Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and … · Thelonius Monk. More recently there...

HAL Id: hal-00190439https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190439

Submitted on 23 Nov 2007

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open accessarchive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-entific research documents, whether they are pub-lished or not. The documents may come fromteaching and research institutions in France orabroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, estdestinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documentsscientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,émanant des établissements d’enseignement et derecherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoirespublics ou privés.

Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies andLearning

Avril Loveless

To cite this version:Avril Loveless. Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and Learning. A NESTA FuturelabResearch report - report 4. 2002. <hal-00190439>

https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190439

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr

Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and Learning

REPORT 4:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Avril M. Loveless, School of Education, University of Brighton

AIMS

This review is intended to provide:

1 a sound theoretical and empiricallyinformed basis for prototypedevelopment of digital learningresources to support the teaching and learning of creativity

2 a sound theoretical and empiricallyinformed basis for informing policy onthe teaching and learning of creativity

3 a basis for communication between theeducational research community andthe commercial sector on the subject ofthe teaching and learning of creativitywith ICT.

1

CONTENTS:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

SECTION 1INTRODUCTION 6

SECTION 2WHAT IS THE ROLE OF CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION? 7

SECTION 3WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ROLES FOR DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES IN SUPPORTING CREATIVITY? 11

SECTION 4HOW MIGHT WE TEACH FORCREATIVITY WITH DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES? 13

SECTION 5HOW ARE PEOPLE USING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIESCREATIVELY? 15

SECTION 6HOW CAN WE ASSESS CREATIVITY, LEARNING ANDDIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES? 25

SECTION 7WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, CURRICULUM AND DESIGN? 27

SECTION 8WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BARRIERS? 29

BIBLIOGRAPHY 31

Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and Learning

REPORT 4:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Avril M Loveless, School of EducationUniversity of Brighton

This report has been designed to enable both rapid identification of the key findings and in-depth exploration of the literature.

The key findings and implications of the report are presented within the Executive Summary and Implications Sections. The main body of the review enablesreaders to explore in more detail the background to these headline issues.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In recent years people in many sectors of society have expressed disquiet about a lack of creativity in the curriculum. From Telford to Tokyo artists, writers,performers, teachers, psychologists,philosophers and representatives of thecultural and commercial industries havewarned against the consequences ofconstraining children and young people’screative potential.

What then, might we mean by ‘creativity’?Creativity can be regarded as not only aquality found in exceptional individuals, butalso as an essential life skill through whichpeople can develop their potential to usetheir imagination to express themselves,and make original and valued choices intheir lives. Societies of the 21st centuryrequire active participation in the fast-changing ‘Knowledge Age’ in which there is an interaction between people,communities, creative processes, knowledgedomains and wider social contexts.

What is the role of digital technologies inthese processes? Digital information andcommunications technologies (ICT) can beseen as a set of tools which can be chosenas and when they are appropriate in thecreative process. In addition, it can beargued that the characteristics of ICT canalso make a distinctive contribution tothose processes, providing new tools,media and environments for learning to be creative and learning through beingcreative. Learners and teachers can useICT to support imaginative expression,autonomy and collaboration, fashioningand making, pursuing purpose, beingoriginal and judging value. ICT can offeropportunities to be creative in authenticcontexts in ways which have not been as

accessible or immediate without newtechnologies. Such accessibility andflexibility, however, present challenges to teachers and schools in confrontingpresent models of resources, timetables,curriculum and assessment requirements,which can inhibit learners’ engagementwith creative processes and lead to asuperficial or fragmented focus onproducts. Creativity can be promoted andextended with the use of new technologieswhere there is understanding of, andopportunities for, the variety of creativeprocesses in which learners can engage.Key issues to be discussed by thoseinterested in creativity in education includethe understandings of ‘creativity’; thefeatures of ICT which enable learners to be creative; the creative activities which arealready going on and the contexts in whichlearners can realise their creative potential.

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION?

The British Government responded to the debates about creative and culturaleducation to meet the economic,technological and social challenges of the 21st century by initiating a range ofprojects to enhance learners’ creativeexperiences. The potential of digitaltechnologies to enable new forms ofengagement, access and educationalachievement is recognised in thedevelopment of proposals such as ‘CultureOnline’ - a service offering interactiveaccess to national arts and culturalresources through the internet and digitaltelevision. Providing access to culturethrough the internet does not, however,make the experience creative in itself, andour perceptions of what we might mean by ‘creativity’ need to be explored.

2

creativity can be regarded as

an essential life skill

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Understandings of the nature of creativityhave changed in scope and depth over thelast hundred years. Many have focused onthe characteristics of exceptionalindividuals in our culture, from van Eyk toVan Gogh, Darwin to Dawkins, Telemann toThelonius Monk. More recently there hasbeen an acknowledgement of the creativepotential of all individuals in differentknowledge domains, or subjects notconfined to traditional definitions of the‘arts’ or ‘sciences’. An ethos whichencourages creativity in differentcommunities and environments also hasan influence on individuals and groups.Creativity can now be recognised andvalued at the level of individuals, peer-groups or the wider society and consideredas an essential element in participating inand contributing to the life and culture ofsociety. There have been many attempts todefine ‘creativity’ and useful theoreticalframeworks have been formulated whichdescribe the interaction between qualitiesin people and communities, creativeprocesses, subject areas and socialcontexts. The National Advisory Committeeon Creative and Cultural Education(NACCCE) draws upon a range ofconceptualisations of creativity andpresents a definition which is a usefulframework for educators - ‘imaginativeactivity fashioned so as to produceoutcomes that are both original and ofvalue’. This definition is helpful in that itexpresses five characteristics of creativity:using imagination; a fashioning process;pursuing purpose; being original andjudging value. Creativity in education canencompass learning to be creative in orderto produce work that has originality andvalue to individuals, peers and society, aswell as learning to be creative in order tosupport ‘possibility thinking’ in makingchoices in everyday life.

WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ROLES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES INSUPPORTING CREATIVITY?

The use of the term ICT is inadequate todescribe the variety of technologies,settings and interventions through whichnew technologies have an impact onpeople’s lives. Digital technologies exhibitfeatures of provisionality, interactivity,capacity, range, speed and automaticfunctions which enable users to do thingsthat could not be done as effectively, or atall, using other tools. People who are ‘ICTcapable’ are certainly able to use a varietyof skills and techniques with particulartechnologies. More importantly, they arealso able to understand the reasons whydigital technologies might be appropriatefor particular tasks and situations, makeinformed choices in their use, evaluatetheir impact and be open to newdevelopments and possibilities. It is theinteraction between the distinctive featuresof ICT and the characteristics of creativitythat opens up new perspectives on thedevelopment of creativity in education.

HOW MIGHT WE TEACH FORCREATIVITY WITH DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES?

Teaching for creativity with digitaltechnologies presents challenges in twoareas – the use of ICT to support creativityin traditional settings such as schools, and the development of ICT resources to support innovation in new learningenvironments for creative activity andcollaboration. Within the more familiarsettings of schools and classrooms,models of access to ICT resources should reflect characteristics of creative

3

understandingsof the nature ofcreativity havechanged in scopeand depth overthe last hundredyears

REPORT 4LITERATURE REVIEW IN CREATIVITY, NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND LEARNING

AVRIL M. LOVELESS, SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON

environments and teaching strategieswhich include:

• awareness of the ways in whichcreativity is related to knowledge acrossthe curriculum

• opportunities for exploration and playwith materials, information and ideas;

• opportunities to take risks and makemistakes in a non-threateningatmosphere

• opportunities for reflection,resourcefulness and resilience

• flexibility in time and space for thedifferent stages of creative activity

• sensitivity to the values of educationwhich underpin individual and localinterest, commitment, potential andquality of life

• teaching strategies which acknowledge‘teaching for creativity’ as well as‘teaching creatively’.

The designs of new communicationstechnologies for creative interactions arepresenting challenges to expectations oftraditional classroom settings in terms ofspaces, time, portability, connectivity andflexibility for individuals and communities.Learners can engage in a range ofactivities, from using interactivewhiteboards and wireless portablecomputers, to working together in virtual spaces to exchange and build ideas and artefacts.

HOW ARE PEOPLE USING DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES CREATIVELY?

Many learners and teachers haveestablished a wide range of activities to

support approaches to creativity andexploit the features of digital technologiesin processes such as:

• developing ideas: supporting imaginative conjecture, exploration and representation of ideas

• making connections: supporting,challenging, informing and developingideas by making connections withinformation, people, projects andresources

• creating and making: engaging inmaking meanings though fashioningprocesses of capture, manipulation and transformation of media

• collaboration: working with others in immediate and dynamic ways tocollaborate on outcomes and construct shared knowledge

• communication and evaluation:publishing and communicatingoutcomes for evaluation and critiquefrom a range of audiences.

These activities are not always discrete or sequential and there can besynchronicity in their expression andoverlap of applications for differentpurposes. Examples of such activitiesrange from using simulations andadventure games to explore the question‘what would happen if…?’, to publishinghypertext stories or constructing avatars to meet and interact in three-dimensional,virtual worlds. This wealth of activityillustrates how children and young people are able to use ICT to demonstratecreative characteristics in the interactionbetween people and processes in subjectareas which are authentic, relevant and challenging.

4

the designs of new

communicationstechnologies for

creativeinteractions are

presentingchallenges to

expectations oftraditionalclassroom

settings

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

HOW CAN WE ASSESS CREATIVITY,LEARNING AND DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES?

Attempts to produce methods for theassessment of creativity have not beenstraightforward, and few of the manyinstruments and tests devised have beenable to measure the concept adequately.There are tensions between assessment ofcreative activities for different reasons. Dowe want measures of creativity for ‘highstake standards’, such as statutory testsand national examinations? Do we want to be able to assess creativity in order to give feedback to individuals on theirachievements and ways forward forprogression? Do we want to have means to recognise and celebrate meaningful andoriginal personal expression? Assessmentof pupils’ ICT capability is no lessproblematic. It is easier to identify whetherpupils can or can’t use particular skillsand techniques than to find correlationsbetween the use of these techniques andtheir attainment in other subjects. It is noteasy to use traditional measures and teststo identify the indirect effects of the use of ICT on motivation, attitude, problem-solving capability, critical thinking andinformation handling abilities. Someteachers and researchers have developedpositive approaches to the complexity of assessment by using dimensions along a range of criteria for the use of technologies to support creativeprocesses. Many have recognised thattraditions and expertise in assessment in both art and media education caninform approaches to peer review,evaluation and formative assessment,recognising the unique contributions of new technologies.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, CURRICULUM AND DESIGN?

Thinking about the potential of digitaltechnologies to promote teaching andlearning for creativity raises a number ofissues for teachers’ work in classroomsand informal sessions, for teachereducation and for the types of questionsinvestigated in research. It is important torealise that there are a number offrameworks for describing and supportingour shared understanding of creativity, andrecognise that the use of digitaltechnologies can make a uniquecontribution to creative processes. It willbe challenging to approach the planningand management of creative learningenvironments and develop confidence inappropriate teaching strategies. Thedesign of strategies for assessment ofpupils’ creativity with ICT will be complex,and will need to recognise the ways inwhich our understanding of the interactionbetween creativity and digital technologiesis emerging from practice and reflection.We can therefore learn much from carefulcase studies of each other’s experiencesand discussion of a range of imaginativeresearch methodologies for furtherinvestigation. Lastly we need to continue inour attempts to find ways in which we candescribe, explain and analyse our creativepractices with ICT, in order to contributeto theoretical frameworks which are

useful to educators in a variety of contexts.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BARRIERS?

