Tag design thinking

5 Things I Understood While Walking 500 Miles …*

5 Things I Understood While Walking 500 Miles ...* | rethinked.org

It has now been nearly a month since I reached Santiago. Since ending this bit of my journey, I have spent the past few weeks attempting to digest the experience and reflect on some of the things I understood during my walk, which I hope to translate into daily habits and behaviors in my life and work moving forward. I’ll write a longer post about each of these five reflections in the coming weeks to provide some context and, hopefully, avenues for further exploration. There’s nothing truly groundbreaking about these observations, in fact they are things that I have been thinking and writing about often on the blog. This is why I am using the term ‘understood’, rather than learned, because these reflections are things I’ve learned a long time ago, but the beauty of the walking and thinking combination, is that it gives one a different kind of understanding of previous knowledge. Without further ado, here is what walking 500 miles has helped me to understand differently and more deeply.

 “My thoughts go to sleep unless they and I wander.” – Montaigne

*

T r a v e l   L i g h t l y – One can only carry so much

*

S t a r t   W a l k i n g – You can make the whole journey one step/arrow at a time and besides, in the end, the best part is not knowing where you’re going or how you’re going to get there

*

B e   O p e n –  To Yourself, Others & the Unknown – You don’t need to travel far to unhouse yourself

*

S t a n d   B y   Y o u r   C h o i c e s – When the going gets tough, lean into the discomfort, after all, you’re the one that chose to put yourself in this situation

*

G r o w   I n   P e a c e – Transformation, it turns out, is astonishingly banal

*

Harper’s Playground: Rethinking the Typical Playground to Create A More Inclusive World …*

“A quality play area is more than just a collection of play equipment. It is a place for play and learning – a place where children develop essential physical, social and cognitive skills, where different generations share common experiences, and where community members gather and build relationships.”The Inclusive City, Susan Goltsman & Daniel Iacofano – MIG

Haper’s Playground, located in Portland, Oregon, is an inclusive playground which allows children of all abilities to play together. Harper’s Playground was founded by April and Cody Goldberg whose daughter Harper uses a wheelchair to get around and could not enjoy their local playground. The Goldbergs were also frustrated with the alternative option of “adaptive” playgrounds which they view as:

expensive solutions to the wrong problem.  The problem isn’t about access to a structure, it’s about allowing and encouraging children of all abilities to play together.

They decided to design their own solution to the unmet needs of their daughter. The result is Harper’s Playground, which is an inclusive, fun and social place where children of all abilities and their families can come together to play, learn and explore. This is a splendid project, which aims to create a paradigm shift in how we think of and design the typical playground. Every community should have such a thoughtfully designed and delightful play space and luckily for us, the Goldbergs have a How To tab on the Harper’s Playground website with a form you can send them to receive feedback and advice on how to start an inclusive playground in you own community.

more play for more people …

Harper’s Playground: “More Play for Everyone” from Cody Goldberg on Vimeo.

Hat Tip: A Lot of Playgrounds Can’t Accommodate Children With Disabilities. A TEDx Speaker is Changing That. via TED, published August 6, 2014. 

{ The Independent Project …* } What If Students Designed Their Own Learning?

A few weeks ago I posted a deeply insightful observation from John Maeda about the disconnect between thinking and doing in academia. Maeda argued that the gift of ideas is the curse of doing nothing and highlighted the stigma around “doing” in the world of pure academia. I posed the question: How might we help students become fluent in both literacies of doing and thinking? Just this morning I read an interesting article on Ashoka’s Start Empathy blog about the importance of college students taking ownership of their education by engaging with the myriad learning opportunities surrounding them both in and outside the classroom. The quote below really struck a chord with me and I thought it highlighted a potent entryway into rethinking * the harmful dichotomies we have created between thinking and doing and being students and “real” people functioning in the “real” world:

“The very best students wring the veritable sponge of their institution for every last drop of value. They assume ownership of their education by taking advantage of all the available resources. They let what they learn shape them as human beings so that when the mantle of “student” eventually falls away, a knowledgeable, prepared, and motivated person remains underneath.” – Engaged Learning, Engaged Living 

