Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

Sir Ken Robinson - Changing Paradigms

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
Sir Ken Robinson - Changing Paradigms Thank you very much. Were you surprised when it was actually me that got the medal? Were you? You could feel the tension building, couldn’t you? Who will it be? Thank you. I am genuinely humbled to have this award. I was thinking earlier that being humbled isn’t a normal feeling, is it? I don’t often feel humbled. Disparaged, humiliated, you know, put down, but humbled is a rather old feeling, isn’t it? It's not a modern emotion, but I do feel it, and particularly to have this award in the name of Benjamin Franklin, who was the most remarkable man. He lived nearby in Craven Street. The house is a few minutes away and I really recommend that you go and take a look at it. It is has just been opened, just been renovated. It is a very powerful evocation of the life of this extraordinary figure. A man who was deeply involved in the local industrialization at the heart of the Enlightenment, at the heart of the creation of the New World, and with a passion for education. A man who was also deeply invest in science, in the arts, in the humanities, and in the politics, ..at polymath. I think a Renaissance figure in the heart of the Enlightenment. And one of the first significant members of the Royal Society of Arts. If you don't know this institution, I really encourage you to find out more about it. It was found, I think I'm correct in saying, in 1753 by William Shipley and its full name is the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufacturers, and Commerce. And it's had a long history in the promotion and advocacy of appropriate forms of public education. I've had a long association myself with the RSA. I gave a lecture here.. um, even Matt might not know this.. in July of 1990. um..in this very room. And I propose to repeat it word for word, if that's all right. [laughter] Don't you wish you were wasting time on anything fresher for you for today? [unclear] No..[chuckles] no.. In 1990, I had been running a National Arts in Schools project and I had published a book on the arts in schools. I have a great passion for the arts, and we were meeting here shortly after the introduction of the national curriculum in England which profoundly misunderstood the place of the arts in education. So I was talking about how the arts could be made part of the mainstream of the education. And here we are, 17 years later, [chuckles] when it's all so different, I feel [chuckles]. So I want to say a few words about that, and I want to show you couple of short movie clips and then to have a conversation with you. One of the things that's happened to me since 1990 is that I moved to America. And, I moved there 7 years ago at the invitation of the Getty Center. I didn't flee Great Britain. But, put yourself in my place. I had a phone call on the 3rd of January 1990 when I was living near Coventry. And this guy said, "Would you like to come and live in California?" [laughter] We left immediately. [chuckles] I didn't ask what the job was, we just went, [laughter] and.. the phone is still swinging off the hook actually in my house and... we hope one day the children will track us down but we don't care. [laughter] But I now live in America and um I love it. Who's been to Los Angeles here, anyone? It's an extraordinary place. We were in Las Vegas recently, my wife and I. We've been together for 30 years. And we decided last year to get married again. So we went to the Elvis Chapel. [laughter] No, I recommend it. You should do it. We had the Blue Hawaii package. [laughter] But uh.. [chuckles] but there are others. But the Blue Hawaii package- you get the Elvis impersonator, 4 songs, the chapel, of course, a puff of smoke as you go in... You have to request that. And uh a hula girl. That was optional. But I opted for it. [laughter] ..for reasons I was rather pleased about frankly. For another 100 dollars, we could've had a pink Cadillac, but we thought that was a bit tacky. You know..frankly, we thought that was lowering the tone of the whole occasion frankly, but uh.. But I mention it because Las Vegas is an iconic example of the thing I would like us to talk about. Not Las Vegas in itself but the idea that gave rise to it. If you think of it, every other city on earth has a reason to be where it is. Like London, you know, it's in natural basin so it's good for trade, or it's in a harbor, or it's in a valley so it's good for agriculture. You know, or it's on a hillside so it's good for defense. None of this is true for Las Vegas. There is no physical reason for it to be there. The only reason it's there is the thing that gave rise to this organization that affects every aspect of your life which makes humanity what it is. - the only thing, in my opinion, which is the extraordinary power, which is bestowed on human beings no other species has. .. so far as we can judge. I mean the power of imagination. We take it totally for granted. This capacity to bring into mind the things that aren't present, and are not based to hypothesize about the things that have never been but could be. Every feature of human culture, in my view, is the constance of this unique capacity. Now, other creatures may have something like it. Other creatures sing But they don't write operas. You know, other creatures are agile but they don't form Olympic committees. They communicate but they don't have festivals or theater. They have structures but they don't build buildings and furnish them. We are unique in this capacity. Capacities to produce the most extraordinary diversity of human culture, of enterprise, of innovation. 