The juice is in here, “Requiring students to solve practical problems is more effective than learning by traditional means like rote memorization or lecture and is a small-scale shift that is often within an individual instructor’s discretion to make. Offering choice-based projects on relevant, high-interest topics are therefore likely to be an effective way for individual teachers to teach creative problem-solving skills to teenagers.” I’d bet this is likely true for any demographic, and in nearly any context, whether interest for learning or practice is even established, formerly and otherwise.
Curiously leading by example is critical for recognizing and tastefully leveraging subjective will for engagement. (Obviously easier said for any solo teacher responsible for overwhelming variables.) If a distracted student prefers focusing on the construction of the infinite landscape of their uniquely pruned Minecraft world, or their 100th consecutive Call of Duty match, perhaps there’s a creative reason to explore and adopt.
Does it require world class creativity to find opportunity for subtle shifts in perspective? Provided an environment can be made to be healthy and safe, by reasonable standards, I believe the biggest hurdles concern logistics through available energy and time, from the top down. In any case, what made the likes of Bill Nye, Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, and others, stand out? Was it their relentless contribution to scientific publication? No. Their ability to relate and appeal (inspire?) through a creative spin to otherwise rote alternatives to the dynamic of how we live our lives day to day. Part of that creative spin was due to the mysterious intangibility of human potential for uniqueness. Increasing the popularity of previous and future female science communicators represents a significant hit to progress as well — Emily Calandrelli, Jane Goodall, Marie Curie, etc.
In elementary school I was reprimanded and scared terrified for copying a Buzz Lightyear book with a type writer in an effort to figure out how to write for my self. Of course plagiarism is bad, but I was like 6 years old, maybe 8. I continued reading but was terrified of writing until my early 20’s in part due to unnecessarily instilled fear of serious consequence. An important lesson was learned early, but in the wrong way. It could be that significant opportunity for unique progress was disrupted due to lack of creative influence.
Junior High — Algebra II, I asked the teacher during class how I could apply what we were learning to building better ramps for my BMX bicycle. Fine, maybe I (probably) asked in an annoyed, wise-ass, tone typical of teenagers. Maybe sympathetic interest attached to my otherwise genuine curiosity would have solved the resulting unproductive drama (and some road rash). Maybe my grade would have improved from a C to an A. Maybe I would have pursued physical sciences more rigorously through college, earlier. I don’t know, but my suspicions are whirling.
It’s an infuriating shame how long it takes to realize ‘Lecture-based rote learning oriented toward standardized testing models’ is [woefully] ill-suited to developing creative problem-solving skills.’ Anyway, to clear room for misunderstanding (this was a a simple, flustered, passionate, incomplete, empathetic rant), I’m with ya.
Thanks for sharing your story! Sorry about the reprimands you got; my first wiring experience was turning the wizard of oz into a play at my typewriter.
Thanks for sharing this! Were there any specific tools you noticed in your study that helped some students learn critical thinking over others? (E.g. debate class)
I think Destination Imagination was valuable specifically because of how it gave so much autonomy to a small group of self-motivated kids with a lot of range of necessary things, and explicit critical thinking exercises. My understanding is that critical thinking is its own thing that gets short shrift if you try to get it implicitly in another subject / structure.
The juice is in here, “Requiring students to solve practical problems is more effective than learning by traditional means like rote memorization or lecture and is a small-scale shift that is often within an individual instructor’s discretion to make. Offering choice-based projects on relevant, high-interest topics are therefore likely to be an effective way for individual teachers to teach creative problem-solving skills to teenagers.” I’d bet this is likely true for any demographic, and in nearly any context, whether interest for learning or practice is even established, formerly and otherwise.
Curiously leading by example is critical for recognizing and tastefully leveraging subjective will for engagement. (Obviously easier said for any solo teacher responsible for overwhelming variables.) If a distracted student prefers focusing on the construction of the infinite landscape of their uniquely pruned Minecraft world, or their 100th consecutive Call of Duty match, perhaps there’s a creative reason to explore and adopt.
Does it require world class creativity to find opportunity for subtle shifts in perspective? Provided an environment can be made to be healthy and safe, by reasonable standards, I believe the biggest hurdles concern logistics through available energy and time, from the top down. In any case, what made the likes of Bill Nye, Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, and others, stand out? Was it their relentless contribution to scientific publication? No. Their ability to relate and appeal (inspire?) through a creative spin to otherwise rote alternatives to the dynamic of how we live our lives day to day. Part of that creative spin was due to the mysterious intangibility of human potential for uniqueness. Increasing the popularity of previous and future female science communicators represents a significant hit to progress as well — Emily Calandrelli, Jane Goodall, Marie Curie, etc.
In elementary school I was reprimanded and scared terrified for copying a Buzz Lightyear book with a type writer in an effort to figure out how to write for my self. Of course plagiarism is bad, but I was like 6 years old, maybe 8. I continued reading but was terrified of writing until my early 20’s in part due to unnecessarily instilled fear of serious consequence. An important lesson was learned early, but in the wrong way. It could be that significant opportunity for unique progress was disrupted due to lack of creative influence.
Junior High — Algebra II, I asked the teacher during class how I could apply what we were learning to building better ramps for my BMX bicycle. Fine, maybe I (probably) asked in an annoyed, wise-ass, tone typical of teenagers. Maybe sympathetic interest attached to my otherwise genuine curiosity would have solved the resulting unproductive drama (and some road rash). Maybe my grade would have improved from a C to an A. Maybe I would have pursued physical sciences more rigorously through college, earlier. I don’t know, but my suspicions are whirling.
It’s an infuriating shame how long it takes to realize ‘Lecture-based rote learning oriented toward standardized testing models’ is [woefully] ill-suited to developing creative problem-solving skills.’ Anyway, to clear room for misunderstanding (this was a a simple, flustered, passionate, incomplete, empathetic rant), I’m with ya.
😭🫠
https://justaplacebo.substack.com/p/doing-the-best-we-can?r=8rl49
Thanks for sharing your story! Sorry about the reprimands you got; my first wiring experience was turning the wizard of oz into a play at my typewriter.
Nice, that’s… wicked!
Thanks for sharing this! Were there any specific tools you noticed in your study that helped some students learn critical thinking over others? (E.g. debate class)
I think Destination Imagination was valuable specifically because of how it gave so much autonomy to a small group of self-motivated kids with a lot of range of necessary things, and explicit critical thinking exercises. My understanding is that critical thinking is its own thing that gets short shrift if you try to get it implicitly in another subject / structure.