I was here four years ago, and I remember, at the time, that the talks weren't put online. I think they were given to TEDsters in a box, a box set of DVDs, which they put on their shelves, where they are now.
Ma olin siin neli aastat tagasi ja ma mäletan, et siis ei pandud loenguid veel internetti üles. TED-i huvilised said neid soetada karbis, DVD-kogumikuna karbis, mille nad panid riiulisse, kus need on siiani.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
And actually, Chris called me a week after I'd given my talk, and said, "We're going to start putting them online. Can we put yours online?" And I said, "Sure."
Ja tegelikult helistas Chris mulle nädal pärast mu loengut, ja ütles:"Me hakkame loenguid internetti üles panema." "Kas me võime Sinu oma ka üles panna?" Ja ma ütlesin: "Kindel see."
And four years later, it's been downloaded four million times. So I suppose you could multiply that by 20 or something to get the number of people who've seen it. And, as Chris says, there is a hunger for videos of me.
Ja neli aastat hiljem nagu ma ütlesin, on seda vaadatud neli... Tähendab, seda on alla laetud neli miljonit korda. Nii, et ma oletan, et võite selle korrutada umbes kahekümnega, et saada aimu, kui palju inimesi seda loengut näinud on. Ja nagu Chris ütles, on olemas nõudlus
(Laughter)
minu videote järele.
(Applause)
(Naer)
(Aplaus)
Don't you feel?
... kas teile ei tundu?
(Laughter)
(Naer)
So, this whole event has been an elaborate build-up to me doing another one for you, so here it is.
Niisiis, kogu see üritus on olnud keerukas loomeprotsess, et teile järgmist loengut anda. Nii, siit see tuleb.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
Al Gore spoke at the TED conference I spoke at four years ago and talked about the climate crisis. And I referenced that at the end of my last talk. So I want to pick up from there because I only had 18 minutes, frankly.
Al Gore kõneles neli aastat tagasi samal TED-konverentsil, kus minagi. Ta rääkis kliimakriisidest Ja ma viitasin sellele oma viimase loengu lõpus. Niisiis tahan jätkata, sealt, kus pooleli jäin, sest mul oli ainult 18 minutit, kui aus olla.
(Laughter)
Nii, nagu ma ütlesin...
So, as I was saying --
(Laughter)
(Naer)
You see, he's right. I mean, there is a major climate crisis, obviously, and I think if people don't believe it, they should get out more.
Tal on tegelikult ju õigus. Selge see, et meil on tegemist suuremat sorti kliimakriisiga. Ja ma arvan, et kui inimesed seda ei usu, peaksid nad rohkem õues olema.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
But I believe there is a second climate crisis, which is as severe, which has the same origins, and that we have to deal with with the same urgency. And you may say, by the way, "Look, I'm good. I have one climate crisis, I don't really need the second one."
Aga ma usun, et on olemas veel teine kliimakriis. Mis on sama tõsine, millel on samad juured ja millega me peame sama pakiliselt tegelema. Ja sellega mõtlen ma... ja te võite muuseas öelda: "Näed, mul läheb hästi. Mul on üks kliimakriis
(Laughter)
ja mul tõesti ei ole veel teist juurde vaja."
But this is a crisis of, not natural resources -- though I believe that's true -- but a crisis of human resources.
Aga see ei ole mitte looduslike ressursside kriis, kuigi ma usun et see on tõsi, vaid inimressursside kriis.
I believe fundamentally, as many speakers have said during the past few days, that we make very poor use of our talents. Very many people go through their whole lives having no real sense of what their talents may be, or if they have any to speak of. I meet all kinds of people who don't think they're really good at anything.
Ma usun kindlalt, just nagu mitmed eelkõnelejad nende viimase paari päeva jooksul, et me kasutame liig vähe oma andeid. Paljud inimesed lähevad läbi terve elu teadmata, mis nende tõelised anded on või kas neid üldse on. Ma olen kohanud igasuguseid inimesi, kes leiavad, et nad ei ole mitte milleski head.
Actually, I kind of divide the world into two groups now. Jeremy Bentham, the great utilitarian philosopher, once spiked this argument. He said, "There are two types of people in this world: those who divide the world into two types and those who do not."
Ausaltöeldes jaotan ma nüüd maailma kahte gruppi. Jeremy Bentham, suur utilitaarne filosoof, tõi kord välja järgneva väite. Ta ütles: " Maailmas on kahte sorti inimesi, need, kes jagavad maailma kaheks ja need, kes seda ei tee."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
Well, I do.
