Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
17
24
25
28
40
and
42
into
schools:
Creative Pedagogies
Fostering creativity in schools by technology
and computer applications
Creativity and Engineering Education
Creativity and language learning
67
69
56
77
78
Definitions of Creativity
Zimmerman, E. (2009). Reconceptualizing
the Role of Creativity in Art Education Theory and
Practice. Studies In Art Education, 50(4), 382-399.
Lack of agreement about a common definition of creativity may undermine
consideration of the concept being included in school curricula by
practically minded school administrators (Coleman & Cross, 2001). Many
contemporary psychologists and educators agree that creativity is a
complex process that can be viewed as an interactive system in which
relationships among persons, processes, products, and social and cultural
contexts are of paramount importance (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996; Feldman,
1999; Gruber, 1989; Sternberg, 1999). All creative work, according to
Sternberg (1999), happens in one or more domains. People are not
creative in a general sense; they are creative in particular domains such
as the visual arts. Talented individuals fit well in certain domains of
knowledge within their own cultures and are recognized as highly
competent by members in their fields of expertise (Csikszentmihalyi,
1996; Feldman, 1982; Gardner, 1999; Winner & Martino, 1993). Creative
persons, however, often do not fit easily within a domain of knowledge,
and it is only after much time and effort that they may be able to establish
a body of work that comes to be valued. Creativity from this point of view
is an individual characteristic as a person reacts with one or more systems
within a particular social context.
Different conceptions about the relationship between intelligence and
creativity, however, make it difficult for agreement to be reached about a
common definition of creativity. Some researchers assert that to be
creative, a person needs intelligence, but not all intelligent people have
high creative potential (Davis & Rimm, 1998; Renzulli & Reiss, 1985).
MacKinnon (1965) argued that a basic level of IQ of about 120 as
necessary for creative productivity, although some researchers posit there
is no direct relationship between creativity and intelligence. Sternberg
(2001), however, differentiated between intelligence and creativity and
viewed intelligence as advancing societal norms and creativity as
opposing societal norms and proposing new norms. As a result of case
studies of adults who achieved success in the arts and sciences, Feist
2
observed directly and imagining next steps, producing works that convey
personal meaning, observing visual contexts closely, reflecting by
communicating about personal and others' art works, and understanding
the world of art locally and in the broader society (Hetland, et. al., 2007).
Costa and Kallick identified 16 Habits of the Mind including one category:
creativity, imagining, and innovating. Others Habits they associated with
creative thinking included taking risks, being empathetic, posing
problems, thinking flexibly and interdependently, persisting at a task, and
thinking metacognitively.
Feist (1999) conducted an extensive longitudinal literature review to
determine whether personality has an influence on creative achievement
in art and science. He found that personality meaningfully co-varies with
artistic and scientific creativity. Both creative artists and scientists tended
to be more open to new experiences, self-confident, self-accepting, driven,
ambitious, hostile, impulsive, and less conventional and conscientious
than others in the general population. Artists, however, were found to be
more affective, emotionally unstable, as well as less social and accepting
of group norms than were scientists who were found to be more
conscientious. It also was determined that traits that distinguish creative
children and adolescents tend to be ones that also distinguish creative
adults. Traits associated with adult creativity, therefore, might be ones
that are relevant for identifying, creating curricula, and assessing products
produced by creative art students.
Creative adult traits described by Gardner (1999) are tendencies to have
high energy, be extremely demanding and self-promoting, deprecate
others, possess child-like traits, ignore convention, and fascination with
their own childhood experiences. He characterized five kinds of creative
activity: (1) solving a well defined problem; (2) devising an allencompassing theory; (3) generating work that is distant in time from
when it was produced to a time when it is evaluated; (4) performing a
ritualized work; and (5) performing a series of actions that bring about
some kind of political or social change. Category numbers 3 and 4 are
concerned directly, according to Gardner, with artistic creativity.
Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi (1976) and Stokes (2001) challenged the
notion that successful problem-finding and problem-solving are always a
means for producing a body of work that can be considered creative.
Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi (1976) studied young college art students
and the relationship between their problem-finding behaviors and the
originality of their artworks. They concluded that the students' methods of
discovery, visualization techniques, and ways they sought productive
questions were often far better indicators of creative abilities than were
their solutions to art problems. Stokes (2001) maintained that many
creative individuals, Monet as an example, rather than adopting problemfinding strategies imposed restrictive task limitations on his own work,
for all students that foster creative thinking, imagination, and innovation
are important for generating solutions to real life problems both now and
in the future. Creativity in the visual arts can no longer be aligned only
with conceptions about creative self-expression. Researchers and
practitioners need to conceive of creativity as multidimensional with
consideration of how cognitive complexity, affective intensity, technical
skills, and interest and motivation all play major roles.
In the past, validity and reliability of current creativity tests in the visual
arts have been questioned. Conceptual and operational definitions of
creativity, as manifest in the visual arts, need to be reconsidered and
inquiry should focus on how new tasks can be developed to help discover
art students who may not be identified as having high creative abilities
through current procedures. Also, in researching and developing
identification procedures, socio-cultural factors including contemporary art
practices, visual and popular culture, and students' personalities, ages,
values, learning styles, motivations, work habits, ethnicity, gender
orientations, and local communities in which they reside all need to be
considered if new means of identification and program development are
augmented.
In the past, creativity and art talent often were viewed as being
synonymous. Recent studies have demonstrated that traits associated
with creativity are not necessarily those associated with art talent. More
research is needed to determine if and how exceptionally creative art
students differ from those who are considered talented in art and what
implications this may have for art teaching and learning.
Artist-based and visual culture approaches to art education present new
avenues for developing conceptions of creativity and creative processes as
bases for inquiry and curriculum development in art education. Creativity
in the visual arts often is difficult to describe with predictable outcomes
that are sensitive to students' needs, processes they experience, or the
products they create. In this era of testing and standards, assessment of
students' progress and accomplishments tends to be concentrated on final
products and rubrics that emphasize predictable, pre-determined
outcomes. A new conception of creativity and the visual arts should foster
research and development that supports art learning in which novel
responses are nurtured and students are encouraged and rewarded to find
and solve problems in unique ways that take into account their creative
abilities.
