Category Archives: 中文

中文内容

申请了Google Street View Trekker背包式街景图摄像机

我已经申请了Google街景开放项目快一个月了,貌似还没有答复,朝好方面考虑就是:还没驳回:(

Street View Trekker背包式街景图摄影机

street-view-trekker

6月27日Goolge宣布了Street View Trekker的第三方开放计划,通过申请的组织可以借用Trekker的设备,对于一个地理摄影迷来说,自然非常渴望第一时间尝试,填写了申请。street-view-trekker-640x360
这套Street View Trekker是由一部Android系统操作的摄影系统,操作者背后背的设备有15个不同角度的镜头,经过处理将这些相片组合成360度的全景图,可以保持两秒的拍摄速度记录沿途风景。

trekker


1306281236532eqr4
Google背包街景机项目的首个参与者是夏威夷旅游局,它已经拍摄了夏威夷岛、活火山、国家公园等。 谷歌将会在未来几个月接受来自世界的申请,申请者可以是旅游部门、非营利组织、政府机构、大学和研究团体。1306281236537hlmb
通过Trekker的项目申请链接申请这个项目时,我填写了2套拍摄计划:

一个是我居住的中国上海,每天在instagram上分享一两张图片已经有些枯燥了。

第二是香格里拉和拉萨(没去过),这个在我的徒步行走的计划表里太长时间了。。。

话说申请通过的可能性不大, 原因:1. 申请开放只针对很小数量第三方,2.虽然时面向全球,但中国Google Map有难以跨域的国家政策障碍,详情见wikipedia  (或需自备梯子)。地图在过去几百年一直是有重要战略意义的国家管控资产,但面对数字化的创新,原来的政策限制会被技术革命一一击破。对于有关部门来说,积极提高自身认知水平,还是固步自封蒙上自己和大众的双眼?it is your call.

如果申请没有获得批准(极大可能),我想征询下资深Geeker的意见:从技术上同步控制15个手机镜头的复杂程度有多高? 是否有可能DIY一套类似的设备?不一定要分享到Google map,希望可以同时发布在instagram或者foursquare之类含有地理信息的图库中。求大神。

全球食物浪费的丑闻

这项揭露全球粮食浪费丑闻的任务 从我15岁起便开始了。 我买了一些猪。当时我住在萨塞克斯郡。 我开始用最传统 和环保的方式饲养它们。 我去了学校的厨房,我说, “把那些我朋友们所看不上的 残羹剩饭都给我。” 我去了当地的面包店,向他们要了那些不新鲜的面包。 我去了当地的蔬菜水果店,还去找了一个 正在丢弃土豆的农民, 仅仅是因为它们形状和尺寸不符合超市的需求。 一切都很顺利。我养的那些猪把食物残渣 都转变成了美味的猪肉。我把猪肉 卖给学校里朋友们的家长,并且我也从中赚到 额外的零花钱。

但是后来我意识到,我喂猪所用的大部分食物 都是人类可食用的, 而我也只触到了问题表面, 在整条食物链的最上面, 在超市里,在蔬菜水果店里,在面包店里,在我们的家里, 在工厂和农场里,我们都在大量地、疯狂地浪费着食物。 那些超市的负责人甚至都不愿意跟我讨论 那些他们到底浪费了多少粮食的话题。 我曾经绕到超市的后面。我亲眼目睹了那些装满食物的垃圾桶 被锁在卡车里,然后被送往垃圾场填埋, 然后我就在想,肯定有更合理的处理食物的方法, 而不是浪费它们。

一天早上,当我正在喂我的猪时, 我看到一块看起来很美味的晒干的西红柿面包, 它们常常会出现。 我抓起了它, 坐了下来,跟我的那些猪共进早餐。(笑声) 这就是我第一次做出这种后来被我称呼为“免费素食主义”的举动, 实际上体现出的是对浪费食物的不满, 并且提供了浪费食物的解决方案, 那就是,坐下来,吃完它, 而不是把它丢掉。 这种行为变成一种对大型产业 浪费食物行为的抵抗, 更重要的是,去向大众揭露, 当我们在说被丢弃的食品时, 我们说的不是腐烂的食品,我们说的不是 那些难以下咽的食物。 我们说的是那些完好的,新鲜的食物 在被大规模地浪费掉。

终于,我决定写一本书, 来说明这个问题在国际上的广度。 这个显示出的是 世界上每个国家对食物可能的 浪费程度。 但是很可惜,实际、确凿的数据很难统计, 因此,为了证明我的观点,我首先得通过 一些替代的方式来揭露 有多少食物被浪费了。 于是,我把各国的食物供应量 跟其自身的实际消耗量 拿来做比较。 这些数据是基于食物摄入量的调查问卷基础上, 再加上肥胖程度和很多其他不同的因素, 来得出一个大概的 关于究竟有多少食物真正进入了人们的口中的推测。 表格中间的黑线 是食物消耗量的大概数值 当中包括了一定量的无法避免的浪费。 浪费永远都会存在。 我还不至于不切实际到去 以为我们可以生活在一个毫无浪费的世界里。 但是那条黑线显示出 一个具备良好的,稳定的,安全的 有营养的食品的国家应该供应给每个人的食物量。 你会发现,世界上绝大多数的国家 都处于这条线的上方, 代表着不必要的盈余,也反映出 每个国家的食物浪费量。

当一个国家变富裕时,它会投入越来越多的资产 来购买大量的、额外的存货 导致商店和餐馆里产生更多的浪费, 同时你可以看到,大多数欧洲 和北美的国家 消耗着150%到200%的 国家总人口营养需求量。 所以一个像美国这样的国家 在它商店货架上和餐馆里所拥有的食物 比实际需要喂饱所有美国人的量还多出一倍。

但是当我处理这些大量的数据时, 一件深深震撼我的事就是, 如你所见,数据点逐渐趋于平缓。 各个国家的点很快升至150的标记,而在到达这个界限后 便趋于平稳,而非像你所预期的那样 继续上升。 所以我决定更近一步的解读这些数据 来看这到底是准确的还是错误的。 这就是我所发现的。 如果不仅仅包括是那些最终 流向在商店和餐馆的食物,而且还包括 人们用来饲养牲畜的食物: 那些玉米、大豆、小麦,等等人类本可以食用 但是却选择给牲畜用来增肥 以便制造更多肉类和奶制品, 你会发现,大多数富裕的国家 消耗着它人口所需要的 三到四倍多的食物。 一个像美国这样的国家有着它人口所需要的 四倍的食物。

当人们在讨论着需要扩大全球 粮食产量来喂饱2050年之际 预计的全球90亿人口, 我总是会想起这些图表。 实际上,富裕的国家为我们和饥饿之间 提供庞大的缓冲。 我们之前从未有过如此庞大的盈余。 在很多方面,这是一个人类文明的成功的故事: 在农业富余方面 我们达到了12,000年前所定的目标。 这是一个成功的故事。这一直都是一个成功的故事。 但是我们现在要认识到的是我们已经 要达到地球所能承受的生态极限, 每天,当我们砍下一片片树林, 来增加越来越多的食物, 当我们从渐渐耗尽的水资源中提取水, 当我们排放着化石燃料的废气 来增加越来越多的食物, 然后再把这么多的食物都丢弃, 我们必须想一想我们能开始保存下些什么。

昨天,我去了一家我常去的 本地的超市 去察看他们丢弃了些什么。 我找到了很多包饼干 还有很多水果蔬菜和其他的一些东西 都在废弃物之列。 然后我想到,这个可以作为今天的一个象征。

所以我想让你们把这9块我在垃圾桶里找到的饼干 想象成全球粮食供应, 好吗?我们最初有9块。 这是全球每年的食物产量。 第一块饼干在我们离开农场之前 就会失去。 这个问题主要与 农业工作发展有关,不管它是 缺乏基础设施,制冷设备,杀菌技术, 以及粮油店,甚至基本的水果箱,这意味着 食物在离开产地之前就会被浪费掉。 下面三块饼干是在我们决定用来 饲养牲畜用的食物:玉米,小麦和大豆。 不幸的是,我们的野兽们是低效的动物们, 它们把2/3都转换成粪便和热量, 因此我们丢失了两块饼干,我们只保留下这一块 代表肉类和奶制品。 还有两块我们会直接丢进垃圾桶里。 这就是我们大多数人所认为的 食物浪费,那些最终到了垃圾桶里的, 最终到了超市的垃圾桶里的, 最终到了餐馆的垃圾桶里的。于是我们又失去了两块, 而我们只为自己留下四块能食用的饼干。 这种利用全球资源的方式并不高效, 特别是当你想起这个世界上有多少亿的人们 正在挨饿着。

研究过这些数据,我还需要 演示这些食物最终去了那里。 它去了哪里呢?我们习惯于看到那些在我们盘子上的 食物,但是那些在这之前不见的 食物去了哪里呢?

超市是个容易开始着手的地方。 而这是我爱好的结果, 就是非官方的垃圾桶检查。(笑声) 你会想这很奇怪,但是如果我们能靠企业 来告诉我们他们在店里都在做些什么, 我们就不必要偷偷摸摸的跑到店后面, 打开垃圾桶去看里面有什么。 但是这就是你或多或少 能在英国,欧洲和北美的大街小巷里看到的。 这表明了庞大的食物浪费, 但是在写书期间我发现 这些显而易见的大量浪费 其实只是冰山一角。 当你开始从食物供应链往上, 你就会发现庞大规模的食物浪费 正在发生

我想让在座的各位来次举手投票: 如果你的家里有一条切片面包, 谁会把那些面包皮—— 就是那第一片和最后一片面包片—— 哪些家庭会把这些吃掉? 好的,大部分人,不是所有人,但是绝大多数人, 而这也是,我很高兴地说,全球都是这样, 但是有没有人看到超市或者三明治店里 世上任何地方卖的三明治 上面有面包皮?(笑声) 至少我没见过。 所以我继续想,这些面包皮都去了哪里?(笑声) 这就是答案,很不幸: 每天都有13,000块新鲜面包 从这一个工厂里产出,这是非常新鲜的、刚出炉的面包。 在我访问这个工厂的同一年, 我去了巴基斯坦,那儿2008年时还有很多人还在挨饿。 这是全球粮食供应紧张造成的。 是我们导致了供给紧张, 我们把食物丢进英国垃圾桶里 还有世界各处。我们把 那些饥饿的人赖以生存的食物从商店货架上拿了下来。