The review has indicated that there are keyfactors which underpin creative processesand have an impact on the success of

5

attempts to producemethods for theassessment ofcreativity havenot beenstraightforward

teaching for creativity, and that digitaltechnologies can play a distinctive role inboth of these aspects of creativity andlearning. There are, however, barriers tothe development of creativity in traditionaleducational settings, in that the creativeethos of schools and classrooms and theapproaches to the uses of ICT will need tobe addressed. Neither are insurmountable,but each needs to be recognised as aconstraint upon learners realising thepotential of the creative use of digitaltechnologies.

It is said that fear and vanity are often thetwo emotions which prevent us fromrealising our potential in many areas oflife, and addressing them takesconfidence, trust and courage inindividuals and within communities. Newapproaches to flexibility and exploration inways of working, teaching strategies,curriculum, assessment and managementof time and resources in schools could betried, but this will require theencouragement of an ethos of creativechallenge and celebration of imaginationand ‘possibility thinking’ for teachers,learners and designers.

1 INTRODUCTION

The focus of the review is on theinteraction between characteristics ofcreativity in people, communities, subjectdomains and social contexts, and featuresof digital technologies which make adistinctive contribution to those processes.The term ‘creativity’ had been defined inwide-ranging ways. These includedescriptions of creative processes as‘spiritual paths’ (Nachmanovitch 1990); ora seeming mystery and paradox whichneeds to be ‘tamed’ in order to be

understood as the computationalpsychology of Artificial Intelligence (Boden1992); or reflected in neurobiologicalprocesses (Zeki 2001). Prentice highlightsthe dangers of using a ‘complex andslippery concept’ leading to confusions andcontradictions which do not help educatorsto focus on the purpose and possibilities ofcreative processes in the curriculum:

Too often the case for creativity is madeeither in general terms that do little morethan assert that it is intrinsically a goodthing for each individual to have a dose of,or more narrowly in instrumental termsthat link it to the economy. (Prentice 2000, p147)

Bold claims are made for the expression of creativity in children and young peoplethrough the use of new technologies, frommobile phones to digital video and music.International governments’ policies reflecta priority for the use of ICT in the spheresof education and culture (Sharp and LeMetais 2000), and awards are granted toindividuals and organizations that usetechnology creatively to benefit society(Rosencrance 2000). Commentators on the convergence of digital technologies inentertainment such as TV and video gamesstate that audiences are getting newcreative options (Fishcetti 2000), andcomputer games are an emerging art form (Jenkins 2000). Sectors of thecreative industries are able to draw uponthe ease and availability of digitalproduction, reproduction and distribution,and consumers of cultural ‘products’, from texts to performances, can also bepotential producers (Blythe 2001). Yet some critics assert that the presence ofcomputers stifles children’s experiences of play, community and creativity andconstrains opportunities for physical

6

fear and vanityare often the two

emotions whichprevent us from

realising ourpotential

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

experiences in a range of media and social settings (Healy 1998).The British Government has responded tothe debates about creative and culturaleducation to meet the economic,technological and social challenges of the21st century. The Minister of State for theArts, Baroness Blackstone, identified arange of projects and initiatives toenhance learners’ experiences of thecreative arts. These initiatives highlight therole of new technologies in developingparticular projects. The potential of digitaltechnologies to enable new forms ofengagement, access and educationalachievement is recognised in thedevelopment of proposals such as ‘CultureOnline’ - a service offering interactiveaccess to national arts and culturalresources through the internet and digitaltelevision. BBC Education producesprogramming and content for television,radio and the BBC Learning website and,at the time of writing (summer 2002), adigital Curriculum Online is beingdeveloped to supply digital content forschools (Blackstone 2002). The NationalFoundation for Educational Research inEngland and Wales (NFER) carried out athematic review on behalf of theQualifications and Curriculum Authority(QCA), focusing on information from 19educational systems to provide acomparative analysis of the arts, creativityand cultural education. The potential ofnew technology to provide resources forarts education was recognised in manycountries (Sharp and Le Metais 2000). Atthe time of writing the QCA is alsoundertaking a literature review in the areaof Creativity and Education and developingmaterials which will be available in 2003.

This review attempts to present aframework of themes arising from the

literature in order to inform the debateamong educators, policy makers,technology developers and the widercommunity. It emphasises the complexitiesof the interaction between a variety offactors in the consideration of creativity,ICT and learning, in contrast to a cleardistinction between ICT as an ‘ElectronicPrometheus’ (Kirschenmann 2001) or a‘Fool’s Gold’ (Cordes and Miller 2000).

2 WHAT IS THE ROLE OF CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION?

2.1 HOW HAS CREATIVITY BEEN DEFINED?

2.1.1 WHAT ARE SOME KEY THEMES IN DEFINING CREATIVITY?

The development of different perspectivesin describing creativity has been traced,from the concerns of the 1950s to 1970s inareas of personality, cognition and thestimulation of creativity in individuals, tothe awareness in the 1980s and 1990s ofthe influence of environments and socialcontexts on the creativity of individuals,groups and organizations (Rhyammar andBrolin 1999). Cropley (2001) reviews arange of attempts to classify creativity:from Guilford’s address to the AmericanPsychological Association in 1949 in whichhe called for attention to ‘divergent’thinking in human psychology, to theimperative to consider the role of creativityin successful technological and economicventures after the shock to the US ofSputnick in 1957. He identifies commonelements to the variety of discussions ofcreativity – novelty, effectiveness andethicality - and focuses his approach tocreativity on people demonstrating

7

thinking aboutthe concept ofcreativity haschanged inrecent years

SECTION 2


characteristics and interacting with othersin environments congenial to creativity.Jeffrey and Craft argue that thinking aboutthe concept of creativity has changed inrecent years and suggest that currentcreativity discourse also encompasses:

• ‘operating in the economic and political field

• acting as a possible vehicle forindividual empowerment in institutionsand organizations; and

• being used to develop effective learning’. (Jeffrey and Craft 2001, p3)

There have been several recent reviews ofthe literature which help to describe andtheorise understandings of the nature ofcreativity (Yeomans 1996; Dust 1999;Rhyammar and Brolin 1999; Sternberg1999; Beattie 2000; Craft 2000; Edwards2000 - 2001; Cropley 2001). Dust’s review(1999) draws upon the work of a number ofresearchers such as Barron, Gardner andCsikszentmihalyi to discuss the processesand levels of creativity, the characteristicsof creative individuals and the role playedby the domain of endeavour and the widersociety. The review addresses the statedaims of the National Endowment forScience, Technology and the Arts (NESTA),making recommendations for achievingthe objectives of exploration, exploitationand explanation in order to fulfil the mainaim to promote talent, innovation andcreativity in the fields of science,technology and the arts. Craft reminds usthat much of the work cited in theliteratures has been undertaken in the US,UK and Europe and the debate needs toacknowledge the possibilities of ‘culturalsaturation’ in western concepts ofcreativity which might limit ourunderstandings of creativity in othercultures (Craft, 2000, p14).

A key issue in discussing and definingcreativity is whether the focus is uponexceptional creative individuals, such asAlbert Einstein or Charlie Parker, who shiftparadigms in society’s ways of knowing, orupon all individuals and their potential forself-actualisation through ‘little ccreativity’ or ‘possibility thinking’supporting people in making choices ineveryday life (Craft 2000). It is this broaderview of promoting creativity in allindividuals which underpins this paper.

2.1.2 CREATIVITY IN INDIVIDUALS

A useful starting point for consideringframeworks for creativity is to considercharacteristics in individuals. Examples ofpersonal qualities of creative individualshave been collated by Shallcross (1981)and described as: openness to experience;independence; self-confidence; willingnessto take risk; sense of humour orplayfulness; enjoyment of experimentation;sensitivity; lack of a feeling of beingthreatened; personal courage;unconventionality; flexibility; preference forcomplexity; goal orientation; internalcontrol; originality; self-reliance;persistance (cited in Craft 2000, p13).Another perspective on the personalqualities of creative individuals isdescribed in Sternberg and Lubart’s‘confluence model’, in which six resourcesconverge: intellectual abilities; knowledge;styles of thinking; personality; motivationand environment (Sternberg and Lubart1999). Gardner presents a pluralist theoryof mind which recognises multipleintelligences in individuals (Gardner 1983;Gardner 1996).

Csikszentmihalyi identifies a commoncharacteristic of creative people as ‘flow’ –the automatic, effortless, yet highly

8

SECTION 2


focused state of consciousness whenengaged in activities, often painful, risky ordifficult, which stretch a person’s capacitywhilst involving an element of novelty ordiscovery (Csikszentmihalyi 1996). Heelaborates the description of thischaracteristic in identifying nine elements which such activity provides:

• clear goals

• immediate feedback

• balance between challenges and skills

• merging of action and awareness

• elimination of distractions

• lack of fear of failure

• lack of self-consciousness

• distortion of sense of time

• autotelic activity (enjoyment for its own sake).

Individual states of intuition, rumination,reverie, even boredom play a role increativity and problem-solving, and somestudies indicate how creativity is enhancedin a state of reverie and imagery (Lynn andRhue 1986; Claxton 1999; Claxton 2000).Such states are not just ‘letting it flow’ or‘leaving it to luck’, but acknowledging away of knowing which is not necessarilyconscious and draws upon resources ofknowledge, skill and experience in order tomake new combinations, explorations andtransformations (Boden 2001).

2.1.3 CREATIVITY IN SUBJECTS

A different conceptual framework fordescribing creativity acknowledges theinfluence of a range of researchers in thefield, yet presents a holistic view of people,processes and domains (Craft 2000). She

asserts that creativity involves peoplehaving agency over their environment,being able to make and act upon choicesto be creative and inventive. People canadapt to existing problems and find ways ofgetting round them, or innovate and dothings differently. Creativity involves beingin relationship with oneself, other peopleand with subject domains, and suchrelationships can also be reflected in theneed for an audience and feedback for theoutcomes of creative activity. She alsoincludes discussion of people’s multiplefacets of mind or intelligences, includingunconscious intelligence and ‘flow’ as wellas essentialist personality factors. Thedescription of creative processes in Craft’sframework identifies the impulse or sourceof creativity which feeds the unconscious,intuitive, spiritual and emotional levels,which in turn support levels ofimagination, problem-solving anddivergent thinking. Being able to take risks is the next level in which the personengages in the ‘creativity cycle’ ofpreparation, letting go, germination,assimilation, completion and preparation.These processes express, shape andencourage creativity as an approach to life.

Domains are suggested in her frameworkas a way of describing ways of knowingbeyond rigid subject definitions, and openup the consideration of creativity in allareas of knowledge, not just the traditional‘arts’ or ‘creative subjects’. The term‘creative subjects’ refers to curriculumareas broadly corresponding to Bell’sframework for ‘Education through the Arts’(Bell 2000, p11):

• visual and performing arts, minimallymusic/art/drama including dance

• designing and making, minimally three-dimensional design including crafts,

9

intuition,rumination,reverie, evenboredom play a role increativity andproblem-solving

technology and the built environment

• written arts, minimally poetry-making,creative writing and more broadly theliterary arts including story-telling.

Such a conceptualisation of creativityhighlights the interactions of personalqualities and creative processes withinsubject domains and areas of thecurriculum. Beattie (2000) cites Fishkin’suse of the term ‘germinal creativity’ todescribe young people’s creative potentialas they develop their knowledge andunderstanding of particular domains(Fishkin 1998).

2.1.4 CREATIVITY AS A SOCIAL PRACTICE

The importance of the social and culturalcontext in which people demonstratecreativity must also be considered. Recentresearch in communities of practice alsopresents a view of learning as social,situated and characterised by interactionand communication between individuals(Lave and Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998).Leach (2001) cites examples of creativeindividuals, such as Nobel Prize winners ormusicians, who benefited from associationwith other creative people within theircommunities which supported andcelebrated the creative process. Feldman,Csikszentmihalyi and Gardner (1994)propose that creativity arises from theinteraction between the ‘intelligence’ ofindividuals, the domain or areas of humanendeavour, disciplines, crafts or pursuits,and the field, such as people, institutions,award mechanisms and ‘knowledgeableothers’ through which judgements ofindividual performances in society are made.

