We had an unusual class, where students were tod to spread out and a set of "rules" were displayed on the board. The activity "rules" were clear; yet, also broad in a way that changes could be made easily. Before starting, Mr. Paterson introduced this game as a means to scrutinize our creativity, which was probably one of the main reasons people started thinking in ways that could make their answers unique. I found it interesting how Mr.Paterson showed us one common way of doing this activity by drawing a 3x3 circle format. This example became a big clue for the majority of students, which made them start off by drawing the same 3x3 circles.
I realized that the first rule, which was to draw 9 circles in a square pattern, did not specify the structure of the square. Therefore, I decided to set aside the idea of drawing 3x3 circles and drew 4 circles in one straight line. As long as there were four circles in the corner, I perceived it as a square pattern, which allowed me to draw 9 circles and complete the first task (4 lines). In the process of trying to connect it with 4 lines, I accidentally found the answer to the next task (3 lines). I was not really thinking of being creative, but rather drawing circles randomly. From this activity and the one prior, I now understand how stressing things out or aiming for a certain goal, does not necessarily speed the process, and that simplistic views are also imperative.
Comments
Post a Comment