Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [524]
CHAPTER 26
TOC for Education
“. . . To Make the Wish Come True”
Kathy Suerken
Why Change?
“When and why did you decide that these thinking tools would work with children all over the world?” asked the Mexican educator through a Spanish translator at the 2001 Mexican TOC for Education Conference. Mrs. Gonzales and 300 other stakeholders of the Nuevo Leon school system had just witnessed very convincing evidence of the efficacy of the TOC tools to enable students of all ages and skill levels to take responsibility for their own learning and behaviors. Moreover, not only were children and educators applying these problem-solving tools outside the classroom to improve family relationships but also some educators and especially those involved in supportive social services were finding these tools very effective in resolving situations of child abuse and to rehabilitate students in juvenile justice institutions.1
Thus, although Mrs. Gonzalez’s question had to be translated for me, the reasons for it did not. Most people are naturally curious about the origins of a program that brings such broad and deep positive change—especially one that works with so many diverse students and adults. The problem of how to differentiate instruction to students with disparate levels of knowledge, experiences, and interests within existing resources is the one dilemma most commonly cited by teachers when asked during TOC for Education (TOCfE) seminars and workshops on five continents.
So what was the compelling evidence that convinced me of the potential global impact of TOC for children? Did I begin to realize the power of TOC as a teaching methodology when I observed the effect of these powerful thinking tools with my own mainstreamed2 middle school students, including those considered to have learning disabilities and other special needs? Was it when I realized other local educators were getting similar results with a variety of age groups and even in interventions with very disruptive students? Or was it when it came to my attention that not only were these students teaching these thinking tools to their peers but even to—and at the request of—their parents?
There is a common denominator for these successes—one that is not dependent on unique teachers or circumstances but rather on a methodology demonstrated in the book The Goal (Goldratt, 1984). Although many consider it to be a business novel about production, as a teacher, I found The Goal to be a book about education—learning to learn, learning to think, learning to lead. I was captivated by the methodology used to enable others to think for themselves, solve their own problems, and take ownership of implementing solutions. While this methodology is not new, what was new to me was the way the scientific method and Socratic questioning techniques were used to motivate others to be more productive and responsible for outcomes in their everyday lives.
After writing the author, Dr. Eli Goldratt, a thank-you letter to explain how I had begun to use this approach to education within my social studies classes and, as well, in managing a volunteer schoolwide international math project, I received, on behalf of my students, a scholarship to a formal training of the TOC thinking processes taught through applications to business and industry. A facilitator training soon followed to enable me to share this knowledge with other local educators.
Later, when teaching 7th grade students a pilot TOC critical thinking class, I shared how grateful I was for this opportunity, along with my concern that I could never repay Dr. Goldratt and the Avraham Y. Goldratt Institute for this expensive, invaluable learning experience. The students suggested an alternative way to express my gratitude . . . a payment in kind. Thirteen-year-old Jesse Hansen converted an idea into a viable solution with words that succinctly and profoundly convey just how much children, like those who teach them, want to make a meaningful difference. “You can use us, Mrs. Suerken. You