Category Archives: Interviews

How is climate change affecting schools and schooling? Sustainability, students and schooling (Part 1) 

Educators and education programs around the world are both developing new ways to make schooling more sustainable and creating new educational opportunities for students to learn about the world around them. To help take stock of these developments, in the first part of this 3-part series, Carter Hyde  and Hannah Nguyen review some of the latest news and research that discusses how climate change affects student learning. Future posts will outline some of the new developments – or “micro-innovations” – in transportation and facilities that educators around the world are pursuing to support a more sustainable planet, cut costs and foster student learning and wellbeing.

These posts are part of IEN’s ongoing coverage of what is and is not changing in schools and education following the pandemic school closures. For more on the series, see “What can change in schools after the pandemic?”  For examples of micro-innovations in other areas, see Access to food and school meals in the US and around the world; Innovations in providing children with food and nutrition; Building Student Relationships Post-Pandemic in School and Beyond; Scanning the Post-COVID Challenges and Possibilities for Access to Colleges and Careers in the US ; New Pathways into Higher Education and the Working World? (Part 2)Tutoring takes off and Predictable challenges and possibilities for effective tutoring at scale.

+++++++++++++

How climate change can undermine student’s health and learning

Each year, schools face a host of climate-related risks that can have a wide range of effects on the health and learning of students. As the authors of a UNICEF report put it, many “schools and education systems are ill-equipped to protect students from the impacts of climate change, particularly in fragile contexts, and climate finance investments in education remain strikingly low.” Just as one example, worsening pollution levels can impact respiratory and cardiovascular conditions, affecting children’s overall health and contributing to absences from school. Illustrating the significant impact that reducing could have on children’s health, in the US, estimates suggest that replacing old buses through a federal rebate program increased attendance between 2012-2017 by 350,000 days and that replacing all buses produced before 2000 would add another 1.3 million school days.

The effects of climate change on environmental, physical, and mental well being, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Of course, natural disasters can have devastating and direct effects, causing injury, illness, or death, and the impact of severe weather alone has a drastic effect on school operations, leading to eroding school finances and disrupted learning. In just one year, in 2024, nearly 10% of the school year was lost to climate related disruptions in low income countries, and extreme heat affected nearly 1 in 3 children. Exposure to heat waves has also been linked to a loss of almost 1.5 years of schooling for some children. In the US, rising temperatures are associated with declines in student math performance, especially for students in high-poverty schools. And it’s only getting worse. The World Meteorological Organization confirmed that 2024 was the warmest year to date, and a record-breaking one-third of the global population experienced a heatwave. “By 2050, nearly every child will face more frequent heatwaves – threatening their health, disrupting their education ,and putting their future at risk.”  Given these challenges, it’s not surprising that concerns about climate change are also having a negative effect on the mental health of children, adolescents, and young adults. As a 2021 survey reported, 59% of 16- to 25- year-olds were very or extremely worried about climate change.

Can schools become more climate resilient?

The costs of school disruptions have sparked a movement toward making schools climate resilient, particularly by improving transportation and infrastructure. More sustainable approaches to schooling can benefit not only students’ health but also help reduce costs that free up funds for other educational purposes. An analysis from the Boston Consulting Group illustrated how government actions on climate  can save considerable money over time.  As the report put it, “By investing a relatively small portion of GDP—less than 1%—into climate adaptation measures, it is possible to avoid much larger economic losses of up to 4% of GDP. Then, the remaining economic impact in a less-than-2°C scenario ranges from 4% to 6% of GDP.” Economically, even modest investments in climate adaptation can prevent much larger long-term losses. 

Climate change costs and investments as a share of cumulative GDP until 2100 (%), BCG Analysis

Despite the available evidence, a focus on sustainability remains controversial in some countries. Countries, like Iran, Libya, and Yemen have also refused to sign onto global accords—such as the Paris Agreement or United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change—designed to support sustainability expressing concerns about sustainable practices negatively affecting their economies. In the US, in particular, the current administration has explicitly worked to remove policies and limit initiatives that aim to combat climate change or support more sustainable practices. The U.S. Department of Education’s recent decision to terminate the Green Ribbon Schools program is a prime example of the reduced funding. The 15-year-old program honored schools across the country for their implementation of environmental practices. The program’s termination came soon after the DOE concluded the National Blue Ribbon Schools Program, in which schools were honored for academic excellence. 

Nontheless, concerns about addressing the climate emergency have continued to grow, with increasing numbers of individuals and organizations joining a broad social movement to create a more sustainable planet. Many teachers and youth have been engaged in this movement for years, as demonstrated by the efforts of Greta Thunberg and others who helped lead the Global Climate Strike in 2019. Since that time, a number of efforts focus specifically on addressing an “understanding gap” as nearly half of teens cannot identify the causes of climate change. As the efforts to address that gap proceed, the impact could be substantial. Research even suggests that if 16% of high school students in high- and middle-income countries received climate change education, carbon dioxide could be reduced by almost19 gigtatons by 2050. To support climate change education, more and more resources are becoming available, including documents like “Climate Literacy: Essential Principles for Understanding and Addressing Climate Change” and collections of Climate Change Resources. These efforts may benefit as well from plans by the OECD to include a measure of climate literacy as part of the PISA assessments in 2029.

Next week – How schools are making busing and transportation more sustainable: Sustainability, students and schooling (Part 2)

Micheal Kirst and Victor Chan on “Broadening our perspective concerning American’s education attainment: Growth, progress and data gaps”

The current narrative of education stagnancy or decline is misleading. That’s the key argument in this excerpt from a recent paper from Micheal Kirst and Victor Eliot Hau Hong Chan. To make that argument, Kirst and Chan draw on a variety of data from students from ages 15-25 that shows a pattern of growth and progress in Advanced Placement, dual enrollment (i.e., combining high school and college), four-year colleges/universities growth and completion, apprenticeships, certificates, and credentials. The full paper was published in April 2026 as part of the Research and Occasional Papers Series from the UC Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher Education. Kirst is Professor Emeritus of Education at Stanford University and the longest serving President of the California State Board of Education. Chan has an MA from Stanford University. Some images in this post are drawn from the Mike Kirst Biography project produced by Richard K. Jung. For previous posts from IEN on the work of Michael Kirst see Big Infrastructure, Big Capacity Building, and State-Wide Scale-Up…”: Mike Kirst on the Need to Revitalize Standards-Based Reform and Making public policy work for education: Reflections on the career of Mike Kirst

+++++++++

For decades, the performance of the American education system has been largely judged by one narrow set of indicators: K–12 standardized test scores that encompass both national and international units of analysis (Hatch, 2021). Proponents of such assessments argue that test scores matter for many things, including national economic prosperity and growth (Hanushek, 2015). The predominant narrative about such data argues that over a long period of time, U.S. scores have either declined or remained stagnant (National Assessment of Educational Progress, n.d.). A resulting sense of alarm about the state of American education has only been intensified by recent test score declines, both before and after the pandemic.

However, K–12 test benchmarks are insufficient proxies for measuring the long-term educational and economic value generated by American educational institutions and programs. While K–12 schools prepare students for education beyond high school, the prominent tests are limited to outcomes in high school alone (OECD, 2023). As Nicholas Eberstadt (2025) has found, there is a “robust and remarkably stable correspondence between a country’s mean years of schooling and its per capita productivity,” meaning that test scores “are less powerful predictors of economic performance than … sheer years of schooling for a national population.” Simply put, students are in school for far longer than K–12 data alone would suggest, putting pressure on the continued reliance on test scores for assessing the state of national education. In order to obtain a fuller and more accurate picture of education attainment, it is important to look beyond K–12 test scores and, indeed, beyond high school graduation itself.

Public opinion has turned sharply negative concerning colleges and universities in the past decade. The slogan “college for all” that guided the Obama Administration has been attacked as putting too little policy attention on vocational and career education. Moreover, a considerable public focuses on the tiny segment of highly selective postsecondary institutions. Yet those critiques have not included an understanding or trend analysis of the vast array of postsecondary education that already exists, including high schools (AP), job sites, military bases, and prisons. Perhaps if the public better understood the entire array of postsecondary education available to Americans, and its contributions to national educational attainment, their opinion might become more favorable.

Focusing on youth 15 to 25, our goal is to reframe the current conversation around U.S. education attainment and performance by systematically examining how different forms of postsecondary education and training have grown, evolved, and contributed to workforce development over several decades. Based on our review of the literature, we estimate that at least 73% of high school students proceed on to some form of postsecondary education (Irwin et al., 2023).