6,000 languages currently spoken on earth. And the great adventure which produced, among other things, the Royal Society of Arts and all of its works. But I believe that we systematically destroy this capacity in our children. And in ourselves. Now, I pick my words carefully. I don't say "deliberately." I don't think it's deliberate. But it happens to be systematic. We do it routinely, unthinkingly, and that's the worst of it. Because we take for granted certain ideas about education, about children, about what it is to be educated, about social need and social utility, about economic purpose. We take these ideas for granted and they turn out not to be true. Many ideas would seem obvious turn out not to be true. That was really the great adventure of the Enlightenment. Ideas that seemed obvious that turned out not to be true. Ironically, though, I believe, the legacy of the Enlightenment is now hampering the reforms that are needed in education. We have grown up in a system of public education which is dominated by two ideas. One of them is a conception of economic utility. And you can illustrate that directly. It's implicit in the structure of school curriculum. It's simply present. There is in every school system on earth a hierarchy of subject. You know it, you went through it. If you're in education, you probably subscribe to it or you contribute to it somehow. When we moved to America, we put our kids into high school. And it was recognizable. The curriculum's totally recognizable. Math, science, and English language at the top. Then the amenities, then the arts way down the bottom. And in the arts, there's always another hierarchy. Art and music are always thought to be more important than drama and dance. There isn't a school in the country that I know, oh sorry, school system - let me be clear - There isn't a school system actually anywhere that teaches dance every day systematically to every child in the way that we require them to learn mathematics. Now, I'm not against mathematics. On the contrary. But why is dance such a loser? in the system? I think one of the reasons is people never saw any economic point in it. So there is an economic judgment that's made in the structure of the school curriculum. And I'm sure it was true of you. You probably found yourself benignly steered away from the things you were good at at school towards the things that other people advised you would be more useful to you. So effectively our school curriculum are based on the premise that there are two sorts of subject. Useful ones and useless ones. And the useless ones fall away eventually. And they fall away especially when money starts to become tight as it always is. George Bush was in town today, wasn't he? I just thought I'd share the pain. That was all, I just...[laughter] [laughter] I'm feeling it. [chuckles] No. President Bush, as I call him, was responsible, with others, for a cross-party piece of legislation in America to reform public education. And I have lots of conversations about it now. I live in America, which I shall keep saying, by the way, to make you feel bad, okay? I live in California. [laughter] And you don't. So there it goes. There. When I got to America, I was told that Americans don't get irony. This is not true. This is a British conceit. But I feel okay about it because they're the ones. When we went to America, we were given a guidebook about how to behave in America. Honestly, by the, our removals agent. How to behave in America. I'm handing it out to all the Americans I meet now. "You do it. You do it." You know. Let's all behave properly, shall we? But, one of the things that said in it was "Don't help people in America, they don't like it." Honestly, Explicit. Don't help them. They don't like it. This turns out to be nonsense. They love it. People in my experience love getting helped in America. But we thought they didn't. So for the first year, we had kept our arms to our sides in social events for fear of giving offense and this all added to the idea that we typified British Reserve [inaudible].. or that we're some refuges from River Dance, you know But I was, I was told that Americans don't get irony. And then I came across this piece of legislation in America called No Child Left Behind. And I thought whoever came up with that title gets irony because this legislation is leaving millions of children behind. Of course that's not a very attractive name for a legislation: Millions of Children Left Behind. I can say that, but But give or take a twiddle, it's the 1988 Education Act in this country. It was the Manifesto, pretty much, that inspired the work of Chris Woodhead, I believe, during his time at Ofsted. Now, I think this is important. Because what it represents to me is the ideology of education writ large and that's the problem. So when we talk about changing paradigms, my firm conviction is that we have to do much much more than is currently happening. Every country on earth at the moment is reforming public education. I don't know of an exception. Mind you, what's new? We've always been reforming public education. But we're doing it now consistently and systematically all over the place. There are two reasons for it. The first one is economic. People are trying to work out "How do we educate our children to take their place in economies of the 21st Century? How do we do that?" Even though we can't anticipate what the economy would look like at the end of next week as the recent turmoil is demonstrating. How do we do that? The second, though, is cultural. Every country on earth is trying to figure out how do we educate our children so they have a sense of cultural identity and so that we can pass on the cultural genes of our communities while being part of the process of globalization. How do we square that circle? Most countries I believe