Indian philosophy / different schools of Indian knowledge system:

Indian philosophy refers to philosophical traditions of the Indian

subcontinent. A traditional Hindu classification
divides āstika (orthodox) and nāstika (heterodox) schools of philosophy,
depending on one of three alternate criteria: whether it believes
the Vedas as a valid source of knowledge; whether the school believes in
the premises of Brahman and Atman; and whether the school believes in
afterlife and Devas.[1][2][3]
There are six major schools of orthodox Vedic philosophy—
Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Mīmāṃ sā and Vedanta, and five
major heterodox (sramanic) schools—Jain, Buddhist, Ajivika, Ajñana,
and Charvaka. However, there are other methods of
classification; Vidyaranya for instance identifies sixteen schools of
Indian philosophy by including those that belong to
the Śaiva and Raseśvara traditions.[4][5]
The main schools of Indian philosophy were formalised and recognised
chiefly between 500 BCE and the late centuries of the Common Era.
[citation needed] Competition and integration between the various
schools was intense, despite later claims of Hindu unity. Some schools
like Jainism, Buddhism, Yoga, Śaiva and Vedanta survived, but others,
like Ajñana, Charvaka and Ājīvika did not.
Ancient and medieval era texts of Indian philosophies include extensive
discussions on ontology (metaphysics, Brahman-Atman, Sunyata-
Anatta), reliable means of knowledge (epistemology, Pramanas), value
system (axiology) and other topics.[6][7][8]
Common themes:
Indian philosophies share many concepts such
as dharma, karma, samsara, reincarnation, dukkha, renunciation, medit
ation, with almost all of them focussing on the ultimate goal of liberation
of the individual from dukkha and samsara through diverse range of
spiritual practices (moksha, nirvana).[10] They differ in their
assumptions about the nature of existence as well as the specifics of the
path to the ultimate liberation, resulting in numerous schools that
disagreed with each other. Their ancient doctrines span the diverse range
of philosophies found in other ancient cultures.[11]
Orthodox schools
Many Hindu intellectual traditions were classified during the medieval
period of Brahmanic-Sanskritic scholasticism into a standard list of six
orthodox (Astika) schools (darshanas), the "Six Philosophies" (ṣaḍ -
darśana), all of which accept the testimony of the Vedas.
These "Six Philosophies" (ṣaḍ -darśana) are:
Sāṃ khya, a philosophical tradition which regards the universe as
consisting of two independent realities: puruṣ a (the
perceiving consciousness) and prakṛ ti (perceived reality, including mind,
perception, kleshas, and matter) and which describes a soteriology based
on this duality, in which purush is discerned and disentangled from the
impurities of prakriti. It has included atheistic authors as well as some
theistic thinkers, and forms the basis of much of subsequent Indian
philosophy.
Yoga, a school similar to Sāṃ khya (or perhaps even a branch of it) which
accepts a personal god and focuses on yogic practice.
Nyāya, a philosophy which focuses on logic and epistemology. It accepts
six kinds of pramanas (epistemic warrants): (1) perception, (2) inference,
(3) comparison and analogy, (4) postulation, derivation from
circumstances, (5) non-perception, negative/cognitive proof and (6)
word, testimony of past or present reliable experts. Nyāya defends a
form of direct realism and a theory of substances (dravya).
Vaiśeṣ ika, closely related to the Nyāya school, this tradition focused on
the metaphysics of substance, and on defending a theory of atoms.
Unlike Nyāya, they only accept two pramanas: perception and inference.
Pūrva-Mīmāṃ sā, a school which focuses on exegesis of the
Vedas, philology and the interpretation of Vedic ritual.
Vedānta (also called Uttara Mīmāṃ sā), focuses on interpreting the
philosophy of the Upanishads, particularly the soteriological and
metaphysical ideas relating to Atman and Brahman.
Sometimes these groups are often coupled into three groups for both
historical and conceptual reasons: Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika, Sāṃ khya-Yoga,
and Mīmāṃ sā-Vedānta.
Each tradition included different currents and sub-schools, for example,
Vedānta was divided among the sub-schools of Advaita (non-
dualism), Visishtadvaita (qualified non-
dualism), Dvaita (dualism), Dvaitadvaita (dualistic non-
dualism), Suddhadvaita, and Achintya Bheda Abheda (inconceivable
oneness and difference).
These are often coupled into three groups for both historical and
conceptual reasons: Nyaya-Vaishesika, Samkhya-Yoga, and Mimamsa-
