Achieving Gender Equity in Public Education

Achieving Gender Equity 

in Public Education 

A Scenario Planning Resource 

for Advocates, Policymakers 

and Practitioners

The Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation, founded in 1987, is a private foundation 

whose mission is to develop and strengthen the movement for equity in education and 

child care. The Schott Foundation focuses on the development of: 

● Universal and accessible high quality early care and education, 

● Excellent public schools in underserved communities, and 

● Gender healthy public schools. 

Further, Schott advocates for increased public support for children. To improve the 

lives of children, Schott builds coalitions by bringing together leaders, experts, and 

citizens to solve community problems. The Schott Foundation follows an American 

tradition of success by assembling private dollars to advance public good. 

The Schott Center for Public and Early Education, a public foundation created in 

1999, is an outgrowth of the Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation’s ongoing work 

in education and child care. The Schott Center’s mission is to ensure high quality 

childcare and outstanding public education for all children. The Schott Center supports 

campaigns that endeavor to educate the public and elected and appointed officials on 

issues affecting children, as well as build the support at the community and leadership 

levels needed to achieve and implement legislative victories for children. 

678 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 301 

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 

Tel: 617-876-7700 

Fax: 617-876-7702 

299 Broadway, Suite 706 

New York, New York 10007 

Tel: 212-962-5444 

Fax: 212-962-5443 

www.schottfoundation.org 

www.schottcenter.org 

Copyright ©2003 Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation and 

The Schott Center for Public and Early Education

Achieving 

Gender Equity 

in Public Education 

A Scenario Planning Resource 

for Advocates, Policymakers 

and Practitioners 

OCTOBER 2003 

A report of the Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation 

and The Schott Center for Public and Early Education

Table of Contents 

1 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

2 Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

3 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

4 Understanding the Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

5 SCENARIO 1: Americana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

6 SCENARIO 2: Community Bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

7 SCENARIO 3: Survival of Fittest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

8 SCENARIO 4: Tech-Connected Pluralism . . . . . . . . . . 21 

9 Strategies for All Future Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

10 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

11 Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

12 Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

ACHIEVING GENDER EQUITY IN PUBLIC EDUCATION 

iii

Acknowledgements 

The board and staff members of the Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation and The Schott Center for Public and Early Education 

are grateful to the many people and organizations that helped bring this report to fruition. We would especially like to 

thank the participants in the scenario planning workshops, listed below, who provided the research and ideas. We are indebted 

to their willingness to come together and think critically about the future of gender equity, to challenge their own assumptions, 

and to dream together about the possibilities of a better tomorrow for our country’s girls and boys. 

We would also like to acknowledge the leadership and commitment of Susan Stickley, senior practitioner at Global Business 

Network and president of Stratus, Inc., and Diana Scearce, practitioner at Global Business Network, for their facilitation of the 

scenario planning process. Their assistance in framing the work, writing the scenarios, and pushing all of us to think beyond 

the present day were invaluable. 

We would also like to thank Jennifer Kramer-Wine, Marie T. Oates, and Korynn Schooley for their writing, Debra M. Beck 

of Beck Designs for her design work, and Dawne Shand of Foresight Publishing for her editing skills and management of the 

report publishing process. 

Finally, we would like to acknowledge The Panasonic Foundation and The Boston Foundation for supporting the scenario 

planning process, and the Ms. Foundation for Women for its financial support of the creation and publication of this report. 

PARTICIPANTS 

Terri Boyer 

Education Development Center 

Bithiah Carter 

Girls’ Coalition of Greater Boston 

Selvin L. Chambers III 

Department of Human Service Programs 

City of Cambridge 

Sandy Close 

Pacific News Service 

Tom Cosgrove 

The Cosgrove Group 

Janice Shaw Crouse 

Beverly LaHaye Institute 

Celina De Leon 

Women Express, Inc. 

Lucy Georgeff 

Women Express, Inc. 

Sara Gould 

Ms. Foundation for Women 

Renae Gray 

Boston Women’s Fund 

Roxann Johnson 

YWCA of Northwest Louisiana 

Greg Jobin-Leeds ★ 

Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation 

The Schott Center for Public and Early 

Education 

★ 

Board Member 

Maria Jobin-Leeds ★ 


Jennifer Kramer-Wine 




Lilo Leeds ★ 




Belle Liang 

Boston College 

Meizhu Lui 

United for a Fair Economy 

Theresa Mayberry-Dunn 

Grace Hill Settlement House 

Shelley McDonough 

Monitor Group 

Shireen Mitchell 

Digital Sisters 

Colleen Moore 

Millennium Pharmaceuticals 

Julie Nelson 

Tufts University 

Thu Nguyen 

Kennedy School of Government 

Nancy Ramsey 

Morning Star Imports 

Independent Consultant 

Marta T. Rosa 

Child Care Resource Center, Inc. 

Jocelyn Samuels 

National Women’s Law Center 

Erik Smith 

Global Business Network 

Korynn Schooley 




Cassie Schwerner 




Marjorie Snyder 

Women’s Sports Foundation 

Rosa A. Smith 




Scott Thompson 

Panasonic Foundation 

Laurie Jo Wallace 

The Medical Foundation 

Janie Victoria Ward 

Alliance on Gender, Culture and School 

Practice, Harvard Graduate School 

of Education 

Wendy Rue Williams 

Massachusetts Caucus of Women 

Legislators 


1

Forward 

The Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation was established to develop and strengthen the movement 

for equity and excellence in education and child care. Lilo Leeds, the foundation’s co-founder and 

my mother, has successfully advocated for children and families for five decades. She won pay equity 

increases in the 1950s for women employees at Bell Labs, co-founded CMP Media, and opened the first 

workplace child care center on Long Island. Later, her victory in the courts enabled my sister to be one 

of the first girls to play Little League in New York state. My sister quickly advanced to the all-star league 

proving that inclusion can lead to excellence. 

My mother and I co-founded the Schott Foundation ten years ago to take our commitment to 

equity to a broader audience. Our vision is for all parents to have the same choice that many wealthy 

and suburban parents currently enjoy: to be able to send their children to well-resourced, academically 

challenging, safe, and respectful pre-schools and public schools. We believe all children can learn 

if given the opportunity and resources. We also believe successful schools recognize individual 

differences and what each child brings to the classroom, help children identify the forces that shape 

and constrain their lives, and build future leaders and decisionmakers determined to create and 

sustain a diverse and equitable world. 

Achieving Gender Equity in Public Education: A Scenario Planning Resource for Advocates, Policymakers 

and Practitioners represents our first publication on a topic that has been a cause of Schott since its 

inception. Influenced by the American Association of University Women’s How Schools Shortchange 

Girls, Schott’s Gender Equity program has supported many innovative projects aimed at eradicating 

the barriers to education for girls: from overcoming bullying, teasing, and sexual harassment to 

improving confidence and interest among girls in math and science. 

