|Daniel Pink (@DanielPink)|
1/22/13 7:25 AM
This interview about education and how teachers sell from @MindShiftKQED already has 1,000+ retweets . . .ow.ly/h1g02
Jobs in education, Pink said in a recent interview, are all about moving other people, changing their behavior, like getting kids to pay attention in class; getting teens to understand they need to look at their future and to therefore study harder. At the center of all this persuasion is selling: educators are sellers of ideas.
Corporate executives, however, rated problem-solving as seventh on their list of attributes in employees, but rated problem identification as the single most important skill. That is, the ability to suss out issues and challenges that aren’t necessarily obvious. And this is where students could benefit from educators — learning the process of identifying a problem.
have to read book I guess... this isn't jiving..
One of the big topics Pink tackles in his current book is the idea of moving from transactions to transcendence — to making something personal. That’s the best way to “sell” students on what they’re learning, Pink maintains. This has been a recurring theme in education: connecting what’s taught in classrooms to students’ personal lives. But, as evidenced by current school dynamics, that’s not the way the tide is moving.
Why is it moving this way? One of the reasons, Pink said, is the “appalling” absence of leadership on this issue. “One of the things that I see as an outsider is that so much of education policy seems designed for the convenience of adults rather than the education of children,” he said. “Start time is a perfect example. Why do we do that? It’s more convenient for the teachers. Why do we have standardized testing? Because it’s unbelievably cheap. If you want to give real evaluations to kids, they have to be personalized, tailored to the kids, at the unit of one. Standardized testing: totally easy, totally cheap, and scales. Convenient for politicians and taxpayers.”
start time? serious? which teachers think that's easy or convenient?
“Here’s the thing,” he said. “We have a lot of learned behavior of compliance, and hunger for external rewards and no real engagement. We have this belief that people perform better if we hit them with this endless arsenal of carrots and sticks: If-then motivators. To get to that engagement, people have to unlearn these deeply rooted habits. I defy you to find a two year old who is not engaged. That’s how we are out of the box.”agree with this one for sure. maybe i'm missing something.. from not reading the book?
IBM Smarter Cities (@IBMSmartCities)
1/22/13 7:35 AM
The 16 Greatest Cities in Human History via @businessinsider.read.bi/TdwPtp
interesting why they don't sustain...
|Mary Loftus (@marloft)|
1/22/13 7:39 AM
Must read! MOOCmania dmlcentral.net/blog/david-the… via@CathyNDavidson
This is not to say that we are public no more. Rather, publicness of the public universities lies today largely elsewhere than in our funding sources. They are a function now more of who we serve, to a degree on how we think of our mission and how we are run and governed, in short, on a set of dispositions. Like Udacity’s San Jose State MOOCs, most all universities are already private-public hybrids.
In addition, any course worth its salt needs updating and upgrading, pretty much from one offering to the next. Literal repetition grows stale fast. None of this comes cheap. Learning institutions can remain starry eyed over the prospects of MOOCs only by padding the business plan. It wouldn’t be the first timoh my... a cmooc isn't about routine.. no?
The “if” here concerns more than will, though as with these things it will require a heavy dose of commitment. It is about ecologies, informational and instructional, technological and dispositional, material and architectural. Traditional learning institutions, from K-12 through higher education, are predicated on a long and well established set of ecologies. Bricks and mortar, mostly static and stand alone technologies, expert and honored instruction, largely passive learners active pretty much only in emulating their honored seniors, hand to hand information flows (handouts, book circulation, verbal sharing, etc). I say this not as belittlement but in awe of the extraordinary achievements in their name, a (now aging) member and inheritor of its copious contributions.
sounds like pink's sell...
how do we do tradition better... ?
Learning has proliferated, across sites and scope, pretty much around the clock, not always trustworthily.
via students... school teaches bad morals.
so... would we rather prep for untrustworthy info... or people?
But their longer term levity will depend upon transforming and transformed structures supporting learning capacity, their ability to enable even as they draw on learner agility in a world demanding of it, their mobile and agile effectivity in getting us from learning departure point to expanding learning destinations in a rapidly transforming educational environment.
sounds like us trying to hold onto management...
levity will depend on ability to give up management issues.
future platform...structure... in your head..
Curiosity, so important to ongoing knowledge formation, is not simply a natural disposition. It is fashioned by the excitement of uncovering the hitherto hidden, of working out and working around, of seeing how things materialize and being excited by the insights and makings of others.
serious? is that true?
it's not natural today... because we've manufactured unnatural. no?
curiosity is quite natural to a two.. four... yr old..
if we could only think in terms of and...
ie.. cool.. and there's another way to learn.