Optivia+ Blog: September 2013

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Pragmatism

The question becomes: when is it best to be a specialist and when is it best to be a generalist? And the ancillary to that question is: is the 21st century the marketplace for specialists or generalists? In my previous writings, I argued two things: 1) the 21st century marketplace is no longer the same as the 20th century, and 2) that education services the marketplace. There is a great amount of debate if education should be idealist or pragmatic? Should education be structured as that of Antiquity where the pursuit of learning was pure and for the betterment of intellectualism? Or should education work towards developing skills in people, helping them acquire employment? Like so many things in these white papers, I feel that education must find its balance. Learning is a pure pursuit, but it has a practical outcome. In the end, students need to become productive members of society.

They need secure employment, they need opportunities for success, and they need a chance to be civically involved. These things cannot take place without a background in the fundamentals (reading, writing, arithmetic, history, science etc.) and cannot take place without training for the workforce. Now, interestingly enough, the 21st century is perhaps uniquely suited for such a balance. Perhaps for the first time in American history, the marketplace needs learned, well-rounded individuals who have marketable skills. This is why allogamy is the ideal education system – it focuses on developing such intellectuals.

references

1. Rimer, Sara. "Study: Many College Students Not Learning to Think Critically." The Hechinger Report January 18 (2011). Print. Teachers College, Columbia University

2. Pink, Daniel H. A Whole New Mind: Why Right-brainers Will Rule the Future. New York: Riverhead, 2006. Print.

3. Peat, F. David. From Certainty to Uncertainty: the Story of Science and Ideas in the Twentieth Century. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry, 2002. Print.

4. “Grow up? Not so fast,” By Lev Grossman. Time, January 16, 2005.

5. Robbins, Alexandra, and Abby Wilner. Quarterlife Crisis: the Unique Challenges of Life in Your Twenties. New York: J.P. Tarcher/Putnam, 2001. Print.

6. Palmer, Parker J., Arthur Zajonc, and Megan Scribner. The Heart of Higher Education: a Call to Renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print.

7. Shoemaker, Jean Eklund, and Larry Lewin. "Curriculum and Assessment: Two Sides of the Same Coin." The Changing Curriculum Number 8 50.May 1993 (1993): 55-57. Print.

8. Fiero, Gloria K. Landmarks in Humanities. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2009. Print.

9. Tufte, Edward. "PowerPoint Is Evil; Power Corrupts. PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely." Wired Sept. 2003. Print. Issue 11.09

10. Reynolds, Garr. Presentation Zen: Simple Ideas on Presentation Design and Delivery. Berkeley, CA: New Riders Pub., 2008. Print.

11. Reynolds, Garr. "Storytelling Lessons from Bill Cosby." Rev. of Keynote Speeches and Comedic Career. Web log post. Presentation Zen. Garr Reynolds, 28 June 2011. Web. 30 June 2011.

Seeding vs Poisoning

The self-fertilizing idea, or autogamous model, is the 20th century mainstay. The idea is cultivated in a very narrow environment and transmitted linearly from lecturer to student listener. Unlike the cross-pollination of ideas, or the allogamous model, there is a certain sterility and paradigmic containment of knowledge. Mathematics is taught during mathematics period in a mathematics room. English is taught through an English curriculum. Art is separated from core coursework and supplements the day. With such segregation, only specific ideas can be cultivated within specific, asexual structures. The compartmentalization is the result of 20th century assembly-line mentalities; but the stifling, idea-draining atmosphere is the result of autogamous model being self-propagating.

What I mean by this, is that the efficiency and selfness structured in autogamy encourages more autogamy. Rimer’s Study: Many College Students Not Learning to Think Critically in Columbia University’s The Hechinger Report, specifically points to this issue: “Students who majored in the traditional liberal arts — including the social sciences, humanities, natural sciences and mathematics — showed significantly greater gains over time than other students in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills… Students majoring in business, education, social work and communications showed the least gains in learning” (Rimer). The liberal arts and the humanities naturally encourage creativity, critical thinking, reading rigor, and above all, allogamy. These disciplines are comprehensive, drawing from multitudes of sources and ideas. Unfortunately, business, education and communications are far more autogamous. These disciplines intentionally separate themselves from the wide-reaching, open-scoped humanities.