In recent years, Schott has labored with the definition of gender equity. The current debate about 

boys’ slide in school has changed the once-clear understanding of gender as a girls’ domain. Girls are 

outperforming boys, especially boys of color, on many levels. Yet, as I drive past most parks, especially 

in urban areas, I continue to see fewer girls playing on the field or court. And I watch my daughter’s 

incredulous eyes when I tell her how few women there are in the Massachusetts House of Representatives 

and how there has never been a woman (or a black or brown) United States President. 

Schott engaged in scenario planning because we wanted new strategic thinking about the subject 

of gender equity. We wanted to ensure we were not limiting ourselves to planning for the world we currently 

inhabit, but instead were planning for the long run. Systemic change happens slowly and, thus, 

our strategies must be relevant for many years to come. The result of the process was incredible and 

led Schott to consider a number of ideas worth pursuing, three of which were especially relevant to our 

work: leadership development, communications and messaging (especially for Generation Y), and 

teacher training. You will read more about each of these in the pages that follow. 

This report reflects our recent efforts to understand how to ensure that the next generation of girls 

and boys enjoy respectful schools and classrooms in which they can grow and succeed. We want all 

children to have the benefits of an education that provides them with a full range of life options and 

helps them become decisionmakers and leaders. We hope this publication will serve as a useful 

discussion tool for organizations, foundations, and individuals interested in creating more inclusive 

societies in the future. 

Greg Jobin-Leeds 

Chairperson and Co-founder 


3

Introduction 

In 2003, the Caroline and Sigmund Schott Foundation began a scenario planning project to 

think about how to ensure that gender equity is the norm in public schools. Schott’s co-founder, 

Lilo Leeds, has advocated for over 50 years for the rights of women and girls to fully and 

equitably participate in society and the educational system. Schott, in seeking to extend Lilo’s 

vision by eliminating all forms of sexism and discrimination, has supported many innovative 

school programs to build equitable and respectful classrooms, schools, and communities. 

In recent years, developing forward-looking programs that promote gender equity has 

proven more challenging. Young women and girls have achieved many gains toward equality 

with men. In fact, women and girls are outpacing men and boys in some educational arenas. 

Currently, women earn an average of 57 percent of all bachelor of arts degrees and 58 percent of 

all master’s degrees in the United States. i Additionally, U.S. Department of Education data show 

that girls outnumber boys in most extracurricular activities in the nation’s primary schools. ii 

Meanwhile, boys’ performance in school offers several troubling statistics. Boys are 30 

percent more likely to drop out of school. iii They make up 68 percent of students with specific 

learning disabilities and approximately 78 percent of students labeled as being emotionally 

disturbed. iv 

Trends such as these have negated the once-clear definition of gender inequity as discrimination 

against girls. The recent debate on the slide in boys’ performance has implied that girls’ 

success has come at the expense of boys. Many people perceive girls as doing better in school 

and suggest we should turn our attention to the until-now neglected students: boys. Yet, consider 

the following facts: 

● While girls’ grades in elementary and secondary school are now on par with boys’ grades, 

girls’ performance on many standardized tests continues to lag behind. This differential 

is consistent across races, ethnicities, and age groups. v 

● 

Boys are still outpacing girls in computer science and technology. Girls make up a small 

percentage of students in high school courses for both fields. Girls compose only 17 percent 

of advanced placement computer science test takers. vi And women receive only 20 

percent of computer science and engineering-related bachelor degrees. vii 

● Even though girls pursue more advanced education than boys, an income disparity 

between women and men lingers. Women with college degrees earn a median annual 

income of $40,314 while men earn $56,334. viii 

Moreover, simply thinking about girls’ performance versus boys’ performance does not 

adequately portray what is happening in schools. Race and economic class, in combination with 

gender, highlight more complex problems. Consider the following: 

● While the drop-out rate for white women is 8 percent, the rates for Latina, African 

American, and Native American women are 28 percent, 11 percent, and 32 percent, 

respectively. ix 

● 

In 2001-2002, the graduation rates for Hispanic males and African American males 

were only 48 percent and 50 percent, respectively, compared to 73 percent of all 

students. x 

● In 1999, 50 percent of black male high school drop-outs had prison records by their 

early thirties, while only 10 percent of their white male counterparts had similar 

records. xi 

These statistics highlight the difficulty of determining the relative success of girls and boys 

in schools. To complicate matters, Schott-sponsored research found that Americans want the 

classroom to be an ideal and controlled environment where children are protected from social 

In recent years, 

developing 

forwardlooking 

programs 

that promote 

gender equity 

has proven 

more 

challenging. 


5

problems such as discrimination, not exposed to them. xii For the most part, the American public 

does not perceive a gender bias in schools and many wonder if gender equity is irrelevant. xiii 

Thus, determining what needs to be done to achieve equity in education and society, and for 

whom, only grows more complex for policymakers, advocates and practitioners. 

So, how do we most positively impact the education and development of girls and boys in 

American societies to achieve an equitable future for the next generation? A group of experts 

convened by Schott and consultants from Global Business Network (GBN) debated this question 

during the spring of 2003. This report is the culmination of those discussions. 

The objective of scenario planning was to consider the ways in which society might evolve 

and develop strategies we can employ now to ensure that schools provide positive learning environments 

for both girls and boys regardless of how the future develops. The pages that follow 

describe the issues and concerns raised by the group, the stories they created, and the strategies 

they brainstormed together to help create a more equitable future. 


6

Understanding the Scenarios 

Scenario planning is a management tool that allows organizations to develop strategies for the 

future. Often, organizations implement well-intentioned strategies that are eventually tested 

by forces outside of the organization’s control, such as: technological innovation, policy changes, 

and shifts in society’s values. When this happens, the strategy may no longer be 

effective in the new environment. The scenario planning process allows organizations to consider 

these unknown and uncontrollable forces before moving forward with an action agenda. 

The goal is to develop a set of fictitious stories, or scenarios, which represent plausible futures. 

With these in hand, organizations have a better sense of how to shape their working priorities 

and be prepared for the future, no matter how it unfolds. 

Scenario planning focuses on a single important question, which the organization identifies 

through research and interviews. In this case, the question posed to the group of scenario participants 

was, “How do we most positively impact the education and development of girls and 

boys in American societies to achieve an equitable future for the next generation?” 

In addition, participants worked to develop a compendium of driving forces that the group 

believed would shape American society in unforeseen ways. For example, access to technology 

emerged as a significant concern. One participant pointed out how computers and instant messaging 

changed the classroom dynamics. This technological shift raised questions about young 

people’s interactions within their communities, which led to further predictions about how 

young people will relate to one another as adults. 

