The conference brings international school leaders together to explore the future of education through dialogue, community-based design, and shared values. It aims to equip participants with practical tools and student-informed insights to drive sustainable, student-centred change in their schools.
As a student who attended the presentation and sat at a table with many incredible principals to share the student perspective, I walked in at 8:30 a.m. with immense hope and left with a mix of understanding, knowledge, and — most importantly — confusion.
I gained a deeper understanding of the pressures principals face as they balance expectations from students, parents, teachers, and board members. Many hopeful ideas were discussed — such as personalizing courses, designing homework that cannot be completed by ChatGPT, and redefining what it means for students to truly flourish in education — creating an atmosphere of optimism throughout the morning. However, while the concepts were inspiring, little attention was given to practical solutions or concrete steps schools could take to turn these ideas into reality.
“We must stop mourning the past and direct all our energy toward creating meaningful change for the future.”
While many concepts were introduced, three sections of the presentation stood out as the most engaging — and revealed both the potential and the gaps in the conference’s approach.
ONE
Regarding AI, the speaker suggested that schools should redesign assignments to be more in-depth — work that cannot simply be completed by artificial intelligence — and focus on the uniquely human skills that AI cannot replace. This is an extremely valid point; however, schools often ignore the reality that AI is not going to disappear from students’ lives anytime soon. Avoiding AI is neither realistic nor effective, especially when it is already becoming deeply integrated into the workforce. Instead, schools should focus on teaching logical thinking, helping students distinguish opinions from facts, and understanding that AI-generated information is shaped by selection processes influenced by underlying values and biases. It is equally important for schools to teach students how to use AI as a learning tool rather than relying on it in ways that weaken their ability to think independently.
TWO
There was extensive discussion around the definition of “flourishing” and how schools currently support student growth, along with the idea of eliminating grades to make education more personalized. While the logic behind this approach is intuitive, I found it unrealistic — especially coming from principals of private schools who have access to far more resources than most institutions. At the high school level, grades remain the primary way universities assess students’ academic ability, and unless that system changes, removing marks only puts students at a disadvantage by replacing clear academic measures with activity lists that are far more subjective. Furthermore, although grades have not eliminated inequality in education, they have helped create a more standardized system that gives public school students a fairer opportunity in university admissions.
THREE
Another idea that deeply stood out to me was the concept of “the bubble” — the notion that schools have increasingly become spaces that shield students from the realities and harms of the outside world. In many ways, school now acts as a protective environment that filters conflict, struggle, and real-world complexity in order to preserve students’ well-being. During the conference, there was ongoing debate about whether this level of protection is still necessary or even helpful. While the bubble offers safety, it also raises an important question: if students are constantly sheltered, are they truly being prepared for the world beyond school? This idea challenges readers to consider whether education should primarily protect students from reality, or gradually equip them to face it with resilience, awareness, and critical thinking.