This coming semester, some of us will be reading the book Drive, which discusses the value of intrinsic motivation. The book is a great read and really helped me strengthen my ideas on the importance of being engaged and committed to the work being done, whether it is the work we create for our students or the work we do as a staff.
The author, Daniel Pink, also created this 2 minute clip that the design team watched the other day at the conference at Tunnel Hill. This short video made me think about my "sentence." What mark or difference do I want to leave? Is it better, as the video suggests, to try to do one simple thing well, instead of becoming muddled by trying to do too much?
After watching the video, please respond and let me know what your sentence is. How do you want to be remembered?
Friday, November 5, 2010
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Pick a sauce, any sauce.
I rewatched a video recently by Malcolm Gladwell, author of several recent bestsellers that I would recommend (Outliers, Blink, and The Tipping Point). Gladwell discusses the concept of individual customization and choice. His discussion on the topic sheds light on what we should consider as we attempt to design work that is engaging, challenging, and meaningful for our students.
As we delve further into design, we must always remember that design begins with focusing on our individual students (or intended audience). This idea of customization (or differentiation) is becoming deeply entrenched in every aspect of our students’ lives. They customize their cell phones by adding ringtones, backgrounds, and varied apps to meet their needs. Instead of buying an album or listening to the radio, they create a playlist of songs they want to listen to on their mp3 players. Many of their parents pick and choose their news sources by using Google Reader to select the news that is pertinent to them. Several of their older siblings are taking on-line classes and working on assignments at times more conducive to their needs. However, when they come to school, choice often disappears and they are given a “one size fits all” curriculum in a form devoid of design.
One idea that really made me think was Gladwell’s assertion that customers sometimes don’t know what they like and want. No one, when asked years ago about their spaghetti sauce preference, said, “I’d like an extra chunky garden sauce.” When applied to the classroom, this means we have to really know our students and ask deeper questions than, “What are your interests?” or “What type of work do you like to do?” These questions, while possibly a step in the right direction, should not be only way we collect data before designing.
I am in no way saying that our students should have total control of their education. Giving 7 year olds free reign to choose their curriculum could lead to some lessons on topics of limited educational value. However, it is essential to consider the student if our goal is to give them work they value and find meaningful. We can’t order students to be engaged because it is of meaning to us.
How do we ensure that we are truly designing and customizing educational opportunities? How do we balance students’ interests with their learning styles, needs and state curricular considerations? What things are we doing at Eastside to address this?
As we delve further into design, we must always remember that design begins with focusing on our individual students (or intended audience). This idea of customization (or differentiation) is becoming deeply entrenched in every aspect of our students’ lives. They customize their cell phones by adding ringtones, backgrounds, and varied apps to meet their needs. Instead of buying an album or listening to the radio, they create a playlist of songs they want to listen to on their mp3 players. Many of their parents pick and choose their news sources by using Google Reader to select the news that is pertinent to them. Several of their older siblings are taking on-line classes and working on assignments at times more conducive to their needs. However, when they come to school, choice often disappears and they are given a “one size fits all” curriculum in a form devoid of design.
One idea that really made me think was Gladwell’s assertion that customers sometimes don’t know what they like and want. No one, when asked years ago about their spaghetti sauce preference, said, “I’d like an extra chunky garden sauce.” When applied to the classroom, this means we have to really know our students and ask deeper questions than, “What are your interests?” or “What type of work do you like to do?” These questions, while possibly a step in the right direction, should not be only way we collect data before designing.
I am in no way saying that our students should have total control of their education. Giving 7 year olds free reign to choose their curriculum could lead to some lessons on topics of limited educational value. However, it is essential to consider the student if our goal is to give them work they value and find meaningful. We can’t order students to be engaged because it is of meaning to us.
How do we ensure that we are truly designing and customizing educational opportunities? How do we balance students’ interests with their learning styles, needs and state curricular considerations? What things are we doing at Eastside to address this?
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Failure and collaboration
Here is a link to a video I watched this week. Pixar's Randy Nelson
Since I was sent this video, I have watched it several times, getting a new piece of information each time.
Nelson's speech discusses many of the concepts we value as a system and a school. One of the key components in our framework is protection from adverse consequences from initial failures. This protection is important for both our students and our co-workers. As we have discussed before, without the understanding that failures should be seen as learning opportunities, people will never venture outside their comfort zone. Innovation can never occur where failure is feared.
