30. Interdisciplinary approaches to modern education with Carl Gombrich

WEBVTT
00:00:19.353 --> 00:00:26.158
hi everyone, thank you for continuing to download, subscribe and all the rest of it to the Bedrock Talks podcast.
00:00:26.158 --> 00:00:27.323
I'm Andy Sammons, the host.
00:00:27.323 --> 00:00:28.847
I lead teaching and learning at Bedrock.
00:00:28.847 --> 00:00:40.795
I'm privileged to do that, and today, alongside the director of education, olivia Sumter, we have Carl Gombrich, who's I mean we've just had a quick five ten minute chat with Carl before coming on.
00:00:40.795 --> 00:00:44.807
This is going to be an absolute banger of an episode, this.
00:00:44.807 --> 00:00:46.622
I can't wait for you to listen to this.
00:00:46.622 --> 00:00:47.887
Um, no pressure, carl.
00:00:47.887 --> 00:00:48.990
Um thanks.
00:00:49.634 --> 00:01:03.000
He's the dean of london uh interdisciplinary school and it just, frankly, what he's talking about and what his website and what, what the university is attempting to do, is absolutely mind-blowing and incredible in equal measure.
00:01:03.000 --> 00:01:05.171
It's the first new university.
00:01:05.171 --> 00:01:07.141
Correct me if I'm wrong, is it 50 years?
00:01:07.141 --> 00:01:21.100
You said yeah to have degree awarding powers, which is no, no, um mean feat by you know, given, given how difficult it is to to get, to get that those be given those awarding powers.
00:01:21.100 --> 00:01:30.067
Um, and just diving into what carl and his colleagues are attempting, and successfully attempting at the interdisciplinary school is incredible.
00:01:30.067 --> 00:01:32.861
So, carl, thank you so much for coming on.
00:01:32.861 --> 00:01:34.947
Um, it's amazing.
00:01:34.947 --> 00:01:37.171
I couldn't quite believe it when, when we got this lined up.
00:01:37.171 --> 00:01:50.727
I couldn't believe when it dropped in my calendar um, would you mind, just, starting off, just giving us a brief kind of pricey kind of your background, how you came to be where you are now and the university's vision?
00:01:50.727 --> 00:01:52.972
That would be really helpful for listeners, I think.
00:01:53.335 --> 00:01:54.000
Yeah, thanks, andy.
00:01:54.000 --> 00:01:55.365
Just to correct a very minor point.
00:01:55.365 --> 00:01:58.007
Sorry, it was all very technical, but it's all very legal as well.
00:01:58.007 --> 00:01:58.709
So I want to get this right.
00:01:58.709 --> 00:02:03.188
We're the first university for 50 years to get our degree awarding powers.
00:02:03.188 --> 00:02:06.543
From our inception, from when we were founded, um.
00:02:06.543 --> 00:02:15.699
Usually you have to grab degrees of other unis for a long time, so you use their degree awarding powers, but because we were um, our quality was very high, we were sufficiently innovative.
00:02:15.699 --> 00:02:20.070
The office for students, um get, gave us our own degree awarding powers from the start.
00:02:20.070 --> 00:02:27.633
So that's, that's been an amazing achievement, um, not, as as you say, historic, but slightly different from being the first uni for 50 years.
00:02:28.780 --> 00:02:33.912
So basically, our curriculum is extremely radical, but also extremely simple.
00:02:33.912 --> 00:02:42.765
In some ways, we don't teach any subjects, but we teach about real-world problems and ways to tackle those problems and, in a nutshell, that's it.
00:02:42.765 --> 00:02:45.586
But you and I could spend an hour unpacking what that really means.
00:02:45.586 --> 00:02:57.000
But if you just think about, we teach about real world problems, so things like inequality, sustainability, technology and ethics, urban futures, and we teach a wide suite of skills.
00:02:57.000 --> 00:03:02.020
We call them methods in a more academic context, but methods that you can use to tackle those problems.
00:03:02.862 --> 00:03:04.868
And another couple of sentences on this.
00:03:04.868 --> 00:03:06.271
Just unpack that a little bit more, if you like.
00:03:06.271 --> 00:03:36.122
The methods range from data science and mathematical modeling right the way through all the social science methods, like how to design surveys, how to run focus groups, right the way to artistic methods, how to create a great video, how to create a great infographic, and the students start off with a very wide suite of methods to tackle these real world problems that they use and the gradually they specialize more in the methods and the suites of methods which they like and they think will be useful for them in their, in their future careers.
00:03:36.383 --> 00:03:48.995
It's interesting that because in my I mean I've I taught for I've talked for over a decade and a lot of what you've just spoken about there are all things that I've asked learners to do in my time as a teacher.
00:03:48.995 --> 00:03:58.193
I mean I've had do an infographic, produce a video, and we kind of ask them to do all of these things in in order to demonstrate learning.
00:03:58.193 --> 00:04:00.485
But what you're doing is you're almost flipping that on its head.
00:04:00.485 --> 00:04:04.343
You're you're giving them the tools to then go and discover more and learn more.
00:04:04.343 --> 00:04:04.564
Is that?
00:04:04.564 --> 00:04:05.747
Am I right in saying that?
00:04:06.388 --> 00:04:07.890
yeah, I think that's a really nice way to put it.
00:04:07.890 --> 00:04:09.313
Um, yeah, exactly that.
00:04:09.313 --> 00:04:25.310
So we're almost using uh, the learning outcomes are to demonstrate that they can use the tools to either generate new knowledge, which is valid, rigorous, relevant or critique knowledge, which we would give them so some kind of report, government report.
00:04:25.310 --> 00:04:32.949
They can then say, oh well, this focus group wasn't carried out quite in the right way, or the data isn't actually saying what the report says it's doing.
00:04:32.949 --> 00:04:33.810
But that's right.
00:04:33.810 --> 00:04:41.411
We focus on the methods and the value of learning those methods rigorously, rather than saying this is the knowledge we want you to know and reproduce.
00:04:42.720 --> 00:04:44.725
So at Bedrock.
00:04:44.725 --> 00:04:53.072
We talk a lot because we have we have a one of the areas of our, of our solution is called bedrock mapper, where we have over 35 000.
00:04:53.072 --> 00:05:06.572
It's growing, as as it is, I think live live will be able to tell us what the, what, the word number is where we can drop very subject, specific, high level, tier three, vocabulary, um, and sequence it alongside curricula.
00:05:06.572 --> 00:05:16.411
So if we're you know, if teachers are teaching a particular topic, they can select words that learners are then asked about, taught about, and it all drives it into their individual knowledge organizers.
00:05:16.411 --> 00:05:21.074
And we talk a lot about domain knowledge alongside implementation of this.
