When the topic of current popular culture comes up in “serious” conversation or writing, a common reaction is that this new culture is, at its worst, senseless drivel that is dominating and undermining our youth, and at its best, a means by which we can grab a little time to relax.  When Steven Johnson writes and speaks about popular culture, however, a whole new view emerges.  He argues that popular culture is evolving, that the most successful examples are complex and sophisticated, and that it is actually make us smarter!  

Johnson demonstrates the evolution in popular culture with a comparison of current and past TV programs (for example, “Dragnet” and “Lost”), and through an analysis of the structure of video games.  In the old TV series “Dragnet”, the plot was linear and formulaic, and the relationships between the very few characters were one-dimensional.  In “Lost”, on the other hand, a series of plots and sub-plots exist, and to understand these requires the viewer to understand the complicated relationships between the many, many main characters, and a willingness to watch many episodes of the program.   

Success when playing a video games, Johnson explains, requires hard work and commitment, attention to intricate detail and higher order thinking skills.  He supposes, therefore, that the derision and condemnation of  this form of entertainment is likely from people who have never actually tried to play the games, and they can only judge the game on the basis of the superficial subject matter (eg, Grand Theft Auto). 

So, it appears that the general population, particularly the younger generation, is able and willing to engage in very intricate, convoluted, and complicated thinking, and in fact will suffer frustration and delayed gratification in the effort required to understand a TV show or succeed in moving to the next level in a video game.   Given Johnson’s conclusions, it is not surprising that our educational systems are often found to be lacking from the points of view of both students  and employers.  Our educational methodologies need to also evolve so that students are just as engaged as they are in popular culture, and emerge from the educational experience with the ability to explore and solve the complicated problems facing us today.

So what do you think of this message from Steven Johnson?  Is popular culture making us smarter or is it turning us into mindless zombies?  I will be interested in your responses to what I thought was a very positive message about the current state of popular culture and how it might inform our educational practice.

Throughout the day I’ve been thinking about educational reform through the lens of scale.  During the Bridges panel discussion one or more of the panelist made the observation that only after we have taken the small successes of the classroom or school to scale, across a district or state, can we claim that we are beginning to offer all students a high quality education.  But what is meant by scale-ability and are all forms equally worthy of consideration?  I agree with our panelists that it is advisable to avoid the “magic-bullet” approach to reform, because learning is far too complex to be capture in one model with universal application.  A true BHO.  Policy makers and educators should be cautious of a reform strategy based on replicating small, yet powerful, gains across a wider area in the hope that achievement indicators will rise.  Or should they?  What if we consider the key to scale-ability is not the size of the reform but rather the over-all ability of a system to support and honor authenticity in teaching, learning, curriculum, and school leadership?  What if a district allowed a flourishing of models with the caveat that the long-term viability of any reform was pegged to student academic growth?  This approach might take the often negative quality of schools to rally around a reform and resist change and instead allow a school to rally around a shared vision and nurture its success.

In September of 2008, Bridges to the Future invited Parker Palmer, author, educator, and activist to the DU campus to kick-off a year-long examination of the current condition of public schooling.  Palmer suggested that many of the core problems we face in educational settings today are not technical in nature but rather matters of the heart.  And that any serious reform efforts should start with the creation of work environments where the wisdom of the professional inner-self is welcome and invited to show up. 

The conversation continued last night with a panel presentation featuring three area educators: Jen Phillps (teacher, Uclid Middle School), Jerry Wartgow (Interim Dean, Morgridge College of Education), and Michael Johnston (Principal, Mapleton Expeditionary School of the Arts).  Adam Schrager (political reporter at 9news) moderated the discussion.  Jen Phillips shared a story about her Grandmother, who is also an educator, and their shared view that teaching is a difficult task with little easy answers.  She also stated that she takes hope from two changes in contemporary schooling, a shift from teaching to learning as the dominant metapohor in education, and an emphasis on knowledge to support 21st century readiness.   Jerry Wartgow encouraged us to look beyond the classroom to the broader policy arena.  He framed his thoughts around several provacative recommendations including: a “weight-watchers” approach to educational reform that requires a fundamental change in our educational life style and the need to develop “civic capacity” to sustain reform.  Michael Johnston shared the story of how 100% of his seniors are graduating and heading to college, far above the national average of 50% of 9th graders making it all the way through high school.  In addition to offering the audience 5 policy considerations he argued that access to educational opportunity is the civil rights agenda of our time, a continuation of the pledge to defend the Declaration with “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.” 

Let me end this post with a variation on two questions that Jen Phillips asked the audience to consider and talk about during her opening comments.  One, what stands out for you from the evening’s presentation?  Two, did you hear anything tonight that connects with your experiences in education?  And let me add one more, what was missing from tonight’s analysis? 

Parker Palmer recently concluded a three day visit to the DU campus. He shared his insights on reclaiming the primacy of the heart in K-12 education, higher education, and religion. I know, as an educator and administrator, how spot on his remarks were. It is easy to be driven in my decision making by institutional imperatives instead of being pulled upward to my highest calling by listening to my inner teacher/leader. I have tried over the years to organize my institutional life around one pole or the other: external institutional demands or internal heart callings. Thanks, in part, to Parker’s articulation of these two aspects of professional life I have come to understand that it is not an either-or choice but rather a choice of both-and. I need to honor and attend to both the external and internal aspects of my professional life. This is what Parker calls living on the mobious strip. As one traces the external demands of the profession along the strip he/she quickly arrives at the internal folds of the strip, only later to return to the external world. It is not a matter of living in balance as much as it is living in and learning from tension; drawing inspiration and insight from the charged interface between the two. I still wrestle with many of the institutional decisions and demands characteristic of teaching and leading in higher education, but I no longer view all of these aspects as something to be avoided or battled into extinction. I now see many of these instutional imperatives as gifts (some are not) that bring me into closer contact with the heart of the matter; reminders of why I willingly agreed to combine my life’s energy with those of the University of Denver.

A leading sociologist and theorist of world affairs, José Casanova argues against the view that religion is best left to the private sphere. For José Casanova, religion must be included in the public square, especially as the lines between “public” and “private” become more and more complicated in our increasingly globalized world. In his talk “Religion, Globalization, & the Pursuit of Happiness,” José Casanova emphasizes this point about globalization, arguing that with the shrinking of our planet into a global village, we can no longer think of our own personal or national happiness without seriously worrying about the impact our decisions will have on the rest of the world. That’s how interconnected things have become: our country makes a decision (even an environmentally responsible one to grow more crops for bio-fuel) and it impacts people living thousands of miles away (José spoke of food-riots all around the globe in poorer countries in response to inflated food prices caused by the American crop-growing decision). We have entered an era where your happiness and my happiness are intertwined — more intertwined than ever. This realization must impact not only on the way we make personal decisions, and not only on the way we want our country to make policy and political decisions, but also on the way that we envision the interaction of religions.

Reflecting on the growth of our global village, José emphasizes a world in which religions extend trans-nationally across any regional boundaries and in which “inter-civilizational encounters” are par for the course. In such a world where national boundaries are increasingly porous, and where the line between “domestic” and “foreign” issues is increasingly blurred, José speaks of a “new interfaith ecological religious discourse,” a new era in which religions must get to know one another more than ever before, and must look out for the welfare of all people — and Mother Earth — more than ever before. In a globalized world, your happiness and my happiness (and Mother Earth’s happiness) are more and more deeply inter-connected, and José sees this as impacting on the way religions view (and must view) the world and one another. It would seem that in time, all religions will more and more fully enter into this “new interfaith ecological religious discourse.” The continuing growth of our global village demands it.

What do you think about this? Do you agree that it is increasingly irresponsible for any person, nation, or religious group to forge ahead in pursuit of happiness while ignoring the happiness of others? Do you think that the fact of globalization demands more and more that we all look out for one another, even if that proves a rather difficult and sometimes impossible task? Do you think that the globalized world makes it more and more likely that religious groups will in fact tend to become more and more aware of larger human issues (like human rights, environmental conservation, etc.)? Does globalization demand a change in the way religions view one another and their responsibility for all people and for Mother Earth? Does globalization ensure (slowly, over time) a change in the way religions view one another and their responsibility for all people and for Mother Earth?

To watch the video, you will need to download Adobe Flash Player.

In her January 15, 2008 Bridges to the Future talk at DU, “Not So Big: The First Step in True Sustainable Living,” Sarah Susanka emphasizes the “not so big” lifestyle and the importance of cutting through the clutter, pursuing your passions, and helping create meaning in your life. In this spirit, Susanka invites us to think of the remodel of the self on analogy with the remodel of a home, and urges us to consider how the positive changes we make in our own lives will reflect outward into larger positive changes in the world.

In an excerpt from her book, The Not So Big Life, Susanka reflects on these themes:

“This is the real key to a Not So Big Life. The creativity in crafting your life remodeling comes when you make all the preparations and then let go. This is how you improve the quality of what you have. You can’t manage what you want into existence, but you can be the instrument of its creation by getting all the tools in place and then letting things unfold as they will. This kind of creativity is something we are all capable of, but in order for it to happen we have to be completely engaged in what we are doing, with no planning, thinking, or worrying about the exact form of what we are making.”

Some questions for thought:

1) What do you think of Susanka’s analogy between remodeling homes and remodeling your life? What seems most helpful to you about this comparison?

2) In the above quote, Susanka talks about “getting all the tools in place and then letting things unfold as they will.” What are some of the tools that you would put in place? What about the idea of “letting go”?

3) Susanka suggests that when you follow your passion, things will fall into place and you will find positive new meaning in your life. Do you have examples of this to share? What passion might you like to more fully pursue in your own life? Do you have any concerns with this advice?

Please share your ideas! As part of our commitment to ongoing learning experiences, Bridges to the Future has created this new Blog feature to keep the conversation going community-wide… (Visit back in a few days to see the new Video Diary feature as well).

As part of our commitment to fostering in-depth conversations within the community around important ideas, Bridges to the Future is pleased to launch our new Blog. Our goal is to enable ongoing community-wide discussion of ideas and themes addressed as part of our Bridges to the Future lecture series which, this year, examines the Pursuit of Happiness.Our Blog also contains the new Bridges Video Diary, a video compilation of community-members speaking onto camera (at our new Bridges Luncheon series), sharing their ideas on Bridges themes.We hope that the Blog and Video Diary will spur new ideas and get people talking across the community about the Bridges to the Future lecture topics. This is your forum. Enjoy!