I help EdTech startups and mission-driven education companies scale smartly - from messy beginnings to meaningful impact.

With over a decade of experience spanning classroom instruction, curriculum design, product strategy, and organizational operations, I now work with pre-seed, Series A, and growing educational organizations to build better learning experiences, stronger systems, and more strategic teams.

I specialize in:

- Curriculum and product development (especially experiential, SEL, STEM, and AI-integrated learning)
- Operational infrastructure and go-to-market strategy
- Policy-informed AI professional development for educators
- Branding, messaging, and community-building
- Cross-functional team leadership with a human-first approach

Whether I’m serving as a fractional COO, leading market research, developing a data dashboard, or building a gamified student learning journey - I’m a connector, a problem-solver, and a builder.

If you’re a founder or education leader looking to move faster without sacrificing quality, let’s connect.

Claire Smizer

Happy #SocialSaturday!

If you are an #Educator, #Principal, #DistrictAdministrator, someone in the #Curriculum, #School or #Classroom IT space, or anyone that works with or has ever worked with #Schools, #Districts, or organization that serves kids - we should be connected! 💯

In a nutshell: I'm a former #Teacher, turned #EdTech generalist that specializes in early stage #StartUps and #UserExperience (think #ProductDesign, #UI, #InstructionalDesign, #L&D) - I've been fortunate to have a wonky career path that has given me the opportunity to work across neurotech (that bordered on sci-fi!), #STEM, gamified #SEL, and even with a handful of founders working on much-needed products in the #Education space. 

What do I do now? I run BrightMinds AI with my best friend and co-founder, Jessica Maddry. 🥰🥰🥰

We're two former #Teachers who got tired of watching districts adopt #AI and innovative tech backwards - tools first, strategy maybe. BrightMinds flips that. We build policies, train educators, and audit tech stacks so districts make informed decisions, putting people first, always. 

Think that sounds like someone you'd like to have in your network? Smash that connect button! 

Can't wait to see you in my DMs!

💜 me!

Co-Founder @ BrightMinds AI | Board Member | EdTech Start-up Builder and Strategist 🌀| Teacher Advocate | Oxford Comma Enthusiast

Let's talk math for a moment. #Politician math. 😒

The proposed FY2026 federal budget cuts over $6 billion from #K-12 #PublicEducation. 

Not one program. 
Not one state. 
Across the board.

$6B is a large number - a really large number. So large that it's almost incomprehensible so... what does that look like in reality?

💸 Migrant Education: $1.3 billion. Poof.
💸 English Language Acquisition: Eliminated entirely.
💸 Title I funding to high-poverty schools: $4.7 billion. Gone.
💸 18 grant programs consolidated from $6.5 billion down to $2 billion - over a 60% reduction.
💸 Community Schools grants: $168 million. Cut.

But we won't be feeling that loss evenly. #Districts primarily serving #Students of color would lose nearly double the funding that their counterparts serving primarily white students will face.

Want an example? 

In #Pennsylvania, the districts most underfunded are also those where students of color make up the majority of enrollment - 64%, compared to 22–30% in adequately funded districts. That gap equals $1,732 less per student, nearly 9% less, in state and local revenue. Federal dollars can help (or rather would have helped) to bridge that disparity.

This isn’t a budget conversation. It’s a values conversation. It's an #Equity conversation.

When #Legislators use language like “local control”, they aren't talking about community empowerment. They're obfiscating the truth. They're asking (telling, really) local communities to make do. 

With less. 

For the kids who already had the least.

I’m not sharing this to spark outrage (though we should all feel outraged). 

I share this to bring attention to the tension local decision makers - #Superintendents, #CFOs, #SchoolBoard members - are grappling with. 

Too many conversations about “innovation” in #Education gloss right over the part where the floor is being pulled out. Purposefully. Systematically.

You can’t build on a foundation that's actively being dismantled.

💜 someone who thinks *actual* math should inform policy

#Teachers! Help!!! 

I'm trying to get a general temperature check on where we are with Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) in classrooms. 

Are you able to set your own?
Is that something that feels necessary in this moment?
Is that something you'd expect for your district or even school leaders to set and roll out? 

You know Jessica & me - we're always looking to close gaps and create useful tools! 

