Sir Ken Robinson on CREATIVITY

I have had the opportunity to see and hear Sir Ken Robinson twice in the past year. His topic, as it always is, was on creativity and its importance to our future. He started the most recent presentation with a question, "What will the world be like in 2070?" The reason for the question was clear to all who were present, kids starting school today will retire in about the year 2070. For us to try to figure out what kids today need to know to be successful in 2070 is almost ludicrous. The current system of education, according to Sir Ken, it totally inadequate to the future. It won't allow us to "see" the future nor to prepare students to enter into the future.

The power of imagination, and by extension, the power of creativity is essential to success in the future. All too many students spend 13 years in school and come out without ever learning what they are good at or even what they might really love. These attributes of the human spirit are often buried deep. Talent, too, is often buried deeply and not evident on the surface. You must look deeply to find it in others or even in ourselves. To find it, we must deliberately seek it. Herein lies Sir Ken's message.

Schools today are locked in a battle with narrowly focused accountability measures; measures which actively discourage the search for talent and creativity. These measures are tied to the economy of the 19th century industrial nations, not to the future needs of mankind. The economy of the 19th century was 80% manual in nature. Today, the economy is less than 20% manual. But, even with this change, we are generating a glut of BA degrees; more than can be absorbed by the economy. The needs we currently face are being addressed by maverick students who have given up on institutional education in favor of something else; something more flexible and dynamic.

In order to change what is going on, we have to totally rethink schools and schooling. This means creating a revolution in thought about teaching and learning. In a revolution there is no precedent and you cannot predict the outcomes. We will have to think radically differently about human resources. Developing human resources, such as creativity, talent and perseverance must become the focus of all our efforts if we are to remain successful in the near future, certainly, and probably into the distant future. In the next 30 years more people will get college degrees than from the dawn of man until today. Higher Education is more of the same done better. So the answer is not in piling on more and more years of formal education.

The answer probably lies somewhere in the ideas of homeostasis. Homeostasis is a balance of needs with functions. We need to rebalance the curriculum between the arts and academics. There are huge synergies among the various areas of learning. The part of the brain that is most active when playing a musical instrument is the same as that which is most active when working at a mathematics problem. This, alone, should tell us something. Perhaps, the renaissance man is the ideal after all.

Finally, we have to change assessments. Right now, we are all grappling with what is important to learn and how we will find out if it has, in fact, been learned. I am not sure a paper and pencil test will do the job. This from a man who spent many years doing evaluations of educational programs using paper and pencil test data. I still believe we can learn a lot from such sources. It is terribly difficult, if not impossible, to measure talent or creativity with paper and pencil. When we try to do so, we define these wondrous attributes of the human being very narrowly. Creativity can be defined as original ideas which have value. It can also be defined as generation of unique behaviors. Only man can do the first; a dolphin can do the second.

So, future success cannot be determined or even defined using our current tools. New ways of thinking about and new goals for formal education must be developed. Creativity and the nurturing of talent may be the best we can do right now. And, when you think about it, those things are not all bad; not too bad at all.

The Medici Effect by Frans Johansson

This little book has a lot to say to anyone who is interested in making things better in their chosen profession, home or life, in general. Basically, Frans Johansson, the author, posits that real innovation happens in two ways, directional and intersectional. Directional innovations are those that represent extensions or remixes within a know field of endeavor. Intersectional innovations are those that represent combinations of ideas or concept from two or more fields.

Imagine, as does the author, that you want to write an innovative piece of music. If you use the instrumentation, generally used harmonics and rhythms of rock and roll, you will have a given number of possible unique combinations. But, if you add to this mix the instrumentation, harmonics and rhythms of baroque orchestral music, you will have increased the number of possible unique combinations logarithmically. In this case, you would go from a couple of thousand possible combinations to several millions.

The resulting ideas or innovations have some interesting characteristics. They:
*are surprising and fascinating
*take leaps in new directions
*open up new fields of endeavor
*provide space for you to call your own
*generate followers.