The present Net-generation of students also needs to be prepared for
participation in an intercultural community that uses cyberspace for
discourse and emphasizes collaboration with groups of individuals to
produce creative outcomes (Brown & Duguid, 2000). The notion of play,
that incorporates participants being willing to fail and try again as a
means of solving problems, can result in their minds being freed through
play to function creatively (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004).
11
References
Amabile, T. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: SpringerVerlag.
Barone, T, & Eisner, E. (1997). Arts-based educational research. In R. Jager
(Ed.), Contemporary methods for research in education (2nd ed.) (pp. 73116). Washington, DC: American Education Research Association.
Berube, M. R. (1994). American school reform: Progressive, equity, and
excellence movements, 1883-1993. Westport, CN: Praeger.
Bolin, P. E., & Blandy, D. (2003). Beyond visual culture: Seven statements
of support for material culture studies in art education. Studies in Art
Education, 44(3), 246-263.
Brittain, W. L. (Ed.). (1968). Lownenfeld speaks on art and creativity Res
ton, VA: National Art Education Association.
Brown, J. S., Sc Duguid, P. (2000). The social life of information.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Brown. N. (2000). Bodies of work and the practice of art making. In Bodies
of work and the practice of art making. Papers: Occasional seminar in art
education 9 (pp. 29-41). Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales,
College of Pine Arts, School of Art Education.
Brown, N. C. M., & Thomas, K. (1999, September). Creativity as a collective
misrecognition in the relationship between art students and their teachers.
Paper presented at the Annual World Congress of the International Society
for Education Through Art, Brisbane, Australia. (Eric Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 455 140)
Clark, G., Day, M., & Greer, W.D. (1987). Discipline-based art education:
Becoming students of art. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 24(2), 129-193.
Clark G., & Zimmerman, E. (2001a). Art talent development, creativity,
and enrichment programs for artistically talented students in grades K-8.
12
Winner E., & Martino C. (1993). Giftedness in the visual arts and music. In
K. A. Heller, E. J. Monks, & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of
research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 253-281). New
York: Pergamon.
Zimmerman, E. (1999). What ever happened to creativity? A new focus on
the relationship between creativity and art talent development. In The
prospects of art education in the 21st century: An international symposium
in art education (pp. 277-299). Taichung, Taiwan: Taiwan Museum of Art
and Taiwan Art Education Association.
Zimmerman, E. (2005). Should creativity be a visual arts orphan? In J. Baer
& J. Kaufman (Eds.), Faces of the muse: How people think, work, and act
creatively in diverse domains (pp. 59-79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, E. (2006). It takes effort and time to achieve new ways of
thinking: Creativity and art education. The International Journal of Arts
Education, 3(2), 57-73.
Performance
Improvement
Quarterly,
24(4), 61-79.
The aim of this research is to investigate the
moderating role of task-related job autonomy to
explain
the
impact
of
team
creativity
on
school
17
than
policy-related
issues
in
the
school
on
creative
skills
development
and
indexes is
director
Massachusetts
Jonathan
Senator
Stan
C.
Rappaport,
Rosenberg,
and
Index for
schools,
which
she
described
as
"public
want you also to include creativity and innovation? They look at you like,
'You've got to be kidding.'"
Also, while the governor described the effort as designed to "measure"
what schools are doing to promote creativity, Ms. Hudecki downplayed
that notion.
"'Measuring' may be too strong a word," she said, emphasizing that much
remains to be decided.
"We don't have any meat on the bones yet," she said.
Meanwhile,
the
California
bill,
approved
Jan.
19
by
the
Senate
Ogoemeka,
O.
(2011).
Emotional
Intelligence and Creativity in Teacher Education.
International Journal Of Social Sciences &
Education, 1(4), 591-604.
Emotional intelligence (EI) and creativity have
emerged to be crucial components of emotional
adjustment, personal well-being, life success, and
interpersonal relationship in the past decade. This
article provides a critical review of the research
field of EI and Creativity in the school context
and analyzes its present and future value in
teacher education in the Nigerian educational
25
effects
on
pre-service
teachers'
professional
professional
knowledge
and
personal
practice,
observational
learning,
group
26
discussion,
peer
evaluation,
and
feedback
are
Teachers
creativity
beliefs/perceptions
and
that
intelligence.
already
These
accounted
findings
for
suggest
by
that
fluid
it
is
methods
commonly
for
emphasized
creativity,
the
problem-based
teachers
or
project-
The
commonly
mentioned
constraints
stimulate
or
inhibit
the
development
of
teachers
are
controlling,
and
excessive
structure exists.
29
students
as
creative,
teachers
mentioned
intrapersonal
Creativity
education
in
science
Although
teachers
are
often
are
prominent.
Some
teachers
identify
of
scientific
creativity
assessment
of
creative
elements
through
in
an
children's
little
agreement
in
teachers'
personal
imaginative
information,
the
processing
construction
of
and
scientific
testing
of
and
science
educators
introduce
their
proved
important
to
developing
the
creative solution, including the following: an openended, goal-oriented task; teacher modeling of inquiry
techniques; provision of tools and an environment that
allowed students to move between dual modes of
interaction (seriousness and play); and provision of
tools and an environment that allowed students to
jointly develop a shared understanding achieved
through tool-mediated, communicative, and cognitive
interaction. The findings suggest that play is an
important mode of inquiry if creativity is the learning
goal. Implications of this research for the design of
learning spaces as well as directions for future
collaborative
creativity
research
are
discussed.
attitudes
toward
creativity
and
risk
taking
(Bereiter
and
applying
what
they
learn.
their
experiments.
For
example,
mid-Atlantic
researchers
at
www.yahoo.com/news/odd
and
the
science
in
the
curriculum
we
teach.
For example, during the unit on weather, students are told that showers of
frogs have been historically reported. Naturally this sparks student
interest, and students discuss how it would be possible for frogs to shower
down from the sky, or whether the report about frogs falling from the sky
was accurate. Some students believe the showering frogs could have been
caused by a tornado picking them up from their pond and dropping them
elsewhere. Others comment that perhaps the reports of frog showers were
inaccurate
and
brainstorm
how
data
might
have
been
reported
inaccurately.