Mina, niisiis, teen seda.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
I meet all kinds of people who don't enjoy what they do. They simply go through their lives getting on with it. They get no great pleasure from what they do. They endure it rather than enjoy it, and wait for the weekend. But I also meet people who love what they do and couldn't imagine doing anything else. If you said, "Don't do this anymore," they'd wonder what you're talking about. It isn't what they do, it's who they are. They say, "But this is me, you know. It would be foolish to abandon this, because it speaks to my most authentic self." And it's not true of enough people. In fact, on the contrary, I think it's still true of a minority of people. And I think there are many possible explanations for it.
Ma kohtun igasugu erinevate inimestega, kes ei naudi seda, mida nad teevad. Nad lähevad läbi elu sellega lihtsalt edasi minnes. Nad ei saa mingit suurt naudingut sellest, mida nad teevad. Nad kannatavad selle ära, mitte ei naudi seda ning ootavad nädalavahetust. Aga ma kohtun ka inimestega, kes armastavad seda, mida nad teevad ja kes ei kujutaks ette millegi muu tegemist. Kui neile öelda:"Ära tee seda enam," nad ei saaks aru, millest sa räägid. Sest see ei ole ainult see, mida nad teevad, see on see, kes nad on. Nad ütlevad: "See olen mina, kas tead. Minust oleks rumal seda hüljata, sest see ongi mu kõige sügavam "mina". Ja see ei ole mitte väga paljude inimeste puhul nii. Ausaltöeldes, ma pigem arvan, et see on nii vähemuse puhul. Ja ma arvan, et sellele on
And high among them is education, because education, in a way, dislocates very many people from their natural talents. And human resources are like natural resources; they're often buried deep. You have to go looking for them, they're not just lying around on the surface. You have to create the circumstances where they show themselves. And you might imagine education would be the way that happens, but too often, it's not. Every education system in the world is being reformed at the moment and it's not enough. Reform is no use anymore, because that's simply improving a broken model. What we need -- and the word's been used many times in the past few days -- is not evolution, but a revolution in education. This has to be transformed into something else.
mitmeid võimalikke seletusi. Ja üks tõenäolisemaid neist on haridus, sest omal viisil haridus ajab väga paljusid inimesi nende loomulikest annetest eemale. Ja inimressursid on nagu loodusressursid, nad on tihti sügavale maetud. Neid peab otsima. Nad ei vedele niisama maas. Neile peab looma soodsad tingimused, et nad saaksid ennast näidata. Ja me võime ju arvata, et läbi hariduse see ka juhtub. Aga väga tihti ei ole see nii. Iga haridussüsteemi maailmas reformitakse hetkel. Aga see ei ole piisav. Reformist ei ole enam kasu, sest see on lihtsalt katkise mudeli arendamine. Mida meil aga vaja on - ja seda sõna on viimase paari päeva jooksul korduvalt kasutatud - ei ole mitte evolutsioon, vaid revolutsioon hariduses. Seda peab muutma
(Applause)
millekski muuks.
(Aplaus)
One of the real challenges is to innovate fundamentally in education. Innovation is hard, because it means doing something that people don't find very easy, for the most part. It means challenging what we take for granted, things that we think are obvious. The great problem for reform or transformation is the tyranny of common sense. Things that people think, "It can't be done differently, that's how it's done."
Üks suuremaid väljakutseid on uuendada haridust põhjalikult. Reformimine on raske, sest see tähendab millegi tegemist, mida enamus inimestest ei leia väga kerge olevat. See tähendab millegi vaidlustamist, mida me enesestmõistetavaks peame, asjad, mida me võtame ilmselgetena. Suureks probleemiks reformi või muutumise juures on terve mõistuse türannia - asjad, mille puhul inimesed mõtlevad: "Seda ei saa teha kuidagi teisiti, sest see on viis, kuidas seda tehakse."
I came across a great quote recently from Abraham Lincoln, who I thought you'd be pleased to have quoted at this point.
Hiljuti juhtusin lugema tsitaati Abraham Lincolnilt, kelle tsitaati minu arvamist mööda teile praegusel hetkel meeldiks kuulda.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
He said this in December 1862 to the second annual meeting of Congress. I ought to explain that I have no idea what was happening at the time. We don't teach American history in Britain.
