Re:Building School 2.0
In 2015, educators Chris Lehmann and Zac Chase published Building School 2.0: How to Create the Schools We Need. In this podcast, they revisit each thesis in the book and examine how their thinking (and the world) have changed or not after a decade of doing the work.
Re:Building School 2.0
Chapter 1: Schools Should Mirror the World as We Believe It Could Be
On the exact 10th anniversary it was published, Chris and Zac revisit the first chapter of Building School 2.0 and double down on the importance of school as a public good. They also examine where they underestimated the onslaught of the attention economy and the tension between capitalism and the potentially liberating effects of technology in education.
Hi, I'm Zac Chase, and you are listening to the first episode of Rebuilding School 2.0. This is a podcast and maybe an audiobook examining each chapter of the book I wrote with my friend, colleague, and co-author, Chris Lehman, Building School 2.0, How to Create the Schools We Need. Chris and I published the book 10 years ago this year, and we thought it might be time, one, to do an audio version, and two, to revisit our thinking. Now, for those of you who did not run out or click on immediately to find your copies of Building School 2.0, let me explain a little bit. There are 95 chapters in this book, but each one is about 250 words. Chris and I took a note from Martin Luther and considered our book 95 Theses Nailed to the Schoolhouse Door about what we thought needed to be changed to improve public education for everybody. The students, the teachers, the administrators, folks inside and outside of public schools. How do we make things better? So for this episode, chapter one, we are looking at the idea that schools should mirror the world as we believe it could be. So sit back, relax, and Chris and I will be back after the chapter to discuss how our thinking has changed or stayed the same since writing these words more than 10 years ago. This book... and this podcast are born of a spirit of hope that we can build healthier, more relevant, more caring schools that in turn and in time will help build a healthier world. According to WolframAlpha, there are 59 million K-12 students in the United States. That's 59 million families' dreams, 59 million young people whose lives are still loaded with potential, 59 million young people whose stories have yet to be written, 59 million students who deserve to be encouraged to believe you can before having someone tell them you can't. For that matter, the over 3 million teachers all over the country also deserve someone to tell them you can before having someone tell them you can't. And yet, so much of what happens in school happens because we believe that we must prepare children for the world as it used to exist. Never mind that we have no idea what the world will look like for kids in kindergarten right now. And we might not even know what it will look like for the kids in ninth grade. We continue to replicate the factory age structures and compliance-based codes of conduct that have governed school for decades because it feels like school to parents and politicians and school administrators all over the world. Worse, in the 21st century, the massive technological changes that have vastly changed our society have had little effect on our schools. In too many places, the technology is merely being used as the next best film strip. Or worse, a better way to quiz and test our students, rather than a way to open up our classroom windows and doors so that children can can learn what they need to, create what they want, and expand the reach of their ideas to almost limitless bounds. In 1518, Martin Luther nailed 95 theses to the door of the church. He envisioned a world where the church did not act as a go-between, and in his mind, a barrier between God and man. We need to understand now that school does not need to be a go-between, and too often it is a barrier between students and learning. We can remake school so that students can feel more directly empowered to learn deeply alongside teachers who share a vision of the sense of joy that learning can unlock. For our 95 theses, we ask you to suspend your disbelief that schools can be better than they are now. In fact, we ask you to suspend your disbelief that the world can be a better place. Each thesis in the text can lead to more questions. deeper discussion, more research, and we hope positive action. It is our hope that individually each thesis could help students and parents and educators to examine more specific practices in their schools as they exist. And taken collectively, they can help communities create a new vision of school built on the best of what has come before us, steeped in the traditions of the progressive educators of the past hundred years, but with an eye toward a future that we cannot fully imagine hi chris lehman
Chris:hi zach chase
Zac:uh it's good to see you good to talk to you
Chris:yeah this is exciting
Zac:it seems important for us to say why are we doing this why are we making a podcast where we share this book why are you doing this why is this important to you
Chris:I've been asking myself that question for quite some time. No, we're starting with the jokes. You know, I think there's a lot of things. One is it is kind of wild that the book came out 10 years ago, right? Like that is, I mean, we are, you know, this episode is actually going to release on the 10th anniversary of
Zac:Is it really?
