Daniel Pink has an interesting theory about motivation that rejects the traditional perception of extrinsic rewards if there is a divergent thinking involved. Evidence of this is shown in his candlestick problem. Instead, Pink claims that motivation is driven for autonomy, purpose, and mastery. For those who haven't read his book drive, or would like to brush up on the content, I have attached a link to a ted talk of him on motivation. He's a really good speaker, and listening to him helped me gain a better understanding.
The following youtube video has been created by Sir Ken Robinson who advocates changing education paradigms to improve motivation.
He claims that our current school system is to standardized and that in turn stunts students motivation. Two quick points he made that I would like to point out is that we are trying to motivate our kids more and more through medication (adderall, ritalin, etc.) This factory made motivation turns what should be aesthetic learning into anaesthetic learning. This defeats the whole purpose of divergent learning. Robinson also claims that schools are too standardized and that in turn stifles divergent learning form occurring. Our educational system is to factory based, where students are grouped by age which is not a very good indicator of learning ability. Everyone is taught the same thing and there is normally only one correct answer. He claims that the key to motivate learners is to allow them to think divergently and break away from the standardized norms of education.
I came across one last video that is very short but provides an interesting concept that I found to be true in my specific case. Derek Severs claims that if you keep goals to yourself, you are more likely to achieve them. Conversely, if you tell your friends your goals, they are less likely to happen. At first this concept sounds like bologna but after thinking back on it, I found that when I told my friends about different short term goals I was trying to achieve, I normally didn't end up achieving them. Take a look at this video so that you can discuss your opinion on it in the critical thinking section below:
He claims that our current school system is to standardized and that in turn stunts students motivation. Two quick points he made that I would like to point out is that we are trying to motivate our kids more and more through medication (adderall, ritalin, etc.) This factory made motivation turns what should be aesthetic learning into anaesthetic learning. This defeats the whole purpose of divergent learning. Robinson also claims that schools are too standardized and that in turn stifles divergent learning form occurring. Our educational system is to factory based, where students are grouped by age which is not a very good indicator of learning ability. Everyone is taught the same thing and there is normally only one correct answer. He claims that the key to motivate learners is to allow them to think divergently and break away from the standardized norms of education.
Critical Thinking:
I have provided you with a couple different "left-field" theories so to speak that have research studies backing each of them up to a point. I have come up with a couple questions below that are based on the blog posting and are geared to help establish your perception feeling on each one.
1. Give an example of how you could incorporate a candlestick type problem into learning, and then explain if you think just having a problem like that in place is enough to motivate and engage the learners, or if you think there is a lot more to it.
2. Do you think the structure and standardization of todays school system has a big impact on motivation. What changes can you think of to improve this?
3. Do you agree or disagree Severs concept. If YES, how so you think an individual goal differs from the goals in the mission, vision, goals, values section of your company? Would you change the way your companies goals were presented at all? If NO, why not?
1. The candlestick problem and Gluxberg’s experiment display how when learners are given incentives (at least with cognitive tasks), functional fixedness prevents them from being creative and thinking outside the box. I think that incorporating candlestick type problems into learning is important because it allows the learners to practice their creativity, and to keep them from being narrow-minded. When these types of problems are incorporated into learning, according to Pink the instructor should not provide incentive. Presenting a problem without incentive will let the learners use their creativity, and in turn be more productive. The motivation comes from the desire to succeed and learn, which is what “drive” is all about.
ReplyDelete2. I absolutely agree with the points Sir Ken Robinson makes in his video regarding standardization of education. I really like the way he compares it to a factory mass-producing these students in an industrial way. I think the way students are educated “in batches” and that the most important thing about them is their “date of manufacture” is completely bogus. There are better ways of grouping students to enhance their motivation. This presents a pretty complicated problem, because I understand that specializing education to each individual student is a very complicated task, but there must be a better way. At a certain point in their development, students know the ways in which they learn best (whether it be independently or in groups, throughout a long period of time or short increments of time, etc.). Finding a way to group students based on these things would be a huge step forward for the education system.
