
Hosted by Harvard Graduate School of Education · EN

Looking back at the early history of U.S. education, Harvard Professor Jarvis Givens says we’ve long told the story in fragments: Native education in one lane, Black education in another, and the rise of white common schools somewhere else. But in his latest research, he shows just how deeply interconnected these histories actually are, particularly how the development of public schools was entangled with Native land dispossession and the economic engine of slavery. This history is the focus of his new book, American Grammar: Race, Education, and the Building of a Nation.“The reality is that it's not that Black and Native people were not included in the project of American school development, because public schooling in the U.S. was actually developed over and through Native and Black people's dispossession through their subjugation,” Givens says. “It's Native land loss and it's the kind of capital generated from race-based slavery that's really driving the economic development of the nation and also its internal institutions, schooling in particular.”Givens introduces the idea of an “American Grammar,” a framework in which race, power, and knowledge were built into the structure of schooling itself. That grammar hasn’t disappeared, he says, noting how today’s debates over curriculum, representation, and educational justice reflect it.“If we're not being clear and if we're not being as nuanced and detailed as possible in how we're naming how we got to this place, then we can allow ourselves to work with faulty assumptions or faulty understandings about this history that then come to inform the solutions we try to create,” Givens says. “And that's one of the major issues I think that we're up against. How we narrate the past and how we narrate injustice has direct implications for how we go about bringing about justice in the context of schools.”In this EdCast, Givens discusses what it means to rethink what we believe we know about the origins of American education and what becomes possible when we finally reckon with the full story.

Harvard Graduate School of Education Professor Jal Mehta knows that education research matters – it has the power to shape schools, classrooms, and policy. Yet, today, in increased political polarization, many may question whether education research can be neutral.“As a researcher, you have a lot of choices about what topics you study. Those choices are driven by a whole variety of things. They're driven by what researchers would think is interesting and sort of like where the edge of the field is. They're driven, to some degree, I would imagine, by people's own kind of values. And they're also driven by the interests of the moment,” Mehta says. He points out that education research inevitably echoes the issues and values of its time — from No Child Left Behind to Black Lives Matter to the current backlash against diversity and inclusion — but that doesn’t mean its partisan. Instead, it mirrors the social and political moment in which it’s conducted.“There's a lot of interest among researchers about how can we talk to each other, how can we work across difference, how can you have constructive conversations,” he says. “And it's not that those things were any less important five years ago. They just weren't at the kind of the center of the zeitgeist. So, sort of wherever the middle is, you'll find a lot of researchers kind of studying that at that moment in time.”Funding and politics, Mehta notes, also play major roles in determining which studies get done, particularly as recent cuts threaten the data infrastructure needed to track student progress. Yet despite those challenges, he sees hope in growing partnerships between researchers and schools, where the questions being asked are grounded in the realities of teaching and learning. He notes that we are all impacted by research whether we recognize it or not. In this episode, we take a deeper look at whether education research can ever truly be neutral and what happens when ideology and evidence collide.

In the wake of the pandemic, tutoring has become a central strategy for helping students recover academically but not all tutoring is created equal. Liz Cohen, vice president of policy at 50CAN, has been closely studying the rapid rise of tutoring programs across the country, especially the emergence of high-impact tutoring as the gold standard.“There's a funny thing about tutoring is that there's a lot of flexibility in it,” Cohen says. “So, in some places it might look like other interventions and in other places it might not. But one thing I want to be really clear about just to start with is that high-impact tutoring in particular is not homework help and it is not on demand.” Instead, high impact tutoring is structured, frequent, and aligned to what students are learning in school: at least three sessions a week, 30 minutes or more, in groups of four students or fewer, with the same tutor each time. Research shows that when tutoring is consistent and connected to classroom instruction, students make significantly greater learning gains, especially in early literacy and math.Cohen points to examples like Tennessee, Louisiana, and district leaders in places like Baltimore and Guilford County, where strong funding, clear expectations, and hands-on implementation support led to meaningful results. But scaling tutoring can be complicated. As Cohen discovered and reveals in her new book, “The Future of Tutoring: Lessons from 10,000 School District Tutoring Initiatives,” there’s many details that need to come together for tutoring to be a success. “What I believe is the most powerful part of the story of the high-impact tutoring movement and the tutoring movement at large that's happened in the last five years in America is that it's a human centered story that is in part empowered by tech,” Cohen says. “This is fundamentally a story about humans, and it's a story about the fact that young people in America are very hungry for meaningful relationships with adults, and those can be young adults in high school and college, or they can be older adults too.”In this episode, Cohen tells us what has made high-impact tutoring so valuable, how districts are successfully implementing tutoring, and how it has become more than just as an academic intervention.

