In This Issue:

  1. Six misconceptions about psychological safety

  2. Five annoying, unhelpful pieces of advice for teachers

  3. College for all?

  4. David Brooks on the urge to explore and excel

  5. Do Democrats and Republicans agree on the purpose of education?

  6. Learning another language in the age of ChatGPT

  7. One school’s guidelines for student AI use

  8. A social studies AI platform

  9. Resources for financial literacy education

10. Picture books on Jewish lives, families, and holidays

11. Short item: Covid’s impact in graphs

 

Quotes of the Week

“Learning is very hard work. It’s a deeply complex process. If you offload onto AI the very cognitively demanding aspects of the learning process, then like a muscle atrophying, you’re weakening that process over time.”

            Beth McMurtrie in “Should College Graduates Be AI Literate?” in The Chronicle of

            Higher Education, April 11, 2025 (Vol. 71, #16, pp. 12-22)

 

“To be AI literate… you must understand how generative AI works, be able to use it effectively, know how to evaluate its output, and understand its weaknesses and dangers.” 

            Beth McMurtrie (ibid.)

 

“AI tools can automate certain tasks and provide valuable support to teachers, but they cannot replace the rich, multifaceted experience of learning a language… Language is not just a code to be cracked or a puzzle to be solved; it is a complex mosaic of culture, identity, history, and human experience.”

            Maureen Lamb (see item #6)

 

“The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology.”

            E.O. Wilson (2009)

 

“Teams that don’t surface hard truths perform worse than those that do.”

            Amy Edmondson and Michaela Kerrissey (see item #1)

 

“We can decide what we’ll order off life’s menu, but we can’t decide what we like.”

            David Brooks (see item #4)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Six Misconceptions about Psychological Safety

            In this Harvard Business Review article, Amy Edmondson (Harvard Business School) and Michaela Kerrissey (Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health) say psychological safety has been widely recognized as a key factor in teams’ creativity, morale, and performance. But a number of distortions and misconceptions have led critics to say it needs to be tossed out as another flawed management fad. Edmondson and Kerrissey address these one at a time:

            • Misconception #1: Psychological safety means being nice. The idea is that you shouldn’t say what you really think unless it’s positive. But safety and comfort are not the same thing. “Wanting to be nice, people avoid being honest and, whether they realize it or not, collude in producing ignorance and mediocrity,” say Edmondson and Kerrissey. “Teams that don’t surface hard truths perform worse than those that do.” Effective teams give permission to be candid, take interpersonal risks, ask questions, disagree, admit mistakes, and distinguish between being nice and being kind. “Nice is the easy way out of a difficult conversation,” say the authors. “Kind is being respectful, caring, and honest.” 

            • Misconception #2: Psychological safety means getting your way. A healthcare executive said a colleague didn’t support his idea in a meeting and that made him feel psychologically unsafe. What nonsense, say Edmondson and Kerrissey. Leaders need to hear what people think and not be emotionally fragile. “It’s helpful to think of psychological safety not as a gift for one participant but rather as an environment for the whole team.” Of course leaders shouldn’t tolerate bullying, harassment, disrespect, or unethical conduct. 

            • Misconception #3: Psychological safety means job security. When Google laid off 12,000 people in 2023, one employee stood up at a town hall meeting and said this went against the company’s commitment to psychological safety. But that policy didn’t guarantee there wouldn’t be layoffs, say Edmondson and Kerrissey. In fact, by feeling safe to stand up and speak out, the employee was validating the policy. 

            • Misconception #4: Psychological safety will undermine performance. Some leaders believe embracing psychological safety will make it difficult to address weaknesses and hold people accountable. But this is a false dichotomy, say the authors; top performance requires both high standards and psychological safety. Leaders need to cultivate a climate in which candor is the norm; otherwise, “people hide information to save face or to be agreeable or both. And teams fall easily into groupthink – where members don’t want to disrupt what they erroneously assume is a consensus.” 

            • Misconception #5: Psychological safety should be a mandated policy. “We can’t mandate psychological safety any more than we can mandate things like trust and motivation,” say Edmondson and Kerrissey. “You can’t pull a lever and make it happen.” In fact, trying to mandate psychological safety is likely to result in people keeping leaders in the dark about things they don’t want to hear. Psychological safety is built in a group’s interactions, and is fostered when leaders consciously use three tools: messaging honestly about challenges the team faces; modeling being a good listener, asking good questions, and showing that it’s okay not to know all the answers; and mentoring colleagues with feedback on group norms.

            • Misconception #6: Psychological safety requires a top-down approach. “It’s true that what leaders do matters,” say Edmondson and Kerrissey. “But ultimately, psychological safety is built by everyone – at all levels… In small but important ways, everyone influences the environment. Anyone can call attention to the need for input or ask questions to draw others out, and anyone can respond to others in productive rather than punitive ways… By showing interest in other people’s ideas and concerns, team members can reinforce their peers’ voices and help establish a productive learning climate.” 

            Edmondson and Kerrissey conclude with suggestions on how to build on these insights to foster and reinforce a team’s psychological safety:

-   Frequently say what your team is trying to accomplish, why it matters, and how everyone plays a key role. 

-   Improve the quality of team conversations. “That entails asking good questions, listening intently, and pushing for closure,” they say.

-   Institute structures for sharing reflections and tracking progress. “What matters,” say Edmondson and Kerrissey, “is the discipline of offering honest appraisals of what’s going on with the work (performance against goals) and of the team climate and quality of interactions.” 

 

“What People Get Wrong About Psychological Safety” by Amy Edmondson and Michaela Kerrissey in Harvard Business Review, May/June 2025

 

Back to page one

 

2. Five Annoying, Unhelpful Pieces of Advice for Teachers 

            In this EduCoach article, Jo Lein tees off on what she believes are the worst suggestions teachers have to put up with and, in each case, offers a better approach:

            • You should smile more. This is “subjective and rooted in personal preference rather than pedagogy,” says Lein. “It reinforces the outdated idea that teachers should prioritize being likable over being effective.” What to say instead: “Students responded well to warmth and clear expectations. I noticed they were more engaged when you checked in with them individually. How might we incorporate more of those moments?”

            • You need to work on your classroom management. This “is like telling a pilot they need to fly better,” says Lein. It’s vague, judgmental, and doesn’t acknowledge what the teacher may be doing right. What to say instead: “When students were working in groups, I noticed some off-task behavior. One strategy that could help is setting clearer expectations before releasing them to work. Here’s what I mean. First, you square up and stand still. You give them the attention-getting signal. Then, you tell them what you want them to do with their bodies, mouths, and brains. Let’s try it.” 

            • The objective needs to be on the board. This confuses compliance with effectiveness; just because the objective is on the board doesn’t mean students understand it and see the connection to the lesson’s big-picture goal and why it matters. What to say instead: “How do students know what success looks like in this lesson? How do you check in with them about their progress toward that goal?”

            • You should differentiate more. This feedback “can feel like an impossible demand rather than a strategic improvement,” says Lein. “Differentiation is essential but it requires time, strategy, and resources.” What to say instead: “I noticed a few students finishing quickly while others were struggling. Would you like to explore ways to provide extension activities for when they finish the independent practice?”

            • You just need to build relationships. Yes, relationships are important, but this feedback ignores what the teacher has already worked on and doesn’t offer an actionable next step. What to say instead: “I noticed your students responded really well when you asked about their weekend. Have you found that certain check-in routines work better than others?”

What about using artificial intelligence for teacher feedback? Lein says AI can be helpful for brainstorming, research, or just recalling something (What’s the name for the move where you call on a kid without hands up?), but she believes it’s a terrible way to give feedback to teachers – inauthentic, impersonal, robotic. “If you want to support teachers in growing their practice,” she concludes, feedback needs to be:

-   Specific – descriptive of what was observed versus a general category;

-   Supportive – building on what’s already working;

-   Actionable – specific, concrete steps to improve.

 

“Top 5 Worst Pieces of Feedback Given to Educators” by Jo Lein in EduCoach, March 8, 2025

 

Back to page one

 

3. College for All?

            In this New York Times article, Dana Goldstein says “college for all” has been many educators’ north star for three decades. “Thousands of new K-12 schools,” she says, “were founded to achieve this ambitious vision, often focused on guiding low-income students toward bachelor’s degrees.” For years, a mantra in KIPP charter schools was College Starts in Kindergarten, and teachers hung pennants of the colleges they attended in their classrooms.