3. I agree with Severs to a certain extent. I think that it depends on who you surround yourself with. If you share your goal with the type of people who will praise you forget about it later, then I think he’s right- you’ll be less likely to accomplish the goal. However, it is different if you are surrounded by the type of people who will constantly check in to see where you are at in the process of reaching your goal. I think in that situation it could help, because you are being constantly reminded of the goal and where you’re at with it. Either way, I think it is important for companies to share their goals so that the people who work for that company (or want to work for it) know what they are striving for. I think Severs’s idea applies only to personal goals- not organizational.
Daniel Pink offers proof that the way we do business ignores the facts of human cognition and motivation. This supports Sir Robinson's critique, that the way we "do education" for the 21st century is equally misguided. I was struck by his observation that the current environment is the most stimulating in the history of earth, yet children are penalized for being distracted instead of motivated to achieve in an educational system that is disconnected from the real world; the widely-adopted solution is to provide medication to focus their attention. I agree that the so-called modern epidemic of attention deficit corresponds with the misguided standardization of education and views of intelligence based solely on "academic" ability. K-12 education could increase intrinsic student motivation by creatively developing and intersecting with student goals. This new approach implies that schools would cultivate divergent thinking and acknowledge multiple intelligences (to include the arts).
ReplyDelete1) There is a lot more to the candlestick problem than meets the eye or the experience itself. Using the actually candlestick problem with learners that have not yet experienced it would be helpful in a new or training situation. It is helpful as it very much stimulates the mind.
ReplyDelete2) The structure and standardization in present day public education system has a major effect on motivation. In most cases standardization has a negative impact on motivation with students and teachers. Education is something that is very difficult to standardize. Testing and SOL’s have mainly had a negative effect on education in the states.
3) To a certain degree, Severs’s claim is valid. Looking back on my personal goals and experiences the ones that I kept to myself are the ones that I achieved. This concept makes sense to me. I think company goals usually need to be known by everyone, as this is a group goal, not an individual one. I would most likely not change the way company goals were presented, as I still think communication is key in a company and employees may suspect something negative was up if messages were not being sent to the whole.
1) I agree with Shana. Including the candlestick problem to learners who have never seen it before could be very helpful. Before the AHRD program I had never seen or heard of the candlestick problem, and to be honest, it fooled me! So I have a firsthand experience that it could definitely be used as an effective learning tool in the right situation.
ReplyDelete2)) I think that more so than structure, standardization has a major impact on motivation, particularly a negative effect. I once heard the saying "trying to standardize teaching is like trying to teach a fish how to walk." Meaning that not all learners will learn in the same way, or at the same level, or in the same time frame. I think a more personalized method of teaching would better benefit students.
3)I agree with Sever's claims to a certain extent. I agree also with Kelly that goal setting and achieving also depends a lot on who you surround yourself with. For example, I grew up in a home where we all set goals for ourselves, and often reached them. Now as an adult I find that I am very goal oriented. However, I know some people who did not grow up in goal oriented families and are not as goal oriented now as adults.
1. Give an example of how you could incorporate a candlestick type problem into learning, and then explain if you think just having a problem like that in place is enough to motivate and engage the learners, or if you think there is a lot more to it.
ReplyDeleteA candlestick problem is a cognitive performance test that measures the influence of functional fixedness on a participant’s problem solving capabilities. Functional fixedness is defined as a cognitive bias that limits a person to using an object only in the way it is traditionally used. Therefore, to incorporate a candlestick problem into learning requires participants to understand various ways to solve problems other than the conventional way.
2. Do you think the structure and standardization of today’s school system has a big impact on motivation? What changes can you think of to improve this?
The structure and standardization of today’s school system has a big impact on motivation. As a positive impact on motivation, structure and standardization gives students end results that they can work towards. As a negative impact on motivation, structure and standardization also can limit the student’s creativity or desire to learn other concepts than what is required.
3. Do you agree or disagree Sivers’ concept. If YES, how so you think an individual goal differs from the goals in the mission, vision, goals, values section of your company? Would you change the way your company’s goals were presented at all? If NO, why not?
I disagree with Sivers’ concept about accomplishing goals. Everyone is different. While it may be helpful for one individual to keep their goals to themselves, others might only accomplish these goals by having a good support system. Personally, unless I share my goals with other people I often find those goals unsupported and lack any motivation to accomplish them. A company’s goals share with others their promise for how they want their organization to be viewed and what they want to accomplish. For these reasons, mission, vision, goals, and values are in integral part of individuals and organizations.