Our research demonstrates that stagnancy or decline is not the dominant trend if postsecondary and K–12 education are combined. We find a pattern of growth and progress in Advanced Placement, dual enrollment (i.e., combining high school and college), four-year colleges/universities, apprenticeships, certificates, and credentials. Together, these elements significantly increase the number of years U.S. students spend in educational environments.

For more on Kirst’s career, see Michael Kirst: An Uncommon Academic, by Richard K. Jung

Just as importantly, however, our analysis identifies where current research and data infrastructure fall short and thus prevent a full accounting of progress or performance. While there are promising developments in sectors such as career and technical education, college transfer, and remedial education, the data gaps in these three sectors do not permit overall conclusions. Some sectors — like on-the-job training, military education, and credentials — lack sufficient data to determine trends. For this reason, our assessment offers not only a longitudinal scan of institutional and programmatic attainment growth, but also a guide to the questions policymakers and researchers must now prioritize and the places where further data must be gathered. This paper thereby contributes to an extensive literature integrating the K–12 perspective with postsecondary education, a literature that argues that this complex array of secondary and postsecondary entities should not be treated as separate domains, and that policies should span the entire spectrum (Hoffman et al., 2007).

Scope of Analysis

This project evaluates 11 distinct categories of educational pathways beyond the traditional higher education framework: 1) Early College Credit (AP); 2) Dual Enrollment in High School and College;  3) Career and Technical Education (CTE); 4) Apprenticeships; 5) Completion of 4-Year and 2-Year College Degrees; 6) Transfers; 7) Remedial Education; 8) Non-Degree Credentials (NDCs); 9) On-the-Job Training; 10) Military Education; 11) Correctional Education. For most categories, we analyze historical enrollment data, changes in completion rates, and evidence of long-term outcomes such as employment and earnings. Sources include federal and state datasets, institutional reports, and national surveys.

Where data is robust — such as with AP or community colleges — trends can be clearly interpreted. But in many domains analysis is hindered by significant gaps: outdated or irregular data collection, lack of standardized definitions, or the near-total absence of national tracking systems. Identifying these weaknesses, while limiting what can be said with confidence, helps to highlight critical blind spots in our understanding of how education and training systems function across the country, and lays a foundation for future research.

For Kirst’s reflections on his career, see this clip from a video produced by EdSource when he was awarded with their first Education Pioneer Award in 2017

Final Comments and Overall Observations

Contrary to the dominant narrative of decline in U.S. education, the analysis presented here reveals a system that has evolved substantially, and often successfully, over the last four decades. At least 73 percent of high school graduates proceed on to some form of postsecondary education soon after they graduate. The broader landscape of American education includes a combination of secondary and postsecondary education that tells a story of student growth and progress despite data gaps across multiple sectors.

Measurements of Success, Current and Future

Across the domains analyzed, several positive stories stand out:

  • Advanced Placement (AP) has seen massive expansion, rising to 23,000 schools and over 5 million exams annually while maintaining or improving pass rates. This signals genuine academic rigor amid democratized access.
  • Dual Enrollment has rapidly scaled, especially in community colleges, bringing college coursework to nearly 1 in 5 high school students nationwide. Lagging states are catching up fast, signaling sustained future growth. More data is needed concerning program quality and student outcomes.
  • Apprenticeships have surged by 73 percent in the last decade, expanding beyond construction into healthcare, IT, and utilities. Completion rates have returned to historical norms, suggesting the system is advancing, not just growing.
  • College and university 4-year graduation rates are at all-time highs, with significant gains since 2007. Degrees and certificates have increased at 2-year public colleges. A combination of policies has helped to cause this positive outcome.
  • Credentials and Certifications continue to grow rapidly and expand in scope. Licensed individuals are more than twice as likely to be employed full-time compared to their non-licensed peers.
  • Correctional Education reduces recidivism by 43 percent and increases employment rates post-release by 13 percent. These are among the strongest outcomes of any education or training program in the country, yet the programs remain underfunded and with fewer participants than in the past.

College Board, Central, n.d. & U.S. Department of Labor, 2021 

These positive trends are not isolated. Rather they are systemic. They reveal that American education, far from failing outright, has quietly adapted to serve millions of learners through flexible, applied, and workforce-linked pathways. However, these gains have not been matched by investment in measurement, trend data or evaluation:

  • High school Career and Technical Education has developed better career pathways and more linkages to postsecondary education. However, longitudinal data systems are underdeveloped to evaluate effectiveness.
  • Remedial education has changed dramatically in its concepts and approach, but benefits are unknown within existing data systems. • Transfer pathways, although central to the community college mission, remain inefficient. Most students transfer without earning a credential, and articulation failures cause widespread credit loss.
  • Credential programs have diversified and expanded, but tracking systems have not. Policymakers cannot yet distinguish between high-quality, market-aligned certificates and low-value credentials.
  • Military education remains opaque. Despite billions in funding, there is limited visibility into enrollment, skill conversion, or post-service outcomes due to data silos and security-driven limitations.
  • On-the-job training, though effective in isolated state evaluations, lacks any national data infrastructure-leaving the largest form of workforce training in the country virtually invisible. OJT is one of the best ways to provide applied and active learning.

The Policy Challenge Ahead

The takeaway is not that the U.S. education system is not broken. It is that it is incompletely understood. Key parts of the system—those with proven returns—are operating in the relative darkness or are misunderstood. Ifthe U.S. is serious about preparing citizens for economic resilience, civic participation, and lifelong learning, then we see three imperatives:

  1. Elevate what works. Scale programs with clear returns on investment such as AP, dual enrollment, apprenticeships, and correctional education into broader federal and state strategies, with targeted funding and accountability.
  2. Fix the data infrastructure. Build cross-agency systems that track participation, progression, and outcomes across all postsecondary pathways, not just for transfer to four-year degree programs. Statistics should be presented with separate categories for youth 15–25 years of age.
  3. Develop policies for a major overhaul of the existing systems. For example, Jobs for the Future (2021) proposes merging grades 11-14 into a single, integrated, and free system. It seeks to eliminate the rigid divide between high school and college, creating a new, equitable educational model that combines academic instruction with workplace learning for 16-to-20-year-olds, directly aligning with modern economic needs.

The U.S. education system is in transformation. In many sectors, postsecondary education is quietly succeeding. The challenge now is to bring success and weakness into full view, build the systems to support attainment, and close the distance between potential and performance.

Fostering collective responsibility for inclusive education: Developing national support for immigrants and multilingual learners in Iceland (Part 2)

Learning materials, language support, and cultural mediators, these are a few of the elements of Iceland’s efforts to create a more welcoming and inclusive education that Fríða Bjarney Jónsdóttir discusses in the second part of this interview. In the first part of this conversation with Thomas Hatch, Jónsdóttir outlined some of the first steps Iceland has taken to establish their national approach. Jónsdóttir works as a specialist at the Ministry of Education and Children coordinating the MEMM project an abbreviation for education, welcoming and culture. The project  is being developed in close collaboration with the Centre for Language and Literacy in Reykjavík and the newly established national Directorate of Education and School Services. Previously Jónsdóttir was the head of the Center for Innovation at Reykjavík’s Department of Education and Youth and before that served as a coordinator for multicultural education in preschools. For earlier coverage of developments in Iceland’s education system see part 1 and part 2 of a conversation with Jón Torfi Jónasson “On the inertia of education systems and hope for the future” and “Relish the freedom you have and find the balance.”

++++++++++++++++++++++

Thomas Hatch: You’ve talked about some of the major initiatives you’re pursuing now including the collaboration around the data system, the production of resources and curriculum for inclusive education, and the development of a group of cultural mediators who can help educators and schools address the needs of immigrant families. But what about the challenges? What are some of the issues you need to deal with in order for your work to be successful? 

Fríða Bjarney Jónsdóttir: One of the issues is that Icelandic is a really tiny language. It doesn’t have much global value. As a result, you might have parents who’ve been living in Iceland for years and years without learning Icelandic. They could be working in the tourist industry, for example, but the company owners don’t care whether their staff speak Icelandic or not. There is a policy to support the learning of Icelandic as a second language, but it’s not acted on, and everyone needs to take responsibility for that. 

We need to provide an Icelandic learning community to support learning the language, and one way we are trying to do that is through continuous education. In almost every corner of Iceland, you have a center where you can go and you can learn all sorts of things, including instruction in Icelandic. But there’s no standardized syllabus, and we don’t have standardized learning material. 

TH: So that’s part of the reason you are trying to create the resources and materials for more effective instruction for Icelandic as a second language? 

FBJ: Yes, we’re doing that for the pre-primary, primary and secondary levels, but ideally it would happen for continuing education as well. It should happen at all levels. Just to give you an example, I was in a municipality where almost 70% of the children in the schools have an immigrant background. I told them, “Okay, you want us to do something about the schools and the education of the children, but what is the welcoming plan of the municipality? How do you welcome newcomers into your municipality?” This can’t be just about the schools.  There has to be a plan for how the community welcomes newcomers that includes both the municipality and the schools. 

Reykjavik has that kind of plan. The idea for their welcoming plan actually started in the Reykjavik Youth Council. That Council includes kids who are 14 to 18, and they can create proposals and appeals for the City Council to consider. They participate in one meeting with the City Council to put their ideas forward, and the City Council accepts some of the appeals.  The ideas that are accepted are sent to the relevant department, like the city’s Department of Education and Youth or the Department of Welfare. 

Back in 2015, I was leading the multicultural team at the Department of Education in Reykjavik, and the Youth Council introduced this idea about how the neighborhood could welcome newcomers. I thought it was so interesting that the youth council was bringing this up, so I called them all in and said “I want to hear the story behind your idea.” This guy who was already in upper secondary school, I think he was 17 at the time, said he was Icelandic, and he was living in a neighborhood in Reykjavik, where you have the most immigrants. “I’ve been in the same school for 10 years,” he told me, “and I’ve been having kids coming in my class every year that don’t speak Icelandic. For many, many years, I was with the same boy from Poland, and no one taught me how to talk to him. I feel so guilty about that, and I wanted to do something about it.” That was the beginning. Now there is a collaboration between the schools and a service center in the four districts of the city. This approach has been implemented in all the districts in Reykjavik, but it’s not something that’s happened nationally. One service center situated in the most diverse district has  “ambassadors” that have been appointed from about 9 or 10 immigrant groups. The ambassadors act as consultants to the service center to help them improve their services, and they serve as a link to the immigrant groups in the district. There are some municipalities, like, the municipality closest to the airport where they have been doing wonderful work, that we can all learn from, but it’s not exactly the same in each place. 

I also remember this wonderful welcoming plan that was in the East fjords some years ago where they had a welcoming person who met all new families. It didn’t matter where they came from, she met all the new families a few days after they moved to the town; gave them a card for the library, visited the pool, showed them where the social services were, and took them to the schools.  Now, when I visit other places, I point out to them that you cannot do this in isolation, and you can build on these examples from Reykjavik and these other municipalities.  

TH: You’ve talked here about welcoming immigrants, but in many cases, with refugees in particular, you’re welcoming people who’ve experienced trauma. How have you addressed that?

FBJ: This is something that we are learning little by little. I know in the US you have had trauma sensitive education and other initiatives that we have not had here, but it’s coming. We have a project we are working on now, Heillaspor that’s nationwide for Icelandic schools. It’s based on a Scottish project called Nurture. That’s an inclusive trauma sensitive project based on attachment theory: How do you build relationships and connections between adults and children? Between the children themselves? Between children and families? Between families and schools? And how can you support teachers in protecting themselves, their emotions and feelings so that they become less fragile in difficult situations? 

Heillaspor (Nurture), Directorate of Education & School Services

But we also have some local projects. One that I have visited is developing micro-initiatives to support children and families who having huge challenges, in terms of finances, parents with drug addiction, children not going to school and all that. One of the initiatives that they are implementing, is called SPARE (It stands for supporting parents among refugees in Europe). They provide a 12-week program for parents with a refugee background and provide clinical therapies. 

TH: Are there any other major challenges that you’re facing? 

FBJ: There are so many challenges! The dominance of English is another challenge for teaching Icelandic as a second language. English is almost the lingua franca in Iceland so there’s a fight to keep the Icelandic language alive. My background is in multicultural, multilingual pedagogy, so when I’m working with multilingual children and families, I build on the strengths and resources that they bring to the school. For example, I will try to activate their languages while teaching them Icelandic. I will try to learn about our similarities and our differences. But that’s becoming a challenge because English is the language that everyone is using, so, for many teachers, it’s easier to speak English to newcomers. Teachers who are responsible for teaching Icelandic as a second language only work with a child for a few hours a week outside the regular classroom, and there is not a focus on building relationships through Icelandic with the classmates. As a result, there is a danger that the  child goes back into the regular class and never practices Icelandic. That’s why we are also trying to change attitudes and beliefs and make it clear that learning Icelandic as a second language is a joint responsibility of the whole school not only the appointed second language teacher. 

But this work has to deal with the increased racism, hate speech, extremism, and polarization that you are seeing in the US and Europe as well. This certainly makes it difficult when you want to work in an inclusive way with cultures and languages. As one example, I gave a course for all the head teachers of preschools in one of the neighborhoods in Reykjavik. I talked about attitudes and beliefs and what inclusion means. What does it mean to be culturally sensitive? They did all sorts of projects and discussions about this, because you can provide all sorts of material and support, but if people don’t work with themselves and their own beliefs and attitudes, things hardly change. We see this as a huge, huge, huge challenge. This is an issue everywhere, but at least the policy here is in favor of multilingualism and multiculturalism. 

The education of teachers is another huge challenge. Icelandic society has changed very, very fast, and teacher education is struggling to keep up with the pace of societal changes. We don’t have a good knowledge of how to teach Icelandic as a second language, for example. We have to build up that knowledge, and we also have to build up the knowledge of culturally and linguistically sensitive practices and our projects are trying to contribute to that. 

TH: Is there anything that’s been successful in working on teacher education? Any area where progress is being made? 

FBJ: There are some good initiatives at our universities for teacher education, and you have teachers that really want to change things. We are working with many different groups, including representatives from the universities, the teachers’ union, the Association of Municipalities, and we are having meetings about teacher education. You could say, we have “opened the mic.” There is also a recent book about teacher education in the Nordic countries when it comes to multilingual children, and there are two chapters about teacher education in Iceland (Teacher education for working in linguistically diverse classrooms: Nordic perspectives). 

TH: All this gives us a great sense of the initiatives you’ve gotten started. Is there anything else that you see coming down the line or that you’re hoping to get going as next steps? 

FBJ: We have less than year to go with this project, and it’s supposed to finish with a draft for the parliament that describes what we want support for school services and support to the municipalities to look like. At the same time, I hope we would get some kind of a consensus between the state and the municipalities:  What is the responsibility of the state? What are the responsibilities of the municipalities? And how are we going to divide the cost? This work has been going on for a while. I think that now we know the challenges. We know what we have to do. We have a lot of resources, but we need this collaboration, and we need a systemic approach so we can work on this together. 

Part of what I’m trying to do during these two years is influence attitudes and change how people view working with culturally and linguistically diverse groups of children so everyone sees that it’s not a matter of fixing someone; it’s not a matter of a single teacher being responsible. We as a society are responsible for building on the resources that people bring and providing them the education they need to live here. That’s where I would like to see us.

Building bridges and creating a warm welcome: Developing national support for immigrants and multilingual learners in Iceland (Part 1)

What does it take to create a safe and welcoming environment for all learners? Fríða Bjarney Jónsdóttir discusses Iceland’s efforts to create a more inclusive and systemic approach to supporting immigrants and multilingual learners in the first part of this interview with Thomas Hatch. Part two of the interview will discuss some of the key challenges these initiatives have to address in order to be successful. Jónsdóttir works as a specialist at the Ministry of Education and Children coordinating the MEMM project — an abbreviation for education, welcoming and culture. The project is being developed in close collaboration with the Centre for Language and Literacy in Reykjavík and the newly established national Directorate of Education and School Services. Previously Jónsdóttir was the head of the Center for Innovation at Reykjavík’s Department of Education and Youth and before that served as a coordinator for multicultural education in preschools.  

The MEMM project was created to support inclusive education and the education of multilingual learners, a need that has been growing with substantial increases in immigration since about 2014. Among other things, immigration to Iceland has been driven by economic opportunities, particularly in the tourist industry. With a total population of less than 400,000 and almost 2.3 million visitors in 2024, immigrants fill about 40% of the jobs in the tourist industry, with many of those immigrants coming from Poland, Ukraine, and the Philippines. For earlier coverage of developments in Iceland’s education system see part 1 and part 2 of a conversation with Jón Torfi Jónasson “On the inertia of education systems and hope for the future” and “Relish the freedom you have and find the balance.” 

+++++++++++++++++

Thomas Hatch: Can you tell me about some of the problems that led to the development of the Directorate of Education and School services  and to your efforts to build national support services for inclusive education and multilingual learners? 

Fríða Bjarney Jónsdóttir: In Iceland, we face the problem that we have very, very tiny municipalities that have very minor support services for their schools, and there is no national support system for children with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Although Reykjavik and some larger cities have developed these support services, the smaller municipalities don’t have this capacity. As a result, the government has changed the law and expanded the responsibilities of the Directorate of Education and School Services.  The MEMM project is part of this expansion and aims to respond to this challenge by learning from municipalities that have developed their school services and building the infrastructure of materials, tools, and services needed to support the education of multilingual and immigrant children across the country. 

