BOOK: Worlds Unfolding

 

Paperback

Price:

$65.00/£55.00

ISBN:

Published:

Oct 20, 2026

Pages:

400

Size:

7.5 x 9.5 in.

Illus:

600 color illus.

Humans are seekers, forever striving to make sense of the multiple worlds in which they live: the skies above, the depths below, earthbound environments, and the body itself. Worlds Unfolding explores this insatiable drive through The Huntington Library’s extraordinary collections in science, medicine, and technology, which span from the tenth century to today. The book, a five-volume slipcase set with a booklet that includes an introduction by Bill Nye, provokes questions fundamental to this pursuit of knowledge. Through suggestive texts and more than 625 illustrations, Worlds Unfolding presents stories featuring the unexpected twists, turns, and conceptual leaps of science.

Each volume in the boxed set focuses on a specific realm of human curiosity—Above (astronomy, aviation, aerospace); Below (geology, mining, oceanography); Within (anatomy, medicine, electricity); Beyond (exploration, science fiction); and Alive (natural history, ecosystems). This dynamic, multidisciplinary approach addresses the ongoing, imperfect evolution of human inquiry. Across centuries of trial and error, illusion and triumph, the history of science is a continuously unfolding quest.

AUTHORS

Jennifer A. Watts is senior curator for library special projects at The Huntington. Her many books include Nineteen Nineteen and A Strange and Fearful Interest: Death, Mourning, and Memory in the American Civil War. Daniel Lewis is the Dibner Senior Curator for the History of Science and Technology at The Huntington. He is the author of Twelve Trees: The Deep Roots of Our Future and Belonging on an Island: Birds, Extinction, and Evolution in Hawai‘i. Joel A. Klein is the Molina Curator for the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences at The Huntington. Natalie Lawler is assistant curator for library special projects at The Huntington. Bill Nye is an engineer, educator, and author, best known as the host of the Emmy Award–winning PBS show Bill Nye the Science Guy.

IMAGES

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

  
  

• 

The e-book of this edition includes all five volumes and the booklet.

Published in association with The Huntington

Child-centered play therapy yields measurable yet heterogeneous benefits for autistic children

 A systematic review of 13 studies covering 25 years of research finds that child-centered play therapy improves social interaction, communication, emotional regulation, and repetitive behaviors in children with autism spectrum disorder—and points to AI and virtual reality as the next frontier for personalized intervention.

As autism spectrum disorder (ASD) affects millions of children worldwide, researchers continue to search for interventions that respect children’s natural modes of expression while delivering measurable therapeutic benefits. A new scoping review published in Frontiers of Digital Education provides a comprehensive synthesis of evidence on child-centered play therapy (CCPT)—a humanistic approach that positions children as active agents in their own healing—and outlines how intelligent digital technologies could address the field's longstanding limitations.

The study, conducted by Jingying Chen, Suyun Tang, and Guangshuai Wang from the National Engineering Research Center for Educational Big Data at Central China Normal University, was published on September 10, 2026.

25 Years of Evidence: Consistent but Heterogeneous Outcomes

The researchers analyzed 13 studies published between 2000 and 2025, involving 130 children with ASD aged 3 to 11. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, the review examined intervention protocols, outcome measures, and therapeutic effects across a wide range of settings—from university clinics and school playrooms to rural classrooms.

The findings indicate that CCPT, which is grounded in humanistic psychology and emphasizes children’s innate potential for self-healing and growth, produces measurable improvements across multiple domains. Participation in CCPT was associated with enhancements in social interaction (12 studies), communication difficulties (6 studies), repetitive behaviors (6 studies), baseline behavioral functioning (4 studies), emotional issues (4 studies), and adverse childhood experiences (1 study).