At the end of class, to help them cement their ideas, students cool down
by explaining what they learned during class. The conclusion of class is
also an opportunity to support students' creativity development. Students
brainstorm questions about what they learned that day. For example, after
studying the structure of an atom, some students' questions are very
36
practical, such as, "What are the charges on the different particles?"
However, students also list questions that demonstrate and build curiosity,
such as, "If atoms can't be seen with a microscope, how do we know what
they really look like?" This question shows that our students are building a
curiosity about science, and also presents a creative problem-solving
opportunity. In this instance, students are asked to think about how they
can figure out what an atom "looks like" without getting to see it. We find
that this experience does not become repetitive and boring for students as
long as they perceive that their questions are treated as unique and have
a life after they are asked. For example, we may bring up a particular
student's question in class the next day, we may encourage some
students to conduct internet research to find answers to their questions, or
we may email the text of some students' questions to scientists at a local
university so they can respond with an answer that is read to the class.
Having students develop and use a variety of methods to answer their
questions helps to nuture their creative problem-solving skills and
prevents their questions from seeming insignificant or easy to answer.
During the cool-down and warm-up experiences, we are most concerned
with helping students use prior and newly acquired knowledge in fluid,
flexible, and complex ways. Additionally, these experiences support
students' positive dispositions toward purposeful, responsive creativity.
Exploratory hands-on activities and class meetings to promote
creativity
Relying on best practices in science instruction, exploratory hands-on
activities and class meetings can be used to support students' creative
development. Students need a solid foundation of science understanding
and skills in order to be creative in science. Exploratory activities can be
short experiences of five minutes or less where students physically
manipulate and observe a phenomenon fundamental to the topic of study.
For example, as part of their studies on the unique properties of water, our
class discusses how changes in water temperature are connected to
changes in water density, and then make observations about the densities
of ice and water different temperatures. Students fill beakers with clear
tap water and place ice cubes dyed with food coloring in the water.
Students observe the colored ice floating and, as the ice melts, students
also observe a stream of very cold colored water melting off the ice. This
cold, colored water then sinks to the bottom of the beaker. As the water
37
they
observe.
Next, students meet as a class to discuss how the movement of the dyed,
melting ice water demonstrates the differences in the densities of ice and
water with different temperatures. Class meetings are a social follow-up
experience to their hands-on exploration where students rely on each
other and the teacher to answer the questions they generate and learn
additional information described in standards, with continuous reference
back to their hands-on exploration. The questions that students generated
while observing their colored ice cubes melting leads to a discussion
during which students try to describe and explain how water molecules at
different temperatures move and space themselves differently to create
changes
in
density.
and
follow-up
class
meetings
before
moving
on
to
their own projects they develop some wonderfully creative ideas and rise
to the challenge of providing creative solutions.
test.
39
suggestions,
such
as
written
biography,
PowerPoint
and
the
temperature
of
the
liquid.
parts
of
the
experiment
do
not
fit
into
their
design.
The difference between this situation and the event we describe in the
opening paragraph of this article is that students view the experiment as
theirs. They are not critiquing some unknown author who designed the lab
for a manual; they are critiquing themselves. This ownership generates a
desire in students. They view this requested creative response as a
continuation of their experimental design process. For example, when
students examine the data from their candy experiment, they decide they
do not have a good method for determining how much of the candy's shell
must be shed to be considered fully shed, since some classmates
classified the candy's shell as fully shed when all of the color came off but
the white candy coating underneath remained, while other classmates did
not consider the candy's shell actually shed until the internal chocolate
layer was the only piece remaining. Investing students in achieving
meaningful findings motivates them to think about different ways they can
measure the amount of color shed, reach consensus, and perform their
redesigned experiments again. This kind of exercise also demonstrates to
students how creative minds can see many different perspectives on the
same
event.
While having students critique more traditional cookbook and teacherdesigned investigations provides an opportunity for learning and some
development of creativity, we find that students' creativity is greatly
enhanced by having students design and test their own experiments.
When completing labs with students, we present them with a question to
answer and ask how they can figure it out; many times we get back
responses that are better than what we had planned for our classes.
Sometimes prompting is needed and we use questions to encourage
students' minds down a more productive path. Either way, we are working
to engage students' minds and teach them that out-of-the-box thinking is
important so they develop positive dispositions toward it.
41
http://sciencebuddies.com/science-fair-projects/recommender_registe
r.php
* www.csiro.au/resources/ps1z1.html
Student multiple-intelligences and learning-style surveys
* http://surfaquarium.com/MI/inventory.htm
*
www.scholastic.com/familymatters/parentguides/middleschool/quiz_learnin
gstyles/index.htm
* www.schoolfamily.com/school-family-articles/article/836-learning-st ylesquiz
References
42
Bereiter, C., and M. Scardamalia. 2006. Education for the knowledge age:
Design-centered models of teaching and instruction. In Handbook of
educational psychology, eds. P.A. Alexander and P.H. Winne, 695-713.
Mahwah,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Dubuque,
IA:
Kendall-Hunt.
The Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh. 2003. The handy science answer book.
2nd ed. Detroit: Visible Ink Press.
Delisle, R. 1997. How to use problem-based learning in the classroom.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Enger, S.K., and R.E. Yager. 2000. Assessing student understanding in
science: A standards based K-12 handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Guilford,
J.P.
1950.
Creativity.
American
Psychologist
5:
444-54.
Lubart, T.I. 1994. Creativity. In Thinking and problem solving, ed. R.J.
Sternberg,
290-322.
San
Diego,
CA:
Academic.
(1):
87-98.
its
development.
Human
Development
34
(1):
1-31.
countries
programmes
and
are
reviewing
implementing
science
new
education
pedagogical
43
output
beyond
the
high-school
requires
dynamic,
and
appreciation
often
of
stochastic,
the
complex,
interplay
of
and
scientists.