Csikszentmihalyi develops his discussionof the field as a component of creativitywherein other individuals act as‘gatekeepers’ to a domain by recognising,preserving and remembering creativeoutcomes (Csikszentmihalyi 1996). Hepresents a systems model in whichcreativity is in the interaction between aperson’s thoughts and actions, theirknowledge and skills within a domain anda sociocultural context which canencourage, evaluate and reward. In such a systems model, the recognition andvalue of creativity is related as much to the wider context of domains and fields as to individuals. This has importantimplications for thinking about creativityand learning, where the context could be aschool classroom or a large corporationwhich can either nurture or dismiss thedevelopment of creative individuals, groupsand communities.

2.2 WHAT IS THE PLACE OFCREATIVITY IN EDUCATION?

‘Creativity is an essential life skill, whichneeds to be fostered by the educationsystem(s) from the early years onward’(Craft 1999, p137). Such a statementemphasises the importance of playfulness,imagination and creativity in learning forchildren, young people and adults and therole that schools might play in promotingthese qualities in learning experiences(Anning 1994; Shagoury-Hubbard 1996;Whitaker 1997).

The National Advisory Committee onCreative and Cultural Education (NACCCE)responded to the 1997 UK GovernmentWhite Paper ‘Excellence in Schools’ bypresenting a report that argued for anational strategy in creative and cultural

10

creativity involves being inrelationship with

oneself, otherpeople and with

subject domains

SECTION 2


education to ensure a broad and flexibleeducation that recognised the talents of all children. The report, ‘All Our Futures’,defined creativity as, ‘imaginative activityfashioned so as to produce outcomes thatare both original and of value’ (NACCCE1999, p29). This definition is helpful in that it expresses five characteristics of creativity:

• using imagination – the process ofimagining, supposing and generatingideas which are original, providing analternative to the expected, theconventional, or the routine

• a fashioning process – the active anddeliberate focus of attention and skillsin order to shape, refine and manage an idea

• pursuing purpose – the application of imagination to produce tangibleoutcomes from purposeful goals.motivation and sustained engagementare important to the solving of theproblem

• being original – the originality of anoutcome which can be at different levelsof achievement: individual originality inrelation to a person’s own previouswork; relative originality in relation to apeer group; and historic originality inrelation to works which are completelynew and unique

• judging value – the evaluative mode ofthought which is reciprocal to thegenerative mode of imaginative activityand provides critical, reflective reviewfrom individuals and peers.

The NACCCE framework and report raisesquestions about the nature and purposesof creative experiences for learners inschools and communities, and thedistinction between teaching for creativity

and creative teaching (Jeffrey 2000;Prentice 2000; Joubert 2001). The fiveelements arising from the NACCCEdefinition can be used with the interactivedimensions of people and communities,processes, domains, and fields, discussedin the definitions of creativity in Section2.1, to provide a framework to describe thecontribution of ICT to creativity in learning.

3 WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ROLESOF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES INSUPPORTING CREATIVITY?

The use of the term ICT as a single term isinadequate to describe the range oftechnologies and the wide variety ofsettings and interventions in which theyare used. McFarlane argues that there is aneed for a more detailed and developeddiscourse to reflect the relationshipbetween a form of ICT, the way in which itis used and any impact it may have on theusers, from using word processors forwriting letters to monitoring andmeasuring environmental changes withsensors (McFarlane 2001). Tolmie alsodraws attention to the need to consider thecomplexities of the contexts in which ICTresources are used, rather than expect ablanket take-up which produces uniformoutcomes for all pupils in all situations(Tolmie 2001). Kennewell considers theanalysis of the effects of ICT incombination with other factors anddescribes a framework for usingaffordances and constraints of ICT ineducational settings (Kennewell 2001). Inthis paper, the use of the term ICT impliesthe broad range of information andcommunications technologies which canbe used for different purposes by learnersand teachers in many situations.

11

the provisionalityof ICT enablesusers to makechanges, try outalternatives andkeep a ‘trace’ ofthe developmentof ideas.Interactivity canengage users at a number of levels

SECTION 3

WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ROLES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES

IN SUPPORTING CREATIVITY?

Digital technologies exhibit features whichcan be exploited by users in order to makea distinctive contribution to activities, thatis, enable the users to do things that couldnot be done as effectively, or at all, usingother tools. These features have beendescribed as provisionality, interactivity,capacity, range, speed and automaticfunctions (Department for Education andEmployment 1998). The provisionality ofICT enables users to make changes, tryout alternatives and keep a ‘trace’ of thedevelopment of ideas. Interactivity canengage users at a number of levels, fromthe playing of a game which givesfeedback on decisions made, to themonitoring of a space probe throughimmediate and dynamic feedback. ICTdemonstrates capacity and range in theways in which it affords access to vastamounts of information locally and globallyin different time zones and geographicalplaces. The speed and automatic functionsof ICT allow tasks of storing, transformingand displaying information to be carriedout by the technologies, enabling users toread, observe, interrogate, interpret,analyse and synthesise information athigher levels. Recognising the potential ofthese features is a significant element ofICT capability, enabling children andteachers to make decisions about whenthe use of ICT in a particular context isappropriate (Sharp, Potter et al 2000).

Loveless argues that ‘ICT capability’ ismore than competence with a set of skillsand techniques with particular digitaltechnologies, but encompasses such skillsbeing turned to use. It can be described asan ability which is used actively, involvingunderstanding, informed choice, criticalevaluation and being open to orsusceptible to development (Loveless1995). Learners can demonstrate such

capability in knowing, not only how tosearch the world wide web or manipulate adigital photograph, but also why and whensuch skills might be appropriate fordifferent reasons in different situations tosolve different problems. Such adescription of ICT capability relates to anecological concept of ability in which‘ability is person plus the opportunities forassistance which their environmentaffords, plus the skill at detecting, creatingand managing these resources’ (Claxton1999, p226).

A characteristic of creativity with digitaltechnologies would be the recognition ofthe potential of the features of ICT to beexploited and experimented with to supportcreative processes. Learners and teacherstherefore need to have a range ofexperiences in which they can engage, playand become familiar with the distinctivecontributions that ICT can make to theircreative practices which other media andtools do not offer. See Table 1.

Table 1: The features of ICT and theNACCCE Framework for Creativity

Features NACCCE of ICT Framework

for Creativity

Provisionality Using imagination

Interactivity A fashioning process

Capacity Pursuing purpose

Range Being original

Speed Judging value

Automatic functions

12

the speed andautomatic

functions of ICTallow tasks of

storing,transforming

and displayinginformation to

be carried out bythe technologies

SECTION 3

WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ROLES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES IN SUPPORTING CREATIVITY?

4 HOW MIGHT WE TEACH FOR CREATIVITY?

4.1 DESIGNING ENVIRONMENTS FOR LEARNING

Establishing environments with ICT inwhich learners and teachers can developcreativity presents challenges in two areas– the use of ICT to support creativity intraditional settings such as schools, and the development of ICT resources to support innovation in learningenvironments. Edwards cites Arieti (1979)who describes how societies and cultureshave the ability to both enhance anddetract from creativity and asserts thattechnology plays a crucial role in providingaccess to cultural means (Edwards 2000 -2001, p226).

Craft et al [2001] present a range of well-supported discussions of the elements oflearning environments which are conduciveto creative developments. Characteristicsof these environments include:

• awareness of the ways in whichcreativity is related to knowledge across the curriculum, not just the ‘arts’ and that the rules and structuresunderpinning ‘conceptual spaces’ indifferent knowledge domains can becombined, explored and transformed(Boden 2001)

• opportunities for exploration and playwith materials, information and ideas(Craft 2000)

• opportunities to take risks and makemistakes in a non-threateningatmosphere (Davies 1999)

• opportunities for reflection,resourcefulness and resilience (Claxton 2000)

• flexibility in time and space for thedifferent stages of creative activity(Claxton 1999)

• sensitivity to the values of educationwhich underpin individual and localinterest, commitment, potential andquality of life (Beetlestone 1998)

• teaching strategies which acknowledge‘teaching for creativity’ as well as‘teaching creatively.’ (NACCCE 1999)

4.2 ICT AND THE PHYSICALLEARNING ENVIRONMENT

Examples of the use of ICT to supportcreativity in traditional settings have beenpresented in earlier sections, but thereneeds to be recognition of the differentmodels of access to ICT resources inschools. Consideration needs to be givento the development of teaching strategieswhich are appropriate and purposeful inthese different contexts. There is anincreasing presence of whiteboards anddata projectors to support interactivewhole-class teaching and presentation(Glover and Miller 2001); ICT suites areavailable in pooled, timetabled rooms inprimary and secondary schools (Loveless2001); and portable technologies forstudent and teacher use are used in manycurriculum areas (Thorpe and Roberts-Young 2001). Researchers have identified arange of factors of personal approaches inprofessional development for bothcreativity and the integration of ICT inteaching (see for example Craft 1997;Watson 2001).

Challenges are being made to expectationsof traditional classroom settings. Open andflexible spaces for interaction betweenpeople and technologies have been

13

societies andcultures have the ability to bothenhance anddetract fromcreativity

SECTION 4

HOW MIGHT WE TEACH FOR CREATIVITY?

designed to support creativity andresourcefulness. Commercial anduniversity research laboratories have beenestablished to reflect the need for flexibilityand multi-disciplinary teams (Anonymous2001). An example of an educationalenvironment designed for creativeinteraction can be found at Highwire, a City Learning Centre in London (seewww.highwire.org.uk). As well as using ICTin fixed, physical spaces, the developmentsin the design of personal mobile andwearable technologies can supportlearners in any location at any time.Sariola and his colleagues working inFinland (2002) describe the early ‘weaksignals’ they detected in the potential of‘mobile learning’ with digital technologiesranging from telephony to videoconferencing, which indicated ways inwhich students could extend the times andplaces of their learning (Sariola 2002).Sharples describes a framework for thedesign and formative evaluation of a newgenre of educational technology whichraises questions about theories ofcomputer-mediated learning anddevelopments in human-computerinterfaces (Sharples 2000), anddevelopments in improving human-technology interaction for stimulatingcreativity and intuition are currently beinginvestigated in the INVITE research project(Intuitive Human-Technology Interaction inthe Information Society) (Bullinger andZiegler 2002).

4.3 ICT AND THE VIRTUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

As well as the physical spaces in which ICTresources are made available to promotelearners’ creativity, ICT applicationsthemselves can provide environments for

creative activity. Storyboard software, suchas Kar2ouche, has been demonstrated tosupport pupils’ engagement with andunderstanding of complex texts(Birmingham and Davies 2001). The useof Virtual Reality environments and

Knowledge Forums as spaces forpotentially creative collaboration isdiscussed in more detail in Section 5(Bruckman and Resnick 1995; Scardamalia2000; Ahlberg, Kaasinen et al 2001; Baileyand Moar 2001; Leach 2001). There isdevelopment in the use of ManagedLearning Environments or Virtual LearningEnvironments in education, yet in the fieldof Knowledge Management, however,Shani et al indicated that the contributionof specific groupware technology to teamcreativity was inconclusive and there was a complex interaction of many factors inthe team’s performance (Shani, Sena et al 2000).

