The Future of Learning

Why can’t schools be based in the clouds? TED talk winner Sugata Mitra on the role of future tech for teachers and students

Sugata Mitra is Professor of Educational Technology at the School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences at Newcastle University, UK. He was given the $1m TED Prize in 2013 in recognition of his work and to help build a School in the Cloud, a creative online space where children from all over the world can gather to answer ‘big questions’, share knowledge and benefit from help and guidance from online educators.

The School in the Cloud brings together Self Organised Learning Environments (SOLEs) to link in with the Granny Cloud, originally set up in 2009 following an appeal for retired teachers willing to offer a few hours a week to help teach English to Indian schoolchildren. This mentoring and encouraging role is still a vital part of the success of this educational approach today.

Mitra came to Second Home to speak passionately about his innovative research projects and their implications on the future of learning.


“‘Learning is something that you do to yourself’, but that’s a bit of a tricky wording, it might be more accurate to saying it’s something that happens to you. Education is easier because it’s thrust down your throat until it comes out of our ears.

All of this started off a long time ago in 1999, and I’d been thinking about it for the previous 12 years. There’s a paper I wrote in 1994 which talked about children and computers, which nobody paid any attention to.

In 1999 I used to teach people how to develop computering systems — how do you plan the system? How do you further at the algorithms? What’s the code you write and how do you debug it? These courses were all attended by the children of very rich people, because the courses were very expensive.

This was in New Delhi, and just outside of my office was this sprawling urban slum, and this slum had children. I thought, ‘This is kind of stupid because how do I know how many children I am missing who might make excellent software developers in that slum?’. So why is the system configured such that only the rich people’s children get that training and the others don’t? It actually doesn’t even make business sense because you are losing human capital.

But on the other hand, you can’t build a school like mine inside the slum, there is no room, you won’t get permission, most of the land is unauthorised — most importantly no teacher wants to go there and nobody wants to pay a teacher to go there either.

So anyway [there was] not much I could do about it except feel frustrated. And I thought, ‘Why not just give these kids a computer? At least it will make me feel a little bit better’. And everybody of course, [with it being] 1999, was like, ‘It won’t work, one computer for 200 children that don’t know any English and have never seen a computer before, they’ve not heard of the internet, nothing is going to happen, they are going to just break and steal the computer’.

So I managed to get the money from my boss by telling him that I wanted to do an important social experiment, ‘I want to film the breaking in stealing of the computer — will it happen at night, will happen during the day, who will do it?’. I don’t know, I conned him into [laughs]. Computers were expensive in those days. I don’t think he minds because he got a lot of publicity out of it eventually [laughs].

So how do I give them a computer? The only way was to copy the banks, the banks but ATMs in roads. So I made myself a do-it-yourself ATM, stuck it up there three feet off the ground with a screen much bigger than an ATM screen, running the internet of those days — the highest bandwidth I could get, 3MB a second which was quite a big deal, which I took out of our office network and stuck it into that — a touchpad on the wall, and running one of the earliest Windows and it had an AltaVista search bar. That’s all it had. Just a browser screen.I left it there, naturally the children gathered around, a whole lot of them, and they said, ‘What is that?’. So at that point I left my subject — my original subject that I studied through college and university was three theoretical physics, then I went into computer science and programming. In those days the only people who knew had to write computer programs were physicists and mathematicians.

“I made myself a do-it-yourself ATM, stuck it up there three feet off the ground with a screen much bigger than an ATM screen, running the internet of those days — the highest bandwidth I could get, 3MB a second which was quite a big deal.”

When they asked me, ‘What’s that?’, I think, if I think back, I shifted my discipline. Because obviously my is the first thought was, ‘Okay, that’s called a computer’. Then I thought if this experiment had to be done all over this world in the remotest places I can think of, I would need one person in each place capable of saying, ‘That’s a computer’. And we didn’t have that. In fact, it might be possible that we still wouldn’t have that many people who can say, ‘That’s a computer’.

So I decided I wouldn’t say it, so I said, ‘I don’t know’. The children laughed because they knew that I knew but I wasn’t going to tell them. But they still didn’t do anything, they just stood around there scratching their heads.

I then learnt my second lesson in education, which is that if you have children and if you have a chap in a tie standing like this, they don’t do anything. For reasons of safety it’s best to say, ‘I’m not doing anything’.

So I had the realisation that they are not doing anything because of me. So I turned around and walked off. True enough, just as I walked off, within a few yards, I could hear voices and they were all over the place.

Eight hours later one of my colleagues said, ‘You know those kids outside? They’re browsing and teaching each other how to browse’. And I said, ‘How can that happen? In what language?’.

The predominant assumption was that one of the students must’ve been passing by and showed them how to use the mouse, so I believed that too. So I said, ‘We have to do this again’. By that time the Times of India, one of the big newspapers, had landed up and the headline was ‘Slum children browsing, and a teacher says no one taught them’. So the implication was that the teacher, me, was lying because how could that happen?

So my boss, the guy who paid for the first [computer], decided he would pay for the second one. This time we went far away in the middle of Northern India, where the chances of a passing software developer would be zero. I repeated the experiment and I got the same result.

The original hole-in-the-wall SOLE experiment

About 15 days later I go back there and these guys are playing a game, ‘Where did you get the game from?’, ‘From there’, ‘Where?’, ‘There! And then, it came down, like that’. I realised they were talking about a downward pointing arrow — they had downloaded and installed a game in 15 days and they were playing it. It was from a Disney site, I still don’t know to date where they got to the Disney site from, but they did. I must add a funny cultural thing: I asked them what game it was and they said, ‘This is the best game’, so I said, ‘What game is it?’, ‘It’s a rat game’, ‘A rat game?’, then I realised… Poor Mickey! [Laughs]

So we started measuring this whole thing. By that time my boss had given up, but the World Bank stepped in and said, ‘This is too good to be true, you’ve got to measure to see if this happens everywhere’. I repeated it — I did all the statistical design, and the socio-economic this and that…

“Groups of children given unsupervised access to the internet will, in a period of nine months, go from a computing literacy scale score of zero to that of the average office secretary in the West”

I repeated the experiment 22 times all across the length and breadth of India, measuring this time what happens. What we got in that study, which was five years long, was: ‘Groups of children given unsupervised access to the internet will, in a period of nine months, go from a computing literacy scale score of zero to that of the average office secretary in the West’. It obviously caused a furore in the training industry — ‘What does it mean, are we worthless or what? [Laughs].

So to give you an example they were making a table in Word and laughing, I [said], ‘Why are you laughing at that table?’, so then they open Excel and say, ‘It’s so much easier to do it in that one’ [laughs]. I said, ‘Who told you?’, and obviously the answer was, ‘Nobody’.

So I repeated this experiment over and over again, published the results and then started experimenting with, ‘So what?’ ‘If they can learn to tinker around with a computer in the middle of nowhere, what’s the big deal? Educational theory-wise it’s great, but so what? What’s it going to do?’. Well I thought, ‘If they can do this much on their own, what else can they do?’.

So I started setting other goals for them, very simple stuff. I’d say, ‘Why is a giraffe’s neck long? Don’t guess, find out’, and they would answer it. I’d make it a little harder, ‘Okay, who was Pythagoras and what did he do?’, and they’d come up with the theorem.

The final experiment which was published was in a village where I downloaded some material on DNA replication — first year undergrad biotechnology — and put it in a hole-in-the-wall computer. The children came in and said, ‘What’s this?’, I said, ‘It’s very complicated stuff, you’ll never understand it’. Just say that to a 12-year-old and see what happens. The next step is very important, you go away, don’t stand there, they’ll do nothing if you stand there. So you go away.

A couple of months later I came back and the children were looking very down in the dumps, ‘We didn’t understand anything, it’s too hard, it’s all chemistry, symbols’. So I said, ‘So you gave up?’. I still remember this little girl who says, ‘Well apart from the fact that improper application of the DNA molecule causes genetic disease, we’ve understood nothing else’ [laughs]. Third lesson in education: when a child says they don’t know anything, don’t believe him. They have no idea of what level to set — if they’re allowed to set their own levels, they’ll set it way over [what] any human being can achieve and then they’ll go for it.

“When a child says they don’t know anything, don’t believe them. They have no idea of what level to set — if they’re allowed to set their own levels, they’ll set it way over what any human being can achieve and then they’ll go for it.”

The name of the paper was Limits to self-organising systems of learning (the Kalikuppam experiment) and the conclusion was, believe it or not, we haven’t found it. Does that mean that given a quantum mechanics problem nine-year-olds are going to solve it? No, but the nine-year-old will explain to you in nine-year-old language what it’s all about.

The example is real because I just tried it a couple of months ago in England. The question was, ‘Can anything be in two places at the same time?’ — nine-year-olds love things like that. ‘Yeah, if you move very fast. When it’s here it’s not there and when it’s there it’s not here…’ a lot of buzz, then go to the internet, come back after some time — ‘Oh, it’s simple, it’s got nothing to do with moving, it’s quantum entanglement. You see, if their quantum states are entangled and you separate them then anything you do to this one will happen to that one’ [laughs]. I’ve studied physics but I didn’t know that stuff [laughs]. Unsupervised children in the presence of the internet can learn anything by themselves. That’s what my results show. Okay, so where do we go from there?

What’s interesting about those desert children is what they were listening to — they were listening to a song that they had sung. This happened overnight, so went I in the next day and they were listening and I was filming this, I said, ‘It’s your song, how did it get into the computer?’. So they pointed to the sound recorder in Windows, ‘Haven’t you seen that?’. This is all happening in days after they first saw the computer.

I must tell you one more story that’s very important. I don’t know enough anthropology to explain it properly, but… In one of the villages the children are doing all of this stuff, so I say to them, ‘What do you have to do to get all these games and new things?’, they said, ‘You have to take an arrow and you have to shoot it into one of those and then hit it. When you hit it, then Shiva’s drum starts to play and always something nice happens’. I was like what’s that? Then I realised: Shiva’s a very ancient Indian God. He has a drum that looks like this and you hold it in your hand and play it. Is this just childish fantasy, or is this how we perceive the world anyway in our own metaphor? Isn’t that what they were doing, understanding what we think of as high-tech in very ancient metaphor (and getting pretty close)?

So this is what we learnt in all those years: somehow, groups of children in the presence of the internet, have an understanding that is greater than each individual within the group — higher than the highest level of individual understanding capability within the group. I like that result, because I said, ‘Okay, here’s something that the education guys are not going to understand’, because this is physics — we call it complex systems, and complex systems show what’s called emergent behaviour.

“Groups of children in the presence of the internet, have an understanding that is greater than each individual within the group — higher than the highest level of individual understanding capability within the group.”

We understand very little of it, but it’s something like this — you have a bit of dust lying on the ground, you have some random breezes, and suddenly a dust devil appears, it moves around and it disappears. Then I ask you, ‘Who made that?’, you’d say, ‘Nobody made it, it just happened’. What does it mean when you say, ‘It just happens’, why does it happen? When does it happen? We don’t know. But we do know that hives seem to have a mind which is bigger than the sum of its parts.

Take an ant hill for example — compared to the size of ant, those things are bigger than any building we have on the planet, proportionately. Who did the civil engineering for that? We know that for gigantic structures like that there is a whole physics which determines the foundation — how much strengthening to put, where are the buttresses? These pillars, somebody who spent years and years in college calculated this — which ant was it? We explain it all away with just one word: instinct.

I’m going to ask you clap together in synchrony — go ahead and do it.

If I’d recorded that and played it back to you, for those of you who heard it, you hear the first second of chaos and then it all comes together. Who brought the claps together, was it any individual in this room? Who decided the frequency of the claps, could it be any individual in the room? No, but there wasn’t anybody in the room who did that. Who decided the volume? Nobody did. So what am I supposed to conclude, that there’s something in here that’s not human? You saw the claps come together, how? That’s called emergent phenomenon — order out of nothing.

It happens all over nature, we don’t know how, we don’t know if there’s something out there that does it, we don’t know if there’s a law, we don’t know anything much about it. But I knew that what I was watching at those hole-in-the-walls was this kind of hive self-organising emergent behaviour.

So after about seven years, somewhere in about 2006/7, I came to the conclusion that what we were witnessing at the hole-in-the-walls was an example of a self-organising system: spontaneous order out of nothing.

In 2006 I came to England with all of these ideas. I was on a project to improve schooling in India, which Newcastle University had the funding for. Very fortunately for me, an English schoolteacher walked into my room one day and said ‘What about us?’, and I said, ‘What do you mean? You’ve got computers, you’ve got money, you’re a developed country. I have nothing to offer you’. She said, ‘Come on, be serious. You have to do the hole-in-the-wall in England’, so I said, ‘No I won’t do it, I can’t do it. Look, if I do the hole-in-the-wall experiment in England all you get are frozen children. You’re meant to do this outdoors; you can’t do anything outdoors in this country!’ [laughs]. She said, ‘No, you tell me how to do it’, so we invented how to do the hole-in-the-wall in England back in 2008 in Gateshead in a little school.

It’s very simple, anyone can try it. Empty out the furniture, put in five or six computers with big screens, everybody should be able to see the screens from far away, bring in about 25 children. So the 25 children in the same day came in and said, ‘Where are all the computers?’, so I said, ‘I don’t know and I don’t care’.

When I speak to teachers I say: ‘For Heaven’s sake, don’t tell them to make groups, if there are six computers and 24 children what else can they do? They’re not idiots, they’ll make groups — you don’t have to tell them to make groups, let them do what they want.’ Then you ask them a ‘big’ question — a question which doesn’t have an obvious answer, perhaps doesn’t have an answer at all, perhaps it has multiple answers’.

In a self-organised learning environment, you try to create that chaotic nature of a complex system, you put in an attractor — the question — and then you cross your fingers and hope that emergent learning will happen. It almost always does.

“In a self-organised learning environment, you try to create that chaotic nature of a complex system, you put in an attractor — the question — and then you cross your fingers and hope that emergent learning will happen. It almost always does.”

There are some unusual things there for people like us who are used to affluence — restriction of resources improves self-organisation. What I didn’t know in my days in India when I used to give 200 children a computer, was that that’s the best. If I’d given them 200 computers nothing much would’ve happened. That one computer sparked social self-organisation, hive minds, leadership, administration, management, just by restricting the resource.

The idea of the SOLE — self-organised learning environment — went viral around 2013 across England and then into bits of Europe, it didn’t go very fast into Europe, it went instead into Australia, then into Latin America, Buenos Aires, Brazil, Chile, then Africa started moving in as teachers started blogging about what they were doing. None of this is my work, it just happened. Then finally North America, United States — and you know what it’s like when the United States, it’s like King Kong.

Newcastle University opened a research centre called SOLE Central because they didn’t want to lose control over SOLEs. I kept trying to tell them it’s not about control, the whole thing happens without control [laughs].

What happens with children is that with SOLEs their self-confidence goes up dramatically quickly, I’ve never seen it happen so quickly. Suddenly it’s as if all those shackles of schooling have just dropped away because they’re answering questions that their teacher barely knows the answer to. Will all the children gain the same amount? No, some children get left behind, but we must understand that in a lecture the same thing will happen. Some get it all, some get nothing.

The difference between a SOLE and a lecture, is that the child that gets left out in a geology SOLE, may be the leader in a music sole. That doesn’t happen in regular schooling because you are told that you are bad, you didn’t do well enough, you failed. You tell somebody that and they apply it to every aspect of their lives, ‘I’ll fail everywhere, I’m the bad boy’. Whereas in a SOLE, ‘You didn’t pay attention to the tectonic thing?’, ‘No, I didn’t like that, it was very boring’, ‘Was that nice, not paying attention?’, ‘Wait until it’s on maths and then you’ll see’.

Why do we want a system where everybody must know everything? That’s the system — 50% is pass, so everybody must pass in everything. Why’s that? It’s from a time when you could be on a ship sailing out of Southampton into the middle of nowhere, stuck on an island with nothing other than pencil and paper. If I have to design an education system for that time, you have to get 50% in everything otherwise you die.

The trouble is [that] we don’t live in that world anymore. It’s very unlikely that any of you here will be stuck on a deserted island and have to use calculus to figure out how many coconuts there are or whatever [laughs].

The old system said, ‘You failed’, instead of that, say, ‘My god, just look at what you did with maths, is that why you didn’t do so well with the tectonic plates, you were thinking about maths?’.

Back in 2010 I wrote an article for The Guardian because I gave this method of admiring a name, I called it the method of the grandmother. If you think about grandmothers, they use a method very different from parents and teachers. A grandmother might typically say, ‘Oh my god, how did you do that? When I was your age I was such a silly little girl, I couldn’t do anything like that’, and the child says, ‘Don’t you even know this is an icon? Let me show you what else I can do’. So she’s driving a learning spiral using admiration instead of discipline.

[In the article] I said if you’re a British grandmother, if you have the internet and a web camera, will you give me one hour of your time every week for free? In two weeks I got 200, right now there are 600 of them. I know more British grandmothers than anybody in this room [laughs]. They are called the granny cloud — you thought they didn’t understand technology, you’d laugh at them — well, the granny cloud sits up there and can beam themselves into schools where good teachers will not go.

The grannies plan for weeks — some of them are retired teachers — and then finally the children say, ‘We don’t want to do any of that. How big is your laptop? Pick it up and take it to your refrigerator, we want to see what’s in your refrigerator’, she’s like, ‘I spent the entire afternoon talking about Tesco’ [laughs].

So in 2013 I got the TED prize, it’s quite a big deal, it’s a lot of money, it’s $1m so I felt quite happy. I was about to call my bank and say, ‘Look guys, the days of three-digit numbers is over’ [laughs] when TED told me that’s not how it works, they give it to the university and you do a research project with it [laughs].

“In 2013 I got the TED prize — it’s $1m so I felt quite happy. I was about to call my bank and say, ‘Look guys, the days of three-digit numbers is over’ when TED told me that’s not how it works, they give it to the university and you do a research project with it.”

So I made up a project to bring in SOLEs and the granny cloud together into facilities called Schools in the Cloud. That money enabled me to build seven of them and study them for three years with a team based partly in England, partly in India.

Three years ago we finished on the 1st of November, so the data’s just come in — it’s quite tantalising, but I can’t tell you more than that because I haven’t started analysing the data. There’s three years of data on reading comprehension, internet searching skills, and self-confidence, so there’s a lot of data there. I know what the answers are even before analysing — but that’s the nature of science that you have to spend a year and a ton of money analysing it.

You could have a whole range of prices — you could have just a hole-in-the-wall computer that doesn’t cost very much, I think you could build one for less than £1000 pounds, but it has less utility. These [Schools in the Cloud have] all the screens visible from any point in the room because then that gives you social control over any kind of misuse. If the screen is big and public, nothing will happen.


Everybody told me it won’t work in Harlem, the children are poor, they’re homeless, they’re all orphans, they’re very violent, they’ll grow up to be drug addicts and monsters. I did the first SOLE [in Harlem], it got filmed by PBS. The children had a question: ‘Why do dogs chase cats?’ — eight-year-old Harlem children — and I said, ‘I really don’t know’. So they came back in about 40 minutes with: ‘Between two people a friendly gesture can be misunderstood as violence, that leads to a real quarrel and the bigger, heavier side wins’.

The superintendent of schooling in that area came there and he saw the whole thing, he said, ‘I don’t believe this, this is just going on on its own?’

This is county Durham in England, it’s one of our best places — it’s built with a green lawn outside, a big glass wall, AstroTurf inside. So it looks like the lawn has come inside, with park benches, gas lamps and computers. In this particular one, the supervisors made a rule that the teachers can only watch from outside the glass and not go inside. So far it’s been working for three years under those rules with no problems at all, except for once…

There were six-year-olds inside, after some time they came up to the glass wall with a piece of paper, which, in very poor quality English, said, ‘Help, we are stuck’ [laughs].

So what does a School in the Cloud do? It improves reading comprehension and communication skills enormously — if a child has to stand up in front of the class and explain quantum entanglement it better have good communication skills — internet searching skills, naturally, if you’re doing that much searching they quickly learn about keywords, they learn how to detect a bad website or an incorrect website, all of the stuff, and self-confidence.

In Delhi, one of the slum schools, it’s a school for girls, it went brilliantly, the quality of the English and the behaviour of the girls just changed dramatically within six months. I went and talked to the school principal and said, ‘Do you like it?’, she said, ‘Yes’. I said, ‘There’s something you’re not telling me’, she said, ‘The girls have become very badly behaved’. I said, ‘Why, what have they done?’, ‘They’ve been saying to their teachers, ‘We Googled what you said for 15 minutes, we could’ve learnt what you were teaching us in five minutes and you made two mistakes in it’’. So I said, ‘That’s terrible, but were they right?’, and she said, ‘Of course they were right, but that’s not how you talk to your teachers’ [laughs].

That’s the end of the good news, and the bad news starts. All these wonderful things have happened in the last 17 years, nobody wants them. Is there a test for how to search on the internet, is there a test of self-confidence? No, not at all. Is there a test for if you can do something in a group which you couldn’t have done alone? No. This is what we have instead: give me your computers, give me your mobile phones, here’s paper and pencil, no other assistive tools, don’t talk to anybody, now answer that question. ‘Why do I have to do it that way?’, ‘What if you were stuck on a deserted island and you had to count coconuts by yourself?’. That seems to be the only answer I can think of [as to] why that exam is required.

