How to Prevent Another Leonardo da Vinci
May 23rd, 2007 Posted in education, intelligence, opinion, science, thoughtEDIT: This post has been chosen as a finalist in the 2007 Edublog Awards! Thank you to all its readers! 
Earlier today, a friend and former teacher of mine made a post (private on another blog, and therefore unlinkable) to his students about the seven ideas featured in the book “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”, which reminded me about a post I had wanted to make for a long time. (Quick explanation of the above, said former teacher is currently teaching a special unit on Leonardo da Vinci to some grade eights at my former middle school and using blogs as a learning device – very cool!)
The things mentioned in that book are ubiquitous in literature about characteristics that separate creative giants from the rest of us (there is indeed such literature, and a fair amount of it), give or take a few points. These seven things plus others – which I will go into greater detail with later – are the attitudes that contribute if not lead into genius… and they’re so very ignored by schools and society in general!
This is how we kill each trait that may yield another Da Vinci:
1. Curiosita (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Intense and insatiable curiosity; constantly learning due to a desire to ask and answer questions
The Murder: In schools, for the most part, students learn only what the teacher decides they will learn. Student questions will often go unanswered if they lead away from the material (go off-topic), or if there are time constraints on what must be learned that leave no time for these questions in class.
2. Dimostrazione (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Constant testing of knowledge through experience and persistence; accepting of and learning from mistakes
The Murder: Except in the sciences (and sometimes even then), knowledge is simply given and expected to be absorbed rather than questioned and tested. On tests and labs, wrong answers cost the students their grades, therefore it becomes unacceptable to make mistakes. Mistakes are less about learning experiences and more about losing marks. Questioning societal norms is a very negative thing, even if they don’t make sense.
3. Sensazione (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Fully noticing and observing things with all senses, but especially sight (seeing things that others miss, seeing the details)
The Murder: Except in the sciences and a handful of other subjects, students are usually taught passively through the use of only one sense, listening, or maybe sight (diagrams, photos, etc.). Classrooms and assignments may be incredibly unstimulating to most (or all) senses.
4. Sfumato (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? An acceptance of ambiguity, paradox, and uncertainty out of a realization that life is not black and white (also an art technique using shadow famous for its use in da Vinci’s paintings)
The Murder: A student’s answer is either right or wrong, usually with no middle ground tolerated. Standardized tests are mostly multiple choice, and in the case of an ambiguous result, students must choose the best possible answer, not a possible answer, even though more than one is really correct. Life and its problems have more than one right answer; multiple choice questions have only one best answer.
5. Arte/Scienza (From “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Interest in both the arts and sciences and interdisciplinary work that combines them
The Murder: High school courses are most often strictly defined as an “Art” or a “Science”, and they never mingle; interdisciplinary courses at this level are rare. In college, an undergraduate usually receives a either Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science, though there is more flexibility here than in high school. Scientists and artists have their own professional domains which almost never overlap.
6. Corporalita (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Keeping one’s body in good shape; attending to nutrition, fitness, and general physical well-being
The Murder: Physical Education programs – especially in the United States – are being severely cut, and obesity has been described as an epidemic. Junk food is readily available and sometimes may be the only option in a high school cafeteria. Fast food is cheaper and more convenient than healthier food ($4 for an entire meal at McDonald’s or $4 for a single, small-sized fruit bowl?).
7. Connessione (from “How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci”)
What? Acceptance and appreciation for the interconnectedness of everything in life; interdisciplinary approaches and thinking
The Murder: Facts and concepts are taught in specific classes that are independent of each other, and students are moved from individual class to individual class without knowledge of how the two might be connected. Boundaries like that between art and science are rarely crossed or their connectedness even explained. Facts and ideas might be taught with no explanation of the links between them (ie, learning individual details and facts but not the big picture).