What might this process look like? How do we enable the young minds that are entrusted to us to engage with and construct their learning in a way that shapes them as human beings rather than simply as “students”–an identity which is context-specific and thus ephemeral (and far too often, is experienced as imposed and begrudged by children who are disengaged and cannot wait to shed the “student” label, eagerly awaiting emancipation from the school system)? In other words, how might we produce ‘knowmads’–lifelong, engaged and passionate learners? One fantastic initiative, which attempts to do just that, is The Independent Project, started by a high school student, Sam Levin, in 2010.

The Independent Project is an alternative student driven school-within-a-school that was started at Monument Mountain Regional High School.

The idea for The Independent Project came about from that student’s own experience of high school, and his observation of the experiences of his peers. The two main things he felt were missing from many high school classrooms were engagement and mastery. He also felt that even students who were engaged were often learning material that was not very intellectually valuable. They were learning lots of information, but very little about how to obtain information on their own, or even create new information. His intent was to design a school in which students would be fully engaged in and passionate about what they were learning, would have the experience of truly mastering something, or developing expertise in something, and would be learning how to learn. He felt that the most important ingredient to a school like that would be that it was student-driven. Research by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi on engagement suggested that if students have more control over their learning, they will be more engaged, excited, and committed to their studies. He also felt that it was important for the school to be focused on methods rather than specific topics, having students work like actual scientists, mathematicians, or writers. – Sam Levin’s ‘White Paper’ on The Independent Project 

The pilot for the Independent Project ran for one semester, accepting eight students ranging in grade levels and academic ability, and was divided into four parts: Orientation, The Sciences, The Arts, and The Collective Endeavor. The students’ days were broken up into collective learning in the mornings and independent, project-based, inquiry-led learning in the afternoons. Watch the two videos below, produced by the students themselves, to learn more about The Independent Project. Also be sure to check out Sam Levin’s White Paper on the project for a detailed overview of the pilot and helpful tips, ideas and insights on the project.

question, engage & rethink …*

Hat Tip: This Is What a Student-Designed School Looks Like via MindShift, published July 14, 2014

{ rethinked*annex } VIA Survey of Character Strengths – Adopt or Rethink?

{ rethinked*annex } Character Strengths Survey - Adopt or Rethink?  | rethinked.org

Screen shot of my signature strengths from the VIA Survey of Character Strengths

{ THE EXERCISE

Head over to the Authentic Happiness website and under the tab labeled “Questionnaires” you will find the VIA Survey of Character Strengths. You will need to create an account on the website and there is a fee to take the test. You will receive a 30 page detailed report of your character strengths in rank order. You will also learn about the benefits of each of your signature strengths, ways to cultivate them and avoid the pitfalls of mismanaging your aptitudes. 

{ UPDATE } It has just come to my attention that you can take a recently validated and briefer version of the VIA Survey of Character Strengths directly on the VIA Institute On Character websiteThe briefer version is now only 120-questions (as opposed to the 240 version found on the Authentic Happiness website). VIA provides a variety of in-depth reports available for purchase after completing the survey which aim to help the individual learn more about how to apply their character strengths to find more life fulfillment. I have not yet taken the updated version of the survey on the VIA website, but intend to do so in the near future and will report back on the experience once I do. 

Once you have taken the survey, Seligman’s next exercise is to evaluate your results–do the strengths the survey identified feel authentic to you?

Typically you will have five or fewer scores of 9 or 10, and these are your highest strengths, at least as your reported them. […] You will also have several low scores in the 4 (or lower) to 6 range, and these are your weaknesses.

Look at the list of your top five strengths. Most of these will feel authentic to you, but one or two of them may not be the real you. My strengths on this test were love of learning, perseverance, leadership, originality, and spirituality. Four of these feel like the real me, but leadership is not one. I can lead quite adequately if I am forced to, but it isn’t a strength that I own. When I use it, I feel drained, I count the hours until it is done, and I am delighted when the task is over and I’m back with my family.

