Creative activity and its impact on student learning: issues of implementation. A presentation of 7 years’ practice of including filmmaking as a learning tool across a range of disciplines.
Claire Allam
This paper will describe how the use of filmmaking as a learning tool has been pioneered at the University of Sheffield, enumerating the many benefits. It will describe the conditions within the institution which have encouraged such innovative approaches to learning and discuss strategies for continuing implementation.
Enabling students to use filmmaking in their coursework offers an exciting and challenging way of learning. Students interact creatively with their subject discipline, engaging closely and thus gaining insight and deeper understanding. Filmmaking can create a motivating environment in the classroom. A whole range of skills is learned through the process, useful both in education and future working life. Perhaps most important, it makes learning fun, and gives students a sense of empowerment and achievement.
Getting students to communicate using moving images and sound rather than text has proved highly stimulating but the learning curve can be very steep and appropriate levels of support need to be given, which can be time-consuming for staff. There has been variable institutional support for these projects over the years: sometimes because of scepticism as to the value of the learning, but also for cost reasons. Certainly, a key question is that of sustainability. This paper will describe the learning outcomes from several projects using differing levels of resource, and offer possible future strategies.
It is difficult to quantify the experience and the type of learning that students undergo on these projects. While the critical thinking element can be judged from written work, the ‘creative’ understanding attained is harder to evaluate. How do you verbalise the non-verbal? And more to the point, how do you measure it? The crude metrics of box-ticking cannot be applied. The best method to date has been to rely on students’ own insight into their learning. They report that they understand the subject better and that they really enjoy the hard work(!) of this creative challenge. This positive feedback has provided the impetus to continue with this work and has convinced the writer that it is a highly beneficial pedagogic practice.
There is strong Government support for creativity in the curriculum. We should respond to this by using our ingenuity to design curricula that stimulate such activity. Feedback from students proves that it delivers a valuable experience and this is backed up by both academics and external assessors. We have incontrovertible proof that creativity is vital. Industry states that it requires a creative workforce. Who are we to argue? Audit-minded managers should take note.
Author Bio(s)
Claire Allam has worked as a producer of multi-media learning resources at the University of Sheffield for 10 years, following a career in television. Initially employed as a producer of educational television, her interest in working in a more facilitative/teaching role with students has increased and her commitment to filmmaking as creative act has inspired her to share this with students. It was for this innovative work, in part, that she was awarded a University of Sheffield Senate Award for Excellence in Learning and Teaching in 2004. In September 2005 Claire was awarded an MEd, having submitted a dissertation on the implementation of blended learning at the University of Sheffield. Her research continues to be based around filmmaking by students, and its creative and pedagogic benefits.
Digital Creativity in Tertiary Learning
Michael Anderson
Digital Creativity in Tertiary Learning investigates how video and film are being used in creative ways in tertiary education. Digital Creativity is the term applied to the pedagogy of film that has emerged from practice and employs and is informed by educators’ conceptions of effective aesthetic education. Principally, screen learning is a doing or making practice acknowledging the seminal work of Heathcote (1984) relasting to learning through process. Through the learning of aesthetics of the screen (Dewey, 1959), and scaffolding skills and knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978), students are empowered with the means of creative expression in digital storytelling. Creating digital narrative involves students negotiating, collaborating and problem solving in the real world (Friere, 1973) and in communities of practice (Wenger, 1997).
The paper focuses on several cases where video and film are being used to create narratives that draw from the filmic traditions of the past as a creative tool of learners and teachers in higher education. The advent of low-cost filming (capture) and editing technologies has seen access to video technologies grow exponentially. This growth is also related to the way many young people are now accessing and using technology to tell their stories on their phones, computers and portable video players (iPods etc). These digital natives (Prensky, 2002), many of whom are our students are now creating video with inexpensive video cameras and editing these on their entry-level computers. This paper explores through case studies of practice and relevant theory how video is changing classrooms and how educators, policy-makers and teacher educators can respond proactively by creating engaging learning and teaching activities in their tertiary learning settings by creating Mediated Learning Communities (Carroll, Anderson and Cameron, 2006).
References:
Heathcote, D., Johnson, L. & O'Neill, C. (1984). Collected Writings on Education and Drama. London: Hutchinson
Dewey, J. (1954). Art as Experience. Capricorn: New York.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Friere, P. (1972) The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth : Penguin
Wenger, E. (1997). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Carroll, J, Anderson, M and Cameron, D. (2006) Real players: drama, technology and education. Stoke on Trent. Trentham Books.
Author Bio(s)
Dr. Michael Anderson works in the Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Sydney where he teaches and researches in Drama and Teaching and Learning. Michael is co-author of Real Players: drama, technology and education with John Carroll and David Cameron. He was previously the Drama Consultant in the Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate, NSW Department of Education and Training where he was involved in curriculum development and professional support for drama educators.
In 2002 he completed his PhD that explored the professional development journeys of four drama educators. His thesis, Journeys in Teacher Professional Development, Narratives of Four Drama Educators won the American Association for Theatre Educators Distinguished Dissertation award in 2003. In 2003 Michael also received the NSW Minister for Education and The Australian College of Educators Quality Teaching Award. Michael’s research interests include, screen drama, drama and professional development, the use of electronic pretexts in drama, the use of multimedia technology in drama education, the impact of technology in drama education and innovative research methodologies.
Experiencing Economics Through Problem Based Learning
Karen S Arul, Alex Lum, Angela Koh
Many who profess to enjoy the study of Economics attribute this interest to the relevance it has to our daily lives. Economics is everywhere, as evident from the fact that it is largely derived from empirically observed human behaviour. Therefore, learning economics cannot be confined to lecture theatres, study halls and textbooks. An effective impartation process has to facilitate the student’s ability to apply the content appropriately by “plugging him/her” into a real world context.
While the success of the above hinges on the student’s own attitude and aptitude to understand and apply, the pedagogy plays a critical role in realizing this outcome. This paper therefore looks at Problem Based Learning (PBL) as a bridging solution to the theory and assimilation of economics. The authors will provide insights on how PBL, which promotes critical thinking and learning, is used to effect stronger and more meaningful learning by turning economics into an experiential module. Students are intentionally taken out of their comfort zones at every lesson to question and solve thereby not only enhancing content absorption but also their retention capacity.
Author Bio(s)
Ms Karen S Arul
Karen graduated from the National University of Singapore with an Honours Degree in Social Sciences (Economics). She commenced her career in the civil service with the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore and subsequently moved on to the Singapore Economic Development Board, where she focused on inward investment, industry promotion & development, public finance and international collaboration.
At The Republic, as the Module Chair of Economics in 05-06, she managed the creation, development and delivery of the economics curriculum through Problem Based Learning. As part of the Polytechnic’s Social Enterprise initiative, she also launched enterprise creation projects for the Tsunami victims of Galle, Sri Lanka.
Karen also maintains her links with the industry through research and joint-projects in the areas of RFID, Strategic Communications and Fiscal Policy.
Dr Alex Lum
Dr Alex Lum received his PhD in Economics from the National University of Singapore (NUS). While at NUS, he taught first-year undergraduate Economics, was the President of the Economics Graduate Student Society and received the NUS President’s Graduate Fellowship for attaining the Top 1% of his cohort. He graduated from the University of Cambridge with an MPhil in Economics and worked in Financial Advisory Services, KPMG Singapore.
His current research includes:
* Singaporeans’ occupational choice in relation to their perception of Government-linked Companies
* Pro-entrepreneurship policies in Singapore
* Multi-National Corporations and education
* Technopreneurship, income inequality and social mobility.
At Republic Polytechnic, he facilitated the Enterprise Skills II module and currently facilitates the Microeconomics module and crafts problems for Economics and Business Statistics. He is the co-module chair for Microeconomics and the chair for the Macroeconomics module, and lead advisor for the Business Climate Interest Group.
Ms Angela Koh
Angela obtained her Honours Degree in Social Sciences (Economics) at the National University of Singapore. Since then, she has worked in various Finance-related fields, including the provision of financial and strategic consultancy work for KPMG Consulting. She also has an interest in studies on low income segments of the population, and has worked with various Church organisations and the Ministry of Community, Youth and Sports (MCYS), the main Government agency specialising in social issues. She is currently a facilitator with Republic Polytechnic, an institution that practices the Problem Based Learning approach. She facilitates and crafts problems for Enterprise Skills and Economics. She is currently the module chair for Microeconomics, a third year course.
Educating the educators for creativity: setting the climate for lecturers as problem-based learning students to experience the PBL process as creative and challenging
Terry Barrett, University College Dublin
Two teams of lecturers were completing a module on problem-based learning (PBL) that was part of an education development Postgraduate Diploma in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, in an institution in Ireland. Problem-based learning was both the content and the process of this module. The lecturers were problem-based students for the module. The research question for this paper is: ‘What can we learn about educating educators for creativity from how lecturers as problem-based students talked about the PBL process?’ This paper is part of a wider doctoral study.
The paper uses conceptual analysis based on identification of interpretive repertoires informed by critical discourse analysis. From analysing how students talked about the PBL process, the illuminative concept of the PBL process as finding and being in flow was derived. The concept of finding and being in flow (Csikzentmihalyi 1997) is very apt for describing and understanding the different experiences and states that teams go through in the PBL process and for exploring its creative potential.
