A wicked problem exists embedded in our world’s societal tendency to classify types of minds into specific categories. I have a specific problem with this as, I’ve never been a ‘straight a’ student, not that I don’t find ways to apply myself and work hard at things, but I just have never had great study / test taking skills. Instantly anyone like myself is placed into a category of a ‘sub-achiever’. To make this easier on everyone involved I was placed into a concrete category of “left-brained or an ‘’artsty type”. There’s a cultural tendency to segregate the mind into tangible categories and this pattern proceeds straight through grade school and into college. In college you have to pick if you want to be an architecture major or an engineering major. The distinction and the expected tendency to separate the two is somewhat ridiculous when considering they both are implemented in doing basically the same thing.
In terms of engaging tools based in technology, this phenomenon is seen mirroring issues from Shapiro’s article. The tendency to categorize types of minds has produced two distinctly different formats of interfacing with computers. One that is engineer based: CAD software, equipped with boring graphics but advanced computing and estimating abilities – and then a completely different set of tools for creating something that looks pretty. (3DS max or Photoshop) This example is a simple one but all the better for Identifying a concrete split in the way we identify categories for designing minds of the 21st century.
Its like Buchanan’s article claims regarding ‘wicked problems’ as a “class of social system problems which are I’ll-formulated…[and] thoroughly confusing.” (pg.15) There’s not necessary an immediate answer to this problem, but it’s certainly worth throwing it out there, and recognizing it as a societal occurrence we should be aware of as it continues to shape systems we deal with on a daily basis such as education and professions.
From Barry:
Ken Robison writes, in his book The Element
“So it is that we came to think of real intelligence in terms of logical analysis: believing that rationalist forms of thinking were superior to feeling and emotion, and that the ideas that really count can be conveyed in words or through mathematical expressions. In addition, we believed that we could quantify intelligence and rely on IQ tests and standardized tests like the SAT to identify who among us is truly intelligent and deserving of exalted treatment.”
He goes on,
“…Some educators and psychologist took-and continue to take-IQ numbers to absurd lengths. In 1916, Lewis Terman of Stanford University published a revision of Binet’s a IQ test. Known as the Stanford-Binet test, now in its fifth version, it is the basis of the modern IQ test. It is interesting to note, though, that Terman had a sadly extreme view of human capacity. These are his words from the textbook The Measurement of Intelligence: ‘Among laboring men and servant girls there are thousands like them feebleminded. They are the world’s hewers of wood and drawers of water. And yet, as far as intelligence is concerned, the tests have told the truth… No amount of school instruction will ever make them intelligent voters of capable voters in the true sense of the word.’”
Those quotes are from the chapter called “Think Differently.” He writes about the eugenics movement’s affect on categorizing people through standardized tests. According to the Robinson, this fallacy leaves out people who are intelligent in other ways. He states, “We think we know the answer to the question, ‘How intelligent are you?’ The real answer, though, is that the questions is the wrong one to ask.” It should be “How are you intelligent?”
The eugenicists’ influence runs very deep and touches more aspects of education than many care to recognize: Standardized testing, letter grades, GPA, Ritalin, etc. The categories you lament were constructed by people who think liberty and democracy are too messy. There needs to be systems to control people.
I’ll jump off my soapbox now.
From Andrew
Nate, don’t feel to bad, I’m the same way when it comes to tests. No matter how much i study, when i get the test in front of me my mind goes blank and i sit there like, when did we learn this? Honestly I can’t remember when i’ve used anything i about the ACT test other than it has many strict rules about taking it, have to answer 40 questions in 30 minutes on I think the english section? and having to write a statement on the back of the test in 2nd grade cursive. It becomes who can remember the most information for the most stressful test you will ever take that will tell you how smart you are under stress. I’m in Industrial design and we have a similar problem with the engineers. Basiclally all the stuff we design looks great but would be impossible to create a real version of it and the engineers can make something that works really well but isn’t visually apealing. I have talked to other designer and friends in the engineering departments and we agree that we need to combine that way both of our creations look great and function great. Too bad the school won’t do it.
Barry’s follow-up:
Andrew, I don’t recall if you’re an arch major. If so, just wait until you take the ARE. Those are brutal. The vast majority of the questions, and the wording of the questions are created by some sadistic employee with a gift for torturous syntax, locked in a dungeon, who they only let out when they clean his dungeon.
Nate Kaylor: Design Thinking 