are doing what we were doing in 1988, operating on the premise that the challenge is to reform education to make it a better version of what it was In other words, the challenge is just to do better than what we did before but improve and we have to raise standards. And people say we have to raise standards as if this is a breakthrough. You know. Really? Yes. We should. Why would you lower them, you know. [chuckles] tell me, I.. I haven't come across the odd one that persuaded me of lowering them. But raising them, of course we should raise them. The problem is that the current system of education, in my view and experience, was designed and conceived and structured for a different age. It was conceived in the intellectual culture of the Enlightenmen and in the economic circumstances of the Industrial Revolution. Before the middle of the 19th Century, there were no systems of public education. Not really, I mean, you could get educated at [inaudible] Jesuit's if you had the money. But public education, paid for from taxation, compulsory to everybody, and free at the point of delivery - that was a revolutionary idea. And many people objected to it. They said it's not possible for many street kids, working class children to benefit from public education. They're incapable of learning to read and write, why are we spending time on this? So there's also built into [there] the whole series of assumptions about social structuring capacity. But it was designed for its purpose which is why, as the public system evolved in the 19th and the early 20th century, we ended up with a very broad base of elementary education during the schools. And we went to that. My father, my father's father - my grandfather - he went to that. He left school by the time he was 12. Most people did then at the turn of the century. And then gradually we introduced a layer above it - a secondary education. And some people went into that. But my father left school at 14, having gone into that. And then, a small university sector sat across the top of it. And the assumption was that people would work up and a few would get to the top and would go to university. It was modeled on the economic premises of industrialism. That is, that we needed a broad base of people to do manual blue collar work and you know, roughly they could do language and arithmetic. A smaller group would go to administrative work - that's what the grammar school was for, and then even smaller group who would go off and run the empire for us and become, you know, lawyers, judges, and doctors, and they were the universities. Now I simplify but that's essentially how the thing came about. And it was driven by an economic imperative of the time, but running right through it was an intellectual model of the mind which was essentially the Enlightenment view of intelligence - that real intelligence consists in the capacity for certain type of deductive reasoning and the knowledge of the classics [originate] - what we'd come to think of as academic ability. And this is deep in the gene pool of public education that there are already two types of people: academic and non-academic. Smart people and no-smart people. And the consequence of that is that many brilliant people think they're not because they're being judged against this particular view of the mind. So we have twin pillars: economic and intellectual. And my view is that this model has caused chaos in many people's lives. It's been great for some. There have been people benefiting wonderfully from it. But most people have not, and it's created a massive problem. I spoke at a conference with couple of other - TED Conference that Matthew referred to - One of the other speakers, Al Gore, or Al as I refer to him, [laughter] Uh...Al Gore gave the talk at the Conference. By the way, if you don't know the TED Conference, I recommend you visit the website TED.com. It's fantastic. But Al Gore gave the talk that became the movie The Inconvenient Truth. Al Gore's view - which isn't his - he'd be the first to say that it dates back to Rachel Carson and earlier. It actually dates back, if you look, even to the work of Linnaeus in the 18th Century, it dates back to Franklin, it dates back to the work of this Society. A concern with the ecology of natural world, the sustainability of industrialism - in the 17th and 18th centuries, we were concerned about it. But his work is an attempt to put the case back into a modern context. I believe he's right. And it's not just his view. A group of geologists have recently published a paper in which they argued that the Earth has entered a new geological period. Classically, the view is that since the end of the last Ice Age about 12,000 years ago, we were in a period called the Holocene Period. They believe we've entered a new period. And they say if people were to, a future generation of geologists were to, come to earth, they would see the evidence of it - of a change in the earth's geological personality. They would see it in the evidence of carbon deposits in the earth's crust, the acidifications of the oceans, the evidence of the mass extinction of species, the change in the earth's atmosphere, and a hundred other indicators. They say it's unmistakably, in their view, a new geological period. A surge of Nobel scientists have agreed to this view. They're provisionally calling this not the Holocene but the Anthropocene. What they mean by that is a geological age created by the activities of people, as in Anthropods. And they say there's no historical precedents for this. And this is really what I want to get to. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, William Shipley, the great figures of the Enlightenment, both in politics and science and the arts, were conceiving public education and civic structures and politics of duty at a time of revolutionary turmoil - It was the age of revolutions. In France, in America, not long after our civil disturbance here, at a time of extraordinary intellectual adventures and new horizons. Extraordinary innovation. For them there was nothing really that ever led to an age of such innovation and such extraordinary change, the rate of it. And it was a fair characterization of the times. But there's every evidence to show now that what was happening then is as nothing to what is happening now. I believe the changes taking place on earth now are without precedent in terms of their character and their implications. And I'll bet salvation is to develop this capacity for imagination and to do it systematically through public education and to connect people with their true talents. We simply can't afford this devastation anymore. So when Al Gore talks about this, I believe him. And I think if you don't think there's a crisis in the world's natural environment, then you're not paying attention. And I would take the option to leave planet soon, really [chuckles] .. because I believe that there is a parallel climate crisis. Now, one of them is probably enough for you, honestly. You know, I think, no, I'm fine, one of them is good. [chuckles] I don't need the second one. But there's is a second one. And it's what my work is about and I guess what many of you will be concerned about and I know what Edge is concerned about and what Matthew and the RSA is currently concerned about. But let me put it in a particular way to you. I believe that there is a global crisis, not in natural resources, though I believe it, a global crisis in human resources. I believe that the parallel with the crisis in the natural world is exact. And the cost of clearing this up are catastrophic. I give you a couple of quick examples. In California, the state government last year spent about $3 billion on the state university system - it's their published figures. They spent over $9 billion on the state prison system. Now, I cannot believe that more potential criminals are born every year in California than potential college graduates. What you have are people in bad conditions going bad. I remember [inaudible] once. He wrote it when he was asked in the time. He said he'd been at a dinner party. and he was asked the question around the dinner table. Was all people mainly good or mainly bad? And he said without hesitation, "They're mainly good." He said, "I was astonished to find I was minority around the table. A minority of one." But he believed with Victor Frankl, who survived the Holocaust and saw his parents die, that for all of that people are fundamentally good. I believe they are fundamentally good. But there are people living in very bad circumstances and conditions. And if you put people in poor conditions, they behave in particular ways. So we spend a lot of our time remediating the damage. and meanwhile I believe that the other exact parallel is that pharmaceutical companies are reaping a Gold Rush from this distress. If you look at the growth of antidepressants, prescription drugs to treat depression, to suppress people’s feelings, this is a Gold Rush. I mean pharmaceutical companies don’t want to cure depression, on the contrary. I mean also, one of the figures I saw recently is that suicide rates among 15 – 30 year olds have increased over 60% globally since the 1960s. It is one of largest causes of death among young people. I mean, what is that? People born with hope and optimism who decide to check out because they can’t cope. Now I don’t say education is a part of that, or responsible for it, but it contributes to it. That is really all I want to say. So this crisis of human resources is, I think, absolutely urgent and palpable. So the challenge for me is not to reform education but to transform it into something else. I think we have to come to a different set of assumptions. Now, I say this advisedly because I have been involved in all kinds of initiatives over my professional life. I started out in drama work, I moved, I ran a big Arts and schools project. Some of the people in the room I have known for years and I’ve worked with for years and I've had a long association here. One of the great initiatives of the RSA in the 1980s was Education for Capability’. You should look at ‘Education for Capability’, it said extraordinary useful and practical things and there were wonderful people around it. Charles Handy, who I have got to know recently, well not recently, but who I have got to know well in recent years, who was Chairman here of the RSA. Tyrell Burgess, Corelli Barnet, Patrick Lutchens, I shared an apartment when I was a student with Patrick’s son and a kind of, a galaxy of really powerful thinkers. John Tomlinson, who are Chairman here for a while, who was with me at Warwick University. There has been a long tradition of arguing for the change, arguing for the alternative and yet successive Governments come in and do what they did before. And this really worries me, and I speak personally. After all the optimism I felt ten years ago, I feel that we’ve had, over the past ten years, a kind of myriad policies but too few principles. I can’t see what they have added up to and I say that because I didn’t see it before and I don’t see it anywhere else. I mean, there are some countries which I feel are getting this right but was are not and the reason is because we are not fundamentally changing the underlying assumptions of the system which are to do with intelligence, ability, economic purpose and what people need. We still educate people from the outside in. We figure out what the country needs and then we try and get them to conform with it rather than seeing what makes people