I believe that each person possesses several signature strengths. These are strengths of character that a person self-consciously owns, celebrates, and (if he or she can arrange life successfully) exercises every day in work, love, play and parenting. Take your list of top strengths, and for each one ask if any of these criteria apply:

  • A sense of ownership and authenticity (“This is the real me”)
  • A feeling of excitement while displaying it, particularly at first
  • A rapid learning curve as the strength is first practiced
  • Continuous learning of new ways to enact the strength
  • A sense of yearning to find ways to use it
  • A feeling of inevitability in using the strength (“Try and stop me”)
  • Invigorating rather than exhaustion while using the strength
  • The creation and pursuit of personal projects that revolve around it.
  • Joy, zest, enthusiasm, even ecstasy while using it.

If one or more of these apply to your top strengths, they are signature strengths. Use them as frequently as you can and in as many settings. If none of the signature criteria apply to one or two of your strengths, they may not be the aptitudes you want to deploy in work, love, play, and parenting. (160)

Learn to Identify, Cultivate & Deploy Your Unique Character Strengths to Live A Full & Authentic Life …*

Source: Seligman, Martin. Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology To Realize Your Potential For Lasting Fulfillment. New York: Free Press, 2002. Print.

{ WHAT I LIKED }

I’ve been thinking a lot about strengths and skills in the past few years and I have come to the conclusion that my highest strengths and deepest weaknesses stem from the same aptitudes. For example, I am a highly curious person, which in many ways is a great asset—I am deeply inquisitive about the world, ideas and people around me, I follow my questions through, I look up words I do not know when reading, even when I can still understand the meaning of a sentence, because I love learning new things, because I cannot resist the call of the unknown. At the same time, my curiosity can prove a serious handicap in some situations—when I have to finish a project or article on a deadline, for example. What I loved most about the character strengths survey is the way it attended to this duality and very deliberately highlighted the ways each strengths could be under or overused. For each of the top strengths, there is a two page report which covers the following rubrics:

  • What does research reveal about the benefits of this strength?
  • What does this mean about the individual?
  • Exploring the strength of [ the strength in question ]
  • Underuse of [ the strength in question ]
  • Novel ways to use [ the strength in question ]
  • Overuse of [ the strength in question ]

I really liked the Exploring the strengths of ____ rubric, which gave a series of questions/thinking prompts to further explore what that strength means to one on an individual level.

{ FRICTION POINTS

One category I thought could use a bit of rethinking was the “Overuse of ___” For example, one of my signature strengths is ‘appreciation of beauty and excellence’ and this is the information that was provided in the Overuse of Appreciation of Beauty and Excellence rubric:

A keen appreciation of beauty and of excellence-in performance, when overplayed, can result in perfectionism, snobbishness, and intolerance of others who do not share this appreciation. One may take offense when others threaten or disregard natural beauty, which may lead one to take an extreme position or stance. One’s personal and work relationships may suffer if one is overly critical of others who do not do things with as much care or as thoroughly as thought necessary. Additionally, personal achievements may be thwarted by one’s own perfectionist standards. Sometimes making commitments to new challenges may be avoided for fear of not being able to perform at a high enough level. Perfectionism can also interfere with decision-making if there is excessive worry about making exactly the right decision. To counteract these tendencies, self-compassion and compassion for others is helpful.

The description of the mismanagement of this strength really resonated with my experience. It felt surprisingly empowering to see that these negative patterns and behaviors which I have struggled with for so much of my life were just the mismanagement of an aptitude that could positively enhance my life, work and relationships. But ‘self-compassion’ and ‘compassion for others’ are really broad terms and can mean a great many things to different people. I wish the report had included some interventions for cultivating self-compassion and compassion for others, or at least some suggestions of curated resources to further explore how these strengths might be cultivated and deployed.