The concept of race and how it will evolve was another driving force that participants thought 

would have strong implications for our society. The increase in marriage across races and 

ethnicities could lead to a country less divided by skin color. On the other hand, a down economy 

could lead to tension between groups in need of the same services and supports. 

Participants also felt that leadership was a strong factor in shaping American society. Who 

will have power in 20 years: federal government, local governments, businesses, or communities? 

What does this imply for immigration, the education system, and income distribution? 

Religion was another concern. Will Americans continue the trend of choosing individualized 

definitions of spirituality over organized religion? Or, will events such as the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001, push people to rebuild stronger faith-based communities? What impact will 

these trends have on relationships, communities, and religious charity? 

Other driving forces with diverging end points were: 

AMERICANA 

COMMUNITY BONDS 

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST 

TECH-CONNECTED PLURALISM 


7

The group then prioritized these concerns and noted uncertain and uncontrollable 

forces that could render strategies ineffective. In order to structure the group’s thinking, 

participants highlighted the two most important and uncertain driving forces: (1) resources 

and (2) cultural values and the impact of demographic shifts. Resources included monetary, 

human, and technological capital from all sectors, as well as strength of the economy. 

Cultural values and the impact of demographic shifts included ideas such as individualism, 

community relationships, race and gender relations, diversity of thought, religion, 

and spirituality. The group used these two concerns to frame the development of plausible 

stories that were (1) sufficiently divergent, (2) plausible, and (3) challenging to the core 

question. 

Following the creation of the matrix, participants characterized society by its economic 

status, ideology, government, technology, family ties, race, and gender within each quadrant. 

These scenarios embody what living in these worlds might be like. The scenarios 

are not intended to be entirely accurate forecasts. Rather, they are fictitious futures that 

suggest how things might evolve depending on how resources, cultural values, and the 

impact of demographic shifts affect society over time. The next four chapters provide 

scenario summaries, characteristics of each world 20 years from now, the scenarios 

themselves, and discussion questions to help you use the scenarios. 


8

Achieving Gender Equity in Public Education 

Scenario 1 

Americana 

Summary 

In this scenario, nationalism and patriotism dominate values 

in American society. Family and community are central and a 

strong federal government ensures basic needs are met. Change 

happens slowly and is usually met with some consternation and 

apprehension. 

The story is told from the perspective of a traditional, middleclass 

wife who shares responsibility for raising children with her 

husband. He teaches middle school; she has left a high-profile 

career in technology and now consults part-time. They live in 

a racially diverse community determined to maintain a safe 

environment for all children. The focus on patriotism also 

emphasizes assimilation of different ethnic groups. The government 

provides a stipend for stay-at-home parents and has focused 

on decreasing the income disparities. 

The tradeoffs, however, are: the scope for women’s participation 

in all aspects of business and political spheres narrows; 

ethnic differences are minimized as community is prioritized; 

and a strong, centralized government exerts an overwhelming 

influence over media, which is controlled by a few corporations 

that subsequently limit society’s perspective. 

9

Characteristics of Year 2023 in the Americana Scenario 

The education of 

children is a top 

priority in our 

community. 

ECONOMICS AND INCOME DISPARITY 

● Small income disparity for those participating in the system but significant disparity 

for those outside the system 

● National community takes care of its own and provides social safety nets 

IDEOLOGY AND VALUES 

● Americans are extremely nationalist and patriotic 

● Society has strong commitment to serving the public good 

● Government regulates culture, values, and information 

LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNMENT 

● Top-down control and strong federal government 

● Strong ethnic and religious representation in leadership positions 

TECHNOLOGY, COMMUNICATIONS, AND MEDIA 

● High public access to technology 

● Centralized government exercising powerful influence over and censorship of media, 

television, and entertainment 

● Small number of companies has monopoly over media 

FAMILY AND WORK LIFE BALANCE 

● Family and national community are valued 

● Parents design schedule to ensure maximum time spent at home with children 

● Education of children and caregiving are important 

● Religious, corporate, and community childcare for those who elect not to care for children 

at home 

● All elderly are provided and cared for 

RACE 

● Race is acknowledged but overshadowed by nationalism 

● Geographic communities mixed by race 

● Focus on assimilating into the American melting pot 

GENDER 

● Limited choices for gender roles; traditional roles continue for the most part 

Americana 

Sitting at the kitchen table, ordering my family’s food for the week from the Remote Recipe 

Shopper, I think about how my life, and this nation, has changed since the turn of the 

century. 

When I was an undergraduate at the start of the millennium, I wondered if a husband, 

wife, and four kids in a family would ever be the norm again. After four years in college, I 

earned my degree in advanced technology and married my high school sweetheart, 

Richard. When my skills led me to a technology consulting job on the East Coast in 2003, 

Richard and I decided to establish our family there. 

The world was such an uncertain and unsettling place when Richard and I began to 

build our lives together in 2003. I’m so proud of this nation and the strides it has taken in 

the past 20 years. I remember the terrorist attacks in 2001 and the wars in Afghanistan 

and Iraq the following years. The country seemed on edge at that time, especially given the 

increased hostility toward the United States by our allies. But once democracy firmly took 

root in Iraq around 2005, not only was the country’s involvement in the Middle East validated 

by the world, the economy slowly turned around as investments by U.S. companies 


10

increased. The American flags that garnished households after September 11, 2001, 

seemed to multiply and once again we could all be proud to call ourselves Americans. 

Today, Americans are extremely patriotic. Society has a renewed and strong commitment 

to serving the public good. 

At age 45, I feel proud of our accomplishments as a family. Richard is an eighth grade 

science teacher. He went straight into a master’s program out of college and began teaching 

just as the landmark No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)—a far-reaching piece of legislation 

that was long overdue—came into effect in 2002. I agree with some critics that this 

law had its quirks, as all policies do, but Richard says it proved to be a critical turning point 

in public school education. Finally, teachers were able to get real data on how kids were 

doing and provide extra help to those who needed it. And all of the children people had 

thought were too stupid to learn were able to set goals and were motivated to prove critics 

wrong. 

In 2005, Richard advocated for the patriot curriculum to be taught throughout his district, 

and in 2008 he testified on Capitol Hill about the impact of this curriculum on his 

students’ national pride. When our own children complained about the weekly assessment, 

he reminded them that every student in the nation was doing the same thing they 

were. It always made us smile proudly when our daughter, Jackie, rallied her siblings by 

singing the national anthem at the top of her lungs. 

Today, the federal government is much stronger than it was at the turn of the century. 

Just today, Richard told me Amendment 28, the National Education Amendment, was ratified. 

Richard’s school celebrated the passage of the law. Amendment 28 will shift much 

more responsibility to the federal government for the education of America’s children. 

Whereas states had previously run their community education systems, now the federal 

government will shoulder that responsibility. 

