WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.839 Welcome to the deep dive today. We're jumping 00:00:02.839 --> 00:00:05.120 into something that structures so much of our 00:00:05.120 --> 00:00:09.140 lives, but we maybe don't examine enough rules 00:00:09.140 --> 00:00:11.820 Specifically rules in schools and interestingly 00:00:11.820 --> 00:00:14.779 the role of ambiguity. Okay, let's unpack this 00:00:14.779 --> 00:00:16.739 a bit We all follow rules right like think about 00:00:16.739 --> 00:00:19.440 driving the rules for which side of the road 00:00:19.440 --> 00:00:21.829 stopping at lights. Yeah They're super clear. 00:00:21.910 --> 00:00:23.890 Yeah, absolutely. And for good reason, safety. 00:00:24.210 --> 00:00:26.910 Exactly. Safety. The lines are clear. Unambiguous. 00:00:27.070 --> 00:00:28.750 Ignoring them. Well, that leads to problems. 00:00:28.910 --> 00:00:31.170 Big one sometimes. That clarity keeps things 00:00:31.170 --> 00:00:33.829 running. But what about other rules? The ones 00:00:33.829 --> 00:00:36.450 that maybe aren't quite so black and white? Our 00:00:36.450 --> 00:00:37.969 source today is a really interesting article 00:00:37.969 --> 00:00:41.210 by Gary Ackerman on hackscience .education. It's 00:00:41.210 --> 00:00:43.630 called Teachers' Inability to Deal with Ambiguity. 00:00:43.799 --> 00:00:47.479 So our mission, really, is to explore these nuances 00:00:47.479 --> 00:00:50.039 of rules in schools and figure out why maybe 00:00:50.039 --> 00:00:51.859 getting comfortable with ambiguity is a vital 00:00:51.859 --> 00:00:54.600 skill for, well, for you in today's world. And 00:00:54.600 --> 00:00:56.899 what's fascinating, I think, is this tension 00:00:56.899 --> 00:01:00.380 we're going to uncover between the need for clear 00:01:00.380 --> 00:01:03.979 structure on one hand. Yeah, order. And the actual 00:01:03.979 --> 00:01:06.900 value, potentially, of uncertainty on the other. 00:01:07.680 --> 00:01:09.900 The article really gets you thinking. Are some 00:01:09.900 --> 00:01:13.590 rules. maybe even well -intentioned ones, accidentally 00:01:13.590 --> 00:01:15.629 getting in the way of a really important learning 00:01:15.629 --> 00:01:18.230 process. Precisely. So let's start with the obvious 00:01:18.230 --> 00:01:20.069 stuff, the places where rules were definitely 00:01:20.069 --> 00:01:23.670 needed and usually pretty clear. Right. The article 00:01:23.670 --> 00:01:26.670 uses that great example, traffic rules, driving 00:01:26.670 --> 00:01:28.969 on the left versus the right. Imagine if that 00:01:28.969 --> 00:01:32.599 was ambiguous. Yeah, chaos. Definitely dangerous. 00:01:32.620 --> 00:01:34.920 Totally. And the consequences are clear, too. 00:01:35.079 --> 00:01:37.920 Tickets, accidents, you name it. It's, like the 00:01:37.920 --> 00:01:40.500 article says, clearly defined and unambiguously 00:01:40.500 --> 00:01:42.640 applied. And you see that same need for clarity 00:01:42.640 --> 00:01:45.859 in big institutions, like schools. Some rules 00:01:45.859 --> 00:01:47.780 aren't really up for debate internally. They're 00:01:47.780 --> 00:01:50.379 handed down. How so? Well, they're dictated by 00:01:50.379 --> 00:01:53.739 laws or policies, things set by elected officials 00:01:53.739 --> 00:01:57.560 or governing bodies, external forces. The article 00:01:57.560 --> 00:01:59.739 mentions things like attendance reporting, purchase 00:01:59.739 --> 00:02:02.120 orders, and similar procedures. These aren't 00:02:02.120 --> 00:02:04.599 just like random hoops to jump through. They 00:02:04.599 --> 00:02:06.959 ensure proper documentation, accountability. 