Do schools kill creativity?

[Emily Lake]

But the current educational system does not take into account individual happiness. It takes into account what was dictated by industrialism in the 19th century. Let's push those children towards careers meeting the demand of an economy based on profit and accumulation of material wealth.

As a result, so many adults have lost touch with what it means to have a career based on what makes you most happy. What they envisioned as children to become as adults was stifled via the current educational system. They are indeed being discouraged from becoming adults who will rely on their own individual intelligence, so diverse from other children, so differently interactive and dynamic and so distinct. They are to be conformed to the vision of a society where the pursuit of happiness can only be achieved via material wealth.

At the risk of creating an entirely new derail here... the idea that we should each be individually fulfilled with our careers, and that education is for that individual fulfillment isn't something that the "current" educational system has lost sight of, it's essentially a new idea being added to education. It is the idea that they should NOT conform to society that is actually the new idea here.

For thousands of years, education consisted of being taught by your parents to do whatever they had done. For the vast majority of people, that was farming. Formal education was reserved only for the wealthy and the priesthood. That formal education served the purpose of allowing the wealthy to maintain their wealth.

More recently, within the last couple of hundred years, basic education was made available to all children. This wasn't necessarily to enable individual pursuit of happiness, but to enable those children to lead productive lives in an industrial world. As we became more technologically advanced, most children did not follow int eh footsteps of their parents and stay home on the farm. Instead they worked in factories and stores, in cities. To do so, they needed to be able to read and to have a basic understanding of arithmetic.

For the overwhelming majority of human history, education, in all its various forms (including learning by example, apprenticeships, and formal education of various sorts) has been aimed very specifically at enabling each generation to be productive members of society when they reach adulthood.

The idea that individual happiness outweighs productiveness as a goal for education is a very new concept.

 

[Emily Lake]

The question of whether creativity, talent, PYL, can be taught is an existential dilemma that only pops up in academic circles, where teaching things and learning things is their reason for existence. The claim, "talent can't be taught," is really just one of those phrases along the lines of, "your mother dresses you funny." It's only real purpose is to accuse a teacher of being useless, or a student of being helpless.

It turns out, after something worthwhile has been created, and this can be a novel, a painting, a theorem, a new plastic, whatever, the creative spark which started the process becomes a very small part of the final product. Creativity and talent cannot be taught, but what can be taught is the skills needed to continue the process until something worthwhile emerges. The world is full of creative people who have never created anything.

Back on topic... I disagree Bronzeage. Creativity can be taught.

I don't think that art or music classes necessarily teach creativity though. They may give an outlet for innate creativity in some students, and may allow it to flourish in others. But to me, creativity is a way of thinking. It is about thinking around corners, it's about rolling a problem around to view it from many different angles and poking it mentally to find the best way to solve it. It's about playing with the topic.

As has already been said by several people, there is far more creativity in math and science than is usually given credit. I am certainly no scientist, I merely apply math and problem solving to data sets to build models and find patterns. But I often start with a blank page and create an end product. There is a significant amount of creative thinking involved, and a large amount of it has been learned through practice.

For me, it was exposure to open-ended problems that taught me how to think creatively. "What if?" is a great game, and a great real-life problem to tackle. "What happens when?" is close companion. There are any number of logic-problems that require mental manipulation of information, and the ability to think about a situation from many different perspectives. These are all ways of learning to think creatively and critically - for the two are inextricably linked.

I very strongly believe that creative and critical thinking should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. I also believe that art and music should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. Different children process information in different ways. Exposure to art and music, as well as to reading, math, history, etc. allows children to process and integrate information from all of their subjects more fully, and to build a more complete and meaningful picture of the world.

That of course, is my opinion, and my belief. You are certainly allowed your own.

 

[ksen]

The idea that individual happiness outweighs productiveness as a goal for education is a very new concept.

Let's say your WOT is true.

So?

Not using slaves is a relatively new concept as well (in most countries). So what?

 

[Bronzeage]

The question of whether creativity, talent, PYL, can be taught is an existential dilemma that only pops up in academic circles, where teaching things and learning things is their reason for existence. The claim, "talent can't be taught," is really just one of those phrases along the lines of, "your mother dresses you funny." It's only real purpose is to accuse a teacher of being useless, or a student of being helpless.

It turns out, after something worthwhile has been created, and this can be a novel, a painting, a theorem, a new plastic, whatever, the creative spark which started the process becomes a very small part of the final product. Creativity and talent cannot be taught, but what can be taught is the skills needed to continue the process until something worthwhile emerges. The world is full of creative people who have never created anything.

Back on topic... I disagree Bronzeage. Creativity can be taught.

I don't think that art or music classes necessarily teach creativity though. They may give an outlet for innate creativity in some students, and may allow it to flourish in others. But to me, creativity is a way of thinking. It is about thinking around corners, it's about rolling a problem around to view it from many different angles and poking it mentally to find the best way to solve it. It's about playing with the topic.

As has already been said by several people, there is far more creativity in math and science than is usually given credit. I am certainly no scientist, I merely apply math and problem solving to data sets to build models and find patterns. But I often start with a blank page and create an end product. There is a significant amount of creative thinking involved, and a large amount of it has been learned through practice.

For me, it was exposure to open-ended problems that taught me how to think creatively. "What if?" is a great game, and a great real-life problem to tackle. "What happens when?" is close companion. There are any number of logic-problems that require mental manipulation of information, and the ability to think about a situation from many different perspectives. These are all ways of learning to think creatively and critically - for the two are inextricably linked.

I very strongly believe that creative and critical thinking should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. I also believe that art and music should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. Different children process information in different ways. Exposure to art and music, as well as to reading, math, history, etc. allows children to process and integrate information from all of their subjects more fully, and to build a more complete and meaningful picture of the world.

That of course, is my opinion, and my belief. You are certainly allowed your own.

If creativity can be taught, I'll happily take a lesson. Please proceed.

 

[beero1000]

what is the point of this?

Math, physics, etc is much more about creativity than painting and making sounds.

How is it much more? Much more of what? How are you comparing the two?

Most people see creativity as a good and positive trait, with a few notable exceptions. No one wants to be labeled as creatively impaired or an unimaginative drudge.

This is a problem for people who not have anything to display as examples of their creativity. This is really difficult for a mathematician. There are only ten distinct numerals and after that, it's just a matter of rearranging and stacking them higher. Except for putting a new name on a really big number, such as a google, there's not much to show a non-mathematical person.

I seriously hope you are joking.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

The question of whether creativity, talent, PYL, can be taught is an existential dilemma that only pops up in academic circles, where teaching things and learning things is their reason for existence. The claim, "talent can't be taught," is really just one of those phrases along the lines of, "your mother dresses you funny." It's only real purpose is to accuse a teacher of being useless, or a student of being helpless.

It turns out, after something worthwhile has been created, and this can be a novel, a painting, a theorem, a new plastic, whatever, the creative spark which started the process becomes a very small part of the final product. Creativity and talent cannot be taught, but what can be taught is the skills needed to continue the process until something worthwhile emerges. The world is full of creative people who have never created anything.

Back on topic... I disagree Bronzeage. Creativity can be taught.

I don't think that art or music classes necessarily teach creativity though. They may give an outlet for innate creativity in some students, and may allow it to flourish in others. But to me, creativity is a way of thinking. It is about thinking around corners, it's about rolling a problem around to view it from many different angles and poking it mentally to find the best way to solve it. It's about playing with the topic.

You do realize you just described jazz, right?

As has already been said by several people, there is far more creativity in math and science than is usually given credit.

With that, I will agree.

I am certainly no scientist, I merely apply math and problem solving to data sets to build models and find patterns. But I often start with a blank page and create an end product.

You mean like a blank canvas?

There is a significant amount of creative thinking involved, and a large amount of it has been learned through practice.

Like crafting a play in workshop?

For me, it was exposure to open-ended problems that taught me how to think creatively. "What if?" is a great game, and a great real-life problem to tackle.

Like writing a novel.

"What happens when?" is close companion. There are any number of logic-problems that require mental manipulation of information, and the ability to think about a situation from many different perspectives.

Like composing a plot.

These are all ways of learning to think creatively and critically - for the two are inextricably linked.

I very strongly believe that creative and critical thinking should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. I also believe that art and music should be a foundational aspect of elementary education. Different children process information in different ways. Exposure to art and music, as well as to reading, math, history, etc. allows children to process and integrate information from all of their subjects more fully, and to build a more complete and meaningful picture of the world.

That of course, is my opinion, and my belief. You are certainly allowed your own.

- - - Updated - - -

 

[Toni]

If creativity can be taught, I'll happily take a lesson. Please proceed.

Plenty of people think that creativity can be taught. I think most of us can agree that creativity can be nurtured or it can be stifled. Here's an interesting article:

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/can-creativity-be-taught/


Have you ever heard of Odyssey of the Mind? It's a creative problem solving competition for kids. Each year there are new problems that teams can choose to attempt (long term problems) from five general categories: mechanical/vehicle, technical performance, classics, structure and performance.

Here's a link to the official site: http://www.odysseyofthemind.com/materials/2015problems.php

An example of a practice spontaneous problem would be:

Cantilever Structure

(This problem is adapted from Make Learning Fun! by Dr. C. Samuel Micklus.)
JUDGE READS TO TEAMS:
You will have 10 minutes to complete this problem.
You are to build a structure of toothpicks and clay that will sit on a table behind a boundary line. The structure will cantilever, or stick out, as far as possible beyond the boundary line without touching the table surface.
You may work anywhere you wish. You may also talk.
You may break the toothpicks into smaller pieces if you wish.
If your structure touches the table surface, you must break it off until it is cantilevered.
The structure will be measured after the 10 minute construction period. The distance cantilevered will determine your score.
You will be given 50 toothpicks and a piece of clay. The clay will be used to make the joints for your structure.
The team must rest the structure on the table behind the boundary line. You may not press down so that the clay adheres to the table to support the cantilever.
Scoring will be as follows: You will score one point for each 1/4" the structure extends beyond the boundary line without touching the surface. The end of the cantilever must be above the yardstick when the judge takes the final measurement.
FOR JUDGES ONLY:
Give each team 50 toothpicks and an equal amount of clay. OM recommends Plast-I-Clay by Amoco, or Crayola's Claytime Clay. (The latter is more expensive.) These are available at Toys "R" Us and other stores. If Plast-I-Clay is used, give each team a 1" x 1" x 1" piece or the equivalent.
You need a table on which a boundary line is taped across the top and a yardstick.
Teams may use their unused clay as a counterweight.
Be sure to end at 10 minutes.

Another verbal problem:

Something In Common

A. JUDGE READS TO TEAMS: (Do not read material in parentheses.)
You will have 1 minute to think and 2 minutes to respond. Questions count against your thinking time. You may ask the judge questions but may not talk to each other at any time.
You will receive 1 point for each common response. Highly creative or humorous responses will receive 3 points. This will be a subjective opinion of the judges and the judges' decision is final.
A number has been placed before each of you. That is your assigned number.
A stack of cards appears before you. When time begins, the judge will turn over the first card. The team member whose number corresponds to the card number will give a response.
After the team member gives a response, he or she will turn over the next card. That team member will respond, and so on.
You may not skip your turn, or repeat, or pass. If one member of the team is stuck, the team is stuck.
Once the time begins, it will not be stopped. If the judge asks you to repeat a response, or to clarify it, or to give a more appropriate response, it counts against your time. Speak loudly and clearly.
Your problem is to name two things that have something in common and what it is they have in common. For example, you might say, "Snow and rain both fall from the sky." (Repeat number 8, "Your problem is....")
B. FOR JUDGES ONLY:
Be sure to give exactly 1 minute to think and 2 minutes to respond. Timing is critical. Students responding at the buzzer can finish and be scored.
Score: 1 point for each common response, 3 points for each creative response.
In order to ensure that in every 5 cards turned over each team member will give one answer, stack the cards in the following order for each team: 2,5,1,3,4; 1,5,3,2,4; 1,5,2,4,3; 5,3,4,2,1; 2,1,5,4,3; 1,3,2,5,4; 3,5,2,4,1; 4,5,2,1,3; 4,3,1,5,2; 3,5,1,2,4.
If all the cards have been used, turn them over and start again. At the end of the session, the timekeeper should check the order of the cards.
Be sure that all seat positions have been marked prior to calling in the teams. If there are fewer than 5 team members, have them turn cards until there is a team member in the numbered position.
Examples of Common Responses:
Obvious similarities: Pens and pencils write; Baseball and football are sports;
Cars and buses move people;
Dimes and nickels are coins;
Steak and cake are foods;
A and B are letters;
1 and 2 are numbers;
Moms and dads are parents;
Red and white are colors;
Oranges and apples are both fruits;
Helicopters and airplanes fly;
Socks and hats keep me warm.
Weak associations: Horses and cats can't fly; June and July aren't winter months;
Trees and ants can't speak;
Car and house don't have the letter "d" in them.

Examples of Creative Responses:
Unusual or humorous similarities: Brown arid black both begin with "b"; Fish and people breathe;
May and June are both girls' names;
My ears and nose are both on my head;
The principal's office and the dentist's office are two places I don't like.
Things that have something in common, but are generally not related to each other: Clocks and people have hands;
Nuns and soldiers both wear uniforms;
Highways and paper clips go around;
Some pizzas and golf courses have mushrooms.
NOTE: Once an answer is given, if a very similar answer is given, count it as common only and then declare any other answers that are basically the same as a duplicate and ask for another response.

One of my kids used to participate. Indeed, the coaches do present the teams with various practice problems, especially spontaneous problems and indeed, generally speaking, the individuals and team to improve as they gain more experience with creative problem solving. And yes, there is a distribution of 'talent' at creative problem solving: some kids/individuals are much better at thinking outside of the box than are others. And some are simply good at trudging along and not getting distracted by the stress, the pressure of the clock, the noise and other outside distraction but keep going and sometimes rack up enough winning points that way. I've watched teams compete together over the course of a number of years and yes, the participants to gain skills but also gain the confidence to be willing to try something they don't know for certain will work. And then try again if it doesn't work the first time--figuring out what went wrong, and fixing that or ditching the idea if it isn't feasible.

From what I gather, you work in mechanics: you fix engines that are broken. I cannot believe that at least sometimes that does not involve some creative problem solving to discover what the problem is and how to fix it.

And I've read some of your poetry: you use language for far more than utilitarian purposes and you do it well.

 

[Bronzeage]

what is the point of this?

Math, physics, etc is much more about creativity than painting and making sounds.

How is it much more? Much more of what? How are you comparing the two?

Most people see creativity as a good and positive trait, with a few notable exceptions. No one wants to be labeled as creatively impaired or an unimaginative drudge.

This is a problem for people who not have anything to display as examples of their creativity. This is really difficult for a mathematician. There are only ten distinct numerals and after that, it's just a matter of rearranging and stacking them higher. Except for putting a new name on a really big number, such as a google, there's not much to show a non-mathematical person.

I seriously hope you are joking.

I don't know if you wish it was a joke, or are not happy that it is.

I have sat through enough math lectures to understand one thing quite well, it's not a spectator sport.

 

[Nexus]

There are only ten distinct numerals and after that, it's just a matter of rearranging and stacking them higher. Except for putting a new name on a really big number, such as a google, there's not much to show a non-mathematical person.

This is the part that probably flabbergasted some posters here. It's woefully incorrect to say math is ten distinct numerals in different combinations. The first ten natural numbers which are what you're referring to are simply a product of our Hindu-Arabic decimal system. Numerals 0 through 9 are not the foundation of mathematics. Geometry for example existed 1000s of years before that aspect of math was developed in the middle ages.

 

[Bronzeage]

One of my kids used to participate. Indeed, the coaches do present the teams with various practice problems, especially spontaneous problems and indeed, generally speaking, the individuals and team to improve as they gain more experience with creative problem solving. And yes, there is a distribution of 'talent' at creative problem solving: some kids/individuals are much better at thinking outside of the box than are others. And some are simply good at trudging along and not getting distracted by the stress, the pressure of the clock, the noise and other outside distraction but keep going and sometimes rack up enough winning points that way. I've watched teams compete together over the course of a number of years and yes, the participants to gain skills but also gain the confidence to be willing to try something they don't know for certain will work. And then try again if it doesn't work the first time--figuring out what went wrong, and fixing that or ditching the idea if it isn't feasible.

From what I gather, you work in mechanics: you fix engines that are broken. I cannot believe that at least sometimes that does not involve some creative problem solving to discover what the problem is and how to fix it.

And I've read some of your poetry: you use language for far more than utilitarian purposes and you do it well.

Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate it very much. I have been found guilty of creativity enough to be considered a multiple offender, something of a career creator. There are some people who simply refuse to believe anything I say. One of the reasons I like this place is because even though it supposed to be a skeptical place some of my most creative statements have gone unchallenged.

We have never determined a satisfactory definition of creativity, which is why conversations such as this go in so many directions. I still say creativity cannot be taught, which is no great loss, because it does not need to be taught. The human mind is creative, all by itself. Everyday, every single human on this planet says something that has never been said before. We are surrounded by creativity, but only like to recognize the stuff which appeals to us.

Beethoven was a very creative person, but as impressive as his work is, imagine how astounding it would have been if he had written his Ninth Symphony before he learned to play the piano. That would be very creative. I would be impressed.

I have written a few noteworthy poems. It would take some very creative mathematics(see my previous post) to calculate the number of words which spun through my brain, before I pared it down to the few which appear on the page. Creativity gives me the words. Skill, perseverance, and patience, determine the final list. It is skill, perseverance, and patience which can be taught.

 

[Bronzeage]

There are only ten distinct numerals and after that, it's just a matter of rearranging and stacking them higher. Except for putting a new name on a really big number, such as a google, there's not much to show a non-mathematical person.

This is the part that probably flabbergasted some posters here. It's woefully incorrect to say math is ten distinct numerals in different combinations. The first ten natural numbers which are what you're referring to are simply a product of our Hindu-Arabic decimal system. Numerals 0 through 9 are not the foundation of mathematics. Geometry for example existed 1000s of years before that aspect of math was developed in the middle ages.

I did specify "numerals", not numbers. I imagine a base 20 system would require ten more names, which would not strain any mathematicians creativity, but on the other hand, a base 2 system cuts out the more interesting shaped numerals.

I will concede, geometry is certainly more entertaining than other branches of mathematics.

Euclid, by Vachel Lindsay

Old Euclid drew a circle
On a sand-beach long ago.
He bounded and enclosed it
With angles thus and so.
His set of solemn greybeards
Nodded and argued much
Of arc and circumference,
Diameter and such.
A silent child stood by them
From morning until noon
Because they drew such charming
Round pictures of the moon.

 

[arkirk]

This is the part that probably flabbergasted some posters here. It's woefully incorrect to say math is ten distinct numerals in different combinations. The first ten natural numbers which are what you're referring to are simply a product of our Hindu-Arabic decimal system. Numerals 0 through 9 are not the foundation of mathematics. Geometry for example existed 1000s of years before that aspect of math was developed in the middle ages.

I did specify "numerals", not numbers. I imagine a base 20 system would require ten more names, which would not strain any mathematicians creativity, but on the other hand, a base 2 system cuts out the more interesting shaped numerals.

I will concede, geometry is certainly more entertaining than other branches of mathematics.

Euclid, by Vachel Lindsay

Old Euclid drew a circle
On a sand-beach long ago.
He bounded and enclosed it
With angles thus and so.
His set of solemn greybeards
Nodded and argued much
Of arc and circumference,
Diameter and such.
A silent child stood by them
From morning until noon
Because they drew such charming
Round pictures of the moon.

It is the politics that are rampant in our land that very much selectively stifle creativity. How can you go to West Point and get inspiration to oppose war? Last night we had a show on TV about West Point grads at the time of the Vietnam war. These guys mostly just did what was driven into their heads at that crappy anti-human institution. Many of them went to war and quit. Despite the fact they bailed out on the war, their West Point training made some of them feel they were somehow defective and one actually wished he was dead. It was indeed an interesting show. Some of the values taught there still were affecting these men 50 years later.

 

[Emily Lake]

The idea that individual happiness outweighs productiveness as a goal for education is a very new concept.

Let's say your WOT is true.

So?

Not using slaves is a relatively new concept as well (in most countries). So what?

It simply means that nobody has "lost touch" with what it means to have a career based on what makes you most happy, which is what Sabine Grant claimed in her post to which I responded.

One cannot "lose touch" with something that one has not yet had.

 

[Emily Lake]

You do realize you just described jazz, right?
You mean like a blank canvas?
Like crafting a play in workshop?
Like writing a novel.
Like composing a plot.

AthenaAwakened, I can't tell if you're agreeing with me, or arguing with me.

The point I was attempting to make was that in order to do the creative things that you've listed, a person must be able to think creatively. I think that most art and music classes are vital outlets for growing creative skills... but I don't know if they necessarily teach children how to think creatively. I do, however, think that creative thinking can be taught.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You do realize you just described jazz, right?
You mean like a blank canvas?
Like crafting a play in workshop?
Like writing a novel.
Like composing a plot.

AthenaAwakened, I can't tell if you're agreeing with me, or arguing with me.

The point I was attempting to make was that in order to do the creative things that you've listed, a person must be able to think creatively. I think that most art and music classes are vital outlets for growing creative skills... but I don't know if they necessarily teach children how to think creatively. I do, however, think that creative thinking can be taught.

I learned more about music and creativity watching Bernstein's Omnibus series than I ever did from several years of Music class in grade school.

Most things can be taught and improved, you just need the right person doing it.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Meh, creativity is overrated.

Surprisingly few practical applications.

You must not live in Silicon Valley.

 

[Toni]

Meh, creativity is overrated.

Surprisingly few practical applications.

You must not live in Silicon Valley.

Or anywhere in the world.