Do schools kill creativity?

[Adrian Camm]

Do schools kill creativity?

Sir Ken Robinson, in his famous TED talk, makes an entertaining and profoundly moving case for creating an education system that nurtures (rather than undermines) creativity. He challenges the way we're educating our children. He champions a radical rethink of our school systems, to cultivate creativity and acknowledge multiple types of intelligence - something that would require a massive shift in the thinking of educators and policy makers.

Sir Ken argues that most education systems around the world were invented in the 19th century to meet the needs of industrialism. For the most part they tend to ignore the nature of individual talent and ability. (One only has to look at the number of standardized tests that students are required to sit)



Living in the networked environments of the 21st century means that we can connect to our passions pretty easily. Especially with the recent announcement by the Education Minister that all Government schools will have free internet access in 2010.

Shouldn't we be giving our students more opportunities to connect to their passions in the classroom? Can't we teach much of what is in the curriculum in a more individualized, passion-based way? I know that Jenny Luca from Toorak College, who constantly inspires me to be a better person, is trialling a new subject in 2010 titled Passion-Based Learning. Are any other schools taking a similar innovative approach?

If you find the time, I also highly recommend Sir Ken's new book The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything.

So, what do you think?

Do schools kill creativity?

[Craig Cummings]

Well, for starters, the classroom is often connecting students to the teacher's passion not the students! In secondary schools it is common to hear that a teacher's personal passion drives what happens in the classroom. Whole units of work have been based on the teachers personal area of interest whether it be in Humanities, Science,etc. In fact a significant proportion of teachers would consider this most appropriate! In this environment, unless the student fits in with this, it "ain't gonna happen!"
Then there is the issue of mass conformity. Pottery classes where we all make the same model. Essays where we are really encouraged to have the same opinions and use the same evidence to back them up, working on the same worksheet, everyone ruling up the page in the same way (believe me, this still happens!), everyone reading the same novel regardless of interest or ability.............
Not every teacher has classes like this but it is still a strong part of the culture in schools. It is "old thinking" that one size fits all and that creativity needs control and boundaries. At my school we have been working on this at year 8 and 9 as part of our Inquiry Based Learning Program where there is far more student choice and direction about what the students do and how they go about doing it. It's a start!!

[Craig Cummings]

This article in the age written by a student says it all!!
http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/surely-theres-a-better-...

[Adrian Camm]

Thanks for sharing Craig.
What a great article that really highlights the issues facing the current system. I particularly like the student's conclusion:

"On the morning of the first exam we will be herded like cattle into the examination hall by grim-faced supervisors who, like prison wardens, will oversee the whole dismal affair and ensure there are no breaches of exam protocol.

As for us, we will be writing furiously for three hours, surfacing only to check the clock and take periodic sips from our water bottles from which we have assiduously removed the labels in compliance with yet another inane regulation, designed to eliminate cheating."

The changes that are required will require some real heavy-lifting. Is it possible? Can the education system redefine itself? Or do we need to start over? A question that I keep coming back to lately - Is standardization a competitor to innovation? The more I think about it, the more I think that it is.

Will Richardson wrote a post about an article written by Thomas Carroll that was titled "If We Didn’t Have the Schools We Have Today, Would We Create the S... In this post Will questions, "Without remaking the system, is it reasonable to expect that we can systemically move toward inquiry based, self-directed, networked learning spaces that focus on the learning that Carroll describes in the essay?"

[Adrian Camm]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/opinion/21friedman.html?_r=2
An article last week in the New York Times highlighting the need for students to have creative and innovative thinking, along with good problem solving and analytical skills.

[Amanda Brady]

I certainly agree schools kill creativity. I often describe teachers as little Hitler's, don't do this, you must do that and often what is being criticised is not a battle that needs to be won. Why do they do it? Whilst listening to Sir Ken and I heard one statement he made and it touched a cord. Younger children will have a go - how can the environment be created where being wrong is not a killer for student discussion? Year 10 - often discussion will not occur because of that fear. I would like to experiment with grouping students for whatever subject is being taught into their main learning intelligence - I wonder what changes would occur in classroom learning.

[Anne Mirtschin]

My year 9/10 ICT and year 11 IT classes are involved in the global flatclassroom projects. This means that they socialize on a ning with their global class members, build wiki pages together in asynchronous time and then create a movie to summarize their findings. This is uploaded to the ning, embedded in the wiki and judged.
In the past, I have found the wiki was a relatively new concept and it took a bit to get students to work it properly and seek information on their given topic. So, when I asked them what was the most difficult aspect of the project, I was rather surprised to learn that it was thinking of a video topic and put it all together - the creativity element!
I love teaching in a prep to year 12 school and going past the primary classrooms there are so many changing displays, colour and creativity in evidence, but by the time they get to year 8 or so, that creativity is not as evident. Yet, this is a vital skill in the 21st century. How can we encourage it throughout the secondary years of education?

[Gary Schultz]

In order to know how to encourage this, don't we know what has been the reasons behind the reduction in creativity. Reading these comments I feel that the discussion is putting the blame on teachers or the education system? I'm not sure that this is the case. Teachers strive to get students to be creative, as students mature, what begins to be more important to them? Being creative, different, an individual or is being accepted, part of a community (the human pack) more important, ask the kids? What is required in society, to be an individual or to conform? I think it is all of them, it is only the depth to which individuals align themselves with each of these that differs, that makes us individuals. Heard a key note speaker a while ago (a futurist) talking about the possibilities of employment in the future - we all know that some jobs aren't even created yet - however, my point is that these people in these positions still require someone to wait on their tables, clean the floors, windows, build the buildings, they will still have a 'boss', aren't they? Robotics may creep into some of these areas in the future, is this right, is this good? How will human nature cope with this? I believe we also must develop humans who will follow instructions (to the letter), obey orders, yet show initiative at the same time. there must be a mix. I think where I am going with this is that society rules the direction of development of people, not educators, I think some times we over emphasise our importance.

[Adrian Camm]

Thanks for the reply Gary - And while I do agree that society shapes our students culture I would have to disagree on our importance, and argue that for the most part, our importance is not emphasized enough. The type of teachers that we need to show our students the way into the future - are not entering the profession for a number of reasons, primarily financial but also for the perception problem that the profession has. The result - the system employ's teachers of a lower quality or those that do not really have a passion for working with children.

A great teacher can have a profound influence on the development of the whole student - including important traits like creativity - and can help light the fire and passion for learning and lay the foundation for future success.

[Craig Cummings]

I think that a lot of teachers (especially maybe in secondary) enter the profession because they succeeded and enjoyed the style of education they experienced. They want to replicate the education they experienced because they liked it. The problem is that things have changed fast and we live in a whole new world that is demanding a whole new set of skills and understandings for everyone including teachers! So the job has changed but nobody saw it coming!
It's a period of transition at the moment and it will be messy until it moves further down the road. Even now, a person who enters teacher training will have a fairly conservative view of the profession because most (if not all) of their education will have been conservative. And then they land in a conservative school and the cycle continues. There are issues here about teacher training perpetuating the cycle too.
I think though, that overwhelming pressure from the rapidly changing world will eventually act as a circuit breaker and things will change eventually. When this happens and the nature of the job changes system wide, then the profession will demand people with different skills/interests/backgrounds to join. Maybe its not so much about quality of people but "horses for courses"!! Or am I being too kind?
I don't agree with the flavor of Gary's comments about "obeying orders" etc. but I may have misinterpreted them!