Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

自動翻譯
  • Reviewer: Queenie Lee

    審稿人:李綺麗

  • Host: Please welcome to the TEDxSonomaCounty stage,

    主持人:大家好,歡迎來到TEDxSonomaCounty的舞臺。歡迎來到TEDxSonomaCounty的舞臺。

  • Todd Rose.

    託德-羅斯

  • (Applause)

    (掌聲)

  • Todd Rose: It's 1952, and the Air Force has a problem.

    託德-羅斯這是1952年,和空軍有一個問題。

  • They've got good pilots flying better planes,

    他們'有優秀的飛行員駕駛更好的飛機。

  • but they're getting worse results.

    但他們'的結果卻越來越差。

  • And they don't know why.

    而他們不知道為什麼。

  • For a while, they blamed the pilots.

    有一段時間,他們責怪飛行員。

  • They even blamed the technology.

    他們甚至責備技術。

  • They eventually got around to blaming the flight instructors.

    他們最終還是把責任推給了飛行教官。

  • But it turned out that the problem was actually with the cockpit.

    但結果發現,問題其實是出在駕駛艙上。

  • Let me explain.

    讓我解釋一下。

  • Imagine you're a fighter pilot.

    想象一下,你'是一名戰鬥機飛行員。

  • You're operating a machine

    你在操作一臺機器

  • that in some cases can travel faster than the speed of sound,

    在某些情況下可以比音速更快。

  • and where issues between success and failure,

    以及成功與失敗之間的問題所在。

  • sometimes life and death,

    有時是生與死。

  • can be measured in split seconds.

    可以以秒為組織、部門測量。

  • If you're a fighter pilot,

    如果你'是一名戰鬥機飛行員。

  • you know that your performance

    你知道你的業績

  • depends fundamentally on the fit between you and your cockpit.

    根本上取決於你和你的駕駛艙之間的配合。

  • Because after all, what good is the best technology in the world,

    因為畢竟,世界上最好的技術有什麼用。

  • if you can't reach the critical instruments

    如果你不能到達關鍵的儀器。

  • when you need them the most?

    當你最需要他們的時候?

  • But this presents a challenge for the Air Force.

    但這給空軍帶來了挑戰。

  • Because obviously, pilots are not the same size.

    因為很明顯,飛行員的體型是不一樣的。

  • So, the issue is:

    所以,問題是。

  • how do you design one cockpit that can fit the most individuals?

    如何設計一個能容納最多人的駕駛艙?

  • For a long time,

    很長一段時間。

  • it was assumed that you could do this by designing for the average pilot.

    假設你可以通過為普通飛行員設計來做到這一點。

  • That almost seems intuitively right.

    這幾乎是直覺上看來是對的。

  • If you design something that's fit for the average sized person,

    如果你設計的東西,適合一般身材的人。

  • wouldn't it fit most people?

    不會'適合大多數人嗎?

  • It seems right but it's actually wrong.

    看起來是對的,但其實是錯的'。

  • And 60 years ago,

    而60年前。

  • an Air Force researcher, Gilbert Daniels,

    一位空軍研究員,吉爾伯特-丹尼爾斯。

  • proved to the world just how wrong this really is,

    向世界證明了這是多麼的錯誤。

  • and what it was costing us.

    以及它讓我們付出了什麼代價。

  • Here's how he did it.

    這裡'他是如何做到的。

  • He studied over 4,000 pilots

    他研究了4000多名飛行員

  • and he measured them on ten dimensions of size,

    他以十個尺寸的維度來測量它們。

  • and he asked a very simple question:

    他問了一個很簡單的問題。

  • how many of these pilots are average on all ten dimensions?

    這些飛行員中,有多少人在十個維度上都是平均水平?

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • The assumption was that most of them would be.

    假設他們中的大多數人都會這樣做。

  • Do you know how many really were?

    你知道到底有多少人嗎?

  • Zero.

    零。

  • Gilbert Daniels proved

    吉爾伯特-丹尼爾斯證明

  • there was no such thing as an average pilot.

    有沒有這樣的事情 作為一個普通的飛行員。

  • Instead, what he found

    相反,他發現

  • was that every single pilot had what we call a jagged size profile.

    是每一個飛行員都有我們所說的鋸齒狀的尺寸輪廓。

  • Right?

    對吧?

  • It means no one is the same on every dimension.

    這意味著沒有人在每個維度上都是一樣的。

  • And this makes sense.

    而這是有道理的。

  • Just because you're the tallest person

    就因為你是最高的人嗎?

  • doesn't mean you're the heaviest,

    並不意味著你'是最重的。

  • doesn't mean you have the broadest shoulders,

    並不意味著你有最寬闊的肩膀。

  • or the longest torso.

    或最長的軀幹。

  • But this is tricky because if every pilot has a jagged size profile

    但這是很棘手的,因為如果每個飛行員都有一個鋸齒狀的尺寸輪廓。

  • and you design a cockpit on average,

    而你平均設計一個駕駛艙。

  • you've literally designed it for nobody.

    你從字面上看是為誰設計的。

  • So, the Air Force realized they had a problem.

    所以,空軍意識到他們有一個問題。

  • And their response was bold.

    而他們的反應也很大膽。

  • They banned the average.

    他們禁止平均。

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • Meaning that moving forward,

    意味著,前進。

  • they refused to buy fighter jets

    他們拒絕購買戰鬥機

  • where the cockpit was designed for an average sized pilot.

    其中,駕駛艙是為一般大小的飛行員設計的。

  • And instead, they demanded that the companies who built these planes

    相反,他們要求製造這些飛機的公司... ...

  • designed them to the edges of dimensions of size.

    將它們設計到尺寸的邊緣。

  • Meaning that rather than design for, say, the average height,

    意思是說,而不是針對比如說平均身高來設計。

  • they wanted a cockpit that could accommodate

    他們想要一個可以容納的駕駛艙

  • as close to the shortest pilot and the tallest pilot

    一高一低

  • as the technology would allow.

    在技術允許的情況下。

  • Now, the companies that made these planes, as you could imagine,

    現在,製造這些飛機的公司,你可以想象。

  • weren't happy, right?

    不高興,對吧?

  • They argued, and lobbied, and they said,

    他們爭論著,遊說著,他們說。

  • it's going to be impossible or at least impossibly expensive

    這將是不可能的,或者至少是不可能的昂貴。

  • to build a flexible cockpit.

    來打造一個靈活的駕駛艙。

  • But once they realized that the Air Force wasn't going to budge,

    但一旦他們意識到空軍不打算讓步。

  • suddenly, it was possible.

    忽然間,就有了可能。

  • And it turned out it wasn't that expensive.

    而事實證明,它並不'貴。

  • And in fact, they made great strides

    而事實上,他們取得了巨大的進步

  • leveraging simple solutions

    利用簡單的解決方案

  • that we all take for granted in our everyday life,

    我們在日常生活中習以為常的。

  • like adjustable seats.

    比如可調式座椅。

  • And as a result,

    結果。

  • the Air Force not only

    空軍不僅

  • improved the performance of the pilots that they already had,

    提高了他們已有的飛行員的性能。

  • but they dramatically expanded their talent pool.

    但他們急劇擴大了人才庫。

  • And today, we have the most diverse pool of fighter pilots ever.

    而今天,我們擁有有史以來最多樣化的戰鬥機飛行員隊伍。

  • But here's the thing,

    但這裡'的事情。

  • many of our top pilots would have never fit in a cockpit designed on average.

    我們的許多頂尖飛行員根本不可能適應平均設計的駕駛艙。

  • So, most of us have never sat

    所以,我們大多數人都沒有坐過

  • in the cockpit of a $150 million fighter jet, right?

    在1.5億美元的戰鬥機的駕駛艙裡,對嗎?