64.7% of first and second generation immigrants in Iceland were living in the Capital region in 2025, but the Southwest region had highest proportion of immigrants, where 33.1%of the populations were immigrants, Statistics Iceland

I’m here at the Ministry of Education and Children now for two years to coordinate this project. Before this I had participated in developing a team for the Centre for Language and Literacy in the city of Reykjavik that had a similar goal. One of the first things that we did through the MEMM project was to move that team from Reykjavik to this new national Directorate for Education and School Services. That way, the new people we are hiring can build on that earlier work. 

The Directorate of Education and School Services is also developing a new database that will provide schools with a completely new system for tracking children’s progress along with a toolbox for supporting teachers’ development. But it’s important to note that providing these kinds of services for schools is a total shift in the way that the Directorate works. Before this, the Directorate was primarily responsible for standardized testing and for publishing learning material for primary and middle school (for compulsory or “basic” education). Now, the Directorate has been tasked with creating the first database that provides real time information about which children are in each school. The teacher can see it; the headmaster can see it; the municipality can see it. We are collaborating with the team that is designing the database to make sure it includes information about children’s linguistic background. With the new database, we will be able to see, for example, how many children with each kind of linguistic background are in a particular school and how they are progressing. We can use that information to think about how we can improve our services to each school, and so that they can improve their support for each child, particularly if the child is not progressing. That effort is a part of making sure that children with linguistic and cultural background have a place in all the education initiatives that are being planned. We are also developing curriculum materials for teaching Icelandic as a second language. Up to now, it has been the responsibility of the teacher who teaches Icelandic as a second language to find their own materials. 

We’re also working on issues like how do you welcome refugee children, refugee parents, refugee families that don’t understand the Icelandic school system? And what kinds of early interventions, inclusive approaches, and culturally sensitive approaches are needed when working with immigrant children and families? As part of our project, we are developing a framework and collecting good examples of welcoming plans from Reykjavik and municipalities that have been working on these issues for some time. Additionally, we will have videos for parents about the Icelandic preschool and compulsory school system, and we have “cultural mediators” that can invite parents for discussions about what’s the difference between, say, the Polish school system and the Icelandic school system. 

TH: Could you say a little bit more about the cultural mediators? 

FBJ: That’s one of the innovative projects we started in Reykjavik thirteen years ago. I had a grant to develop this one position with a Polish speaking mediator for preschools, and now Reykjavik has four of those positions for immigrants who speak Polish, Filipino, Arabic, Spanish, English and Ukrainian. We call these cultural mediators Brúarsmiðir, which means bridge builders, because we’re building bridges from one culture to the other. In our current project, we have hired four more people to serve as cultural mediators, and they are collaborating with the team from Reykjavik. There’s a slightly different role with those working in Reykjavik and those we hired to work in the Directorate, because by law, the municipality has different responsibilities for their schools and families than the state. In the municipalities, you can work with individual families, but when you are coming from the Directorate, you hardly work with individual families. Instead, you help the school and the teachers to become more culturally sensitive.  

Educational Toolbox to support the work of cultural mediators from the Center for Language and Literacy, Reykjavik

TH: And do you have an example or a story of a successful mediator? 

FBJ: There are many stories! For example, it’s a very common misunderstanding that if a child speaks another language at home and the child is not making progress in Icelandic, the teacher assumes that the child is very good in their mother tongue, so the Icelandic doesn’t matter as much. But when you have the cultural mediator sitting down with the teacher and the parent, the cultural mediator realizes that the parent thinks that the child is perfect in Icelandic but is not very good in their home language. The cultural mediator can help the school and the parents to work together developing a shared understanding of the child’s strengths and the possibilities for improvement

When the Ukranian war broke out and also when we had a large group of refugees coming from Palestine, Reykjavík created what we’re calling family and school-based centers  that can provide a “soft welcoming” into the system. The cultural mediators can work there and talk to the parents and help clear up any misunderstandings. It’s not like we can take prejudices away, but when you have someone who can understand both sides, it’s easier to build cultural sensitivity into the system.  

TH: I’ve talked to people in Poland who’ve taken a similar approach to welcome Ukrainian refugees into their system (see Jacek Pyżalski on the Refugee Crisis and the Polish Education System’s Response to the War on Ukraine). Obviously, you can’t cover every language or every background, so how do you handle that? What happens if there’s no cultural mediator that fits your background or your language?

FBJ: We can’t cover all of them, but we try to collect information about as many school systems as possible. The cultural mediators also host webinars and courses for Icelandic teachers to learn about the school system in Poland, the school system in Ukraine, and other places. This can help teachers to understand what to do if there is a parent who is not willing to put their child in afterschool activities for example. Informal education is very, very highly regarded in Iceland, and it’s an important part of the whole system. But some immigrant parents may think afterschool activities are a waste of time because the child is “not learning.” The cultural mediators can sit down and help the teacher explain why it’s important for the students, how it can support their social development, and how it can help build trust among a group of children. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of having the mediators in our system, but we cannot put the sole responsibility on their shoulders.  We need cultural sensitivity and inclusive thinking from all our teachers, head teachers, headmasters. We cannot take that responsibility away from the school just because we have a mediator.  

Next week: Fostering collective responsibility for inclusive education: Developing national support for immigrants and multilingual learners in Iceland (Part 2)

Contesting Educational Accountability Across Contexts: An Interview with Luis Felipe de la Vega and Claudia Carrasco-Aguilar

How can we build accountability systems that strengthen professional responsibility, social participation, and equity? That is one of the critical questions that Luis Felipe de la Vega and Claudia Carrasco-Aguilar discuss in this interview about their new edited book Contesting Educational Accountability Research: Cross-National Dialogues on Quality and Equity (Springer 2026). The book includes comparative research on the implementation and effects of accountability systems in countries like Brazil, Chile, Italy, Honduras, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. Chapter 1 — “Performative Accountability: A Close Examination of a Dominant Model”– is available open access.  De la Vega is a researcher at  Bernardo O’Higgins University in Santiago, Chile and Carrasco-Aguilar is a researcher at the University of Malaga in Spain. AI was used to assist in the translation of this interview from Spanish into English.

For other IEN posts related to accountability, see School Networks, Accountability and Improvement in Scotland, Northern Ireland, England, and Chile; Accountability in Decentralized Systems: Rethinking How We Evaluate Schools; Do Charter Schools in Colombia Provide Sufficient Accountability and Choice?; and School Inspections in Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability.

++++++++++

IEN: Why this book? Why now? 

Luis Felipe de la Vega & Claudia Carrasco-Aguilar:  We have been analyzing accountability mechanisms in education for several years. Our analysis of the research findings has revealed a significant consensus regarding the implementation and outcomes of the “market-based,” “performance-based,” or “high-stakes” model. While these models have moderate or minor positive effects on improvement processes, they also have negative effects at the system, institutional, and stakeholder levels. Despite this consensus, the adoption of this type of accountability as a strategy for improving systems has continued to spread worldwide.

We investigated how and why some countries incorporated components of this mechanism into their institutional design to understand this phenomenon. We also identified alternative strategies that aim to recognize other ways of conceiving or using accountability. These strategies may be effective and beneficial for educational communities and/or have fewer negative implications for their stakeholders. In short, while accountability can allow for greater transparency and collective, citizen-led monitoring of educational processes, it also places significant pressure on schools, as if continuous improvement were solely the responsibility of schools and their teachers. Globally, educational accountability appears intertwined with market models, where families and communities demand that schools act as service providers and assume the role of customers rather than as true collective learning communities. We find ourselves in a globally polarized era, where the common good and shared responsibilities are overshadowed by a focus on individual gain.

In a context marked by discourses promoting competitiveness and mistrust at every level, it is important to reinforce the idea that positive improvement processes in education occur more naturally through collaboration and a deep, shared sense of purpose. The data support the need to develop accountability mechanisms grounded in education that align with societal expectations of educational systems.

IEN: What are some of the key similarities and differences in the accountability approaches used by the countries you and your colleagues have written about? 

LFV & CCA: The book has helped confirm a significant trend toward incorporating performative accountability mechanisms in different parts of the world. Two decades ago, literature analyzing this strategy focused predominantly on the U.S. context and always took a critical tone. Over the years, however, we have observed growing interest in other regions, such as Latin America, Africa, and Europe. Furthermore, some countries that have long upheld an ethos of trust, such as Sweden, have also begun to incorporate these mechanisms. In general, significant similarities can be observed in these cases. Beyond distinctions in prioritized data, strategies, or associated consequences, there is a trend toward homogenizing an approach that aims to improve educational outcomes through accountability mechanisms. This strategy is often accompanied by a market-driven education system that confuses the public by blurring the lines between empowerment and clientelism. Educational standardization, high-stakes assessments, and the idea that students’ learning outcomes depend solely on the quality of teaching in schools seem to be creating a high-pressure system that is spreading worldwide. In many of the cases presented in this book, we see that educational accountability dissociates schools from their social context. It holds educational leaders and teachers responsible for students’ academic outcomes and obscures the role of social inequalities and injustices.