Notably, the intervention group in one randomized controlled trial showed a significant decrease in Social Responsiveness Scale-2 total scores (78.83 to 70.58), while the control group’s symptoms worsened (73.64 to 77.91), yielding a large effect size (ηp² = 0.47). Another study found that CCPT significantly boosted alpha wave activity (p < 0.001) as measured by electroencephalography (EEG), indicating improved neural relaxation and an enhanced ability to suppress distracting information in social situations.

However, the review also revealed substantial individual differences. High-functioning children demonstrated more pronounced improvements in social skills and empathy, whereas low-functioning children required extended periods to establish therapeutic rapport. Some studies reported mixed effects, with certain participants showing no improvement or even regression in specific domains.

From Playroom to Daily Life: The Generalization Challenge

While CCPT’s flexibility allows it to be combined with other approaches—including robot-assisted play, music therapy, and rhythmic synchronization activities—the review identified a persistent limitation: Skills acquired in the playroom often show limited transferability to children’s daily lives.

“VR and augmented reality technologies address this gap by simulating authentic social scenarios, effectively bridging the divide between therapeutic acquisition and real-world application,” the authors note. Virtual playrooms eliminate constraints imposed by physical time and space, allowing for feasible adjustments based on children’s individual needs while mitigating concerns about fatigue and emotional fluctuations affecting therapeutic outcomes.

A New Paradigm: “Child-Led + Data-Driven” CCPT

The review proposes a forward-looking theoretical framework for what the authors call a “child-led + data-driven” two-dimensional CCPT paradigm. In this model, children maintain autonomy in selecting physical or virtual toys, determining play themes, and freely transitioning between VR and AR environments, while therapists adhere strictly to nondirective principles.

Simultaneously, multimodal data collection—including behavioral data (play duration, toy selection frequency), physiological data (eye-tracking, heart rate variability, galvanic skin response), and affective computing (facial micro-expressions, vocal affect)—provides objective therapeutic benchmarks. Machine learning identifies deviations as “critical behavioral nodes,” enabling dynamic adjustments to the therapeutic environment.

The authors emphasize that these two dimensions are not mutually exclusive but interact dynamically through intelligent systems. “Data systems provide indirect guidance through environmental fine-tuning rather than direct instruction,” they write. When AI detects an increase in a child’s anxiety—evidenced by repeated discarding of virtual toys—the VR scenario might automatically dim the lighting, play soothing music, or summon a docile virtual pet. Yet the ultimate decision regarding whether and how to intervene remains with the therapist, avoiding overreliance on technology.

Addressing the Evidence Gap

The review also highlights a critical shortage of high-quality studies. Among the 13 reviewed studies, only 2 were randomized controlled trials meeting high-quality criteria. The authors attribute this evidence gap to four methodological challenges: the inherent complexity of CCPT’s relational nature, the heterogeneity of the ASD population, resource constraints, and the inadequate use of digital tools in existing research.

“The predominance of case studies may reflect that the effect of CCPT in educational interventions for children with ASD remains at an exploratory stage,” the authors note. “Future research should integrate both paradigms: Case studies may inform localized variables for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), while rigorous RCTs could help correct over-interpreted associations from case studies.”

Implications for Digital Educational Tool Design

The findings offer three key guidelines for designing digital educational tools and learning environments for children with ASD. First, the significant individual differences revealed by the research necessitate tools with deep personalization capabilities. Second, digital environments should prioritize constructing open-ended interactive narratives and game scenarios that foster social initiative, joint attention, and symbolic play, rather than isolated skills-training modules. Third, a blended learning ecosystem—seamlessly integrating quantifiable, adaptable personalized digital practice with opportunities for skill application in safe, supportive real or virtual social environments—would create a complete closed loop from personalized training to socialized application.

This design philosophy—combining a “data-driven personalized core” with a “child-led interactive shell”—constitutes the systemic blueprint for implementing the proposed paradigm.

---

DOI

10.1007/s44366-026-0098-7 

Large language models in lesson planning

 A narrative review of 53 studies finds that while LLMs can generate well-structured lesson plans and save teachers time, their output often lacks the contextual awareness, differentiation, and pedagogical depth needed for direct classroom use.

As generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude become increasingly prevalent in educational settings, teachers are experimenting with using them to draft lesson plans. But how good are these AI-generated plans, really? A new narrative review published in Frontiers of Digital Education offers a systematic synthesis of the current evidence, concluding that large language models (LLMs) can serve as useful support tools for lesson planning—but are not yet capable of replacing the teacher’s pedagogical role.

The study, conducted by Vassilis A. Failadis, Sotiris K. Tasoulis, Spiros V. Georgakopoulos, and Vassilis P. Plagianakos from the University of Thessaly, Greece, was published on September 11, 2026.

A Focused Look at an Underexplored Area

While much existing literature on AI in education takes a broad approach, this review narrows its scope specifically to lesson planning—an essential part of a teacher's daily work and a core element of professional preparation. Following the search–appraisal–synthesis–analysis (SALSA) framework, the researchers analyzed 53 recent publications, organizing their findings around four main themes: quality and pedagogical value, challenges and limitations, teachers’ attitudes and perceptions, and improvements and future directions.

Well-Structured but Lacking Pedagogical Depth

Across the reviewed studies, LLM-generated lesson plans are frequently described as well-organized, with clear instructional formats. Most studies acknowledge that platforms such as ChatGPT can produce structured plans following common instructional models—for example, organizing activities into brainstorming, group discussion, guided exploration, presentation, and evaluation stages.

However, empirical evidence suggests that while these plans are often clearly structured, they typically provide only a general framework and require significant adaptation before they can be effectively implemented in real classrooms. Key limitations identified across the literature include:

• Limited pedagogical depth: Teaching practices suggested by LLMs tend to promote procedural knowledge rather than conceptual understanding, offering little support for complex learning processes such as reasoning, reflection, and justification.
• Weak differentiation: Plans typically do not include strategies for individualization or alternatives for students with different learning profiles—a limitation that is particularly pronounced in specialized contexts such as special education.
• Unrealistic time planning: One study found that a plan designed for one hour would require at least three hours in practice, with LLMs assigning very short durations to essential tasks while giving more time to reminder stages.
• Inconsistent output quality: High variance has been reported even within the same prompt groups, with outputs generated from identical prompts differing by at least five rubric elements.

“These findings suggest that producing LLM-generated lesson plans is not a one-step process but involves iterative refinement,” the authors note. “The quality of the generated material depends partly on the clarity and specificity of the prompts.”

Teachers Remain Central to the Process

The review found that while most teachers acknowledge the usefulness of AI tools in lesson planning, they simultaneously express reservations about their pedagogical adequacy. Teachers use AI to generate content, but many still prefer to work collaboratively with colleagues and emphasize the need for clear policies to regulate its use.

Some educators see LLMs as a helpful aid but do not believe they can replace teachers’ pedagogical judgment. Many agree that AI can assist with the initial organization of a lesson, but stress that the final responsibility for adapting and applying the plan lies with teachers.

“There appears to be a difference in how teachers respond to AI, depending on their level of experience: Younger educators tend to be more open to using AI, while more experienced ones remain cautious,” the authors observe. “This difference illustrates how teachers’ perspectives are influenced by professional experience and familiarity with classroom practice.”

Four Directions for Improvement

The review identifies four main directions that appear frequently in the literature for improving the reliability and pedagogical value of LLM-generated lesson plans:

1. Teacher training and AI literacy—Educators need appropriate preparation to understand what AI can do and to develop the ability to adapt and assess the content it produces.
2. Prompt engineering and reflective use—The pedagogical value of generated content depends directly on how clear, precise, and well-targeted the prompts are.
3. Policy development and ethical guidelines—Clear policies are needed to ensure responsible and educationally appropriate use of AI tools.
4. Model improvement and pedagogical alignment—AI tools need enhanced features and greater flexibility in instructional design, including guided interfaces and options for teachers to provide contextual information.