But several stubborn facts have raised doubts about the goal of all students attending four-year colleges:

-   The college dropout rate: about 40 percent of all students don’t earn a degree;

-   Staggering debts carried by those who don’t graduate – and those who do;

-   Sticker shock at the escalating cost of college;

-   Reduced public respect for colleges, egged on by some politicians;

-   Doubts about whether college prepares young people for the job market.

As a result, some high schools are encouraging students to think about other options: trade schools, apprenticeships, two-year degrees, the military. 

            The challenge for school leaders, reports Goldstein, is maintaining high expectations for students, opening multiple opportunities, and steering students toward pathways with the most potential for successful life trajectories – for example, some apprenticeships have much more potential and are much more financially viable than others. 

The Bronx Early College Academy in New York City, an International Baccalaureate school, has embraced I.B.’s new career track, which includes a course called Personal and Professional Skills that explores ethical questions, career choices, professional writing, public speaking, and disagreeing respectfully. The KIPP network has also made changes: 

-   All juniors and seniors now enroll in a two-year seminar called College Knowledge and Career Success and research a variety of career paths.

-   Students attend workshops on demystifying the college application and financial aid process.

-   Students analyze specific college and training programs, especially each one’s graduation and job placement rates.

-   Persistence advisors – who work with recent graduates to troubleshoot college, career, financial, and mental health challenges – are no longer required to have a college degree.

-   College counseling teams have been renamed Match Counseling.

 

“The Reason Some Schools Are Rethinking ‘College for All’” by Dana Goldstein in The New York Times, Mach 8, 2025

Back to page one

 

4. David Brooks on the Urge to Explore and Excel

            In this New York Times article, David Brooks wonders why people do things that are immensely challenging – hours of tedium to learn the violin, repeatedly falling off stair railings to master skateboarding, going through arduous mental work to solve a scientific problem, managing other people (which is truly hard), or starting a business (which is insanely hard).

            This kind of dedication differs from our normal cost-benefit desire to avoid pain and seek out easy pleasure, “low costs and high rewards,” says Brooks. “Effort is hard, so we try to reduce the amount of effort we have to put into things – including, often enough, the effort of thinking things through.” 

            But when it comes to the most important things in life – vocation, family, identity, what gives our lives purpose – “we are operating by a different logic,” he says, “which is the logic of passionate desire and often painful effort. People commit to great projects, they endure hard challenges, because they are entranced, enchanted. Some notion or activity has grabbed them, set its hooks inside them, aroused some possibility, fired the imagination.”

            This process sometimes begins with a moment of recognition, says Brooks – a surprising connection or realization:

-   Contact with a group of people who seem cool and are doing something worthwhile, triggering the thought, I want to be like them.

-   Contact with beauty – “a future astronomer awed by the beauty of the universe, a future mechanic awed by the beauty of a smoothly running engine.”

-   Yehudi Menuhin going to a concert at three and knowing he wanted to play the violin. 

-   As a child, Einstein noticed invisible forces controlling the needle of a compass, and his life’s work became exploring unseen forces. 

-   People inspired to go into public service upon hearing a compelling statement.

“In all these cases,” says Brooks, “there is a moment of ignition, something outside touching something deep inside, the opening up of new personal possibilities.” 

            These moments are clouded in mystery: “Why am I interested in astronomy but not geology? I don’t know. Why am I entranced with Rembrandt and left cold by El Greco? I don’t know. Why do I love her but not her? I don’t know. We can decide what we’ll order off life’s menu, but we can’t decide what we like.” 

            Ignition is followed by questions: “Curiosity is the eros of the mind, a propulsive force. It can seem so childish… Curiosity drives you to explore that dark cave despite your fears of going down there.”

            The next stage is realizing how much there is to fathom: “Whether it is ballet, engineering, or parenting,” says Brooks, “the seeker is humble enough to see where she falls short, inspired enough to set a high ideal and confident in her ability to close the gap.” 