8. Drive, energy, intense focus (from various studies on creative genius)
What? Energy and desire to focus intensely on one’s work and interests (often the same thing); merging of work and play
The Murder: Each class is allotted a certain period of time that is inflexible. Despite the student’s interest in a particular class, they must conform to this schedule. Many schools have required curriculum that force a student to give up desirable or necessary electives for core classes they may not need. Students must go to school and all perform well academically, despite their individual talents and aspirations. Musicians and artists especially must break focus on their real interests to attend required academic classes, and may be too drained to work on their own by the end of the school day.
9. Confidence, willingness to take risks, and tolerance of failure (from various studies on creative genius)
What? Willing to continue on with creative work despite rejection; ability to sell oneself and one’s talents
The Murder: Many creative people must face multiple rejections until their idea is sold, and they must accept that if their idea or creative contribution is too radical, society may not yet be ready for it (many artists and writers have only been recognized after their deaths). However, as mentioned above, mistakes and failure are not tolerated in schools and this learned attitude may carry on throughout life. Instead of learning the value of taking risks, students are taught to fear any mistakes that might result. Students are often “babied” – all team mates get a ribbon or a trophy for “participation” – and do not gain the real-world skills they need to sell themselves.
10. Independence, introversion (from various studies on creative genius)
What? Willingness to spend lots of time alone working and honing skills; acceptance of possible isolation
The Murder: The social climate of high school severely discourages spending time alone, especially when spent “working”, and loners are isolated and considered antisocial and friendless. Refusing to conform and “sticking out from the crowd” is highly discouraged by peers and teachers. Creative individuals may have to accept that if the world is not ready for their ideas, they may find few people who understand and support them.
This is how we kill the spirits of our up-and-coming da Vincis. These ten things are the most commonly cited characteristics of highly creative people… and they’re heavily discouraged in the early years by the education system and social climate of adolescence. This is why we won’t see another da Vinci for a long, long time – or why, if we do, he/she would not have come from the system we currently have in place. At every turn schools and society are set on pushing back the most creative individuals. Their common traits are not welcomed nor encouraged, and certainly not nurtured. This must not persist, because I think the world is long overdue for another da Vinci-type right now.
Related posts:
- Recommendations for public education I’ve been engaging in a lot of criticism lately, I...
- …WTF? (+ politics) I usually try to save my links until Saturday, but...
- Seen it, Heard it… Done the Homework I’m once again pushing aside the topics I want to...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
48 Responses to “How to Prevent Another Leonardo da Vinci”
By David Truss on May 29, 2007
“Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!” -LEONARDO DA VINCI
This post should be a mandatory read for every student teacher before they graduate.
Your perspective is enlightening, and disheartening. But it also holds promise as we begin to use web2.0 tools to engage students in new, more engaging ways, and teachers find new ways to collaborate and learn from each other. (Assessment is still an issue we really, really need to figure out.)
You are, and always will be, a lifelong learner who engages in a quest to meaningfully exploring your world, (dare I say like da Vinci)… I guess one would argue despite your education rather than because of it… so there is hope, and there is potential for us to find our next da Vinci… perhaps SHE is within our midst today:-)
By Nick Kearney on Jun 1, 2007
Do you really think Web 2.0 will solve it? It is not about tools and it isnt about students doing projects or creating their own content. That already happens, within the organisations Kris is talking about. It isnt about the tools, it is about attitudes, curriculums, who defines what is relevant, and who certifies that etc. Boil it down, hard, to the residue and you hit politics. But that is not surprising, education is political, always.
By David Truss on Jun 2, 2007
Nick, it isn’t the web2.0 tools per se, but the way these tools can help “teachers find new ways to collaborate and learn from each other.” It is the collaboration between teachers, learning from each other, publicly sharing their experiences (online), and engaging in conversations such as this (as a result of a student’s blog), that will make things better… in my humble opinion.
These tools help us get beyond the politics and get to the point of doing what is best for our students.
By joanthemaid on Jun 2, 2007
I was feeling very guilty and ashamed when I read your post because today is my birthday and non of my few friends are in town. Spending one’s birthday on one’s own…
But if it means that I might become a genius, hurray!
