Humanistic educational environments for the age of AI
Thomas Lickona
Marvin W. Berkowitz · James Arthur Andrew Peterson · Pepe Menéndez Joanne Quinn · José Víctor Orón
A good education is a good character education
Director of Impuls Educació
Dear reader,
‘How can we help our young people to understand who they are and what they want to contribute to the world?’ This is how Professor Edward Brooks, from the Oxford Character Project, opens a window to reflect on education in times of change. Today, artificial intelligence is redefining everyday life and values, challenging schools to educate in not only knowledge but also integrity, human awareness and the social role of citizens.
In this edition, Diàlegs would like to invite you to join our experts in taking a closer look at how to reassess the humanising role of schools. Joanne Quinn believes that deep, life-transferable learning that contributes to real improvement in the world requires the development of critical thinking, character and citizenship. To Quinn, deep learning implies social engagement and a personal identity geared at the common good.
José Víctor Orón reminds us that every educational experience should be an opportunity for students to find what they really want. From a more philosophical perspective, Francesc Torralba insists that education should encompass the person’s physical, emotional, social and spiritual development. In a world where values seem to be fading away, he believes it is essential to foster virtues such as judiciousness and boldness in young people so they can find their way in times of uncertainty.
From a standpoint critical of AI, Carlos Magro warns of the danger of considering technology a panacea for all kinds of problems. The idea that education has to be humanised within the omnipresence of technology encourages Pepe Menéndez to defend schools in which critical thinking and freedom are encouraged. Meanwhile, José María Torralba is committed to a form of education in which young people can reflect on essential issues of human existence by reading great books.
Andrew Peterson and James Arthur of the Jubilee Centre stress the importance of character education in an increasingly fragmented world. Both believe that virtues such as honesty and resilience are crucial in forming responsible and committed citizens. They point out that character education helps young people to not only find purpose in life but also contribute to a more cohesive society.
Finally, from the Become project, Juan P. Dabdoub and Aitor R. Salaverría propose redesigning an educational school culture that is committed to students’ integral development and well-being. And they suggest we rethink daily educational interaction and learning practices so that they foster personal character and identity. In an era dominated by technology, Diàlegs seeks to inspire reflections to ‘make things happen in the schools of today and tomorrow’ and once again asserts that education cannot lose its essence of forming human beings capable of being in the world with humanity and purpose.
I hope you enjoy it.
INTERVIEW WITH JUAN P. DABDOUB & AITOR R. SALAVERRÍA project
INTERVIEW WITH FRANCESC TORRALBA
INTERVIEW WITH MARVIN W BERKOWITZ
EDITORIAL BOARD
Management and interviews
Ana Moreno
Publications
Jordi Viladrosa
Original Design
Guillem Batchellí
Design and Communication
Maria Font
Illustrations
Maria Yuling Martorell
Translation
Incyta Multilenguage
Editorial department and subscriptions
Impuls Educació
Avda. Montserrat Roig, 3
08195 Sant Cugat del Vallès revista@impulseducacio.org https://impulseducacio.org/
ISSN 2938-2122
DL B7336-2023
Juan P. Dabdoub González (Pamplona) is Professor and PhD in Education Theory in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Navarra. He is a member of the Education, Citizenship and Character Research Group at the same university; the Secretary of the Association for Moral Education; and a Scholar Affiliate of the Center for Character and Citizenship at the University of Missouri-St Louis. He has been codirector of Become since 2022. He has been researching and promoting character education with a focus on leadership around the world with the support of the Templeton World Charity Foundation since 2015.
Aitor R. Salaverría (Pamplona) is a doctoral student in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Navarra working on a thesis aimed at researching and promoting character development in university communities. He has been the co-director of Become since 2022. He was the educational director of the Colegio Mayor Belagua until 2021, where he worked for the last ten years. He is a collaborator of the Education, Citizenship and Character Research Group at the University of Navarra.
by Ana Moreno Salvo
Education seeks to prepare new generations for adult life in the world and society they will live in. What does character education contribute to the formation of future citizens of the twenty-first century?
We are often asked this question: Why should we commit to character education? Is it really necessary to add more to what we already do in schools now? Do we really have to?
When asked this, we tend to answer that the approach to the question is wrong. Rather than thinking about ‘What does character education contribute?’, we try to make people realise that it is inevitable. Schools are influencing their students’ character development whether they want to or not, consciously
or unconsciously. More than 2,000 years ago, Aristotle said that the mere presence of adults influences children’s character, especially if the relationship is as close and prolonged as it is between teachers and students. As Marvin Berkowitz often says, you cannot ‘not educate’ character.
Therefore, rather than considering whether or not to
Schools are influencing the character development of their students, consciously or unconsciously
engage in character education, we want to help schools realise that they are already doing so. Based on this conviction, we try to guide a common reflection on how we are, in fact, influencing our students’ development. The goal is to review what we already do so that it strategically and intentionally supports people’s growth.
How was Become founded, what is its purpose and who is it aimed at?
Become originated as a spin-off of the research and development work we have been doing for the past ten years in the Citizenship and Character Education Group at the University of Navarra in conjunction with the Center for Character and Citizenship at the University of
Missouri-St Louis, and with the generous support of the Templeton World Charity Foundation.
We are an organisation that wants to help people become who they are called to be. We seek to help communities create the conditions that promote their members’ personal growth, character development and well-being. We do this by adopting a researchbased, common-sense approach to restore many organisations to their original, noble meaning. The work we have done in the field of education has led us to partner with institutions interested in promoting people’s integral development. We have worked with schools in different countries, such as Spain, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Colombia, Slovakia, Croatia, Ecuador and Peru. In 2025, we plan to start in Chile, the Philippines, Finland, Estonia, the Czech Republic and Sweden.
We believe that the principles that can make a school an ideal place for people to grow could also inform the daily life of a university, a residence, a company, a hospital or even a family. This is why in the coming years we want to work to be able to support organisations beyond the school environment.
In the case of character education, why do you focus on leaders rather than teachers?
Research suggests that the culture of the school is the most important factor in promoting character development. Schools often have a range of initiatives to promote student growth, such as service learning, collaborative learning, classes on virtue, great books programmes, one-to-one tutoring, mindfulness activities and so on. We try to help them to see that what is really ‘shaping’ students is the ordinary life of the school, which affects their development on a daily basis. Rather than thinking about
‘doing things’ to promote character development, we should look at the way we are and the way we do the things we already do: What are our priorities? What kind of relationships are created at school? What are the motivations that drive us? What is the level of involvement of students and teachers?
To paraphrase Paul Houston, we believe that ‘schools are perfectly designed for the results we are getting. If we don’t like the results, we have to redesign schools.’ In this sense, promoting the integral development of people within institutions requires a redesign of the ordinary elements that shape their daily existence and dynamics. This redesign has to prioritise the individual in their tasks and raison d’être more than results, utility or productivity.
We focus on leaders because they are the ones who have the power to take decisions that have a significant impact on the culture of the school community. These decisions are often preceded by personal change. The work that teachers do to promote individuals’ growth is irreplaceable, but we decided to start with leaders for strategic reasons. Without a good culture, teachers’ efforts are unlikely to bear fruit.
You talk about the importance of redesigning communities. What conditions should an educational community have in order to provide good character education? Before answering, I think I should clarify something: the conditions for good character education are the same as the conditions for good education. There is no need to add something else to education. Many of the movements that have emerged in recent decades, such as character education, personalised education, socialemotional education or positive youth development, are nothing more than attempts to remind us
of something essential to education that has been neglected for one reason or another. Is it possible to educate without taking character into account? Is it possible to educate without taking into account that children are people? And without taking emotions into account? This is nothing new or contemporary. Way back when, Aristotle said (quoting Plato) that a good education was manifested in our ability to ‘rejoice and grieve with what is right’. Rather than adding to education, the goal is for education to fulfil its purpose.
We say that the design of education today is especially geared towards two objectives: to know more things and to know how to do more things. Without disregarding these two objectives, at Become we invite a redesign of education to prioritise three essential goals for a person to become the best version of themselves: well-being, integrity and identity. By well-being, we mean promoting the conditions needed for people to be physically and psychologically well. The level of well-being answers the question ‘How am I doing?’ People cannot develop properly if they do not feel safe and loved or if they are on the verge of collapse from exhaustion.
Integrity encompasses the spectrum of morals, ethics, character development, virtues and values. This level answers the question ‘What am I like?’ The goal is to design education in such a way that it can promote the cultivation of virtues and stable dispositions to do good.
The redesign of educational communities has to prioritise everyone’s well-being, integrity and identity
Finally, the identity level answers the question ‘Who am I?’ It is one of the questions we will continue to answer every day of our lives. Who do I want to be? Who am I called to be? You may already have all the virtues and feel inclined to do many good things, but that is not enough to answer what good things you will do with your life, bearing in mind that you cannot do them all.
What are the distinguishing features of Become compared to other training models?
We propose five arguments that characterise our formative approach and, to some extent, distinguish it from other initiatives. ONE: WE FOCUS ON WHAT CAN BE CHANGED
At the beginning of our programmes, principals are often asked what they think needs to change for their schools to improve. They often respond that they need better students, better teachers, better families, better facilities or even better politicians. These perspectives are quite frustrating for them because these things are unlikely to change in the near future, nor do they have the ability to significantly influence them. Most principals will have the same students, teachers, families, facilities and politicians. If they continue to focus on changing what they cannot change, they will become exhausted, indifferent or cynical about any hope of education improving. Become does not focus
on aspects that cannot be changed, or ones that educators cannot change because they’re beyond their reach. Instead, we suggest focusing on the aspects that the leaders and community members can change. Redesigning the way a school operates, redesigning its practices and strategies, is something that can be promoted and achieved by most school leaders in any cultural setting.
TWO: WE START WITH THE LEADERS
As we said before, Become focuses on leaders to initiate and sustain the redesign of educational communities to generate a culture that effectively promotes students’ character development. The first thing principals can change or
improve to promote a better culture in their schools is their own character and leadership style. If leaders do not begin by cultivating the character they want to see in their teachers, staff and students, they will likely fail to promote good character development regardless of the message, curriculum, programme or strategy. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, ‘What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say’. Principals are often unaware of how they can improve their character or what shortcomings they need to rectify, and they may be reluctant to change the way they lead or even unaware that their leadership needs to improve. Because of the position they occupy, it is often
difficult for members of their educational community to tell them what aspects of their character they need to check or correct. There are faults that are hard to tell a friend, let alone a boss: lack of humility, inability to listen, distrust, perfectionism, paternalism, coercion, inability to forgive, wanting to control everything, etc. Our programmes address this concern not by dictating to leaders how they should be but helping them to become more aware of how they really are, reflect on how they would like to be and encourage them to start this process. Being part of an interactive community of principals is helpful in this regard because people are often more open to listening, observing, learning and
taking advice from their peers than from their employees.
Our programmes use readings, conversations, reflections, videos, teamwork and other activities to achieve their objectives. However, the most significant means we use is creating the kind of community (culture, climate, ethos) with the participating leaders that they could create when they go back to their schools. The design of these programmes fully matches the proposed principles of school redesign. In this sense, participating in one of our programmes is a lived experience of the kind of culture that could be created at school. What is done, how it is done, why
We don’t ask anyone to do more but instead to rethink what they already do to strategically impact education
it is done and the character of the programme facilitators is intended to be a living example of what they can do, how they can do it, why they can do it and what they can be like when they return to their schools. They include planning activities so everyone can get to know each other; authentically listening to and respecting different opinions; setting aside time for silence and reflection; not imposing important decisions or leaving them for another time, but encouraging everyone to seek solutions collaboratively and decide as a community. The programme doesn’t just include theory and practice, it is also about directly experiencing those practices and watching them being modelled. FOUR: WE AVOID GENERAL PRESCRIPTIONS
A number of education programmes spell out what needs to be done in detail. This could be teaching a new curriculum or set of lessons, performing a series of activities or implementing a teacher training course. All of these initiatives undoubtedly have a positive side, but not all of them work in all communities or have the same impact; or they may be useful, but only for a certain period of time. This is because each school’s circumstances are unique and changing, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution for all of them, or for all times. Perhaps most importantly, they often overlook the deeper work of adult development and culture change. Our approach shares the conviction that there
is no one character education programme or curriculum that will work in all schools, nor any that will work indefinitely. Each school has its own problems, resources and challenges, and what it needs to transform its culture is a particular solution which has to be flexible enough to adapt to a rapidly changing world. Rather than proposing general and somewhat rigid solutions, these programmes advocate particular and flexible plans. For this reason, it is less effective to train leaders in a specific, fixed approach than it is to help them develop what it takes to lead effectively in their own circumstances: assessing the climate of their schools, discerning what programme or approach is needed at that specific time, being agile enough to adapt when circumstances change (e.g., pandemic) or being exemplary in leading their community. Rather than telling leaders what to do, it is more effective and sustainable to focus on helping them develop what they need in order to diagnose what their community needs and be able to provide it. Principals often know their schools better than anyone else or are in a privileged position to know the most relevant aspects of their community.
FIVE: WE DO NOT ASK ANYONE TO DO MORE
Principals often fear that character education is one more thing they have to add to the never-ending list of things they have to do in their schools. Some often use the expression: ‘My plate is full; I don’t have room for anything else’. However, our programmes invite leaders to understand that character education is not just another thing on their plate. To paraphrase many leaders in the field, character education is not something else added to their plate; it is the plate that holds everything else together at school.
The essence of promoting character development is not about doing more things but about redesigning the ordinary parts of education. This is convenient because implementing extraordinary initiatives often requires time and resources that schools lack, while the ordinary things are going to be done anyway and will have an impact on students’ development, intentionally or not. In this sense, you cannot not educate character: to a greater or lesser extent, everything that is done at schools has an impact on children’s character, whether you want it to or not. Moreover, it is not something that competes with or detracts from academics. Studies show that schools that integrate character education through this redesign approach ultimately achieve better academic results.
How do you approach this? What is expected of participants? What do they take back to their schools? We do not believe that a few courses or programmes will have a transformative impact on the education of a school, a city or a region. What we believe is truly transformative is belonging to a community of leaders where everyone collaborates and learns from each other to strategically and intentionally redesign their communities. If we can get principals to be willing to serve each other to help each other grow and move their schools forward, real educational transformation will very likely take place.
Schools that are well designed for character development have better long-term results
In our search for effective ways to start such communities, we have found two remarkable initiatives. They are two training programmes developed by Marvin Berkowitz and Melinda Bier at the Center for Character and Citizenship at the University of Missouri-St Louis: an executive programme (vLACE) and a focused programme (PRIMED Institute).
vLACE is a programme aimed at educational community leaders. Each workshop is led by a facilitator who uses videos, interactive activities, readings and reflections to try to generate a community of practice among participants. There are two main objectives. The first is to influence self-knowledge and cultivation of the identity and integrity of the leader and their community. There can be no significant change in a school’s culture without its leader starting by cultivating the character they want to see in the rest of their community. The second is to engage leaders in the learning and development needed to design, implement and assess initiatives that make their schools true learning communities, where character development is a real priority. vLACE includes the development of a long-term plan for transforming school culture. It consists of nine eight-hour workshops held monthly over the course of an academic year. Each workshop presents an international expert’s approach to character education. These experts do not attend the workshops in person. The vLACE facilitators lead each workshop by presenting each author’s approach through videos, activities, reflections and readings. Finally, vLACE includes eight monthly assignments that include personal reflections, surveys or questionnaires for each school community. These tasks require an average of four hours each, and
some have to be done in teams with the school’s other leaders. The outcome of all this work is a medium- to long-term plan to transform each community’s culture.
The PRIMED Institute, on the other hand, is a five-day immersion experience in character education. We invite leadership teams to spend a few days together in a climate of trust, reflecting on and discussing what can make their schools places where character development is promoted strategically and intentionally. It has three main objectives. The first is to learn about the fundamentals of effective character education. We use the PRIMED model developed by professor Marvin W Berkowtiz as a guide to introduce participants to a successful approach to school transformation. The people who will lead this change need to know the principles underpinning the practices they will then implement. Secondly, we strengthen team relationships in an experiential learning format. Implementing a change of this magnitude, which directly affects the school culture, requires a united team eager to take on this ambitious challenge. During the course, participants will have the opportunity to bond with the other team members, share many hours of conversation and have a good time together. Finally, they will make an action plan for the next academic year. With the knowledge gained in PRIMED, participants are invited to develop an action plan for the next school
Leaders can transform school culture and the character development of their students
year. Any transformation of this style requires several years of work. The plan developed as a result of this experience can serve as a way forward and introduce the character education perspective at school. Participants are mentored by the course facilitators as they make this plan.
Our experience in recent years is that people who have participated in these programmes want to keep the community of leaders they have created during our programmes in order to continue the journey they have embarked on together. The community of leaders becomes a great opportunity to continue to cultivate friendships, enhance self-awareness, further deepen the principles of effective character education and help each other to move their schools forward. Making principals part of such a community is the best way to promote real change in schools.
Francesc Torralba Roselló (Barcelona, 1967) holds a doctorate in Education, Philosophy, History and Theology. He is currently an accredited full professor at Ramon Llull University. He alternates teaching with writing and disseminating his thoughts. His work is geared at philosophical and ethical anthropology framed within contemporary personalism. He is a prolific author, with more than 1,800 articles and 100 books published, including: "Vivir en lo esencial" (Plataforma Editorial, SL, 2020), Liderazgo ético (Ppc Editorial, 2017), "Correr para pensar y sentir" (Lectio, 2015) and "El valor de tenir valors" (Ara llibres, 2012).
Young people need to be supported as they construct their life project
by Ana Moreno Salvo
Since Faure’s 1972 report, "Learning to Be: The World of Education Today and Tomorrow", school education has been broadening its horizons from the purely academic to a holistic view of the whole person. However, there are as many versions of what it is to educate for being as there are educational models. Could you tell us what it means to educate for being and what its main purpose is?
We use the word education a lot, but it has many different connotations. I like to approach this subject following Edith Stein’s philosophy of education, which is a point of reference for me. In fact, my doctoral thesis in Education was dedicated to Stine. She uses the concept of education as the translation of the German word ‘Bildung’. To educate,especially in an education centred on being, actually means to develop all the powers or capacities that a person has, which are already there in an embryonic or dormant state. So, when we educate,
we want them to develop and reach their peak. This means the whole being. Therefore, it is education that not only focuses on memory, imagination or will but also embraces the person’s entire being and allows this being to develop to its fullest.
I believe this basically has four dimensions, but in education we sometimes forget some of them and succumb to what I call a onedimensional or reductionist kind of education.
On the one hand, we have to develop the person’s physical dimension. This means healthy lifestyle habits, exercise, the bodily dimension of that person, care, hygiene, nutrition, lifestyle habits, sport and of course also care for the person’s sexual dimension.
The psychological dimension, whether emotional, mental or intellectual, also has to be developed.
This is the ability to calculate, think, reflect and speculate. But it’s also the ability to organise emotions, to know how to prioritise them and even how to control certain toxic or negative emotions.
Then there is the social dimension. Each person should know how to interact with others, create solid bonds, establish trusting relationships, and, in short, create invigorating and noble relationships.
And then there is the spiritual dimension, which is also inherent to the person. Therefore, educating it means for that human being to develop a certain set of values, a certain type of ideals or purposes, and to reflect deeply on what beliefs they feel called to develop or even to accept.
What often happens, however, is that this education is reduced to a plan, even though we are all
Educating in being means developing all the person’s dormant powers or capacities to their fullest potential
There is a reservoir of virtues that transcend time and are true today and will still be true five centuries from now
polygons with different facets. That is why I believe that educating in being means developing all the capacities latent in the person, and this cannot be done by a single human being: we need a community. It is done by the school, the family and extracurricular activities. And when they interact, all these stakeholders make this seed develop, grow and finally bear fruit.
