Education systems across the world are facing enormous challenges – what are the reasons why they have to change so radically?

Fthenakis: Never before in history have education systems been faced with the kind of immense challenges they are facing today. The reasons are manifold: they include the globalisation of the economy and of communication and the fact that children grow up in societies characterised by increasing social complexity and cultural diversity, in societies in which the future is impossible to predict and which furthermore show a high level of discontinuity in their development.

But above all, the digitisation of society and educational institutions is both providing new opportunities and at the same time changing the way children and young people learn.

Moreover, existing education systems have inherited design flaws which are compromising their efficiency. And not least, since the turn of the century a paradigmatic change has been taking place with significant consequences for education: not only transmitting knowledge is a core concern, but also enhancing children’s development and strengthening their competencies from the very beginning. In order to meet these challenges we need a different concept of quality in education and a reformed education system.

What approaches towards reform can already be identified?

Fthenakis: The most important aspect of an education system is the theoretical foundation on which it is based and the understanding of education derived from this. And this is where a radical change is taking place: Education based on constructivist approaches is beginning to be replaced by approaches favouring social-constructivist principles.

And instead of theories of personal growth and development, interactionist approaches are being used as a referential framework for the entire educational lifespan. This has fundamental consequences for the way in which education is understood and how educational institutions need to develop.

If education is conceptualised as a social process, and if learning processes are to be oriented towards the context in which they take place, this then requires an understanding of education which views the child as embedded in social relationships from birth onwards. In this sense, both learning and the construction of knowledge are understood as interactional processes based on co-construction and striving for meaning making, and the internalisation of these processes is foregrounded as a research topic in developmental and individual psychology.

Does this changed understanding of learning have practical implications?

Fthenakis: Social interaction is a key category in the changed understanding of learning and this has two advantages: if learning is an interactional and social process, actively co-constructed by the child and other actors, then this opens up a unique chance for strengthening the quality of education. First, the traditional understanding of learning as centred on the individual was not accessible to direct intervention. It was only possible to influence the learning process indirectly, through providing a stimulating learning environment. However, interactions can be changed directly: for example, if an educator is able to pose the 'right' questions, this changes the quality of the interaction. And in the meantime there are numerous approaches and methods for shaping interactions in order to reach a higher level of quality in the learning process.

And what about the second aspect?

Fthenakis: Interactions don’t take place in a vacuum. They are embedded in a specific social and cultural context. And it is important to realise that different contexts can lead to different kinds of quality. As a consequence, education systems need to encounter this diversity with respect and utilise it to discover a broader learning space for all, one which prevents a specific cultural group’s understanding of quality from claiming supremacy over all others.

You have already pointed out that reformed education systems seek to enhance children's competencies from the very beginning.

Fthenakis: Reformed education systems support each child‘s development and focus on competence enhancement.

With the help of contemporary curricular frameworks it has been possible to provide a detailed conceptualisation of the competencies which need to be strengthened. In general, they comprise four categories: individual-related competencies; competencies which enable the child to participate in society, to shape it and to share responsibility for it; competencies related to learning and how to learn; and resiliency-related competencies.

The latter two areas of competence were not a feature of education systems at the beginning of the 21st century. What were the reasons for introducing them?

Fthenakis: That is correct. Two decades ago they were still largely unknown. Introducing them was a response to societal demands and social transformation processes.

If the children's learning rather than the mere acquisition of knowledge is the main concern, then it makes sense to develop the competencies that help children learn how to learn. And if today, more than ever, children need to master discontinuities in their life course and to cope with accelerated processes of change, if they increasingly have to face risk situations, then it is the task of the education system to enable children to handle such challenges in a competent way.

Let's return to the issue of which competencies need to be enhanced. The competence approach is not new. At the latest through Heinrich Roth, at the end of the 1970s, we became aware of the importance of self-competence (Ichkompetenz), social competence (Sozialkompetenz) and technical competence (Sachkompetenz). What's so different now?

Fthenakis: Heinrich Roth deserves credit for drawing our attention to these three concepts of competence. However, the problem in this case was that for all three concepts no adequate operational terms were provided. Educators were left to interpret them in their own way. This resulted in an (undoubtedly not intended) arbitrariness in the field.

Contemporary curricula transcend this limitation by providing a detailed description of competencies and by replacing this global description with a clarification of terms based on evidence from developmental psychology. Furthermore, we now have a different understanding of the term competence: competence is not an individual characteristic, a child’s personality trait. Competence is now understood as the result of a social process which is situated and actively co-constructed by the child.

