What we know: <-- return to the graphics version of this page
What we know: To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong. -- Joseph Chilton Pearce
We know that most of the content our students are learning in our classrooms will be obsolete just a few years after they graduate. Also, we know that academic grades are often a poor predictor of success satisfaction in the workplace. Often students "succeed" by figuring out how to become good academic test takers but don't develop their critical thinking skills, problem solving skills, or divergent thinking skills, or their ability to adjust to change. Designing appropriate, complex learning experiences (along with appropriate assessment) will help our students succeed. Developing classroom practices that foster creativity will help students construct individual meaning.
There's a mystique about being creative that permeates our culture and our educational system. My twelve years of coaching in the Odyssey of the Mind program (click here to read more about OM) have given me the inspiration and time to think about what it means to be creative, whether or not creativity can be taught, and the implications the answers to these questions may have for our community college students.
I can't count the times I've heard adults (including teachers) say they'd like to coach in the Odyssey of the Mind program, or perhaps learn to paint a picture, or write a book, but they haven't tried because "they're not creative enough." Even worse, I've heard this statement from my community college students (and from faculty members). I use many strategies in the classroom that I've learned while coaching Odyssey of the Mind; therefore, I question my students about their participation in the program during elementary school, junior high, and high school. (Because many of the strategies may not resemble what students "expect" in a college classroom, it's important for me to be clear about how the activity has been designed to create an appropriate learning experience.) When I ask the "how many of you participated in OM" question, this is how the conversation usually goes:
STUDENT (intrigued, enthusiastic):
Oh, wow, I always wanted to be in the Odyssey of the Mind."
PROFESSOR FORD: Well, why didn't you participate?
STUDENT (disappointed, resigned): They told me I wasn't creative enough.
What's even more upsetting than the thought that a teacher would tell a student she isn't creative enough to participate is the fact that the students so readily accept this evaluation. Furthermore, if I ask the student at this point, what it means to be creative, or how she knows she isn't creative enough, the student usually can't form an answer. Thinking about the connection between creativity and learning can help us open new windows into designing appropriate learning experiences for our community college students. While defining creativity is a challenge, it's clear that creativity can be developed, and that many of the qualities possessed by "creative types" are the same qualities we'd like our community college students to develop. With thought, we can design activities that help students develop their creativity.
The support for what we know:Our contention is that creativity is not something we "have" or don't "have." Although we've used the phrase "creative type" above, most scholars think of creativity as being linked to a process or final product rather than to a person. In other words, people aren't born more or less creative. Every brain has the potential to be creative. People we call "creative" are simply more fluent with the creative process and are therefore more likely to fashion a product considered to be creative.
As stated above, the creative product and the process of being creative are separate concepts. Arthur Cropley (2001), a well-known researcher and writer on creativity, explains that a product may be judged to be creative if it is novel, effective (it works) and ethical (not selfish or destructive) (p. 6). E.P. Torrance contends that a person fluent with the creative process exhibit particular skills (critical thinking, divergent thinking, abilities (concentration, imagination, problem finding), and motives (curiosity, willingness to take risks, persistence) (cited in Cropley, 2001, p.9). Creativity, as Cropley defines it, "does not involve abandoning conventional understandings of the world . . . [rather it requires] going beyond them and building structures that contain novelty while at the same time retaining the capacity to function in the social environment" (p. 30).
Howard Gardner (1999), in Intelligence Reframed, defines creativity like this: "People are creative when they can solve problems, create products, or raise issues in a domain in a way that is initially novel but is eventually accepted in one or more cultural settings" (p.116). By domain, Gardner means a field of study or artistic endeavor or discipline. For example, Leonardo da Vinci was creative in the domains of painting and invention. A creative process/product must be more than novel, it must also have meaning within cultural settings. Although Gardner allows for "small-scale creativity" of the sort we see day to day in our classrooms, for him, the essence of creativity is that which transforms a domain. Gardner points to examples of creative people who have affected domains: composers Richard Wagner and John Lennon, scientists James Watson and Francis Crick, and filmmaker Steven Spielberg (p. 117).