00:02:07.480 --> 00:02:09.139 Right, keeping track of everything legally and 00:02:09.139 --> 00:02:11.680 financially. Exactly. It connects back to efficiency 00:02:11.680 --> 00:02:14.259 and effectiveness. When it's about safety or 00:02:14.259 --> 00:02:17.000 legal stuff or just basic operations, clear rules 00:02:17.000 --> 00:02:19.800 make us, quote, effective and efficient. They 00:02:19.800 --> 00:02:22.180 protect the system, basically. Gotcha. Make total 00:02:22.180 --> 00:02:24.599 sense. Right. Without that kind of clarity, things 00:02:24.599 --> 00:02:28.759 would fall apart. OK, but here's where it gets 00:02:28.759 --> 00:02:32.330 really interesting, I think. We move away from 00:02:32.330 --> 00:02:35.870 those big clear operational rules into the classroom 00:02:35.870 --> 00:02:38.490 itself. And this is the core mystery Ackerman 00:02:38.490 --> 00:02:42.370 brings up. Why are classroom rules often so? 00:02:42.750 --> 00:02:45.389 Well, fuzzy in their reasoning. LZ. He asked 00:02:45.389 --> 00:02:47.629 these questions that honestly, probably everyone 00:02:47.629 --> 00:02:49.990 who's been to school has wondered, why do we 00:02:49.990 --> 00:02:52.169 not wear hats? Why do we not carry backpacks? 00:02:52.770 --> 00:02:56.110 Right, or even just why do we set any rules beyond 00:02:56.110 --> 00:02:59.550 the absolute essentials? Compared to like a fire 00:02:59.550 --> 00:03:02.310 drill rule or the attendance policy, the why 00:03:02.310 --> 00:03:04.430 for some of these common classroom rules feels 00:03:04.430 --> 00:03:07.569 different. less immediately obvious. It doesn't 00:03:07.569 --> 00:03:09.849 seem tied to that same level of safety or legal 00:03:09.849 --> 00:03:12.229 necessity. And this connects directly to something 00:03:12.229 --> 00:03:14.569 really crucial that schools say they want to 00:03:14.569 --> 00:03:17.889 teach. The article points out that students surely 00:03:17.889 --> 00:03:20.629 need the ability to deal with ambiguity, especially 00:03:20.629 --> 00:03:23.310 now, you know, in this global culture dominated 00:03:23.310 --> 00:03:26.169 by digital technologies. OK, say more about that. 00:03:26.189 --> 00:03:27.870 Why is that so important now? Well, think about 00:03:27.870 --> 00:03:30.949 it. We're flooded with information, right? Algorithms 00:03:30.949 --> 00:03:34.430 are nudging us. News is complex. Facts can be 00:03:34.430 --> 00:03:38.210 debated. being able to navigate situations where 00:03:38.210 --> 00:03:41.210 things aren't clear -cut, where there isn't one 00:03:41.210 --> 00:03:44.449 simple answer. That's not just a nice -to -have 00:03:44.449 --> 00:03:48.289 skill anymore. It's fundamental. For work, for 00:03:48.289 --> 00:03:51.289 life, for just understanding the world, clear 00:03:51.289 --> 00:03:54.330 answers are rare out there. That's a really strong 00:03:54.330 --> 00:03:57.129 point. Okay, so we know students need this skill. 00:03:57.360 --> 00:03:59.960 And teachers often talk about encouraging risk 00:03:59.960 --> 00:04:01.460 -taking, don't they? They do, yeah. The whole 00:04:01.460 --> 00:04:03.560 idea that school is a safe space to fail. Yeah. 00:04:03.699 --> 00:04:06.379 You hear teachers say, try it. We are here to 00:04:06.379 --> 00:04:08.120 support you if it goes wrong. Yeah. And that's 00:04:08.120 --> 00:04:10.020 great. It's about learning from mistakes, which 00:04:10.020 --> 00:04:12.400 is like a permanent part of life. Absolutely. 