Ta ütles seda 1862. aasta detsembris Kongressi teisel aastakogunemisel. Ma peaks selgituseks ütlema, et mul ei ole aimugi, mis sel ajal juhtus. Meil Suurbritannias Ameerika ajalugu ei õpetata.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
We suppress it. You know, this is our policy.
Me vaikime selle maha. See on meie põhimõte.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
No doubt, something fascinating was happening then, which the Americans among us will be aware of.
Niisiis, ilma igasugu kahtluseta juhtus 1862. aasta detsembris midagi võluvat, millest meie keskel olevad ameeriklased teadlikud on.
But he said this: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion." I love that. Not rise to it, rise with it. "As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country."
Aga ta ütles seda: "Dogmad vaiksest minevikust ei vasta tormisele olevikule. Olukord on kõrge raskuste koorma all ja me peame olukorraga koos tõusma." Ma armastan seda. Mitte selleni tõusma vaid sellega. "Kuna meie juhtum on uus, peame me ka mõtlema uutmoodi ning käituma uutmoodi. Me peame end vabastama orjastusest
I love that word, "disenthrall."
ja siis me alles päästame oma maa."
You know what it means? That there are ideas that all of us are enthralled to, which we simply take for granted as the natural order of things, the way things are. And many of our ideas have been formed, not to meet the circumstances of this century, but to cope with the circumstances of previous centuries. But our minds are still hypnotized by them, and we have to disenthrall ourselves of some of them. Now, doing this is easier said than done. It's very hard to know, by the way, what it is you take for granted. And the reason is that you take it for granted.
Mulle meeldib see sõnapaar "orjastusest vabastama" Kas teate, mida see tähendab? Et on ideid, mille orjastuses me kõik oleme. Mida me lihtsalt enesestmõistetavatena võtame. Nagu asjade loomulik käik, viis kuidas asjad on. Ja paljud meie ideedest on vormitud mitte selleks, et neist oleks kasu selle sajandi asjaoludega hakkama saamisel vaid selleks, et toime tulla möödunud sajandite asjaoludega. Aga meie meeled on ikka veel neist hüpnotiseeritud. Ja me peame osalt end nende orjastusest vabastama. Sellest on muidugi kergem rääkida, kui konkreetselt midagi ära teha. Muuseas, on väga raske teada saada, mida me enesestmõistetavaks peame. Ja selle põhjuseks on, et me seda enesestmõistetavaks peame.
(Laughter)
Niisiis, lubage mul küsida teilt midagi, mida te võite võtta enesestmõistetavalt.
Let me ask you something you may take for granted. How many of you here are over the age of 25? That's not what you take for granted, I'm sure you're familiar with that. Are there any people here under the age of 25? Great. Now, those over 25, could you put your hands up if you're wearing your wristwatch? Now that's a great deal of us, isn't it? Ask a room full of teenagers the same thing. Teenagers do not wear wristwatches. I don't mean they can't, they just often choose not to. And the reason is we were brought up in a pre-digital culture, those of us over 25. And so for us, if you want to know the time, you have to wear something to tell it. Kids now live in a world which is digitized, and the time, for them, is everywhere. They see no reason to do this. And by the way, you don't need either; it's just that you've always done it and you carry on doing it. My daughter never wears a watch, my daughter Kate, who's 20. She doesn't see the point. As she says, "It's a single-function device."
Kui paljud teist siin on üle 25 aasta vanad? See ei ole see, mida ma arvan, et te enesestmõistetavaks võite pidada. Ma olen kindel, et te olete sellega juba tuttavad. Kas siis on kedagi, kes on noorem kui 25 aastat? Väga hea. Nüüd need, kes on üle 25, kas võiksid tõsta käed need, kes kannavad käekella? See on suur osa meist, kas pole? Küsi toatäielt teismelistelt sedasama asja. Teismelised ei kanna käekellasid. Ma ei mõtle sellega, et nad ei saa või et nad ei tohi, nad lihtsalt tihti valivad seda mitte teha. Ja põhjuseks, kas teate, on see, et me oleme üles kasvanud digitaliseerumise eelsel ajal, need meist, kes on üle 25 aasta vanad. Ja meie jaoks, kui me tahame teada aega, tuleb midagi kanda, mis seda ütleb. Tänapäeva lapsed elavad digitaliseeritud maailmas ja nende jaoks on aeg kõikjal. Nad ei näe ühtegi põhjust, et seda teha. Ja muuseas, seda ei olegi üldse vaja teha, asi on lihtsalt selles, et me oleme seda alati teinud ja me lihtsalt jätkame seda. Mu tütar ei kanna kunagi käekella, mu tütar Kate, kes on 20. Ta ei näe sel mõtet. Ja ta ütleb: "See on ühe ainsa funktsiooniga seade." (Naer)
(Laughter)
"Kui mõttetu saab üks asi üldse olla?"
