The High Concept & High Touch Whole Mind

When wabbit just introduced me to Daniel Pink's A Whole New Mind, she said, just read the first chapter and you'll be excited. Pinks introductory chapter started with "The future belongs to a different kind of person.... Designers, inventors, teachers, storytellers — creative and empathetic right-brain thinkers whose abilities mark the fault line between who gets ahead and who doesn't." The idea that those people who "Think different" may be valued even more than ever instantaneously got me hook onto the book!

Mind map on Daniel Pink's book from http://www.learning-tech.co.ukwhole_new_mind.htm.gif/

Below is a fine piece of how Garr Reynold's combined Pink's aptitudes of Design. Story. Symphony. Empathy. Play. Meaning. with the mastery of great presentation.
http://www.presentationzen.com/presentationzen/2006/08/from_design_to_.html
In Reynold's words, "these are not the last word on the aptitudes needed by the modern presenter, but mastering these along with other important aptitudes such as strong analytical skills will take you far as a communicator in the "conceptual age."" (And yes, Reynold's blog is simply one of the coolest, well-dated and much wisdom waiting to discover!)

From an educational standpoint, since the ability to see connections require cognitive engagement, brain-based theory recommends that educators ought to engage both sides (hemispheres) of the brains to learn.

“Today the left brain capabilities that powered the information age are
necessary but no longer sufficient. The “right brain” qualities of inventiveness, empathy, joyfulness and meaning – increasingly determine who flourishers and who flounders. …professional success and personal fulfillment
now requires a whole new mind.” (Daniel Pink, p3)

With these in mind (now that our mind has “expanded”) how do we leverage on the instructional techniques associated with brain-based learning:

1. Creating learning environments that fully immerse students in an educational experience (Orchestrated immersion)
   
2. Eliminate fear in learners, maintaining highly challenging environment (Relaxed alertness)
   
3. Allow learners to consolidate and internalise information by actively processing it. (Active processing)

Highly recommended website (learning theories on curriculum design and student engagement) http://www.funderstanding.com/right_left_brain.cfm

Libraries of Tomorrow

Just as we are cracking our brains thinking the importance (or non-importance) of how design is changing schools, I was deeply impressed on Bosch & Fjord's "point of view" approach of co-creating on actual projects that his company has managed to execute. They have recently launched their new project "The Library of the Future".

This was one of the most 'core' words I heard from Rosan Bosch as she explained why designing to bring out the individuality in all aspects of work, play and chill means a great deal. "You need to have room for your personality at work otherwise you cannot be creative."

Their amazing works brings together "opportunities, common to all of humanity, for experiencing a new sensibility, tactility, and sociality - by also investigating the various codes and games in which the body takes part, and the spaces established around such games, be it in financial, cultural, or social terms." http://uk.bosch-fjord.com/content.asp?page=text&ID=164

Do catch a glimpse of this on http://www.bosch-fjord.com/ Check out the mind blowing pictures on the Library of tomorrow!

Ambidextrous Organisations & Other processes

Innovation can be an extremely chaotic and messy business. Many theories, many alternatives, many views. Yet, the real thinking needs deepen to understand what works for us and be well contextualized for innovations for tomorrow.

One article that I was greatly inspired is the ‘Ambidextrous Organisations’. It pointed the different models of organizations that deals with both incremental and radical innovations well.

"... these kinds of companies "ambidextrous organisations", and we believe they provide practical and proven model for forward-looking executives seeking to pioneer radical or disruptive innovations, while pursuing incremental gains. A business does not have to escape its past, these cases show, to renew itself for the future."

On why Singapore Quality Assessment is still key to put organizations ‘in place’ people need understand that the difference in the process of SQA and innovation is in the extent of turbulence created by the external environment. An organization need have an understanding of how to respond to changes around. Theodora Tan, Supt of E5, extracted the concept from the book by Brent Davies and Linda Ellison entitled 'Strategic Direction & Development of the School’. It explains the differences between emergent strategy, intraprenuership, strategic planning and strategic intents.

