Pre-Ramble: The next in a tidy little series of blog posts I had planned about the Project Zero conference  was going to feature the power of the learning environment. I was going to talk about how inspiring, and reverent really, it was to partake in lofty discussions around the imperative of education with such a cast of renown experts and among such ”historically significant” works of art. 

As is the case with most museums of mention, Washington’s National Gallery is a splendid receptacle for artwork of all sorts. The playful interior atrium hosts a variety of works … from the spindly Giacometti sculpture striding across an upper walkway, to the gnarly human bust made of roots and branches (at right), to a colorful Calder mobile dangling overhead. This  environment provided a rich backdrop for our various explorations into the critical dynamics of teaching and learning for the 21st Century.

“Global competence” – Our lectures were filled with theoretical views on the optimal “mindsets” for teachers and students. We addressed the role of education to not only facilitate employability for a competitive global marketplace, but also to impart a sense of  actual “global competence” in future generations. We talked about the need to nurture students … to prepare them for the world they will inherit and the issues they will be called upon to resolve –economically, culturally, environmentally, … digitally. In the moment, this line of reasoning made complete sense. It felt important, valuable, proactive and scholarly.

Cut to a rickety, threadbare seat in an urban movie theater in the heart of uptown Minneapolis. The vintage venue was sprinkled with patrons who had come out on a cold November evening to see a documentary about education called “Waiting for Superman.” (Two yahoos who mistakenly came dressed in tights and a cape walked out after the opening credits.) Awarded audience honors for best documentary at the Sundance Film Festival, Waiting for Superman portrays a dramatic account of a “broken” education system as seen through the experience of five low-income students and their families.

“Filmmaker Davis Guggenheim reminds us that education “statistics” have names: Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily, whose stories make up the engrossing foundation of [the film]. As he follows a handful of promising kids through a system that inhibits, rather than encourages, academic growth, Guggenheim undertakes an exhaustive review of public education, surveying “drop-out factories” and “academic sinkholes,” methodically dissecting the system and its seemingly intractable problems.” – Sundance

Other reviews include:

“… powerful, passionate, and potentially revolution-inducing.” – Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly

” … the film is never less than buoyant, thanks largely to the dedicated and effective teachers on whom Guggenheim focuses.” – Variety

“ … a stunning liberal expose of a system that consigns American children who most need a decent education to our most destructive public schools.”  – William McGurn, WSJ op ed

“It’s hard to deny the power of Guggenheim’s lingering shots on these children.” – Scott Bowles, USA Today

“What struck me most of all was Geoffrey Canada’s confidence that a charter school run on his model can make virtually any first-grader a high school graduate who’s accepted to college. A good education, therefore, is not ruled out by poverty, uneducated parents or crime- and drug-infested neighborhoods. In fact, those are the very areas where he has success.” – Roger Ebert

“I urge you all to drop everything and go see the documentary “Waiting For Superman” at the earliest opportunity.” – Melik Kaylan, Forbes

The Take-Away: The contrast between education theory and education reality is striking. On the one hand, we’re mingling among Monets and Harvard academians to consider, in hushed tones, various analyses, syntheses and matrices. While on the other, we witness the breathless angst of defiantly hopeful parents as they wait in a crowded chaotic gymnasium to see if their child has been plucked up by fortune  – a lottery with very remote odds – to receive an opportunity to attend a “good” school, … an opportunity for a ”good” education, … a good life.

Where is the disconnect?  Superman?  Are you out there? Or, are you sitting in a classroom at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, waiting to finish up a few straggling classes before commencing to swoop in and save the American education system?  Hopefully, you are not struggling in a supply room somewhere, overcome by the evil educational kryptonite.

Pre-Ramble:  Just the sound of the word “innovation” gives me a rush of energy that rises up out of a cross section of art, science and the romantic notions of resourcefulness and hard work. Over the past decade, this glorified word has been slapped all over everything from business schools to soap, claiming the “frontier spirit” and trading on its appeal to dreamers and pragmatists alike. 