The detriment, in such autogamous rigidity, is that with a varied collection of resources, ideas remain very stable. Ideas rarely undergo innovation, because the resources themselves are very akin to one another – each source of information is alike the next. Autogamous disciplines like business, education and communications rely on their separation from liberal arts and the humanities. This stems from the generalist vs. specialist debate. During the 20th century, the marketplace favored the specialist. So much so, that as work and workflow became more and more assembly-lined, individual tasks became the sole responsibility of a worker. This only furthered specialization. Autogamy is a very strong model when specialization is the desired outcome. The division of labor, departmentalization, and the separation of tasks were championed in the 20th century market. Functionality is key. An analogy can be drawn between specialization and an organism. Each cell in the organism’s body performs a designated task. The entire body requires each cell to continually perform this task, for without the collective work of all the cells, the body would perish. The 20th century economy is structured very similarly.

But this places a huge amount of pressure on the specialized worker, who must not deviate from his/her task. This also makes the individual worker completely dependent on the system. In this specialized workforce, the individual does not perform anything independently. His/her individualism is secondary to the collective production. And s/he is completely removed from the end outcome – s/he only plays a part, but never produces anything as a whole. In one sense, this is vastly important because without specialization huge goals would be unattainable (ie. enormous production numbers, speedy processes, rapid growth). But in this model everything is autogamous. The specialized worker can only train another worker in his/her specialized task. Ideas flow top down and are tailored to very specialized, isolated functions. Autogamy is efficient, but not comprehensive. We can see how business, education and communications favor this model. Each of these fields produce highly specialized professionals which enter highly specialized markets. But these markets are quickly and irregularly changing. In my previous papers, I explained how autogamy is ideal for a stable environment whereas allogamy is better for an unpredictable environment. Autogamy focuses on rigid structure and best practices. Allogamy focuses on fluidity and integrating varying ideas. Under these principles, autogamy is very specialized and allogamy is very generalized. Autogamous adaptations become specialized because there is no need for variation – the environment provides the same stimuli. Allogamy needs variation in order to cope with drastic changes. In biology, species are categorized in such ways: generalist or specialist. Those species which are generalist have a greater chance of long-term survival, but must also undergo evolutionary changes. Specialists fill special niches, but if that niche changes, than the specialist species typically dies out.

Koalas are specialists. Their entire repertoire of adaptations is for a very specific environment and a very specific food source: eucalyptus. Because of this, koalas live only in the coastal regions of Australia, and could not survive anywhere else. An animal of similar size, but is far more equipped for change, is the raccoon. Unlike the koala, the raccoon is an omnivore and inhabits the entire continent of North America (in all of its climates and ecosystems – north, south, east and west). A subtle change in the koala’s habitat could result in a mass extinction – for instance, a disease killing off most of the eucalyptus trees would have disastrous effects on the koala population. Raccoons, on the other hand, eat a variety of foods including invertebrates, plants and fruits, and vertebrate animals. Any shift in any of these food sources, would simply mean the raccoon would have to find greater quantities of the others. Autogamous disciplines are specialist-orientated like the koala. Becoming an expert in a very narrow field makes you very desirable as long as that market is stable. Once there is a shift, the skills mastered in that field are rarely transferable to other fields.

Being trained in finance does not mean you can transfer those skills to personnel management. Likewise, art teachers typically cannot teach math or physics. So we can see that autogamous training is very efficient and beneficial as long as the market provides consistency. But what if the market changes over night? What of a dotcom boom or new technologies replacing old practices? What of smart technologies? What of automation? How can a specialist cope in such markets? The 21st century has been hallmarked by great cultural, societal and technological upheavals. And these are projected to remain exponential – continually growing at tremendous paces. Does the koala or raccoon fair better in such a world? Who adapts and who goes extinct?

references

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Role-Playing

Each of the eight steps outlined above are important to finding awe, bliss and pleasure in the world – or in short, Csikszentmihaly’s sense of flow. This grows inspiration and when we are inspired there is a natural, intrinsic drive to create. A culture and atmosphere of creativity leads to becoming playful. Oftentimes, we hear that “learning should be fun” but under the allogamous model, this means playfulness. This is different than playing games or making curriculums easy. Playfulness is about humor, relaxation, imagination, and whimsy; all of which are integral to flow and creativity.