The use of Knowledge Forums forcollaborative knowledge building withingroups of peers, novices and experts canalso be seen as the development of toolsfor creative collaboration which reflectbeliefs, values and theories about howlearners learn and the roles that teachersmight adopt. Scardamalia describes thedesign challenges in developing knowledgebuilding communities in which participantswork creatively with ideas:

• provide ‘a way in’ to knowledge creationfor all students. This requires thatstudents acquire agency over their ownminds. It is this ‘epistemic agency’ thatallows them to begin to create, examineand improve ideas

• engage students directly with ‘ideaimprovement’ and with ‘problems ofunderstanding’. This requires thatstudents become constructivists

14

challenges are being madeto expectations

of traditionalclassroom

settings

SECTION 4

HOW MIGHT WE TEACH FOR CREATIVITY?

themselves – understanding thatknowledge is constructed andcontinually improved upon by people,and this is something they can do

• render the hidden aspects of knowledgecreation transparent and foster theseprocesses in day-to-day discourse.‘Knowledge-building technology’ servesthis purpose

• provide social supports for knowledgecreation. This is the role of ‘knowledgebuilding communities’

• sustain work at the cutting edge ofabilities and disciplines. This is fosteredthrough a ‘Knowledge Society Network’.(Scardamalia 2000, p5)

In thinking about how we might teach forcreativity with digital technologies, a keyfactor is the development of learningenvironments which provide opportunitiesand promote an ethos which supportcreativity. Contexts which are conducive tocreativity reflect qualities of exploration,play, taking risks, reflection, flexibility,focus, commitment and sensitivity tovaluing the endeavours of individuals andcommunities. Such environments may betraditional classrooms and schools, orinnovative approaches to the design and location of places to learn, or even virtual spaces created by thetechnologies themselves.

Teachers and learners working in moretraditional spaces need to consider thedemands placed upon them by the sheerphysicality of the resources, from ICTsuites to portable computers, andrecognise that in such a fast-changingfield, today’s ‘solution’ may be tomorrow’s‘problem’. Establishing a suite ofcomputers or sets of interactivewhiteboards in a school may address

problems of access and coverage ofmaterial at a particular time in a school’sdevelopment, yet become too fixed andinflexible as the confidence, competenceand rationale for using ICT in creative ways develops. Designers of innovativeenvironments for creative learning,whether in physical places such asHighwire, or with resources such asmobile technologies, can consider the‘weak signals’ in early work in human-technology interaction which can indicatepossibilities for further development.

Creative imagination is needed torecognise the potential of the technologiesthemselves, from Virtual Reality toKnowledge Forums, to afford new kinds ofspaces for trying out ideas, collaboratingand building knowledge communities. The following section will address variouscreative practices which are currentlybeing expressed with digital technologies.

5 HOW ARE PEOPLE USING DIGITALTECHNOLOGIES CREATIVELY?

It is important to note that it is not theaccess to digital resources which ‘delivers’creativity, but the opportunities suchaccess affords for interaction, participationand the active demonstration ofimagination, production, purpose,originality and value. Creative activitieswith new technologies can includedeveloping ideas, making connections,creating and making, collaboration,communication and evaluation. Each ofthese activities draws upon an interactionof the features of ICT and elements ofcreative processes. These activities are notalways discrete or sequential and therecan be synchronicity in their expressionand overlap of applications for different

15

contexts whichare conducive tocreativity reflectqualities ofexploration, play,taking risks,reflection,flexibility, focus,commitment and sensitivity

SECTION 5

HOW ARE PEOPLE USING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES CREATIVELY?

purposes. The following sections presentexamples of such activities which illustratehow children and young people are able touse ICT not only to demonstrate elementsof ICT capability, but also to support andenhance the development of creativecharacteristics in the interaction betweenpeople, processes, domains and fields.

5.1 DEVELOPING IDEAS WITH ICT

The ICT strand of ‘Developing ideas andmaking things happen’ is often associatedwith the use of digital technology toexplore the question ‘what would happenif….? The provisionality, interactivity andcapacity of ICT to represent information ina variety of modes underpins the potentialof digital technologies to promoteresources for imaginative play, exploration,trying out ideas, approaches to problem-solving, taking risks in conjecture, andmaking connections between ideas.Software to support this includessimulations for modelling, spreadsheets orcontrol technology to sense, monitor,measure and control sequences of eventsmediated by devices such asprogrammable toys or control softwareapplications. Examples and discussion ofsuch applications have been available inthe literature for many years (see forexample Loveless 1995). Loveless citesKemmis et al who developed a model inwhich Computer Assisted Learning (CAL)could be described. They outlinedparadigms of computer use asInstructional, Emancipatory, Revelatoryand Conjectural Computer use which is‘revelatory’ allows guided discovery andthe revealing and construction ofunderlying models. This paradigm can beseen in the use of simulations andadventure games. Computer use which is

‘conjectural’ encourages playfulexploration and the testing of ideas whichenable learners to construct their ownmodels and test hypotheses (Kemmis,Atkins et al 1977).

Examples of the conjectural approach tothe use of computers are found in the useof Logo as a programming language whichcould support a ‘constructionist’ view oflearning, in which exploration, play and the testing of hypotheses in ‘Microworlds’play an important role (Subhi 1999).Papert’s early vision of the use of Logoin schools has not been realised, yet

there have been a number ofdevelopments arising from the work in this field. Imagine is a new generation of Logo which is a computational system ‘to stimulate the emergence of newcultures for constructing, exploring andunderstanding… It employs creativecomputer environments to:

• encourage motivation in specific topics

• explore, visualise and demonstraterelations and dependencies

• simulate and model

• act as a microworld for discovery…creating and building…

• solve problems with constraints

• test…’(Kalas and Blaho 2002, p91-92)

See also the ‘Thinking Skills, Technologyand Learning’ Literature Review forFuturelab, in which Logo is also discussedin some detail.

Developments are also being made in thedesign of materials to support children’sexploration, problem-solving and scientificenquiry. In the US, researchers in the MIT

16

SECTION 5


Media Laboratory have developed a rangeof programmable ‘toys’ or ‘digitalmanipulatives’ - beads, blocks and bricks - which reflect this purpose(Sargent, Resnick et al 1996) (seehttp://toys.media.mit.edu/). The BeyondBlack Boxes (BBB) Project used tiny,programmable computational devicescalled Crickets which could be embeddedinto everyday objects to control, sense andcommunicate with one another via infraredlight. The aim of the project was to‘reintroduce a vigorously creative,aesthetic, and personal dimension into thedesign of scientific instrumentation –particularly in the context of scienceeducation’ (Resnick, Berg et al 2000, p2).Such work was also an attempt to counterthe ‘opacity’ of computers in scientificprocesses. This project has beendeveloped further in the Playful Inventionand Exploration Network (PIE), which hasestablished a network of museumsworking in collaboration with the MITMedia Laboratory, to disseminate theconstructive use of new digitaltechnologies (see http://llk.media.mit.edu/projects/pie). In Europe, the eTui project ispart of the i3 – ‘I cubed’: IntelligentInformation Interfaces – researchorganization. The collaborative projectinvestigated ‘tool-cases’ for learning about learning, and in the UK, Ultralabdeveloped an interactive toy that can learn, and be taught by children (seehttp://www.ultralab.ac.uk/projects/etui/index.shtml).

There is a wealth of high specificationdigital technology available for explorationand creation of ideas from film productiontools to CAD/CAM and virtual realitysimulations. These are used in a range ofprofessions and occupations such asarchitecture, engineering, film-making and

design. One example of such applicationsis provided in the description of a course inVirtual Design and Representation atCornell University (winter 2000). Theapplication of cheaper and moreaccessible versions of such software fordeveloping ideas with children and youngpeople is taking place in some contextswithin and out of schools.

Web based resources are also available forlearners to explore and test ideas online.Cannon et al investigated the design of aweb-based National Laboratory of VirtualManipulatives, in which elementary schoolchildren could interact with and designnew mathematical objects that are noteasily constructed physically (Cannon, Healet al 2000). Other examples of theprovisionality, interactivity and range of ICTwhich can underpin playful approaches totrying out imaginative ideas include theTracy Beaker web pages on the BBCSchools website (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbbc/tracybeaker/); the BlockCorner site (see http://www.blockcorner.com/content.html) or the Sodaplay site which enables users to construct andanimate models on screen (seehttp://www.sodaplay.com/). Building ondevelopments in shared 3D VirtualEnvironments accessible on the internet,The Vertex Project focused on the ways inwhich children explored the design andcreation of virtual spaces and objectsusing interactive virtual reality software(Bailey and Moar 2001).

Digital technologies have also been usedto support the early stages of imaginativeplay, speculation and ‘brainstorming’.Baron et al review the literature to supportthe development of methodologies forinvestigating representations of therelationships in IT systems using concept

17

digitaltechnologieshave also been used tosupport the earlystages ofimaginative play,speculation and‘brainstorming’

maps and computer-based conceptmapping tools (Baron, Bruillard et al 1999).The use of software applications such asInspiration is supported by a bibliographyon visual learning to underpin an approach to the use of concept maps by individuals and groups (seehttp://www.inspiration.com/vlearning/suggestread/index.cfm?fuseaction=suggested).

An innovative use of ICT in drama has beendeveloped by Simpson, who describes theways in which digital cameras and imagemanipulation software can be used inexploration and improvisation ‘within’drama activities rather than just recordingfinal outcomes. Digital images are used inthe ‘sketching’ stages of the explorationand interpretation of texts, such as themulti-layered illustrated children’s book,‘Not Now, Bernard’. They are thendeveloped as an integral element of thedrama as children respond to theirconstructed, manipulated images andincorporate them into their developingimprovisations (Simpson 1999).

5.2 MAKING CONNECTIONS

Finding things out in order to support,challenge, inform and develop ideas is animportant element in the processes ofusing imagination, fashioning and pursuingpurpose. ICT can play a role in makingconnections with other people, projects,information and resources through theinternet, world wide web and CD-Rom andthe use of these communicationstechnologies is well-documented (seehttp://www.teachingideas.co.uk/welcome).Many websites act as portals or startingpoints for information about creative usesof new technology. It is beyond the scope ofthis review to provide a comprehensive list

of such sites, but examples of sites withnews, events, resources, research andlinks to related sites can be found throughgovernment and public agency portals.(See Table 2 for examples in the UK.)

As reviewed in Section 1, the BritishGovernment has identified a number ofinitiatives to provide online access tocreative practitioners and materials(Blackstone 2002). Culture Online willprovide new digital materials for theschool curriculum and lifelong learning.They will be made available in a variety ofways, including new and existing websites,through a Culture Online gateway andlinked to the DfES Curriculum Onlineportal and the National Grid for Learning.Projects will be developed by partnershipswhich might include cultural and artsorganisations, broadcasters, creativemedia companies and educationalpublishers (see http://www.cultureonline.gov.uk/).

Table 2: Examples of websites forinformation and networking in the UK

British Educational CommunicationsTechnology Agency (Becta)www.becta.org.uk

National Endowment for Science,Technology and the Arts (NESTA)www.nesta.org.uk

Association of Teachers ofMathematics (ATM)http://www.atm.org.uk/

Association of Teachers of English (NATE)http://www.nate.org.uk

18

finding thingsout in order to

support,challenge,

inform anddevelop ideas is

an importantelement in the

processes ofusing

imagination,fashioning and

pursuingpurpose

SECTION 5


National Drama – the association for drama educatorshttp://www.nationaldrama.co.uk

Association for Science Education (ASE)www.ase.org.uk

Design and Technology Association (DATA)http://www.data.org.uk

National Society for Education in Art and Design (NSEAD)http://www.nsead.org/

Creating Spaces, network of educationprofessionals promoting the creativeuse of digital technologieshttp://www.creatingspaces.org.uk

There are also many examples of websitescreated by individuals or organizations toprovide resources for particular agephases and subject areas. One example isthe EarlyBirds Music website whichprovides multimedia examples of video,sound and links to music resources forearly, primary and special education (seehttp://www.earlybirdsmusic.com). BBCiprovides access to artists’ work which canbe downloaded, viewed and listened tothrough its website (seehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/digital/guestartists/index.shtml). Another example in thesecondary sector is the Digital ArtResource for Education, DARE (seehttp://www.dareonline.org). This initiativeis a collaboration between the Institute ofInternational Visual Arts (inIVA), MiddlesexUniversity’s School of Lifelong Learningand Education (LLE) and the LansdownCentre for Electronic Arts (LCEA).

