Among many of the thoughts that swirled in my mind, one immediately led to this Tweet:
Sinek kept talking about how finite games end, with rigid rules, with a clear winner and a loser.When we preach mission, of course, we imagine students engaging in an infinite game. A mission is aspirational; it's our linguistic attempt to express the ideals towards which we strive. Just as Sinek talked about America growing over time into the notion of everyone being equal, we grow into our missions. We keep finding ways to do better.Listening to @simonsinek at #naisac and thinking that if we’re really inspiring lifelong learning, we are helping kids to love playing an infinite game.— Mark Crotty (@crottymark) March 2, 2019
At the same time, though, we must ask ourselves what are some of the traditional practices in school--ones that we hang onto as we consider other innovations--that turn learning into a finite game for students. Think about how a course ends with a test called a "final." Grading and academic prizes. The metrics we use. The celebration on next-school placement. Consider how we design curriculum, with distinct departments, courses, units, credits, scope-and sequence. We could create similar lists about many aspects of school. Many of them are captured in a book actually called The Game of School: Why We All Play It, Why It Hurts Kids, and What It Will Take to Change It.
As we're doing all this reimagining, we must reflect on what Sinek calls our just cause. We can't just rush forward with the new without courageously questioning everything and asking what game we invite students to play.
1 comment:
Thanks for the entire information you have given here to impart knowledge amongst us?
mu online
Post a Comment