One of the best ways to cultivate this sort of attitude is through role-playing and skits. When students engage in such practices they are forced to place themselves in points of view of others. This mental dexterity encourages problem solving in various different levels. Such instructional opportunities are rich, and impart lifelong lessons about interaction, communication, and human nature. Beginning with a scenario or problem, encourages students to engage in ways like role-playing or other creative brainstorming, group activities. Instead of making these “special days” or “fun days” at the end of a unit, these sorts of practices should be mainstay. Contemporary students crave these sorts of interactions. Communication and information exchange fills the day of the 21st century student’s life. Instead of avoiding or regulating such interests, we should be encouraging communication. No era has had such availability of communication and information resources. This is the new literacy as explained by Nichole Pinkard, founder of Digital Youth Network – one of the five schools showcased in Digital Media: New Learners of the 21st Century. In that documentary, Pinkard said, “Literacy has always been defined by the technology. Before the printing press, your ability to orally recite something meant to be literate. And so, as technology has made things cheaper, we're now saying, "Well, hmm, is someone literate if they cannot critique media, take media in, if they're only talking in traditional text?" That's a question to answer today, but what will that mean in 2020?

I would venture to say that they won't necessarily be considered as being literate” (PBS Teachers). If we truly want to develop lifelong learners, how can we continue to ignore the greatest changes in society’s and the culture’s dynamics? This is a unique time in history: more information is available to more people – more so than any other time in history! Yet we ignore these resources every day. As Pinkard says, literacy no longer means the ability to simply read and write. This is not a new phenomenon, for literacy has evolved throughout the entirety of human history. Prior to the invention of the printing press, literacy meant oral tradition – the ability to memorize narratives (such as the Illiad and the Odyssey). When the printing press was invented literacy meant the ability to read and write books, newspapers and pamphlets. Today literacy refers to new media, and incorporates visual, audio, and interactive qualities unseen in any other format. Literacy has changed but has also expanded. The Homers was rare; Gutenberg expanded communication to those that could afford it; and today the internet is free to use at any public library across the country (not to mention its continual global expansion). Progress and expansion are the key components to literacy today. How does the modern day school system utilize and serve this change in literacy? Innovative schools are using: experiencing over telling, demonstrating instead of lecturing and creating in place of memorizing. Those who continue to favor autogamous models in fear of not meeting State standards, should know that it is impossible to be new media literate without the basics of 20th century literate – the means at which this literacy is achieved, only needs to change.

Pinkard explains: “Media work builds on top of traditional literacy. And if a kid hasn't had art, they don't understand color. If they don't understand shapes and circles, then it's very hard for them to ... to say, "Oh, we want to do graphic design… You can't write a movie unless you create a script first. Oftentimes, great songs have to be written down. So, the final product we're seeing is often the video format, but so many traditional forms of literacies go on” (PBS Teachers). I argue that digital media is not the only form of literacy needed in the 21st century, but that creativity and creative thinking are forms of literacy as well. Under the work by Edwards and Csikszentmihalyi’s research, we can frame creativity as a discipline unto itself. In the new allogamous education system, which shifts the autogamous paradigm to a model that starts with a PBL and ends with innovative solutions, we can see creativity as being the language, the dynamic and the skill needed to succeed. In her article, Study: Many College Students Not Learning to Think Critically, Sara Rimer points to the dire need for such an institutional change. “An unprecedented study that followed several thousand undergraduates through four years of college found that large numbers didn't learn the critical thinking, complex reasoning and written communication skills that are widely assumed to be at the core of a college education” (Rimer). This staggering truth, supports the institutional change needed in the US education system. I identified, early on in this paper, that the education system is failing not because of those popular ideas which riddle our public discourse, but because we are falling behind our global competitors in scores and in creativity. We have to stop thinking of creativity as “artistry” and realize it is innovation, problem solving and decision making. “Forty-five percent of students made no significant improvement in their critical thinking, reasoning or writing skills during the first two years of college, according to the study. After four years, 36 percent showed no significant gains in these so-called "higher order" thinking skills” (Rimer).

The reason students are not succeeding in higher education, is because they are illiterate – they are creatively illiterate which means the foundation of their learning is not prepared for higher education. It is time to make the paradigm shift. It is time to overhaul the current educational model and transform. It is not enough to identify the problem, but schools need to be remodeled both in structure and mission. To truly improve teaching and learning, we need to examine what it means to learn in the 21st century.

references

1. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a Part of the U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences. Web. 26 June 2011. .

2. Sung-Jun, Chung. "In Ranking, U.S. Students Trail Global Leaders." USA Today 7 Dec. 2010, The Associated Press ed. Print.

3. Reich, Robert B. "Manufacturing Jobs Are Never Coming Back." Forbes Magazine 28 May 2009. www.forbes.com. Web. 10 June 2011.