In an era when many Americans believe the country is too divided to come back together, Tufts University political scientist Eitan Hersh believes higher education has a crucial role to play in bridging divides and he’s putting that belief into practice through a new university center devoted to viewpoint diversity.“What do we want from students when they graduate high school or college,” Hersh says. “We want them to be able to engage with lots of different kinds of people in the workforce or in civic spaces, and know how to handle disagreement, and know how to fight for the things that they care about and know how to listen and learn and develop new ideas.”Too often, he says, universities and social networks confine people to intellectual bubbles. However, when students understand how others’ beliefs shape their views, they learn to think critically, listen better, and handle disagreement with more nuance. That philosophy drives the creation of Tufts’ new Center for Expanding Viewpoints in Higher Education, which Hersh leads. The center will host reading groups, workshops, and in-person discussions that encourage open, offline dialogue across disciplines and ideologies. The center’s mission extends beyond events. In fact, Hersh wants to rethink curriculum and teaching practices to ensure dissenting voices and unfamiliar perspectives are part of students’ education. “It doesn't mean that you, as a student change your mind on every issue. But you just realize that these issues are complicated for a reason, which is that there is a lot of gray area,” he says. “And to me, that is quite depolarizing. Because all of a sudden, it takes something that looked like an us versus them story into a story of people with different values and senses of the world reach reasonable, different conclusions.”While “viewpoint diversity” has become a politically loaded term, Hersh sees it as central to higher education’s purpose, not a partisan issue. In this episode, Hersh discusses his hope to rekindle a university culture defined by curiosity, conversation, and understanding.

Curiosity is one of our most powerful, yet often overlooked, human drives, especially in education. Elizabeth Bonawitz, associate professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, explains that while there’s no single definition of curiosity, it’s best understood as an internal desire to resolve gaps in our knowledge or a wondering about how the world works. That innate drive begins in infancy, fueling our rapid early learning. But as children grow older, especially within structured school systems, that spark too often dims.Through her research, Bonawitz explores how curiosity operates like mise en place for learning preparing the mind to absorb, connect, and retain new information. It activates attention, memory, and motivation, setting the stage for deeper understanding. Studies from her lab show that simple practices, like encouraging children to ask more questions, not only increase curiosity but also improve learning outcomes.“Children who are more curious do better in math or reading scores in school. And that's particularly true for students that come from more under-resourced communities or students that might have other challenges associated with school,” Bonawitz says. “So, curiosity is the great equalizer for education.”But curiosity is not the easiest thing to cultivate, especially in a classroom where barriers like test driven school structures and cultural differences link to uncertainty. The good news is there are things educators and even parents can do to help foster a child's curiosity. In this episode, the EdCast takes a deeper look at curiosity and explores ways to home in on what Bonawitz considers the simple act of wonder.

