Future Skills

The text is structured into four developmental areas (rational, emotional, spiritual, transformational) and four levels (I, You, We, All). The visual representation of skill classes is helpful. However, the specific descriptions of skills and their link to practice fields remain vague. Some metaphors (e.g., 'Upshift of the Human Condition') reduce clarity and pedagogical applicability.

Quick-start exercises and digital assessments are mentioned, but their content and methodology are not explained. The Future Skills Assessments are not publicly documented. There is no level-specific operationalization through competence levels, indicators, or transferable didactic formats. The navigator serves more as an inspirational meta-model than an implementable educational tool.

The paper deeply contextualizes Future Skills in relation to the VUCA world, societal uncertainty, technological disruption, and human-made crises. Change is described systemically and human-centered rather than tech-centered. This integration is comprehensive and connected to current transformation discourse.

The text repeatedly speaks of a 'new way of being human' and an 'upshift of the human condition.' Concepts such as meaning, self-efficacy, connection, and responsibility are central. However, a systematic ethical framework is missing. Concepts like justice, human rights, or democratic competence are not addressed. The perspective remains personal-existential rather than societally ethical.

The text emphasizes the need for societal co-creation, particularly via the 'planetary level.' There is a clear transformative ambition: 'a bridge between personal potential development, social action, and planetary life.' However, how collective processes are supported institutionally or politically remains unclear.

The article offers a deep and differentiated future analysis, links Future Skills to SDGs, reflects VUCA conditions, and emphasizes human-centered, shapeable futures. The connection of content, tone, and objective is exemplary.

Interdisciplinary sources such as neuroscience, systems theory, positive psychology, and game theory are cited. However, no educational theories or models are referenced. The educational concept is implicit, with terms like 'potential development' and 'growth mindset' providing loose orientation. Didactic grounding is missing.

The competence logic is multidimensional, addressing thinking, feeling, acting, and connectedness. However, there is no clear differentiation between skills, attitudes, and abilities. The 16 skill classes are not fully defined or operationalized, making assessment and support of competence acquisition unclear.

No information is given on conceptual development, empirical validation, or institutional participation. The origin of the 16 skills remains unclear and is only referred to an external website, which lacks scientific documentation.

Formats such as learning journeys, group training, and assessments are mentioned, but it remains unclear how they are integrated, funded, or scaled. There are no references to cooperation with educational institutions or policymakers. The approach focuses primarily on personal and corporate self-organization.

The navigator aims to promote future viability and well-being for humans, society, and the planet and refers to the SDGs. However, it lacks strategic framing through institutional goals, educational planning, or evaluation structures.