❤️  someone very excited to be building tools that #Educators actually want

#Education #K12 #TeachersofLinkedin #AIinEducation #InnovativeTech #AcceptableUse #ItTakesAVillage

Do you have an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for AI-enabled/enhanced tech in your classroom?

Educator ➡️ Freelancer | Content with EI | Learning AI

I didn’t come to chase trends, I came to build what education needs.

I’m Jessica Maddry, co-founder of BrightMinds AI, architect of the PURPOSE framework for ethical AI in schools, and author of Beyond the Machine: Teaching with PURPOSE in the Age of AI.

With over two decades in education — from classrooms to leadership in the UAE to building district-level strategy in the U.S. — I’ve seen firsthand how disconnected tools, top-down mandates, and compliance-driven systems erode the joy of learning and the power of teaching.

That’s why I help school systems and edtech leaders cut through the noise. Through research-backed consulting and hands-on frameworks, I support:

*School districts building safe, ethical, and sustainable AI integration plans
*Leadership teams evaluating tool adoption through strategic, student-centered lenses
*Edtech organizations aligning products to actual classroom needs and policy guardrails

My work is rooted in the belief that purpose must lead — in pedagogy, technology, and policy.
If you're seeking guidance that centers equity, intention, and impact — not just innovation — I’d be honored to support your next move.

Jessica Maddry, M.EdLT

Hey there and happy #SocialSaturday!

Transitioned teacher and lifelong educator here. After 15 years in schools around the globe, I made a change. But somehow, #education just has a way of sticking with you.

A few years ago, I met my cofounder and now best friend, Claire, right here on LinkedIn . As two #TransitionedTeachers, we started building something special… a business rooted in emerging educational research, lived classroom experience, and a deep respect for the people inside our schools. Along the way, I also found myself back in the academic world, pursuing my PhD, because asking better questions (and grounding the work in research) still matters to me.

Together, we designed BrightMinds AI to help schools and districts slow down, make sense of current and emerging technology, and make decisions that center people, equity, and ethics, not just the latest tools. In the process, we’ve built a genuinely thoughtful network of #Educators, #Researchers, #Leaders, and #Founders who care deeply about doing this work well.

If you’re an #Educator, #Principal, #DistrictAdministrator, work in #Curriculum, #School, or #IT, or support #Schools and the people inside and this sounds like a network that fits, lets connect! 💛

Co-Founder @ BrightMinds AI | Building Safe & Purposeful AI Integration in K–12 | Strategic Advisor to Schools & Districts | Ethical EdTech Strategist | PURPOSE Framework Architect

No alternative text description for this image

Confession: I was playing around in Midjourney this morning using the likeness feature to introduce myself and my cofounder… and apparently we’re just one human now 😂

However, I think I’ve nailed a new tagline:
One character, two cofounders– Jessica & Claire, building education services together at BrightMinds AI 

Anywho, for those of you who already know us, you’ll probably spot both of us in this image. For those who don’t, just know this image accurately represents the two of us brilliantly combined into a single human.

The learning curve is real… 👀
Check the comments for some of the worst results, and feel free to drop your own AI likeness experiments or tips and tricks.

P.S. Prompt better. Challenge accepted! 

Happy #SocialSaturday!

#Cofounders #EducationServices  #Midjourney #AIForFun #LearningInPublic

𝘠𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘺, 𝘐 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘥:
“𝐅𝐖: 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐫 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.”

I opened it and started reading...

“Please see the forwarded email.
______ has been assigned a lunch detention.
If you have any questions, please contact the teacher.”

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯?
"𝐎𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞."

As an educator and a mother, this stopped me in my tracks.

Not because I don’t understand the need to know where students are.
I do.

But because at some point, we handed judgment to a device
while keeping responsibility with the human.

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐄𝐫𝐚 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐧𝐮𝐭𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐥.

We’ve layered systems that track, time-stamp, and flag behavior
without removing a single expectation placed on educators.

Behavior.
Attendance.
Communication.
Academic progress.

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐚𝐝𝐝:
Minute-by-minute monitoring of a basic human need.

𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐬.