Another idea that was meaningful to me was his idea of collaboration. As we continue to focus on student work and begin to look at using protocols to discuss the work we design, this idea should be in the back of our minds. When we work together, are we dividing up the work tasks to speed up our completion, or do we work together to make the finished product better? Cooperation is not bad. The assembly line revolutionized industry, and there are many times that dividing and conquering is necessary to do. However, that should not be the final goal when working together. Innovation (often through collaboration) must always occur before the routine cooperation occurs.
Is there anything else that stood out in the article? What methods should we implement to ensure that students (and adults) feel comfortable venturing outside of their comfort zone? If collaboration is meaningful, how do we guarantee that there is time for it to occur?
Since I was sent this video, I have watched it several times, getting a new piece of information each time.
Nelson's speech discusses many of the concepts we value as a system and a school. One of the key components in our framework is protection from adverse consequences from initial failures. This protection is important for both our students and our co-workers. As we have discussed before, without the understanding that failures should be seen as learning opportunities, people will never venture outside their comfort zone. Innovation can never occur where failure is feared.
Another idea that was meaningful to me was his idea of collaboration. As we continue to focus on student work and begin to look at using protocols to discuss the work we design, this idea should be in the back of our minds. When we work together, are we dividing up the work tasks to speed up our completion, or do we work together to make the finished product better? Cooperation is not bad. The assembly line revolutionized industry, and there are many times that dividing and conquering is necessary to do. However, that should not be the final goal when working together. Innovation (often through collaboration) must always occur before the routine cooperation occurs.
Is there anything else that stood out in the article? What methods should we implement to ensure that students (and adults) feel comfortable venturing outside of their comfort zone? If collaboration is meaningful, how do we guarantee that there is time for it to occur?
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Do schools kill creativity?
Last year, a close friend of mine sent me this video, Do Schools Kill Creativity. It is pretty interesting and has some "British" humor. The speaker discusses many of the things we have discussed in faculty meetings, and several ideas resonated with me.
After watching the video again, several thoughts and questions come to mind. First, I agree with many of his ideas and think that some areas in school have been relegated to the back (even more so with the advent of standardized tests and the enormous focus on reading, math, and language arts). A perfect setting would be one where the other subjects are considered just as valuable.
Another point that Mr. Robinson discusses is that diploma inflation has occurred. 50 years ago, a high school diploma was the door to success. Now, an advanced degree is almost required to separate yourself from the flock.
The above, combined with hungry and willing professionals in China and India, who will do what Americans will do for less, makes the need to educate the whole child even more important. The book, Catching Up or Leading the Way addresses how we can continue to be a global leader. Like Mr. Robinson, the book's author discusses the focus on testing and lack of emphasis on "right brain" activities in other countries and the automatons this type of schooling turns out. By teaching the whole child and fostering creativity, we allow kids to invent, create, design, innovate, and many other higher level skills that will help them be successful in a changing world.
What are your thoughts? How do we do what we realize is important while meeting governmental requirements? Do we educate creativity out of students? How does fostering creativity help the whole student? What would a school look like if we followed Mr. Robinson's suggestions?
After watching the video again, several thoughts and questions come to mind. First, I agree with many of his ideas and think that some areas in school have been relegated to the back (even more so with the advent of standardized tests and the enormous focus on reading, math, and language arts). A perfect setting would be one where the other subjects are considered just as valuable.
Another point that Mr. Robinson discusses is that diploma inflation has occurred. 50 years ago, a high school diploma was the door to success. Now, an advanced degree is almost required to separate yourself from the flock.
The above, combined with hungry and willing professionals in China and India, who will do what Americans will do for less, makes the need to educate the whole child even more important. The book, Catching Up or Leading the Way addresses how we can continue to be a global leader. Like Mr. Robinson, the book's author discusses the focus on testing and lack of emphasis on "right brain" activities in other countries and the automatons this type of schooling turns out. By teaching the whole child and fostering creativity, we allow kids to invent, create, design, innovate, and many other higher level skills that will help them be successful in a changing world.
What are your thoughts? How do we do what we realize is important while meeting governmental requirements? Do we educate creativity out of students? How does fostering creativity help the whole student? What would a school look like if we followed Mr. Robinson's suggestions?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)