  • But we've all sat in the classroom.

    但我們'都坐在教室裡。

  • And I would argue

    我想說的是

  • (Laghter)

    (Laghter)

  • (Applause)

    (掌聲)

  • I would argue that these are the cockpits of our economy,

    我認為,這些都是我們經濟的駕駛艙。

  • and I think we all know that we have some problems.

    我想大家都知道,我們有一些問題。

  • We're spending more money than ever before,

    我們'花的錢比以前更多。

  • but we're getting worse results.

    但我們'的結果越來越差。

  • Whether we're talking about declining test scores in math and science

    無論是我們'說的是數學和科學方面的考試成績的下降

  • or our dropout crisis.

    或我們的輟學危機。

  • You probably know,

    你可能知道。

  • that we have over 1.2 million dropouts

    我們有超過120萬名學生輟學。

  • every single year in high school in this country.

    在這個國家的高中,每一年。

  • What you may not know

    你可能不知道

  • is that at least 4% of those dropouts are known to be intellectually gifted.

    是這些輟學者中至少有4%的人被認為是有智力天賦的。

  • That means we're losing over 50,000 of our brightest minds every single year.

    這意味著我們'每年都會失去超過5萬名最聰明的人才。

  • So, we know we have a problem.

    所以,我們知道我們有一個問題。

  • But do we know why?

    但我們知道為什麼嗎?

  • So far, we've been content to blame the students.

    到目前為止,我們'已經滿足於責備學生。

  • We blame the teachers.

    我們責怪老師。

  • We even blame the parents.

    我們甚至責怪父母。

  • But here's the thing ...

    但是,這裡的事情......。

  • I think back to the Air Force example,

    我想起了空軍的例子。

  • and I can't help but wonder:

    我不禁疑惑。

  • how much of this problem is just bad design?

    這個問題有多少是設計不好?

  • Here's what I mean.

    這裡'是我的意思。

  • Even though we have one of the most diverse countries

    儘管我們是最多樣化的國家之一。

  • in the history of the world,

    在世界歷史上。

  • and even though it's the 21st century,

    而且即使是21世紀。

  • we still design our learning environments,

    我們還是要設計我們的學習環境。

  • like textbooks, for the average student.

    像教科書一樣,對於普通學生來說。

  • No kidding.

    別開玩笑了

  • We call it age-appropriate.

    我們稱之為適齡。

  • And we think it's good enough.

    而我們認為它'已經足夠好了。

  • But of course, it's not.

    但當然,它'不是。

  • I mean, think about it.

    我的意思是,想想看。

  • What does it even mean to design for an average student?

    對於一個普通學生來說,設計到底意味著什麼?

  • Because a student is not one-dimensional,

    因為學生不是單一的。

  • like struggling to gifted.

    像掙扎在天賦的。

  • Students vary on many dimensions of learning,

    學生在學習的多個維度上存在差異。

  • just like they vary on dimensions of size.

    就像它們的尺寸大小不同一樣。

  • Here are a few obvious ones.

    這裡有幾個明顯的。

  • And just like size,

    而且就像大小一樣。

  • each student, every single one of them,

    每一個學生,他們中的每一個人。

  • has a jagged learning profile.

    具有鋸齒狀的學習特徵。

  • Meaning, they have strengths,

    意思是說,他們有實力。

  • they're average at some things,

    他們'在某些事情上是平均的。

  • and they have weaknesses.

    而他們也有弱點。

  • We all do.

    我們都是如此。

  • Even geniuses have weaknesses.

    即使是天才也有弱點。

  • But ...

    但是...

  • if the fighter pilot example has taught us anything,

    如果說戰鬥機飛行員的例子給我們帶來了什麼教訓,

  • it's this.

    是這樣的。

  • If you design those learning environments on average,

    如果你平均設計這些學習環境。

  • odds are you've designed them for nobody.

    賠率是你'設計他們為任何人。

  • So, no wonder we have a problem.

    所以,難怪我們有問題。

  • We've created learning environments that because they are designed on average,

    我們'創造了學習環境,因為它們是平均設計的。

  • cannot possibly do what we expected them to do,

    不可能做到我們所期望的那樣。

  • which is to nurture individual potential.

    也就是培養個人的潛能。

  • But think about what that could really costs us.

    但是,想想看,這到底會讓我們付出什麼代價。

  • Because every single student has a jagged learning profile,

    因為每個學生的學習情況都是參差不齊的。

  • it means that the average hurts everyone,

    這意味著,平均數傷害了所有人。

  • even our best and brightest.

    即使是我們最好的和最聰明的。

  • Even for them,

    即使對他們來說。

  • designing on average destroys talent in at least two ways.

    設計平均至少在兩個方面摧毀了人才。

  • First, it makes your talent a liability.

    首先,它使你的人才成為一種負擔。

  • We all know kids like this.

    我們都知道這樣的孩子。

  • So unbelievably gifted in one area

    竟然在某一方面有如此驚人的天賦?

  • that their educational environment can't challenge them.

    他們的教育環境無法挑戰他們。

  • We also know what happens.

    我們也知道會發生什麼。

  • They get bored, and a shockingly high number of them drop out.

    他們會感到無聊,而且輟學的人數多得驚人。

  • The second way

    第二種方式

  • that designing on average destroys talent

    平均而言,設計會毀掉人才

  • is that it means your weakness will make it hard for us to see,

    就是說你的弱點會讓我們很難看到。

  • let alone nurture, your talent.

    更不用說培養你的人才了。

  • We all know kids like this as well.

    我們也都知道這樣的孩子。

  • Like the kid who's gifted in science but who is a below average reader.

    就像那個在理科方面很有天賦的孩子,但他是一個低於平均水平的讀者。

  • Because our science textbooks

    因為我們的科學教科書

  • assume that every kid is reading at grade level,

    假設每個孩子都在讀年級。

  • this kid's in trouble.

    這孩子有麻煩了。

  • Because for her,

    因為對她來說。

  • science class is first and foremost a reading test.

    科學課首先是閱讀測試。

  • And it's doubtful that we will ever see what she's truly capable of.

    而我們是否能看到她真正的能力是值得懷疑的'。

  • Now, it's one thing when our technology

    現在,它是一回事,當我們的技術'。

  • does not allow us to do anything other than average.

    不允許我們做任何事情,而不是平均。

  • But it is a whole other thing

    但這是另一回事

  • when the technology changes and we can do more,

    當技術發生變化,我們可以做得更多。

  • but we don't realize it.

    但我們沒有意識到這一點。

  • That's where we are today.

    這就是我們今天的處境。

  • In the last few years, education, just like the rest of society,

    在過去的幾年裡,教育和社會其他方面一樣。

  • has gone digital.

    已經數字化了。

  • If you don't believe me, just consider this fact:

    如果你不相信我,就想想這個事實吧。

  • U.S. public schools are one of the largest buyers of iPads in the world.

    美國公立學校是全球最大的iPad買家之一。

  • Right? So, the question isn't do you want the technology?

    對不對?所以,問題不是'你要技術嗎?

  • It's already here. You've already paid for it.

    它已經在這裡了。你已經支付了它。

  • The question is: what do you want it to be?

    問題是:你想讓它成為什麼?

  • And this is where it really gets exciting.

    而這才是真正讓人興奮的地方。

  • We have a chance, right now,

    我們有機會,現在。

  • to use this technology to create learning environments

    利用這一技術創造學習環境

  • that are so flexible

    伸縮自如

  • that they truly can nurture the potential of every single individual.

    他們真正能夠培養每一個人的潛力。

  • Now, you might think that sounds expensive, right?

    現在,你可能覺得這聽起來很貴,對吧?

  • Doesn't have to be.

