This blog focusses on my own perceptions and ideas that I have learnt and built upon from the module, The Enquiring mind: Creative Apporaches to education.
To see the introduction please click on the label: Introduction
A lot of the posts talk about the idea of Flow Learning. To look at this idea and where it came from please click on the label Csikszentmihalyi or FlowLearning
I, myself, have never seen film being used effectively in education. Usually, it is seen as something just used in wet play, or as a time filler for teachers. So it is interesting to see how film can be used effectively in education today. Today, children as young as age one can use an iPad. They live in a world that is so engaging and hands on, it would be the right thing to introduce some of the world they live in into the classroom. Parry, B (2014) explains in her article the need to 'connect home and school experiences'. If a child comes from a home where reading is not the norm, but watching a film is, surely they would work better doing what they know. She found in her research that children have a strong understanding of media language and narrative. Their strengths should be used to further expand their skills. Using a film that they can relate to is especially useful (Parry, 2014). Parry, B (2014) also found the activities used in her research successfully promoted inclusion. This is something that really fascinated me, and is something I have thought about. I looked at an article by Karaolis, O (2009). She explored the effect that film had on children with autism. The film they explored was called 'Honey Bee', a silent black and white film that the children made and worked on themselves. She explains how creative expression are 'important part of people's lives' (Karaolis, 2009), and through this creative expression, children can better understand themselves and each other. Through drama, children comminicate better, because it is a different and fresh way of communicating.
Research has shown how film encourages children to be critical in how they think, because they have the strong understanding of media language and narrative. It is also an oppertunity to explore other cultures and genres, for example: black/white films, or bollywood. It also gives children the chance to be creative in their outcome. Also, similar to other approaches to creative learning, film is about active learning. Children are learning through doing, much like the Leonardo Effect and the Mantle of the Expert. To explore these ideas further, please click on the links MoT and the LeonardoEffect Exploring Film Education
http://www.filmeducation.org/ I think it is amazing how children can learn by exploring their favourite films. They develop skills such as team work, communication skills, language, speaking and listening. I did some work on The Lovely Bones.
Although I enjoyed discussing the various themes and symbolism that is seen throughout the film, it was interesting to talk about the emotions I might be able to feel in the characters position. I feel that today in schools, children being able to feel comfortable about talking about the emotions that they feel is a working progress, and using film could be a great way to do this. For example, issues such as bereavement can be discussed in more detail because the film is their talking point, children may feel more comfortable to talk about their emotions than they would otherwise. Reference
KARAOLIS, O. Children with Autism. Honey Bee,
LA, v. 39, p. 38-39, March 2009.
Much if the work carried out by Csikszentmihalyi has emphisised how the community that we live in can effect a creative outcome.
"Creativity is just a mental process"
Disagree. Creativity involves just as much social and cultural elements.
"Creativity is the product of a single individual"
Disagree. According to Csikszentmihalyi creativity is about the judgments people in different communities make about the individual product.
THE SYSTEMS MODEL
This sparked an interest with me as it means because community is involved anyone can be creative. Somebody will look at your idea and could make a good judgement.
Cultural/ symbolic aspect = the domain
Social aspect = the field
Creativity can only occur at the "intersection" when the invididual, the domains and the fields all interact. it occurs when the individual makes a change 'in the domain'.
More likely to make such changes due to personal qualities or your position in society or the "field". If you are wealthy and well respected you are more likely to have more time to experiment and make that 'change'.
If an idea is liked enough it will be kept in the domain, the people who make these decisions are called the "gatekeepers".
I picked this flow chart as I believe it links Czikszentmihalyi's idea of 'Flow Learning' with scientific method. The idea that trial and error, stress and control are all involved in the scientific process of experiement, much like an artist. I believe it links them both to show how creativity is involved in both. See the labels ScienceAndCreativity or ScientificEnquiry to further explore the idea of the creative link in the Arts and Science.
Other creative approaches: The idea of 'flow' learning can be seen in the Mantle of the Expert and The Leonardo Effect, see label 'MoE' and 'LeonardoEffect'
"Adults can learn from kids creativity".
"Shouldn't be the teachers standing at the head of the class saying do this or do that, the students should teach their teachers".
"Adults should listen more and expect more".
"Kids need opportunities to lead and succeed".
The Mantle of the Expert is a perfect way to let children teach their teachers, and share power with their teachers. I looked further into this idea and found an article by Hymers, J (2009) who quoted Heatcote and Bolton (2005). ‘The teacher must share power to position the students (individually and collectively) as knowledgeable and competent colleagues and also ensure that children position one another similarly’. Heatcote and Bolton (1995)
She goes onto say that fairness in our classrooms helps children to 'think more productively', because roles and rules are removed during this activity. It helps children to feel more comfortable. It is the opposite to traditional classroom teaching where the teacher is at the front, transferring information to a group of people who know less, like Adora Svitak stated in her TED talk. Going back to the question I asked "Will it benefit the quieter pupils in the classroom?", the answer is yes! The Mantle of the Expert is a perfect tool to build on confidence because they are made to feel so comfortable. They lead their own learning. It lifts the barriers of the 'fear of being wrong' which may have led them to be shy.
"Working together is expressed within a caring, sharing community, in which all voices will have equal weight. Teacher and student share power by drawing on the authority of all people in the group rather than relying on predetermined texts or simply the authority of the teacher". (Hymers, J 2009).
Reference
HYMERS, J. Little Children, Big Questions. Does
Mantle of the Expert create an environment conducive to philosophical thinking
in the early years? , Norwitch, 2009.
The Mantle of the Expert is another great way of introducing a creative approach into the curriculum. It intoduces roleplay into the curriculum, but can be used in any subject much to my surprise, not just drama! Much like the Leonardo Effect, it encourages pupils to think for themselves. It encourages confidence, communication skills, team work and leadership qualities. As well as opening their imaginations and encouraging their creative instinct.
Some great point made by Sayers, R (2011)
"Heathcote shares Wenger’s belief that learning must have a real and not an artificial context for it to be rooted and meaningful".
This is an important point. There are always arguments that children are not getting enough experience to help them in the real world. This is a good way of giving them some.
"MoE has been successful in this respect and has been of interest to those wanting to explore drama, creativity in the classroom and speaking and listening".
Much like Leonardo effect, it is giving the students a chance to take hold of their own learning. They also share their own knowledge, and bounce off each other to gain more skills. (Sayers, R 2011).
I had a taste of the Mantle of the Expert when we were given the task to be experts in bridge building, and to build a new bridge somewhere in Swansea. One question that I thought of when looking more closely at the Mantle of the Expert is: Will it encourage further negative gender stereotypes in education? For example will the males be the boss or CEO of their project? When looking at this further, I came across an article which showed MoE being used in a positive way in regards to stereotypes of gender. The research took place in a year 5 class. Using the Mantle of the Expert, the children created performances engaging with the versions of gendered femininity in their school. They based their work on the book "The Boy in the Dress", which shows how the MoE can be used in a literacy lesson. Research suggests the use of MoE encouraged the children to explore the 'construction of their own gender', and become more aware of their roles in the 'regulation of gender conformity'. (Terret, L 2013). Having studied stereotypes in gender and how common it is in 21st century education, I was really surprised to see how the MoE could be used to help children become more aware of it.
Another point that I questioned is will it actually benefit everyone? What about the pupils who are not as outspoken as others, the quieter pupils? Will they have as much benefit?
Two articles I looked at both expressed the positivity that comes from the Mantle of the Expert regarding this issue. One I explored features in another post, simply click on the label 'FurtherExplored'. An article by Fields, D et al (2013) explored the idea of pupils taking on new positions within their classroom environment whilst doing a project based on MoE. They saw the positive effects this had on the children's confidence. Personally, I believe even shy pupils will find it easy to speak out, because you become so engaged in the role you play, you forget you are actually in a classroom. You actually believe you are an expert on the project you are given. This is such a great way to build on children's confidence, especially the quieter pupils who may be overshadowed.
Reference List
ENYEDY, N.; FIELDS, D. Assigned Roles, Assertion of
Identity, and Peer Recognition within a Programming Class. Picking up the
Mantle of "Expert" , London, v. 20, n. 2, p. 113-131, 2013.
TERRET, L.
The Boy in the Dress: queering Mantle of the Expert. Research in Drama
Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, London, v. 18,
n. 2, p. 192-195, May 2013
As talked about in an earlier post, the similarity between science and creativity is more than you would initially think.
As Barrow (2010) stated in the article 'encouraging creativity with scientific inquiry', today creativity is usually linked with the humanities and arts. It is rarely linked with science. However he then goes on to explain how numerous scientists, e.g. Darwin and Isaac Newton, have all linked in many ways creativity with scientific discovery. I, myself would never think artists and scientists approached anything in the same way in their fields but after watching the YouTube video about the similarities between the artist and the scientist, their processes to their fields of work are similar. As Barrow (2010) stated 'art can influence science discovery and vice versa'. Merten, S (2011) also investigates the 'natural combination' of art and science. She states in her article 'Enhancing Science Education through Art' how scientists use creativity daily in what they do. They both share the 'common trait' that they are constantly asking questions, trying to find solutions, and wonder about the world they live in.
I agree with Barrow (2010) when he states that students' ideas on science are 'shaped' by their experiences in school. The investigations I remember doing are very much like how Barrow explains in the article: Investigations are short They just seem to be conducted so that the teacher can prove/shown what has been studied. Usually very much like following a recipe. Student usually does not understand why this investigation is being carried out. How can a student express themselves creatively when what their doing is so structured? I was never encouraged to ask questions, or follow my own instinct. Just to simply follow the textbook.
Students should be encouraged to ask more questions in things that they are interested in (Barrow 2010) and to investigate what this causes and it effects. This can be linked with the Leonardo effect - child led investigation into what they want to know and learn. I believe by instructing their own learning, and investigating something they have an interest in, children will learn more. They need to ask questions and find their own answers. "Cschszentonhalyi and Penick consider question-posing and problem-finding are at the heart of originality; thereby, strongly associated with creativity". Barrow (2010). The Leonardo Effect is a perfect way of doing this.
In America, the use of the 'four question strategy' is a good way of encouraging students to be creative, because it they can choose their approach, how they will collect the data and form their own conclusion, whilst feeling comfortable. Here in the UK, I do not feel there is enough space or time for students to be creative in science, therefore I do not feel the four question strategy will work. Some teachers are more concerned about all results showing the same thing and being right, rather than allowing students to do their own thing and ask questions about it.
References
BARROW, L. Encouraging Creativity with Scientific
Inquiry. Creative Education, Columbia, p. 1-6, June 2010.
MERTEN, S.
Enhancing Science Education through Art. Creativity in Education ,
Arlington, v. 35, p. 31-25, October 2011.
In our first lecture to the introduction to our module we were asked "what is creativity?"
A simple question that really did make you think! We all wrote down what we thought creativity was and then swapped papers with another person.
This is the answer I got:
I completely agree with creativity being linked with using your imagination to discover new ideas. I also think creativity is working on old ideas and making something yours and making it meaningful to you, whatever it may be. I think creativity is about having no boundaries and not being afraid to take risks.
In the lecture we also got the chance to see some of Suzie's big "C" heroes.
I couldn't think of any of mine during the lecture, but when I thought about it there are quite a few people who have influenced me with their creativity during my life.
The first is an artist that was introduced to me by my mother.
Vincent Van Gogh.
His painting 'sunflowers' is my favourite.
Whenever I look at it I feel warm and happy. I think he's a creative genius to have the power to make you feel something from a painting.
The second is a music artist who I believe is beautifully creative in her lyrics.
Lana Del Ray
Her voice is so powerful and different.
The last Big C hero I am going to share is my favourite director, Baz Luhrmann.
He's so clever at making things his own, which is what I think creativity is all about.
Films such as Romeo and Juliet, Moulin Rouge and most recently The Great Gatsby all have the same feel about them. You watch a film by Baz Luhrmann and you know it's been directed by him.
Finally we were asked to write down our final thoughts on what impact creativity has on our lives.
When I first thought of art and Science together I thought "complete opposites - chalk and cheese".
I could not understand how science could be creative.
However the more I thought about it, the more it makes sense.
Science and art are more similar than you think; both are an attempt to better understand the universe around us.
The common characteristic between scientists and artists: playfulness and the willingness to be creative with their projects.
I looked at a YouTube video in which an artist and a scientist talked of their approaches to research.
They both come to a conclusion that their approaches are in fact very similar.
They both build on prior knowledge, research, calculate and implement ideas. Scientists work to solve a problem whilst artists work to answer a question. The one difference is measuring their work. There is no way for artists to measure their work like there is with science. Art is more personal. See the label 'ScienceAndCreativity' to further explore this idea.
In order to further explore how science could be creative, we looked at the Leonardo effect, which is all about creatively exploring the curriculum.
"A perfect blend of art and science".
We, ourselves, did our own Leonardo effect project.
STAGE 1: capture the learner's imagination:
In our groups we went around each table which had a piece of paper on each with a word in the middle:
Earth.
Fire.
Air.
Water.
We had to go around and write as many things as we could from our experience with the four elements. This then inspired us to write questions about what we wanted to find out. It could be anything. For example:
Earth: how long until the world ends?
My group talked about water, and our curiosity took us to fish and why/how they could breathe under water.
STAGE 2: development
During stage 2 we went away in our groups and used multimedia to further develop our ideas.
This was the chance for us to put what we had found out into a creative context. We had studied each step of how a fish breathes underwater, and so decided to create a poster to illustrate our ideas and form a visual representation:
Stage 4: reflect and communicate.
This was a chance for us to show everyone the work we had done and to communicate what we had learned.
My thoughts:
The Leonardo effect is a great way of putting science and art together to make it creative and exciting.
This is such an exciting, new approach to education today. Children have the chance to lead their own learning and to really discover what they want to know, whilst keeping within the curriculum. It covers a variety of key skills including communication, knowledge and understanding and self evaluation. It also builds on confidence and self esteem as the children stand up and show the work they have done themselves.
Another thing I thought of is the doors that this approach opens for teachers. With the demands of the curriculum and testing, I feel teachers are finding it hard to be creative themselves with their lessons. As it says on the website, the Leonardo Effect is a great way to 're-energise' teaching. As I myself, want to go into teaching, this is such a positive strategy I am excited to use.
To explore this idea of Schools 'killing' creativity, please click on the label SchoolsKillCreativity or KenRobinson
"All kids have tremendous talents - and we squander them pretty ruthlessly" - Ken Robinson
This is something I do feel especially passionate about.
During the lecture a person in the theatre asked Suzie "do you think every person has a talent" to which she replied ABSOLUTELY!!!
Every person has a talent.
In my own opinion I believe more and more children are not having their talents recognised.
In schools it seems the focus is on core subjects rather than focussing on what your good at.
With the national curriculum there does not seem to be any time for children to explore their talents.
Are schools valuing diversity with the current system?
I have taken this quote out of this weeks lecture as it is something I strongly agree with.
In his talk "does education kill creativity", Ken Robinson makes the valid point "we are educating our children to become good workers rather than creative thinkers".
After reading the recent article "towards transformation: conceptions of creativity in higher education", it led me on to read another article: Assessment if creativity in education. 2008 university of Exeter. Report. Mogbel Alenizi.
It was stated in the article that focussing on everyday creativity or "little c creativity" is important as it helps the individual to seize opportunity and overcome obstacles. However I believe there is not enough recognition of this "little c creativity" in schools.
I then went onto read a different article which was about schools 'crushing' creativity today.
Shaheen in her article "creativity and education" (2010) States that education institutions have changed drastically. She blames the system for "spoon feeding" our children and killing creativity. There are increased pressures more than ever for schools to meet targets in terms of exams and inspections. There are also pressures to meet the requirements of the national curriculum and it is argued it is this which prevents the government from creating a "creative society". Shaheen also argued schools are the perfect place to foster the growth of creativity but there is not enough room or time for it to grow.
DCSF (2009) states that primary education is about children experiencing the joy of discovery solving problems being CREATIVE in writing, art, and music.
AIM ONE of the national curriculum:
Enable pupils to think creatively and critically. To solve problems and make a difference for the better. Give them an opportunity to become creative, innovative and enterprising (QCDA 2009).
If it's in our targets why is there such a lack of creativity?
There is not enough recognition of our talents in my opinion. Children are only recognised as being 'clever' by their ability to gain good grades in core subjects. Not for their talents and abilities.
Those children who do not receive good grades but have an amazing talent at playing piano will go their whole life thinking its worthless because it may have not been appreciated enough in school.
As Einstein said:
Assessment if creativity in education. 2008 university of Exeter. Report. Mogbel Alenizi. Creativity and education. 2010. Robina Shaheen. Birmingham. University of Birmingham. Scientific research.