So, isn't creativity just a form of intelligence? Gardner would say no, that creativity and intelligence are different. Furthermore, we can be experts without being creative. He explains the difference like this:
Both [creativity and intelligence] involve solving problems and creating products. Creativity includes the additional category of asking new questions -- something that is not expected of someone who is "merely" intelligent ... Creativity differs from intelligence in two additional respects. First, the creative person is always operating in a domain or discipline or craft. One is not creative or noncreative in general ... Second, the creative individual does something that is initially novel, but the contribution does not end with novelty -- it is all to easy to do something merely different. Rather, what defines the creative act or actor is the ultimate acceptance of that novelty; and again, the acid test of creativity is its documented effect on the relevant domain or domains. (p. 116, 117).
Gardner acknowledges that his definition of creativity may seem unfair in that some creative products may be so unusual that the affect on the domain may not be apparent for many years. For example, the French mathematician Galois, who died at age 20, left a creative body of math that was not recognized/understood until years after his death (Cropley, 2001, p.8).
Gardner has explored what factors may lead to the development of a creative personality, including:
• exposure at an early age to people who are comfortable with making changes and who do not easily admit failure
• the opportunity to excel in at least one pursuit when young
• sufficient discipline so that a domain can be more or less mastered in youth
• an environment that constantly stretches the young person, so that triumph remains within grasp without being too easily achieved
• peers who are also willing to experiment and who are not deterred by failure
• late birth order or an unusual family configuration that encourages or at least tolerates rebellion
• some kind of physical, psychic, or social obstacle or anomaly that makes a person marginal within his or her group (Gardner, Intelligence Reframed, p. 121)
It's interesting to think about how unlikely it is that most young children will experience these factors in elementary school or in the home. While we do cheer on children with stories about "never giving up" (such as The Little Engine That Could), the typical school system is not usually comfortable with change, for example. Scheduling often prevents the blocks of time necessary for children to "excel in at least one pursuit." Experimenting and creative risk-taking are not rewarded. Rebellion of any sort gets children labeled "difficult." And who in elementary school wants to be an outsider? Sameness and the pressure to "fit in" have been cited as the source of many problems including cliques and bullying. Of course, the pressure to "fit in" can also stifle creative thought. Grading is often focused on one "correct" answer (convergent thinking) rather than allowing for many solutions (divergent thinking). Even when problem solving is taught, students are not able to identify/frame the problem.
During my twelve years of coaching Odyssey of the Mind teams, I've observed that teams who develop fluency with the creative process and produce creative solutions tend to have these qualities:
There are many ways to think about and classify the qualities possessed by creative learners. Bena Kallick and Arthur L. Costa describe sixteen "Habits of Mind" that help illuminate how students construct individual meaning. Kallick and Costa say, "A 'Habit of Mind' means having a disposition toward behaving intelligently when confronted with problems, the answers to which are not immediately known" (Costa & Kallick, 2000). They point out that the list of sixteen habits is not meant to be complete but is, rather, a starting point. The Habits of Mind include persisting, managing impulsivity, thinking flexibly, thinking about thinking (metacognition), questioning and posing problems, applying past knowledge to new situations, responding with wonderment and awe, taking responsible risks, and finding humor. (To read more about the Habits of Mind, click here. http://www.habits-of-mind.net)
How does this relate to teaching in the community college classroom?I would suggest that our community college students are already extremely creative, and that acknowledging that inherent creativity is our first step. For example, think about the tremendous creativity many of them must use to juggle their home lives, their work responsibilities, their social lives, and their academic work! In many cases, though, these students have not had this creativity acknowledged or supported or even recognized by our current system. The first step is for us is to RECOGNIZE what the students BRING TO OUR CLASSROOMS and then use what they have brought to help them construct meaning. Creativity, or the state of mind we might call "being creative" is a lens the students can look through that will help them construct meaning out of the world around them. In order to unlock this potential, we have to understand what it means to be creative and begin thinking about how to design learning experiences that will help unlock this creativity.
