NESA Presentation 3
Transcription
NESA Presentation 3
Keynote Leading for Creativity With new 2014 research, Douglas Reeves provides a compelling case for what leaders must do – and what they must avoid – to nurture creativity among students and teachers. “Nearly everyone claims to value creativity as an essential 21st Century skill,” Reeves contends. “But policies and practices in curriculum, assessment, and the evaluation of teachers and administrators often systematically undermine these intentions.” This practical keynote address includes a multi-‐disciplinary approach to the subject of creativity, including the latest research and ideas from neuroscience, education, psychology, and philosophy. The latest book by Dr. Reeves and coauthor Brooks Reeves on this subject is The Seven Virtues of Creativity, to be published in early 2015. The Presenter: Dr. Douglas Reeves has addressed audiences around the globe on educational leadership and effective teaching. The author of more than 80 articles and 30 books, he was twice named to the Harvard University Distinguished Authors Series. Doug was named the Brock International Laureate for his contributions to educational research and received the Contribution to the Field Award from the National Staff Development Council. Doug’s volunteer work includes helping doctoral students complete their dissertation (see FinishTheDissertation.org) and providing one-‐to-‐one writing coaching for veterans suffering from post-‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Their collected work will appear in 2016 in the SNAFU Review, which Doug edits and publishes. He lives with his family in downtown Boston. Leading(for(Crea-vity((( Douglas(B.(Reeves,(Ph.(D.( ChangeLeaders.com( Dreeves@(ChangeLeaders.com( 1.781.710.9633( ( Overview' • Learning'Objec/ves' • Brief'Review'of'2013'Leadership' Research' • New'evidence'from'2014' • New'tools'for'assessing'crea/vity' 2 Learning(Objec-ves( 1) Understand(the(value(of(crea-vity(for(students(and( adults( 2) Iden-fy(the(gap(between(what(we(value(and(how(we( assess( 3) Apply(the(knowing;doing(gap(to(your(own(specific( educa-onal(role( 4) Plan'and'Execute'specific(ac-ons(and(tools(that(you( can(use(to(enhance(crea-vity(for(students,(teachers,( administrators,(and(governing(board(members.( Applying(the(research( • Workshop(on(“Assessing(Crea,vity”(will(apply(the( meta5rubric(used(in(today’s(research(to(three( anonymous(crea:vity(rubrics.((You(are(welcome(to( apply(this(meta5rubric(to(crea:vity(rubrics(within(your( schools.( • Workshop(on(“Crea,vity(in(a(Standards3Based( World”(includes(the(development(of(a(standards5 based(performance(assessment(for(students,( teachers,(administrators,(or(board(members(that(best( meets(the(dimensions(of(crea:vity(assessment.( 3 Fundamental*Research*Findings* • Crea3vity*is*essen3al*for*society*and* the*planet* • Crea3vity*is*valued*by*businesses,* schools*and*governents* • Unfortunately*.*.*.** Enormous(gap(between(inten1ons(and( reality( • Student(grading(systems(deliberately(undermine(the( essen1als(of(crea1vity(–(trial,(error,(feedback,(and( improvement.((The(“average”(punishes(every( experimental(error.((( • Teacher(evalua1on(systems(undermine(experimental( approaches(to(teaching,(learning,(and(engagement( because(they(punish(failure.((( • Zero(errors(=((zero(learning( 4 Crea%vity*is*systema%cally*devalued* • The*most*crea%ve*students*were*the*least*popular* with*students*and*teachers;*the*least*crea%ve* students*were*the*most*popular*(Skidmore,*2012)* • Crea%vity*is*some%mes*associated*with*anxiety,*an%A social*behavior,*and*substance*abuse.