Resolving
the
tension
their
knowledge of
knowledge
of
science
with
their
and solve
between
they
creative
predictably
and
reproductive
demonstrated
narrow
44
Creativity
in
Mathematics
and Physics subjects
Levenson,
E.
(2011).
Exploring
Collective
and
theories
related
to
mathematical
creativity
in
elementary
school
collective
mathematical
creativity
may
be
studies
characterizing,
mathematical
have
investigated
identifying,
creativity.
ways
and
Haylock
of
promoting
(1997),
for
open-ended
problems
and
measuring
creative,
the
individual
or
the
school
Province;
while
physics
the
students
sample
in
Nairobi
comprised
763
46
techniques.
Questionnaire
for
Data
Physics
were
collected
Students,
using
which
was
in
psychometric
measures
from
Maseno
divergent thinking
scores
and: creative
The
supplementary
study
print
recommends
and
(1)
audiovisual
use
of
scientific
contemporary
notions
about
Association
conferences
or
in
its
and
creativity,
and
educational
on
an action
research
that
state
standards
curriculum
against
document
which
teachers
that
sets
assess
out
each
research
to
examine
her
teaching
for
we
identify
the
process
whereby
she
understands
the
nature
of
their
own
pedagogical reasoning.
The process of teaching entails a variety of decisions. In 1987, Shulman
published an influential paper that categorized the informing knowledge
48
behaviour
(Cropley
2001;
Brown
1989).
that
creativity
can
be
taught.
system
of
classroom
is essential
for
learning
creativity.
become
more
willing
to
participate
in
art
making.
of
clearer
theoretical
structure.
50
While acknowledging the evolution of CPS over time (e.g. Isaksen, Dorval
and Treffinger 2000), Corcoran elected to try out an early five-stage linear
approach. Parnes had applied a revised version of Osborn's original
framework within a secondary school context. Further, Cropley (2001) had
established that this resulted in positive outcomes in secondary school
students' creative problem solving when it was embedded within learning.
Parnes' model became the focus of Corcoran's action research into her
own practice and the starting point for considering her pedagogical
position.
Parnes understood good ideas as occurring increasingly in the later stages
of the creative thinking process. He stated that:
a non-creative problem-solver gets an idea, sees it as a possible solution
to his (sic) problem, and settles for it without further ado. The creative
problem-solver is not satisfied with (the) first idea.
(Parnes and Harding 1962: 190)
In his view 'delayed' thinking is the key to generating more creative ideas.
Corcoran took on board his suggestion, grounded in research carried out
by Osborn (1953), and Gordon (1971), that avoiding jumping straight in
and
assuming
first
solution
is
important.
generated
ideas
regarded
as
potentially
valuable.
v. Acceptance finding: involves selling the idea to others and getting them
to
identify
with
the
solution
as
the
'best
possible'
alternative.
The action research set out to understand the implications of using this
theoretical structure in depth. It is at this point that the pedagogy moved
from a process-product into a reflective practitioner stance, in which a
teacher examines not only her practice but also the reasoning behind it.
51
The participants were fifty students aged between sixteen and eighteen, in
two different schools. An action research spiral is a structural device used
to group together investigation and reflection into a series of cycles of
planning, action and reflection on something the teacher understand's
needs to change. There were two spirals of action research in this study
focusing on Corocan's teaching and learning and her students creativity.
The first spiral comprised visual art lessons with twenty-four students
implemented over a twelve-month period in 2000. The second comprised
52
of lessons with another fifteen students at the same site (Site 1) in 2001.
The involvement of a further eleven students at a different site (Site 2)
finalized this spiral in 2003. Research into learning and the CPS model
provided the theoretical framework for the study and the data analysis.
Evidence of change in student learning and teacher practice was recorded
in a teacher field log, through student interviews and during classroom
interactions. The field log included photographs, lesson plans, personal
reflections, evidence of student problem solving and completed artwork.
The interviews with students and colleagues, that sought to determine
their views about the strategies implemented within the study, were audio
taped. Written comments about their experiences were collected from all
the students at the end of each cycle. As they used the strategies
designed to enhance their creativity, their classroom interactions were
videotaped. Triangulating student, colleague and teacher researcher
views, led to the identification of conceptual 'themes'. The understandings
gained from analysing this evidence were re-examined during the last
cycle at Site 2. Video-stimulated recall interviews with the students in Site
2, were used to identify how the initial conceptual 'themes' from Site 1 had
formed
over
time
and
in
different
place
(Site
2).
model.
appreciated
the
structured
steps
the
model
offered.
individually.
One finding was that the students began to reflect on and take ownership
of their learning processes. As participants in the action research, they
assessed the use and potential of cooperative learning as a strategy for
enhancing creativity and to a certain extent, developed an ability to
process their own learning meta-cognitively. The combination of the
problem-solving model with explicit involvement of students in the action
research
resulted
in
the
development
of
self-regulated
learning.
that
the
students
moved
quickly
to
become
what
is
necessary
to
enhance
creative
ideas.
block'
or
experiencing
'mental
ruts'.
Andrew's story supports this claim. In the past he had struggled in Visual
Art. However when he experienced 'artist block' this time, he retraced his
steps using the CPS model and was able to work autonomously to
overcome this. In other words, he took ownership of the learning. He
recognized which part of the problem solving process he was having
difficulty with, and was able to rectify the problem by searching out
answers independently. Andrew became increasingly confident in his own
ability to identify and address problems.
As the students began to understand the steps involved and become
competent at implementing them, they used the CPS model according to
personal need so flexibility became a part of the pedagogy. There was
some evidence that their participation as co-researchers in the action
research transformed the pedagogy from a process-product to a reflectivepractitioner approach. Action research enables teachers to become more
analytical about their practice, thus they can view it in a new light and
develop different ways of improving it. The action research design of this
study was critical for Corcoran. Throughout the project she followed
Wilson's (2004) advice that as an art educator she was shaping the visual
products, so must ask the question: How am I controlling my students'
creativity?
There was evidence from the study also that flexible use of classroom
space in Visual Art environments is conducive to cooperative learning.