drive forward and building education systems around a model of personhood, which I think is what we should come to. So let me just, I just want to show you a couple of quick slides to, … I don’t have to, but as I’ve gone to the trouble of preparing them … frankly, I just want to give you an example of a couple of things here. Oh, by the way, some of these things, as Matthew kindly said, are in this book. This book, by the way, is terrific. You could not do better than buy this book. That is, unless you buy this book, which is the new book which is coming out in January from Penguin. I am very excited about this book. This book is about the nature of human talent and how people discover it. It is based on the premise that people do their best when they do the thing they love, when they are in their element. So I was trying to get to grips with what that is. What is it to be in your element? I spoke to scientists and artists and business leaders and poets and parents and kids and it seems to me the evidence is absolutely persuasive. When people connect ����� ������� �� ������� � ���� ��, ������ ������� ����� ����� �� �� ��������� � ���� �����. �� ��� ���� � ������������ �� ���������� �� ���� ������������� �������. �� �������� ������ �� �������� ������ �����, �� �� ������������ ��������� �� ���� ��. ���� ����� ���� �������� ���� ��������� � ������ �� �����������. ����������� ��� ������� �������� �� ������� � ������� �� ������������. ���� � ������� ������. ����, ����� ����� �� ��������� � �� ������������ �� �������� ��-����� �� ������� �������� ���� ��������� ����. ���� �� �� ������� ����� �� ��� �� �� �����-��� ����������� ��� ��-���������? ���� �� � ��������. ������? ��� �� �? ����� �� ����������� X ��� �� �������������? �����. �������� �� ��-���������... ����, ����� ��� ��� 30 ������ ����� �� �������� ���� ��� ������ ����� ��������? ���, ���������. ������ �� �����������. ��, ���� � ���������. ��������� ����� ������ � ���� ����� � �����������. ��������� �� ���� ����� ���������. �������� �� �� ������. �� ������� �� ��� ������. ��������� �� �� �� ����� ��������� � ������ �� ������ ������ � ����. ������ �� ��� ������� � ���������. �� � � iPhone-��� ��, iPod-��� ��, ���������� �� � ���������. ������ ���� �� �� �����? ������ �� ����: "���� �� �������� ��������� ������ �� ������� �� �� �� �� ������� �������? ����� ���� ����� ���� ���� ����. ������� �! ������ � ���� �������! �� �� �� �������?" �� ��� �� �������� �� ��������, ����? ��� � ����� �����������... ���� ���� �� ���������� �� �������� �� ������ � �����. ������ ��� ������ �� ������� � �� �� ������� � ���. ���������� �� �� ����� �� ������� ��������� �� ���� ������? ��������, ���� �� ������ �� ������? "�� �� ����� ��? ���� � ��� �� ��������." �� �� �������. "�� �� ����� �� ����� ������." ������ �� �� �������. ������ ���� ��� �� ������. �� ��� �������� � �� ��������. ����� �� ��� ���� ������� ������ ��� ������ �� ������ � ���� ����. ��� ������ �� ��������� ����� ������� ��������� � ��������� ����������. ��� ��� ��� 20 �� ��� �� � �������. �������� �������, ������ ��� � ���� � � � ������� �� ���� ������ ����. ��� ��� ��-�����. �� ���� �� ������ ��-����� � ��-����� � ��-�����. ���� ������ ������ � ��������� �� �������� �������� � ��������������� ����������. ���� � ������� ������, � ���� � ������� ������ ������� ����� �������� ���. ���, �� �����. �� ��� ����, ����� �� � ��������, ������ ����� ����� ���������. � ������������� �� ����� ��������� �� ���� ������������. ���� � ����� �����, ����� ����� �� ������ � �������� �� ���������� ���������. ���� 1750, ������ RSA � ���� �������� � ������ ����� �� � ����� ����� �� ����� �����, ����������� � ���� ����� 1 ������ ���� �� ����� ����. ����������� ����� ������������, �������� � ��������� ������ ���� �� ���������, �� ����� �� ��� � ������������������� �� ���������. ����� 1 ������ ����. ������ ������ � ��� �����. ����������� ���������� ���� ��� 6 ������� � �������� ���� � ���� 1970-��. ����� 1970 � 2000 ����������� �� ��������� � ��� 3 �������. �������� ��, �� ������ �� 1968 �� ������ �� �������. �������� ����������. ������ ��� ���������� � �������. ���� ����. ���� � ��������� � ��-������� ����� � ������������� �� ��������� � ��������� �������. ���������� ���������� �� ������ � ��������������� �� ��������� � ����, ������, ����� �� ���� ������� � �.�., � ��������� ��� 9 �������. ������� � �� ����� ��� ������ ������� ������� ���. � �������� �� 18-� �� 19-� ��� �������� ���� ������� � �������� �������. ����� 3% �� ������ ������� � ���������. ������� �� �������� �������� ������� �� �������������� �� ���� � �������� �� 20-� ��� ��� ��� ��-����� �� 20% ������� � ���������. ���� 50% �� ����������� �� ����� ����� � �������. 50% �� 6 �������, � ��������� �� 60% ������ ��������� 9 �������, ������ � ���������. �� ���, �� � ����������� ��������, �� � ������� ��� ��� � ������, � � ����������������� �� �������. ���� ������� ��������� ���� ���������. ������ �� ���� �� ����� ����� ��������� ������� � ���� ������ � Starbucks. �� �� ������ ������������ ������ �������. �������� ���-���� ������... ���� � �������, ���������. ������� � ����� ��������� �� �������. ������������� �� ����� � ������� � � ��������� 35 ������� ����, ����� � ������ �� ������ ��������� �� ������, �� ���� �����. ��� ������� �� ���� ���� �� ��� 20 ���������� � ��� 500 ����� � ��� 1 ������ ���������. ��������� ����, �� ���� �� ������������� ��� ���������, �������������� ������������ �� ����� �������, �������������� ������� �� ��������, ���� �������, ���� �������� �������, ���� ������ �� ������������� �� ���� �� �������� ���� �� � �� ������ ����� � ������ ������. ������������� � ������� ���� �� ���������. �� ��������� � ���� � �� ��� ������ �������� ���. ������� ������ ������ �� ��������, ����� ��������� ����. ���� �������� � �� �������. � ������� �� ����� 1980, ��������� �� ����������� �� �� ��������� � 