The No Child Left Behind Act started the drive away from state control. It led to the passage 

of the English Is the Language of Democracy Act (EILDA) in 2007, which eliminated 

bilingual education across the nation. At that time, the number of immigrants flowing into 

the country was decreasing and the pressures to assimilate were rising. The number of foreigners 

coming to the United States had significantly increased in the early part of the 21st 

century. With the terrorist attacks and a growing need for jobs for American citizens, 

restrictions on immigration were put in place. 

My family and I live in a fairly mixed community with people of all races and backgrounds; 

since the big push for assimilation around 2007, communities have become less 

and less segregated. Just on our block there is an Indian family, several Hispanic families, 

two African American families (including us), and a few mixed families. We have a lot in 

common with our neighbors: creating a safe community and raising our children to be 

good patriots is paramount to all of us. We’ve really found a common ground. Nationalism 

has overshadowed the importance of racial diversity. However, ethnicities and religions 

have strong representation in leadership positions. Not a day goes by that I don’t have a 

community activity planned for either my family or myself. I like to organize potlucks, I 

serve as the president of the Civic Engagement Board, and I am helping to establish the 

local community center’s Internet monitoring system. 

The education of children is a top priority in our community. These days, parents 

design work schedules to ensure that maximum time is spent with children. Richard 

arrives home in time for me to get my few hours of work in before dinner. Luckily, his 

teaching schedule fits perfectly with my work schedule. Ever since our first child, Jackie, 

was born in 2007, I’ve been working a lot less. I was able to turn over my CEO reins at 

InfoVox, the company I established 16 years ago, to a smart and energetic man before 

You can have 

it all, just not 

at the same 

time. 


11

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 

1 How is change affected in 

this world? By government 

policy? By individual 

communities? By other 

means? 

2 How does this society 

define gender equity? 

3 What does the education 

system look like in this 

world? 

4 What are the implications 

for the education and 

development of girls and 

boys in America? 


for the work I am doing? 

6 If society does evolve in 

this direction, what can 

we do now to ensure equity 

in the education system? 

Richard and I had any children. Since then I’ve been working half-time. It’s important to 

us that someone is at home with the children until they leave the nest after high school. 

Most men today would not be as willing as Richard is to help me with the children. If our 

work schedules did not mesh, though, are religious, corporate, and community childcare 

options available to us. 

InfoVox has continued to build on the American values of family and community since 

I handed over the CEO role. Our most profitable creation is a micro-PDA for the 21st century 

community member. This credit-card-looking device enables people to access any personal 

information stored on their virtual network. Currently, InfoVox is in negotiations 

with the U.S. government to supply the entire nation with this technology. The government 

sees this as the solution to all social needs—especially healthcare issues. The many 

doctors a community member has (dentist, family doctor, OB/GYN, psychologist) can easily 

access a patient’s entire history. This invention also allows the media to access the 

national community 24 hours a day with public service announcements. It’s important to 

have tools to connect America’s diverse, yet closely-knit, communities. The public’s access 

to technology is extensive thanks to government support. However, the support also has a 

powerful influence on the kinds of messages people receive. The small number of companies 

controlling the media today limits the kinds of information, stories, and perspectives 

available. 

A federal stipend enables families with stay-at-home parents like us to spend much 

time in the community and caring for our children. In fact, government policies like these 

have helped families across the board. Twenty years ago, the income disparity in this country 

was incredibly large. The recognition of this gap as the leading cause of other problems 

plaguing the country and our nation’s desire to invest in children pushed the government 

to implement a number of policies and programs over the past couple of decades to help 

the working poor. Of course, we still live in a market economy so there are still poor people, 

but they’re a lot better off than the poor in 2003. Thankfully, Richard and I are able to 

budget well so we are still considered middle class—we have to plan carefully, though. 

It’s interesting to think about how quickly my life changed once Jackie came into our 

lives. I was a high-powered, high-rolling, twenty-something CEO back then; but now, my 

family and community matter much more to me. You can have it all, just not all at the 

same time. 


12


Scenario 2 

Community 

Bonds 

Summary 

In this scenario, America is isolated and suffering from an anti- 

American global sentiment. A constant uneasiness grips the 

nation. Americans have turned towards community—ethnic, religious, 

and geographic—to find stability and solace. 

The story is told from the perspective of a couple struggling to 

make ends meet. They live in a racially homogeneous community, 

which shares and trades many resources for the good of the 

whole. Income disparity is limited within the group, though disparities 

grow wide between communities. Religious participation 

and community volunteerism make up for the weak and ineffective 

government. The community highly values children and child 

development, while elders are cared for in their homes by family 

members. Racism and stereotyping run rampant, however, and 

women and men tend toward traditional careers for their sexes. 

13

Characteristics of Year 2023 in the 

Community Bonds Scenario 

We take care of 

each other, less 

consumerism 

pervades the 

community, and 

there is a strong 

sense of sharing 

among people. 


● Large income disparity between communities, smaller disparity within communities 

● Increase in collaborative spending (tithing) and the sharing or trading of resources 

within communities; less consumerism overall 


● Emphasis on collectivism and identifying with one’s group 

● Scapegoating of those who do not fit middle class, upper-income, and white ideals 

● Public paranoia and constant uneasiness 

● Public benefit through community, volunteerism, and religion 

● Participation and membership in religious communities on the rise 


● Weak government at all levels causes reliance on communities 

● Strong religious representation in leadership positions 

● Little separation between church and state 

● Federal government focuses on foreign defense and military 

● Community policing rising 


● Technology is regulated and controlled at the community level 

● Newspapers, television, and Internet customized to identity groups more so than geographic 

regions of the country 


● Public commitment to family and community 

● Women tend to take leave or take time off from work to care for children 

● Women and men tend toward traditional careers for their sex, i.e. women in services 

and caring professions 

● High value placed on children and child development 

● Marriage and birth rates are high and divorce rate is low 

● Elders cared for in the homes by families 

RACE 

● People identify with their racial group 

● Racism and stereotyping are rampant 

● Racial identity of white now includes Hispanics 

● Faith communities segregated by race 

● Regional and racial militias arise 

GENDER 

● Women and men’s differences are celebrated 

● Community sets standards for gender roles 

Community Bonds 

Ever since the war in Iraq began in 2003, fear and paranoia have affected almost every part 

of our existence in this country. The good times I knew as a child are distant memories— 

traveling to Europe over spring break, going to summer camp. After the war we experienced 

a long expected but brief upturn in the economy. However, intermittent terrorist attacks on 

American soil and the resurgence of corporate scandals caused the economy to slip into a 

long depression. The income gap has grown wider between communities, which have got- 


14

ten more homogeneous. This has its advantages: we take care of each other, less consumerism 

pervades the community, and there is a strong sense of sharing among people. 

After the war with Iraq and the United States’ continued unilateral military action in 

Iran, North Korea, and Syria, Americans became reluctant travelers to foreign countries. 

Likewise, foreigners rarely traveled to the United States. The federal government weakened 

and focused only on foreign policy and defense. America became an isolationist 

country. By 2008, the United Nations had moved to Paris, France, symbolically distancing 

itself from the United States. The government weakened at all levels, forcing communities 

to provide a lot more social services. 

Another change these past 20 years has been the merging of church and state. There 

is strong religious representation at all levels of government. With the continued crises 

and stress of the past 20 years, even the most independent and agnostic Americans are 

turning to their communities and religious organizations to find comfort and stability. One 

of the saving graces and sources of pleasure for me is my local church. I enjoy the volunteer 

work I do each month with the wives in the church and always find it comforting to 

meet with other folks in the black community. 

In my community, we established an additional meeting place and source of support 

called Crossroads. This weekly marketplace lets members buy or trade food, household 

goods, and other necessities. More than just a method for shopping, Crossroads is a 

chance for neighbors and friends to come together and help one another. This is one of the 

positive things that has come out of the scarcity of economic resources, unemployment, 

and tension: the community has filled in the gaps and neighbors offer help at a moment’s 

notice. Community policing is also on the rise. 

Technology has also impacted the life of the community. All media—newspapers, television, 

and the Internet—are tailored toward communities and not geographic regions, as 

was the case 20 years ago. 

In 2007, my life as a technology consultant ended rather sadly when my employer went 

out of business. Looking back, it was probably for the best. I hated the constant feeling of 

being overwhelmed and in a hectic race to nowhere. After the loss of my job and long






means? 





world? 











rates have dropped. The schools can cater to the desires of the people they serve. Schools 

have become an integral part of most communities. 

Teaching has also changed dramatically since I entered the field. Once the Department 

of Education was dissolved in 2013, states tried to hold some resemblance of an education 

system together, but eventually local communities were left with the responsibility to educate 

their children. This meant the income disparities among communities translated into 

drastic differences in resources available for schools. Poorer communities just did not have 

the funds to provide the basic needs of a community school, much less the extras. 

When the federal Department of Religious and Spiritual Affairs (DRSA) was established 

in 2017, schools in communities of all income levels improved somewhat. The 

DRSA began providing guidance to local communities and religious organizations on setting 

up parochial community schools and helping to improve existing schools. In most 

communities today, neighbors will chip in, share resources, help in the schools, watch one 

another’s children, and police the streets. 

Unfortunately, support for the common good at the community level only takes people 

as far as their limited resources allow. And resources can’t eradicate the isolation of individual 

communities and the rampant racist acts that occur between communities in the 

United States. To top it off, the Supreme Court is about to hear a case on the separation of 

church and state, which may lead to religious organizations pulling their resources from 

the schools in the future. 

The glue that holds us all together these days is family. I have time to care for children, 

though it means money is tight, and we visit my parents weekly. They really should be in 

some sort of professional care setting, but who can afford it these days? For now, they’re 

making do by themselves and our continued visits to help out with buying food, cooking, 

and cleaning. And even though Richard and I struggle to balance time at home with work, 

and worry about whether or not we will be able to afford college for our kids, the time we 

do find together with family and friends is priceless. 


16


Scenario 3 

Survival of 

the Fittest 

Summary 

In this scenario, America has scarce resources. Competition and 

entrepreneurship define daily life. People are more self-reliant; 

community ties are weaker. The income disparities between people 

are at their largest. The values of freedom and individuality 

constantly conflict with the reality of limited alternatives. This 

conflict is inherent in all political, business, and social decisions. 

The scenario is told from the perspective of a single mom who 

is surviving thanks to her strong education and personal ambition. 

Her daughter has taken advantage of private sector education 

by completing an apprenticeship program that will move her 

into the working world quickly. Unlike the main characters, the 

less fortunate in this world have few options and no social safety 

net. They are constrained by social class as well as the limited educational 

and vocational options open to them. The elderly are particularly 

at risk and the government is limited in its ability to 

provide social programs for this group or any other in need. 

17


Survival of the Fittest Scenario 

We now have 

very minimal 

government and 

rely mainly on the 

free enterprise 

system. 


● Large income disparity 

● Limited access to social services 

● Limited transfer of wealth 

● Entrepreneurship increases out of necessity 

● Private sector benefits from the few economic gains 

● Cutthroat competition 


● Individualism, freedom, and self-governance are valued 

● Strong focus on materialism 

● Identity group politics are shunned 

● Personal spirituality more prevalent than organized religion 


● Minimal government; free enterprise system 

● Private sector controls and runs many former government responsibilities 

● Libertarian leadership 

● Limited government assistance programs and stricter regulations on such programs 

that exist 


● Digital divide remains 

● Technology highly valued and innovation is driven by necessity 

● Instant communications and media 


● Work, career, and individual success are valued 

● Pressure to be a superwoman 

● Difficult to balance life and work 

● Marriage and birth rates are low 

● Elderly not receiving much care; many starving and living on the street 

RACE 

● Little identification with racial groups 

● High number of interracial relationships but bound by class 

● Social mobility rarely constrained by race 

GENDER 

● Gender roles bound by class 

● Flexible gender roles for the educated, middle and upper classes; inflexible roles for 

lower class and less educated 

Survival of the Fittest 

As luck would have it, the closest hydrogen docking station for our hydrauto is next to a 

restaurant called The Newspaper Bar. My 16-year-old daughter, Jackie, and I dock the car 

and go into the restaurant. Sitting in the bar, I reminisce about the old headlines from 

2003 framed on the walls. So much has happened since then. The reputation of America 

as a superpower went by the wayside after the second Bush administration: no weapons of 

mass destruction were found in Iraq after the 2003 war, and the press reported that Vice 


18

President Dick Cheney and the company he formerly led, Halliburton, were manipulating 

contracts for rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure. Rebuilding Iraq and world relations took 

much longer than anticipated. We now have very minimal government and rely mainly on 

the free enterprise system. The private sector controls and runs many former government 

responsibilities. With the Libertarian party in charge, the government offers few assistance 

programs and puts strict regulations on those that do exist. 

The newspaper headlines from that era read: “Economy spiraling downwards at rapid 

pace,” “Deficit swells to $3 trillion,” “You pick: $50 at the gas pump or $5 for hydrogen to 

fuel your $1,000 fuel cell!,” and “Dow Jones drops to below 6,000.” Things have improved 

somewhat since the early part of the millennium, but it has been far from smooth sailing. 

Before Jackie was born in 2007, my husband at the time, Richard, and I did some soul 

searching about bringing a black child into this depressing world. My fear was that my 

child would not have the same advantages that I had growing up. Sure, Richard and I had 

done well—he was teaching, I was a technology guru. We were able to provide a loving 

home for a child, but all around us we saw the impact of the government’s failure to provide 

for those who weren’t as lucky as we were. It has only seemed to get worse over the 

years. 

After Social Security was privatized in 2009, welfare laws became much stricter and 

eventually became a permanent part of our history. The income gap had intensified significantly 

by 2010, dividing every possible group—rich and poor, women and men, whites 

and blacks, whites and anyone else, for that matter. In fact, it was exactly this problem of 

the have-nots that led to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, begun by the late Reverend Jesse 

Jackson, gaining so much momentum in 2012. The coalition tried to raise awareness about 

the vast number of poor and the number of people of color falling through the cracks. 

There were few opportunities for education as the system moved towards privatization. 

Prisons outnumbered schoolhouses. And society completely lacked any sort of public safety 

net for the elderly and the mentally ill. 

Americans, who had come to value individualism and self-governance, quickly dulled 

the roar of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. By 2015, the haves and have-nots were left divided. 

Identity politics were passé and individualism proved its popularity when Libertarian 

Catherine Roberts was elected in 2016 and re-elected in 2020. 

Although the presidency is hopelessly powerless these days, I’m much happier to have 

a single woman in that role. It’s a daily reminder that women can make it on their own, 

which is exactly what I needed after Richard and I divorced. Of course, Catherine Roberts 

does not have the additional challenge of raising a child. Luckily, Jackie and I manage to 

make ends meet, but balancing life and work is hard for everyone. We consider ourselves 

members of the haves. We’re rarely judged by the color of our skin; instead, we’re judged 

by our skills and motivation. Work, career, and individual success are highly prized in this 

society. 

Jackie and I are heading to my parents to celebrate her graduation from apprenticeship 

to master carpenter. Though not the youngest in her group to be promoted, she completed 

the training in only a few years and aced the exam. Mom and Dad are still not on board 

with the value of her education. They are stuck in the time warp of my school years. I was 

in high school until I was eighteen, then I received bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral 

degrees from a state school. These days, that is rare. The shift from a well-rounded liberal 

arts education to skill-based education occurred just as Jackie became a teenager. Jackie left 

the traditional school environment at 14 to become an apprentice in carpentry. Soon after, 

public schools were basically upended. The “over the hill, shouldn’t foot the bill” mantra of 

the baby boomers was extremely influential in eliminating the property tax system of fund- 

Learning a 

specific skill 

in order to find a 

job is much more 

important today. 


19

ing schools. This led to the creation of the Education Empowerment Act of 2019, which set 

up a privatized system. Using the voucher system, parents can now choose to send their 

children to any school as long as the student qualifies for a full tuition voucher or the parents 

can afford the supplemental money it may require. 

Looking back, it all makes sense. Given the economic times, learning a specific skill in 

order to find a job is much more important today. And the companies and trade organizations 

that require these skills are best equipped to run the apprenticeship programs—the 

government certainly doesn’t have the resources to provide such a system. The world today 

is all about free enterprise and innovation dictates survival. Fortunately, Jackie and I have 

been able to stay one step ahead of the competition, but not everyone is as lucky as us. 






means? 





world? 












20


Scenario 4 

Tech-Connected 

Pluralism 

Summary 

In this scenario, America is experiencing another wave of prosperity, 

which is fundamentally different from any that preceded it. 

In a society driven by advances in technology and innovation, 

Americans view themselves as unique, self-sufficient individuals 

able to enjoy unparalleled independence and freedom. This is a 

borderless society where people, information, and goods move 

across the globe with ease. The booming economy supports a 

robust private sector and income disparities are minimized. 

The story is told from the perspective of a single woman in her 

40s with a successful career in technology, a field that plays a vital 

role in the fabric of this society. She never married nor had children, 

like many in her generation. Family and community ties are 

no longer critical in this world. Pluralism, individual voices, and 

non-conformity are honored and appreciated. No single religion, 

race, or gender dominates. 

21


Tech-Connected Pluralism Scenario 

We have a true 

democratic 

society that 

recognizes and 

respects the 

opinion of each 

individual. 

A backlash 

against 

standardized 

testing fed the 

movement for 

home schooling 

and child-guided 

learning. 


● Small income disparity due to wealthy giving back to less advantaged 

● Private resources channeled towards the public good 

● Booming economy driven by private sector 

● Creative competition 


● Pluralism, individual voice, and non-conformity are honored and appreciated 

● Self-sufficiency leads to private benefit 

● Everyone’s opinion in society is valued 

● No dominant religion; multiple religions and spiritual followings 


● Weak federal government 

● Democracy fully represents all individuals 

● Publicly controlled campaign financing 

● Proportional representation voting system 


● Universal use of technology; digital divide decreases 

● Technology innovation due to creativity, entrepreneurship, and abundance 

● Technology translates all languages 

● High information availability and connectivity 


● Family is no longer the center of American economy; more emphasis on individuals 

● Flexible work and home environments make balancing the two easier 

● Marriage and birth rates are low 

● Elderly take care of themselves; numerous assisted living and retirement communities 

RACE 

● Race is a valued attribute 

● High number of interracial relationships not bound by class 

● No dominant racial group 

● Large percentage of multiracial and multinational people 

GENDER 

● Flexible gender roles for all people 

● Individual merit trumps gender 

Tech-Connected Pluralism 

November 10, 2023: I am at my friends’ home celebrating Bob and Al’s 15th anniversary 

party. I remember their Cape Cod wedding vividly. For years they had looked forward to 

having a marriage recognized by the state of Massachusetts. Every five years their family 

and friends have a reunion to honor their marriage. 

Growing up, I had always thought I would marry my high school sweetheart, Richard, 

and have at least three children. After college, I realized that the family thing just wasn’t 

for me. I decided to make a life for myself through my friends and my work. As it turns 

out, many people in my generation similarly resisted the pressure to marry and have children. 

Young professionals today have experienced a level of independence and freedom 

that is hard to give up. Not surprisingly, the marriage and birth rates have been on the 


22

decline over the past 20 years. 

Though it’s nice to be here with Bob and Al, it was almost impossible to leave work 

today. In this day and age, disconnecting completely from work is tough. My Personal 

Knowledge Management System (PKMS) makes it simple to take care of certain tasks 

while away from the office. I often forget the PKMS is embedded behind my left ear. Some 

people wear their unit as a piece of jewelry or have the desktop version at home or office. 

I just find it easier to have it with me all the time. With this smartifact connected to my 

neural network, I am constantly connected to work, as well as the people I care about. 

