Thoughts: Why are some textbooks so off-target?

This entry is about a personal peeve that has flared me up numerous times in the past, and has done so once again this evening. The worst prime examples I have come across are just about every California Math textbook I have seen. Previously, it was the Scott Foresman series and today it is the Prentice Hall edition. With bad textbooks like these, how can anyone not explain the struggles that students have learning and teachers have teaching? Grades and scores don’t measure proficiency, they reflect the results of a sporting competition (ie, could be one result on a particular day, and another on the next). Here are the specifics…

In one Scott Foresman California Math textbook, there was a word problem involving calculating the number of tiles needed to tile a bath. Now just how many kids have tiled a bath? Then there are the problems involving building a picket fence and taking connecting buses to reach a destination. How hard is it to know these are hardly contextual across the scope of the students? How could the editors be so negligent in their responsibility to create a functional learning platform?

To today’s case with the Prentice Hall Practice book. There are several problems (section 2.2) about multi-step problem solving. The examples in the textbook show how to set up a single variable problem. Several of the word problems are actually two variable problems (and hence two equation problems). – just search for solutions to these problems on the Internet and you will find that all provide a multi-variable solution. And some of the word problems are also significantly out of audience context – Cell phone bill?! Vacation expenses?! – these are cases where adults are presenting adult problems for learning. This is SO WRONG.

So, one can expect a significant portion of students to not immerse themselves in the context (isn’t that the point of word problems?) and hence not to be able to solve the problem without help and hints. Even with help, these practice problems serve no useful purpose as applying the same logic to a similar problem mathematically is not possible because of un-relatable context. What a waste of time (oh yes, one of those Homework issues – where homework problems are extensions of classroom examples and not interwoven). But some may contend that this confusion and irrelevancy is intentional – aimed at creating scoring striations – you have to include some problems where a segment of students will almost certainly get wrong – that’s how we differentiate students and justify grade differences. These would be adults who are in the business of teaching, but not in the business of learning (teaching being the external phenomenon, and learning being an interfacial phenomenon). I got this cynical viewpoint from the time I read that the difficulty of SAT questions are periodically adjusted so that a  fairly smooth distribution of scores can be predicted and attained – to evenly distribute across percentiles. Great for assessment, loathsome for learning.

To relate to the YCISL format, our aim is to make our learning accessible to all participants. We attempt to accomplish this by using fun as a motivator and fun is mainly be derived by being within relatable context. With motivation and context, we can readily demonstrate empowerment and useful experience. To borrow from Daniel Pink’s “Drive,” in our program design we strive to set up exposure to Mastery, Autonomy and Purpose in YCISL. We enable mastery by not laying out traps intentionally to thin the herd; we set objectives then observe and answer questions to inculcate Autonomy and steer away from one-size-fits-all; and by encouraging user-generated youth context settings, we establish a Purpose that clarifies individual leadership ability and teamwork mindsets that present natural lifelong learning lessons and growth opportunities.

Thoughts: Lessons from the Y2E2 Experiment

In my view, the Jerry Yang & Akiko Yamazaki Environment & Energy Building at Stanford University is unsuccessful in so many respects and in total – but we can chalk that up to the experimental nature of the building. But still, one would hope that diligent experimental design would have produced a better experiment. This is one experiment that should end so that another can be started. Accept the failure and learn from the lessons.

Reference Point – The Leslie Shao-Ming Sun Field Station at the Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve of Stanford University. This is a truly amazing structure and space. It embraces sustainable functionality and efficiency, and maintains productivity while continuing to evolve as challenges get addressed.

Architectural – A few of the individual failures include (a) bathrooms opposite faculty offices [see hallway photo at end of this entry] – demonstrates no consideration of how faculty operate, (b) staff administrator offices with no outside windows – the only personnel who typically stay in their offices 8 am to 5 pm and you suppress natural sunlight to their workspace?, and (c) low-height ceilings in lab offices that are reached by going down one floor then up half a floor? There are many more. An exercise for a YCISL workshop could be jotting down the Y2E2 Features on the walls of the red atrium stairwell, and creating a list of failures – and doing a value analysis. Lesson: Ask. Gather information. Do your homework.