    不一定要這樣。

  • In fact, we can get a long way,

    其實,我們可以走得更遠。

  • we can make great strides with simple solutions

    我們可以通過簡單的解決方案取得巨大的進步

  • that we take for granted in our everyday digital lives.

    我們在日常數字生活中習以為常的。

  • Here I am thinking about basic stuff

    在這裡,我考慮的是基本的東西

  • like language translation, support for reading, vocabulary,

    如語言翻譯、支持閱讀、詞彙。

  • you know, even the ability of a machine to pronounce a word for you,

    你知道,甚至機器的能力 發音一個詞給你。

  • or read a passage if you want.

    或讀一段話,如果你想。

  • Basic stuff.

    基本的東西。

  • But while these are simple solutions,

    但雖然這些都是簡單的解決方案。

  • you'll be surprised

    你會驚訝的

  • at how big of an impact they actually have on the lives of individuals.

    在他們對個人生活的影響到底有多大。

  • I know I was, the first time that I saw it happen.

    我知道我是,我第一次看到它發生。

  • I was observing a fourth-grade classroom

    我在觀摩四年級的課堂上

  • a few years ago,

    幾年前。

  • and they were participating in a study

    他們正在參加一項研究

  • where we were testing the effectiveness of a new digital science curriculum.

    在那裡,我們正在測試一個新的數字科學課程的有效性。

  • Now, I'll be the first to say

    現在,我將是第一個發言的人

  • this new digital version wasn't fancy.

    這個新的數字版不是'花哨的。

  • In fact, it was pretty basic.

    其實,這是很基本的。

  • The thing that it had going for it though,

    不過它有的東西。

  • was that it did not assume

    是它沒有假設

  • that every student in that classroom was reading at grade level.

    那間教室裡的每個學生都能讀到年級的水準。

  • Now, one of my favorite things about this particular classroom

    現在,我最喜歡的事情之一 關於這個特殊的教室

  • was the teacher.

    是老師。

  • Because she hated technology.

    因為她討厭科技。

  • And I know this

    我知道

  • because it's the first thing that she told me when I met her.

    因為這是我見到她時她告訴我的第一件事。

  • And my response was,

    而我的回答是:

  • "OK, why did you sign up for a study that's about technology?"

    "好吧,你為什麼要報名參加一個關於技術的研究'?"

  • She told me

    她告訴我

  • she was willing to go through this

    她願意經歷這些

  • in the hopes that it might help one kid in her class.

    希望能幫助她班上的一個孩子。

  • His name was Billy.

    他的名字是比利。

  • And Billy, as she told me, had a mind for science.

    而比利,正如她告訴我的那樣,有一個科學的頭腦。

  • But he was one of those kids who was a below average reader.

    但他是那種讀書水準低於平均水平的孩子。

  • And she was hoping this might reach him now

    她希望現在就能收到這個

  • while he's still learning to read.

    在他還在學習閱讀的時候。

  • Now, I have to say, that actually made me nervous.

    現在,我不得不說,這其實讓我很緊張。

  • Because as I said, the technology was pretty basic.

    因為我說過,當時的技術很基礎。

  • And I didn't want to disappoint her.

    我也不想讓她失望。

  • So, you can imagine

    所以,你可以想象

  • how pleasantly surprised I was about halfway through the study,

    我在學習進行到一半的時候,是多麼的驚喜。

  • the teacher reaches out to say, "Hey, guess what?"

    老師伸手說,"嘿,你猜怎麼著?"

  • Not only has Billy taken to the technology

    比利不僅採取了技術

  • but I'm starting to see improvement in his performance.

    但我'開始看到他的表現有所改善。

  • So, that was nice.

    所以,這是很好的。

  • But nothing,

    但什麼都沒有。

  • nothing prepared me for what I saw

    目不暇接

  • when I went back to that classroom at the end of the study.

    當我在學習結束後回到那間教室時。

  • Billy had become the de facto smartest kid in the class.

    比利已經成為班上事實上最聰明的孩子。