Sunday, January 22, 2012
Sunday, March 20, 2011
-Environment – global warming, earth (fields, valleys, caves, oceans, water, land, ice, mountains, beaches, trees, cities, suburbs, etc.)
-Health – food
-Technology (nano, computer,mobile, cyber, virtual worlds, touch, hologram, etc.)
International (global security, politics, business, peace, health, economy, wisdom, etc.)
-Diversity and inclusion
-Legal – supreme court cases
-Living things (People, Animals, plants, etc.)
-Materials (wood, metal, glue, tape, etc.)
-Words, audio, video
-Education – problem solving, critical thinking, strategic thinking
-Social – bullying, etc.
-Air earth fire water liquid solids plasma
-Music, art, acting, photos
-Internet devices (computers, phones, etc.)
-Senses (see, hear, touch, smell, taste, sense, etc.)
-Light, sound, air, movement, balance, and electronic, infrared, digital and computer devices
Thursday, November 18, 2010
2. Who’s Here?
3. Stand Up
4. Bad Collaboration is Worse than No Collaboration
a. Apple, m&a, 1 in 5 mgrs
5. Cynefin (image)
6. 3 problems
b. Connect the dots (9/11, mars orbiter, challenger, Toyota)
c. Decision advantage (ooda, time/attn)
7. ??-How long do you search?
8. ??-How many meetings/hours sharing status?
9. Solution Framework
a. Who knows who (ona, Jeanne)
b. Who knows what (profile, knowledge mkt, dir quality, unity, eureka)
c. Who does what (portfolio mgmt, vna, talent mkt, vesp)
d. Ppl > ppl; ppl>projects;projects>strategic objectives
e. MEO – offshore, outsource, free agent
f. Network of value
i. Memories in brain
ii. Living company (id, fiscal conservative, tolerance, environment)
10. ??-job title? Who do you go to for questions? How did you know? What if someones first day?
11. Wirearchy – 2 way flow of power, structure
13. Stand up
14. Thank you!
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
She spoke to a group of [approximately] 30 parents of elementary aged students. She wrote a few notes on an easel as she spoke for visual reinforcement. She started with three main areas that she thinks parents/children should learn and practice:
- Self management
- Thinking (consider points of view)
- Problem solving
She further expanded into:
- Hypothesis (predicting)
- Collaboration (enhancing planning, thinking, and communicating)
She talked about "habits of mind" or "dispositions", such as persistence, reflection and self assessment.
I could immediately tell that she had great thoughts and I was interested in them. I felt my interest pique because it seemed as though we were very similar (in what we're trying to accomplish), yet coming from different perspectives....more on that below...
She then dove into specific examples (i.e. stories) and she recommended three books. Her first example was to give kids "a list" - i.e. "things I need to do". She called the items on the list "criteria" and she mentioned that we don't need to worry about calling these lists "criteria" (just know that they are).
She jumped back up to the abstract/conceptual and talked about:
- Time mgmt
- Priority mgmt
Then said something to the effect of "schools will look different in the future, not what we're used to, for example more online, some instructor-led and some learning with friends" (I of course loved these comments :) )
She then moved into one of themes that seemed to pop up from time to time - "you're not telling, you are asking" (as in, you should be asking more, looking for more conversation, and casting your thoughts/feelings less).
She jumped back to the example and talked about the importance of visual reminders - "kids like contracts, I used to buy gold seals, have them sign the agreement and then seal it, they said it looked adult-like". (I think there's a parallel to the project charters we create :) )
I think I forgot to write in my notes that she took questions around this point...which was good...made it interactive, dynamic, tactical...
Then she mentioned an interesting quote "Structure is not about 'what', it is about 'how'". (reminds me of the definition of process...now is when the thoughts start popping up in my head about 'how do we find the balance between structure/process and creativity/innovation')
"Don't tell them what's important, but help them think about it" (variation on a theme)
She then recommended her first book - Miss Nelson. She said it helps children understand point of view, i.e. ask "how did miss Nelson feel". Then she gave the poignant example of the Rutgers student that recently jumped off a bridge (and how those other children probably did not consider other's points of view) (I'm not sure this is a new message, I seem to recall my parents saying "walk a mile in someone else's shoes", but maybe its taken more seriously/critically now?)