00:05:21.295 --> 00:05:46.093
You know domain knowledge, thinking, talking like a subject expert, and I suppose one thing I really wanted to tease out here was you know, you don't have those traditional canonized subjects, as we touched on just before the show, but what's your view on that connection between domain specificity knowledge but then those broader skills?
00:05:46.093 --> 00:05:55.199
Because I think there's been a shift and both of you are equally, if not more qualified than I, certainly, to comment on this, but there's been this shift since, certainly 2010,.
00:05:55.199 --> 00:06:08.605
You know, ed Hirsch, domain specificity knowledge, unlocking learning, that's really where a lot of secondaries have landed in terms of curricula, in terms of testing knowledge, knowledge, understanding, that being the key.
00:06:08.605 --> 00:06:32.247
Where do you feel this should sit in terms of those domain, specificity versus creativity and critical thinking, because I think what you're doing here is really blowing the lid off a lot of that in some ways well, it's a fascinating, deep question, andy, we can't do this justice because there's so many nuances here and the whole debate got so over characterized between treads and progs and all this stuff.
00:06:32.649 --> 00:06:34.233
You lived through all that, as I did, I'm sure.
00:06:34.233 --> 00:06:43.723
Um, first thing I want to say is I'm very concerned with rigor, and often interdisciplinary learning is, uh, seen to be and maybe sometimes correctly seen to be not rigorous enough.
00:06:43.723 --> 00:06:47.911
So we, we really are conscious about the, the, the rigor element.
00:06:47.911 --> 00:06:57.826
Um, gosh, let me take, let me take, let me take first the angle that I, we were discussing off air and then see if we go back into the other, because there are so many ways to unpack this.
00:06:57.826 --> 00:07:11.762
As a university person, I'm very concerned with the education that we give our students, being relevant for the rest of their lives, not just the jobs they do, but also the kind of fulfilling lives they want to lead.
00:07:11.762 --> 00:07:42.309
But if I look at just the employment aspect the Institute for Student Employers, which is a fantastic organization that looks at all the kind of trends of student employability and speaks to hundreds of graduate employers They've now for years been surveying what graduate employers actually want in graduates and it's been between 80% and 90% of all graduate employers that civil service, banking sector, creative sector, whatever you like 80% to 90% don't care what undergraduate degree a student has when they join them, right?
00:07:42.309 --> 00:07:45.259
So the idea, and so let me tie this in straight.
00:07:45.259 --> 00:07:48.028
I haven't actually spoken about this for a long time, so it's quite nice to revise this.
00:07:48.028 --> 00:07:58.012
Let me tie this into the trad view like but knowledge is non-transferable and therefore you have to learn domain specific language, because that's what you asked about that.
00:07:58.853 --> 00:08:17.374
What the the one of the paradoxes in the heart of the trad, the trad thinking there are paradoxes on both sides and neither side they really acknowledge, I think is is that they say, you know, have to learn this stuff and that's what rigor is, and so on, but then they don't seem to recognize that no one is using that education then when they go into the workplace, or at least they're not aware of that.
00:08:17.374 --> 00:08:27.805
So they're either, you know, ignoring it or willfully disregarding the fact that the education that they're then giving the students is irrelevant for most graduate jobs.
00:08:27.805 --> 00:08:36.801
And I think that stems from the traddies, if we could characterize that, having a very outdated view of what employment is actually like in the modern world.
00:08:36.801 --> 00:08:42.077
No one is actually going on to be a historian or even an economist.
00:08:42.077 --> 00:08:47.366
Yes, they might work in business, but they don't use the language of formal economics, let alone biology and all those things.
00:08:47.539 --> 00:09:06.551
So traddies claim, maybe correctly, that you need subject-specific knowledge to get that thing, get that discipline down if you like and be able to work in it, but then either ignore or are unaware of the fact that that's completely useless for up to 90% of graduates going into the world of work.
00:09:06.551 --> 00:09:09.789
So how do we square that circle?
00:09:09.789 --> 00:09:20.571
Progressives, on the other hand, might correctly say, yeah, it's all kind of useless, they need to be learning other things, but they never then say exactly what they should be learning and what the rigorous aspects of it are that they should be learning.
00:09:20.571 --> 00:09:25.591
So I think both sides have things they really need to consider in in their arguments.
00:09:26.422 --> 00:09:28.647
Um, and I think I would sorry I'll ever go ahead.
00:09:28.647 --> 00:09:32.523
I think you know we would probably name that in secondary education skills.
00:09:32.523 --> 00:09:39.572
That tends to be the other side of knowledge and actually you can't apply your knowledge without the skills of being at.
00:09:39.572 --> 00:09:48.113
You know, without having that language, without having that skill set of being able to communicate effectively, write an effective essay, read analytically can I, can I jump in there?
00:09:48.153 --> 00:09:49.274
so sorry because I slightly lost.
00:09:49.274 --> 00:09:55.625
You've actually helped remind me what I really want to say, because the progressives would say we need to learn all these 20th century skills.
00:09:55.625 --> 00:10:00.725
Right, yeah, and they're not wrong in the sense that those are actually the things you're going to need in the workplace.
00:10:00.725 --> 00:10:19.129
But the uh, but we, no one's, but the traddies won't admit because they don't admit, they don't think about domain transfer that you can then transfer what you learn in english literature or biology or mathematics into the workplace because transfer of knowledge doesn't exist in the trap, in the ultra trial argument, right, so you know which.
00:10:19.129 --> 00:10:19.789
Which is it?
00:10:19.789 --> 00:10:31.275
Is it that subjects actually do give you those kind of very important generic skills which you can transfer out from subject disciplines into the workplace, but in which case the tradies are wrong that it doesn't transfer?
00:10:31.275 --> 00:10:44.086
Or is it that you can go completely broad and not learn via different disciplines for the actual workplace what people do after university, but then the proggies never actually codify that in any way.
00:10:44.086 --> 00:10:45.769
They never actually say these are the things you learn.
00:10:45.769 --> 00:10:52.381
They're never rigorous enough about the different categories of language vocabulary knowledge that you do need to learn to go into the workplace.
00:10:52.381 --> 00:10:55.389
So no one's quite getting this right.
00:10:55.469 --> 00:11:02.206
I'm not saying we're either getting this right, but we do think that, well, we go very much by what is actually useful to our graduates.
00:11:02.206 --> 00:11:09.716
Of course I've got tons of data on this because before this I worked at UCL where I set up the first Bachelor of Arts and Sciences in the UK which is like this kind of education.
00:11:09.716 --> 00:11:20.034
So we've got tons of data that the sorts of skills and knowledge and methodological rigor that our students know is really useful for the workplace.
00:11:20.034 --> 00:11:22.940
But it's not entirely subject-specific.
