Let's Get Disruptive

My husband likes to read a lot. He brought me an article from one of his Forbes magazines entitled “How to Change the Way Kids Learn.” The fact that he thought of me when he read that title is flattering, in my opinion, so I delved into it.

Computers have failed to improve education. That’s because no one’s gotten disruptive with technology.

This intrigued me further. Getting disruptive with technology? I’m not sure what that means but it sounds cool! I read on.

The authors state that U.S. public schools struggle to improve because they aren’t motivating the children. Ok, I see children in my classroom everyday that force me to inevitably come back to one question: why aren’t they motivated? Just today I had a student tell me in not so many words that he wanted to do the minimum, just what he can get by with. Do educators condition students in a way that encourages this notion of “just getting by?” Where did the natural curiosity and thirst for learning go? Didn’t they have it when they were 2 or 3 or 4?

If the goal is to educate all students so they have an all-American shot at realizing their dreams, we must find a way to disrupt the monolithic classroom and move toward a student-centric model.

I will admit that I proceeded to look up monolithic to make sure I understood the message. Monolithic means cut out of one stone, characterized by total uniformity and rigidity. This is a business magazine with an article that indicates the typical American classroom is monolithic, rigid and totally standardized. As an educator, I took that to heart. For all of the information on differentiation, learning styles, brain-based strategies, etc., the business world still sees our classrooms as inflexible and ineffective.

The way to implement an innovation so it will transform an organization is to implement it disruptively.

One of my goals this year is to revise the curriculum for 6th grade Language Arts so that a student-centered approach emanates from the curriculum map and other files that communicate standards. That means getting disruptive with some of the curriculum pieces. That means moving further toward an open-content type curriculum as opposed to a text-driven curriculum. Blogs, wikis, skype, wiziQ, moodle, etc., all have the potential of transformation if we get "disruptive" with them. My students will be putting together curriculum resources through our class wiki. I want the students to create resources for curriculum. How will students develop creativity without being given opportunities to create?

For now, I am still pondering, "What does 'getting disruptive' really look like?"

"A Smart Person is Never Bored"

I grew up in a household with a teacher for a mother. Now, this gives me a unique perspective when dealing with my own kids since I chose the noblest of professions as well. (ok, yes, I just showed my bias) Not only was my mother a teacher but I had four siblings. Our house never lacked for activity. However, my mother did not set out to "entertain" the kids. On the contrary, she expected we would find ways to entertain ourselves, to fill our time with experiences that were meaningful to us. She would always tell us, "A smart person is never bored." What she meant by that was that a smart person could always find something meaningful to do: read a book, ride a bike, make up games, use your imagination in creative ways.

All of this came to mind as I was reading Will Richardson's blog post entitled, "Get Off the Computer!" He talks about an experience he had with his own children. Additionally, Laura Deisley, in her blog post entitled "Drumming it Out," addressed the same issue as a reaction to Richardson's post by reflecting upon her own childhood. It is interesting to me that edubloggers are bringing this issue to light. I have thought for some time that the children growing up in our present society are being conditioned to "expect" to be entertained, not "bored."

Maybe this is a product of our educational system? Ok, just stay with me for a minute here. When at school if all a child experiences is an education that is "done to him/her," (i.e. lecture) then a child becomes conditioned to sit back and wait for people to bring things to him/her. Think about the opposite for a minute. When a child experiences a classroom that is active and student-centered, then he/she gets the message that learning is not something "done to him/her" but something he/she must do.

I said earlier that my mother expected us kids to use our imaginations in creative ways. I remember my brothers putting on a lion tamer's show for a birthday party for me and my sister. I remember many a summer day in the garage playing "school" or playing "The Price is Right." All of these kinds of experiences encourage creativity. After reading Daniel Pink's A Whole New Mind and Clay Shirky's Here Comes Everybody, I am left with this question: Can we really afford not to encourage creativity-building experiences for our kids?


Image Source: Flickr, original uploaded by keb