Pink opens with a quote from Samuel Coleridge, "The truth is, a great mind must be androgynous." It seems a little silly that this is a point even worth making. However, many people seem to think that the left brain is more important, at least to intelligent people. But as most of us already know, and as Daniel Pink spends the rest of part one proving to any doubters, the right brain is equally important.
According to a scientist name Roger Sperry the right hemisphere of our brains reasons holistically (in addition to several other things) (14). This holistic reasoning should then lead to greater transfer and application of new knowledge rather than just good test performance. Therefore, it seems very logical to me that all teachers would want to encourage the development of the right brain is their students.
Pink goes on to say that the right side of the brain handles metaphors and synthesizes, which once again seems important to everyone, but we can certainly see why the right brain attributes seem so strong in most artists. He says that L-directed thinking is characterized by the, "sequential, literal, functional, textual, and analytical" (26). While the R-directed mind thinks in terms of the, "simultaneous, metaphorical, aesthetic, contextual, and synthetic" (26). While I agree with him that both sides need to be strong in order to work in concert together I will say that our side of the pARTy certainly sounds like more fun.
In chapter two Pink discusses abundance, Asia, and automation. To sum it up very quickly he says that because of availability of goods, cheap Asian outsourcing, and computers that can handle human tasks we have to step up to the plate and be able to innovate in order to compete with these factors. What we produce through ideas or actual products must be aesthetically pleasing, well-planned, and not something your computer can "think" of. He even explains how computers are taking the jobs of lawyers (46).
In chapter three Pink discusses how we have gone from the agricultural age to the industrial age, to the information age, to the conceptual age. Or our society has progressed from farmers, to factory workers, to knowledge workers, and now to creators, empathizers, pattern recognizers, and meaning makers (50). "More Americans today work in arts, entertainment, and design than as lawyers, accountants, and auditors" (55). Even a GM executive said that they are in the art business (55). If Pink is right, it will soon be our time to shine. Furthermore, this made me think of the changes at MoMA. A museum that once held "fine art" created by the dead white dudes, is now showcasing cars and video games.
Pink descirbes a new test called the Rainbow Project which is apparently twice as accurate at predicting college success and seems to eliminate racial bias. However, it is not trying to replace the SAT. My question, why not? It is funded by the College Board, so some part of them is acknowledging that the old system might not be so great. Pink says that these test are specifically better at measuring "high-touch" capabilities such as compassion, care, and uplift necessary for jobs in the "caring professions - counseling, nursing, and hand on health assistance" (59). I think that teaching should be included in that grouping.
Play:
Pink shows us how laughter, fun, and games can strengthen the right brain. Though I don't think I will have my students participate in the yogic style forced laughing that he describes at the end of the chapter, but I think he brings up a good point that in the classroom we need to remember a spirit of joyfulness. I want my students to love the art room and see it as a place where they can explore these right brained expressions of their mind that are often neglected in school. Pink also discusses games, specifically video games. This created a clear ping with The New Culture of Learning and our disussion in class last week. I will say that, in my opinion, the army using war video games as a recruiting tool is probably more irresponsible and dangerous than it is a good idea, I know that wasn't his point. He says that video games are about connecting and manipulating. These are certainly abilities we want in our students. Furthermore, I think that game design is largely about imagining something so new and inventive that it can blow the minds of others. If you don't let yourself play with the unknown and the world of possibilities, instead of logical L-directed answers, then you won't ever be able to create the new and previously unimagined. As we get older it seems to get harder and harder to do this. I think that Pink is right that this spirit of play is something we need to keep sparked within ourselves and within our students.
No comments:
Post a Comment