Creativity and Education

Andrew and Anthony have raised some interesting issues about creativity; I hope this will add to and spark further debate.

Creativity is the new buzz word in education. Just have a look at the Governments site http://www.ncaction.org.uk/creativity/whatis.htm which is trying desperately to promote a particular notion of creativity in the National Curriculum. This is how creativity is defined:

"First, they [the characteristics of creativity] always involve thinking or behaving imaginatively. Second, overall this imaginative activity is purposeful: that is, it is directed to achieving an objective. Third, these processes must generate something original. Fourth, the outcome must be of value in relation to the objective"

This could be read as a really positive idea, in that it emphasises notions of purpose and of value (might this solve the problem of 'worthiness' that you mentioned Andrew?), it's not just creativity for creativity's sake. In this respect, and with regards to secondary education, i think that the promotion of this conception of creativity may actually solve some of the problems of prescriptivism that has dogged the National Curriculum since it emerged in 1999. In fact, the government seem to be back-pedaling a little, and rightly so. To quote David Stevens in" The Art of Teaching Secondary English" (2004:London, Routledge)

"‘The best writing is vigorous, committed, honest and interesting’, wrote Cox, famously, in the prelude to the first version of the National Curriculum for English (DES 1989) – before equally famously deciding with his committee, that such qualities could not be fitted in to the imposed structure of the curriculum being formed."

The NC document is notorious for applying too many standards and criteria which act to suppress individualism and freedom of expression, particularly in writing. But does the above redress the balance or just impose unnecessary criteria on creativity?

Perhaps any form of creativity could be seen more as 'rehersal' than 'performance', particularly in younger age groups. I think in this sense it can have a place without having to produce anything of value. Just the freedom and environment with the right encouragment may allow children to explore methods of thinking and of producing that just can't be 'taught', and they need opportunities to try and fail many many times. That's my opinion anyway. Perhaps you need to practice being creative in order to be good at it, and to produce results that have "value".

Take a novelist like Haruki Murakami. His method is to pour ideas out onto paper without any restrictions imposed by planning or structuring the text formally. To quote him:

"If you know beforehand “I want to say this or that”, then the structure naturally begins to become oppresive and to interupt the spontaneous flow of the story...Basically, I believe in the inner power of the human being." (in Jay Rubin, 'Haruki Murakami and the Music of Words', Vintage:2005)

This seems to me to be as good a definition of pure 'creativity' as any, just the contents of the mind channelled through the imagination and transformed into fiction. But of course this is not as easy as it sounds, and perhaps accounts for why Murakami is, in my opinion, rather hit or miss as a writer. But the point is that the good stuff would not be allowed to materialise without the bad stuff too, it's just a consequence of the method. And this kind of approach needs to be encouraged more, i feel. Being able to take risks is vital too, without any fear of failing to produce something valuable.

Comments

[Tim]

Murakami's "hit and miss" aesthetic is even more remarkable when one takes into account that he was educated in Japan. Asian school systems are notorious for maintaining the notion that There Is One Right Answer. Children are seldom, if ever, encouraged to risk failure in an effort to achieve. But then, by his own account, Murakami owes more to Carver and Fitzgerald than to Oe and Mishima.

In the UK, the problem with the national currciculum (at least when it comes into contact with the exam system) is that it is prescriptive on what to say; but not at all on how to say it. Examiners mark papers by ticking off the predetermined 'right' bullet points that a candidate has mentioned; but they are discouraged from marking down (or, indeed, up) for grammar, spelling, style or even construction of argument.

As a result, we have a generation, not only with few interesting or original ideas but, just as importantly, without the means to express those ideas coherently.