73%. ���� �� ��������� � ��������� � ������� �� ����������� ����� ����. �� �� ���� ���������� � ������������ �� �� ���������� ����������. ������ ���� � ��-����� ������� � ��� �������. ��������� �� ���� �� ������������, �������� �� ����������� ����� � ���� � ����� �������. ��������� � �� �� �������� �� ������� �������� � �������� �� ��������. � ���� ����� ����������� ������� ����, ����� �� ������ ������ �� ����� �� �������. ������ ��� ������� �� ������� �� ���������, �� ��� �� ������, ������� �� ����� � ������� ������� �� ������� ������. ������ ���� �� ������ �� ����. � �� ����� ����� �������. ������ � �� ���� �����������, �� �� ���� �� � ��������. ������� ������ �� ������������ �� �� ��������� �������� ����, ����� �������� ����� �� ���. ���� �� ������ ������ � �������� �� ���� � ����������, �� ����������� ���������� � ������������ ����; �� ��������������� �������� �� � ��-����� �� ��������; �� ���� � ������������ ����������� �� ������������ ��-����� �� ���� � �������� � ���������, ����� ���� ���� �� ����� � �������� �������. ���� ������������� ���������� ��������� ��������������� �������. � ���� ����� ���� �� �� �������� �� � ������� ��� �� � ����������. ����� �� ������ �� ���������� ���� ��� � �� �� ��������� �� ������ �� �� �������. ���� � ���� �� ����������� �� ����. ���� �� ����� ��� ���� ������. ����� �� ��� ��� 30 ������� ������� ��� ���������� ��������� ��? ������ ���������. �������. �����. ����� ��, ������ � �������� � ������, ����� �������� �� ��������. ������ �� ����� ���������, � �� ��� ����� ���� 1950... ����, �� �� � �� �������. ������ ��� ��������������� �� ���� � �����������, ����? "��� � ��������?!" ������� �� �������. ���, ����� � ��� ��������. ����� �� �� ����? ��������. ��... �� ������ �� ����� ���������, �� 50-�, 60-� � 40-� ����������� � �������, � ����� ������� �� �� ������� ����� �� �������� ����� ��� � �� �������� ���������. ������ �, ���� �� �? ������� �� �������� �� �� ��������� ���������. ���� 50-� �� �� ��������� �� ���� �������. ������ ����� �� �� ������ � ������� � ������� �� �� ����� ���������. ���� ��������. ������� ������� ���� ���������� � ���� ������. ����� ������ � ���? �� �����. ���� � ���������. ���� ���� ������ ��� ���� 56. ������� ������ � �������, � ��������� �� ���������. ����� � �� �. �������� � ���, �� ���� ������ ���� ��������� ��������� ��, �� �� ������. ���� � ����� ���������� �� �� ��������. ������ ��������� �� ���������, ��� ������� �� ��������������, �� �� �� ��������� ���������. ������ �� ��� ���� �� �������, �� �� �� �� ���������� ��������. ���� ������ �� �� ������� �� ���� ����������. � ����� ���������� �� ������ �� �� ��������� ��������. ������ ����, ��������� ��������� �� �� �������� �� ���� ����. �� ��� ������� �� ���� ������� ��������, ����� � ��������� � ���������. �������� �� ����(ADHD). ���� � ����� �� �������� �� ���� � ������� ��� ������������ ������� �� ����. �� �� ���������� �������� � �� ������, �� ���� ������ ���� ���� ������������ �� ���������� � ��������������. �� ��� ������������ �� ����. ���� �� ������������ ��������� � �������� ������, �� ������ ���� ����������. �� ��� ��� �� �������� �� �������. ����, ����� ���� ��� ��������� � �� �� � ��������. ������ �� �� ���� ���� �� ����� ��������� ��� ������ ���������� ������, � ������� ���� ���������� ������ �������. ��������� � ���������� ����. ������ �� ��������� � ���-������������� ������ � ��������� �� �����. ���������� �� � �������� � ���������� � �������� ���������: ��������, iPhone-�, ����������� �� �������� ��������, �� ������� ������������ ������. � ��� �� ��������� ������, �� �� ���������. �� �����? �� ������ ���� � �������, ���-����. ��������, �� �� � ���������� �����, �� ������������ �� ���� �� ��������� ��������� � ������� �� ����������������� ��������. �� ���� ���� �� �� ��������� �������, ����� � ����� ��������� �� �� �� ��������� � ��������, ����� �� ����� �� �������. ���� �� ���� � �������� � ������� �� �� ����������. ��-�������� ������� �������� ��-����� ������������ ������ �� ����. �� ����� � ����������, � ������ ��� �� ���� �� �������� �������� �� ������ �� ������ � ��������. �� ������ ���� ����� �������������� �� ���������� � ���������������� �� ��������� ������������ �� ��� ��-�������. ������ �������� �� ����� ������� � ��������, ���� ������� �� ������ �������� � �������� � ������� �� �� ��������� � ��� ������ �� �� �����. � ��������� �� �������, ������. ����������� ������... ���������, �� ����� �� ����, �� ����������� � ���������, �� �� � �������� � � ���������. ����� ����� ��-����, �� �� ����������� �� ��������. � ��� �� ��������� ��... � �� ���� ��, ����� �� ���� �� ������ � �� ������� � ������������, �� ���� ���� �� ���������� ���������, ������ �� �� ������ �� ���� ����������, ������� �����������. ���������� �� ������� ��� ����������� �����������. ���������� ����������� � ������ �������� �� �������� �� ������ ����. ������ ���������� � ������� ������, ������ ���������� �� �������� � ���, ������ �� ������� ���. � ����������� �����������, ������ �������� �������� �� � �� ����� �� ���������� ��. ����� �� ���� ��������� �� ������. ������ �� ������� ���������� �� ������ �� ���. � �� ����� �� ������ �� ������ ���������. �� ���� �� �� ����������, �� �������� �� �� ������� �� ������, ����� ���� � ���� ��. �� �������, ����� ������ �� ����� � �� ������� �� ������ � ���������� �� ��������������. �� �� ��� ������� �������. ��������� �� ������������ ���� �������������� ����� � ������, �������� ����������, �������������� �� ������� ��������. ������������ �� ���� ������ � ������� � ���������� ��������� �� ���������� �����. ����? ���� � ������, �� ���-������� ���� ���� ����� ������ � ��������� ��? ����� ���-��������� ����, ����� ���������� � ������ �� �� ������������. �������� ����, ����� �� ����� ��-����� �� ����� �� ���� � ���� ������� �� �������� ���������� ��� �� �������� ����� �� ����. ��� �� ��-����� � ����� ����� ��������� � ������. ��� ��� �������� ����� �� �� ����. ��� �� ������������ �� ����� �� ��������, ��� �� �� �������� ���� ������ �� �������������� �����. ���� �� ��������� ���� �� ������������� �����: '�����' � �������� ������� ����; '���������' � ��������� ������ � ������������ �� ������, ����� �� �� ��������; �� ������ ������ '����������' ��� ��������� ������� �� ��������������� � ����������� � � ������� ����; � '��������������'. �������������, �� ����� �� ������� ��, �� ������ �� �� ������� � ��������� ������. ���� ���� ������� � ��������� �� ��������. ������ �� �� ��������� � ������ ������ �� ��������. ��������� � ����������� �� ����������� � �� �� ����� ��� �� ��. ���� ������� �� �������� ����. <i><font color=yellow>���� ������� � ����, ����� ��������� ����� � ���������� ���� �� ������� ����e��� � ����</i> <i><font color=yellow>�������� ������ ����� ����� � ������������ �������? ��� � ����, ����� ������ �����?</i> <i><font color=yellow>��� � � ����� ������������? <font color=green>������� �����</i> �� ����� �� ���� � �������� ������ ������� �� ��������� ���������. ������ �� �� �������, ����� � ��������? ���� ��� ����, ����� ������ � ������ ��� ��� ���� ��� ������������ ���������� ����������? ������������� ������� ���� �� ������� � "����� � ������������ �������". ����� �����? ����� � ������� ���� �������? ������ � �� �� �� ����������, ������ ������������ � ������� �� �������. ��������, ���� ����������� �� ���������� �����. ���� � ����������� �����. ������������ � ������� �� �������� � ��������� ������ � ������������, ����� �������� ���������� �� ���� ������, ����� �� � ����� � ������� �� ��������. ���� � ���� ��-����� �� �������. ���� � ���������� �� 170 000 ��������� ������. ������ �� �� �� �� �����������? ������� ��: "���, ������ �!". ����� ����� ����� ������? ��������� � �� ������������ �� ������� ������, �� ��������� ��������� �� ��� ����������� ����������� �� �� ���������. � ������ �������� �� ���� ����������� ...� ��������. �� ����� �� �� �� ������. ���������� ��. �� �� �� ��������� �� ���� ���������. ���� �� ������ ��������� �� ����������� ���� �� ����� �� ������� ������ � ���� ����� � ����� ������� � ���������� ������� � ��� �� ������� ��������� ��. ���� ������� ������ �� ��������� � ���������� ������� � ����� ���. ��������� � ����: �� � �� �������?... ������ �� �... ����� �� ���������� �����... �����. ����� �� ���� ������� ����. ������� � �� ���� ��� ��-����� ��������� ��� �� �������� �����������. ���� ����? ����� �� ����... ������� �� �� �����! ��������� � �� ������ ���� �� � �������. � ���������... ����� �� �� ����� ����. ����� ��� �� ������������. ���� ������ ����� �. ���� �� ��������� ����� ����� �������� ��-����� �������������. �� ������� ��? � ������ �������� ���� ���������� �������������. �� ��� �����, �� �������� � ������ ������. ����� ������ � �������� � ��������� ��� ������? ������� � ����������� � �� ������: "��, ���� �������� ��������". ��� �� ��� �������� �� ���� ������. ������� ��? ������ ������� �� ����� ��������, ������ �� �� � ���-�������� � �������. ���� � �������� �� ����� ����� ������ ����� ���������� �������, �� ����� ����� �� ����� �� ������� ����. ��� ������ � ���� ������, � ������ � ����. ������ �� ������ �������� � ������. �������� ������� �� ����� ������. ��� �� ������� �� �������. ������ ���� � �������������, ����? � ������ ��������� �����, ��� ��� ����� � ����� � ��������� ���������� �������. ����� ���� ������� �� ���� ������� ����. ������� � � � ������� � ������� �� ��� �� �������� ���� ������, ���������� ��. ��������, ������ ���������� ������. ����� � ���� � �� ��� ������ � ������������, �� ����������� ������������ ����������. �� �� ���� ����: ����������� ���������� ����������� �� �� ��������� ������ ��������������. ����� ����� �������� �� ����� �� ���� ������� ��������� �� ���� �����������. ���� ����� ��������, ����� �� �����: "����� �� � ���� �� � ����. ����������. ������ �� �� �������." ����. � � �� ���� �� ����� �� �������� ������ �����������. ����������� �������������� ���������� �� ��������� �������� ����� ����� ����� ���� � �� �� ������� � �������, �������, �� ������ � ����� ����� ���� �� �� ������ � �������������. ��� ��� ����, ����� �� ������� ������ � �������� �� ������, �������������� ���������, ���� ������������� ������ � ������������ � ������, ���-���, ����, �������� ��������, �������� �� ���������������, ���������� ��������, ���������� ��������, ������ ����� �������������� ������� �� ��������� �������. �� ��� � ����������� � �������� �� �� ����������. �� ������� � �� �������� ��������� ���� ���� ���� �� ��� ���� ������. ����� ���� ����� ��������� �� ������������ �������. ���� ����������� ����� ������� ������. ������������ ������� �� � ������ ���� ������������. ��������� ������������ ���� ���������� �� ���������� ����, ����� �� ����������. ������������ ������� �� � ����� �������, �� � ������� �������� �� ������������. ���� � ������������ �� ����� �������� �������� �������� �� ���� ������, �������� ������ �� ��������� �� ���� ������, �� ������ ���������, � �� ���� �� ������ ��� ����������� �����. �� ������ ����� ��������, �� ����. ������ �� �������� ���� ����, ���� ���� ��������. ���� �� �������� ������ �� ����� ����� ���� �� �� �������� ���� ������. ���� � ������� ������. �������� ���� �������� �� 10-15. ����, ����� �� ����� � ���� ���� �� ��������� 200. ������: ���� �� �� �� ������; ���� �� �� � �������� �� ������; ����� �� � �� ��������� ������? ��� ��������� ����� �� ���� � �� �� ����� �� 1 500 ����, ���� �� �� ����� ���������� "Break Point and Beyond". ��� ��������� ��� ���������� ���� �� ������ ������ �� ����� �� ������������ �������. �������� �� ��� ��� � ����� ������� �� ���������� 1 500 ���� �� ��������� ������ �� ����� �� ���������� �������? ������ �� ����� ������� ��� ���� ���� �� ��� � �� �� ���� �� �������� �������. ����� �������? ����� �������� �� �����? 