A key aim of DARE is to enable teachersand young people to access some of theideas, issues and processes of a culturallyand stylistically diverse matrix of recentwork. The internet is probably unique in itsexistence as both an experimental mediumand as a space for research, display andexchange, and the DARE site allows usersto view how artists have been exploiting as well as critiquing the internet. (Sinker 2001, p33)

Access to worldwide galleries andmuseums can provide resources forstimulation and research. Access topractitioners such as artists, designers,engineers and architects through e-mail orvideo conferencing can establish networksand communities sharing expertise,questions and work in progress. The 24Hour Museum is the National VirtualMuseum which acts as a gateway to over 2,500 museums, galleries andheritage attractions in the UK (seehttp://www.24hourmuseum.org.uk). TheMuseum Open Learning Initiatives (MOLLI)is another example of such a ‘window’ toartefacts, activities and work produced bychildren and adults in the community inresponse to particular exhibitions and to individual artists’ work (seehttp://www.molli.org.uk). The Questwebsite of the Natural History Museum inLondon is an example of a constructivistapproach to use of the web for scientificenquiry (see www.nhm.ac.uk).

5.3 CREATING AND MAKINGMEANING

The weaving of imagination, fashioning,pursuing purposes and being originalneeds to move beyond the use of tools andtechniques for their own sake in the

19

creation, drafting, editing and refiningprocesses towards creating tangibleoutcomes, such as an image, a poem, a drama, a 3D construction or a movie. This involves not only the physical act ofmaking, but also an ongoing ‘dialogue’where ‘the maker produces and the workresponds’. The artist Terry Taylor placesthis dialogue at the centre of his work with children and digital images:

It is the representation of meaning that is the key that elevates production to aposition beyond the merely decorative…By dialogue I mean the dynamic andcreative cognitive processes involved when encoding and decoding meaning in visual texts…This takes time and acontinuation of intention and cannot be achieved by ad hoc projects based on mechanical processes. (Loveless 2000)

The Glebe Project and the Access Projecttook place in primary schools wherechildren worked with visual artists. Theyused different media, including the digitaltechnologies of scanners, cameras andgraphics software, to capture andmanipulate images in order to create andmake meanings in the visual arts. Thechildren produced pieces in response to avariety of stimuli and were encouraged todisplay and evaluate each other’s work inprogress. The digital images were notalways the final products, but sometimesacted as stimuli or sketches fordevelopment of representations in othermedia. The children’s skills with ICTtechniques were demonstrated anddeveloped in the context of their desire toexplore and produce specific effects, whilstthe aims of the projects were clearlyfocused on the creative expression ofmeanings (Loveless 1999; Loveless 2000).

The investigation of children’s use ofmultimedia and presentation tools tocreate multimodal texts with images,written text and sound also recognises thedevelopment of multiliteracies in workacross the curriculum (Cope and Kalantzis2000; Callow 2002). Mavers draws on thework of Kress in discussing youngchildren’s understandings of multimodalityin the use of the internet and the changing‘communicational landscape’ (Mavers2002). Atherton has carried out extensivework with primary school children usingmultimedia across the curriculum anddescribed the planning and time requiredfor the children to engage with theprocesses of creating and making complexmultimedia pieces. The children’s workdemonstrated a good understanding of theways in which the authors could constructinteractive presentations with visualimages, sound, animation and hyperlinks(Atherton 2002).

In a research project carried out withsecondary pupils using multimediaauthoring in the art curriculum, Longdemonstrates not only the processes ofdevelopment, manipulation and evaluationof digital images, but also growingawareness of the potential ofmultimodality in pupils’ art work. Duringan eight month period, pupils worked withmultimedia software on an art projecttaking ‘Movement’ as a theme. Theyexpressed some disquiet as to whethertheir pieces were ‘art’ as they incorporatedmoving visual images and sound withreference to popular culture. Inchallenging their conceptualisations that art inhabits space whilst musicinhabits time, as well as different aspectsof the school curriculum, they ‘alsoexperienced the idea that art and imagemaking is changed as a process when it

20

the weaving of imagination,

fashioning,pursuing

purposes andbeing original

needs to movebeyond the use

of tools andtechniques fortheir own sake

SECTION 5


becomes part of a transmittable andinfinitely repeatable set of information’(Long 2001, p261).

In these examples the technology played adistinctive role in these activities byproviding opportunities for the pupils tocapture, edit and transform digital data inorder to make meanings. The creativeprocesses of imagination, fashioning and‘flow’ were supported by the immediacy ofthe presentation, the ease of manipulationand the possibilities of ‘leaving a trail’ ofwork in progress in order to trace thedevelopment of ideas, or revisit them inorder to explore other possible routes.These characteristics of ICT are also beingexploited in software applications whichare accessible for young learners for thecreative moving images with digital video,music, and the creation of 3D virtual worlds.

The British Educational Communicationsand Technology Agency (Becta) is runningan award scheme for Creativity in DigitalVideo (www.becta.org.uk) which willpresent examples of DV work in schools.See also the website of Apple Computer,Inc for examples of pupils’ work withcreating and editing digital video (see http://www.apple.com/education/dv/).The Interactive Education Project at theUniversity of Bristol includes work withdigital music (Sutherland, Breeze et al2002) (see also http://www.interactiveeducation.ac.uk/music_designs.htm ). The Vertex Project at MiddlesexUniversity is exploring the ways in whichchildren build and use structures, spacesand avatars in virtual worlds shared withother users on the Internet (Bailey andMoar 2001).

In a response to concerns from theAlliance for Childhood that computers

stifle creativity (Cordes and Miller 2000),Abbott et al present a critique anddescribe a range of examples of children’screating and making work with multimediaand web technologies (Abbott, Lachs et al,2001; Lachs and Wiliam 1998; Lachs 2000).However, there could be a danger ofreading many of the published examplesand descriptions of creative production aspositive and progressive. Someresearchers, however, draw attention tomore problematic aspects of the creatingand making work with digital technologies.Sefton-Green and Buckingham noted thelimited nature of ‘creative production’ thatwas taking place in young people’sexperience with and access to digitaltechnologies at school and at home(Sefton-Green and Buckingham 1998).Sefton-Green and Parker investigated howprimary school children used edutainmentsoftware to create and edit stories,recognising that editing is the key creativeact in the production of moving image‘texts’ such as films or televisionprogrammes. The research demonstratedthat the software available for this agerange supports animation andcomposition, rather than conventionalediting and the report argued that existing edutainment software packagesaimed at children are severely limited in their creative potential (Sefton-Green and Parker 2000) (see http://www.bfi.org.uk/education/research/edit-play/).

5.4 COLLABORATION

Recent understandings of thecharacteristics of human learning haverecognised its social, situated anddistributed nature in which knowledge isconstructed through interaction and

21

communication with others incommunities (Lave and Wenger 1991;Somekh 2001). The speed and range ofcommunications technology enablelearners to collaborate with others inimmediate and dynamic ways during theircreative work in progress. Collaborationwith artists, writers and fictionalcharacters in ‘non-residence’ through e-mail or video conferences offers learnersopportunities to work with others togenerate ideas, pursue purpose andevaluate ongoing, original work. Juniorchildren in Robin Hood School inBirmingham used video conferencingfacilities to establish contact with artistNick Eastwood, look at his work, ask himquestions and receive feedback from himon their own work created in response tothe experience (see http://www.becta.org.uk/technology/desktopvc/telecomms/art.html). Children participating in theInteractive Education Project focused onthe use of e-mail to explore howawareness of audience and purposeshapes writing by corresponding with two‘Viking settlers’ (Sutherland, Breeze et al 2002).

The Bristol Internet Project was set up in1998 to enable children in schools in twodifferent communities in the city tocollaborate with each other on makingvisual images over time and distance. Theyused digital cameras and ‘paint’ programsto construct images of themselves whichwere attached to e-mail messages to their‘key pals’ in the other school, askingquestions such as ‘Who am I?’. Artists ineach school worked with the children tointerpret, respond to and manipulate theimages received before sending them backwith their developed ideas (Loveless 2000).Similarly, the Virtual Identities Digital ArtsProject involved post-16 art and design

students in schools in Liverpool and Kent.The students sent ‘digital postcards’ whichrepresented their personal identity to theirpartners who interpreted and manipulatedthe image, whilst keeping 20 per cent ofthe original image (Leach 2001).

The internet can also be used as a ‘sharedspace’ beyond a straightforward exchangeand collaborative manipulation of images.The Hands-On Dance project at theUniversity of Leeds enabled interactivedance workshops between novice andmore experienced dancers to take placeusing e-mail discussion, internet videoconference rehearsals and an interactivewebsite (Popat 2001). Text-based virtualreality environments can be viewed asspaces for creative collaborations in storytelling and role play. Bruckman andResnick, for example, have worked withresearchers and children using MUDS(Multi-User Domains) (Bruckman andResnick 1995), and Abbott discusses thelinguistic forms of real time written chat insuch environments (Abbott 1998). Thedevelopment of 3D shared spaces in virtualreality internet games and applications hasbeen highlighted in the work of the VertexProject (Bailey and Moar 2001).

5.5 COMMUNICATION, PUBLICATION AND AUDIENCE

Presentation and communicationstechnologies enable learners to presentand celebrate their work to a range ofaudiences, from a Powerpoint presentationin a classroom to a website available to anunknown, and unpredictable, audience.Richard Hitcham School, for example,publishes children’s work from all areas ofthe curriculum, including the variety ofpieces produced in a project working with

22

SECTION 5


an artist in residence sharing his own painting and digital work (seehttp://www.hitchams.suffolk.sch.uk/ict_art/index.htm). Similarly, initiatives such as‘Walkers’ Showcase’ enable children topublish a wide variety of their creativework, from scanned images of art work inother media to poetry and sound files ofthem playing musical instruments (seehttp://www.walkersshowcase.co.uk/index.jsp). Examples of a range of pupils’work with multimedia, digital video andweb publishing can also be seen in thework of Highwire, a City Learning Centre in Shoreditch, London (seehttp://www.highwire.org.uk).

It is the consideration of purpose andaudience which can lead children intomore detailed evaluation of the levels oforiginality and the critical, reflectiveconsideration of value in their work. Lachsemphasises the importance of theawareness of audience in the wholedesign, creation and presentation processof making multimedia (Lachs 2000). InAtherton’s work with multimedia inprimary classrooms, the children may bemaking a game for their younger siblingsor a presentation for a visiting dignitary,but she places appropriate interaction andcommunication with audiences centrally tothe processes of design, making andevaluation (Atherton 2002).

It is beyond the scope of this review toconsider a particular domain in detail, butthere are some useful indications of thepotential of ICT in creativity and learning inthe ways in which practitioners in the artsand cultural industries employ digitaltechnologies. Mak presents evidence ofnegative attitudes towards computers inart amongst 64 high school students whowere familiar with digital technologies and

art in their curriculum. She discusses thereinterpretations and changes which wouldneed to take place in understandings ofpluralistic styles, realism, interactivity,originality and ownership with ‘digital art’(Mak 2001).