4. Digital Media: New Learners of the 21st Century. Prod. Mobile Digital Arts in Association with Tpt National Productions. PBS Teachers, Feb 2011. Documentary.

5. Bronson, Po, and Ashley Merryman. "The Creativity Crisis." Newsweek 19 July 2010. Print.

6. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Flow the Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York [u.a.: Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2009. Print.

7. Savery, John R., and Thomas M. Duffy. "Problem Based Learning: An Instructional Model and Its Constructivist Framework." CRLT Technical Report No. 16-01 June (2001). Print. Center of Research and Technology Learning Indiana University

8. Edwards, Betty. Drawing on the Artist Within: a Guide to Innovation, Invention, Imagination, and Creativity. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986. Print.

9. Kelley, Tom, and Jonathan Littman. The Ten Faces of Innovation. London: Profile, 2006. Print.

10. Rimer, Sara. "Study: Many College Students Not Learning to Think Critically." The Hechinger Report January 18 (2011). Print. Teachers College, Columbia University

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Implementation of Creative Solutions

According to Kelley, the cross-pollinator uses “design-thinking” to create “seed-ideas” (Kelley, 71). These sorts of ideas are the “Ah-ha” moments which Edwards describes as being the culmination of the creative process. She explains that there are no words or expressions which explain what happens when the “light-bulb goes off” or those “eureka moments.” We sense these moments when a good idea sort of just hits someone and s/he says, “Ah ha!” Kelley thinks of these moments as seed ideas that need to be nurtured and helped to grow. Writers refer to a seed idea as an original thought or inspiration from which entire works like books, films and other works of art grow. Dr. Betty Edwards refers to this as the inspiration and insight heralding the creative process. Edwards says “creative solutions come more easily to a mind prepared with knowledge” (Edwards, 126).

When a person is saturated with research and resources, ideas sort of spring up on their own – Edwards calls this “looking around for information” (Edwards, 126). When students are surrounded with information, and simply follow pathways of interest, instead of hunting for the one right answer, they become saturated with knowledge. An analogy can be drawn between this and using the internet. The student looks up a topic or idea and finds a webpage with information. On this page, links take the student to different collections of information. Good sites will also point users to different websites and resources, allowing the research to be natural and flowing. As the student absorbs this information and tailors his/her experience s/he learns a vast multitude of facts and concepts.

As these ideas swell, the teacher should act as a guiding light – not interfering – but supporting the search and asking questions to help the student probe further. This is how the student will become saturated, and “ah ha!” moments will flourish. At first, students may need to be shown this process: the teacher might role-model how to seek saturation. It is also important that through this process answers and solutions “may change or even be transformed during the research” this is what leads to “the inspiration, which by definition “breathes life into” the pursuit of the solution” (Edwards, 127). The research will plant ideas in the student. The student will get ideas which will seed solutions. The student will exchange this seed idea with other students and the teacher, and vice versa.

The learning process becomes an organic give and take, as opposed to an autogamous lecture at. Seed ideas cross-pollinate between facilitators and learners, as opposed to facts being forced into students. When formed from cross-pollinated sources, the seed idea can blossom. However, the seed needs time and even then, these sorts of creative innovations can fizzle out. The important thing to remember about these ideas is that they are not complete. They are just the triggers for bigger moments (Kelley, 82). Kelley argues that seed ideas need the right environment to develop. A culture of creativity is enlivened by the cross-pollination of vastly different sources. Excitement ensues – sparking seed ideas within the cross-pollinators (Kelley, 83). Cross-pollination practices like these have become the hallmark of the most innovative businesses. It is no coincidence that we are using biological language to describe this process. Creativity is like growing a flower, and requires specific and delicate actions. Kelley suggests that seed ideas are out there, they just need to be tapped (Kelley, 84). Allogamous education is this sort of biological, organic institution and uses a PBL to encourage creative problem solving through cross-pollinating innovation. Implementing this sort of education will lead to an institutional change. School environments need to change in order to embrace allogamous practices. In order to develop this, Csikszentmihaly argues that we need to cross-pollinate dualities – the opposite pairs which complement one another.