往上走一步,你就能找到农民, 他们把三分之一或者更多的 收成都丢掉,只因为外形标准。 举例说,这个农民投资了16,000英镑 来种菠菜,但是没有收割一片叶子, 因为菠菜之间长了一些草。 那些外形不完美的土豆 都归猪所有。 对超市来说太小的欧洲萝卜, 特内里费的西红柿, 佛罗里达的橙子, 厄瓜多尔的香蕉,那是我去年去过的地方, 都被丢弃了。这是厄瓜多尔的 一个香蕉种植园一天之内的废弃量。 全部被丢弃了,明明完全都能食用, 只因为它们的形状或者大小不对。

如果我们对水果和蔬菜这样做, 我们肯定也会这样对待动物。 肝脏,肺脏,头部,尾部, 肾脏,睾丸, 所有这些被丢弃的脏器都是传统意义上 可口又营养的美食部分。 最近30年,内脏消费量在 英国和美国减少了一半。 结果是,这些东西最好的下场是喂狗吃了, 或者被焚烧。 这个男人,在中国西部的新疆省喀什市, 正在做他的民族佳肴。 它叫做羊内脏。 既美味又有营养, 还有我去喀什的时候学到, 它代表食物浪费的禁忌。 当我坐在路边的咖啡馆里, 一个厨师来跟我说话,我刚吃完了我碗里的饭, 而话谈到一半,他不说话了 然后开始对着我的碗皱眉头。 我想,“天啊,我打破了哪些禁忌? 我如何侮辱了这个厨师?“ 他指着我碗底的三粒米, 然后说”吃干净。” (笑声) 我想,”天啊,你知道,我到世界各地 告诉大家停止浪费食物。 这个人居然在我的游戏里让我输得一败涂地。”(笑声)

但是这给了我信心。它给了我信心,我们人类 有力量来停止这种悲剧般的资源浪费 如果我们把大规模的食物浪费视作 不被社会接受的, 如果我们发出声音,告诉企业, 告诉政府我们不想再看到食物被浪费, 我们有能力来带来变化。

鱼,40%到60%的欧洲的鱼 被丢弃在海里,他们甚至都没上过岸。 在我们的家里,我们已经失去了与食品的接触。 这是一个我在三棵生菜上做的实验。 谁把生菜放在冰箱里? 大部分人。左边的 是在冰箱放了10天的。 中间的那棵,是放在我厨房桌上的。没什么区别。 右边的这棵我把它视为精心修剪的花。 它是一个有生命的机体,我把它一片一片切下来, 放在一个有水的花瓶里, 它在两周后都是好的。

有些食物浪费,像我在一开始说的那样, 是不可避免的,所以问题是, 最好的解决方法是什么? 我15岁就回答了那个问题。 实际上,人类在6,000年前就回答了这个问题: 我们驯化了猪, 把食物残渣转换成食物。 然而,在欧洲,这种做法已成为非法行为 自从2001年口蹄疫爆发后。 这不科学,也毫无必要。 如果你做饭给猪,就像 你做饭给人类一样,就是安全的。 同时也能减少很多资源利用。 现在,欧洲依赖着从南美进口 几百万吨黄豆, 其生产导致全球气候变暖, 大片森林遭砍伐以及生物多样性的丧失, 来饲养在欧洲的牲畜。 同时我们扔掉几百万吨 可以饲养这些牲畜的食物。 如果我们那样做了,把它喂给猪,我们可以减少 那么多的二氧化碳。 如果我们浪费的食物, 这是现在政府最喜欢用的处理剩余的食物的方法, 进行厌氧消化,将食物渣滓 转换成汽油来生产电, 你能省下微不足道的448公斤的二氧化碳 在每吨食物残渣里。把这些食物残渣喂给猪更好。 在战争时期我们就懂得。(笑声)

有一线希望:它在全球已经拉开序幕, 就是寻求解决粮食的浪费的方法。 Feeding the 5000是一个我在2009年第一次组织的活动。 我们用本会被丢弃的食物 喂饱了5000个人。 从那以后,在伦敦又进行过一次, 全国各地以及国际上也在进行着。 这是所有组织在一起 赞美食物,并同意处理食物的最好方法 就是吃它和享受它,而不要去浪费。 为了我们所赖以生存在的地球, 为了我们的孩子, 为了其它 跟我们一起分享地球的生物, 我们是陆生动物,而我们依赖我们的土地 来给我们供应食物。此刻,我们正在摧毁我们的土地 来栽种没有人吃的食物。 停止浪费食物。

网友@艾力亚尔是个疯子 专门把其中喀什的一段给截屏出来

——————————————English Script————————————————–

The job of uncovering the global food waste scandal started for me when I was 15 years old. I bought some pigs. I was living in Sussex. And I started to feed them in the most traditional and environmentally friendly way. I went to my school kitchen, and I said, “Give me the scraps that my school friends have turned their noses up at.” I went to the local baker and took their stale bread. I went to the local greengrocer, and I went to a farmer who was throwing away potatoes because they were the wrong shape or size for supermarkets. This was great. My pigs turned that food waste into delicious pork. I sold that pork to my school friends’ parents, and I made a good pocket money addition to my teenage allowance.

But I noticed that most of the food that I was giving my pigs was in fact fit for human consumption, and that I was only scratching the surface, and that right the way up the food supply chain, in supermarkets, greengrocers, bakers, in our homes, in factories and farms, we were hemorrhaging out food. Supermarkets didn’t even want to talk to me about how much food they were wasting. I’d been round the back. I’d seen bins full of food being locked and then trucked off to landfill sites, and I thought, surely there is something more sensible to do with food than waste it.

One morning, when I was feeding my pigs, I noticed a particularly tasty-looking sun-dried tomato loaf that used to crop up from time to time. I grabbed hold of it, sat down, and ate my breakfast with my pigs. (Laughter) That was the first act of what I later learned to call freeganism, really an exhibition of the injustice of food waste, and the provision of the solution to food waste, which is simply to sit down and eat food, rather than throwing it away. That became, as it were, a way of confronting large businesses in the business of wasting food, and exposing, most importantly, to the public, that when we’re talking about food being thrown away, we’re not talking about rotten stuff, we’re not talking about stuff that’s beyond the pale. We’re talking about good, fresh food that is being wasted on a colossal scale.

Eventually, I set about writing my book, really to demonstrate the extent of this problem on a global scale. What this shows is a nation-by-nation breakdown of the likely level of food waste in each country in the world. Unfortunately, empirical data, good, hard stats, don’t exist, and therefore to prove my point, I first of all had to find some proxy way of uncovering how much food was being wasted. So I took the food supply of every single country and I compared it to what was actually likely to be being consumed in each country. That’s based on diet intake surveys, it’s based on levels of obesity, it’s based on a range of factors that gives you an approximate guess as to how much food is actually going into people’s mouths. That black line in the middle of that table is the likely level of consumption with an allowance for certain levels of inevitable waste. There will always be waste. I’m not that unrealistic that I think we can live in a waste-free world. But that black line shows what a food supply should be in a country if they allow for a good, stable, secure, nutritional diet for every person in that country. Any dot above that line, and you’ll quickly notice that that includes most countries in the world, represents unnecessary surplus, and is likely to reflect levels of waste in each country.

As a country gets richer, it invests more and more in getting more and more surplus into its shops and restaurants, and as you can see, most European and North American countries fall between 150 and 200 percent of the nutritional requirements of their populations. So a country like America has twice as much food on its shop shelves and in its restaurants than is actually required to feed the American people.

But the thing that really struck me, when I plotted all this data, and it was a lot of numbers, was that you can see how it levels off. Countries rapidly shoot towards that 150 mark, and then they level off, and they don’t really go on rising as you might expect. So I decided to unpack that data a little bit further to see if that was true or false. And that’s what I came up with. If you include not just the food that ends up in shops and restaurants, but also the food that people feed to livestock, the maize, the soy, the wheat, that humans could eat but choose to fatten livestock instead to produce increasing amounts of meat and dairy products, what you find is that most rich countries have between three and four times the amount of food that their population needs to feed itself. A country like America has four times the amount of food that it needs.

When people talk about the need to increase global food production to feed those nine billion people that are expected on the planet by 2050, I always think of these graphs. The fact is, we have an enormous buffer in rich countries between ourselves and hunger. We’ve never had such gargantuan surpluses before. In many ways, this is a great success story of human civilization, of the agricultural surpluses that we set out to achieve 12,000 years ago. It is a success story. It has been a success story. But what we have to recognize now is that we are reaching the ecological limits that our planet can bear, and when we chop down forests, as we are every day, to grow more and more food, when we extract water from depleting water reserves, when we emit fossil fuel emissions in the quest to grow more and more food, and then we throw away so much of it, we have to think about what we can start saving.

And yesterday, I went to one of the local supermarkets that I often visit to inspect, if you like, what they’re throwing away. I found quite a few packets of biscuits amongst all the fruit and vegetables and everything else that was in there. And I thought, well this could serve as a symbol for today.

So I want you to imagine that these nine biscuits that I found in the bin represent the global food supply, okay? We start out with nine. That’s what’s in fields around the world every single year. The first biscuit we’re going to lose before we even leave the farm. That’s a problem primarily associated with developing work agriculture, whether it’s a lack of infrastructure, refrigeration, pasteurization, grain stores, even basic fruit crates, which means that food goes to waste before it even leaves the fields. The next three biscuits are the foods that we decide to feed to livestock, the maize, the wheat and the soya. Unfortunately, our beasts are inefficient animals, and they turn two-thirds of that into feces and heat, so we’ve lost those two, and we’ve only kept this one in meat and dairy products. Two more we’re going to throw away directly into bins. This is what most of us think of when we think of food waste, what ends up in the garbage, what ends up in supermarket bins, what ends up in restaurant bins. We’ve lost another two, and we’ve left ourselves with just four biscuits to feed on. That is not a superlatively efficient use of global resources, especially when you think of the billion hungry people that exist already in the world.

Having gone through the data, I then needed to demonstrate where that food ends up. Where does it end up? We’re used to seeing the stuff on our plates, but what about all the stuff that goes missing in between?

Supermarkets are an easy place to start. This is the result of my hobby, which is unofficial bin inspections. (Laughter) Strange you might think, but if we could rely on corporations to tell us what they were doing in the back of their stores, we wouldn’t need to go sneaking around the back, opening up bins and having a look at what’s inside. But this is what you can see more or less on every street corner in Britain, in Europe, in North America. It represents a colossal waste of food, but what I discovered whilst I was writing my book was that this very evident abundance of waste was actually the tip of the iceberg. When you start going up the supply chain, you find where the real food waste is happening on a gargantuan scale.