The well-known German developmental psychologist, Franz Weinert, has pointed out that competencies cannot be directly transmitted as learnable dispositions, but that they indeed can be acquired and enhanced over a longer-term learning process in specific situations. Of particular significance is Weinert's view with regard to the relevance and determination of domain-specific knowledge acquisition and the development of domain-specific competencies (such as reading competence, mathematical competence, etc.). Competence in this sense is related to defined and specific domains. The problem here lies in the question of how to achieve a balance between competence-related arbitrariness and transparency.

You were the initiator of the contemporary curricular frameworks in Germany and were responsible for the educational plans in Bavaria and Hesse. You mention visions for the new curricula.

Fthenakis: Education systems without a vision tend to fall swiftly into a problematic pragmatism and fail to offer a level in which stakeholders can become involved. This is necessary so that everyone can participate in the same kind of educational process. Furthermore, visions help to achieve cohesion across educational institutions. The educational visions which are followed from the start and consistently adapted across all stages of education are: (a) strong children; (b) communication, media and digitally competent children; (c) children as creative and imaginative artists; (d) children as active learners, researchers and explorers and (e) children behaving in a responsible and value-oriented way. These five educational visions are organised into areas of learning particularly suited for achieving the educational goals.

Which competencies are codified in these curricular frameworks?

Fthenakis: Four areas of competence are foregrounded in the curricula developed under my responsibility: (1) individual-related competencies, (2) competencies related to the social context, (3) competencies related to learning skills and learning how to learn and (4) coping with change and stress: resilience-related competencies.

The individual-related competence areas include above all (a) personal competencies (self-esteem, positive self-image); (b) cognitive competencies (problem-solving; creativity; memory; ability to think; differentiated perception); (c) motivation-related competencies (autonomy, self-efficacy, self-regulation, curiosity and interests); (d) physical competencies (taking responsibility for one’s own health; ability to recuperate in stress situations) and (e) emotional competencies (such as enhancing meta-emotional competence).

The basic competence areas which enable children to act competently in their social context include (a) social competencies (empathy; ability to communicate; team skills; conflict management); (b) developing values and orientation competencies (feeling of belong to one’s own culture; sensitivity and respect for difference and otherness; solidarity; acting in a socially and ecologically responsible way); (c) ability and willingness to assume responsibility (assuming responsibility for one’s own behaviour both towards others and towards the environment and nature); (d) ability and willingness to participate in a democratic way (respecting rules in communication and coming to an agreement; clarifying and re-evaluating one’s own point of view; listening and negotiating).

You have already mentioned that competencies related to learning skills and resilience are being introduced for the first time. What do you mean by this?

Fthenakis: Competencies related to learning skills and learning to learn are those which promote knowledge acquisition by using social and individual forms of metacognition and self-regulation in learning. The focus of learning when acquiring these competencies is on those aspects of the world that children take for granted. Reflection is explicitly used as a method and individual differences in learning processes are foregrounded. Differences in children’s thinking are deliberately utilised.

In this way, learning is understood as part of the child’s overall experiences. Basic principles of children’s learning include recognising the structure of learning processes, i.e. realising that various partial activities are related to the project topic as a whole, and conveying the understanding that knowledge acquired in this way can also be applied to other situations.

Moreover, before starting a learning activity it is important to be aware of each child’s strengths and how individual differences can be better used in joint learning processes. And finally it is important to consider how children can participate in shaping the learning environment through their individual strengths.

Does this mean that activities and projects alone are not sufficient?

Fthenakis: Activities alone may serve the child's learning during the first years of life. Later, both the content and also the learning itself are emphasised in the learning processes. The focus of learning is on those aspects of life which children take for granted.

Children only learn something about the world surrounding them if they are aware of individual phenomena and understand their sense and purpose, if learning takes place as meaning making. Children are not always aware of phenomena if educators do not explicitly draw their attention them, such as what numbers and letters are for.

Children need to talk and think about what they do and what they are learning when they do it. This can take place in various ways (by using photos, portfolios, videos, etc.). For the educators, it can also be useful and stimulating if they themselves think about how they learn and what they learn. And not only the shared ground, but also and above all the differences in the thinking styles of the children need to be highlighted and communicated to other children.

A variety of didactic approaches can be utilised for this: role play, drawing, painting, games and above all discussions. The acquisition of learning skills and learning how to learn take place primarily during the preschool years and the first years at school, as Swedish research has shown.

