What if...

Original Learning was to be pitched as a pedagogical approach worth investing in?

One of a hundred or so questions I asked…
This is what Chatgpt came up with - this time I will write my comments in italics within brackets - and then further reflections at the end.

Policy Brief: Invest in the Original Learning Approach (OLA)

A rights-based, play-centered route to deeper learning, wellbeing, equity and future skills (play responsive, not play-centred)

Executive summary (one line)

Investing in OLA — a curriculum-integrated, play-responsive approach that protects children’s time for play while weaving curriculum outcomes into joyful, transdisciplinary projects — delivers better long-term outcomes for children, more equitable education, and strong social and economic returns.

---

Why now? (policy drivers)

1. Future skills demand. Global frameworks call for education that develops curiosity, collaboration, creativity and wellbeing — not just memorised facts. The OECD Learning Compass and Education 2030 emphasise agency, wellbeing and transdisciplinary competencies. OECD (this is something I truly believe, that the so-called “soft-skills” that are being ignored in the education system - or only supported in the early years - are vital for both now and the future)

2. Neuroscience of motivation and durable learning. Curiosity activates memory systems and improves retention — learning that sticks. Playful curiosity is therefore an engine of efficient learning. PMC (absolutely - because if children are not motivated to learn then it’s just not going to work. Of course fear can be a motivating force, as can grades or sticker charts - but these are extrinsic motivations and are no way near as close as effective as intrinsic motivation)

3. Early investment yields long-term societal returns. High-quality play-based early interventions show sustained gains across decades (education, employment, reduced welfare/criminal justice costs). Economic analyses show large returns on investment. PMC+1 (shame that it’s always about economic gains… but… that’s the language that policy makers talk)

4. Evidence that playful, project-based pedagogies build the 21st-century skills we need. Playful learning promotes collaboration, creativity, critical thinking and confidence (the “6 Cs”) — skills strongly linked to later success and equity. Brookings+1 (of course this point is useless if the government/leadership is not actually interested in equity - but the success part might win them over)

---

The case for OLA — succinct points for decision-makers

1. Learning that lasts. When children are curious and engaged (as OLA deliberately nurtures), memory encoding and transfer increase — reducing the need for repeated remediation later. (neuroscience: hippocampus + dopamine) PMC

2. Economic return & social value. Longitudinal studies of early, play-rich programmes report better educational attainment, higher employment, and lower social costs in adulthood — meaning sustainable public savings. (Perry Preschool / Heckman analysis). High Scope+1

3. Equity and inclusion. Playful, transdisciplinary pedagogy narrows gaps by engaging learners from diverse backgrounds and providing multiple access points—especially low-cost and high-impact for disadvantaged groups. (playful learning evidence). Brookings

4. Aligns with national & international frameworks. OLA meets the OECD/UN calls for systems that develop agency, wellbeing, and competencies for a rapidly changing world — giving ministers an evidence-aligned route to policy targets. OECD

5. Low-cost, high-leverage interventions. Many OLA elements (protected playtime, teacher training in play-responsive pedagogy, loose parts, documentation practices) are cost-effective compared with large infrastructure or testing regimes and can be piloted within existing settings.

---

Anticipated political concerns — short rebuttals

Concern: “Will play make children fall behind in tests?”
Answer: No — curiosity and play increase deep understanding and executive function, which support later academic performance and test application; documentation links play activities explicitly to curriculum outcomes. (Harvard on executive function; Gruber on curiosity). Harvard Child Development Centre+1

Concern: “This sounds expensive to scale.”
Answer: Initial investments in teacher training and protected play time are modest compared with long-term savings (lower remediation, better employment outcomes). Perry Preschool ROI studies show strong long-term returns. PMC+1

Concern: “How do we measure success?”
Answer: Combine traditional attainment metrics with validated measures of executive function, socio-emotional competence, agency and durable knowledge (see OECD competencies and Harvard EF resources). OECD+1

---

Concrete policy asks (what ministers can do now)

1. Fund targeted pilots (3 years): 20–50 schools/preschools across diverse regions to implement OLA with fidelity (teacher training, protected play schedules, loose-parts provision, atelier/atelierista support). Include matched control sites for evaluation. (now I could get behind this… I know there are some places already implementing OLA)

2. Create a national Playarista training fund: scalable, tiered certification (Level 1: practice fundamentals; Level 2: strategy & advocacy; Level 3: mentorship). Investment covers release time, mentors, and small materials grants. (the first 2 cohorts of playaristas are half way through their training)

3. Protect curriculum time for play: legislate or issue guidance guaranteeing minimum weekly play-rich, unhurried learning hours (e.g., specified blocks that cannot be replaced by test prep). (this I think is essential - play as part of the curriculum, not a break from it, and not playful activities pretending to be play)

4. Change accountability metrics: incentivise documentation of transdisciplinary learning and wellbeing (e.g., include measures of executive function, agency, and socio-emotional learning in school review frameworks). (learning to measure the unmeasurable, alongside deeper understanding of the measurements we already take and how they are done - are they actually erflections of children’s learning, or teachers teaching?)