{ NEXT STEPS }

I would recommend taking the VIA Survey of Character Strengths, I’m a big believer in the value of self-reflection and self-knowledge and I found the survey and its accompanying report to be a powerful tool in that direction. For each of the top strengths, there was a bullet list of suggestions on how to optimize the cultivation and deployment of the strengths. I’ve put together all the suggested ways to use each of my signature strengths and I am now going to create a framework to ensure that I follow through on each of the suggestions. Design Thinking challenge ahead!

Buzzwords Can Be Dangerous If They Don’t Promote Sustainable Changes In Thinking, Doing & Shared Understanding …*

Buzzwords Can Be Dangerous If They Don’t Promote Sustainable Changes In Thinking, Doing & Shared Understanding ...* | rethinked.org

You may find the confession I’m about to make a bit strange given how central design thinking is to our team’s work as well as my rethinked*annex side project. But here it goes: I am sick and tired of talking about design thinking. As you know, design thinking is a huge buzzword right now in innovation and management circles. Unfortunately, most conversations and articles about the discipline center on either embracing it as a cure-all methodology for every single one of our innovation and creativity woes or decrying it as a depthless, overhyped, passing fad. I find these two binary views to critically miss the point about what design thinking is and what it can offer.

Just yesterday, browsing LinkedIn’s “Management Consulting” news tab, I found two separate articles detailing the woes of design thinking. In “Design Thinking” Destroyed Us, Brian de Haaff  writes:

The problem is when this approach is fervently adopted as the only approach to solving challenges and delivering great customer experiences. And this is where it all went wrong. Everything looked like a problem that we could “design think” our way out of to the UX teams.

Even problems that no one on the product team thought were customer or business problems became ripe for long design-centered studies by people who never previously spoke with customers and definitely did not grok our product.

I see three big problems with the above passage. First, nothing about design thinking mandates that it should be embraced as a step by step recipe. “When this approach is fervently adopted as the only approach to solving challenges” –who is doing the fervent, exclusive, adoption? That is a result of the company’s culture and management, not the discipline of design thinking itself. The second issue is the “long design-centered studies” that he describes. As IDEO’s Kelley brothers like to say, “Fail faster, succeed sooner.” Design thinking is about rapid prototyping and iteration, not months of market research. Also, and perhaps more worryingly, why are these studies being conducted by people who are not at all plugged in to the environment of the challenge they are trying to solve–those “people who never previously spoke with customers and definitely did not grok our product”? If there were a design thinking mandate it would be to empathize. Design thinking is, above all, human-centered–meaning the solutions focus on the actual perspective and experience of the people invested in the challenge, not on unexplored assumptions of what that experience might be.

The third big issue here is “everything looked like a problem that we could “design think”.” I think this statement reflects a serious misunderstanding of the design thinking process. It is not simply a list of steps to problem solve, it’s a way to explore and redefine the problem landscape to uncover more holistic and potent solutions. One of the major benefits of design thinking is how richly it allows one to explore and reframe the problem one is trying to solve. In design thinking, teams use an initial definition of the challenge at hand as a springboard for further exploration. I have never participated in a design thinking challenge where the initial statement of the problem wasn’t later reframed and recrafted.

de Haaff goes on to list some of the specific reasons why his company’s “application of design thinking destroyed progress and fractured the UX groups from the product and engineering teams“:

“The core issue was that design thinking fundamentally requires that no matter how obvious the solution may seem, many solutions must be created for consideration and testing.” 

Again, design thinking doesn’t fundamentally require anything–it’s a tool. If you had to mow your lawn and you had at your disposal a lawn mower and a pair of scissors and decided to use the scissors, when you found yourself exhausted and discouraged at having wasted your afternoon cutting only a small patch of grass with your scissors instead of finishing the job in an hour with the lawn mower, you wouldn’t blame your scissors for the poor outcome, would you? Tools are just tools, their impact and effectiveness depends on how we choose to use them.