The SQA process assumes that there is a high level of understanding of how an organisation should respond to the challenges it faces. Hence it plans and puts in place processes in a systematic manner. However, when the level of understanding is low, which is essentially the work that we do and what innovation is all about - breaking new ground, the process is messy and a lot more fluid.

Can all the approaches co-exist in an organisation? In my mind, the answer is 'yes'. It just depends on what aspect of the work we are talking about and the level of understanding of how we should be approaching it.

Can You Become a Creature of New Habits?

Christophe Vorlet

The New York Times
by JANET RAE-DUPREE
Published: May 4, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/business/04unbox.html?ei=5087&em=&en=12f4319f96a5d073&ex=1210737600&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1210583527-C/L6paCiUVnguCtJ9hBl4w

"HABITS are a funny thing. We reach for them mindlessly, setting our brains on auto-pilot and relaxing into the unconscious comfort of familiar routine. “Not choice, but habit rules the unreflecting herd,” William Wordsworth said in the 19th century. In the ever-changing 21st century, even the word “habit” carries a negative connotation."

Author suggest that it seemed antithetical to talk about habits in the same context as creativity and innovation. Yet with the advances in neuroscience, brain researchers have discovered that with conscious development of new habits, parallel synaptic paths are created and even allows new neurons to 'jump our trains of thought onto new, innovative tracks.'

"Rather than dismissing ourselves as unchangeable creatures of habit, we can instead direct our own change by consciously developing new habits. In fact, the more new things we try — the more we step outside our comfort zone — the more inherently creative we become, both in the workplace and in our personal lives.

Dawna Markova, author of “The Open Mind” and an executive change consultant for Professional Thinking Partners noted “the first thing needed for innovation is a fascination with wonder ... But we are taught instead to ‘decide' ... and to decide is to kill off all possibilities but one. A good innovational thinker is always exploring the many other possibilities.”

Whats interesting is that: researchers in the late 1960s discovered that humans are born with the capacity to approach challenges in four primary ways: analytically, procedurally, relationally (or collaboratively) and innovatively. The argument goes on to say that with standardized testing in schools, analysis and procedure that is highlighted would then disallow people to use their "innovative and collaborative modes of thought."

New personal mastery can come by developing new habits. "If you’re an analytical or procedural thinker, you learn in different ways than someone who is inherently innovative or collaborative. Figure out what has worked for you when you’ve learned in the past, and you can draw your own map for developing additional skills and behaviors for the future..... If you have a pathway to learning, use it because that’s going to be easier than creating an entirely new pathway in your brain.”

Ms. Ryan and Ms. Markova identified 3 zones of existence: comfort, stretch and stress. "Comfort is the realm of existing habit. Stress occurs when a challenge is so far beyond current experience as to be overwhelming. It’s that stretch zone in the middle — activities that feel a bit awkward and unfamiliar — where true change occurs."

When we enter the stretching zone, “it helps keep your brain healthy. It turns out that unless we continue to learn new things, which challenges our brains to create new pathways, they literally begin to atrophy, which may result in dementia, Alzheimer’s and other brain diseases. ... but scientists speculate that getting out of routines makes us more aware in general.”

Interestingly, the May 08 issue of Harvard Business review interviewed John J. Medina and sought his views on how 'The Science of Thinking Smarter' can show managers way to improve productivity.

• He stated that scientists still know very little about how to apply the new knowledge of neuroscience to real-world settings.
• Whats for real though, would be that by "unpacking the neuroscience of stress, companies can dramatically improve the productivity of their knowledge workers and thus gaining a competitive edge."
• Also, it is established that the brain is highly sensitive and can respond very differently to external experiences and thus implies that we can "literally rewire it through exposure to cultural influences."
• How learning is fixed is unclear and he notes "memory is not fized at the moment of learning, and repetition improves the odd of retrieval."
• What is common knowledge is that the brain, like a muscle, gets larger and more complex with increased activity and experience.
• Oh, and that exercise-known to be improve cardiovascular system enhances blood flow and blood vessels in the brain and thus, reduce chance of contracting Alzeheimer's disease
  

Ms Ryan proposed the practice of kaizen, a Japanese technique that calls for tiny, continuous improvements. “Whenever we initiate change, even a positive one, we activate fear in our emotional brain,” “If the fear is big enough, the fight-or-flight response will go off and we’ll run from what we’re trying to do. The small steps in kaizen don’t set off fight or flight, but rather keep us in the thinking brain, where we have access to our creativity and playfulness.”