When technologies are added without redesigning roles, time, and decision authority, they increase cognitive load rather than reduce it (Cuban, 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003). Accountability doesn’t disappear; it concentrates, often on the classroom teacher, who remains legally and ethically responsible for student well-being (Means et al., 2001).

Nothing was taken off the plate.
Everything was added.

And when something goes wrong,
the accountability still lands on the adult in the room.

This is why “one more thing” isn’t resistance.
It’s capacity.

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐀𝐈 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞.

If we scale automation without redesigning
we won’t reduce overload
we’ll automate it.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬.

It’s whether we’re willing to return judgment to people
and design systems that actually support the work they’re still responsible for.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐄𝐫𝐚.

And it’s the moment we decide whether AI deepens it
or finally forces us to change it.

#BrightMindsAI #TeacherFirstTech #EducationLeadership #TechWithPurpose #BeyondTheTool #HumanCenteredAI #EducationJustice #EdTechReality

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI. We help schools move beyond layered compliance and into systems that support the people inside them.

𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠. 
𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧’𝐭.

During the same period that classroom technology expanded rapidly, learning outcomes remained largely unchanged, not because technology was ineffective, but because adoption consistently outpaced instructional redesign and educator support (Dubé & Wen, 2021; Reynolds et al., 2022).

I started teaching with an overhead projector.
Then came Promethean boards.
Then computer labs.
Then came laptops.
Then 1-to-1 devices.
Then platforms stacked on platforms.

None of it felt wild at the time.
It felt incremental. Practical. Necessary.

Looking back, what stands out isn’t any single technology.
It’s how little time we were given to stop, reflect, and reset.

The change wasn’t explosive.
It was a slow burn.

As AI moves from pilots to everyday infrastructure, 
that history keeps resurfacing for me.

Not as resistance.
As a reminder.

So this week, I want to do something different.

I want to unravel decades of education research and past technology shifts, not to predict the future with certainty, but to make better, more grounded decisions about what we do now.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭𝐬 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐩?

#BrightMindsAI #ReimagineEducation #TechWithPurpose #TeacherFirstTech #EducationLeadership #ImplementationOverAdoption #HumanCenteredAI #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI, where we translate tech talk into classroom impact.

While much of the country is frozen right now… 
something meaningful has been quietly coming together.

And I’m excited to share that 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐁𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬, a collaborative book, is coming soon and is now open for preorder.

This volume brings together educators, researchers, and builders to explore the next phases of AI in education – from external use to integration, to AI-native learning, and ultimately to a future where AI becomes an assumed condition of learning itself.

Some of my most fulfilling projects started with relationships built right here on LinkedIn. What an honor and privilege to collaborate alongside such incredible humans:
Patrick Dempsey, Tawnya Means, Adam Pryor, Anastasia Goudy M.Ed., Arafeh Karimi, Craig Seal, Haley Miguel, Jason Gulya, Krystal Rawls, Ph.D., Rachel Horst, Susan Ray, PhD, Tim Dasey

If this resonates, feel free to share in your circles and grab early access here👇
https://lnkd.in/gPXbqtrw

𝐖𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐝𝐨𝐩𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲. 
𝐖𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥.

That’s what we carried forward from the Access Era (1995–2005).
The problem was clearly defined: access.

So we solved for infrastructure.
What it didn’t solve for was learning.

And so we entered The Availability Era (2005–2015)
aka: “Anytime, Everywhere Learning”

Core belief:
If technology is always available, learning will naturally happen 
more often and more deeply.

What defined it:
• Adaptive software and digital curriculum layered onto existing pacing guides
• Homework, grades, and communication moved into portals
• “Anytime learning” quietly extended the school day for everyone

What shifted:
Access stopped being the goal and became the baseline expectation.

Even then, the research was clear:
technology improved outcomes only when instruction changed with it
(Cuban, 2001; Means et al., 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003).

Here’s what the research told us and what we skipped:

1️⃣  𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐝.
Tools were added without changing how learning worked.
2️⃣ 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞.
Not demos. Not one-off PD. Real time to adapt practice.
3️⃣ 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞.
But scope, pacing, and expectations largely stayed the same.
4️⃣ 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐨.
Instead, we measured learning the same way as before.
5️⃣ 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐬.
Nothing was removed. Everything was added.

