Education 2047 : THE FOUR QUADRANTS THAT EXPLAIN EVERYTHING WRONG (AND RIGHT) ABOUT HIGHER EDUCATION

Education 2047 #Blog 52 (06 NOV 2025)

The Question-Answer Lens That Exposes Education’s Fault Lines

For decades, we have diagnosed education through its exams, curricula, and infrastructure—but what if the deeper problem lies in something far simpler? Every learning act involves two constants: a question and an answer. Whether these are known or unknown to the learner and the teacher determines the nature of learning itself.

If both are known, learning is about memory.
If the question is known but the answer unknown, learning becomes exploration.
If both are unknown, learning becomes discovery.

This simple logic unravels the entire architecture of our education system. It maps directly to three paradigms that define the evolution of learning across a lifetime—Pedagogy, Paragogy, and Heutagogy. Each paradigm aligns with a dominant learning domain—affective, psychomotor, and cognitive—and therefore with a particular stage of education.

The Four Quadrants of Learning: Mapping the Known and the Unknown

To represent this relationship visually, I developed a Four-Quadrant Framework (Figure below).

The Four Quadrants of Learning: Mapping the Transition from Pedagogy to Heutagogy through the Known–Unknown Matrix of Questions and Answers

The horizontal axis represents the known–unknown continuum of questions, while the vertical axis depicts that of answers. Together, they define four distinct learning spaces.

Quadrant	Question	Answer	Paradigm	Learning Type	Dominant Domain
Q1– Known Questions, Known Answers (KAKQ)	Known	Known	Pedagogy	Teacher-directed learning	Affective
Q2– Known Questions, Unknown Answers (KAUQ)	Known	Unknown	Paragogy	Inquiry-based learning	Psychomotor
Q3– Unknown Questions, Known Answers (UAKQ)	Unknown	Known	Paragogy	Peer-directed learning	Psychomotor
Q4– Unknown Questions, Unknown Answers (UAUQ)	Unknown	Unknown	Heutagogy	Self-determined learning	Cognitive

The framework reveals not only how learners grow, but also how education should mature—from the known toward the unknown.

Quadrant 1: The Comfort Zone of Pedagogy

In Quadrant 1, both the question and answer are predetermined. The teacher asks; the learner repeats. This model is useful for building early foundations, discipline, and shared understanding— Bloom’s lower levels: Remember and Understand besides the dominating affective domain.

However, the danger lies in its overuse.
When pedagogy persists into higher levels, it converts curiosity into compliance. Students learn to reproduce rather than reason. Our classrooms reward accuracy, not inquiry, and the coaching industry thrives on that predictability.

Pedagogy is necessary to begin the journey of learning, but fatal when it becomes the destination.

Quadrant 2: The Missing Bridge— Known Questions, Unknown Answers

This is the space of inquiry and research learning. Here, the problem is defined but the solution is not yet known. Learners investigate, interpret, and test hypotheses. It builds the psychomotor bridge that connects theory to practice and pedagogy to innovation.

Unfortunately, Indian schools and colleges treat inquiry as a side activity. Projects are decorative; experiments are demonstrative. The courage to explore uncertainty— so vital for scientific temperament— is rarely cultivated. Consequently, few students arrive at higher education equipped for research.

Quadrant 3: The Space of Collaboration— Unknown Questions, Known Answers

This quadrant nurtures peer-directed learning or paragogy. Learners face unfamiliar contexts but rely on established tools or principles to create solutions. It corresponds to Bloom’s Apply and Analyze stages and develops teamwork, design, and execution skills.

For instance, “Design an app for campus food delivery” uses known coding principles but demands creative application. This is where learners discover the joy of doing with others. Yet, in reality, group projects are often perfunctory, assessment-driven, and teacher-controlled—robbing students of genuine collaboration.

Quadrant 4: The Frontier of Heutagogy— Unknown Questions, Unknown Answers

The highest approach to learning— heutagogy— emerges when neither questions nor answers are known in advance. Learners identify problems, design solutions, and evaluate their own learning paths. It represents the Evaluate and Create stages of Bloom’s taxonomy and demands self-determination, reflection, and adaptability.