Functional – What would one expect to be the main functions of an academic building at Stanford? Teaching? Research? Study areas for students? As for teaching, there is just 1 formal classroom – someone was thinking “one-size-fits-all.” Conference rooms have been partially re-purposed for teaching but you can guess what happens when a space is used for something other than its intended function (many are not great as conference rooms either). Regarding research, look at the distance separating the various researchers in a group, and the distance of faculty offices from their laboratories –  hardly encourages research and collaboration. As for study areas, I would acknowledge that there are a number of small meeting rooms that students can use to meet for group work or discussion – a reasonable success. Even the scattered sofas and padded chairs are a plus – but it’s less than what was in our previous building, the Terman Engineering Center (TEC). Lesson: Focus quality on main requirements.

Operational – During off-hours, the building is locked and inconvenient to access even for legitimate use. Then there’s package delivery for which there is no system – delivery persons are constantly looking for anyone to sign for a delivery so they can move on to their next stop. Yes, there are the “neat” thermostat-controlled actuated louvers that let cool air in on the 1st floor at out the top of the atria – but is there any fresh air in the basement (where the labs and research students are?) Lesson: A little compatibility testing (even simulated) can be a huge value differentiator. Fail often. Fail fast. Do something about the failures.

Social – Sadly, a net zero social environment is acceptable here given the politically combative environment that exists because of logistical arrangements. The social environment is net zero and is reflected by typical long empty hallways and distance between co-workers (a logistical failure). There was a good-intentioned idea to create theme areas in clusters but it resulted in broken existing ties and turf wars. Social is another area where Y2E2 scores well below TEC. Lesson: Sustainability should attract people, not repel them.

Health – The flame-retardant soaked artwork in the atria (especially in the red atrium where food service takes place) showed a lack of care for environmental health. But also look at the lack of water fountains as well as poor ventilation in the bathrooms. Then there are the hard, unpadded staircases and lack of real sunlight in the inner spaces (mental health not considered). Lesson: Sustainability should nurture a healthy ecosystem.

Environmental – One of the most interesting positive features of Y2E2 is the enhanced thermal transfer between floors because of the non-carpeted floors – I mention this to all visitors as a smart feature. But among some of the less-than-smart things is that building warmth is dependent on actual bodies in the building. Whereas the Sun Field Station anticipates the time people will arrive for work and initiate heaters/coolers to get to a comfortable temperature by the appropriate time, Y2E2 will only heat up when a critical number of bodies get in (if they get in). Cooling is just as unreliable with a central controller determining the delivery of cool air with no regard for how individual spaces are used – again “one-size-fits-all.” On the “positive” side, TEC was worse at heating//cooling. Lesson: Sustainability savings through discouraging occupancy is a net loss.

Logistical – It is mind-boggling how usability was not at the forefront in Y2E2’s planning and design. I’d like to mention even one user-friendly logistical arrangement in Y2E2, but I can’t think of one (right now). How about a simple enough problem needing a forward-thinking solution such as bicycle parking? Nope, just as bad as it was at the TEC. Could’ve just visited a truly bicycle-friendly university campus such as UC Davis. There is the cafe in the red atrium first floor – glad there is a food outlet in the building but it’s situated next to the classroom and a couple of key conference rooms (which have clear glass sides facing the cafe so there is massive distraction in meetings), and its ordering line and waiting area extends into an entry area so traffic jams are common. Lesson: Usability supports sustainability.

Technology – What would it have taken to make the VoIP jacks a different color from the Ethernet jacks? And one has to check in and out a VoIP audio conference speakerphone? Yes, most conference rooms have a Smart Panel to connect a laptop and connection points in the floor and elsewhere – but reliability should be higher. Yes, we have group videoconference units – but they are underutilized because of scheduling policies and lack of support. Lesson: Efficiency also involves time savings. Make it convenient.

