1 . These days, there’s barely a world leader who doesn’t talk up science. For example, the India’s Prime Minister was the main performer at the annual Indian Science Congress, held in Nagpur, where he encouraged the nation’s researchers to do the science needed to make India self-reliant.

The message to researchers is crystal clear: leaders see science as essential to national prosperity, well-being and, of course, competitiveness. So, is research fit for the challenge of advancing, refining or critiquing these goals? Not exactly. And it won’t be until there is fundamental reform to the gateway to a research career: PhD training.

As Nature and other publications have frequently reported, PhD training worldwide has been in trouble for some time. Students’ stipends (生活津贴) are not enough in most countries, creating a cost-of-living crisis. Early-career researchers constantly report concerns about a constant lack of support and poor-quality supervision, with senior researchers rarely trained in mentorship (指导).

Furthermore, PhD candidates are inadequately prepared for the cross-disciplinary working and large teams that characterize cutting-edge science today. This is especially true for careers outside academic research, where the overwhelming majority of PhD candidates will be heading.

It is not all bad. Universities in a small number of high-income countries have reformed, or are reforming, PhD assessment. But in most places, and especially in low- and middle-income countries, a candidate’s work is still evaluated using a single-authored paper. In many countries, candidates must publish in a journal before they get a PhD, something that critics say could fuel profitable publishing.

The system’s strains have become more obvious because the number of people doing PhD training has been rising sharply. According to the 2022 book Towards a Global Core Value System in Doctoral Education, the number of PhDs awarded in India increased from 17,850 in 2004 to 25,095 in 2016; US figures climbed from 48,500 to 69,525 over the same period. If researchers are to meet society’s expectations, their training and mentoring must escape the nineteenth century.

2 . “From one day to the next, our profession was wiped out. We woke up and discovered our skills were unnecessary.” This is what two successful graphic designers told me about the impact of AI. The old promise—creative workers would be better protected than others from mechanization (机械化) —ruined overnight. If visual artists can be replaced by machines, who is safe?

While there’s plenty of talk about how education might change, little has been done to equip students for a world whose conditions shift so fast. It’s not just at work that young people will confront sudden changes of state. They are also likely to witness more environmental breakdown and the collapse of certain human-made systems.

Why are we so unprepared? Why do we manage our lives so badly? Why are we so expert at material innovation, but so unskilled at creating a society in which everyone can succeed? Why do obvious lies spread like wildfire? What is lacking in our education that leaves such gap s in our lives?

The word education partly comes from Latin, meaning “to lead out”. Too often it leads us in: into old ways of thinking, into dying professions. Too seldom does it lead us out of our cognitive and emotional circles, out of a political and economic system that’s killing us.

I don’t claim to have definitive answers. But I believe the extreme demands, throughout our schooling, of tests and exams reduce the range of our thinking. The exam system creates artificial borders. The intense combined demands of the testing system leave almost no time to respond to opportunities and events, or for children to develop their own interests.

Education should be joyful and delightful, not only because joy and delight are essential to our health and happiness, but also because we are more likely to survive major changes. Schooling alone will not be enough to lead us out of the many crises and disasters we now face. But it should at least lend us a torch.

3 . As children returned to school in Sweden last month, many of their teachers were putting a new importance on some traditional skills. These included reading printed books, quiet reading time and handwriting practice. Teachers were spending less time on digital products, online research and typing skills.

The return to traditional ways of learning might be the answer to questions raised by experts. They have questioned the country’s dependence on electronic technology in education. For example, schools in Sweden have introduced tablets (平板电脑) in preschools.

Lotta Edholm, Swedish Minister for Schools, was one of the biggest critics (反对者) of the level of technology in schools. “Sweden’s students need more textbooks,” Edholm said. “Physical books are important for student learning.” Edholm said last month that the government wants to reverse the decision made by the National Agency for Education to make digital products required in preschools. The ministry plans to stop digital learning for children under the age of six.

Sweden’s students score above the European average (平均分) for reading ability. But an international test of fourth grade reading levels showed Sweden’s children had lost ground between 2016 and 2021. “An overuse of electronic products during school lessons may cause kids to fall behind,” education experts said.

Sweden’s Karolinska Institute, a medical school centered on research, said in a statement last month, “It has been proved that digital tools harm rather than benefit student learning.” It added that schools should instead center on teaching using printed textbooks.

