When culture limits design: iTunifying our thoughts and ideas

Graphic by Irfan Darian (2011)

This thought occur to me when I was preparing my learning materials for my upcoming trip in a few months time. And the irony that the most innovative nation in the world comes from a country that is not really cultured, in an Asian sort of way, did not surprised me too.

But what I would really like to uncover over here is the thought that perhaps, the culture that we were brought up in, is indeed a key limiting element of how we adopt design thinking. Could this be so? Alternatively, could the absence of such be a good way for a race or a country to be more adaptable to design thinking?

I've always wondered where are the scientific discoveries of my own race, when the other 2 major races over here are historically brimmed with technological achievements throughout their civilization. The Chinese have their thousands of years of inventions, artistic pieces, technological achievements as well as their architectural marvels. Similarly the Indians too have their rich history to thank for for showcasing their inventions and other worldly marvels. But I do find these technological marvels lacking, or sadly, almost non-existent, in my community's history. Except for perhaps a culture of artistic and related works, the other aspects are seemingly not mentioned, or perhaps if they do, are not showcased in the way that it should be showcased...publicly!

Which somehow just made me come to a conclusion. Could the culture of being humble, showing respect to even undeserving leaders, being deceitful, and other racial stereotypical characteristics be the limiter towards developing our very own design thinking? And could this be then THE thing that limits our own growth as a society, or is slowing us down? I'm not condoning that we turn our backs to our culture totally, but I thought some things would just have to be more....in tune with the times. Could we really afford to be talking about how much is an appropriate 'gift' (hantaran) to a bride, when the whole point of having that has already been clarified in a religious context. I think more than just about looking at the cultural details, could we even begin to start to question some of these practices? Perhaps not in a confrontational sort of way, but rational, logical and even with an amount of big picture/deep thinking thrown in for good measure.

In a more non-communal context, could the culture then in itself be something that we can tweak further? These culture of being accepting, of showing affirmation of successful failures, and of celebrating every single pound of success even more! And to add further, building an eco-system of sorts that would allow for such thinking to sprout and flourish? Could we then iTunify the entire process and experience? So it is no longer about having a silo system of buying, storing and playing music, but the whole experience of buying, storing, playing, seeking comments, ranking, having customised playlists and downloading music and media. If we could just iTunify these whole thinking into such a singular system, where instead of music, the commodity is now thoughts and ideas, wouldn't we then be able to move the community and society ahead? Perhaps...?

The Future of Travel...

This animated clip just reminded me of The Jetsons, a futuristic family-oriented cartoon shown when I was much younger. I thought this is a cool idea, and one thing that stood out in the short clip is the idea of customised experiences. Although no longer a remote possibility, I thought if such an endeavour could be further customised to schooling and learning experiences, where each child can and will learn the things that they enjoy doing, then perhaps, schooling in itself would no longer be just about the development of the child's intellect, but more on the development (and education) of the child.

Enjoy the clip nonetheless...

Design? by Design Says Hello

An interesting peek into the design industry in Singapore. And yes, comparatively we are still a relatively young industry over here. It would definitely take time to make the culture here to be more design-conscious, but at least this is a start to something more...I hope!

Design for Education...Teaching Design for Change

I just love the idea of the 6 Design Directives, and looking at how design is slanted to be WITH the people, and not FOR the people.

The irony of collaboration

Picture taken from: http://www.mwdadvisors.com/pix/

With 'collaborative learning' being one of the new buzzword in education, it won't take long for this habit of including it, in one form or another, into our daily teaching routine be the norm. But is it really an effective strategy, let alone a useful tool for teaching and learning.

For me, I do find that collaborative learning does have its intended flaws, but as a concept and an idea,  it is still basically sound. But how then should one be managing collaborative learning, to ensure that the intended outcomes are met, while taking care and managing some of its deficiencies.

I, for one, have this idea that for it to work effectively, the classroom facilitator, or teacher, would need to understand the work or lessons being covered, and the main intent of having collaboration. I would think that collaboration would and could only happen if, and only if, there is truly an exchange of enriching and almost mutually exclusive content amongst the students. Or in another way, it would also work when there is an explicit intent to level up the expertise of the non-experts with the experts. I guess to draw a similarity here, one wouldn't buy an exact copy of the pair of shoes that one is having, unless of course there are some non-rational explanations for it. Maybe the same designs with a different colour, or shades of colour or with some minor enhancements...perhaps...but definitely not of the same exact design, colour, size, etc....well you know what I mean.

And to add to that argument, collaborative learning would also work, if and only if, there is this process, or perhaps criteria, that ensures that each and every one of them has almost the same level of importance towards this collaborative effort. I mean there would perhaps be no point, and in fact would be the natural human behaviour, if you suddenly find one of your students suddenly losing interest when he or she realises that his/her expertise is no longer valued, or put up to an equal footing, compared with the rest. This is perhaps why sometimes, collaborative endeavours fail. When the degree of importance is not clearly demarcated and deemed to be almost equally important, what we would have is a failure in our efforts, no matter how successful the final product is.

Which begs the question, if collaborative learning is so difficult to manage, why do we want to have it in the first place? Well, it is like asking a shoe-lover, why does he or she needs 10 pairs of shoes when he/she only has one pair of feet/legs to go with them. It is not so much of that pair of legs that is of the concern here, but the 10 pairs of shoes that are in the wardrobe (that we should worry). The leg would most probably remain quite a constant, with some variations in sizes and perhaps, colour and other minor features. More importantly is the colour of the shoes. As time goes by, and style and preferences changes, the 10 pairs might no longer suffice. One would need a lot more to cater to different situations, events and contexts. Which begs the question on the need for the development of niche areas of expertise and content knowledge!

So can we afford not to try collaborative learning? I don't think so. But more importantly, how then can we ensure that this practice is indeed successful. I for one, have no easy answer. I do have my fair share of lessons where things could, and did go either way. But that is the whole point isn't it. Knowing what doesn't work, and what works, is education for the teacher too, right? So to put the analogy of the shoes above to the question, can we then only survive, in tomorrow's day and age, with only a single pair of shoes?