*** • The*“good*girl”*effect*–*we*effec%vely*undermine*the* crea%vity*of*half*the*planet.*(Reeves*&*Reeves,*2015)* Levels&of&evidence& • 1)&&Personal&beliefs& • 2)&&Personal&experiences& • 3)&&Collec8ve&experiences& • 4)&&Systema8c&comparisons& • 5)&Preponderance&of&evidence& 5 More%Bad%News% • Emula0ng%crea0vity%(such%as%Google’s%20%%of% free%0me)%is%incredibly%difficult%when%people% already%have%fullD0me%jobs.%%% • Evalua0on%systems%punish%the%errors%that%are% an%inherent%part%of%crea0vity%and%riskDtaking% How$to$Assess$Crea,vity?$ • Torrance$Tests$of$Crea,ve$Thinking$–$the$ most$widely$used$crea,vity$test$in$the$world$ • 40$languages$ • Systema,c$assessment$of$validity$–$the$ rela,onship$$between$student$scores$and$ later$adult$crea,ve$produc,on,$over$four$ decades$ $ 6 Crea%vity*is*Declining*for*Individuals* • Crea%vity*among*students*has*declined*significantly* in*the*past*20*years.* • Biggest*decline*is*in*“crea%ve*elabora%on”*–*the* ability*to*develop*and*elaborate*upon*ideas*with* detailed*and*reflec%ve*thinking* • *(Source:))Kyung)Hee)Kim,)College)of)William)&) Mary,)a9er)analysis)of)almost)300,000) American)adults)and)children)based)on)the)The) Torrance)Tests)of)CreaCng)Thinking)(TTCT),) October)2010.)) Crea%vity*is*Declining*for* Organiza%ons* • Fewer*than*half*of*companies*surveyed*said* their*corporate*culture*robustly*supports*their* innova%on*strategy* • But*most*organiza%ons**make*decisions*based* on*avoiding*mistakes*rather*than*embracing* risk*and*innova%on.* • (Source:))Booz)&)Co.,)Global)Innova7on)1,000,) 2013,)Innocen7ve.)) 7 “Crea&vity+is+not+just+the+way+that+ the+great+geniuses+of+the+past+ have+used+to+enrich+and+give+ meaning+to+our+culture,+but+it+is+an+ obliga&on+we+all+have+to+enrich+ and+give+meaning+to+our+own+lives+ and+the+lives+of+our+community.”+++ Reeves%&%Reeves,%The+Seven+Virtues+of+Crea&vity+ (Solu,on%Tree,%2015)% Please&stop&and&process& What%is%your%personal,% professional,%and%moral%obliga6on% to%encourage%crea6vity?% 8 A"Working"Defini-on"of"Crea-vity" • The$process$of$experimenta*on,evalua*on,-and-follow-through$ which$leads$to$a$significant$ discovery,-insight,-or-contribu*on.• Note-what-it-doesn’t-say:--original,novel,-superstar-.-.-." The False Dichotomy Between “Big C” and “Little c ” creativity • Big$C:$ • Li=le$c:$ – The$creator$as$ – Insights$that$are$ rock$star,$or$at$ func:onal,$oAen$ least$a$Nobel$Prize$ based$on$previous$ winner$ major$insights.$ – Social,$ar:s:c,$or$ scien:fic$ recogni:on$ 9 Assessing'crea+vity'assessments' • 100+'crea+vity'assessments,'including'K812' and'college,'evaluated'on'88dimension'scale,' with'four'points'on'each,'for'>3,200'data' points' • >95%'inter8rater'reliability' • Maximum'score'of'32'(Level'4'on'all'eight' dimensions)' • The'results'.'.'.'' Overall'rubric'scores' 80' 70' Elementary' 60' 50' Secondary' 40' 30' K712' 20' 10' 0' 25732' 17724' '9716' ''179' 10 Strengths)and)weaknesses) STRENGTHS:) • Mul8disciplinary) orienta8on) • Product) requirements) WEAKNESSES:) • Research)basis) • Collabora8on) • Trial)and)error) A"few"research"footnotes" • Posi0vely"biased"sample"–"these"were"publicly" available"and"willingly"shared.""Don’t"be" disappointed"if"your"ini0al"results"are"lower." • Don’t"try"this"alone.""Checks"for"inter@rater" reliability"are"essen0al"for"meaningful"results" • Use"this"meta@rubric"as"a"star0ng"point"–"not"the" ending"point.""When"there"is"disagreement"in" applying"a"rubric,"the"rule"is,"“The"enemy"is"not" one"another;"the"enemy"is"ambiguity.”""Rework" the"rubric"un0l"you"achieve"80%"agreement." 