In this model, Csikszentmihaly borrows from another biological concept: symbiosis – two organisms which mutually benefit from one another’s relationship. The classic example is that of clownfish cleaning a sea anemone of harmful bacteria while the anemone provides protection for the clownfish. Sources which provide a symbiosis, allow for deep innovation. Csikszentmihalyi argues that the deepest, richest meaning of flow is symbiosis. “Life-styles built on pleasure survive only in symbiosis with complex cultures based on hard work and enjoyment” (Csikszentmihalyi, 175). Flow allows for a “perception of both what can be accomplished ad what we as individuals are able to accomplish, until the two are in balance” (Csikszentmihalyi, 172). Studies done by Csikszentmihalyi show that some of the most creative people were raised in households of opposites: parents offered stability while encouraging uniqueness. Once the environment is structured to allow the students to explore their own dualities and cultivate their own ideas, the PBL can be introduced.

The PBL should immediately evoke wonder and inquiry. To continually encourage students to experience wonderment, teachers should follow these guidelines: First, students should, whenever, they experience a moment that is breath-taking or beautiful, write down their feelings and impressions. Students should try to keep track of these moments. This will help students recreate these feelings later, when they need them during problem-solving activities or critical thinking exercises. Second, students should identify moments when they should be experiencing awe and are not. There are many times when we see a sunset, notice an exchange between mother and child, or read a moving quote that we think we should feel something – but nothing happens. Students should immediately brainstorm on why. Why didn’t s/he feel moved? Was the moment genuine? Is the student in a bad mood? Is something blocking the student from feeling awe? Identifying these moments can also help students better understand the practice of wonderment. Third, students must pay attention! Students can only find awe, inspiration and wonder by being observant and looking for new, exciting experiences.

They should talk with others – ask them about exciting ideas or experiences, ask them about wonderful things. Students should continue to write down things that are important and things that are unimportant – this will help them develop the habit of wondering. Students should make tables of things that inspire them and things that do not – identifying them verbally and in written form will help train their eye for those experiences. Fourth, students should focus on the physical aspects of creativity in order to relax. Students need to clear their mind. They should choose a quiet place and sit in a comfortable manner. They should keep their back straight and partially close their eyes. They should breathe in through their nose and exhale through their mouth. By focusing on their breathing – they should listen to the air entering and leaving their bodies, concentrating on the feeling of air in their windpipes and lungs, and feeling their chest rise and fall. Creating a peacefulness is crucial to developing self-reflection and creativity. Fifth, students should focus on the mental aspects of creativity in order to seek out awe. While in a physical state of peace and tranquility students can open their mind.

Contemplation helps us build the habit of finding wonder. While their heart rate is low, their breathing will slow and their body will relax. In this mode, students can force their minds to think in abstractions. Students should try not to think about concrete objects but ideas like peace, happiness, bliss, infinity, nothingness etc. This will encourage creative growth and help students become more sensitive to their own metacognition. While in this state, saturation is important. When calm and open-minded, resources should be made available. The cross-pollination of ideas will flourish naturally, when the environment is prepared. Sixth, help students find inspiration and avoid the pitfalls of entertainment – they must actively seek things that inspire. Inspiration can come from a variety of resources and people, such as: The students should ravenously read focusing on stories and information that contain narratives. They should listen to music: we all have our playlists and favorite MP3s, but if you listen to an entire album from start to finish it’s like a novel – the music is a narrative. The students should seek out mentors: help them find people that inspire – choose people because they are interesting, informative and charismatic. Students should cut out the negativity: there are those people and things which bring us down – they should avoid them! The students should learn to enjoy art, food and movies/plays: instead of just viewing, they should participate! They should really look at a piece of art, really immerse themselves in a movie and really turn food into an experience. Seventh, student should seek out new places; it’s not enough just to let the masters be an inspiration, but the students should seek out creative atmospheres. They should go somewhere they have never been before; they should go somewhere that they would never thought they would enjoy or want to go to. They should try new restaurants and coffee shops or try a new theater, go to a play, attend a symphony or ballet, and really try to keep an open mind. Finally, the students need to allow for serendipity – serendipity is about allowing for a discovery when looking for something completely different.