Ms. Markova suggests that by taking a look at how colleagues approach challenges, it brings about intellectual diversity in the business. "We tend to believe that those who think the way we do are smarter than those who don’t. That can be fatal in business, particularly for executives who surround themselves with like-thinkers."

They encouraged that by churning through the initial confusion state with new activities, the brain then starts organizing the new input, leading to the creation of new synaptic connections if the process is repeated enough. But if, during creation of that new habit, the “Great Decider” steps in to protest against taking the unfamiliar path, “you get convergence and we keep doing the same thing over and over again,” she says.

“You cannot have innovation ..... unless you are willing and able to move through the unknown and go from curiosity to wonder.”

The Cognitive Age

New York Times By DAVID BROOKS
Published: May 2, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/opinion/02brooks.html?ex=1367467200&en=cc3f18b330bcead4&ei=5124&partner=facebook&exprod=facebook

Brooks argue that we need look beyond the globalization paradigm Although most agree that globalization is the chief process driving our age and that our lives are being transformed by the increasing movement of goods, people and capital across borders.

The changing of historical narratives shows that what used to determining boundaries are blurred where capital flows freely and technology levelling the playing field allowing for fiercer global competition.

Yet the globalization paradigm has evolved and is no longer the central force driving economic change. "Pankaj Ghemawat of the Harvard Business School has observed, 90 percent of fixed investment around the world is domestic. Companies open plants overseas, but that’s mainly so their production facilities can be close to local markets."

Brooks identified that the chief force reshaping manufacturing is technological change. "Thanks to innovation, manufacturing productivity has doubled over two decades. Employers now require fewer but more highly skilled workers. Technological change affects China just as it does the America."

The central process driving that is changing the ecomomy landscape is no longer globalization but a skills revolution - a more demanding cognitive age.

"In order to thrive, people are compelled to become better at absorbing, processing and combining information. But the most important part of information’s journey is the last few inches — the space between a person’s eyes or ears and the various regions of the brain. Does the individual have the capacity to understand the information? Does he or she have the training to exploit it? Are there cultural assumptions that distort the way it is perceived? .....

But the cognitive age paradigm emphasizes psychology, culture and pedagogy — the specific processes that foster learning. "

How Google Fuels Its Idea Factory

CEO Eric Schmidt describes the simple principles driving the company's steady stream of innovations http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_19/b4083054277984.htm

Think like a CEO: Imagine if you were the CEO, what would you say?

• Do companies have to manage innovation differently in a downturn?
• Can other companies emulate Google's famous model of letting engineers spend about 20% of their time on projects outside their main job?
• Why aren't many other companies doing this, too?
• What obstacles does Google face in continuing to innovate?
• So you still need that face-to-face contact?
• Google has a reputation for doing a lot of R&D in-house, as well as buying companies to bring in other technologies. Are you shifting that toward getting outside talent to contribute in a bigger way than they have?
• So we're likely to see even more acquisitions by Google?
• Does this mean it's tough for people to adjust, and will that limit the number of companies you can comfortably buy?
• How does Google make sure it's producing innovations that change the game enough to create big new markets but also continue to appeal to its main customers, who might not want so much disruption?
• How do you make sure all these Google engineering projects actually turn into useful services?
• How much of a concern is it that Google has seen both executives and engineers depart for other companies or startups?
• Can innovation really be managed, or is it a case where you have to keep the company and its managers out of the way?