80% � 80? �����. �� � �� ������� � 98%. ���� ����� � ���� ������������� ���������. ������ �������� ������ ������ ���� 5 ������ ��-�����, �� ������� �� 8 �� 10. ����� �������? 50? ������ �� �������� ��� 5 ������ ��-�����, �� 13-15 ������. ������� �� ���������, ����? ���� �� �������� � 200 000 ��������� ��� 25 ������. ���� ������ �� ��������. ����� �������? ��. ������ ������, �� ��� ��� ��������� ���� �� ������, ����� �������. ���� �������� ��������� �������, ������ �� ����� �� � ���������, �� ������ �� ������� ����. ���� �� �? ��������� � ����, �� �� ��� ����� �����, �� � ��������� �� �����������. ���� ����� �� �������� ��� ����. ������ � �� ������ ��� ����� ���� ���������� � ����� � ��������� �. ����� ���� �� �� ������� � ���� ���� ������ ���������. �����. �� ��� ������, �� ���� �� ���-������� �� ��� � �� �� ����� ����������. ��������� 10 ������ � �������. ������ ��, �� ��� ���� ���� ������� � �� ����� �� ��������. � �� �����������. �� �����������, ������ ���� � ������. ����� ������� �� ���� �� �� ����� ����������, �� � �������... ���� �� � ������ ��������� ����� ����, � ������ ���� � ���������. ������ � �������� � �������� �� �������������. � �� �� �� ���������� �� ������ �� ������ ��������. ���� ������� ���� �� ����, �� ������ �� ������ �� �������� ����� �� ��������� �����������. �� ���� ����� ���� � ������� �� "���������". ������ �� ��������� ��� ������� �������� �� ����������, ������������, ����������, ����������, �������������; � �� ��������� �� ��� ������ ������� � � ���. ����� - ������ �� �������, �� ������ ���� �� ���������� �� ������� � �����, �� ������������ � �������. ��� ����������� � ��������� ������ � �� ��������� �������, ��������� ���������������� ����� ��� � ������� ���������� ����� �� ���������. � ���������, ����� ��������. ���� �� �� ����� � ����. ���� ������� �����, ����� ���� �� �� ������� ������� �� ���������� ����� ��� � �������� ���. �����... ���� �� �� ������. �������� � � ������ �� ������. ���. ������� �� ���� ��������. �����, �� ������ ������ �� ������ ������ �� �������� �� ��� ��-���������. �����: "� ���� �� �������� �������� �� ������ ������� � ������� �� ���������, � �� �� ��������. �� ����� �� �� ����������� ������? �� ��������� ��? �� ��������� ��? ��� �� ������ ��������? ������ �� �������� ��� �� � � ���� ����� ����� ��� ��������, � �� ������������� �� ������ �������. �� ����� �������� ���� �������� �� � ������ �������, � � ������ �����." ������, �� � ���� ��� ��������� � ������� ������. � ������ ����������� � �� �������� ������� �� ����������� ��� ������ �� ���� ������� ��������. ���� �������� ����� �� ������������� ���� �� ���������� �� ����������� ����, ����� �� �� �������. ��� �� ��������� � ���������� ������� �� ������������ �� �������� �������� � ����������� ��������� ���� ��������� ��������, ���� �� �? ��� �� �������� � ����������� ��. �� ��������� ����������� �� �� ��������� ���� ���� �������� �� ����������� ��������, �� ��. ��������� ����������� �� ������ ���� ���������. �������� �� �� ������� � ���������, ���������, ��������, ����������, ������� �� ����������� � ���������. ������� �� �� ������ � ������ ����������� �� ����� ������� �� �������� �� ��� ���. �� ���� ������� ������, �� ����� ��-������ � �� �������������� ����, � ����������� � ���������� ����. ������ ����� ������ � ���� ��������, � ����� �� ������� �� �������� ���� ���� �� ����� ���. �������� ��� ����� � ��������. ����� �� �� ������ ���� �������� �����������. �� ����� �� ��� ����� ��� ����� �������� �������� �� �������. �������� �� ������� � ���-�������� ����� � �������. ����� ���� �� ����� ���. ������ �� ����. ���� ������ �� 2004 �����, �� ������� ���� �������������. ������. 7 ����. � ���� �������� �� 2005 �� ������� ���� �����������. ������ ����� �� �������� �� ������� ���� ������� � �������� �����. ��������� � �������� ����� �� ������ ������ �� �������� �� �� ������ ����, ����� ���� �� �� ����� ������ ������. ����, ����� ������� ���� ����, �� �������� �� ������� �� ���� ������. � �������. ����� ��� ������������ ���� ���� ������ � �������� �� ����� �������. �� ������, �� ������ ���� � �� ������. ��� �������� ����������� ������� � ���������, ��� �������� �������� ������, ��� ����� �������� ����� ���� �� ������ ����� ����, ������� �� ���. �������� �� ������ �������������... ����� �� ������ � ������� ������ �����, � ����� �� �����������, �� ������ �� ����� ��������... ����. �� ������, �� ������ �� �� ���������� �� ������������� ����� ��� ���� ��������� �����. � ����� �� � ������� ��������� ���. ������ �� ������ ������������ ������������, � �� ���������������, ����� �� ���� �� ����� �������, �� � �������� � ��������� �����������, ��������� �� ������������� � ������������ �� �� �������������; ����� �� ����������� � ������� �� �����������, � �� �������������, ������ � ������������� �� ������ � ���; ����� �� �� ������� ��� ����������, � ��� ������������ � ������� ��� ����������. ���� � �������� �� ������� ���� �������� �� 2005. �����, �� ������ ������� ����� �� ����� ������. ����� ���� �����: "��������� �� ������ �� � � ����, �� �� ���� ��������� ������ � �� �������, � ������ �� ���� ��������� ����� � ������." �����, �� ������ �� ����� ����� � ��������� �������� �� �� ����� ������. ��������� �������� ������ �����: "�� ����� ����������� ��� ���� ����: ����, ����� �� ����������; ����, ����� �� �������� � ����, ����� �� ������." � ������ � RSA �� ���������� �� �� ������ � �� ���������. ��������� ��.

Video Details

Duration: 55 minutes and 20 seconds
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: Sir Ken Robinson
Views: 394
Posted by: julius on Nov 10, 2010

Creativity expert Sir Ken Robinson will ask how do we make change happen in education and how do we make it last?

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub above to caption this video.