A heutagogical learner might investigate an urban waste crisis, develop a technological solution, and test it with community partners—without waiting for institutional direction.

This is the essence of research, entrepreneurship, and lifelong learning.
Yet, in our universities, this quadrant barely exists—confined to isolated innovation cells while the rest of academia remains exam-centric.

Diagnosing the System: Where Each Level Went Wrong

Education should progress from Q1 → Q4, matching each learner’s maturity.
However, India’s ecosystem stays stuck in the Known–Known zone at every stage.

Level of Education	Intended Quadrant(s)	Actual Dominant Quadrant	Expected Domain Focus	Core Learning Objective	Systemic Misalignment/ What Went Wrong
Primary (Classes 1–5)	Q1– Pedagogy (Known Q, Known A)	Q1– Pedagogy	Affective– curiosity, empathy, foundational habits	Learning through play, stories, and observation	Overloaded with academic content; early testing kills wonder and emotional growth.
Middle/ Upper Primary (Classes 6–8)	Q1→ Q2 Transition (Pedagogy→ Inquiry)	Q1– Pedagogy	Affective–Psychomotor Bridge– exploration, experimentation	Guided inquiry, small projects, teamwork	Standardized syllabi and rote exams suppress curiosity; little peer or experiential work.
Secondary (Classes 9–10)	Q2→ Q3– Paragogy (Known Q, Unknown A)	Q1– Pedagogy	Psychomotor– application, collaboration, experimentation	Applying knowledge through projects and labs	Board pressure dominates; labs mimic textbooks; creativity excluded from evaluation.
Higher Secondary (Classes 11–12)	Q3→ Q4– Paragogy→ Heutagogy Transition	Q1– Pedagogy (with traces of Q3)	Psychomotor–Cognitive Bridge– reasoning, synthesis, choice	Linking subjects to real-world issues	Coaching culture replaces inquiry; boards test recall; early specialization narrows thinking.
Undergraduate	Q3→ Q4– Paragogy→ Heutagogy	Q1/ partial Q2	Cognitive– critical thinking, innovation	Exploring unknown problems with known tools	Attendance and exams outweigh creativity; limited interdisciplinary or industry exposure.
Postgraduate	Q4– Heutagogy (Unknown Q, Unknown A)	Q1/ Q2 – Pedagogic Research	Advanced Cognitive– evaluation, synthesis	Independent inquiry and reflection	Dissertations recycle prior studies; safe topics encouraged; originality undervalued.
Doctoral Research	Q4– Heutagogy (Unknown–Unknown)	Q1 disguised as Q4	Meta-Cognitive– knowledge creation, theory-building	Generating new knowledge	Many theses replicate known work; supervision and evaluation reward compliance over creativity.

Patterns that emerge:

Pedagogy overstays its purpose, persisting where autonomy should take over.
Paragogy is missing, depriving learners of peer collaboration and applied practice.
Heutagogy never arrives, except in isolated start-up or innovation cells.
Domain progression breaks down—affective, psychomotor, and cognitive learning remain unsequenced.

The Consequences: Coaching, Cognitive Stagnation, and Collapsed Curiosity

When every level remains in the known-known quadrant:

Coaching replaces curiosity, and test preparation masquerades as learning.
Employability declines, since graduates can answer but not ask.
Research loses integrity, because repetition replaces originality.
Innovation evaporates, as institutions measure conformity, not creativity.

This explains India’s paradox—rising literacy and enrolment, yet persistent unemployment, low innovation index, and limited intellectual risk-taking. We are teaching answers when we should be teaching awareness.

Redistributing the Quadrants: The Way Forward

The current distribution of learning effort (≈ 85 % in Q1) must be fundamentally rebalanced.

Quadrant	Current Share	Target Share	Required Action
Q1– Known–Known (Pedagogy)	85 %	15 %	Restrict to foundational stages; integrate play, empathy, and reflection.
Q2– Known Q/ Unknown A (Inquiry)	5 %	25 %	Embed project-based and inquiry-led curricula from middle school onward.
Q3– Unknown Q/ Known A (Paragogy)	8 %	25 %	Institutionalize peer collaboration, maker labs, skill challenges.
Q4– Unknown–Unknown (Heutagogy)	2 %	35 %	Redesign higher education around SPRINT cycles and self-determined learning.