Can I have a show of hands if you have a loaf of sliced bread in your house? Who lives in a household where that crust — that slice at the first and last end of each loaf — who lives in a household where it does get eaten? Okay, most people, not everyone, but most people, and this is, I’m glad to say, what I see across the world, and yet has anyone seen a supermarket or sandwich shop anywhere in the world that serves sandwiches with crusts on it? (Laughter) I certainly haven’t. So I kept on thinking, where do those crusts go? (Laughter) This is the answer, unfortunately: 13,000 slices of fresh bread coming out of this one single factory every single day, day-fresh bread. In the same year that I visited this factory, I went to Pakistan, where people in 2008 were going hungry as a result of a squeeze on global food supplies. We contribute to that squeeze by depositing food in bins here in Britain and elsewhere in the world. We take food off the market shelves that hungry people depend on.

Go one step up, and you get to farmers, who throw away sometimes a third or even more of their harvest because of cosmetic standards. This farmer, for example, has invested 16,000 pounds in growing spinach, not one leaf of which he harvested, because there was a little bit of grass growing in amongst it. Potatoes that are cosmetically imperfect, all going for pigs. Parsnips that are too small for supermarket specifications, tomatoes in Tenerife, oranges in Florida, bananas in Ecuador, where I visited last year, all being discarded. This is one day’s waste from one banana plantation in Ecuador. All being discarded, perfectly edible, because they’re the wrong shape or size.

If we do that to fruit and vegetables, you bet we can do it to animals too. Liver, lungs, heads, tails, kidneys, testicles, all of these things which are traditional, delicious and nutritious parts of our gastronomy go to waste. Offal consumption has halved in Britain and America in the last 30 years. As a result, this stuff gets fed to dogs at best, or is incinerated. This man, in Kashgar, Xinjiang province, in Western China, is serving up his national dish. It’s called sheep’s organs. It’s delicious, it’s nutritious, and as I learned when I went to Kashgar, it symbolizes their taboo against food waste. I was sitting in a roadside cafe. A chef came to talk to me, I finished my bowl, and halfway through the conversation, he stopped talking and he started frowning into my bowl. I thought, “My goodness, what taboo have I broken? How have I insulted my host?” He pointed at three grains of rice at the bottom of my bowl, and he said, “Clean.” (Laughter) I thought, “My God, you know, I go around the world telling people to stop wasting food. This guy has thrashed me at my own game.” (Laughter)

But it gave me faith. It gave me faith that we, the people, do have the power to stop this tragic waste of resources if we regard it as socially unacceptable to waste food on a colossal scale, if we make noise about it, tell corporations about it, tell governments we want to see an end to food waste, we do have the power to bring about that change.

Fish, 40 to 60 percent of European fish are discarded at sea, they don’t even get landed. In our homes, we’ve lost touch with food. This is an experiment I did on three lettuces. Who keeps lettuces in their fridge? Most people. The one on the left was kept in a fridge for 10 days. The one in the middle, on my kitchen table. Not much difference. The one on the right I treated like cut flowers. It’s a living organism, cut the slice off, stuck it in a vase of water, it was all right for another two weeks after this.

Some food waste, as I said at the beginning, will inevitably arise, so the question is, what is the best thing to do with it? I answered that question when I was 15. In fact, humans answered that question 6,000 years ago: We domesticated pigs to turn food waste back into food. And yet, in Europe, that practice has become illegal since 2001 as a result of the foot-and-mouth outbreak. It’s unscientific. It’s unnecessary. If you cook food for pigs, just as if you cook food for humans, it is rendered safe. It’s also a massive saving of resources. At the moment, Europe depends on importing millions of tons of soy from South America, where its production contributes to global warming, to deforestation, to biodiversity loss, to feed livestock here in Europe. At the same time we throw away millions of tons of food waste which we could and should be feeding them. If we did that, and fed it to pigs, we would save that amount of carbon. If we feed our food waste which is the current government favorite way of getting rid of food waste, to anaerobic digestion, which turns food waste into gas to produce electricity, you save a paltry 448 kilograms of carbon dioxide per ton of food waste. It’s much better to feed it to pigs. We knew that during the war. (Laughter)

A silver lining: It has kicked off globally, the quest to tackle food waste. Feeding the 5,000 is an event I first organized in 2009. We fed 5,000 people all on food that otherwise would have been wasted. Since then, it’s happened again in London, it’s happening internationally, and across the country. It’s a way of organizations coming together to celebrate food, to say the best thing to do with food is to eat and enjoy it, and to stop wasting it. For the sake of the planet we live on, for the sake of our children, for the sake of all the other organisms that share our planet with us, we are a terrestrial animal, and we depend on our land for food. At the moment, we are trashing our land to grow food that no one eats. Stop wasting food. Thank you very much.

【TED2013】Rose George: 咱们谈谈大便吧,都严肃点!


Rose George思考、研究、编写、讨论公共卫生问题。这位英国记者兼作家认为,腹泻是一项大规模杀伤性武器,厕所的缺少是导致当前最大的公众健康危机的根本原因。2012年,世界上五分之一的人无法使用公厕。

George认为,解决这个问题的关键是“不再将厕所锁在门后”。不要再假装“与水相关的疾病”引起了世上无数苦难,而是“与贫穷相关的疾病”所引起的,只要有厕所便可解决。

只要我们开始行动,就可以将人类粪便变废为宝。

TED六一儿童节特辑

此次以后六一儿童节对我有不同的意义了。

以前曾经在微博上分享过很多适合儿童的TED演讲,但这次要为孩子做过一个特辑,当然,很大程度上这是给父母们看的。

ted_for_kids

1.  15张照片见证父女情缘

多年前摄影师史提芬阿迪斯站在纽约街头抱着他的女儿,妻子帮他们拍了一张照片。这张照片引发了每年一度的父女小传统,阿迪斯和女儿每年在同一地方摆同一个姿势拍照。阿提斯分享了这15张珍贵的照片,并探讨为什么这些重复的小传统意义非凡。

2. 大人能从小孩子这里学到什么

在2012年多哈的TEDxSummit上和邹奇奇(Adora Svitak)的母亲相识,然后过去1年多就一直在Facebook关注这家人,每天看着她和家庭共同成长,看着一个稚气未脱却毫无怯场的小姑娘出落成亭亭玉立的少女,看她如何和小伙伴去爬山,晚上去数星星,看她如何游学多个大学,出席联合国等多个论坛,和不同的人沟通交流… …其实我想到的更多是我的孩子,我会努力让我的孩子有一个开放的视野,不要管什么补习班,将来的大学不是你的目标,不要让分数成为禁锢你幼小心灵的紧箍咒,只要你有好奇心,爸爸和你一起去探索,无论你想知道宇宙洪荒的始终,还是想了解人性深处五颜六色善恶美丑;爸爸会培养你读书、伴你远游、帮你认识各行的奇葩人物,为你打破阻挡你思考的各种墙。

575743_10200917351478676_1385704158_n

3. 培养孩子判断的能力

2010TEDx大会上,年仅11岁的Birke Baehr开门见山地指出他眼中工业化食品体系的阴暗面:1转基因食品 2农业化肥 3化学杀虫剂 4食物美容,一个橙子从“东施”变到“西施”。他自己希望成为一个有机农场主:钱迟早是要花的,看你是花在医院里,还是花在健康的食品上咯!TEDX上的讲稿是自己独立完成的。至于他演讲的内容中转基因食品是否有致病的可能,引起很大争论,在这点上我也不知道,这个视频希望像这个孩童样有自己思考和判别的能力、有这样的表达能力。

4.获奖青少年,科技在行动

2011年,三个女孩包揽了第一届谷歌全球科学展的头奖。在TEDx女性大会上,劳伦·霍奇, 斯里·波色和内奥米·沙阿展示了她们无与伦比的项目–以及她们如何对科学产生了热情

5. 好奇心和主动性可以让14岁的孩子做个核反应器


14岁在自家车库成功取得核聚变,去年获得Thiel Prize十万美元的奖金,今年TED2013再次登台,用新的途径解决一个老问题:核裂变。他满怀激情地介绍了自己设计的安全的、小型模块式的核裂变反应器,并相信这是解决全球能源危机的下一突破,这能利用冷战时的核废料,也能解决人类的能源问题,甚至为推动人类太空的探索做出贡献。

这个少年通过网络自学建核反应堆。这是新一代的学习方式,这种自发主动行为靠的是兴趣。这是一场革命?No,始于维多利亚时代,注重听说读写、记忆训练的所谓现代教育已经成为模式僵化的代名词,相对于网络化自学,它无法给学生提供及时有效的反馈,或者交互式教育,尤其对于这样有强烈主动性的孩子。创新教育才是寻回创造力的关键。
其实给孩子的TED演讲很多,先整理5个出来。

Amplify Festival澳洲最棒的创新商业论坛

In the heart of AMP’s offices in Sydney (June 3 — 7) and Melbourne (June 7), you are invited to spend a day or a week unpacking the future with some of the world’s boldest innovators, academics and industry luminaries.

什么是Amplify Festival?
Amplify Fest大会2009年由AMP创意执行官Annalie Killian组织发起,每两年召开一次,为其一周,来自全球的科技、商业、市场、创意等各个领域的数十位演讲人齐聚悉尼, 已经成为澳大利亚最大的创意、科技、领导力、商业等跨界论坛.

Amplify论坛邀请的嘉宾来自全球各个领域,其中不少重量级演讲人本身也曾经出现在TED和TEDx舞台上,在ideas、innovation这样的大概念下,有一定重合度。2009年时Amplify Festival的总监Annalie Killian女士曾经在访问上海时有过一面之缘,她当时畅想着努力将Amplify Festival打造成一个跨越思想、商业领导力领域、有国际化影响力的大会。Amplify更强调创新对于商业企业的影响,跨领域的演讲人如何在一周之内给商业领袖和企业员工带来冲击式的”思想洗涤”效果。2013年大会更强调的其中一点是传统领域企业如何应对新变革,比如金融保险行业,如何能在大数据、用户交互等等层面从内部组织结构调整到产品、服务设计实现不同的创新;企业领导层、员工如何能不断更新知识结构,无论对个人还是企业而言都有不断调整的迫切需求…

看2013年的规模和质量已经达成Annalie在几年前的心愿了。过去几次大会Annalie曾数度邀请我参加,都因为生活琐碎杂事所羁,今年不再错过,必须参加!