Innovation Matters

In one of my earliest blog entry on No-big-deal Innovation http://create-teeth-buzz.blogspot.com/2008/03/innovation-is-no-big-deal-really.html after being so inspired by dining with thoughts leaders of the different fields, bringing the learning back home, I am increasing sensing the great disjoint.

I think my exasperation lies in this observation- that Singaporeans are only hung up over "innovations is good to have, we believe its the next tipping point, we know it drives change,...." and the wonderful list goes on. YET, it leaves many to wonder, what worked for the thriving firms on innovation or why didn't it work for us? I wish to probe deeper then that we need to re-examine- how many truly embraces this level of change? What does this change management entail? How can we contextualise innovation for ourselves?

A paradigm shift: Straits Times (April 30, 08) carried the article 'Clash in Innovation Incentives' by Richard W. Carney and Loh Yi Zheng that highlighted the conflict that I am grappling with. It identified in bold the root of the problem-

'Singaporean managers and employees may be exceptionally creative. But Singaporean institutions foster conflicting innovation styles, their efforts do not produce any sustainable innovation activities of either type.'

Some food for thoughts...

• Singapore face a 'considerable difficulty in building a durable base of entreprenuerial activity- despite being richer than France, Germany and Japan on per capita basis and numerous government efforts to spur innovation.
• Is our culture is simply too risk adverse or do we lack creativity? Or could the writers rightly identify it as the fault of institutional arrangements?
• What are the types of incentives of institutions that will allow both incremental (or small scale improvements to products or services) AND radical innovation to take place?
• For long term focus, incremental innovation matters most. It involves cumulative learning with specialised training of workers to prevent other companies from "poaching" these skilled workers. With clients and major suppliers, investment into specific physical assets in important. Such practices establish a culture of 'trust, certainty and camaraderie throughout the value chain'- thus spreading the benefits of costs, benefits and risk of R&D for all to grow in the process and generally uninterupted by the 'occasional difficulty of the individual firms'.
• Role of dominant owners: shield from short-term capital market pressures and producing long term productivity goals. Impact on managers: focus on 'low-risk strategies and continous improvements on established products, ... to build a competitive edge.'
• Conversely, radical innovation focus on the short term- 'hit and miss' of seeking the next 'blockbuster' product, which would 'recover the cost of all other unprofitable endeavours'.

SO here's the big argument...

Firing of employees with the requsite skills and the knowledge after if a product does not materialise, essentially is no big deal! In fact, writers opined that 'arm-length relationships also enable such firms to poach the highly valuable 'drop-outs'. The writers argue that since fast evolving sectors' success depend on speed and flexibilty, our strong commitment of inter-firm relationship is thus a reliablity.

Paradoxically, since the nimbleness to mandate only fall on managers, and require little consultancy with the workers OR even the owners, the tendency for managers to 'wield greater powers' disperses the ownership. This frees up firms with 'liquid and virbrant equity market' to better to 'coping with novelty and catering to investors with heterogenenous risk appetite'. On investment, the stock market then allows venture capitalist to exit easily after IPO. It then suggest that this key to driving a bigger thrust for innovative companies to emerge with this constant flux of knowledge spillover to renew itself through the formation of new firms and new R&D competencies. In fact, some of my friends that visited US recently commented that the park/garage of temp 'car-stayers', was a highly regarded as anyone in there could be jolly well the next Bill Gates or Steve Jobs.

Our BIG problem then would be....

when we want encourage both incremental and radical approaches, we are at a fix then with how to set the incentives for innovation. Also, since coporate ownership is so high, we also then tend to focus more on the low risk strategies for improvements.

The authors thus challenges companies to either choose ONE of the following:

• Create longer term employment and stronger inter-firm relationships
• Disperse coporate ownership and cultivate a thriving venture capital market

Which then would be approach that best suits our 'unique cultural and economic circumstances'?

Learning Spaces

Space is a constraint in Singapore.