            Finally there is striving for mastery. “Whether it’s coding, cooking, or gardening, people intrinsically desire to achieve excellence at their craft,” says Brooks. “They are drawn by some positive attraction, not driven by a fear of failure. They perceive obstacles as challenges, not threats. On their good days, they’ve assigned themselves the right level of difficulty. Happiness is usually not getting what you want or living with ease; it is living, from one hour to the next, at a level of just manageable difficulty. 

“By the time you’ve reached craftsman status, you don’t just love the product, you love the process, the tiny disciplines, the long hours, the remorseless work… Effort becomes its own reward. Mountain climbers often don’t pick the easiest route to the mountain top; they pick the hardest route they can manage, because they value challenge, growth, and the fruits of hard effort itself.” And in that flow, people can endure discomfort, hardship, and pain. That is inevitable; suffering is optional. 

Paradoxically, says Brooks, life goes more smoothly when we take on these super-difficult challenges. “People are more tranquil when they are headed somewhere, when they have brought their lives to a point, going in one direction toward one important goal. Humans were made to go on quests… Evolution or God or both have instilled in us a primal urge to explore, build, and improve. But life is at its highest when passion takes us far beyond what evolution requires, when we’re committed to something beyond any utilitarian logic.” 

 

“A Surprising Route to the Best Life Possible” by David Brooks in The New York Times, March 30, 2025; Brooks can be reached at [email protected]. 

 

Back to page one

 

5. Do Democrats and Republicans Agree on the Purpose of Education?

            In this Educational Researcher article, Ebba Henrekson (Marie Cederschiold University, Sweden), Fredrik Andersson (Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden), and Jurgen Willems (Indiana University) report on their study of Americans’ opinions on the basic purposes of education and whether there are significant differences by political affiliation. In their 2022 study, the researchers asked a representative sample of 19,032 U.S. adults how important they considered seven distinct, non-competing K-12 goals on a 5-point scale: 

1.   Not At All Important

2.   Not Important

3.   Somewhat Important

4.   Very Important

5.   Extremely Important

Here are the average ratings on each goal, ranked by importance:

-   Learning Core Academic Subjects (e.g., Reading, Math, Science) – 4.4795

-   To Become Independent Thinkers – 4.3645

-   Skills for Future Employment – 4.3029

-   How to Interact with Others (Socialization) – 4.2968

-   How to Be a Good Citizen – 4.2944

-   Values, Moral Character, or Religious Virtues – 3.9459

-   To Fix Social Problems – 3.5035

How did the results break down by political affiliation? People’s rankings of the first five goals were very similar (see the graphic in the article link), but there were big differences on the sixth and seventh: 

-   Republicans ranked Values, Moral Character, or Religious Values significantly higher than Democrats and Independents.

-   Democrats ranked To Fix Social Problems significantly higher than Republicans and Independents.

Henrekson, Andersson, and Willems draw several other conclusions from their study:

First, this cross section of Americans rated six of the seven goals Very Important, with only one of them (To Fix Social Problems) averaging between Very Important and Somewhat Important. This tells us, say the researchers, “that most citizens share the opinion that education should serve multiple distinct purposes. This finding is important because it illuminates that few citizens look at education as defined by a single or narrow objective.”

Second, the general public was considerably less polarized than elected officials who have campaigned on wedge issues. “Even when citizens and politicians,” say the researchers, “are confronted daily with partisan polarization on topics such as student testing, prayer in schools, sex education, and school choice, the apparent high uniformity in public opinion on the overall purposes of education could form a basis to build on for reducing dysfunctional polarization that harms the maintaining and development of a good educational system.” 

Third, the two areas where opinions diverge – the importance of moral values and solving social problems – reflect important areas of progressive versus conservative orientation. Democrats, Independents, and Republicans all rate these goals between Somewhat and Very Important, but the differences revealed in the survey reflect the debate around the role of religious values in schools and whether people believe the public school curriculum should, for example, trace current racial and economic inequalities back to slavery. 