"Like, how lame is that?" And I say, "No, no, it tells the date as well."
Ja ma ütlen: "Ei, ei, see ütleb kuupäeva ka."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"It has multiple functions."
"Sel on mitu funktsiooni"
(Laughter)
But, you see, there are things we're enthralled to in education. A couple of examples. One of them is the idea of linearity: that it starts here and you go through a track and if you do everything right, you will end up set for the rest of your life. Everybody who's spoken at TED has told us implicitly, or sometimes explicitly, a different story: that life is not linear; it's organic. We create our lives symbiotically as we explore our talents in relation to the circumstances they help to create for us. But, you know, we have become obsessed with this linear narrative. And probably the pinnacle for education is getting you to college. I think we are obsessed with getting people to college. Certain sorts of college. I don't mean you shouldn't go, but not everybody needs to go, or go now. Maybe they go later, not right away.
Aga nagu te näete, on aspekte hariduses, mis on meid orjastanud. Ma toon teile paar näidet. Üks neis on idee sirgjoonelisusest, Et see algab siin ja kui jälgida täpselt rada ning teha kõike õigesti, jõutaksegi kohta, kus kõik on terveks eluks paika pandud. Kõik, kes on TED-i raames kõnelenud, on meile rääkinud piltlikult või mõnikord ka otse, hoopis vastupidisest, et elu ei ole mitte sirgejooneline vaid orgaaniline. Me ehitame oma elud üles sümbiootiliselt kuna me avastame oma andeid sõltuvalt tingimustest. Aga kas teate, meile on saanud kinnisideeks see sirgjooneline narratiiv. Ja ilmselt haridussüsteemi tipp on pääs ülikooli. Ma arvan, et meie kinnisideeks on ajada inimesi ülikoolidesse, kindlat sorti ülikoolidesse. Ma ei pea silmas, et me ei peaks minema ülikooli, aga mitte kõik ei pea sinna minema. Ja mitte kõik ei pea minema nüüd. Võib-olla lähevad nad hiljem, mitte kohe praegu.
And I was up in San Francisco a while ago doing a book signing. There was this guy buying a book, he was in his 30s. I said, "What do you do?" And he said, "I'm a fireman." I asked, "How long have you been a fireman?" "Always. I've always been a fireman." "Well, when did you decide?" He said, "As a kid. Actually, it was a problem for me at school, because at school, everybody wanted to be a fireman."
Ma olin mõnda aega tagasi San Franciscos, kus jagasin oma raamatu autogramme. Seal oli üks kolmekümnendates mees, kes oli ostnud mu raamatu. Ma küsisin talt: "Mis ametit Sa pead?" Ja ta ütles: "Ma olen tuletõrjuja." Ma küsisin: "Kui kaua Sa oled juba tuletõrjuja olnud?" Ta vastas: "Alati, ma olen alati olnud tuletõrjuja." Ja ma küsisin: "No, millal Sa siis otsustasid?" Mille peale tavastas: "Lapsena." Ta ütles: "Koolis oli see probleemiks, sest koolis tahavad ju kõik tuletõrjujaks saada."
(Laughter)
"Aga mina TAHTSIN tuletõrjujaks saada," ütles ta.
He said, "But I wanted to be a fireman." And he said, "When I got to the senior year of school, my teachers didn't take it seriously. This one teacher didn't take it seriously. He said I was throwing my life away if that's all I chose to do with it; that I should go to college, I should become a professional person, that I had great potential and I was wasting my talent to do that." He said, "It was humiliating. It was in front of the whole class and I felt dreadful. But it's what I wanted, and as soon as I left school, I applied to the fire service and I was accepted. You know, I was thinking about that guy recently, just a few minutes ago when you were speaking, about this teacher, because six months ago, I saved his life."