So when learning didn’t transform, education concluded:
“We need better tools. More use. More access.”

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐫𝐚.
Access became expectation.
Infrastructure became availability.
Availability became anytime, everywhere learning.

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐰𝐞’𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐧𝐨𝐰.
AI will expand access to feedback, content generation, 
and customization faster than anything before it.

If we don’t redesign the conditions this time...
we already know how this ends.

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI.
We help schools move beyond adoption and into real transformation.

#BrightMindsAI #ReimagineEducation #TechWithPurpose #TeacherFirstTech #ImplementationOverAdoption #HumanCenteredAI #EducationLeadership #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice #AIEthics #EdTechEquity

𝐖𝐞 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐮𝐧𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭.

Before AI, there were other promises.

𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓):
We wired schools. Devices appeared. Content expanded.

𝐀𝐯𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟓):
Access became expectation. LMSs went default. 

𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟎+):
Nothing was removed. Everything was added.

Now we’re here:
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟑–𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭)

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲:
AI will personalize learning.
AI will reduce workload.
AI will fix inefficiencies.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲:
AI is scaling faster than our systems can adapt.

‼️ Policies are forming mid-rollout.
‼️ PD is starting after implementation.
‼️ Expectations are rising without workload relief.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐰𝐞 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐨 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲

1️⃣ 𝐑𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬
Adding technology without changing pedagogy produces substitution, not improvement (Cuban, 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003).

→ Action: define where AI meaningfully supports higher-order thinking before adoption.

2️⃣ 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐥𝐮𝐱𝐮𝐫𝐲
Instructional change unfolds over years, not rollouts or PD days (Means et al., 2001; Fullan, 2016).

→ Action: schedule protected experimentation time and reduce parallel initiatives.

3️⃣ 𝐑𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲
Cognitive overload undermines both teacher effectiveness and student learning
(Sweller et al., 2019; Dubé & Wen, 2021).

→ Action: pair every tool with a clear removal of tasks or expectations.

4️⃣ 𝐀𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠
Measuring new practices with old metrics suppresses innovation (Pellegrino et al., 2012).

→ Action: design assessments that measure reasoning, synthesis, and judgment.

5️⃣ 𝐓𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤
Top-down rollouts fail without educator agency and trust
(Bryk et al., 2015).

→ Action: position educators as co-designers, not end-users.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐰. 
𝐀𝐈 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧. 
𝐈𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬.

If we scale without redesign, AI will accelerate overload and inequity.
If we redesign conditions first, emerging technologies can finally support learning instead of distorting it.

𝐒𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐬𝐨 𝐟𝐚𝐫. 
𝐃𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞.

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI.
We help schools redesign conditions so technology improves learning.

#BrightMindsAI #TechWithPurpose #ImplementationOverAdoption #TeacherFirstTech #HumanCenteredAI #EducationLeadership #EdTechEquity #AIEthics #BeyondTheTool

𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲
Design After Exposure

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐬...
Recent research indicates that the rapid expansion of generative AI in education has illuminated existing gaps in pedagogical alignment, ethical governance, and institutional readiness, rather than functioning as an inherently disruptive force in itself (Garzón et al., 2025).

𝐒𝐨 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.
What becomes possible when clearer conditions are visible and better information is available?

𝐋𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞-𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐈 𝐢𝐧 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠:
learning outcomes are shaped less by the technology itself and more by the conditions under which it is implemented, including alignment and system readiness.

𝐒𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐮𝐭, 𝐀𝐈 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬. 
𝐒𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬 𝐝𝐨.

Research reveals:
1️⃣ AI supports learning in systems with strong governance and alignment.
2️⃣ In their absence, AI surfaces existing gaps.

This is where 2026 continues.
Once a system shows you how it’s functioning, you have a choice.

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI. We translate complexity into clarity so schools can lead technology with purpose.

#BrightMindsAI #DesignAfterExposure #FromRevelationToResponsibility
#SystemsLeadership #ImplementationMatters #EthicalAI #TeacherFirstTech #ReimagineEducation #BeyondTheTool

𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦. 
𝐀𝐈 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐮𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐢𝐱 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭... 𝐢𝐟 𝐰𝐞’𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤.

We named the problem in the first era of edtech: Internet access.

