astray? In my own work, I’ve seen many. For example, removing pen-to-paper tools might seem like a good way to encourage students to get comfortable with digital assessments and note-taking, but long-form writing has big advantages for student note-taking. Similarly, while technology can help provide English learners with content in their home language, time spent alone on a computer can reduce critical peer-to-peer time for rich dialogue. How do we share these findings, either to help avoid negative impacts or to create the opportunity to tackle challenges together? At The Learning Accelerator, we’re collaborating with our networks to share stories of learning focused on what participants have tried and what hasn’t worked along the way. We’re figuring out how to generalize these lessons for broader dissemination.

2 How do we balance the individual with collective experiences of learning?

Personalizing, by its nature, requires thinking about individual students as the level of analysis and planning. In doing so, we move away from devising approaches that aim for the middle or for broad groups. It’s easy, however, in highly individualized environments, to forget that so much of learning is social. When we don’t zoom out to the bigger picture of the classroom, and all the interactions — or “valuable points of convergence,” as — between the learners within it, we lose out. We run the risk of “tak[ing] away the very things that make the human condition of learning utterly personal in the first place.”

In our conversations about personalizing, we need to talk about how to strike a balance between targeting education toward individual students as well as toward the collective — and how to amplify the benefits of both. This should happen in the day-to-day decision-making of teachers, who should make sure they’re creating opportunities for students to , as well as . Partners we bring into the work can’t be let off the hook either. A question to ask every instructional supporter or tool designer is, how will this solution help students engage in their personal, proximal zones of development, individually as well as with a group? If the answer isn’t clear, then either we’ve got the wrong approach or the solution needs to be looked at as one very small piece of a personalized learning puzzle.

3 Where might our efforts to personalize potentially widen gaps in equity?

Few seeking to personalize aim to do so inequitably, but seeking equity is a complex task. Some inequities, such as access to tools like broadband, hardware, and curriculum, are easier to spot and relatively straightforward to remedy. Others live at the level of instructional choice-making and require close monitoring and balancing.

Take, for example, self-pacing. Giving students greater opportunity to move at their own pace is often a core element (though hardly a defining or complete one) of many personalized learning programs. Educators seeking to implement competency-based models in which students work toward mastery at varying speeds, whether on technology or in more analog formats, have a lot of tensions to manage. How slowly might we allow a student to work before intervening? Conversely, how far ahead might we allow others to go without destroying the complex group-learning environment of the classroom? (Or, as one leader put it more eloquently, “At what point does our desire to ‘accelerate’ the learning of some get in the way of achieving equitable outcomes for others?”)

I’m just scraping the surface here, but there’s a lot to think through in just this example. Those of us who work in the technology and innovation space obviously believe it’s possible for educators to meet the needs of learners working at both ends of the mastery spectrum, providing the crucial support for students at beginning levels as well as allowing for opportunities for others to go further and deeper. But we have to balance this desire with a critical eye toward closing gaps rather than broadening them. We can’t do that unless we create spaces for nuanced, deep conversations about the choices to navigate.

Put together, if we want to produce better — more equitable and deeper — learning outcomes, we’ve got to engage in critical questions like these. It’s OK if, at this stage of the game, we don’t have easy answers or consensus. Disagreement and constructive inquiry, in the name of learning together and figuring out how to navigate challenges, are some of the best tools we have to improve outcomes together.

Beth Rabbitt, Ed.L.D., is CEO of The Learning Accelerator, a national nonprofit that connects teachers and leaders with the knowledge, tools, and networks they need to enact personalized and mastery-based practices to transform K-12 education. She will be at SXSWedu at The Learning Accelerator’s on March 4 and March 6.

The 2019 South By Southwest Education Conference and Festival kicks off March 4 in Austin, Texas, and the headliners for its ninth year promise an expansive mix of policy, practice, and personality. Beyond the keynote sessions that run the gamut from to , some of the more prominent workshops, performances, and policy sessions feature an eclectic lineup of thought leaders, including former governor Jeb Bush (), actor LeVar Burton (), and author and performer Aija Mayrock ().

As the festival has expanded (more than 1,100 speakers appeared across 449 sessions in 2018, for an audience of more than 15,000 attendees), so too has the range of topic areas and SXSW “tracks,” which allow a visitor to go deep in a specific subject area. This year, there are 17 separate tracks, including “Science of Learning,” “Student Agency,” “Learning Spaces,” “SEL,” and “Emerging Tech.”