Corcoran allowed students to move around the classroom freely. A finding
was that for cooperative learning environments to be productive, students
need room to move around in informal settings. However, success is
dependent on the guidance they receive for becoming self-regulated
learners.
COOPERATIVE
LEARNING:
COLLEGIALITY,
DIVERSITY
AND
ACCOUNTABILITY
In analysing all the evidence, the integral part played by the particular
learning situation could not be ignored. In this study students who had
55
very
little
(Larey
and
Paulus
1999;
Slavin
1991).
research cycle. Sharing ideas and techniques this way was worthwhile
because the students appeared less inhibited and creative ideas emerged
more openly. These findings about friendship groups endorse the claim by
Zurmuehlen (1990) that the 'inner self' becomes more public in Visual Art
classrooms. Alexandra for example said she gained 'more direction' with a
friend.
When groups were formed so as to reflect student choice as far as
possible, insights emerged as to how to teach students with diverse
artistic abilities. Cooperative learning offers a more positive environment
in which students can motivate and challenge each other to learn. This
study found that learning in cooperative groups, rather than individually,
enables low achieving students to develop ideas and solve problems more
creatively.
Evidence gathered from groups with diverse confidence levels suggested
that the cooperative learning experience strongly influenced the creative
thinking of individuals. Students who participated in friendship groups with
diverse artistic abilities produced more creative ideas when brainstorming
and their thinking improved. Milliken, Bartel and Kurtzberg (2003) reported
similar findings in their research.
Despite some disagreements, students worked productively on personally
set goals while seated with peers in groups in collaborative learning
environments. In an interview, Matthew emphasized the importance of this
input from peers, commenting that, '... they talked to you on your level so
it was good.' The strength of collegial learning environments was realized
and understood. Importantly, the study demonstrated that establishing a
supportive learning environment reduces classroom competition and
strengthens the quality of learning. Students became motivated to engage
in more productive, creative learning opportunities and were successful as
a result of collegiality, rather than competition.
This result was most obvious after analysing the video taped classroom
interactions. Here the researchers could see that some students engaged
with others more readily and openly than before. Andrew, the low
achieving student, recognized the value of collegial work and realized he
'generated more ideas' from being part of a group. The cooperative
learning environment created a sense of comradeship. At this point, we
57
will briefly summarise the findings from the action research about the
problem-solving model the teacher researcher applied.
CONCLUSIONS
As an experienced teacher, Corcoran was aware that many students in her
senior art classrooms struggled to think creatively and to develop
artworks. When they tried to solve problems during the conceptual stage
of art production, they tended to choose the most obvious, basic solution
that came to mind. This led them to underestimate their abilities and
undermined their self-confidence and esteem. The challenge for a teacher
was to identify and change the learning style so as to help them think
more creatively. Too often their lack of confidence to 'take a chance'; 'go
out on a limb' or be radically different obstructed their approach to
problem solving; yet at other times, they spent hours in the problemsolving stage but appeared confused and unable to decide what direction
to take.
In this study the combination of the Parnes model and action research
produced a positive, dynamic pedagogical environment. The teacher
acting as researcher gained insight into the learners' reactions to her
reasons for implementing the model and this influenced her decision
making along the way. Furthermore, she incorporated their input into her
teaching and discovered they were willing to invest time into developing
their abilities and had the capacity to be interactive and flexible in their
learning.
Cooperative learning was successful not only because a well-researched
model was introduced into the classroom, but also because the teacherresearcher was willing to reflect-in-action on its implementation. The study
provided evidence that introducing a learning model successfully requires
not only time and effort, but also openness to student input.
Traditionally, teachers have directed students through the learning process
and dictate time frames and outcomes. The process of pedagogical
decision-making may be restricted by concern with teacher control and, as
a result, teachers may be unresponsive to student needs. However in this
study students engaged cooperatively in the creative process, and the
teacher made the basis for her decisions explicit. The study demonstrated
58
creativity
and
engagement.
learning
requires
adjustments
in
teaching
styles
and
REFERENCES
Amabile, T. M. (1996), Creativity in Context, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
59
Press,
pp.
3-30.
New
York:
Teachers
College
Press.
125-130.
Books.
Cliffs,
N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Creativity
Research
Journal,
12:
3,
pp.
175-184.
London:
Oxford
University
Press.
(2008),
'National
Education
and
the
Arts
Statement',
http://www.mceetya.edu.au/mceetya/national_education_and_the_arts_s
tatement,20981.
Osborn,
A.
F.
Accessed
(1953),
Applied
28
March
Imagination,
New
York:
2008.
Scribner.
New
York:
Charles
Scribner's
Sons.
Harvard
Educational
Review,
57:
Spring
Issue,
pp.
1-22.
Educational
Leadership,
48:
6,
pp.
82-85.
The
Gifted
Child
Quarterly,
49:
4,
pp.
342-353.
Webb, N., Nemer, K., Chizhik, A. and Sugrue, B. (1998), 'Equity issues in
collaborative group assessment: Group composition and performance',
American
Educational
Research
Journal,
35:
4,
pp.
607-651.
Wilson, B. (2004), 'Child art after modernism: Visual culture and new
narratives', In E. Eisner, E and M. Day (eds), Handbook of Research and
Policy in Art Education, The Project of National Art Education Association
(NAEA),
Mahweh,
NJ:
Lawrence
Elbaum
Assoc.,
pp.
299-328.
focus
is
described
and
analysed.
Main
thinking
and
interdisciplinary
or
and
decision-making
tool)
in
today's
complex post-industrial, digital and sustainabilityfocused society. This within the context of the
'contribution of the creative class' (Florida, 2002) and
a 'new world in which inventiveness, empathy and
meaning predominate' (Pink, 2005).
article
identifies
some
concerns
or
drive
how
people
should
conceptualize
the
ways
in
which
transdisciplinary
64
Siegle,
D.
(2012).
Using
Digital
Photography to Enhance Student Creativity.
Gifted Child Today, 35(4), 285-289.
The
article
presents
information
on
how
digital
provides
educators
with
opportunity
to
The
article
also
provides
set
of
and
beneficial
in
terms
of
visual
expression.
