The practical strategies that emerge from school improvement meetings hold an insidious tyranny over us. I have nothing against things that are practical, in fact I have an incredible bias towards the practical. My problem really comes from the belief that we have incorrectly defined practicality. The things that we continue to regard as very practical have proven to do very little in terms of student achievement or school improvement.
Benjamin Franklin, John and Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee probably had better things to do than hang out in taverns, but we can't discount the fact that those conversations led to American independence.
School improvement teams typically come up with their activities by brainstorming. Many consider brainstorming to be a trite practice that has value only in making team members feel included. The fact is that, done right, brainstorming is one of our most powerful tools. In his book Think Better, Tim Hurson describes the typical items that appear as a result of brainstorming.
Hurson divides the lists generated through brainstorming into thirds. The first third of the items will usually be "mundane, tired thoughts, that reside close to the surface of our consciousness." These are not new ideas, but things that we recall having heard (or thought of) before.
Second third thinking is represented by ideas that are more than regurgitation of things we already know, but are still constrained by the things that we already know and have thought of before.
Finally, third third thinking is, according to Hurson, "where the diamonds lie." Here is where you will find true "productive thinking." You will notice unexpected connections, breakthrough ideas, and innovative solutions.
The value of third third thinking lies not only in the product, but the process. Once again, according to Hurson, "the challenge is not to get new ideas, but to get rid of the old ones." By generating long lists, we "flush" ideas from our heads, making room for new ones. The Greeks use the word kenosis, or self-emptying, to describe the process.
The tyranny of the practical prevents us from ever getting to the third third. Time that we have with teachers is so limited, that we tend to only do things that we deem essential. Brainstorming, dialogue, and debate are "luxuries" that we do not have time for. The result is disheartening. In an attempt to do something practical we eliminate the practices that are most likely to result in the improvement we seek.
1 comment:
You describe a sad situation, Jeff. But not an atypical one.
Here's something I've discovered that may help:
Lots of people are reluctant brainstorm as designed by Alex Osborn in the early 1950s, because they fear it will take too much time. But in reality, it can be remarkably time-efficient. In many cases more efficient than normal meetings.
There are several reasons for this. In "normal" meetings someone comes up with an idea and everyone starts discussing it. Often by the end of the meeting, people have discussed exactly one idea. In order to discuss the next one, they need another meeting.
A second common time waster in normal meetings is the revenge discount syndrome: you deliver an idea, I say that it won't work. Then, when I come up with an idea, you diss my idea and so on. The revenge discount syndrome eats up a lot of time — and discards some potentially wonderful ideas.
A third reason is that if we say no to the first 10 ideas, and yes to the eleventh, by the time we get there we're desperate and so we're may satisfice on that "yes" idea rather than looking for the second right idea, the third right idea and so on. We end up with mediocre solutions that often need rework, and we fall prey to the we don't have enough time to do it right but we have plenty of time to do it over trap.
In the long run, good brainstorms can be way more efficient than "normal" meetings.
Hope this helps, Jeff. Thanks for referring to my book!
Post a Comment