In terms of creativity and schooling I believe overall that
the structure of the public school educational system seems to favour the
‘analytical intelligence’ over the other two intelligences in the Sternberg’s
triarchic theory of intelligence, which are creative intelligence and practical
intelligence (Santrock, 2011). Santrock (2011), states that Guilford (1967) ‘distinguished a difference
between convergent thinking and divergent thinking. Convergent thinking is highly regarded within
the educational system as the majority of testing is aimed at this level of
thinking, where it requires one specific answer. Divergent thinking lends
itself more to the creative side where multiple answers can be constructed. Students who are creatively intelligent may
not conform to the structure within the public school system as they can view solutions
to questions in a more creative way, drawing on the differing elements of
creativity which was discussed in early blog post.
There are models of educational systems that vary from how
mainstream educational systems are set up. Three of these educational systems
are the Waldolf Steiner approach, Maria Montessori approach and A Pasifika
perspective approach. In essence of the definition that creativity is the connecting
of concepts and creative thinking to problem solve, Montessori seems to cater
for this. The philosophy ‘encourages students to make discussions from an early
age developing it to self-regulated problem –solvers.’(Santrock, 2011). It also
has the ideology that the hand is connected to the soul. Gibbs (2006) informs
us that Maria Montessori considered that if you educate the senses you then
educate the intellect. These sensory materials stimulate sensory awareness to
help involve and understand their environment which helps construct meaning. However
Montessori has been critiqued that it ‘restricts imaginative play’ and relies
on materials that do not allow for adequate creativity (Santrock, 2011).
Steiner is set up in a way that embraces creativity as a
whole. It emphasises that through experiences the student acquires
understanding. Steiner approaches concepts that the students are engaging in,
in away that encourages them to portray it pictorially. The students through doing and expressing
themselves through artwork they are able to achieve greater understanding. This
allows the students to ‘allow their learning to become alive’ (Gibbs, 2006). Steiner
includes a ‘visible song’ called eurythmy, which reveals the feelings that are normally
felt internally. Gibbs (2006) states that this creative expression helps
physically strengthen muscles, helps with listening skills, and increases space
and social awareness. Within the first seven years, Steiner students are
nurtured within and encouraged to use their hands to promote mental agility for
future learning, through activities such as knitting which echoes the rhythms
that are later used within cognitive thinking. Steiner incorporates the use of
pictures and stories when teaching the Alphabet and early learning of reading
and writing and Mathematics. Not only is Steiner students encouraged to use
creativity as a learning factor they also develop their own workbooks or main
lesson book to stabilise their understanding of concepts which are learnt. The
pedagogy is clear throughout the progression of each seven year cycle and
highlights the necessity of creative opportunities i.e through imitations and
through play, artistic attitude, and later freedom. I believe the sense of
freedom granted in the later years allows students to use divergent thinking to
come to their own personal conclusions in learning.
A Pasifika perspective approach is intertwined within the
Pasifika and Maori culture. Learning is collaborative and done together. Teaching
is taught through songs, art work and oral stories. A sense of community is
established and used within the classroom. Opportunities occur and on the spot
teaching is often apparent, in Maori culture if they opportunity arose to teach
weaving it would happen in context and would be explained and children who are
already competent within that area will become tuakana and help teach the
inexperienced student.
In response to Sir Ken Robinson, I feel he has extremely
valid points. There is an abundance of people accomplishing university degrees
and contributing to an academic inflation. Educational institutes will
definitely need to revise the system to incorporate more opportunities to
engage all areas of human creativity. As stated above there are alternative
structures which do incorporate and drive a different learning approach and
offer more creative opportunities to learn. However these ideologies can be
utilised within a public educational system. As Sir Ken Robinson states it is
our task as teachers to educate the whole being, so our students can face this
unpredictable future.
References
Gibbs, C.
(n.d.). To be a teacher. Journey towards authenticity. New Zealand, Auckland: Pearson Education.
Santrock, J. W.
(2011). Life span development (13th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