5. Public investment in low-cost materials and spaces: grants for loose parts, outdoor playful spaces and atelier materials in underfunded schools — highly cost-effective to improve access. (developing the play ecosystem so that they have high play value - and as much as possible living play landscapes - so that we are including nature as well)

6. National communication campaign: evidence-based materials (one-pagers, short films) for parents and leaders showing research and local success stories — to build public support and counter myths about “play = no learning.”

---

Implementation roadmap (high level)

Year 0–1 (Design & Pilot setup)

• Coalition building: education ministry, local authorities, universities, NGOs.

• Select pilot sites; co-design curriculum maps linking OLA threads to national standards.

• Begin Playarista cohort 1.
  Year 2–3 (Pilot delivery & evaluation)

• Implement OLA in pilots; rigorous mixed methods evaluation (attainment; executive function tests; wellbeing; teacher practice surveys; long-term tracking plans).

• Refine training and materials; hold parent/community play workshops.
  Year 4–5 (Scale & policy alignment)

• Publish evaluation; scale promising elements via conditional grants; update national guidance; embed OLA principles in teacher training standards.

---

Key metrics / success indicators (what to measure)

• Short term (1–2 years): teacher practice fidelity; time protected for play; child engagement; parent satisfaction; pilot school readiness indicators. (as in are the schools ready for children and not just children ready to comply to a system)

• Medium term (3–5 years): gains in executive function measures, socio-emotional competence, transdisciplinary project outcomes, reduced need for remediation.

• Long term (10+ years): improved graduation, employment, reduced welfare/criminal justice dependence (tracked via cohort studies — akin to Perry study design). High Scope+1 (since Sweden is very keen on reducing the “criminal side of society” maybe this is something they should be seriously considering)

---

Five load-bearing research claims & citations (for policymakers)

1. Early play-rich interventions yield large long-term social and economic benefits. (Perry Preschool / HighScope results and Heckman ROI analysis). High Scope+1

2. Executive function — developed through playful activities — is foundational to learning, focus and life outcomes. (Harvard Center on the Developing Child executive function guidance). Harvard Child Development Centre+1

3. Curiosity enhances hippocampal memory encoding (neuroscience of curiosity → durable learning). (Gruber et al., Neuron 2014). PMC

4. Playful, project-based learning supports development of the 21st-century competencies (6 Cs) and promotes equity. (Hirsh-Pasek et al.; Brookings synthesis on playful learning). Brookings+1

5. International policy frameworks (OECD Education 2030/Learning Compass) call for systems that develop agency, wellbeing and transdisciplinary competencies — OLA maps onto these goals. OECD

   (I haven’t double checked these links yet - although I do know the OECD one is correct - and of course more links and research would be necessary - as I know studies that should have been included here)

---

Cost considerations (illustrative, indicative)

• Playarista training: per-teacher training + release time — modest compared to salary budgets; phased roll-out recommended.

• Materials and loose parts grant: one-off kit per setting (recycled/natural parts) + small maintenance budgets.

• Evaluation & research: essential — allocate 5–10% of pilot budget to rigorous mixed-methods evaluation.
  (Exact costs depend on country context)

---

Closing argument (political framing)

Investing in OLA is an investment in human capital, social cohesion, and democratic resilience. It is not ideological fancifulness — it is evidence-aligned, rights-based, and economically savvy. By protecting children’s time for play while holding teachers accountable for deep learning through documentation and measurable competencies, OLA gives policymakers a scalable pathway to future-ready education that improves life chances and reduces later public costs.

back to me…
It does feel nice that it’s not just me that thinks Original Learning could make a difference - even if it is just AI - and has learned how to communicate with me the way that I have been communicating with it.
I won’t be using AI again for a few months - despite the wondrous rabbit hole like experience - because I am also acutely aware of how much energy is used for AI to function. I started using AI to create images for my posts, when I first started, because it felt like a way to embrace the future. But until there are climate smart ways to not just power AI but also to keep it cool (which it currently uses most energy) I will not be turning to AI unless I have a very specific reason. This time it was because I realised AI did not properly know what Original Learning is - and I did not want it to be interpreted through a traditional teaching lens, when it is supposed to be a lens that allows traditional teacher to see new ways of interacting with the art and science of teaching that values play and understand how children learn - all children, not just the normative ones!!

What do you think?