To what extent is ‘becoming a better human being’ a question of context, time or culture? Can we assume that there is something immutable, universal and inherent to every human being that defines them qualitatively? Yes, this is the debate between the permanent and the temporary. And in the educational process, we have to link the two dimensions. On the one hand, we have to train these children to be able to live in a complex world and therefore to know how to move around successfully in the technological world, the digital world, to understand languages well, to understand artefacts, robots, machines, biotechnologies.... All of this is circumstantial, contextual. Schools have to encourage this because we want them to adapt to and act in the world and not be social outcasts or maladjusted. Then there are certain elements that are universally permanent. For example, there are virtues that are essential and have to be developed, regardless of whether we are in the twelfth or the twenty-first century. Consider the virtue of judiciousness. What father or mother does not want their child to be judicious? When it comes to driving, or taking decisions, or partying or starting a relationship. Who doesn’t want them to be fair, temperate, humble, or strong in the face of setbacks? Therefore, I believe
that there is a reservoir of virtues that transcend time and are true today, were true ten centuries ago and will be true five centuries from now, if there are still people on the planet. It has to do with the character that allows a person to develop fully. Therefore, there are temporary aspects and we have to be attentive to them. On leaving school, a child has to have the skills and abilities to be able to work in a technological society. On the other hand, there is a series of qualities or virtues, which, if they have them, will allow them to govern their various facets as a human being, a professional, a parent and a friend.
You have written a lot about human virtues and values. What do you think about ethics education in schools? What values would you highlight as most important in today’s world? The first thing I would like to say is that there is no such thing as a neutral education and there never has been, and anyone who puts it that way is being deceitful. All education has an axiological dimension; that is, it is the bearer of certain values or counter-values. And we very often convey them unconsciously. In other words, depending on what teachers say or do in the classroom, they are conveying one kind of value or another. Let’s imagine that there has been a fight on the playground. The students go into the classroom and the teacher doesn’t say anything. This is one type of behaviour. Or
let’s imagine the teacher says: ‘Let’s talk about what happened on the playground, why there was a fight’. In this case, we initiate reconciliation processes so that that boy is able to apologise to that girl because he threw sand at her, and she is able to forgive him and they reconcile. There is an intervention here. One can emphasise environmental values, family values, the value of work; one can be very demanding in terms of assignment deadlines and therefore encourage rigour and a sense of effort, but there is no neutral education. Consequently, there can be no purely objective education. Teachers always radiate what they have, and parents radiate their values to their children and to the whole extended family.
As for the second part of the question, what values or virtues should be fostered, I think there are three basic ones today. One is boldness. I believe that the kids we are now training have to be very daring. Boldness is the ability to face difficult challenges, not to be intimidated and not to be afraid to move forward with life projects. Boldness tries to make a plan come to fruition with others. An entrepreneur has to be bold, but so does someone who studies medicine, because that means many years and a lot of dedication; or someone who wants to work in philosophy, because they will have a hard time awakening a philosophical vocation in their students.
Another is flexibility or ductility. We are in an ever-changing, constantly transforming world, and we need children who are able to adapt to new and different environments. Therefore, rigidity is an obstacle. Someone who says, ‘I only know how
There is no neutral education, and there never has been. All education is the bearer of values or countervalues
to do this, so don’t ask me to do anything else’ or ‘a machine can do that’ is lost. Ductility is the ability to adapt to different environments or different systems, to work in different countries. Today many young people go through many different companies, countries, languages, technology systems, and those who are more ductile or flexible survive.
And the last one: I believe that we need children who have a third virtue, which is compassion, so they don’t ignore all the dramas in the world. This is the opposite of indifference. Pope Francis uses an expression that, in my opinion, is very appropriate, which is the ‘globalisation of indifference’. It means that ignoring others is becoming globalised. I believe that education should make us people who show solidarity, who are responsible, who do not close our eyes in the face of tragedy but who try to contribute our talent and commitment to improve other
people’s quality of life.
I believe that this is basic education, that is, a school that does not consider this is a school that is out of touch with the twenty-first century. We need young people, we need entrepreneurs, we need people who are involved in the noble causes that the world is facing today.
Nowadays, there is a lot of talk about the importance of ‘agency’ in order to be able to act with a sense of purpose, think critically and make intentional and informed decisions in order to take charge of one’s own life. How important is it to ask about meaning? What are the keys to doing so?
The question of meaning, purpose, objective, what you live for, is crucial. And sometimes that question becomes blurred. I believe that it is central in educational practice that a kid begins to ask themselves
what they want to do with their lives, What is their purpose or objective, and if that purpose is viable or not, if it is noble or not, if it is aligned with their nature or simply totally disproportionate. This has to do with discernment, tutorial action and mentoring, and we do this when we educate as opposed to just informing.
Educating does not mean entering the classroom and saying: now I will tell you what photosynthesis is, or what happened in the Spanish Civil War, or who Miguel de Unamuno was. It has to do with instructing and informing. Because educating has to do with supporting a person as they develop their life project. Therefore, we have to help students to discern, to see what steps they have to climb to make it a reality, and to support them when they fail, because quite often the project does not come to fruition for a thousand reasons: sometimes eventualities, sometimes
misfortunes; sometimes adversities that occur. We have to help them to rebuild a purpose, an objective, a meaning, because this is what fulfils people: to be able to dedicate themselves to something that is truly meaningful. And it is essential to do this even if you are not famous, even if you don’t get rich, even if others don’t share it. When a person is engaged in an activity that fulfils them, they are very happy. Now, if they find that activity sterile, absurd, empty, meaningless, even if they make a very good living, they will not be not happy. They may be wealthy and live comfortably, but when we talk about fulfilment, we are talking about a life project that is meaningful in itself.
One important issue in education is our concept of human freedom. There is a lot of talk about free will, and that being free means being able to choose what we want to be in every sense. What idea of freedom would make sense in education?
The word ‘freedom’ is one of the most manipulated, altered and, I would even say, semantically reduced words. This happens with the big words; it happens with the word ‘dignity’, it happens with the word ‘happiness’. It happens with many words when we use them too superficially.
One idea of freedom is free will, which is the translation of the Latin ‘liberum arbitrium’, that is, the ability to choose between two or more options. You go to a restaurant and they say: ‘We have all these pizzas, which one do you fancy?’ And you exercise your free will. Or a first-year university student is told: ‘These subjects are compulsory, these others are optional. Which ones do you want to take?’ This is free will.
This is a basic level of freedom. Naturally, there are other more demanding levels of freedom. Being free means being able to determine one’s own life project, to embody one’s own vocation, in short, to realise one’s own dream. And this is no longer a specific act of saying margherita or Neapolitan pizza but has to do with a process that entails discipline, effort, continuity over time, tenacity and a great deal of sacrifice Someone who says ‘I want to play the piano and make a living out of it’ will have to give up many things; the same is true if they want to be the mother of a large family, or if they want to write a great philosophical work. Today we have an idea of freedom without sacrifice. And that’s a mistake.
There is one last idea of freedom, which is freedom as liberation, freedom from everything that subjugates you, enchains you, keeps you imprisoned. Many things keep us alienated, and many people suffer severely from the opinions of others; others are subjugated to drugs, alcohol, screens and other new addictions. This is not freedom; this is slavery or servitude.
I believe that a free person is a person who can choose between A and B, who makes their life a work of art and builds a life project with the help of others, and who progressively frees themselves from everything that deceives them, from everything that weighs them down. I believe that, in this sense, when one frees oneself from remorse or resentment, one is much freer. And all this happens through the act of forgiveness.
With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), many fears are cropping up about its increasing ability to replace human functions.
There are three basic values or virtues to be strengthened, which are boldness, flexibility and compassion
To what extent do you think this is possible? What should the role of AI be in a truly human society centred on the full development of each person?
This is the big issue. We are kind of awed, moved and perplexed by the capabilities that these generative artificial intelligence systems are developing. We are increasingly finding that they have more capabilities, more features, that they are performing operations faster and are far superior to us in many fields, such as the ability to calculate or write a text based on information that exists on the web in any language. This is far superior to our natural intelligence, even though we have created this artificial intelligence ourselves. So, what we need to do is take three actions in response. First, there is a need for proper regulation of artificial intelligence. That is, when you have an instrument with this potential, it is essential for it to be regulated. We also need transparency; we need to be told how it works, what algorithms are in place, what criteria they take into account. In other words, it should not be a black box that only techies, engineers, mathematicians and computer scientists can read or interpret. And then there is a third key point, which is that it is essential to use it to help the most vulnerable. These systems can be very helpful for people who have intellectual and physical disabilities, limited intelligence or learning difficulties. These technological resources can greatly stimulate that person and give them attention that perfectly matches their needs. Therefore, they can develop skills or abilities that may simply be lost in a classroom. We have to work hard on this so that artificial intelligence really becomes a system that serves the integral progress of the person, individual dignity and especially the most fragile and vulnerable among us.
Marvin W Berkowitz (New York, 1950) is a leading scholar specialising in character education and development. After holding the Sanford N. McDonnell Chair in Character Education for 25 years, he is now Founders Professor of Education and continues to be Co-Director of the Center for Character and Citizenship at the University of Missouri-St Louis. He previously taught at the US Air Force Academy and Marquette University. He earned a PhD in Developmental Psychology in 1977 and has since published extensively, including works such as "Parenting for Good" (Character Development Group, 2005) and "PRIMED Model for Character Education" (Ediciones Universidad de Navarra, 2022). In addition, he has received numerous awards for his contributions to the field, including the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Character Education Partnership and the Good Works Award from the Association for Moral Education.
by Ana Moreno Salvo
In your book "PRIMED", you outline an educational model aimed at improving schools. Can you tell us about its origin and purpose?
I have always been interested in how children grow up to become good human beings, and this led me to research parents’ influence on their children’s development. I found five parenting strategies and then became interested in schools’ influence on children. I did a project called ‘What Works In Character Education’ with my colleague Melinda Bier, and we discovered six design principles for promoting positive character in young people. Also, since the beginning of my career, I have been intrigued by the topic of ethics and how we define
what is right and what is wrong. I studied the moral development of children and adolescents and then became interested in parenting and education. For the past few years, I have been researching how to achieve the optimal, positive development of students in schools.
What do you mean by the spirit of ‘Tikkun Olam’?
My motivation for this work comes from my Jewish heritage and the concept of ‘Tikkun Olam’, which means ‘healing the world’. I believe that each person has a responsibility to add value to the world and improve the problems that exist. I want to use my knowledge and talents to help more people become good human
Each person has a responsibility to add value to the world and improve the problems that exist
beings, as I firmly believe that the only way to have a more moral world is to have more moral people. My research has focused on the influence of parents and schools on children’s development, and my motivation stems from my desire to contribute to a better world through the concept of ‘Tikkun Olam’. I believe that promoting positive character and morality in young people is fundamental
to bring about positive change in society.
Could you clarify what you mean by nurturing the flourishing of human goodness and what this has to do with character education? What does this kind of education offer? Is it applicable in any culture?
Character education is based on understanding children from an organic rather than a mechanical perspective. We need to be aware of our own implicit theories about how children function and what influences them. Jean Piaget was a major influence on this approach, as he believed that children are organic and try to make sense of
and interpret the world. The goal is not just to convey knowledge but to nurture and guide the development of children as complex, organic entities. The aim is for them to flourish, especially in terms of human goodness.
We seek to foster ethical and moral goodness, values and virtues in people. Character education
involves bringing out the best in students and nurturing the flourishing of human goodness. This contributes to making the world a more moral place and reduces atrocities, corruption and cruelty. However, not all cultures can take this approach, especially those that are authoritarian or racist. Still, it would be beneficial for all cultures.
The PRIMED model proposes six principles that scientific evidence identifies as important for effective human education. Is there one you consider more important than the others? What kind of school leadership does it require?
Six major design principles have been condensed into the PRIMED model: Prioritisation, Relationships, Intrinsic Motivation, Modelling, Empowerment and Developmental Pedagogy. The P of PRIMED is the most important because it means prioritising character education in general and in the other five design principles. Character education is crucial, as children are the future and educators have the power to change people and the world. Singapore is a good example of how a character-centred approach can improve a society.
Leadership is critical, as a great school leader is essential for the successful implementation of character education. In Spain, there is a version of the PRIMED programme, and a servant leadership model has also been developed based on the virtues of a leader who educates in character.
This model has been integrated into leadership training programmes and has received positive feedback for its focus on gratitude and forgiveness. In other words, servant leadership, understanding and prioritising character education and developing personal strengths are fundamental to the effective implementation of character education.
Could you tell us about the role of relationships in educating in human kindness and several good practices?
Relationships are essential in both school and character development. However, often those who need these relationships the most do not get them, such as children who are shy, different or have special needs. It is therefore necessary to build inclusive relational structures at schools to ensure that all members of the school community are included.
Some ways of fostering inclusive relationships include establishing cross-grade buddies in primary school, where students of different ages interact on a weekly basis through joint academic activities. In secondary school, it is best to have advisories of different ages rather than just one in particular. It is also suggested that adults who do not usually lead class, such as the school principal or administrative staff, be adopted as honorary class members and invited to special events. Another suggestion is conducting a survey to identify which students do not have close relationships with any adults at school and to set up structures for adults to ‘adopt’ these children and maintain healthy relationships with them. These are just a few ways to build strong relationships at school.
What role does intrinsic motivation play in students’ character development? How can
A great school leader is essential for the successful implementation of character education
it be fostered at school?
Many schools rely on extrinsic motivators, such as rewards or recognition, to encourage the desired behaviour in children. However, research shows that this is not effective and can even block character development. Instead, it is important that the children internalise character concepts so they become caring, responsible and fair. Extrinsic motivators do not achieve this goal, so prizes and trinkets should be removed from schools. Instead, the authentic value of character strengths should be emphasised, and adults at school should be honest, kind role models. In addition, it is crucial for children to feel emotionally connected to the adults at school and to see themselves as valued members of the school community. Instead of giving public rewards, children should be praised in private to acknowledge their good behaviour and contribution to the school. In this way, they will be intrinsically motivated, acting for who they are and what they value rather than seeking external rewards.
Parker J. Palmer says, ‘what will transform education is not another theory or another book or another formula but a transformed way of being in the world’. In what sense is PRIMED a guide to personal transformation? Could you tell us about the pedagogy of modelling?
There are three steps to the optimal implementation of this work. The first step is to have a committed, knowledgeable leader with the right
Children should be praised in private, acknowledging their behaviour to the school
personal and professional skills. The second step is for the leader to work with the adults responsible for the children, because the leader’s primary job is to lead the adults. Leaders have to be trained to create a culture of mutual support, where learning through failure is encouraged. The third step is to motivate the adults to be role models for the children by being the change they want to see in them. The leader has to get everyone to follow this model. It is important for adults to be authentic and bring value to the students, the world and the school. This step can be difficult to implement, as it requires the courage and motivation to selfreflect and seek improvement.
Nowadays there is a lot of talk about empowerment. Why is it so important to educate through autonomy and freedom? Can you suggest good practices?
During my post-doctoral studies with Lawrence Kohlberg at Harvard University, I had my first experience at school, where I participated in experiments in radical school democracy. This experience taught me the importance of each individual’s voice as a psychological and political necessity. In Spain, there was a time when there was no democracy because of the Franco dictatorship. For a democracy to work, people have to feel compelled to participate and work for the common good. This is achieved by turning schools and classrooms into laboratories of democracy, as John Dewey taught us.
In terms of training democratic
citizens in the United States, teachers have to be trained for class meetings, problem-solving and decision-making. In addition, an authentic student government has to be created that can take real decisions instead of just being a sham. These are just a few examples of how to transform the educational structure to become more democratic and less authoritarian.
You talk about the importance of an organicist view of a person’s development as opposed to a predominantly mechanistic view. Could you suggest some pedagogies geared towards the development of human goodness?
One form of peer interactive pedagogy is cooperative learning, where students work together. Peer tutoring is also considered a form of peer interactive pedagogy. Another methodology is project-based learning (PBL), where students carry out group projects. Reading circles, where students support each other in reading, also fall into this category. However, we often focus on individual pedagogies, where children read, learn and respond without interacting with other peers. These interactive peer-to-peer pedagogies are beneficial for not only academic learning but also students’ character development. Service learning is one example, where students apply what they learn at school to solve real problems and improve the world. In addition, democratic structures at school, where students have a voice in decision-making, promote favourable character education. It is also valuable for teachers to receive constructive feedback from students to improve their teaching. Although this may feel threatening to some educators, doing so can improve the quality of education in general and character education in
particular. However, it is important to create a safe environment where students feel comfortable to express themselves freely.
Can you tell us a success story in which the PRIMED model was implemented?
We are partnering with Coschool, an organisation in Colombia, which was a pioneer in this field. We initially focused on working with leadership teams from 11 elite private bilingual schools. We are now extending our activities to public schools and have recently worked with a school in Medellín, where we have seen incredible transformations. We are working with six struggling public secondary schools in Jalisco, Mexico. Testimonials from school leaders and staff describe how our interventions have radically changed their schools. For example, a principal who used to be authoritarian now interacts closely with teachers and communicates with students.
Thanks to our trainings and PRIMED, we have managed to transform the culture of a school that was about to close. In Pamplona, Spain, we have been training a group led by Juan Pablo Dabdoub and gotten very positive testimonials. In addition, we have been implementing this model in Taiwan for ten years and are starting a new project in Singapore. We also have projects in Central America and São Paulo, Brazil. The model is being disseminated in Korea and China thanks to the recent translation of the book. This is the success of our model.
It is important for adults to be authentic and bring value to the students, the world and the school
James Arthur (Birmingham) is a leading SCHOLAR in character education and entrepreneurship in the UK. He is the founder and director of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues at the University of Birmingham. This is a unique institution that is a global leader in studying and researching how character and virtues impact the individual and society. He has written extensively on the relationship between theory and practice in education, specifically on the connections between character, virtues, citizenship, religion and education. Of particular note is his book "Virtue" (2023, Rialp).
A good education is a good character education
by Ana Moreno Salvo
You run a young institution that works to promote character and virtue training in a world that seems to have turned its back on this kind of education. Do you have the sense that you’re going against the tide?
We are going against the tide in a way because we have introduced the term virtue into schools, universities, magazines and books. My idea of education, which comes from many years of teaching, has to do with the character virtues that link human growth to the kind of person a human being has the potential to be and decides to be.
Classical philosophers believe virtuous character is at the core of human moral growth. A virtuous
person always does the right thing for the right reasons. That was Aristotle’s philosophy. Possession of the virtues involves doing good actions with good motives, intentions and attitudes. And this is what we do at the Jubilee Centre. This approach is not popular in our modern society. Yet we have influenced both government policies and some school practices in the UK. We have also had an
The virtues link human growth to the kind of person a human being has the potential to be
impact on other governments, and the number of academic articles published on virtue education is growing. We have contributed significantly to this growth and to the interest in character virtues as part of education and education policy.
Can you tell us about the main successes of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues in its almost ten years of existence?
We have worked in Europe with the Jesuits in Germany, at the National Institute for Pedagogy in Munich, with UNICEF, in the Balkans and with some organisations in Poland. I would say that our biggest presence is in Asia: Japan, South Korea and Singapore. We have worked very
If you want to develop resilience in children, you need to know why and for what purpose
extensively with the governments of all three countries. We are part of advisory committees in those regions. We also have close working relationships in the Americas, not with governments but with our partner institutions and research centres. We have also started to work in Kenya, Africa; I have been with the education minister of Argentina, in Latin America; and I have been to Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and Chile. And we have started to work more broadly around the world in all continents, including China. We even have delegations in Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis have come to Birmingham to talk to me about character education.
What can you tell us about the importance of character education today, or how does character education contribute to education in today’s world?
I would argue that what is happening with the theory and practice of modern education in schools is that it is much more geared towards learning competencies, skills and forms of knowledge that are considered essential to boost our ability to succeed. It is a very pragmatic approach that is concerned with a technological and material ideal of success. In contrast, we focus on the relationship between human nature and ‘flourishing’. We have to do this if we are talking about human beings’ character. We believe that the only way to understand growth in virtue is to start with the meaning and
purpose of human life. Schools cannot avoid character education, because a good education is a good character education. All schools are concerned about their students’ character, whether they are aware of it or not, and the reality is that most teachers are.