Sustainability – I’d like to think that this was a sustainability experiment, but at this time, I wonder whether this was more of a psychology experiment – one in which people’s tolerance for pain, suffering and sacrifice – in the name of sustainability – were tested. This observation has led me to decide that the discussion of sustainability in the YCISL program needs to focus on efficiency, productivity and enhanced health so that intrinsic motivation is optimized, and solutions actually solve problems, not create new ones.

In the picture below: Y2E2 Green atrium area at 9:33 am on Tuesday September 18, 2012. Empty. Un-used. Un-productive. Sustainable – yes.

Game: Creative Definitions

If you listen to NPR’s “Wait Wait…Don’t Tell Me!,” you’ll know about the various games that are played [Credit to Jim and Susie for getting me started listening to this show]. Many of these could be adapted as YCISL creativity activities.

Here is an example of one game from the show [from Wikipedia entry]:

Bluff the Listener
The contestant hears three odd but related news stories read by the panelists. Two of the stories are invented by two panelists, with the actual story being read by the remaining panelist. The listener must determine which one is true and not a product of the panelists’ imaginations. The show uses a sound bite from the actual story (either the newsmaker himself or herself, or a reporter or expert familiar with the story) to reveal the answer.

Perhaps we could conduct this game using sustainability-related news?

Another example, we could get groups of three or more students to come up with definitions for unusual words (English, I would presume – I hope this works) and they would present their definitions – and the actual definition – and an example of its use in a sentence. The other participants would vote on which definition they think is correct.

A 3rd example is to have participants create fake announcements for school or their family or friends (eg, parents caught speeding at school drop-off will get citations and fines from the school). Other participants will try to identify the true announcement.

Or students could create their own games using a similar style. Using sustainability as a theme, perhaps we could use the Fill in the Blank game?

WSJ: Why Our Innovators Traffic in Trifles

In the Saturday/Sunday July7-8, 2012 issue of the WSJ, there is an article titled “Why Our Innovators Traffic in Trifles” by Nicholas Carr on page C2 (article can be found online at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577508820786062502.html).

The article addresses the immense public awareness and awe surrounding incremental innovations such as Instagram. Carr writes “What we are seeing is not a slowdown in the pace of innovation but a shift in its focus.” He adds “We are getting precisely the kind of innovation that we desire – and deserve.” He points to Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs” and suggests we are experiencing a progression in human desires.

But really, I only heard about Instagram when Facebook offered to acquire them. Even then, I would estimate 98% or more of us look at Instagram’s user interface level to assign a level of innovation quality. How innovative is the whole product from design level to architecture level to structural coding etc? I can’t tell you. Could you? I did, however, work with the Blazer team when Bluelark was acquired by Handspring and the web browser app would become central to the Treo. I knew of its server-side features, its security issues, interface challenges and user experience aims. This level of detail allowed me to appreciate the innovative qualities of the product and process. So, can innovation be judged by the user interface and interaction alone? The answer, broadly speaking is “Yes, but not well.”

I’ve long held the definition that innovation is a term that should exclusively be associated with inventions that had a massively influential effect on life. Some of the best examples are flight, fire, the computer and the pencil. However, now that I think more about innovation as a process than an object, there is room for incremental innovation – for those who have gone through the same process as for true innovation – and yielded something that is unique and provides a valued alternative to existing solutions. By thinking of innovation as a process, we can make it accessible to youth and provide lessons in creative thinking.

And to Carr’s point about focus, innovation is really a matter of perspective and the level of fascination that is realized. While the truest innovations affect all, most of what is held as innovation today is held so by adult eyes and their focal control. At best, these are quasi-innovations – objects that have unique life-changing qualities but only upon a limited segment of people. Therefore, I am looking forward to helping define innovation for the youth segment and differentiating it from the “trifle” that has filled our lives.