A man who parked his bike illegally stirred the media last year when he revengefully locked the doors of the National Library after his bike was locked couple of times. NLB said that it posed a danger as a fire hazard, he refuted the argument. Now, NLB brought in the bicycle rakes for users who decide to go green by not using petrol/diesel. hmm...a situation where opportunity arised from conflict perhaps.


On the other hand, one of the first mega schools in Singapore- Anderson Primary School, merged 3 primary schools together was not exactly 'mega' in size. Yet the tiny plot of land in Ang Mo Kio has caused the management to innovatively optimise the use of space/lack of space :) I was marvelled by the use of the white overhead beam along the walkway into the courtyard of the school. Most schools would have installed a overhead television to screen programs, announcements, or other edutaining purposes. They cleverly converted that space into a wide screen projection area. Definitely well utilised to capture attention, many times better than a large screen TV. A simple, little frills, but highly economical innovation.


I recently shared the article "Design of the Learning Space" from Educause Review (July/August 2005) with the Innolab team and DCPD circulated it to rest of directors. Some importants questions as school leaders need to re-think.

What were the "formal" spaces of learning yesterday? How have we changed the use of space today? What do we envision for learning spaces tomorrow?

In my earlier blog entry, I shared how Hellerup Skole in Denmark reshaped learning spaces to be more student centred (rather than activity/schedule centred). I like to challenge educator then to ask: how can we consider the instructional implications of these spaces along our corridors, hall ways and even canteen (would blog about my mini PBL project in next entry) One thing is for sure, our students are increasingly becoming digitally literate (and believe me , I lost countless games on maple story when I play with my 9 yr old niece-her ability to multitask and strategise online is something worth carrying out an enthnography). How should we be concerned then with creation and support virtual learning spaces? Brown stated "Learning spaces encompass the full range of places in which learning occurs, from real to virtual, from classroom to chat room".


To me, there is a pressing need, especially with our small size land area, to study about the driving force within the design process and set our own new benchmarks for progress to be measured. In the article, the authors suggested 4 areas t consider aspects of change- life-cycles, how people learn, technologies for teaching, and students themselves. I would just like to focus on 2 key areas:

How people learn-

1. How would expert learners differ in the way they are engaged as compared to novice learners?


2. How does that impact deeper learning?

The article suggest that expert learners have a more developed scaffold of experience and knowledge that allows them to assimilate and process new information. In contrast, novice learners will "fare better if they reconcile new information with prior knowledge." For educators, I believe this has implication on how we differentiate our instruction in a mix-ability class. When novice learners may struggle with transferring of "problems and data from one context to another", expert learners have greater ease with "reflecting on learning, or metacognition".

As I always encourage teachers to purposefully question the our students learn, it is evident that deeper learning implies a "disciplined perspective" of a practitioner. And beyond the knowledge management, teachers as facilitators need be highly midful that deeper learning occurs when learning is social, active and promotes student ownership. I sense many teachers today are less comfortable with ambiguity in the classroom. I agree that I previously insisted that my teachers have a clear lesson plan. However, that to me is a prerequsite to a good lesson preparation. But beyond that, the teacher needs to clear the collaborative atmosphere in class can only be established if teachers provide prompt and ongoing feedback. To balance between skill set and mind set of a teacher facilitator, a good teacher needs be a reflective practioner! It boils down to unravelling the principles behind PBL, TfU, UbD- which is to identify the meaningful learning experiences and study how we could shape this environment to promote learning. In essence, I think as educators, we need to ask ourselves beyond looking at the instructional needs, do we also consider the learning needs of our students?

The Net Generation -

Face it, I know my students are so much more comfortable with technology than with their teachers, yes, even Mr Yeo :) My ex-students are so much freer to communicate with me via MSN, facebook or even their blogs then to pick up their phone and greet:"Hello Mr Yeo..." (sigh...) Except when one called to say, Mr Yeo, can you attend my wedding! Ha3. The kids today are of the Net Generation and this IS their preferred modes of interaction, communication and socialisation. Our kids love to "augment" with 'formal and informal small groups and discussions". In fact, recalling the first national award that I mentored in 2003, was a group of Sec 3 students who designed a Biology game on SEX-the human reproductive system. Yes, apart from a sexy biology teacher, they had all the skills of designing and programming a splendid digital story- while I had none of their mastery and competence. What I had (then..ha3) was my ability to advise on the content, story board and suggest ideas to make the game more sex-citing. Needless to say, we got first!