00:11:22.940 --> 00:11:37.985
It crosses between different subjects, it uses various frameworks, various assessment requirements which require students to evidence all this kind of different sort of vocabulary which isn't necessarily domain specific, um.
00:11:37.985 --> 00:11:41.058
So yeah, I think you've got to.
00:11:41.058 --> 00:11:47.078
You've got to let go of some of the subject specific specificity, but you mustn't let go of rigor while you're doing it.
00:11:47.099 --> 00:11:48.744
I think that's the that's the point I'm trying to make.
00:11:48.744 --> 00:11:58.986
So you're seeking new vocabulary, new things, you want to teach new ways of demonstrating that you've learned those things, uh, which may not be attached to individual disciplines.
00:11:58.986 --> 00:12:01.263
Now, that's for university people.
00:12:01.263 --> 00:12:05.285
As, again, we said before we got on air, that may not be what you need at secondary.
00:12:05.285 --> 00:12:09.667
I'm quite sympathetic to thinking that secondary students need a lot of structure.
00:12:09.667 --> 00:12:21.903
They need to understand that the world is categorized in certain ways and each thing brings with it certain vocabularies which have to be learned, also certain methodologies which have to be learned as well.
00:12:21.903 --> 00:12:38.606
By the way, epistemological worldviews, all those things come with subjects and it's quite helpful to separate them, sort of for mental hygiene, if you like, just so that students can learn, have some clarity in their learning in this crucial kind of year 11 to to the I'm sorry year 7 to 13.
00:12:38.687 --> 00:12:50.371
I think one of the things that we uh talk about often, carl in say, in a secondary setting, is that when we think about tier 2 vocabulary, we think about our academic verbs, so verbs you know, analyze, evaluate, etc.
00:12:50.371 --> 00:13:06.168
And actually when we look at the whole school curriculum, I think evaluate has got eight distinct meanings in different subject areas right is that something that you come up against that actually, depending on domain, meaning changes, or is that?
00:13:06.335 --> 00:13:08.481
is that something that you equip your students to navigate?
00:13:08.481 --> 00:13:11.096
Is that something you've thought about in in your setting?
00:13:11.998 --> 00:13:15.484
I honestly I'm not going to say that we have thought about it.
00:13:15.484 --> 00:13:25.144
I think that's in a funny way, that's a consequence of very siloed education.
00:13:25.205 --> 00:13:27.028
I suppose it really is, yeah, yeah.
00:13:27.934 --> 00:13:41.400
And because we try to either you could think of it as jump over that or kind of deconstruct that in some ways we don't worry too much about what each different discipline says these particular verbs mean.
00:13:41.400 --> 00:13:44.014
So that is a clear contrast thing between what you're trying to do.
00:13:44.014 --> 00:14:00.543
What we're trying to do, um, as I mentioned, what we're trying to do is give students the tools, the analytical tools, from understanding the way the knowledge was generated, how a scientist generates knowledge, how a social scientist generates knowledge, how a humanities person generates knowledge.
00:14:00.543 --> 00:14:08.741
Understand how that knowledge was generated in order for them, our students to either critique that knowledge or produce similar knowledge of their own.
00:14:08.741 --> 00:14:09.985
Both are valuable.
00:14:10.956 --> 00:14:17.364
But that kind of strips out a little bit the kind of worrying too much about what particular vocabulary means in every particular area.
00:14:17.364 --> 00:14:20.826
If you know how that knowledge was generated, you may not need to kind of fuss too much about what particular vocabulary means in every particular area.
00:14:20.826 --> 00:14:25.822
If you know how that knowledge was generated, you may not need to kind of fuss too much about the nuances of the different terms, I think I mean you might disagree with that a little bit.
00:14:25.822 --> 00:14:28.903
Maybe you think the vocabulary is extremely important even so I do.
00:14:28.942 --> 00:14:35.669
Well, I mean, my life's mission is definitely predicated on the fact that I do think language is very important, for sure.
00:14:35.669 --> 00:14:46.104
But I also entirely agree with you that I think I think it is reflective the fact that evaluate needs to mean eight different things for a student going into a different classroom hour on hour.
00:14:46.104 --> 00:14:49.975
I think that that's a like, I mean, that is a headache, isn't it?
00:14:49.975 --> 00:15:00.839
That is, for me, reflective of a system that has not really thought holistically, that hasn't thought globally about actually, how are we kind of sharing curriculum learning across the different subject areas?
00:15:00.839 --> 00:15:05.821
How are we building in a need for a school to make links between different subject domains?
00:15:05.821 --> 00:15:08.235
How are we building in that kind of much more holistic thinking?
00:15:08.235 --> 00:15:16.869
I think it, I think we need to answer to it, because that's the assessment system that we work in and therefore we do need to equip our students with that understanding.
00:15:16.869 --> 00:15:22.486
But I think, more broadly, it speaks to the fact that that holistic thinking isn't really in place in our curriculum.
00:15:23.876 --> 00:15:26.325
Do you guys work with things called threshold concepts?
00:15:26.325 --> 00:15:27.576
Do you know?
00:15:27.576 --> 00:15:29.283
About threshold concepts I don't.
00:15:30.235 --> 00:15:49.671
I've played with them when I was director of English in my previous role and that's how we really looked at designing our, our curriculum, using at least a version of that term, which was you know what other concepts we want, the, the, the, the pupils to be able to kind of move past as they progress through the curriculum.
00:15:49.671 --> 00:16:04.904
But I think what I hope you're about to touch on and was what I was about to ask you, which was about, you know, we talked previously about giving learners opportunities to address real world problems.
00:16:04.904 --> 00:16:07.839
I think at this point in the conversation it'd be really useful.
00:16:07.839 --> 00:16:17.046
Could you give us a sense of the types of module, the types of experiences that that learners in your interdisciplinary school?
00:16:17.046 --> 00:16:21.860
Could you give us a sense of kind of an you know, the, how you would break that learning experience down?
00:16:21.860 --> 00:16:23.946
Yeah, sure, philosophy.
00:16:23.946 --> 00:16:27.846
I think that would be a really important moment in this conversation yeah, sure.
00:16:27.886 --> 00:16:29.934
So we look at the problem of inequality right.
00:16:29.934 --> 00:16:37.099
That's a what we call a problem area in our lis london interdisciplinary school vocabulary problem areas inequality.
00:16:37.099 --> 00:16:45.475
Then we'll have two to four external people come in from the real world outside academia and talk about what inequality means to them.
00:16:45.475 --> 00:16:47.081
That could be financial inequality.
00:16:47.081 --> 00:16:53.309
So we had someone come and talk about the racialized financial wealth gap when it comes to getting loans.
00:16:53.309 --> 00:16:59.287
So people from some ethnic backgrounds find it very hard, much too hard, and disproportionately hard to get loans from banks compared to others.
00:16:59.287 --> 00:17:01.964
We had someone come in and talk about health inequality.
00:17:01.964 --> 00:17:07.027
So we have people come in and talk about this concept of inequality and how it plays out in their real world area.
00:17:07.027 --> 00:17:14.308
Then our students work in groups to refine what we call a problem statement about a particular area of inequality they're interested in.
00:17:14.308 --> 00:17:23.978
So then there's quite a lot of that shaping, which is so, so important in higher education, about what is an actual tractable research question, because we know students always want to go very, very broad.
00:17:23.978 --> 00:17:26.242
How can I solve health inequality in?
00:17:26.262 --> 00:17:27.023
the world you know.
00:17:27.384 --> 00:17:38.082
No, how can you help bangladeshi second generation women in tower hamlets have reduced health inequality when it comes to women's health issues.
00:17:38.142 --> 00:17:47.845
You, you know that's the kind of targeted, rigorous, precise research question we want them to ask and then they'll go in do some research to answer that question.
00:17:47.845 --> 00:17:53.894
Now, the first year, they can't apply a lot of data science to that because they haven't learned that they can't make a great campaign video.
00:17:53.894 --> 00:17:54.977
They haven't learned how to do that.
00:17:54.977 --> 00:17:58.605
But we thread in more and more of these methods.
00:17:58.605 --> 00:18:02.913
We teach focus groups, survey writing, analysis of archives.
00:18:02.913 --> 00:18:33.394
We've got a fantastic library in the city of london here where students can go and look up archives and do archival research there and gradually they will do, they will use the methods they've learned on each of these big problems modules, on the refined research question which they've done coming out of the out of the out of the problems module to actually tackle that problem in a meaningful way and come up with a meaningful contribution really to understanding that problem question from their own perspective that's so interesting when you're grounding it in that, in that kind of that real world scenario.
00:18:33.575 --> 00:19:01.025
Because and I loved again, um, what you said, uh, what you've said previously about the hourglass model yeah, how you see it as an hourglass, because I think a lot of you know secondary, secondary colleagues and primary colleagues actually primary certainly as well who are listening to this, who will think that they'll be interested in this stuff because they're listening to it, but at the same time, I think they'll also be thinking about how they can possibly ground this in their own roles as well at work.
00:19:01.025 --> 00:19:12.830
So, where do you see, just explain to us briefly, give us a recap of that hourglass model and how you, where you see this fitting, because to a certain extent, we're kind of stuck with this system.
00:19:12.830 --> 00:19:14.656
You know eight different meanings of evaluation.
00:19:14.656 --> 00:19:23.239
You know not having through up front and and we, you know we're still you know, let's be honest, we're still living in a, in a system where we've got the six weeks holiday because that fit the agrarian.
00:19:23.680 --> 00:19:32.050
Yeah, we're stuck with some remnants, right, but yeah, in terms of curriculum design, I know there are some schools that are starting to break these barriers down.
00:19:32.050 --> 00:19:35.201
There are days, um, there are, uh, this in the north.
00:19:35.201 --> 00:19:36.723
I forget that the name.
00:19:36.723 --> 00:19:37.625
I apologize.
00:19:37.625 --> 00:19:40.961
I'll put it in the in the we're andy, we're working with some schools.
00:19:41.002 --> 00:19:54.676
Now we have quite an interesting, quite a powerful consortium come to us to ask to redo, uh, some aspects of the their curriculum because they want to help in making connections across subjects and doing some we call them sort of almost post-disciplinary things like systems thinking.
00:19:54.676 --> 00:20:01.228
I don't know if you guys know about systems thinking, but we have a, a fantastic person that I think is I'm helping him get a book out.
00:20:01.228 --> 00:20:03.759
I hope he's going to become much more better known.
00:20:03.759 --> 00:20:07.674
But there are all sorts of um, new ways of crossing the curricula, sort of things.
00:20:07.674 --> 00:20:13.875
You mentioned libya that I think you can weave them into into the school, um, uh way of doing things.
00:20:13.875 --> 00:20:17.040
I mean, the ib does this, to be honest, has been doing it well for years.
00:20:17.040 --> 00:20:20.546
Unfortunately, the UK government doesn't seem to be able to afford it.
00:20:20.546 --> 00:20:30.762
But you can do perfectly traditional and you probably should do some quite traditional disciplinary stuff alongside insisting that students then connect that stuff to other disciplines.
00:20:30.762 --> 00:20:43.528
So this hourglass model you were mentioning, basically you start broad at the bottom when students are young, because you know students don't see academic subjects, they just see world, and the world is non-disciplinary, as someone once famously said.
00:20:43.528 --> 00:20:52.166
But then I think as you get to that adolescent period, years 7 to 13 you know there's a lot going on in the developing brain there and the structure is just helpful.
00:20:52.166 --> 00:20:57.420
I think it's helpful for clarity, for sort of mental hygiene, for just organizing the school day.
00:20:57.420 --> 00:21:01.085
I don't really have much of a problem with it in that in that period.
00:21:01.085 --> 00:21:03.970
But I don't think it should get too set either.
00:21:04.089 --> 00:21:11.368
I do think british students with their famously narrow a-level system I think it's the narrowest in the world apart from mauritius, or certainly used to be.
00:21:11.368 --> 00:21:18.788
It might be a bit out of date there, but even china and india some of these systems we think of as very traditional have five subjects if you include English.
00:21:18.788 --> 00:21:23.165
So I think the UK system is way too narrow and it's certainly too siloed.
00:21:23.165 --> 00:21:32.165
I mean you still get students like my little boy who's brilliant at science but he's still asked the question like is that physics or is that chemistry?
00:21:32.165 --> 00:21:33.318
And I'm like who cares?
00:21:33.358 --> 00:21:34.663
You know it's interesting, it's both.
00:21:34.663 --> 00:21:36.920
It's neither you know, but that's the way they're taught.
00:21:36.920 --> 00:21:42.936
They interesting, it's both, it's neither you know, but that's the way they're taught.
00:21:42.936 --> 00:21:43.257
They're taught in these very narrow bands.
00:21:43.257 --> 00:21:44.770
They still ask those kind of slightly irrelevant bureaucratic questions.
00:21:44.770 --> 00:21:51.827
So I think you've got to be careful not to let students get too siloed, particularly 16 to 18, and there should be part of the curriculum, whether it's the extended essay, you know, the sort of epq.
00:21:51.827 --> 00:22:06.159
Extended essay is the ib thing, then the epq is the sort of A-level version or systems thinking of some new A-levels even introduced which encourage students not to get too rigidly confined to their silos, because that just won't help them in the longer run.
00:22:07.061 --> 00:22:08.965
I think this links directly to.
