Learning and Work
In a planning process with Ford Motor company back in 1996 I suggested they make the assembly line both a production line and a place for continuous learning and improvement and not to think of these as different things to take place at different times and places.
I don't think Ford heard what I meant but it seems that Toyota has done just that:
MAKE IT REAL
Doing leads to learning. Instead of confronting students (or employees) with abstract concepts, take the lesson out into the real world. Make it real: That's what Bob Moses did when he created the Algebra Project. He took his middle-school students around Boston in search of experiences that demonstrated the practical uses of math. A ride on the subway became a lesson in coordinate graphing and negative numbers. When Moses taught students about displacement, he had them measure the dimensions of their own bodies. Students always had to "participate in a physical event." Follow-up studies have confirmed the benefits of Moses' experiential curriculum. Ninety-two percent of his Algebra Project graduates in Cambridge went on to upper-level math courses, twice the rate of students not in the program. The same philosophy works outside the classroom, too. Look at Toyota. In many ways, its Georgetown, KY, manufacturing plant is a school that happens to produce cars. Because Toyota doesn't distinguish between learning and doing, it's willing to stop the assembly line any time a problem crops up on the floor. With its philosophy of constant self-improvement, turning out slightly fewer engines each day is a small price to pay for teaching its workers how to turn out better ones. (Seed 19 Jul 2006)
Why is learning and work separated? Doesn't it make sense to connect the learning to the work? In every day situations there are times and places that can be great learning opportunities if we take advantage of them.
And continual learning creates an environment that leads to both incremental improvements and breakthrough innovations.