WSJ: Children Learn a New Way to Play At Summer Camp That Teaches Tech

In the Thursday July 5, 2012 issue of the Bay Area edition of the WSJ on page A7B, there is an article titled “Children Learn a New Way to Play At Summer Camp That Teaches Tech” by Rachael King which describes the ID (“Internal Drive”) Tech Camps – some of which take place at Stanford. Many private non-Stanford companies run summer camps at Stanford as well as other university campuses.

One of my children attended a similar camp at Stanford in summer 2011 offered by Digital Media Academy – it was a compelling package including a Java curriculum based on Stanford’s popular CS106A course (including Karel the Robot) and overnight accommodations in a Stanford Row House. However, the only really authentic Stanford quality of these camps is the Row House living, dining in one of the Residence Dining Halls and being on-campus. Stanford classrooms are not used (our camp had a computer lab set up in the Row House’s kitchen), the people are migratory (just here for the summer), and the Stanford scholarly culture and atmosphere are missing.

I also say this to differentiate the YCISL program from these summer camps. The summer camps are a marvelous asset to extending learning opportunities when school is closed for the summer; this helps address the deep lull some students may get into when they are not tasked with school work (an interesting puzzle that there is way too much work during the school year, and relatively little during summer). So, I view the 3rd-party summer camps such as those at Stanford as competitors and I need to emphasize the YCISL features that works to our participants’ advantage. I also recognize that Stanford Summer College and EPGY are also competitors, and communicating the differences is warranted.

As for the WSJ article, I wish it had provided more evaluation on how camps such ID Tech helps supports education.

Thoughts: Creativity from Any Point of View

In a Nikon ad that came with today’s paper, there is a statement saying “CREATIVITY from any point of view” which reminds me of how creativity is a vital component of the photo essay that the YCISL students have to compose. As an example, photographs of the same object or scene from different angles or distances can inspire different thoughts and interpretations. By being creative in how the photograph is presented in the photo essay, the viewer’s response can be lightly or heavily influenced. Quite powerful.

Exercise: Empathy and User Experience Through the iPad

Here are my notes for an exercise that utilizes the iPad to create a user experience-focused mini-project that combines technical (functional requirements) and emotional (user needs and preferences) design.

CSDGC
YOUTH CREATIVITY, INNOVATION & SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
iPAD USABILITY EXERCISE

 June 2, 2012

 CONCEPT
Experience the interface between a developer/producer and an end-user by applying consult-design-build an iPad layout with a goal of customized usability.

FRAMEWORK
The iPad is the latest popular mobile information appliance, and is on the leading edge of human-computer interaction with largely untapped potential for usability. Students will examine various parameters of usability, develop a concept and attempt to gain user satisfaction.

THE ASSIGNMENT
Each team of students will consult with an iPad user to gather user preferences, habits and needs, then redesign the content and layout of the iPad screens – at first, on paper and getting the user buy-in; and second, implementing the design and getting customer feedback.

RULES
Each team will designate just one member to interview the client user. An interview may last up to 10 minutes.
Each team may designate up to two members to conduct an observational study. An observational study may last up to 15 minutes.
Each team must apply at least one IDEO Method Card in the data gathering part of their effort.
Up to $20 of paid apps may be purchased from the App Store. Paid apps already on the iPad do not count towards this limit. There is no limit of FREE apps from the App Store that may be installed.
Teams may provide their user with a one sheet Quick Guide to explain the new layout (this may be handy ahead of one of the challenges).

 THE CHALLENGE
The team mentor will select one or more particular uses for the user to attempt using the new layout. This challenge will be scored by a combination of time in seconds to complete the task and the number of interactive motions (eg, taps, swipes, button pushes, etc). Mistaken moves will also count.

Additional notes (from my notepad):

IDEO Method Card scenarios to recommend – Flow Analysis, Personal Inventory, Cognitive Map, Narration, Fly on the Wall

The How? Understand customer habits and needs -> interview or prepare questionnaire.
Study current layout->discover likes/dislikes
Brainstorm possible improvement strategies-> Plan
Create new feature list
Uncover new uses
Increase efficiency
Address concerns
Documentation->rate satisfaction from user and developer perspectives
Implement changes->get feedback on tangibles and intangibles

Exercise: Sailcar

Here are my notes for a sailcar rapid prototyping exercise. It is intended to teach working on a primitive prototype of a product idea.

CSDGC
YOUTH CREATIVITY, INNOVATION & SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
PAPER SAILCAR EXERCISE

June 4, 2012

CONCEPT
Rapid design, build and prototyping of a wheeled vehicle (out of limited materials) that is propelled by a can of compressed air.

FRAMEWORK
Working with simple materials to build a prototype is a technique employed in many product development cycles. This exercise focuses on the simple form and function of a wheeled vehicle, and provides only a can of compressed air to create movement.

THE ASSIGNMENT
Build a set of functional requirements such as number of wheels, sails, size, etc. Then render a drawn design of the proposed vehicle. Next, build the vehicle and engineer as needed within the time limit. Each team will then put their vehicle through some tests.

RULES
Materials include 3 sheets of 8.5”x11.5” cardstock, three straws, a pair of scissors and a roll of Scotch tape. Each team will also receive only one can of Duster compressed air.
Teams will have 15 minutes to work on the functional requirements and drawn design.
Teams will have 30 minutes to build and engineer their vehicle prototype.

THE CHALLENGE
Speed: To cross a finish line in the shortest time.
Distance: To cover the most longitudinal distance with x seconds of compressed air.
Maneuver: Steer the vehicle around obstacles without falling over.

VARIATIONS
Provide a balloon for propulsion (speed or distance challenge).
Design a watercraft.
Vehicle must carry golf ball.

WSJ: Interior Gardens Hit the Wall but Don’t Forget to Water Them

This article (WSJ May 30, 2012, Personal section) reminded me of Rik Juan Yikai’s design of a green office divider.  I am going to order a few of the Wally Ones by the Woolly Pocket Garden Company: one to try out in my office, and the others to inspire similar thinking in a YCISL exercise, perhaps rapid visualization and prototyping. We can look at the feature set as well as the challenges that must have been faced in the design. Will we be able to detect any issues that were not addressed? The blend of garden greenery, home decor, architectural feature (uses wall space which is often ample in a home) and recycled material serves as a good case study for the YCISL.

Quotable: WSJ Article “How Not to Ruin a Swimming Prodigy”

Tucked away in the Sports section of the May 30, 2012 WSJ (yes, I read the Sports section of the WSJ), is an article by Matthew Futterman about one coach’s successful style which incorporates adaptation in order to maintain an element of fun in practice. In the end, the element of fun extends the training and achieves more than if the drills were fixed. To a degree, the coach allows some elective participation but this seems to have resulted in a greater focus on the outcome. In swimming as much as in any other sport I can think of, the swimmer must come up for air and periodically think about how much more they need to put in to reach the goal. To the YCISL, this style of training with an element of fun is one I would care to embrace.

Here is some extracted text that impresses me…

As a coach, however, Schmitz stands out for a devotion to rest and play. No less important than his swimmers’ splits is whether they are having fun inside and outside the natatorium. At practice, if the kids seem spent, he’ll end the workout midway through and start a game of water polo. “He’s a fun loving kid, he laughs with them, he plays loud music,” said D.A. Franklin, Missy’s mother.

Schmitz’s swimmers also go through a structured dry land practice twice a week that focuses on building core strength and athleticism. “Looking at a black line all day, every day gets awfully dull,” he said.

Even when it comes to improving form—something other coaches regard as a strict science—Schmitz believes in the art of play. Sometimes, in fact, he orders his charges into the deep end for a session of vertical kicking, with the aim of lifting their torsos out of the water.

“A lot of this is about simply playing around in the water,” he said. “That’s what kids do naturally, and the play engages the mind and gives the swimmer the tools to figure out the right way to move their body.”