Vedanta.
Besides these schools Mādhava Vidyāraṇ ya also includes the following of
the aforementioned theistic philosophies based on the Agamas and
Tantras:[4]
Pasupata, school of Shaivism by Nakulisa
Saiva, the theistic Sankhya school
Pratyabhijña, the recognitive school
Raseśvara, the mercurial school
Pāṇ ini Darśana, the grammarian school (which clarifies the theory
of Sphoṭa)
The systems mentioned here are not the only orthodox systems, they are
the chief ones, and there are other orthodox schools. These systems,
accept the authority of Vedas and are regarded as orthodox (astika)
schools of Hindu philosophy; besides these, schools that do not accept
the authority of the Vedas are heterodox (nastika) systems such as
Buddhism, Jainism, Ajivika and Charvaka.[12][13][14] This orthodox-
heterodox terminology is a construct of Western languages, and lacks
scholarly roots in Sanskrit. According to Andrew Nicholson, there have
been various heresiological translations of Āstika and Nāstika in 20th
century literature on Indian philosophies, but quite many are
unsophisticated and flawed.[3]
Charvaka is a materialistic and atheistic school of thought and, is
noteworthy as evidence of a materialistic movement within Hinduism.
[15]
Heterodox (Śramaṇ ic schools)
Several Śramaṇ ic movements have existed before the 6th century BCE,
and these influenced both the āstika and nāstika traditions of Indian
philosophy.[16] The Śramaṇ a movement gave rise to diverse range of
heterodox beliefs, ranging from accepting or denying the concept of
soul, atomism, antinomian ethics, materialism, atheism, agnosticism,
fatalism to free will, idealization of extreme asceticism to that of family
life, strict ahimsa (non-violence) and vegetarianism to permissibility of
violence and meat-eating.[17] Notable philosophies that arose
from Śramaṇ ic movement were Jainism, early Buddhism,
Charvaka, Ajñana and Ājīvika.[18]
Ajñana philosophy[edit]
Main article: Ajñana
Ajñana was one of the nāstika or "heterodox" schools of ancient Indian
philosophy, and the ancient school of radical Indian skepticism. It was a
Śramaṇ a movement and a major rival of early Buddhism and Jainism.
They have been recorded in Buddhist and Jain texts. They held that it
was impossible to obtain knowledge of metaphysical nature or ascertain
the truth value of philosophical propositions; and even if knowledge was
possible, it was useless and disadvantageous for final salvation. They
were sophists who specialised in refutation without propagating any
positive doctrine of their own.
Jain philosophy
Jain philosophy is the oldest Indian philosophy that separates body
(matter) from the soul (consciousness) completely.[19] Jainism was
revived and re-established after Mahavira, the last and the
24th Tirthankara, synthesised and revived the philosophies and
promulgations of the ancient Śramaṇ ic traditions laid down by the first
Jain tirthankara Rishabhanatha millions of years ago.[20] According to
Dundas, outside of the Jain tradition, historians date the Mahavira as
about contemporaneous with the Buddha in the 5th-century BCE, and
accordingly the historical Parshvanatha, based on the c. 250-year gap, is
placed in 8th or 7th century BCE.[21]
Jainism is a Śramaṇ ic religion and rejected the authority of the Vedas.
However, like all Indian religions, it shares the core concepts such as
karma, ethical living, rebirth, samsara and moksha. Jainism places
strong emphasis on asceticism, ahimsa (non-violence)
and anekantavada (relativity of viewpoints) as a means of spiritual
liberation, ideas that influenced other Indian traditions.[22] Jainism
strongly upholds the individualistic nature of soul and personal
responsibility for one's decisions; and that self-reliance and individual
efforts alone are responsible for one's liberation. According to the Jain
philosophy, the world (Saṃ sāra) is full of hiṃ sā (violence). Therefore,
one should direct all his efforts in attainment of Ratnatraya, that are
Samyak Darshan, Samyak Gnana, and Samyak Chàritra which are the
key requisites to attain liberation.[23][self-published source?]
Buddhist philosophy
Buddhist philosophy is a system of thought which started with the
teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, or "awakened one".
Buddhism is founded on elements of the Śramaṇ a movement, which
flowered in the first half of the 1st millennium BCE, but its foundations
contain novel ideas not found or accepted by other Sramana movements.
Buddhism and Hinduism mutually influenced each other and shared
many concepts, states Paul Williams, however it is now difficult to
identify and describe these influences.[24] Buddhism rejected the Vedic
