Some tangible steps towards more creative schools

I continue to have an abiding interest in what leadership might need to look like if we are to build and sustain kura that nurture and grow more creative young people for our society. I need no further convincing of the 'why'. Many of the arguments are well summarised in the paper I've cited before - 'Replanting creativity during post normal times" (https://www.teritotoi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Replanting-Creativity-during-post-normal-times_FINAL-2021.pdf)

Susnea and Tataro give us an economic 'why':

"By comparing the Forbes list of most powerful brands (http://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/ ), and the list of most innovative companies according to Boston Consulting Group (http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/09/27/is- apple-the-worlds-most-innovative-company-still/), as shown in Table 1, two things become obvious: first that there is a strong correlation between the capacity of the companies to generate (and absorb) innovation, and their economic power, and on the other hand, that there is a large disparity between the USA and the rest of the world in this direction.This conclusion is almost a literal transcription of an idea formulated 10 years ago by Hargreaves7: ìwe live in a knowledge economy, a knowledge society. Knowledge economies are stimulated and driven by creativity and ingenuity. Knowledge society schools have to create these qualities, otherwise their people and their nations will be left behind."

And it's worth reminding ourselves of what we mean by creativity, and also how it differs from innovation.

"Creativity is typically centered around original thought and knowledge, which unleashes potential and is an integral part of idea generation. Innovation, on the other hand, is used to turn the creative idea that you come up with into a viable solution." (https://online.stanford.edu/creativity-and-innovation-management, accessed 12.10.2023)

In an article by James C. Kaufman & Ronald A. Beghetto (2013) I came across this framework which helps to unpack this very large idea.

Kaufman & Beghetto 

Susnea and Tataru make the point that creative thinking and the development of creativity require deep knowledge, or subject knowledge, with their enhanced model of creativity in education.

Susnea & Tataru

This all connects really nicely with the Manaiakalani 'Learn Create Share' pedagogy. 

For students in the Manaiakalani kura generally, much of their 'create' will be what Kaufman and Beghetto call 'Mini-c'. It also reinforces the point that creativity (regardless of the level) happens when we also have rich knowledge and skills. 

But I think this begs the question of whether or not you can teach for creativity, or what kaiako might be doing if they are to sustain creative growth and creative thinking for our rangatahi.

Susnea and Tataru begin their piece with the fairly definitive statement that it most definitely can: 

"Thus, creativity training appears beneficial for a variety of people, not just elementary school students or the unusually gifted. Taken as a whole, these observations lead to a relatively unambiguous conclusion: Creativity training works." 

They list the following inhibitors to creativity in schools:

"In summary, the main factors that act as inhibitors of creativity in the educational process are (see also Cachia, and Craft):

· The prescriptive environment of the school;

· The curriculum oriented towards quantity rather than quality of the information;

· The lack of consensus regarding the definition and the model of mental processes

associated with creativity;

· A certain confusion of values: teachers frequently perceive some behaviours or

personality traits specific to creative students (e.g. stubbornness, hyperactivity,

argumentiveness, and independence) as misbehaviors.

· Teachers are not trained to foster creativity of students: though most of them claim they encourage students to be creative, they simply donít know how to do this;

· The lack of quality educational content for teaching creativity. Teachers and students are equally in need of such materials;

· The lack of simple and easy to use instruments for the assessment of creativity;

· The lack of IT&C tools to support teaching for creativity."

They also identify factors in the environment that could promote creativity.

"Davies et al. count the following positive factors:
· Flexible use of time and space;
· availability of appropriate materials;
· working outside the classroom/school;
· playful or games-bases approaches with a degree of learner autonomy;
· respectful relationships between teachers and learners;
· opportunities for peer collaboration;
· partnerships with outside agencies;
· awareness of learners needs, and non-prescriptive planning.
Other researchers indicate a variety of other factors that can influence creativity in
school:
· Moods and emotions ;
· Pattern recognition and visual thinking;
· Organizational and institutional influences;
· Teamwork;
· Some cultural factors;
· The ability to use certain heuristics, e.g. TRIZ.
And, last but not least, an essential factor that could dramatically impact the future of teaching for creativity is the use of ICT in education (Ala-Mutka, Loveless, Jahnke, Roschelle, Thompson). "

 They conclude with a list of possible actions that we might take:

"By analyzing the factors that influence in both positive and negative directions the education for creativity, the following action directions for fostering creativity through education become obvious:

• Eliminate the factors that inhibit creativity. The responsibility for this lies with the decision makers at the European, national, and organizational level, and to a certain degree with the teachers, who should contribute to the creation of a less-prescriptive educational environment. In this category of measures, we count: the reform of the curriculum, defining and promoting a respectable social status for the teachers, which includes decent salarization, increasing the autonomy of the public schools, etc.