Not all experts think Sweden’s move away from digital technology is only about what is best for students. “It ignores the fact that technology improves learning,” said Neil Selwyn, a professor of education.

4 . Traditional public schools assign a child to a given school based on his family’s place of residence. As Coleman pointed out, residential assignment promotes division between schools by family background. It creates motivation for families to move to the “good” school districts. Under this system, schools cannot serve as the equal-opportunity engines of our society.

The most promising social policy for fighting the effects of family background, then, could well be the expansion of programs — small schools of choice. These programs allow families to choose schools without regard to their neighborhood of residence. An analysis of more than 100 schools of choice in New York City between 2019 and 2020 might tell us something. It witnessed 9.5 percent increase in the graduation rate of a group of educationally and economically disadvantaged students, at no extra cost to the city.

Small schools of choice might also build the social relationship that Coleman considered crucial for student success. First, small schools are well positioned to build a strong school culture. Helping students to cultivate networks of social relationships better equips them to handle life’s challenges. While schools may not be able to compensate fully for the negative effects of an unstable family, a strong school culture can transform the “social ecology” of a disadvantaged child.

Small schools of choice also encourage a voluntary community that comes together over strong ties and shared values. Typically, schools of choice feature a clearly defined mission and set of core values, which may come from religious traditions and beliefs. The Notre Dame ACE Academy schools, for instance, strive for the twin goals of preparing students for college and for heaven. A focused mission also helps school administrators attract like-minded teachers. A warm teaching staff can be particularly beneficial for children from unstable homes. Exposure to well-functioning adult role models at school might promote well-being and positive emotional development.

6 . Ajay Gupta suffered from polio (小儿麻痹症) when he was six months old. However, seeing his father and grandfather run businesses aroused a deep sense of curiosity within Ajay to explore entrepreneurship.

While sending his daughter to playschool, he realized there was a gap in the quality of education provided. That’s when the idea of starting a playschool chain struck him. He launched Bachpan Play School in 2004 using his personal savings. Starting with one branch in Delhi, today the school has scaled up to 1,100 branches across India.

According to Ajay, what is unique about Bachpan’s story is the impact it has been able to create across Tier Il and Tier III cities in India. “Education institutes seem crowded in big cities, but when you move away from them, the case is different,” says Ajay. Furthermore, in the smaller cities, many schools were established around 40 years ago, and they lacked quality.

Ajay did not set out to penetrate (渗透) Tier II and Tier III cities exactly. His mission was to make preschool education more accessible and standardized. “I did not want Bachpan Play School to be a place where you send your kid for two months,” he says. “We made clear guidelines for teachers and syllabuses (教学大纲) for the kids monthly and annually.” Ajay adds that the particular curriculum, design, books, and well-thought-out strategy along with professional training are what shapes the core of Bachpan Play School chain.

As offline classes shifted to online ones during the pandemic, Ajay’s company launched Bachpan Live platform in April 2020. It also launched Bachpan Live app to offer live classes, online books, and more.

Since its launch, the platform has witnessed about 65,000 downloads. Ajay says, “The team has to consistently work towards improving the platform as parents of today have become very demanding. You cannot sell them anything. They want to see quality programs.”

10 . Whether your kid can count on a sizable inheritance (遗产) or your family is living pay period to pay period, a college degree is a must. Along with the invisible life skills you get from those formative years on campus, college comes with a bankable payout: A Georgetown University study found that, on average, college graduates make a million dollars more over a lifetime than people who stop at high school.

Recently, a Bronx nonprofit asked me to speak to a group of high schoolers whose families were struggling financially. The participants were (rightly) worried about taking on too much college debt. Here’s what I told them: Even when you subtract (扣除) tuition, lost earnings during the college years, and other factors, an average college grad will still take in $300,000 more than those without a college degree.

And while rising tuition fees are a serious worry, free college programs of one kind or another have sprung up in more than 20 states. My own home state, New York, boasts one of the most comprehensive efforts. The Excelsior Scholarship program guarantees that students at public institutions attend tuition-free if their family earns under $110,000 a year.

Even in Silicon Valley, where there are many successful people who don’t own a college degree, I asked a group of parents there if it’s true that kids are giving up a college degree because they’re sure they’ll be rich people. The answer was a resounding, unapologetic no.

The truth is that in this STEM (science, technology, engineering and math)-centric age, any form of home-schooling or social education can’t replace the formal school education. Especially in an age when many low-end careers are being replaced by artificial intelligence (AI), a college degree can give your kid an edge.