Who Will Build the School of the Future? Giving Teachers Their Time Back

There is an important difference between correcting a student’s wrong answer and understanding how the student reached it. The first may take seconds. The second requires a teacher to pause, listen and sometimes explain the subject by a different route. When discussing educational quality, do we ask often enough how much time remains for this second task?

The future of schools is frequently described through new programmes, examinations and technologies. Each may have value. Yet every innovation eventually brings us back to the same question: does a teacher have the conditions needed to understand the learning needs of the student in front of them and respond?

UNESCO’s assessment of the teaching profession, published on October 5, 2026, and updated on October 13, reports that the world needs 50 million additional teachers by 2030 to ensure universal access from pre-primary through secondary education. The finding that 58% of this need concerns replacing those leaving the profession is especially striking. This is a global calculation, not a figure for a teacher shortage in Türkiye. It shows why retaining teachers matters alongside recruiting them.

I read this evidence as more than a call to train additional teachers. It poses a harder question: are we organising the conditions of the work we ask people to do so that they can keep doing it well for many years?

The work beyond classroom hours

A teacher’s work does not begin at the classroom door and end with the bell. Preparing a subject for different learning speeds, assessing assignments, communicating with families and following students who need support are also part of the job. Ignoring these activities leads us to misjudge its actual demands.

An institution expecting well-prepared teaching should protect the time preparation requires. Every additional form, report and meeting takes time from something else. This is not an argument against oversight or record-keeping. The questions are which decisions the requested information improves and how often the same information must be supplied.

Half an hour that could have helped a teacher understand a student’s needs may instead go towards repeatedly completing a spreadsheet. That has an educational cost, even if it never appears as a separate budget line. It may emerge in a learning difficulty identified later or a conversation with a family that never happens.

Schools across Türkiye have different circumstances. The same method will not work identically everywhere. Counselling support may be the priority in one school; transport, staffing or materials may be more pressing in another. Giving teachers identical targets and comparing only results can disguise the effects of circumstances as differences in individual performance.

Considering a school in Diyarbakır requires more than examining its building and examination results. Regular attendance, space to study at home, the support available from families and the professional assistance teachers can reach all matter together. Improving education cannot mean asking teachers to solve every social problem on their own.

Respect should include a voice in decisions

Saying teachers are valuable is easy. More revealing is how their classroom experience informs educational decisions. A teacher who learns last about a programme they must implement, cannot communicate a difficulty and never sees what happens to their suggestions has mainly been given responsibility.

A voice for teachers need not mean an uncoordinated system in which everyone makes separate rules. Shared aims and professional standards can coexist with channels that carry practical difficulties upwards. Why did a method fail? Which students did it not reach? What adjustment helped? Answers are found in the knowledge accumulated in classrooms.

Regular opportunities for new teachers to work with experienced colleagues can also be valuable. Mentoring should not depend entirely on somebody’s spare time and goodwill. It needs allocated time, defined responsibilities and an arrangement that genuinely helps both people.

Professional development should not be judged by attendance certificates alone. What usable method remains after the training? Does the teacher have the materials and time to try it? Several months later, is there a person or team available to discuss difficulties? Learning does not end with a single event for teachers either.

A complete discussion of professional status must include material working conditions. Livelihoods, a safe workplace and a predictable professional life affect the attention teachers can give their work. No single measure will solve every problem. We should examine these connected conditions together.

Whose time does technology save?

Artificial intelligence and digital systems offer new possibilities in education. Drafting materials, producing different exercises and simplifying some routine tasks may help teachers. But we cannot assume that every digital purchase automatically saves time.

One application may make work easier while another creates more notifications, continuous data entry and endless checking. The value of technology cannot be established by the presentation on the day it is bought. We need to see what has changed in a teacher’s working day several months later.

I would ask a straightforward set of questions about educational technology purchases. Can teachers give students more time and better attention? Can they get help with operating difficulties? Do they have the professional preparation to assess the content the tools produce? How is student data protected?

A polished answer generated by software does not establish that it offers the right learning route for a particular student. This is where a teacher’s contribution matters: understanding where a child is struggling, which explanation helps and when another form of support is needed.

I do not imagine the school of the future as a quiet place where machines have taken over every task. I imagine teachers supported by better tools, learning from one another and able to follow students more attentively. Innovation budgets and support for people should be considered together.

My suggestion is to begin by identifying concretely what consumes teachers’ time in schools with different circumstances. Repeated administrative work can be mapped, support needs prioritised with teachers and the results of modest changes followed. Success should include whether time saved returns to learning.

A country’s educational vision must consider the person who makes learning possible alongside what children should learn. Trust, curiosity and attention in a classroom cannot be produced by a circular. The conditions in which they develop can be strengthened through deliberate choices.

When discussing tomorrow’s school, we should not leave the teacher inside it as an exhausted implementer. We should protect their knowledge, voice and time. Sometimes the greatest educational advance begins by giving a teacher back the time to truly listen to a student.

Read this column in Turkish ↗