concepts of Brahman (ultimate reality) and Atman (soul, self) at the
foundation of Hindu philosophies.[25][26][27]
Buddhism shares many philosophical views with other Indian systems,
such as belief in karma – a cause-and-effect relationship, samsara –
ideas about cyclic afterlife and rebirth, dharma – ideas about ethics,
duties and values, impermanence of all material things and of body, and
possibility of spiritual liberation (nirvana or moksha).[28][29] A major
departure from Hindu and Jain philosophy is the Buddhist rejection of
an eternal soul (atman) in favour of anatta (non-Self).[30] After the
death of the Buddha, several competing philosophical systems
termed Abhidharma began to emerge as ways to systematize Buddhist
philosophy.[31] The Mahayana movement also arose (c. 1st century BCE
onwards) and included new ideas and scriptures.
The main traditions of Buddhist philosophy in India (from 300 BCE to
1000 CE) were:
The Mahāsāṃ ghika ("Great Community") tradition (which included
numerous sub-schools, all are now extinct)
The schools of the Sthavira ("Elders") tradition:
Vaibhāṣ ika ("Commentators") also known as the Sarvāstivāda-
Vaibhāśika, was an Abhidharma tradition that composed the "Great
Commentary" (Mahāvibhāṣ a). They were known for their defense of the
doctrine of "sarvāstitva" (all exists), which is a form of eternalism
regarding the philosophy of time. They also supported direct realism and
a theory of substances (svabhāva).
Sautrāntika ("Those who uphold the sutras"), a tradition which did not
see the Abhidharma as authoritative, and instead focused on the
Buddhist sutras. They disagreed with the Vaibhāṣika on several key
points, including their eternalistic theory of time.
Pudgalavāda ("Personalists"), which were known for their controversial
theory of the "person" (pudgala), now extinct.
Vibhajyavāda ("The Analysts"), a widespread tradition which reached
Kashmir, South India and Sri Lanka. A part of this school has survived
into the modern era as the Theravada tradition. Their orthodox positions
can be found in the Kathavatthu. They rejected the views of
the Pudgalavāda and of the Vaibhāṣ ika among others.
The schools of the Mahāyāna ("Great Vehicle") tradition (which continue
to influence Tibetan and East Asian Buddhism)
Madhyamaka ("Middle way" or "Centrism") founded by Nagarjuna. Also
known as Śūnyavāda (the emptiness doctrine)
and Niḥ svabhāvavāda (the no svabhāva doctrine), this tradition focuses
on the idea that all phenomena are empty of any essence or substance
(svabhāva).
Yogācāra ("Yoga praxis"), an idealistic school which held that only
consciousness exists, and thus was also known as Vijñānavāda (the
doctrine of consciousness).
Some scholars see the Tathāgatagarbha (or "Buddha womb/source")
texts as constituting a third "school" of Indian Mahāyāna.[32]
Vajrayāna (also known as Mantrayāna, Tantrayāna, Secret Mantra, and
Tantric Buddhism) is often placed in a separate category due to its
unique tantric elements.
The Dignāga-Dharmakīrti tradition is an influential school of thought
which focused on epistemology, or pramāṇ a ('means of knowledge').
Many of these philosophies were brought to other regions, like Central
Asia and China. After the disappearance of Buddhism from India, some
of these philosophical traditions continued to develop in the Tibetan
Buddhist, East Asian Buddhist and Theravada Buddhist traditions.[33]
[34]
Ājīvika philosophy[edit]
Main article: Ājīvika
The philosophy of Ājīvika was founded by Makkhali Gosala, it was
a Śramaṇ a movement and a major rival of early Buddhism and Jainism.
[36] Ājīvikas were organised renunciates who formed discrete monastic
communities prone to an ascetic and simple lifestyle.[37]
Original scriptures of the Ājīvika school of philosophy may once have
existed, but these are currently unavailable and probably lost. Their
theories are extracted from mentions of Ajivikas in the secondary
sources of ancient Indian literature, particularly those of Jainism and
Buddhism which polemically criticized the Ajivikas.[38] The Ājīvika
school is known for its Niyati doctrine of absolute determinism (fate),
the premise that there is no free will, that everything that has happened,
is happening and will happen is entirely preordained and a function of
cosmic principles.[38][39] Ājīvika considered the karma doctrine as a
fallacy.[40] Ājīvikas were atheists[41] and rejected the authority of
the Vedas, but they believed that in every living being is an ātman – a
central premise of Hinduism and Jainism.[42][43]
Charvaka philosophy[edit]
Main article: Charvaka
Charvaka (Sanskrit: चार्वाक; IAST: Cārvāka), also known as Lokāyata, is
an ancient school of Indian materialism.[44] Charvaka holds direct
perception, empiricism, and conditional inference as proper sources of
knowledge, embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects ritualism
and supernaturalism.[45][46][47][48][49] It was a popular belief system
in ancient India.[note 1]
The etymology of Charvaka (Sanskrit: चार्वाक) is uncertain. Bhattacharya
quotes the grammarian Hemacandra, to the effect that the
word cārvāka is derived from the root carv, ‘to chew’ : “A Cārvāka chews
the self (carvatyātmānaṃ cārvākaḥ ). Hemacandra refers to his own
grammatical work, Uṇ ādisūtra 37, which runs as follows: mavāka-
śyāmāka-vārtāka-jyontāka-gūvāka-bhadrākādayaḥ . Each of these words
ends with the āka suffix and is formed irregularly.” This may also allude
to the philosophy's hedonistic precepts of "eat, drink, and be merry".
Brihaspati is traditionally referred to as the founder of Charvaka or
Lokāyata philosophy, although some scholars dispute this.[51]
[52] During the Hindu reformation period in the first millennium BCE,
when Buddhism was established by Gautama Buddha and Jainism was
re-organized by Parshvanatha, the Charvaka philosophy was well
documented and opposed by both religions.[53] Much of the primary
literature of Charvaka, the Barhaspatya sutras, were lost either due to
waning popularity or other unknown reasons.[54] Its teachings have
been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in
the shastras, sutras, and the Indian epic poetry as well as in the
dialogues of Gautama Buddha and from Jain literature.[54]
[55] However, there is text that may belong to the Charvaka tradition,
written by the skeptic philosopher Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa, known as the
Tattvôpaplava-siṁ ha, that provides information about this school, albeit
unorthodox.[56][57]
One of the widely studied principles of Charvaka philosophy was its
rejection of inference as a means to establish valid, universal knowledge,
and metaphysical truths.[58][59] In other words, the Charvaka
epistemology states that whenever one infers a truth from a set of
observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge
is conditional. [60][61]
Comparison of Indian philosophies[edit]
The Indian traditions subscribed to diverse philosophies, significantly
disagreeing with each other as well as orthodox Hinduism and its six
schools of Hindu philosophy. The differences ranged from a belief that
every individual has a soul (self, atman) to asserting that there is no soul,
[62] from axiological merit in a frugal ascetic life to that of a hedonistic
life, from a belief in rebirth to asserting that there is no rebirth.[63]
Comparison of ancient Indian philosophies
Ājīvika Early Charv Jainism Orthodox schools
Buddhism aka of Hinduism
(Non-Śramaṇ ic)
Karma Denies[4 Affirms[6 Denies Affirms[6 Affirms
0][64] 3] [63] 3]
Samsa Affirms Affirms[6 Denies Affirms[6 Some school
ra, 5] [66] 3] affirm, some
Rebirt not[67]
h
Ascetic  Affirms Affirms Denies Affirms Affirms
life [63] as Sannyasa[68]
Rituals Affirms Affirms, Denies Affirms, Theistic school:
, Bhakt optional[6 optional[ Affirms,
i 9] 70] optional[71]
(Pali: Bha Others: Deny[72]
 tti) [73]
Ahims Affirms Affirms, Strongest Affirms as highest
a and Unclear propone virtue,
Vegeta on meat nt but Just
rianis as of non- War affirmed
m food[74] violence; Vegetarianism
Vegetaria encouraged, but
nism to choice left to the
avoid Hindu[76][77]
violence
against
animals[
75]
Free Denies[3 Affirms[7 Affirm Affirms Affirms[79]
will 9] 8] s
Maya Affirms[8 Affirms Denies Affirms Affirms[82][83]
0] (prapañca
)[81]
Atman  Affirms Denies[62 Denies Affirms[ Affirms[86]
(Soul, ] [84] 85]:119
Self)
Creato Denies Denies Denies Denies
Theistic schools:
r god Affirm[87]
Others: Deny[88]
[89]
Episte Pratyakṣ Pratyakṣa, Pratya Pratyakṣ Various,
mology a, Anumāṇ a kṣa[92 a, Vaisheshika (two)
(Pram Anumāṇ a [90][91] ] Anumāṇ to Vedanta (six):
ana) , a, [90][93]
Śabda Śabda[90 Pratyakṣa
] (perception),
Anumāṇ a
(inference),
Upamāṇ a
(comparison and
analogy),
Arthāpatti
(postulation,
derivation),
Anupalabdi (non-
perception,
negative/cognitiv
e proof),
 Śabda (Reliable
testimony)
Episte Denies: Affirms: Denies Affirms:  Affirm: Vedas an
mic Vedas Buddha te : Jain d Upanishads,
authori xt[94] Vedas Agamas [note 2]
ty Denies: Denies: Affirm: other
Vedas Vedas texts[94][96]
Salvati Samsdras Nirvana Siddha, Moksha, Nirvana,
on uddhi[97 (realize Ś [99] Kaivalya
(Soteri ] ūnyatā) Nirvana Advaita, Yoga,
ology) [98] others: Jivanmuk
ti[100]
Dvaita,
theistic: Videham
ukti
Metap Śūnyatā[1 Anekānta Brahman[104]
hysics 01][102] vāda[103 [105]
(Ultim ]
ate
Reality
)

Political philosophy[edit]
The Arthashastra, attributed to the Mauryan minister Chanakya, is one
of the early Indian texts devoted to political philosophy. It is dated to 4th
century BCE and discusses ideas of statecraft and economic policy.
The political philosophy most closely associated with modern India is the
one of ahimsa (non-violence) and Satyagraha, popularised by Mahatma
Gandhi during the Indian struggle for independence. In turn it
influenced the later independence and civil rights movements, especially
those led by Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela. Prabhat
Ranjan Sarkar's Progressive Utilization Theory[106] is also a major
socio-economic and political philosophy.[107]
Integral humanism was a set of concepts drafted by Upadhyaya as
political program and adopted in 1965 as the official doctrine of the Jan
Sangh.
Upadhyaya considered that it was of utmost importance for India to
develop an indigenous economic model with a human being at center
stage. This approach made this concept different
from Socialism and Capitalism. Integral Humanism was adopted as Jan
Sangh's political doctrine and its new openness to other opposition
forces made it possible for the Hindu nationalist movement to have an
alliance in the early 1970s with the prominent Gandhian Sarvodaya
movement going on under the leadership of J. P. Narayan. This was
considered to be the first major public breakthrough for the Hindu
nationalist movement.
Influence[edit]
In appreciation of complexity of the Indian philosophy, T S Eliot wrote
that the great philosophers of India "make most of the great European
philosophers look like schoolboys".[108][109] Arthur
Schopenhauer used Indian philosophy to improve
upon Kantian thought. In the preface to his book The World As Will And
Representation, Schopenhauer writes that one who "has also received
and assimilated the sacred primitive Indian wisdom, then he is the best
of all prepared to hear what I have to say to him"[110] The 19th-century
American philosophical movement Transcendentalism was also
influenced by Indian thought.[111][112]
Scope of education:

