Author Archives: mkaufman

Schools stamp out intrinsic motivation in students!

Posted on by mkaufman

This was originally posted on May 2, 2005 in my blog entitled Schooling ≠ Education.

If I’m responsible for my own learning then I am intrinsically motivated. If we look at the structure of public education and of most of western society – our businesses, our religious institutions, and our governments – we can see that intrinsic motivation is something that we say we value while at the same time we ‘motivate’ it right out of people.

One of the best works I know of that articulates this is Alfie Kohn’s Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes.

Education does nothing (or very little) to develop a human beings natural inclinations to learn, to grow, and to improve. And, at the same time, consciously or unconsciously; purposefully or ‘by accident’ – we are doing a lot to repress or stamp out these natural tendencies and replace them with external motivations and rewards (grades, points, gold stars, bonuses, prizes, and host of additional more subtle and devious devices). 

These devices influence our behaviour and impact our productivity as individuals and as a nation.

Back in 1996 we were working with what was then the Ernst & Young Management Consulting group. We were helping them develop a unique collaborative environment and practice for helping their corporate clients. As young consultants would come into this environment to see if they wanted to work there I would ask them, “what do you want to do?” and they would answer, “just tell me what to do and I’ll do it.” 

Now these were the brightest of the brightest – MBA’s fresh out of college as well as seasoned consultants. Their intrinsic motivation had been ‘educated’ right out of them. It took weeks and months for the ones that were able to work in this environment to unlearn what they had learned and to get back in touch with the parts of themselves they had lost or denied in order to survive their education and get into the positions they were in.

David Langford – an educator and consultant – does a fabulous experiential activity in his seminars to get people to feel the insanity of this practice. Because, if you think about it, where does this kind of thinking lead us? Where will it end?

We haven’t seen anything like the ending yet but you can get a sense of where it might go when you see where some schools are finding themselves – paying students to come to school. 

And the flip side of this thinking takes us to an extreme that is so unthinkable but metaphorically already happening – we will kill young people if they don’t pass the test, achieve the grade, or make the team.

So what would it take for us to transform education so that every single person involved was intrinsically motivated? Was in touch with their natural tendencies and desires to learn, to grow and improve? What would a school look like if everyone that attended was there because they wanted to be there?

Who is responsible for students learning?

Posted on by mkaufman

Originally published April 29, 2005 in my blog Schooling ≠ Education.

I just read an article in BusinessWeek about Arnold Schwarzenegger (Governor of CA) attempting to push pay for performance for California’s teachers. Nothing could be further from the ‘right answer’ for education. It’s upsurd to think that paying teachers to get students to perform on tests will improve the education system. Does anyone understand systems thinking? 

This argument is becoming more and more prevalent across the US. More and more communities are putting pressure on teachers to conform and as most people involved in education know, more and more emphasis is being put on standards and standardized testing to measure the ‘quality of a teacher’ and the ‘quality of a school’. 

From my point of view these people are asking the wrong question. Maybe the question that needs to be asked is: who is responsible for a learners learning?

Whatever happened to the idea of creating an environment where young people are curious and want to learn? What ever happened to the learner in all of this? The focus on testing and pay for performance for teachers will only make matters worse. We’re forgetting the most important person in the equation – the learner. 

Do test scores measure learning? knowledge? understanding? wisdom? Do test scores measure the performance of teachers?

Back to this ‘fundamental question’ – who is responsible for a learners learning?

Who is responsible for my learning? 

I am!

Find anyone that has been successful in school or any other endeavor and ask them who is responsible for their learning? I will bet money they will tell you they are responsible for their own learning. They may have had a person or two in their lives that encouraged them to take responsibility for their learning but I can bet they didn’t like nor would they tolerate someone else imposing their agenda for learning on them. I would bet that these people have had one or more incredibly powerful and influential people in their lives that encouraged them, provoked them, challenged them and probably pissed them off at some point. But these people were critical in their development and critical in inspiring them to learn and be successful in life. 

My own story is an example of this. About 33 years ago (in 11th grade) I woke up one morning and asked myself why I went to school – and more importantly – who I went to school for? As soon as I realized that I went to school for me, I also realized that I would no longer go to school for someone else (for teachers, for my parents, for society, or for anyone). 

That day I went to school and informed my teachers that I would no longer come to school for them – and hence, if I showed up in their classroom I was there to learn something, and they had better have something to teach – or I wouldn’t show up any longer.