• Attract teachers in CPD (Continuous Professional Development ) courses to help them understand the psychological mechanisms involved in creativity.

• Develop educational content specially aimed for the education for creativity. This includes both courses for teachers, and specific courses for students designed to improve their creative thinking skills, and help them acquire certain specific heuristics.

• Develop solutions based on IT&C to promote creative problem solving in education.

• Develop simple and easy to use IT&C tools for the assessment of creativity.

  Ala-Mutka et al33. extend the responsibility from teachers to policymakers, researchers, and other practitioners, who should engage in developing a common vision of future learning for innovation, as a tool to guide their joint effort. "

Ala-Mutka, Punie, and Redecker, in their 2008 paper primarily focussed on helping learners to understand when it's right to be creative, and when it's not, also make this point:

"Support innovative organizations

• Open and networked institutions. Policies should encourage institutions to embrace the networking opportunities available. By opening their learning materials (open educational resources), institutions can attract learners and also support informal learning outside institutions. Networking between institutions can enrich the curricula provided for students and transfer subject-related knowledge between practitioners. Institutions should promote collaborative networks between teachers, researchers, and professional networks, in order to support the emergence and sharing of learning innovations."

Innovation is to be embraced and supported, so if we can network organisations, and build communities of shared practice, we are more likely to see greater student success, and enhanced creativity. That odes assume however that those communities are able to build environments that all (whether principals or front line teachers) feel safe, feel valued, in sharing their practice.

The Manaiakalani pedagogy and kaupapa is an independent piece of work that addresses several of these suggestions.

The pedagogy leans heavily on a strong ICT base in order to 'magnify' the impact of the pedagogy. Significant resources are put into the support of 'Education Programme Leaders' for each cluster, the job of whom is to up skill teachers in both the pedagogy and ICT skills generally. In that work is included the enhancement of teacher understanding of the drivers behind creativity. EPLs generally run one staff meeting a term in each participating kura, the focus shifting term by term between learn, create, and share. (It should be noted that once a cluster has moved on from the initial 'Outreach' programme, it has to fund the funding itself to employ its EPL, a significant drain on resources, and one often met with the support of a local Trust that seeks the necessary funding. The trustees that do this mahi are indeed heroes!).

At the time that I stepped back from Principalship, the Manaiakalani Education Trust was leading work to build effective and sustainable teacher practice in the teaching of reading and maths, with the appointment of well qualified leads in both of these areas. This work supplements the work that has already taken place to build good writing practice, work that sees learners in Manaiakalani schools make progress in their writing at twice national averages (when those students had been in the Manaiakalani environment for three or more years). The fact that teachers are generally deficient in much of this speaks to the work that does (or doesn't) go on in initial teacher education.

All of the Manaiakalani kaupapa is driven by a commitment to shared practice, to identifying what works and spreading the word. Whether it be 'Class on Air', or the Manaiakalani Innovative Teacher programme, their colective;ly developed and implemented Cybersmart programme or the Digital Fluency Intensive, the work of those involved ticks so many of the boxes that could enhance creativity for learners in our kura.

And.. ALL of this requires consistent, committed, focussed, leadership from Principals, leadership that is unrelenting in its messaging, unrelenting in that focus on creativity, leadership and everything that is required to see it through.

This still leaves the issue of curriculum reform, and I am not convinced that our reform in Aotearoa meets these needs. It does well to ensure kaupapa Māori is increasingly embedded, as is the teaching of New Zealand histories. A shift to the political right will in my opinion further remove us from the necessary focus on creativity, with it's nineteenth century view that 'an hour a day of reading, writing, and 'rithmetic;' will solve all of our educational woes. That doesn't mean I think these things are unimportant. It is an insult to teachers to suggest that such practices don't already go on. It does in my opinion presage a return to a system that privileged pakeha middle and upper class learners, thus depriving us as a society of so much richness and talent that, by virtue of race, culture, and impoverished means, is condemned to lie undiscovered, undeveloped. Our society is the poorer for this.

References

Kirsti Ala-Mutka, Yves Punie, and Christine Redecker (2008) "ICT for Learning, Innovation and Creativity" Policy Brief for European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies

James C. Kaufman & Ronald A. Beghetto (2013) "In Praise of Clark Kent: Creative Metacognition and the Importance of Teaching Kids When (Not) to Be Creative", Roeper Review, 35:3, 155-165, DOI: 10.1080/ 02783193.2013.799413

Ioan Susnea and Alexandru Tataru (2014) "Fostering Creativity Through Education: Key Factors, And Action Directions", Research and Science Today No. 1(7)/2014

'Manaiakalani 2023' https://www.manaiakalani.org/home last accessed 13.10.2023