I do not mean to pick on Mr. de Haaff, but I think his article illustrates a lot of the problematic ways in which design thinking is being framed and experienced. Design thinking is a human-centered problem solving methodology–it gives us a framework and a set of tools to problem solve. It is neither a miracle nor a curse, it is what we make it. Which is what makes Tamara Christensen‘s interview on think jar collective about Demystifying Design Thinking such a refreshing and important read:

Buzzwords can be dangerous if they don’t promote sustainable changes in thinking and doing, and shared understanding. They can be easily dismissed. Ironically, I find that most designers have trouble clarifying exactly how they think and making their own process explicit for others. The most simple definition of design that I use is by Herbert Simon, from Sciences of the Artificial (MIT Press, 1969) where he describes design as “transformation of existing conditions into preferred ones”. Design thinking, therefore, is basically about the kind of mental activity that facilitates this transformation. Fortunately IDEO and the d.school at Stanford (among others) have done a great job of promoting the process and providing a wealth of information about how it’s done and why it’s valuable.

I think the biggest obstacle to understanding Design Thinking is to treat it as a rigid process, a series of steps that must be followed in a particular sequence. I have seen this happen time and again when a team tries to apply Design Thinking with questionable success and then decides “Design Thinking doesn’t work.” In reality, what doesn’t work is treating Design Thinking like a recipe that must be adhered to. It is more like a mindset, multiple modes of thinking and doing that are iteratively utilized as the project requires. Design Thinking is first and foremost about people and keeping them at the center of the process.

The most common modes are Empathize (with humans), Frame (an opportunity from the perspective of a human), Ideate (about how to address the opportunity), Prototype (possible solutions) and Test (your ideas with people using the prototypes).

IN MY EXPERIENCE THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THINGS TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT DESIGN THINKING (AS A PROCESS AND A MINDSET) ARE:

  1. It is human-centered and people-powered, keep stakeholders engaged as much as possible.
  2. Empathy is an essential and transformational experience for fueling creativity.
  3. Prototyping is about building to think and test ideas. The faster we fail, the better.

Source: Demystifying Design Thinking: Interview With Tamara Christensen via Think Jar Collective

{ Stanford 2025 } Design Thinking Major Paradigm Shifts For Future Learning Opportunities …*

Just yesterday, I was writing about an upcoming MOOC on the Science of Happiness that is poised to make online learning history according to this Forbes writer. MOOCs have sent the world of education into a bit of a frenzy as we attempt to collectively shape and understand the disruptive effects that online learning will have on future learning environments. Personally, I find the idea that schools have now been rendered obsolete by online learning misguided. It is a gross oversight of the critical need and function of social connection to deep learning. As Sophia Pink, daughter of Dan Pink, observed after spending a year of independent learning, using a mix of online learning courses and independent projects:

“classroom education shouldn’t be fully replaced by online courses, but it can draw on what works well online. Huge online courses have many virtues but need to do better at fostering the sort of side by side back and forth collaboration that we all need to learn.”

What might this relationship between social and online learning look like? And what types(s) of environment might facilitate and enhance this hybrid form of learning? Those are precisely the questions that Stanford’s d.school explored through its @Stanford Project, which ultimately generated the Stanford2025 exhibit and website. Noting the potential disruption posed by online learning and noticing that “many parts of the undergraduate experience are ripe for reinvention” prompted a team at the d.school to question how time, space, expertise, accreditation, and student agency may also change within higher education:

College has multiple aims: it’s a place to gain expertise and develop abilities, but also to come of age. These are entwined together in a residential college experience―a complex and special setting. Enormous energy and investment are now being placed in experimentation and pioneering in the online learning space. We wanted to complement these efforts with an exploration of learning and living on campus, now and in the future.

A design team from the Stanford d.school worked with hundreds of perceptive, creative, and generous students, faculty, and administrators over the course of a year to explore this territory. We considered many lenses—from how students prepare for a Stanford education while still in high school, to patterns of undergraduate decision-making about what and how they study, to the shifting needs and expectations from future employers. 

The project culminated with an experiential exhibit entitled “Stanford 2025,” held at the d.school in May 2014. To encourage an exploratory mindset, the event was staged as a time-travel journey. The community embarked to the distant future—and landed just at the moment when Stanford was looking back retrospectively at major paradigm shifts that “happened” around 2025. These possible shifts were shared as provocations—a subjective, student-centered imagining of what could happen as the future unfolds.

While the Stanford2025 exploration of future learning environments is focused on higher education, the provocations listed are critically relevant to K-12 learning as well. Head over to the website to dive more deeply into each of the four provocations and download the accompanying toolkit to “Make them your own. Try them, tweak them, push them, or even reject them.”

  • The Reflect Worksheets are excursions into imagined worlds inspired by the provocations.
  • The Imagine Cards are prompts to spark inspiration in your own work.
  • The Try Playbook is a set of activities and suggestions to get started.

reflect, imagine, try & rethink …*

{ OPEN LOOP UNIVERSITY } Bringing an End to a Society of Alumni in Favor of Lifetime Learning:

From: Students received four years of college education, front-loaded at the beginning of adulthood

To: Students received a lifetime of learning opportunities.

The perspective that the university could effectively serve its original mission while continuing to narrowly define the time in one’s life when learning would happen was challenged.

Open Loop Vimeo from Stanford d.school on Vimeo.

*

PACED EDUCATION } Abolishing the Class Year & Embracing Adaptive Learning:

From: Structured, 4-year courses of study advanced students by seat hours on a quarterly rhythm.

To: Three phases of varied lengths provided personalized, adaptive, calibrated learning.

Paced Education Vimeo from Stanford d.school on Vimeo.

*

AXIS FLIP }  Flipping the Axes of Knowledge & Competency:

From: Knowledge within a particular discipline was the criteria for graduation; skill development was secondary.

To: Stanford flipped the axes so that skill development became the foundation.

Axis Flip Vimeo from Stanford d.school on Vimeo.

*

PURPOSE LEARNING } Declaring Missions, Not Majors:

From: Students declared Majors and focused their studies around set requirements.

To: Students declared Missions and coupled their disciplinary pursuit with the purpose that fueled it. 

“I’m a biology major” was replaced by “I’m learning human biology to eliminate world hunger.” Or “I’m learning Computer Science and Political Science to rebuild how citizens engage with their governments.”  

The goal was to help students select a meaningful course of study while in school, and then scaffold a clear arc for the first 10 – 15 years of their professional lives. It wasn’t about the career trajectory, but the reasons behind it.

Purpose Learning Vimeo from Stanford d.school on Vimeo.

*

[ Hat Tip: Students Travel To 2025 To Question the Future Of Higher Education via PSFK, published May 9, 2014 ]

Stanford’s Dave Evans & Bill Burnett on Using Design Thinking to Address the “Wicked Problem” of Designing Your Life & Career

Here’s a great ‘open office hours’ chat with Stanford’s Dave Evans and Bill Burnett, who co-teach a course called “Designing Your Life ” at the d.life lab. The course uses design thinking to address the “wicked problem” of designing your life and career.

Reminds you of anything? That’s right–rethinked*annex! For those of you unfamiliar with rethinked*annex, it is a side project that I started last year in which I experiment at an individual and personal level with some of the methodologies that we explore on the blog. In particular, design thinking, integrative thinking and positive psychology. My goal had been to do three months with each and while I completed the design thinking and integrative thinking cycles, I never got around to experimenting with positive psychology. Get excited, because starting this week, I am getting back into the swing of things and will post about my experiments in positive psychology here on rethinked …* every Thursday.

Check out Bill and Dave’s course website for tons of other inspiring resources on design thinking your way to the life you want.

Stanford Open Office Hours: Dave Evans and Bill Burnett via Stanford University, published January 30, 2014.

– Passion is a capacity that can be developed, not an inherent attribute –

The research says that maybe only two or three out of ten people actually have a passion that they’ve identified, that they can work into. We believe that actually, passion turns out to be what you develop after you find the things that you enjoy doing.

 *

– Shedding Dysfunctional beliefs –

These are two, what we call dysfunctional beliefs, and once you get rid of both of those –that your major is linked to your job and that your passion is somehow an innate quality–once you realize neither of those things are actually true, you’re really free to use design thinking to start designing the life you want to have.