Ja ta ütles: "Kui õppisin viimases klassis ei võtnud õpetajad mu soovi tõsiselt. Eriti umbusklik oli selle suhtes üks õpetaja. Ta ütles, et raiskan oma elu, kui see ongi kõik, mis ma otsustan sellega teha, et ma pidanuks minema ülikooli ja saama haritud inimeseks, kuna tema arvates oli mul selleks palju potentsiaali ning et tuletõrjujaks saamine olnuks talendi raiskamine." Ta ütles: "See kõik oli väga alandav, sest õpetaja ütles oma arvamust terve klassi ees, mis pani mind end väga halvasti tundma. Aga kuna tuletõrjujaks saamine oli see, mida ma tahtsin, siis peagi pärast kooli lõppu esitasingi taotluse tuletõrjele ja mind võeti vastu." Ja ta ütles: "Kas tead, ma just enne mõtlesin sellest õpetajast, just paari minuti eest, kui Sa loengut pidasid, sest kuue kuu eest
(Laughter)
ma päästsin ta elu." (Naer)
He said, "He was in a car wreck, and I pulled him out, gave him CPR, and I saved his wife's life as well." He said, "I think he thinks better of me now."
Ta ütles: "Kunagine õpetaja oli sattunud autoõnnetusse, ma tõmbasin ta välja, tegin talle kunstlikku hingamist, ning päästsin ka ta naise elu." Ja ta ütles: "Ma arvan, et õpetajal on minust nüüd parem arvamus."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
(Applause)
(Aplaus)
You know, to me, human communities depend upon a diversity of talent, not a singular conception of ability. And at the heart of our challenges --
Kas teate, minu jaoks sõltuvad inimühiskonnad annete mitmekesisusest, mitte erilisest nägemusest võimekuse kohta.
(Applause)
Ja meie väljakutsete sisus - (Aplaus)
At the heart of the challenge is to reconstitute our sense of ability and of intelligence. This linearity thing is a problem.
Väljakutse sisuks on uuesti moodustada võimekuse ja intelligentsi meel. See sirgjoongelisuse asi on probleemiks.
When I arrived in L.A. about nine years ago, I came across a policy statement -- very well-intentioned -- which said, "College begins in kindergarten." No, it doesn't.
Kui ma L.A.-sse kolisin umbes üheksa aastat tagasi, juhtusin ma nägema üht poliitilist lööklauset, idee poolest väga heade kavatsustega, mis ütles: "Ülikool algab lasteaias." Ei alga.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
It doesn't. If we had time, I could go into this, but we don't.
Tõesti ei alga. Kui meil oleks aega, võiksin sellesse teemasse sügavamalt süüvida, aga meil ei ole aega.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
Kindergarten begins in kindergarten.
Lasteaias algab lasteaed.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
A friend of mine once said, "A three year-old is not half a six year-old."
Üks mu sõber ütles kord: "Kolmeaastane ei ole pool kuueaastasest."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
(Applause)
(Aplaus)
They're three.
Nad on ju ainult kolmeaastased.
But as we just heard in this last session, there's such competition now to get into kindergarten -- to get to the right kindergarten -- that people are being interviewed for it at three. Kids sitting in front of unimpressed panels, you know, with their resumes --
Aga nagu me eelmisel loengul kuulsime, on praegusel hetkel suur konkurents, et saada laps lasteaeda, et saada ta õigesse lasteaeda, et kolmeaastaseid lapsi interviueeritakse selle tarvis. Lapsed, kes istuvad pettunud spetsialistide nõukogu ees, oma elulookirjeldustega,
(Laughter)
(Naer)
Flicking through and saying, "What, this is it?"
kes seda läbi lapates küsivad: "Kas see ongi kõik?"
(Laughter)
(Naer)
(Applause)
(Aplaus)
"You've been around for 36 months, and this is it?"
"Sa oled siin juba viimased 36 kuud ja see ongi kõik?"
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"You've achieved nothing -- commit.
"Sa ei ole mitte midagi saavutanud ega korda saatnud.
(Laughter)
Sa veetsid esimesed kuus kuud olles rinnaga toidetav, nii näen seda mina."
Spent the first six months breastfeeding, I can see."
(Naer)
(Laughter)
See, it's outrageous as a conception.
See on pöörane idee, aga see veetleb inimesi.