11 Suppor&ng)curiosity) • Confidence)in)the)value)of)failure)–)including) public)displays)of)“I)used)to)think).).).)but)now)I) think.).).)(Elmore)) • Replacing)supreme)selfDregard)with)rigorous)selfD examina&on) • Social)media)as)an)echoDchamber) • Ques&on)assump&ons) • Make)guesses)before)heading)to)Google) • Beware)of)punishing)curiosity) The$“Good$Girl”$effect$–$ Na3onal$Honor$Society$ Membership$ 70$ 60$ 50$ 40$ 30$ 20$ 10$ 0$ Women$ Men$ Kristof,$Nicholas,$New$York$Times$3I27I10$ 12 From%2014%Interviews%with%Successful% girls%and%women% • “There&were&many&,mes&I&knew&that&a&colleague&was&wrong,& but&I&didn’t&speak&up&because&it&was&inappropriate&to& challenge&someone&else.”& – Helen&–&Ivy&League&graduate&& • “The&playground&hasn’t&been&updated&for&six&years&and&some& of&it&is&dangerous.&&I’d&like&to&write&a&story&for&the&school& newspaper,&but&I&don’t&want&to&cri,cize&the&teachers&or&school& leaders.”& – Jessica&–&excep,onal&student& Reeves%&%Reeves,%The&Seven&Virtues&of&Crea,vity& (Solu>on%Tree,%2015)% Versa&lity:,,Applying,new,perspec&ves, • The,“ab$ini'o”$fallacy, • Examples:,,From,plane,geometry,to, mul&dimensional,sta&s&cal,modeling, • Building,blocks,vs.,plagiarism, 13 Please&stop&and&process:& • Iden0fy&two&or&three&of&your&greatest&insights& as&an&educa0onal&leader& • Iden0fy&at&least&one&source&for&your&insight& • Synergy&–&“the&produc0on&by&two&or&more& agents,&substances,&etc.,&of&a&combined&effect& greater&than&the&sum&of&their&separate& effects.”&(O.E.D.)& There%is%no%contradic.on% between%crea.vity%and%academic% discipline.% In#fact,#disciplinary#knowledge#is#essen5al# for#crea5vity.# 14 Who$said$this?$ • “Crea&on)is)unlikely)to)emerge)in)the)absence)of) some)disciplinary)mastery)and,)perhaps,)some) capacity)to)synthesize;)it's)not)possible)to)think) outside)the)box)unless)you)have)a)box.”))) • Hint%#1:%%The%author%of%“Five%Minds%for%the% Future”% • Hint%#2:%%The%most%influen;al%thinker%about% mul;ple%intelligences% • Hint%#3:%%Name%rhymes%with%“Howard%Gardner”% The$elements$of$discipline$ • Focus$ • “Beginner’s$Mind”$ • Deliberate$prac<ce$ • Incremental$prac<ce$ • Recording$progress$ – From$the$basketball$court$to$Cogni<ve$ Behavioral$Therapy$ 15 What%do%the%best%orchestras,% hockey%teams,%choruses,%pianists,% and%school%administrators%have%in% common?% Talk%to%Prac+ce%ra+o%is%remarkably% consistent%for%professional%Prac+ce% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% Symphony% 40% Chorus% 30% Hockey% 20% 10% 0% Talk% Prac+ce% 16 90% Talk%to%Prac+ce%ra+o%is%remarkably% consistent%for%amateur%Prac+ce% % 80% 70% 60% 50% Symphony% 40% Chorus% 30% Hockey% 20% 10% 0% Talk% Prac+ce% Professional+Prac-ce+and+the+ “What+the+Heck+?”+effect+ “If$I$miss$a$prac,ce$day,$then$I$might$ as$well$give$up.”$ $ But$what$does$the$evidence$say?$ 17 Performance*with*daily*prac3ce* 140* 135* 130* 125* 120* 115* 110* 105* 100* 0* 5* 10* 15* 20* 25* 30* 35* Miss$two$days$of$prac/ce$ 135.00$ 130.00$ From$100$to$130$ 125.00$ 120.00$ 115.00$ 110.00$ 105.00$ 100.00$ 0$ 5$ 10$ 15$ 20$ 25$ 30$ 35$ 18 Miss$Every$third$day$of$prac2ce$ $ 120$ 118$ 116$ From$100$to$118$ 114$ 112$ 110$ 108$ 106$ 104$ 102$ 100$ 98$ 0$ 5$ 10$ 15$ 20$ 25$ 30$ 35$ Stop%and%process:%%Enhancing%crea2vity% with%discipline% • Measure%crea2vity%goals%9%number%of%ideas% generated,%number%of%experiments%conducted,%or% other%meaningful%metric.