Amplify

Chris Anderson: How to Give a Killer Presentation

最近,Chris Anderson 先生在《哈佛商业周刊》发表了名为《如何做顶尖级演讲》(“How to give killer presentation”)的文章,从如何更好地叙述与表达想法,演讲形式、现场表现与多媒体应用等方面分享了30多年来作为TED 大会策展人的经验,并引用多个他在工作中接触到的事例。此文由TEDxNanjing 外事翻译部成员首度翻译,供大家学习参考,了解TED 筹备组的精神与思想,也欢迎喜爱思考的各位对本文内容及翻译进行交流,各平台宣传使用!http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_772d87330101epr5.html

Chris-Anderson-TED-007

如何做顶尖级演讲
By Chris Anderson
TEDxNanjing 翻译&校对 曾冉 胡雪妮

一年多前,我和一些同事们在去肯尼亚内罗毕的路途中遇到了一个12岁叫Richard Turere的马赛族男孩,他给我们讲述了一个非常有趣的故事。他家在一个开阔的国家公园边上,以蓄养家畜为生,然而有一个大麻烦就是得保护牲畜免受狮子的侵害,特别是在夜间。Richard发现在牧场放置灯泡并不能阻挡狮子,不过当他持着电筒巡查时,狮子就不靠近了。打小时候起,他就对电子器件无比痴迷,并通过例如拆卸父母的收音机来自学。运用这些经验,他设计了一个由太阳能板、汽车电池以及摩托车转向灯构成的灯光系统,可以依次开灯关灯,营造出一种运动感,他希望可以借此吓跑狮子。在他安装了灯光系统后,狮子再也没有攻击家畜了。之后不久,肯尼亚的其他村庄也开始安置Richard的“驱狮灯”。

这么鼓舞人心的故事十分值得通过TED大会让更多的观众来了解,然而表面看起来,Richard并不太可能成为TED讲者。他十分羞涩,英语也说的结结巴巴。一旦他尝试介绍述自己的发明就会变得语无伦次。坦白来说,我们很难想象一个小孩站在1400个观众面前演讲,更何况这些观众已经习惯了听诸如Bill Gates、Ken Robinson爵士或Jill Bolte Taylor等大师级的演讲。

可是Richard的故事是如此引人入胜,我们太想邀请他了。在2013年大会举办的几个月前,我们和他一起准备提纲,寻找合适的切入点以及简洁且有逻辑性的叙事方式。得益于Richard的这个发明,他获得了肯尼亚顶尖学校的奖学金。借助申请奖学金的机会,他得以在真正的现场观众面前练习了几次演讲。关键的一点是他得能够建立足够的自信,从而闪耀出自己的个性。最终当他在长滩发表TED演讲时,你可以说他紧张,但紧张仅使他更加充满魅力——观众们全神贯注地聆听着他说的每一个词语,他们被Richard的每一个笑容感染。演讲结束时,回应他的是爆发般的欢呼与持续不断的掌声。

Richard Turere:我的一个与狮子和平共处的发明

在13岁男孩——Richard Turere所生活的马赛族,所有的牛畜都是极其重要的。但是狮子的袭击却变得越来越猖獗。 在这个短片里,通过鼓舞人心的演讲,你将会看到,这个年轻的发明家是如何利用他发明的太阳能方法安全地驱赶走捕食的狮子。


http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_turere_a_peace_treaty_with_the_lions.html

自三十年前第一届TED大会以来,跨越各领域的讲者如政治家、音乐家和电视演员在观众面前表现的要比不知名的学术家、科学家和作者更从容,后者中的一些在演讲时会感到极不自在。这么多年来我们探索出一套程序,帮助缺乏经验的讲者表达、演练并最终做出为人喜爱的演讲。这个程序一般在大会举办前九到六个月开始,包括不断修订讲稿、排练以及大量的微调。我们也一直在改进具体的方法——因为公众演讲艺术也随着时代变化而改变——但从公众的反馈来看,基本的一些方法是很有效果的:TED视频自2006年上线以来至今已被观看十亿多次。

基于这方面的经验,我相信要做一个好的演讲需要很多训练。在区区几小时内,演讲的内容和叙述方式就可以由混沌不清变得精彩动人。我们团队所专注的18分钟甚至更短形式的演讲经验,对其他演讲者也很有用,无论是做IPO路演的CEO,发布新产品的品牌经理,亦或寻求风头的创业者。

表达你的故事

除非你有值得一说的东西,不然你就做不了一个好的演讲。同时,对你想说的内容进行提炼和升华,并恰当地表达出来是准备过程中最重要的部分。

我们都知道人们很喜欢听故事,那些最引人入胜的叙述结构中有着大量的隐喻。当我想到要做一个扣人心弦的演讲,在我脑海中的是去带着观众踏上一段旅途。一个成功的演讲是一个小小的奇迹,人们由此看到不同的世界。

如果你把故事当作一段旅途,最重要的便是找出从哪里开始、到哪里结束。想想观众们对你的故事可能已经有了哪些了解、他们有多关心它,以此找到合适的起点。若你高估了观众的知识储备或者对话题的兴趣,亦或你开始使用术语搞得太专业,你就失去观众了。最棒的演讲者会非常快速地介绍主题,解释他们自己为什么会对这个话题感兴趣,并说服观众相信他们也应该关注这个主题。

我在演讲者的初稿中发现的最大问题是会涵盖太多内容。你无法在一个演讲中去概括整个行业。如果你试图塞进所有你知道的东西,那就没时间去举出关键的细节了,而且你的演讲会因各种抽象的语言而晦涩难懂,从而会导致本身就懂的人能听得懂,而之前不懂的人就不知所云了。你需要举出具体的例子来使你的想法有血有肉充实起来。所以,把你的演讲局限在可以被解释清楚的范围内,并且尽可能举出例子使其生动。我们在筹备前期给讲者的反馈大多是建议他们不要太冲动,不要一心想把所有东西都纳入到一个短短的演讲,相反应当深入下去把内容细节化。不要告诉我们你研究的整个领域,要给我们分享你独一无二的贡献成果。

当然,过度阐述或者纠结于内容的意义也不可行。对这种情况有另一套补救的方法。记住观众们很聪明,让他们自己去找寻出一些意义,去各自归纳收获的结论。

很多顶级的演讲具有着侦探小说般松散的叙事结构。演讲者引出问题开始演讲,然后介绍寻求解决方法的过程,直到恍然大悟的一刻,这时观众自会看到这一切叙述的意义。

如果一个演讲失败了,大多数是因为讲者没有找到好的表达方法,错误估计了观众的兴趣点,或者忽略了故事本身。即使话题再重要,没有足够的叙述作为铺垫,反而偶然冒出一些武断的意见总会让人感到不爽。没有一个递进的过程,就不会感到自己有所收获。

我参与过一个能源会议,市长和前州长两人出席了一个座谈。市长的演讲大量罗列了他的城市开展的各种大型项目。这样的演讲如同吹嘘自诩,就像他再次选举所用的成绩单或者宣传广告。演讲很快变得无聊起来。而当州长开始演讲的时候,她并没有列出各种成就,相反的,她分享了一个想法理念。她虽然也叙述了执政期间的诸多趣事,不过那个理念则是核心,所有故事都是围绕这个理念而来,故事本身也说得到位而有趣。这个演讲相较而言则更令人有兴趣。市长的潜在台词看起来是在说他有多伟大,而州长的演讲却表达了“这儿有一个很了不起的启示,我们都能从中获益”。

一般来说,人们对关于组织或者机构的演讲并没有什么兴趣(除非他们是其中成员)。理念和故事吸引着我们,但机构组织使我们厌烦——因为他们和我们没太大关系。(商务人士特别需要注意:不要吹嘘你的公司,与其那样还不如告诉我们你的公司正在解决什么问题。)

决定你的演方式

一旦你想好怎么说故事了,就可以开始重点考虑具体的演讲方式。发表一个演讲有三个主要的途径:你可以照着手稿或提词器直接读;你可以记下演讲提纲来提示你要讲的具体内容而不是把整个演讲都记下来;或者你可以记住全部内容,当然这需要大量的排练预演,直到你最终能完全把控演讲内容。

我的建议是:别照着读,不要使用提词器。提词器通常会有一段距离,人们会知道你在照着读。并且一旦他们发现了,他们的注意力就会转移。突然你就与观众变得疏远,从而变得太官方。在TED我们一般不允许照着读的行为,虽然几年前有个例外,因为有个讲者坚持使用显示器。我们在观众席的后面设置了一个屏幕,希望观众不会注意到它。起先他讲的很自然。可没过多久他僵住了,当人们发现“我勒个去他在照读”的时候,你可以看到一种很糟糕的消极情绪在观众间传递。虽然他的演讲内容很精彩,得到的评分却很低。

我们很多最受欢迎的TED演讲都是脱稿的。如果你有充裕的时间做这样的准备,这其实会是最好的演讲方式。不过不要低估这项准备工作所需要的时间。TED上最令人难忘的一个讲者是Jill Bolte Taylor,一位得过中风的大脑研究员。她分享了自己在这八年的大脑恢复期间学到了什么。在仔细雕琢并一个人练习了数十小时后,她又在一个观众面前演练了十几次以保证她的演讲可以成功。

吉尔·伯特·泰勒的奇迹
吉尔伯特泰勒所拥有的研究机会不是每一位脑科学家都所希望拥有的:她有严重中风,并且观察到她大脑的功能–运动,语言,自我意识-一个接一个关闭。这真是令人惊讶的故事。

http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

显然,不是每一个演讲都值得如此耗费时间准备。不过如果你决定脱稿,那你就要懂得学习曲线的大概形状是什么样子。大多数人都会经历一个“抓狂的低谷期”,此时他们并不能很好地脱稿演讲。如果他们在这个低谷期间做演讲,观众就会有所发觉。他们们演讲听起来会如同在背东西,或者在他们竭力回想该说什么的时候,他们的眼神会放空或者上翻显得很尴尬。这样会造成演讲者和观众之间的关系变得疏远。

想要走出这个低谷期很简单,只要充分进行排练,演讲的每一句话都将会吐露得如此自然。之后你就可以把准备的重点放在演讲内容的意义和真实性上了。不要慌,你能行。

不过如果你没有足够时间准备并渡过低谷期,那就别试了。用小卡片记下演讲要点吧。只要你知道每一个点该如何展开就够了。注意记住如何从一个要点过渡到另一个要点。

与此同时,你还要注意自己的语气。有些讲者倾向于较为权威、装逼、强硬或激烈的语气,可是谈话式的语气会听上去更令人舒服。别强求,莫装逼,做好自己就行。

如果成功的演讲是一趟旅途,那就不要在过程中惹恼你的旅伴。有些讲者表现的太过于自我。他们表现的特牛逼、人生特圆满,观众就会特无语。千万别这样。

端正台风

就那些毫无经验的演讲者而言,肢体表现是演讲中最难的一部分,不过人们却会太容易高估它的作用。用对措辞,说好故事,演讲的内容要比你站姿如何、看起来是否紧张更大程度地决定演讲能否成功。对台风而言,稍加注意就够了。