As you say in your recent book "The Formation of Character": ‘There is widespread agreement today on the importance of character formation, but not on its content, what it is or how to acquire it’. Can you tell us what you mean by the secularisation of character?
We live in a period of unprecedented technological change that has given rise to radical questioning about how we should live. I think everyone would agree with that. We also live in a time when many live as if God does not exist. If you live in a nation in the Western world, as many of us do, you know that their culture is counter to the idea of the transcendent. There is a denial of the transcendent; it simply does not appear in education, at least in public education.
This means that in contemporary schools the philosophy of education and religion are divorced, and truth is perceived as relative. Many teachers and students prefer not to judge right from wrong. Instead, they celebrate being open-minded. Instead of judging what is good, they prefer to judge that ‘it’s good and never judge’. This widespread subjectivism and plurality of opinions means that people are unsure of what is true and are unable to reach a consensus on moral issues. Alongside this confusion and scepticism, in moral matters there is a ‘sense or yearning’ in all human beings that inspires them to live well and grow in fullness, regardless of whether or not you hold religious beliefs.
Most people want to live well and improve themselves, and they strive to do so. Unfortunately, our modern society does not help them in this endeavour, yet there is a growing grassroots concern with virtues and character. This is what I mean by secularisation: turning away from the transcendent, from any idea of an ultimate reality.
What does ‘character’ mean to you, and what is the relationship between educating in personality traits such as resilience, self-esteem or empathy and educating in virtues such as strength, courage, respect or understanding?
When we talk about personality traits, we are really talking about psychology. We are looking at the edge of character, and educating it is seen as ‘character development’. Using classroom strategies to change behaviour, advising students, managing the classroom, working with parents, developing social skills, giving guidance in certain directions .... all this is a psychological approach and a way of looking at character. I think it is useful, but I don’t think it’s the main way we should look at character. For example, take the idea of resilience, as you mentioned. Resilience is an important skill. Every child should develop resilience in some way. My question is, ‘Resilience for what?’, because resilience is neither good nor bad in itself. Resilience enables moral, civic and intellectual virtues to be developed. It should therefore be developed with them in mind.
Human beings are social animals; they need a positive social context in which to develop
I think there are many resilient people in our society, but they can use their resilience for the wrong purposes. Think of members of the Mafia or criminal gangs: they have plenty of resilience. If you want to develop resilience in children, you need to know why and for what purpose.
Why do we prefer to talk about values education today?
Values are, in essence, what people consider valuable. Many people have different values and use this terminology because our education system promotes the idea that we should have our own values.
But there are also common values that I believe promote the common good, and they require agreement and consensus. I prefer the term virtue because it is less relative and more solidly grounded. Values can vary from place to
place and can easily become very different. Virtues are more grounded.
In most societies today, plurality is a fact of life. The ‘universal values’ in schools are social justice, equality, sustainability and commitment to building a better world. Are there other ‘universal values’ that are necessary for a good education and human progress?
A life worth living is a life lived according to virtues. This is our basic argument. Purpose in life is found in common projects, shared activities and intimate relationships. Individuals need other individuals to be who they are, as human beings.
Essentially, we need others to be truly ourselves. The Jubilee Centre’s proposal recognises that full human development can only occur in a decent, well-governed society
Character is the basis for human development and moral, civic and intellectual virtues
characterised by social justice and the common good. Extreme inequalities destroy harmony and stability and strip away the positive social context needed for human development. Human beings are social animals who need a positive social context in which to develop, as well as external needs, such as basic food, shelter and access to health and education. Now, if we have adverse social conditions, they actually lead to vice. This explains why virtues seldom develop in areas where there is no access to health and adequate education.
Character is mostly learned directly from those around us. They serve as our mentors
Character is the basis for human and social development, as we have tried to argue. They can be seen as two sides of the same coin. You need both: you need human development, which requires access to material things like health, welfare and education, but you also need moral, intellectual and civic virtues.
In reference to the question about social justice and solidarity, I would say that the focus of those who advocate social commitment, usually referred to as social justice, is often actually injustice. They set their sights on injustice. This inevitably means different things to different people. And it is even more complex when the left and the right consider political causes to be socially just and therefore politicians obviously think that what they are doing is socially just.
Western communities today are marked by division, confusion, disagreement and polarisation. This is true in Europe as well as in America, and I think in other countries as well. People seem unable to disagree with each other politely. There is a lack of harmony and consensus. However, we need to agree in order to develop as individuals. We need solidarity and positive social justice to achieve this. We need to talk to achieve this. I think we need to talk to each other, and we need to do it in a friendly way. So instead of polarising and condemning each other, it is very important to seek friendship and listen to others, even if we don’t agree with them.
We human beings have a
lot of common ground. What is happening today is that those who are advocating social justice seek to remedy injustice, and then there is an imbalance, because what we have to do is to agree with each other on the way forward. Things are not black and white, and thinking they are is really not good for democracy; in fact, it’s very bad. I often use the example of a bridge built only on two ends that don’t meet in the middle; we have to build that bridge, build alliances with others to make our society work better than it does right now. This is very important for character. If we fail to do that, the pinnacle of character, the pinnacle of who we are, will be marked by division and disharmony.
You also talk about the importance of the meaning and purpose of education and its dimensions (moral, intellectual, civic and executive). Can you discuss these dimensions and their importance?
In education today, there is increasing anxiety among young people like we have never seen before. This anxiety emphasises success in school as the sole purpose of education. We have students at universities who have never failed and have always achieved excellence. They have always progressed on their way to success, always a material success. Our education system is dominated by the idea that the purpose of being human is to consume in a market economy and that the measure of all success is in that market. Profitability in the case of the individual, the level of their milieu, their wealth and status, have become the most important goals. If we say that education prepares human beings for life, it follows that we need to have some idea of what the purpose of this life is, as I said earlier. The main
purpose of education is to help human beings to become more fully human. Education is becoming who we are; it is essentially a human unfolding.
Education, in this sense, is a continuous process of ‘being’ that never ends. This is what we sometimes forget: that character is not static; it evolves, and it is never too late.
We need to develop intellectual, moral and civic virtues, because they help us to grow as human beings. They allow us to become wise. All the virtues are integrated, and the ultimate goal at the end of the day is practical wisdom. That’s the ultimate goal. This practical wisdom, which is a kind of metavirtue, is the main virtue that helps us to decide when virtues collide with each other. Here’s an example with honesty: when asked by the teacher what happened in a situation, some children choose their friendship and loyalty, which are also virtues, over telling the truth. And then the teacher ends up thinking that the child is problematic. That is why they need practical wisdom, to make wise decisions, and they can only do this through experience. Experiences from school and from outside school, and what they actually do, help them to become wise.
If a school wanted to shape its students’ character, what should it know about their natural process and what aspects should it pay special attention to?
Freedom is about whether or not you can choose good, whether you act in the service of what is right
Students gradually become more reflective and critical as they get older during their school years. All teachers know that they go through different developmental stages. In the end, virtuous living and virtuous character are the practice of good judgement and intelligent action. We want students to be rational and to make the right decisions based on proper knowledge and reasoning. This results in greater wisdom; the more rational they are, the more able they are to judge and perform intelligent actions and increase their wisdom.
A school’s culture and practice are also formative. Virtue formation is slow and requires intentional practice. So we have to think about it. We cannot guess what will
happen. Virtue is something we practise and get better at. Schools and teachers need to think about how they are going to integrate it into their teaching, into the school’s philosophy, into their being role models as teachers. All these things are very important. Experiences in schools can be the catalyst for the development of virtues. These experiences provide opportunities to practise sound judgement (discernment) and virtue. This can be done in the classroom, regardless whether one teaches mathematics, physics, history or any other subject.
This desire for truth, for seeking the truth, for understanding in a reflective
way without excluding anything, looking at the world around us, has to be instilled in students. So, thoughtful reflection on the practical experience of the goal leads to good decisions and good living.
It is absolutely vital that the intellectual virtues are a priority. We have to develop them because they help us to discern and do the right thing, and to gain the knowledge we need to live a good life.
You often say that ‘a virtuous person who cares for others and treats them with dignity is a character educator themselves, whether or not they are aware of it’. What different areas are
involved in the formation of a child’s or young person’s character?
I would say that the formation of virtues is not simply a matter of listing certain virtues in order to ‘ground’ them, like a catalogue of virtues, but that they have to be situated within a specific social context.
This means that there is no one model for character education; it depends on the context. Character education needs to be situated within a specific context that provides students with real-life examples of how their actions affect them and others. Character is mostly learned directly from those around us. They serve as examples, or as mentors, you could say. This is why it is extremely difficult to develop virtuous individuals without having a virtuous community. In other words, we learn to be virtuous in community.
Academic excellence is an important goal of schools. In addition, parents have to be involved in developing enduring positive character in students. This involves nurturing knowledge of the moral good through the virtues, fostering students’ desire to be good people by doing good and developing a solid conscience as part of this character.
Students need to clearly understand the reasons why they should be good - that is, the intellectual virtues - and they need to experience practical ways of being good. So, schools need to give students opportunities to practise the virtues. The aim of character education is to motivate
Students should be encouraged to search for truth looking at the world around them
the desire to act in the service of good. That is its sole purpose. Teachers need to think about it and plan for it.
I would say that character is both attracting and teaching, and I often say it is also seeking. It is attracting those around us, our teachers and peers. It is teaching by developing the language of virtues, and it is seeking through the free choice to be the kind of person who can promote the common good and make a meaningful contribution to society.
This idea of seeking is the ultimate freedom. All students eventually have to make a decision about the kind of person they want to be. And this means that they have to commit themselves to the virtues they would like to embody in their lives.
Nowadays there is a certain wariness about imposing a view of character education that focuses mainly on educating the will. How important is freedom in character formation?
Freedom cannot mean blind obedience to an authority. We cannot be coerced into doing good. It has to happen freely; we have to choose to do it. Character would be impossible in the absence of freedom, and virtue would not exist because we could not say that what we choose determines what we will be. After all, we have to choose what we do; in a sense, making a choice entails being free to make it.
Nor does freedom mean that you can do whatever you feel like doing and are allowed to do; this would simply be pure licence. It is not permission or a kind of freedom for its own sake. Freedom has a much broader scope. It is not about how many choices you can make but whether or not you can choose the good. This is really crucial. There is only true freedom when you act in the service of what is good and right.
All virtues are integrated, and the goal at the end of the day is practical wisdom
We have a very important choice; we have the freedom to make our own choices and they help us to become what we will eventually become. This concept of freedom is not about restrictions or obligations. It’s about asking students to ask themselves questions: What do I want to be free for? Most students will not say they want to be free to do bad things; they usually want to be free to be good. Freedom in this sense is freedom ‘for something’, and that is to do something positive. This is the pinnacle of freedom and free will. What we are talking about cannot be imposed. There is no roadmap. It is an individual relationship with the teacher in the classroom, which is realised in a community and freely chosen.
Reflecting on the world and life through literature
by Ana Moreno Salvo
Could you explain briefly what liberal education is and how it came about?
The concept of liberal education is very old. It goes back to the Greco-Latin world, but the way it is used today is more modern, from the nineteenth century. A key figure is John Henry Newman (1801-1890), who wrote the book "The Idea of a University" (1852), in which he used the concept of liberal education.
A liberal education can be defined by contrast. That is, it is an education that is not pragmatic
or utilitarian in the sense that the purpose of education is to be useful. It is not about how what one studies can be useful to earn a living or be successful; rather it is the pursuit of knowledge, knowledge for its own sake. This sounds very utopian or philosophical, and in the best sense, it is. I like to say that it is not incompatible to talk about the value of education, the value of knowledge in itself, and its usefulness. It is true that the first question that young people and families ask themselves nowadays is utility: What is a degree or a science
The first aim of education is to grow as a person, to cultivate the intellect, to mature intellectually
or literature baccalaureate going to be useful for? From the perspective of liberal education, this is a mistake; it blurs the hierarchy.
The proper order defined by those who defend the tradition of liberal education is that the primary purpose of education is for students to grow as people, to cultivate their intellect, to mature intellectually. And as a secondary or parallel aim, obviously, it should serve you to earn a living and live in the world, because they are not incompatible. But this hierarchy is always borne in mind.
How did it come about? After John Henry Newman, there was an intellectual educational movement in this direction in the United States in the early twentieth century. A number of universities such as
José María Torralba López (Valencia, 1979) is Professor of Moral and Political Philosophy at the University of Navarra and Director of the Civic Humanism Centre for studies on the character and ethics of the professions at the Institute for Culture and Society. He has served as director of the Core Curriculum Institute (2013-2022). He is on the board of directors of the Association for Core Texts and Courses and on the editorial board of the International Studies in Catholic Education. He advises universities in several countries on their humanistic education programmes. He is the author of "A Liberal Education. In Praise of the Great Books" (Encounter, 2022).
Columbia University, the University of Chicago and St John’s College promoted this approach to liberal education, which took the form of what has become known as the ‘Core Curriculum’, which is synonymous with Great Books programmes or Great Books seminars. In other words, it means providing all students with a basic cross-disciplinary humanistic and scientific education, regardless of the degree they are going to pursue (be it physics, mathematics, engineering or law).
For many people, this type of education is more akin to AngloSaxon traditionalism or perhaps even somewhat outdated. To what extent is it currently applied at universities, especially at Spanish universities?
In general, the humanities seem old-fashioned, because any humanistic educational initiative nowadays has to overcome a series of prejudices such as that they are a thing of the past, they are pursuing an ideal in vain, they don’t interest students, they are a waste of time or there is no place for humanistic education in the university system. I dare say that my experience is the opposite. I won’t say that everything I mentioned at the beginning isn’t real. There are certainly some obstacles, but students are actually interested in it. When students are given the opportunity to get a solid humanistic education, they enjoy it and become passionate about it. It seems to me that a good part of the problem, particularly thinking about the Spanish educational system, is that we educators are the ones who do not trust that this is possible. At the University of Navarra, we have developed a Great Books
The classics help young people today to learn about other ways of understanding life
programme as part of the Core Curriculum. This programme is now ten years old and has been taken by 700 students. We recently conducted a survey on the educational outcomes of this programme among the students who had taken it. The responses were strikingly positive. It is a type of teaching that manages to awaken students’ enthusiasm and ignite their intellectual spark.
My impression is that more and more institutions are joining this movement. Since 2015, a European conference called ‘Liberal Arts and Core Curriculum’ has been held every two years, and every congress has had 100 or more participants from different countries. I think this is remarkable and new. Plus, the first Latin American ‘Core Curriculum’ conference is currently being planned. In Spain, there is an educational group that is designing a pilot programme to implement the Great Books Seminars in schools. Although it is more difficult in secondary education because the curriculum is closely regulated, my experience is that if there are educators who believe in the project, there are ways to do it.
Humanistic education is essential. I would go so far as to say that it is even more important now than in the past. We are at a time of cultural change. At times of change, points of reference and guidance are needed. And this is what young people need right now. The goal is not to show them the way or ignore their freedom, yet we should
Why do you think a humanistic education is important in today’s world? What does it give young people who have to deal with a future that is uncertain in so many ways?
When students are given the opportunity to get a solid humanistic education, they enjoy it and become passionate about it
also not abandon them to their fate.
The great human problems are not new. Through literature, philosophy and examples from history, one can learn from cultural tradition and thus gain experience and reference points. It is an effort to open the door to the cultural tradition through books. Why books? Because culture has been handed down to us largely through books. Also because from
an educational standpoint, I think it is the most accessible way. The main advantage of encouraging reading or awakening in them an interest in reading is that good books are not instruction manuals or self-help books; they are books where there is a moral and the aim is for the student to discover or conclude it. The classics are always openended.
reflect while reading and to talk to their classmates and reach conclusions about life, society and the future. And I think this is the path we should take today. In fact, the classics help young people today to learn about other ways of understanding life.
fine and necessary, but it is different from the approach and focus we use to read these same books. Why? Because in the Great Books Seminars the aim is not so much to analyse the work in a scholarly or historical way but to read it as an educated reader and to ask oneself: ‘What does this work say to me?’
Could you tell us about the Great Books programme? What kind of books are included? Can you give us an example of how a book can impact a person’s life?
In the Great Books programmes, the key concept is the seminar. By great books we mean good literature. We talk about the classics, but classics does not
The context of the seminar is usually the overarching questions of human life. We don’t ask how the book exemplifies a historical epoch or a certain literary style, but we ask challenging questions such as what is good, what is freedom, what is a fair society or what is a human person. This means that in the seminars, the conversation connects with people’s lives and their most intimate or existential interests.
We live in a world where freedom is very important. It is a positive value that should be encouraged, but it shouldn’t lead to people who are unable to find their way in the world. Reading allows readers themselves, in this case students, to
mean ancient. Of course, there are classics from the Greek and Latin tradition, but there are also modern and contemporary classics. The most important thing is the seminar, because it is the methodology in which the books are read or incorporated into the educational curriculum. The objective is different from that of an ordinary literature class, at both school and university. At school there is a Language and Literature curriculum that has to be covered with an academic, scientific, knowledge-based approach. This is
Another feature of these seminars is that they are held in small groups and via dialogue. The ideal number is 18 students, but at the University of Navarra we do it with up to 25 and it also works. Seen from the standpoint of the school, this is the typical number of students in a classroom, sometimes a little more, but up to 30 is possible. ‘Dialogical seminars’ means that the teacher plays a key role, which is to engage the students in a deep and relevant conversation that connects the book to the existential issues I mentioned above. The teacher is not merely a moderator. They are another participant in the conversation, one that is more qualified who tries to get the students to find answers for themselves. They are no more and no less than the vessel through which the ‘Socratic Method’ is implemented. The goal is not to cover a syllabus or prepare for an exam but to ask questions in order to awaken interest and
The context is often one of the big questions of human life, such as what is good?, or what is freedom?
When talking about existential issues, it may be easier for an adolescent to talk about them with the help of books
critical thinking. The teacher helps to deepen and mature these ideas. And so an intellectual community is created, a high-level intellectual dialogue. It is very valuable and enriching.
Teachers have to have a clear methodology to generate a conversation where opinions are supported with reasons, positions are challenged and conclusions are reached. This methodology is also supported by writing essays or argumentative texts. In other words, in addition to reading, going to class and speaking, students have to write about the topic. Sometimes the topic will be determined by the teacher; other times it will be openended, although the students have to argue their point. This writing and arguing is important because it adds rigour.
You asked me for an example, and I’m going to give you one about "The Confessions of St Augustine". There were two reactions to this book. After working on it in class, I asked the students what they thought of it. A group of students who, based on what they said, held religious beliefs, said that they loved it: ‘We identify with it because we see that St Augustine is one of us, or we are like St Augustine’. The reality is that someone who lived so many centuries ago, who is identified as a prime intellectual figure, had managed to challenge 18- or 19-year-olds with his story and words. On the other hand, there was another group of students who, based on what they said, not only didn’t like the religious aspect but also somewhat rejected it, and they said: ‘St Augustine is a great man; he is a genuine person whom I would have liked to meet and talk to’.
Some educational institutions have been offering a humanistic ‘Core Curriculum’ for a while now. To what extent can adolescents benefit from this training? How can it be made appealing so that it can have a real impact on their lives?
We are at a time I find propitious for humanistic education. There is increasing awareness of the need for it, perhaps in reaction to the technocratic world we live in, utilitarian approaches in education, approaches that are too narrowly focused on preparing for the job market or overvaluing what the market is asking for.
We live in a world where young people are forced to position themselves in life too early. I think it would be better to give them a little more time. Making tradition accessible to them can help them. There is an author I recommend, Karen E. Bohlin, who developed a classical Great Books education programme. She published a book a few years ago called "Character Formation through Literature", in which she talks about the Great Books and the power of reading in character formation and education. In other words, this approach helps students to orientate themselves in life and answer ethical and existential questions. The book says that it can be easier for adolescents to talk or think about ethical or existential questions if they do so through books and fiction, because they will not feel judged. There is a clear challenge, which is asking questions about one’s own life. With books, one sees stories about good and evil, where adolescents can identify with or see situations or aspects that reflect their own lives.
