In
"Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change the
World," Harvard Innovation Lab Expert in Residence Tony Wagner describes
parents’ educational policies and the roles fulfilled by universities. It is a
good book.
Wagner
advocates the importance of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)
education. He presents a policy of cultivating critical thinking ability,
creativity, communication, and collaboration.
The
book scathingly judges US university innovative education quality as low. One
ponders his consideration of Japanese universities.
Wagner
says university reform is essential. He states that, as the impact of “MOOC”
(Massive Open Online Courses) implies, the value of knowledge and information
is close to zero. I too gave lectures on the MOOC, but in my view existing
instruction is not the value of university. We are asked whether we must hasten
the formation of universities as models of creation and opportunity, or if we
must try to protect past models.
The MIT Media Lab is given as an
example. It gives no grades, classes can be taken freely, and there are no
required subjects: it is enough to simply create. Lessons are rich in immediacy
and utility, and directly connected to business, social conduct, etc. I also
like that vision and put my efforts into the media lab. I want to create such
an environment in Japan as well.
When David Kelley made the Stanford
University d. school (Institute of Design), it seems that instructors with
business experience held a lower position than academics, which caused trouble,
but the school was completed with the contributions of SAP’s Hasso Plattner.
When attempting to break through a large wall, the finishing move (fundraising
in this case) means victory or defeat. This appears to be the same everywhere.
Creator education is filled with
unconventional mentors. Rather than teaching, they create opportunities, make
students act, and play a supportive role. When I was at MIT and at Stanford
University, my time was spent on research (or rather, project creation) rather
than direct training. Now I am finally also engaged in teaching at Japanese
universities, but the learning style is that students are given
industry-academic project opportunities and learn in the midst of actual
performance.
My thoughts align with this book, I am
not achieving its concepts. I think this is because I lack the politically
strategic mindset of training innovators. Rather than training, I am preparing
to train. So something is lacking. Yet such is my situation; I feel that it is
easy to merely devise project ideas.