Some theatre practitioners warn againstthe loss of spontaneity and communitywhich can accompany the use oftechnology in the theatre and theatreresearch practices (Carson 1999). Beardon,however, draws attention to thedevelopment of Visual Assistant softwaredesigned to promote improvisation,expression and communication of visualand spatial ideas about theatreperformances (Beardon 1999). Designersalso express concern that the high levelsof technical expertise required in newinter-disciplinary design studies may leadto a loss of quality without evaluation ofprocesses and outcomes. Neilson andTrias propose a model for evaluation whichreflects reason, function, emotion andsenses and technology (2000). Examples ofthe work of artists using digital media arecommissioned and exhibited by galleriessuch as ‘Wired Worlds’ at the UK NationalMusuem of Photography, Film andTelevision (Ferris 2000); new works arepresented and discussed at conferencessuch as ISEA (see http://www.isea.qc.ca),whilst ‘tradigital’ is a term used todescribe artists and groups whose worksbridge traditional and digital worlds(Gollifer 2000).

5.6 MOVING FORWARD

The practices described in the previousexamples illustrate how people haveengaged their imagination in recognisingthe potential of ICT to make a distinctive

23

ICT resourcescan support thecreation anddevelopment of ideas if theyreflect anapproach toopen-endedexploration indesign and use

contribution to creative processes ofdeveloping ideas, making connections,creating and making, collaboration andcommunication for audiences. Thiscontribution affords opportunities forexperiences which are not as easilyaccessible or possible with other mediaand tools.

ICT resources, whether hardware orsoftware, can support the creation anddevelopment of ideas if they reflect anapproach to open-ended exploration indesign and use. Such resources are oftendeveloped to high specifications withincommercial or research environments, butthoughtful and well-informed design canpresent these ideas more appropriately foryounger or less-experienced users. Thedesigners of the concept-mappingsoftware Inspiration, for example, indicatea bibliography of resources and researchinto learning which stimulated theirthinking in the design. It is the examinationof the concepts which underpin ICT toolsfor practice in design, manufacture, editingor virtual reality which will support thedevelopment of hardware and softwarecreated to mediate learning, rather thanthe production of ‘cut down’ applicationsfor office productivity. Analysis of casestudies of innovative use of ICT inexploratory and playful ways could provideinsights into deeper understandings ofboth creative processes and ICT capability.

The use of ICT to make connections is apowerful and positive use of the technologywhich provides access to culturalexperiences and perspectives across timezones and geographical spaces. Access,however, is only part of the story, andattention could be given to the nature anddesign of truly interactive learningexperiences with resources such as the

world wide web. The Quest website at the Natural History Museum, for example,provides not only access to artefacts but also opportunities for communicationwith ‘experts’ and knowledge buildingthrough activity.

Creating and making with ICT toolsenables users to capture and manipulateinformation and provides immediacy forfeedback and development, yet we mustrecognise that digital technologies arerecent tools and media which we are stillexploring. There are parallels with theintroduction of earlier technologies suchas photography and film which were firstused to imitate rather than express newideas. We are still in the early days ofunderstanding the characteristics andpotential of the new digital medium whichcan be manipulated to literally ‘paint bynumbers’ in the manipulation,transformation and processing of data(Mitchell 1994; Loveless 1997). Designersand developers of ICT resources couldconsider innovative ways to work with anddevelop understandings of the nature ofdigital technologies as both a tool and amedium in creative processes.

The range of creative practices discussedin this review will of course develop withtime, and probably in unpredictable ways.There are four questions we can ask toassist us in developing a critical awarenessof our practices:

• how are we using digital technologies at present to mimic activities we havedone by other means?

• what is gained and what is lost inexperience and expression in usingdigital technologies in creativepractices?

24

the use of ICT to make

connections is apowerful and

positive use ofthe technology

SECTION 5


• how are we exploiting features of ICT which enable us to express different ideas?

• how do we evaluate the processes andoutcomes of work with thesecomparatively recent tools and media?

The following section indicates how wemight develop our sense of value andjudgement of creativity and digitaltechnologies.

6 HOW CAN WE ASSESS CREATIVITY, LEARNING AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES?

6.1 ASSESSING CREATIVITY

The assessment of creativity is complexand problematic in structures ofassessment in which quantifiable,measurable outcomes are considered tobe ‘high stakes’ and valued for the purposeof making judgements and comparisonsbetween individuals, institutions andsystems. Beattie draws attention to thecomplexity of identifying and assessingcreativity, stating that over 200instruments have been developed for thepurpose and citing Sternberg (1991) inclaiming that none have been able tomeasure the concept adequately. Sheoffers detailed suggestions for the formatof creativity assessment tasks and thecriteria required for judgements whichfocus on creative processes, environmentsand student expression as well as finaloutcomes (Beattie 2000). Sefton-Greendiscusses the complexities of evaluation ofcreativity in relation to a range ofcurriculum subjects and highlights thetensions which underlie views of childhoodand power relationships in assessment in

schooling. He acknowledges the dilemmawhich teachers face in evaluating pupils’creative work, not only in terms of thepupils as learners needing to improve andprogress, but also regarding the pupils asmakers of personal meanings, expression,values and attitudes (Sefton-Green 2000).The NACCCE report, ‘All Our Futures’,acknowledges the role of assessment andinspection frameworks in raisingstandards of school achievement in theUK, but includes recommendations for aneasing of pressure of assessment, a closerconsideration of appropriate assessmentstrategies for different areas of theNational Curriculum, and greateremphasis on formative assessment forlearning (NACCCE 1999).

6.2 ASSESSING ICT CAPABILITY

The assessment of ICT capability is no lessproblematic. McFarlane presents anaccount of the three perspectives on ICT inschools which influence policy, practiceand perspectives on assessment:

• ICT as a set of skills or competences

• ICT as a vehicle for teaching andlearning in and across the curriculum

• ICT as an agent of change in teachingand learning.

Her discussion highlights the inadequacyof approaching assessment strategies forICT capability without consideration of thecontext and purpose of use of resources.She also emphasises the inappropriatenature of current standardised assessmentand testing instruments which do notrecognise the indirect effects of the use ofICT on learners’ motivation, attitude,problem-solving capability, critical thinking

25

digitaltechnologies are recent toolsand media which we arestill exploring

SECTION 6

HOW CAN WE ASSESS CREATIVITY, LEARNING AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES?

and information-handling abilities(McFarlane 2001). The NationalCurriculum Attainment Target for ICT ispresented in terms of process and higherorder thinking, yet the terms are notclosely defined, nor related to levels andareas of attainment in other curriculumsubjects (McFarlane, Williams et al 2000).

There are, however, examples in theliterature which indicate approaches tomeaningful evaluation and assessment oflearners’ creativity and ICT capability.McFarlane et al describe how the use ofmultimedia authoring enabled 9/10 yearold pupils to create multimedia pieceswhich demonstrated their understandingof content and conceptual relationships indrugs education topics more clearly thanwritten tests. In discussing the potential ofsuch tools and processes in assessment,they call for further research anddiscussion of how teachers can ‘interpret,evaluate and assess the processes,practices, skills and competencesevidenced in the form, structure andcontent of pupil-authored multimediawork’ (McFarlane, Williams et al2000, p210-211).

6.3 ASSESSING CREATIVITY AND ICT CAPABILITY

Useful starting points for the discussion ofevaluation and assessment of creativityand ICT have been offered by Jonassen(Jonassen 2000) and Lachs (1998) whoboth suggest dimensions along a range ofcriteria. Jonassen focuses on the use of arange of ICT applications (or ‘Mindtools’)within subject domains to demonstrateknowledge construction, self-regulation,collaboration, critical thinking and creativethinking. Lachs emphasises the

importance of peer review and evaluationas well as teachers’ formative assessment.In evaluating pupils’ multimedia and webwork she proposes dimensions for criteriafor audience interactivity, planning non-linear environments, data collection and design, subject matter and workingwith others.

Sinker offers a detailed discussion of theissues associated with evaluating youngpeople’s creative multimedia production(Sinker 2000). She suggests that there is aneed to draw upon traditions and expertisein both art and media education in the useof multimedia technologies in teaching andlearning, echoing earlier calls for suchcollaboration in the development ofphotography. She recognises that suchwork is still in its infancy and that the useof digital technologies raises questionsabout the evaluation and judgement ofcreative processes and products that are different from more traditional tools in arts practice.

The multimedia terrain, with its strata ofmeanings, its combination of media, itscompilation of data, and its branching,tangential connections would seem theideal tool for this ‘postmodern’ age. But itschameleon character – a tool for writing,reading, talking and listening, a tool fordrawing and looking, a tool for animatingand viewing and a tool for gaming,interacting and consuming – makes it lesseasy to gauge in evaluative terms. (Sinker 2000, p195)

26

SECTION 6

HOW CAN WE ASSESS CREATIVITY, LEARNING AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES?

7 WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, CURRICULUM AND DESIGN?

7.1 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In the context of this review, implicationsfor practice are focused on three areas:

• classrooms or planned informal settings

• teacher education

• research.

7.1.1 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICEIN CLASSROOMS OR PLANNEDINFORMAL SETTINGS

A Creativity Framework should underpinplanning, practice and evaluation. The framework should recognise theinteraction between individuals andcommunities, processes, domains andfields, and the characteristics ofimagination, fashioning, pursuing purpose, originality and value judgements.In planning, for example, teachers

could identify the learning intentions,teaching strategies and opportunities for assessment to reflect an area such as Developing Ideas or Collaboration, in which the features of ICT contribute to the NACCCE framework for creative processes.

The learning environment established ineducational settings should acknowledgeand reflect characteristics which areconducive to creative developments:

• awareness of the ways in whichcreativity is related to knowledge across

the curriculum, not just the ‘arts’ and that the rules and structuresunderpinning ‘conceptual spaces’ indifferent knowledge domains can becombined, explored and transformed

• opportunities for exploration and playwith materials, information and ideas

• opportunities to take risks and makemistakes in a non-threateningatmosphere

• opportunities for reflection,resourcefulness and resilience

• flexibility in time and space for thedifferent stages of creative activity

• sensitivity to the values of educationwhich underpin individual and localinterest, commitment, potential andquality of life

• teaching strategies which acknowledge‘teaching for creativity’ as well as‘teaching creatively’.

The models of access to ICT resourcesshould provide opportunities for wholeclass, group and individual work which canbe focused and flexible according thenature and demands of the processes andactivities. This may involve a reappraisal ofaccess to ICT in classrooms, dedicatedsuites, clusters, sets of portable resourcesand provision in the home.

Hardware and software resources shouldreflect a range of tools and media suitablefor activities throughout the CreativityFramework, from developing ideas topublishing and reviewing outcomes.

Learners should have opportunities to develop ICT skills and techniques in authentic and challenging creativecontexts.

27

a creativityframeworkshould underpinplanning,practice andevaluation

SECTION 7


Learners should have opportunities tomake informed choices of ICT tools andmedia available for different creativeprocesses and stages.

Consideration should be given to flexibilityin time and space for creative activities.

Strategies for appropriate formativeassessment of creativity and ICT capabilityshould be developed and evaluated.

7.1.2 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE IN TEACHER EDUCATION

Continuing professional developmentshould be available at local, regional andnational level to develop awareness of andconfidence in:

• frameworks for creativity

• potential for interaction with ICT capability

• pedagogy and management of learning environments

• evaluation and assessment strategies

• case studies of practice in othersettings.

Models of professional development andinitial teacher education should provideopportunities for experiences of creativeprocesses with ICT in a range ofcurriculum subject domains.

7.1.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE IN RESEARCH

Research should conceptualise theoreticalmodels of creativity with ICT which cansupport a range of research questions,

methodologies and modes of presentationof the practices which are ongoing orbeing developed.

Research should make connectionsbetween the different strands of creativityresearch and educational ICT research.