The whole idea of intersectional innovation is being driven by some obvious forces in our society, but their relationship to innovation may not be apparent.

*Movement of people from one palce to another. Migration and immigration are at levels unprecedented in recent history. The person standing next to you is likely fewer than three generations in this country. Whether forced to immigrate because of war, famine or economic opportunity, the continued prosperity of our country depends on this force and as people move they bring with them perspectives and norms which are different from those already here. This diversity of perspectives and norms can be a positive force for creativity and innovation.

*Convergence of Science. I can remember when biochemistry courses first started to appear on university campuses. The is the study of chemistry in living organisms seems common place and obvious to us today. I assure you, this was not the case 50 or so years ago. Alan Leshner, CEO of the AAAS, states it simply, "Disciplinary science has died. It's gone." The natural sciences were among the first fields to begin to converge, but, s it turns out, they were just the trail blazers for what has become the norm.

*Leap in Computation. I do not believe that we could have anything close to the explosion on new information that we face daily without the computing power of the computer. When I first taught statistics using a new fangled gadget called a hand held calculator, my students were able to make more data driven decisions in each class than I had been able to do in seven years of work as a program evaluator. It was incredible to me then. Imagine my amazement watching classroom teachers using statistical algorithms to sort students for assignment to tutorial groups. I doubt they realize that is what they are doing, but it is and they are making very good decisions based on a simple score analysis program housed on their desk top computers.

As these three forces create more and more intersections, we simply must learn how to insert ourselves into them and find in them the new possibilities they present. Imagine finding a way to reduce costs, put increase technological power in the hands of students and make teachers truly creators of work that spawns learning. The answer to this is probably not in public schools as they exist today. But, the answer does lie in some intersection somewhere. We just have to prepare ourselves and our work groups to find it. That probably means:
*exposing ourselves and our groups to a more diverse range of cultures;
*wider informal learning, study groups on topics outside our profession;
*reversing our assumptions about what is important and effective; and
*taking on multiple perspectives to the issues we face daily.

Oh, and we need to be ready to fail and fail miserably. When we innovate directionally, the risk of failure is minimal and we plan for success. It is innovation in a known environment. Intersectional innovations have very high risk of failure and spectacular failure, at that. This sort of innovation requires that we plan to fail and be amazed when we do not. Because, when we do not fail, the results will likely equally as spectacular as would the failure be. Planning for failure is just not compatible with the way we have always done things. It could be that planning to fail and recover is a close to impossible idea that comes from an undefined intersection.

Read the book. It is an easy read and truly thought provoking.

ENGAGE ME OR ENRAGE ME

I pulled the following together from a presentation at a conference earlier this year. It is an interesting look at student engagement in classrooms. Students are totally connected beings and they expect, rather demand, that they be actively involved in the process of learning. The days of the cold teacher lecture are going away to be replaced by a much more interactive learning environment. Classrooms will become places of active student involvement or the students will take charge. This is nothing new. Experienced teachers have known for years that they path to a productive classroom is through student involvement in the learning activity.

There are changes in the old three component learning situation. The learning situation is clearly made up of three components: student, teacher and lesson. The background that the student brings into the classroom is much more varied that was true in the past of only 10 - 20 years ago. Students know more, have access to more information and expect to be allowed to use their knowledge and connectivity to participate in the classroom. The teacher and the lesson are evolving, but not fast enough to keep up with the changes in the student. Mr. Prensky's view of this situation is interesting and clear; engage the students or they will become enraged with all the implications of that enragement carried full bore into the classroom.

WHAT DOES RESEARCH TELL US ABOUT ENGAGEMENT?

ENGAGE ME
OR
ENRAGE ME

What do students tell us?
*We don’t listen
*We don’t engage them
*We don’t respect them
*We bore them (worse at lower grades)
*Engage me or enrage me

Kids are not engaged for one of two primary reasons
*We are not teaching the right things (focused on past, not kids future)
*We are not teaching the right way (use tools we know, not tools they respect)

Kids used to grow up isolated and in the dark; school opened the world to them.
Now, kids grow up in the light; we take away their tools and put them in the dark at
school.