Chris:Yeah. Yeah. August 4th, 2015 was the date it was published. Yeah. So on one level, it's kind of fascinating to go back and look at this and say, what do we think now? And then I think the other thing is, is like, you know, and I don't know how many people other than our close friends know this is like, we didn't get the chance to talk about this book as much as we wanted to when it came out. You had just taken the job at the Department of Ed. So you were like forbidden
Zac:to talk about the book. A lot of lawyers telling me that I was not allowed to talk about the book that I had just written.
Chris:Right. And I had just taken on doing two jobs at once, in addition to being principal of SLA, being the head of innovation for the district. And that was hard. So we never got the chance to really kind of talk with people about this book anywhere near as much as we wanted to. So I think this just feels like a good time to do it.
Zac:Every once in a while, I'll look at a chapter or I'll want to be like, how did we put that? But I think the chance to really... look at those thoughts and say, do we think those things still? Specifically, chapter one is on its own. Like, huh, that's an interesting, yeah, we'll talk about it in a second. But it's important, it is important to say that, so we recorded chapter one, What we did not record and need to say is there is a wonderful foreword written by our friend and colleague, Diana Laufenberg.
Chris:It's
Zac:a
Chris:really good foreword.
Zac:And she hates writing. I don't think she'll mind me saying that. She hates writing. And so just that she said yes... Yeah, because that's
Chris:what you do. put me... I mean, she talks in the foreword. I guess we should tell people since we're not going to read it to them. She talks about what it was like in those early days of SLA, which, you know, are starting to feel like a long time ago. You know, when the three of us would just... Right. Absolutely. Absolutely. Giggling and trying to get some work done, but also just enjoying each other's friendship and collegiality and communion as we were working on this crazy idea of a school.
Zac:of this first chapter of schools should mirror the world as we think it could be, right? Because I think that that was an important part. I just spoke to a class of pre-service teachers and I said, you know, when you were interviewing, if you get the feeling that you are not interviewing with a group of curious people or if you're interviewing with people who think they have the world figured out, tell them your car's on fire and you've got to leave because that is not the job for you. Yeah, I think that's right. And so, as I said, when they ask if you have any questions for them, ask, what is a problem you're currently trying to solve as an institution? Yeah. whether or not I wanted to move or not, was kind of, do you want to be the one? Like, do you want to be like the innovative person in the space where you're working? Or do you want to be one of? And there's a magical alchemy in being with a group of people who are all in this community of building the same thing.
Chris:Yeah, that's right. And, you know, and I think you know, not to get off on a tangent, like we're going to do this entire podcast.
Zac:Yeah, it's going to be great. But like short little tangents. Short little tangents.
Chris:And jealous. But I think one of the things that's super interesting is that was obviously needed in years one, two, three, four, five, right? Like when you're building a thing, One of the things that we've worked really hard at is making sure people still have that sense of awe and wonder and still have that sense of becoming. I guess another reason to revisit the book is we are about to hit... the start of the 20th year of Science Leadership Academy. We're not the new kid on the block anymore. I mean, we're a real school, Geppetto. And holding on to that sense of purpose, that sense of wonder, that sense of becoming, and that sense of learning and continuing to be a learning institution becomes the thing that, when it's not obvious anymore, that has to be super, super intentional.
Zac:I... I want to make sure that we're not making it sound like this is a mystical Shangri-La space. And I think, again, tied to this chapter, schools mirroring the world as we wish they could be, is the space of disagreement. And I think that that's really important. And as much as you and Diana and I love each other, and as much as we love that original faculty that I was a part of, disagreement came up. And I... I think that, so George Lakey has this great book, Facilitating Group Learning, which sounds like the most boring-ass title you could think of. But one of the things he talks about is when working with groups is if you cannot disagree, if you cannot argue, then your organization is sick. Right. And I think that that was part of the magic of And that is what I want in the world. Like specifically right now, this moment, why are we doing this right now? Because there is a space to think through how do you have disagreements with somebody and come to a common understanding. And consensus is such an important piece of how we drove what we did at SLA. And I think what's in the book too, like bring people along.
