What the way New Zealand attacked Steve Smith helped me realise about education.
Yes, it's a cricket analogy.
Those of you who know me know I’m a bit cricket obsessed, and so it’ll probably not surprise you to hear that with New Zealand playing in England, and the World Test Championship less than a week away (go New Zealand!), my mind has spent a fair bit of time immersed in cricket thoughts (this has nothing to do with me staying up way too late each night and therefore finding it hard to focus during the day).
People tend to give me a bit of stick for this tendency to run life through a cricket lens, but I find immense value in it. Often, cricket thoughts skittle into other notions bubbling away in my subconscious, and in doing so unlock interesting ways of thinking about them.
An example.
On Thursday my mind swung to New Zealand’s last ‘big’ tour: Australia in 2019. It was the first test in Perth and Steve Smith was being peppered by our attack with short pitch bowling that was slightly leg side and into his ribs. We had a leg slip in place (unusual), so obviously there was a plan. Yet, the Australian commentators were bemused, and I recall one of them saying something along the lines of
I don’t get this plan, it seems like a waste of time. Steve Smith has never been dismissed this way.
It was true. Most plans against Steve Smith looked to attack his front pad, and because of this most of his dismissals had occurred when he played deliveries of that sort. The trouble for most teams was that he was so good, he generally got out after he’d scored heaps. Often, he got himself out from being exhausted.
His stats were impressive, and other teams had resigned themselves to the fact he would score heaps, it was just a case of limiting the heap as much as possible. On this tour though, New Zealand didn't accept that as a reality they were prepared to endure. So, they imagined another way, and were bold enough to try it. It worked. Smith was dismissed a few times that series in that manner, and it was a poor series for him. New Zealand had opened a door to another reality.
(I will not go into the fact this was pretty much the sole highlight of that tour. Well, that and Tom Blundell’s brilliant 100 at the MGC which I had the pleasure of seeing in the flesh).
Statistics are great at describing the world as it is. But, if we rely on stats to guide us things will never change. If you want change, it takes imagination.
Here’s what Steve Smith helped me realise about education’s reliance on (obsession with) statistics borne from assessments to guide practice and policy: doing so will never show what might be, because it keeps us locked in the same reality. But, and this is important, stats are no match for imagination.
If we want education to change, we need to change the way we attack it. And for that, we need to be imaginative and bold.
Have a good week everyone.
Bevan
PS: If you’re feeling imaginative and bold, the SMATA app will support you as you try a new way of attacking teaching and learning. Not everyone is ready for SMATA, but if you think you might be, click the link below to check out the website, and get in touch if you want to know more.
What the way New Zealand attacked Steve Smith helped me realise about education.
"Statistics are great at describing the world as it is. But, if we rely on stats to guide us things will never change. If you want change, it takes imagination."
See, it is that simple!
Thank you.
I don't really get cricket, although I did love playing it with my dad, and yet somehow I got your use of cricketing language...to the extent that I actually understood some of the jargon...a fairly unprecedented occurrence. And I heartily endorse your call for imagination over stats...but that could be confirmation bias.
Having just spent a couple of hours over dinner helping my son's girlfriend with her queer futuristic Wellington script (for her master's in film project) during which I kept coming back to Mitch Resnick and others' calls for the development of tech in more autonomous and life affirming ways...trying to envision what that would look like...how will we create real connection and tolerance of difference?...I have to say that your cricket reference doesn't seem so silly mid on or even out of bounds. Imagining what we will need to do in order to survive the next hundred years is an interesting focus...and technology will certainly be key, but what kind of tech and how will we overcome the problems and pitfalls of over use and chronic disconnection?