Creativity

How could creativity potentially impact on primary education?

This post will create discussion around creativity within education and explore the impact it has on a child’s learning.

Although definitions of creativity can be identified; it may also be a term than can become overcomplicated due to the uncertainty of the term. Torrance, (1988) stated that “creativity defies a precise definition because it is largely unseen, nonverbal, and unconscious” (p.43). This uncertainty of a non conclusive definition could be as a result to researchers not treating the study of creativity in much detail. Several different views have been included in the creativity debate (Starko 2013) and most theorists agree that creative process involves immeasurable positive results for a child’s learning and development.

My view of creativity mirrors that of Sharp’s who suggests the idea that it involves the “imagination and originality” (Sharp, 2004. P.5) Another view that correlates the views of Sharp includes “Creativity as: imaginative activity fashioned so as to produce outcomes that are both original and of value” (NACCCE 1999, p.30) I believe this statement to be true as in order for it to be identified that we are thinking creatively, we must be original and ensuring that our idea is authentic. It is often the ideas that are viewed as ‘different’ and ‘unique’ that are suggested to be creative as it is highlighted by Charles Mingus “Creativity is more than just being different.” I believe children should be encouraged to be creative and assured that when thinking creatively they are having a beneficial affect on their development and education as a whole. It should be emphasised that creative thinking also enables the application of knowledge in order to generate a variety of different ideas through divergent thinking (Casakin,2007).

The Fairy Logo

 A personal experience that relates to creative learning and imagination includes a session I participated in with other students. We worked with a local primary school, and in the session we talked about 'authentic learning'. We built fairy castles, rafts and looked for trees that were in disguise. Immediately I was able to recognise the children that would engage automatically and those that would need a little help finding their creative identity.

The Fairy Raft

In conversation with the pupils it was mentioned that they found easier to be creative when working outdoors. They said that having the natural environment around them while learning helped them spark their imagination in ways that would not be possible in the classroom. The children also stated how they enjoyed the freedom of the outdoors. Forest Schools aims are to promote the holistic development of all those involved, fostering resilient, confident, independent and creative learners (Knight, 2013). Learning outdoors allows children to make curriculum links while making it more engaging and relevant. Forest schools provides contact with the natural world and provides hands on experience for those that need it. The children became more confident as the session progressed and their engagement increased. According to Winnicott (1964), children believe that they own their environment and the people in it. This became apparent amongst the children as I observed how they worked with their peers and used their imagination.

Year 2 students with pupils from the local primary school

Within education, particularly in the foundation phase, I believe there is a significant hunger for creativity due to emphasis put on the development of “enterprising creative contributors” in the new welsh curriculum (Donaldson, 2015). In order for students to successfully fulfil the criteria of the new curriculum, creative thinking is essential both in and outside of the classroom in order to ‘make a difference for the better’ (QCA 1999:11-12).

Theorists that have similar views on creativity include both Plato and Rousseau. They argued many years ago that children should learn in imaginative and creative ways that keep them in tune with their natural ways of learning (Plummeridge 1980). This is important for them in order to gain knowledge in addition to keeping their imagination active. In the US it was Dewey that mirrored the views of Plato and Rousseau, but in Europe theorists Montessori and Piaget were spreading the same message. Each of the theorists shared the same belief that “children learn from doing” (Pound 2012). They both agreed that children should be given the opportunity to learn from “real life materials and experiences” (Mooney, 2013, p.38).  Having this creative opportunity within a classroom is vital in a child’s development as it exposes them to new challenges and enables them to learn with materials that they will be using later in life. This could impact on primary education as children are becoming more aware at a younger age of what is to come in their future years. Research suggests that autonomy and choice facilitate creativity (Craft, 2002) so ensuring choice and child led learning is available in classrooms is important in the encouragement of creativity.

According to Duffy (2006: xvi), "it seemed as though creativity had been relegated to the back seat in education but has made a come back" due to the value of creativity across the curriculum and also in a child’s understanding. Despite creativity being associated with expressive arts, the new shift for cross-curricular is ensuring that children are able to foster creative characteristics through all projects and subjects. The arts alone provide children with practical and visual learning experiences that enable them to express themselves and become confident individuals. Therefore, promoting creativity within all aspects of education and making it a priority joins up the curriculum making it more purposeful for children. Creativity has an immediate impact on the stimulation of practical learners that use the constructivist approach (Hein,1991).

