casting with I.D. students

I'm doing an independent study with two Industrial Design students this semester. Last semester Austin asked me last semester if I would do the independent study as a class and then Casey asked me over winter break if I would be her mentor. They are both working on their Senior capstone course so they have a show at the the end of the semester where they present their work and research. Casey is doing a lighting project and Austin is doing the electric motorcycle. I'm really enjoying the interactions with them both We have great conversations about design and process and I've found myself engaged in some philosophical conversations about what it means to be a maker of things. They are both hungry to learn things and last week asked for a casting demo. They also showed me their timeline for creating their work. It's interesting working with them as some parts of the teaching is similar to my art students and other parts are radically different. It's not the first time I've encountered this during my years of teaching, but I would generalize that the majority of the design students from industrial design and architecture have been more engaged with their own work than the art students as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I have had some amazing art students who were super engaged, but it's just not the case with the majority of art students I've taught. I walk away from these interactions and wonder what the difference is between the student groups that causes this phenomenon. 

This semester I do know... that teaching motorcycle design just happens to be of extreme interest to me. I feel like I am drawing from close to thirty years of obsessing about, reading, and looking at motorcycles so I find the conversations to be easy to facilitate. I went back and looked at some of the pictures of building my triumph chopper when I was in school and I feel like I've learned a lot since then and I've been telling the Austin how lucky he is to live in a time where so many things can be manufactured via a desktop/laptop and some low price CNC machines.

I wish I could do classes like this all the time. I'm not getting paid or getting any credit for teaching this course, but that's ok. It's just fun to know that I'm helping to facilitate something that Austin and Casey are into and I hope the experience helps them get a good job in the future.

history of kindergarten

Visual Play - Learning How to Learn

most likely to succeed

Several weeks ago, Jill and I went to see a documentary at the Milwaukee Film Fest called Most Likely to Succeed. If you are interested in education then you should see this film. I was able to meet with the producer, Ted Dintersmith, at the DCRL before the film. Chad and Caitlin joined us as well. We had a very interesting conversation with Ted and Kristie. I am currently researching a middle school - high school curriculum that focusses on project based learning as an alternative to AP college prep courses. 

I see it in my college students: who cares what facts you know; if you can't implement, problem solve, make decisions, create, and connect your hands with your head then what can you do beside spout facts? There is a revolution coming in education and the current teaching models and economic structure is going to be changing drastically. The makers and problem solvers are going to play a pivotal role in how our young people are shaped. Think of it as a return to those one room schools, and collaborative work spaces of industrial arts programs from long ago. A place where people build things and they don't wait for someone to hand them "knowledge on a platter". It will hopefully create a generation of self sufficient thinkers and doers. At the least maybe we'll be able to create a society where people take pride in their work. Maybe I'm just dreaming...

slöjd

This recent article via American Craft Council pretty much sums up my opinions on "why we should make" and on my role as a teacher. I'm not in the business of turning students into metalsmiths, artists, craftsmen, designers, and artisans... I'm in the business of opening students eyes to becoming well rounded individuals who appreciate each other and seek to become better people. Sounds simple doesn't it?

The article by Perry A Price is below.

Making as Morality
BY PERRY A. PRICE
NOVEMBER 17, 2014

Boys busy themselves during a manual training class in woodworking at the Franklin summer open-air school in Chicago in 1917. Photo: Burke & Atwell, Chicago 

“The finest fruit of education is character; and the more complete and symmetrical, the more perfectly balanced the education, the choicer the fruit.” ~Calvin M. Woodward, The Manual Training School, 1887

More than a century ago, craft education in the United States wasn’t meant only to make you a better potter or a more marketable cabinetmaker; it was also meant to make you a better person. Education reformers in the 19th century argued for the instruction of both the hand and the mind as an improvement on the teaching model of rote memorization and recitation. But unlike an apprenticeship, which prepares someone for a craft or trade, training children in handwork was intended to promote “the healthy growth and vigor of all the faculties” and the “general robustness of life and character,” according to Calvin M. Woodward, who wrote a book advocating the movement in the late 19th century. The legacy of these reforms can still be felt today, in both craft instruction and the moral value we ascribe to the work of the hand.

