Whats wrong with creativity?
It's interesting how often you hear people talking about creativity. As an educator I've been on courses to develop my creativity where various analogies and metaphors are used to compare the work of the teacher with that of the artists who refines a piece of work over time. I've even heard narratives where teachers are compared with the artwork itself where they themselves are polished and improved through the influence of others.
While I completely agree that creativity and innovation are amongst some of the most crucial tools in an educators arsenal, a lack of appreciation for what creativity is, and what we can and cannot achieve through creative practice is crucially important.
Robinson (2011) acknowledges that:
"Education is not a linear process of preparation for the future: it is about cultivating the talents and sensibilities through which we can live our best lives in the present and create the best futures for us all."
This concept of releasing our creativity to enable us to solve the problems of the future and to prepare the next generation for life in the future is a familiar and effective narrative. It's not wrong in itself though most of my own experience points to an educational system that does indeed reduce learning to a series of linear learning outcomes which in turn dictates the course of learning and teaching.
But, if even if we accept that learning is linear, and we liken the learning process to running a race strewn with hurdles, we need to consider where is the starting point?
Any design student will tell you that creativity always operates within constraints. Constraints come in many forms: Political, Social, Technological, Economic, Legislative and even Environmental (as Covid-19 has proved). Teachers across the globe apply their creativity to develop engaging learning experiences every day, and they do so operating within a complex web of constraints. But what happens when a narrative of creativity becomes more insidious? When is the language of creativity used as a tool to distract us from more wide ranging issues.
I'm sure educators will be familiar with the experience of having been praised for our innovation, creativity and adaptability in supporting my learners through what has been an extremely trying year. We've changed the way we work, supported our students through unbelievable changes and all the while working in a way which blurs the lines between our professional and personal lives. However, while giving so much of ourselves, we quickly learned that no amount of creativity could support those learners who simply didn't have access to reliable WiFi and suitable computer hardware. Moreover, we are now discovering that those same students lack in a whole range of digital literacy skills which have to be creatively embedded in the existing curriculum. Why? Because there's no time or money available to do anything else.
It seems clear to me that in running the educational race that not every learner has the same digital starting point.
Governments across the globe have stepped up and provided funding which enables that gap in resource provision to be filled. But did anyone stop to address the question of whether these students capable of operating these devices safely, and in a way that is conducive to effective online learning? Or is this another layer of complexity that teachers are expected to muddle through by way of creativity and innovation?
Indeed digital literacy isn't something that we as teachers should have to be creative about. This is a clear and identifiable need which must be systematically addressed. There needs to be proper strategies and policies put in place to ensure that our learners are capable of handling the emerging post-covid digital landscape. Such a wide ranging problem deserves more than just a creative approach which heaps yet more pressure on teachers.
The language of creativity is important!
By definition, creative methods can be thought of in a number of different ways.
Invention - when a new product is made available to a new market.
Innovation - when an old product is revised or improved to better meet the needs of an existing market.
Does our current practice fit the definition of invention? Are we offering a new product or service? Have we identified a new market? Does our practice fit the definition of innovation? Have we retrospectively examined the needs of our learners and the quality of our service and made changes to improve and find a better match?
Or have we simply adapted our practice to fit a new environmental constraint? The government funding made available to enable schools, colleges and universities enabled institutions to adapt to the new post-covid environment. While it may have equipped us as educators to adapt, is there now an expectation that learners must adapt to this new environment? Our learners deserve more than an adaptive approach. They deserve proper retrospective innovation, long-term strategic thinking, not just Darwinian survivalist adaptation.
The language of creativity may be laden with positivity and praise. But when we examine it more closely, are we being mislead into believing that short term, survivalist thinking is doing our learners sufficient justice? If the mantra of creativity is repeated enough times, do we come to accept it and even believe it?
Would love to know your thoughts.
Follow me on twitter
@McintoshMclean.
Comments
Post a Comment