00:22:08.965 --> 00:22:12.327
I mean, you speak on on your website and you know you've spoken.
00:22:12.327 --> 00:22:14.878
We've spoken previously about the changing nature of expertise.
00:22:14.878 --> 00:22:17.248
You know I've got this.
00:22:17.327 --> 00:22:19.295
As I said before, I've got this kind of double-edged sword.
00:22:19.295 --> 00:22:25.366
When it comes to ai, I am fearful of it and in love with it in equal measure.
00:22:25.366 --> 00:22:26.836
Um, in terms of what?
00:22:26.836 --> 00:22:28.442
The, the potential and I?
00:22:28.442 --> 00:22:39.227
I spoke to dan fitzpatrick a few months ago and, and I agree with him wholeheartedly, I think that ai is akin to fire in terms of elemental.
00:22:39.227 --> 00:22:41.170
I think it's just incredible.
00:22:41.671 --> 00:22:46.664
Yeah, and so you, you spoke, you speak, you've spoken about the change notes for expertise.
00:22:46.664 --> 00:22:58.863
In a world where content is generated the click of a button, yeah, in a world where you've got access to all of, as you've said before, all of these kind of information, um, your trads, I think.
00:22:58.863 --> 00:23:07.961
Still, to some extent, I agree, you do need domain-specific knowledge in order to function, as you say, in certain domains.
00:23:07.961 --> 00:23:17.747
But what I would ask here is what is your view of this changing nature of expertise where you can produce, you can research, at the click of a button?
00:23:17.747 --> 00:23:32.126
We've got for, for example I use often perplexity ai is yeah, I love perplexity, I love it yeah and so what role do you see literacy playing in this, in this, because it really is.
00:23:32.468 --> 00:23:33.171
It's we're about.
00:23:33.171 --> 00:23:35.135
We're on the precipice of something massive, aren't we?
00:23:35.576 --> 00:23:35.916
we are.
00:23:35.916 --> 00:23:37.779
We are totally on the cusp of something massive.
00:23:37.779 --> 00:23:43.997
Um, and for me the divide is going to be people who are able to critique what ai shows them and those that can't.
00:23:43.997 --> 00:23:59.304
And um, for me this is a right back to methods again, and I think for schools it's a huge challenge because not as it only is it back to methods, but it's then a back back to were the methods used correctly and but, and who was the authority, if you like, in quotes who used that method?
00:23:59.304 --> 00:24:02.710
Now, when you get to 18 plus, you can start to ask those questions.
00:24:02.710 --> 00:24:03.998
It kind of makes sense in the world.
00:24:03.998 --> 00:24:05.321
You start to doubt a bit more.
00:24:05.722 --> 00:24:10.027
But how can you talk to a nine year old about the legitimate generation of knowledge?
00:24:10.027 --> 00:24:14.818
Do they have any concept outside what mum and dad tells them, that knowledge is even generated?
00:24:14.818 --> 00:24:15.740
That's a weird phrase.
00:24:15.740 --> 00:24:17.604
Right, there is stuff, there isn't stuff.
00:24:17.604 --> 00:24:31.423
But that is where we are, because they are themselves going to be typing into AI, getting all sorts of stuff the machine gives them, with no concept of how that knowledge in quotes that AI presented knowledge came to be.
00:24:31.423 --> 00:24:33.165
But that is what we have to try and teach.
00:24:33.626 --> 00:24:41.269
It seems to me increasingly young people have to understand that all knowledge is in a sense generated by humans at some point in history and in some ways.
00:24:41.269 --> 00:24:45.665
And in generating that knowledge, all humans use some methods to do it.
00:24:45.665 --> 00:24:51.585
They use experimentation, they use creativity, they use digging in the ground if they're archaeologists.
00:24:51.585 --> 00:24:56.428
So, again, it's about teaching students the methods that generated that knowledge and then teach them.
00:24:56.428 --> 00:25:02.364
Every single time a machine presents them with some knowledge, they have to ask the question where's this knowledge from?
00:25:02.364 --> 00:25:03.935
How is it produced?
00:25:03.935 --> 00:25:06.561
Why do I trust the person that's produced it?
00:25:06.561 --> 00:25:13.048
And I think that's hard enough and rich enough, but exciting enough at university to do how you do with younger learners.
00:25:13.048 --> 00:25:17.382
I have no idea, because how can children even think of the world in that way?
00:25:18.605 --> 00:25:21.739
you've just, you've just annihilated my next question there.
00:25:21.739 --> 00:25:32.957
I was going to ask you, you know, from your you know, uh, knowledge of the secondary system, where you, you know, with your own children, you know 10 gcses, 3a levels and that type of thing.
00:25:32.957 --> 00:25:43.566
Yeah, if you did have a magic wand, or at least half a magic wand, to be able to do half of the things, or even a quarter of magic wand to be able to do half of the things, or even a quarter of the things that you would like to do, where do you see this?
00:25:43.566 --> 00:25:49.325
Where do you feel the system could shift to, or or thinking about moving towards?
00:25:50.346 --> 00:25:55.827
so, um, this is fun, and because I've got no um dog in this fight, because I'm not in school system.
00:25:55.827 --> 00:25:59.000
But I look at my, my young boy, who's super good at science.
00:25:59.000 --> 00:26:03.061
He's doing the double maths, physics, chemistry, and he doesn't do any coding.
00:26:03.061 --> 00:26:03.737
He doesn't do any.
00:26:03.737 --> 00:26:05.523
You know, which is crazy.
00:26:05.523 --> 00:26:07.461
I mean, maths is now coding.
00:26:07.461 --> 00:26:12.035
Basically, there's a bit of mathematical modeling needed, but a tiny fraction of what they're actually told.
00:26:12.035 --> 00:26:35.436
But I would like to flip it entirely on its head and say'd say to them okay, we're going to tell you nothing about um, the mechanism, this, but you have to go off and produce a piece of code which is going to um design, I don't know, a, a toy rocket that's gonna be sold in the shops, and they have to go off and use the ai to do that.
00:26:35.436 --> 00:26:42.519
But the, the requirement because this is what people are nervous about is the is when it goes wrong.
00:26:42.519 --> 00:26:45.727
Right, so you can get a great mark if it's right.
00:26:45.727 --> 00:26:55.363
But you're going to get massively penalized if you've done an uncritical accepting of what the ai has told you, told you without looking deeper into why it's told you that.
00:26:55.363 --> 00:26:57.248
So by all means, produce stuff.
00:26:57.248 --> 00:27:04.917
But the bar is now so much higher, and I'm actually doing this at my uni with my students, but not around coding, this is more around quality stuff.
00:27:04.917 --> 00:27:10.135
The bar to getting like really good grade is so much higher anyone can pass that bar now.
