Notebooks patterned in cells

Recently, I talked with a female friend from Cuba, who has been living in Minsk for a long time. She graduated from a high school in Minsk, studied at the university. So I asked her – “What surprised you the most?”. “Notebooks patterned in cells” she replied. I was surprised and she added – “Well, here you have to buy a notebook patterned in cells to study at school”. “And what about Cuba?” – I wondered. “Well, we are allowed to have any. At the end of the day, what is important – is not a pattern.”

To the one who lives in the CIS this explains a lot. Cells – step two down, one to the side. In many schools – being extremely accurate is the main KPI for pupils to achieve and to be evaluated by a teacher. It is so easy to control – just count the cells.

But is it the way schools and teachers should follow? I have been teaching for a long time at universities both in the CIS and abroad and I saw different students and many CIS students are alike. “Cells” – they are deep inside. After all, learning is a creative process. It has nothing in common with formal rules of expression. It is about being curious, about researching and using critical thinking, about faults and achievements, about conclusions and abilities to share them. It’s about using all the possible sources – social networks, computers and smartphones, Internet. Following “rules” is the best way to kill creativeness.

Is it possible to teach a child to love to discover? Sounds strange, right? Any child has been programmed to be curious and to discover. But what children are being taught in a usual CIS school? Formalities! They are being taught to “cram” instead of to “create” and to “think.” This is much easier for a teacher, or a director, or a ministry to control. And we, university professors – each year face guys who are focused on “cells” whose “wings” are tightened. They are afraid of making mistakes. For many years I have been practicing open book examinations. Internet is allowed as well. But to deal with the cases I give one needs to use logic, large set of knowledge and critical thinking. Actually, as in a real life. And a couple hours is not enough to get them at once. And even internet can’t help. And for some students this becomes a real shock.

Today I was interviewed and I was asked – what would I change in the education system? There are hundreds of ideas in my head, but the most important thing is to teach kids to think, to teach them to create and not to be afraid of mistakes. The only important thing that should be learned by them is to love the very process of cognition, of making discoveries and being curious. I believe, nothing else is needed. The rest – will come itself.

Do you agree? What about your experience? Did it work the same way?

P.s. Afteword.
Sir Ernest Rutherford, Nobel prize winner shared the following story.

Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed a perfect score. The instructor and the student agreed to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.

I read the examination question: “Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.” The student had answered: “Take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building.”

The student really had a strong case for full credit since he had really answered the question completely and correctly! On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade in his physics course and certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this.

I suggested that the student have another try. I gave the student six minutes to answer the question with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he hadn’t written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said he had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him and asked him to please go on.

In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which read: “Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula x=0.5*a*t^2, calculate the height of the building.” At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded, and gave the student almost full credit.

While leaving my colleague’s office, I recalled that the student had said that he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.

“Well,” said the student, “there are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.

For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building.”

“Fine,” I said, “and others?”

“Yes,” said the student, “there is a very basic measurement method you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and this will give you the height of the building in barometer units.” “A very direct method.”

“Of course. If you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of g [gravity] at the street level and at the top of the building. From the difference between the two values of g, the height of the building, in principle, can be calculated.”

“On this same tack, you could take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to just above the street, and then swing it as a pendulum. You could then calculate the height of the building by the period of the precession”.

“Finally,” he concluded, “there are many other ways of solving the problem. Probably the best,” he said, “is to take the barometer to the basement and knock on the superintendent’s door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: ‘Mr. Superintendent, here is a fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of the building, I will give you this barometer.”

At this point, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.

The name of the student was Niels Bohr.” (1885-1962) Danish Physicist; Nobel Prize 1922; best known for proposing the first ‘model’ of the atom with protons & neutrons, and various energy state of the surrounding electrons — the familiar icon of the small nucleus circled by three elliptical orbits … but more significantly, an innovator in Quantum Theory.

Published after this source.

If you are interested to visit one of my lectures or to support the idea of creative education – please write me in the comments. My Instagram is: @prof_ipl