What is Education?
Studying education is just what it sounds like, the study of education
itself. Education aims to explain educational outcomes - why people
learn in the way they do when living in different contexts such as in
families, schools, neighbourhoods and society. Thereby, it takes into
account the role of learning intentions, epistemological beliefs, cultural
contexts, the role of language and signs, the nature of academic and
vocational disciplines and how the memory works. As such, it is a very
complex and demanding subject. In turn, this study programme aims to
improve education, based on the assessment of past and current
research.

Three reasons to study Education:

1. Be part of someone’s learning process: by studying the learning

process, you have the chance to learn about techniques that help to
educate a person and make them feel comfortable in their
respective social environment. Many people working in
educational contexts say the best aspect of their job is seeing a
 person overcome personal problems and understand something
being taught. This process of education is something from which
they will benefit the rest of their lives and by studying education,
you become an important part of it!
2. Understand human behaviour and the development of society: the
learning process of a person is a life-long process which is always
affected by its overarching social relationships and surroundings.
Educational sciences research analyses behavioural shifts and
transfers of educational concepts to different societies, which gets
you in contact with a wide range of cultures, milieus and age
groups.
3. Interdisciplinary subject: education is a perfect degree for you to
combine with other subjects. Also, there is the option to specialise
in different areas such as adult learning.

What is Education?
Studying education is just what it sounds like, the study of education
itself. Education aims to explain educational outcomes - why people
learn in the way they do when living in different contexts such as in
families, schools, neighbourhoods and society. Thereby, it takes into
account the role of learning intentions, epistemological beliefs, cultural
contexts, the role of language and signs, the nature of academic and
vocational disciplines and how the memory works. As such, it is a very
complex and demanding subject. In turn, this study programme aims to
improve education, based on the assessment of past and current
research.

Three reasons to study Education:

1. Be part of someone’s learning process: by studying the learning

process, you have the chance to learn about techniques that help to
educate a person and make them feel comfortable in their
respective social environment. Many people working in
educational contexts say the best aspect of their job is seeing a
person overcome personal problems and understand something
being taught. This process of education is something from which
they will benefit the rest of their lives and by studying education,
you become an important part of it!
 2. Understand human behaviour and the development of society: the
learning process of a person is a life-long process which is always
affected by its overarching social relationships and surroundings.
Educational sciences research analyses behavioural shifts and
transfers of educational concepts to different societies, which gets
you in contact with a wide range of cultures, milieus and age
groups.
3. Interdisciplinary subject: education is a perfect degree for you to
combine with other subjects. Also, there is the option to specialise
in different areas such as adult learning.

THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC HAS CHANGED

EDUCATION FOREVER.
This is how 

 The COVID-19 has resulted in schools shut all across the world.
Globally, over 1.2 billion children are out of the classroom.