I found the answer to why it is that way. This is an office in 1920, rows and rows of clerks, a floor supervisor walking up and down, what do these clerks need to know? Good reading, clear handwriting, the ability to do computation in their heads, don’t look left, don’t look right, do not talk, understand instructions and follow them, do not ask questions, and under no circumstances be creative.

Those were the requirements, that’s how this world was run in those days without machines. These were people who did the job of machines. We have a schooling system invented then, which was very efficiently producing these people, otherwise we wouldn’t be here today. But it’s gone and we are still producing them mindlessly. So can you see who we are preparing our children for? For employers who’ve been dead 100 years.

In order to cater to the needs of this obsolete system, we have to have an obsolete education system. There’s no point blaming teachers — they’re forced to follow the methods of the 19th Century teacher, because that’s the obsolete system they have to service. What can the teacher do except drill, and practise, and yell at the child and so on? Drill, practise, negative enforcement. So I started to say, from 2015, that we should allow the use of tablet phones in exams — allow the use of the internet. It was greeted around the world with horror, absolute horror. What’s the problem? Isn’t that how we all solve problems today? When I had to come from my hotel to this venue, Google got me here, if at that point you’d said, ‘You’re stupid, give me your phone, now tell me where that hotel is’, what sense does that make?

“We should allow the use of tablet phones in exams — allow the use of the internet. It was greeted around the world with horror, absolute horror. What’s the problem? Isn’t that how we all solve problems today?”

I think schools should produce happy, healthy and productive people. I don’t think there can be much argument about that. I made this matrix that I think everybody who’s building a school should use — it’s got ‘happy, healthy, productive’ — take the three skills — reading, writing and arithmetic and subsume them inside three bigger areas: ‘comprehension, communication and computing’.

So why only reading comprehension? Why not the ability to comprehend a YouTube video, to make out if the speaker is genuine etc — comprehension is a much bigger area. Communication — why should the child have to write this essay about, ‘My trip to the zoo’, why can’t she make a multimediaPowerPoint, video, audio description out of it. Computation — I don’t mean computers; I mean the ability to compute a solution to a problem.

In order to do all of that I think we need a curriculum of questions — the curriculum has to change. Instead if you were to say, ‘You know what? Here are the big things we don’t know yet’. In order to find out a big thing that we don’t know, you anyway have to find out what’s known, that follows on automatically. Children love questions to which an adult says nobody knows the answer — it’s an easy attractor and they’ll self-organise immediately.

We need a pedagogy that encourages collaboration and use of the internet, that’s life, that’s how we all do things so let’s teach them that. If you’re worried about what the internet will do to them, every parent is so petrified of the internet, but at the same time we don’t allow it inside the school, we expect them to learn the internet in the street — the most dangerous thing there is on the planet, what sense does that mean?

I think the internet should be taught as a subject like physics, or chemistry, or maths. It’s what they will do 24/7, it’s what will surround us, it already does, today. It’s not taught, there is no textbook on it because there isn’t a teacher to teach it. The internet cannot be taught; it can only be learned. We need an assessment system that looks for productivity over process.

You know what’s happening? You can’t keep the internet outside the exam, it’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller, so today what they do, in India the CBSE — the equivalent of GCSE — there’s a newspaper report that says, ‘Army deployed to search for mobile phones with students’ — 300 million students. So this year they’ll do that, next year they’ll look for smart watches, smart eyeglasses, smart jewellery. The year after that, what will we do? MRI scans? [Laughs] we won’t be able to keep out.

If you can’t keep the internet out then the guy that writes the question paper has to change, the questions have to change. You can’t write a straight Google-type question, so you change it completely. As soon as you change the question paper, the teachers will react, and finally, teachers will feel free to do what they were supposed to do in the first place — open the minds of the children.

So that, to my mind, is the future of learning. I don’t think anybody has to do it, like the very first hole-in-the-wall experiment it’s predicted how it will happen: it will happen on its own.”


This talk took place st Second Home, a creative workspace and cultural venue, bringing together diverse industries, disciplines and social businesses. Click here to find out who’s speaking next.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.