Chris:Yeah. And do you remember, I'm sure you do, there were moments when the faculty was just like, Chris, could you please just tell us what to do?
Zac:Absolutely.
Chris:And it was like, yeah, no. I can't do that. And what we've learned over time is that there's decisions that you actually can do that for. There's moments that not everybody has to agree that prom is on a Tuesday. But we still want to do that. And actually, one of the things that I think is super interesting is That was obvious that everybody had to be involved in the decision making when everybody fit around the table. But as we've grown, as there's now an assistant principal, a climate manager, making sure that people don't come into the system and want their decision making, their authority, their sense of belonging to come at the expense of other people's. you know, is, is a real challenge and holding onto that sense of like, no, we're going to stay in the room until we figure something out. And we're not just going to say just whatever decision you come to. Well, that's fine.
Zac:So when you look at chapter one,
Chris:yeah.
Zac:Is there anything you don't believe anymore?
Chris:Oh, that's a great question. Um, I mean, there's nothing, I don't think there's, there wasn't anything that I was like, Oh, not this.
Zac:Yeah.
Chris:But I think there are moments when it's like, oh, did we mean it this way? Right? Like I think about what people are saying now about the micro school or what AI or blah, blah, blah. And, you know, we wrote in the book. which was funny for this nice Jewish boy, this idea that Martin Luther did not want the church to be the go-between between man and God. And we wrote, we did not want school to have to be the go-between between kids and learning. And when I read that now, I'm like, yes, and. Right. Like to use your favorite construct.
Zac:You're skipping ahead. No, I know.
Chris:It's a super chat. There's going to be there's the Venn diagram of how these chapters overlap. And by the way, that's my first time I've said Venn diagram. Somebody should keep a running tally because it will be in the hundreds. But we still want schools. And I think it's very easy to read that phrase and think or read that sentence or two and think, oh, yeah, this is the argument of why we don't need school anymore. But the whole book is actually, oh, no, no, no, wait. We really do need school. And just, you know, like what we need is a reformation. What we need is reform. Because I think there's so many people who just want to blow it up now. More than there were 10 years ago, even.
Zac:I got interviewed for something a couple of weeks ago, and I drew on and paraphrased our friend Sam Chaltain. and said, you know, public education is the only institution that has this much participation generally. It's like 97% of all people in the US participated in public education. There are a few institutions where we have collectively have a shared experience. And the more we diversify it, the more we personalize it, the more less we have those shared touchstones. And at some point, I'm sure you and I are going to talk about whether or not everybody in an English class has to read the same book. And I'm going to get dangerously close to saying yes right now. Like there are pieces, like school is a public good. It ensures an equity. It ensures civil rights. It ensures the best of what we want for the country. It is also important to know what you're putting into the container. That's right. Well, this container of school matters. But what you put into that container makes it matter one way or the other.
Chris:That's right. And and, you know, what I always worry about is an idea sounds great as long as you're the one making the decisions. Right. Like, you know, and I look at even some of the folks who are friends of ours who are sort of railing against what school is right now and wanting it to be something it's not. And it's like, yeah, and school's got to serve even the people who disagree with you. And I think that becomes super, super hard. And I think that one of the things that I think we try to do in the book and even try to do in the very first chapter is talk about this. It's steeped in pedagogy, not content. This isn't about everybody has to learn X.
Zac:Yeah, computer science. Not everybody has to learn philosophy. Not everybody has to learn French. But what a school. Philosophy, French, and computer science is your core curriculum?
Chris:Yeah, right? For a book that was about looking forward, right? I mean, School 2.0 is foundationally a forward-looking book. Right. Again, in that first chapter... we really, really ground this book by saying this is steeped in the traditions of progressive education. Like we, we put our stake in the ground to say there's a kind of education we believe in.