Nevertheless, the book includes South Africa as an example of how accountability strategies based on different principles, such as culturally responsive assessment, can successfully promote relevant educational goals. Additionally, the debate on performative accountability has been accompanied by alternative proposals demonstrating various accountability approaches. However, these have not clearly established themselves or moved beyond being good practices or promising experiences. It is interesting to consider why this is the case. The book puts forward some hypotheses on this matter.

IEN: What else did you learn while producing this book that you didn’t know before? 

LFV & CCA: We learned many things, but one of the most important was that the discussion about performative accountability isn’t just about its use as a technical tool. Rather, it reflects a broader discussion about accountability in education and its ethical, political, and educational implications. Accountability systems reflect not only how education systems conceive of their own improvement but also their priorities for day-to-day operations. 

So, two things happen. First, many researchers in education quickly reached a consensus that performative accountability is educationally counterproductive because it clashes with pedagogical logic and sensibilities. It makes it difficult for stakeholders to address the challenges communities identify as essential and fosters a competitive logic. This leads to mistrust and a lack of collaboration within the system. Second, despite this consensus, it has not been possible to build a sufficiently robust foundation to generate alternatives capable of competing with performative logic. In this regard, despite notable and interesting case studies, there is significant criticism of those who have promoted these proposals.

Another key insight is the importance of comparative research. This book introduces vastly different settings and contexts from various continents. The significant socio-geographical diversity involved makes this phenomenon particularly striking. Here, we observe the rise of market-driven education and its influences as they are culturally adapted. Clearly, researching educational accountability in Europe is not the same as doing so in the Global South. This book details both the differences and similarities between the two. Thus, we have learned about the power of local contexts in translating educational policies designed at the global level and how the performativity of these policies can be observed in these translations despite the influence of supranational bodies. In simple terms, performative accountability reshapes and transforms subjectivities, identities, and cultural realities that may appear similar at first glance but possess highly complex differences when analyzed in greater detail. These differences enable movements of opposition and resistance and may help us understand possible alternatives to these forms of accountability in the future, moving toward a more social form of accountability.

Luis Felipe de la Vega Rodríguez
Claudia Lorena Carrasco Aguilar

IEN: What are some of the key implications for policy and practice? 

LFV & CCA: From a systemic perspective, the discussion on accountability should address its meaning and contribution to comprehensive educational improvement. Although the discussion of which test is best or what a certain score implies may be relevant, it does not address how each actor or institution can contribute to helping the education system and students achieve our envisioned goals. 

Having strong accountability mechanisms does not mean having harsh ones. Alternative proposals can be equally rigorous in analyzing the extent to which we fulfill our responsibilities to achieve those goals. If educational processes have eliminated violence as a form of correction over many years, then educational principles that promote collective and institutional learning should be established as the foundation for improvement processes. This implies that we must consider other types of accountability relationships, including greater opportunities for peer collaboration among individuals and institutions and creating spaces for dialogue across levels of the education system. These spaces should not be solely marked by the possibility of sanctions but rather reflect a commitment to jointly seeking solutions to educationally relevant problems.

A fair accountability system holds everyone accountable, not just schools. However, the consequences should promote collective learning rather than punishment. Ultimately, what happens in a classroom is the result not only of a teacher’s actions, but also of their school, district, state, and other collaborating institutions. If we all have responsibilities, we should all take ownership of them. In that case, a system based solely on punishment loses meaning, making collaboration more logical.

IEN: What else have you learned about accountability since writing that book? 

LFV & CCA: As authors, we have learned that educational accountability is much more ambiguous and contentious than is typically assumed in public policy discourse. Our comparative studies and theoretical review show that accountability does not have a single form but rather takes on multiple configurations that answer different questions: What should be accounted for? To whom? For what purposes, and through what mechanisms?  When these questions are answered from a technical or administrative perspective, accountability tends to be reduced to measurement, control, and sanctions. However, when answered from an educational perspective, accountability can become an instrument of reflection, improvement, and shared responsibility.

Another important finding is that the global dominance of the performance-based model has had deeper consequences than previously thought in terms of not only outcomes, but also school culture and teaching practice. In many contexts, systems based on standardized tests, rankings, and incentives have reinforced competitive dynamics, narrowed the curriculum, and shifted the focus from educational processes to indicators. Assessment and accountability are not inherently negative; rather, design matters, and certain formats can undermine what they seek to improve, especially in contexts of inequality.

We have also learned that the effects of accountability are not universal but depend heavily on context. The chapters in the book demonstrate that the same policies can generate different results based on the education system’s history, level of institutional trust, regulation of teaching work, and social structure. This calls into question the idea that certain models can be considered transferable without adaptation. It compels us to view educational accountability as a context-specific framework designed according to each system’s actual capabilities and the goals pursued.

Based on this information, the most relevant open-ended question for us is how to build forms of accountability that strengthen professional responsibility, social participation, and a commitment to equity, rather than being limited to external control. Reviewed evidence suggests the most promising approaches combine evaluation and collaboration, incorporate community voices, and view accountability as part of education’s public mission, not just an obligation to report. Thus, the future challenge is not to set accountability aside but to shift it from a culture of surveillance to a culture of shared responsibility oriented toward educational improvement.

We believe this requires significant effort from academic and political perspectives, which is why partnerships are needed to drive progress. As academics, we must ask ourselves why our robust evidence is not sufficiently impacting decision-making and consider how we can improve.

Why Is Meaningful Educational Change So Difficult to Achieve? The Re-Educated Podcast with Goutham Yegappan and Thomas Hatch

What if the most important part of education is learning how to live with uncertainty? That’s the question that Goutham Yegappan pursues in the 8th season of his Re-Educated Podcast. In the latest episode, he discusses these issues with IEN Editor Thomas Hatch, who highlights the multi-layered problems that make it so difficult to improve schools on a large-scale. For previous interviews, see “Thomas Hatch on The Education We Need and the Future We Can’t Predict” Getting Smart podcast (2021); “What Type of Education Do We Need for a Future We Can’t Predict?The Getting Unstuck Podcast (2021); Mapping New York City’s ‘School Improvement Industry’ CPRE’s Research Minutes Podcast.

++++++++++++++++++

Thomas Hatch on the Re-Educated Podcast with Goutham Yegappan (YouTube video); Spotify: Apple Podcasts

02:10 – Thomas Hatch’s Path into Education Research

06:45 – Understanding the History of Education Reform

12:30 – Why Promising Reforms Often Fail & The Complexity of Systemic Change 

18:40 – The Architecture of Education Systems

24:55 – The Challenge of Scaling Innovation

31:10 – Policy, Practice, and the Classroom Reality

37:20 – Accountability and Its Unintended Consequences

43:35 – Improvement Science and Systemic Change

49:15 – Rethinking School Reform for the Future

55:10 – Lessons for Educators and Policymakers

58:30 – Closing Reflections

Foundations for Lasting Educational Change: Lead the Change Interviews from the American Educational Research Association

This week IEN is highlighting Lead the Change’s post featuring this years presenters in their Educational Change SIG sessions. This year’s 10 sessions highlight different contexts, perspectives, and methodological approaches to educational change. The issue features a small slice of the symposia and paper presenters. This post includes presenters from the session titled: “Foundations for Lasting Equity and Transformation: Policy, Organizations, and Professional Practice.”  These interviews are part of the Lead the Change series produced by Series Co-Editors Jackie Pedota & Soobin Choi and colleagues from AERA’s Educational Change Special Interest Group. The full interviews can be found on the LtC website

group photo

Faculty Cluster Hiring as a Catalyst for Racial Equity in Academic Departments — Román Liera (RL) Montclair State University, Rosa M. Acevedo (RM) University of Pittsburgh, Baili Park (BP) University of Pittsburgh, Aireale J. Rodgers (AR)
University of Wisconsin – Madison, Heather McCambly (HM) University of Pittsburgh

Dr. Román Liera
Dr. Heather McCambly 
Dr. Aireale J. Rodgers
Baili Park, M.A. 
Dr Rosa Maria Acevedo

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work to inform policy and practice?