The other big issue is conformity. We have built our education systems on the model of fast food. This is something Jamie Oliver talked about the other day. There are two models of quality assurance in catering. One is fast food, where everything is standardized. The other is like Zagat and Michelin restaurants, where everything is not standardized, they're customized to local circumstances. And we have sold ourselves into a fast-food model of education, and it's impoverishing our spirit and our energies as much as fast food is depleting our physical bodies.
Teine suur probleem on kuulekus. Me oleme ehitanud oma koolisüsteemid üles kiirtoidu mudelile. Sellest rääkis ka Jamie Oliver mõni aeg tagasi. Toitlustuses on kaks mudelit kvaliteedi garantiiks. Üks on kiirtoit, kus kõik on standardiseeritud. Teine on see, mille alla käivad näiteks Zagati ja Michelini restoranid, kus kõik ei ole standardiseeritud, nad on kohandatud vastavalt kohalikele tingimustele. Ja mis puudutab haridust, oleme me endid müünud kiirtoidu mudelile. Ja see laostab meie hinge ja meie energiaid just niisamuti kui kiirtoit laastab meie füüsilisi kehasid.
(Applause)
(Aplaus)
We have to recognize a couple of things here. One is that human talent is tremendously diverse. People have very different aptitudes. I worked out recently that I was given a guitar as a kid at about the same time that Eric Clapton got his first guitar.
Mulle tundub, et peame siinkohal mõne asja selgeks tegema. Üks on see, et inimtalent on tohutult erinev. Inimestel on väga erinevaid oskusi. Ma mõistsin hiljuti, et mulle kingiti lapsena kitarr
(Laughter)
umbes samal ajal kui Eric Clapton sai oma esimese kitarri.
It worked out for Eric, that's all I'm saying.
Ericul see õnnestus, see on ainus, mida ma sellega öelda tahan.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
In a way -- it did not for me. I could not get this thing to work no matter how often or how hard I blew into it. It just wouldn't work.
Ühel või teisel põhjusel minul see ei õnnestunud. Ma lihtsalt ei saanud seda asja tööle hoolimata sellest kui tihti ja kui tugevasti ma sellesse puhusin. See lihtsat ei töötanud.
(Laughter)
But it's not only about that. It's about passion. Often, people are good at things they don't really care for. It's about passion, and what excites our spirit and our energy. And if you're doing the thing that you love to do, that you're good at, time takes a different course entirely. My wife's just finished writing a novel, and I think it's a great book, but she disappears for hours on end. You know this, if you're doing something you love, an hour feels like five minutes. If you're doing something that doesn't resonate with your spirit, five minutes feels like an hour. And the reason so many people are opting out of education is because it doesn't feed their spirit, it doesn't feed their energy or their passion.
Aga selles ei olegi asi. Asi on kires. Tihti on inimesed head asjades, millest nad tegelikult ei hooligi väga. Asi on kires ja selles, mis meie hinge ja energiat kõige rohkem ergutab. Ja kui teha midagi, mida sa armastad ja milles sa oled hea võtab aeg lõpuks ikka õige kursi. Mu naine just lõpetas romaani kirjutamise, ja ma arvan, et see on suurepärane raamat, ning ta kaob pidevalt tundideks. Teate seda ju isegi, et kui teete midagi mida armastate, tundub tund viie minutina. Kui teete aga midagi, mis ei toeta teie hinge, tunduvad viis minutit tunnina. Ja põhjus, miks nii paljud inimesed otsustavad haridusest loobuda on, see, et see ei toida nende hinge, see ei toida nende energiat ega kirge.
So I think we have to change metaphors. We have to go from what is essentially an industrial model of education, a manufacturing model, which is based on linearity and conformity and batching people. We have to move to a model that is based more on principles of agriculture. We have to recognize that human flourishing is not a mechanical process; it's an organic process. And you cannot predict the outcome of human development. All you can do, like a farmer, is create the conditions under which they will begin to flourish.
Nii, et ma arvan, et meil on vaja muuta metafoore. Me peame liikuma eemale haridusest, mis pärineb tööstuslikst mudelist, tootmismudelist, mis põhineb sirgjoonelisusel ja kuulekusel ning inimeste töötlemisel. Me peame liikuma mudeli suunas, mis põhineb rohkem põllumajanduslikel põhimõtetel. Me peame mõistma, et inimlik õitseng ei ole mehaaniline vaid orgaaniline protsess. Ja ei saa ette prognoosida inimliku arengu tulemust; kõik, mida me saame teha, just nagu farmerid. on luua tingimused, mille käigus inimesed puhkevad õitsele.