We’ve combed through the hundreds of events listed in the 2019 catalog, looking to assemble a mix of high-profile, under-the-radar, and eye-opening sessions that could make for a richer visit to Austin. So between all the tacos and barbecue, here are 19 speakers and events you might want to check out (arranged chronologically):

Monday, March 4

9:30 a.m. — ‘Building Community: Weaving America’s Social Fabric’: The festival’s opening keynote spotlights “,” a new initiative of the Aspen Institute that will soon be entering its second year. Focused on the issue of social fragmentation and the ways in which today’s society can fuel issues of isolation and alienation, “Weave” aims to celebrate groups across the country that are looking to rebuild community and create social capital. The Aspen Institute’s Dan Porterfield and David Brooks will be joined by Darius Baxter, co-founder of GOODProjects, and Lisa Fitzpatrick, executive director of APEX Community Advancement Inc. (; will begin 9:30 a.m. Monday at the Austin Convention Center, Ballroom D)

11 a.m. — ‘Building Empathy Through Storytelling’: What can creative writing teach kids about kindness and empathy? How can teachers harness the power of narrative in developing social-emotional learning competences in their classrooms? That’s the focus of this workshop featuring Anna Griffin, manager of 826 National’s educator platform 826 Digital, and Debra Serebrin, director of marketing at the Cartoon Network. (; will begin 11 a.m. Monday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon F)

1 p.m. — ‘Demystifying AI: Machine Learning in the Classroom’: As artificial intelligence expands across industries, few classrooms teach it. These panelists will share their story about teaming up to create an artificial intelligence curriculum to teach students about how this technology can be a force for good. Led by Joe Bungo of NVIDIA Corporation and Tara Chklovski of Iridescent. (; will begin at 1 p.m. Monday at the Austin Convention Center, Exhibit Hall 4 Next State)

1:30 p.m. — ‘Blended & Personalized Learning Toolbox’: This interactive, learner-centered workshop promises to share practical and tangible strategies for bringing blended learning into the classroom, as well as resources to assist with personalized learning and guidance for district leaders surrounding critical decisions that leaders face, such as “scaling innovation across a district.” Led by Saro Mohammed and Stephen Pham from The Learning Accelerator. (; will begin 1:30 p.m. Monday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon K)

2:30 p.m. — ‘Vulnerability Is Power: A New Learning Movement’: Using an online platform that includes 300,000 students, this organization created a learning community that emphasizes how students can learn from their errors. Led by Eduardo Valladares of Descomplica. (; will begin at 2:30 p.m. Monday at the Austin Convention Center, Ballroom E)

Tuesday, March 5

11 a.m. — ‘What Do We Mean by Personalized Learning?’: Two education technology leaders will discuss what personalized learning looks like in schools and how it can support instruction. Led by Larry Berger of Amplify and Michael Horn of The Entangled Group. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Tuesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon C)

11 a.m. — ‘The Power of Collaborative Teacher Communities’: Giving teachers the opportunities to lead starts with teacher communities. A group of educators from New York City will share how collaborative teacher groups can result in better respect for the profession and support for students. Led by Jude Julien of Bronx High School for Writing and Communication Arts, Megan Roberts of Math for America, Lynn Shon of Middle School 88, and Andrew Wille of Brooklyn Technical High School. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Tuesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon E)

12:30 p.m. — ‘Ban the SAT: College Admissions Redesigned’: This is the story behind how one college banned the SAT. After Hampshire College conducted a research project to see whether their student admissions process determined student success, they made changes and learned a lot about access, innovation, and ed reform. Led by Kristina Moss Gunnarsdottir of Hampshire College and Meredith Twombly of Clark University. (; will begin at 12:30 p.m. Tuesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon E)

2 p.m. — ‘Sex Ed in the #MeToo Era’: Comprehensive sex education could be the antidote to a pervasive culture of sexual assault. This panel will argue that a sex ed curriculum that encompasses healthy relationships and consent should be just as important to students’ education as math or history. Led by Caitlyn Caruso of Advocates for Youth, Lincoln Mondy of AMAZE.org, and Rebecca Ruiz of Mashable. (; will begin at 2 p.m. Tuesday at the Austin Convention Center, Room 10C)

3:30 p.m. — ‘Social Emotional Learning Should Be Like Fluoride’: Think social-emotional learning has to be another program to add to the school day? Actually, it can be what fluoride is to drinking water: blended into what already exists. This panel will discuss how subjects like math and reading can incorporate social-emotional skills like communication, collaboration, and citizenship. Led by Pam Betten of Sunnyside Unified School District, Brian Kingsley of Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools, Christina Riley of EL Education, and Jessica Reid Sliwerski of Open Up Resources. (; will begin at 3:30 p.m. Tuesday at the Austin Convention Center, Room 11AB)

