This becomes obvious after spending some time on the frontlines building in edtech and selling to schools.
Doesn’t take a PhD to figure it out.
Schools have no incentive to spend more on improving teachers’ quality of life or even improving student outcomes above a certain
Maybe I’m quite naive, but after two years of a PhD at Harvard, I’ve come to a few realizations about higher education:
1) Many faculty members genuinely seem to despite students. students become ego boosters until they disagree with them, at which point they become competitors
Every student uses AI to write do their assignments.
For the past year, teachers have been using a team of AI agents to grade and return those assignments instantly.
Introducing Polsia for Schools.
“We're in the middle of the second renaissance where proof of work replaces the resume, an audience replaces the employer, and taste replaces credentials.”
The SAT will be replaced by CLT.
Public school will be replaced by Units.
The SAT and ACT literally compete to see who can make the dumbest test. I'm not joking.
Higher scores = more scholarships = more students = more money.
The SAT now has "reading passages" that are 25 words long. Half the applicants at some Ivy campuses are showing up with SAT
everyone who says they built the future of learning is just as lost as you.
building apps to memorize different facts instead of real understanding.
that’s not novel. it’s the same thing we’ve been doing for the past 200 years rebranded as “personalized learning”.
the reality
I go to Alpha. what it looks like: the apps find your knowledge gaps and make you close them before you move on. that’s the whole trick. you never advance carrying holes, so harder material doesn’t collapse later.
that’s why it works as well as it does. no chatbot lecturing you,
