A traditional school curriculum is comprised primarily of topics that teach cognitive skills. Topics like reading comprehension, vocabulary, algebra and biology. These topics are comprised of "blocks" of knowledge such as: "2 + 2", "what is a nucleus", "what caused the US great depression", "what is a verb".
These knowledge blocks can be stacked into a 9 month curriculum with the same standardized answer being taught to all students. Knowledge of each block can be categorized as "pass" or "fail". Students can be ranked by the amount of pass knowledge blocks they've obtained. Obtain enough, move on to the next grade.
A teacher can teach such curriculum with minimum creativity and improvisation. Teach the block, assess knowledge of it, move on to the next. It's a system that allows thousands of teachers to teach millions of students across 50 states. An assembly line model that scales and "works".
A growing movement is to determine how to make noncognitive skills (aka soft/life/character skills) more prevalent in school curriculums. Technological trends and research indicate that a developed set of noncognitive skills will better equip students for 21st century jobs. For it's likely that the jobs that exist in 10 years do not exist today (e.g. the job "podcast booking agent" did not exist 10 years ago). Technology innovation will continue to disrupt industries and shift the landscape of jobs. Likely at an even faster pace than today. Students need to be ready to adapt.
Skills such as grit, empathy and gratitude can have a profound impact on a student entering the job market. I believe a student that displays grit and gratitude can figure out how to succeed in the job market, even in a role that may not be directly aligned to the cognitive skills they learned in school.
As an example, I graduated with a Bachelors of Science in Finance in 2009. One of the worst majors to have after the great financial collapse in 2008. My first job was as Operations Director for a startup online retailer. I was responsible for managing the warehouse and all aspects of logistics. I had no experience in logistics. I did not study it in school. And yet the noncognitive skills I developed throughout school (grit, empathy, confidence) empowered me to obtain and succeed in this role. I knew how to learn, and I had confidence that I could figure it out.
Today few curriculum allocate time for students to acquire knowledge blocks of noncognitive skills. How does a teacher teach topics such as "leadership", "grit" and "curiosity". What is the "2+2" equivalent knowledge block within grit? Often these topics are viewed as byproducts of a traditional curriculum or the responsibility of parents. A student that takes AP Calculus will develop grit as a byproduct of working hard and passing the AP exam. A parent will or should instill gratitude in their child.
And yet unlike all students learning "2+2" in school, not all students will have the opportunity to foster skills like grit and gratitude. A big challenge is establishing a baseline. What does it mean to pass or fail the topic of grit? What is the baseline? How much do we standardize what about grit is taught, versus giving teachers the flexibility to improvise? Is it a problem if what about grit is taught at one school is vastly different from another? Or is the biggest value just to make students aware that these are innate skills they can channel and develop? Just exposing them to these skills may spark their own interest in developing them?
Currently we leave it to chance that students will develop noncognitive skills while at school. Luck is the driving factor that places one student in a classroom with a passionate teacher focused on teaching these skills, versus a classroom where they are never mentioned. In order for all students to be able to develop noncognitive skills we must standardize a set of skills that all students should develop, establish a baseline for measuring them, and make them part of all school curriculums.
The subway in New York City is more than a utility. It's a microcosm of society. An environment where scenarios can symbolize abstract social topics.
So there I was.
Inside a crowded subway train. I stood in front of the doors, ready to exit at the next stop. As the train approached the station I felt someone push in front of me. It was a little girl determined to exit the train first. Her guardian stood by with a disapproving look but said nothing.
The scenario is no big deal. I had no need to exit first and easily took a step back to make room for the girl. And yet what bothered me was that neither I nor the guardian said anything. We let it happen - depriving her of a basic lesson in courtesy.
What if I had said something to the girl? Something like: it's rude to cut in front of people, you should be patient and wait your turn to exit the train.
Through one interpretation it's a favor. I offered basic courtesy advice that she may utilize in the future. I surfaced something she may not be aware of.
Yet through another interpretation I have ventured into "mansplaining" territory. Through my tone and word choice I just "mansplained" to this girl how she should behave. What if the girl actually needed to exit the train first and my condescending advice didn't help her at all?
The latter interpretation is becoming more common in our "politically correct" society. So even a simple comment on common courtesy can become misconstrued. The attention shifts from the comment to the intent.
The mansplaining interpretation makes my feedback personal. It implies that I said this to the girl because I'm a man, she's a girl, and I know better.
Yet what about the fact that she is a child and I am an adult?
Yet what about the fact that if she was a he, I would have said the same exact words in the same tone?
And this is why I have a problem with the word mansplaining. We already have a word for the scenario it describes: patronizing. What additional insight does the word mansplaining bring? Instead of value it brings harm and divide.
If you interpreted my comment to the girl as patronizing, that label is associated with that scenario. Gender stereotypes are not introduced. You acknowledge my intention (to teach a lesson in courtesy) but you disagree with my approach.
To interpret my comment as mansplaining, you now see me as someone that is reaffirming negative gender stereotypes. You don't recognize my intention (to teach a lesson in courtesy) and you fault me for trying because of my gender. You view me as patronizing and discriminatory.
And what can I say to convince you otherwise?
If you call me out in front of a group as mansplaining, that label is attached to me. People now evaluate all of my statements with the mansplaining lens.
I'm guilty without a trial.
And yet if you called me patronizing, the label attaches to the scenario. I was patronizing in that moment. The label doesn't persist. So future scenarios will be interpreted on a case by case basis.
A term like mansplaining is persistent. It attaches to people. It becomes a dark cloud that follows us, tainting everything we do.
So was I right to keep my mouth shut on the subway? I protected myself from being misconstrued. And yet I also deprived the child of a basic lesson in courtesy.
How do you listen to music? Do you focus on the beat? The vocals? The lyrics? Or is it just background noise?
Several years ago my music teacher introduced me to an exercise that changed the way I hear music. The exercise is simple, but it's benefits are vast.
As I've reflected on it I've realized it's a practical and fun way to develop certain non-cognitive skills (aka emotional intelligence). Emotional intelligence is a "hot" topic at the moment (see Unselfie book, VR and Empathy, Emotional Intelligence skills) as we are starting to recognize and quantify it's vital importance in life success. And yet emotional intelligence topics are alarmingly absent from a traditional school curriculum, and if you're an adult, you're on your own to figure it out.
The challenge with non-cognitive skills is there isn't a formula for teaching them. How do you teach someone creativity? Taste? Focus? I've found that certain exercises can be used to hone non-cognitive skills. This music listening exercise is one of them.
I classify non-cognitive skills into two categories: practical and influential. You develop the practical skills by doing the exercise. For example through this music exercise, you'll develop skills like listening and focus. Influential skills are indirectly influenced by this exercise. You don't practice these skills, but doing the exercise influences their development.
Take creativity as an example. Creativity isn't something you train. It's a result of your experiences and influences. Doing an exercise that allows you to recognize and appreciate someone else's creativity influences your own creativity "muscle". By experiencing an influential skill you see what's possible. Your mindset is altered and your collective experience allows you to build on it and apply it in your work.
This listening exercise will impact different influential skills for different people. For me, this exercise influences my appreciation for nuance, taste, and creativity. And the cool thing is I've been able to apply these skills to many other facets of my life.
So what is the magic exercise? The idea is simple. Pick any song, grab some headphones and play the song. While the song is playing focus on one instrument. For example if you're listening to a Beatles song, start by focusing and listening to only the drums for the entire song. Hear nothing else, just the drums. Then replay the song and listen to only the guitar. Then the bass guitar, and then the vocals.
The idea is every time you listen to the song, you focus on a single instrument. Analyze the tone. The part being played. For the repeating section of a song (verse 1 versus verse 2, chorus 1 versus chorus 2) does the musician play the part exactly the same? Or do they embellish it? You may find musicians will add slight embellishments throughout the song to keep things interesting.
As you're doing this you may find it to be meditative. You'll need to focus in on specific parts and block out external noise. Focus on the instrument. If you generally focus on vocals and lyrics when listening to music, this will be a very rewarding exercise.
Here is an example of things I notice when listening to a song in this manner. I've found well-produced pop songs tend to work really well for this exercise as they are engineered to perfection. One of my favorites is Savage Garden's "To The Moon And Back". Here are some things that jumped out to me while focusing in on the different instruments.
On the 3 pre-choruses, notice how the vocal harmony only occurs in the 3rd one (3:27). It was not part of the first (1:08) or second (2:18). Why did the producer decide only to do a harmony on the 3rd one? One idea is that the first and third pre-choruses share the same lyrics. But the harmony in the 3rd one keeps it different from the first. So now each pre-chorus is unique. You'll find the great musicians are all about adding slight variety to keep things interesting.