And this repertoire of skills is complemented by resilience, an unknown concept for many educators!

Fthenakis: The fourth competence category in terms of education focuses on the competencies needed to deal with change and stress, on those related to resilience. Resilience refers to the child’s ability to utilise his or her individual and social competencies and resources successfully in order to cope with difficult circumstances in life and with critical events and risk conditions.

This includes positive, healthy development despite persistent high risk status (e.g. low socio-economic status or parents with mental health issues), the ability to cope successfully with stress and acute stress conditions and to seek help independently, as well as rapid recovery from traumatic experiences.

The child thus acquires the competence to view difficult situations in life not only as a burden, but also as a challenge and to cope with them appropriately. Resilience builds on the basic individual-related and social competencies and is significantly enhanced through the child's social resources, in particular through stable emotional relationships with caregivers, through an open and respectful learning climate in the family and the educational setting, through exemplary role models, through positive relationships with other children or through enriching experiences in the educational institutions.

If we look at the situation in many education systems, we find a significant proportion of children with at least one parent who comes from another country. Cultural diversity is increasingly common and many educators are faced with a further challenge: how to do justice to children from other countries of origin.

Fthenakis: As I pointed out previously, children grow up today in societies characterised by social complexity and cultural diversity. The education system of the 20 th century had a largely troubled relationship to diversity: in the best case it was ignored, in the worst case eliminated. However, a change can be identified here too: it concerns the understanding of diversity and how to handle it. Contemporary curricula do not ignore difference and do not attempt to eliminate it. Rather, difference is affirmed, welcomed and specifically utilised to acquire more learning experiences and to maximise mutual benefits.

This changed understanding of difference is a reflection of cultural diversity; diversity is viewed as an opportunity and its inclusion in curricular programmes as a hallmark of quality. Differences resulting from an extended age mix, from the children’s gender, from their cultural and social backgrounds as well as from special needs (e.g. highly gifted children, children with developmental risks, etc.) become issues for reflection. At the individual level, children are encouraged to think about their own strengths and weaknesses. This intra-individual sensitivity towards diversity can be used as the starting point for jointly developing with the children an understanding for the fact that their friend’s strengths are possibly not the same as their own. This gain in understanding will need to be based on appreciation, thus legitimising the expectation for respect regarding one's own strengths. The key issue is therefore the recognition of differences and their explicit utilisation in learning processes throughout the education system.

You are an advocate of co-construction as a didactic-pedagogic approach. Many educators could not appreciate this idea at first. In just a few sentences: what does it mean?

Fthenakis: If the theoretical base changes, then the education system itself changes in a fundamental way. This is particularly the case in terms of the organisation of learning processes. Following the significance of interactionist approaches, I drew attention to the didactic method of co-construction for shaping educational processes.

Co-construction as a pedagogical approach means that learning takes place through cooperation, that it is jointly co-constructed by educators and children. According to this approach children learn how to understand the world through communicating with others and negotiating meanings with one another.

In recent contributions and publications you refer to two further debates. One of these concerns a new conceptualisation of learning spaces.

Fthenakis: Long unnoticed in education, a debate has been taking place for some time in other disciplines, such as cultural and historical sciences, architecture and urban planning, on the meaning and role of space, alongside time, as a principle of organisation and design. This debate has now reached the educational sciences. It seeks to examine the role of space in the planning and organisation of learning processes and in general the relationship between space and pedagogy. If education is conceptualised as a social process shaped by a co-constructive approach, then learning spaces need to specifically facilitate interaction and communication, changes of perspective and discourse. And it is not a question of one-sided spatial requirements, but rather of the interactive effects between pedagogy and space.

This also suggests that cognitive, language and social development is promoted through social interaction with others. Educators can co-construct knowledge with children by placing more emphasis on the exploration of meaning rather than the acquisition of facts.

In order to learn facts children need to observe, listen to and remember something. By way of contrast, the exploration of meaning means discovering, expressing and sharing meanings as well as accepting the ideas of others. Exploring meanings is thus a co-constructive process by means of which children and adults in a community jointly discuss and negotiate their understandings and interpretations of phenomena.

How does this take place in reality?