我们在早期排练时候发现的最常见的错误是人们会过于频繁地移动身体。他们会晃来晃去,或者把重心在两腿间不停移动。人们在紧张的时候常常不自觉的这样,但是如此容易分散观众的注意力,而且使演讲者看上去没有说服力。只要减少下半身的移动就可大大提高台风。不过也有人能够在演讲时在舞台上自如地走动,我们认为只要足够自然倒也无妨。但对于大部分人最好还是站定了就不要晃动,仅通过手部姿势来强调重点。

在台上最关键的肢体语言或许应该是眼神交流。在观众席里找五六位看起来顺眼的,在演讲时眼神盯着他们看。把他们当成你很久没见到老朋友,想象你正把他们带进你的工作中来。这样的眼神交流将变得不可思议的有效,它比其他任何方法都要对你的演讲有帮助。即使你没有时间充足做好准备,必须得照着稿子读,那么抬起头做一些眼神上的交流将会产生巨大的反响。

对无经验的演讲者而言,另一个大挑战就是紧张,不管是在台前还是台上。不同人应对紧张有不同的处理方法。很多讲者在演讲前会呆在观众席中,这方法很有效,因为听前面的演讲者演讲可以转移注意力并减少紧张。哈佛商学院的一位教授Amy Cuddy研究了怎样的姿势可以产生气场,她运用了我见过的最不同寻常的准备技巧。她建议讲者们在演讲前到周围大步走一走,站在高处,或伸展四肢,这些姿势都可以使你倍感自信。她自己上台前就是如此做的,而且她做的演讲精彩非凡。不过我认为最简单的方法就是上台前做一下深呼吸,这很有效果。

总的来说,人们太于担心自己会紧张。紧张不是病,观众们其实也期待看到你紧张,紧张是一种自然地身体反应,并且事实上能使你表现得更好:它给予你表现的力量,并保持你思维敏捷。稳住呼吸,一切都没问题的!

承认紧张也可以带来魅力。要大胆展示出你的脆弱,无论是紧张亦或是你的语音语调,真的都是赢得观众倾心的有力武器。出版过有关内向性格的书并在2012年TED大会上演讲的Susan Cain就特怕做演讲。你可以感觉到她的脆弱,这种感受让观众都为她加油——所有人在结束后都想拥抱她。努力使她美丽,也使她的演讲成为当年最受欢迎的一个。

苏珊·凯恩:内向性格的力量
在社交和外向性格备受推崇的文化中,成为内向的人可能会很难,这甚至是可耻的。但是,当你聆听苏珊·凯恩激情澎湃的演讲时,你会发现内向的人给这个世界带来了惊人的天赋和能力,这是值得鼓励和庆祝的。

http://www.ted.com/talks/susan_cain_the_power_of_introverts.html

恰当采用多媒体技术

在我们处理过的所有多媒体文件里,用的最多的应该就是幻灯片。现在大多数人都知道PPT的诀窍:保持简洁;不要把幻灯片做成演讲稿(如列出你所要讲的各点——这些最好写在你手中的小卡片里);不要大声重复读出幻灯片上的内容。除了可能出现类似于使用提词器时会出现的问题之外——比如“我勒个去她也在照读!”——往往只有最新鲜的信息才能调动人们的兴趣,人们不喜欢重复地看到和听到相同的信息。现在大家应该都很明白这点,但如果去各种公司看看,每天依然有人在演讲时犯这种错误。

许多顶尖的TED演讲者不用幻灯片,而且很多演讲内容也不需要它。如果你展示一些照片插图可以让话题更生动的话,那就用吧,否则至少对于演讲的某些部分来说就考虑不要用。如果你要使用幻灯片,PPT的替代品也是值得一试的。比如,TED的投资对象Prezi,这家公司的演示软件提供了一种聚焦追踪式的二维画面。与传统的平面图像切换方式相比,这个演示软件允许用户根据需要移动或者放大演示的画面。恰当地采用多媒体技术可以极大提高演讲的视觉冲击力并加深其内涵。

艺术家、建筑师、摄影师和设计家会更多地使用影像资料。幻灯片可以帮助讲者更好地表达、把握节奏并且能在讲者不得不使用专业用语时帮助观众更好地理解。(艺术很难用言语去表达,用视觉来体验更好)。我看过一些艺术家或设计师的很棒的演讲,他们将幻灯片的图片设置为每15秒切换一次。我还看过演讲者跟随一段视频进行演讲。这可以帮助保证演讲连贯性和节奏。比如工业设计师Ross Lovegrove的TED视觉演讲,他使用了这些手段,带观众踏入了一段难忘的创造之旅。

Ross Lovegrove 分享有机设计
设计师 Ross Lovegrove 说明他的「无脂」设计哲学, 并赏析几件他的独特产品,包含 Ty Nant 水瓶及 Go 椅。

http://www.ted.com/talks/ross_lovegrove_shares_organic_designs.html

另一种创造性的表达方式或许是在演讲中适当地停顿,让作品自己去表现。动力学雕塑家Reuben Margolin使用此方法来感染他人。关键就在于不要想着“我正在演讲”,而是想着“我想要给观众一个关于我的作品的难忘体验”。艺术家和建筑师最可能搞杂的就是把他们的演讲用抽象概念化的语言来表现。

罗本·马格林: 用时光与木头雕成的浪
罗本·马格林是一个动态雕刻家, 他创作了一个个像波浪一样流动的作品。用接下来的九分钟陶醉,沉思在他那包含着数学与自然的艺术里。

http://www.ted.com/talks/reuben_margolin_sculpting_waves_in_wood_and_time.html

视频对很多讲者都很有用处。例如在一个关于乌鸦的智慧的TED演讲中,科学家播放了一个视频片段,展示了一只乌鸦弯出一个钩子勾出管子里的食物的过程——也就是说一只乌鸦创造工具的过程。这段视频比任何语言都更有说服力。

恰当地使用视频可以让演讲变得效果非凡,不过也有一些常犯的错误需要避免。视频剪辑需要足够短——如果长于1分钟,你就有可能要失去观众了。特别需注意的是,不要使用企业视频,这看起来像自我宣传或电视广告,观众早已看腻了。任何带背景音的视频都会让人倒胃口。而且无论如何,别放你自己被如CNN等采访的视频。我看过演讲者这么干过,真烂透了,没人会想要了解你的自大。观众已经在你面前听你现场演讲了,为什么还让他们同时到看你出现在新闻采访中?

整合起来

我们在演讲前至少六个月开始帮助演讲者准备他们的演讲内容,这样他们可以有充足的预演时间。我们希望讲者可以在活动一个月前定下最终的演讲。在最后的几周内他们预演的越多,最后的效果就越好。理想的情况下,他们会自己单独彩排,并且在一名观众前预演。

在其他人面前预演有一个问题,即听者会觉得自己有义务来提供反馈或者提出建设性的批评。不同人的反馈常常差异巨大甚至互相矛盾。这可能会让讲者不知所措甚至抓狂,所以挑选谁来观看预演并给出反馈尤为重要。总的来说,有丰富演讲经验的人能给出好的建议。

2011年我自己从中学到了很多。我的同事,TED Global活动的策划者Bruno Giussani指出即使我在TED里工作了九年,主持过各种大会,介绍过那么多演讲者,我却从未做过一个属于自己的TED演讲。所以他邀请我来做一次演讲,我接受了。

我感到了比预想还要大的压力。就算我花了那么多时间指导过别人如何构建故事框架,当换成自己的故事时,还是会变得很困难。我决定脱稿演讲,讲关于网络视频如何促进全球创新的话题,但这个过程很艰难:即便我花了那么多个小时,从同事那里得到各种建议,我还是感到有些措手无错甚至开始怀疑自己的能力。我真的感觉自己可能要歇菜了。在登台的前一刻我依旧很紧张。不过之后一切都变得那么顺心如意。这次演讲肯定不算最棒的TED演讲之一,不过它还是得到了好评,我也扛过了这段巨大压力。

总之我亲身体会了我们的讲者在这30年里所挖掘出来的东西:演讲的成功取决于想法的质量、叙述表达的方式以及演讲者的感情。这和内容的实质有关,而不是演讲的风格或是绚烂的多媒体。一个演讲的表述很容易通过准备期间的指导和训练来完善,但故事和想法本身却不是能被训练出来的——演讲者心中必须要有货。如果你有要说的东西,你就可以做出很赞的演讲。不过如果没有一个中心思想,那你最好是别说了。拒绝演讲邀请,回去工作,等到你真正有值得分享的想法再来。

记住一点,做出好的演讲没有捷径可走。最令人难忘的演讲总是有大家前所未闻的新鲜东西。最糟糕的演讲则充满陈词滥调。所以任何情况下都不要试图照搬我这里提供的各种建议,当然了,要了解这些建议的大体意思,但演讲内容终归还是要由你自己拟定,因为你知道你和你的想法与种不同的地方。发挥你的长处,做出真正属于你自己的演讲。

—————————————–English Version——————————————–

How to Give a Killer Presentation

by Chris Anderson

A little more than a year ago, on a trip to Nairobi, Kenya, some colleagues and I met a 12-year-old Masai boy named Richard Turere, who told us a fascinating story. His family raises livestock on the edge of a vast national park, and one of the biggest challenges is protecting the animals from lions—especially at night. Richard had noticed that placing lamps in a field didn’t deter lion attacks, but when he walked the field with a torch, the lions stayed away. From a young age, he’d been interested in electronics, teaching himself by, for example, taking apart his parents’ radio. He used that experience to devise a system of lights that would turn on and off in sequence—using solar panels, a car battery, and a motorcycle indicator box—and thereby create a sense of movement that he hoped would scare off the lions. He installed the lights, and the lions stopped attacking. Soon villages elsewhere in Kenya began installing Richard’s “lion lights.”

The story was inspiring and worthy of the broader audience that our TED conference could offer, but on the surface, Richard seemed an unlikely candidate to give a TED Talk. He was painfully shy. His English was halting. When he tried to describe his invention, the sentences tumbled out incoherently. And frankly, it was hard to imagine a preteenager standing on a stage in front of 1,400 people accustomed to hearing from polished speakers such as Bill Gates, Sir Ken Robinson, and Jill Bolte Taylor.