00:27:10.135 --> 00:27:15.856
So they're going to be much tougher penalties on if you haven't critically engaged with what the ai is telling you.
00:27:15.856 --> 00:27:22.809
So that's what we're going to assess is your critical engagement with the code, with the information you're given.
00:27:23.894 --> 00:27:31.304
And in my university I asked students to produce a five-minute video which evidences how they interacted with the AI all the way along the piece.
00:27:31.304 --> 00:27:40.500
They can talk me through it, they can produce slides, they can give me screenshots, whatever it might be, and that has an equal weighting in the assessment to the thing actually produced.
00:27:40.500 --> 00:27:49.240
So so I dived in with a code example, because I think the stakes are a bit higher there and I haven't done this myself, so I'm actually less good at describing it than the other thing which I just did describe.
00:27:49.240 --> 00:27:58.039
But I think you could produce certainly university rather than students say I don't know anything about coding, you say, right, you've got a weekend, go on chat sheet, bt, code something.
00:27:58.039 --> 00:28:08.227
But then what I'm interested in is your critique of the code and seeing how they then use all the machine stuff possible to critique the code that they've been given.
00:28:08.227 --> 00:28:13.005
This is very, very unworked out because we're right at the foothills here.
00:28:13.005 --> 00:28:20.420
But I suppose the take-home for me now is the bar is so much higher and we mustn't stop students getting over that bar because that's a good thing to do.
00:28:20.420 --> 00:28:35.345
But they've also got to understand the stakes are so much higher if they get something wrong, because these machines make terrible mistakes and they have to know about that and there has to be kind of rigorous spot-checking of that and they might therefore lose a lot of marks when they do it.
00:28:35.664 --> 00:28:39.528
And I suppose the sort of halfway house between those two things is what I'm doing with my students at the moment.
00:28:39.528 --> 00:28:40.628
They have to produce an essay.
00:28:40.628 --> 00:28:44.131
It's a complex thing to explain but it's quite a creative essay.
00:28:44.131 --> 00:28:45.372
It's called a vision paper.
00:28:45.372 --> 00:28:49.982
It combines all sorts of ideas of arts and sciences and problem solving.
00:28:49.982 --> 00:28:57.508
But what I'm actually just as interested in looking at is their critical engagement with the AI in the process of producing that paper.
00:28:57.508 --> 00:29:00.199
And I don't the hard thing.
00:29:00.199 --> 00:29:04.318
I don't think that's actually too difficult to set and I think it's actually quite fun for teachers to engage with and it's inspiring.
00:29:04.318 --> 00:29:07.896
Actually to see students have these thought partners and work is amazing.
00:29:07.896 --> 00:29:10.522
What's difficult is the time required to assess it.
00:29:10.522 --> 00:29:15.343
It's not conceptually difficult to do and it's actually really valuable for the teacher and the students.
00:29:15.343 --> 00:29:22.980
But just marking, you know, 10 minute videos of students engagement with this stuff is very time-consuming, so that bit I haven't worked out.
00:29:24.116 --> 00:29:52.673
My good friend is a lecturer in international politics and she was having such problems with AI-generated essays that she now just sets podcasts to produce a podcast episode that is an assessment and she said that whilst the time marking button is actually important, you know larger in the first, in the first instance actually, and to remark and guide the students through the reiterations of that project actually ends up being kind of 50, 50.
00:29:52.673 --> 00:30:00.145
Um, and the and the initial output from the students is much of a much higher quality and shows, like you say, that they've engaged with it critically.
00:30:00.968 --> 00:30:01.730
Yeah, that's interesting.
00:30:01.730 --> 00:30:03.122
Yeah, I completely agree with that.
00:30:03.122 --> 00:30:07.252
Of course, we're probably only two years away from AI producing a perfect podcast in a student's voice.
00:30:08.482 --> 00:30:10.160
Yeah, that's probably true, can I?
00:30:10.160 --> 00:30:12.667
Ask you something which is a bit provocative.
00:30:13.190 --> 00:30:13.510
Yeah, go on.
00:30:14.480 --> 00:30:16.821
Who does this work for, can you like?
00:30:16.821 --> 00:30:21.585
If you think about the students that are coming through your doors, are they highly highly academic students who would thrive in any model?
00:30:21.585 --> 00:30:25.247
Highly highly academic students who would thrive in any model.
00:30:25.247 --> 00:30:36.814
And if I was a teacher sitting here listening to this in a secondary setting, there might be students who think, actually, if I just set them a more open-ended task without that scaffolding, they would really struggle to access that.
00:30:36.814 --> 00:30:38.695
So is this way of thinking.
00:30:38.695 --> 00:30:40.717
Is this model appropriate for all?
00:30:40.717 --> 00:30:41.657
Is it universal?
00:30:43.279 --> 00:30:43.863
What do you think about that?
00:30:43.863 --> 00:30:44.625
It's a really good question.
00:30:44.625 --> 00:30:48.369
At UCL, of course, I was spoiled with some of the best literally best students in the world.
00:30:48.369 --> 00:30:54.135
Right and um, you just open up a course like this and they're like oh, thank goodness, something like this exists at uni.
00:30:54.135 --> 00:30:56.345
At last I can go somewhere and do something I want to do.
00:30:56.925 --> 00:31:02.385
And I was a bit worried that, you know, it was basically quite an elitist thing and only a tiny fraction of students could cope.
00:31:02.385 --> 00:31:16.269
But I had the privilege privilege, of course, of going around to many other unis I won't name them because that would look like I was dumbing down on their students but I went to some very not Russell Group universities and they were all very interested.
00:31:16.269 --> 00:31:19.445
Many students there also said we wish we could do something like this.
00:31:19.445 --> 00:31:21.767
You know, combining English literature and biology.
00:31:21.767 --> 00:31:27.752
I remember and I'm afraid I can't remember the particular thing the student was working on, but it was very coherent, it made a lot of sense.
00:31:27.752 --> 00:31:32.711
She was doing something between developmental biology and English literature and it was great.
00:31:32.711 --> 00:31:35.568
So I think it's something to keep an eye on.
00:31:36.500 --> 00:31:56.025
I think you're right to raise it as a possible elitist thing and I think the way around, that is, to develop these specific courses, like in systems thinking or in um, in cognitive biases, so kind of new cross-disciplinary type courses which in a sense have a bit of the smell of the old.
00:31:56.025 --> 00:32:02.134
You know, they're packaged, they're a bit of a silo, but they're explicitly not old-fashioned disciplines.
00:32:02.134 --> 00:32:11.983
They cross different disciplines and require different vocabularies to use your, your guys ways of thinking or different um, different knowledge sets from traditional disciplines.
00:32:11.983 --> 00:32:13.789
So yeah, so I don't.