% • How%can%you%prac2ce%ac2vi2es%related%to%the%goal?%% For%example,%for%at%least%one%of%the%next%three%Board% decisions,%consider%mutually%exclusive%alterna2ve% with%“construc2ve%conten2on.”%%% • What%is%the%recovery%plan%–%if%and%when%–%you%miss% goals?% 19 Some%Prac*cal%steps%for%crea*ve% collabora*on% • Give%everyone%two%veto%votes%–%make%vetoing% a%scarce%but%reliable%resources% • Spli;ng%the%cake% • “Yes.%.%.%And?”% • Challenging%the%illusion%of%collabora*on%in%the% classroom% Encouraging*experimenta0on* • If*you*already*know*the*answer,*then*it’s*not*an*experiment* • Disconfirming*hypotheses*is*as*important*–*o?en*more* important*–*than*confirming*hypotheses* • Experiment*with*games:* – Rock,*paper,*scissors.*.*.*Water* – Replace*the*Monopoly*B&O*Railroad*with*the*TGV* • Experiment*with*media*–*every*adver0sing*and*poli0cal*claim* is*a*hypothesis*to*be*tested* * 20 Assessing'tenacity' • How'has'your'governing'board'agenda'changed'in'the'past'20' years?' • What'is'the'ra:o'of'board'and'cabinet'level':me'from' presenta:ons'to'delibera:on?''How'has'that'ra:o'changed?' • How'have'“class'rules”'changed'in'the'last'20'years?' • How'does'your'evalua:on'system'reward'tenacity'–' perseverance'in'the'face'of'failure?' • What'happened'with'a'recent'failure'in'your'school?''Was'it' rewarded'or'punished?' Encouraging*crea,ve*tenacity* • Culture*of*mul,ple*a5empts*before*a*final* product*is*accepted* • Require*construc,ve*conten,on,*debate,*and* dissent* • Ban*the*use*of*the*average*for*evalua,ons*of* students,*teachers,*and*administrators* • Celebrate*the*right*kind*of*failure* 21 Guaranteed)ways)to)insure)zero) crea1ve)opportuni1es)for)students) • Have%them%drop%out%of%school%because%they% lack%sufficient%literacy%skills%to%survive%high% school.% • Have%them%repeat%courses,%so%that%they% have%no%room%in%their%schedules%for%visual% and%performing%arts.% How$We$Discourage$Crea0vy$Among$ Teachers$ • Discourage$taking$risks$and$failure.$ • Punish$feedback$and$dissent.$ • Use$the$“average”$in$mul0ple$ teacher$observa0ons.$ 22 How$We$Discourage$Crea0vity$Among$ Leaders$ • Annual$(or$end$of$contract)$performance$ reviews$ • Strategic$plans$that$elevate$execu0on$over$ crea0vity$ • Micromanagement$ • Unclear$job$descrip0ons$ How$We$Discourage$Crea0vity$Among$ Policy$Makers$and$Board$Members$ • Standardized$agendas$ • One$administra0ve$recommenda0on$ submiAed$for$upDorDdown$votes$ • A$culture$of$congeniality$over$discussion$and$ debate$ • Discussion$and$debate$is$more$than$cri0cism$ and$contradic0on.$ 23 You$cannot$expect$cri.cal$ thinking$in$the$classroom$or$ faculty$room$if$there$is$not$ cri.cal$thinking$in$the$board$ room.$ For$a$complete$set$of$crea.vity$ resources,$please$e4mail:$ Dreeves@ChangeLeaders.com$ 24 Creativity Meta-Rubric Dimension Research Basis Multidisciplinary Perspective Source Material Clarity of Guidelines Developing (1) The rubric is based on intuition or hunches and has little basis in research as evidenced by the promotion of practices1 that are contrary to research. The rubric focuses narrowly on subjects and ideas from a single discipline, and explicitly punishes or dissuades students from using sources or media from other disciplines. The rubric expects students to be completely original and punishes the use of outside materials for inspiration or use. The Rubric contains language that is ambiguous, so that the difference between the levels of the rubric is unclear to students