Research Gaps and Future Directions

Despite the growing number of publications on LLMs in lesson planning, the review identifies four important gaps in the literature. First, most studies remain theoretical or rely on teachers’ opinions without examining what happens when these plans are actually applied in the classroom. Second, most studies are based on qualitative observations, interviews, or questionnaires, with limited direct comparisons between teacher-created and LLM-generated lesson plans. Third, the literature is geographically concentrated, with the United States and Türkiye appearing most frequently. Fourth, limited attention has been given to the processes through which teachers interact with AI systems during lesson planning.

Recent empirical evidence also points to a difference between perceived and actual quality. One study found that although teacher-created lesson plans were rated higher in quality overall, teachers were unable to reliably distinguish between LLM-generated and teacher-created plans. Another found that refined LLM-generated mathematics lesson plans received high evaluation scores and, in several cases, outperformed teacher-created lesson plans—although teacher-generated lesson procedures were often more closely consistent with classroom practice.

A Tool for Support, Not Substitution

The review concludes that LLMs can serve as useful tools for lesson planning, but they are not yet capable of replacing the teacher’s pedagogical role. While LLM-generated lesson plans are usually well-structured, organized, and goal-oriented, they tend to fall short in adaptation, differentiation, and pedagogy.

“LLMs should currently be viewed as support for lesson planning rather than as ready-made planning tools and should not yet be considered a substitute for pedagogical expertise,” the authors write. “Their use makes sense when they function as support tools and not as substitutes for pedagogical judgment.”

---

DOI

10.1007/s44366-026-0099-6 

Combining literacy promotion with community assistance improves developmental outcomes

Literacy promotion programs, combined with community-based support programs, can affect literacy development in Latino children from birth to 18 months of age, Rutgers researchers have found.

“Our study is one of the first of its kind to test a cross-sector approach,” said Manuel E. Jimenez, associate professor in the Department of Pediatrics at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and lead author of the study. “We found that aligning these supports for families resulted in more responsive parent-child interactions and better social-emotional health for children compared with standard literacy promotion alone.”

Less than a third of U.S. fourth graders read at a proficient level or above, according to the Nation’s Report Card. A 2025 study in the Journal of School Psychology found there are literacy disparities among racial and ethnic groups, with Black and Hispanic children more likely to experience early reading difficulties than their white and Asian peers. 

Literacy promotion programs, such as Reach Out and Read — which enlists the support of primary care providers to encourage families to make reading a part of their routines — can improve reading and communication skills. However, evidence has shown that additional strategies, such as text messaging caregivers in between visits to the doctor, can produce even better results.

The study in Pediatrics, a publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics, included three intervention strategies. The first was a literacy promotion program that included free books and modelled reading during preventive visits beginning at six months of age. The second added text messaging for a duration of 18 months. The third combined the latter two with referrals to Connecting New Jersey (CNJ), a Help Me Grow affiliated statewide initiative that connects families with support services for young children.

The results showed that combining literacy promotion programs with referrals to Connecting New Jersey resulted in significant improvements in verbal responsiveness and social-emotional development nine months after enrollment. The intervention also demonstrated enhanced social-emotional development 18 months after enrollment.

“This study provides evidence that integrating primary care-based literacy promotion with systems-based efforts in the community to support children and families can optimize its impact on relational and developmental health,” Jimenez said.

DIY filter systems improve air quality in classrooms

 

Tests in university classes show that simple, low-cost systems can remove airborne particles with little disruption from fan noise.

Peer-Reviewed Publication

American Chemical Society

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

A C-R Box is made from a standard box fan, four high-efficiency filters, two pieces of cardboard, and tape, creating a device that can improve air quality in active classrooms.

view more 

Credit: Adapted from ACS ES&T Air 2026, DOI: 10.1021/acsestair.6c00143

As students return to school and cold and flu season begins, researchers are studying ways to improve indoor air quality and reduce the risk of airborne disease transmission. A study in ACS ES&T Air reports test results of do-it-yourself (DIY) air filters, known as Corsi-Rosenthal Boxes, in university class sessions. The units reduced particulate matter across the occupied classroom by 61%, produced minimal noise, and were more affordable than commercial portable air purifiers.