00:32:13.789 --> 00:32:15.636
I think it's okay.
00:32:15.636 --> 00:32:17.102
I think it's something you've got to keep an eye on.
00:32:17.782 --> 00:32:25.526
I do think super bright people flourish in this kind of environment because often very bright people are interested in lots of different things.
00:32:25.526 --> 00:32:31.247
I mean, it's as simple as that and when you give them the opportunity to study all those things and connect them, they're just, they're like in a playground.
00:32:31.247 --> 00:32:31.728
They love it.
00:32:31.728 --> 00:32:35.933
But I don't think it has to be only super bright or super academic, should we say people.
00:32:35.933 --> 00:32:49.464
I think there are other ways to scaffold this and reframe where we've got to in knowledge which everyone can engage with it's so interesting when you, when you think about when, when you think about where this is moving towards.
00:32:50.467 --> 00:32:59.737
And I think the final thing I really want to sort of touch on and just looking at this here is where do you see things moving in the next?
00:32:59.737 --> 00:33:02.382
I mean, I think you guys are obviously ahead of the curve.
00:33:02.382 --> 00:33:03.663
I think there's that that.
00:33:03.663 --> 00:33:05.787
I don't think that's really up for debate.
00:33:05.787 --> 00:33:07.829
I think you're ahead of where things are moving to.
00:33:07.829 --> 00:33:28.005
But we at bedrock we talk about the classroom of the future, we talk about um, where we are trying to move to and support schools to move to in terms of that much more fluid um interaction with it, um being able to kind of enter into dialogue with teachers online, all that sort of stuff.
00:33:28.005 --> 00:33:34.673
Where do you see things moving in the next five, 10, 20 years?
00:33:34.673 --> 00:33:39.192
What do you see in terms of the young people coming through your university?
00:33:39.192 --> 00:33:43.048
And, more broadly, have you had your crystal ball?
00:33:43.048 --> 00:33:44.192
What are you thinking?
00:33:44.779 --> 00:33:45.945
Well, andy, I like to joke about this.
00:33:45.945 --> 00:33:49.549
I've been wrong for 15 years, so you certainly shouldn't listen to me, right?
00:33:49.549 --> 00:33:53.391
I thought when the moocs came along in 2010 wasn't massive?
00:33:53.391 --> 00:34:04.045
Open online courses, the free courses from stanford, from harvard, from yale I thought why would anyone blow 70 grand going to uni when you can literally get the same knowledge, probably better taught, from your bedroom?
00:34:04.045 --> 00:34:11.802
So I completely misunderstood what university had come to mean in our culture, which is a great right of right of passage for a generation.
00:34:11.802 --> 00:34:22.282
It's, I mean, students will tell you they go for the learning, but actually an economist would say you're not going for the learning because you can get the same learning for 70 grand, 90 grand less at home.
00:34:22.282 --> 00:34:23.826
So it's not really you know.
00:34:23.826 --> 00:34:34.842
So there's a lot of really really weird mysteries in the, in the university sector in particular, which do not fit any rational theory of human behavior, economics, right.
00:34:34.842 --> 00:34:47.612
But putting that aside, um, I think we've got a really bad disconnect from the way education's gone in this country the last 12 years and what graduate work actually is, leaving out the whole university piece in the middle.
00:34:48.213 --> 00:34:49.175
And I'm sympathetic.
00:34:49.175 --> 00:34:51.126
You know I've followed Tom Bennett for years on Twitter.
00:34:51.126 --> 00:34:54.289
I admire Tom, I know he's very traddy and he has a lot of detractors.
00:34:54.289 --> 00:34:57.889
You might be in Tom Camps or David Dido, these people but I admire them.
00:34:57.889 --> 00:35:04.864
I like their emphasis on cognitive science and all the learning sciences stuff and I'm naturally quite a progressive person.
00:35:04.864 --> 00:35:10.592
I find the wooliness and a lot of the prog side of things, uh, you know, a bit dispiriting, to be honest.
00:35:10.592 --> 00:35:30.987
Yeah, but I but I but I do think that insisting on you know, on on siloization and nothing else and insisting on exam prep and I see this, of course, with my kids has been pretty disastrous for, uh, the university sector and for then students actually understanding what the world's going to require of them four or five years after doing their A-levels.
00:35:30.987 --> 00:35:51.061
So perhaps the way to get back to this is, as I was saying to Olivia a bit earlier, to think of new things which fit in with the trad view of what rigor is required, what it means to use what the learning sciences have taught us for hundreds of years and the properties kind of ignore, but some actually new, more progressive type modules which require that.
00:35:51.061 --> 00:36:20.143
So, whether it's in systems thinking, whether it's methodologies or something about the scientific method, having students do more of their own um, experimental work or generating their own stuff, critical evaluation of ai, all those kinds of things could, I think, perhaps bridge that divide between the desperate need, I think, for novelty and some progressive thinking in the UK school system and being rigorous about it and not just being all fluffy and saying that let students do what they want.
00:36:20.362 --> 00:36:29.364
I mean, one thing that amazes me is that we still really don't have a respectable and rigorous media studies A-level and university course in the country.
00:36:29.364 --> 00:36:35.614
Why aren't Oxford and Cambridge delivering the most exciting media studies undergraduate degree in the world?
00:36:35.614 --> 00:36:40.588
Is there anything more important than understanding the modern media's role in society?
00:36:40.588 --> 00:36:47.197
And it's a combination of computer science, politics, psychology, um graphic design.
00:36:47.197 --> 00:36:57.797
It's a fascinating interdisciplinary area and we've had like 15 years to think about developing this now and we're still sort of ridiculed and you know you don't get your very best students doing it.
00:36:57.797 --> 00:36:59.161
The best universities don't offer it.
00:36:59.161 --> 00:37:00.965
I mean, that's just a symptom, if you like.
00:37:00.965 --> 00:37:07.831
That's emblematic how incredibly kind of uh, victorian and backward a lot, a lot of the education system is.
00:37:07.831 --> 00:37:10.559
But yeah, it's just one example.
00:37:11.221 --> 00:37:17.431
I often say, because, as an English teacher, I often say that I'm frustrated with the modern English language.
00:37:17.431 --> 00:37:26.128
Gcse, you know, from my very confined experience, you know, even just as a minor step towards what you just said there.
00:37:26.128 --> 00:37:34.947
Why are we talking about what we're talking about for the non-fiction paper and we're not talking about how newspapers construct images and bias and things like that?
00:37:34.947 --> 00:37:37.733
Why aren't we giving out?
00:37:37.733 --> 00:37:41.253
You know, I think that I actually, uh, wouldn't, you know, don't shy away from saying this.
00:37:41.835 --> 00:37:44.302
I think there's a certain amount of moral failure going on.