The manual training movement, as championed by Woodward, added instruction in drawing, woodworking, and metal forging to a curriculum that included Latin, mathematics, the sciences, and English composition. In 1880 Woodward opened the St. Louis Manual Training School and put into practice a three-year course of study for young men from 14 to 18 years old; it was followed soon by other manual training schools in Chicago and Toledo, Ohio. Similar to the philosophy of the manual training movement was the Swedish slöjd educational model – slöjd meaning “craft” or “hand skills” – advocated and expounded by Otto Salomon. Slöjd instructed children in the production of household goods, with an emphasis on wood, as part of their overall education; it was most notably promoted in the United States by Pauline Agassiz Shaw, who founded Boston’s North Bennet Street School in 1885.

Neither manual training nor slöjd intended to prepare students for a trade. In his writings on educational slöjd, Salomon argued that “its purpose is not to turn out carpenters, but to develop the mental, moral, and physical powers of children.” Woodward echoed that notion: “To make the production of articles the main object, and the learning of principles metal shop classes and home economics courses, which, until the late 20th century, were required of middle and high school students.

Shop class altered the course of craft education in the last century, as did the GI Bill that later sent thousands of students into academic art departments and helped lead to the establishment of craft programs across the country – which expanded opportunities to teach and learn. Generations of shop students were introduced to the work of the hand without the commitment to a trade. Whether or not their manual training made them better people, the exposure to making, for craftspeople from hobbyists to masters, helped drive energy and innovation in the field of craft to the present day.

Perry A. Price is the American Craft Council director of education.

art of teaching: wisdom of the hands

Wisdom of the Hands just had another stellar post on education. Go check it out and think about what we all could learn from this. I ripped the quote below from his post. It really makes me wonder where were headed in this country with education. Honestly I'm scared for my own children's future and am wondering how to continue in academia with the standardization coming our way just as it is in public schools; not to mention skill and craft being thrown out in favor of theory and the pursuit of "higher thought processes". I think people forget why were here and abandon their job in favor of chasing "power" and promoting themselves and their ego. When people's "research" gets out of balance with their "teaching" you have to question what their real motivation for being here is.

Anyway, enough ranting. Go read Wisdom of the Hands.

In his book The Teachers Hand-Book of Slöjd, Salomon wrote: 

"... it is by no means sufficient to be in possession of a certain amount of knowledge and dexterity in order to follow with success the important responsible calling of a teacher. Teaching is an art quite as difficult as any other, and for its practice certain qualifications are demanded which are far from being in the possession of all. The teacher must not only know what he has to communicate, but also how he ought to do it. Nor is this all; for if all instruction is in reality to be education, the teacher must rise from the instructor to the educator; he must not only understand how to impart knowledge and dexterity, but also how to impart both in such a manner that they make for the mental development of the pupil, especially with regard to moral training. But as we cannot give to others what we do not ourselves possess, it must necessarily follow that only he who is himself educated can have an educative influence over another. Therefore, exactly in proportion to the educative aim of the teacher does his personality enter as an important factor into the work of instruction. Now since Slöjd is to be regarded more as a means of education than a subject of instruction in the common acceptation of the term, the first demand of all made upon the teacher who undertakes it must be that he would feel himself to be an educator, and strive without ceasing to improve himself as such."

eiu video

Eastern Illinois University came to UWM and filmed a video about my time at EIU. It was nice of them to consider me for this opportunity.

