Ken Robinson, in his highly amusing TED Talk, suggests that our schools operate on a hierarchical system. Math and English are at the top and we know that this is true because they are considered the "Common Core Standards." This distinction, while rather small, shows our students that these are the subjects that we, as a society, value the most as they are the "core" of our education system. Science, history, technology, the arts and everything else our students learn about are considered "Essential Standards." While they are not altogether forgotten, they are clearly next in importance and the arts inevitably fall at the bottom of the list (Robinson, 2006).
This hierarchical structure shows our students that what they are good at may not be sustainable as a career or it may be a waste of time that could be used to master something more valuable. The ironic thing, coincidentally, is that creativity has become a quality that CEOs and executives look for in potential employees (Franklyn, n.d.). Innovation and the ability to think outside the box gives companies an edge on their competition. Our schools, however, seldom give students the time to develop these things because there's just "not enough time" to get it all done. This mentality is what, in essence, "kills" creativity. With that said, I don't believe that it is our schools that are at fault. I don't think they do enough to fix the problem, either.
In my opinion, creativity can't be taught. If a teacher attempts to teach creativity, students are not learning how to make new things or think of new ideas—they are learning from someone else. This is why creativity is something that must be developed independently. But while a teacher may not be able to teach a group of children how to be creative, students may be given the tools to develop and give rise to their creative abilities. Teachers can provide students with the ideal environment, including a creative atmosphere and opportunities to strengthen their creative thinking techniques, that can train a student to approach their work and life with creativity in mind. Creativity is in an entirely different realm than multiplication facts or grammar nuances, so it cannot be taught in the same way. Children who have the opportunity to develop their creative thinking skills, however, may be able to come up with unfamiliar ways to understand their multiplication facts or use an invented strategy to remember the difference between there, their, and they're.
In order to train students to become more creative, teachers need to first improve student's understanding of creativity. It is a quality that requires intrinsic, authentic motivation (Sternburg, 2006). This comes from allowing students to engage in projects that tap into their interests and connect to their everyday lives. By providing students with this opportunity, they are more likely to invest themselves in their studies and produce higher quality work.
Additionally, teachers must tend to the environment that their students are working in. Giving a student the opportunity to explore their interests in an unsupportive atmosphere will not yield the best results. Instead, teachers need to invest in developing their classroom into a creative space in which students are encouraged to ask questions and try new ideas. New ideas are risky for students—they may be met with negativity, failure, or ridicule which are all things that people tend to avoid. However, if a student's environment has fostered a healthy self-esteem and promises an encouraging response to their risk-taking, it may engender several new ideas that a student is willing to share with their peers.
Sternberg even mentions the environment as one of the most important aspects of igniting creativity in people. He states that a person could have all of the "internal resources" necessary for creativity, but without environmental support, that creativity may never be shown (Sternburg, 2006). Inevitably, there will be obstacles in every environment that impede the development of creativity. With this in mind, teachers must act as creativity fosterers and help students face these challenges while providing them with supportive validation.
Lastly, students and teachers alike need to learn how to assess their work in terms other than "passing" or "failing." There is much more work to a problem than the answer that a student chose on a standardized assessment. Teachers must provide students with opportunities to demonstrate their understanding in other ways that value the decisions they made throughout their problem-solving process. While they will not be assessed in this way every time they take a test, at least students understand that their work and creative thinking skills can be evaluated in more than one way.
Although I do not believe creativity can be taught and I do not believe that our schools are "killing creativity," I do think that our teachers and schools can do much more for our students in terms of helping them to develop their own creativity. By providing students with tools and encouraging their unique ideas, we teach them that what they are good at is valuable to our society. Rather than focus on subjects that are at the top of the hierarchy, we must do more to integrate all subjects and show our students that innovation is a commodity that we value.
References
Robinson, K. (2006). How Schools Kill Creativity. TED 2006 conference. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity#t-925986
Sternburg. R. J. (2006). ‘The Nature of Creativity’. Creativity Reasearch Journal. 18: 87-98
Sternburg. R. J. (2006). ‘The Nature of Creativity’. Creativity Reasearch Journal. 18: 87-98
Franklyn. (n.d.). Creativity [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/hpuedu4420/Creativity.ppt?attredirects=0