We should help children ask (and answer) "What could she have done differently?" (variation on a theme)
"We should raise questions, not answers" (variation on a theme)
Her second book recommendation was - Doctor de Soto by William Steig (which I sadly never heard of! :( ) She talked about how it helps children ask "How do we make judgments?". She talked about perceptions leading to problems which should lead to brainstorming of solutions (ah, the first time we've flipped from structure to creativity, I think?).
She then moved into her second main point - "we need to stress Thinking skills". "Get away from our concrete way of dealing with kids". Her second book recommendation was
Alexander's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day. She said it helps kids to ponder "Not is it right to feel that way, but why does he feel that way?" and "What could have been another ending?" as well as a series of "What if?" questions.
Her third book recommendation was "The man who walked between the towers". She talked about "How do you make dreams come true". "We have a tendency to dash our kids dreams, especially too early". "Greatness comes from dreams". We should embrace and childrens dreams and ask "So what do you think you have to do that?". I loved this line - "Once a kid develops discipline (read: passion) they can translate that to anything they do, so we should encourage kids to dream and dream big"
If I recall correctly, she "ended" there and took questions for quite awhile after that... here are a few quotes from my notes of the q&a time...
"Ask them - What do you think it takes to get there? [when they set goals]"
"We're living in a world that has far fewer boundaries, create your own boundaries"
"If you have a dream but no persistence [then you probably will not achieve that goal]..."
"How do we encourage persistence?"
"Try again, stick with it, try new ways"
"Spend time reflecting"
"Ask - If you had to do it again, what would you do differently?"
"The most powerful tool we have is modeling"
"We're always projecting our feelings [better to ask]"
"You might consider being careful to not bury the answer in the question, such as - Do you think this is going to be hard?"
"Aim for intrinsic rewards not a trophy culture"
"Don't kill their curiosity"
"Don't [always] be linear thinkers"
"Help them to deal with [and realize] ambiguity"
"We have the potential to have our kids be more flexible, and be thinkers"
"Help them learn to problem solve in a group"
"We have a tendency to over protect"
"Let kids have choices"
"Let the child do the planning, see if it works [referring to days, events, etc.]"
"Even if it was successful, ask how could we done it even better"
"We think were helping by structuring everything"
=== As I was listening, several comments sparked ideas, here are a few===
-John Seely Brown tells a great story about his neighbor. A young man that had a dream of becoming the best surfer in the world. He and his friends practiced, practiced, studied, studied and eventually became the greatest surfers in the world.
-The concept of "follow your passion" - and the question she asked about "what would be the impact if we all did that" - made me think of our recent trip to Italy. To me, that is a culture based on everyone following their passions - its a beautiful thing.
-Dr Randy Pausch says "Follow your passions, believe in karma and you wont have to chase your dreams, they will come to you"
-I heard a lot of questions/comments about specific individuals, I wonder [just like she asked] what affect these kinds of thoughts/approaches have at a macro level [like Italy]
-"Precision Questioning and Answering" is a phenomenal approach for asking great questions and giving great answers - I think it has value in this conversation
- video games - I thought Marian would be interested to see all of the TED talks that mention how video games provide an excellent way to learn, practice and improve -- very quickly.
-There's a great book that I'd recommend "Relax, it's only uncertainty"
-When we go on vacation, we like to each take a day and call it "our day", which simply means that person is the "leader" for the day (i.e. its up to them what we do, including a day led by our daughter)
-I read a great article recently that talked about the "ability to say no" (and HOW to say no - I think this relates to the time/priority mgmt issue. It can be exceedingly difficult to say no to opportunities.
-This was a key point for me - and a question that I really wanted to ask - Doesn't it seem tricky to find the delicate [shifting] balance between structure and ambiguity?
-I was surprised that personalities didnt come up as a topic - I could have easily seen any of the personality assessments popping up in this conversation...