Many artists refer to this as the “happy accident.” Here, the students are trying one thing and something else interrupts – they should allow this to happen. They should embrace and cherish these moments. Serendipity can only happen if the student has practiced the first seven steps. It is during serendipity that the student will cross-pollinate ideas, which will lead to creative practice. This, in turn, will lead to problem solving and decision making, allowing for innovative answers to the original PBL framework. By following these practices, teachers can help facilitate an atmosphere and culture of creativity. These sorts of activities replace the need for traditional curriculum. Allogamous education is self-directed. Students who are engaged, and encouraged to be creative, will develop their own learning experiences under the guidance of the instructor. This is how allogamous education starts with a PBL and grows into an experience.

references

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Interdisciplinary Education

As I have already said, Edwards describes the root of creativity and innovation as: 1) looking at problems in new, innovative ways and 2) focusing on connections that might not be apparent. The latter of these ideas is crucial to the institutional change needed in education. Problem-based learning strategies encourage a student-centered process. Instead of a predestined road planned by the instructor, the student chooses pathways of learning. In this system, the instructor serves as the travel guide and facilitator, pointing to ideas and facts, but allowing the student to discover them on his/her own. The problem-based learning system is inherently creative and relies on creative processing, while accommodating the need for flow. However, PBL is not complete. It is very open-ended and leaves a lot of questions: how does an instructor create a problem scenario? How does an instructor ensure the students maintain focus?

How does the instructor lead the students to the right curriculum standards? If we look back at the structures being employed at the five different schools showcased in Digital Media: New Learners of the 21st Century, we can see it is not necessarily about the outcome and more about the process. In a day in age when a student can simply type any question into his/her cell phone and receive the answer in seconds, is the memorization of facts that crucial of a skill? Instead, it is more important for the student to know where to look and what to look for. It is more important to know how to use resources then to simply know information. In order for the PBL and creative learning to be successful, the student must learn to be a new learner.

This means the student cannot simply undergo learning methods and practices used in 20th century classrooms. Instead, the new learner must become an innovator. Tom Kelley is the author of the best-seller, The Art of Innovation, and is the general manager of IDEO. As such, innovation has become his life’s calling. IDEO pulls from more than 400 interdisciplinary professionals, including designers, engineers and strategists. These professionals have grown a world-leading design firm which develops innovative products for such companies as Procter & Gamble, Pepsi-Cola, and Samsung. In his work, The Ten Faces of Innovation, Kelley explores the roles each of his people play in IDEO and how new ideas are formed. One of these roles that Kelley defines, is key to the success of not only innovative business but also to creative learning. When student emulate this role and the functions of this role, they become creative problem solvers and can exploit the deep richness of a PBL. This role is the Cross-Pollinator. According to Kelley, this type of innovator “draws associations and connections between seemingly unrelated ideas or concepts to break new ground. Armed with a wide set of interests, an avid curiosity, and an aptitude for learning and teaching, the Cross-Pollinator brings in big ideas from the outside world to enliven their organization. People in this role can often be identified by their open mindedness, diligent note-taking, tendency to think in metaphors, and ability to reap inspiration from constraints” (Kelley, 9).

In this paper, and my other writings, I rely on the biological term for cross-pollination: allogamy. This comes from the processes of cross-pollinating ideas which is the future fundamental in American education. Autogamy – the self-fertilization – is the teacher dictating to the student within a rigid curriculum, course and test-orientated learning model. Allogamy is fluid, embracing flow and being open to the combination of new ideas. For Kelley, the cross-pollination of ideas is about juxtaposing two opposing or totally unrelated concepts and developing clever innovations (Kelley, 68). What this means is that ideas mix from different sources and blend naturally, smoothly and consistently throughout. In nature, birds and bees are the agents of cross-pollination. It starts when a bee travels to a flower and gathers pollen. As the bee goes from flower to flower, it picks up parts of one plant and leaves this bit in another. Pollen from one flower mixes with the next, so on and so forth. By doing so, the bee helps the crop of flowers become heartier – the next generation of flowers will benefit from genetic diversity.

This allows the flowers to be better prepared to deal with environmental challenges as they continue to reproduce with greater variety. Allogamous education models work in the very same way. Students travel from source to source, picking up ideas and bits of research. As they combine this information, they become innovative and seek their own solutions. If given a strong PBL structure, the student can allogamously discover – pull from the sources and solve problems. So in allogamous education, PBL facilitators and creative learners are the agents of cross-pollinating ideas. Pulling from a source or a topic and then mixing it with another, makes that information richer.

A truly interdisciplinary approach requires this mixing and blending, but it must be done in such a way that the different sources conjoin to form a new material. It is not enough to simply place topics or ideas next to one another. This is co-disciplinary not interdisciplinary. If we want to serve the needs of 21st century learners we need to develop curriculums and lessons which seamlessly blend ideas from multitude of sources. This is how American education systems will compete with creativity-rich curriculums in Britain, the EU and China.