“Corsi-Rosenthal Boxes are a safe, highly effective tool for improving indoor air quality without disrupting the learning environment.” – Misti Zamora

“Indoor air quality in educational settings is a critical factor affecting student well-being and academic performance because children and school staff spend a large portion of their day inside classrooms,” says Misti Zamora, corresponding author of the study. “When schools lack good ventilation, harmful particles like infectious respiratory aerosols, dust, mold spores, and pollen can build up, creating an unhealthy environment.”

Commercial portable air purifiers clear airborne particles and help limit disease transmission. But they’re expensive — with the smallest sizes starting around $140 per device — and many school districts can’t afford them for every classroom. As a lower-cost, DIY alternative, researchers developed the Corsi-Rosenthal (C-R) Box, which combines a box fan, four high-quality pleated air filters (about $60 total), cardboard, and duct tape. Previous studies reported that the C-R Boxes effectively remove airborne pollutants, but few assessed their performance in active, occupied classrooms. So, Marina Creed, Kristina Wagstrom, Zamora and colleagues have been evaluating the system’s effectiveness and practicality, and this study focuses on university classes.

The researchers built two C-R Boxes and tested them during 59 class sessions with 14 to 30 students in a rectangular room. They turned on both boxes 10 minutes after the classes began and ran the fans at a low setting for the rest of the 50-minute period. Results showed that the boxes:

• Reduced ultrafine, fine, and coarse particulate matter concentrations by 61% on average by the end of class.
• Produced 46 to 55 decibels of noise, comparable to a typical office environment.
• Moved air evenly around the rectangular classroom space.
• Removed airborne particles at similar rates at three places around the room.

To Zamora, the study suggests that “Corsi-Rosenthal Boxes are a safe, highly effective tool for improving indoor air quality without disrupting the learning environment. We showed that the clean air circulated around the entire room, meaning every student receives the protective health benefits regardless of where they sit.”

“Commercial units can cost five to ten times more than these DIY air filters to provide the same amount of clean air,” says Zamora. “This research proves that communities don't need to choose between clean air and their school budgets.”

The study’s authors are part of the University of Connecticut’s Indoor Air Quality Initiative, which provides resources for schools and videos on how to build a DIY air purifier.

The authors acknowledge financial support, discounted materials, and/or donations of materials from the Balvi Filantropic Fund; Petit Family Foundation’s Haley’s Hope and Michaela’s Miracle MS Memorial Fund; TexAire Heating and Air Conditioning; The Home Depot; and the University of Connecticut’s Schools of Medicine, Engineering, and Nursing.

To learn more about the Corsi-Rosenthal Boxes, watch co-inventor Richard Corsi put one together in a short video and listen to an interview with Corsi on the Chain Reaction podcast episode, “The Air We (Want to) Breathe: The Chemistry of Pollution.”

Postsecondary Educational Value

Complete Executive Summary

US postsecondary education and training have long been valuable assets to the country and to individuals. From the early days of the republic, American colleges and universities have conveyed skills that are foundational to our democracy. As the centuries have rolled on, these institutions have evolved to become equally vital to the US economy, undergoing a transformation in the 19th century to become drivers of American innovation and industry. 

Through key legislation and investments—such as the two Morrill Acts, the GI Bill, and the Pell Grant program—policymakers have opened the doors of higher education to increasing numbers of students. Following World War II and the Civil Rights Act, enrollment in college grew rapidly with the recognition that American postsecondary education and training offer a ticket to a better life. 