Examples of creative practice anddevelopment with ICT should be described,analysed, theorised and presented for peerreview in order to provide greater breadthand depth in the literature. This could beachieved through the encouragement ofsmall-scale evaluations of ongoing workwhich apply rigorous research techniques, as well as more large scale andlongitudinal research designs.

The role of ICT in supporting the researchprocess itself as a creative activity shouldbe investigated.

Strategies for research in the field shouldaddress the themes outlined in this review:the interaction between creativity and ICTcapability; cross-disciplinary and cross-phase communication of practice;evaluation and assessment of creativityand ICT capability; developing learningenvironments for creativity with ICT.

7.2 IMPLICATIONS FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Consideration should be given toexplorations of broad knowledge domains through cross-curricular and thematic work.

Curriculum areas should identify creativityframeworks in their subject domains, theinteraction with ICT capability and the

28

SECTION 7


appropriate use of ICT as a tool and as a medium.

Assessment strategies which areappropriate for identifying the interactionbetween creativity and ICT capability, anduseful in providing formative feedbackwithin knowledge domains, should bedeveloped and evaluated.

Ongoing examples of innovative practiceshould be analysed in terms of theirpotential to inform curriculumdevelopment.

7.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGNOF LEARNING RESOURCES

Guidelines for a ‘creative toolkit’ of ICTresources should be identified to enableindividuals and communities to haveaccess to technologies which enable themto engage in a range of creative processesfrom conjecture to evaluation. This mightinclude descriptions of the types of ICTapplications and equipment which couldsupport a range of creative practices -from portable devices to capture digitalimages and sound to multimedia authoringsoftware or programmable toys.

Guidelines for the evaluation of ‘creativelearning resources’ should be developed toenable designers and users to makeinformed decisions about the claims madefor products and materials. These mightinclude exemplars and questions to askabout ICT resources to determine theirpotential to support developing ideas orcreating and making, or their potential topromote individual or collaborative work,or publish outcomes of creative work inorder to engage in evaluative feedbackfrom others.

Guidelines for the design of creative digitallearning resources should provideopportunities for interaction betweenhigher order ICT capability and creativeprocesses. The design and development oflearning resources, whether bycommercial or non-commercial producers,should recognise potential to supportprogression and interaction in creativeprocesses, from imaginative activity andmaking informed decisions aboutappropriate media and tools, to engagingin critical evaluation.

8 WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BARRIERS?

The review has indicated that there are keyfactors which underpin creative processesand have an impact on the success ofteaching for creativity, and that digitaltechnologies can play a distinctive role inboth of these aspects of creativity andlearning. There are, however, barriers tothe development of creativity in traditionaleducational settings. None areinsurmountable, but each needs to berecognised as a constraint upon learnersrealising the potential of the creative useof digital technologies.

There are some critical concerns about thedevelopment of creativity in schooling inthe UK. Kimbell has highlighted the‘profound state of alarm about the creativecondition of the experience received by ouryoungsters in school’ (Kimbell 2000, p206).He states that the necessary conditions forcreative acts are affective and cognitivesupport and a trusting relationshipbetween children and teachers whichallows risk and failure. Yet he argues thatthe artistry required of teachers to inspireand encourage pupils’ creativity is

29

artistry requiredof teachers toinspire andencouragepupils’ creativityis marginalisedand damaged bythe ‘dead hand’of the regulatoryorganisations

SECTION 8


marginalised and damaged by the ‘deadhand’ of the regulatory organisations, suchas Ofsted, which value standards andmanagement over creativity and risk-taking (p208).

Although many countries focus oncreativity and cultural education, there arerecognised to be challenges in curriculumoverload and low status of the arts inschools (Sharp and Le Metais 2000). In theEnglish National Curriculum the time andattention given to creative subjects in theprimary curriculum is also being squeezedby the demands of the National Literacyand Numeracy Strategies and the focusupon school performance in league tablesof children’s achievement in StandardAssessment Tests in English, Mathematicsand Science. There is also evidence thatthe time allocated to consideration ofcreative subjects is also limited in teachereducation provision (RSA 1998).

Access to a range of technologies tosupport creative practices is important andsizeable government resources have beengiven to support the development of ICT inschools, libraries, museums andcommunity spaces. Many of the Britishgovernment initiatives relate to providingaccess to the internet to support thedevelopment of ICT capability in thecreative spheres, yet in a preliminaryconsideration of the impact of the NationalGrid for Learning Initiative (NGfL),researchers note the need for caution inclaiming significant and purposeful accessto the internet for children and youngpeople in school and home (Furlong,Furlong et al 2000). Teachers need notonly access to technologies, but also a

framework to promote understanding andconfidence in their own creative teachingpractice and professional development.

It is said that fear and vanity are often thetwo emotions which prevent us fromrealising our potential in many areas oflife, and addressing them takesconfidence, trust and courage inindividuals and within communities. Newapproaches to flexibility and exploration inways of working, pedagogy, curriculum,assessment and management of time andresources in schools could be tried, butthis will require the encouragement of anethos of creative challenge and celebrationof imagination and ‘possibility thinking’.

30

teachers need a framework

to promoteunderstanding

and confidencein their own

creative teachingpractice andprofessional

development

SECTION 8


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbott, C (1998). Making Connections:Young People and the Internet in J. Sefton-Green (ed) Digital Diversions: Youth Culturein the Age of Multimedia. London: UCLPress.

Ahlberg, M, A Kaasinen, et al (2001).Collaborative Knowledge Building toPromote In-service Teacher Training inEnvironmental Education. Journal ofInformation Technology for TeacherEducation 10(3): 227 - 240.

Anning, A (1994). Play and legislatedcurriculum in J. Moyles (ed) TheExcellence of Play. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Anonymous (2001). Sites of specialcreativity - laboratories and researchfacilities redesign workplaces. NewScientist. 171: 56.

Atherton, T (2002). Developing ideas withMultimedia in the Primary Classroom in A. Loveless and B. Dore (eds) ICT in thePrimary Classroom. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Bailey, F and Moar, M (2001). The VertexProject: Children creating and populating3D virtual worlds. Journal of Art andDesign Education 20(1): 20 - 29.

Baron, G-L, E Bruillard, et al(1999). Representations, modeles etmodelisations: implications sur lesstrategies educatives et sur les processusd'apprentissage: synthese bibliographique.Montrouge, INRP-TECNE, France.

Beardon, C (1999). Computers andImrovisation: Using the Visual Assistant forTeaching. Digital Creativity 10(3): 153 - 166.

Beattie, DK (2000). Creativity in art: thefeasibility of assessing current conceptionsin the school context. Assessment inEducation: Principles, Policy and Practice7(2): 175 - 192.

Beetlestone, F (1998). Creative Children,Imaginative Teaching. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Bell, G (2000). Towards a New ArtCurriculum: Reflections on Pot Fillers andFire Lighters. Journal of Art and DesignEducation 19(1): 10 - 19.

Birmingham, P and Davies, C (2001).Storyboarding Shakespeare: learners'interactions with storyboard software intheprocess of understanding difficult literarytexts. Journal of Information Technologyfor Teacher Education 10(3): 241 - 253.

Blackstone, T (2002). A creative andcultural education for the 21st century.Education review 15(2): 2 - 9.

Blythe, M (2001). The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction: TheSignificance of the Creative Industries.Journal of Art and Design Education 20(2): 144 - 150.

Boden, M (1992). The Creative Mind.London: Abacus.

Boden, M (2001). Creativity and Knowledgein A. Craft, B. Jeffreys and M. Leibling (eds)Creativity in Education. London: Continuum.

Bruckman, A and Resnick, M (1995). The MediaMoo Project: Constructionismand Professional Community. Convergence 1(1).

Bullinger, H. J. and J. Ziegler (2002).Intuitive Human-Computer Interaction -Toward a User-Friendly InformationSociety. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 14(1): 1 - 23.

31

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Callow, J (2002). Visual literacy and ICT.Learning with Technologies in School,Home and Community, Manchester, UK,International Federation for InformationProcessing Working Group 3.5 onInformatics and Elementary Education.

Cannon, LO, Heal, ER et al (2000).Serendipity in interactive mathematics:virtual (electronic) manipulatives forlearning elementary mathematics.International Society for InformationTechnology in Education (SITE), San Diego,USA, Association for Advancement ofComputers in Education (AACE).

Carson, C (1999). Theatre and Technology:Battling with the Box. Digital Creativity10(3): 129 - 134.

Claxton, G (1999). Wise Up: The Challengeof Lifelong Learning. London: BloomsburyPublishing Plc.

Claxton, G (2000). The anatomy of intuitionin T. Atkinson and G. Claxton (eds) TheIntuitive Practitioner. Buckingham,Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Claxton, G (2000). A map of learning tolearn in B. Lucas and T. Graeny (eds)Learning to Learn: Setting the Agenda for Schools in the 21st Century. London:Campaign for Learning.

Cope, B and Kalantzis, M Eds. (2000).Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and theDesign of Social Futures. SouthMelbourne: Macmillan.

Cordes, C and Miller, E (2000). Fool's Gold:A Critical Look at Computers in Childhood.Maryland: Alliance for Childhood.

Craft, A (1997). Identity and Creativity:educating teachers for postmodernism?Teacher Development 1(1).

Craft, A (1999). Creative development inthe early years: some implications of policyfor practice. The Curriculum Journal 10(1):135 - 150.

Craft, A (2000). Creativity across theprimary curriculum: framing anddeveloping practice. London: Routledge.

Cropley, AJ (2001). Creativity in educationand learning: a guide for teachers andeducators. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Csikszentmihalyi, M (1996). Creativity:Flow and the Psychology of Discovery andInvention. New York: HarperCollins.

Davies, T (1999). Taking Risks as a Featureof Creativity in the Teaching and Learningof Design and Technology. The Journal ofDesign and Technology Education 4(2): 101 - 108.

Department for Education andEmployment (1998). Teaching: High Status,High Standards. Requirements for theCourses of Initial Teacher Training.Circular 4/98. London: DfEE.

Dust, K (1999). Motive, Means andOpportunity: Creativity Research Review.London, NESTA.

Edwards, SM (2000 - 2001). TheTechnology Paradox: Efficiency VersusCreativity. Creativity Research Journal13(2): 221 - 228.

Feldman, DH, Csikszentmihalyi, Met al (1994). Changing the World: AFramework for the Study of Creativity.Westport, CT, London: Praeger.

Ferris, M. (2000). Wired Worlds. Leonardo 33(2): 85 - 92.

Fishcetti, M (2000). The Future of DigitalEntertainment. Scientific American. 283:47 - 49.

32

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Fishkin, AS (1998). Issues in studyingcreativity in youth. Investigating Creativityin Youth: research and methods. A. S.Fishkin, B Cramond and P. Olszewiski-Kubilius. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Furlong, J, Furlong, R et al (2000). TheNational Grid for Learning: a curriculumwithout walls? Cambridge Journal ofEducation 30(1): 91 - 110.

Gardner, H (1983). Frames of Mind: TheTheory of Multiple Intelligences. London:William Heinemann.

Gardner, H (1996). Are there additionalintelligences? The case for naturalist,spiritual and existential intelligence in J. Kane (ed) Education, Informationand Transformation. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Glover, D and Miller, D (2001). Runningwith Technology: the pedagogic impact ofthe large-scale introduction of interactivewhiteboards in one secondary school.Journal of Information Technology forTeacher Education 10(3): 257 - 278.

Gollifer, S (2000). Artist Space 4 Tradigitalimaging. Digital Creativity 11(4): 234 - 248.

Healy, J (1998). Failure to Connect: Howcomputers affect children's minds forbetter and worse. New York: Simon &Schuster.