RL, RM, BP, AR & HM: In an increasingly hostile sociopolitical climate that actively defunds and undermines racial equity efforts, university-based faculty cluster hiring (FCH), designed to recruit faculty cohorts around shared research themes to advance interdisciplinarity and diversity, has not been immune to anti-DEI backlash. Drawing on the modes of reproduction framework (Anderson & Colyvas, 2021), our analysis examines how whiteness is animated and potentially disrupted at the department level within FCH implementation. By tracing inequitable outcomes to their sources, whether exclusionary criteria, departmental values, or individual racial schemas, we illuminate the specific sites where racialized mechanisms operate.

Our work suggests that the field of Educational Change must recognize that sustainable, equity-focused transformation requires more than rhetorical commitment or effective hiring practices. Institutional change agents must attend to the institutional routines that reproduce whiteness even within well-intentioned initiatives. Practically, this means embedding equity-minded evaluation criteria into formal policies, creating accountability structures, and designing post-hire support rather than relying on faculty of color’s precarious labor (McCambly et al., 2025). Our findings underscore that equity innovations are vulnerable to co-optation without sustained investment in the structural conditions that enable their flourishing. Lasting change requires dismantling the modes of reproduction that animate whiteness, not merely diversifying within them.


Middle Leaders and the Illusion of Reform: Unpacking Faux Comprehension and Pseudo-Understanding in Curriculum Change — Chun Sing Maxwell Ho (CH) The Education University of Hong Kong, Chiu Kit Lucas Liu (CL) The Education University of Hong Kong

Lucas Chiu-kit Liu 
Dr Chun Sing Maxwell Ho

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work to inform policy and practice?

CH & CL: Meaningful educational change depends not only on policies, timelines, and accountability routines, but on the quiet, caring work middle leaders do with educators—checking understanding, building trust, and creating safe spaces to question and refine practice. 

When care is replaced by tight control and a chase for ‘efficiency,’ schools risk ‘faux comprehension’ among teachers, in which they appear aligned yet quietly prioritize their own aims (which is not necessarily problematic). When care gives way to hands-off optimism, schools drift into ‘pseudo-understanding,’ a sincere but flawed enactment sustained by vague goals and overconfidence. 

To move beyond surface-level claims of success, reform should adopt a dual learner-centered stance: student-centered (clear non-negotiables anchored in educational purpose) and teacher-centered (bounded autonomy, structured sensemaking cycles, and timely support and feedback). Attending to both learners surfaces misunderstandings early, aligns pedagogy with purpose, and yields an impact visible in students’ work and in teachers’ growth.
Drawing on Sengupta-Irving et al. (2023), we suggest situating the present in the context of the past as we struggle toward an imagined future. Our comrades in Black studies teach us that we find hope in deep study and struggle (Harney & Moten, 2013; Hartman, 2019; Kelley, 2018). Thus in the context of our symposium, we invite attendees to think with us about the particularities of present DEI and/or antiracist change efforts across higher education in the context of their historical emergence, while remaining them attuned to what the future of these change efforts must become to build a just system of higher education. Practicing how to design change efforts that stand the test of time demands explicit attention to multiple timescales, and we offer that as an important takeaway through our symposium.


The Role of Absorptive Capacity for ICT-knowledge management in schools: Does collaboration matter?
— Sandra Fischer-Schöneborn (SF) IU International University of Applied Sciences, Marcus Pietsch (MP) Leuphana University – Lueneburg, Chris Brown (CB) University of Southampton, Burak Aydin (BA) Ege University, Stephen W. MacGregor (SM) University of Calgary

Dr Sandra Fischer-Schöneborn
Chris Brown
Dr Stephen MacGregor

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work to inform policy and practice?

SF, MP, CB, BA & SM: This study examined the role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) -knowledge absorptive capacity (ACAP) for technology integration (TI) in schools. The aim was to contribute to the international debate on ACAP as a critical factor for organizational learning in schools and for the implementation of innovations in schools by integrating external knowledge generated in networks. 

Findings indicate (among others) that ICT ACAP has a positive effect on TI in schools and serves as a mediator in the relationship between external knowledge and TI. Additionally, the impact of ICT-ACAP on TI is contingent upon the presence and efficacy of knowledge-sharing mechanisms within the school, as well as the extent to which schools engage in collaborative efforts with competitors (known as coopetition). 

These results have implications for policymakers and educational leaders, who could prioritize building ACAP and fostering collaborative networks, such as research-practice partnerships or professional learning networks, to create more adaptable and innovative school environments. 


Leading Educational Change by Learning from Failure in Networks – Stephen W. MacGregor (SM) University of Calgary, Marcus Pietsch (MP) Leuphana University – Lueneburg, Sharon Friesen (SF) University of Calgary.

Dr. Stephen MacGregor
Dr. Sharon Friesen

Lead the Change (LtC): What are some ideas that you hope the field of Educational Change and the audience at AERA can learn from your work to inform policy and practice?

SM, SF, & MP: In our study of leaders implementing multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) for student mental health through a cross-sector network (MacGregor & Friesen, 2025), a consistent pattern was that most setbacks were not caused by “bad actors” but by process and capacity problems: fragmented implementation, weak data infrastructure, uneven rollout, and too much work for the available people and services, especially in rural communities. 

First, treat implementation as facilitation, not compliance. Leaders need time, authority, and routines to align the innovation, the people affected, and the local context, and to surface small failures early before they harden into routine. Second, build the infrastructure, including shared measures and data-aggregation pathways that enable schools to learn from patterns rather than anecdotes and to reduce duplication and drift. Third, protect purposeful risk. 

We saw little evidence of exploratory testing in MTSS, which signals a field squeezed by short funding cycles and public accountability. Create “safe-to-try” zones inside MTSS work: small pilots with explicit learning aims and rapid feedback. Networks can host this work by normalizing candid failure talk and turning it into collective problem-solving.

Who’s happy Now? Scanning the headlines for the results of the latest Word Happiness Report

All five Nordic countries and Costa Rica occupy the top slots on the latest World Happiness Survey, but life satisfaction of those under 25 in English countries has dropped sharply in the past 10 years. What’s going on? This scan of the headlines from around the world gives a glimpse of the results from the latest World Happiness survey and explores the relationship between children’s social media use and happiness. For other recent stories from IEN about children’s wellbeing see: Could concerns about the academic pressure on students in China lead to real changes in conventional schooling? Stability & change in the education system in China (Part 4), Engagement, Wellbeing, and Innovation in the Wake of the School Closures in Vietnam:  A Conversation with Chi Hieu Nguyen (Part 2); A view from Poland (Part 2) – Jacek Pyżalski discusses the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on students, teachers and wellbeing; Thirteen insights into teacher wellbeing and mental health in England; Headlines around the world: PISA (2015) Well-Being Report

++++++++++++++++++

World Happiness Report 2026

Mapped: The Happiest Countries in the World, Visual Capitalist

Ranked: The World’s Richest Countries vs. the Happiest Countries, Visual Capitalist

A Nordic nation is the world’s happiest country for the ninth year in a row, CNN

The 25 Happiest Countries In The World, According To The 2026 World Happiness Report, Forbes

World Happiness Report highlights social media’s negative impact, ranks Finland as happiest country, NBC News

Social media makes people unhappy — World Happiness Report, Deutsche Welle

What the World Happiness Report reveals about social media and the world’s happiest country, AP

Australia

Australia falls to new low in World Happiness Rankings, 9 News

The authors of the World Happiness Report praised Australia’s social media ban, 9 News

Canada

Where Canada falls on the 2026 World Happiness Report, CTV News

Cyprus

Cyprus falls to 62nd in world happiness ranking as decade-long slide continues, In-Cyprus Phile News

Finland

Finland ranks as “world’s happiest country” for 9th year in a row, YLE

France

‘Harm at a population level’: World Happiness Report flags social media’s negative impact, France24

Germany

World Happiness Report: Finland tops the list – where does Germany stand? Deutschland

Greece

Greece and Cyprus Slide in 2026 World Happiness Report, Greek Reporter

Greece experienced one of the most dramatic declines in the region, plummeting 21 places to 85th, Greek Reporter

India

World Happiness Report 2026: Finland and Afghanistan maintain top and bottom positions respectively; India improves ranking, The Times of India

World Happiness Report: Only place Pakistan is ‘smiling,’ India at 116, Herald GOA

Israel

Despite war, Israel ranks 8th in global happiness survey, same as last year, Times of Israel

Luxembourg

Luxembourg ranks ninth among world’s happiest countries, Luxembourg Times

Netherlands

Dutch drop in World Happiness ranking, social media aid decline, Dutch News

New Zealand

Kiwis aged 15-24 lag in world happiness rankings, 1 News

Philippines

Philippines inches up to 56th in global happiness index, B World Online

Romania

World Happiness Report 2026: Finland tops ranking for ninth year, Romania climbs one place, Romania Insider