00:37:44.302 --> 00:37:51.152
We're not, we're not allowing and exposing our young people to how narratives get shaped in the media.
00:37:51.152 --> 00:38:15.650
I won't name names, but I've got apps of all sorts of all sorts of newspapers on my phone and, as an as a linguist by trade, as an english language degree, um, uh, you know, that's, that's what I got, as in my linguistics, I love reading all range of newspapers and apps because I love looking at the technical side of how the bias is produced, but I would hate to be a passive recipient of some of these.
00:38:16.061 --> 00:38:18.659
Yeah, 100%, 100%, 100%.
00:38:18.659 --> 00:38:23.130
Why don't we teach cognitive biases through academic subjects in a rigorous way?
00:38:23.130 --> 00:38:27.545
That's another thing we could do to make the system much more relevant and progressive and rigorous.
00:38:28.101 --> 00:38:29.748
I think we do do that in Key Stage 3.
00:38:29.748 --> 00:38:34.045
I think, where schools have got bandwidth to do that, some schools are doing brilliant jobs doing that.
00:38:34.045 --> 00:38:34.909
Okay good.
00:38:34.909 --> 00:38:44.927
I was at a school the other day and they were talking to me about just that and had an amazing scheme of work about media, but then at Key Stage 4, obviously that gets….
00:38:45.588 --> 00:38:45.990
Narrowed.
00:38:47.239 --> 00:38:47.722
Exactly about uh media.
00:38:47.722 --> 00:38:49.570
But then at key stage four, obviously that gets narrowed, exactly.
00:38:49.570 --> 00:38:56.210
It gets pushed aside because it's not within the assessment uh criteria, which is I mean this has been an incredible conversation.
00:38:56.251 --> 00:38:57.534
I've this is flown by.
00:38:58.155 --> 00:38:59.960
I've loved it yes, not enough time.
00:38:59.981 --> 00:39:00.501
Sorry about that.
00:39:00.501 --> 00:39:18.670
I mean, I would love, sincerely love, to have you back on again later this year, carl, because this has been so incredible, and please do in the follow up obviously we'll get some details from you, but please do, we'll make sure you share your links with us for the university.
00:39:18.670 --> 00:39:27.530
I would love to work with you further in the future and engage further, because I think what you're doing is is really incredible and I and the sort of the litmus test for that.
00:39:28.411 --> 00:39:36.793
I would love my own children to come through and oh, that's nice so it's 100% the litmus test, andy, I I've put a post on linkedin.
00:39:36.793 --> 00:39:46.945
I don't post as much as I should probably, but I basically said my, my sole criterion really is can I create educational things that I would be happy for my children to to do?
00:39:46.945 --> 00:39:52.443
You know, and I and it's been challenging we got there, we've got the last two or three years I think two years maybe LAS.
00:39:52.443 --> 00:39:53.427
Now we've really been there.
00:39:53.427 --> 00:40:04.753
My oldest boy wanted to come, uh, to LAS and I felt good, I thought, yeah, he could be here, but unfortunately my wife and the, the boss here, thought it wouldn't be a good idea for him to be, so he's gone somewhere else doing something similar.
00:40:04.753 --> 00:40:13.864
But that was a big moment for me when I felt, I felt, um, he would get an education here which I think I'd be very happy for him to get so yeah, it's nice to hear that you feel similar.
00:40:13.905 --> 00:40:16.471
That's great in terms of application?
00:40:16.471 --> 00:40:18.905
Does it work in the same way that happens through ucas?
00:40:18.905 --> 00:40:25.389
Just thinking about we, could, you know, flag that to the advisors within the secondary schools yeah, no, it does it.
00:40:25.489 --> 00:40:31.847
We're on UCAS and we also have an independent application as well if students don't want to make us one of their choices.
00:40:32.019 --> 00:40:36.431
But yeah, we're completely kind of in the mainstream now in terms of applications.
00:40:36.431 --> 00:40:48.487
We have a longer process, so we interview all students to make sure that they're a good fit and actually this is quite an interesting point actually, and it sort of touches a bit what you were saying earlier, livia, about who this is for.
00:40:48.487 --> 00:40:57.413
We have a really interesting cohort because we can be more flexible with grades than some unis, but we also have some very, very good students.
00:40:57.413 --> 00:41:02.400
We have 3A stars and so on, and it kind of segments into a few different categories.
00:41:02.400 --> 00:41:16.864
So we have quite a few mature students who who, uh, have been out for a while, or students have been in really tough circumstances in school that we're able to consider, who some you know universities might not be able to, and we have, um, you know, traditionally very, very good students as well.
00:41:16.864 --> 00:41:21.766
So it's a bit more like a comprehensive school actually than many universities, uh, and I like that.
00:41:21.766 --> 00:41:26.367
That also feels really kind of progressive and more you need to be doing doing that sort of thing as well.
00:41:26.699 --> 00:41:28.485
But what are your visions for kind of scaling?
00:41:28.485 --> 00:41:30.711
What are your ambitions?
00:41:31.320 --> 00:41:32.362
Well, yeah, it's been interesting.
00:41:32.362 --> 00:41:37.333
So our master's program has really taken off way faster than we expected, but our undergraduate has been a bit slower.
00:41:37.333 --> 00:41:40.766
So I think we're going to be 45 intake next year, which would be great.
00:41:40.766 --> 00:41:42.027
It's still pretty small, though.
00:41:42.027 --> 00:41:44.532
I'd much rather be at sort of 60 to 80 now.
00:41:44.532 --> 00:41:55.141
Um, so I think the the honest answer is uh, firstly, stability and growth for the undergrad and quite a lot of growth in the postgrad.
00:41:55.141 --> 00:42:04.827
So we're launching an lsmba actually next calendar year, and we plans for another master's in education and possibly one in systems thinking as well.
00:42:04.827 --> 00:42:21.782
Um, that might be a symptom that this sort of thinking is a little bit more, um, apparent as to why it's needed as you head into your 20s, but that itself, as we've touched on, might be simply because school students are so poorly educated for the modern world.
00:42:21.782 --> 00:42:30.195
Yeah, but they don't realize they need this stuff until they get out in the modern world yeah, yeah, thank you so much, um, carl, it's been amazing.
00:42:30.576 --> 00:42:46.300
Um, and all the very best um for everything you're you're continuing to work on, and congratulations on everything you're doing, because it sounds amazing and if there's anything we can ever do to kind of promote that message and and speak to schools on, if you know, on your behalf, I would love to advocate for you.
00:42:46.300 --> 00:42:48.465
What a fantastic thing you're doing pleasure.
00:42:48.485 --> 00:42:49.266
Well, thanks so much.
00:42:49.266 --> 00:42:50.690
Thanks, guys, have a good day.