education: gaining approval

Wisdom of Hands just wrote the post below. I can't really sum up what he wrote so I've quoted a large portion of his text below. I was just talking to one of the younger faculty here at UWM about this very thing. Over the years of  attending school, I have experienced many different teaching methods; some great and many not so great (to the point of the not so great methods being "damaging").  I have had a few colleagues over the years that felt that it is was necessary to intimidate, scare, or get students to "compete" with each other. I wish those individuals would take a note of two from the Wisdom of Hands reading below. I think the desire to please is the strongest teaching tool there is. Of course this also requires that the teacher be a true and honest advocate of what the student is doing/creating/learning. This takes genuine investment in what each students is working towards in their work, education, and life. It also requires that the teacher be invested in creating a positive community among all students in the classroom. I'm not sure when exactly I discovered this fact; I think I just stumbled upon on it when I was teaching in graduate school and I became so involved in what my students were creating. Teaching to achieve test results, grades, or build the legacy of a school, program, or teacher can create the ultimate damage. If the teacher is invested in the students learning by creating a community in the classroom, and by setting up learning experiences that build the students skills and gives them a sense of accomplishment, then "the rest" of the things will fall into place. Wisdom of Hands gets this and sites the readings to back it up. Good stuff...

"I have written before in the blog about maximizing the use of our best resources in the education of our children and one of the things inherent in the nature of the child is that of wanting to gain the approval of his or her family, and community. When my mother was a kindergarten teacher, one of the things she knew and used to be more effective as a teacher was that the children really wanted her approval and recognition. Children want to please. It is not because they are innately wired to be competitive, but because they are wired by genetics to be cooperative. Can you see that that is different from the assumption that too many make concerning the education of our children?

Lothar Schäfer, in his book Infinite Potential which takes the lessons of quantum physics and applies them to material and emotional human life noted the following: 

... the discovery, in physics, of a transcendent cosmic order is of the utmost significance: It offers a way out of a "robber's life" as Plato called it. In his book For a Civil Society, Hans-Peter Dürr describes how the awareness of quantum reality can help us build a kinder world and a society whose order is based on community, not adversity; on cooperation, not competition. "We are not 'stuck' with an innate viciously competitive nature," writes Bruce Lipton in his book The Biology of Belief. Instead, "survival of the most loving is the only ethic that will ensure not only a healthy personal life but also a healthy planet."

So how do we make schools so that they foster the most loving? You can see that our schools have gotten off track. Educational Sloyd recognized the child's inclination to gain the respect of his or her family, community and peers through the making of beautiful and useful things. That is an adult craftsman's inclination to make something beautiful for his or her own home. To know that this inclination arises from our own quantum nature may help us to understand the importance of encouraging our children to understand the relationship between  craftsmanship and community."

-  Doug Stowe; Wisdom of Hands

wisdom of the hands blog

I was just taking in my daily blog reading and checking out Shop Teacher Bob's blog and I decided to click on one of the links on his page. Shop Teacher Bob and I seem to see eye to eye on education and work ethic, not to mention he and I both seem to attract interesting projects, so his links were worth a little investigation. The link on his page led me to the Wisdom of the Hands blog. Within the first few posts, I found myself intrigued by the writings and citations. I've copied a sampling of his writing below, but make sure to go over and read his blog if this happens to strike a chord in you.

"One thing that all students seem to know about school is that it is artificial, that in some cases it has only tenuous connection to real life. It is claimed that education is preparation for real life. We know the statistics tell us that those with more education make more money in real life than those who do not. And yet we know when we question the efficiency of formal education that nearly 50% of teachers with masters degrees in education leave the field within 3-5 years. All kinds of students move on to fields other than those in which they invested heavily in time and money to enter...

So that is where my friends Elliot's and Charlie's new book Leaving to Learn comes in. We learn best when we can connect what we are learning to real things that we are actually doing in real life to benefit family and community.

Is that so hard to explain to explain to anyone? Dewey knew it and said it. Saloman and Cygnaeus and Pestalozzi explained it and demonstrated it and devised educational methods to make use of it. There is no better way to learn than by doing real things, and by being of real value to family and community. The great shame of modern education is that we squander our most valuable resource... that of being  purposefully engaged in real life. The strategic engagement of the hands in learning can fix all that."

-Doug Stowe

It doesn't get much better than that. I'm still exploring Doug's blog, but you might be interested in some of the things he writes about if his words above speak to you the way they do to me.