From 1995–2005, the dominant belief was simple:
If students could get online, learning would modernize.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐫𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫:
technology alone does not improve learning (Cuban, 2001; Means et al., 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003).

What we missed wasn’t the technology.
It was the system work required to make technology matter, especially for students and schools with the fewest resources.

𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐯𝐨𝐢𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞.

𝟏. 𝐖𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐧.
Access is a prerequisite.
Learning is the outcome.

AI access will become increasingly widespread.
That cannot be the success metric.

The metric has to be:
→ what changed in instruction
→ what changed in teacher workload
→ what changed in student thinking

𝟐. 𝐖𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬.
That means:
• protected time for practice and sense-making
• fewer simultaneous initiatives
• clear “not yet” decisions
• slower, modeled rollouts tied to real classrooms

𝟑. 𝐖𝐞 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐡𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧.
Judgment.
Relationships.
Pedagogical decisions.

AI should reduce cognitive overload, not replace professional expertise.

𝟒. 𝐖𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤.
The research has been clear for decades:
learning changes when teaching changes.
That means investing in educators as designers, not end-users.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲.

AI is the first technology shift that forces us to confront these questions 
not because it’s more powerful,
but because scaling it without redesign 
will break what’s already fragile.

We already know what doesn’t work.
This time, the choice is whether we’re willing to build differently.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥?

#BrightMindsAI #TechWithPurpose #ReimagineEducation #TeacherFirstTech #ImplementationOverAdoption #HumanCenteredAI #EducationLeadership #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice #AIEthics #EdTechEquity

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI. We help schools move beyond tool adoption and into real transformation

𝐖𝐞 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐮𝐧𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝. 
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐮𝐭.

Over the last few posts, we traced two major eras of education technology:

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓)
We solved for infrastructure.
Schools were wired. Devices appeared. Content expanded.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐯𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟓)
Access became expectation.
Learning management systems became default.
Homework, grades, and communication moved into portals.

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐬:
We didn’t redesign instruction.
We didn’t redesign time.
We didn’t redesign assessment.
We didn’t remove anything.

𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰. 
𝐈𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭.

That assumption carried us into the next phase.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐄𝐫𝐚 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟎+)
When learning was expected everywhere, all the time,
and teachers became the shock absorbers for the system.

That’s where we go next.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐤, 𝐈’𝐦 𝐮𝐧𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠
1️⃣ what that era demanded,
2️⃣ who absorbed the cost,
3️⃣ why AI makes this moment different.

Same story so far.
Different ending still possible.

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI.
We help schools move beyond adoption and into real transformation.

#BrightMindsAI #ReimagineEducation #TechWithPurpose #TeacherFirstTech #ImplementationOverAdoption #HumanCenteredAI #EducationLeadership #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice #EdTechEquity

Ruminating in isolation… a task educators are asked to endure far too often. We sit with a problem, imagine solutions alone, and usually touch only a sliver of what’s possible.

The experience of contributing to 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘌𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 is the opposite. It begins with possibility, and takes readers on a journey that ends where AI becomes ambient. Not a tool to integrate, but a condition of cognition.

Just finished reading Chapter 3, Ambient Learning Models: The Civic Institute as Post-AI Pedagogy, and WOW!

Krystal Rawls, Ph.D., and Haley Miguel invite readers to experience possibility. Peering into a futuristic city called 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘦, the chapter unfolds through the daily responsibilities of Jordan and Alina, two fictional characters. Their everyday experiences pull the imagination to the edge of what feels possible, while remaining grounded in what is already within reach.

Within The Institute, the boundaries between the classroom, civic life, and professional growth blur, inviting readers to reconsider learning not as preparation for the world, but as a means of participation within it. The chapter leaves you with a lingering sense that the future of education may be closer and more human than we think.

Every chapter presents a fresh perspective on what education could become. Don’t miss the opportunity to grab your copy: https://lnkd.in/gPXbqtrw

#WhatEducationBecomes #FutureOfEducation #PostAIPedagogy
#AmbientLearning #HumanCenteredLearning #CivicLearning

𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐍𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐅𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐬 𝐃𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭
And U.S. school leaders are feeling it.

For many leaders, this year already feels heavy.
Maybe even like a wash.

Not because effort was missing.
But because the ground kept shifting while the work continued.