JN and JM Trias (2000). From the times ofthe first scribes: innovation and technologywithin graphic design. Digital Creativity11(2): 89 - 98.

Jeffrey, B (2000). Primary Pupils'Perspectives and Creative Learning.British Educational Research Conference,Cardiff, Wales.

Jeffrey, B and Craft, A (2001). TheUniversalization of Creativity in A. Craft, B. Jeffrey and M. Leibling (eds) Creativity in Education. London: Continuum.

Jenkins, H (2000). Art Form for the DigitalAge. Technology Review (Cambridge,Mass.). 103: 117.

Jonassen, DH (2000). Computers asMindtools for Schools: Engaging CriticalThinking. 2nd Edition. Upper Saddle River,New Jersey, Columbus, Ohio:Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Joubert, MM (2001). The Art of CreativeTeaching: NACCE and Beyond in A. Craft,B. Jeffrey and M. Leibling (eds) Creativityin Education. London: Continuum.

Kalas, I and Blaho, A (2002). Exploringvisible mathematics with Imagine: Buildingnew mathematical cultures with apowerful computational system. Learningwith Technologies in School, Home andCommunity, Manchester, UK, InternationalFederation for Information ProcessingWorking Group 3.5 on Informatics andElementary Education.

Kemmis, S, Atkins, R et al (1977). How doStudents Learn?: Occasional Paper 5.Norwich, Centre for Applied Research inEducation: University of East Anglia.

Kennewell, S (2001). Using Affordancesand Constraints to Evaluate the Use ofInformation and CommunicationsTechnology in Teaching and Learning.Journal of Information Technology forTeacher Education 10(1 & 2): 101 - 116.

Kimbell, R (2000). Creativity in Crisis. The Journal of Design and TechnologyEducation 5(3): 206 - 211.

33

Kirschenmann, J (2001). The ElectronicPrometheus and its Consequences for ArtEducation. Journal of Art and DesignEducation 20(1): 11 - 19.

Lachs, V (2000). Making Multimedia in theClassroom: A Practical Guide. London:Routledge.

Lachs, V. and Wiliam, D (1998). Making the computer dance to your tune: primaryschool pupils authoring hypermedia.Journal of Computing in ChildhoodEducation 9(1): 55 -77.

Lave, J and Wenger, E (1991). SituatedLearning. Legitimate PeripheralParticipation. Cambridge: CUP.

Leach, J (2001). A Hundred Possibilities:Creativity, Community and ICT in A. Craft,B. Jeffrey and M. Leibling (eds) Creativityin Education. London: Continuum.

Long, S (2001). Multimedia in the ArtCurriculum: Crossing Boundaries. Journal of Art and Design Education 20(3): 255 - 263.

Loveless, AM (1995). The Role of IT:Practical Issues for Primary Teachers.London: Continuum.

Loveless, AM (1997). Working WithImages, Developing Ideas in A. McFarlane(ed) Information Technology and AuthenticLearning. London: Routledge: 121 -144.

Loveless, AM (1999). A Digital BigBreakfast: The Glebe School Project in J. Sefton-Green (ed) Young people,creativity and new technology: thechallenge of digital arts. London:Routledge.

Loveless, AM (2000). Creativity, visualliteracy and information andcommunications technology in D. M. Watson and T. Downes (eds)

Communications and Networking inEducation: Learning in a NetworkedSociety. Boston/Dordecht/London, KluwerAcademic Publishers: 51-58.

Loveless, AM (2001). The interactionbetween primary teachers' perceptions of information and communicationtechnology (ICT) and their pedagogy.School of Education. Brighton, Universityof Brighton: 390.

Lynn, SJ and Rhue, JW (1986). The fantasy-prone person: hypnosis,imagination and creativity. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 51: 404 - 408.

Mak, B (2001). Learning art withcomputers - a LISREL model. Journal ofComputer Assisted Learning 17: 94 - 103.

Mavers, D (2002). The multimodality of the Internet from a child's perspective.Learning with Technologies in School,Home and Community, Manchester, UK,International Federation for InformationProcessing Working Group 3.5 onInformatics and Elementary Education.

McFarlane, A (2001). Perspectives on therelationships between ICT andassessment. Journal of Computer AssistedLearning 17: 227-234.

McFarlane, A, Williams, JM et al (2000).Assessment and multimedia authoring - a tool for externalising understanding.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16: 201 - 212.

Mitchell, W (1994). The Reconfigured Eye.Cambridge, Mass. and London: MIT Press.

NACCCE (1999). All Our Futures:Creativity,Culture and Education. Sudbury, NationalAdvisory Committee on Creative andCultural Education: DfEE and DCMS.

34

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Nachmanovitch, S (1990). Free Play:Improvisation in Life and Art. New York:Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam a member ofPenguin/Putnam Inc.

Popat, S (2001). Interactive dance-making:online creative collaborations. DigitalCreativity 12(4): 205 - 214.

Prentice, R (2000). Creativity: areaffirmation of its place in early childhoodeducation. The Curriculum Journal 11(2):145 - 156.

Resnick, M, and Berg, R et al (2000).Beyond Black Boxes: BringingTransparency and Aesthetics Back toScientific Investigation. Journal ofLearning Sciences.

Rhyammar, L and Brolin, C (1999).Creativity research: historicalconsiderations and main lines ofdevelopment. Scandinavian Journal ofEducational Research 43(3): 259-273.

Rosencrance, L (2000). Innovators FetedWith Smithsonian Awards; Technologyleaders presented awards for creativitythat is benefiting society. Computerworld:24.

RSA (1998). The Disappearing Arts? Thecurrent state of the arts in initial teachertraining and professional development.London, Royal Society for theEncouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce.

Sargent, R and Resnick, M et al (1996).Building and Learning with ProgrammableBricks in Y. Kafai and M. Resnick (ed)Constructionism in Practice. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum: 161-173.

Scardamalia, M (2000). Can Schools Entera Knowledge Society? Educational

technology and the impact on teaching andlearning, London, UK: Research Machines.

Sefton-Green, J (2000). From creativity tocultural production: Shared perspectives inJ. Sefton-Green and R. Sinker (eds)Evaluating Creativity. London: Routledge.

Sefton-Green, J and Buckingham, D(1998). Digital Visions: Children’s ‘Creative’Uses of Multimedia Technologies in J. Sefton-Green (ed) Digital Diversions:Youth Culture in the Age of Multimedia.London: UCL Press.

Sefton-Green, J and Parker, D (2000).Edit-Play: How Children Use EdutainmentSoftware to Tell Stories. London: BritishFilm Institute.

Shagoury-Hubbard, R (1996). Workshop of the Possible: Nurturing Children'sCreative Development. Maine: StenhousePublishers.

Shani, AB, Sena, J et al (2000). Knowledge work teams and groupwaretechnology: learning from Seagate'sexperience. Journal of KnowledgeManagement 4(2): 111 - 124.

Sharp, C and Le Metais, J (2000). The Arts,Creativity and Cultural Education. London:International Review of Curriculum andAssessment Frameworks.

Sharp, J and Potter, J et al (2000).Primary ICT: Knowledge, Understandingand Practice. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Sharples, M (2000). The Design ofPersonal Mobile Technologies for LifelongLearning. Computers and Education 34:177 - 193.

Simpson, D (1999). The making of drama?Working on a children's novel with a digitalcamera. Drama Magazine Winter 1999.

35

Sinker, R (2000). Making Multimedia:Evaluating young people's creativemultimedia production in J.Sefton-Greenand R. Sinker (eds) Evaluating Creativity.London: Routledge.

Sinker, R (2001). Distance No Object:Developing DARE, the Digital Art Resourcefor Education. Journal of Art and DesignEducation 20(1): 31 - 39.

Somekh, B (2001). Methodological Issuesin Identifying and Describing the WayKnowledge is Constructed With andWithout Information and CommunicationsTechnology. Journal of InformationTechnology for Teacher Education 10(1 & 2): 157 - 178.

Sternberg, RJ, Ed (1999). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge, New York:Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, RJ and Lubart, TI (1999). The concept of creativity: prospects andparadigms. Handbook of Creativity. R. J.Sternberg. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Subhi, T (1999). The impact of LOGO ongifted children's achievement andcreativity. Journal of Computer AssistedLearning 15(2): 98 - 108.

Sutherland, R and Breeze, N et al (2002).Pedagogy and purpose for ICT in primaryeducation. Learning with Technologies inSchool, Home and Community,Manchester, UK: International Federationfor Information Processing Working Group3.5 on Informatics and ElementaryEducation.

Thorpe, R and Roberts-Young, D (2001).Portable Computers: a catalyst forcollaboration? A Study of How the Use ofMultimedia Portable Computers in PrimarySchools Can Affect Teacher and Pupil

Collaboration. Journal of InformationTechnology for Teacher Education 10(3):203 - 226.

Tolmie, A (2001). Examining learning inrelation to the contexts of use of ICT.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 17: 235 -.

Watson, G (2001). Models of InformationTechnology Teacher ProfessionalDevelopment that Engage with Teachers'Hearts and Minds. Journal of InformationTechnology for Teacher Education 10(3):179 - 190.

Wenger, E (1998). Communities ofPractice: Learning, meaning and identity.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Whitaker, P (1997). Primary Schools andthe Future: Celebration, Challenges andChoices. Buckingham: Open UniversityPress.

Winter, M (2000). Breaking Free. HumanEcology 28(4): 18.

Yeomans, M (1996). Creativity in Art andScience: A Personal View. Journal of Artand Design Education: 241 250.

Zeki, S (2001). Artistic Creativity and theBrain. Science. 293: 51.

36

BIBLIOGRAPHY

About Futurelab

Futurelab is passionate about transforming the way people learn. Tapping into the hugepotential offered by digital and other technologies, we are developing innovative learningresources and practices that support new approaches to education for the 21st century.

Working in partnership with industry, policy and practice, Futurelab:

• incubates new ideas, taking them from the lab to the classroom• offers hard evidence and practical advice to support the design and use of innovative

learning tools• communicates the latest thinking and practice in educational ICT• provides the space for experimentation and the exchange of ideas between the

creative, technology and education sectors.

A not-for-profit organisation, Futurelab is committed to sharing the lessons learnt fromour research and development in order to inform positive change to educational policyand practice.

Futurelab1 Canons RoadHarboursideBristol BS1 5UHUnited Kingdom

tel +44 (0)117 915 8200fax +44 (0)117 915 [email protected]

www.futurelab.org.uk

Registered charity 1113051

Creative Commons

© Futurelab 2006. All rights reserved; Futurelab has an open access policy which encourages circulation ofour work, including this report, under certain copyright conditions - however, please ensure that Futurelab isacknowledged. For full details of our Creative Commons licence, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm

Disclaimer

These reviews have been published to present useful and timely information and to stimulate thinking anddebate. It should be recognised that the opinions expressed in this document are personal to the author andshould not be taken to reflect the views of Futurelab. Futurelab does not guarantee the accuracy of theinformation or opinion contained within the review.

This publication is available to download from the Futurelab website –www.futurelab.org.uk/research/lit_reviews.htm

Also from Futurelab:

Literature Reviews and Research ReportsWritten by leading academics, these publications provide comprehensive surveys ofresearch and practice in a range of different fields.

HandbooksDrawing on Futurelab's in-house R&D programme as well as projects from around theworld, these handbooks offer practical advice and guidance to support the design anddevelopment of new approaches to education.

Opening Education SeriesFocusing on emergent ideas in education and technology, this series of publicationsopens up new areas for debate and discussion.

We encourage the use and circulation of the text content of these publications, whichare available to download from the Futurelab website – www.futurelab.org.uk/research.For full details of our open access policy, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm.

Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and … · Thelonius Monk. More recently there...

Documents

Transcript of Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and … · Thelonius Monk. More recently there...