In the UK, Every Child Matters and the Children Act (Dfes 2004) provide the right of every child to;

•      Be healthy

•         Stay safe

•         Enjoy and achieve

•         Make a positive contribution

•         Achieve economic well-being

Creativity ensures that the rights of each child are met. Without the opportunity for children to explore imagination and creativity these rights may not be fulfilled. This underlines the significance creativity has on a child’s immediate early year education and early life as a whole. Although educational policies come and go, it is essential that the demonstration of developmental approaches is present within schools and they are providing a sound basis for learning through the constructivist perspective.  The exploration of creativity and imagination should be taken advantage in order for children to make the most of their education.

Bibliography

Casakin, H. P. (2007). Factors of metaphors in design problem-solving: Implications for design creativity. International Journal of Design, 1(2), 21-33.

Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. Psychology Press.

Donaldson, G. (2015). Successful futures: independent review of curriculum and assessment arrangements in Wales: February 2015.

Duffy, B. (2006). Supporting creativity and imagination in the early years. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Hein, G. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Institute for Inquiry. Available at:/http://www. exploratorium. edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning. htmlS.

International handbook of creative learning (pp/45-53). New York. Routledge.

N.A.C.C.C.E. (1999) All our futures: creativity, culture and education. London: DfEE

Knight, S. (2013) ‘What Makes A Forest Schools?’. Forest School and Outdoor Learning in the Early Years 2^nd ed.  3 Church Street: Singapore Ltd.

Mooney, C.G. (2013) Theories of childhood, Second edition: An introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget & Vygotsky. 2nd edn. San Francisco, CA, United States: Redleaf Press.

Plummeridge, C. (1980). Creativity and music education-the need for further clarification. Psychology of Music, 8(1), 34-40.

Pound, L. (2012). How children learn: From Montessori to Vygosky-educational theories and approaches made easy(Vol. 1). Andrews UK Limited.

Sharp, C. (2004) Developing young children’s creativity: what can we learn from research? Topic (32) pp.5-12

Starko, A. J. (2013). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. Routledge.

Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. The nature of creativity, 43-75.

Winnicott, D. W. (1964). The Child, the Family, and the Outside World. Harmondsworth (Penguin) 1964.

Qualification and Curriculum Authority (QCA) (1999) The National Curriculum Handbook for Primary Teachers in England. London:QCA.

How could cross-curricular learning impact on Primary Education?

        

        In Donaldson’s (2015) ‘Successful Futures’, the review recommends that literacy, numeracy and digital competence should be held as the three main cross – curriculum Responsibilities (Donaldson, 2015, p.41) and to not be seen as disregarded or marginalised, as it has in the past (Donaldson, 2015, p.35). He disputes that the curriculum structure needs to both allow as well as ensure that children and young people “develop high levels of competence in these aspects and apply them across the curriculum” as they progress throughout education (Donaldson, 2015, p.40). Correspondingly, he adds that the national curriculum that stands today along with its assessment arrangements are no longer meeting the needs of the many diverse learners in Wales (Donaldson, 2015, p.11).

        Comparably, Power (2002, p.103) claims that schools need to embrace and be open to cross – curriculum learning, and try stay away from those reforms “that position subjects in ways that hark back to some imagined past, rather than forwards to more globalised times” as with the world is endlessly changing alongside the rapid technological developments being encouraged. This impacts both society and the economy tremendously; meaning that many argue that education and schools should equip their children correctly with the right knowledge for this unpredictable future. With cross – curricular learning, children and young people are able to connect with each other and share ideas as we as experience the world around us differently (Barnes, 2011, p.70). “Cross curricular approaches mirror and maximise this valuable diversity” (Barnes, 2011, p.70) allowing this to take place.

        Relatedly, Kerry (2015, p.15) disputes that as we live in a rapidly growing information age, we need to accept that some knowledge “will be beyond the capacity of the human brain”, meaning that in the future, the important skills that need to be acquired will be in “evaluating and applying knowledge”, showing its links to collaboration within education and how working through collaboration, processes can be achieved and applicable.

