Creative Learning Exchange

[<<< Previous Post] [View All Postings] [ Post Follow Up ] [ Next>>>]

Subject: Creativity

Posted by Jay Forrester on 10/10/2010

Message:

A persuasive observation from George.

Many critics lament the lack of innovation in our society, and draw the conclusion that more emphasis on mathematics and science will lead to innovation. However, pressures in the present school systems suppress innovation. Innovation comes from repeated successes in innovating. Innovating means trying ideas outside of the accepted pattern. It means the opportunity to fail as a learning experience rather than as an embarrassment. It means living part of the time outside of the traditionally accepted track. An innovative spirit requires years for developing the courage to be different and calibrating oneself in identifying the effective region for innovation that lies between the mundane and the impossible. Almost none of the conditions for developing innovative attitudes are to be found in the usual K-12 education. In fact, the traditional school powerfully suppresses any tendency toward being innovative. Both teachers and students are driven to conform.

I have known an economist who was writing a book of the exceptional innovators in the recent past. He told me that all of his subjects had two things in common--they had all grown up on a farm or in a small town, and they all had mothers who had been school teachers.

Jay Forrester

On Aug 10, 2010, at 5:00 PM, George Richardson wrote:

Back when I taught math at the U of Chicago Lab School, I recall a study on creativity and intelligence in the schools (I don't remember what levels) by Phillip Jackson and another University of Chicago scholar. This was about 1960-65

To the extent that the study could separate high creative and high intelligence kids, the study found that school teachers liked intelligent kids a lot more than they liked creative kids. Creative kids were more disruptive, more of a bother, less easily led, and so on. Could be a reason we're not heavily invested in teaching for creativity now.

I don't have any idea what the scholarship on this says now (after all, that was 50 years ago), but it does sound reasonable that to encourage creativity would mean encouraging divergent, "subversive activity" of sorts. We'd have to learn how to encourage the good divergent stuff from the stuff that gets in everyone's way, including the kid exhibiting it.

If we get good at teaching for creativity, we may have to watch out or we'll get what we aiming for! : )

...George Richardson

Follow Ups:

[<<< Previous Post] [View All Postings] [ Post Follow Up ] [ Next>>>]

Social CLE

Getting Started: Learn System Dynamics

Splash!

Simulations

CLE Products

Upcoming Events