Do teachers who teach this content receive any special training? What training would a secondary school teacher need? The teachers who teach these contents have attended courses at universities in the United States that have this type of programme. We have done this through ACTC (Association for Core Text and Courses). This is an association that brings together some 100 universities from all over the world that are committed to this educational model. Any educator with teaching experience can readily understand this method, and although we can speak of a Great Books methodology, it is actually not a technique. What shapes the methodology of the Great Books Seminars are the basic elements of any educational approach, which is knowing how to speak, write and read. In this sense, there is nothing special about it, but it does help to learn by watching others.
I would say that the training a secondary school teacher needs is nothing special, but the content needs to be adapted to the age and educational level. At the University of Navarra, we have also organised a course where we share our experience. We offer it to university teachers, and when secondary school teachers come, it is just as useful.
Challenges and opportunities of educating for moral and civic development
by Ana Moreno Salvo
INTERVIEW WITH ANDREW PETERSON
Andrew Peterson (Birmingham) is Professor of Character and Citizenship Education and Deputy Director of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues at the University of Birmingham. He is also Head of the Department of Education and Social Justice in the Faculty of Education. A former school teacher, his research focuses on the connections between character education and citizenship, in particular on the nature of civic virtues and educating on these virtues in schools. He has written extensively on this topic, combining theoretical and empirical research to examine how schools cultivate informed, active and morally responsible citizens. His work has been published in leading academic journals and in numerous books, most recently "Civility and Democratic Education" (2019, Springer), and he has edited several major collections on citizenship and civic education.
In the book "Understanding Character Education", you and your colleagues talk about the emergence of character education in the twenty-first century. Why do you think it is emerging now?
I think there are several reasons for this resurgence, not only in the UK but also in other countries around the world, including Spain. Character education has often been framed as an answer to certain social or moral problems. There is concern about many young people’s moral and political apathy, polarisation, economic inequalities and lack of involvement in communities. There is also mention of the lack of soft skills valued by employers, or the lack of resilience among young people. However, seeing character education as a reactive solution is problematic for two main reasons.
First, it reinforces a deficit view of young people, attributing responsibility and blame to them without building on the character strengths that many already possess. Secondly, it overlooks the fundamental reason for character education: to develop and express virtues, especially moral virtues, which are the basis for human and social flourishing. Character is key to a sense of purpose and belonging, especially for children and young people. If we focus on this positive perspective, another important reason to explain this resurgence arises.
In a world of challenges and complexity, character education helps us to find positive solutions and ways of living together and recognising our differences. Moreover, it offers a holistic approach at a time when academic performance and assessments dominate education systems. Many teachers and school leaders have shifted the focus to character education to balance the education students receive and to reconnect with the motivations that brought them to teaching. An Edutopia study in 2015 revealed that the qualities most valued by teachers were compassion, kindness and respect.
A final point is that character is present in everyday language. We define people by their qualities, such as whether they are kind, honest or trustworthy. Similarly, children are interested in whether their friends are good friends or whether their teachers are patient. Schools play a key role in helping young people to explore their character and understand how their relationships with others are linked to what it means to be a good person and live a good life in community.
Character education helps us to find positive solutions and ways of living together and recognising our differences
Today there is often a holistic view of education, and many schools rely on positive education and social-emotional education or personal and social development programmes. How does this type of education differ from an education focused on character development?
I think there are important differences between character education and its not-so-distant relatives, such as positive education and social-emotional learning. However, before talking about the differences, I should highlight some important commonalities. In practice, many schools are likely to use a combination of all three. Some frameworks designed by organisations seek to integrate socialemotional learning and character education. However, I believe there are important differences in both how we conceptualise these approaches and how they are practised. At the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, we adopt a neo-Aristotelian approach to character education based on Aristotle’s key ideas updated with contemporary research.
A neo-Aristotelian approach sees virtue as a medium between two extremes: excess and deficiency. For example, the virtue of courage is situated between recklessness (excess) and cowardice (deficiency). Unlike some forms of positive education and social-emotional learning, virtue is not simply having more of a quality such as empathy or courage. It is about having the right amount for the right reasons at the right times, which depends on the situation, our capacities and previous experiences that guide us towards virtuous action.
It is important to note that learning and educating in virtue are lifelong processes. Very few of us are fully virtuous, and we often fail. Character education, especially for children and young people, offers the opportunity to explore and practise virtue, as well as to reflect on their actions and experiences: Why did I do something? Why did I fail? What could I do differently next time?
This brings us to another vital difference: how we judge the right amount of virtue for the right reason at the right time. Aristotle used the term ‘phronesis’, or practical wisdom. This wisdom guides our behaviour in difficult situations, especially when virtues clash. A common example is the conflict between honesty and kindness. A friend says to me: ‘I got a haircut. Do you like it?’ My practical wisdom helps me to choose the best answer based on knowing my friend and my previous experiences.
These are not just theoretical ideas; they also have important practical relevance. We know from many schools in and outside the UK that have integrated our educational framework that these ideas are important for staff, students and families. These schools work with young people to help them to reflect on their actions, deliberate on what it means to do the right thing in each situation and learn from their experiences.
What is meant by character education at school?
At the Jubilee Centre, we define character education as all the educational activities and relationships that help children and young people to develop virtues. It is a lifelong process and does not follow a linear course. No one is perfectly virtuous, but we hope to learn from our mistakes. Children and young people need space to reflect on their mistakes and learn from them, especially during childhood and adolescence, which are key periods in this learning.
In one way or another, all schools educate in character. The question is whether they do so in a positive, intentional and planned way. It is important to note that there is no single model for character education. Each school has to make it relevant to its context, its students and its community. However, there are useful ways of thinking about character education that can be applied at any school. One is to divide the virtues into four categories: moral, intellectual, civic and acts. The latter kind of virtues, such as perseverance, only become true virtues when they serve moral and intellectual virtues. For example, a thief may be perseverant, but that does not make him virtuous.
Another key idea is to integrate character education into school life. This implies that students not only learn about virtues but also have opportunities to put them into practice and reflect on their experiences. In addition, we divide the virtues into seven components, which include the perception of which virtue is needed in which situation, knowledge of the virtues and aspects such as emotion and action.
Character involves acting with the right amount of virtue for the right reasons at the right times
There are no ‘ready-made’ programmes that guarantee effective character education. Schools wishing to integrate character education need to undertake a reflective process including the entire educational community to ensure that it is responsive to the needs of their students and their context.
What are the biggest challenges facing character education in schools?
There are two main challenges I would like to highlight. One is the challenge of education with concerns about high marks, examinations, academic achievement and - also linked to this - preparation for working life. This can be seen as very utilitarian
and instrumental, but it may work against or to the detriment of character education in children and young people. I think it is better to see them as different goals of education that are not necessarily mutually exclusive. When we advocate for the education of the whole child using a character education approach, we are not saying that achievement is not important. In fact, a lot of research on character education, especially in the schools we work with, shows that achievement has improved since they adopted an explicit and integrated approach to character education. The same is true for readiness for the working world. In fact, most reports on professional skills, attributes and qualities emphasise that young people with
virtues and character traits are sought after.
I think this is a challenge, not at a fundamental level but at a practical level.
A school’s focus on results actually acknowledges the importance of holistic education and character education, even though they are what motivate teachers in the first place. At schools that have truly integrated character education, it becomes the core of their academic achievement, preparation for the working world and other educational goals.
I think the second challenge, which has to do with the challenges facing democracies around the world, is to find a consensus and a set of virtues or values, if you will, that we can agree on within a given
context, that are truly meaningful and inclusive, without being exclusive or overly exclusionary. I think this is the real challenge, because from an educational standpoint, it is much easier to define things at a very general and ambiguous level, because you can bring more people to the table, so to speak. This is the danger, especially when it comes to values education, that values are defined so broadly that they mean something yet nothing.
A challenge for character education is to find core virtues that people can agree on and to ensure that they are agreed upon inclusively. In character education, there is always a balance between recognising the situation in which one is acting and the virtues, but you also have to be aware that these are general, universal virtues that are considered important by many different cultures. Compassion is a good example. Most if not all cultures have some virtue akin to or aligned with compassion. This does not mean that we all understand compassion in exactly the same way. Each culture may have a different concept or term, but we can come to an agreement and consensus that this universal virtue of recognising the suffering of others is a virtue and something we would like children and young people to learn and develop.
It is difficult to find this real consensus, especially across differences and contexts. But I think it is very important to try. A lot of work has been done on this, but I think there is still a long way to go to reach a consensus on the shared virtues that are fundamental, and again, neither so narrow as to be
exclusionary nor so narrow as to be meaningless or overly ambiguous.
What is the character-based learning? What are the evidencebased benefits?
The best way to understand character-based learning is to focus on character education embedded in the school through an approach: understood, taught and sought after. Character provides a clear mission, vision and ethos that are at the heart of the school, embedded in its culture and relationships. It is not just about including character education but about it being lived out in the everyday reality of the school and in the experiences of those who interact with it.
Furthermore, character education should be reinforced in the curriculum, not necessarily as a separate subject but integrated into the content and other processes, such as assemblies. For example, I have seen schools using the virtues to explore the characters in a literature text that students are reading.
It is crucial for students to have opportunities, both within and outside the curriculum, to pursue their own character development, such as through social actions and civic activities, which enable them to contribute to their communities. Character formation should be autonomous, and young people should pursue their own opportunities as they grow older. Regarding the evidence, we have to be cautious in interpreting it. Some studies show the benefits of interventions that develop specific virtues, such as critical thinking or empathy. Some schools assess character development holistically, and these practices work best when
The biggest challenge is to find a consensus on what virtues should be taught in an inclusive and culturally meaningful way
they are based on a longitudinal view, assessing progress over time and engaging students in reflection about themselves and their peers.
The most compelling evidence comes from school leaders, teachers, students and families. In schools that incorporate character education, there is a greater sense of purpose and clarity, which allows for more meaningful conversations about character. These testimonials are coupled with evidence from school inspection reports and academic research. For example, in a study by the Jubilee Centre, we found a clear correlation between schools that integrate character education and students who have a greater sense of belonging and trust in their schools and local communities.
At times, fully integrated character education can be intangible. An example is like when we see a beautiful landscape and take a picture that never fully captures what we feel when we are there.
Similarly, we can only fully perceive the effects of character education when we are at school and experience it first hand. While it is possible to measure it and collect testimonials, there is also an intangible aspect that we should not forget.
What responsibility do teachers have for their students’ character education? Teachers have a major responsibility for character education,
Schools have to integrate character into their culture, curriculum and experiences, not just as an add-on, but as its core
but families have the primary responsibility. Both schools and teachers have the responsibility to support students’ character
development. I believe that this work begins with teachers as role models for students who convey the ethos of the school through their actions, behaviour and relationships. Take, for example, a teacher who is uninterested in what a child has to say about a
particular issue or who shows no respect or humility towards students, or worse, is even indifferent to a child’s interests and even family life. I think that teacher conveys quite a different message to their students than the one who does show adequate interest in the child and takes time to listen and understand the child’s interests and challenges. As good teachers know, this is about not just what happens in the classroom but also what happens in the playground and at the school gate and in the hallways, when teachers meet students and have conversations with them.
In fact, I think that sometimes these informal encounters and experiences are just as formative for young people as the more formal experiences within the classroom. I think it is also important
to note that teachers need some support in this role, whether from their colleagues, families or the wider community.
I think teachers play a key role, but they can only do so much individually or in small groups. It has to be a community-wide effort involving families and society at large.
What role do families and the community play in character education?
Families are really the primary educators of a child’s character. Communities also play a positive role in children’s education. In turn, it is very important for children to have the opportunity to learn from and play an active role in their communities. In this sense, the development of a common language on character is a vital aid in contributing to cohesion and collaboration among schools, families and communities. This is something we hear loud and clear from the schools we work with at the Jubilee Centre. While not everyone may share the language of character, understanding it can be the basis for constructive dialogue when there is disagreement or even conflict within a school community. In turn, this common language can also help children and young people make connections among their different experiences.
There were two points about community in the project I mentioned at the Jubilee Centre on schools, civic virtues and good citizenship.
The first was that school leaders and teachers saw schools as civic centres operating within and working for local communities. Thus, they saw schools as complementary to providing experiences for students to play
a role in the civic life of their communities. Secondly, students in the study stated that a sense of belonging and trust in their local community was always based on experiences and opportunities to participate with others in community settings. So when students said: ‘Yes, I feel like I belong to my school community and to my local community’, or when they said: ‘Yes, I feel trust within my local community’, it was always related to having experiences of meeting others in their communities. Sometimes it was about talking to neighbours. Other times, it was about participating in community events, groups, clubs, etc.
It didn’t matter whether these groups were related to sport, music, scouts and guides or whatever. But it was the opportunity to spend time with others in associations and groups within the local community.
In other words, for the over 1,500 10- to 16-year-old students we spoke to and surveyed, a sense of community emerged from opportunities to experience communities with others, and that played a key role in thinking, expressing, experiencing and developing character-related skills and experiences.
It is essential for us to recognise that there are complexities and challenges, just like in any relationship. I think perhaps the most important thing for schools in terms of character education, in terms of families and communities, is when there are conflicts between the ethics and virtues of the school and those of families and communities. There are no easy solutions and no easy answers to resolve these conflicts. I certainly do
The language of character can be the basis for constructive dialogue when there are disagreements in a school community
not believe that they are only about one group within society or one social class. I believe they are crosscutting in many ways, although they may be different according to social class or particular groups and cultures.
For example, some schools organise regular workshops for parents or members of the school community to learn about the school’s character education provisions and to discuss common moral and educational dilemmas involving difficult decisions that affect character. Whatever practical approaches are used, the key principle is the idea that schools, families and communities try to work together in partnership. On the basis of that partnership, which includes a common language of character, we hope that difficult and complex conversations will be easier to hold and resolve as a result of the trust and sense of common purpose that has been established.
by Ana Moreno Salvo
He is the president of the Open Education Association. He holds a degree in Physics from the Complutense University of Madrid. He works as an independent education consultant in the fields of educational innovation, educational technology and public policy in education. He is a member of the Conocimiento Abierto para la Acción Social CAAS research group at the University of Granada and the DIME (Docentes para la Inclusión y la Mejora Educativa) group, among others.
If we consider that educating means preparing a person for the world and the society in which they are going to live, what do you think are the key aspects of educating children and young people in the age of artificial intelligence?
From a very general standpoint, we could say that educating has to do with giving those we educate the words and ability to think in order to understand the world in which they are living. I would say that one of the main purposes of education is to help children, adolescents and young people to be able to read, interpret and act on the world in which they are living. What we have
to ask ourselves is whether, as we are educating them, we are giving them that ability to understand the world in today’s schools. This has to do with understanding the environmental crisis we are experiencing and the social injustices and inequalities that still surround us all. And we could also
Educating is helping people to be able to read the world, interpret it and to act on the world in which they live
say that understanding the world today has a lot to do with what is happening with technology, for example.
Therefore, the first question we should ask ourselves is whether at school, that is, the entire initial formative stage, which we could even extend to higher education, either vocational training or university, we are helping young people, children and adolescents and young adults and giving them the tools to understand this techrelated world.
There is a lot of talk about the importance of personalised, deep and lifelong learning, but the
complexity of school education makes this difficult. How can technology help to improve the quality of education?
Well, we don’t really know. We’re always trying to figure that out. Actually, there has always been a lot of technology at school. Schools are a technological device, perhaps not the way we view that term now as information technology or something that comes out of technical, technological or scientific advances. But if we think a little about the history of schools, they are full of technology, sometimes simply things that we take for granted and do not notice. Books are an incredible technology that have lasted a long
Schools live with technology, but each innovation brings promises that are not always fulfilled
time, yet they are still on students’ desks and make a school a school. But the organisation of schools themselves, by age groups, levels and subjects, is basically a type of technology, a technology that seeks specific results.
In the last 100 years, when we think about education and schools
and their improvement, the kind of technologies that we think of are linked to information. And now, in the last year and a half, although we have been talking about it for a few years now, we keep talking about AI, artificial intelligence, especially generative artificial intelligence, and its impact on education, and whether it is going to help us or hinder us. Three years ago, we were talking about the metaverse. Five years ago, we were talking about the impact of online learning platforms; in the 1970s it was about video or computers; in the 1950s and 1960s we talked about television, about that whole movement, about educational
television and how it was going to transform schools. Even further back, we could see how when radio appeared and became widespread, we also immediately imagined whether this instrument was going to help us to improve education.
Universal schools, the schools we have today, the schools that educate everyone and that aim to
educate everyone, live with these paradoxes, these tensions. It is very difficult to focus on the individual, on personalisation, and to attend to differences and diversities. And this has been the case for at least the last few decades.
Therefore, every time one of these technologies appears, we dream that it will help us to do what we want to do, what we say schools should be doing, which is attend to the interests and the
The biggest risk of AI is to think of it as a magical solution to complex social and educational problems
differences that our students show in the classroom, which we are apparently unable to do. And we are once again pouring all our hopes into this technology that is going to help us personalise education, or save time, or help us, like helping to eliminate their bureaucratic tasks so teachers can focus on what really matters, which is educating. This is a promise that is floating around but has never been fulfilled. I am not saying it’s not possible with technology, but it probably requires us to think a little bit beyond technology.
If we really want to serve everyone at school, if we really no one to be left behind, perhaps we need to invest more; perhaps we need to transform the way we organise schools; perhaps we need to invest more in transforming the curriculum; perhaps we need to invest more in teacher training in order to change the way we understand why it is important to educate, what expectations we should have of each student, what
If we are able to make artificial intelligence educational, it will probably be an opportunity for the education system
the main difficulties that teachers face every day when they have a classroom of 30 totally different people in front of them.
In other words, it seems that technology can help us. We are not going to squander this promise, but it is clear that we have to make interventions that have to do with social factors, and resources, with how we really take this promise of inclusion and diversity seriously. And on this path of taking this commitment to educating everyone based on personalisation seriously, we will probably be able to make much better use of this promise of technology.
Since the emergence of generative AI, there has been a lot of speculation on the risks and opportunities it brings. What do you think is the greatest risk and the greatest opportunity it could bring to the world of education?
The greatest risk with AI, or one of the greatest risks to not overstate it, is thinking of it as a solution, which is a bit like what I was saying before, that is, thinking that AI is going to solve the social-educational problems we have, which, I repeat, have more to do with people’s living conditions, the resources we invest, teacher training, the structure of schools and families’ expectations. Education is tremendously complex, and to think that AI or any other technology will solve these problems in and of themselves would be a great risk. It would be equally risky to not take AI or
technology seriously, or to deny it, exclude it, take it out of education, think that we have to ban it, think that it is not worth incorporating it into school learning, that is, persisting in the idea of a school disconnected from life, which we like more because it is less technological.
Therefore, the first two risks are like twins but almost opposites. On the one hand, one risk would be thinking that everything will be solved with technology, in this case AI. And the other major risk would be thinking that AI is an evil thing that we have to exclude from the education of children, adolescents and young people, and from schools. What might the greatest opportunity be? We have yet to see it, but for technology to be an opportunity and not a necessity, for it to really be a lever of transformation for schools, we probably have to ponder a lot more what artificial intelligence means for education. And pondering does not mean setting it aside but rather opening the black box, understanding what’s behind it, what the interests are. Somehow, the opportunity will come if we are able to make AI truly educational, that is, if we are able to incorporate the values that we consider important in education, such as attending to everyone, attending to inclusion, attending to diversity, using certain pedagogies and not others. If we are able to make AI educational, it will probably be an opportunity for the education system, but that remains to be seen.
Technology is increasingly present and integrated in all areas of life. How does this omnipresence affect education and specifically a good education for children and young people? Whether we like it or not, technology is part of our lives. It
always has been, but these current technologies are more omnipresent than ever. They give us possibilities to do things we couldn’t do before, but they also create complexities and difficulties that we still don’t know how to handle.
It is essential to keep in mind that we are surrounded by technology. Human beings have advanced thanks to technology almost since we were carving flint. There have been different technologies in every era, and this includes not only tools but also the ecosystem in which we live, which affects how we understand, interact and work.
A few decades ago, we decided as a society that we educate for life, not just for work or basic literacy, but in a holistic way. We equip students with tools, critical thinking and words to understand and act in the world. And if life is full of technology, schools also have to educate in and with technology.
At school, technologies impose a pedagogy, often behaviourist, based on repetition, punishment and reward. However, classroom pedagogies tend to be more socioconstructivist, making knowledge and what we use it for meaningful.
A specific subject isn’t needed; as we teach students to think historically or mathematically, we should also teach them to think digitally and to be critical of technology.
The Internet and social media have a huge influence on shaping people’s thinking and ways of life. Many people fear that AI is a new tool for manipulating and
We educate for life and if life is full of technology, school also have to educate in and with technology
shaping the way people think and act. How can we empower children and young people at school to grow up to be free and socially engaged citizens?
By taking artificial intelligence seriously at school, that is, not by leaving it out but by using it as a learning object in the classroom environment, just as we have done with other fields and other forces that shape our way of thinking. And it is important that we do this. Taking artificial intelligence seriously means educating in technology first and foremost, but also with technology. This means using technology to understand how we can do it. I think that’s the way forward.
Of course technology can manipulate us and shape the way we think. Moreover, it is the perfect economic ally of the society in which we are living. You don’t have to think about these things separately.
In the last 30 or 40 years, we have been living in what some call a period of absolute economic neoliberalism, based fundamentally on consumption, spending, the increase in the consumption of goods that perhaps we don’t need, the increase in constantly fulfilling the urge that we want something so we get it now. And technology is the perfect ally in this society that we have created, which is growing.
So, part of what we have to do is at least make this evident, make it clear that there is a kind of alliance between this way of understanding the world, which is a predatory, consumerist world that generates inequality, and the way technology drives us to spend more, to have more and as soon as possible, and not to stop and control our desires, which are always here, now and quickly.
Asking schools to fight this is very difficult, and it is asking too much, but it is certainly a place where
The goal is to understand the implications that these technologies have in our lives and the world in general
if we educate in justice, equality, democracy, understanding that not everyone has everything, if we instil these types of fundamental values and human rights, this will come out as a contradiction with our way of life and we will probably train people who are at least capable of questioning this way of life, where the economy and technology are very closely linked.
Sometimes there is speculation about a not-too-distant future when machines will play an increasingly prominent role while human beings will gradually recede. Do you think it is reasonable to think that this might happen, and how could schools provide a kind a preventive education given this possibility?
This question also has to do with what some call the myth of artificial intelligence. It’s nothing new. Since the 1950s, we, or some of us, have built a myth around artificial intelligence, either warning us or promising us that a time is going to come when machines, robots and technology are going to be more capable and intelligent than us and are somehow going be able to totally replace us. This is what some call the Technological Singularity, that is, the moment when we lose control over the technology we ourselves have created. This kind of threat has been with us since the 1940s and 1950s. Science fiction has fleshed it out, and now we get these devices that we casually call artificial intelligence, even though
they are neither intelligent in human terms - they have nothing to do with our intelligence - nor are they artificial, because they actually consume resources and are physical artefacts. Artificial intelligence reappears, and we’re told that in a few years these machines will think for themselves, learn for themselves and somehow surpass us, and we will be controlled by robots that will be smarter than us, almost like in ‘Planet of the Apes’.
In fact, nothing we have right now seems to be going in that direction. After all, calling artificial intelligence intelligent, when it is a device that is fundamentally a question of statistics or probability, is stretching the concepts too far.
On the other hand, what this does require of us as a society is to take technology and artificial intelligence seriously. And that means taking it seriously at school, among other things. So we don’t need a kind of education that protects us. Instead, we need a kind of education that allows us to understand and question what is happening, understand and question many of the difficulties we have. But we also need schools that allow us to make better use of technologies and artificial intelligence, to figure out what their limits are, to know how to use them for what we need, not the other way around.
In short, we need to educate. It is very important to educate, not so much with but especially in technology. The goal is less how to use it, because that can be learned, but more to understand the implications that these technologies have in our lives and the world in general, for better or for worse.
José Víctor Orón Semper (Madrid) is a teacher, trainer and researcher. He has a PhD in Education from the University of Navarra and is currently developing the project ‘UPTOYOU, Accompanying growth’ dedicated to the personal training of educators. His field of research is an educational model centred on interpersonal relationships complemented by other related topics like emotional education, educational neuroscience and the psychology of human development.
by Ana Moreno Salvo
ORÓN SEMPER
The mission of the UPTOYOU project is quality education. Could you explain your vision of education in today’s world and society?
The truth is that education today relies more on things than on people and more on what the person knows how to do than on who the person is. This leads to problems, because it is a kind of competency-centred education, that is, one in which the person has a lot of power to transform reality for whatever life they may have. It thinks that providing tools without training people is a resource. And from the very origin of education, that has been known not to work. In other words, knowing how to use a
hammer very well without knowing whether the hammer is being used to hammer nails or to hit people is a bit ridiculous. And this current division in education aims for grand horizons and a new world, but at the operational level it is losing its purpose and focusing simply on the means or instruments, that is, on competencies.
What we propose is an education integrated in meaning. That means that we work on mathematics,
Education today is more focused on what the person knows how to do than on who the person is
history or whatever so that the person grows as a person. And when we talk about personal growth, we are referring to self-knowledge, to the knowledge of why you live the way you do, and to taking decisions about who you want to be in your relationships with others. If studying English or geography is an opportunity for students to get to know themselves, take charge of their lives and take decisions about the way they live and relate to others, the subject becomes very interesting. Another type of motivation and excitement appears from that, another way of working. If students see that they are simply being forced to meet others’ interests, then they say: ‘What does that have to do with my life?’ I believe
that children rebel against what we adults have naturalised as a way of living life and working; this adolescent rebelliousness is much healthier than it would be in adults, who have already become socialised and have shifted to a more conformist model.
What role do relationships play in people’s growth and therefore in education?
The connection between people and education is total. The most important thing in people’s lives is their interpersonal relationships, so why not put what we do at the service of what we know is the most important thing in life? Moreover, studies on the importance of highquality interpersonal relationships in a person’s life and development are clear. Likewise, when you
The quality of education is by the educator’s personal quality, not by their technical training
study how human beings learn and make reality meaningful, it turns out that everything becomes meaningful because of the way a person experiences their interpersonal relationships.
It is common knowledge that the quality of education is determined by the educator’s personal qualities, not by their technical training, which is obviously desirable. When I was teaching, I would often say to my students: ‘If you are bad students, you are not students’. Why aren’t they students?
Because deep down they don’t see the value in it, even if they are clever. Why should they get involved in something that has no value? It started in my first years of teaching, and people still talk about school failure. And when you begin to look deeper, you discover that school failure in itself does not exist. What tends to happen is that some people’s lives are unstructured and they don’t know how to situate themselves, and this manifests itself in many aspects, including school failure. In my opinion, a student who fails everything is just as problematic as a student who passes everything with A’s simply because that is what’s expected of them. What is happening to them as a person? How are they growing? What is new for them? What are they contributing? And my experience is that when you focus on the person and their
personal reality, everything else falls into place.
Another key aspect of UPTOYOU is emotions Why are emotions so important in education?
This could actually be the title of a book, "The Sad Origin of Emotional Education". Its origin historically is the business world, not the world of education. It’s about that businessman who know that he wants to make money, but he has a problem. As a person, there are days when he goes with the flow and other days when he goes against it. And in order to make money, this businessman wants to control everything, not only all the external elements, but even his own internal elements. He becomes his own worst enemy and then has to control his emotions to always get what he wants. That is why almost all emotional education proposals seek to identify emotions in order to regulate them. But he also discovers that this has to be done with the workers, not just with himself. After all, if they don’t know how to set problems aside, they don’t do what they have to do in the company, which is to work to fulfil the boss’s goals.
And a third dimension appears, which is how you can influence others, because if you are aware of how you move, speak and suggest, you can really engage in emotional manipulation. This was born in the business world with this vision, and it has been shifted to the world of education, although some things have changed. Instead of a boss it is a teacher; instead of an employee it is a student; and instead of making money it is training the student.
Emotions are the expression of the complexity of life at a particular moment in time
But it’s the same idea. Moreover, conceptually speaking, it sprang from a misconception of emotions. Emotions are viewed as a kind of reaction to something that impacts you and generates an emotional state in you that you need to control or regulate.
Emotions have much more to do with expressing the complexity of life at a particular moment and, therefore, they’re about the person. For example, a father shouts at his son and the son says to him: ‘Why are you shouting at me?’, and the father says: ‘Because you made me nervous’. This parent is profoundly ignorant of what emotions are, because it seems that the child has passed on their nervousness to the father. It is wanting to make the other person responsible for what are actually inner dynamics that are manifesting themselves in certain contexts.
The person needs to know, not to identify. Nor is it a question of regulating; it is a question of acting. This is why it is very important to point out that we work a lot on emotions, but from this different perspective. We want people to be people and bring out their full potential. I don’t agree with focusing on competencies, but I am not criticising competencies per se. The goal is knowing how to put competencies at the service of interpersonal relationships. Emotional experience is very important, but it is essential to place it in an adequate conceptual framework, which is not viewing emotions as a kind of reaction to an event.
The first thing to understand is that the most important decision is knowing that what a person is deciding is who they want to be, not what they want to do. There is
The most important decision is knowing that what a person is deciding is who they want to be
a Canadian Jesuit philosopher who said: ‘The way I act presupposes a way of being and promotes a way of being’. You have to know that this is the core of decision-making. And then, with the formation of character, virtue and the whole, we sometimes start from certain semi-dogmas. The first is educating in a way of being, ignoring the fact that the child already has a way of being. By the time they’re five, their whole character is already defined. That doesn’t mean that it’s not open to change, because as long as we are alive there is the possibility of growth. So, first and foremost, people need to understand their current way of being. Instead of putting a kind of pre-set list of goals that people have to achieve, instead of taking people out of their reality, why not approach character education in way that helps people to know and embrace their reality? Everyone who has worked on the theme of growth, despite all the different expressions and different ways, has suggested that there is no way to grow except by accepting one’s own reality.
In addition to relationships and emotions, UPTOYOU considers experience to be a valuable aspect of people’s growth. What role does it play in the educational model? Experience is the person’s confluence with the world and their relations. Experiencing by touching things is not experience. Experience is the confluence of who we are in our relations with the world itself. That’s where people get to know
themselves, others and the world at the same time.
At all times, in all circumstances, one is always experiencing. Even when the teacher says: let them experience, let them touch. What they may be experiencing there is the teacher’s abandonment, because the child is pitted against the world if the teacher is taken out of the classroom. And so what they are experiencing is, in fact, abandonment.
What often happens? The teacher speaks from the mindset of someone who has already experienced abandonment. And then the children don’t understand this language, because they start to speak from the particular to the general. When human beings learn something, they always go from the general to the particular, not from the particular to the general. However, when someone already knows a lot, they tend to go from the particular to the general. But teachers should not speak for those who already know; they have to speak to encourage processes. And therefore, teachers should not present their classes based on the particularity that they already know, their entire world of details, but instead support students in such a way that they will be able to learn much more quickly. And this is a key factor that teachers have to take into account when designing their classes. For example, experience is not pouring sulphuric acid onto marble to see if CO₂ is produced to find out if it is real or fake marble; this would be an experiment. Experience is about what teachers suggest students do that includes personal elements,
Experience is where people get to know themselves, others and the world at the same time
relational elements and elements of the world all together, and how should they support this to unpack all the elements? By doing this, the students learn it in such a way that they can then make better use of what they have learned. Because from an integrated experience between the person, the world and the other, they will then be able to use things by introducing ethics from the beginning. This competency-centred education, which leaves out the personal, ends up nullifying ethics.
In what sense is UPTOYOU an educational model more than a method?
The difference between model and method is simple. A method tells you what to do. When supporting growth, UPTOYOU does not have methodological elements such as books for tutorials. A model is an attempt to answer the big questions of education. What is education? What are the keys to it? What does education seek? What is the role of interpersonal relationships in education? What we want to do is to primarily focus on being able to develop an educational model that we know meets needs, and that is not original to us. What we are doing in supporting growth may be novel, but it is not new. It seems novel because, in the current context, no one speaks with such power about the person.
In fact, in many places where we go to give training, people are often happy because they find an orderly presentation of something that they already had in their hearts, namely the desire to focus on the person. To do this, we have to help the person to be a person, to be the author or the creator of their own life. And this cannot mean telling others what to do. In other words, the goal isn’t to give others thoughts but to help them to think. The goal isn’t to give others your assessments
so they copy them but to help them learn how to assess. You shouldn’t tell them how to behave but help them to know how to contextualise and translate their positions into behaviour according to contexts. And in that sense, we are a model. There are teachers who don’t take responsibility when it comes to deciding how to intervene or what methodology to use. The goal is not to lose sight of the focus on the person. Because if the teacher is a ‘programme implementer’, the child will be a ‘programme executor’. If we want the teacher to promote the child’s authorship and creativity, we need training that promotes the teacher’s creativity. When the bulk of training in an institution is focused on methodologies, not the teacher as a person, what is the teacher going to do naturally when they reach the classroom? They are not going to focus on the student as a person; they will focus on doing things the way they should be done.
How do you approach teacher, leader and family training at UPTOYOU?
The training is personal and person-centred so participants can get to know themselves and be able to act on their own reality. Formal university training and the majority of postgraduate courses focus on methodologies or organisational and pedagogical issues. Many of the institutions that support their teachers offer identity-based training courses, and all of them are necessary. But the question is: What about the teacher’s personal training? In other words, why should a teacher be sensitive to the complexity of a student’s life? A teacher is only going to be sensitive to the complexity of a student’s life and will not be satisfied with superficial interpretations if they experience it themselves. If the teacher is living in an accelerated, rushed fashion,
ignoring their own inner life because they are constantly putting out fires everywhere, they will be unable to support children in their situation even if they want to.
The teacher needs to do this exercise of reconsidering questions like what kind of self-esteem am I going to promote in children? A teacher need to re-understand their own self-esteem in all its depth, understand that their life is meaningful through their relationships with others. Then they will be able to promote a different kind of self-esteem. We offer trainings that are designed for participants to work on themselves
and focus on the things they have to do with their students.
We focus a lot on the foundations, the anthropology of education. We work on personal experience with tools that enable self-knowledge and decision-making. We help to work on support, on how to talk with children, how to turn conversation into the teacher’s most valuable educational instrument with the students. So, we work a lot on dialogue and teaching. We have gradually been venturing into other areas of training, such as mental health issues, to avoid withdrawing into oneself and instead knowing how to open ourselves up to the complexity and discover that
mental health is impossible without personal health.
We have also developed a way to view education from birth to age five in a new book, "The Cradle of Humanity". This is training for early childhood teachers so they can overcome reductive views. Children need routines, but sometimes educators need routines for their psychological peace of mind than more than children do for their process. Interaction platforms are sought to follow up on the training courses so they can be transferred to day-to-day life in the classroom, so there ends up being a clear transformation.
INTERVIEW WITH JOANNE QUINN
Learning as a driver of global change p. 66
JOSÉ MANUEL LÓPEZ POTENTE
AIRISS model: Six Character Strengths for the Twenty-first Century p. 74
INTERVIEW WITH EDWARD BROOKS
Educating for global leadership p. 76
JOSÉ MARÍA RUIZ PALOMO
The experience of IES Cartima p. 82
Joanne Quinn (Toronto) is the global director of New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (NPDL), where she leads a global innovation partnership involving twenty countries working together to activate deep, learner-centred, real-world learning by fostering the competencies known as the 6Cs. She is also an internationally renowned consultant, speaker and author on learning, leadership and system change. She is the co-author of "The Drivers: Transforming Learning for Students, Schools and Systems" (Corwin, 2024) "Dive Into Deep Learning: Tools for Engagement" (Corwin, 2019), "Deep Learning: Engage the World Change the World" (Corwin, 2017) and "Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts and Systems" (Corwin, 2015).
New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (NPDL) is a global innovation partnership committed to transforming learning so that all learners thrive by developing the six global competencies - citizenship, character, communication, critical thinking, collaboration and creativity - they need to flourish in this complex and everchanging world. Deep Learning includes a set of collaborative learning tools and processes that transform teachers into activators and architects of learning.
Deep Learning transforms education and prepares students for twenty-first-century challenges
by Ana Moreno Salvo
Deep Learning enables educational innovation on a global scale in tune with the needs of the twenty-first century and educating the world. Could you explain why you chose ‘Engage the WorldChange the World’ and how you talk about the project?
The complexity of society, the global challenges and the speed of change were evident a decade ago. This highlighted the need for students to develop a new set of global competencies to navigate this turbulence.
We began the Deep Learning work ‘to foster deep learning so that all learners contribute to the common good, address global challenges and flourish in a complex world’. We almost immediately saw that this real-world approach to learning was intrinsically motivating and energising because it made sense.
The phrase ‘Engage the World
- Change the World’ evolved to capture the duality of humanity’s need to develop individual potential while also contributing to society, that is, ‘being good at learning and good at living’.
The hyper-connectedness of today’s world means that in addition to internal development, young people also have to possess the skills to collaborate and problemsolve with others from a wide range of cultures and backgrounds. The good news is that students crave that opportunity. They are no longer content to read what others have done in textbooks but want to tackle authentic issues. We need to make learning as addictive as social media, which means real-time interaction and the ability to see results.
We recently asked a group of secondary school students whether it was an overblown expectation to suggest that they tackle the important issues like climate change
and equality. They seemed perplexed by the question and quickly said: ‘Of course we want to improve the world, whether in our school, in our community or by solving the big problems. This is our future and we are ready to embrace it.’
‘Engage the World - Change the World’ thus embodies the philosophy that students learn for today and don’t have to wait to use that learning in the distant future.
The six educational objectives of Deep Learning are: Character, Citizenship, Collaboration, Communication, Creativity and Critical Thinking. They all prioritise education in being for learners. Could you explain to us why you chose them and especially why you consider character important, which few other systems do?
Deep Learning is now a global association in more than twenty countries. The global competencies
In Deep Learning, students learn for today and don’t wait to use that learning in the distant future
emerged from conversations with our members around the world a decade ago.
We started with a simple question: ‘What do we want students to know, to be able to do and to be?’ These simple questions generated rich responses that were very consistent across all groups: parents, employers, educators and students. The words might vary, but when the groups reached consensus, six competencies emerged: Character, Citizenship, Collaboration, Communication, Creativity and Critical Thinking. These competencies have withstood the test of time and are even more essential today as a basis for navigating a complex world. But six words were not enough: each of the six competencies has a set of specific dimensions that describe the key aspects of each and the way to develop it.
The terms Character and
Citizenship were complicated because they have different meanings depending on context and culture.
As partners of Global, we chose the word ‘Character’ to describe three fundamental internal dimensions or attributes:
– Developing the social and emotional traits to be a lifelong learner capable of self-direction.
– Possessing tenacity, perseverance and resilience.
– Being capable of demonstrating empathy, compassion and integrity in action.
Citizenship in our model refers to the external demonstration of character and has three fundamental dimensions:
– Global perspective.
– Commitment to human equity and well-being through empathy and compassion for diverse values and worldviews.
– Genuine interest in human and environmental sustainability. One idea is that character has been readily assumed and serves as a catalyst for the other five. It seems that the need for lifelong learning, with empathy and appreciation of different perspectives, crosses all boundaries in today’s globally connected society.
