Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Thoughts on Jeff's post

So I finally got around to watching Jeff's video earlier tonight featuring Sir Kenneth Robinson, and I have to say that it's absolutely right on the money concerning the state of creativity in today's education system. Let me preface by saying that if you haven't watched this video yet - do so ASAP. Kenneth is a funny and knowledgeable guy with incredible insight into both education and the mind of school children in general. Watching him speak on this topic gave me both laughs and keen analysis on creativity in the school system.

I figured that since I have nothing better to do tonight, I'll sort of sum up Kenneth's presentation for those of you unable to view the video either for technical or time-related reasons. I'm going to run through the presentation, chronologically, by highlighting some key quotes of his stated in the presentation and my personal analysis of it. Here we go:


"Creativity is as important in education as literacy, and we should treat it with the same status." (3:27)

A brilliant thesis statement to start of the speech. He jumps the gun and makes the message very clear: Creativity simply isn't recognized or even enforced in public education. He goes on to tell a few anecdotes illustrating this point. The first is a story about a girl drawing a picture of God, in which after being approached by the teacher who says "but we don't know what God looks like," she replies "neither do I."

Another has to do with his very own son who plays the role of one of Joseph in a school reproduction of the Nativity. He tells of how the first two of the Three Wise Men present gold and mer respectively, each one presenting their gift saying, "I present you with ___". The third one hands over his gift stating, "Frank sent this" clearly misconstruing the correct pronunciation of 'frankincense.' (Note that my two recollections aren't exactly accurate but just a quick annotation of what I heard. Please correct me if I'm wrong, as it's 11:30 at night.)

His point is that kids aren't afraid to take chances at an early age and aren't afraid to be wrong. In both instances, the young children were oblivious to social conventions simply because they didn't know what was considered "right" or "wrong". They just went with the flow and did what they wanted to without limits.


"If you're not prepared to be wrong, you will never come up with anything original." (5:56)

Absolutely in agreement. And simply because this doesn't just apply to a traditional creative field like advertising, but ANYTHING in life that requires effort and determination. Look at all of the multi-billionaires, tycoons and moguls that rule the business world. There are two things that set them apart from the pretenders: 1) Perseverance and vision, and 2) their ability to think outside the box.

Marketing mogul Donnie Deutche has a show called The Big Idea and he harps on this all the time. I can't quote anything from him ad verbatim, but one thing he always says is that to make it big you need to think of something that nobody else has and do whatever it takes to be recognized for it. Dress up in a chicken suit to draw attention to your little store on the side of the road if that's what it takes. Just be smart and don't be afraid of failure.

Ken's other main point is that even though kids aren't afraid to be wrong (as stated previously) we as a society stigmatize mistakes. This stunts intellectual growth in a lot of cases and most importantly, creativity. And creativity, of course, is one in the same with being willing to take chances.


"We do not grow into creativity - we are educated out of it." (6:31)

Excellent observation. Following a humorous anecdote of he and his family moving to LA from Stratford-Upon-Avon, England, he goes into detail on what he calls a "hierarchy of subject" in public schools. His belief is that the public education system places varied importance on the various academic disciplines in schools. He claims that at the very top of the hierarchy, math/science/languages reign supreme. And towards the bottom, you reach more creative disciplines such as the arts; these include anywhere from music to dance to studio art.

He also builds a new sub-hierarchy within the arts. He states that fields such as traditional art and music rate higher than dance and performing arts like acting, theater, etc. Although frankly I view all art as almost one in the same (as essentially you're creating something in some way or another) this is an interesting view on his part. In high school, I was a part of one of the most recognized high school marching bands in the state, if not, the country. We were undoubtedly the shining star of the arts program at school while other sub-divisions like orchestra, theater, chorus, etc. were often overlooked despite their great talents.


"The whole purpose of public education is to produce university professors." (10:00)

Very funny, but mainly true. As he claims, the bulk of public education in this country is predicated on the academic ability required for entrance into the university level.

One of the more interesting observations he makes is the historical explanation behind this structure. According to Ken, public education wasn't established until late in the 19th century when the Industrial Revolution really started to take full-effect. As a result, public education was designed to meet the needs of growing industrialism during this time. Ken reiterates what he says earlier by giving two main effects of this cause: 1) The most useful a.k.a. practical subjects like math and sciences are positioned towards the top of the academic hierarchy, and 2) public education is centered around university entrance and the arts are stigmatized as a result.

I personally feel that for the most part, math and science departments in high schools are often the more revered and prestiged divisions of the school and art departments are mostly taken for granted. In my high school this wasn't the case as we had one of the best art programs in the state, but I can definitely see how this scenario holds true in other schools around the country. The ultimated result is that creativity is stunted and not emphasized by schools who are often more concerned with high test scores and college placement for their students.


Towards the end, Ken lays out his three primary components for intelligence (and coincidentally they all start with the letter 'D'.)

1. Diverse - this deals with the way we perceive the world around us; either visually, through sound, or kinesthetically.

2. Dynamic - Interactivity. Creativity comes form the interaction between a person and the things around them.

3. Distinct - Ken tells an inspiring anecdote about Gillian Lynne, the chief choreographer for the musical CATS. He tells the story of how when she was a little girl, her parents brought her to a doctor to diagnose problems she had been having in school. She was said to always be fidgeting and being unstable during class and could never pay attention to the teacher or any of her classmates. This was during a time where ADHD hasn't even been conceived yet, so the doctors had NO idea of how to approach this.

After a few hours, the doctor told her mother to come with him for private conference in another room. Before he left, he turned a radio on in the same room as Gillian. The doctor and her mother than observed Gillian dancing to the radio, unknowingly. It was then when the doctor told the mother that she belonged in dance school.

From that point on, Gillian would enroll in dance classes for the rest of her young life. Eventually, she would go on to meet Andrew Lloyd Webber and they would produce a little Broadway musical called CATS. She is now incredibly successful and a multi-millionaire.


Ken concludes his presentation by reaffirming that education needs to be reformatted to inspire creativity in young children. To paraphrase, "we must breed creativity and educated our children to secure a future for all."


Once again Jeff - excellent, excellent post of yours. I'm really glad you put this on the blog for all to see.

And for those of you who actually made it through this entire thing, remind me in class next time that I owe you a cookie. OK, well maybe I can't get you a cookie necessarily, but at least I'd really appreciate the fact that I didn't just waste an hour of my life :)







Thoughts on Jeff's post

No comments: