Becomming better.
Page 2 of 2: 12
Member
Posts: 374
Joined: 25 mar 2012
No, i do not agree that institutions are killing creativity. My point is that each individual is responsible for his own learning. And that individualized focused practice is a vital part of that learning. Furthermore he must design and modify his own practice routine since he is the only person who can do that. He is also responsible for structuring the material in such a way that it fits his previous knowledge or at least ask for help with that.
Blaming institutions and teachers is a very lame excuse for not doing that. And don't forget, you are the customer, that means you decide where to spend your time and money (I'm still talking adult learning here, youngsters are a different story). Just attending to some programme or institution and going through the motions has never helped anyone. And today there is less and less need for that since the (external) availability has increased dramatically.
Blaming institutions and teachers is a very lame excuse for not doing that. And don't forget, you are the customer, that means you decide where to spend your time and money (I'm still talking adult learning here, youngsters are a different story). Just attending to some programme or institution and going through the motions has never helped anyone. And today there is less and less need for that since the (external) availability has increased dramatically.
SUPPORTER
Posts: 533
Joined: 25 nov 2013
Once again Nilton I'm very sorry that you have taken this personally. Again the inquiry is from a young musician who is unsure of the best course. Your telling him that he should responsible for making the right decision when he's asking because he is unsure? Your observations about older adult students may have relevance in those situations. What you're saying is not relevant for this inquiry and certainly has no relevance when once again faced with the absolute statistic of ZERO known successful PhDs in the arts or music. How can anyone argue against that kind of statistic. Lets stay in the real world.
Harley Benton TE-52 NA Vintage Series
Electric Guitar
159 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
Member
Posts: 374
Joined: 25 mar 2012
No, i am not taking this personally. I am really trying to help because the only thing that matters here is exactly what im trying to communicate:
The only person that can teach you anything is you. (period)
And in order to do that you have to understand how your own learning works. And again the only person who can do that is you. This since we all have different previous knowledge and different structures in our brains. If you do not accept this fact most of the knowledge you acquire will lack the structural depth that is necessary in order to use it creatively. There could be (and are) situations where a teacher or a lecture or a book etc happens to resonate. But these occasions are purely coincidental despite the fact that most teachers put a lot of effort in to make that happen. Watch Lara Boyds video and you get a very plausible explanation for this.
But once you have accepted the idea of brain plasticity, and the responsibility that follows from it, teachers, institutions, books, videos, peers and colleagues become useful tools for your own learning. But there is no single best tool or best method. The most useful thing you can do is to reflect each tool and how it affect the process for you. Once that is done you can optimize the use of that tool.
The only person that can teach you anything is you. (period)
And in order to do that you have to understand how your own learning works. And again the only person who can do that is you. This since we all have different previous knowledge and different structures in our brains. If you do not accept this fact most of the knowledge you acquire will lack the structural depth that is necessary in order to use it creatively. There could be (and are) situations where a teacher or a lecture or a book etc happens to resonate. But these occasions are purely coincidental despite the fact that most teachers put a lot of effort in to make that happen. Watch Lara Boyds video and you get a very plausible explanation for this.
But once you have accepted the idea of brain plasticity, and the responsibility that follows from it, teachers, institutions, books, videos, peers and colleagues become useful tools for your own learning. But there is no single best tool or best method. The most useful thing you can do is to reflect each tool and how it affect the process for you. Once that is done you can optimize the use of that tool.
SUPPORTER
Posts: 533
Joined: 25 nov 2013
So, it seems that (according to Nilton) all of those students who got PhDs should blame themselves. Society and the institutions that trained them had nothing to do with it. Every teenager should instinctively know how to process information and (somehow) overcome a system that has a 100% record of failure. Bizarre
Nilton, I get what you're saying but there is a huge leap between what those teenagers NOW know, have experienced, and the systems that they encounter. The fact that brain plasticity can be utilized doesn't equal that the whole world currently knows how to do this or that those teaching institutions will somehow miraculously incorporate this. It will not change their syllabus, or those institutions requirements for uniform testing in order to pass and get your piece of paper. What students will experience will be the same, and the result will also be the same. For it to be otherwise requires the student to seek and practice other learning outside what they are trained for at those institutions. Otherwise when and where does the practice that broadens and keeps their creativity open happen?
Although we are (in theory) able to change our brains this usually comes about through effort and/or a change of circumstance that requires a change. The average child grows up and "imprints" on the cultural and educational information they have as teens and young adults. Unless they deliberately push to continue to learn, this becomes their compass for life. This is most easily seen in musical taste where older adults mostly relate to the music they listened to in their teens and early 20s (musicians are different as we tend to keep pushing our ears to hear and adapt).
Can everyone change? Yes, of course! Will they change? No, not many. Will institutions suddenly develop systems that keep creative minds open? I don't think so, but hopefully it will eventually happen.