00:04:12.539 --> 00:04:15.780 That encouragement is vital. This is where the 00:04:15.780 --> 00:04:17.980 paradox Ackerman points out comes in. It raises 00:04:17.980 --> 00:04:20.579 a really important question. If we're genuinely 00:04:20.579 --> 00:04:23.100 trying to foster that ability to take risks, 00:04:23.300 --> 00:04:26.439 to handle uncertainty, why are we often so rigid 00:04:26.439 --> 00:04:29.639 about classroom rules? He notes, many of those 00:04:29.639 --> 00:04:32.720 same teachers are also strong advocates for rules 00:04:32.720 --> 00:04:35.100 that are common to all classrooms and spaces. 00:04:35.439 --> 00:04:38.060 And he just lays out his confusion directly. 00:04:38.259 --> 00:04:41.740 Quote, It seems we want students to gain experience 00:04:41.740 --> 00:04:44.240 taking risks, but we do not want them gaining 00:04:44.240 --> 00:04:47.360 experience navigating ambiguous rules. I am confused 00:04:47.360 --> 00:04:50.160 by this. Wow. Yeah, when you put it like that, 00:04:50.579 --> 00:04:52.759 it does seem inconsistent, doesn't it? Encourage 00:04:52.759 --> 00:04:55.660 academic risks, but enforce sometimes arbitrary 00:04:55.660 --> 00:04:58.100 -seeming behavioral rules really strictly. Exactly. 00:04:58.300 --> 00:05:00.540 It potentially sends a mixed message. It might 00:05:00.540 --> 00:05:02.620 stifle the very adaptability we claim we want 00:05:02.620 --> 00:05:05.430 to build. OK, but playing devil's advocate for 00:05:05.430 --> 00:05:08.089 a second, what about school -wide consistency? 00:05:08.550 --> 00:05:11.310 If one teacher lets kids wear hats and the next 00:05:11.310 --> 00:05:15.129 one doesn't, doesn't that create confusion or 00:05:15.129 --> 00:05:18.110 conflict between staff? How does one teacher 00:05:18.110 --> 00:05:21.430 introducing ambiguity square with the need for 00:05:21.430 --> 00:05:24.250 some common ground across the school? That's 00:05:24.250 --> 00:05:27.290 a really valid point. Ackerman's focus is more 00:05:27.290 --> 00:05:29.889 on the individual teacher's sphere of influence, 00:05:30.129 --> 00:05:32.470 their classroom. He's not really arguing for 00:05:32.470 --> 00:05:35.790 total anarchy across the school. It's more about 00:05:35.790 --> 00:05:38.269 recognizing where a teacher does have autonomy. 00:05:38.850 --> 00:05:41.850 And his really quite radical suggestion is that 00:05:41.850 --> 00:05:44.730 in some cases, particularly when conduct is concerned, 00:05:45.129 --> 00:05:47.310 maybe we should intentionally introduce ambiguity. 00:05:47.449 --> 00:05:49.970 Introduce ambiguity. She argues that by being 00:05:49.970 --> 00:05:51.949 super rigid about what he calls insignificant 00:05:51.949 --> 00:05:54.350 rules, teachers might actually be missing a chance 00:05:54.350 --> 00:05:56.879 to teach that. Doing a disservice, he says. Yeah, 00:05:57.000 --> 00:05:59.019 a disservice. They're missing the chance to let 00:05:59.019 --> 00:06:01.300 students practice navigating situations where 00:06:01.300 --> 00:06:03.779 the lines aren't perfectly drawn, which, again, 00:06:03.779 --> 00:06:06.040 is closer to real life, isn't it? OK, so what 00:06:06.040 --> 00:06:08.220 does this introduction of ambiguity actually 00:06:08.220 --> 00:06:10.680 look like in practice? It's not just ignoring 00:06:10.680 --> 00:06:13.019 rules, right? No, no, not at all. He's very clear 00:06:13.019 --> 00:06:16.079 about that. He says, you are not throwing my 00:06:16.079 --> 00:06:18.160 colleagues under the bus when you violate the 00:06:18.160 --> 00:06:21.680 insignificant rules. You are introducing ambiguity. 00:06:21.939 --> 00:06:25.389 So it's deliberate, intentional. Precisely. It's 00:06:25.389 --> 00:06:28.689 about the teacher recognizing, okay, this specific 00:06:28.689 --> 00:06:31.350 role, maybe the hat rule or the backpack rule 00:06:31.350 --> 00:06:34.689 in my classroom, isn't crucial for safety or 00:06:34.689 --> 00:06:38.089 core learning, and then using that flexibility 00:06:38.089 --> 00:06:40.350 intentionally. Can you give an example? Sure. 00:06:40.610 --> 00:06:43.050 Instead of just no hats, period, a teacher might 00:06:43.050 --> 00:06:45.569 say, look, in here, hats are generally okay, 00:06:46.009 --> 00:06:48.540 but you need to use your judgment. If it's blocking 00:06:48.540 --> 00:06:50.920 someone's view or if it seems distracting during 00:06:50.920 --> 00:06:53.060 a discussion, maybe take it off. Let's see how 00:06:53.060 --> 00:06:54.879 it goes. And we can talk about it if it becomes 00:06:54.879 --> 00:06:57.300 an issue. I see. So you're shifting the responsibility 00:06:57.300 --> 00:06:59.540 a bit, making this student think about the context. 00:06:59.879 --> 00:07:02.860 Exactly. You're teaching discernment, not just 00:07:02.860 --> 00:07:05.259 blind rule following for the minor stuff. OK, 00:07:05.259 --> 00:07:08.019 that makes more sense. It's not chaos. It's guided 00:07:08.019 --> 00:07:10.560 flexibility. Right. And he points out that this 00:07:10.560 --> 00:07:13.139 comes with duties for everyone. It's duties. 00:07:13.279 --> 00:07:15.939 For the teacher, the duty is to explain it to 00:07:15.939 --> 00:07:19.290 students and others. You can't just change a 00:07:19.290 --> 00:07:22.230 rule silently. You need to communicate the why. 00:07:22.810 --> 00:07:25.509 Why this flexibility here? What's the goal? What 00:07:25.509 --> 00:07:28.750 are the new, maybe slightly fuzzier expectations? 00:07:29.050 --> 00:07:32.069 So transparency is key. Definitely. And for the 00:07:32.069 --> 00:07:34.750 students, their duty is to listen and understand 00:07:34.750 --> 00:07:37.110 and to recognize the importance of ambiguity. 00:07:37.649 --> 00:07:41.149 It's not a free pass. It's an invitation to learn 00:07:41.149 --> 00:07:44.189 how to handle situations that require judgment 00:07:44.189 --> 00:07:47.050 and adaptation. But... Practically speaking, 00:07:47.250 --> 00:07:49.860 I mean... Teachers are already stretched thin. 00:07:50.339 --> 00:07:52.480 Do they really have time to explain the nuances 00:07:52.480 --> 00:07:55.519 of every slightly relaxed rule? And won't students, 00:07:55.620 --> 00:07:57.600 especially younger ones, just push the boundaries 00:07:57.600 --> 00:08:00.779 constantly? Couldn't it lead to nonstop negotiation 00:08:00.779 --> 00:08:03.680 instead of learning math or history? That's the 00:08:03.680 --> 00:08:05.500 challenge for sure. And it probably means this 00:08:05.500 --> 00:08:07.399 isn't an all or nothing approach. Ackerman isn't 00:08:07.399 --> 00:08:09.540 saying ditch clarity everywhere. Right. We still 00:08:09.540 --> 00:08:11.459 need those safety rules, those operational rules. 00:08:11.839 --> 00:08:14.139 Absolutely. The ones that make us effective and 00:08:14.139 --> 00:08:16.459 efficient. But the argument is that for some 00:08:16.459 --> 00:08:19.839 rules, the truly insignificant ones. It's worth 00:08:19.839 --> 00:08:22.120 the investment. Maybe a teacher picks just one 00:08:22.120 --> 00:08:25.259 or two areas to introduce this ambiguity. And 00:08:25.259 --> 00:08:27.420 yes, it takes time initially to explain the why 00:08:27.420 --> 00:08:29.759 and guide students. But you frame it as a teaching 00:08:29.759 --> 00:08:32.220 moment itself. You're teaching how to think, 00:08:32.320 --> 00:08:34.899 how to discern, not just what to do. So it's 00:08:34.899 --> 00:08:36.539 part of the curriculum in a way, learning to 00:08:36.539 --> 00:08:39.139 navigate the gray areas. Exactly. For younger 00:08:39.139 --> 00:08:42.440 kids, it might be simpler choices, more scaffolding. 00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:45.759 But the goal is the same. build that capacity 00:08:45.759 --> 00:08:48.000 to deal with ambiguity, because the world outside 00:08:48.000 --> 00:08:51.419 the classroom demands it. It's connecting school 00:08:51.419 --> 00:08:54.240 rules back to real world skills. It really is 00:08:54.240 --> 00:08:56.419 a crucial skill. So wrapping up this deep dive, 00:08:56.580 --> 00:08:58.440 we've kind of explored this balancing act, haven't 00:08:58.440 --> 00:09:01.299 we? Between the absolute need for clear rules 00:09:01.299 --> 00:09:05.159 in some areas, safety, operations, and this other, 00:09:05.500 --> 00:09:09.259 perhaps equally vital skill of learning to navigate 00:09:09.259 --> 00:09:11.840 ambiguity. Knowing when to follow the letter 00:09:11.840 --> 00:09:13.759 of the law and what a bit of flexibility, a bit 00:09:13.759 --> 00:09:16.340 of judgment is actually the better path. Yeah, 00:09:16.480 --> 00:09:18.659 that ability to discern which situation you're 00:09:18.659 --> 00:09:21.320 in seems key. Absolutely. And that's priceless 00:09:21.320 --> 00:09:23.440 in a world that just keeps changing. So maybe 00:09:23.440 --> 00:09:26.240 the question for you, the listener, is what stands 00:09:26.240 --> 00:09:28.679 out to you from this? Think about your own life, 00:09:28.919 --> 00:09:31.610 your work. How often do you run into rules that 00:09:31.610 --> 00:09:35.169 feel maybe insignificant, as Ackerman puts it? 00:09:35.230 --> 00:09:38.250 Or rules where the original why seems lost. Right. 00:09:38.809 --> 00:09:41.090 And could questioning that rule or maybe just 00:09:41.090 --> 00:09:43.950 explaining its ambiguity lead to something better? 00:09:44.490 --> 00:09:46.809 A deeper understanding, maybe even a more effective 00:09:46.809 --> 00:09:49.610 way of doing things. Ackerman's piece really 00:09:49.610 --> 00:09:53.460 pushes us to think. maybe appreciating ambiguity 00:09:53.460 --> 00:09:55.840 rather than always demanding perfect clarity 00:09:55.840 --> 00:09:58.539 is actually a really powerful tool for growth. 00:09:58.980 --> 00:10:00.740 It's a fascinating thought. Looking at rules 00:10:00.740 --> 00:10:03.279 not just as constraints, but sometimes as opportunities 00:10:03.279 --> 00:10:06.480 to practice judgment. Food for thought. Definitely. 00:10:07.320 --> 00:10:09.200 Well, thank you for joining us on this deep dive 00:10:09.200 --> 00:10:11.679 into the complex world of rules and ambiguity. 00:10:12.200 --> 00:10:13.600 We hope we gave you something to think about. 00:10:13.879 --> 00:10:16.259 Keep questioning, keep exploring, and we'll catch 00:10:16.259 --> 00:10:16.700 you next time.