*

– Counsel vs. Advice –

Do we give advice or do we give counsel? And we make a distinction there, by the way, which is counsel is when we help you figure out what you’re thinking and advice is when we tell you what we think and they’re very different.

*

– Start where you’re at –

If you’re in the situation where there’s lots and lots of things you’re excited and interested about but you can’t pick one, our advice, again, is to start where you’re at. There will be one or two things that maybe have a slightly different emotional energy in them than the other ones. So you go find somebody who does something like that. You look at the future you–someone who’s already living the you you might become–and you go talk to them.

There’s a place again where the design thinking really impacts reality. We kind of go with prototype iteration, try stuff, see what works, bias to action.

*

– BIAS TO ACTION & REFRAMING THE PROBLEM –

Bias to action — don’t try to decide your way forward, just do something. Design your way forward. And the second is reframe. Reframe the problem from, “Gee, I can’t figure out which one of these is my most favorite to all of these are good, I’m just going to start doing them.”

So if i’m a generalist with equal interests, I’m in a much more powerful position because I have lots of available starting places to begin to understand what it is I really want to do. As opposed to “I can’t possibly choose,” you’re not choosing yet, you’re just starting. Which is a very powerful reframe. In the old position, since I can’t choose, I can’t start, I have no power. In the reframed position, I’m in a better situation than a specialist. Which is the design point of view, you know you don’t know the answer. Many people in this vocational way-finding, we call it, think you have to know the answer at the beginning and then you implement. And then you’re screwed. But what it really means is, “I just know what I know,” take the next step, it will be revealed as you go.

*

– On Figuring Out Who You Want To Be When You Grow Up –

It’s a pretty common question, and again, it’s one of those things where we’d like to sort of reframe the answer. Because you can’t know, ultimately, who you will become when you, quote, ‘grow up’. And by the way, that’s the good news –do you really want to be able to know at twenty-two who your sixty year-old self should be? I mean do you really want this twenty-two year old running the next fifty years of your life? We hope to find out things we couldn’t possibly have imagined. The design perspective is, when I’m starting a new design, I don’t actually know the answer. I’m going to design into that possible future. So we reframe the question not as, “what do I want to be when I grow up?,” it’s like, “where am I right now and what is the next step I can take to move towards the best possible version of me?”

– NAVIGATING VS. WAY-FINDING –

We frame that with language. So the way the question is usually posed, assumes you could navigate to where you should be. That you know the end point. I need to get to Fresno so I just GPS myself to Fresno. But we can’t, because I don’t know where I’m going so I can’t navigate, so I have to way-find. What’s way-finding? It’s moving from where you are to the next available place that you can make a decision about. It’s the same thing as the generalist deciding, “hey, what’s available to me?”

– COHERENCE –

By coherence we mean, you know, “who am I? What do I believe and what am I doing?” If I understand what those things are–what do I think about life and who I am, what I’m actually doing and where I’m trying to go–if I can describe those things articulately and interconnect the dots, not that they’re perfect, but even understanding where the compromises are, I’m living coherently. Who I am, what I’m doing all lines up for me, that’s the coherent life and even positive psychology research demonstrates pretty clearly, if I can articulate what those things are–who I am, what I believe and what I’m doing–and I can understand the interrelationship between them, my chance of feeling good about my life, that it’s a meaningful experience, is much higher.

*

– ENCORE CAREER –

Usually the best place to start is what did you notice that you’re already doing that you could grow into a new thing? Or, who’s that person you used to be that you left behind and do you want to bring her back out of the freezer and give her another shot?

*

– The Courage to accept the truth about yourself  –

You’ve got to accept the truth about yourself. So we have all of our students write two things: a work view and a world view. What do you think work is for and how does that connect to why you’re here? And it takes a lot of courage not to sell out those two ideas about yourself.