5 p.m. — ‘Is School Choice the Black Choice?’: ����Ӱ��’s Mimi Woldeyohannes leads this frank conversation about the critical role that school choice — or the lack thereof — can play for communities of color. Joined onstage by Derrell Bradford, the executive vice president of 50CAN (and a frequent contributor to ����Ӱ��); Naomi Shelton, the director of K-12 advocacy UNCF; Gerard Robinson, the executive director of the Center for Advancing Opportunity; and Jacquie Hood Martin, co-founder of J Hood and Associates, the education and civic leaders will spotlight how choice policies and initiatives improve the educational environment for students of color — as well as their families. (; will begin at 5 p.m. Tuesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon H)

Wednesday, March 6

11 a.m. — ‘Pathways to Personalization’: For leaders who want to create personalized learning initiatives, this panel will walk through the process and best practices of creating and launching these pilots and eventually scaling across a school or district. Led by Roshni Lakhi and Shawn Rubin of Highlander Institute. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Wednesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Room 412)

11 a.m. — ‘Going Digital: The Future of the K-12 Library’: Libraries are no longer just responsible for curating and sharing literature. As education technology becomes more widespread in classrooms, libraries also need to start vetting and sharing these products, and this panel will look at one district’s process to do this. Led by Stacy Fox-Myers of Epic!, Melanie Rosier of Gowanda Elementary School, Ellen Ullman of eSchool Media, and April Woolsey of Liberty Elementary School. (; will begin at 11 a.m. Wednesday at the Austin Convention Center, Room 10C)

12:30 p.m. — ‘Integrating SEL Into Data Systems for Improvement’: To make sure students in California’s largest districts are prepared for college and careers, leaders are turning to measures of social-emotional learning. The data team behind this effort will share how they launched and analyzed data systems to help improve schools. Led by Noah Bookman of the CORE Districts and Libby Pier and Andrew Rice of Education Analytics. (; will begin at 12:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Room 408)

2 p.m. — ‘Millennials Matter: Ed Reformers Need to Hear Us’: As a generation that’s grown up with the concept of choice embedded in their lives, millennials are naturally supportive of school choice. However, this group is not represented in communities debating these topics. This panel covers how to amplify their perspectives. Led by Mendell Grinter of the Campaign for School Equity, Lalla Morris of Families Empowered, Evy Valencia Jackson of EVJ Consulting, and Emmeline Zhao of ����Ӱ��. (; will being at 2 p.m. Wednesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon G)

3:30 p.m. — ‘Supporting the Teachers of Tomorrow’: Following a wave of teacher strikes across the country that have called fresh attention to teacher salaries, education funding, and classroom conditions, Margaret Hoover helps guide this conversation about recruiting, supporting, and retaining educators. The panel spotlights a trio of current school and district leaders, including Matt Kramer, CEO of Wildflower Schools; Sharif El-Mekki, principal of Mastery Charter School-Shoemaker Campus; and Pedro Martinez, superintendent of San Antonio ISD. (; will begin at 3:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Austin Convention Center, Room 12AB)

5 p.m. — ‘The Art of Discipline in the Age of Screens’: How is technology impacting children’s brains? Panelists will talk about attention, self regulation, and strategies for helping children manage themselves, especially with a lens toward trauma and the excessive punishment of children of color or children with disabilities. Led by Anya Kamenetz of NPR, Jelani Memory of Circle Media Labs, and Katherine Lewis, author and journalist. (; will begin at 5 p.m. Wednesday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon G).

Thursday, March 7

2 p.m. — ‘Mayors, Youth, and the Fate of Cities’: These city leaders have recognized that youth are the future of economic, social, and civic success in their towns, and they have invested in their welfare and social mobility. Led by Shane Bemis of the City of Gresham, Jorge Elorza of the City of Providence, Elizabeth Gaines of Children’s Funding Project, Lisa Piscopo of the City and County of Denver, and Levar Stoney of the City of Richmond, Virginia. (; will begin at 2 p.m. Thursday at the Hilton Austin Downtown, Salon J)

2 p.m. — ‘Translating Research into Practice’: Sometimes learning science myths drives classroom instruction, and sometimes research-backed practices don’t translate well into the real world. This panel will discuss how applying science behind learning and human development can help students succeed. Led by Betsy Corcoran of EdSurge and Priscilla Chan, Bror Saxberg, and K. Brooke Stafford-Brizard of Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. (; will begin at 2 p.m. Thursday at the Austin Convention Center, Room 18ABCD)

Go Deeper: This is the first in a series of articles, essays, and reports from South By Southwest Education 2019. Get the latest updates — and all of the day’s most interesting education headlines — delivered straight to your inbox by signing up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter.