Technolandy

SOL – Summer of Learning 2026: #2 @YongZhao Courageous Minority

The call to be considered to join an international cohort of educators that Yong Zhao has since labelled the “courageous minority” has been a great push on my brain.

I love thinking about all things education, and having conversations with educators from around the world has been empowering. Similar concerns about what students need vs. what they get vs. what they want in their own learning journey. Looking at the tools that we currently have, and the tools that are lurking to disrupt the original setup of schooling.

Acknowledging that a lot of “schooling” is established for convenience, and not as much for learning. That sometimes we move too fast, and instead of leveraging new tools, we try to limit new technology to continuing to do tasks and practice skills that can be done without it.

Ugh. It’s made me ponder:

What is school for when the world no longer requires schools to be the primary distributors of knowledge, credentials, or even demonstrations of competence?

And I like schools. Whatever their configuration… K-4, K-6, K-8, 8-12, 10-12, K-12 – in person… online…

I also like using metaphors, and I worry that “big education” is doing the same thing that Blockbuster once did. Thought itself was “too big to fail,” while worrying more about floor layouts and how the stores were organized than acknowledging the opportunity, aka Netflix, that was trying to become part of the environment.

AI and its unintended consequences are making us reconsider some key elements: What is the role of school? What is the benefit of learning in the traditional manner when the world around us is shifting so fast?

How do we balance keeping key elements of knowledge, especially the building blocks of communicating and mathing that allow and engage greater learning, while asking whether that next learning needs to be a preset catalogue of compulsory curriculum?

Or could it be personalized passions blended with learning how to learn independently?

The idea of schools preparing students for the real world feels disingenuous when we too often talk about banning personal technology and AI, and not enough about whether or not we are supporting learners to become good ancestors.

This has led me to lean even more heavily into my own passion around thinking, learning, and doing different(iatedly).

Not creating one menu for all.

Not even a smorgasbord.

But creating an à la carte option where the ingredients are listed, and how they are combined is waiting to be explored.

Schooling asks:

• Did you complete the course?
• Did you demonstrate the prescribed outcomes?
• Did you accumulate the required credits?
• Did you meet the graduation requirements?

Learning asks:

• What did you become able to do?
• What problems can you now tackle?
• What are you curious about?
• What do you want to pursue next?
• Who benefits from what you learned?
• Can you continue learning without us?

And a key starting point for me already exists in British Columbia: the Adult Dogwood.

A graduation pathway that acknowledges that the traditional K-12 pathway isn’t the only legitimate way to become a graduate. A way to differentiate the “required” courses on the way to crossing the graduation stage. The only ‘limitation’ is around age… gotta finish courses after you turn 18…

Some look at the Adult Dogwood and see that it needs five courses: Math 11, English Studies or First Peoples 12, and three more Grade 12 electives.

I see that it sets a minimum of courses needed.

Not a maximum.

Here is where AI can potentially be a curator and connector rather than a homework completion machine.

A collaborator in learning.

But it means asking some hard questions, as we are doing when we get together:

How do we help young people become capable of creating futures worth inhabiting? Can we better take on key topics around Climate, Gender, Mental Health, Equity… blending global and local mindsets.

If students simply develop their individual competitive skills, we’re supporting a very efficient sorting machine.

If students develop passions, agency, capability, curiosity, and the capacity to work with others on meaningful problems and projects, then we’re doing something quite different.

Yes, we want all learners to build a strong, solid foundation.

But it doesn’t work when we also have the mindset of:

“By age/grade X, the learner will…”

It also isn’t just about removing the clock from the old system and allowing pacing to become the focus.

Personalization is agency over what, why, how, and with whom we learn.

And now I’m also wondering:

If we give learners more agency, what responsibilities do we need to go along with it?

I love that Yong Zhao has assembled a group of educators that are doing just that: pushing thinking.

Not finding “a” fix.

Being curious, not judgemental.

Even, perhaps especially, with disruptions like AI.

I have said several times in my career: it’s an exciting time to be in education. I continue to be excited about what might be next…