I run the tech support network for Representative Democracy, Inc., a software firm that 

created a digital voting system for the PKMS operating system. We launched version 17 last 

month. I am often amazed to think how we’ve revolutionized voting. Compared to the 

2000 presidential election—with the hanging chads, the miscounts, and re-counts—our 

voting system enables everyone’s opinion to count in our society. We now have proportional 

representation in the voting system. Campaign finance is publicly supported and controlled. 

We have a true democratic society that recognizes and respects the opinion of each 

individual. 

The technological innovations we have today came about, in part, during the second 

war with Iraq. The United States and Great Britain positioned the victory as an Arab victory 

over oppression. Many Muslims holding true to the Koran saw the potential to achieve 

peace and freedom from tyranny. The presidency of George W. Bush is most commonly 

remembered as the administration responsible for respectfully implementing representative 

government in the Middle East in 2004. Although the United States forcefully entered 

Iraq in 2003, the Iraqis oppressed under the Hussein regime finally were able to construct 

an environment of respect for people and able to form a representative government. The 

United States was able to decrease its presence in the region much faster than originally 

planned. By 2005, the new government was up and running on its own. 

In parallel with this diplomatic coup was the vast number of government contracts that 

funded technological advances related to homeland security and defense. This funding led 

to the creation of the first Knowledge Management System (KMS) that enhanced our intelligence 

gathering and analysis capability. KMS, with the advancement of new technologies, 

sparked the first interactive PKMS, thanks to generous government funding. Government 

contracts were wide and far reaching, allowing for renewable energy, sustainable development, 

and other programs that enhanced our independence and strength as a nation. 

I started working at Representative Democracy in 2005. That year became known as 

the beginning of a golden era in technology and I quickly moved up the technical ladder 

after a string of successes. In 2010, I created the backbone program that serves as the base 

for our voting software in America. Changes in the political environment spurred new 

interest in enhanced voting processes. You could say our company was at the right place at 

the right time. 

The voting system has changed as much as the political parties and their presidential 

candidates. In 2008 two minority candidates were on the ballot: Hillary Clinton and Colin 

Powell. Colin Powell prevailed, riding on the coattails of the Bush II era. However, in the 

middle of Powell’s first term, Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi dictator pushed out by the 

second Iraq war, re-emerged in Syria. The American public was astonished. Over $100 billion 

had been spent on establishing democracy in the Middle East. Everyone thought Hussein 

had died; his reappearance destabilized the Powell presidency. After the Syrian 

incident, the World Party emerged in 2011 as a viable third party in America. The year 2012 

was the first presidential election in which the World Party had a candidate on the ballot. 

The pluralistic political system it espouses has produced many powerful ideas and creative 

leaders. The party helped establish the leadership we have today: a much weaker federal 

People are proud 

of their heritage, 

which is often a 

fascinating mix 

of ethnicities. 


23






means? 





world? 











government, but much stronger individual participation. 

Brainpower and technology fueled these kinds of social and political innovations. They 

also forced significant changes to the education system as the United States worked to 

maintain its leadership in the knowledge economy. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), 

thought to be the answer to our struggling education system by many Americans, only lasted 

from 2002 to 2009. A backlash against standardized testing fed the movement for 

home schooling and child-guided learning. My educational experience was completely different 

from what the current generation receives. The brick and mortar schools, reading, 

writing, and arithmetic, and the pigeonholing of kids into specific tracks are now a part of 

history. Instead, the technology and the growing desire to explore individuals’ possibilities 

meant kids could create their own curriculum and goals, and do it online. By 2015, most 

schools and students were connected virtually with a PKMS. When a child does homework, 

data are collected on speed, method, eye movement, and how often tutorial assistance 

are required. The data makes teachers better prepared to formulate customized 

learning agendas for each of their students. 

With new learning technologies and new metrics in place, the old perceived barriers to 

equity in education were dropped. Twenty years ago, finding women like me in technology 

and computer science was uncommon. Now, we’re a dime a dozen. And the barriers to 

quality education faced by the poor and many “people of color” (an old-fashioned term we 

formerly used to describe anyone who wasn’t Caucasian) have virtually disappeared. The 

PKMS has been instrumental in creating an environment where all kids have equal access 

to learning opportunities. PKMS allows kids to input data, ask questions, and do research 

any time, any place. The world around them is their classroom. If children are interested 

in gardening, they can contact a horticulturalist online to learn about that field. PKMS can 

monitor conversations and gather data about the types of questions that are asked. PKMS 

facilitators, all certified teachers, monitor children’s progress, and provide feedback to push 

their learning further. 

Technology isn’t the only aspect of life that this generation has embraced. They have no 

boundaries in terms of relationships. The only social norm is to appreciate everyone for 

who they are and where they are from. People are proud of their heritage, which is often a 

fascinating mix of ethnicities. Instant language translation software is standard in all 

PKMS units, making the world a little smaller and the barriers less apparent. 

Things certainly have changed since I was a child, especially the concept of race. The 

Supreme Court decision to uphold affirmative action in college admissions in 2003 was 

viewed by many as imperative to ensuring that African Americans, Latinos, and others did 

not face discrimination in the admissions process. This type of policy sounds antiquated 

in this day and age of respect for racial and ethnic differences. 

The weak federal government we have today isn’t all about positive change and innovation. 

One of the things my generation quickly realized as pluralism took hold was that with 

the weakening of central government came the weakening of many of the regulations and 

systems we had taken for granted. New viruses have doubled over the past ten years and 

many attribute this, in part, to the lack of food and drug regulations. For the most part, we 

have been lucky to have a strong biotech industry to counter new diseases with genetic 

therapeutics. Like viruses and other organisms, our pluralistic society cannot be fully constrained 

or controlled. The effective rules and doctrines defining behavior today are often 

emergent and self-regulating. In many cases this leads to exciting and creative new 

approaches. It also means that the most entrepreneurial and digitally savvy people thrive 

and those without these skills are left behind. Luckily, those who have benefited have also 

become philanthropists. But you can never be certain that some folks don’t slip through 

the cracks. Plurality has its disadvantages. 


24

Strategies for All 

Future Scenarios 

As the group of scenario planning participants considered these scenarios, possible strategies, 

tactics, approaches, and action plans began to emerge. Participants asked probing questions 

such as: If we find ourselves in one of these future worlds in 20 years, what will life be like? How 

should we, as advocates, direct our work in preparation for these possibilities? What could we do 

now to help girls and boys prepare for the future? And, “How do we most positively impact the 

education and development of girls and boys in American societies to achieve an equitable future 

for the next generation?” 

The dominant themes that emerged from the discussion included: 

● We need to listen more to the generation that will bring about change. 

Participants realized teenagers and people in their early 20s (Generation Y) face far 

fewer of the social inequities that challenged women in the 1950s, ’60s, and ’70s. 

The gender equity problems of old have little or no relevance for young people. 

