He has told us throughout his speech, that the current educational system kills children’s creativity. His opinion was really new and impressed me, but I half agree, and half disagree.

First, he said, “We don’t grow into creativity, we grow out of it.” It’s true that most people feel the things that we can do are being limited, and our brain are losing creativity, as we get older. But I think nobody knows how to become creative, because it’s not that creativity is what we can be taught from others, or taught at school. I felt what he said was irrelevant to education. I might hit on a great story on the train. I might create a fantastic computer. So I cannot say categorically that we grow out of creativity, because we cannot judge whether we grow into creativity or not, until we die.

Second, he casted a question taking a girl who likes dancing for example, “Why does every education system on earth have the same hierarchy of subjects?” I think that the girl’s good point was hard to be found unless people around her considered it as a good point. As he said in the other part, intelligence is divers, dynamic and wonderfully interactive. So, I think it’s very important to have the same hierarchy of subjects in order to be intelligent.

Third, in his opinion in the last part, we cannot develop children’s originality, or creativity unless we change the whole system of public education around the world, which highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they’re not, because the thing they were good at at school wasn’t valued or was actually stigmatized. It’s great if we can find talented sport players, dancers, musicians, artists, with his way of thinking. But, I don’t think everyone has a talent, everyone can be like famous stars, everyone should be treated like that dancing girl. There are not so many geniuses. One class usually consists of about 80% ordinary students, I think. They don’t have something distinctive, and “that something” cannot be found so easily, so they must find “that something” in the future. Even though he said, “the whole system of public education is a protracted process of university entrance…”, I think it’s the right period for students to find something that will be a strong point for them in the future. It’s a good opportunity to find something in this period, so I think it’s not a protracted process. I believe what we are studying now will have some meaning, even if it’s not useful now.