- A line I've heard before in this kind of conversation is "we need to move beyond [read: add to] the 3 r's of the 20th century - reading writing 'rithmetic...and into [list all of the qualities we discussed]"
- If I were to list the skills of the 21 century, and I'm sure I'll forget a few, I might list reflection, problem solving (individual and team), retracting, strategic and critical thinking, finding information/knowledge, validating information/knowledge, synthesizing information/knowledge, connectivity, accessibility, innovating, creativity, artistic/design, multi-disciplinary, multi-cultural, communication, technology, research, experimenting, observing, networking, practicing/repeating, questioning, curiosity, leadership .... I think she covered most of them...
- "We have a classroom system when we could have a community system"
- Another related book would be the innovators dilemma
- One last question I would have liked to ask, even though she somewhat indirectly answered it throughout her talk was "How did you arrive at this kind of thinking?" (i.e. was it through life experiences, books, mentors, friends, physical locations/events... I'm sure it was a combination, but it would be fun to hear her perspective of the combination - a thread of pearls, if you will)
Thursday, April 15, 2010
My friends and I had a problem last week. We wanted to have all 10 of us in the same room at the same time for our fantasy baseball draft. We tried to find a time that we were all available on the same day at the same time. We emailed each other. We called each other. We texted each other. We even got fancy and used doodle.com to ‘vote’ for the best time to get together. Apparently, we’re all very busy people and it just wasn’t possible to all be in the same room at the same time (before the baseball season started).
So, we dropped the requirement of being in the same [physical] room at the same time. We said, “there must be a way for us to get online and FEEL like we’re in the same room – we’ll share our webcams or at least audio.” Being that we’re technology savvy folks, I expected this to be an easy task. I thought “we’ll just use Second Life, WebEx, Adobe Connect, Telepresence or something like that”. The team offered ideas like oovoo.com, tokbox.com, Vonage, CamFrog, Savorchat, etc. We even reached out to our networks through Facebook, Google Buzz, gtalk, aim, and twitter to ask for ideas. Apparently, even through our networks, the technology just doesn’t exist – at least not in the format we wanted (and, of course, the [free] price we wanted :) )!
The draft HAD to happen, so what did we do? We failed to meet our expectations. We all sat at our own homes, on a weeknight, and we used chat. No audio, no video, just chat – as if it were 1997.
This failure doesn’t bother me – we still had a great draft and we’re looking forward to a great season. What WOULD bother me is if we didn’t take a moment to reflect upon this failure and learn from it.
Find A Solution
The simple solution would be to find or create an application that allows for 10 simultaneous webcams. I think this solution already exists, but it comes with a cost. Maybe it will be free someday, but until then, I took the opportunity to let my mind wander and consider all possibilities (especially if I have to pay, I want to think about what I want to pay for). In order to consider all possibilities, I tried to remove all the barriers of reality and I thought about synthesizing a number of related ‘problems’ and ‘solutions’.
Imagine… (The Craziness Begins Here)
All of these technologies already exist, but it seems to me that they are currently progressing down separate paths – it seems like there would be tremendous benefit in blending their value.
|Technology||What is it?||[Some] Examples|
|Social Media||Connecting people to people in a 2-d, textual way (on a screen)||Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Wikipedia, etc.|
|Geospatial Awareness||Sharing/awareness of physical location||Foursquare, iPhone|
|Virtual Worlds||Connecting people to people in a 3-d way (on a screen), greatly increasing the ‘feeling’ of being in the same room at the same time||Second Life, World of Warcraft, Active Worlds, etc.|
|Interactive Holograms||Realistic 3-d objects||interactive holograms|
|Touch Tables||An interactive, touchscreen tabletop that recognizes and interacts with standard objects (cell phones, credit cards, cups, etc.)||touch tables|
|Project Natal||Interactive artificial intelligence on a screen, with NO controller||Project Natal|
|Webcam||A device to share video||Logitech QuickCam, Microsoft LifeCam|
There is already a way for a webcam to be put on a car, and while the car is driving around taking video, a virtual world is simultaneously being created. That virtual world mirrors the real world – and its online, so we can interact with it. It seems to me that it is only another small leap to project that virtual world into a 3d hologram, as opposed to a 2-d screen. Then, if we can have connected, online, interactive holograms – wait a minute, woah! Imagine the fun – talk about connecting people to people, sharing non-verbals, ‘feeling’ like you are face to face! Maybe I can be in my living room, sitting on my couch, watching tv – and I can have a live hologram of my best friend “sitting on my couch” right next to me (looks like a hologram to me, but he’s sitting on his couch at his house, 1000 miles away – and he has a similar experience while sitting on his couch at his house).