1. I like the idea of incorporating the candlestick problem into learning because it allows the learner to deviate from the norm by enhancing their ability to think outside of the box. It is important that learners are able to come up with more than one traditional answer because often times things are more complex.
ReplyDelete2.I defeinitely think that standardization has a huge impact on motivaion. There is a large demographic in each learning population so it is apparent that there will be many different cultures and learning styles. If learning is geared more towards a stereotypical or assumed view then the total population will not be reached effectively. If someone is learning something in a way in which they do not understand it, then their motivation will be low due to their lack of comprhension and overall success on the material being presented.
3. I agree with Sivers to an extent that some goals should be kept private, however I also think that it depends on whehter or not you are surrounded by enablers or supporters. If someone supports your goals, then they can be there to encourage you to stay on course and make the appropriate decisions. However, enablers will deter you from reaching your goals at the slightest sign of conflict by compensating with you. For example they may say it is ok that it did not play out because look at how far you made it vs. a supporter that would encourage you to go back to the drawing board until you achieve whatever it is you are trying to reach.
1. I believe incorporating a “candlestick type problem” into learning could be a great source of motivation, however, only if you are certain your learners can achieve a high self-efficacy. Depending on the problem, the learners may display low self-efficacy, hindering the entire exercise. Since the “candlestick type problem” encourages to think outside of the box (so to speak) it would be better used to instill creativity and effective problem solving skills.
ReplyDelete2. Absolutely-the current structure/standardization of school systems is outdated and archaic. In business, it is constantly stressed how an organization needs to be able to change/evolve with advancements & changes to ensure success. The same concept can be said for education, however, we seem to still be stuck in the lecture based instruction. This is now going unnoticed, for example-the flipping of the classroom ideology. There needs to be more advocacy of these studies, findings, theories so more people who are in the position to make the change are informed. No advocacy, no change.
3. I do tend to lean in the direction of agreement with Siver’s concept. An individual goal differs from an organization’s mission, vision, values mainly because the individual goal has personal significance and meaning, where the organization’s may not directly affect you; so why care? Just like in instructional design/training, one of the most important things the instructor needs to do (referencing Gagne’s Nine Events) is to establish relevance of the material/training to the audience. If there is no relevance to the learner, there will be minimal outcomes-same concept with goals/mission/vision/values, etc. Also, this ties into autonomy…Pink mentions how companies have shown their highest productivity periods are when they allow the employee to work on something of their choosing.
On a different note-I think the Siver’s concept really rings true to those who keep their goals to themselves because there is less pressure/expectations…and you more so rely on your self-efficacy. Again, the more important the goal is to you personally, the higher self-efficacy yielded.
ReplyDelete-Incorporating a candlestick problem into learning allows learners to enhance their creativity and increases the opportunity for learning. Traditional learning has been focused on a structured learning approach which concentrates on specific goals, and doesn’t encourage learning beyond what is taught. An example of adding a candlestick problem within a learning environment would be assigning students a general topic to present to their peers. By keeping the topic general it allows the students to discover information that might not be discovered if the assignment was more structured. Also by allowing the student to present the information, students can follow their strengths and enhance their knowledge on the topic by creating a video, PowerPoint, or other creative design to display this information.
-I do believe that the structure and standardization of today’s school system has a big impact on motivation. As the video stated as the rise of standardized testing has increased so has the number of cases for ADHD. The structure of today’s school system lacks individuality and doesn’t encourage students to be different. I think it is important to find a way that we can promote individuality to motivate students. An idea to improve these should be taken from Montessori education. Montessori education focuses on the child’s natural psychological development. A Montessori classroom may have a variety of different ages within the class, and students have the choice to choose their activity during work time. Having this type of approach could potentially enhance the motivation of the learners.
-I would have to disagree with Siver’s concept because, I believe, that accomplishing a goal whether you decided to share your goal or keep it to yourself, depends completely on what motivates that person. Some individuals may be motivated by knowing that others are expecting them to complete a goal, and others may be motivated by surprising others with a completed goal.