 

“The Purposes of Education: A Citizen Perspective Beyond Political Elites” by Ebba Henrekson, Fredrik Andersson, and Jurgen Willems in Educational Researcher, April 2025 (Vol. 54, #3, pp. 123-131); Willems can be reached at [email protected]. 

 

Back to page one

 

6. Learning Another Language in the Age of ChatGPT

            In this article in Independent School, veteran world language teacher Maureen Lamb pushes back on the idea that Google Translate (launched in 2006) and ChatGPT (in 2022) have made her field irrelevant by providing increasingly competent language translation. “AI tools can automate certain tasks and provide valuable support to teachers,” she says, “but they cannot replace the rich, multifaceted experience of learning a language… Language is not just a code to be cracked or a puzzle to be solved; it is a complex mosaic of culture, identity, history, and human experience.” 

            Take the Latin expression carpe diem. It’s often translated as seize the day or make the most of the present moment, says Lamb, but “its full meaning is richer and more nuanced within its original context. Literally translated, it means ‘pluck the day,’ as if each day were as fleeting as a petal plucked from a flower. This suggests a balanced approach to enjoying life’s pleasures while recognizing life’s impermanence.” 

Understanding the social and emotional nuances and context of words is one payoff from learning another language. Two others: developing cross-cultural critical thinking, creativity, and empathy, and navigating an increasingly globalized world with a different cultural lens. 

Which is not to say that language teachers shouldn’t use AI in their classrooms, says Lamb. She uses ChatGPT to generate vocabulary lists based on specific texts, create reading comprehension questions and interactive activities, simplify texts for struggling students, simulate conversations, and create materials and assessments tailored to individual needs. This saves hours that she used to spend developing such materials by hand. “In these ways,” she says, “AI empowers teachers to make language learning more equitable and inclusive for all students.” 

That said, AI “cannot replicate the creativity, empathy, and personal connection that a teacher brings to the classroom,” says Lamb. “After all, language is a social task. As language educators, we understand that language learning is not just about acquiring knowledge – it is about communication and building relationships… Language teaching is dynamic and often requires improvisation, allowing educators to respond to students’ needs and adapt lessons based on their moods, interests, or current events. AI cannot match the flexibility and creativity of a human teacher.” 

 

“More Than Words” by Maureen Lamb in Independent School, Spring 2025 (Vol. 84, #3, pp. 45-47)

Back to page one

 

7. One School’s Guidelines for Student AI Use

            In a sidebar to her article in Independent School, Jennifer Parnell (Lawrenceville School, New Jersey) shares her school’s policy for student use of AI (quoted verbatim):

            • AI use not allowed – Please complete this assignment without the use of any AI tools. The objective is to assess your personal understanding and critical thinking skills. 

            • Minimal AI influence – You can use AI tools for limited assistance, such as refining language or identifying sources, but ask for specific permission first. However, the core concepts and ideas should be developed independently.

            • AI as a learning aid – Feel free to use AI tools to create learning aids that enhance your understanding of the subject matter. However, the final work should showcase your own analytical skills and critical thinking and include citations.

            • AI for background research – Utilize AI tools for background research and gathering information. You must cite all assistance. However, the main content and arguments in your assignment should be original and reflect your understanding of the topic.

            • AI-guided research and creativity – Feel free to utilize AI tools for research and idea generation. You may use AI to gather information, generate ideas, and refine your work. You must cite all assistance. The final product should reflect your own understanding and creativity.

 

“Survival Guide: A Framework for Thinking About the AI-Pocalypse” by Jennifer Parnell in Independent School, Spring 2025 (Vol. 84, #3, pp. 56-59)

 

Back to page one

 

8. A Social Studies AI Platform

            In this article in Social Education, Paul Sauberer, Zafer Unal, Ilene Berson, and Michael Berson (University of South Florida) recommend the social studies area of the free AI platform TeacherServer, especially these tools:

-   Historical event perspective generator

-   Primary source analysis guide

-   Timeline creator

-   Map creation and analysis tool

-   Historical figure interview simulator

-   Contemporary issue debate generator

-   Geographic feature impact analyzer

 

“Empowering Educators with AI: TeacherServer for Social Studies Classrooms” by Paul Sauberer, Zafer Unal, Ilene Berson, and Michael Berson in Social Education, March/April 2025 (Vol. 89, #2, pp. 100-105)