Fthenakis: Co-construction is supported through the use of visual artifacts, documentation and discourse. Visual artifacts (e.g. drawings) and documentation (e.g. the educator’s records and notes, videotaped sequences) enable children to express their own ideas and to share them with others. It also enables them to get to know the ideas of others. Finally, discourse is the process through which meanings are discussed with the children, where meanings are expressed, shared and negotiated with others and when each child attempts to understand the others’ drawings and documentation.

Educators should take note of the children’s theories, their assumptions, contradictions and misunderstandings and talk about these. In this way they can ensure that they explore meanings together with the children and do not just promote the learning of facts.

And what are the goals of co-construction as a didactic approach?

Fthenakis: By co-constructing meaning children learn that the world can be explained in different ways; that meanings can be shared and negotiated with one another; that there are many approaches towards solving a problem or issue; that ideas can be transformed, extended and exchanged; that their understanding can be enriched and deepened and that the joint exploration of meanings between adults and children is stimulating and rewarding.

What role does co-construction play in the demand for inclusion in the education system?

Fthenakis: I am deeply convinced that inclusion is only possible if the system itself and above all the didactic-pedagogic approach inherently enables inclusion.

Co-construction is an excellent way of enabling this. Co-construction itself thrives on diversity of thinking, of opinions and of problem-solving. As previously mentioned, it is an invitation to each child to actively shape his or her own learning process. Individual solutions are always included and treated with respect. The approach is based on a symmetrical relationship between the actors in which there is no room for power.

Co-construction can foster the development of self-confidence by encouraging the children to express their personal opinion and also if adults show interest in their opinion and value it. Furthermore, co-construction transmits the willingness to understand and respect the views of others, thus encouraging a growing awareness and respect for diversity. Children can also be specifically encouraged to find out and express their understanding of cultural differences.

Let’s return to the education system. You call for the construction of an education system from bottom to top and by one architect. How do you justify your claim?

Fthenakis: Historically, education systems were developed from top to bottom: first the universities were established which had the task of codifying the knowledge of their time and passing it on to future generations. The oldest universities, in Tunisia and Morocco and Cairo, were founded in the 9 th and 10 th centuries. The first secondary schools were established much later; in Bavaria, for example, compulsory education was not introduced until 1802, and the kindergarten is not even 180 years old. However, if the task of education today is no longer primarily that of processing and passing on knowledge but instead the enhancement of child development and children’s competencies, then we have to acknowledge that these are developed early in the individual lifespan.

It therefore makes sense to support them during the time in which they are developing and to do this continuously, not only in the following stages of education but throughout life.

You criticise the lack of consistency in the educational process and complain about the loss of educational outcomes. What do you mean by this?

Fthenakis: A significant problem in many education systems is the lack of consistency in the educational process. An education system can frequently be compared to the construction of a house in which different architects have been deployed for the different floors. Each architect has realised his or her own vision on a particular floor, but all have forgotten to build the connecting stairways.

Thus constructed, an education system produces substantial losses and causes additional problems for some children, not least during the transitions, as empirical research internationally has confirmed. When developing the curriculum in Hesse, for example, I attempted to initiate consistency in the educational process by applying one and the same theoretical foundation, by ensuring that the educational goals regarding competence enhancement do not collapse at the point of transition, as has been the case up till now, but continue to be strengthened, albeit in new domains, that the guiding principles of pedagogical activity are shared by all stakeholders at all levels of education and that co-construction as a didactic approach is applied throughout.

Learning spaces outside educational institutions are increasingly gaining significance, not least the home learning environment.

Fthenakis: There is a considerable body of research evidence which suggests that learning environments outside the educational institution influence child development and children’s competencies more than the overall formal educational process. They therefore need to be included more strongly in the curriculum and in the organisation of learning processes than this is still currently the case.

Among these, the family has the role of being the most important place of learning for the child. This means that the relationship between family and educational institution is based on symmetry, in the sense of an educational partnership, and even more so, the family is recognised as the most important learning environment and needs support as such. In both areas we still have a long way to go.

Digitisation has reached the everyday life of even very young children. They grow up in a digital world and many parents and educators seek orientation and a clear positioning. Is digitisation a blessing or a curse?

Fthenakis: Neither the one nor the other. It depends on how it is handled. One thing is certain: digitisation is certainly changing society as a whole and the way in which children learn. It is part of the culture of growing up for children. The question arises as to how the chances of digitisation can be used to enhance the quality of education. Digitisation enables better access to knowledge, enhances children’s autonomy, can foster creativity and enable both self-directed and cooperative learning.

Numerous studies have indicated that these effects can only then be expected if an appropriate infrastructure is available, if educators are provided with professional development opportunities, if an appropriate educational programme is available and if families are informed and actively involved. The focus is on strengthening digital competence. Alongside writing, reading and arithmetic it is now the fourth basic skill. Recent research in the European context provides evidence that through the use of innovative technologies a higher level of quality in digital literacy can be reached.

Today the worldwide web is just as important as the ABC was in the past. And one thing is clear: the future of education is digital. Already we now need a new generation of educational tools which integrate both analogue and digital elements. So far, we were unanimous in our view that children learn through their senses. This is certainly still the case, but the senses alone are not enough.

Innovative technological opportunities such as those provided through augmented reality can extend and deepen the learning process and include elements which are not only accessed through the senses because they would be too broad or invisible or risky otherwise. The utilisation of technologies also changes the way educational institutions function. And digital competence also includes identifying and avoiding the risks associated with dealing with new technologies.

Digitisation raises new questions, however, which are revitalising current theory debates.

Fthenakis: All the theories which we have used up to now to describe and explain child development and learning focus on interactions and learning processes which take place between human beings.

Today, however, through the likes of artificial intelligence, new knowledge can be generated without the direct participation of the child and learning processes can be actively shaped with the help of new technologies. We need to include both analogue and digital elements when constructing learning processes. With the help of innovative technologies the documentation of learning processes can reach a level of quality which educators alone cannot provide. And most recently, facial recognition technologies are being introduced which enable the recording of events in educational institutions and the interactions taking place there with unprecedented meticulousness. We have no elaborated theories for this newly emerging complexity. Debate is in its infancy. Connectivism, the actor-network theory, the so-called social shaping of technology and many other approaches provide the beginnings for a theory debate which is likely to lead to the development and application of new approaches towards learning in the digital era.

If you were in a position to shape digital transformation, where in the education system would you start?

Fthenakis: Changing systems is an immense challenge which also takes time. If they are to be efficient, then it would make sense to start with that part of the system which is strongly and intrinsically motivated and open to change. This means with the children themselves. They grow up in a digital environment and have immediate access to technologies which are needed in everyday school practice. They can be the driving force behind such development, win over teachers and actively contribute to changing and enriching learning. This is the strength of STARC.

What do you think about the current education system?

Current education system is stressful and boring, there is no innovation in it for many years. And now a days education system is becoming more like business, it teaches children to run behind marks and demands more money from parents and because of that it's being unreachable for many of the children as their parents cannot afford it.

I think the current education system is mainly focused on getting good grades, rather than enjoying the learning process. There might be slight changes from curriculum to curriculum. Mainly, students stress out with immense pressure from the amount of study materials of courses.

What works really well according to you?

Education environment is playing an important role. Competition between students has increased. A good education platform, with good teachers, who can reduce your educational stress.

What needs to improve according to you?

Courses must be upgraded, bring creativity in the teaching style and make it available for everyone. I believe that the teaching tools has to change in order to cope up with the technological advances.

Are you using any educational management system today?

No, not specifically education management system but for education purpose, facebook groups and dropbox is very useful, it would be great to have a single platform which can provide both services.

What seems to be the biggest challenge during your education?

Lack of resources. The study materials are outdated. Sometimes, when I attend a class having some knowledge about the course, I get a feeling that these things are from the 90s.

If you could change one thing within the education system what would it be?

Make it accessible for everyone and provide knowledge in more creative ways which will be less stressful and more fun.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam sed libero nec eros rhoncus consectetur eleifend ut purus. Curabitur dignissim at diam vel volutpat. Nullam vitae sollicitudin ipsum. Pellentesque convallis sodales ligula sit amet lacinia. Proin commodo lacinia metus eu ullamcorper. Donec vel ipsum vel ligula pellentesque vestibulum vehicula nec diam. Suspendisse dictum viverra pharetra. Phasellus lectus odio, rutrum eu finibus eu, pretium id lacus. desktop 1

Sed in turpis nec turpis rutrum viverra. In eu sollicitudin nunc. Maecenas ullamcorper porttitor nulla, a luctus turpis convallis eget. Nulla convallis tincidunt orci non ornare. Suspendisse vulputate pulvinar interdum. Duis convallis sagittis vestibulum. Fusce ullamcorper lacinia auctor. Mauris tortor sapien, mattis non metus eget, tempus fermentum est. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Proin et dolor sem. Nam vulputate elit est, non auctor nunc accumsan egestas. desktop 2