A balanced distribution will ensure that learning matures with the learner, steadily shifting from dependence to autonomy.

Aligning Domains with Educational Stages

Domain	Aligned Quadrant(s)	Ideal Stage	Learning Focus
Affective	Q1	Primary	Values, empathy, curiosity
Psychomotor	Q2–Q3	Middle & Secondary	Skill building, teamwork, experimentation
Cognitive	Q3–Q4	Higher Secondary & UG	Problem solving, reasoning
Meta-Cognitive	Q4	PG & Research	Reflection, creation, lifelong learning

This sequencing ensures that emotional maturity precedes cognitive sophistication, and practice precedes theory—precisely the inverse of how education often operates today.

Policy and Institutional Implications

Transforming education through this framework requires simultaneous reforms across five levers:

Curriculum– Replace static syllabi with SPRINT Learning Cycles (Self-Paced, Problem-Based, Reflective, Innovative, Navigated, Transformative).
Assessment– Shift from summative exams to rubric-based evaluation emphasizing creativity, collaboration, and ethical AI use.
Teacher Training– Redefine teachers as mentors and co-learners, integrating paragogy and heutagogy into B.Ed. and M.Ed. programs.
Technology– Position AI as a thinking partner; learners must declare and justify its use.
Research Ecosystem– Value originality, societal relevance, and patents or prototypes as legitimate research outputs.

From Answers to Awareness: A New Educational Ethos

Ultimately, this framework is not about managing information but mastering uncertainty.

The next generation must learn how to learn when no one knows the question or the answer.

Such learners will not just survive the AI age- they will lead it.

Education’s purpose is no longer to fill minds with facts but to free minds from fear.

When learners travel from the known to the unknown:

Teachers evolve into facilitators.
Classrooms evolve into ecosystems.
Learning evolves into living.

Conclusion: From the Next Class to the Next Mind

The Four-Quadrant Model clarifies where we went wrong and how we can recalibrate.
If Primary builds empathy, Middle builds curiosity, Secondary builds competence, Higher Education builds creativity, and Research builds new knowledge, then every level complements the next.

Let pedagogy remain where it belongs- at the start.
Let paragogy and heutagogy define the future.
Only then will India move from pushing learners to the next class to propelling them to the next mind.

* * *

About the author

Dr. Neeraj Saxena serves as the Pro-Chancellor of JIS University, Kolkata, blending his expertise in educational leadership with a background in technology foresight. His earlier roles at national institutions such as AICTE and TIFAC enabled him to convert visionary concepts into actionable reforms in India's education system.

As co-author of Technology Vision 2035: Education Roadmap, he continues to contribute to policy thinking and innovation in education. His work reflects an independent, research-driven approach to reimagining teacher education, grounded in experience and guided by the urgent need for cognitive transformation in schools.

Through Education2047, Dr. Saxena advances the conversation on heutagogy and self-determined learning, advocating for educational systems that prepare students not just for known careers, but for the capacity to navigate any future—known or unknown.

Previous (51) blogs

§ Teaching Teachers to Think: Redesigning Secondary Education for Higher Cognitive Learning

· § The Quiet Revolution: How Everyday Practices Can Transform Higher Education for the AI Age

· § Books and Learning 2047: From Sacred Texts to Fading Relevance

· § Rebuilding Trust in Education: AI-based Transcript Revolution

§ The Centenary Disappointment Awaits: Teachers' Choice Between Evolution and Extinction

§ Breaking Industrial Cages: Society6.0's Path to Educational Liberation by 2035

§ Decoding Human Potential: Why Grades Are Failing Our Future

§ Ancient Wisdom, Digital Age: What Dronachatya Knew About Teaching With AI

§ Will Universities Survive the Age of AI and BCI ?

§ From Factories of Marks to Foundries of Character: Indian Higher Education in the AI Age

§ Breaking the Silos: Remagining Universities without Subjects (PART II)