                                                                 Back to page one

 

9. Resources for Financial Literacy Education

            In this article in Social Education, Scott Niederjohn and Billie Kowalke (Concordia University Wisconsin) and Kim Holder (University of Tennessee/Chattanooga) make the case for personal 8ucation in secondary schools and list key topics that should be included: income and careers, money management, credit and debt, saving and investment, risk management and insurance, financial decision-making, consumer protection, and taxes. They suggest these online resources:

-   Council on Economic Education (CEE) – https://www.councilforeconed.org

-   Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) – https://fee.org

-   JumpStart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy – https://www.jumpstart.org

-   Junior Achievement (JA) – https://jausa.ja.org

-   Next Gen Personal Finance (NGPF) – https://www.ngpf.org

 

“The State of Personal Finance Education in the U.S.” by Scott Niederjohn, Kim Holder, and Billie Kowalke in Social Education, March/April 2025 (Vol. 89, #2, pp. 91-96)

 

Back to page one

 

10. Picture Books on Jewish Lives, Families, and Holidays

            In School Library Journal, Amy Lilien-Harper recommends these early-grade books on Jewish experience:

-   Ria Fortuna’s New Home: A Jewish Cuban Journey by Ruth Behar, illustrated by Devon Holzwarth, kindergarten-grade 4

-   Big Dreams, Small Fish by Paula Cohen, K-grade 2

-   Many Things At Once by Veera Hiranandani, illustrated by Nadia Alam, K-grade 1

-   Two New Years by Richard Ho, illustrated by Lynn Scurfield, K-grade 3

-   Kol Hakavod: Way to Go! by Jamie Kiffel-Alcheh, illustrated by Sarah-Jayne Mercer, Preschool-grade 2

-   The Passover Guest by Susan Kusel, illustrated by Sean Rubin, K-grade 3

-   Rising by Sidura Ludwig, illustrated by Sophia Vincent Guy, K-grade 1

-   Alone Together on Dan Street by Erica Lyons, illustrated by Jen Jamieson, K-grade 2

-   Measuring a Year: A Rosh Hashanah Story by Linda Elovitz Marshall, illustrated by Zarà González Hoang, Pre-grade 2

-   The Very Best Sukkah: A Story from Uganda by Shoshana Nambi, illustrated by Moran Yogev, K-grade 1

-   Joyful Song: A Naming Story by Leslea Newman, illustrated by Susan Gal, K-grade 3

-   Sharing Shalom by Danielle Sharkan, illustrated by Selina Alko, Pre-grade 2

-   Joseph Had a Little Overcoat by Simms Taback, K-grade 3

-   The Rabbi and His Donkey by Susan Tarcov, illustrated by Diana Renjina, Pre-grade 2

-   Rivka’s Presents by Laurie Wallmark, illustrated by Alelina Lirius, Pre-grade 2

-   Shoshi’s Shabbat by Caryn Yacowitz, illustrated by Kevin Hawkes, K-grade 3

 

“L’Chaim! Celebrating Jewish Lives, Families, and Holidays” by Amy Lilien-Harper in School Library Journal, April 2025 (Vol. 71, #4, pp. 36-38)

 

Back to page one

 

11. Short Item:

Covid’s Impact in Graphs – From The New York Times, these 30 graphs show the impact of the 2020-22 pandemic on employment, mothers working, spending on food, home haircutting, adults reporting a learning disability, deaths, flu tests, public transportation use, reading scores, socializing, online shopping, dog adopting, TV watching, carbon dioxide emissions, income, and more. 

 

“30 Charts That Show How Covid Changed Everything” by Aatish Bhatia and Irineo Cabreros in The New York Times, March 16, 2025

 

Back to page one

 

            

 

 

 

© Copyright 2025 Marshall Memo LLC, all rights reserved; permission is granted to clip and share individual article summaries with colleagues for educational purposes, being sure to include the author/publication citation and mention that it’s a Marshall Memo summary.

 

If you have feedback or suggestions, please e-mail [email protected]

 

 

 

 

About the Marshall Memo