But Richard’s story was so compelling that we invited him to speak. In the months before the 2013 conference, we worked with him to frame his story—to find the right place to begin, and to develop a succinct and logical arc of events. On the back of his invention Richard had won a scholarship to one of Kenya’s best schools, and there he had the chance to practice the talk several times in front of a live audience. It was critical that he build his confidence to the point where his personality could shine through. When he finally gave his talk at TED, in Long Beach, you could tell he was nervous, but that only made him more engaging—people were hanging on his every word. The confidence was there, and every time Richard smiled, the audience melted. When he finished, the response was instantaneous: a sustained standing ovation.

Since the first TED conference, 30 years ago, speakers have run the gamut from political figures, musicians, and TV personalities who are completely at ease before a crowd to lesser-known academics, scientists, and writers—some of whom feel deeply uncomfortable giving presentations. Over the years, we’ve sought to develop a process for helping inexperienced presenters to frame, practice, and deliver talks that people enjoy watching. It typically begins six to nine months before the event, and involves cycles of devising (and revising) a script, repeated rehearsals, and plenty of fine-tuning. We’re continually tweaking our approach—because the art of public speaking is evolving in real time—but judging by public response, our basic regimen works well: Since we began putting TED Talks online, in 2006, they’ve been viewed more than one billion times.

On the basis of this experience, I’m convinced that giving a good talk is highly coachable. In a matter of hours, a speaker’s content and delivery can be transformed from muddled to mesmerizing. And while my team’s experience has focused on TED’s 18-minutes-or-shorter format, the lessons we’ve learned are surely useful to other presenters—whether it’s a CEO doing an IPO road show, a brand manager unveiling a new product, or a start-up pitching to VCs.

Frame Your Story

There’s no way you can give a good talk unless you have something worth talking about. Conceptualizing and framing what you want to say is the most vital part of preparation.

Find the Perfect Mix of Data and Narrative

 

We all know that humans are wired to listen to stories, and metaphors abound for the narrative structures that work best to engage people. When I think about compelling presentations, I think about taking an audience on a journey. A successful talk is a little miracle—people see the world differently afterward.

 

If you frame the talk as a journey, the biggest decisions are figuring out where to start and where to end. To find the right place to start, consider what people in the audience already know about your subject—and how much they care about it. If you assume they have more knowledge or interest than they do, or if you start using jargon or get too technical, you’ll lose them. The most engaging speakers do a superb job of very quickly introducing the topic, explaining why they care so deeply about it, and convincing the audience members that they should, too.

The biggest problem I see in first drafts of presentations is that they try to cover too much ground. You can’t summarize an entire career in a single talk. If you try to cram in everything you know, you won’t have time to include key details, and your talk will disappear into abstract language that may make sense if your listeners are familiar with the subject matter but will be completely opaque if they’re new to it. You need specific examples to flesh out your ideas. So limit the scope of your talk to that which can be explained, and brought to life with examples, in the available time. Much of the early feedback we give aims to correct the impulse to sweep too broadly. Instead, go deeper. Give more detail. Don’t tell us about your entire field of study—tell us about your unique contribution.

Of course, it can be just as damaging to overexplain or painstakingly draw out the implications of a talk. And there the remedy is different: Remember that the people in the audience are intelligent. Let them figure some things out for themselves. Let them draw their own conclusions.

Many of the best talks have a narrative structure that loosely follows a detective story. The speaker starts out by presenting a problem and then describes the search for a solution. There’s an “aha” moment, and the audience’s perspective shifts in a meaningful way.

If a talk fails, it’s almost always because the speaker didn’t frame it correctly, misjudged the audience’s level of interest, or neglected to tell a story. Even if the topic is important, random pontification without narrative is always deeply unsatisfying. There’s no progression, and you don’t feel that you’re learning.

I was at an energy conference recently where two people—a city mayor and a former governor—gave back-to-back talks. The mayor’s talk was essentially a list of impressive projects his city had undertaken. It came off as boasting, like a report card or an advertisement for his reelection. It quickly got boring. When the governor spoke, she didn’t list achievements; instead, she shared an idea. Yes, she recounted anecdotes from her time in office, but the idea was central—and the stories explanatory or illustrative (and also funny). It was so much more interesting. The mayor’s underlying point seemed to be how great he was, while the governor’s message was “Here’s a compelling idea that would benefit us all.”

As a general rule, people are not very interested in talks about organizations or institutions (unless they’re members of them). Ideas and stories fascinate us; organizations bore us—they’re much harder to relate to. (Businesspeople especially take note: Don’t boast about your company; rather, tell us about the problem you’re solving.)

Plan Your Delivery

Once you’ve got the framing down, it’s time to focus on your delivery. There are three main ways to deliver a talk. You can read it directly off a script or a teleprompter. You can develop a set of bullet points that map out what you’re going to say in each section rather than scripting the whole thing word for word. Or you can memorize your talk, which entails rehearsing it to the point where you internalize every word—verbatim.

My advice: Don’t read it, and don’t use a teleprompter. It’s usually just too distancing—people will know you’re reading. And as soon as they sense it, the way they receive your talk will shift. Suddenly your intimate connection evaporates, and everything feels a lot more formal. We generally outlaw reading approaches of any kind at TED, though we made an exception a few years ago for a man who insisted on using a monitor. We set up a screen at the back of the auditorium, in the hope that the audience wouldn’t notice it. At first he spoke naturally. But soon he stiffened up, and you could see this horrible sinking feeling pass through the audience as people realized, “Oh, no, he’s reading to us!” The words were great, but the talk got poor ratings

Many of our best and most popular TED Talks have been memorized word for word. If you’re giving an important talk and you have the time to do this, it’s the best way to go. But don’t underestimate the work involved. One of our most memorable speakers was Jill Bolte Taylor, a brain researcher who had suffered a stroke. She talked about what she learned during the eight years it took her to recover. After crafting her story and undertaking many hours of solo practice, she rehearsed her talk dozens of times in front of an audience to be sure she had it down.

Obviously, not every presentation is worth that kind of investment of time. But if you do decide to memorize your talk, be aware that there’s a predictable arc to the learning curve. Most people go through what I call the “valley of awkwardness,” where they haven’t quite memorized the talk. If they give the talk while stuck in that valley, the audience will sense it. Their words will sound recited, or there will be painful moments where they stare into the middle distance, or cast their eyes upward, as they struggle to remember their lines. This creates distance between the speaker and the audience.

Getting past this point is simple, fortunately. It’s just a matter of rehearsing enough times that the flow of words becomes second nature. Then you can focus on delivering the talk with meaning and authenticity. Don’t worry—you’ll get there.

But if you don’t have time to learn a speech thoroughly and get past that awkward valley, don’t try. Go with bullet points on note cards. As long as you know what you want to say for each one, you’ll be fine. Focus on remembering the transitions from one bullet point to the next.

Also pay attention to your tone. Some speakers may want to come across as authoritative or wise or powerful or passionate, but it’s usually much better to just sound conversational. Don’t force it. Don’t orate. Just be you.

If a successful talk is a journey, make sure you don’t start to annoy your travel companions along the way. Some speakers project too much ego. They sound condescending or full of themselves, and the audience shuts down. Don’t let that happen.

Develop Stage Presence

For inexperienced speakers, the physical act of being onstage can be the most difficult part of giving a presentation—but people tend to overestimate its importance. Getting the words, story, and substance right is a much bigger determinant of success or failure than how you stand or whether you’re visibly nervous. And when it comes to stage presence, a little coaching can go a long way.

The biggest mistake we see in early rehearsals is that people move their bodies too much. They sway from side to side, or shift their weight from one leg to the other. People do this naturally when they’re nervous, but it’s distracting and makes the speaker seem weak. Simply getting a person to keep his or her lower body motionless can dramatically improve stage presence. There are some people who are able to walk around a stage during a presentation, and that’s fine if it comes naturally. But the vast majority are better off standing still and relying on hand gestures for emphasis.

Perhaps the most important physical act onstage is making eye contact. Find five or six friendly-looking people in different parts of the audience and look them in the eye as you speak. Think of them as friends you haven’t seen in a year, whom you’re bringing up to date on your work. That eye contact is incredibly powerful, and it will do more than anything else to help your talk land. Even if you don’t have time to prepare fully and have to read from a script, looking up and making eye contact will make a huge difference.

Another big hurdle for inexperienced speakers is nervousness—both in advance of the talk and while they’re onstage. People deal with this in different ways. Many speakers stay out in the audience until the moment they go on; this can work well, because keeping your mind engaged in the earlier speakers can distract you and limit nervousness. Amy Cuddy, a Harvard Business School professor who studies how certain body poses can affect power, utilized one of the more unusual preparation techniques I’ve seen. She recommends that people spend time before a talk striding around, standing tall, and extending their bodies; these poses make you feel more powerful. It’s what she did before going onstage, and she delivered a phenomenal talk. But I think the single best advice is simply to breathe deeply before you go onstage. It works.

In general, people worry too much about nervousness. Nerves are not a disaster. The audienceexpects you to be nervous. It’s a natural body response that can actually improve your performance: It gives you energy to perform and keeps your mind sharp. Just keep breathing, and you’ll be fine.

 

Acknowledging nervousness can also create engagement. Showing your vulnerability, whether through nerves or tone of voice, is one of the most powerful ways to win over an audience, provided it is authentic. Susan Cain, who wrote a book about introverts and spoke at our 2012 conference, was terrified about giving her talk. You could feel her fragility onstage, and it created this dynamic where the audience was rooting for her—everybody wanted to hug her afterward. The fact that we knew she was fighting to keep herself up there made it beautiful, and it was the most popular talk that year.

Plan the Multimedia

With so much technology at our disposal, it may feel almost mandatory to use, at a minimum, presentation slides. By now most people have heard the advice about PowerPoint: Keep it simple; don’t use a slide deck as a substitute for notes (by, say, listing the bullet points you’ll discuss—those are best put on note cards); and don’t repeat out loud words that are on the slide. Not only is reciting slides a variation of the teleprompter problem—“Oh, no, she’s reading to us, too!”—but information is interesting only once, and hearing and seeing the same words feels repetitive. That advice may seem universal by now, but go into any company and you’ll see presenters violating it every day.