[Andrew Mellor]

Creativity is the lifeblood of humans - whether assembling flatpack furniture from IKEA or writing a novel - that I am not denying. Neither am I denying the fact that it's vital that children are given the freedom and encouragement to be creative. What I think is dangerous is for creativity to be the goal - and not perfection. So, as long as you make the effort you're all equal - which is simply not true and only debases the vaule of a masterpiece. I'm not a fan of Murakami. For me, a work of music or literature needs to be more than a stream of consciousness. The great works of art of the past were all created by people for whom the attainment of perfection was the most important goal. I can imagine the scenario now - Beethoven's in his music class at school in Newham when Ruth Kelly comes to 'observe'. 'Well done Ludwig' says the music teacher. 'I know you've been working on this symphony for three years and I think it's a very nice piece of work. But Antonio here wrote this piece yesterday which we're also going to perform at the concert tomorrow. It's based around him thrashing some chords out on a piano, but he did get a little ditracted towards the end...' 'It's crap' shouts Ludwig's friend Ferdinand. 'Don't play it at the concert'. 'It's not crap' says the teacher, 'it's every bit as valuable as Ludwig's symphony, just different, that's all'.

[Thomas Conolly]

The AQA English syllabus, which is used in most school in England for GCSE and A-level, does allocate 3 marks out of the total 54 for spelling, grammar and punctuation. This is unlikely to make a real impact on the final grade though, and there is no consideration of style involved.

[AJE]

I think encouragement (and an environment hospitable to creativity) can be accomplished without resorting to the idea of equal validity. When I coached kids football this was the aim - allowing scope for individuals to experiment, without making standards of attainment meaningless. Kids know what's good or bad, so to claim otherwise would discredit you.

The way to do this (i believe) is focussing on individual attainment relative to their own capabilities, rather than in comparison to an arbitrary group. My job was to make kids improve, not to become "poor", "average", "good" etc.

The problem with secondary education is shifting measurement away from objective exam results, to some form of value added. A good school is one that adds most to their students, not one that ends up with the best ones. This is tricky to measure, and therefore incompatable with a centralised education system.

Ultimately we need to confront the folly that "we're all as good as each other" and show that our true measure of attainment is our previous self.

Those are my thoughts, and not written to contradict any of the previous discussion.

[Andrew Mellor]

You're of course correct in that it's a folly to think we're all as good as another.

Look. I don't know much about education. What I do know is that when I experience art I like it to be great - I like it to show me something new about the world and the way that world can be viewed, and even to show me something new about myself - whether it's Tracy Emin, Will Self or Alonso Lobo. Any old attempt to be creative without the degree of understanding required to show me those things doesn't count.

If I ever have kids, which I don't think likely, their shit paintings will not me stuck to my fridge with an Alton Towers fridge magnet!

[AJE]

here here!!

[thomas conolly]

Anthony, you're thinking is exactly in line with the current trend in educational statistics, at least in the secondary sector. "Value Added" is increasingly becoming the most valued figure among teachers and parents when chosing schools, and there has been a marked move away from an absolute measure of pupil achievement. I agree that this is a very encouraging move. There is still a major problem though, and that is that the means of testing are still solely focussed on the traditional models of mathmatical and logical intelligence, with no real account taken of other types of intelligence or ability. So even if a school was vastly improving its pupils' artistic or kinaesthetic skills, this would not be picked up by either value added or absolute statistics. I think that's a shame, and is ignorant of the difference between individuals.

Andrew, you have a duty to produce more people like yourself, the world needs them.

[AJE]

TC, i agree

The school that my mum worked for had precisely this problem - an intake of absolute retards yet excellent teachers who clearly "added value". By contrast you get schools down the road who handpick the brightest 11 year olds, get better exam results, and appears to be a better school.

But despite the government rhetoric to go down more value added lines, there's something inhrently immesureable about the type of attainment we're talking about, which is why I think it's a problem with the system. Since we have to compare so many students it's inevitible that the methods to do so is too simplistic.

Whilst i've always had a natural aversion to home schooling, i'm familiar with several educational initiatives out here that seek to discover alternative standards of judgement (see Michael Strong). I wonder if the the structure of the current education system can deliver (and capture) the effects it rightly realises are important.

[thomas conolly]

I think the point that David Stevens makes about the Cox report illustrates that perfectly:

"‘The best writing is vigorous, committed, honest and interesting’, wrote Cox...before deciding with his committee, that such qualities could not be fitted in to the imposed structure of the curriculum being formed."

It was too difficult to assess these qualities, or to teach them in a way that was easily quantifiable, so they were ignored.