Federal direction is fragmenting.
States are carrying more responsibility, faster, with fewer guardrails.
Accountability, funding, AI, workforce alignment, and choice are all moving.

This isn’t a pause.
It’s a redistribution of responsibility.

Before talking about innovation for next year,
there’s something more important to do.

𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞.

If I Were Leading a School in the U.S., Here’s What I’d Do
Before this school year ends:

𝟏. 𝐑𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐭𝐲
Not by adding oversight... by simplifying tech, tools, and contracts.
Most systems are still living with decisions made under pressure.

𝟐. 𝐑𝐞-𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲
Unclear commitments compound.
And schools are still paying for decisions they can’t easily undo.

𝟑. 𝐏𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡-𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐤 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬
Some choices do not belong to summer urgency.
The hardest ones to reverse are the rushed ones.

𝟒. 𝐍𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐧-𝐧𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐬
Human judgment.
Student data boundaries.
What stays intentionally human.

𝟓. 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐚 “𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲” 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧
Not a five-year vision.
A one-year commitment to what will not change so learning stays the priority.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐀𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝
The strongest leaders in 2026 won’t be the fastest adopters.

They’ll be the ones who:
→ Reduced decision fatigue
→ Simplified systems
→ Protected human judgment
→ Recognized the capacity this work actually requires

Many systems assumed they could do this alone.
They’re still trying to unwind the consequences.

For leaders who don’t want to navigate this moment in isolation, this is the kind of stabilizing decision work we support at BrightMinds AI.

#EducationalLeadership #ReimagineEducation #StrategyOverShortcuts
#TechWithPurpose #SchoolLeadership #DecisionMaking
#SystemsThinking #BrightMindsAI

𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥 𝐒𝐚𝐟𝐞𝐭𝐲 𝐯𝐬. 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫

It sounds like protection.
It looks like responsibility.
But it often functions as compliance.

𝟏: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐏𝐚𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐥
A student receives a detention after an ePass records
four minutes over the allotted bathroom time.

The issue wasn’t student safety.
More monitoring didn’t make anyone safer.
It just made noncompliance easier to record.

𝟐: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐏𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐮𝐩
A grandfather takes the wrong child home from daycare.

The issue wasn’t a lack of tracking.
More monitoring didn’t prevent the mistake.
Fewer human checks made it possible.

𝟑: 𝐏𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐧𝐬
A student is disciplined after defending herself
when AI-generated “nudified” images circulate at school
in a state where phones are already banned.

The issue wasn’t device access.
Phone bans didn’t prevent harm.
They removed communication and trust when it mattered most.

𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧:
When something goes wrong,
technology documents it,
systems enforce it.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐚𝐟𝐞𝐭𝐲. 
𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲.

It’s about recognizing when safety language
is used to justify surveillance and compliance
without actually reducing risk.

𝐒𝐨, 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥 𝐬𝐚𝐟𝐞𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫? 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞.

#BrightMindsAI #TeacherFirstTech #SchoolSafety #EducationLeadership
#HumanCenteredAI #EdTechReality #BeyondTheTool

About 14% of U.S. students are identified as having a disability.

That’s roughly 1 in 7 learners.

Research on Universal School Choice — Deep Dive #3

As school choice expands, this raises a core question:

What do we actually know about how these students are served?

In short:
1️⃣ Public schools serve ~14% of students with disabilities
2️⃣ Charter schools serve ~11–12% nationally
3️⃣ Private schools report ~5–6% disability identification
4️⃣ Legal protections and service requirements vary by setting

What we don’t know
⛔️ No comprehensive national data on outcomes in private choice programs
⛔️ Disability services and results are inconsistently reported
⛔️ Long-term impacts 

What research suggests
📉 Choice systems enroll lower proportions of students with disabilities
📉 Access to supports is uneven and context-dependent
📉 Evidence is strongest where accountability exists

Bottom line:
Choice expanded faster than the evidence.

This isn’t anti-choice.
It’s anti calling something “choice” when access and evidence are incomplete.

This is why BrightMinds AI partners with schools to strengthen systems, so support doesn’t depend on who can navigate uncertainty. 

