Suggestions
Jal Mehta
Professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Professional Background
Jal Mehta is a distinguished academic and a recognized thought leader in the field of education, particularly in educational reform and policy. He has held prestigious positions at Harvard University's Graduate School of Education, where he served as a Professor and previously as an Assistant Professor. His career at Harvard has been marked by a commitment to improving educational practices and understanding the complexities of learning environments. Over the years, Professor Mehta’s work has significantly influenced educators and policymakers alike, helping to bridge the gap between theoretical research and practical implementation in educational settings.
Professor Mehta's research covers various topics, including the sociology of education, the design of educational innovations, and the impact of policy on school reform. His interdisciplinary approach ensures that he brings in diverse perspectives to better understand and address the challenges facing contemporary education systems. His innovative teaching methods and dedication to mentoring students have further established his reputation as a leader in educational scholarship.
Education and Achievements
Jal Mehta earned his academic credentials from eminent institutions, which laid a solid foundation for his expertise in education. While specific details about his degrees are not included here, it is known that his educational background is extensive and rigorous, aligning with his professional pursuits in the realm of educational reform and academia.
As an influential voice in the education community, Professor Mehta has engaged in various research projects and collaborations that aim to elevate educational standards and practices. His published works contribute significantly to the ongoing dialogues about effective pedagogy, systemic reform, and the role of education in fostering an informed citizenry. His inquiry into the realities of classroom dynamics and educational institutions continues to inspire educators and leaders, guiding them toward more effective teaching and governance.
Notable Contributions
Throughout his career, Jal Mehta has contributed to numerous conferences, seminars, and discussions focused on education. His insights into the dynamics of school systems and the necessary frameworks for educational success are frequently sought after by peers and practitioners in the field. He not only engages with academic audiences but also communicates effectively with the broader public, advocating for changes that support innovation and improvement in educational policies.
As part of his endeavors at Harvard, he has influenced a generation of educators and drove meaningful conversations around school improvement. His work resonates with a broad audience, including education leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders committed to fostering student success and equity in education.
In his scholarly pursuits, Jal Mehta has demonstrated an unwavering dedication to the betterment of the educational landscape through extensive research, thoughtful discourse, and active participation in community-building efforts around education.
title
summary
Highlights
A few thoughts on AI from Rick Hess and my latest conversation:
Especially with young people who are learning to do something for the first time, there is a real risk that AI will replace the hard work of learning how to write, design, or program. Tools like AI are at their best when they complement human intelligence and skill, but those human capacities develop slowly and often painfully, which is why shortcuts are so tempting but ultimately misguided.
Learning environments often take away some of these tools to force students to concentrate on learning the skills they are being taught. For instance, laptops are banned from many Harvard Business School classes because computers provide too many interruptions and professors want students to engage in case discussions without distractions. When I was learning to ski as an adult, my instructor forbade me to use poles until I could get down the mountain without them. When we teach pitching in baseball, we often start the kids on one knee so that they can get the top half of the body right before they worry about the legs. So, there is a long tradition of restricting the learning environment so as to focus on the actual skills that we want to teach.
Teachers can do that in school, but the use of ChatGPT and Microsoft Co-Pilot for homework is, based on what I can see, absolutely rampant. And here I think AI is revealing an old problem rather than creating a new one: There is so much work that just has to be completed, but students see little purpose or meaning in what they are doing. TikTok is awash with videos about HOMEWORK—Half Of My Energy Wasted On Random Knowledge. In many classes, kids do so many worksheets that teachers don’t have time to mark them. If this is what learning is like—particularly if the assignments are mainly asking for summaries of factual knowledge—AI is going to be the solution. But if kids had fewer assignments that connected to a purpose they saw as relevant, and if more of that work were original rather than the same recycled assignments year after year, then perhaps we would see more original thinking and less AI-generated content.
Given that, I have one suggestion: Let students in on the conversation. Let them think about when it is OK to use AI—for instance, as a starting point to generate some ideas for writing—and when doing so would impede skill development or create unfairness. Have students draft guidelines about the uses of AI in school, and as they do so, let them read the work of the various task forces and commissions that are pondering the same questions. Not only would this turn AI into a teaching moment, it also promises to have students feel a sense of ownership over AI guidelines. Students are much more likely to follow guidelines that they help develop rather than ones that were imposed upon them by adults.
https://lnkd.in/ebXXWhuu
Why has all the talk of student absenteeism focused more on changing students' behaviors than reimagining schooling as a place students want to go? Rick Hess and I discuss.
But I’m struck by the way in which this discussion has completely ignored the most important and obvious question: Why don’t kids want to come to school? The current debate seems to take as a given that the students and not the schools are the problem. We know that most academic tasks are fairly rote and that students report seeing little purpose in completing them, and we know that many students, particularly the most disengaged, have few if any deep and meaningful relationships with the adults in their buildings. But rather than take these things on, our analysis seems to focus almost exclusively on what the students and their parents need to be doing differently.
If we took this perspective seriously, we would stop hectoring students. Instead, we would really think about whether we wanted to make some significant changes in our schools and we might enlist students to help us in doing so. For instance, Salem Middle School in Salem, Massachusetts, was able to reduce its absenteeism rate by more than 50 percent by convening students in a human-centered design process and using what they learned to develop a more flexible curriculum, create opportunities to learn in local communities, and design more hands-on and project-based learning. Much as the post-pandemic work conversation has led to a redesign of many workplaces to attract those skeptical of returning to the nine-to-five grind, we could view students’ slow return to school as a sign that we should redesign schools as well.