Today, a college degree remains the surest pathway to economic security. Economic projections suggest that workers will need more education, not less, to thrive in the labor market of the future. Higher levels of education correspond with higher earnings for workers, which translate to public gains such as higher tax revenues and less reliance on public services. Higher levels of education are also associated with a host of nonmonetary benefits, including greater well-being and more civic engagement. Across many monetary and nonmonetary dimensions, postsecondary education and training have significant value for individuals and society. And yet, our postsecondary institutions are facing a crisis of confidence. 

Concerned about college costs and the content of the curriculum—and unsettled by growing doubts that postsecondary education prepares students for work—Americans no longer fully trust colleges and universities to teach the right things well and at a reasonable cost. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) and its feared impact on the workplace have only heightened these concerns, leaving education and training providers under pressure to adapt to rapidly evolving technologies. 

Individual students are prudent to exercise a degree of caution about postsecondary education. College can be expensive, and not all educational pathways provide the same level of access to economic opportunity. Students who take out large loans to fund their degrees, certificates, and other credentials may find that their investment doesn’t yield an adequate monetary payoff, and they may face financial precarity as a result. Some graduates may find themselves struggling to land their first job after completing a degree, or they may end up employed in a role that doesn’t use their college-level skills. 

Policymakers realize that they need to protect students from poor financial outcomes, so many states and philanthropic organizations are working to define “credentials of value” according to monetary metrics. Additionally, federal and state governments are developing policies to hold institutions accountable for producing credentials that meet earnings or return-on-investment (ROI) benchmarks. These efforts recognize that Americans want—and deserve—to know that they are likely to benefit from their investments in postsecondary education. At the same time, regulatory efforts focused on credentials of value don’t capture the full value of postsecondary education and training. For a more complete assessment, we need to develop an approach that incorporates higher education’s many nonmonetary benefits. 

This series of reports helps make sense of the complex challenge of conceptualizing and measuring postsecondary value. The public conversation about postsecondary value spans multiple points of view. Students and their families want to know that their investments in college will pay off. State policymakers want to know that public funding for education is put to good use. Educators and education advocates want to ensure that decision-makers recognize the complete value—monetary and nonmonetary— that postsecondary education and training provide. A more robust approach to assessing postsecondary value will need to grapple with multiple perspectives on what education offers to both individuals and society. I

n this report series, the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce explores the measurement of postsecondary educational value. Across three reports, we examine what various stakeholder groups expect postsecondary education and training to do, how these groups measure the outcomes of postsecondary education and training, and what changes in policy and practice need to happen next to ensure that postsecondary education delivers on its full potential as both a private and public good. The reports speak to different but overlapping audiences with their own interests and aims. In the following sections, we describe each report’s purpose and which stakeholder groups would most benefit from reading that report.

From Mann to Markets

The first report in the series, From Mann to Markets: Evolving Ideas About the Value of Postsecondary Education and Training to Individuals and Society, examines the historical and philosophical developments that have led policymakers and the public to focus on earnings and return on investment as the primary measures of postsecondary education and training success.

Download Report

Measuring Postsecondary Value

The second report in the series, Measuring Postsecondary Value: A Model for Applying Research to Policy and Practice, provides a resource to help leaders identify and measure how investments in higher education support the production of credentials that lead to value for both students and society.

The report’s Postsecondary Value Model (PVM) organizes metrics into categories that generally align with educational inputs (e.g., investments) and outputs (e.g., credentials) that contribute to value-related monetary and nonmonetary outcomes. The PVM includes six categories of inputs, outputs, and outcomes: investment, education, employment, earnings, wealth, and well-being.

Download Report

A Framework for Assessing the Value of Postsecondary Education and Training

The third and final report in the series, A Framework for Assessing the Value of Postsecondary Education and Training: State Guidance, provides practical direction for defining and measuring postsecondary value to policymakers, policy analysts, researchers, and practitioners at the state level, with particular attention to two major use cases. The first use case is assessing the broad value that accrues to each state from a robust postsecondary education and training system; the second is applying transparency and accountability metrics to ensure that institutions and programs deliver on the value they promise to students.

Download Report