The goal is to change the world through education with the cooperation of different countries in ‘New Pedagogies for Deep Learning’. Why seek cultural change and not settle for a programme? How does it affect the students involved, their schools, teachers or communities? The answer is simple: programmes come and go at the whim of leaders, budgets, politics and trends. Based on our work in the field of large-scale change, we know that positive, deep change has to be rooted in a strong culture of learning.
In our book "Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts, and Systems", we wrote about the need for a new dynamic
of change. The days of ‘rolling out’ multi-year implementation plans are long gone. Innovations are living, evolving entities. They need clarity of purpose, objectives and a strategy to mobilise people, but they have to be able to adjust and pivot in this rapidly changing world.
This is where the culture of learning plays a critical role. Once people are engaged and try new ideas, this builds their capacity. They become more involved as they develop their capacity and begin to see results. In this way, the shared purpose and the learning culture reinforce each other. The culture needs to be nurtured to sustain itself, but that emerges as people learn and grow together, find better ways to solve problems and see the impact.
We wanted sustainability, so we knew it was time to move beyond ‘fixing’ parts of the system and instead to take a systemic perspective. Deep Learning was conceived as a new mindset that encompasses everything we know about organisational learning and change. Deep Learning became an umbrella or reference point that signalled that all change would be connected to purpose. Just as we know that students need lifelong learning to navigate the massive changes ahead, so do adults and organisations.
Our framework for deep learning is as simple as it is necessary to cut across contexts and countries, but it has to be comprehensive. It includes the six competencies needed by everyone (learners and adults) and four elements of learning design that support the development of deep learning experiences. Surrounding the learning approach are learning conditions that organisations need to foster for learning to take root.
We see examples of its impact in classrooms and schools in all twenty countries. Recently, Sarah Fine and Jal Mehta wrote an article (‘A “Big Tent” Strategy for System-
Wide Transformation’) in which they explored real stories of sustained change in learning, teaching and leadership driven by a relentless focus on creating the conditions for all students to develop the six global competencies. The study was conducted at the Ottawa Catholic School Board. In their research, they saw that each classroom became a space where young people from diverse backgrounds explore big ideas from multiple perspectives, practise the 6 Cs and become the change agents the world so desperately needs. What is impressive is that Deep Learning has become embedded throughout the system and its community. It has become widely taken up. Its success is a shared enterprise.
This kind of transformation cannot come from a single programme: sustainable change can only come from a change in coherent and widely accepted goals and practices.
At Deep Learning, you achieve excellence and equity. What are the keys to making this happen? Equity is a very broad issue, and while we haven’t solved inequality, we do see some glimpses of progress. I noted earlier that when we started, our aim was to create deep learning for everyone, so all the decisions we made when creating the approach were aimed at making the framework accessible to everyone. We wanted to avoid being an enrichment or gifted programme; instead, we wanted to provide strategies and approaches that would foster success for all children, regardless of their background or circumstances. Our approach is asset, not deficit-based, and based on learners’ needs and interests.
To support this goal, we design learning using four elements or decision points. Two elements that have a major impact on both learning and equity are learning partnerships and learning environments
Learning partnerships focus on relationships: student-to-student, student-to-teacher and everyone-tocommunity. By being explicit about how to create a meaningful voice, choice and instruction for students, teachers ensure that students have a say in the design of learning. This addresses the power imbalance that occurs when teachers take all the decisions. Students feel that they have more control, that their interests and talents are recognised and that they are more engaged and motivated.
The second element that impacts equity is the learning environments, which address the learning culture established. Human beings need to feel safe and sense that they are valued and belong to a group in order to learn effectively. These are the same factors that contribute to well-being. Being explicit about establishing a culture that honours the diversity and gifts that students bring to the learning situation increases their confidence and ultimately their engagement and performance.
Respectful relationships and a culture of belonging create learning that is authentic and intrinsically more engaging. The pedagogy uses interactive approaches that value all types of learning and offer a variety of ways for students to demonstrate their learning. For example, students may lack reading and writing skills since the pandemic, but they are quite capable of thinking and articulating at sophisticated levels. Rather than focusing on what they
We know that positive and profound change have to be rooted in a strong learning culture
In Deep Learning, we wanted to provide strategies and approaches that foster success for all children
lack, students have multiple options for demonstrating what they have learned. We focus on what they know and can do.
This combination of strategies, learning partnerships and learning environments creates an environment focused on success rather than deficits. This mutual reinforcement is what is helping to move the needle on equity and well-being.
How do you create a Deep Learning environment that prepares students to change the world?
It would be a daunting task to set out to teach students to change the world. The good news is that humans are social beings by nature who seek connection and meaning. Traditional schooling was more unnatural, as we expected students to sit and listen endlessly and accept that they had to solve twenty problems by the end of the chapter, and we assumed that one day those skills would help them.
Watch a young child for thirty minutes and you’ll see their natural curiosity to solve problems, be creative and communicate. Deep Learning harnesses that natural curiosity and hunger for social connection to design learning environments that pose real problems and opportunities. When learning makes sense, motivation and engagement soar. When students analyse a problem or situation, they are drawn to want to do something about it. It can be as simple as finding a way to bring water to the garden from another part of the school.
Deep Learning intentionally develops the six competencies so that students have the skills, knowledge and attributes they need
to succeed in their lives. As they gain knowledge about themselves and their environment, they can make informed decisions about how they want to influence their families, their community and even the world.
If you had to prioritise educating in three values and three character traits or virtues from the Deep Learning framework, which ones would you choose and why?
The six competencies are not in competition with each other but are an integrated whole. They are all essential, but they’re required with different emphases in different tasks or interactions. It is rare to find a job or pursue a career that does not require all six competencies to varying degrees. And they are just as important in our personal lives as we communicate and collaborate with others and use creative and critical thinking to discern options and solve problems. Character and citizenship are crucial in guiding our behaviour. While all six are essential, there is an increasing focus on critical thinking so that students can discern what is real and what is fake in a world of artificial intelligence (AI). This capacity for discernment translates into the competencies of character (the internal ability to learn, be compassionate and act with integrity) and citizenship (the outward-facing attributes that make them contributors to society).
At a time when artificial intelligence is storming onto the scene at all levels, how is Deep
Learning dealing with this new technological revolution?
AI suddenly permeates every aspect of life. Harnessing digital technologies has always been one of our four elements of learning design, and we want to allow deep learning to respond to the advent of AI. Technology is now in a position to help us re-imagine learning. The pandemic certainly raised the awareness and capacity of technology, but it also highlighted the crucial importance of relationships in a digital environment.
Generative AI is showing potential new tools that can change the way the learning process unfolds, but it requires significant discrimination. It should be viewed through the lens of critical thinking with awareness of the global and local impact.
We and our partners are exploring AI applications that help teachers design and assess deep learning. As AI takes over some aspects of routine learning, teachers can focus on enriching interactive experiences and collaboration. Here are two examples. Our network in Uruguay is focusing on ways to use AI to improve its outreach in remote communities, but is doing so on the basis of Deep Learning. In a very different context, in Ottawa, Canada, we have a school board that embraces AI exploration not as an innovation but as an enhancement of its focus on Deep Learning. It is asking how AI can amplify learning.
In the end, the positive use of AI will depend on the degree of good judgement and discernment of teachers, learners and leaders. These are challenging but exciting times, and the possibilities are exponential as we work with our ecosystem of partners.
Being explicit about a culture that honours students’ gifts increases their confidence, engagement and achievement
by José Manuel López Potente
Education today faces the challenge of developing well-rounded individuals who are prepared for an ever-changing world. This requires not only developing academic competencies but also cultivating essential life skills. In this context, the AIRISS model is presented as a holistic approach focusing on the development of six character strengths: Autonomy, Identity, Resilience, Integrity, Sociability and Wisdom These strengths not only prepare students for the personal and social challenges of the twenty-first century but also foster values education, with families playing a key role.
This article explains what the AIRISS model is, how it can be implemented in the classroom and the importance of supporting families during their children’s educational process.
THE SIX CHARACTER STRENGTHS IN THE AIRISS MODEL
At the core of the AIRISS model is the development of six character strengths that are fundamental to students’ growth in today’s world. Below, we outline each of these strengths and their importance in the educational process.
Autonomy is a person’s ability to take decisions for themselves consciously and responsibly. In the context of education, it means that students not only gain knowledge but also develop the ability to manage their own learning, take informed decisions and accept responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
The key to fostering autonomy is preparing students to be curious, proactive, self-directed and capable of facing new challenges. Teachers play a crucial role in providing an environment that promotes reflection, decision-making and personal responsibility. This is achieved through activities that challenge students to solve problems for themselves and reflect on their choices.
Autonomy is not just an academic skill but a strength that extends to everyday life, from managing emotions to taking moral decisions. In the AIRISS model, students learn to regulate their urges and defer gratification when needed, thus enhancing their self-control. In addition, they have the opportunity to develop a healthy interdependence in their relationships and a sense of meaning and purpose in what they do.
2. Identity
Identity is students’ ability to know themselves, understand their values, strengths and limitations and act accordingly. This strength is essential for the development of healthy self-esteem and a personal life plan.
The AIRISS model aims for students to develop a strong identity based on self-awareness and self-respect, and to interact with others assertively. Through activities that promote personal reflection, metacognition and self-awareness, teachers can help students to build their identity coherently and consistently. In addition, it is important to create an environment where students feel safe to express who they are, value differences and work on their personal growth.
A clear, positive identity is essential for students to deal with life’s challenges with confidence and a sense of mission. The construction of this identity is a process that involves both the learner and their family and school environment.
3. Resilience
Resilience is the ability to overcome difficulties, adapt to change and emerge stronger from adversity. When educating students, this strength is crucial so they can face the challenges in school and their personal lives.
The AIRISS model fosters resilience by helping students to develop tools to manage stress, overcome failure and learn from it. Teachers should create optimistic environments where mistakes are considered a normal part of learning, forgiveness is encouraged and effort and perseverance are valued over immediate results. This involves seeing problems and obstacles with hope, as opportunities for growth, and having the ability to find creative solutions.
Resilience is also worked on with families to help them to understand the importance of not overprotecting children and young people but instead empowering them and allowing them to learn from their own mistakes and challenges, thus fostering an inner strength that will be useful throughout their lives.
4. Integrity
Integrity refers to acting in accordance with personal
and ethical values and standing firm on the principles that guide our actions. In education, this strength is fundamental in developing people who are loyal, sincere, responsible and consistent in their values and beliefs.
In the AIRISS model, integrity is fostered by teaching students to take ethical decisions, even when they are difficult or unpopular. Teachers can raise debates about ethical and moral dilemmas in the classroom to help students to develop critical thinking about what is right and wrong and act with commitment in their interpersonal relationships.
In addition, integrity is reinforced by the example provided by teachers and families. Students learn as much from what they are taught as from what they observe in those around them, so it is essential that both school and home promote behaviour consistent with the values they wish to promote.
5.
Sociability is the ability to interact with others respectfully and effectively. It involves social-emotional skills such as empathy, listening, communication, cooperation and peaceful conflict resolution. The AIRISS model understands that human beings are interdependent, that we share a natural world and that the common good and social well-being depend on our ability to interact and collaborate with others. In the classroom, teachers can encourage sociability through cooperation, activities that promote dialogue, respect for a diversity of opinions and values related to a job well done or an ethic of excellence and sustainability. In addition,
PHYSICAL value of things personal management healthy life authenticitysustainability value of life
EMOTIONAL self-control emotional awarenessoptimismself-esteem empathy
SOCIAL interdependence assertiveness forgivenessloyalty and sincerity communication service
RATIONAL curiosity metacognition creativity and imagination critical thinking work and cooperation strategic thinking
TRASCENDENT meaning and purpose mission hopecommitment love global vision flexibility
Teachers need to create optimistic environments, where mistakes are considered a normal part of learning
it is important to teach students to resolve conflicts constructively, always seeking solutions where both parties benefit (win-win approach), as well as personal appreciation for people.
The development of this strength also involves families, who should foster their children’s ability to interact positively with others based on mutual respect and understanding.
Wisdom refers to not only academic knowledge but also the ability to take decisions with a global vision so that they benefit the people involved and bring added value. Therefore, it means they act judiciously and in solidarity with everyone. This requires acting flexibly, judiciously and ethically. In the AIRISS model, wisdom involves using knowledge, experience and values to guide actions to serve the common good and respect for the dignity of all human life.
Teachers can promote wisdom in students by encouraging critical reflection on complex decisions and having them analyse the consequences of their actions and consider the ethical values underlying each choice. It is essential for students to learn to act with strategic thinking, not only in terms of their immediate desires but also by thinking about the long-term impact of their decisions on their own lives and the lives of others.
As a strength, wisdom is closely related to self-knowledge and reflection, skills that need to be developed in both the school and family environment.
At AIRISS, the teacher plays an essential role that goes beyond transmitting academic knowledge to foster integral growth that encompasses the emotional, social, physical, rational and transcendent dimensions. The teacher becomes a creator of meaningful experiences in the classroom by designing activities that encourage reflection, collaboration and self-knowledge. These activities seek to not only develop cognitive competencies but also promote growth in the six strengths of the AIRISS model. By focusing learning on the process and not just the outcomes, teachers create
a positive emotional climate where each student feels valued and motivated to explore their personal and collective potential.
The personal tutor is a key figure in the implementation of personalised education within the AIRISS model. Through regular meetings with students and their families, the tutor personalises growth strategies based on each student’s strengths and areas for improvement. This close support allows AIRISS proposals to be uniquely adapted to each student, guiding them in their personal and formative development and aligning their personal goals with the educational objectives. The tutor is not only in charge of academic monitoring but also cultivates the virtues and skills each student needs to face challenges in a resilient, ethical and purposeful way.
The AIRISS model offers a holistic view of education, focusing on the development of six character strengths
that are fundamental to achieving a fulfilling life. For teachers, applying this model at school and in the classroom means supporting all students’ growth, especially the most vulnerable ones, by creating a school culture that fosters the development of the entire educational community’s strengths. Likewise, supporting families is essential so that students receive consistent and constant support both in school and at home, which will enable them to successfully face future challenges.
José Manuel López Potente is a teacher and educational psychologist. He is currently the director of the technology and new business opportunities area at Institució Familiar d’Educació. He has a postgraduate degree in multimedia and education and two master’s degrees, one in new technologies applied to education and the other in e-learning. He has participated in numerous research projects at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and has created the Conecta+ project for education in the proper use of the Internet and technologies.
The world needs virtuous leaders to rise to its challenges
by Ana Moreno Salvo
Edward Brooks (Oxford) is director of the Global Leadership Initiative at Oxford University and the Oxford Character Project. He received his PhD from Oxford University and has since spent many years exploring the question of good leadership from a philosophical standpoint. His research focuses on the intersection between virtue ethics, character and leadership development, with particular interest in the concepts of hope and resilience, the educational potential of role models, the relationship between character and organisational culture and the importance of character for ethical and effective leadership.
Leadership with character benefits both individuals and the organisation
To change the world, we need ethics, evidence and engagement
Leaders are expected to be models of what they say and of the change they call for
Role models are one way to help students develop their character
Virtues
How technology and inclusive school culture are transforming teaching and learning in a democratic environment
by José María Ruiz Palomo
IES Cartima opened in September 2014. It is located in the Guadalhorce Valley, twenty kilometres from the capital, Málaga, and it currently has 560 students and 50 teachers. We offer five lines of secondary education and two specific classrooms.
From the very start, we have been concerned about ‘the lack of attention to the emotional development of human beings, the fundamental engine of learning’ (Pérez Gómez, AI, 2012). At the same time, we are very aware that ‘teachers need to construct their complex professional roles and ways of thinking about their teaching practice in safe contexts of community learning’ (Korthagen, 2011).
The main challenge we face as a school is sustaining a recognisable school culture, with principles, goals and lines of action based on education studies. They are made public, so they can be the subject of reflection and debate within the educational community and anyone considering coming to the school can be familiar with them. The effort to disseminate our activity over the years has been the key to creating a committed teaching team and making the students, teachers and families aware that our priority is the quest for the common good in order to meet the needs of the entire group.
This has several practical consequences: we were recognised as a Learning Community (INCLUD-ED) in 2017, we make inclusion a priority objective and we put caring for people first. The school’s dynamics have clearly democratic roots and are based on participation, listening and dialogue. In turn, we prioritise the connection between academic activity and the real world, both face-to-face and virtual, to make learning meaningful. We like to say that we learn for life.
A key tool for achieving our objectives is technology. For this reason, our school operates on a 1x1 model, in which each student has a tablet. The development of digital competency and learner autonomy can make an important difference in the opportunities that students and families may have after their time at IES Cartima. And we understand that creating the conditions for people to have access to more opportunities is a way of making them freer.
We were recognised as a Learning Community in 2017, we make inclusion a priority objective and we put caring for people first
The connection between academic activity and the real world, both face-to-face and virtual, makes learning meaningful
On the other hand, schools have long demonstrated their ability to harness digital tools to serve pedagogical objectives, making schools the ideal place to educate students in how to use them. Confronting students with the need to use devices, applications and online spaces on a daily basis gives us the opportunity to reflect on their use, to reach a consensus on rules and to develop responsible attitudes as technology users. The teachers have proven their ability to lead these processes, which should be developed with the support of families in the most horizontal, participatory dynamics possible.
To this end, we developed a session as part of our initial training programme. Between 4 and 14 September each year, we devote training/reflection sessions to multiple aspects of teaching (learning assessment, inclusion and attention to diversity, interdisciplinary projects, project-based learning, cooperative learning, technology use, peaceful coexistence, etc.), and there is always a morning set aside for technology. Right now, artificial intelligence now occupies the main part of this space.
José María Ruiz Palomo is the director of IES Cartima. He is a member of the Steering Group for the development of the Strategic Innovation Plan of the Andalusian Regional Ministry of Education (2021-2027). He has given numerous lectures and courses on active methodologies, integration of technology in schools and school organisation.
Notes
1 Cartima Project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCwJ3SEGhnE
EXPERIENCES
Acompañando el crecimiento personal Orón, J.V. and Cenoz, M. Acompañando el Crecimiento, 2023
This book presents a proposal for personal and shared growth. Starting from lived experience with all its emotional load, it encourages readers to follow a path of knowing the complexity of themselves and others that leads to finding all the good that is hidden. The book presents the foundations that support education centred on the individual and their growth by approaching their complexity from different vantage points. It also discusses some of the keys to personal support to encourage trust, healthy relationships and sustained growth.
L’ètica algorítmica
Francesc Torralba Edicions 62, 2022
Marvin W. Berkowitz Routledge, 2021
Today’s technological world is radically changing the way we live, interact with each other, think, create, love and work, as well as raising big questions about our own identity and society. The author, who has exemplary mastery of the subject and the philosophical references, proposes an ethical approach to this world marked by social media, virtuality, robotics and mechanisation, and the power of data and information.
This book distils decades of research on evidence-based practices and field experience into a clear list of principles that school leaders and teachers can implement to help students to grow as people. It offers comprehensive guidance based on six principles for shaping learning environments; fostering healthy relationships, core values and virtues; recommending role models; and the empowerment and long-term development of any school.
Una educación liberal
José María Torralba Encuentro, 2022
This book presents the history of liberal education and its theoretical principles, as well as the practical problems that often impede or hinder students’ formation in the humanities. The result is a book that not only educates and inspires but also challenges and provides the tools needed to meet the future challenge of university education in an increasingly technocratic world of profound and accelerating change, where the very meaning of what it means to be human is at stake.
Watts, P., Fullard, M. and Peterson, A. Open University Press, 2021
This book presents the key ideas, practices and concepts that are shaping character education in schools today. It explores the principles that underpin character education and the pedagogical practices that ensure that it comes to life in schools. It is essential reading for everyone involved in the teaching and learning of young people, as well as for those studying this vital subject in education studies, teacher training and postgraduate courses.