I argue that the PBL process is one of finding and being in flow and that this process of finding flow involved experiences of the anxiety of confusion and the uninterest of boredom en route to the experiences of being in flow, for the students in this study. It is at the edge of chaos in the PBL process that flow and creativity can happen. Combining an analysis of student talk with O’Connor’s (1998) model an adapted form of this edge of chaos model was constructed to discuss the features of the PBL process that encourage the development of creativity and flow. I assert that academic staff should first experience PBL as PBL students so that they can reflect on the impact the experience had on them cognitively, emotionally and philosophically and so that they can understand some of the ranges of reactions and changes that their students may experience when they are PBL tutors. This can facilitate them maximising the potential of the PBL process for encouraging student creativity. I argue that PBL has the potential to stimulate students’ creativity but that building in specific features to the PBL process may create favourable conditions and climate for supporting students’ creativity. Writing is seen as a form of research and this paper imaginatively combines academic prose with visualisations and poetry.
References
Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1997) Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life New York: Basic Books.
O’Connor, J. (1998). Leading with NLP: Essential Leadership Skills for Influencing and Managing People. London: Thorsons
Author Bio(s)
Terry Barrett is a lecturer in education development at the Centre for Teaching and Learning, University College Dublin. Previously, she was a lecturer in education studies at Dublin City University and Programme Leader of the Postgraduate Programme in Learning and Teaching at Dublin Institute of Technology. She has published and given keynote papers on problem-based learning (PBL). She is particularly interested in the creative potential of the PBL process.
Subject benchmark statements and the requirements of professional, statutory or regulatory bodies; do external reference points for courses inhibit innovation and creativity?
Laura Bellingham, Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)
‘It is a place where those who hate ignorance may strive to know, where those who perceive truth may strive to make others see; where seekers and learners alike, banded together in the search for knowledge, will honour thought in all its finer ways, will welcome thinkers in distress or in exile, will uphold ever the dignity of thought and learning and will exact standards in these things’ (John Masefield during an address at the University of Sheffield in 1946). These words were encapsulated in the 1997 Dearing report, the result of the National Committee of Enquiry that set out new initiatives for higher education. While seeking to commend and uphold universities as places of learning with associated values of “developing the powers of the mind”, shaping the nation’s “social, moral and spiritual life” and “enabling personal development for the benefit of individuals and society as a whole” the report expressed its concern that universities continue to be able to engage in an internationally competitive market for employment, training and technology transfer which requires public confidence in the standards of awards and the quality of the learning experience made available to students. Thus followed a renewed engagement with institutional audit and review, and the introduction of a series of ‘tools’ aimed at securing confidence in standards of learning and teaching delivery. Some ten years on, what value or purpose have such initiatives served? Does the administrative burden associated with the pursuit of external (and internal) quality assurance mean that time and resources have been taken away from maintaining the very values that the Dearing report sought to uphold? Is it possible to harmonise the pursuit of creativity, innovation and excellence in learning and teaching with assuring public confidence and accountability in the standards of awards being delivered in universities and the abilities and skills being fostered in graduates entering local, national and international markets for employment and training? In line with the particular audience, the presentation takes as its focus the existence of subject benchmark statements for individual disciplines in exploring some of the questions outlined above. Also considered is whether the requirements set down by professional, statutory and regulatory bodies for certain disciplines present a barrier to creativity and innovation.
Author Bio(s)
Educated in Bristol I went on to study Zoology at Cardiff University (1993–1996). Undertook a Ph.D in Animal Behaviour at the University of Liverpool from 1998–2002. After some part-time lecturing of biology and psychology undergraduates at Liverpool, went on to take up a full-time lectureship at Nottingham Trent University delivering modules as part of undergraduate degrees in Animal Science and Wildlife Conservation. Upon returning to the South-West, I accepted a full-time position within the Development and Enhancement Group at the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) where I am currently responsible for policy development relating to subject benchmark statements. My full CV includes time spent undertaking research in animal behaviour, welfare and conservation at several leading zoos, which has fostered my interest in public understanding of science and the importance of bridging the gap between formal science education and the communication of science and natural history to a non-specialist audience.
Multi-Dimensional Learning – Creativity Throughout the Curriculum
Karen Bishop
This paper will illuminate an eclectic creative methodology, already in practice on the A Level Drama and Theatre Studies Course at Pembrokeshire College, Haverfordwest. Evidence of the success of this methodology can be supplied through video footage, schemes of work and lesson plans. This methodology is a bridge between Mainstream Education and Holistic Education, addressing the whole person in the learning environment, whether primary, secondary, FE or HE.
It is also titled ‘Creative Learning’, yet since it addresses the whole person it is multi-dimensional, including the physical, the emotional, the mental and the spiritual. The methodology utilizes Howard Gardner’s ‘Multiple Intelligences’ (He names 7); Daniel Goleman’s ‘Emotional Intelligence’; DEMOS thinktank Tom Bentley’s ‘Learning Beyond The Classroom’; John P. Miller’s ‘Holistic Curriculum’; the Perennial Philosophy; the Transpersonal philosophy of Ken Wilber and the teaching methodology of Educational Drama practitioner Dorothy Heathcote, who synthesizes them with the emerging transpersonal awareness of practitioners in Religious Education such as the theologian John Hicks, the late Ninian Smart and many others. It takes a transformational position and thus includes transmission and transactional learning methods.
This unique methodology celebrates the multi-dimensional nature of consciousness. It seeks to shift our perception through the re-conception of the human being and thus initiate the creative transformation of education. It seeks to stimulate a higher order of synthesizing ability, and to allow teachers, educators and students to make connections, relate truths, co-ordinate ideas and integrate concepts. To achieve this, the methodology creates internal and external spaces in learning for creative opportunities to develop a holistic consciousness, that is the ability to think in ‘wholes’ and is inclusive of reflective self-spectatorship and development. Further, it values spontaneity in its original Latin meaning in the learning environment and seeks to enrich the contexts of our experience with greater depth and integrity.
This methodology is based on our new and emerging understanding of human consciousness and incorporates this understanding in its design. The paper will present this methodology as a creative opportunity for teaching training courses.
Research for this methodology resulted in a thesis/dissertation entitled ‘The Re-Enchantment of the World – The Transformation of Education through the Re-Conception of the Human Being.
Author Bio(s)
Karen Bishop is a professional eclectic educational practitioner with an M.A in Educational Drama. She studied at Trinity College, Caramarthen. Karen has been teaching A Level Drama and Theatre Studies at Pembrokeshire College for five years and during this time combined practical research in multi-dimensional learning for a Masters whilst teaching and running the course. However, experience in Holistic Education stems back over 10 years. Karen has been a co-focaliser for 2 conferences in Spiritual Education; ‘The Spirit of Learning’ 1998 and ‘Soul in Education’ International Conference, Findhorn, Scotland 2000. She has also presented for the past few years at OISE’s Holistic Conference in the University of Toronto and has run workshops in Britain and Canada. Recently she presented and facilitated a workshop on Multi-Dimensional Learning for the FreeSpirit Conference in London (see www.educatingheartandsoul.org) Karen is also a member of the University for Spirit Forum and has presented talks on Multi-Dimensional Learning and Creativity and will be facilitating in the forthcoming conference ‘The Emerging Spirituality Revolution: Embodying the Spiritual Imperative of our Time’ on the 4th and 5th November 2006. Karen is also running staff training workshops at Pembrokeshire College in ‘Creative Learning’.
Another way of thinking about Creativity AND Conformity
Erik Bohemia, Northumbria University
Kerry Harman, University of Technology, Sydney
A binary ordering of the way we know and understand the world has prevailed since Enlightenment times. In a binary ordering the relationships between dimensions are overlooked thus working to make these divisions appear natural. Rather than understanding creativity and conformity as separate elements, where one is understood as excluding the other, we discuss the potential of examining the relationships that might exist between them. In other words, can creativity produce conformity and can conformity provide the conditions for creativity?
Using various case study examples we examine the interrelatedness of creativity and conformity. For example, how might design styles, which are generally understood as creative outcomes, constrain creativity and lead to conformity within the design field? How might artists, an identity usually associated with high levels of creativity, constrain and regulate themselves? Is fashion producing creativity or conformity?
Conversely, the ways conformity contributes to creativity is also discussed. For example, the conformity imposed by the State on arts and design industries within the communist block and how these created a thriving underground movement with a high level of creativity in challenging the imposed conformity. Another example can be found in contemporary workplaces where the introduction of IT systems, often with the aim of producing conformity, are transgressed and used creatively by employees for their own purposes. These exemplars begin to illustrate the ways the introduction of programmatic mechanisms, with the intent to control and regulate conduct, often lead to resistance, contestation and unanticipated outcomes.
Drawing on a Foucauldian conceptualisation of governmentality we offer another take on creativity and conformity which draws attention to the complexities of the relationships between them. In this take conformity is read as both the regulation of others and the regulation of self, thus introducing the element of power. A governmentality focus draws attention to the relational aspects of power, thus making visible potential spaces where existing relations of power might begin to be renegotiated or contested.
Author Bio(s)
Kerry’s background in fine arts is complemented by a Master of Commerce (hons) from the University of New South Wales, Australia. Her most recent research work has been on a three year Australian Research Council (ARC) funded project exploring the significance of everyday learning at work. She is currently completing her doctorate at the University of Technology, Sydney, in the field of Workplace Learning, with a focus on worker identities. She has over 15 years combined experience in the field of training and development and lecturing in Human Resource Management related subjects.
Erik is a Reader in Three Dimensional Design Studies at the School of Design, Northumbria University. As a researcher and an educator in the field of design he is interested in the skills and competencies of designers and the match between these and industry requirements. The results from his research in this area have been used to guide the development of curriculum in design management subjects and courses so that future graduates may more effectively fulfil industry requirements. Erik’s current research focus is on global product design development processes and its impact on the industrial design profession. Erik’s research has been published in international journals and conferences.