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam sed libero nec eros rhoncus consectetur eleifend ut purus. Curabitur dignissim at diam vel volutpat. Nullam vitae sollicitudin ipsum. Pellentesque convallis sodales ligula sit amet lacinia. Proin commodo lacinia metus eu ullamcorper. Donec vel ipsum vel ligula pellentesque vestibulum vehicula nec diam. Suspendisse dictum viverra pharetra. Phasellus lectus odio, rutrum eu finibus eu, pretium id lacus. desktop 3

Sed in turpis nec turpis rutrum viverra. In eu sollicitudin nunc. Maecenas ullamcorper porttitor nulla, a luctus turpis convallis eget. Nulla convallis tincidunt orci non ornare. Suspendisse vulputate pulvinar interdum. Duis convallis sagittis vestibulum. Fusce ullamcorper lacinia auctor. Mauris tortor sapien, mattis non metus eget, tempus fermentum est. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Proin et dolor sem. Nam vulputate elit est, non auctor nunc accumsan egestas. desktop 4

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam sed libero nec eros rhoncus consectetur eleifend ut purus. Curabitur dignissim at diam vel volutpat. Nullam vitae sollicitudin ipsum. Pellentesque convallis sodales ligula sit amet lacinia. Proin commodo lacinia metus eu ullamcorper. Donec vel ipsum vel ligula pellentesque vestibulum vehicula nec diam. Suspendisse dictum viverra pharetra. Phasellus lectus odio, rutrum eu finibus eu, pretium id lacus. desktop 5

Sed in turpis nec turpis rutrum viverra. In eu sollicitudin nunc. Maecenas ullamcorper porttitor nulla, a luctus turpis convallis eget. Nulla convallis tincidunt orci non ornare. Suspendisse vulputate pulvinar interdum. Duis convallis sagittis vestibulum. Fusce ullamcorper lacinia auctor. Mauris tortor sapien, mattis non metus eget, tempus fermentum est. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Proin et dolor sem. Nam vulputate elit est, non auctor nunc accumsan egestas. desktop 6

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam sed libero nec eros rhoncus consectetur eleifend ut purus. Curabitur dignissim at diam vel volutpat. Nullam vitae sollicitudin ipsum. Pellentesque convallis sodales ligula sit amet lacinia. Proin commodo lacinia metus eu ullamcorper. Donec vel ipsum vel ligula pellentesque vestibulum vehicula nec diam. Suspendisse dictum viverra pharetra. Phasellus lectus odio, rutrum eu finibus eu, pretium id lacus. desktop 7

Sed in turpis nec turpis rutrum viverra. In eu sollicitudin nunc. Maecenas ullamcorper porttitor nulla, a luctus turpis convallis eget. Nulla convallis tincidunt orci non ornare. Suspendisse vulputate pulvinar interdum. Duis convallis sagittis vestibulum. Fusce ullamcorper lacinia auctor. Mauris tortor sapien, mattis non metus eget, tempus fermentum est. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Proin et dolor sem. Nam vulputate elit est, non auctor nunc accumsan egestas. desktop 8

What do you think about the current education system?

Lacking, there's a lot of things that can easily be done better. For starters, the course material in a lot of my subjects is outdated. Second, we're rarely taught anything beyond the basics of a subject, basics that we could learn by ourselves through many other sources besides college. That is very wasteful in my opinion. Finally, the complacency of everyone involved in the education system (including students).

What works really well according to you?

The sense of community, and that fact that colleges don't hold your hand too much. The fact we only learn the basics of a subject actually helps us to be responsible enough to learn more by ourselves.

What needs to improve according to you?

I think the current system would be a lot better if it wasn't too complacent about everything.

Are you using any educational management system today? If yes, which one? What do you think about it?

Blackboard. It's a system that just works, but it could be a lot better. The UI is outdated, and a lot of its features like forum discussions and chat are never used. Our college only uses it to manage lessons, grades and assignments. The attendance is managed through a different system, and course registration is managed through another system as well. All of these could (and should in my opinion) be managed through one system, that will make it all more convenient for everyone.

What seems to be the biggest challenge during your education?

The fact that I haven't faced a big challenge is what worries me the most. I think a lot of students feel they're under prepared for life beyond higher education.

If you could change one thing within the education system what would it be?

The drive of everyone in charge of the system in my college. I want them to be more focused on growing students into critical thinkers, than just graduates.