*

The Truth About Creativity – A Series of Interviews with Over 30 Experts on Creativity, Innovation & Design Thinking

The Truth About Creativity - A Series of Interviews with Over 30 experts on Creativity, Innovation & Design Thinking | rethinked.org

Join David Burkus, author of The Myths of Creativity, and 30+ experts on creativity and innovation as they explore the truth about how the most creative companies and people REALLY generate great ideas.

Here’s a bit of wonderful news for all you creativity and innovation loving knowmads: there’s a free, virtual conference focused on the inner workings of creativity coming this June. The Truth About Creativity, hosted by David Burkus, features a series of curated interviews that dive into how creativity works with over thirty experts on creativity, innovation and design thinking. The content will be free from June 2nd to June 6th, just sign up and you’ll receive an email when the interviews are available to watch. The roster of interviewees is super exciting and includes some rethinked …* favorites such as Roger Martin, Scott Barry Kaufman, Teresa Amabile and Daniel Pink.

 

learn & rethink …* 

{ Friday Fun Day } Tinker, Play & Prototype With Build With Chrome …*

Build: A Chrome Experiment with LEGO® via Google Chrome, published January 28, 2014.

Tinkerers and design thinkers rejoice, Google Chrome has brought the endless possibilities of LEGO bricks to the web with their latest Chrome Experiment – Build With Chrome.

Build. A partnership between Google Chrome and LEGO®

Welcome to Build – the largest LEGO® set the world has ever seen. Developed with the latest web technology in Chrome, Build is a place for everyone to imagine, create and explore building with LEGO bricks online.

Choose to build on any plot in the world across your laptop, phone, or tablet. Once you’ve created something, publish it on the map, and share it with your friends.

If you’d like to train to become a great Master Builder, visit the Build Academy. Complete a series of exciting challenges over different locations and you can unlock cool new Lego bricks along the way. Plus, you’ll meet loads of characters from The LEGO® Movie!

Fire up your Chrome browser and head over to Build With Chrome to start building. { Friday Fun Day } Tinker, Play & Prototype With Build With Chrome ...* | rethinked.org

Not sure how to use the controls? No problem, check out the Build Academy and master the online LEGO skills in a series of guided challenges

{ Friday Fun Day } Tinker, Play & Prototype With Build With Chrome ...* | rethinked.org

I especially loved the growth mindset tone of the assistant in the Build Academy–it’s all about practice and effort over time.

{ Friday Fun Day } Tinker, Play & Prototype With Build With Chrome ...* | rethinked.org

Share your buildings and explore others.

{ Friday Fun Day } Tinker, Play & Prototype With Build With Chrome ...* | rethinked.org

build, play & rethink …

{ If You Build It } New Documentary on Project H – Reviving Communities, Rethinking Education & Empowering Youths Through Design & Creativity …*

IF YOU BUILD IT (Official Trailer) from OCP Media on Vimeo.

Educators and design thinking enthusiasts rejoice, today is the opening of a new documentary–If You Build It—which features the work of Emily Piloton and Matt Miller’s Project H and their students. Project H, “uses the power of creativity, design, and hands-on building to amplify the raw brilliance of youth, transform communities, and improve K-12 public education from within.”

From the director of WORDPLAY and I.O.U.S.A. comes a captivating look at a radically innovative approach to education. IF YOU BUILD IT follows designer-activists Emily Pilloton and Matthew Miller to rural Bertie County, the poorest in North Carolina, where they work with local high school students to help transform both their community and their lives. Living on credit and grant money and fighting a change-resistant school board, Pilloton and Miller lead their students through a year-long, full-scale design and build a project that does much more than just teach basic construction skills: it shows ten teenagers the power of design-thinking to re-invent not just their town but their own sense of what’s possible. Directed by Patrick Creadon and produced by Christine O’Malley and Neal Baer, IF YOU BUILD IT offers a compelling and hopeful vision for a new kind of classroom in which students learn the tools to design their own futures.

If you’re in New York, the documentary is premiering today, Friday 1/10, at NYC’s IFC Center with filmmaker & designer-teacher Q&As all opening weekend!

 

enjoy & rethink * 

%d bloggers like this: