Talking about Creativity Is Fun, But How Do You Teach It?

by John R. Walkup, Ph.D.

Nothing in education engenders as many bumper sticker slogans as creativity. We want our kids to develop creative minds. But creativity is difficult to measure and so research in this area is scant, leaving us to our own devices. 

As Legend Will Have It

One common notion is that allowing students more freedom to express themselves fosters creativity. Along the same lines, many argue that strict educational systems dampen creativity. 

Although seemingly obvious, history does not bear this out. Many of the strictest educational systems in the world routinely produced clever approaches in the arts and sciences. The Germans in WWII were hardly taught in the Montessori tradition, but had little trouble producing some of the most jaw-dropping creations in military history. (Many of their aircraft designs were far ahead of their time.) Their work in the arts was nothing to sneeze at either.

Another unproven legend is that creativity is fostered by providing students with more creative tools to express themselves. But history once again dispels this notion readily. Leonardo da Vinci certainly didn't have many tools to work with to display his creations: Essentially just ink and paper. If anything, access to modern technology may have only diminished his output.  While creative forces like Tangerine Dream used the advanced sound-producing possibilities of the synthesizer to create amazing soundscapes, their creative peak took place when synthesizers were relatively crude. The arrival of computers, with the ability to do pretty much anything you want, did nothing for their creative spirit. 

Movies are no different. The ability to simulate special effects using CGI has done little to spur creativity in the movie world. If anything, it has pushed too many movie producers to use the enhanced imagery to do nothing more than replicate movies from the past, although with more explosions.

Neil Wadhwa in 5 Culprits That Are Killing Your Creativity also claims that pressure dampens creativity. Perhaps it does for some people, but not all. After all, whenever we say that someone works well under pressure, we are essentially saying that "this person becomes creative under pressure." The music world is replete with artists who have created their greatest works under rushed time constraints. ("Paranoid" by Black Sabbath comes to mind.)

Finally, one of the most vocal criticisms of state content standards and standardized testing is that they inhibit creativity. I see no evidence to support this argument and consider it one of the educational community's myriad false dilemmas: That if one teaches academic thinking, one undermines creative thinking. I fail to see any value in casting this issue into an either/or argument. I'm no fan of the current high-stakes testing system, but preparing students to meet CCSS expectations will not hurt their creativity one iota.

My Suggestions

Obviously, we have much to learn about spurring creativity in the classroom. But can we come away with anything by studying the history of creative endeavors. I think so.

First, I think we need to teach students concepts and skills. One reason Germans were so creative in the engineering field during WWII was that they were pretty darn good engineers. Likewise, a pianist steeped in musical theory is in a better position to create clever compositions. In short, the more you know, the more cognitive tools your imagination has at its disposal. 

I also think that we should limit the tools students have at their disposal. Rather than giving them a wide range of paint colors to choose from, give them just them just a few (perhaps only one).  Rather than letting students write on any subject they wish, constrain their choices.

Activity prompts should peg more upper Depth of Knowledge levels, which compels students to acquire more knowledge, make decisions, and (hopefully) produce a wider range of responses. Bloom's levels should increasingly target the analyze, evaluate, and create levels.*

Now that we have talked about setting up the learning environment for enhancing creativity, how do we actually teach it?

The Think-Aloud

There are hundreds of instructional methods available to teachers, but I have singled out one as particularly promising for teaching creativity: The think-aloud.

The think-aloud is an aural performance in which the instructor verbalizes his or her thought patterns. As such, the think-aloud is always cast in the singular first person (“I). Used strategically and skillfully, the think-aloud is particularly effective for teaching abstract concepts. In essence, by hearing their teachers voice inner thoughts, students learn to think creatively by example.

I'm looking at my poster and somehow it comes off as bland. Hmmm... what can I do to spruce it up? Let me think... I'm stuck. Let me go back to the Principles of Design. Perhaps they can help spur my imagination. Here's one principle: Scale. According to my notes, scale can be used to elevate the importance of an idea. My poster is about violence. Can I scale up the symbols of violence in my poster? Let me try it...

Digital Thought Library

Finally, I think the nation would benefit from a Digital Thought Library, where the creative forces from a wide range of fields (art, music, literature, engineering, science) use the think-aloud to convey their thoughts as they mastermind their next creation.

Some have done this in the past. In his "Theory of Composition," Edgar Allan Poe** detailed his thinking processes employed when writing The Raven. His work, however, is tough-sledding for most public school students and completely opaque to English Learners. It also isn't quite the think-aloud process described above.

We all remember Bob Ross, the host of The Joy of Painting, using a think-aloud (of sorts) when teaching viewers how to paint. While Ross wasn't a creative mastermind (if you've seen one Bob Ross painting, you've seen them all), his method of thinking aloud provided viewers insight into the creative process. 

As I envision it, the Digital Thought Library would function much like "The Joy of Painting," only with elevated cognition and a stricter adherence to the think-aloud process.

Settling on the cast of characters will prove difficult: One man's Pink Floyd is another man's Milli Vanilli. There will naturally be calls to include certain people out of political concerns, rather than the quality of their creative endeavors. And no doubt certain artists will be included because of their popularity, or the popularity of their musical genre.

While artists will fall over themselves to join this project, they will probably find the affair more challenging than anticipated. Many will want to talk about what is creative, but the world doesn't need more bumper sticker slogans. We need to know how they actually do it, and the think-aloud is the only vehicle I know for getting that idea across to the public.

______________

* The creativity we are discussing here is not equivalent to the create-level of Bloom's Taxonomy, although they are closely related. 

** Some think that Poe didn't actually write the Theory of Composition and it is a hoax. Not sure.