Education and Child Development

“Systematic bullying and undermining of girls and women in STEM starts early on and is the reason why they do not stay in science and related fields.”  – proposition nr. 6 that accompanied my PhD thesis.   Whenever I shared with my male colleagues that I did not always feel welcome or safe in the predominantly male field that I worked in, I was always met with disbelief. “I don’t feel like that’s true” I would hear from the man sitting in front of me when I shared the numbers, the proven trends and the systemic biases that I got from the literature. Then, when I chose to share my personal and painful anecdotes of things that had happened to me, I got told that that was bad but also that it is “not all men” and maybe they didn’t mean it like that. More out of frustration than anything else, I chose to add an extra section to my thesis next to the acknowledgements, a section for my “anti acknowledgements”.  My goal here was not to blame individual people. I just wanted to prove the point of my 6th proposition: I had been told explicitly and implicitly that I shouldn’t be a scientist often enough that it had eaten away at my confidence and joy. When I said I didn't feel welcome, this is what I meant. I am sad to say that if I were to leave science, this would be my biggest reason for that. And I know for a fact that I am not alone. If we want to create a welcoming scientific environment for every person, we have to actively champion the people who currently do not make up a representative part of the scientific community. It is not enough to just not be mean to people, because the truth is that there are plenty of people who will. If we want to keep women and girls in science, we all have to actively take part in welcoming them, including them and cheering them on from the start. In a world full of Warners, be an Elle Woods.

Yesterday, I received an email from our childcare center outlining the annual tuition increase for the 2026–2027 school year. We operate on a school-year calendar, so this won’t take effect until September. There’s notice. There’s time to plan. And the increase itself—5%—is not unusual. It was 5% last year, 4% the year before. Across the country, families are seeing annual childcare increases anywhere from 3% to 20%. I want to be clear: childcare centers aren’t arbitrarily raising prices. Insurance costs rise. Payroll rises. Food, taxes, utilities, all of it rises. Care providers are underpaid as it is, and centers are trying to stay open in a broken system. There are real cost pressures on their side. The problem is that families’ incomes are not rising at the same rate. While inflation touches everything, childcare costs are outpacing most household expenses, often faster than groceries or housing. And when families are squeezed, when there’s a gap or a breaking point, that impact is rarely absorbed evenly. More often than not, women absorb it, by scaling back, stepping out, or carrying the invisible load of “making it work.” What makes this especially hard is the expectation curve. Families enter childcare knowing infancy is expensive, trusting that costs will ease as children get older. But with annual increases layered on year after year, many families find themselves paying more over time, not less, effectively earning less the longer they stay in the system. This isn’t about one tuition increase or one center. It’s about a system that places unsustainable pressure on families and caregivers alike, and quietly pushes women to absorb the fallout. We don’t have a childcare cost problem or a workforce problem. We have both. And until we treat childcare as essential infrastructure, families will keep getting squeezed from all sides. #childcare

Girls start school just as capable in math. So why does the gender gap widen within months? This chart is both fascinating and troubling. It tracks all children in France who began school in 2018. At the start, boys and girls scored similarly in mathematics. But just four months in, boys begin to pull ahead. By the start of the second year, the gap is no longer subtle—it’s systemic. The data points to a hard truth: the gender gap in math isn’t innate. It’s learned. Girls are subtly (and not so subtly) steered away from math from the earliest stages of education. The result? Fewer girls in STEM, fewer women in high-earning tech roles, and yet another pipeline problem that starts before they even learn multiplication. For those of us advising on leadership, equity, and talent strategy, this matters. Because the solution isn’t just in university quotas or boardroom targets. It starts in the classroom. The future of innovation demands that we rethink how we educate and who we empower—early. #Leadership #STEM #Education #GenderEquity #WomenInTech #FutureOfWork

“Pretend play is often considered one of the best ways for children to learn about the world and their place in it. But recent research has revealed that it’s so effective, it could help girls persist at science! Even though progress has been made, research conducted by the United Nations shows that women in STEM publish less, are paid less for research, and don’t progress as far in their careers as men. Women make up just 42 per cent of the total number of science professionals. The issue may be rooted in how girls approach STEM fields at a young age. A 2014 study in the journal Psychological Bulletin found that despite girls often earning higher grades than boys in science and math, they become less interested in science as they progress through childhood. Stereotypes also set in by the time kids reach six years old. A January 2017 study published in the journal Science found that by age six, girls begin to believe that boys are more likely to be ‘really, really smart’. Researchers also found their belief extending to their behaviours. Both boys and girls were equally likely to be interested in playing a game for children who ‘try really, really hard’, but girls were less keen than boys on playing a game that was described as being for children who are ‘really, really smart’. In a new study from the American universities Yale, Duke and the University of Chicago, published in September 2022 in the journal Psychological Science, scientists decided to examine whether pretending to be a talented female scientist could encourage young girls to persevere in science-based tasks. The results were remarkable. The study found that girls and boys tended to be equally good at the game – they guessed correctly 75 per cent of the time. However, the boys persisted longer in the game. But when girls pretended to be a real scientist, the gap became smaller. And those who role-played persisted just as well as the boys did. The study showed that it wasn’t enough for girls to learn about a female scientist to close the gap – they had to pretend to actually be one. For boys, role-playing made no difference to the results. So parents, consider swapping your daughter’s princess dress and tiara with a lab coat sometimes. Role-playing could be a simple, inexpensive way to challenge young girls’ beliefs that boys are smarter than them.” #WomenInSTEM #GirlsInSTEM #STEMGems #GiveGirlsRoleModels https://lnkd.in/gZyTKPfk

Sudha Murthy recently suggested that teachers in India should take exams every three years to ensure accountability and professional growth. We’ve been saying it for years - exams shouldn’t dominate our education system for children. And now, we want to extend it to our teachers, Wow! If we center teacher evaluation around exams, will it not reduce everything to a single number? Just like with students, we might end up encouraging teachers to focus on “beating the exam system” rather than engaging in meaningful professional development. This approach misses the mark because it fails to address the true essence of teaching. A teacher’s success isn’t just about how much theoretical knowledge they can demonstrate on paper. It’s also about how they engage with their students, how they foster inquiry, how they adapt their lessons to meet individual learning needs, and how they inspire curiosity and critical thinking. None of these essential elements can be measured by a standardized exam. Once again, exams may become the end goal, instead of being one small part of a much broader, more nuanced conversation about quality education. Moreover, there’s the issue of stress and added pressure. Teachers in India already operate under challenging conditions - large class sizes, administrative workloads, and often insufficient support. Asking them to take exams every few years might increase this burden rather than alleviate it. For many, it could become more about surviving the system than about thriving as educators. I wonder what this would mean for teachers in rural or under-resourced schools, where access to professional training and preparation might be limited. Would such teachers be penalized simply because they lack the same resources as their urban counterparts? I agree our teachers lack accountability and there are deep issues but what we propose doesn't seem like a viable solution. Instead of focusing on mandatory testing, we should be asking different, more meaningful questions: How do we create a culture where teachers feel empowered to keep learning without the fear of punitive assessments? How do we give them access to high-quality, practical professional development that actually helps them in the classroom? How do we recognize and reward teachers’ diverse contributions beyond just their subject knowledge - such as their ability to foster empathy, manage classrooms effectively, or engage with parents and communities? Teaching is one of the most challenging professions - and one of the most essential. If we truly want to improve the quality of education, we need to move beyond the exam-centric mindset that has already taken such a toll on our students. Let’s not reduce teachers to just another number. Let’s rethink what real teacher growth looks like! #education #exams #teachers #schools #learning #priyankeducator

Now live: the latest ranking of English universities based on their contribution to social mobility. University of Bradford, Aston University and the University of Wolverhampton take the top three places. Elite research-intensive universities, Imperial College London and The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) both make the top ten. The "English Social Mobility Index", which is compiled by London South Bank University (LSBU) and published by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI), shows the number of socio-economically disadvantaged graduates AND the social distance they travel for each registered higher education institution in England. Nicholas Hillman OBE, director of HEPI, said: "At a time when there is a lot of criticism of universities, it is important to be reminded of the critical work they do transforming lives. The Social Mobility Index is different to other rankings because it puts the focus wholly on students and their real-world outcomes. The diversity of institutions in this year’s top 10 suggests the Index measures something valuable that institutions of all types can do well at, if they choose to adopt a dedicated focus." Professor Aleks Subic, vice chancellor of Aston University, said: "Education has the power to transform lives, families, and communities. When students gain the skills, confidence, and opportunities to succeed, the impact extends far beyond the individual. That is why advancing social mobility sits at the very heart of Aston’s purpose." View the full tables and find out more here: https://lnkd.in/eer88mVd