Most teachers, if asked, would say that creativity is a plus and that they support creativity in the classroom. However, studies have shown that many teachers disapprove of behavior traits associated with creativity (boldness, desire for novelty, originality) (Cropley, 2001, p.137). Many teachers favor memorization and accurate recall to critical thinking and independent decision making. Creative students are often in trouble with teachers. They talk too much, they take risks, and they question everything. They don't "go along with the program." The creative classroom is noisy, messy, complex, and challenging (without being threatening).
Teachers can foster creativity in the community college classroom by designing projects that give students the opportunity to identify and/or frame the problem. One approach is thematic teaching. For example, when giving students a research project, present the project in such a way that they have to identify the problem to be solved. When shaping a thematic unit on homeless people in the college community, students will benefit from identifying the problem(s) they will attempt to solve. Rather than asking them to investigate programs designed to help the homeless, create a learning experience for them that encourages them to ask the questions: Are there homeless people in our area? Why? What can be done to solve this problem? What's being done now? What needs to be done? Problem presentation is key. Here's an example from Odyssey of the Mind. Students were given an engineering problem requiring them to build a new kind of boat. However, rather than asking them to build a new kind of boat, the problem presenter asked the students to design a way to get across the water. This problem presentation could lead to the design of a cable system (like a clothes line), a bridge, a hovercraft, or other creative solutions. One team of Odyssey of the Mind students given this problem designed contraptions with wood and tires that worked like the "water-walking" spider, the ranatra fusca! (The "Ranatra Fusca" is now the name of an award earned by children in the OM program for demonstrating exceptional creative risk-taking.) If, on the other hand, we ask the students to design a "better boat" they will probably just design a boat. The point is to think very carefully about every problem we give our students. An approach that encourages divergent thinking skills will more often lead to the development of a creative solution. Furthermore, encouraging the students identify the problem (rather than providing a problem for them) will also help them develop creativity.
Cropley suggests that teachers who foster creativity in the classroom share these traits:
We suggest the following additions/clarifications to Cropley's list. Teachers who foster creativity in the community college classroom help students develop their creative thinking skills with brainstorming and other creativity exercises, teach creative problem-solving including how to identify the problem, value creativity (even when it produces a "wrong" answer), help students think about the connections between creativity and learning, emphasize higher-order thinking skills ( teach divergent as well as convergent thinking), create complex learning activities, help students learn to view obstacles as opportunities, model the creative process, design appropriate learning assessment tools, and celebrate diversity and social interaction.
Creativity is inseparable from learning. One can't "learn" (in the sense the Caines give the term "learning") without being creative. We are all creative. We can, however, improve our creativity with appropriate learning experiences. As Cropley suggests, learning experiences should encourage students to develop the following aspects of divergent thinking: "fluency (quantity of answers), flexibility (variability of idea categories in the answers), and originality (uncommoness of answers)" plus "elaboration (complexity and completeness of answers)" and "effectiveness (link to constraints of the real world)" (p. 102). We can teach creativity by teaching students to identify and solve problems. Also, we can teach creative brainstorming and other techniques. We can design learning experiences for our students that encourage the development of qualities creative people exhibit. As Cropley says, "The central focus of fostering creativity in the classroom is thus not production of creative geniuses and it is not necessary for teachers interested in fostering creativity to set their sights on achieving scientific, technological, literary, artistic or other revolutions. Of course teachers may sometimes make a contribution in this direction by sowing the seeds" (p. 135).
Cropley (2001) writes, "Turning to teaching methods it has been shown that learning activities that emphasize branching out, finding out, or inventing such as discovery learning, learning under playful conditions and learning with the help of fantasy can be more effective than traditional methods such as the face-to-face lecturing or rote learning" (p.136). How can we use this information in the community college classroom? As David A. Sousa (2001) explains, "New research is revealing that students are more likely to gain greater understanding of and derive greater pleasure from learning when allowed to transform the learning into creative thoughts and products" (p. 40). In other words, when students are encouraged to use creativity to construct individual meaning for themselves, they are more likely to not only remember what they've learned, but also to be capable of retrieving what they've learned to use in future applications.
<--
return to Model IntroductionAbout
Us
Model
Resources
Classroom Applications
Community
Workshops
Site Map
<--
return to Model Introduction
<--
return to Dialogue on Learning Home Page