George Siemens at http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/11/08/its-new-its-new/ did a post on "key skills for educators in the 21st century"(and other centuries as well.) In his posting he takes a knock at Ken Robinson's "emotional-feel-good-message" on creativity. Nick Kearney wondered why Siemens had a problem with Robinson. I too wonder about the negative attitude toward Ken Robinson's message. I see his talk as a plea to consider creativity in the arts as important. I think Robinson sees the arts as important forms of knowing and ways of sharing knowledge. What does it mean react negatively to Robinson's message? Should we continue to undervalue art, music, theatre, dance? Should we discourage students who express themselves well in art forms? (Robinson's TED talk from 2006 http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
Kearney (http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/11/08/its-new-its-new/#comment-77712) also discusses the idea of that a percentage of people never need school and can learn on their own. The implication to me was that there must be a percentage of people who really do need some guidance and direction in their learning - maybe via something like... our concept of "school." (?)
No comments:
Post a Comment