Rather, Generation Y will need to grapple with new and different struggles that they 

need to identify as a generation. 

● 

Helping girls to achieve does not preclude helping boys to achieve. 

The gender war being waged in society was not only a concern of Schott, but of participants 

as well. Debates about gender equity are often cast as a zero-sum game in 

which women’s gains necessarily equal men’s losses. This perspective is neither 

accurate nor effective, and undermines efforts to help all students achieve their 

fullest potential. 

● 

Gender intersects race and class. 

Participants echoed Schott’s concern that looking only at gender skews our understanding 

of the situation. Race and class, as well as gender, provide a better glimpse 

into what is happening in public education today. We cannot ignore these demographic 

distinctions in our search for solutions. 

From the themes generated by the group, robust strategies emerged. The following strategies 

are characterized as robust because each one could be effective in at least three of the four scenarios. 

The group felt that regardless of how society evolves, these strategies would be useful 

today in bringing about gender-healthy schools in the future. The strategies are broad ideas that 

can be developed into specific action plans. 

TEACHER TRAINING 

● Promote gender equity in education through training and education for teachers and 

parents. 

● Add a component of gender equity training to teacher education and certification. 

● Develop and implement educational programs—from after-school programs for children 

to teacher training—that are specific to the culture of the students and communities that 

the public education system is serving. 


25

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 

● 

● 

● 

● 

Identify and cultivate Generation Y advocates. Support these advocates as they challenge 

the norms society holds about the roles of women and men. 

Teach youth how to act as activists and agents of change, how to bring their causes forward, 

and how to involve themselves early in campaigns for change. 

Share the work. Build bridges and work in partnership with organizations that span a 

wide spectrum of ideologies and missions, yet share similar concerns for children. 

Develop renewed activism and advocacy for gender equity at the grassroots level. 

TECHNOLOGY 

● Ensure equal access to technology. Improve technology training for all students to close 

the gap between girls and boys. 

● Make more creative use of technology to engage students in learning. 

COMMUNICATIONS AND MESSAGING 

● Redefine the term gender equity to be relevant for the younger generation and develop 

new messages around that definition. 

● Conduct research on current perceptions of gender equity and why the general public 

finds it unappealing. 

POLICY CHANGE 

● Work within the government system to leverage change through legislative and legal 

efforts. 

● Find the next Title IX. Look for new policy opportunities that might shape societies’ 

expectations for gender-equitable schools as successfully as Title IX did. 


26

Conclusion 

The scenario planning process was a useful method for Schott to test its assumptions about current 

program work and to think about what the future will hold. It reaffirmed the challenges 

Schott had experienced in trying to create effective gender equity strategies. 

Gender equity has become a vague, poorly understood concept. The term no longer applies 

only to women and girls; men and boys should be considered in the equation. Also, the problem 

cannot be defined purely by sex; class and racial distinctions play equally important parts in 

explaining disparities and should be considered in solutions. Furthermore, the term no longer 

resonates with youth today, despite the quantified and qualified examples of gender disparities. 

At the same time, Schott learned that teacher training, which has been the main component 

of its gender equity work, remains an important strategy in moving forward. Throughout all considered 

scenarios, the role of teachers in providing curriculum and practices that reflect an 

understanding of the unique needs of girls and boys across race and class is critically important. 

As Schott contemplates its work for the next 20 years, it will continue to support professional 

development that equips teachers with the knowledge and tools necessary to teach all children, 

regardless of gender, race, class, or sexual orientation. 

Schott hopes that these frameworks, stories, questions, and strategies will inspire your 

organization and others interested in gender equity work to prepare for the future of our complex 

society. 


27

Endnotes 

i. National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Educational Statistics, 2002. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 

2002. . 

ii. Bae, Yupin, Susan Choy, Claire Geddes, Jennifer Sable, and Thomas Snyder. Trends in Educational Equity of Girls & Women. 

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2000. 

iii. Conlin, Michelle. “The New Gender Gap,” Businessweek. 26 May 2003, p. 76. 

iv. Office of Civil Rights. OCR Elementary and Secondary School Survey: 1998. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1999. 

. 

v. National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education. Title IX at Thirty: Report Card on Gender Equity. Washington, D.C.: National 

Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, June 2002, pp. 46-49. . 

vi. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. Tech-Savvy: Educating Girls in the New Computer Age. 

Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, 2000, p. 3. 

vii. Title IX at Thirty. pp. 51-54. 

viii. Digest of Educational Statistics, 2002. 

ix. National Women’s Law Center. At the Intersection of Race and Gender: The Promise of School-to-Work for Young Women of Color. 

Washington, D.C.: National Women's Law Center, 1997. . 

x. National Center for Education Statistics. Common Core of Data. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2002. 

xi. Western, Bruce, Vincent Shiraldi, and Jason Ziedenberg. Education and Incarceration. Washington, D.C.: Justice Policy Institute, 

August 2003, p. 6. . 

xii. Bales, Susan. Talking Gender Equity and Education: A Frameworks Message Memo. Washington, D.C.: Frameworks Institute, 2000. 

xiii. Ibid. 

Resources 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR SCENARIO PLANNING 

Fahey, Liam, and Robert M. Randall, eds. Learning from the Future. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1997. 

Meadows, Donella H. “Chicken Little, Cassandra, and the Real Wolf: So many ways to think about the future,” Whole Earth Review. 

Spring 1999. . 

Ogilvy, James. Creating Better Futures: Scenario Planning as a Tool for a Better Tomorrow. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 

Ringland, Gill. Scenario Planning: Managing for the Future. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 1998. 

Ringland, Gill. Scenarios in Public Policy. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. 

Schwartz, Peter. The Art of the Long View: Paths to Strategic Insight for Yourself and Your Company. Second edition. New York: Doubleday 

Currency, 1996. 

van der Heijden, Kees. Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation. Chichester, England & New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996. 

EXAMPLES OF SCENARIO PLANNING 

Destino Columbia: An effort to explore the future of Columbia. . 

Global Business Network: An international consulting firm specializing in scenario thinking, planning, and strategy. Web site offers 

resources and examples. . 

Royal Dutch/Shell: A detailed account of the company’s most recent scenario report, "People and Connections." 

. 

The Valley Futures Project: The Great Valley Center web site covering its efforts to define a vision for Central California. 

. 

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development: A set of scenarios about the future of sustainable development. 

. 


28


29

Caroline and Sigmund 

Schott Foundation 

Schott Center 

for Public & Early Education 

The 

678 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 301 

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 

617-876-7700 | FAX 617-876-7702 

299 Broadway, Suite 706 

New York, New York 10007 

212-962-5444 | FAX 212-962-5443 

www.schottfoundation.org 

www.schottcenter.org

Achieving Gender Equity in Public Education

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?