TED（Technology、Entertainment、Design的縮寫）大會的宗旨是“用思想的力量來改變世界”，它于1984年由理查德·溫曼和哈里·馬克思共同創(chuàng)辦。每年來自全球不同學科的頂尖學者與實踐者們會云集該大會，將自己的研究成果凝聚在一個18分鐘的演講里。演講內(nèi)容涵蓋科學、藝術、政治、建筑、音樂等。

Ken Robinson，全球知名創(chuàng)新與創(chuàng)造力專家，在開發(fā)創(chuàng)造性和創(chuàng)新能力方面是國際公認的領袖人物。本文節(jié)選自他在TED大會論壇上就創(chuàng)建一個呵護而非摧殘創(chuàng)造力的教育體系而發(fā)表的演講，語言深入淺出、發(fā)人深思。

We’ve all agreed on the really extraordinary capacity that children have， their capacities for innovation. And my 1)contention is， all kids have tremendous talents and we 2)squander them， pretty ruthlessly. So I want to talk about education and creativity. My contention is that creativity now is as important in education as literacy， and we should treat it with the same status.

I heard a great story recently， I love telling it， of a six-year-old girl who was in a drawing lesson. The teacher said usually this little girl hardly paid attention， but in this drawing lesson she did. The teacher was fascinated and she went over to her and said， “What are you drawing?” and the girl said， “I’m drawing a picture of God.” And the teacher said， “But nobody knows what God looks like.” And the girl said， “They will in a minute.”

Picasso once said that all children are born artists. The problem is remaining an artist as we grow up. I believe passionately that we don’t grow into creativity， we grow out of it. Or rather we get educated out of it. So why is this?

Every education system on earth has the same hierarchy of subjects—every one; it doesn’t matter where you go， you’d think it would be otherwise but it isn’t. At the top are mathematics

and languages， then the 3)humanities， and the bottom are the arts. Everywhere on earth. There isn’t an education system on the planet that teaches dance every day to children the way we teach them mathematics. Why? Why not? I think this is rather important. I think maths is very important but so is dance. Children dance all the time if they’re allowed to， we all do. We all have bodies， don’t we? Truthfully what happens is， as children grow up we start to educate them

progressively from the waist up. And then we focus on their heads. And slightly to one side.

If you were to visit education as an alien and say what’s it for， public education， I think you’d have to conclude (if you look at the output， who really succeeds by this， who does everything they should， who gets all the 4)brownie points， who are the winners) the whole purpose of public education throughout the world is to produce university professors. Isn’t it? They’re the people who come out on top. And I used to be one， so there. And I like university professors， but you know， we shouldn’t hold them up as the 5)high-water mark of all human achievement. They’re just a form of life， another form of life. But they’re rather curious and I say this out of affection for them， there’s something curious about them， not all of them but typically， they live in their heads， they live up there， and slightly to one side. They’re 6)disembodied. They look upon their bodies as a form of transport for their heads， don’t they?

In the next 30 years， according to 7)UNESCO， more people worldwide will be graduating through education than since the beginning of history. More people， and it’s the combination of all the things we’ve talked about—technology and its transformation effect on work， and demography and the huge explosion in population. Suddenly degrees aren’t worth anything. Isn’t that true? When I was a student， if you had a degree， you had a job. If you didn’t have a job it’s because you didn’t want one. And I didn’t want one， frankly. But now kids with degrees are often heading home to carry on playing video games， because you need an 8)MA where the previous job required a 9)BA， and now you need a 10)PhD for the other. It’s a process of academic inflation. And it indicates the whole structure of education is shifting beneath our feet. We need to 11)radically rethink our view of intelligence.

We know three things about intelligence: One， it’s diverse. We think about the world in all the ways we experience it. We think visually， we think in sound， we think 12)kinesthetically. We think in abstract terms， we think in movement.

Secondly， intelligence is dynamic. The brain isn’t divided into compartments. In fact， creativity， which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value， 13)more often than not comes about through the interaction of different 14)disciplinary ways of seeing things.

And the third thing about intelligence is， it’s distinct. I’m doing a new book at the moment called Epiphany which is based on a series of interviews with people about how they discovered their talent. I’m fascinated by how people got to be there. It’s really 15)prompted by a conversation I had with a wonderful woman who maybe most people have never heard of， Gillian Lynne. She’s a 16)choreographer. She did Cats， and Phantom of the Opera， she’s wonderful. Gillian and I had lunch one day and I said， “Gillian， how’d you get to be a dancer?” And she said it was interesting， when she was at school， she was really hopeless. And the school， in the 30s， wrote her parents and said， “We think Gillian has a 17)learning disorder.” She couldn’t concentrate， she was 18)fidgeting.

Anyway， she went to see a 19)specialist in an oak-paneled room with her mother and she sat on her hands for 20 minutes while this man talked to her mother about all the problems Gillian was having

at school. In the end， the doctor went and sat next to Gillian and said， “Gillian I’ve listened to all these things that your mother’s told me， and I need to speak to her privately. Wait here， we’ll be back， we won’t be very long，” and they went and left her.

But as they went out the room， he turned on the radio that was sitting on his desk， and when they got out the room， he said to her mother， “Just stand and watch her.” And the minute they left the room， she said， she was on her feet， moving to the music. And they watched for a few minutes and he turned to her mother and said， “Mrs. Lynne， Gillian isn’t sick; she’s a dancer. Take her to a dance school.” Somebody else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down.

I believe our only hope for the future is to adopt a new conception of human ecology， one in which we start to reconstitute our conception of the richness of human capacity. Our education system has mined our minds in the way that we 20)strip-mine the earth， for a particular commodity， and for the future， it won’t serve us.

We have to rethink the fundamental principles on which we’re educating our children. And our task is to educate their whole being， so they can face this future—by the way， we may not see this future， but they will. And our job is to help them make something of it.

我們一致認同，孩子擁有超凡的才能，或者說創(chuàng)新能力。我認為：每個孩子身上都蘊含著巨大的才能，卻被成人無情地磨滅了。因此，我想談談教育和創(chuàng)造力。我相信在當今這個時代，創(chuàng)造力在教育中的地位同讀寫能力一樣重要，理應得到同等程度的重視。

前些日子我聽到了一個很棒的故事，我喜歡逢人就講。有個6歲的小姑娘在上繪畫課。她的老師說，這個小姑娘上課一向不怎么專心，而這次卻不同。老師很好奇，于是走過去問小姑娘：“你在畫什么？”“我在畫上帝”，小姑娘答道。老師不解：“可是從來沒有人知道上帝長什么樣?。　毙」媚锎鸬溃骸暗任耶嫼盟麄兙椭懒??！?/p>

畢加索曾經(jīng)說過：每一個孩子都是天生的藝術家。問題在于我們長大之后能否繼續(xù)保持著藝術家的個性。我堅信，隨著年齡的增長，我們的創(chuàng)造力并非與日俱增，反而是與日俱減。甚至可以說，我們的創(chuàng)造力被教育扼殺了。怎么會這樣呢？

世界上所有的教育系統(tǒng)都有著相同的學科體系，無一例外。你會想肯定有某個地方會例外的吧，可是無論你走到哪都是這樣。位于頂端的是數(shù)學和語言，接著是人文學科，處在最底端的是藝術。全球普遍如此。在這顆星球上沒有一個教育系統(tǒng)會像上數(shù)學課一樣天天給孩子們上舞蹈課。為什么？為什么不這樣？我覺得這非常重要。我知道數(shù)學很重要，但是舞蹈也同樣重要啊。如果獲得允許，孩子們可以整天跳舞，我們也是。我們都有身體可以舞動起來，不是嗎？現(xiàn)實中的真相是：隨著孩子們在長大，大人們開始逐步地訓練他們，首先是腰部以上的部位，然后是集中訓練他們的大腦，并且漸漸地有點偏向大腦一側。

假設你是一位外星來客，來考察地球上的教育，想知道公共教育究竟有何作用。在得出結論之前，我建議你先看看公共教育的產(chǎn)物，看看究竟是誰通過教育獲得成功？是誰中規(guī)中矩地完成了使命？是誰得到了所有的贊許？又是誰成了最后的贏家？我想你會由此得出結論：全球公共教育的目的完全在于培養(yǎng)大學教授，不是嗎？他們是教育體制最高端的產(chǎn)物。我過去也曾是其中一員，嗯，我喜歡大學教授們。不過，你知道，我們不應該將他們推崇為全人類最大的成就。他們所代表的僅僅是一種生活方式，另一種不同的生活方式。不過大學教授們還是蠻古怪的，我是出于對他們的喜愛才這么說的，雖然不是所有大學教授都這樣，但他們的確有些奇特，典型表現(xiàn)為：他們生活在自己的思維里，住在自己的大腦中，而且還略偏向于大腦一側。他們崇尚精神世界，軀體在他們看來不過是思維的承載工具，不是嗎？

