Teaching Innovation in Traditional Education

Back to my previous question, “What is a good education?”

In my last post, we looked at what many of those in business and political circles think is a good education–learning to innovate. We saw that some of these people think that this innovation will come only from long hours of studying math and science, and I showed that this is silly thinking.

 

So, I wonder, can we teach kids to be innovative? Is that possible in traditional education? We need to look at brain“innovation” in another way to get at this.

 

Continuing, let’s look at Mark Zuckerberg. We see that he learned computer programming from his father, then was tutored, and basically seems to have taught himself the rest. Obviously, traditional education did not harm or help him. No answer here.

 

What about Steve Jobs? If we do a little bit of research, we can see that he had an even more untraditional start. He was taught by his mother and father when young, then went to lectures at Hewlett Packard after school. He later started college then quit, but watched classes for no credit, that he himself chose. He worked at some computer companies, and took a journey to India in search of an Indian wise man, and experimented with LSD. Very untraditional.

 

Traditional education cannot teach kids to innovate. In fact, if either of these two innovators had followed the path of traditional education, I do not think they would have achieved a fraction of what they did.

 

What does this mean for education? This means that to see what a good education is, we need to look beyond the box of traditional education.