Enabling international access: deconstructing our concepts of creativity
Adrian Bregazzi
The greatest barrier facing the otherwise fully-resourced international student seeking to enter creative industries education in Britain is gaining fluent access to the concepts of creativity deeply embodied in ‘the portfolio’. This barrier often continues to exist even after a successful application and actual enrolment, when a student encounters problems associated with the implicit or arcane lurking under the surface of almost any aspect of non-technical learning and teaching experiences
It is unreasonable to expect a student from (say) Arkhangelsk, Buenos Aires or Chennai to demonstrate the same visual or linguistic culturally-determined experience and interests as a student from (say) Aberdeen, Birmingham or Cardiff. Yet effectively this often seems to be the norm. This is exacerbated by opaque concepts of creativity employed in assessing applications to creative industries courses in UK.
Assumptions about what constitutes creativity come cloaked in collateral professional experience. “I know it when I see it” is not acceptable, though commonplace. Entry criteria enshrined in validated course documents unpick dismally, if at all. Even if we think we have a clear idea, we do not explain what we are looking for in Plain English. Assignment and project briefs come steeped in assumption. And actual study experience can be so infected with an unnecessary clubby exclusivity that many international students are prevented from full integration and engagement with a course. We need to identify exactly what we are looking for in an application and then develop transparent ways of communicating this to potential students. Logically, this process then needs to be extended to on-course learning and teaching.
This richly audiovisual paper will set out ways Falmouth is developing with partners in Canada and USA to provide international students with remote experiential access to the concepts of creativity that underpin and evince real entry requirements to our courses. It will look at ways of simplifying intractable concepts and complex language, yet retaining all salient issues. It will introduce simple but highly effective ‘do it at home’ work-generating projects. It will demonstrate the visual tools that guide the student through the process of creating material that demonstrates their skills and interests, and how to reflect and enhance this in their statement of purpose. It will give an overview of how we brace students for their first engagement with British/Canadian/US Education. And it will illustrate how we have successfully banished the ‘p’ word.
Author Bio(s)
Secret Destinations
David Buss, University College for the Creative Arts
The concept of learning outcomes is now firmly embedded across the higher education sector. A typical definition of learning outcomes is that they provide ‘a statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and be able to do at the end of a period of learning.’ Advocates of learning outcomes claim that it is impossible to evaluate learning unless clearly defined goals have been specified and agreed. But if learning outcomes prescribe the results of a period of learning before the outset of the ‘journey’, how appropriate are they to learning in subjects where we are ‘educating for creativity’, subjects where often we want our students to discover the ‘secret destinations’, and where we may deliberately wish to avoid prescribing clearly defined goals? Can learning outcomes be articulated in such ways that they encourage the traveller (i.e. the learner) positively to seek out secret destinations, destinations that may be unknown to the tutor as well as the student? Or do we need an alternative to this behaviourist approach to learning?
Dr Elliot Eisner, the US arts educationalist, believes that to expect all of our educational aspirations to be either verbally describable or measurable is to expect too little. Eisner has advocated the use of what he calls ‘expressive outcomes’ as the consequences of ‘curriculum activities that are intentionally planned to provide a fertile field for personal purposing and experience.’ For Eisner, Purposes need not precede activities; they can be formulated in the process of action itself, while Allan Davies has identified what he refers to as unintended learning outcomes. (I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I intended to be. Douglas Adams.)
This presentation will begin with a consideration of the appropriateness or otherwise of learning outcomes for study and practice in the creative arts and a brief examination of alternative approaches to learning outcomes in the context of ‘education for creativity’. It will then address issues relating to how ‘secret destinations’ might be assessed while maintaining the spirit of section 6 of the QAA Code of Practice, Assessment of Students.
Author Bio(s)
David Buss is Deputy Rector and Professor of Higher Education, Art and Design, at University College for the Creative Arts. Previous posts include: University of Plymouth, Birmingham and Wolverhampton Polytechnics, University of Kansas, and Kent Institute of Art and Design. David served as a member of the Editorial Board and Reviews Editor for The International Journal for Art and Design Education, and has presented research papers to international conferences in Japan, Australia, South Korea, Finland, Sweden and Norway. A member of QAA’s Benchmark Steering Group, he also chaired the QAA Subject Benchmark Group for Art and Design, and held offices with the Council for Higher Education in Art and Design, the National Society for Education in Art and Design, and the Group for Learning in Art and Design. Other experience includes Quality Assessment for HEFCW, Institutional Audit and Subject Review for QAA, and external evaluation for the FDTL project ADEPTT.
Creativity and Conformity in Professional Ethics
Gideon Calder, University of Wales, Newport
This paper explores relationships between academic theory, professional imperatives and individual practice in the teaching of programmes in Professional Ethics. In recent years these have mushroomed: more and more, vocational degrees programme involve an ethical component at the centre of the curriculum, rather than at its periphery. Even so, in this paper I argue that while most theoretical discussion of professional codes of ethics has tended to concentrate on the coherence and practicability of the principles involved, they have tended to overlook a certain paradox at the heart of the very idea of such a code of ethics. That paradox is roughly this: that if codes of ethics are adhered to strictly, this is likely to turn the process of ethical decision-making into a mechanical, uncritical, uncreative and so not particularly ethical exercise. The more directive a code, the less room for manoeuvre for the individual in displaying the virtues of a critically reflective practitioner. And yet the cultivation of the latter is typically at the heart of the stated aims of the profession in question. Mere obedience or conformity does not, as it were, an ethical decision-maker make.
Drawing on the work of Michael Loughlin in the healthcare setting, I argue that the concentration on codes of ethics runs the risk of distracting from the cultivation of such virtues at an individual level. This is not to denigrate the significance of such codes, or to deny the possibility of universal principles, but rather to argue that to avoid these principles becoming reduced to depthless slogans, or examples of mere institutional ‘box-ticking’, the role of practice needs to be included in their construction, rather than being something to which ‘all-purpose’ principles are applied, as if an instruction manual. Interpreted in this latter sense, the code of ethics becomes an instrument for managerialism, rather than the genuine facilitator of ‘bottom-up’ ethical exploration and reflection which it otherwise has the potential to be. And it is as an ‘under-labourer’ towards this end, rather than as a simple dispenser of wisdom, that ethical theory has most to offer.
Author Bio(s)
Gideon Calder teaches ethics and social theory at University of Wales, Newport. He has written two books on the work of Richard Rorty, along with journal articles on ethical issues connected with (amongst other things) evil, sporting boycotts, sexual consent and ownership of the human body and its organs. He is editor of Res Publica: A Journal of Legal and Social Philosophy (Springer).
Breaking the Chains that Bind us: Towards an Emancipatory Model of Creativity
Phil Clegg, Leeds Metropolitan University
Models of creativity in education are often informed by notions derived from existentialist philosophy and psychology. This paper asks is it possible to develop a model based on an alternative approach derived from collectivist rather than individualist views of human nature? Rather than seeking the source of creativity within the individual psyche should we not be engaged in collective critical reflection with our fellows – students and colleagues alike - on the organisational and structural constraints that inhibit the development of creative thinking within the various social institutions where we work and live. Collectivist models emphasise the cooperative, synergistic and transformative aspects of our social being; individualist models the spontaneous, adaptive and transcendental ones. All aspects may be necessary for us to experience a sense of wholeness as human beings but it is the collectivist model which leads to strategies of social action and social change.
But is critical thinking enough to release creative energy? It takes courage and an ability to accept risk to challenge the bureaucratic organisational structures that stifle and contain our creativity. We may be faced with debilitating conflict eventually leading to exhaustion and defeat. We may feel like giving up, if the challenge is too great, and seek refuge in introspection, passive acceptance of our fate or some form of martyrdom (e.g. going down in ‘glorious defeat’). Just as the energy of political revolutionaries can end as disillusion, and social detachment, our day-today desires to break the chains that bind us may come to naught. An example is someone who feels stifled within an oppressive personal relationship but who dare not leave because, without support, the alternative is even more frightening than the reality that oppresses her.
Building an emancipatory model of creativity requires personal as well as collective reflection. What then could be the features of your own personal emancipatory model of creativity? To answer this question, it is necessary to pose others:
To what extent is your creativity dependent upon democratic personal relationships and values?
What constraints are you aware of in relation to your own creativity?
Which of these constraints are personal to you and which are inherent in your organisational culture?
How important to your professional life are collective problem solving, mutual support and solidarity?
How do these affect your creativity?
How should we respond to the fears and anxieties of students that may inhibit creativity?
How can political factors affecting learning be addressed?
What limits should we put on our expectations of political change?
What do we learn when political change is thwarted?
And finally:
Where does ‘spirituality’ fit in?
These questions will be further explored through examples from practice within the session.
Author Bio(s)
Phil Clegg is a Teaching Fellow within the Faculty of Health at Leeds Metropolitan University. He has a special interest in promoting e-learning within the faculty’s undergraduate and post-graduate programs, and has developed an on-line ‘learning object’ to help students of non-mathematical subjects develop an understanding of research and statistical terminology. He has a batchelor’s degree in Scandinavian Languages, a master’s in Social Research, and professional qualifications in nursing and teaching. His research interests include the application of spatial statistics to the geography of suicide in the city of Leeds.
Learners Re-conceptualising Education: Widening Participation through Creative Engagement.
Anna Craft
Peter Twining
Kerry Chappell
This paper will argue that engaging imaginatively with ways in which statutory and further education is provided and expanding the repertoire of possible transitions into higher education, is necessary for providers both in higher education and in the contexts and phases which precede study at this level. Fostering dispositions for creativity in dynamic engagement with educational technology together with the consideration of pedagogy, learning objects, inclusion, policy and the management of change, requires innovative provision to span the spaces between school, home, work and higher education learning. Reporting on The ASPIRE Pilot, a NESTA-funded initiative at The Open University, the paper will offer a theoretical frame for considering learning, learners and learning systems in the information age prioritizing learner agency. It will report emergent empirical findings from this inter-disciplinary project, with a significant e-dimension, which seeks to foster the creativity of 13-19 year olds in considering future learning systems, developing provocations for others to explore creative but grounded possibilities. It will explore implications arising from this project for pedagogy, learning and other practices and approaches that may facilitate imaginative approaches to widening participation in higher education.