Why stop there? :) If we, as regular human beings, can interact with a blended ‘real world’ and ‘virtual world’, then maybe we can add in the phenomenal artificial intelligence of Project Natal. We could have many, many Milos running around. They could learn from us and we could learn from them – in a blended reality. Add in the concept of touch tables, where we can interact with [real or virtual] objects.
Can you picture it? What are you picturing? I think it is an environment. It is an environment with many potential applications.
Imagine the Applications
A few possible uses of this environment might be:
1. Education system
Education System: Used as an education system, this blended reality provides tremendous opportunities. Real people can find and interact with other people in real-time, in 3-d. Virtual Worlds could be built to look like anything, so you could have a holographic rendering of any period/place in time that you’d like to study (while walking around it – with other people).
Healthcare: In healthcare, this could be a way to have any person meet with any doctor at anytime that they are both available (without any travel costs). I’ve even heard about ‘remote surgery’, so I think this could be an environment to have as many doctors (and protégés) available to operate and ensure that remote surgery goes well.
Business: Of course we have to consider the financial application. This could lead to extremely efficient business operations. Employees could ‘meet’ with any other employee in the world at any time – sharing all non-verbals as if they were in the same room. No more scheduling conference rooms, no more travel costs (or at least, less worrying and travel costs J).
Entertainment: Think about the next generation of tv shows. There could be 25 “Survivors” all going on at the same time – like a tournament (think about how quickly people would become Survivor experts – that’s a perfect example of learning agility). The cast with the most interest would make the best revenue because of ads (which makes me think about entire new ways to sell advertising – experiential ads)
In general, we’re talking about sharing of resources – anyone in the world with a minute, passion, priority – can help or share a dialog with anyone else. Maybe we even build-in automatic language translation as Phase 2 J??
Let’s play Devil’s Advocate – Why is this a terrible idea?
If we were to share spaces, what does the combined space look like? Lowest common denominator (i.e. whomever has the smallest room, blandest colors is the design of the shared room), or do we need certain physical boundaries/markers?
The obvious problem of privacy – and the related problem of folks just wanting to be offline/disconnected/local. There would be normal resistance to change, not ‘getting it’, or just pure ‘wanting to watch – why would I need to connect to others?’.
The artificial intelligence of this connected world – as avatars are out learning on their own, it could be possible that they do harm in the virtual world.
What about the true physical characteristics – ie my daughter asked if we could have a virtual, holographic Yoshi that she could actually ride around the house. Or I thought of surgery, what if I needed surgery, could the physical changes be made in a virtual environment – could a team of doctors from around the world work on me if I were in a special physical building that automatically made corrections or at least allowed them to operate from anywhere in the world? (similar to remote surgery?).
Recap – In a Nutshell
Come home, put on your webcam, you can see 3d holograms in your room, you can interact with them – touch them - some of them are real people, some of them are avatars, some of them are just objects. Picture watching a 3-d, live, interactive, holographic version of your favorite sporting event – with all of your best friends standing “right there” with you – laughing and loving every second!
I’m sure there are movies about this concept. It’s exciting to think the technology is already getting close to this holographic, 3-d rendering of blended reality and virtual worlds – with automated, intelligent avatars and interactive objects. Will it happen? How soon might it happen? How can we leverage it? Is there a reason to get there “first”?
I wrote this fairly quickly, so I hope it is interesting and makes sense.
My daughter dubbed this idea “for real, make believe”.
“Don’t believe everything you think about.” -Wayne Dyer
“We already have all the answers, we just don’t have the right questions” - not sure, heard it somewhere, can’t find a source through Google
What do you think?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
John Hovell (klowey22)
I took my five year old daughter to an historic town last week. We walked into a room with an old machine to which she pointed and said “Daddy, Daddy, what’s that do?” I said, “Oh, that’s what they call a loom, a long time ago they used it to make clothes. They would shear the hair off a sheep, step on this pedal, and slowly make clothes.” She said “Daddy, that’s weird, we just go to Wal-Mart and buy clothes, they use to have to hurt sheep?” I said, “No no, they didn’t hurt the sheep, but yes, it’s easier for us to get clothes, isn’t it?”
We walked into the next room where there was a man blowing glass. The room was really hot. My daughter pointed to the man and said “Daddy, Daddy, what’s he doing?” I said “Well, he’s making glass, he’s blowing into that tube and shaping things like glasses and vases and bowls”. My daughter said “Daddy, that’s weird, we just go to Wal-Mart to buy bowls and stuff, and there’s so much broken glass in here, and its hot, wow Daddy.” I said “Yes, yes, that’s why we’re here, to learn new things”. We walked into the next room and my daughter said, “Daddy, Daddy, I know what this is! It’s a classroom!”
It is time for us to re-think the concept of how we produce and impart ‘learning’. It is time for us to check our assumptions. The world has changed, we’ve moved from an industrial age to an information age to a knowledge age. Land, labor, and capital should no longer be our primary focus; now, we must put an emphasis on how we allocate time and attention, especially in an area as critical as learning. We must continuously be aware and have the ability to change/adapt, especially in the area of learning.
The amount of information available online is increasing exponentially and we soon may have the information of the entire human race at our fingertips – to include new information as it emerges. How do you handle that? The rate at which information and knowledge emerges has surpassed our ability to “keep up”. At what point do we shift our focus from “keeping up” to “my passions are” or “my happiness comes from” or “I value”? In other words, we started with reading, writing, and arithmetic, and now we’ve added the 21st century set of literacies that include finding, validating, synthesizing, leveraging, and communicating information/knowledge. These literacies also include innovation, collaboration and problem solving with raised awareness through a multi-cultural and multi-lingual mindset. Today, successful people exercise critical thinking, systems thinking, and strategic thinking. Everyone can benefit from learning emotional intelligence, IQ and leadership skills.
The problem is that the ‘winners’ of the current education system are those who become professors. It’s all about the ability to know answers and repeat them. This outdated approach makes sense because the designers of the system have created a self-sustaining system that produces exactly what they need for it to remain alive – more teachers. This is not all bad. Learning is happening in this system, but maybe it’s too focused on the institution and not the individual.
Maybe it’s time to truly embrace the passions of each individual. Maybe it’s time to design an approach or system that optimizes each and every student – putting students at their own individual, unique center. In the past, this was too complex and apparently just not possible. A new framework/approach/system/concept has been enabled because of the emerging world of technology.
Dr. Martin Luther King spoke about the “tranquilizing drug of gradualism” in a much different context, but I think it now applies to the world of learning. There are many great organizations trying to “re-build the classroom” – doing great things like connecting the best teachers with each other, with the best labs, with the best thought leaders. Many organizations and universities are bringing more technology into classrooms. This is great, but it is time to check our assumptions and re-think how learning occurs. What is the true value of a classroom?
Aren’t these additions, just that, additions to a classic system? It is time for a new approach, a new system. Technology can enable the transformation of learning and the continuous emerging life changes that we face. The learning transformation would allow those with a passion to be professors to become professors, those with a passion to be engineers to become engineers, those with a passion to be doctors to become doctors, those with a passion to be a musician to become musicians, ALL on their own optimal path with efficient and effective allowances for changing passions along the way.
I often think, well, this is too big, too great a shift. Is it really that bad now? Don’t we already have a map of critical skills that lead to specialized skills and it’s already up to the individual to find their passions and embrace their path? What about curriculums? What about earning degrees and testing knowledge and skills? These are valid questions and what we’re getting down to is this question – what is the value of learning? What is the optimal approach to maximize that value? How close is our current system to offering that value through the optimal system? This system has withstood the test of time, right? Doesn’t that mean something? Will there still be standards? What about the folks with just truly lower IQs, does self-led learning pan out? Some suggest that our decision making ability (and thorough understanding of consequences) isn’t developed in our brains until 18 years of age, doesn’t that disable self-led learning up to that point? Isn’t it valuable to be well-rounded? Does this system offer enough diversity? Can there be enough social interaction in a new approach?
So then I come back to the consideration if a whole new system would be better? I believe the answer is yes. Some of the current issues that can be addressed are: ‘underachievement is over-accepted’, spending too much time to develop a curriculum, providing the ‘right-answer vending-machine’ approach, preparing for standardized tests when we know it’s face to face that is the true test, having dependencies on physical area/wealth/teachers/friends, not having enough ‘room’ in universities today, and not having enough people “get it” in their respective fields (which usually comes from lack of perspective, practice and openness). Would this new approach just solve some of these problems, but present new (maybe worse?) problems? Maybe that concern can be thought through – or maybe the known benefits outweigh the unknown unintended consequences? Would this concept best suit emergent learning (i.e. adult learning post-college)? The future holds the answers to these questions.
It comes down to learning how-to-learn what you need to know to follow your passions. This approach optimizes the value of passion, because each person has their own path and will learn best, in their own way, which is the basis of this new approach.
So – here it is – the new approach!
Envision a blend of universities, markets and amusement parks. Universities focus on learning (imparting knowledge), markets focus on trade (the equilibrium of supply and demand), and amusement parks focus on fun (maintaining interest through entertainment). This blend would be both physical and virtual – in an environment that is similar to a mixture of the passion and happiness found in a small town in Italy and the energy and diversity in a bustling large city such as New York. Imagine a beautiful cobblestone street lined by both small cottages and high rises that block out the sun. Remember, this is real and virtual - in something like second life or tele-presence. Visualize one or two piazzas and a central gathering area lined with flowers, gardens and art. Further down the street is a lake and a golf course (and sports fields). Strategically interspersed in the community is an amusement park featuring rides and games. What’s in the buildings along the cobblestone streets (with no cars on them, by the way)? We don’t know, because that is driven by the learners – some may have people learning English, some may have people learning how to sing, some may be alive with live performances such as history re-enactments. All of these buildings are interconnected. Anyone on the street can be learning, teaching, sharing, and practicing with anyone else on the street. Imagine this extended so that every street in the world was interconnected.
So how do you get to this virtual street? How does this learning approach work? What do I do first? Everything starts with a personality diagnostic. You take the Trimetrix or Hogan for example. Diagnostics provide core motivators that drive human behavior. There are at least four core sets of behaviors that are displayed in conjunction with those motivators. So, if we focus on each unique combination of the top 3 motivators, then we have unique combinations. Let’s build a matrix with the twenty unique sets of motivators down the left column of a spreadsheet. Now, let’s put the four core behavior groups across the top. Now we have a matrix of 20 rows by 4 columns. These 80 boxes in the matrix can be pre-determined topics/ways/approaches that a person with that combination of motivators/behaviors will want to learn (oh, but isn’t this pre-determining like a ‘general doctor’. We’ll discuss later that these boxes are actually dynamic and have several ‘paths’ as opposed to pre-determinations)
So now you have your personality assessment – which, by the way, already provides tremendous insight into your passions – and we can map where you should ‘go’ to do your learning. Oh, you brought your friends with you today – great, we can map your collective best route for learning today. But it’s not just one day, it could be daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, semester based, annual, etc.
Maybe you earn ‘lifelong learning credits’ for each hour you learn as opposed to high school or college credits. These credits might help to validate and provide ‘rating’ for questions and answers. Certain plateaus of credits would emerge over time and that might prove to be the equivalent breaking points of the ‘degrees’ to which we’ve become accustomed.
To be more specific, let’s give some examples of what’s in those boxes.
We would need to ensure that all paths (i.e. areas of study, specialization, need, etc.) are available through all 80 boxes so that means that each box probably has multiple options.
That’s part of the beauty of this system- it is not necessarily taught by professors, it can be mentoring/coaching, thought leaders, experts or collaboration/diversity in thought that teaches the participants. Remember some of the boxes are markets, not just ‘classes’; so, for example in one ‘place’ you can have students, teachers, buyers, and sellers for pottery.
As an aside, another reason this concept has potential is because of the ‘free agent nation’ that we’re beginning to see and experience. In a ‘free agent nation’, each individual has a talent (i.e. passion) that they offer as they bounce from company to company (synchronously or asynchronously). We’re seeing more and more of this as baby boomers retire and just offer a few hours a week to several different companies. Generation X’ers are seeing this trend and beginning to capitalize on it as well. The learning approach we’re talking about in this document aligns nicely with the ‘free agent nation’ effect because it helps learners to follow, practice and immerse in their passions (even if they change over time).
We know the best learning model is ‘tell, show, do’, and we know the best learning is experiential (full immersion) with an engaged learner. We know role-models, mentors and leaders propel learners. We realize that family and culture play a critical role in the development and realization of potential. This concept sets up an environment to maximize those connections, that network, across the world – in real time. Here’s a little bit of a downside, in the 20 unique combinations of motivators, only 50% have to do with the motivation for knowledge. The other 50% focus on value or tradition or social – this is where the amusement park (and market) come in. Some folks are driven by value or social motivations, which means we should embrace and leverage that environment for learning. For example, let’s teach physics on a roller coaster or teach entomology in an ice cream shop.
We live in a transformative world right now where the newspaper industry needs leaders, the music industry needs leaders, the government needs leaders, and virtually every area needs leaders. I submit that people following their passions, learning value, learning leadership, learning how to learn in their own unique, engaged way can collectively bring us an improved living environment.
As a recap, this new approach to learning is a virtual and physical ‘world’ that centers on the individual and their motivations/behaviors. It couples those motivations/behaviors with learning opportunities. Based on the nature of human motivation, learning opportunities exist as a blend of ‘university’ meets ‘market’ meets ‘amusement park’. Learning is directly connected to buyers and sellers (of the goods and services that are produced from the practice of learning) and there is a noticeable element of ‘fun’. Learning opportunities are connected in a global manner, so that the learner and the learning is truly always the ‘latest and greatest’. A learner is guided and can guide them self through their passions and therefore attain their highest potentials. This new learning approach supports an individual in their journey of self mastery, vision(s), and passion(s) while moving with the pace of global change.
Tell me again exactly how it works? People come to a physical place (maybe it’s a new place or maybe it’s our current schools) or a virtual place (like second life), then they take a personality diagnostic (which can be taken numerous times throughout a lifetime). The person then receives a de-brief of the diagnostic so that they gain in personal awareness. Given their specific motivations and behaviors, they are guided to learning opportunities where others are learning as well. These learning opportunities are geared towards their motivations/behaviors and ‘offered’ in numerous formats (university setting, market setting, amusement park setting, audio, visual, kinesthetic, etc.) In these online and physical worlds, they are connected to resources (human and otherwise) that help them to guide themselves to the amount of learning that maintains their happiness. It is these resources (these connections/networks), and their interaction/feedback with these resources, that maintain the learning opportunities at the pace of human understanding (a self-sustaining/centralization/validation of worldwide learning).
I share this idea as an initial concept. This concept isn’t flawless and it’s not meant to be. Let this be the beginning of a fundamental re-assessment. Let’s re-assess how to optimize the value of the design/delivery of [global] lifelong learning. If we think we’re on to something here, then let’s form groups to share more research, brainstorming, innovation and planning, in a collaborative manner. Will you help?
Learning to Change, Changing to Learn (YouTube video by CoSN)
Ken Robinson Says Schools Kill Our Creativity (TED video)
Consortium for School Networking
Vision 2015 Delaware
Learning Is For Everyone (url listing public education support and resources)
• Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships
• Center of Reinventing Public Education
• Center on Education Policy
• The Imaginative Education Research Group
• National Education Association
• National Parent Teacher Association
• National School Boards Association
• International Association for K-12 Online Learning
• OWL Institute – Open Educational Resources
• Rethinking Schools
• Teachers Without Borders
• Global Campaign for Education
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
American Productivity and Quality Consortium (APQC) Process Improvement and Implementation in Education
Education Reform (Wikipedia)
Related Blog Entry by Bill Ferriter
Related Entry – especially first comment
Why Are Current Education System is Failing Us
Disruptive Idea: The Education Organization is Not Structure But Capability
Is The Education System Broken? (short video by Lee Hamilton - President & Director, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; Former Congressman)
Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns (book by Harvard professor Clayton Christensen
Opening story credit - Tony O'Driscoll, Professor of the Practice, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, original slides
The Future Problem Solving Program International (FPSPI) engages students in creative problem solving. http://www.fpspi.org/ FPSPI Mission: To develop the ability of young people globally to design and promote positive futures using critical, creative thinking.