So, how can we turn on the lights?

Schools are in real competition - kids are learning with out us.
Schools give out “old stuff”, they learn what they need after or out of school.
Schools are the real problem for kids’ learning and we are losing the competition.

There are three switches to “turn on the light” at school
*Understanding and dealing with contemporary students
*Understanding and dealing with change
*Engaging kids in real learning

Switch 1
Kids are not the same anymore
*They are digitally engaged to excess
-We see technology as a tool; they see it as life
*They learn differently, think differently
*Kids are digital natives, we are the immigrants – we have accents

Switch 2
We have only begun to experience rapid change
*Rapid change is the norm of kids’ lives
-Teaching and our job should change; learning already has
*Kids are the only ones embracing change today
*We must teach with things we do not understand
-Get kids to help us with it
*Teachers shouldn’t waste time trying to learn it all
-We just look stupid

Switch 3
Engagement = Motivation = Passion = Learning
*Engagement is changing
*The effort of learning can feel either like work (school) or play (engagement)
* Kids have to “power down” when they come to school
-Do dumber things and only one thing at a time
-They are multi-taskers; we call them ADHD
*To teach today, we must enter their world and use their tools

Here’s a bonus switch
Mutual respect
*We are disrespectful of kids
*We get back what we give out
-We are all learners and teachers
-Give them work that is worth respect
-Respect what kids find important
-Respect kids for what they are and what they will become

A few last words
*Let kids help with instruction
*Involve kids in everything we do
*Keep asking key questions
-This is the reason teachers are in classrooms with the kids


Marc Prensky
1-30-07

Five Causes of Low Student Performance

I had the opportunity to hear Pedro Noguera at a conference recently. He made some very interesting and important points for us to consider. His basic message was that, "If you don't believe that it can be done (improve student performance), it won't be done". He strongly believes that low performance is not about kids, but about how we treat kids. He went on to outline five causes of poor student performance.

1. Alienation - weak adult-student relationships. Most students learn through relationships. We all know that there are some teachers for whom students will do anything and in whose classes all students learn and learn well. Weak relationships cause weak engagement; block scheduleing and true advisory times help with this IF the time allocated is used wisely. And then there is the safety issue. Alienated students are those who create crises in schools.

2. Boredom - school is boring because of weak teaching according to Dr. Noguera. Weak engagement and poor reading skills exaserbate the problem. When teaching and learning are disconnected, boredom is the result. I had a professor who had a way or describing such disconnects..."She teaches the same way whether or not there are students in the room". Remember STUDENT PERFORMANCE IS THE KEY INDICATOR OF TEACHING.

3. Lack of clear academic focus - there is little or no articulation between and/or among classes in schools. This absence of focus gives students the impression that everything is random in schools and nothing is connected. We have all heard students ask, "Why do we have to spell correctly? This is Science class".

4. Dysfunctional school clutures - There is a pervasive culture of anti-intellectualism in most high schools. For example, in some schools, students of color find themselves ostracized by their peers if they achieve at high levels or even sign up for honors classes. Changing this student culture and reconnecting students to the school are key and are the difference between good and bad schools.

5. Poverty and inequality - Whether we want to admit it or not, these factors are still alive and well in our schools. When children come from backgrounds where these two factors are strong, they limit there aspirations to what they see as reasonably possible. Our role as educators is to open their worlds to the REAL possibilities out there in the real world--to the possibilities that perserverance can open to them. Since behavior is directly liked to future aspirations, raising the aspirations of our poor students makes our job easier.

These five issues bring me to a question that has bothered me for decades. "Can teaching be said to have occurred in the absence of learning?" Frankly, I think not. But there are five issues we can address each day in our schools and classrooms which may help us get to real changes in student performance.