根據(jù)聯(lián)合國教科文組織的統(tǒng)計預測，未來三十年內(nèi)全球的教育系統(tǒng)畢業(yè)生人數(shù)將達到歷史之最。高科技及其對工作性質(zhì)的改變影響，人口以及人口大爆炸，這些我們提及過的因素加在一起將導致畢業(yè)生越來越多。學歷突然縮水了。難道不是嗎？我上學那會兒，只要你有一紙文憑，你就有飯碗。如果你沒有工作，那是因為你不想要。坦白說，我當時就不想要（作者的自嘲）。可現(xiàn)在有學歷的畢業(yè)生們卻常常待業(yè)在家打游戲，因為工作崗位的學歷要求都升級了，過去需要學士的崗位現(xiàn)在開始要碩士了，過去要碩士的崗位現(xiàn)在要博士了。這是個“學歷膨脹”的過程。這一過程說明了整個教育體系正在我們眼下經(jīng)歷著重大轉變。我們需要從根本上重新審視自己的智能觀。

我們知道智能有三大特點：第一，智能具有多元性。我們運用各種體驗方式來認知世界，比如視覺、聽覺、觸覺、抽象化、動態(tài)化等等。第二，智能具有交互性。大腦并不是由相互隔絕的單元組成的。事實上，創(chuàng)造活動往往就誕生于各學科看待事物的不同方式所產(chǎn)生的交互作用，在我看來，創(chuàng)造就是“有價值的原創(chuàng)思想的產(chǎn)生過程”。

第三，智能具有獨特性。目前我正在寫一本新書，叫做《悟》，是根據(jù)一系列人物訪談寫成的，主題圍繞“你是如何發(fā)現(xiàn)自己才能的？”。我對人們的自我發(fā)現(xiàn)很感興趣。事實上，寫這本書的念頭源自我和一位出色的女士之間的對話，也許這里大部分人沒有聽說過她，她叫吉莉安·林恩，是一名舞蹈指導，曾經(jīng)給歌舞劇《貓》、《歌劇魅影》編排舞蹈，非常棒的一位女士！有一天我和吉莉安一起吃午餐，我問她：“吉莉安，你當初是怎么走上跳舞這條路的？”她告訴我，其中的故事還蠻有趣的。當年她在學校時，大家都說她沒得救了。那還是在上世紀三十年代，學校寫信給她父母說“我們認為吉莉安有學習障礙”。那時候的她無法集中注意力，總是坐立不安。

后來她媽媽就帶著她去看?？?。那是一間鋪著橡木地板的診室。吉莉安把雙手壓在屁股下，耐住性子坐了20分鐘，這段時間里醫(yī)生和她媽媽談論了她在學校里出現(xiàn)的種種問題。最后，醫(yī)生走過來坐在吉莉安身邊對她說：“吉莉安，你媽媽和我講了你的所有事情，現(xiàn)在我要和她私下談談。在這兒等著，我們很快就回來?！庇谑撬麄兙土粝滤鋈チ?。

就在他們離開房間的時候，醫(yī)生擰開了他桌上的收音機。走出房間后，醫(yī)生對吉莉安的媽媽說道：“就在這兒觀察一下她”。吉莉安說，他們剛離開房間她就站了起來，隨著音樂移動步子。在外面觀察了幾分鐘后，那位醫(yī)生轉向她媽媽說道：“林恩夫人，吉莉安并沒有生病，她是個天生的舞蹈家。送她去舞蹈學校吧?！保ǜ兄x當年那位醫(yī)生，）換了別人或許會對吉莉安進行藥物治療，并告訴她要平靜下來。

我認為我們未來唯一的希望在于創(chuàng)設一種新的人文生態(tài)構想，唯有在此構想上才可重新認識到人類能力之豐富。如同獲得商品的欲望驅使人類掠采礦物資源，現(xiàn)行的教育體制也正以此道壓榨著我們的智力，而這種壓榨并不能造福人類社會。

我們必須重新思考我們教育孩子的基本原則。我們的任務是教育所有的孩子，以便他們能夠面對未來——順便提一下，這個未來或許我們是看不見了，但是他們可以，我們的工作就是幫助他們戰(zhàn)勝未來的挑戰(zhàn)。