So, once again we come to what advice to give a student TODAY: The student must know when to quit the system. If somehow (miraculously) the system changes and starts to pump out creative successful people then that would be good. It's not happening today, and we can only give REAL advice and information based on today and the REAL world.
Nilton, I get what you're saying but there is a huge leap between what those teenagers NOW know, have experienced, and the systems that they encounter. The fact that brain plasticity can be utilized doesn't equal that the whole world currently knows how to do this or that those teaching institutions will somehow miraculously incorporate this. It will not change their syllabus, or those institutions requirements for uniform testing in order to pass and get your piece of paper. What students will experience will be the same, and the result will also be the same. For it to be otherwise requires the student to seek and practice other learning outside what they are trained for at those institutions. Otherwise when and where does the practice that broadens and keeps their creativity open happen?
Although we are (in theory) able to change our brains this usually comes about through effort and/or a change of circumstance that requires a change. The average child grows up and "imprints" on the cultural and educational information they have as teens and young adults. Unless they deliberately push to continue to learn, this becomes their compass for life. This is most easily seen in musical taste where older adults mostly relate to the music they listened to in their teens and early 20s (musicians are different as we tend to keep pushing our ears to hear and adapt).
Can everyone change? Yes, of course! Will they change? No, not many. Will institutions suddenly develop systems that keep creative minds open? I don't think so, but hopefully it will eventually happen.
So, once again we come to what advice to give a student TODAY: The student must know when to quit the system. If somehow (miraculously) the system changes and starts to pump out creative successful people then that would be good. It's not happening today, and we can only give REAL advice and information based on today and the REAL world.
Member
Posts: 374
Joined: 25 mar 2012
Wanting to develop is a necessary prerequisite, so is accepting that development requires time and effort and that you have to cope with the feeling that induces. Why are we having this discussion otherwise? But we are in the middle of a paradigm shift here. Previously, if you attended some institution and did put some effort in, you were expected to succeed. If you didn't you where perceived untalented, lazy, insubordinate or politically suspect. Recent findings about brain plasticity has rendered that untrue.
What is true today is that you have to match your learning and practising strategies to your own current state. And you must do that yourself since you are the only one that has sufficient information about your state. Yes, there are personality tests and biomarkers but they are neither widely accessible nor desirable except for special cases.
And you are right, institutions haven't coped with this (yet). My point is that it doesn't matter. We are seeing young adults in all fields and all parts of the world realising this new paradigm and taking advantage of it and thereby surpassing institutions. But we're also seeing equally many using this new knowledge from within institutions and gradually changing them from within. That also means that institutions will change their function from being a filter that individuals have to pass in order to qualify (and earn the bragging rights that come with putting some letters beside your name and join the society of mutual admiration) to being a base for interpersonal networking. Something that is equally important compared to knowledge and proficiency.
As for creativity i think it is often confused with imagination or fantasy just as knowledge is confused with memorization. In my model there are three important factors that boost creativity.
1)Deep, well structured knowledge
2)Lateral thinking
3)The ability to recognize, capture and nurture impulses that are both promising and viable. I have experienced these having a certain quality to them that is hard describe. Like faint and clear at the same time. The interesting thing is that this quality seems to be the same regardless of the subject itself.
These three factors interact which could make the actual mechanisms hard to grasp. But nevertheless can they be improved by practice.
What is true today is that you have to match your learning and practising strategies to your own current state. And you must do that yourself since you are the only one that has sufficient information about your state. Yes, there are personality tests and biomarkers but they are neither widely accessible nor desirable except for special cases.
And you are right, institutions haven't coped with this (yet). My point is that it doesn't matter. We are seeing young adults in all fields and all parts of the world realising this new paradigm and taking advantage of it and thereby surpassing institutions. But we're also seeing equally many using this new knowledge from within institutions and gradually changing them from within. That also means that institutions will change their function from being a filter that individuals have to pass in order to qualify (and earn the bragging rights that come with putting some letters beside your name and join the society of mutual admiration) to being a base for interpersonal networking. Something that is equally important compared to knowledge and proficiency.
As for creativity i think it is often confused with imagination or fantasy just as knowledge is confused with memorization. In my model there are three important factors that boost creativity.
1)Deep, well structured knowledge
2)Lateral thinking
3)The ability to recognize, capture and nurture impulses that are both promising and viable. I have experienced these having a certain quality to them that is hard describe. Like faint and clear at the same time. The interesting thing is that this quality seems to be the same regardless of the subject itself.
These three factors interact which could make the actual mechanisms hard to grasp. But nevertheless can they be improved by practice.
Page 2 of 2: 12
wikiloops online jamsessions are brought to you with friendly
support by:
Wikiloops is good for your creativity. Where else do you get to jam with many excellent musicians, world-wide, from the comfort of your studio?
Gatorblue