Fullan, M. and Quinn, J. Corwin, 2023
Educar para ser García, JB. and Riquelme, F. Biblioteca Innovación Educativa, 2020
Thomas Lickona Bantam Books, 2009
In this book, the authors set out a comprehensive model for transforming teaching and learning. The goal is to ensure that students are truly prepared to live and thrive in the complex world around them. Among other things, the authors discuss how to guide students, staff and the community around the four drivers: well-being and learning, social and machine intelligence, equity-quality investments and systemness.
This book contains reflections by practising teachers who think and feel that education is a transformative action at the social, community and personal levels. According to the authors, the teacher’s role is to create the right framework for students to find the optimal learning conditions. The challenge of education begins with transforming the educator with the aim of knowing how to support the development of meaning, of human beings’ profound purpose, for a full life, shared based on the individual’s identity, values and talents.
The author, an international expert in character education, calls for a revamping of school education and offers dozens of programmes that schools can adopt to teach students respect, responsibility, quality work and other values that they should embrace, in collaboration with families.
Pepe Menéndez (1956, Barcelona) has more than four decades of experience as a teacher and has spent more than ten years as an international consultant on educational matters for institutions and governments all over the world. He has a degree in Journalism from the Autonomous University of Barcelona and has been the rector of the Joan XXIII School in Barcelona and deputy director of the Network of Jesuit Schools of Catalonia. He was cofounder of the European International Education school association. He has a blog, ‘pepemenendez.wordpress. com’, where he publishes a series of educational conversations, and he is the author of the books "Educar para la vida" (2024, Siglo veintiuno editores) and "Escuelas que valgan la pena" (2020, Paidós).
by Ana Moreno Salvo
In your book "Educar para la vida" (Educating for Life), you ask the following question: What should we teach today to guarantee knowledge that makes us more human? Could you tell us which three lessons you would prioritise?
This is a question that it seems to me that educational institutions should ask themselves on a permanent basis. The first idea would be: it is not a question that can be answered and then dismissed, but a question that basically has to serve as a constant challenge because of the incessant changes that we are experiencing. It used to be said that things changed every few years, but now we can
almost say that they change every day. I would cite three lessons which I think should be prioritised. The first would be to teach how to search for information, discern sources and organise thinking based on rigorous data. We could summarise that with the idea of learning how to learn. But we also have to study to learn. And above all, schools should help to organise a solid way of thinking based on the rigour that comes from data, history itself and reliable sources. That’s learning.
The second priority for me would be to work in a team, to know how to engage in teamwork, which seems redundant. But it also means an ability to understand other ways of being and thinking. That is, it
harbours a willingness to learn by understanding other ways of being and thinking, especially with an attitude that means we learn from others in all their diversity. In other words, it means learning to do and learning to live together. And at the same time, of course, it means learning to do.
And the third priority would be to connect learning with the construction and development of one’s personal life project, which, in the words of the legacy of the Delors report, would be tantamount to learning to be.
How do you think that the binomial being + knowledge should be resolved in the age of artificial intelligence? What we need to do is be careful how people use this powerful tool. We know that artificial intelligence is not intelligent inasmuch as it takes advantage of the data that human beings feed it.
It seems to me that the great tools that human beings have given themselves throughout history, from the wheel, to fire, to the printing press, to gunpowder, to the laser beam, are all very powerful for doing both good and evil. That is precisely where their power lies: they are tools capable of doing good and evil depending on the way humans use them. Toni Matas said that we had an idea, excessively distorted by fiction and films, that artificial intelligence was going to overtake human beings. If education is unable to understand that technology is part of human existence and one of the tools we can use according to our educational goals, the question will be: What others will govern education?
What does the value of humanising school and learning as restorative processes mean to you?
My restorative vision has to do with a permanently critical view on the very becoming of humanity. For example, when we look at the twentieth century, we see that it is one of the most terrifying centuries from the standpoint of violence and human conflicts, but it is also one of the centuries that essentially developed the entire welfare state in Europe. It is the great century of the universal right to education. In other words, I like this critical but optimistic view of history, in which the main challenge is how we live, how we understand those advances and how we move forward on issues such as analysing climate change and the national histories that migratory movements have called into question.
Today the history of Spain cannot be taught as it was back when I was a student, now that we have schools in Catalonia with a huge North African population. You can’t tell what other countries do when basically you’re telling the story of the victors. These national histories based on winners and losers, with the migratory movements that we have; the debates on sexual identity; the dominance of patriarchy based on the permanent, preferential, dominant presence of the white man: this is an entire way of understanding the world... All of this is what we should be looking at now, in my opinion, with a restorative vision, which does not mean demolishing or taking a
Artificial intelligence can be a powerful tool, but it will depend on how humans use it for good or evil
hypercritical view of the whole past without taking into account certain contexts.
I think that one of the most obvious examples is that education has not always been an element of humanisation. It has often been an element of domination, even of forcing students’ personality to adapt to a certain way of being, to a certain profile, in terms of not only cultural considerations but also forms and identities. Education has also been enormously valuable in the past, and it remains so, but we have to look at it with a critical, restorative eye. Let’s think about the number of people who experience major traumas today as a result of their time at school. I am no longer talking only about abuse but simply about relations, about the relational environment. That is, school has also been a place of competition, the abuse of power, if you will, and classification. So, in my opinion, the restorative approach is a look from love and gratitude, as well as from the ability to build critical thinking that leads us to ask ourselves what is going to make schools truly more humane.
Educating in freedom means that students really take their own decisions and that their personal process is respected
What do you consider to be the key aspects of educating students in freedom?
If we focus on empowering the students’ life projects, something that has become more prominent now than ever, it is important that students really take their own decisions and that their personal process is respected. To me, freedom has to do with the system’s ability to adapt to each person, not the other way around. What we have to do is make sure it does not become a kind of head-on collision with a school system that has closed itself off. And we can’t ignore the fact that people also have to adapt to social norms, conveniences, needs for the sake of coexistence and pragmatism. What should not happen is for students to think that going to school is a kind of sacrifice they have to make, and that freedom, creativity and decision-making will come later, when they are adults. Early childhood is a crucial stage in forming a person, and I believe that has to do with the education of freedom and character.
How can the methodology of questioning foster a holistic education, an education for being, which puts the whole person at the core of the educational process?
Questioning is consubstantial with human development from the time a child is a baby. It is about curiosity, wanting to know, asking, questioning. We learn by asking good questions. With the advent
of artificial intelligence, one of the best exercises a person can do is to analyse what kind of questions they ask ChatGPT, how they formulate them. This may even be far more interesting than the answers they receive. To give an example of this, Melina Furman proposes an exercise that involves asking questions that cannot be solved with a single click of a search engine, that cannot be answered with ‘yes’ or ‘no’. If I ask: ‘Why is democracy so beneficial?’, we are practically signalling to students that they have to answer in a politically correct way, but we’re not actually asking them to think. A good question is one that forces a person to look for information, read, compare and decide which option seems better. And it’s even better if those questions lead to good teamwork, in which we learn more from others, from their different way of seeing reality, by working with peers.
For me, learning with questions means learning to make connections between different kinds of knowledge after lots of reading and questioning, learning not to give an answer but to ask yourself new questions.
Right now, the instrument that very powerfully connects us with information is technology. It connects us with competencies related to reading comprehension and learning in all the major fields of knowledge. Methodologies are always functional and instrumental; they are seldom an end in themselves. But most of them have ideological components, an understanding of what we think learning is. Let’s remember, for example, when the printing press was invented, how it practically scandalised those who held the power of knowledge. The same thing is happening now with the Internet. That’s why I say that questions, which are really a classical technique, are pretty much the
learning methodology par excellence In addition, if we connect with the technological resources available historically, namely writing, printing and now the Internet, we get the same methodology, but extraordinarily enhanced through technological resources. I believe that the idea of integral education linked to questioning essentially has to do with a person who interrelates knowledge and is capable of basing their thinking on rigour and data. For example, if you use technology just to cut and paste, you’re using the methodological resource of repetition, which scientific evidence shows has very little solidity, very little consequence in the subsequent consolidation of the student’s knowledge. In other words, we have to relate what we want to consolidate, what we want to deepen, with the technology we use.
What teaching role does this new way of viewing education demand, and how do you work on the teacher’s educational identity so that they know how to support students and be a role model?
I think now than ever it is more difficult to be a teacher, because it is also more difficult to be a parent, and because it is also more difficult to be a representative of public institutions. This is because everything is much more horizontal than it was 40 years ago, and because even access to knowledge, access to information, the very cultural conception of the dignity of the person and their rights
Questions are a classical technique, the learning methodology "par excellence" , now enhanced by AI
have evolved a great deal. Some sectors are nostalgic for the time when teachers were the fount of knowledge, because students did not have those levels, but now knowledge is much more accessible for everyone.
Knowledge-related professions are much more demanding now and require much more versatile skills than they did years ago. In the past, it was enough for a teacher to know their field of knowledge. Now, however, they are asked to know much more about the teachinglearning process, psychology and conflict resolution, and they have to be capable of having a horizontal relationship with their students. And teaching is a typical knowledge profession. At the same time, we
find that the universalisation of school education, which has been a huge social conquest, has also strained its quality.
Major conquests often present us with new challenges. We still cling to old paradigms in the conditions of entering the profession of teaching, when the challenges of its practice have changed a great deal. I am surprised that in some sectors there is a kind of nostalgia for an idealised school, where students had outstanding skills and a zeal to learn. I think that that schools weren’t quite that good and their students weren’t quite that well prepared.
The requirement that the entire population should have a good level of education is an enormous challenge. And from my standpoint,
it should also be parallel to a country’s own social, educational, cultural and economic conditions. In other words, we ask schools to be equitable and able to attend to this enormous diversity so that students leave with solid, firm judgement, but society does not support them and schools can’t do it alone.
Teachers are facing much greater challenges; hence the need for
We still cling to old paradigms in the education profession, when the challenges have changed a great deal
If we change our predisposition towards relational learning, we will be better able to teach teamwork
training for all the activities we do, not only in training courses. Teachers are trained when they attend an assessment meeting or an activity preparation meeting. And they have a key idea in their heads: I am learning how to do this activity with others. If a teacher changes this predisposition, they will be much more capable of teaching students to work in teams because they will have done it beforehand, with that attitude of relational learning and preparing things for the good of other people. We have to do things this way, because nobody can teach what they haven’t experienced, that is, what they don’t know experientially. You don’t learn how to work in teams from a teacher who has only read great books on teamwork. You does not learn to support a student if you have not experienced the process of supporting your own administrative team, the people around you who have helped you to grow throughout your professional life. You don’t learn to ask good questions and get students to work with good questions if you haven’t previously learned to ask those good questions through an exercise. I think there has to be a major change in the conception or in people’s understanding that we are in a permanent process of transformation.
Do you think it is possible that one day machines will take over the role of schools?
Schools, like other social institutions, are not an isolated element; they
are in a crisis of recognition which all institutions are experiencing, even democracy itself. Why is that? It’s because of the increase in horizontality in relationships and something that is costing us a lot as human beings: the speed of so much change keeps us from consolidating what has come before. So, a positive opinion of schools will not come by either good words or decrees, far from it. In reality, just like other social institutions, schools are called upon to earn their authority by the recognition that society gives them.
This means, for example, that society ends up understanding that schools not only have value as custodians of children and adolescents when parents work, but that they have a real, relevant, significant value in children’s and young people’s vital process of development. I think that sometimes we ask schools for things that are beyond their reach, like a kind of perfectionism. I also see that we demand the same of families. At the same time, we ask or tell schools that their authority has been lost.
Schools have to make an effort to earn that authority, just as other institutions do. If teachers can be replaced by machines, it is because they are only focused on transmitting information. And in that sense, machines are much more powerful. If schools continue to focus primarily on being spaces for transmitting information, teachers will gradually be replaced by technology. However, if schools focus on the most valuable thing they have, which is helping the advancement of the integral formation of children and adolescents, that is, of human beings, if they focus on that through learning knowledge, then they are irreplaceable.
A machine, at least the machines we imagine, cannot empathise
emotionally beyond the polite words it uses. ChatGPT, for example, tells you: How can I help you? If you say: Good morning, it replies: Good morning. In other words, it has formally acquired a polite formulation from information from human beings. But it is only a formulation. There is no soul behind it, no ability to empathise with another person’s pain. So we will see things that can be learned with machines, but schools are unlikely to be replaced by machines that provide personal support. If we lose the sense of the very purpose of education and the educator, one who teaches by contagion, we will lose the human factor, and then we can be replaced by machines. But if we focus on the process of humanising schools, they will be irreplaceable. Human beings are irreplaceable.
You talk about the kind of school leadership that makes things happen. What characterises this kind of leadership?
‘Making things happen’ is a famous expression coined by the Harvard professor Ronald Heifetz. People, increasingly, and teachers, have always done things not by decree but out of conviction. The fact that teachers are usually alone in the classroom means that they have to be convinced of things in order to actually do them. In this sense, education, or teaching even more than education, is a process with strong intimate components. If we turn now to administrators, one of the lessons learned from the
If schools focus on the most valuable thing, helping the advancement of human beings, then they are irreplaceable
pandemic was that administrative teams were more highly valued. Their role really was strategic. I held many sessions with schools in Spain, Portugal and the Americas on learning from the pandemic. And one of the lessons that teachers pointed out was that they now valued the role of administrative teams more.
At that time, their role had strong organisational components, but at the same time it was also important in terms of what the priorities were, how teachers could be guided to keep students learning. In that sense, I think we need leadership geared at improving teaching and learning processes. We need leadership linked to student support, to creating relational contexts that favour this learning. And this calls for an administrative team profile with the ability to learn and move teachers’ competencies and beliefs towards the conviction that everyone can
A good leader has knowledge of pedagogy and of guiding people towards a common project
learn. The characteristics of this leadership are people who have a solid knowledge of pedagogy and the relational part, the psychology of human groups, to help them to get to know each other better, work as a team and guide them towards a common project. We need leadership that takes advantage of teachers’ competencies and experiences to improve practices. We do not need substitutive leadership, that is, replacing teachers with
each other, although in some cases it is necessary.
Good leadership knows teachers’ competencies and experiences and puts them to work to improve practices in order to serve the educational project. This type of leadership requires humility. Sometimes there is a lack of perseverance. These people in administrative positions should be the first to meet these conditions of willingness to learn, willingness to work with others, empathy, honesty. We need this training to focus more on professional skills, on the personal skills of mobilising people and resolving conflicts and knowing how to recognise and promote talent, and less on accumulating knowledge about regulations and technical issues. Making things happen not by decree but by stimulus, mobilisation or seduction is much more complex.
by Ana Moreno Salvo
At a time when technology is advancing by leaps and bounds and artificial intelligence is transforming every aspect of our lives, education plays an essential role in shaping ethical and responsible citizens. Thomas Lickona, PhD, is a developmental psychologist, a leading advocate of character education and professor emeritus at the State University of New York at Cortland.
He was the founding director of the Centre for the 4th and 5th Rs - Respect and Responsibility - at the same university from 1994 to 2022, and has received
He has been the most influential voice in the development of an model that combines intellectual with character development
national recognition for his work in teacher and parent education. As a pioneer of character education, he has been the most influential voice in the development of an educational model that combines intellectual with character development. His bestseller, "Educating for Character: How Our Schools Can Teach Respect and Responsibility", is a seminal text in the field of character education.
Published in 1991, this book has not only been crucial in designing educational programmes around the world but also set forth the principles that guide educators and parents in the task of forming citizens of integrity. Lickona is recognised as the father of modern character education. As the president of the Association for Moral Education, he has lectured around the world and played a key role in training countless educators on how to develop moral virtues and character in schools, families and communities.
His books have been translated into more than a dozen languages, among them: "Educating for Character, Raising Good Children, Character Matters: Smart & Good High Schools" (with Matthew Davidson), "Sex, Love and You: Making the Right Decision" (with his wife Judy Lickona and William Boudreau), "How to Raise Kind Kids: And Get Respect, Gratitude, and a Happier Family in the Bargain" and "Narnian Virtues: Building Good Character with C.S. Lewis" (with Mark A. Pike).
His article ‘Teaching Johnny to Be Good’ made the cover of New York magazine. He has also received awards such as character.org’s Sandy Award for lifetime dedication to character education, the University of San Francisco’s Award for Excellence in Moral Education and the Christopher Award for ‘affirming the highest values of the human spirit’. He has been a special guest on Good Morning America, Larry King Live Radio, Focus on the Family and National Radio.
He and his wife Judy have two children and 16 grandchildren and live in Cortland, New York.
A WELL-ROUNDED EDUCATION FOR AN ETHICAL SOCIETY
Lickona’s phrase ‘educating the mind without educating the heart is not to educate at all’, reflects his conviction that education cannot be limited to academics but has to also include values and character education. In his view, character education is fundamental to creating a fair and compassionate society, especially in times of complex ethical and social dilemmas. Through his decades of research, writing and teaching, Lickona has convinced thousands of educators that ‘character is not simply innate; it is a skill to be nurtured and developed’.
Much of Lickona’s inspiration for character education came from his experience as a parent. While raising his two sons, he became aware of the enormous responsibility of guiding young people on their path to moral maturity. This personal experience, coupled with his training as a developmental psychologist, motivated him to write "Raising Good Children", a book that explores the challenges and rewards of instilling strong values in children. Thus, Lickona has appealed not only to educators but also to parents, whom he sees as the primary agents in children’s moral education.
In his lectures, he often reminds his readers and
He has convinced thousands of educators that character is not simply innate; it is a skill to be nurtured and developed
Raising good children is one of life’s most important tasks, and the family is the first school of values and character virtues
listeners: ‘Raising good children is the most complex and challenging job in every parent’s life’. Indeed, he insists that the family is the first school of character values and virtues.
COMPONENTS OF CHARACTER EDUCATION
In "Educating for Character", Lickona presents a number of practical strategies for implementing character education in the classroom. These principles have become benchmarks for many educational institutions around the world and have inspired organisations such as the Josephson Institute of Ethics, the Developmental Studies Center and character.org, which use his methods to promote ethics education in young people.
Some of these key principles include:
1. The Educator as Model and Mentor: Lickona argues that teachers should not only teach values in the classroom but also be living examples of what they teach. Ethics and respect cannot be transmitted solely through theoretical concepts but have to be present in every daily interaction between the educator and the student. He recounts an example of how in the midst of a classroom dispute, a primary school teacher demonstrated to his students the process of apologising and forgiving. For Lickona, this type of exemplary teaching is essential, as students learn by observing how their authority figures handle and resolve conflicts.
2. Creating an Ethical Community in the Classroom: According to Lickona, the ideal classroom should be envisioned as an ‘ethical community’ where every student feels valued and heard. Activities such as class meetings offer students the opportunity to express their opinions and participate in democratic decisionmaking. The result is a culture of mutual respect, tolerance and a shared sense of responsibility for everyone’s well-being.
3. Moral Discipline and Conflict Resolution: Instead of arbitrary punishment, Lickona advocates discipline that encourages reflection and selfcontrol. This discipline helps students to value the impact of their actions and teaches them peaceful ways of resolving disputes, developing in them a deep sense of fairness and respect for others.
A clear example of this strategy is ‘restorative discipline’, an approach promoted by the author that enables students to repair the harm they have caused, understand the consequences of their actions and learn to solve problems effectively.
4. Moral Reflection and Discussion of Controversial Issues: Lickona believes that character education should include the analysis of moral dilemmas and controversial issues so students question their own beliefs and develop a critical mindset. He found that addressing complex issues, such as social justice and ethics in technology, helps young people to grapple with multiple perspectives and understand the complexity of issues. In this way, education not only prepares students to face today’s challenges but also empowers them to take responsible decisions in the future.
Lickona’s contribution to education goes beyond his books and lectures. His methods have been adopted by character education programmes around the world, from Character Counts! in the United States to ethics education programmes in Asia and Europe.
Lickona has worked with the Josephson Institute of Ethics to help school districts and local governments to develop values-based curricula. This institute, founded in 1987, is largely based on Lickona’s principles, and its Character Counts! programme has reached millions of students in more than 60 countries. His influence has also extended to the corporate sector: aware of the need for ethics in the workplace, many companies have adopted his methods to create a values-based organisational culture. At a conference in California, Lickona explained how a tech company in Silicon Valley used the character education model to develop more supportive and responsible work teams.