Strategic leadership may be one of the hardest — and most vital — skills for school leaders to master. Liz City, senior lecturer at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and a long-time coach to school and system leaders across the country, says strategic leadership is not innate but a skill that can be learned and strengthened over time.“We're in a context which, over the last five years, has been full of uncertainty and ambiguity,” City says. “I think that makes it harder for people to be strategic. It puts people in a kind of reactive survival mode, which is not our best place to be.”Learning how to be strategic can mean the difference between finding success over being less effective, doing too much, and burning out, she says. Drawing from decades of experience and recent research, City emphasizes that being strategic is not just about setting goals — it’s about taking intentional action, maintaining focus over time, and deeply understanding people and systems. In her new book, “Leading Strategically: Achieving Ambitious Goals in Education,” she and co-author Rachel Curtis outline five key elements of strategic leadership: discerning, cultivating relationships, understanding context and history, harnessing power, and think big, act small, learn fast.She explains how leaders often get stuck, especially around power and discernment, and offers practical advice for moving from reactive leadership to purposeful progress. “You can lead from lots of different vantage points. I think we assume that if you have formal authority, you have power, and you'll be able to get things done,” City says. “It turns out, though, that most things are accomplished through a large measure of informal authority.” In this episode, City shares what it really means to lead with purpose, especially in today’s climate of uncertainty and change.

It’s easy to feel overwhelmed by the statistics on global education — millions of children, especially in low- and middle-income countries, are spending years in school without mastering foundational skills. But as Harvard Lecturer Robert Jenkins reminds us, we can't afford to stay stuck in what we think we know about the learning crisis. Innovation is not just possible — it’s essential, he says.“When you look at the big picture overall globally, it feels daunting, the scale of the challenge,” he says. “But when you disaggregate that and see the incredible innovations and proactiveness of many leaders, many educators, the commitment of educators around the world, indeed, [it’s] very exciting, and reason for optimism.” While expanding access to education has been a major achievement, Jenkins points out that access alone doesn’t guarantee learning. “There was, I think, a very simplistic understanding that by promoting access and enabling kids to go to school, that would automatically translate into higher levels of learning and success in learning levels,” he says, “meaning kids, by going to school for many years, would graduate with the level of learning that would enable them to realize their full potential. And that's not the case.” True progress, he argues, requires tailoring education to individual needs, investing in holistic student support, and improving quality at every level.With the growing threats of declining humanitarian funding, Jenkins warns this has the potential to stall or reverse progress in education systems worldwide. However, he also believes that a greater awareness and engagement from high-income countries, along with encouraging innovation, evidence-based interventions, and inclusive leadership can lead to transforming global education systems.In this episode of the EdCast, Jenkins dives into what’s working, what needs to change, and how educators everywhere can play a part in transforming global education, so every child has the chance to thrive.

Texas and California often appear to be worlds apart when it comes to politics and culture, but the education students are getting – as far as their textbooks go, at least – may not be so different.University of Chicago Assistant Professor Anjali Adukia investigated more than 260 textbooks used in both public and religiously affiliated schools in the two states, analyzing their portrayal of race, gender, religion, and historical events. “I think the part that was the most surprising to me is despite this narrative of political polarization, we actually don't necessarily see that in the books themselves that are given to kids on average,” Adukia says.While there are differences, especially regarding religious content, textbooks used in both states tend to emphasize similar themes such as family, nature, and history, she says. Additionally, the textbooks also feature similar portrayals of females in passive and stereotypical roles, while males are more often linked to power, politics, and military.She argues that textbooks play a crucial role in shaping students' identities and worldviews, transmitting cultural values and societal norms. Despite changing public attitudes, these textbooks remain largely unchanged, posing important questions about how educational content influences future generations and the values that schools are endorsing.“The process of education and its associated books and curriculum materials necessarily, and by design, transmit the knowledge that we care about, the values that we care about. They transmit messages about who belongs in what spaces in society,” Adukia says. “Also, the presence and the absence of different identities can send messages to kids which can contribute to how they view their own potential and the potential of others.”In this episode, we explore the similarities and differences across textbooks in public and religious schools, and the role textbooks play in shaping students’ identities and worldviews.

