By definition, an innovator is someone who comes up with something novel, some item or some process that has not been seen before, or at least in that same way. Innovation comes when people ask questions. Are we on the right path? Is this as good as it gets? Is there a better way? Are we doing the right things? Are we doing them right? Yet these seemingly innocuous words hold danger for those dependent on the status quo for their sense of security and identity.

In his book A More Beautiful Question, Warren Berger (2014) expressed the opinion that “A beautiful question is an ambitious yet actionable question that can begin to shift the way we perceive or think about something-- and that might serve as a catalyst to bring about change” (p. 8). According to Berger, questions, not answers are the new currency. Since knowledge is largely available at the press of a button, the contest no longer inevitably goes to the person who knows the most off the top of their head, but to the person who asks the best questions to draw out that knowledge. 

Computers are great at answering questions and as shown by supercomputers like Watson and Deep Blue in their exploits on Jeopardy and in chess respectively, much better at it than humans are. Yet, although computers beat us hands down in the speed of finding the answers to questions and in memory for storing the answers to questions, it is a distinctly human ability to be able to ask the right questions.  

The image below is the product of my five-minute Quickfire activity. It was challenging for me to come up with question after question and not take the time to investigate. By nature, I am a deep thinker and walking around wondering how things work and why things are the way that they are is a normal experience for me, but I am used to taking one question at a time and chewing on it for a bit before going to another. By the way, my questioning nature drives my wife nuts because we will go someplace and see some otherwise ordinary piece of machinery and I will become engrossed in detailed observation of the moving parts and trying to figure out the mechanics of it all.

Berger's organization of the process of productive inquiry into the key questions of "Why," "What If," and "How" was something that stood out to me as I read. The "Why" question seeks to understand the current environment and to become knowledgeable about the problem and all of its dynamics. The "What If" question puts forth possible solutions to the problem. And the "How" question tries to figure out how to bring the prototype into reality. This seems like a very logical step-by-step process in order to bring about meaningful change. Young children ask "Why" so frequently because they are trying to understand their world. Why do we lose this admirable trait which brings so much wonder and excitement into our lives? 

Another interesting thing that struck me was Berger's analysis of the link between the origins of our educational system in the era of the industrial revolution and schooling's tendency to stifle questioning on the part of students. One can argue that our educational system was designed (very successfully) to create workers and citizens to fill America’s factories and workplaces. One of the main jobs of schools was (and still is) to prepare students for productive lives. In most factories, workers are not generally encouraged to question the processes that they are a part of, but to leave that to the management and simply do their job. Since schools have this heritage, do they, whether intentionally or not, squelch free thinking as a part of an educational process that values conformity? What kind of preparation do today’s students need to be successful in the twenty-first century? By the way, I thought it fitting to end with questions.