I guess it leaves me to ask "What technology skills and preferences do students currently have?" "What skills do they have in future?" "What skills do they need?" and "How will we meet these needs?" Much room for thought.

I welcome post for comments/concerns. For the teachers in Anderson, please share with me how these ideas would change the way you go into your classroom next week? I look 4ward to your thoughts....

Bird : Innovation & Creativity, Team Dynamics, Leadership 1

In an article from the McKinsey Quarterly (April 2008): 'Innovation lessons from Pixar: An interview with Oscar-winning director Brad Bird' by Hayagreeva Rao, Robert Sutton, and Allen P. Webb
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Innovation/Innovation_lessons_from_Pixar_An_interview_with_Oscar-winning_director_Brad_Bird_2127

Although stimulating the creativity of animators might seem very different from developing new product ideas or technology breakthroughs, Bird’s anecdotes are powerful to stir the imagination of innovation-minded executives in any industry.

These were some of his other creative insights from the interview-

Creativity and Innovation

Great ideas come from unexpected places. Who could have predicted that bicycle mechanics would develop the airplane or that the US Department of Defense would give rise to a freewheeling communications platform like the Internet. Seek inspiration in surprising sources.

Fear becoming complacent. Steve Jobs, Ed Catmull, and John Lasseter said, in effect, “The only thing we’re afraid of is complacency—feeling like we have it all figured out. We want you to come shake things up. We will give you a good argument if we think what you’re doing doesn’t make sense, but if you can convince us, we’ll do things a different way.”

Value failure. Bird joined Pixar after coming off a film that was a highly regarded financial failure. Yet, for a company that has had nothing but success, they invited him to "Go ahead, mess with our heads, shake it up". "I worked on a number of badly run productions and learned how not to make a film."

Provide room to experiment ideas - "the heads of Pixar gave us leave to try crazy ideas."
Be 'dirty' In order to do things differently, he had to shake the purist out of those who are things really well—"essentially frighten them into realizing I was ready to use quick and dirty “cheats” to get something on screen if they took too long to achieve it in the computer."

Embrace inequality. "Not all shots are created equal. Certain shots need to be perfect, others need to be very good, and there are some that only need to be good enough to not break the spell. "


Team Dynamics

Importance of pushing teams beyond their comfort zones, encouraging dissent, and building morale.

Get the "involved" for better innovation. Don't just go for the passionate folks; pick people who are involved and engaged- "what they have in common is a restless, probing nature: “I want to get to the problem. There’s something I want to do.” If you had thermal glasses, you could see heat coming off them."

Value of “black sheep”—restless contributors with unconventional ideas. When managed opined that the production of Incredibles would need 10 yr and US$500 million to shoot, he then built him team with "artists who are frustrated", "have another way of doing things that nobody’s listening to" and probably "headed out the door”. He noted "a lot of them were malcontents because they saw different ways of doing things, but there was little opportunity to try them, since the established way was working very, very well."

Synergise diversity. "... find a way to get them to put forth their creativity in a harmonious way. Otherwise, it’s like you have an orchestra where everybody’s playing their own music. Each individual piece might be beautiful, but together they’re crazy."

Innovation takes TIME to make and break, & vice versa. "By the end of the film, that animation team was much stronger than at the beginning, because we had all learned from each other’s strengths. But it took two months for people to feel safe enough to speak up."

Be transparent, even to conflicts. When project failed, instead of working with the individual teams(as previous directos had done), he brought them together and created magic "... we all have different strengths and weaknesses, but if we can interconnect all our strengths, we are collectively the greatest..Everyone will get humiliated and encouraged together. If there is a solution, I want everyone to hear the solution, so everyone adds it to their tool kit. .... if you see something different, go ahead and disagree. I don’t know all the answers.” "I saw directors systematically restricting people’s input and ignoring any effort to bring up problems. As a result, people didn’t feel invested in their work, and their productivity went down. " "..... but the money gets on the screen because we’re open in our conflict. Nothing is hidden."