Zac:And we weren't the ones to come up with the idea. Like, yeah. And, and I think we try and we'll examine in the chat and I sure, I'm sure there will be parts where you and I are like, we should probably have cited these four people. Yeah. We tried to cite everybody we could, but I think it's really important to say we are steeped in progressive education as a way of saying other people thought these things and we're trying to make a more perfect version of that thing.
Chris:Just move the ball down the field. I don't even know if it's more perfect. We're just trying to move the ball down the field. I always say this about SLA. SLA represents a mashup. Of so many ideas, right? Like there are probably, and I think that the mashup became something unique. Like I do think that the amalgamation of a whole lot of folks in a whole lot of ideas, um, created something that. doesn't exist in many places elsewhere. I mean, having been to a lot of the other schools that, you know, it looks different than, this is not a knock, but it feels different than high-tech high. It feels different than a new tech school. It feels different than some other places. And that's okay and should, right? Like, I mean, I like that. I remember when my old principal came to visit SLA and, you know, and I said to him, I hope you see Beacon in... the walls of this school. Like I hope you see where the work that I, the stuff that I learned from you lives here.
Zac:I was a progressive educator before I knew the term progressive educator. And I think that much of the book, hopefully as we go through, gave people the knowledge that the things they were thinking there were, there were words and terms for that. Yeah. Right. Like even just the idea of pedagogy. I think SLA is, And the folks who are in our kind of learning space use the word pedagogy more than most teachers in the country use the word. They probably had to do it in their theory of learning paper that they wrote when they were in pre-service. But after that, not very often do schools talk about the pedagogy around which they are built. That is important. That is not good. We talk about that in the book quite a bit. Right. so Tayak and Cuban talk about the grammar of school and that's not what this is right they're talking about a really specific and different thing but that there is a like once we have common terms for the things we're talking about once we can say this is progressive education once we can say what is the pedagogy of your school once we can say this is the shared vision of what we want for school and thereby the world we can actually start to build toward that thing and that goes back to that shared decision making and that shared vision that's right if we don't all if we're not all in that conversation how can we own it in the same way
Chris:yeah well I mean it's I mean it's the most basic version of that is if you don't know where you're going any road will get you there it's amazing to me how few schools have a defining pedagogy right and we talk about this all the time and I'm sure this will be the first of a zillion times we bring up this idea but think about what that does to kids if you can go to from class to class to class, right? In a typical high school, I mean, this is, we all know this, like typical high school, a kid's got seven or eight classes in a day. They're 45 minutes long. Every teacher has their own pedagogy. Every teacher, if they even have a pedagogy, right? I mean, there is an implied pedagogy if there is no pedagogy, but you know, there's a different way to do things in every single classroom. That's bewildering to a child. And we talk about sort of cognitive load And how much of a kid's day is spent on just figuring out the game of school. But I think that one of the things we do from the start of this chapter and from the very start of the book is say, there's a thing. And we believe a thing. And we're going to, like I said, we're going to put our stake in the ground for a thing. I mean, I remember talking to a technology company that will remain nameless recently. trying to get them to support what we were up to. And I remember saying to their head of education, this is your chance to put a stake in the ground for the kind of education you want to see. And he was like, why would we do that? People who disagree with us are going to buy our stuff too. I just remember being so disappointed. Time 137,000, where the corporate creep of why... schools don't always get to where they could be and the stuff we have to buy to get there
Zac:comes into
Chris:play.
Zac:Right. It's the intersection between capitalism and a public good, right? And the friction that is at play there of sometimes you are moving in the same direction, right? Sometimes their profit margin and your vision of what the world can be are moving in the same direction. And sometimes they're not. And that hurts... and you want for better, and also that's what capitalism does, right?
Chris:Yeah, and the minute they don't, you will know exactly where you stand. But to that end, you asked the question, do we believe everything we believe? Again, even in this first chapter, we're talking about how technology is a major part of changing what school can be, and the tools can enable a lot. And I think that that's a place where I don't disagree with it, but I am more skeptical of it. And I think that talking about how capitalism has played a role in all of this is really important because I think that we thought the tools were going to be liberating, and in many ways and in many moments they can be. And we forgot that people were still making money. And the attention economy has shown us that these tools... have a valence that we have to be aware of. And we have to be a little more intentional than we were 10 years ago about making sure we're using them in the healthiest ways. And I think that the coming AI storm is going to be the greatest version of that that we have ever seen.
Zac:I think also we saw those tools and we saw this is the liberating potential. This is the creative potential. This is the connecting, the democratizing potential of these tools. And I certainly know I was wrapped in a wonderful blanket of naivete. Naivete? Naivete. Of like, oh, everybody else will see these tools and want to use them in the same way. And I think that is where my biggest disconnect came. I picked up a fork and I was like, this will help me. And you picked up a fork and stabbed me in the leg. And whoa, we both have different versions of how the forks are used in this place. Important podcast note.
Chris:Chris never stabbed Zac in the leg with a fork.
Zac:Didn't he?
Chris:No, I think that's right. But I also think that yes. And like, yes. And, um, I think that educators, many, like, you know, and again, people thought to use the tools in a million different ways, but educators saw fork and said, let's eat. Companies saw fork and said, let's charge people. Like, let's figure out how we can monetize this.
Zac:Yeah, this one-time fork will be free. But if you'd like more than one time on your fork.
Chris:Or like, you know, I mean, again, like, I think that I missed the attention economy. I missed the notion, the idea that attention was something that could be monetized, right? And that putting all these tools in the kids' hands, while awesome and great, that there was going to be a trillion dollar industry about pulling their attention away from the moment that they are living in now. We rail against an education that is about not You know, that is not about the present. That is not about where you are in the moment that you live. And then, of course, we handed kids tools that did everything but put kids in the moment where they live. And yet we still use them. And yet they're still powerful. And yet we're making a podcast with all of these tools.
Zac:And we're doing it better. Right. That's the thing is we didn't think about that. Nothing has to be perfect on the first try. Although I'd say this is the end of a perfect episode. I think no one will find any critique. I harbor no such. So that's the end of chapter one. I will say what I noticed is we set a beautiful, like serene, idyllic world in chapter one. And then for chapter two, our next episode, we come out swinging with, we must end educational colonialism. It was like, we should build this wonderful shared vision. And also we have to stop the monsters. So that will be next time.
Chris:Again, like I think in these first couple chapters, we weren't hiding what our agenda was, right? No one can say Chris and Zac didn't tell us what we were in for. Our editor, Kate, who was wonderful, forced us to write these from theory to practice books. parts of each chapter, right? And in doing so made the book so much better, right? And when she told us this, you and I had been struggling with finishing this book and then we're like, what do you mean we've got to write more? But it really did make the book better. And I was struck by the fact we're launching this podcast. The first thing we did was like, go have more conversations, right? Go talk about this stuff. And so with that I am really excited to talk about where we talk about this stuff. So we just launched the opening of Educon 2026. Educon is the conference that Diana references in the foreword. It's the conference that we have hosted at Science Leadership Academy since 2008. where we talk about what we think school can be and a vision for a better future for all of us who spend our time in schools, kids, teachers, administrators, parents. The conference this year is January 30th through February 1st because nothing says learning like winter in Philadelphia. And if you want to facilitate a conversation as one of the sessions, session proposals are due on September 15th.
Zac:And they can find out more at 2026.educon.org. That's 2026.educon.org.
Chris:And if you just go to educon.org, it'll take you to the right thing too.
Zac:Thank you, my friend.
Chris:Thank you, my friend. And thanks to everybody for listening.
Zac:Thank you. Thank you indeed. Chris and I will be back in our next episode with another chapter. If you're interested in reading ahead or reading along, you can find Building School 2.0 wherever books are sold. And you can find us on Facebook. Just search Building School 2.0 and like our page where you can read my writing, Chris's writing, and catch episodes. Please make sure you subscribe, like, and review the podcast wherever you got this episode. And we'll talk to you next time.