Romania Insider

Sri Lanka

World Happiness Report 2026: Sri Lanka ranked among world’s unhappiest countries, Adaderana LK

Turkey

Turkey ranks 94th in world happiness report as Nordic countries top list again, Turkish Minute

United Arab Emirates

UAE first in Arab world and 21st globally in World Happiness Index, Gulf of Today

United Kingdom

Happiest countries 2026: Finland tops list as UK drops six places, BBC

What Conditions Could Foster More Balanced School Experiences? Stability & Change in the Education System in China (Part 5)

Can the changing economic, political, and demographic conditions in China combine with growing concerns about students’ mental health and wellbeing to create a more balanced education system? Thomas Hatch explores this question in the final post in a series that shares his reflections on his conversations with Chinese educators and visits to Chinese schools over the past two years. The first post in this series explored some of the “niches of possibility” within the conventional Chinese curriculum and schedule that may foster the development of more student-centered approaches. The second post reviewed changes in educational policy in China that may have created some additional flexibility for schools to pursue innovative educational approaches and reinforced exam pressures at the same time. The third post discussed how one experimental school is trying to take advantage of AI to support students’ learning and development and the fourth considered recent efforts to respond to growing concerns about students’ mental health.

For other posts on education and educational change in China see “Boundless Learning in an Early Childhood Center in Shenzen, China;””Supporting healthy development of rural children in China: The Sunshine Kindergartens of the Beijing Western Sunshine Rural Development Foundation;” The Recent Development of Innovative Schools in China – An Interview with Zhe Zhang (Part 1 & Part 2);” “The Desire for Innovation is Always There: A Conversation with Yong Zhao on the Evolution of the Chinese Education System (Part 1 & Part 2);”“Surprise, Controversy, and the “Double Reduction Policy” in China;””Launching a New School in China: An Interview with Wen Chen from Moonshot Academy;”and ”New Gaokao in Zhejiang China: Carrying on with Challenges


The elite schools I visited in China demonstrate the kinds of innovative practices that can fit into the Chinese education system even with its exam-based focus and intense academic pressures. At the same time, the academic pressures continue to constrain any attempt to change instruction and spread more student-centered pedagogies on a wide scale. Although it seems that there may be no way out of the “trap” of increasing academic pressure, it’s also clear that the Chinese education systems has changed substantially over the past thirty years, in concert with significant developments in the demographic, economic, technological and political conditions in China.  These realities left me wondering: Could China leverage the changing societal conditions to create more balanced educational experiences for future generations of students?

Changing conditions in China over the past 30 years

In China, the massive expansion of education at every level, and particularly the growth in the number of university places could have helped to lessen some of the exam-based pressure on students. However, those developments took place along with the massive growth in the Chinese population to over 1.3 billion people by 2010. At the same time, almost 800 million people have lifted themselves out of poverty and China’s middle class, now the largest in the world, includes over 500 million people.  Even with the substantial increases in the number of colleges and universities, those developments mean that many more parents aspire to get their children into a handful of top institutions of higher education and many more students are competing for those limited places.

Further fueling the pressure is a substantial rural-urban divide, with students in rural areas experiencing much more difficult basic conditions and much less chance of getting a good education, getting a good score on the Gaokao, or getting into college. Although most villages had a primary school of some kind in the 1990’s, as birth rates fell and rural parents migrated to cities to take advantage of the economic opportunities, almost three-quarters of all primary schools – around 300,000 – were closed. As a consequence, some children have to travel long distances to school and others spend the school week at boarding schools, including what are estimated to be some 60 million “left-behind children” whose parents could not take them when they migrated to find work. As of 2015, there were about 100,000 boarding schools in rural China, with an estimated 33 million children living in them, including about 12% of primary school children and 50% of rural secondary school students. Crucially, the difficult conditions contribute to the gap between urban and rural students in high school completion and access to higher education. 

Recent changes in birth rates, employment, and college enrollment 

But conditions are changing again – fast. Births in China have now declined so much that the birth rate in 2023 was about half of what it was in 2015 only eight years earlier. The population decline in 2023 was also twice as large as it was in 2022, the first year the population dropped in 60 years. China’s economic growth has now slowed to one of its lowest rates in more than three decades; a real estate crisis has contributed to plunging house prices; and unemployment among youth has been so bad that in 2021 more than 70% of those 16 – 24 year-olds who were unemployed in Chinese cities had a college degree. By 2023, once the overall youth unemployment rate passed 21% China temporarily stopped reporting the figures. In 2024, with a new measure that excludes students, youth unemployment still stood at over 14%. At the same time, the expansion of higher education has continued while employment opportunities for post-secondary graduates have dropped. In 2024, only half of the 11.58 million graduates have gotten a job or gained admission to postgraduate study. Recognizing that problem, the Chinese government has encouraged universities to admit many more masters and doctoral students, leading enrollments in graduate programs to double between 2010 and 2021.

Number of total enrollments for graduate students (2010–2021). Graduate Education in China

Unfortunately, the glut of college graduates, in turn, has contributed to diminished job prospects for many of those who worked so hard for good grades and high scores on the Gaokao. As one researcher at China’s National Institute of Education Sciences put it, college graduates should lower their expectations and look for jobs in sectors such as food or parcel delivery; other reports claimed masters degree recipients were taking on jobs like trash collectors. These changing circumstances challenge the very idea that schools are a vehicle for upward social mobility As one joke puts it: “The mortgage is nearly 10 million, the spouse does not work, and the second child is studying abroad. This is simply the three things that will cause the middle class to fall back into poverty.” Given these developments, some researchers see a recent drop in the number of graduate school applicants as a “return to rationality” Perhaps, the latest generation of Chinese students are beginning to recognize that postgraduate study can no longer guarantee them a better job.  

Under these demographic and economic conditions, it’s possible to imagine scenarios where the seemingly inevitable increases in academic pressure and competition might subside somewhat. After years of urbanization that exacerbated the rural-urban gap in educational and economic prospects, a “reverse” migration and a redistribution of the population back to smaller cities and rural areas may be underway. Rural – urban migration had already slowed down before the COVID pandemic, and China’s statistics bureau reported that there were almost two and a half million fewer migrant workers in urban areas in 2021 than there were in 2019, with more migrants staying closer to home. That reversal has been aided by the development of the digital economy and opportunities for remote work as well as by longstanding restrictions that make it difficult, if not impossible for migrant workers to access housing, schooling for their children, and other benefits.  

Since 2012, the Chinese leadership has also made reducing the gap between urban and rural development a priority, and the government has supported investment in rural areas through a variety of policies. In 2015, for example, the General Office of the State Council of China issued the “Opinions on Supporting Migrant Workers and Others Returning to their Hometowns to Start Their Own Business” to encourage migrant workers, college students, and retired soldiers to return to their hometowns to start new businesses. in 2017 those efforts took off with the announcement of a “rural revitalization” strategy. That strategy seeks to make China self-sufficient in terms of food production and consumption and focuses on modernizing agriculture and rural areas by 2035. Policies and investments are designed to accomplish critical tasks like ensuring the grain supply, developing high-quality rural industries, increasing farmers’ incomes, and fostering a beautiful countryside. The strategy is encouraging a generation of “’new farmers,’ mostly well-educated young people with new ideas and skills,” to move from big cities to the countryside. In 2021, 1.6 million more people returned to the countryside than in 2019, with the government reporting that more than half of the entrepreneurial projects it supported focused on using livestreaming and other online methods to sell products. 

Taken together, these changes could encourage many more students and their families to stay where they are and to take advantage of the massive growth in higher education outside the major cities. With a decreasing population more distributed around the country there could be fewer students competing for an expanded number of places in colleges and universities. At the same time, if more youth recognize that academic competition is not yielding the access to elite universities or job prospects that previous generations expected – and they see that more studying does not necessarily lead to better results – academic pressure could subside further. 

New developments in curriculum, technology, and assessment?

A new set of curriculum standards and new textbooks may also help to fuel this shift, providing a policy context that can encourage many schools to pursue more student-centered learning. As one description of the changes put it, beginning in 2024 with the initial introduction of new textbooks, “compulsory education will enter a new era in which new curriculum standards, new textbooks, and new classrooms are mutually compatible, from the past ‘educating for scores’ and ‘educating for abilities’ to the comprehensive deepening of ‘educating people.’”