#EducationResearch #SchoolChoice #SpecialEducation #Neurodiversity #EducationPolicy #PublicEducation

𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲
When Responsibility Outpaced Authority

Yesterday ended with a simple truth:
once a system shows you how it’s functioning, you have a choice.

𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬.
Who is being asked to carry that responsibility without the authority to shape decisions?

𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐧 𝐀𝐈 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧:
educators are expected to manage ethical risks, instructional alignment, and student impact, even when they are not included in policy decisions, tool selection, or implementation planning (Garzón et al., 2025).

This is not a failure of educators.
It’s a systemic failure.

𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲:
1️⃣ educators become risk absorbers
2️⃣ innovation becomes personal liability
3️⃣ ethical decision-making is pushed downward instead of shared

Research shows that successful AI integration depends less on individual competence and more on clear governance, shared decision-making, and institutional support structures. When those are missing, even well-intentioned innovation becomes unsustainable.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭.
Not more resilience.
Not more training layered on top of uncertainty.
But systems that align authority, responsibility, and purpose from the start.

𝐈𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞...
educators being invited to the table early, policies receiving feedback before implementation, and expectations being shaped with the people responsible for carrying them out.

𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝, 
𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥.

P.S. Still playing with animations...

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI. We translate complexity into clarity so schools can lead technology with purpose.

#BrightMindsAI #FromRevelationToResponsibility #DesignAfterExposure
#SystemsLeadership #ImplementationMatters #EducationPolicy
#TeacherFirstTech #EthicalAI #ReimagineEducation

Yesterday’s post wasn’t about a bathroom pass….

It was about what we’ve replaced.

At some point, we stopped having conversations and started generating notifications.

A bathroom break became a data point.
A judgment call became a timestamp.
A relationship became a referral.

And when something goes wrong,
the accountability still lands on an adult in the building. 

This isn’t a technology problem.
It’s a systemic problem.

Research warned us about layering technology onto schools. Without redesigning roles, time, and decision authority, cognitive load increases  (Cuban, 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003).

Here’s the part we keep missing:

Most of what schools are adding to automate used to be handled through trust, context, and connection.

AI won’t fix this by watching more closely.

It helps only if it gives educators back the space to:
notice, ask, listen, and respond.

The real opportunity is rebuilding systems that trust people enough
that fewer things need to be monitored at all.

#BrightMindsAI #TeacherFirstTech #HumanCenteredAI #TechWithPurpose #EducationLeadership #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice

After billions of dollars spent on educational research, we have answers...
which have been met with celebration over scrutiny.

While AI continues to dominate conversations, another force is reshaping the U.S. education system:

Universal School Choice

But here is the part that the language obscures:
Choice implies agency.
Agency requires access.
And access isn't universal. 

Time.
Flexibility.
Information.
Transportation.

After years of funding, pilots, and extensive study, the evidence does not show broad academic gains or improved equity.

What it does show:
Selection effects.
Rising private school costs. 
Weakened public accountability.

Education doesn't unravel all at once. 
It frays. It fragments. 
It splits into systems that appear equal, but aren't.

Over the next several posts, I'll break down the research. 
No fluff, just the facts.

This moment matters more than it appears.
If access becomes optional, equity becomes conditional.

If a once public good becomes a private choice,
that is not an accident.

#SchoolChoice #EducationPolicy #EducationResearch #EducationEquity #AccessMatters #PublicEducation #EvidenceBasedPolicy #SystemsThinking #Accountability

Hi, I'm Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI, where we translate policy, research, and tech talk into real transformation.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥?

A walk with a neighborhood friend.
A bus ride full of familiar faces. 
A quick drop-off before work.

𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧’𝐭 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 
𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲’𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲.

That’s why conversations about school choice deserve more than slogans.
They deserve scrutiny.

𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥 𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐞
𝐃𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐃𝐢𝐯𝐞 #𝟏: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 “𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐞” 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐬

If school choice worked the way it’s often framed, competition would push schools to improve teaching and learning.

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬.

A large systematic review of more than 80 peer-reviewed studies (Greaves et al., 2023) examined how schools behave in choice-based systems across multiple countries.

𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰𝐬:
1️⃣ As choice expands, school marketing increases
2️⃣ Branding, image management, and selective messaging become common
3️⃣ Schools compete for students, not necessarily for better outcomes
4️⃣ Instructional improvement is not the dominant response to competition

When funding follows enrollment, visibility matters.
This isn’t about bad intentions.
It’s about system incentives.

𝐅𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞, 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲  
𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐧𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬.

Families aren't wrong to choose.
Choice itself isn’t inherently bad.
The problem is structural...

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 “𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐞” 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐤𝐲.

Tomorrow’s deep dive looks at the next question the research raises:
Do competitive systems actually improve academic outcomes at scale?

#SchoolChoice #EducationResearch #EducationPolicy #EducationEquity #AccessMatters #EvidenceBasedPolicy #SystemsThinking #PublicEducation #EducationalLeadership

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI, where we translate policy, research, and tech talk into classroom impact.

𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲
When Use Accelerates Faster Than Understanding

𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐮𝐝𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦𝐬.
𝐈𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝.

Program by program.
Platform by platform.
Expectation by expectation.

𝗧𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆, 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝗮 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻.
Yet there is no shared benchmark for what effective instructional screen time looks like (Digital Learning Collaborative, 2025).

𝗔𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲, 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴.
National and international assessments show downward trends, even as digital learning tools have expanded (NAEP, 2023; OECD, 2023).

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧. 
𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐀𝐈.

UNICEF is clear: despite rapid adoption, there is insufficient evidence on the long-term cognitive and educational impacts of AI on children (UNICEF Innocenti, 2025).

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬. 
𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐈 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐞𝐧𝐯𝐢𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

We are layering it onto learning systems that are already screen-dense, already time-constrained, and often lacking long-term measurement plans.

𝐒𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐞. 
𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐞𝐬.

It’s building better-designed systems.
Systems where tools serve clear learning purposes.
Where time, attention, and outcomes are designed together.
That’s the leadership shift this moment requires.

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI. We translate complexity into clarity so schools can lead technology with purpose.

Yesterday, Patrick Dempsey asked a question I can’t shake:
“𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞?”

So I went back to the first major wave.

𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟓–𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓. 
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬.

The dominant problem of the time was access.

𝐈𝐟 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞, 𝐰𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐝:
1️⃣ learning would modernize
2️⃣ equity gaps would shrink
3️⃣ instruction would naturally evolve

And to be fair, the infrastructure work mattered.
Schools were wired. Computer labs appeared. 
Student-to-computer ratios dropped rapidly.

But what’s striking, revisiting the research from that era, is this:
𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧, 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠.

Research throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s consistently found that technology supported learning only when paired with instructional redesign, sustained teacher support, and time for pedagogical change (Cuban, 2001; Means et al., 2001; Zhao & Frank, 2003).

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫:
✔️ Teachers need time, modeling, and stability to integrate new tools meaningfully (Means et al., 2001)
✔️ Most classroom technology use reinforced existing routines rather than transforming practice (Zhao & Frank, 2003)
✔️ Instructional change unfolds over years, not semesters (Cuban, 2001)

At the same time, educator compensation and working conditions did not rise in proportion to expectations. Teachers were asked to integrate new technologies, redesign lessons, and troubleshoot systems... often without added time, compensation, or structural support (Lankford et al., 2002).

𝐒𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐭𝐥𝐞.
‼️ Technology opened doors.
‼️ Education determined what students could actually walk through.

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐲𝐞𝐭… 𝐰𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞.

Instead of stabilizing and investing in instructional capacity, 
the system moved on to the next promise.

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐰 𝐠𝐨𝐞𝐬.

🎙️ When you think back to early edtech, what do you think we should have slowed down to learn before scaling further?

#BrightMindsAI #ReimagineEducation #TechWithPurpose #TeacherFirstTech #ImplementationOverAdoption #EducationLeadership #HumanCenteredAI #BeyondTheTool #EducationJustice

Hi, I’m Jessica, cofounder of BrightMinds AI, where we translate tech talk into classroom impact.

taplio

The Battle

Claire Smizer

Jessica Maddry, M.EdLT

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreClaire Smizer's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreJessica Maddry, M.EdLT's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Claire Smizer

Jessica Maddry, M.EdLT

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Claire Smizer's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreJessica Maddry, M.EdLT's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreClaire Smizer's LinkedIn Performance