Chapter 4- Social Innovators Reflection
Wagner continues to site the importance of play, passion,
and purpose with social innovators. He also notes the major difference between
STEM innovators and social innovators being their motivation and a liberal arts
background. I thought the definition of a social innovator as described by
David Bornstein on p. 101 was particularly clear to me, “people with new ideas
to address major problems who are relentless in the pursuit of their visions,
people who simply will not take ‘no’ for an answer, who will not give up until
they have spread their ideas as far as they possibly can.”
All of the examples of social innovators in this book have
had the influence and support of another individual. This mentor not only
supports the student in their project, but supports them in other areas of
their life. These social innovators were able to grasp the bigger picture. The
world is greater than just you or where you live. These innovators were acutely
aware of the needs of others or their environment. Their awareness developed
their sense of responsibility to make a change. These experiences developed
their empathy for others.
None of these life stories provided a “fairy tale” model
with an easy answer, but discussed the journey and the learning experiences
along the way. The experiences provided these students with a level of tenacity
that cannot be taught inside a classroom.
Laura noted that exploration was a key element in her
development as a social innovator, but the experiences allowed her to become
familiar with pressure. She also became aware that she could sit down and
accomplish things that needed to be done. She also noted systematic problem
solving would have been helpful to have been taught instead of learning by
fire.
All three of the social innovators noted that school stifled
their creative abilities. If the schools were aware of their accomplishments,
they did little to support them. These innovators had a greater ability than
what a traditional classroom can provide. They had a way of connecting with
others. These connections helped them convey the passions they had for their
projects. Laura was described as a pragmatist. She wouldn’t settle for
mediocrity.
Zander’s mother, who is also an educator, discussed the impairment
that can accompany labeling a child. She also described the painful stress
caused by monotonous school. Students can live up to the label we place on them
in a classroom. I am the parent of a child, now teen, who is anxious, ADHD, and
severely dyslexic. There for, I believe I can view her thoughts through more
than one lens. As the parent, I felt it was my responsibility to encourage my
child and to push him to keep working and not settle. Honestly, I did not
medicate him for ADHD until I taught him in 3rd grade. When I agreed
that his in attention was preventing him from developing as a reader and
writer. Socially, he has always been amazing! He has never met a stranger and
is aware of others needs just by observing their body language. All parents
want the best for their child, and for so long that goal has included classroom
performance and grades and test scores.
She also noted the requirements of teachers to all be in the
same place. Admittedly, I struggle with that concept. My personality loves a
checklist, sometimes adding things just to relive the joy felt when I can add
the check. I believe a good teacher can’t always rely on a checklist, nor can
we completely follow the lesson plan lying on the desk. When a teachable moment
arises, we have to follow. In that
perspective, school can also stifle a teacher’s creativity.
I believe my biggest take away from chapter 4 is the mindset
and goals of education. As an elementary teacher I feel the demand of pushing
foundational skills. I feel the pressure of balancing reading, math, and
writing along with developing a sense of curiosity. Yes, we have standards to follow;
I need to know where the balance of time should be? How much time should be
devoted to PBL during a school day? How do I make that function with the
schedule that I am required to follow and the progression of standards and
scaffolding of units.
Kelly - Thank you for sharing with us. I, too, appreciate the prospective of the social innovators. Some of our students are naturally interested in the technical skills required of STEM innovators but others see the societal implications of human/relational innovations. It is our job as educators to know our students in such a way that we are able to guide, direct, and support...to connect them and their interests to the possibilities of the "real world."
ReplyDeleteYou have also spoken about the necessary soft skills for our students to be successful in tomorrow's world. While I believe this is true, I have been challenged to consider how these soft skills are assessed. Any thoughts on this? How do we, as educators, assess the soft skills we deem important? Some soft skills are easier to assess than others...time management, collaboration, and communication are probably easier to "grade" than creativity, critical thinking, and integrity. What do you think?
Thank you for your reflection and response.