Currently Empty: $0.00
RESEARCH
What we are researching, and with whom
Silicon Valley Futures Institute runs applied research with schools, universities, associations and community organizations across the US–Latin America corridor. Every line below is tied to something we deliver — a curriculum, a credential or a policy — so findings are tested in real institutions rather than in the abstract.
Research lines
Three active lines. Each one produces something an institution can adopt — not only a paper.
RESEARCH LINE 01 · CHILDHOOD & FUTURE-READINESS
F3 — the Foundational Future Framework
F3 is our child-centred methodology for building future-readiness in children aged 6–14. It rests on five principles — Kid-Centered design, Parental Involvement, Skill in Context, Neurodevelopmental Alignment and Tech-Without-Tech — and on a four-tier architecture that maps curriculum to cognitive development rather than to grade level: Explorers (6–8) learn the what, Innovators (9–11) the how, Leaders (12–14) the why, and Geeniers (14+) carry it into real-world impact.
The research question underneath it is deliberately uncomfortable for the ed-tech field: children are taught technology almost exclusively through screens, yet the reasoning technology demands — logic, sequencing, problem decomposition, collaboration, ethical judgment — is not itself screen-dependent. F3 teaches those capabilities through analog play, exploration and real-world challenges, and we track whether they transfer when the screen finally arrives. We measure retention, transfer to unfamiliar problems, and the quality of the judgment children apply once they do have the tools in hand.
STATUS
Active — in delivery, with instruments under continuous revision.
RESEARCH QUESTION
Can children build durable technical and ethical judgment through analog, discovery-driven learning — before, and without depending on, screens?
POPULATION & SCOPE
Children ages 6–14 across four developmental tiers, in bilingual (English–Spanish) settings.
COLLABORATION
Delivered with partner schools and community organizations.
RESEARCH LINE 02 · FAMILIES & ETHICAL DIGITAL USE
The Digital Parental Domain
Parents are handed a false choice. Give a child the technology without the knowledge to guide its use — or ban it, and strip away the very digital skills that child will need for the rest of their life. Neither is really a decision; both are ways of avoiding one. The cost of the first is a child improvising ethics alone. The cost of the second is a child arriving late to a world that assumed they had been practising.
The Digital Parental Domain is our name for the way out: a fourth domain, alongside reading, writing and arithmetic, that a parent must be able to teach rather than merely supervise or forbid. It covers the ethical use of digital tools in practice — attention and what is being spent, privacy and what a child is giving away, the provenance and reliability of what they read, identity and reputation, and the responsibility that comes with tools that can affect other people.
The harder half of the problem is pedagogical: how to teach this to adults who did not grow up with it, without shame, and without turning the household into a surveillance operation. Our instruments are co-learning activities at home, parental reflection sessions on technology ethics, and family missions that make the conversation routine rather than reactive.
STATUS
In design — curriculum and measurement instruments under development.
RESEARCH QUESTION
How do parents teach ethical digital use — escaping the dilemma between unguided access and a ban that costs the child the skills they will need?
POPULATION & SCOPE
Parents and caregivers of children 6–14, and the children they are raising, beginning in the US–Latin America corridor.
COLLABORATION
Open to partner schools, parent associations and community organizations.
RESEARCH LINE 03 · ACCESSIBILITY & DATA LITERACY
Data management as a digital skill for the neurodivergent community
Data management is normally taught as a corporate discipline, in a format that quietly assumes a neurotypical learner: ambiguous language, implicit social rules, dense slides, open-ended group work and a pace set by the median. That format excludes people whose attention to structure, pattern and precision would make them unusually good at the work itself.
This line rebuilds an introductory data management curriculum for autistic and neurodivergent learners — explicit rules over implied ones, predictable structure, controlled sensory load, unambiguous instructions, and pacing the learner controls. The second question is the more interesting one: which of those adaptations turn out to improve the course for every learner. The outputs are a course, an accessibility specification institutions can apply to their own material, and a credentialing path so the skill is recognised by employers.
STATUS
In design — curriculum drafted, pilot partners being identified.
RESEARCH QUESTION
Which design adaptations make data management genuinely learnable for autistic and neurodivergent learners — and which of them improve the course for everyone?
POPULATION & SCOPE
Autistic and neurodivergent young adults and adults entering data roles; Spanish-first delivery.
COLLABORATION
Seeking partner institutions and neurodiversity organizations for the pilot.
Research with us
If your school, university, association or organization works on any of these questions, we are open to collaboration — as a pilot site, a co-author, or a partner institution.