The new curriculum and textbooks continue to highlight the learning of subjects but promote a change in focus from “fragmented class objectives” to more integrated and systematic unit objectives, a new emphasis on the transfer and application of knowledge, and a transition from “practicing questions to solving problems.” The math textbook, for example, has added two “mini-projects” for each semester that are supposed to take up at least 3 lessons. The changes in the English textbooks create another niche of possibility for more interdisciplinary and student-centered learning by spending less time on grammar and organizing each unit around theme-based projects. Changes being made in the questions for the Gaokao to focus more on applications of knowledge and on problem-solving rather than on memorization could play an important part in this shift. 

Technological developments could also facilitate the development and spread of innovative practices by facilitating more personalized learning experiences and contributing to more powerful assessments. Although these new technologies and AI could be used to teach students more and more traditional content and skills more quickly, they could also help to make conventional instruction much more efficient. As the efforts of the teachers at the Suzhou Experimental Primary School demonstrated, AI could also create more space and time for student-centered learning experiences and to support the development of a much wider range of interests and abilities and student wellbeing. Of course, such technological development in schools depends on close cooperation between AI and tech companies and Chinese schools as well as the Chinese government’s continuing efforts to support digitization of schools and teaching in remote rural areas. 

As I have argued in “The power of condensing the curriculum,” all of these demographic, economic, political, technological and educational changes could create the opportunity and incentives to reduce the time spent on exam preparation and create more balanced school experiences. All of these are enormous “if’s,” however. Predicting generational attitudes, in particular, is far from an exact science and certainly not something to count on. As Yong Zhao, a well-known expert on educational change and China told me in my interview with him before my first trip, “China will not drop the Gaokao,” and taking the “tang ping” route for many is a risk that could have consequences like social isolation, diminished economic potential, and a lower standard of living. 

A perfect storm or just another typhoon? Changing society, changing beliefs, changing schools

In the end, real changes in the academic pressure, and expanding support for a wider range of abilities and student mental health and wellbeing in China, as in the US and education systems, depends on the “perfect storm” of changes in education policies, technologies, economic and demographic conditions, and changes in the deep-seated values and beliefs that sustain conventional school practices. 

As important as the Gaokao may be, by the time I left China I was convinced that the Gaokao is just an expression and manifestation of a basic belief that those who score the highest, those who work the hardest, deserve the riches they accumulate. In that sense, China may not be that different from the United States, where that same kind of belief in individual achievement sustains a highly inequitable system and the conventional modes of instruction and schooling it relies on. 

As Daniel Markovitz argues in The Meritocracy Trap, in the US, success in school and in life is generally seen as a product of an individual’s talent and effort. Similarly, failure – in terms of poor grades, the inability to get into a good college, get a good job, or make a good living – is often cast as a personal failing rather than a manifestation of systemic inequalities. From this perspective, those who score high on exams, secure admission to an elite college, become CEO’s or make billions of dollars deserve the rewards and riches they have attained. My conversations with many of my colleagues and many students in China seemed to echo these beliefs, as they noted that competitions and rankings, including the Gaokao, provide the best way to identify those who will be most successful despite the pressure and the problems it produces. Those beliefs also contribute to an internalization of failure and feelings of shame, with many students worrying that with poor performance in school or on the Gaokao they are letting their families down. 

Changing any education system depends on understanding the complex interplay of historical, geographic, demographic, economic, political, and cultural conditions that produced the schools, policies, and practices that operate today. But it also means confronting those conditions, while embroiled in them. We can look for leverage and open up opportunities for people to expand their views, question their values and beliefs, and develop alternative points of view that might support the emergence of new institutions, structures, and practices over time.  Perhaps these generational changes can support the emergence of a hybrid “East/West” approach to education that provides a better balance between a focus on academic achievement the development of a wider range of skills and students’ wellbeing.  

When disruption replaces support: Scanning the headlines for recent developments in US education policy

This week, IEN rounds up a wave of articles over the past 2 months about the effects of the policy changes in the first year of the current US administration. Firings, slashed budgets, lawsuits, immigration raids dominate the headlines. Despite the challenges, Congress just passed a 2026 budget that rejected the administration’s proposals to cut billions of dollars in education funding. For recent related posts see AI, Cellphones, Literacy, Students’ Mental Health, Political Turmoil and More: Scanning the Headlines for the Top Education Stories for 2025and Reform, Resistance, and More Turbulence? Scanning the Headlines for Predictions for Education in 2026

President Trump’s First Year: Education in America, U.S. Department of Education

8 takeaways from the first year of this Trump administration, EducationNC

What’s the Trump administration’s theory of action for improving schools? ChalkBeat

Trump 2.0: A sea change for K-12, K-12 Dive

Education has seen unprecedented changes in Trump’s second term, WPR

Brown Center scholars reflect on education after 1 year of the Trump administration, Brookings

11 numbers that capture the Trump effect on education, Hechinger Report

From head start to civil rights, 8 ways Trump reshaped education in just 1 Year, The74

Protesters demonstrated outside the U.S. Department of Education in March after the first round of layoffs affecting over 1,300 staff. (Bryan Dozier / Middle East Images / Middle East Images via AFP)

See all the lawsuits Filed Over Trump’s Education Policies, Education Week

Funding cuts & other disruptions

The Education Department’s efforts to fire staff cost over $28 million, watchdog says (NPR)

In Trump’s First Year, at Least $12 Billion in School Funding Disruptions, EducationWeek

Trump Slashed Billions for Education in 2025: See a List of Affected Grants, EducationWeek

Investigations and a Billion-Dollar ‘Shakedown’: How Trump Targeted Higher Education, The New York Times

See Which Schools Trump’s Education Department Is Investigating and Why, Education Week

What Trump’s $100,000 Visa Fee Could Mean for Schools, EducationWeek

Trump administration drops appeal in D.E.I. schools lawsuit, New York Times

Education Department doubles down on anti-DEI efforts, K-12 Dive

Expanded Private School Choice

Federal Program Will Bring Private School Choice to At Least 4 New States, EducationWeek

Federal Private School Choice: Which States Are Opting In? EducationWeek

Trump administration pushes for school choice expansion amid declining test scores, ABC3340

What you need to know about private school choice, K-12 Dive

As School Choice Goes Universal, What New Research Is Showing, EducationWeek

Private school choice could ‘undermine’ special education gains, COPAA says, K-12 Dive

Trump’s national school voucher program could mean a boom in Christian educationThe Hechinger Report

Anti-immigration & ICE in schools 

Tracker: ICE activity on K-12 school grounds, K-12 Dive

Minneapolis Public Schools community members demonstrate in Minneapolis, Minn., on Jan. 9, 2026, following reports of federal immigration agents on school grounds in the city..Kerem Yücel/Minnesota Public Radio/AP

Immigration enforcement gets closer and closer to schools. The effects are wide-reaching, Chalkbeat

Federal immigration enforcement near schools disrupts attendance, traumatizes students and damages their academic performance, The Conversation

Parental stress, raids, and isolation: How immigration raids traumatize even the youngest children, The Hechinger Report

 ‘Band-Aid Virtual Learning’: How Some Schools Respond When ICE Comes to Town, EducationWeek 

Kids, staff, parents detained: How federal activity in Minnesota is affecting schools and students, MPR News

U.S. Border Patrol agents detain a person on the ground near Roosevelt High School during dismissal time on Jan. 7 in Minneapolis. Kerem Yücel | MPR News

ICE’S assault on a Minnesota school district, The New Yorker

Whistles and walkie-talkies: Minneapolis keeps guard over schools amid ICE arrests, Reuters

Twin Cities Parents and Educators Describe Terror of ICE Raids, Call for Help, The74

ICE detained a 5-year old Minnesota boy. School leader says agents used him as ‘bait’, MPR News

The ICE surge is fueling fear and anxiety among Twin Cities children, NPR

As ICE Targets Twin Cities Schools & Bus Stops: Even Citizens Keep Kids Home, The74

Minneapolis Schools Shut Down for 2 Days in Wake of ICE Clashes, Fatal Shooting, The74

Twin Cities Schools Offer Online Classes, The74

St. Paul schools leader: 1 in 4 students in virtual learning amid ICE surge; district tweaks grading, K-12 Dive

‘There are kids not going to school’: fear of ICE is keeping children from classes in Connecticut, The Guardian

Portland Public Schools says attendance has dropped since start of ICE operation, WGME 13

‘People shouldn’t live in fear’: Denver students protest ICE actions under Trump, ChalkBeat

Hundreds of Texas public school students walk out to protest ICE killings The Texas Tribune

Utah students walk out to protest ICE tactics: ‘Fascism has got to go’, The Salt Lake City Tribune

Thousands of students walk out of Arizona schools to protest ICE, Arizona’s Family 5

Indiana students hold ICE walkouts, Indiana Star

Thousands of students across the Bay Area walked out of schools in protest of ICE, ABC 7

Students walk out of schools in Knoxville to protest ICE, NBC 10