So when we look at reforming education and transforming it, it isn't like cloning a system. There are great ones, like KIPP's; it's a great system. There are many great models. It's about customizing to your circumstances and personalizing education to the people you're actually teaching. And doing that, I think, is the answer to the future because it's not about scaling a new solution; it's about creating a movement in education in which people develop their own solutions, but with external support based on a personalized curriculum.
Niisiis, kui me vaatleme hariduse reformimist ja selle muutmist, siis näeme, et see ei ole nagu süsteemi kloonimine. On olemas häid süsteeme nagu KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program). On olemas palju suurepäraseid mudeleid. Asi on kohandamises meie tingimustele, ja hariduse muutmises isikupärasemaks täpselt nende inimeste jaoks, keda parasjagu õpetatakse. Ja seda tehes, ma arvan on leitud ka vastus tuleviku jaoks, sest asi ei ole uute lahenduste ümberarvestamises; asi on liikumise loomises hariduses, mille raames inimesed ise arendavad omaenda lahendusi, aga seda juba välispidise abiga, mis põhineb isikupärastatud õppekaval.
Now in this room, there are people who represent extraordinary resources in business, in multimedia, in the Internet. These technologies, combined with the extraordinary talents of teachers, provide an opportunity to revolutionize education. And I urge you to get involved in it because it's vital, not just to ourselves, but to the future of our children. But we have to change from the industrial model to an agricultural model, where each school can be flourishing tomorrow. That's where children experience life. Or at home, if that's what they choose, to be educated with their families or friends.
Praegu, selles ruumis on inimesi, kel on erakordseid võimeid äris, multimeedias, internetis. Need tehnoloogiad kombineerituna õpetajate erakordsete annetega loovad võimaluse revolutsiooniks hariduses. Ja ma õhutan teid selles kaasa lööma, sest see on eluline, mitte ainult meile endile, vaid ka meie laste tulevikule. Aga me peame muutuma tööstuslikult mudelilt põllumajanduslikule mudelile, kus iga kool võib õitsele hakata juba homme. See on see, kus lapsed kogevad elu. Või kodudes, kui nad on otsustanud oma hariduse seal saada koos oma pere või sõpradega.
There's been a lot of talk about dreams over the course of these few days. And I wanted to just very quickly -- I was very struck by Natalie Merchant's songs last night, recovering old poems. I wanted to read you a quick, very short poem from W. B. Yeats, who some of you may know. He wrote this to his love, Maud Gonne, and he was bewailing the fact that he couldn't really give her what he thought she wanted from him. And he says, "I've got something else, but it may not be for you."
Palju on räägitud unistustest nende viimase paari päeva jooksul. Ja ma tahaksin lihtsalt väga kiiresti - Ma olin väga liigutatud Natalie Merchanti lauludest eile õhtul, ta taaselustab vanu luuletusi. Ma tahaksin teile lugeda kiiresti ühe väga lühikese luuletuse W.B. Yeatsilt, keda osad teist võivad teada. Ta kirjutas järgneva oma armastatule Maud Gonne'ile, ja Yeats halas selle üle, et ta ei saa oma armsamale anda, mida ta neiule soovis. Ja ta ütles: "Mul on midagi muud, mis ei pruugi olla Sinu jaoks."
He says this: "Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths, Enwrought with gold and silver light, The blue and the dim and the dark cloths Of night and light and the half-light, I would spread the cloths under your feet: But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams." And every day, everywhere, our children spread their dreams beneath our feet. And we should tread softly.
Yeates ütleb järgnevalt: "Kui mul oleks taevaste jagu tikitud kangaid, sepistatud kulla ja hõbeda valgusega, Siniseid ja sumedaid ja tumedaid kangaid öölt ja valguselt ning pool-valguselt, Ma laotaksin need kangad Su jalge alla. Aga kuna ma olen vaene, on mul ainult mu unistused. Ma olen laotanud oma unistused Su jalge alla; Sammu pehmelt, sest Sa jalutad mu unistustel." Ja iga päev, igalpool, laotavad meie lapsed oma unistused meie jalge alla. Ja me peaksime sammuma pehmelt.
Thank you.
Tänan teid.
(Applause)
(Aplaus)
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Thank you.
(Applause)