As a third-grade teacher, Lily Howard Scott noticed how she spoke to students impacted more than just their experience in the classroom. How teachers speak to their students and intentional shifts in language can nurture children’s inner lives, foster self-regulation and reduce perfectionism, she says, and become their inner voice.“The thing about teachers, particularly elementary school teachers, is they have this superpower, which is that they catch kids at a moment where their capacity for neuroplasticity is more remarkable than it will ever be again. These kids are developing theories about themselves and their abilities, and they're bucketing themselves in all ways that may stay with them for the rest of their lives,” Scott says. “They're establishing thinking patterns that will stay with them, and elementary school teachers spend 1000 hours a year with their students in the same connected classroom… subtle shifts in language that help kids learn these basic things, that they have agency within, that they can choose which thoughts and feelings to amplify and which to quiet.”Scott shares that young children are remarkably receptive to reflective conversations about language and often adapt the terms in creative, personal ways — such as a student renaming their “inner voice” the “President Decider.” She highlights the power of reframing mistakes as "brilliant mistakes," which invites curiosity rather than shame. This shift, supported by neuroscience and the work of researchers like Lisa Feldman Barrett and Carol Dweck, helps children interpret challenges with a mindset geared toward growth and resilience.How to make these shifts is now the focus of Scott’s work and the central theme of her book, “The Words that Shape Us,” where she shares classroom-tested strategies and brain-changing teacher language.Learning to speak differently as a teacher or even parent can be challenging, but Scott stresses the importance of modeling lifelong learning alongside children. For instance, by admitting their own struggles with perfectionism or learning from errors, teachers can foster trust and mutual growth. Scott explains that language like “feelings are visitors” (inspired by Rumi’s The Guest House) helps children understand emotional regulation and agency. She admits that young children are particularly receptive to language shifts. Perhaps even more importantly, the effort to tweak how we speak to children may also play a role with children’s mental health. “If your mind is better company when you're seven, you hold on to these language nuggets and you repeat them to yourself when you're 17, so I think elementary school, it's not the precursor to serious learning. It's the most serious learning, and we should tip our hats to elementary school teachers and understand the immense and enduring influence they can have,” she says.In this episode, Scott shares insight into when children are taught empowering, compassionate language early, they carry it with them for life, enabling healthier thinking patterns and emotional well-being. She provides caution against well-meaning but common phrases like “try harder” which may inadvertently shame children.

To succeed in school, in life, and as contributors to a more equitable society, students must be able to recognize, analyze, and challenge systemic injustices, say Harvard Lecturer Aaliyah El-Amin and Boston College Professor Scott Seider. Through their research, they are examining what it truly means to pursue education for justice in K–12 schools.“The kids who are in classrooms right now are our country's next generation of leaders,” says El-Amin. “They’re the people who are going to help determine whether we continue on our current path of deep injustice and human suffering, or whether we chart a new course toward a more just society — one where people across differences have equal access to well-being and thriving.”El-Amin and Seider argue that equipping young people with the tools to understand and respond to injustice is not only critical to building a more just society but also key to supporting youth development—academically, emotionally, and civically.“Young people who are more critically conscious of injustice are more civically engaged. They have higher self-esteem. They have better mental health…” says Seider. “The primary goal of nurturing young people's understanding of injustice is to prepare them to help build a better world. But we also have growing evidence that this critical consciousness contributes to positive youth outcomes.”To explore how justice-oriented education is being implemented across different contexts, the researchers studied more than 100 schools, identifying four core strategies for embedding this work throughout K–12 education:Building adult capacityCentering justice in the curriculumPartnering with families and communitiesEngaging students in social actionWhile this work may look different depending on the local context, El-Amin and Seider believe it can be implemented in schools everywhere.“Students are asking big questions about the world around them,” says El-Amin. “And when students are curious, engaged, and eager to participate in these conversations, educators have a powerful opportunity to bring them into critical consciousness and advocacy right in the classroom.”This episode of the EdCast explores how schools can become places where students are not only academically prepared but also empowered to confront—and help transform—the world they inherit.