Author Bio(s)
Anna Craft
Anna Craft is currently Reader in Education at the Open University, where she established The Open Creativity Centre in 2002. She also holds a visiting appointment at Harvard University. She is Founding Co-Convenor of the BERA SIG, Creativity in Education, and Founding Co-Editor of the international journal, Thinking Skills and Creativity. She researches and writes about creativity in education and is particularly drawn to capturing perspectives of learners, teachers and others in fostering and exercising creativity. She combines philosophically-based conceptual work with empirical traditions of enquiry from social science enabling her to build theory through inductive engagement with situated data, using a grounded theory approach to analysis. Her empirical work is thus interpretivist, informed by constructivist and socio-cultural views of learning, and angled ultimately toward seeking impact on practice and policy, by improving the learning offer. From January 2007 she will be taking up a Chair in Education at the University of Exeter.
Peter Twining
Peter Twining is a Senior Lecturer in Education in the Centre for Curriculum and Teaching Studies (CATS) at the Open University. He specializes in the areas of pedagogy, educational transformation and new technology. Peter has a long-standing interest in the ways in which new technologies potentially impact on education. The main focus of Peter’s current research is on schome (not school – not home – schome – the education system for the Information Age). The Schome Group is researching the design and development of an education system that meets the needs of society and individuals within the 21st Century (see http://www.schome.ac.uk)
Kerry Chappell
Kerry Chappell is Project Officer at the Open University, working on the ASPIRE Pilot project, having recently completed her AHRC-funded PhD at LABAN on creativity in late primary age dance education. Alongside and since her PhD, Kerry has carried out a combination of contracted research, evaluation, project management and lecturing. Kerry is also a Project Supervisor for NESTA. Prior to her PhD, Kerry worked as Projects Manager in the Laban Education and Community Programme and as a freelance dance artist and street performer. Kerry also writes professionally for the arts education press (Dance Theatre Journal, Dance Matters, Inkpellet), specialising in performance work for children, and education and community dance initiatives.
Nurturing strategic Intelligence in Art Education through Using Assessment to Improve Self-regulated Learning and Self-regulated Creativity
Leslie Cunliffe
This presentation will discuss the purposes and practices of assessment in art education. In so doing, it will come out strongly in favour of practices that promote and cultivate the dispositions that lead to self-regulated learning and self-regulated creativity. Adopting such a strategic approach to nurturing self-regulated cognition and developing certain character traits for creativity requires a radical change in the current assessment culture of art education in the UK, which predominantly continues to use assessment for alternative and often educationally regressive ends. The critique of current practices of assessment in art education offered in this presentation is built on a variety of sources and arguments to include: wider research in assessment; research in two paradigms of cognitive psychology that identify the salient cognitive processes and dispositions that are required to achieve self-regulated learning, research that provides a multi-level analysis of learning to include the Neo-Vygotskian idea of mentor/apprentice relationships that operate in a participation theory of learning; Wittgenstein’s philosophy of mind that makes a distinction between following a rule for action and acting in accordance with a rule, and which also exposes a dualistic view of mind and its corollary of a mentalist shadow world of intuition; research that makes up the new sociocultural paradigm of learning and creativity that has established a key role for mentors giving expert instruction for improving learning and creativity, as well as the significance of the duration of time taken to build and deliberately practice the necessary knowledge and skills for achieving excellence; and, finally, work in virtue that sees epistemic and creative reliability as emerging and operating in an analogous way to ethical virtue in that all three require the deliberate acquisition of stable character traits and habits of mind that go down deep.
Author Bio(s)
Leslie Cunliffe is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Education and Lifelong Learning, University of Exeter, where he has experience of undergraduate and post-graduate teaching and higher degree supervision He has taught undergraduates studio-based practice, art history and critical theory. He runs the secondary PGCE art course, which has a national reputation for excellence. Before taking up his current post, he taught in secondary schools for fourteen years. His research embraces a range of topics to include empirical aesthetics, cognitive processes and art education, assessment and learning how to learn in art education, the relationship between sociocultural and psychological processes and art education, and the role of declarative and procedural knowledge in art education, through to reconstructivist aesthetics and Wittgenstein’s philosophy. He has published several papers on Wittgenstein’s philosophy and art education, and has also published work on Ernst Gombrich and Peter Fuller. His most recent work has appeared in the 2006 (40,1) issue of the Journal of Aesthetic Education, the 2005 (31,4) issue of the Oxford Review of Education, a chapter in the 2005 book Critical Studies in Art Education (Intellect publications), and the 2005(24,2) issue of The International Journal of Art and Design Education. He also has two chapters in a forthcoming (2006) book on Assessment and Art Education (Element Books).
A pedagogy of connection for working across and between disciplines. Some epistemological and methodological considerations
Patrick Dillon
Elsewhere (Dillon 2006), I make a case for working across and between disciplines in higher education, utilising an organising framework based on integrativism. Working integratively is presented as a creative activity. The application of integrativism to the curriculum leads to the notion of a pedagogy of connection. A pedagogy of connection consists of a framework for focusing on the contexts of connection and tools for making connections.
Integrative work inevitably generates a number of intellectual and practical tensions. Thus a pedagogy of connection must also take account of the intellectual currencies and rules of the contributing disciplines and ensure that border transactions are properly negotiated. In this paper, I look at some epistemological and methodological issues arising from two published cross-disciplinary works: Vargish & Mook’s Inside Modernism (1997), and Finn’s Past Poetic (2004).
Vargish & Mook (1997) uncover some common structures and values that underlie modernism. In order to demonstrate that physics, painting and fiction of the period share a high degree of recognisable, definable value, they identify three cultural diagnostics through which they abstract the historically defining values. The diagnostics are relativity theory, cubism and modernist narrative. Finn (2004) explores how two Irish poets, W.B. Yeats and Seamus Heaney, used archaeology in their work and how, in turn, their work may be used as a filter for a reading of the history of archaeology.
From an analysis of these works, I explore tensions that occur at the intersections of disciplines. I use the notion of boundary objects to conceptualise these tensions and examine their implications for a pedagogy of connection. Walker & Creanor (2005) describe a boundary as a discontinuity in some form of practice, often determined by limits of effective communication. Boundary encounters occur as people interact across these boundaries. They may be interpersonal or mediated by artefacts. Boundary crossings are the flow of ideas and across boundaries often facilitated by personal networks.
References:
Dillon, P. 2006. Creativity, integrativism and a pedagogy of connection, International Journal of Thinking skills and Creativity, 1 (2), forthcoming
Finn, C. 2004. Past Poetic. Archaeology in the poetry of W.B. Yeats and Seamus Heaney. London, Duckworth.
Vargish, T. & Mook, D.E. 1999. Inside Modernism. Relativity theory, Cubism and Narrative. New Haven, Yale University Press.
Walker, S. & Creanor, L. 2005. Crossing complex boundaries: transnational online education in European trade unions, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 343-354.
Author Bio(s)
Patrick Dillon is Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Exeter, UK. He has visiting positions at the Universities of Helsinki and Joensuu in Finland. His research is in (i) cross-disciplinarity and a pedagogy of connection, (ii) education, culture and technology, (iii) e-learning and multimedia in education, and (iv) theories of design and design education. He has also published in the fields of environmental educational and landscape studies.
The Learning Grid at the University of Warwick: An Innovation to Support Learning within Higher Education
Rachel Edwards
Opened in September 2004, The Learning Grid is a pioneering, flexible library space situated over an area of 1350m². Conceived and developed as a collaborative, technology rich and informal learning space, The Learning Grid aims to provide a purposeful provision with a focus on the development of study, transferable and professional skills. Pulling together library services with other support service providers, for example Careers, Academic Support and IT Services, students at the University of Warwick have been able to experiment with a variety of learning modes whilst applying a range of resources all within one facility.
The design, ethos and service delivery model that have been created within the space naturally encourage students to engage with their studies in a different way. By creating a sense of ownership for the management of the space, users are free to experiment with the blend of resources, which are each of equal importance. Through providing a physical space that actively supports and stimulates creativity and a problem-solving approach to learning, feedback suggests that there has been a significant impact on scholarly success, opportunities for accelerated learning and the development of learner autonomy. To support activities within the space, students are employed as Student Advisors; a professional and proactive approach has been found to reduce some of the barriers to students seeking advice and guidance. The Learning Grid is allowing colleagues to explore a changing paradigm in the delivery of Library services, one which aims to support the holistic nature of the learner and provide students with opportunities to innovate and reflect on their learning experiences.
The presentation aims to introduce participants to the concept of The Learning Grid, the unique service delivery model that has been created to support users within the environment, and more critically the impact that this innovative library facility has had on the student learning experience. Evaluation activities conducted with users of The Learning Grid have provided valuable insights into the needs of 21st Century learners within the context of higher education. In addition, The Learning Grid has begun to explore with academic colleagues the value of embedding aspects of what the physical space and its services can offer in order to facilitate the teaching and learning process both effectively and creatively. Providing the University of Warwick with an alternative to traditional library provision, dynamic opportunities to experiment with the partnership between library services and the curricula are being pursued.
Author Bio(s)
Rachel Edwards graduated in Applied Social Studies and then worked in London for the National Autistic Society. She has a PGCE in psychology and basic skills and has extensive experience in the field of learning and teaching in the post-16 sector, primarily in further education.
