Educational Design Thesis #1

The traditional education paradigm fails to recognize learning as a process. This is evident in the language used to describe student learning, as if it’s something that can be artificially imposed on students during the neat hours of 8:30 to 3:30. It’s also embedded in the system’s basic design: the curriculum dictates what is taught, teachers are instructed to distribute information (largely revolving around memorization), and students are expected to conform to a tedious cycle of downloading knowledge and being tested on it to measure their academic worth.

Schools, in essence, institutionalize the inherently human process of learning.

But If the purpose of school is to accomplish genuine learning, then most classrooms are failing. When students aim to do the bare minimum to pass a class (the “just enough to get by” mentality) or resort to dishonesty to boost their grades—behavior seen at every academic level—these are clear signals that the “learning” isn’t authentic. It bears repeating, even though many have recognized this: higher test scores do not indicate genuine learning. Rather, they are a transient measure of academic discipline, correlating more closely with privilege than with personal and intellectual growth.

True learning begins with curiosity, a human trait, not a structural one. Organic learning requires intrinsic motivation, which can only be achieved when students are granted the autonomy to shape their own pursuits. However, the idea of learners shaping their own learning cannot exist within a system rooted in a hierarchy between those who teach and those who are taught. Intrinsic engagement is directly at odds with extrinsic motivation; one threatens the survival of the other.

Intrinsic learning is a process of self-actualization. It’s an act of transforming oneself from a person existing within the world to a person engaging with it. When this learning succeeds, it means people believe in themselves enough to acquire and practice skills or knowledge that are applied in real-world situations, providing value to themselves or the world.

Intrinsic engagement is essential for every person’s development. It’s also essential for upholding a harmonious society and pushing the boundaries of civilization. It shouldn’t be forced; it can’t be structured. It must be nurtured. Simply put, the fundamental dynamics of traditional schools are simply incompatible with intrinsic learning. Those who have recognized this reality and are inspired to act have created numerous experiments attempting to reimagine what education could look like.

However, while there are pockets of amazing work happening, my experience attending one of these schools highlighted three challenges underpinning the expansion and quality of these efforts:

Challenge #1: Often, a “reimagined” education is conceptualized and created by a think-tank of adults and then imposed on students. Yet, a school designed to cultivate intrinsic learning and curiosity must, by definition, involve learners from its inception.

Challenge #2: Innovative educational styles are often limited in their freedom because they exist within established structures, typically for financial and accountability purposes. For instance, public charter schools must undergo accreditation and audits, administer state-mandated tests, or adhere to rigid schedules to qualify for public funding. However, to truly reimagine education, there must be a collective paradigm shift about what schools are meant to be in every regard, without constraints.

Challenge #3: A new style of education likely won’t last if it’s a one-hit wonder or dependent on certain visionary leaders; it needs to scale without sacrificing quality. Thus, the measures of a “successful” model must be replicable elsewhere, and the structures that support it must be sustainable in contexts where it’s not easy to do so.