Did you know that 756,384 working-age adults in Illinois currently lack a high school credential? This statistic isn't just a number—it's a call to action for us all during Advocacy April. Why? Because every individual empowered with education is a step toward a stronger, more resilient economy and a healthier, happier family life. Here’s how: 👨👩👧👦 Family Impact: Adults obtaining their high school credentials set a powerful example for their children, fostering a culture of learning and ambition. Education within the family can break the cycle of poverty and inspire the next generation. 💼 Economic Benefits: Educated workers are the backbone of our economy. They earn significantly more than those without a high school diploma, contributing to higher tax revenues and lower reliance on public assistance programs. This means more resources for community development, better services, and a stronger economy for Illinois. 🚀 Workforce Development: With a high school credential, individuals gain access to further education and training opportunities, filling skill gaps in our economy. This alignment between education and workforce needs is crucial for Illinois' competitiveness in a rapidly evolving job market. 💡 Innovation and Community Engagement: Educated individuals are more likely to engage in civic activities, volunteer, and contribute to societal innovation. Their diverse experiences and insights are invaluable to creating vibrant, inclusive communities. Let's advocate for and invest in adult basic education. It's an investment in our people, our economy, and our future. Together, we can transform this statistic into a story of success and empowerment for Illinois. #AdvocacyApril #AdultEducation #EconomicGrowth #FamilyEmpowerment #WorkforceDevelopment Coalition on Adult Basic Education Erin Vobornik

I'm sorry but what the hell is this headline?? A mother choosing the date of her C-section to make sure her family was eligible for 30 hours of funded childcare. Read that again. Not about convenience. Not about preference. About survival in a system that makes parents strategise over surgery dates just to access support. We can talk about family values all day long. But when parents are pushed into decisions like this, it’s not a story of “gaming the system.” It’s a story of a system failing families. Childcare in the UK is eye-wateringly expensive. Availability is patchy. Support is inconsistent. And families are left to make impossible choices, that no one should ever have to make in order to raise their children with stability and care. We need to stop treating childcare as a “nice to have” and recognise it for what it is: critical infrastructure. The foundation that allows parents to work, families to thrive, and children to get the best possible start in life. If parents are planning MAJOR medical procedures around policy deadlines, the problem isn’t the parents. It’s the policy. #Childcare #Equity #PeopleExperience #FamilySupport #UKPolicy #Leadership

The Inconvenient Truth About Education Elite educational institutions often present themselves as neutral pathways to opportunity, yet their underlying structures tend to reproduce existing social and economic hierarchies. The dominant meritocratic narrative suggests that access is determined by talent and effort. In reality, access is shaped long before admissions by early exposure to enriched learning environments, private tutoring, and high‑quality preparatory schools. These advantages correlate strongly with household income and parental educational attainment. As a result, admissions processes frequently reward accumulated privilege rather than isolate innate ability. Entrance examinations are widely regarded as objective assessments, but they largely measure the long‑term effects of unequal resource distribution. By the time students reach the testing stage, disparities in nutrition, literacy development, school quality, and parental availability have already influenced their academic trajectories. The exam functions as a symbolic equalizer that obscures the structural inequities embedded in the educational pipeline. Policymakers often rely on this symbolism to justify existing systems, despite consistent evidence that opportunity gaps emerge years before formal schooling begins. For individuals who succeed within this architecture, achievement reflects both genuine effort and the presence of enabling conditions that many students never experience. These conditions include stable households, functional schools, psychological safety, and access to mentors who can translate potential into performance. Many equally capable individuals are excluded from the competition long before selection occurs. Their absence is not a reflection of lower ability but of systemic barriers that restrict participation. A policy‑informed response requires interventions across multiple stages of the educational pipeline. Early childhood programs must be expanded to ensure that foundational skills are not determined by socioeconomic status. Public investment in teacher quality, school infrastructure, and community‑based learning resources can reduce disparities in basic education. Admissions processes should incorporate contextual indicators that recognize structural disadvantage rather than relying solely on standardized tests. Targeted scholarships, mentoring programs, and bridge curricula can support high‑potential students who lack preparatory advantages. Without such reforms, elite education will continue to reproduce inequality while maintaining the appearance of fairness.