and inconsistently applied. Progressing (2) The rubric includes some elements based in research and some other elements that are not based on research. Proficient (3) The rubric reflects current research on creativity. Exemplary (4) The rubric reflects the latest and best research on creativity, with clear citations. The rubric allows students to explore projects in an individual interdisciplinary approach, but does not evaluate or note that approach. The rubric encourages and rewards an interdisciplinary perspective. There is clear evidence that students, through an iterative process expand the scope of their work to include ideas and perspectives from an array of media and disciplines. The rubric allows for students to consider outside sources, but makes no special note of the process. The rubric encourages the use of a variety of digital, print, and personal sources. The rubric encourages the both the use and accreditation of outside sources. The rubric is expressed in language that is not accessible to students so even if it is clear to the teacher, it is rarely used as a feedback tool. The rubric guidelines encourage teachers to clearly outline what is expected and the methods by which the students will be evaluated. The guidelines dictate that evaluation should be made clear to students in a way that fosters continued performance improvement, with the expectation of failure. 25 Dimension Product Developing (1) The product requirements are ambiguous (or absent) and differences among performance levels are not clear. The process requirements are ambiguous and differences among performance levels are not clear. Progressing(2) Although a work product is required, there is not objective feedback that leads to improved product development. Proficient(3) The rubric requires the creation of a work product, with objective evaluation of the product based on the rubric. Exemplary(4) The rubric requires a work product that can be objectively evaluated, with the feedback on the product used for improvement. Process requirements are inconsistent and students have difficulty using the rubric to improve their creative processes. The rubric has clear process requirements and students can differentiate performance levels based on the rubric. Collaboration The rubric requires that students work in complete isolation without the aid or feedback of other students or teachers. The rubric requires a portion of the project to be group based, and sets up clear guidelines as to how group collaboration should be utilized. Practice and Error The rubric promotes “oneshot” attempts at performance. The ideal submission is error-free. The rubric allows for collaborative or group work, but has no guidelines for evaluating the process of collaboration itself and which party was responsible for what. The rubric allows for re-drafting work products that are not acceptable on the first attempt. The rubric evaluates not only the end product, but also evaluates the students through every step of the process, to examine the method as well. The rubric sets guidelines on how collaboration should be utilized, with also the expectation of citation individual participation. The rubric requires multiple drafts and there is clear evidence that students learn from their mistakes. The ideal work is never “errorfree” but full of learning that resulted from errors. Process The rubric requires multiple drafts of work products with students using the rubric to improve performance 26 27