After that day I began a journey that has included many mentors and coaches. That journey included meeting and being influenced by remarkable people from all walks of life. A few of these people are the likes of Buckminster Fuller and W. Edwards Deming. These people challenged me and they also had something for me to learn (lots of somethings!). And they inspired continuous learning!

Forcing teachers to perform by getting students to do better on standardized tests will not inspire anyone to do anything other than get a score on a test (and most likely inspire them to do anything possible to get out of that system as soon as possible). Drop out rates are already 30-40% in the US high school. That’s before No Child Left Behind and all this pay for performance bunk. If this kind of movement continues it will only get worse.

Making change in schools? Ask these fundamental philosophical questions first.

Posted on by mkaufman

originally published April 27, 2005 in my blog entitled Schooling ≠ Education

Anyone participating in the process of educational change or anyone who is thinking about making changes to a school or school system is faced with making several significant choices. These choices are not typically addressed consciously and yet they impact every other choice that’s made along the way.

These ‘choices’ are actually answers to several questions. These answers begin to uncover some fundamental beliefs about the nature of human beings and how human beings learn. From my point of view, these ‘questions’ cut at the very core of any educational change process.

The first question is one that determines the systemic ‘vantage point’.

Question: Is education as we know it fundamentally flawed and hence needing redesign?

or

Is education as we know it generally working and simply needing improvement?

At first glance the significance of this question may not be apparent as I think most people who engage in thinking about education and learning have a strong desire to improve what we currently call ‘school’. The significance of this question – or it’s answer – is the clarification of a systemic vantage point. This systemic view will determine ‘a path’ in which the process of change will travel. In many cases answering this question will save the change agents significant heartache (not to mention time and energy). Improvement and redesign (design) are completely different activities and require different strategies, different types of knowledge, different skills, different resources and require different kinds of effort (hence time).

Improvement

If an individual or group of people believe that education is generally working and simply needs improving then the universe of possible solutions (or improvements) will lie within a certain bandwidth of options (or ‘right answers’). If improvement is the approach taken to educational change that implies then a series of follow-on questions that need to be asked. Those questions include but are not limited to are:

What should we improve? Why?

What improvement will make the most difference (provide the most bang for the buck so to speak)? What shouldn’t be improved? Is anything sacred (beyond question)?

How will we know things have improved? How do we define improvement (what is ‘improved’)?

Redesign

If an individual or group of people believe that education as they know it is fundamentally flawed and needs redesign, then the universe of possibilities (or right answers) becomes very different from the universe of possibilities that an improvement focus provides.

Essentially this individual or group has engaged in a design process and as such has embarked on a journey that, by definition, will have a uniquely different ‘right answer’ for each group that takes this path.

A design process often begins with a relatively clean slate and has no preconceived answer built in. This is a wholly different and much more complex process then improvement and yields wildly different results (potentially).

If redesign is the approach taken to educational change then the next series of questions needing to be asked include:

What is the purpose of education?

What is learning? What is education? Who’s responsibility is it for a learner’s learning?

If we had an education system why would we want one?

A follow-on question that needs to be answered prior to beginning any educational change process determines the human vantage point.

Question: Are human beings born good and ‘learn’ to be bad?

or

Are human beings born bad and need to be made good?

Again, the significance of this question may not be apparent at first glance but the answer to this question begins to get at some very core beliefs about human beings and human nature. The beliefs we have about human beings and human nature determine our approach to learning and significantly impact our ability to ‘see possibilities’ for human potential.

The ‘universe of possibilities’ available to an aspirant for change will be shaped by their beliefs about human potential. These beliefs will color one’s approach to learning. In addition, there is a lot of research on the brain and how humans learn but our beliefs will have an influence on how we view this research and how we might utilize it.

May 2024

I’m surprised I didn’t include another philosophical question (or perspective) I believe is critical for anyone making changes in schools and schooling. That is whether you are committed to and come from a place of

Win/Win vs Win/Lose

Are you committed to Win/Win transactions or are you ok with Win/Lose transactions?

The answer to this question will influence the ‘universe of solutions’ (the solution space) and be relevant to all the questions above. Similar to the last question in the article above, knowing which one of these perspectives (or beliefs) you have will influence the ‘universe of possibilities’ available for solutions. Said another way, this belief will influence the ‘solution space’ and help change agents understand more of the implications implications for the solutions they develop.