Face challenges ...humbly. A staff said to Bird, “I want to know why you’re doing this.” Bird thought:" And there was a part of me that wanted to say, “Because I’m the director, that’s why. Do you want to take this problematic thing over?” After a pause, he explained his rationale. He noted that once he gave that answer, everyone felt, “OK, we’re on this ship and we’re going toward a definite destination.”

Work on the morale. "In my experience, the thing that has the most significant impact on a movie’s budget—but never shows up in a budget—is morale."

Reach for the impossible dream. "The first step in achieving the impossible is believing that the impossible can be achieved. ...You don’t play it safe—you do something that scares you, that’s at the edge of your capabilities, where you might fail. "

Encourage people to upgrade. Pixar calls thier optional classes “PU,” or Pixar University- to basically encourage people to learn outside of their areas, which makes them more complete. "Sometimes, people even move from one area to another."
Weed out the passive agressive people - people who don’t show their colors in the group but then get behind the scenes and peck away—are poisonous (toxicity in organisations)

Leadership
Innovative leaders are subversive. "I think the best leaders are somewhat subversive, because they see something a different way. "

Be open minded to change. "They(the old animators) were masters of the form, but they had the attitude of a student."

Bird : Design of Physical Space 2

Someone recently commented that we do not need to add 'meaningless' structures or objects in the passage way, just to make people interact more. She questioned how much would it then make the workplace a more creative space, leading to a change in the 'dry' culture. I appreciate her concern. Based on the profiling tool of Emergenetics, I can understand such people whose minds are wired with a strong structured thinking(versus one with high social/conceptual thinking) would consider the photos of my earlier entries as superficial (( = superficial, superfluous, or even Silly). My gut feel, has always been, structures/sytems change behaviours. I remain true to this.




Its subheadings says: What does stimulating the creativity of animators have in common with developing new product ideas or technology breakthroughs? A lot. http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Innovation/Innovation_lessons_from_Pixar_An_interview_with_Oscar-winning_director_Brad_Bird_2127

Brad's thoughts on the design of the physical space:

The Quarterly: What does Pixar do to stimulate a creative culture?
Brad Bird: If you walk around downstairs in the animation area, you’ll see that it is unhinged. People are allowed to create whatever front to their office they want. One guy might build a front that’s like a Western town. Someone else might do something that looks like Hawaii. Steve Jobs initially didn’t like this idea, but John Lasseter said, “We’ve got to let it go a little crazy where the animators are.” John believes that if you have a loose, free kind of atmosphere, it helps creativity.

Then there’s our building. Steve Jobs basically designed this building. In the center, he created this big atrium area, which seems initially like a waste of space. The reason he did it was that everybody goes off and works in their individual areas. People who work on software code are here, people who animate are there, and people who do designs are over there. Steve put the mailboxes, the meetings rooms, the cafeteria, and, most insidiously and brilliantly, the bathrooms in the center—which initially drove us crazy—so that you run into everybody during the course of a day. He realized that when people run into each other, when they make eye contact, things happen. So he made it impossible for you not to run into the rest of the company.

My thoughts: Perhaps we then need to address, how can we help people to learn to USE these spaces, more comfortably perhaps?

The key to Schooling FOR the Future- Projects

All these talk about preparing students to be well equipped for the 21st Century. What are the distinguishing attributes of their program that separate them from the rest of the world?