            Moreover, aside from these three cross – curricula learning areas there are six Areas of Learning and Experience in Wales: (Donaldson, 2015, p.39)

Ø  Expressive Arts

Ø  Health and well – being

Ø  Humanities

Ø  Language, literacy and communication

Ø  Mathematics and numeracy

Ø  Science and technology

           

        These learning and experiences should certainly not be seen as “watertight compartments” but rather as a process of systematising these diverse intentions in children and young people’s education (Donaldson, 2015). While they are seen as independent areas of learning, they should not be perceived as “timetabling devices”, as they can translate these experiences and capabilities into every day living and activities (Donaldson, 2015). “The approach should help to ensure breadth and encourage appropriate decisions about ‘balance’ across a child or young person’s learning at any time, for example by removing distinction between ‘core’ and ‘foundation’ subjects” (Donaldson, 2015, p.39).

            To add to this argument, since 1967, it was discussed that learning should not be delivered through the division and separation of subjects as Plowden (1967, p.555) reasoned that, throughout their conversations and observations concerning the curriculum, they found that children’s learning does not fit into subject categories. Furthermore, this marginalisation of subjects and its structured ways of thinking is subsiding children’s knowledge (Eisner, 1996).

            Alternatively, Fuchsman (2009) testifies against the implementation of cross – curricular learning, as he believes that during project work titles are usually given out where ideas and ‘chunks of knowledge’ are shared. He argues that “learning is not deep enough and is lacking compared if these topics were taught in single disciplines”, giving value and importance to single segmented subjects across the curriculum structure (Fuchsman, 2009). In agreement, Professor Paterson (2017) declares, due to the new curriculum instigated in Scotland, it could cause an affect to pupils learning because of its “cross – curricular nature”. She, along with other critics, opinion that children and young people will be at a steep disadvantage if they continue to learn in a cross – curricular way, as they will only be learning “superficial” matters which will not be explored in the appropriate depth that is needed.

            Lastly, with regards, to assessments, Kerry (2015) is concerned that cross – curricula assessments are changing and that they are not ensuring, nor certifying students that the studies they are learning are indeed faithful to their disciplines, likewise “that those disciplines are used in an insightful and balanced way” (Kerry, 2015). Dean (2001) is also alarmed by this and states that subjects are unfortunately being “watered down” and not given the prominence that is necessary.

        Nonetheless, cross - curricular learning is becoming one of significance. On the 1st December, a peer and I created a short and snappy stop motion animation clip, using a toy bear, play-dough and an iPad. This activity was cross - curricular due to the fact that technology was used to create the clip, we inserted music in the background to set the scene and we had to count the seconds between every snap shot, as well as check the angles and positioning of the materials used. This is an example video of the short clip we created: 

 

            
        To conclude, cross – curricular education allows learning to be more relevant and applicable to everyday living, which can be enjoyable. Children are able to both build and reinforce key concept matters and able to be consistent in learning between subject areas (Barnes, 2011; Chard, 2000; Dean, 2001). During Pestalozzi’s (1746 – 1827) finding, he wanted children to learn through activity and arrive at their own personal answers, exhibiting that this cross – curricular approach was something he agreed with. Moreover, these methods have been argued to provide high degrees of motivation and enthusiasm in children throughout their education (Barnes, 2011). Ultimately, disregarding all beliefs, any alterations and transformations to the curriculum should undoubtedly be implemented with both education, and most importantly the children’s prospects in mind (Lawson, et al, 2007).

Reference List:

Barnes, J. (2011). ‘Cross-curricular learning’ 3-14 (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, [Calif.] ; London: SAGE.

Dean, J. (2001). ‘Organising Learning in the Primary Classroom’ (3rd edn). London: Routledge.

Donaldson, G. (2015). ‘Successful futures’: Independent review of curriculum and assessment arrangements in Wales. Wales

Eisner, E. (1996). ‘Cognition and the Curriculum’ Re-considered (2nd Edn). London. PCP.

Fuschman, S. (2009). ‘Re-thinking integration in integrated studies’. Issues in Integration Studies. 27: 70-85.

Kerry, T. (2015). ‘Cross-curricular teaching in the primary school’ : Planning and facilitating imaginative lessons (Second ed.). London ; New York: Routledge.

Lawes, S., Ledda, M., McGoven, C., Patterson, S., Perks, D. & Standish, A. (2007) The Corruption of the Curriculum. London: Civitas

Paterson, L. (2017). The Edinburgh History of Education in Scotland. Journal of Scottish Historical Studies, 37 (1), pp.106 - 108

Plowden, Lady Bridget. (1967). Children and Their Primary schools: A report of the Central Advisory Council for Education, Volume 1. London: HMSO.

Power, (2002)