The ubiquitous availability of devices that record
digital
images
opportunity
to
affords
enhance
educators
their
an
students'
excellent
creative
devices
can
play
an
important
role
in
66
hope
of
remaining
viable.
Now, let's ask these same questions of ourselves. Are we preparing our
students for collaboration? Are we fostering innovation? Who is monitoring
technology needs and developments? Is your competitiveness being
discussed?
Web 2.0 tools are synonymous with sharing, creating, and
collaborating. They are so very social and friendly, and most of
them are free! They are alternatives for demonstrating what
students know; they motivate and engage students in learning
their way.
WORDLE
It was love at first sight with Wordle, the brainchild of Jonathan Feinberg
(2008). I became familiar with it after reading a School Library Media
Activities Monthly blog post by my friend and former colleague, Kristin
Fontichiaro (2008). Hers is my "must read" blog as Kristin is able to bring
new tools and original thoughts to her readers, which challenge me to
imagine new possibilities. She cautioned that Wordle is addictive -- perfect
to hook teachers!
Teachers are fascinated with Wordle because it is visual, simple, and
creative. When you paste text into Wordle and click "Go" the words are
transported into the computing cloud of cyberspace only to return as art.
67
Words that appear most frequently in the text become large and bold; less
frequent words diminish into the background. The layout, font, and color
can be personalized to produce original, creative word clouds (see Figure
1).
When I share Wordle with teachers I use the United States Declaration of
Independence. What emerges are the themes of that historic document -People * Laws * Right * States * Government. Such a powerful tool for
students! How easily would students be able to answer, "What are the
themes of the Declaration of Independence?" How engaged would they be
if they could use Wordle to discover the themes instead? As a culmination
to a research or writing project, have students create word clouds of their
own work. I have been told that students are so proud of their word
clouds, they have them hanging in their lockers! This is an easy sell to
teachers. Consider this -- President Barack Obama's inaugural address:
America
New
Nation.
Now
you
know
what
saw!
Take it upon yourself to try a Web 2.0 tool. Reflect upon your use of these
tools. What have you learned? Do you have a favorite? Why? How did it
help you as a learner? How could it help you as a teacher? How could it
help your students enjoy and participate in learning, to take ownership of
their learning?.
Play with these tools, become familiar with them, share with a colleague
or friend. Use one with your children, spouse, sisters, brothers, or parents.
Get everyone in on the action. The excitement will be contagious, and
you'll soon be telling others what you're experiencing. You will be the
resident
social
learning
expert.
Working with colleagues and friends makes it easy to lead students to the
use of technology for learning. You will be providing them with
opportunities to be social learners using technology tools. Soon they'll be
sharing, innovating, and collaborating in a virtual environment. They will
be ready to advance their knowledge and enter the workforce ready for
lifelong learning as an accomplished 21st-century learner!
68
technology into the hands of students and must trust them with more
progressive technology use.
It is no longer sufficient for students to have less access to technological
tools than the teacher, nor is it enough for any one suite of software to
serve as the zenith for technology mastery. For student performance to
approximate student potential, students need access to a constantly
evolving array of technological tools and activities that demand problemsolving, decision-making, teamwork, and innovation. The four C's are at
the heart of the International Society for Technology in Education's
National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for Students, providing
a substantial framework for defining the focus of technology objectives for
K-l 2 students. For example, in implementing these standards we have
found that even our youngest 21st century learners are capable of
independently creating digital storybooks, artwork, presentations, and
movies.
Shift in Roles
Following the joyous moment when educators realize their students are
capable, independent technology users who can create inspiring digital
masterpieces, die next reaction is often a more solemn, "How do we fit it
all in?" In fact, the answer to this question is vital to a successful
technology integration transformation.
In the former mindset of teaching with technology, the teacher was the
focal point of the classroom, creating (often time-consuming) interactive
and multimedia presentations to add shock and awe to his or her lessons
and capture the attention of the 21st century child. A new mindset of
teaching through technology must emerge, which depends on a vital shift
in teacher/ student roles.
In this configuration, the teacher acts as a learning catalyst, orchestrating
and facilitating activities that spark defining moments for students. The
most effective activities take two forms-discovery and creation-though
they often symbiotically work together. The student then becomes the
focal
point
of
the
classroom,
acting
as
explorer
(e.g.,
sites
such
as
Storybird
(www.storybird.com)
or
StoryJumper
(www.storyjumper.com); and
* Fifth graders collaborate to launch a Web Safety Wiki to teach other
students
worldwide
about
digital
citizenship
(wildcatwebsafety.
wikispaces.com).
The projects created are excellent tools for formative and summative
assessment. Yet more than that, through creation activities, students
design products that make them active partners in constructing learning
experiences in the classroom and beyond. In demonstrating their skills and
knowledge, they become more confident in their own abilities and their
own voices.
Authentic Audiences
One of the greatest benefits of 21st century technology infusion is also
one
of
the
key
mandates
for
successful
technology
integration.
Traditionally, students have composed their work for an audience of onedie teacher. By using technological resources to establish authentic
audiences for student work, we tell students that their work is worth
seeing, worth reading, and worth doing.
Authentic audiences come in many forms-class presentations, school
news shows, school websites, film festivals, literary publications, online
publishing
through
blogs
or
other
web
2.0
tools,
contests
and
read all the stories in the contest and yours is the best! Be a writer when
you grow up. You will be world wide!"
One comment like that can transform a student's outlook on his or her
education. As an International Story Contest runner-up at age 9, this
creative young girl now plans to be a writer when she grows up.
Worldwide, students and teachers are discovering the benefits of global
collaboration and the power of authentic audiences. For example, students
at Lincoln Middle School in Santa Monica, California, share a collection of
student-created math screencasts at Mathtrain. TV, which has received
more
than
350,000
views.
The
ThinkQuest
Project
Library
73
specialists,
educators,
parents,
and
students
who
can
collaborate to create a shared vision for 21st century learning. The vision
should establish not only ideals for technology-infusion in the classroom,
but also a set of NETS-based progressive technology objectives that
outline what and when technology skills will be introduced, developed, and
mastered by students. Additionally, the vision should account for the
evolution of the program to sufficiently adapt to the emergent needs of
learners.