Practitioners with a commitment to win/win transactions will lean towards, look for and find solutions that are generative and potentially less destructive. They will look for and find solutions where all stakeholders win.

Practitioners who believe in or are committed to win/lose believe for someone to win someone else must lose. These practitioners will look for and find solutions where one or more stakeholders lose. Changes made from this perspective have a tendency to lead to further complications down the road.

Young students benefit from iPads

Posted on by mkaufman

What is your experience working with young people and iPads?

In a study conducted in Northern Ireland with about 650 pupils in five Belfast primary schools and five nursery schools it was found that young people can benefit from using iPads in school.

The study reveals a boost in engagement and motivation, plus improvements in English, math and communication skills if they use iPads in school on a regular basis.

The schools which took part in the study were in some of the most deprived areas of the city. They were each supplied with sets of iPads for nursery, primary one, primary two and primary three classes.

This study was carried out over two years by researchers from Stranmillis University College.

The researchers then assessed how pupils, parents, principals and teachers used them over the course of two years.

Among their key findings were that:

  • The introduction of digital technology has had a positive impact on the development of children’s literacy and numeracy skills
  • Contrary to initial expectations, principals and teachers report that the use of ipads in the classroom has enhanced children’s communication skills
  • Children view learning using handheld devices as play and are more highly motivated, enthused and engaged
  • Boys appear to be more enthused when using digital technology, particularly when producing pieces of written work

IPads helped young children to be more motivated and engaged in class, said Dr Colette Gray from Stranmillis, who was one of the study’s authors.

The study also found that although some teachers were initially nervous, many had developed their own confidence by using iPads extensively in class.

There were concerns, however, that parents needed to know more about the safe use of technology if young children were using one outside school.

Schools Are At Risk

Posted on by mkaufman

Actually, the title for this should be “every organization is at risk.”

If you haven’t already heard about some of the major trends in technology I’m sure you will. A few of the most important trends are what is euphemistically called: SMAC (social, mobile, analytics, and cloud). I like to add the Internet of Things (IoT) to this list as I believe it is an extremely significant trend that in and of itself will cause some serious disruptions to the way we live, learn, and work.

So here’s the short story.

accelerating rate of change

The business environment we are in has already eclipsed the ability of most organizations  to respond to the rate of change (which we used to characterize as accelerating or exponential change). That situation is now exacerbated by the trends being labeled: social, mobile, analytics, cloud, and the internet of things.

SMAC - social, mobile, analytics and cloud

The environment we now find ourselves in can be characterized as

Always On, Real Time, Anywhere

No organization that I am aware of is designed to operate in an always on, real time, anywhere world. That puts them at risk. Why? Because the external environment is changing at a rate that far surpasses the ability for organizations to keep up. And, the ‘next thing’ will be here before you know it.

No matter what changes an organization begins to implement now, by the time those changes are in place the world will have changed again and the organization will be behind. Not only will they be behind but their competition can and will come from just about anywhere. The barriers to entry (the cost and time it takes to create an enterprise with the capabilities of a mature organization) has shrunk significantly.

So what is the solution?

New business models, new organizational structures, new operating models, and new ways of working are required.

Organizations have to be ‘re-conceived’ in a manner that enables them to operate in this new environment.

This type of environment puts schools at risk for a number of reasons. The most obvious one is related to the rate of change. When the external environment changes faster than the internal environment there will be significant pressures put on schools. As also mentioned, the barriers to entry have dropped significantly. If I can ‘put up a school’ in a matter of days or weeks at a cost lower than existing schools what might happen?

The other risks relate to organizational models, operating models, and ways of learning. All of those things need to change if an organization/school wants to be relevant in this current environment. The organizational model (the whole concept of schools actually) was developed at a time when change was extremely slow and the outcomes for schools and schooling were somewhat simple (reading, writing and arithmetic). The operating model for schools hasn’t changed much in more than 100 years. And, the way of learning – pedagogy – hasn’t changed much either.

All of those things put schools at risk. We’ll add one more. I’ve mentioned previously about the trend called BYOD – bring your own device (one of the impacts of the mobile trend). In many parts of the country families now have better technologies and better access to information than most schools. That adds additional tension to an already pressure filled situation. Where families do not have these technologies (poorer communities) the already stressed local school becomes further behind the rest of their neighbors.

What do you think? Are schools at risk?