Project Management—A 21st Century Skill
KaosPilot International
International School of New Business Design and Social Innovation -Training entrepreneurs and project leaders with a creative edge and a global mind.


http://www.odemagazine.com/doc/27/most_unusual_college_in_the_world

Their incredible Tibet Project that has a documentary produced on it. http://www.tibet.net/en/flash/2003/1103/261103_1.html

Their website with their big projects http://www.kaospilot.dk/docs/HotProjects.asp

Some thoughts: Although Kaospilot is really one of its kind, in general, the Danish education system and the philosophy of teaching does provide foundations for development of creative minds in people. The focus of education is on problem-solving, emphasizing on analysis and application. Diversity that comes with not banding pupils according to abilities builds acceptance that there will always be different ways that people learn and relate, and allows for people to bring ‘different things’ to the table.

New Tech Foundation
Extracted from: http://www.newtechfoundation.org/press_articles.html

December 2007 Real Projects in a Digital World, Principal Leadership Magazine
By Suzie Boss & Jane Krauss

Managing a complex project is the stuff of real work. In the business world, a good project manager is a master communicator, an efficient time manager, a careful budgeter, and a
tireless troubleshooter. These skills can be applied to the world of teaching and learning, too. Few teachers have received formal training in project management.... help teachers think about the tools and strategies they can use with students for managing time, collaborating with team members, and assessing progress.

For example, teachers will need to:

• Communicate with students and others about the project
  
• Make milestones and events visible and notify students of changes
  
• Get resources to students


• Assess student work from many angles and give just-in-time


• Feedback on student work as it develops, not just when it’s completed.
  

Students will need to:

• Manage their time and flow of work


• Manage materials and control work drafts


• Collaborate with team members and experts
  
• Get and use feedback on their work (through self-reflection, team input, and teacher advice)


• Work iteratively and see how parts add up to the whole.

Some thoughts: In the face of NCLB in US, the opportunity to bring forward different school models help to free up the public school system to raise quality. A visit last March to San Francisco allowed me to see how New Tech Foundation transformed schools through the pervasive practice of Problem-based learning. An honored opportunity to meet Bob Pearlman, Director of Strategic Planning and his team showed us that technology could be a very powerful way to drive learning as students articulate the problems posed by teams of teachers, using internet to gather their information and synthesize their learning in a truly authentic manner. The foundation's philosphy is anchored on making the 21st centuries literacies embedded and enlivened in their curriculum design.

For more info on Bob and the New Technology Foundation and the schools: http://www.bobpearlman.org/

In Singapore, the papers highlighted an interesting project that was shared during the 10th Hwa Chung Institution's Students’ Research Symposium commended by SMS Lui for their creativity. The team had conducted surveys, organised other secondary school students to watch the movie "A beautiful mind", as well as produced their own musical, to educate students on the history, research and symptoms of mental illness, culminated into a handbook distributed to almost 300 students.

CNA Online noted SMS Lui commented that R&D was a driver for economic growth and a strong pillar for our long-term competitiveness. To succeed, we(Singapore) needed to attract and grow a sizeable crop of research talent that would enable us to sustain a critical mass of advanced research activity over the long term. He added that we could not wait til the university level to interest our youths in research and innovation. Thus, a need to start them young and allow them to experience the thrill and excitement of being part of a team that was involved in carrying out research that was deeply meaningful and truly significant.

Report noted SMS Lui as saying that it was not hard to conduct research for a project, but by incorporating the topic into reality, it was able to bring about changes.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/343879/1/.html(Posted: 26 April 2008)

A possible flipside to making Mathematical problems too problematic???

Students ‘learn better with symbols’ (Straits Times, 26/4, P48)
Report, taken off Reuters and New York Times, on a research conducted in the United States on maths teaching methods.

Report noted researchers’ argument that maths concepts taught in abstract symbols and various formulae registered better than when students were taught with real-world examples. The research also found that students who first learnt maths concepts using abstract symbols were better able to transfer that learning to other problems when tested. Report also noted that adding extraneous details in story problems made it hard for students to extract basic mathematical concepts and apply them to new problems.

Report additionally noted that the findings cast doubt on the widely used practice of using concrete examples to teach abstract maths concepts, although some mathematicians warned against over-generalising the findings.

Even Standard has an adapted version of PBL- Its called P5BL. http://pbl.stanford.edu/index.html