During her time as Programme Area Manager for Learning Development in further education, Rachel completed a Postgraduate Diploma in Dyslexia Diagnostic Assessment and Support and her other areas of expertise include development with the ‘Skills for Life’ agenda and inclusion. Learning development - by enhancing the student learning experience through meeting individual needs - and innovative ways of delivering the curriculum, have also been significant areas of interest and development throughout her career.
Rachel joined the University of Warwick in July 2004 specifically to manage and develop The Learning Grid. This facility has gained a national reputation as a test bed for innovation in the support of learning and has provided the university with a cornerstone for future developments.
Assessing creativity in an unhelpful climate
Lewis Elton, University of Manchester
The increasing audit culture of quality in universities based on simplistic quantitative performance indicators of quality is the enemy of creativity. Hence issues of quality assessment are important, particularly in the face of the traditionalism of university teaching and examining, but in practice quality assessment has had little, if any, effect on this traditionalism. Instead it has led to a shift from unjustified total trust to equally unjustified total lack of trust (O’Neill 2002) and a corresponding shift from collegial to top down management (Elton 2005). The latter is now so firmly entrenched in universities that the first step towards the general introduction of a component of creativity into university curricula (isolated examples of creativity can readily be found) may well require an academic revolt (see eg Elton 2006a).
There have been aspects of creativity in the most traditional curricula - even in the sciences - for a long time (e.g. project work, Elton 2003) but really hopeful signs pointing to the introduction of aspects of creativity into whole curricula are in:
* The move from teacher centred to student centred learning (Savin-Baden 2000);
* The expression of this move in the form of problem based and enquiry based curricula (see eg Savin-Baden and Howell Major 2004 and Hutchings and O’Rourke 2002);
* A move from positivist to interpretivist assessment and, in particular, assessment in general from unseen papers to portfolios (Johnston 2004, Elton 2005, Elton 2006b).
References
L. Elton (2003), ‘Dissemination of innovations in higher education: a change theory approach’, Tertiary Education and Management 9, 199 – 214.
L. Elton (2005), ‘Could there be a balance between top down and collegial management in universities?’ 4th Annual Conference on Leadership Research, Lancaster, 12 – 13. December.
L. Elton (2006a), ‘Some dumb insolence might get their ear’, Times Higher 24. March,p.16.
L. Elton (2006b), ‘Designing Assessment for Creativity: – Guide for busy academics’, Higher Education Academy.
B. Hutchings and K. O’Rourke (2002), ‘Problem-based Learning in Literary Studies’, Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 1, pp. 73 – 83.
B. Johnston (2004), ‘Summative Assessment of Portfolios: an examination of different approaches to agreement over outcomes’, Studies in Higher Education 29, pp. 395 – 414.
O. O’Neill (2002), ‘A Question of Trust’, BBC Reith Lectures.
M. Savin-Baden (2003), ‘Facilitating Problem-Based Learning’, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press 2003.
M. Savin-Baden and C. Howell Major (2004), ‘Foundations of Problem Based Learning’, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press 2004.
Author Bio(s)
Lewis Elton is Visiting Professor of Higher Education, University of Manchester, Honorary Professor of Higher Education, University College London, Professor Emeritus of Higher Education and Visiting Distinguished Scholar, University of Surrey, Fellow of the American Institute of Physics and of the Society for Research into Higher Education. He holds Doctorates (honoris causa) of the University of Kent at Canterbury and the University of Gloucestershire. He has been presented with a Festschrift by his former students [P. Ashwin (ed.), ‘Changing Higher Education: The Development of Learning and Teaching’, Routledge Education], and received the Times Higher Lifetime Achievement Award, 2005. His most recent work has been concerned with the scholarship of teaching and learning, including the research/teaching nexus in higher education, and the balance between collegial and ‘top down’ management in universities.
Creativity in Higher Education: a non-scientific view of developing creativity
Andrea I. Frank
Fred Buining
Professional role models are constantly shifting and adapting to the employment market. An emerging theme throughout many professions is a demand for empowered individuals who are able to think creatively, develop collaboratively and design novel solutions to address the complex and pressing problems threatening society today including, for example, climate change, sustainability, racism, terrorism and poverty. The field of urban planning is no exception. Mere knowledge of planning control (processes) and administration is deemed insufficient, and professional institutions and experts are challenging educators in the field to focus more on leadership, visionary development and creativity. In order to facilitate creativity and leadership development we believe that students need to be confronted with a learning experience that differs from that offered by a traditional Higher Education degree programme.
Naturally, the development of such capacities requires certain changes and adjustments in the curriculum. Introducing any significant modification in established programmes and curricula represents a challenging organisational culture change, which typically involves a long-term and sustained programme of intervention in which there is time and opportunity for staff to learn, experiment with and adopt new teaching ideas. In a nonconformist collaboration of a junior lecturer and an expert creativity consultant introducing creativity development in teaching, old and new techniques and approaches are used which question established models of teaching and creativity.
This paper first highlights important elements of the authors’ vision of a structure and programme in planning education that fosters students’ creativity. In particular, the vision embraces two areas of creativity development: “empowered leadership” and “intelligence in urban planning”. The second part of the paper will examine the implementation of the interventions and tools. We will describe the initial steps taken toward changing the learning environment and developing a creative culture and creative abilities of students in an undergraduate city and regional planning degree course at a major research university in the UK. We conclude by sharing findings from our first three years of collaboration, discussing different pedagogical experiments and variations of interventions and elaborate on the planned activities in the coming years.
Author Bio(s)
Andrea Frank
Andrea Frank lectures at the School of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University and pursues development work at the interdisciplinary Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Education in the Built Environment (CEBE). In her latter role, she collects good practice in teaching and learning, disseminates pedagogical research findings relevant to all Built Environment disciplines and organises workshops and conferences for the Centre, to help educational planners develop more creative approaches to curriculum design.
Fred Buining
Much of Fred Buining’s work involves helping organisations embrace change and develop new products, business processes and markets. Creativity and creative thinking techniques are part of his daily toolbox. As a visiting lecturer at the MBA in Berlin, he teaches organisational transformation. At the MBA in Maastricht, he is responsible for the personal and leadership development of student executives. He is part of the Change Academy, which facilitates organisational change teams in higher education.
The Enrichment Triad Model: Nurturing creative-productivity among college students
Maria Caridad García-Cepero, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá-Colombia
The Enrichment Triad Model (ETM) - an organizational model developed by Renzulli - is a program for infusing high-end learning strategies into existing programs to promote excellence, enhance self-confidence, and nurture creativity. The enrichment triad model was developed in the early 1970s as an alternative to the available models for gifted and talented development. According to various surveys, it has been, since its first implementation, the most used enrichment model in the United States and Canada in addition to being implemented in many other countries around the world. Renzulli developed it initially as a model for teaching gifted students, but due to its success with this population, it has been transferred to the regular classroom as a model to develop all students’ creative productivity.
The ETM has been implemented primarily in elementary and secondary education. There have been efforts to implement the model in higher education, such as the integration to the honors program at University of Connecticut.
Developing successful educational innovation implies the systematic introduction of changes to current educational practice. The integration of creative productivity and high-end leaning is not an exception. To incorporate high-end experiences into higher education, it is necessary to create organized processes that guarantee the success of the implementation.
The main purpose of this paper is to discuss how the ETM can infuse enriched experiences into learning at the university level. These experiences will contribute to students’ motivation and engagement with their study program. Additionally, they help students focusing on career goals, by equipping students with valuable skills that will help them to become successful in academic, professional and personal environments, and most importantly will create an enriched environment to develop creative productivity.
This paper will present pedagogical and organizational foundations of ETM and a six-step process to integrate the model into courses at college and graduate level.
Author Bio(s)
Maria Caridad García-Cepero is Assistant Professor in the College of Education at the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá-Colombia.
Currently she is a PhD Candidate in Educational Psychology-Gifted Education and Talented Development and Associate Researcher at the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented at University of Connecticut.
Developing a new curriculum: ‘chartered street’ or ‘valley wild’?
Karen Gomoluch, University of Bolton
Gill Whittaker, University of Bolton
A growing recognition of the constraints placed upon innovative curriculum development, amongst other areas, prompted academic staff in the Education department at a university in the North West of England to evolve an agreed ‘philosophy’. They were seeking to develop a more meaningful identity through exploring and capturing the philosophy by which they wished to work and through which they could respond to change.
The development of the agreed philosophy took place against a background of both external and institutional change. The DfES signalled radical changes to the ways in which teachers are prepared for the post-16 sector. Consequently, the education department has begun the curriculum development of the new initial teacher training (ITT) qualification in post-compulsory education. Simultaneously, the department finds itself in a university that is itself undergoing considerable change since the granting of university title in 2005 and the appointment of a new vice-chancellor in 2006.
One of the key ideas of the ‘philosophy’ centres on critical and creative thinking. The authors of this paper are interested to discover whether this underpinning philosophy can be maintained whilst lecturers are involved in the complex process of developing an ITT curriculum which is subject to the particular demands imposed by external agencies including the Quality Assurance Agency; Standards Verification UK; Lifelong Learning UK; OfSTED and also the department’s partner colleges. The research will explore how (or if) the development of a common philosophy can shape responses to outside pressures, and how (or if) it influences the ways in which the department works, specifically in the area of curriculum development. Can critical and creative thinking continue when faced by frameworks which are externally prescribed and regulated?
Case study research methods including semi-structured interviews, documentary analysis and questionnaires will be used over a period of ten months in order to trace the curriculum development up until internal validation of the ITT course by the university.