74
Once you have crafted a common vision, this team can perform a needs
assessment. Do you need to reallocate or obtain more hardware resources
for classrooms? Do your teachers need training in transforming 21st
century technology integration? Do you need to explore the array of web
2.0 resources to determine which are best suited for your educational
environment? One need that is often overlooked is the support of a
designated person, perhaps a technology integration specialist or coach,
to assist teachers as they implement technology uses in their classrooms.
The team can then analyze this information to create a unique plan to
address the needs identified in the assessment.
With the vision and plan in place, enlist a handful of innovative educators
to pilot the use of new technology and methodology in their classrooms.
Encourage these early adopters to create a personal learning network
(PLN)
through
online
communities,
such
as
Classroom
2.0
National
Educational
Technology
Standards
(NETS)
for
Listen to Sugata Mitra share more about his research through his TED Talk
titled "The Child-Driven Education."
Gain technology integration tips on the Edutopia website.
McKeel Elementary Academy students produce work for authentic
audiences
and widespread is the goal of integrating the arts across every subject of
the school's curriculum? Meet with stakeholders and plan the change you
would like to see. What steps will you and your faculty take and what
initiatives will you lead to get to the ultimate "dream space" in four years?
Embrace project-based learning. If you want to use project-based
assessment, map the progress you would like to see during the next four
years. A first goal might be to offer training for classroom teachers on how
to infuse arts across the curriculum. Next, map out how to get parents
involved and help them understand the value of project-based learning.
Consider hosting a project fair or incorporating "family projects" that help
parents to see how much their children learn from these experiences.
You'll also want to plan how projects will eventually make up the majority
of assessments rather than standardized tests.
Name a chief creative officer. Does the title of art teacher still fit when the
job has been expanded to inspire colleagues' creativity? What would it
mean if your art teacher became the "chief creative officer" who manages
the infusion of creativity throughout your school? Think of a job description
that includes supporting the creative endeavors of your faculty as well as
students. It often takes years to make job description and responsibility
changes official within school districts, so start now and map out your plan
for this change over the next four years.
Principal Support
"When it comes down to it, [the success of arts education] has an awful lot
to do with sustained leadership," said UCLA professor James S. Catterall,
who has published leading studies on the impact of the arts on children.
"Ultimately you need to have the principal's support for it to last. ... You
also need a program that has visibility and becomes part of the school's
conversation about children, teaching and learning."
Not every idea suggested here will be the right choice for your school.
You'll need to consider your student population, budget, and the internal
and external resources available. Make the best use of time by starting
with smaller changes and working up to the bigger ones. In the end, you'll
be amazed at what the four C's can do for your students' lives now and in
the future.
77
Creative Pedagogies
the
archives
into
digital
format
and
learning
model
that
guides
the
of
is
knowledge
what
in
authentic
distinguishes
learning
progressive
cooperative
group
work
skills,
and
task
problems
or
areas
of
study.
Authentic
and
disseminator
of
knowledge
to
Although
products
play
an
solutions,
and
products.
The quest to understand and tap into the nature of creativity is, of course,
81
active
role
teaching
for
innovation?
into
action
(Knodt
1997,
2008,
2009).
Engage
include
and
the
trust
natural
following:
curiosity
82
Develop
series
of
related
investigations
be
taught.
It may also be that the most powerful tactic available to any parent or
teacher who hopes to awaken the curiosity of a child, and who seeks to
join the child who is ready to learn, is simply to head for the hands (Wilson
1998,
296).
Even though students are attracted to lab projects like magnets, a well
designed hands-on manipulative establishes a multi-dimensional tactile
and spatially-perceptual arena in which students build challenges and
think through possibilities. The experience of doing (Dewey 1907) gets
well underway, with busy hands establishing cognitive connections,
building skills, and activating concrete understandings (Wilson 1998).
The project as medium (and the focused energy it sets forth) provides a
unique opportunity for educators to interact with students. The result is an
apprentice-like pedagogy through which critical and creative thinking tools
can be guided into concrete practice.
TAKING RISKS AND PLAYING AROUND WITH BIG IDEAS
Creativity and innovation require that we accept change and step out with
our ideas. Doing so can often feel uncomfortable and risky, something to
move away from. If that pattern sets itself, we learn not to trust our ideas,
and to perhaps think of ourselves as "not creative." Engaging individual
creativity and building a community of innovative collaboration is,
therefore, all about establishing a culture that actively affirms risk-taking,
discovery,
and
exploration.
IDEO, a global design consultancy firm that designs products and services
ranging from ergonomic stride-friendly baby strollers to re-conceptualizing
83
as
the
designer,
architect,
engineer,
or
fine
artist
would
and
professions
found
in
the
community.
It feels right to follow the instincts of students as they ask and explore,
structure their own challenges, test out their skills, build personalized
understandings, and experience the joy and promise of doing so. It is our
instinct as adults to see them well prepared and set to pursue positive,
productive
lives.
are
also
part
of
the
program's
agenda.
Such
a
85
for
Supervision
Csikszentmihalyi, M. Flow:
and
Curriculum
The Psychology
Development,
2000.
of Optimal Experience.
HarperPerennial,
1990.
Dewey, J. The School and Society. University of Chicago Press, 1907. IDEO,
A Design and Innovation Consulting Firm. http://www.ideo.com (accessed
February
17,
Lemelson
Center's
Invention
2010).
at
Play:
Inventors'
Stories.
http://invention.smithsonian.org/CENTERPIECES/iap/inventors_main.ht
(accessed
February
17,
ml
2010).
no.
10
(October
2004):
122-4,
126,
128.
Learners
Win!
Hi
Willow
Research
&
Publishing,
2008.
no.1
(September
1997):
35-37.
Learning.
Teacher
Ideas
Press,
2008.
the
World."
Investor's
Business
Daily,
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=339768
86
(accessed
National
February
Gallery
of
Art.
17,
Claude
Monet:
2010).