‘Integrity and ethics are essential in all walks of life’, said Lickona, ’and the sooner we start developing them, the better prepared we will be to meet the challenges of the modern world’.
With the swift development of artificial intelligence
We need to develop ethics and integrity to be better prepared to face the challenges of the modern world
We need citizens who not only know how to do things but also why and for what purpose they should do them
and the emphasis on digital learning environments, Lickona’s approach is now more relevant than ever. Technology is not neutral, and the impact it will have on society depends directly on the values that guide the way it is applied. According to Lickona, artificial intelligence poses new ethical challenges that require clear moral guidance. Thus, his legacy not only prepares students for life but also empowers them to be responsible citizens in a rapidly expanding and increasingly complex world.
In his own words: ‘Knowledge without goodness is a danger to society. We need citizens who not only know how to do things but also why and for what purpose they should do them.’
Thomas Lickona has left an indelible mark on the world of education, and his influence will continue to resonate in classrooms and homes around the world for a long time to come. His emphasis on character education is a powerful reminder that true education is about more than academic knowledge; it is about shaping individuals who can contribute positively to society. In this age of constant change and challenges brought about by technology, Lickona reminds us of what education should be geared towards: developing competent but also compassionate, responsible and ethical learners.
Thomas Lickona (New York) has a PhD and is a developmental psychologist, character educator and professor emeritus of Education at the State University of New York at Cortland. He is regarded as ‘the father of modern character education’. He has lectured worldwide on the promotion of moral values and character development in schools, families and communities. He has written ten books on moral development and character education including "Educating for Character: How Our Schools Can Teach Respect and Responsibility" (1992, Bantam), "Raising Good Children; Educating for Character" (1994, Random House Publishing Group), "Sex, Love and You: Making the Right Decision" (2003, Ave Maria Press), "Smart and Good High Schools" (2005, Center for the 4th and 5th Rs) and "How to Raise Kind Kids" (2018, Penguin Books).
How the integration of technology and human values can transform education towards the holistic development of learners
by José Blas García Pérez
In the age of artificial intelligence (henceforth, AI) and at a time when technology is advancing by leaps and bounds and redefining the way we live, work and learn, it is essential to reflect on the purpose and methods of education.
An approach to the use of technology from the paradigm of ‘educating for being’ is more relevant than ever in this context of constant change, as it fixes and protects the person against cultural and technological
The ‘educating for being’ paradigm promotes education centred on the individual’s integral development.
ups and downs and, in the case of education, places students at the core of any action, innovation or educational process so they can as the author and engine of their own integral development.
In this article, we will try to reflect on whether it is possible to generate humanistic educational environments within the emergence of AI, emphasising the conscious role that technology should play in the training and empowerment of twenty-first century citizens.
HUMANISM AND TECHNOLOGY: BRINGING TOGETHER TWO CONCEPTS IN EDUCATION
It seems logical to try to bring these concepts together in a world where technology has already proven its ability to automate many tasks and processes, and where the ability to be fully human - with empathy,
creativity and an ethical sense - is becoming the irreplaceable ‘value’.
This seemingly contradictory idea, that the integration of technology in education - especially AI - and the principles of educational humanism centred on the integral development of the human being - empathy, creativity, ethical and critical sense - and the ability to actively participate in society, is increasingly necessary and possible. Far from a dissonant perception, it is becoming increasingly possible to bring these two concepts together in a complementary and mutually reinforcing fashion.
The concept of ‘educating for being’ is based on the idea that education has to go beyond the mere transmission or possession of knowledge and technical
skills. An approach, deeply rooted in humanist pedagogy, that promotes that these characteristics should go hand in hand with an integral development of the individual that includes their emotional, social and ethical dimension.
Below, we will describe strategies and approaches to achieve this complementarity in education with the development of the capacity to be ‘fully human’.
AI expert Kai-Fu Lee1 explains why education needs to be rebooted: ‘Education has to focus on what humans need. We should not teach children to be like artificial intelligence; instead, we should teach them to do what artificial intelligence cannot do.’
Human capacities can be condensed into three key areas: empathy, creativity and ethics. Kai-Fu Lee explains it with the Three Cs: Curiosity, Critical Thinking and Creativity. He explains it (in condensed form) as follows: Education should focus on teamwork, communication and collaboration, not on individual and competitive homework or testing. Students have to learn empathy (love, compassion, etc.) and know how to gain the trust (of those around them). The important part is in the added values. This does not mean that basic skills should not be learned (but as the name suggests, as a basis, not as the mainstay of education). We need to stop training children to be robots and rote learners and instead train creative and empathetic humans. We need university students to be critical thinkers and creative, compassionate, empathetic people. We have a long way to go, because education is one of the sectors that is slowest to integrate technology.
Focusing on the development of these specifically human capacities which are complementary to AI, in practice we need to combine the potential of AI to enrich education while maintaining the core values of humanistic pedagogy.
In order to put these principles into practice and develop the human capacities of empathy, creativity and ethical sense, an integrated and coherent approach involving all actors in the educational process is needed:
Empathy
AI-supported activities and designs:
– Design a curriculum that integrates emotional and ethical development objectives, integrated into and complementary with academics and technology.
– Incorporate AI as a permanent dialogue companion which reinforces arguments, generates alternatives and can help to weigh and assess each of them.
– Include readings, projects and activities that foster understanding and respect for the experiences of others, supported by AI. These can include community service projects, simulations and roleplaying activities.
Complementary actions:
– Create an environment where empathy is valued
AI should complement humanist pedagogy to promote critical thinking and emotional development
In the artificial intelligence age, education should focus on human capacities such as empathy, creativity and ethics
and practised. This includes anti-bullying policies, mentoring programmes and social integration activities.
– Train teachers in techniques that promote empathy, such as active listening, constructive feedback and conflict management.
Creativity
AI-supported activities and designs:
– Engage in interdisciplinary projects, including those designed and developed with AI, that allow students to apply knowledge from diverse fields creatively and ethically.
– Promote activities that stimulate lateral thinking and the exploration of multiple solutions to a problem.
Complementary actions:
– Design classrooms and school spaces that foster creativity, with areas for collaborative work and free thinking.
– Implement active and participatory methodologies, such as project-based learning, design thinking and creative problem solving.
Ethical Sense
AI-supported activities and designs:
– Teachers and school leaders should model ethical behaviours, work on the ethical sense of technology and demonstrate how to apply ethical principles in their use and decision-making.
– Implement AI-supported formative assessments and self-assessments that promote personal reflection and continuous development.
– Use assessment methods that consider not only academic performance but also students’ emotional and ethical growth.
Complementary actions:
– Include ethics and citizenship topics in the curriculum; this can range from case studies to debates on contemporary ethical dilemmas.
– Encourage spaces for reflection and debate on ethical issues, allowing students to explore and discuss their own values and principles.
– Organise community activities that enable students to apply their skills in a meaningful way in their local environment.
The key to "educating to be" is to train empathetic, creative and ethical individuals capable of being fully human
The paradigm of ‘educating for being’ in the AI age is based on the premise that holistic human development is essential to meet future challenges. By focusing on empathy, creativity and ethics, we are not only preparing students for a technologically advanced world but also empowering them to be well-rounded, responsible individuals. The implementation of these principles requires a collective commitment and a holistic vision of education, where every aspect of the educational environment contributes to the full growth of each student.
José Blas García Pérez has worked for more than 38 years as a teacher and educational psychologist in secondary schools and at the University of Murcia. He is an expert in inclusive, equitable and quality education; technology applied to education; and hospital pedagogy. He shares ideas, reflections and opinions on educational evolution in his blog ‘Transformar la Escuela’. He occasionally participates in online training with Aula Desigual, a project devoted to training and advising schools, teachers and institutions on inclusion and pedagogy. He is the author of Inclusión: acciones en primera persona (2021, Graó) and "Educar para ser" (2020, Ediciones SM).
Note
1 Source: Aprendemos Juntos 2030. WMCMF
by Manel Soengas
ChatGPT appeared on 30 November 2022 and within days had been adopted and used by one million users. The breakthroughs and societal impact of artificial intelligence (AI) have been widely reported. The 6D model of digitised technologies1 shows the keys to mass adoption.
Generative models’ processing and knowledge-creation capabilities have an impact on education. The fact that AI emulates certain human cognitive skills which are fundamental in the development of learning has led governments and educational administrations to propose a new educational paradigm.2
Neal Stephenson’s book "The Diamond Age" features ‘Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer’, a device like an e-book that is used as an educational tool; it is managed by advanced artificial intelligence that provides individualised tutoring and guidance and adapts to each user’s specific circumstances and learning needs. This device becomes the main character’s inseparable companion.
The plot of the book makes me wonder whether in the nearer or more distant future, generative tools such as ChatGPT will be able to create other AI-based systems that can be used as assistants to monitor students’ learning and development process and support them in much of their lives. This idea leads to other no less important questions: Will any student, regardless of their social status, have access to individualised tutoring to assess and monitor their academic progress with the aim of improving the learning process? Will freedom be lost? Are we ready to adopt disruptive technologies? Is it essential to prepare future citizens to be resilient?
In recent decades, the educational system has been
With the emergence of ChatGPT, the educational community has quickly understood the scope of the transformation
attentive to the adoption and application of different technological projects at schools, with disparate results. However, with the emergence of ChatGPT, the educational community has quickly understood the scope of the transformation. Just to cite a few examples, these technologies can generate personalised learning materials, create simulated and immersive virtual environments, generate educational content, offer writing and research assistance, assess assignments and provide feedback on a subject or area.
Despite the enrichment of the educational setting, the integration of GenAI in education opens the door to risks and challenges:3
– Getting an accurate, relevant answer depends on defining a good prompt.
– False or unrelated answers to the question asked can be generated, even though they appear coherent.
– Reliance on AI-based tools can diminish creativity or critical thinking.
– Confidential data from stored conversations may be used to train the model in the future.
The integration of generative artificial intelligence in education opens the door to risks and challenges
– Human interaction and supervision is essential for students’ proper social and emotional development.
– The type of data used in training determines the accuracy and reliability of the response, as well as whether bias is perpetuated and stereotypes accentuated.
– Ethics and responsibility are needed in relation to intellectual property, control, plagiarism and data protection.
Regarding teachers,4 their position changes and adapts to the moment in time. Initially, teachers were concerned about the fact that plagiarism was made easier by the use of technology. Subsequently, in the second stage they saw the possibility of automating tasks within the domain of the field or subject. Finally,
Transformation of physical or analogue elements into digital formats
Initial technologies may appear less efficient
Significant improvement offering advantages over traditional methods
Cost reduction until services are accessible
Physical elements become unnecessary thanks to digital solutions
Universal and affordable access for all
they value the possibilities offered by GenAI to improve educational and assessment experiences.
Likewise, educational administrations5 are facing a series of ethical and social challenges, and in order to achieve them, it is essential to:
– Define strategies to integrate AI developments in the technological domains.
– Ensure compliance with the legal framework related to data processing.
– Limit dependence on tech companies outside the education sector.
– Devise an ethical code of practice to serve as a reference and guidance framework.
Despite the existence of a document published by the Department of Education6 containing guidelines and recommendations, there are no regulations to help schools and teachers to integrate AI in the classroom, and the curriculum at the different educational levels does not specify the competencies that students should achieve in this area. Last March, the law to regulate artificial intelligence7 was approved in the European Parliament. This law guarantees security and respect for fundamental rights while boosting innovation. It establishes a number of risk levels depending on the area in which it is used, as well as obligations. For example, any use of AI that implies a risk to individuals’ safety or rights is prohibited. In the specific case of education, the use of AI for processing emotions or biometric recognition is prohibited, and any AI rolled out in critical infrastructures such as the education system is categorised as high risk. In this case, an impact assessment is required prior to roll-out.
The law aims to ensure fairness and eliminate bias, understand the mechanism that leads an AI-based system to provide a given response, strengthen privacy and data protection, preserve the reliability and security of AI-based systems and ensure inclusiveness and accessibility.
The use of generative AI in education is revolutionising classrooms and offering opportunities to personalise
These technologies can create personalised learning materials or immersive simulated virtual environments
Administrations have to develop educational strategies and policies to ensure they are used ethically and responsibly
learning and improve assessment. The AI-based assessment process is fairer, richer and more inclusive. It allows students to be assessed over longer periods of time, with an evidence-based perspective and at a lower emotional cost, and it would reduce students’ current oversaturation. However, the challenges and threats are significant, such as the management of critical data, the possible decline in critical thinking and the associated ethical risks. The adoption of this technology is inevitable, so teachers and administrations need to develop educational strategies and policies to ensure that it is used ethically and responsibly. AI training and policy regulation are key factors in prepare students for a future where technology and humanity complement each other.
Manel Soengas is a technology teacher and industrial engineer and holds a master’s in AI. He currently works as a technology manager in the ICT area of the Department of Education, which he combines it with training in digital culture, dissemination, communication and AI-related consulting.
References
1 P. H. Diamandis and S. Kotler, Abundance: The Future Is Better Than You Think (Exponential Technology Series). The Free Press, 2012.
2 Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Published in 2024 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. UNESCO.
3 The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson.
4 F. J. García-Peñalvo, F. Llorens-Largo, and J. Vidal, ‘The new reality of education in the face of advances in generative artificial intelligence’, RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 9–39, 2024, doi: 10.5944/ried.27.1.37716.
5 Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education: From Deceptive to Disruptive Marc Alier 1, Francisco José García-Peñalvo 2, Jorge D. Camba.
6 Artificial Intelligence Act. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/ document/TA-9-2024-0138_ES.pdf
7 La intel·ligència artificial en l’educació Orientacions i recomanacions per al seu ús als centres. https://educacio.gencat.cat/web/.content/home/ departament/publicacions/monografies/intelligencia-artificial-educacio/ ia-educacio.pdf
by Diego Vergara Rodríguez
Both companies and society itself are adapting to an increasingly digitalised world. Faced with this new paradigm, education also has to be transformed and redirected towards a model that helps students to rise to the new challenges they will face in today’s society. It would probably be foolhardy to forgo this adaptation of the teaching-learning process to the new digital age. Technology is advancing at breakneck speed, and those who fail to integrate it effectively into their educational practices run the risk of being left behind. In addition to the familiar information and communication technologies (ICT), the digital revolution has arrived with artificial intelligence (AI) applications and extended reality (XR), which encompasses virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR).
It is foolhardy to forego adapting education to the digital age in a world where technology is advancing extremely quickly
These latest technologies are truly revolutionising education, giving rise to an urgent reflection on what the future of learning will look like in a wide range of fields, such as technology, architecture, art, history, nature, literature, etc. VR, AR and MR offer new forms of immersive and collaborative learning experiences. VR allows students to virtually explore environments that would otherwise be inaccessible. AR superimposes digital information on the real world to enrich interaction with the physical environment. MR integrates virtual and real elements to provide even more immersive and realistic experiences. Nonetheless, although the societal trend is towards creating immersive experiences, nonimmersive VR currently appears to be better suited to education. In addition, there are concerns that overexposure to virtual environments may have negative effects on students’ mental health and well-being, highlighting the importance of carefully balancing screen time and other activities. Future generations’ personality and behaviour will surely be shaped by the intrinsic features of being born in this new digital age.
Extended reality offers immersive learning experiences that revolutionise the study of disciplines
Looking ahead, the implementation of AI in VR, AR and/ or MR environments promises even more exciting developments in education. AI systems are expected to become more sophisticated and capable of seamlessly adapting to learners’ individual needs and providing more natural and contextual interactions. In addition, AI can facilitate the creation of virtual environments and personalised learning experiences in real time, allowing for greater flexibility and efficiency in teaching and learning.
However, the adoption of AI in education raises ethical challenges which have to be carefully considered to ensure equitable and responsible educational development. The assistance that certain AI applications can provide students can lead to a fraudulent use of these resources, which would seriously damage their capacity for reflection, effort, critical thinking, etc. In this sense, we should teach not only how to use different AI applications but also the way they should be used, taking advantage of the potential they offer but in an ethical and responsible way.
In education, AI promises to make definitive strides towards personalised learning, including improvements in efficiency and broadening access to education. For example, smart tutoring systems can adapt to individual students’ pace and learning style and provide instant feedback and personalised resources. In addition, the potential integration of AI in VR, AR and MR environments can offer new opportunities to develop personalised immersive educational experiences. For example, we can already imagine our students exploring ancient history through a virtual reality simulation, or solving complex mathematical exercises or problems with the help of a virtual tutor in augmented reality.
However, this opportunity for personalisation afforded by the convergence of AI and XR also opens up another important ethical issue: data privacy. This is because the use of AI algorithms to personalise learning requires a significant amount of personal information on the learner. On the other hand, another ethical factor to reflect on is how to determine the intellectual property of a new AI-generated creation (images, videos, presentations, etc.).
It is crucial to teach students to use artificial intellifence ethically while maximising its potential
Ethical engagement in the implementation of technology will ensure fairer and more inclusive education.
Ultimately, educating in the digital age requires a balanced approach that harnesses the benefits of technology while addressing the ethical and pedagogical challenges that arise. AI and XR have the potential to revolutionise education, but they have to be implemented carefully and responsibly. It is essential to prioritise equity, privacy and autonomy in the design and use of educational technologies, while fostering digital and ethical literacy among students and educators.
The developments that this digital age will bring will undoubtedly affect the evolution of education and force it to adapt to these new times. But in order to fully harness the transformative power of technology and thereby build a more fair, equitable and humane educational future, we have to remain committed to ethical values that promote all students’ inclusion and well-being. In this sense, future teachers will need to teach not only subject-specific content but also lessons on how to use AI-based tools or apps responsibly.
Diego Vergara Rodríguez holds a PhD from the University of Salamanca (USAL) in Mechanical and Materials Engineering. He is a Materials Engineer and Technical Engineer in Public Works, USAL. He is a graduate in Mechanical Engineering from the Catholic University of Ávila (UCAV). He is a researcher and lecturer at the UCAV, and Dean of the Faculty of Science and Arts at the UCAV. He is the Director of the TiDEE.rg Research Group (Technology, Instruction and Design in Engineering and Education). His main lines of research are related to two fields: energy efficiency and materials science, and educational technologies and active learning methodologies. His work has led him to be listed in the Stanford ranking, which recognises the top 2% of scientists with the highest number of citations worldwide.
We are preparing the next issue of the magazine Diàlegs.
Leading a good school is within the reach of many, but transforming it into an excellent school is within the reach of only a few. School survival increasingly depends on excellence in educating global-minded, critical, ethical and committed citizens for the common good. Much has been written about transformative leadership and teacher empowerment, and there is now sufficient knowledge and experience on what are the keys to leading an educational institution towards progressive and sustainable quality.
Send your contribution to: revista@impulseducacio.org
State the section to which you would like to contribute: Project, News, Experiences, In Depth, or the Opinion column.
Articles
Articles must be 1,500 words in length.
Authors must send in:
- Title
- Subtitle
- Author bio (40 words)
- Photo of the author
- Publishable email (if you wish)
- Social media profiles (preferably Twitter and/or LinkedIn)
- Bibliographic references
The quotations included in the text must be accompanied by their corresponding reference as a footnote. Data, figures or references to reports must be accompanied by the corresponding footnote. If you suggest a highlight, it has to be about 30 words in length.
Opinion column
Opinion columns must be 900 words in length.
Authors must send in:
- Title
- Subtitle
- Author bio (40 words)
- Photo of the author
- Publishable email (if you wish)
- Social media profiles (preferably Twitter and/or LinkedIn)
- Bibliographic references
The quotations included in the text must be accompanied by their corresponding reference as a footnote. Data, figures or references to reports must be accompanied by the corresponding footnote. If you suggest a highlight, it has to be about 30 words in length.
Avda. Montserrat Roig, 3. 08195 Sant Cugat del Vallès www.impulseducacio.org