 As a result, education has changed dramatically, with the

distinctive rise of e-learning, whereby teaching is undertaken
remotely and on digital platforms.

 Research suggests that online learning has been shown to increase

retention of information, and take less time, meaning the changes
coronavirus have caused might be here to stay.

The coronavirus pandemic has forced students and educators across all
levels of education to rapidly adapt to online learning. The impact of this
— and the developments required to make it work — could permanently
change how education is delivered.
The global health pandemic has shined a harsh light on the vulnerabilities and
challenges humanity faces. It has provided a clear picture of existing inequalities—
and a clearer picture of what steps forward we need to take, chief among them
addressing the education of more than 1.5 billion students whose learning has been
hampered due to school closures. This report is the result of the collective work of the
International Commission on the Futures of Education, established by UNESCO in
2019. I would like to acknowledge the Members of the Commission for contributing
to the timely preparation of this report. It presents nine key ideas for navigating
through the COVID-19 crisis and its aftermath, contending that we cannot forget core
principles and known strengths as we face unprecedented disruption to economies,
societies and—our particular focus here— education systems. It is evident that we
cannot return to the world as it was before. One of the strongest messages in the
attached report is that our common humanity necessitates global solidarity.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides many of the necessary
signposts and guidelines. In this report, the International Commission on the
Futures of Education—established by UNESCO in 2019 and composed of thought
leaders from the worlds of academia, science, government, business and education—
presents nine ideas for concrete actions today that will advance education tomorrow.
1. Commit to strengthen education as a common good. Education is a bulwark
against inequalities. In education as in health, we are safe when everybody is
safe; we flourish when everybody flourishes. 
2. Expand the definition of the right to education so that it addresses the
importance of connectivity and access to knowledge and information.  The
Commission calls for a global public discussion—that includes, among others,
learners of all ages—on ways the right to education needs to be expanded.
3. Value the teaching profession and teacher collaboration. There has been
remarkable innovation in the responses of educators to the COVID-19 crisis,
with those systems most engaged with families and communities showing the
most resilience.  We must encourage conditions that give frontline educators
autonomy and flexibility to act collaboratively.
4. Promote student, youth and children’s participation and rights.
Intergenerational justice and democratic principles should compel us to
prioritize the participation of students and young people broadly in the co-
construction of desirable change.
5. Protect the social spaces provided by schools as we transform education.  The
school as a physical space is indispensable.  Traditional classroom
organization must give way to a variety of ways of ‘doing school’ but the school
as a separate space-time of collective living, specific and different from other
spaces of learning must be preserved.
6. Make free and open source technologies available to teachers and students.
Open educational resources and open access digital tools must be supported. 
Education cannot thrive with ready-made content built outside of the
pedagogical space and outside of human relationships between teachers and
students.  Nor can education be dependent on digital platforms controlled by
private companies.
7. Ensure scientific literacy within the curriculum. This is the right time for deep
reflection on curriculum, particularly as we struggle against the denial of
scientific knowledge and actively fight misinformation.
8. Protect domestic and international financing of public education. The
pandemic has the power to undermine several decades of advances.  National
governments, international organizations, and all education and development
partners must recognize the need to strengthen public health and social
services but simultaneously mobilize around the protection of public
education and it’s financing.
 9. Advance global solidarity to end current levels of inequality. COVID-19 has
shown us the extent to which our societies exploit power imbalances and our
global system exploits inequalities.  The Commission calls for renewed
commitments to international cooperation and multilateralism, together with
a revitalized global solidarity that has empathy and an appreciation of our
common humanity at its core.
COVID-19 presents us with a real challenge and a real responsibility. These ideas
invite debate, engagement and action by governments, international organizations,
civil society, educational professionals, as well as learners and stakeholders at all
levels.
(A published article: https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/education_in_a_post-
covid_world-nine_ideas_for_public_action.pdf)