Book Study--Tipping Points

According to Gadwell, it is sometimes the smallest thing that will "tip" a situation, either toward the better result or the worse. One example early in the book is one that is directly related to public education. He cites the fact that, when the minority enrollment in a public schools reached the 30% level, the campus would tip to majority minority very quickly. This was certainly true in the 1980's. I would hope that it is not so true today....that we have become much more tolerant.

It does seem that such tipping points should exist in other areas of public school operation. We do know that athletic teams that are successful seem to find ways to win games that they might should not. We know that profiles of student achievement seem to be very stable over time unless there are very significant shifts in teaching faculty or student body. Where schools evolve in any way demographically, the achievement profile seems relatively stable. Even if the absolute scores on measures go up and down, the relationship among the scores, the profile, seems stable. To alter this profile takes something radical--a significant change in instructional methods or materials that is diligently supported with training and supervision; a change in principalship combined with a significant change in total staff; an extreme, rapid change in student body demographics such as that created by revised attendance zones, or new home/apartment construction.

There is little opportunity for most school districts to have rapid, significant impact on student demographics. The staff of the campus is totally under the control of the district. The fact that the current staff has had the opportunity to make significant changes in instructional methods and materials and has not done so with any success. The district can, and is now forced, to change the staff in the belief that a new staff will seek new solutions to consistent problems. This fact alone is the basis for the requirement that consistently low performing campuses be reconstituted.

We can impact campus performance significantly by realizing that we can. It is not impossible and does not always require reconstitution of the entire staff. It simply requires that we do what a new staff coming into the situation would do.
*Identify the performance issues which exist in great detail;
*Identify the performance profiles of the campus and individual students;
*Research the materials and methods which seem to hold promise for impact
to the campus-wide performance issues identified;
*Train staff in the new methods and materials;
*Set an expectation that all staff will properly utilize the selected
materials and methods;
*Commit to supervise classroom implementation of the new materials and
methods every day;
*Commit to take the action necessary to ensure daily implementation of the
new materials and methods;
*Measure student performance regularly and provide tutorials, or other such
individualized assistance as soon as any weaknesses in performance are
seen;
*Evaluate campus performance at the appropriate and adjust to better impact
the campus issues identified.

Really pretty simple, isn't it? Simple, perhaps; difficult, absolutely.

Brutal Fact for May 1--Libraries and Achievement

Thre are a couple of interesting things about libraries about which we should all be aware.

1. There is a direct correlation between campus budgeting for libraries and academic achievement on the campus. Don't really know why this is true, but it is probably related to the fact that campuses that take care of their libraries also pay attention to other academic supports.

2. Effective schools are characterized by high use libraries and highly involved librarians. Where the librarian is actively involved in identifying appropriate materials and in the coteaching of mateials-enriched lessons, students perform at higher levels.

Note the coteaching above. This simply allows the teacher and librarian to team plan and team deliver a lesson, typically in the library. Having two instructional folks involved lowers the pupil teacher ratio by 50% and we all know that is a good thing.

Do a walk through in your library. How often do classes meet there for instruction which utilizes both the teacher and the librarian? Might be a good thing to have happen, don't you think?

Doing Our Due Diligence

I forwarded to our leadership team a newspaper article which reported on a situation in Austin in which the district and a high school were found liable for the death of a student. The argument was that the campus knew that the victim was being harassed by the perpetrator and did not take prudent steps to stop the action.

The issue is now settled. If we are aware of a situation of harassment and do not take steps to stop it, we may be held liable for what ever hurt arrises from the harassment. REmember, harassment does not have to be Title IX type sexual harassment as was true in the newspaper article, it may be bullying or other forms of harassment.

I am certain that our staff, counselors especially, hear of situations like this every day. If we as administrators do not step in firmly, we may be liable for what ever follows. The real lesson here is that we must do everything we can to protect our students. After all, if we are not the ombudsmen for children, who will be?