Voices and Faces of Teachers at the Scuola del Noi

Following the first account, the series Voices and Faces of Teachers at the Scuola del Noi continues with a new contribution that offers an in-depth look at the value of the professional community. The interviewee’s words powerfully highlight the need, shared by many teachers, not to face the complexities of contemporary schooling alone – from educational innovation and artificial intelligence to citizenship and inclusion. This reflection captures the deepest meaning of the School of Us: making collaboration not an abstract principle, but a concrete practice of professional growth.

The subject of the second interview is Elisabetta Nanni, a music teacher and trainer.

What professional or personal need prompted you to join the community of teachers at the Scuola del Noi?

The need to move away from a solitary working environment which, in schools, risks becoming professional isolation. It is not an abstract feeling: it is what you feel when you return to the staff room after a lesson in which something interesting has happened, and there is no one with whom to really discuss it. At a time when complexity has increased – with digital technology, artificial intelligence, new ministerial guidelines and increasingly complex educational needs – I felt the need for genuine discussion, not just a quick chat between lessons. I wasn’t looking for quick fixes or ready-made solutions. I was looking for a space for shared reflection, where it was possible to engage with the difficulties without the pressure of having to have the answers straight away. On a personal level, too, there was something deeper: the need to rediscover meaning. To understand the direction in which schools are heading, and what my contribution as a teacher might be today, after almost forty years of teaching, in a context that has changed radically.

How has participating in the community changed the way you view your role as a teacher?

It has made more explicit a transformation that was probably already taking place within me, but which struggled to find the right words. Today I increasingly see myself as a designer of learning environments. It is not just a change in terminology: it is a cultural shift. The community helps to focus on the value of the process, not just the final product. Greater emphasis is placed on open-ended questions, opportunities for reflection, and moments of pause in which meaning is constructed. This tangibly changes the way we conduct ourselves in the classroom: more listening, more openness to the unexpected, and more intentionality in methodological choices.

What, in your view, is the most important objective of the Scuola del Noi?

To build a shared professional culture. It is not just about ‘networking’ – an expression that risks remaining empty – but about developing a common language, an educational vision that places collaboration, mutual responsibility and awareness of one’s own role at the centre. The Scuola del Noi is a space where we genuinely try to move beyond the idea of the teacher as an isolated figure, each shut away in their own classroom, in their own subject. It is a space where we work towards a truly community-based school, and the word ‘truly’ is important, because the community aspect is often declared but rarely practised. Here, however, it is practised.

How does the project help you prepare your students for the present, not just the future?

It shifts the focus from skills ‘to be acquired one day’ to experiences to be lived now. This is the difference I feel most strongly. Preparing for the present means offering students tools to interpret what surrounds them today. It is not about anticipating future scenarios, but about building interpretative skills in the here and now. Even the use of artificial intelligence, in this sense, is not an exercise in the future: it is a daily practice of questioning reality. Who produced this content? How was it generated? What is it telling me, and why?

Have you adapted a teaching practice thanks to the community?

Yes, especially during the planning phase. I’ve started designing activities that are less linear and more open-ended, where students can truly play an active role in constructing meaning, rather than simply completing an assigned task. It completely changes the dynamic: students stop waiting for the teacher’s answer and start constructing their own. My use of artificial intelligence has changed too: not as a shortcut to produce something quickly, but as a tool to stimulate reflection, discussion and questions. The difference lies entirely in the pedagogical intent with which it is proposed.

How important is it to be able to share doubts and experiments with other teachers?

It is fundamental. I would say it is the most important thing. Sharing doubts, not just successes, is what makes authentic professional growth possible. It is through discussing difficulties that competence is truly built. When an experiment is shared, even when it is still uncertain or incomplete, it becomes part of our collective knowledge. It means we don’t always have to start from scratch, avoiding both improvisation and rigidity. It is a way of valuing the everyday educational research that exists, which is real, but which too often remains invisible.

Do you feel better equipped to tackle complex topics such as AI, digital technology and citizenship?

I feel better equipped from a cultural and methodological perspective, and this is a substantial difference compared to mere technical updating. I no longer feel the urgency to ‘keep up’ with the tools – an urgency which, particularly in the field of AI, is bound to generate nothing but anxiety. Instead, I try to understand the phenomena: what is changing, why it is changing, and what questions we need to learn to ask. This also transforms the way we approach these topics in the classroom: not as content to be explained and learnt, but as subjects for shared reflection. Artificial intelligence is not a topic that is ‘explained’ and then moved on from. It is something we are all already immersed in, and one that is worth pausing to think about together. The community helps to develop a more critical and less superficial perspective,

What kind of school do you want to help build?

A school capable of being inclusive in practice, not just in planning documents. A school that truly values differences as a genuine resource for thought and approach. A school where teaching methods are truly at the heart of professional focus, and technology is a tool serving a pedagogical vision. And above all, a school where students can develop autonomy, critical thinking and the ability to collaborate – not because these are skills ‘demanded by the world of work’, but because they must be able to tackle complexity.

What responsibility do you feel today as a teacher in the age of AI?

A very strong educational and cultural responsibility. Artificial intelligence is not just a technical tool to learn how to use: it is a paradigm shift affecting the way we produce and evaluate knowledge, and the way we relate to creativity. As teachers, we have the task of guiding and educating students to understand it, not just to use it in an informed way. Our students are already immersed in this environment. They are not entering the digital world: they live in it. Schools cannot pretend that this is something external. Today, teachers are also called upon to make the environment in which students live and learn comprehensible.

If the Scuola del Noi did not exist, what would be missing from your journey?

A point of reference would be missing: a place, even if only a mental one, where one can pause to think, to reflect, to engage in dialogue without the pressure of immediate results. Without a community, the real risk is proceeding through isolated attempts, with plenty of energy but little shared direction. You do, you try, you change, but without really knowing where you’re heading. The Scuola del Noi, on the other hand, can offer continuity, meaning and direction. And in a profession where discontinuity is often the norm—changing classes, colleagues coming and going—having a place of continuity is no luxury.

It is a professional necessity.

What would you say to a teacher who thinks they ‘don’t have time’ to join a community?

I would say that this is precisely why they should do it. Time invested in a community is not time taken away from work: it is time that improves the quality of work. Engaging with other teachers allows one to avoid mistakes already made by others, find new ideas, and give meaning to one’s own practices rather than carrying them out out of habit.

But there is something even more important: the feeling of not having time, in schools, is often a symptom of a lack of purpose. When you work alone, without dialogue and without a shared vision, everything becomes heavier and takes longer. The community is not ‘something extra’ to add to an already full workload. It is an integral part of teaching professionalism, the part that transforms a solitary profession into a collective practice.