There is growing concern, however, that the U.S. prowess for innovation is in danger, and that steps must be taken to ”reclaim our edge.”  John C. Lechleiter, chairman, president and CEO of Eli Lilly and Company expounds upon that sentiment in a recent Opinion page article (WSJ, 7/9/10, p. A17).

A stream of inventions helped make the 20th century the American century … Unfortunately, America’s economy is in danger of losing what has always been our greatest competitive advantage – our genius for innovation. … A recent study ranked the U.S. 6th among the top 40 industrialized nations in innovative competitiveness, but 40th out of 40 in the rate of change in innovative capacity … In other words, we’re at serious risk of falling behind.”

(Forgive me if I’m missing something here, but how much farther behind can we fall if we’re already dead last?)

Building capacity. In crafting a turnaround plan, Lechleiter talks about an “ecosystem” of conditions that are required to foster an environment of innovation, among them the “seeds of innovation” meaning, us human beings with our talent and energy, creativity and insights, “…  a priceless resource and one that is woefully underdeveloped in this country.” Lechleiter goes on to suggest that, along with simplified immigration policies and adequate funding for our research infrastructure, one way to bolster America’s “capacity for innovation” is to step up the rigors of science and math instruction in our schools.

At the recent Apsen Ideas Festival, education gurus like Bill Gates, Jeffrey Canada, and Howard Gardner discuss the future of education in America. They suggest all kinds of great ideas, innovative ideas even, that strive to engage young people in real learning and give them the tools they will need for a successful future. They talk about innovative models for reform … a longer school day, … an articulated curriculum, … more rigorous testing, … accountability for results, … teacher quality and parent involvement.  Certainly, these are all important elements in a high-quality education, and important building blocks for innovation as well.

Jack Hidary, a successful innovator/entrepreneur in the tech and finance camp, former philosophy and neuroscience student at Columbia University, and also a speaker at this year’s Aspen Festival, puts things in another perspective, 

“Problem-solving is not correlated with grade scores on a transcript.”

Science and reading and math – Oh my!  Sure, high performance in math and science (and reading ) are critical skill sets that must be nurtured in the well-rounded innovator, but so too are the critical traits of curiosity, independence and engagement. What is going to actually engage these kids?  Why are they going to want to sit in the classroom longer and take harder courses?  What is going to get them excited to come to school and apply themselves?  To get excited about learning?  How are they going to find what they are looking for in life unless they are given an opportunity to access their their imagination, their chi, their passion, their hidden sources of motivation? What is going to compel these students to shift their internal paradigm such that they see barriers and obstacles as exciting ”challenges to be overcome”?

Follow the yellow brick road.  Sometimes the answer is to go off of the beaten path and find yourself in a whole new place … maybe even one with rainbows, a tin man and ruby slippers (awesome, magical sparkliness shown above). Problem-solving – a gateway to innovation – involves critical thinking, exploration, resourcefulness and creativity. Future  innovators need to develop the motivation and capacity to snoop around … to follow their whims … listen to their gut, and rely on instinct and insight to make new connections among an infinite sea of random data points.

We need to provide kids with opportunities to venture down the yellow brick road … to get out of the black and white and see the world in color on a regular basis. In addition to a crabby Auntie Em and high winds, Dorothy’s data points were facilitated by her encounters with the Scarecrow, Tin Man and Cowardly Lion.  The future entrepreneur needs a firm understanding of math and science and literature, AND art and music and team-work and a whole bunch of other random and wonderful things.

The Take-Away: We’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto. Like Oz and the Fab 4, our the world is spinning and we need to figure out a way to make sense out of it. If we are to have any hope of rebuilding the American capacity for innovation, we need to engage and “nurture the seeds” in new ways. … Even clicking our societal heels in a spanking new pair of sparkly red shoes isn’t going to help us find our way back to innovation if we continue to ignore the critical role that the arts and extracurricular activities play in human engagement and continue to undervalue (cut funding for) them in our public and educational environments.