By joanthemaid on Jun 2, 2007
To David Truss…
Yes, indeed, despite education.It is not, I think, that education makes you dumber but the fact that it begins and end, that it is compulsory, leads people to stop any activity that would hae links with learning, out of school. Once people learned as a hobby more than something they had to do to get a job, and by making things compulsory, we made them universal but the elite is pulled back to the rests’s level.
By Skip Via on Jun 2, 2007
Well-stated, and excellent food for thought. Schools are under tremendous pressure to show gains on standardized tests, and the result is often the squelching of creativity, initiative, and curiosity. While much of this can be traced to No Child Left Behind and other “reform o’ the day” movements foisted on education through political channels, I sometimes wonder what school would really look like in the absence of these pressures. Would teachers teach any differently? What other models of good pedagogy do they have? Are our schools of education properly preparing teachers to teach creatively, or are they (or should I say “we,” as I am an education faculty member) simply perpetuating the traditional models?
By Carolyn Foote on Jun 7, 2007
Wow. Your blog is going on my “must read” list and I’m going to share this post with teachers at my campus.
I think you have done a great service for educators everywhere.
I do have hope that somewhere many of us do get it. And I hope that web 2.0 will help drive this needed change in schools, just as it has started doing in business and elsewhere.
By David Truss on Jun 10, 2007
You have provided me with a lot of food for thought recently. Here is a link where I hope to return the favour…
I just meandered my way to this ‘older’ post and thought I would share it here.
Stephen Downes: Things You Really Need to Learn
http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2006/08/things-you-really-need-to-learn.html
Enjoy:-)
By Dave MacLean on Jun 11, 2007
Kris,
Congratulations! Yet another example of your insight stirring thinking. My challenge for you is to work to the solution(s). How do we get from the constraints of our current predicament as educators to empowering students like yourself to learn the way they you want to and to have opportunity to be exposed to learning and thinking? Another brain wrestle is that public education is, in its idealistic form, meant to be a great equalizer. Is this a valid goal for our education system or should we concentrate our efforts to those who are intrinsically motivated? Is there a standardized curriculum that all children of BC should know? It is important to understand that I am not asking these questions of you as a rebuttal but with intentions of hearing your ideas. I look forward to your responses.
By Doug on Sep 16, 2007
Kris,
I found it. Interesting commentary with some worthwhile thoughts. I certainly agree many students would benefit if the education system taught and reinforced the traits you specify.
However, with regards to the next Da Vinci…
1) If a person really had the nature and skills of the prototypical “Da Vinci”, it would seem unlikely they would be stopped by the current education system (…although perhaps impeded and probably frustrated by it). I would think that Da Vinci probably had minimal “formal” education until he went to apprentice at age 14. It’s hard to stop true genius. I guess I think that no particular education system will make or break a “Da Vinci”. A more critical problem is limited access to information, which, for many, has improved significantly in the last decade thanks to the internet.
2) I suspect the world may not, in fact, ever see somebody as set apart from everybody else as Da Vinci was (…although who knows). The reason is that the accumulated knowledge of humanity is growing exponentially, and to make a significant impact in any area now requires tremendously specialized skill, typically acquired over years of study in a focussed area, working with colleagues that are just as brilliant. The connectedness of our world enables information to be shared at a prodigious rate, but consistent information sharing encourages rapid, incremental advancements rather than fundamental leaps (although admittedly not always). The net result is that we end up with more brilliant people making more advances all the time (look at the significant changes that are happening in our understanding of physics, mathematics, chemistry every day), but no one really stands as obviously apart. So, I suspect quite a few geniuses are actually coming out of the school systems – it is just that the stuff they are working on is very specialized and not really known by the general public (for some reason, they prefer to focus on Paris Hilton)
3) I think if we were really serious about encouraging brilliance, it would probably mean having a tiered education system where those with serious potential are selected early (which means coming up with a good identification mechanism), we spend more to educate them (very best educators trained to deal with geniuses and with access to all resources needed), we use the principles you mention above, and we enable them to move as quickly as they can (which means they aren’t in regular classrooms with all the other students). It seems likely that educating brilliant people requires different methods than educating the masses, and anytime you give more to someone, you take away from someone else. It seems unlikely that our society would have the political will to undertake something like this (…although I guess we already do it in some limited way with IB programs)
…Just some thoughts.
By Suz on Sep 26, 2007
I was led to this post by a comment on my blog, when I posted the question ‘Is Education Killing Creativity?’. How very relevant….and disturbing. I will direct my colleagues to come and read as well – it definately time for some major changes to be made to education, but while standardised testing hold such importance, I fear the needed changes will be slow to come.
By jim delisle on Oct 15, 2007
I’ve always found that the people who have the best bead on what it means to be gifted are those who live with the label. They are also the people in the best position to know what goes right–and wrong–in schools when it comes to educating people with high intelligence. The posting about preventing another Leonardo da Vinci is a classic case of one student who understands that the worst school crime of all is the killing of spirit, and this is done too often with gifted students. Thank you for reminding us about the benefits of listening to the students we teach. Ignoring their valid calls for something more than the “same old, same old” is a peril we must avoid if our gifted students are to find school fulfilling, not stifling.
By Brian Kuhn on Nov 26, 2007
Very interesting perspective. Although I agree with your thinking, I think we all would agree that student still rise to their potential even though our education system can have a tendancy to stifle creativity and out-of-the-box thinking. It raises an interesting question… will highly gifted (genius) people succeed regardless of their circumstances and / or educational path?
On a web2.0 note, I think one of the greatest benefits to students with the 21st century tools is voice. Everyone gets a voice in this new world era we have entered. So all the geniuses out there can participate, communicate, and contribute freely despite their context in an education system.
Very interesting times we live in…
By Casdok on Nov 26, 2007
Interesting!
By Walter on Nov 26, 2007
I’m linking this to my blog…. Nice work!
By Paul Hillsdon on Nov 26, 2007
Brilliant post. I’ve subscribed and look forward to more great content. I’ve thought a lot about education in the past few years, after dropping out as a 15 year old (now turning 18 soon), and I was at a stand still for the longest time. I’ve examined the system, and broken it all down over and over. However, it was difficult for my subconcious to determine a logical way of explaining my solutions. This post has struck a cord with my mind, and, I believe, enabled me to find my logics once again.
For the record, I strongly believe in the process of unschooling, however it is completely unsustainable in today’s world and job market to be without a high school diploma.
Also, this “discussion” about School 2.0: it won’t change much. Sure, information will be spread, but a lot of it comes down to politics. Until the politics change, school will remain very much the same as it’s been for the past two centuries.
By Antonio Viva on Nov 27, 2007
I am currently teaching this as a trimester elective at my school for Upper School students. They receive an arts credit for taking the course. Information can be found here. I am using the Michael Gelb book and this is a new course which was offered for the first time last spring. I will be updating regularly. Please consider visiting.
http://antonioviva.com/thinking-like-leonardo
By Idetrorce on Dec 15, 2007
very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce
By KendraK on Jan 16, 2008
I believe that this blog is the best blog I have ever read. (I have only just started blogging since October maybe September). I love how she touches on EVERY problem that we as humans and citizens of the U.S. face everyday: the lack of education in our children; the “beauty” of everywhere we look we find constant obesity.
By paradox on Jan 25, 2008
I am not the normal visitor here, but a wanderer who got linked by the inimitable Natasha at Pacific Views. Politics is my arena, not art or education.
I have asked this question for a very long time, but from a different perspective; it’s not the mistakes in the system I worry about, it’s making sure the system works at all and is open/equal to everyone.
We invest .50% of what we should in our children; what should have been making another da Vinci a total certainty is being squandered on a new class of aircraft carrier, the Gerald Ford Class, at a cool 20-25$ billion each. Nimitz class cost 6$ billion.
How many geniuses and breathtaking accomplishments are we missign with that god damn ship? Makes me want to cry.
By ???????????? ????????? 2009 ??????? ??????? on Sep 16, 2009
Yes interesting look at the world.