Author Bio(s)
Karen Gomoluch is a lecturer in the Education department at the University of Bolton. Her work involves both initial teacher education and the continuing professional development of teachers in the post-compulsory sector. In initial teacher education she is interested in the ways in which student teachers acquire the knowledge and skills to teach English language and literature. On CPD programmes she teaches gender and education and the history of education to Education Studies students and has begun to develop interdisciplinary modules for joint honours in Education and English. She also teaches study skills to undergraduate students and is involved in exploring how personal tutoring systems can support these needs.
Gill Whittaker is involved with teaching mentoring modules on undergraduate and post-graduate programmes in Education and with initial teacher training in the Education Department at the University of Bolton – with special responsibility for mentoring and mentor support. In November 2005, Gill was made a Learning and Teaching Fellow at the University with a special interest in personal tutoring and mentoring. She is currently conducting research across the University to explore departmental approaches to personal tutoring and is engaged in the development of mentoring programmes for University staff members. Gill has supported numerous projects across the UK concerned with mentoring women in science, engineering and technology.
Creative Assignments as a Motivation Tool
Gabriela Pleschová
In my paper I shall discuss the impact of creative activities in the classroom on fostering students’ and teachers’ motivation. I will examine two examples of innovative assignments when teaching political science: doing an interview with a political analyst and writing a short analysis of a foreign policy event based on drama watching. These tasks are assigned with the aim of getting students out of both classroom and library and let them do something practical.
Normally, unusual activities make students more motivated as they can escape from regular duties and develop those skills best suited to them as individuals. But what is perhaps more important, such assignments also encourage teacher motivation. Today, more and more teaching and research load has been put on university teachers. With increasing numbers of students, teachers are prone to make assignments standard and less demanding to assess. However, this might lead to a situation where teaching becomes routine and the educator’s inspiration sharply diminishes. The paper describes how innovative assignments may require more efforts from the teacher at the beginning but will bring much encouragement at the end of semester.
Author Bio(s)
Positions Held
9/2004 - Comenius University, Bratislava, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Institute of European Studies and International Relations
Jean Monnet European Centre of Excellence, assistant professor
9/2003 - project manager of EUREA, NGO (part-time)
10-12/2001 editor-in-chief of the newsletter of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association
9-11/2001 referent at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovakia, Department for UN
7-8/1998 Assistant to the Deputy Director at the Bureau for Strategic Planning
Teaching Experience
9/2004 - Comenius University in Bratislava, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, courses: International Relations, Contemporary Chinese Politics, China-EU relations, Management of EU Projects and Programs
2004-2002 Comenius University in Bratislava, Faculty of Philosophy, courses: Contemporary Chinese Politics, Slovak - Chinese Economic Relations
On Trial: teaching without talking
Kirsten Hardie
This session provides a critical consideration of a case study example – On Trial - that is successful in facilitating, promoting and celebrating creativity in learning and teaching.
This presentation aims to consider critically the concepts of student-centred, experiential, problem-based and enquiry-based learning through the exploration and interrogation of a creative and highly successful approach to learning that celebrates what Finkel (2000) calls ‘teaching with your mouth shut’.
The session explores how the format, language and dynamics of the courtroom drama, as made popular and familiar to students through the media, are used as the context and vehicle to secure deep learning through dynamic role play where the tutor is the silent witness. The ‘On Trial’ approach encourages a community of enquiry where students question, defend and judge an idea or problem; it provides a creative learning experience that facilitates and celebrates students at the centre of all activity.
The presentation considers how this learning experience harnesses popular culture in a creative fashion to help students engage with tough academic issues and wider ethical concerns relevant to their specialist discipline. It explores the challenges and nuances of such learning and considers the reasons for its success and popularity with both learners and fellow tutors.
The session considers the nuances of the creative ‘reflective practitioner’ who ‘learns by doing’ ‘(Schön,1987) and how the teacher as coach (Schön,1987) can employ dynamic and creative approaches to secure creative learning that has unique and innovative outcomes.
The presentation is positioned within the context of current debates regarding creativity and it aims to reconsider key views such as ‘… higher education has widely been regarded as indifferent or even hostile to creativity’ (Cropley, 2001 : 159) and that creativity is ‘… generally unrecognised or undervalued in undergraduate disciplinary learning in UK higher education’ (Jackson and Shaw.(2002). Imaginative Curriculum Study: HE Academy).
Whilst the On Trial learning and teaching approach is illustrated through a specific art and design focus, its potential for wider cross discipline dissemination, adoption and adaption is recognised.
This session will provide a dynamic hybrid presentation that will include critical consideration of this highly successful creative learning and teaching approach - lavishly illustrated with imagery and footage throughout. The session will incorporate critical and reflective commentary from learners and observers and will be presented jointly by the tutor and Graphic Design undergraduate students who have experienced and developed this innovative learning extravaganza.
Author Bio(s)
Kirsten Hardie is Principal Lecturer in Design History and Theoretical Studies at The Arts Institute at Bournemouth (AIB). Specialising in Graphic Design history and theory, she has extensive teaching experience across a range of levels and courses within art, design and media.
In 2004 Kirsten was awarded National Teaching Fellowship (NTF) by the HE Academy. Her NTF international project that aims to create a range of unique learning and teaching case studies and materials which can be used across disciplines - focusing upon how museums and design objects can be utilised creatively and innovatively to inspire and enhance learning and teaching.
Kirsten created and continues to work with the AIB Design Collection Museum, and recently led its international collaborative AHRC funded www.plasticsnetwork.org project. She is an active member of a number of international organisations and societies and a popular conference speaker. She is currently completing her PhD.
Anti-creativity, ambiguity and the imposition of order
Judith Harding, University of the Arts
Lynne Hale, Educational Development Consultant
Although there are many ways of describing markers of creativity, one of the most persuasive was one of the earliest we encountered: the ability to tolerate ambiguity. It is precisely that ambiguity, valued in the arts for its richness of interpretive possibility, that is perhaps most at risk in the current sector and institutional climate of imposed order. An insistence on a rigidly enforced language of learning outcomes seems to value tidiness and clarity over the excitement and engagement of open-ended exploration. An emerging pedagogical correctness (focusing on easily assessable and quantifiable outcomes) threatens invention and critical questioning as not only an aim for students but also for teachers as part of the task of developing engagement with the culture of a specific discipline.
This paper will, first, explore the idea of tolerance of ambiguity through the history of its critical discussion and relation to notions of metaphor and imagination. It will then look at the history and experience of participants in one specific group exercise designed to address issues of ambiguity, categorization and organisation. This exercise, drawing on the recognition of and imaginative connection between properties of natural objects, has been used widely in a range of educational and developmental settings with sometimes startling and certainly memorable results. It may not always, however, be seen as conforming to current demands for rigid clarity of intentions and learning outcomes, and can raise issues of the legitimacy of questioning, surprise and hidden agendas as pedagogical strategies and prompts to imaginative leaps.
Finally, it will contextualise this discussion by looking in a broader way at the tone of imposed order in pedagogical literature, its application in e-learning methodology, and the ways that it may tend to discourage rather than reinforce cultures of creativity in teaching practice.
Author Bio(s)
Dr. Judith Harding first became interested in innovative approaches to teaching and professional development while completing her doctoral studies in art history at the University of California, Berkeley She also has a background in art practice and criticism, theatre design, counselling and group dynamics. As Associate Director of Learning Development at Middlesex University, she worked extensively with both new and experienced university staff to encourage imaginative thinking about learning and teaching. She has a keen interest in innovative applications of new technologies, and is currently a student on the MSc in E-Learning at Edinburgh University.
Lynne Hale trained as an actor and photopgrapher in the US prior to completing her MA in Applied Linguistics at the State University of New York, Stonybrook. These diverse elements, together with her background in English language, communications and cross-cultural issues, informed her fifteen years of teaching at New York University and Harvard. In 1994, she established the Middlesex University English Language and Learning Support unit,now one of the largest in the UK. She has designed staff development workshops and individual coaching in creative pedagogy, communication skills and leadership. She is a fellow of the School for Social Entrepreneurs.
The two authors now collaborate as Educational Development Consultants in Hale&Harding Creative Professional Development.
Risk: the ethics of a creative curriculum
Janet Hargreaves, University of Huddersfield
Regulations in Higher Education, e.g. subject benchmarks, the qualifications framework (QAA) and the CATs system. play an important role in ensuring the quality of educational standards. They assure students that each CAT point they acquire has value and that ‘graduateness’ is of equal worth regardless of location or subject.
In addition, a growing consumer ethos and the introduction of fees encourage students and their financial supporters to view Higher Education as a product. Whilst the student’s own motivation and input is still important, Universities are expected to deliver learning opportunities that maximise the likelihood of successful completion.
Innovation and creativity do not sit comfortably within this paradigm. Delivering educational experiences where the outcome is uncertain, or where there are less clear and objective methods for measuring student achievement, presents a risk to educational standards and to student experience.
This paper seeks to explore the relationship between risk, ethics and the introduction of creativity and innovation into the curriculum.
It is generally accepted that university education should be challenging – encouraging the development of an enquiring mind that does not accept things at face value and the confidence to argue from an alterative viewpoint. These aspirations are related to notions of autonomy as espoused by J S Mill (1859) and others. Nurturing such attributes means respecting the autonomy of the student to make decisions, stand by them and to take responsibility for risk taking and its outcomes. It also means allowing lecturers to design courses that permit change, diversity of practice and risk taking.
By contrast an unintended effect of the paradigm outlined above is a culture in which individual academic freedom is stifled by the need for conformity. Success may be measured by the averagely intelligent student, with average levels of motivation, achieving an award one point higher on the value added scale than they came with. The ethical principle of non-maleficence takes precedence such that the possibility of doing harm – to the student or University - outlaws risk taking behaviour in curriculum design and delivery.
Utilitarian ethics (West 2004) is effective in surfacing such dilemmas. Its use in detailed analysis may help students and academics to plot the risks and benefits of innovative practice.
References:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/default.asp
J S Mill (1859) On Liberty (Penguin edition 1974), St. Ives
West, H (2004) An Introduction to Mill’s Utilitarian Ethics, Cambridge University Press
Author Bio(s)
Having left School at 16 I embarked upon a career in the health service, moving into an educational role in the 1980s. In 1986 I commenced part time study on an OU degree and completed my Dr. Education in 2006, taking in a Certificate in Education and Masters in Healthcare Ethics along the way. I have been involved in the design, delivery, management and quality assurance of Higher Education provision since 1989.
My current post involves academic leadership for learning and teaching across a wide range of subjects including human sciences, police studies, health and social care. I am interested in ethics as it affects the behaviour of the students in their chosen profession,in our management of their learning experience and assessment within the University and amongst ourselves as educationalists.
Building Trans-disciplinary Borderlands for Creative Futures: What barriers and opportunities?
Greg Hearn, Brad Haseman, Erica McWilliam
The call to ‘creativity’ has become increasingly familiar as a catch-phrase of higher education policy. Much current academic and policy discussion, however, is based on assertions of the importance of ‘more creativity’ without any clear sense of what the implications are for the disciplinary cultures that organise knowledge work within universities. This paper explores whether and how disciplinary boundaries can be re-organised so that creativity might become more evident in the teaching and research activities of universities. It utilises a trans-disciplinary move to ‘creative industries’ within one Australian university to open up considerations of whether and how universities might make more of the call to creativity than its current status as a rhetorical flourish in policy documents.
The advent of the ‘creative industries’ as a new node for re-organising knowledge is taken as a starting point for this exploration. According to the Australian Research Council’s newly established Centre of Excellence in Creative Industries and Innovation, the creative industries are not only the ‘cultural’ industries (ie, the performing and visual arts), although they include many widely recognised cultural activities. In more specific terms, they exploit symbolic knowledge and skills, often through adding value and marketing. In this sense, they combine commercial knowledge and application with aesthetic modes of knowing and doing. It has been estimated by Richard Florida (2004) and others that nearly one third of the future workforce will be identified within the “Creative Workforce” because the nature of their work is turning latent symbolic value of their work into economic and social assets.
As is evidenced in the Bologna agreement and pre-empted in the Dearing Report, higher education has a major role to play in preparing the sort of highly educated and flexible workforce necessary to this economic, social and cultural endeavour. It is unlikely, however, that this work will be done best through the transmission of traditional disciplinary knowledge and the requirement that it be reproduced in traditional forms of evaluation and assessment. The argument put here is that a trans-disciplinary knowledge environment has a greater capacity to inform creative work futures. Such an environment is not so easily created in practice, as the paper demonstrates by elaborating lessons learnt from a trans-disciplinary re-structure within the authors’ own university context.
Author Bio(s)
Greg Hearn
Professor Greg Hearn is Director of the Institute for Creative Industries and Innovation at Queensland University of Technology. He has been a pioneer in detailed mapping and integration of the creative industries into innovation policy. In 2005 he was an invited member of a working party examining the role of creativity in the innovation economy for the Australian Prime Minister’s Science Engineering and Innovation Council. His work also includes applications development and evaluation of new technologies and services in the creative industries. Currently, he is a chief investigator on a number of applications development projects currently funded by ARC Linkage grants: (e.g. Sticky.net.au: the Youth Internet Radio Network). His research outputs (5 books, 80 refereed papers or book chapters) bridge across psychology, economics, media and communication studies, cultural studies, forecasting, and management.
Brad Haseman
A/Professor Brad Haseman is Assistant Dean Research in the Faculty of Creative Industries at Queensland University of Technology. He has been an award-winning teacher and supervisor and has designed a highly innovative Doctor of Creative Industries program with strong connections to leaders and managers in the commercial sector. This coursework doctorate represents a radical departure from the traditional PhD and features a common and stable theory base (around reflective practice, practice-led research and interdisciplinarity), a modularised course structure and cumulative assessment. He has also contributed nationally to debates about the place of research in the arts, media and design.
Erica McWilliam
Erica McWilliam is Professor of Education and Assistant Dean Research in the Faculty of Education at the Queensland University of Technology. She currently leads the Creative Workforce research program within the newly established Australian ARC Centre of Excellence for Creativity and Innovation. Her recent scholarship around what she terms “the Yuk/Wow Generation” builds on her long-term research into pedagogical processes and the impact of social change. She has produced 7 books (2 sole-authored) in 10 years, and 5 books, 15 book chapters, 18 refereed articles and 15 refereed conference papers in the last 5 years. Her strong reputation has been achieved through her extensive publications, but also through her editorial leadership (she is she sole editor of ‘Eruptions’, an interdisciplinary academic series with Peter Lang Publishing, New York) and her numerous invited keynote presentations to academic and professional conferences.
Creativity is the Currency of the New Millennium
Rodney Hill, Texas A&M University
“I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success.” (Nikola Tesla)
“The University will be the least prepared to prepare you for a world of change!” (Paul Tinari) The University of tomorrow will not resemble the university of today. The present education system retards the ability for students to create knowledge. “Despite constantly accelerating social and technological change, the paradigm for education has remained essentially static.” (John Lundt)
When there was a surplus of a certain crop, the Department of Agriculture paid farmers not to grow that particular crop. Maybe the Department of Education should pay certain teachers not to teach reproducible knowledge! We are leaving the Knowledge Age and entering the Innovation Age where the students of today will experience more new inventions in their lifetime than all the discoveries from the beginning of recorded history to the present. We are on the crest of the wave of a tsunami of accelerating change! The World Future Society stated that two thirds of the jobs that will be available in 2020 have not been invented yet. In the 21st Century as knowledge workers become ubiquitous, you will be competing with the world for any information that can be reproduced. Knowledge Creators are the only people whose jobs cannot be outsourced.
“The person that cannot create and produce knowledge in the 21st Century will be destined to live with the equivalency of a 20th Century minimum wage.” (Bruce LaDuke) Institutions that are fixated on rigid curriculums will become lower tier universities. The top tier universities currently are ranked on how well they train knowledge workers. While the majority of universities proudly reproduce knowledge workers, future progress in the world will depend on the knowledge creators. The institutions that do not nurture knowledge creators will become lower tier universities. Will universities receive accreditation based on the numbers of knowledge creators they graduate? The new knowledge they generate? The number of new domains they create? The number of a country’s population engaged in knowledge creation will determine the future economic health of a country. Business Week devoted their August issue to Creativity and said that creativity is now the core competency of business. Creativity is the currency of the new Millennium.
Author Bio(s)
Rodney Hill holds the University Professorship in Teaching Excellence at Texas A&M University and is on the Board of the Institute for Applied Creativity. He received the 2006 Champion of Creativity Award at the American Creativity Association International Conference and has received numerous college, university and national teaching awards.
Professor Hill served several years as a board member for the American Creativity Association and has given papers at their annual conferences since 1993 including two keynote addresses. For nine years, he delivered papers on creativity, education and future studies at the World Future Society.
By Measure: Creativity in Design
Brad Hokanson
Creativity and its progeny, innovation, are widely viewed as economic panaceas for countries, companies and organizations. Now post-industrial and post-information age, the knowledge worker is being empowered to invent and change, collaborate and create. We know that generating new ideas is a critical skill in any field. Our educational system, however, has highly developed abilities to de-skill; facts yes, creativity never.
Creativity is a dangerous thing: it's messy; it's an irritation; it's mostly uncontrollable; and it doesn't abide by the rules. When properly done, creativity is coloring far outside the lines; it's coloring off the paper, off the charts, and all over the place. Within education, creativity is seldom taught or cherished. Ironically, even design education is not always a source for the development of creativity. We expect, wrongly, that designers become more creative as they progress in their learning.
Creativity is a skill that can be taught: a well-documented body of research supports the idea that creativity can developed in learners in a wide range of disciplines, ages and backgrounds. Central to this study is the idea that creativity should be included specifically in design curricula, and not assumed to develop as part of a studio culture. It is a skill that can be employed on a small or large project, but one which must specifically be nurtured, developed, and practiced through active learning and repeated practice.
This writing presents empirical research using the written Torrance Test of Creative Thinking and its application within a design curriculum. Design students receiving specific training in creativity showed significant increases on all three metrics; a parallel group of students did not. Similarly, design students in their final year of study were not significantly more creative than first year students. Context, methods, results, and observations applicable to design education will be presented.
This research indicates that creativity can be developed in learners and that design students, in a regular curriculum, do not exhibit spontaneous creative development. The study is valuable in its support for teaching creativity as a topic of learning, even in a curriculum which highly values creativity.
Author Bio(s)
Brad Hokanson is an associate professor at the University of Minnesota, where received his Ph.D. in Instructional Systems Technology. He helped initiate a new MFA program in Interactive Design and teaches primarily in the field of computer graphics and graphic design. His research focuses on the use of technology to aid cognition and he has taught courses in creative problem solving for seven years. He is also a registered architect in the State of Minnesota but is no longer in active practice.
Student Projects Enhance Learning and Benefit Communities
Diane Ingraham
Universities offer project-based instruction as a pedagogically sound method to enhance creativity and to promote integration of the theoretical with the practical. Generally, this comes at or after second year level when students have covered the basics. First year physics/engineering are often not able to discuss their science choices, defend a position or theory, draft coherent reports, or give public presentations. These skills must be developed and practiced to instill confidence and increase career success. This paper compares and contrasts project-oriented instruction at two types of Canadian universities where the author has initiated project-oriented instruction: (1) a large urban graduate research university (Simon Fraser University SFU) where student enrolment in engineering science attracts elite high school students; and (2) a small Canadian rural undergraduate university (Cape Breton University CBU) where student enrolment is primarily from the surrounding region.
SFU is situated in an industrially active economic centre. In the mid-1980s Dr John Wighton endowed the Wighton professorship of laboratory studies to encourage a more hands-on approach to problem solving for creativity and innovation. CBU is situated in an economically disadvantaged region shifting from the historically significant coal and steel industry to tourism, recreation, and technology industries. In September 2004, CBU revamped its first year physics and second year engineering to include team projects complementing and fortifying theory and problems presented in classes and labs.
The project-oriented approach was a success at both institutions. At each, students and faculty overcame significant hurdles, including: students’ inexperience working cooperatively to achieve long-term goals, crafting business-like correspondence describing their project (memos, emails, letters, proposals and reports), and their lack of confidence in public presentations. Students were successful in completing and demonstrating projects and prototypes. Examples of projects include: urban students designed and built electronic musical instruments for young persons with disabilities, exposing them to substantially different segment of society; rural students designed and built apparatus for a local rural volunteer fire department providing them with solutions that were usable, affordable, and built in the community. Rural students drew heavily on the practical skills and knowledge alive in their communities (fishing, farming, trades) to create, design and implement their solutions. Urban students drew on technological knowledge available at specialty electronics shops and industries around them. Community engagement was easier to achieve for the rural students than for urban students.
Project-oriented instruction encourages active creative transformational learning with rewards to faculty, students and their communities.
Author Bio(s)
Dr. Ingraham worked for 25 years in the Canadian high-tech industry where she contributed to the research and development of electronic systems for handling large amounts of image data. Her research interests encompass remote sensing and multi-media presentation of data for enhanced understanding. Currently her research within the innovative Integrative Science team at Cape Breton University explores cross-boundary understanding through combining western science and traditional knowledge of small rural and Mi’kmaq First Nations communities. She has a B.Sc. (Physics) 1974 Dalhousie University, SM (Civil Engineering) 1976 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Ph.D. (Civil Engineering) 1980 University of British Columbia. Dr. Ingraham held a 2-year Killam Post-Doctoral Research position at UBC subsequent to her doctorate and held the first Wighton Professorship in Laboratory Studies in Engineering Science at Simon Fraser University. She is currently in Integrative Science at Cape Breton University.
Outside In: Finding ways of making reflective practice accessible to student social workers.
Maggie Jackson
Social workers are expected to be reflective about their work (however we may define that) and so the process of learning how to make sense of this notion of “being reflective” starts when they embark on an undergraduate course in social work. At Teesside we have designed a core module which runs throughout the three-year course (and alongside students’ practice experience) to help develop skills in “being reflective”.
Connecting the personal, academic and practice worlds is a complex task which we have tried to carry out as creatively as possible. Here I wish to look at how disposable cameras were used as a way of capturing the learning journey of both the individual student and then the group. The paper will discuss the way image was used to enhance and develop reflective skills and will consider ways in which this work will be added to in subsequent years.
Moving away from the spoken or written word to make sense of an event has helped the students to share common experiences and has allowed them to enhance their understanding. Issues of interpretation are also made more explicit – as we do have to move back to using the spoken or written word to share with others ? but this process has then allowed us to consider how often in spoken or written communications we make assumptions about a shared understanding and fail to take notice of the meaning intended.
Author Bio(s)
Maggie Jackson worked as a specialist social worker and senior practitioner for the psychological service in Cleveland for ten years mostly using play therapy as a means of communicating and working with children. Now lectures in social work at the University of Teesside where her particular interests are creative methods of communication and death education. Has written and published on the subject of death education.
Use of Creative Space in Enhancing Students’ Engagement
Maja Jankowska-Kolasa
This paper explores the effect teaching in a ‘creative space’ has on students’ engagement with the learning process, their motivation to explore, experience and discover (i.e. to be creative), and on them becoming more active, autonomous learners. The presentation will examine the notion of creative space, how it has been made a reality as part of the Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at the University of Bedfordshire, how it differs from teaching and learning in a typical classroom environment and the impact it has on students and staff.
Socio-economical changes affecting Higher Education are having a considerable impact on the nature of the curriculum and the way in which teaching is carried out. The student body is becoming increasingly diverse and a greater premium is being attached to the development of so called higher order skills such as creativity. This is being further affected by an increase in the use of advanced technology. Furthermore, our greater understanding of the teaching-learning relationship with the lecturer’s role becoming increasingly one of a facilitator of the learning process also increases interest in exploring innovative and stimulating practices to meet the needs of diverse groups of students.
Staff, students, technology and the curriculum come together in the physical environment and the way in which it is configured (see, for example, ‘Spaces for Learning’ – a research report prepared for the Scottish Funding Council’¹). A literature review indicates that the physical environment is one of the important aspects of learning, especially in learning by doing, creativity problem solving and reflective practice. Creative space can give a sense of surprise and challenge, and the switch from ‘ordinary’ teaching may influence students’ attention, motivation to learn and their way of thinking. It also supports the notion of playfulness and fun as essential factors in innovative and creative thinking (De Bono, 1986)². Offering both advanced technology and a place with its own unique atmosphere, a creative space can be an environment which invites social interactions, enhances group work and stimulates the free flow of thoughts (especially with the use of specialist brainstorming software such as FacilitatePro which allows complete anonymity).
It is not an easy task to measure the effectiveness of any learning space as there are many variables: teacher style, learning techniques, the method of delivery, etc. This presentation will report on the initial findings of using such a space in a variety of subjects in an attempt to make a difference to students’ learning and their creative capacity.
1. Alexi Marmot Associates (2005). Spaces for learning – Research report prepared for the Scottish Funding Council
2. De Bono, E. (1986). Six thinking Hats. Harmondsworth : Penguin
Author Bio(s)
CPD: Challenging Personal Development.
Clare Kell
Gwyneth Owen
Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an expectation of practice for many professional groups and a requirement for license-retention among healthcare professionals. CPD has to be done.
A new MSc Physiotherapy module entitled ‘Personal and Professional Development’ seeks to help participants go beyond seeing CPD as a hind-bound necessity. The module frames CPD as a stimulating, creative and rewarding activity that is central to clinical practice. Despite a clear module outline, over half the participants enrolled were seeking a formulaic approach to meeting their CPD obligations. What they experienced however was a journey of self-discovery.
Using a framework grounded in reflective practice, this highly interactive module challenged participants to problematise professionalism and professional identity while exploring such concepts as personal learning characteristics, familiarity, action research and change management. Through negotiated assessments, participants were empowered to explore different forms of writing and presentation, so freeing and developing their ‘natural’ communication styles.
The design, context and delivery of the module required individuals to identify and work with the self, making CPD personally meaningful and useful. This module was emotionally, physically and intellectually challenging for all participants and staff. By the end of the module, however, some participants described deep empowerment effects that have helped them look both critically and creatively at their profession and their current and future place within it.
This paper will use case studies to describe the personal journeys of both staff and participants as we worked together to personalise and realise CPD in practice. While we would like to share the highs and lows of the module experience with delegates, we are also very aware that the professional working environment may, in some cases, hinder the participants’ implementation and development of their new learning. We would value the opportunity to discuss these issues with colleagues.
Author Bio(s)
Clare Kell and Gwyn Owen share a passion for supporting student learning development, engagement in professional socialization and continuing personal and professional development activities. They are Chartered Physiotherapists with many years’ experience working in Higher Education.
Creative Conversations: conceptions of creativity in learning and
teaching in higher education
Paul Kleiman
Creativity surrounds us on all sides: from composers to chemists, cartoonists to
choreographers. But creativity is a puzzle, a paradox, some say a mystery.
(Boden 1991)
Creativity has now entered the discourse in higher education, as part of a wider policy agenda that situates creativity alongside other agenda items such as enterprise, entrepreneurship and innovation. There is an expectation that higher education will engage with creativity in the design, delivery and assessment of its curricula. But creativity is an elusive, slippery and complex notion, with many aspects and facets, and it evades the sort of definition, categorisation and compartmentalisation required to incorporate it into the curriculum frameworks and assessment regimes that are currently in place in higher education.
This paper discusses the findings from two linked research projects that each set out to explore the variation in the way academics, from range of arts, humanities and science disciplines, conceptualise and experience creativity in relation to their pedagogic practice. The first project was an analysis of detailed responses to an online questionnaire about the conceptions and
experiences of creativity in learning and teaching in higher education. The second project was a phenomenographic study of academic conceptions of creativity in learning and teaching in higher education, based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with a selection of respondents to the
online survey. These ‘conversations about creativity’ revealed the fascination with and complexities of exploring creativity within the context of learning and teaching.
Author Bio(s)
Paul Kleiman is Associate Director of PALATINE, the Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Dance, Drama and Music, based at Lancaster University. Paul trained as a theatre designer, and worked in the performing and visual arts for twenty years as an artist, designer, director, musician, performer and writer. In 1995 he joined the small team that set up the Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts (LIPA) and its unique interdisciplinary degree programme. At LIPA he led the Performance Design course and he was also responsible for designing and implementing the institution’s assessment strategy. He joined PALATINE in 2001, and his work and research at the Subject Centre has focused mainly on the assessment of creativity and creative curriculum design. Recently, in November 2006, he was invited to the USA to join a small group of scholars, policy makers and practitioners discussing the development of The Creative Campus as a follow up to a major report by the American
Assembly.
Confirming Conformity? Revisiting Creativity in the Design Studio
Leonidas Koutsoumpos, University of Edinburgh
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, during the 14-16 century there was considerable confusion between the verbs conform and confirm. This paper will play with/against the conformist notion that sees ‘creativity’ and ‘conformity’ as antithetical and exclusive t