Many of the best TED speakers don’t use slides at all, and many talks don’t require them. If you have photographs or illustrations that make the topic come alive, then yes, show them. If not, consider doing without, at least for some parts of the presentation. And if you’re going to use slides, it’s worth exploring alternatives to PowerPoint. For instance, TED has invested in the company Prezi, which makes presentation software that offers a camera’s-eye view of a two-dimensional landscape. Instead of a flat sequence of images, you can move around the landscape and zoom in to it if need be. Used properly, such techniques can dramatically boost the visual punch of a talk and enhance its meaning.

Artists, architects, photographers, and designers have the best opportunity to use visuals. Slides can help frame and pace a talk and help speakers avoid getting lost in jargon or overly intellectual language. (Art can be hard to talk about—better to experience it visually.) I’ve seen great presentations in which the artist or designer put slides on an automatic timer so that the image changed every 15 seconds. I’ve also seen presenters give a talk accompanied by video, speaking along to it. That can help sustain momentum. The industrial designer Ross Lovegrove’s highly visual TED Talk, for instance, used this technique to bring the audience along on a remarkable creative journey.

Another approach creative types might consider is to build silence into their talks, and just let the work speak for itself. The kinetic sculptor Reuben Margolin used that approach to powerful effect. The idea is not to think “I’m giving a talk.” Instead, think “I want to give this audience a powerful experience of my work.” The single worst thing artists and architects can do is to retreat into abstract or conceptual language.

Video has obvious uses for many speakers. In a TED Talk about the intelligence of crows, for instance, the scientist showed a clip of a crow bending a hook to fish a piece of food out of a tube—essentially creating a tool. It illustrated his point far better than anything he could have said.

Used well, video can be very effective, but there are common mistakes that should be avoided. A clip needs to be short—if it’s more than 60 seconds, you risk losing people. Don’t use videos—particularly corporate ones—that sound self-promotional or like infomercials; people are conditioned to tune those out. Anything with a soundtrack can be dangerously off-putting. And whatever you do, don’t show a clip of yourself being interviewed on, say, CNN. I’ve seen speakers do this, and it’s a really bad idea—no one wants to go along with you on your ego trip. The people in your audience are already listening to you live; why would they want to simultaneously watch your talking-head clip on a screen?

Putting It Together

We start helping speakers prepare their talks six months (or more) in advance so that they’ll have plenty of time to practice. We want people’s talks to be in final form at least a month before the event. The more practice they can do in the final weeks, the better off they’ll be. Ideally, they’ll practice the talk on their own and in front of an audience.

The tricky part about rehearsing a presentation in front of other people is that they will feel obligated to offer feedback and constructive criticism. Often the feedback from different people will vary or directly conflict. This can be confusing or even paralyzing, which is why it’s important to be choosy about the people you use as a test audience, and whom you invite to offer feedback. In general, the more experience a person has as a presenter, the better the criticism he or she can offer.

I learned many of these lessons myself in 2011. My colleague Bruno Giussani, who curates our TEDGlobal event, pointed out that although I’d worked at TED for nine years, served as the emcee at our conferences, and introduced many of the speakers, I’d never actually given a TED Talk myself. So he invited me to give one, and I accepted.

It was more stressful than I’d expected. Even though I spend time helping others frame their stories, framing my own in a way that felt compelling was difficult. I decided to memorize my presentation, which was about how web video powers global innovation, and that was really hard: Even though I was putting in a lot of hours, and getting sound advice from my colleagues, I definitely hit a point where I didn’t quite have it down and began to doubt I ever would. I really thought I might bomb. I was nervous right up until the moment I took the stage. But it ended up going fine. It’s definitely not one of the all-time great TED Talks, but it got a positive reaction—and I survived the stress of going through it.

Ultimately I learned firsthand what our speakers have been discovering for three decades: Presentations rise or fall on the quality of the idea, the narrative, and the passion of the speaker. It’s about substance, not speaking style or multimedia pyrotechnics. It’s fairly easy to “coach out” the problems in a talk, but there’s no way to “coach in” the basic story—the presenter has to have the raw material. If you have something to say, you can build a great talk. But if the central theme isn’t there, you’re better off not speaking. Decline the invitation. Go back to work, and wait until you have a compelling idea that’s really worth sharing.

10 Ways to Ruin a Presentation

As hard as it may be to give a great talk, it’s really easy to blow it. Here are some common mistakes that TED advises its speakers to avoid.

1. Take a really long time to explain what your talk is about.
2. Speak slowly and dramatically. Why talk when you can orate?
3. Make sure you subtly let everyone know how important you are.
4. Refer to your book repeatedly. Even better, quote yourself from it.
5. Cram your slides with numerous text bullet points and multiple fonts.
6. Use lots of unexplained technical jargon to make yourself sound smart.
7. Speak at great length about the history of your organization and its glorious achievements.
8. Don’t bother rehearsing to check how long your talk is running.
9. Sound as if you’re reciting your talk from memory.
10. Never, ever make eye contact with anyone in the audience.

 

The single most important thing to remember is that there is no one good way to do a talk. The most memorable talks offer something fresh, something no one has seen before. The worst ones are those that feel formulaic. So do not on any account try to emulate every piece of advice I’ve offered here. Take the bulk of it on board, sure. But make the talk your own. You know what’s distinctive about you and your idea. Play to your strengths and give a talk that is truly authentic to you.

来自台湾的声音:留18分钟给一首诗

我愿是满山的杜鹃

只为一次无憾的春天

我愿是繁星

舍给一个夏天的夜晚

我愿是千万条江河

流向唯一的海洋

我愿是那月

为你,再一次圆满

 

如果你是岛屿

我愿是环抱你的海洋

如果你张起了船帆

我便是轻轻吹动的风浪

如果你远行

我愿是那路

准备了平坦

随你去到远方

当你走累了

我愿是夜晚

是路旁的客栈

有干净的枕席

供你睡眠

眠中有梦

我就是你枕上的泪痕

当你埋葬土中

我愿是依伴你的青草

你成灰,

我便成尘

如果啊,如果——

如果你对此生还有眷恋

我就再许一愿 ——

与你结来世的因缘


这是在去年TEDxTaipei2012大会蒋勋先生的视频,他1947年出生在历史古都,曾留学法国,也得过台湾小说比赛第一名,他是台湾家喻户晓的学者,血液中流着一种传统的古风,他不同于一般的艺术家,永远流露对儒家思想的执着。蒋勋的声音极好听。有网友评论说说:因为你前世捐了一口钟,所以今生你有这样 好听的声音。如果真的如此,那我今生也捐一口钟吧,来世便会有好听的声音。

JX

后来看过将先生的一些其他作品,有的像在洒金的绢帛上摹写着一篇篇眷恋红尘的诗篇,蒋勋的散文有悲情而无愤意,也因慧智,一些不要紧的话从他口中出来,竟变得十分要紧了。张晓风说蒋勋善于把低眉垂睫的美、沉哑喑灭的美唤醒,不愧知音!

蒋勋先生根据其对中国文化美学的精深研究,从人性的、文学的角度挖掘《红楼梦》独特的人文内涵,还原《红楼梦》真正的文学内蕴,让读者不再陷入诸如考据、论证、红学派别的迷阵,真正感受到这部伟大的中国文学巨著非凡的魅力。建议大家看看他在网上的【蒋勋说红楼梦】系列。

这个TEDx演讲真是棒极了,让我一个老文艺青年重拾对诗歌的热爱。

Freeman Hrabowski Excellence is never an accident

我们如何去教育个性迥异的学生?

在美国有这么个学校,无论是艺术、人文、科学还是工程类院系,这个学校招入校的学生并不一定是佼佼者,而是有色人种或那些常被忽视的人群,这个学校帮助大量非洲裔学生、拉丁裔学生和低收入家庭学生成为世界顶尖的科技和工程人才——UMBC——我一下就记住这个大学的缩写名字,因为它的校长曾经开玩笑说”我们大学的缩写UMBC可以被翻译成You Must Be Chinese”,这就是马里兰大学巴尔的摩分校,这个校长是弗里曼·洛堡斯基(Freeman A. Hrabowski, III)。

有人音译他的名字费里曼,但我觉得这失去Freeman英文名字的意义。Freeman发起了“Meyerhoff Scholars”教育计划,旨在帮助有潜力的少数族裔学生掌握必要技能,攻读科学技术、工程和数学等学位,从而培养出大量取得这些领域博士学位的非裔美国学生。他被奥巴马总统任命为非裔美国人优质教育总统顾问委员会主席,并已经赢得了无数的奖项和认可,其中包括被 “时代”杂志评为2012年100位最有影响力的人物之一,Freeman还被马州华盛顿少数族裔公司协会授予“年度远见卓识奖”。

Freeman的背景故事应该从他上一代人说起。他的母亲在种族歧视严重的南部小镇长大,小时候做女佣,但很喜欢泡图书馆自学,后来成为数学教师,她重视Freeman的教育,向儿子灌输对知识的热爱、对教育力量的理解。Freeman自小酷爱数学,喜欢阅读,成绩很好,都是A,当老师在课堂上宣布“作业有10道题目”的时候,他会大喊“再来10道!”—— 这小子讨人厌吧,我小时候班里哪个尖子生敢这么嚣张,放学我也得修理他。那时小小的Freeman就开始纠结一个问题:我们怎样让更多的孩子喜欢学习?

小时候Freeman不愿去教堂的,喜欢躲在最后一排做数学题,一次他到一个男人说 “如果我们的孩子们能够参与到伯明翰的和平示威游行中来,那么我们就能够向全美国人民宣告,就连小孩子都能辨别出其中的对错,而我们的孩子们有多么想要得到最好的教育” ,这一下触动到Freeman, 别人告诉他说演讲人就是马丁·路德·金博士,回家后他斩钉截铁要求“我要去参加游行!我想去,我想要成为他们的一员。”而父母却坚决不同意。Image 5-28-13 at 5.56 PM

Freeman那是才12岁,他和父母争辩:“知道么,作为父母你们言行不一。你们让我去教堂,让我去听演讲,当这个人号召我去参与的时候,你们却说‘不行’。” 这个场景是不是太熟悉了?我们父母经常为自己和孩子制定不同的标准,我们期望孩子按照我们的说法成长,我们告诉他们要勇敢、要真诚、要有爱、坚强、要言行一致,但却经常在不知不觉中将我们成人的孱弱、虚伪、圆滑、懒惰、贪婪曝露给孩子。

还好,Freeman的父母想了整整一个晚上,整晚都在哭泣着为Freeman担心和祈祷,虽然他们参加游行有危险,可最终他们的内心战胜了胆怯,允许12岁的Freeman参加游行。小孩子Freeman很高兴,开始想像自己游行时被狼狗追咬,被高压水枪冲的画面,他也突然有害怕了,从这段经历中Freeman学到一个道理:有时候有些人满怀勇气去做一件事情,或许并不表示他真的有那样的勇气,他只是相信这件事情非常重要,一定要去做!

这次游行的结果是Freeman被关了5天监狱,马丁·路德·金博士拜访Freeman的父母,称赞说 “你们的孩子今天所做必将会影响到尚未出生的下一代”。和马丁.路德.金一起战斗过经历让Freeman受益匪浅,他不但深受民权运动影响,成为儿童领袖,而且这也启迪他无让他在教育之路上走得非常远。

Freeman从小就明白自己的诉求很简单,就是希望接受更好的教育,有很多新的课本,学校不仅拥有好的老师,还能拥有足够的所需的资源。现在三分之二的美国人是在1963年之后出生的,大多数人通过电影、电视或书籍听到当年伯明翰少年游行,或许跟看电影《林肯》的感觉差不多——历史太遥远了。从这个表达诉求的游行中我们现代的年青人能学到什么?Freeman在TED演讲台上总结:最重要的是学生能够自己掌控教育的主动权,他们学习的热情可以被启发出来——渴望学习,并且热衷提出自己的问题。

Freeman和马丁路德金在1963年入狱,而同年马里兰大学巴尔的摩分校(UMBC)创办,而现在Freeman负责领导该校的事务。这所学校的创办意义重大是因为马里兰州属于南方州(美国南方的种族歧视更严重)实际上,这是当时全美第一所自创办之日就没有进行种族限制的大学,黑人学生、白人学生和其他肤色学生都在此求学,这是一场持续了50年的实验,目的是希望大学乃至国家拥有这样一种教育体系,让学生不分背景成分的人来此求学,学习如何与人合作、如何领导团队学会相互帮助。

UMBC大学从60年代开始在艺术、人文和社会科学领域发力,培养了大量的人文和法律人才,大量的艺术家,和演艺事业的佼佼者,学校现在重视非洲和拉丁裔等少数种群学生在自然科学和工程学领域的努力 。Freeman坦承在自然科学和工程学领域所有的美国民族都表现的不尽如人意。那如何解决这个问题?

UMBC采用四种办法来帮助这些弱勢学生提高。

法宝一:提高期望。Freeman强调努力才有成功,他说:我不管你有多聪明,或自己自己觉得自己多聪明, “聪明”在这里仅仅表示你准备好去学习。你要有兴趣学习新东西,这让你兴奋,让你提出高质量的问题。他举例:诺贝尔奖得主 I. I. Rabi 小时候住在纽约,其他家长问孩子: “今天在学校学了什么新东西?” 而他的犹太裔妈妈问的就不一样: “Izzy,今天你有提出有质量的问题么?” 所以“高期望值”需要兴趣作为支撑,需要鼓励年轻人的好奇心,学生变得更加主动地从学校这里寻找帮助,而不仅仅是为了通过考试拿到学位,而是更进一步的追求更高的目标。这里我想要着重谈谈这句:It’s hard work that makes the difference. I don’t care how smart you are or how smart you think you are. Smart simply means you’re ready to learn.因为我从小愚钝,从小学到大学从来没被划在聪明学生的圈子里,班主任给好学生吃小灶从没我的份儿!可Freeman让我看到how to make difference.

法宝二:分数不是唯一。分数是很重要,但是并不是最重要的。Freeman鼓励学生建立自己的圈子,在科学和工程领域竞争非常残酷,学生没有获得团队合作方面的教育,而教育者要做的就是把他们结合起来,让他们相互了解,建立信任,相互支持,学习如何提出有质量的问题,以及如何清晰的阐述概念。自己拿到高分是一回事,能帮助他人做得更好是另外一回事,这种责任感对于整个世界的影响都是巨大的,所以让学生之间建立联系,这点非常重要。啊!这个让我想到我们TEDtoChina的志愿者们,自己看大量TED和其他的海外课程,开拓视野,同时,利用个人的盈余时间和盈余技能将自己所看、所想分享给跟多需要这些ideas的朋友们——自己能从不同角度看世界是一回事,能帮助其他人看世界,是另一回事!——forgive me,时刻不忘做广告 :)

法宝三:依靠专业人士培养专业人士。术业有专攻,在艺术领域艺术家培养出新的艺术家,在社会科学领域也是如此,这是通用法则,自然科学和工程学领域也一样。学生需要在科学家的带动下充满热情开始相关的工作。他举例,有一年巴尔的摩下了很大的暴风雪,一名科学家在暴风雪刚过去就跑回实验室工作,而他所有的学生都坚持呆在实验室,他们自带干粮,把实验室挤满了,他们把这些工作视为生命的一部分,而不仅仅是作业而已,他们知道他们在研究的是艾滋病防治,他们醉心于创造新蛋白质的过程,每个人都非常专注,没有什么场景比这更美好的。在此,很想吐槽国内大学… … 算了,行政干预教学的事情太多了,都知道,不说也罢。

法宝四:当你已经给了他们高度期望,已经建立了学生圈子,已经有专业人士培养,你需要找到乐于跟学生交流的老师,教员用心观察学生的表现,用心去识别谁在用心听,谁又在开小差,并且愿意和学生一起解决问题。

FreemanHrabowski_2013-embed

在UMBC大学这套作法实实在在起了作用。UMBC也响应重新设计课程,改革了化学专业、物理专业,现在正在尝试改革人文和社科专业,太多这些专业的学生觉得课程无聊了,他们不愿意干坐在那里听别人讲课,他们需要参与其中。比如改革化学课程,UMBC强调合作的重要性,不是死板的传授理论,而是让学生自己去挑战这些理论,鼓励他们利用所掌握的技术解决生物科技公司遇到的实际问题,越来越多的课程正在按照这样的方式改革。这称为学术创新

UMBC也在改革师范教育和IT女性培养计划(从2000年至今计算机专业女学生比例已经下降了79%),大学建立学生之间的联系,鼓励女学生、少数裔学生以及所有的学生跟教员一起工作,让教员指导他们,当然最最重要的是学生的自我意识,他们心中的梦想和价值将会改变世界,这才真真叫人激动!

Freeman在12岁时被关在伯明翰监狱时可没想到一个伯明翰的黑人小P孩竟然有一天成为一所拥有来自150个国家学生的大学的校长,这所学校的学生并不满足于混个文凭,他们热爱学习,他们享受做到最好,他为这些学生自豪,因为这些学生有能力改变世界。

亚里士多德说:“优秀绝不会出自偶然,优秀是强烈的动机、不懈的努力和智慧的共同结果,它体现了所有选项中最具智慧的一个。” 接下来他的的话更令人震撼不已“决定你命运的,不是机会,而是选择。” 不是机遇,而是你的选择,决定了你的命运、梦想和价值。

意志力是成功关键

丘吉尔说:成功的秘诀就是:坚持、坚持、再坚持

股神”巴菲特成功的秘诀:耐力胜过脑力

朱熹:立志不坚,终不济事。

毛泽东:苟有恒,何必三更起五更眠;最无益,只怕一日曝十日寒

…….

这样的名言警句我年青时背过不少,但回头想想,什么也没有坚持下来什么,除了每天看两三个TEDtalks坚持了多年,并通过TEDtoChina分享给更多人,算来现在最少也有一千多个演讲了,从开拓视野,思考新知的角度来说,这也是一种成功。

关于意志力和持久心,很少有人从心理学或者统计试验上做过研究。在2013的TED教育专题上Angela Lee就分享了她的研究。
AngelaPhoto

她27岁时辞去悲催的管理咨询工作,转而到纽约公立学校教七年级学生数学。她发现最好和最差的学生之间的差异并不仅仅是智商。几年的教学经验使她相信:我们的教育所需要的是一种对学生、对学习更好的理解—— 从动机的角度、 从心理的角度去理解。
而不仅仅是测试智商。后来Angela继续博士学习,成为了一名心理学家,并开始研究儿童与成人在各种艰巨挑战中的表现,看谁会成功?为什么会成功?

她和研究团队去西点军校,尝试预测哪些学员能通过军事训练,哪些会放弃;去看全国拼字比赛,预测哪些孩子能在比赛中笑到最后;研究在非常艰苦的环境下工作的新教师,预测哪些教师能坚持这份职业,顺手预测哪些教师教出的学生成绩的提高最为显著;她也和公司合作预测哪些销售人员能保住饭碗?谁能赚最多钱?… …在这些非常不同的背景下,她发现意志力指标是观测重点,而非社交能力、美丽的外貌、健康的身体,更不是智商。

意志力是面对长远目标时的热情和毅力,意志力是有耐力的表现,意志力是日复一日依然对未来坚信不已,不只是这周、 不只是这个月,而是年复一年地用心、努力工作来实现所坚信的那个未来。意志力是将生活看作是一场马拉松而非短跑。

后来她开始在芝加哥公立学校研究意志力。她请数以千计的高中生填写关于意志力的问卷,然后等了大约一年多看看谁会毕业。结果发现,意志力越坚定的孩子毕业的可能性明显越高,而家庭收入,标准化测验的分数等指标则是无效的。

她的调查资料非常清楚地揭示有很多才华横溢的人并不能坚持到底。事实上,意志力通常与才华无关,有时甚至成反比。

意志力对学校学生是重要的,同样,因为组织TEDx活动和认识很多NGO从业者、创业者、艺术家,在和他们的访谈中,他们也都回答不懈的坚持、强大的意志力让他们成为不同的一群人。科学界对于如何锻炼意志力知之甚少。家长经常问老师 “如何锻炼孩子们的意志力? 我怎么教会孩子坚实的职业道德? 怎样才能让他们有长远的动力?” 这个没人能回答,如果哪位家长来问我,我会反问:那为人父母,你有意志力嘛?我相信父母是培养孩子意志力的第一责任人。

关于锻炼孩子们的意志, 到目前为止最好的理论斯坦福大学Carol Dweck教授的“成长型思维模式”理论,这个理论相信学习的能力不是一成不变的,它会由于你的努力发生变化。当孩子们在学习大脑的相关知识,以及大脑在面对挑战时会怎样变化和成长时,他们更有可能在失败时继续坚持,因为他们不相信他们永远会失败。

对于这个短小的TED演讲,我也很佩服演讲人Angela,她在研究学生意志力项目上坚持多年,看看她其中跨越一年的高中生毕业项目就知道,她有不懈的意志。

Grit is sticking with your future — day in, day out, not just for the week, not just for the month, but for years — and working really hard to make that future a reality 不懈的意志,我缺,我太缺了!我是反面教材。