The
Series
http://www.nga.gov/collection/gallery/gg85/gg85-main1.html
February
Paintings.
(accessed
17,
2010).
(accessed
February
17,
2010).
Teaching
in
Culture
of
Thinking.
Allyn
and
Bacon,
1995.
Wilson, Frank R. The Hand: How Its Use Shapes the Brain, Language, and
Human Culture. Pantheon Books, 1998.
Creativity
learning
and
language
88
to
practice
and
to
produce
more
Therefore,
creativity,
which
involves
that
affects
language
learning
outcomes.
creativity
in
second-language
oral
task
school
creativity
was
learners
measured
of
with
English
a
whose
standardized
opportunities
for
themselves
to
use
the
89
among
and
creativity
lexical
variety
and
was
accuracy,
found.
The
in
addition
to
investigating
the
effects
of
but
not
on
the
quality
of
narrative
When we are trying to define the construct of creativity, the first difficulty
we encounter is that this concept covers a wide range of distinct but
related phenomena: the creative performance or product, the creative
person, the creative situation, the creative process, and creative potential
(Brown, 1989; Lubart, 1994). Therefore, when we attempt to define this
concept, one of our first tasks should be restricting the scope of our
investigation and specifying the area or aspect of creativity that is to be
examined. This means that for lack of space, neither theories of the
creative process (see Finke, Ward, & Smith, 1992; Hayes, 1989; Wallas,
1970), nor theories for evaluating creative products (see Finke et al.,
1992), will be discussed here. Similarly, although theories of personality
also address the issue of creativity and evidence suggests that it might be
strongly related to the Openness to Experience factor of the Big Five
90
to
compare
the
capacities
disparate
to notice
information,
to
relevant new
find
relevant
abilities
redefinition,
include
choosing
problem
useful
finding,
problem
problem
definition
or
presentation,
selecting
an
fluency,
word
fluency,
sensitivity
to
problems,
(Carroll,
1993,
p.
638).
approaches
are
taken.
One
option
is measuring
several
EFFECT
OF
INDIVIDUAL
VARIABLES
ON
TASK
PERFORMANCE
Only a few studies have examined the effect of individual variables on the
performance of communicative tasks. MacIntyre and Gardner (1994)
studied the influence of anxiety on the quality of self-descriptions in L2.
Their results indicated that anxious L2 learners produced shorter selfdescriptions, which were also judged to be less fluent and less complex.
Dewaele and Furnham (2000) investigated how fluency, accuracy, and
formality of vocabulary use were affected by extraversion. In their study
extraverts were found to be more fluent and to use a greater number of
colloquial words than introverts. Drnyei and Kormos (2000) analyzed how
various components of motivation affected the quantity of talk students
94
language
teaching
and
testing
tasks.
Press.
creativity].
Budapest:
Orszgos
Pedaggiai
Intezet.
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shilcock, R., & Yule, G. (1984). Teaching talk:
Strategies
Cambridge
for
production
and
assessment.
University
Cambridge,
England:
Press.
97
Plenum
Press.
3,
185-214.
Hall.
Cambridge,
England:
Cambridge
University
Press.
31,
141-152.
Language
Acquisition,
11,
367-383.
tests.
Developmental
Psychology,
6,
119-124.
38,
31-47.
applied
linguistic
research.
Language
Learning,
49,
509-544.
28,
355-365.
England:
Multilingual
Matters.
(pp.
137-158).
Amsterdam:
John
Benjamins.
Hungarian
EFL
learners.
Language
Testing,
9,
187-206.
Drnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables
in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275-300.
Dugast, D. (1980). La statistique lexicale. Geneva, Switzerland: Slatkine.
Ehrman, M. E. (1996). Understanding second language learning difficulties.
Thousand
Oaks,
CA:
Sage.
learning
success.
Modern
Language
Journal,
79,
67-89.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory,
research
and
applications.
Cambridge,
MA:
MIT
Press.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on
second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
18,
299-323.
role
of
attitudes
and
motivation.
London:
Edward
Arnold.
211-220.
1-11.
Hargreaves, D. J., & Bolton, H. (1972). Selecting creativity tests for use in
research.
British
Journal
of
Psychology,
63,
451-462.
and
Social
Psychology,
45,
609-623.
York:
Plenum
Press.
Hatch, A., & Lazaraton, E. (1991). The research manual: Design and
statistics
for
applied
linguistics.
Boston:
Heinle
and
Heinle.
diversity.
Language
Testing,
19,
57-84.
11,
1-3.
802-810.
Interkulturellen
Fremdsprachunterricht,
9(2),
1-19.
Press.
England:
Multilingual
Matters.
Long, M. H., & Crookes, G. (1993). Units of analysis in syllabus design: The
case for task. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in a pedagogical
context: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9-54). Clevedon, England:
Multilingual
Matters.
solving
(pp.
289-332).
San
Diego,
CA:
Academic
Press.
44,
283-305.
England:
Multilingual
Matters.
15,
323-337.
Review,
69,
220-232.
England:
Cambridge
University
Press.
T,
Kanagy,
R.,
&
Falodun,
J.
(1993).
Choosing
and
using
practice
(pp.
9-34).
Clevedon,
England:
Multilingual
Matters.
Plough, I., & Gass, S. M. (1993). Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effects on
interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language
learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 35-56). Clevedon, England:
Multilingual
Matters.
Press.
Richards, B. (1987). Type/token ratios: What do they really tell us? Journal
of
Child
Language,
14,
201-209.
Language
Learning,
45,
99-140.
Semantics,
11,
249-260.
Edward
Arnold.
in
Second
Language
Acquisition,
13,
275-298.
Applied
Linguistics,
17,
38-62.
Oxford
University
Press.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as
influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research,
1,
185-211.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and
processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93120.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985a). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and
wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607-627.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985b). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human
intelligence.
Cambridge,
England:
Cambridge
University
Press.
its
development.
Human
Development,
34,
1-31.
M.
51,
(1985).
Communicative
677-688.
competence:
Some
roles
of
Rowley,
MA:
Newbury
House.
Hall.
NJ:
Personnel
Press.
102
103