The lead vocal remains at dead center of the mix throughout the song. This is nicely juxtaposed by the second vocal just before the chorus. Notice how the second vocal is audible in both the Left and Right channels and sounds much wider. It's mixed to give a nice contrast and lead you the listener into the chorus.
Check out the keyboard lead that kicks of at 0:14. Engrain that sci-fi melody in your mind. Now jump to 2:18. Can you hear that same melody being played in the background? It's slightly buried behind the vocals, drums, and guitars, but it's there. It was introduced at the beginning of the song and is layered throughout the pre-choruses to maintain the song's cohesiveness.
The bass guitar is the ideal instrument to focus in on in this song. It's not very prominent, and you have to really focus to hone in on it and block everything else. I bet you may have not even noticed it before, but it does a lot for the song! The bass is most prominent when it's first introduced at 0:31. Notice the cool syncopated rhythm it's playing. The bass goes silent at 0:42. It's back at 1:00 but it doesn't do much, just plays whole notes. But it's there to build the listener to the chorus, and once the chorus hits, the bass starts grooving! Check it out at 1:22.
The guitars have a ton going on. The primary thing to notice is you have the lead guitar in the Left channel, and the rhythm guitar in the Right channel. You can hear this at 2:07 and 2:17. Notice how in the Right channel you have a pulsating "clean" guitar rhythm (very U2-esque), while in the Left channel you hear the electric lead guitar play a few lone notes. It's never too much, just a little a bit to keep things interesting. Why did the producer decide to "sprinkle" those little guitar leads in those sections? Nuance, taste, flavor.
Those are some examples of things that jumped out at me. There is much more to discover in this song, and in your favorite songs. I hope you'll find this exercise interesting and helpful.
Cognition is the knowledge we obtain when our brain processes our environment. Cognitive skills are defined as the brain-based skills we need to function in the world. Skills like language and reading. And the ability to think, focus, remember, and make decisions. Grade school's specialty is to develop student's cognitive skills. But should more time be spent developing non-cognitive skills?
Non-cognitive skills are difficult to identify because they are difficult to measure and quantify. They are believed to underpin our success at school, work, or life in general. The meaning of success is objective (for example financial vs. emotional success). However you measure success, research is showing that non-cognitive skills will get you on the road to success. Examples of non-cognitive skills includes: creativity, critical thinking, motivation, perseverance, self-control, work ethic, resilience, and coping.
In sports, non-cognitive skills are often referred to as the "intangibles" (aka intangible skills). So in basketball, your cognitive skills are your ability to dribble the ball, shoot, and make passes. The intangibles are how well you perform under pressure, how you react to taunting from opposing players, and your motivation to improve. Often times it's the intangibles that separate a good player, from a great player.
- Product vision
Notice that all of these skills are non-cognitive. If non-cognitive skills are the keys to success in school/sports/life, why do K-12 schools focus on cognitive skills?
One reason is that cognitive skills are measurable. Schools need to measure students in order to evaluate student and teacher performance. We can standardize measuring how well Sally can read. But standardizing how relentless or creative she is is much more difficult.
This leads to some big questions. Should K-12 curriculums be 50% cognitive and 50% non-cognitive skills based? How do schools measure the effectiveness of teaching non-cognitive skills? Is school the right environment for teaching non-cognitive skills? Can these skills be taught? How do you teach a child resilience?
Non-cognitive skills cannot be taught the same way cognitive skills are taught. I can give you a workbook that will teach you how to add and subtract fractions. I can't give you a workbook to teach you resilience. Non-cognitive skills need to be instilled. And that requires a different approach to lecture/workbook based instruction.
High Tech High, a charter school in San Diego California, approaches the challenge through the statement: "it's your decision". Empowering kids to think for themselves and make decisions is a way for them to develop non-cognitive skills at school. Kids need an environment where they can dream, build, question, fail, and explore. It gives the dual benefit of making school more interesting, and conducive to honing non-cognitive skills.
Standardizing a non-cognitive skill based curriculum would be a big blocker to getting mass adoption. Knowing which skills to teach would also be a challenge. We develop non-cognitive skills in different ways and from various sources. Whether from hobbies, mentors, parents, friends, values, school, or other sources, we amass our skills as a byproduct of our environment.
These skills are valued highly across the world. The jobs of the future will depend on workers that have these skills. And therefore we may be moving toward a future where learning non-cognitive skills becomes a large component of a child's environment.