Students just love to know "the answer". They frantically flip through the syllabus on the first day of class to find out exactly how many points the course is worth and what assignments will be expected of them. They anxiously take notes as the professor speaks or clicks through a power point. They often say "Is this on the test?" The way many faculty teach is by lecturing "the answer" and further validating this type of need-to-know-the-answer, book-smart students. Students are then taught that learning is memorizing information and displaying their memory on a test enough to pass the class and move on to the next degree requirement. While I know this is a generalization of pedagogical practices and student mindsets in higher education, I believe it is rather common and I also believe thinking about higher education in these terms can help us begin to creatively change the way we work.
An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education discusses that we are not preparing our students to be, and think creatively. We are sending them into the work force with mainly memorized, book knowledge and may be inhibiting them to be successful in their careers. I was intrigued by the following statement in the above article: "If colleges want to justify the value of their degrees in the future, they better start creating learning environments where their students can be creative, try things out, and on occasion fail without being penalized." By providing environments conducive to creative learning, students then become more innovative, independent, and successful in their careers. For me, when I know there is a "right answer" my motivation decreases because a) there is a possibility to be wrong and b) if there is not an alternative answer then there is no reason to think about the subject extensively or in creative terms.
My passion for higher education is rooted in student development. I believe higher education training, no matter what the age of the student, is (or should be) a transformative experience. When looking at higher education with a pedagogical lens, simply providing the "right answer" may lead to incremental improvements on the students' current knowledge whereas cultivating creativity and critical thought may lead to altering the way students think as well as creating new schemas and knowledge. Assisting students to develop a critical, creative mind will not only help them in their future careers it will also, over time, advance their professions as a whole.
Easier said than done, right? Well, sort of. Creativity is a mindset or a skill. Think about other areas in your life where you have developed a skill. How did you do that? I am willing to bet you answered to yourself: "Hard work and practice." The same approach applies to our students' creativity. One article looks at it like this: we are creating a black and white, concrete learning culture in our universities. In order for our students to think in more creative ways we must change the culture and create conditions conducive to creativity. This article describes innovation and creativity stemming from brainstorming, lateral thinking, and risk taking methods. While I agree some professors utilize the first two techniques, I would argue that risk taking is forgotten or perhaps discouraged. To me, risk taking is crucial for our students to engage in because it creates opportunities for failure. This may sound counter-productive to our overall goal of creating successful students but failure due to creativity and risk taking also provides students an opportunity to correct mistakes and strengthen weaknesses. Without the initial creative idea and risk taking activity, students may simply be remaining in their learning comfort zone which may lack creativity and growth.
I recently read "Talent is Overrated". This book opened my eyes to a new way of analyzing the way I work. Basically, innate talent does not have as much influence on us as it was once believed. Talent can be important but studies show that it is actually the way we practice desired skills in the domains we wish to become successful that really counts. This type of practice is different than the way most tend to "practice". Simply practicing is repeating an action that one already does well only to maintaining their level of skill. On the other hand deliberate practice is accurately pinpointing one's weaknesses, identifying competencies just beyond one's current abilities and continuously working to improve those skills. This type of practice is not generally fun because it is so hard and unusual. Students who are encouraged to take risks, think outside their current competencies, and learn from their mistakes are engaging in deliberate practice and thus growing and developing. Since each student may have varying weaknesses, it takes creativity to design individual deliberate practice procedures.
This type of creativity and understanding of deliberate practice and its benefits is a skill that can be taken with each student beyond their education. I understand professors have difficult, time-consuming jobs so the thought of altering the way they teach and offering opportunities for creativity/risk taking in the classroom may seem unattainable yet I believe this is exactly what creates a stronger university, stronger students, and stronger professions. I know many of us work in areas of higher education outside of the classroom so for those who do, think about your position...how can you cultivate an environment of creativity and deliberate practice with the students and/or other professionals you work with?
I worked at an Art & Design college for some time and wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments about creativity being a vital skill for students to develop- not only for their future professional careers, but also for the collective future when we consider our economic, environmental, and political crises. Daniel Pink’s book, A Whole New Mind puts this into specific terms and provides relevant examples about the value (and necessity) of creative thinkers in our society. Check it out if you are interested in this topic—it is an easy read with important lessons. He discusses the relationship between technology and creative thinkers—as technology advances, the need for creative thinkers increases. Task-oriented jobs are few and far between, and as such, creative innovators will be the professionals of the future. He also brings the globalization of our society into the discussion- yet another very relevant consideration for educators.
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to comment that in many ways, I see the ‘risk taking’ element that you and the article reference as the ‘challenge’ in everyone’s favorite student development theory (Sanford, right?). Your comments about failure being opportunity for learning are in line with this approach, as our educational environment provides many of the supports necessary for students to learn from their so-called failures. In many ways, the blogging in this class reminds me of an artist’s critique process, which is a fundamental aspect of developing creativity in traditional art pedagogy. It intentionally sets a ‘risky’ environment. Students take something personal (artists: their art which is representative of themselves in some way; us: our stance on a particular current issue in higher education), they are asked/required to share it publicly with the class (artists: on the wall; us: on this blog), and the class provides feedback (artists: many forms- often verbal, sometimes written; us: the comments). This feedback is then used to shape future art/writing. In taking this risk, and in engaging with others around the issues posted here, we are developing our own creativity (slowly).
I whole-heartedly agree that society has reached a level of mediocrity when it comes to educating our youth. In my experience teaching freshmen level classes, I conquer that the first thing students want to know is exactly how do they earn the right number of points for a certain grade. They are very interested what is going to be on the test. It is not enough to give broad ideas, they want concrete.
ReplyDeleteI do not just see this problem in higher education however, I see it stemming from years of dysfunctional attempts to standardize education in the K-12 system. I don’t see much room for creativity. Children are instructed to color inside the lines at a very early age. They are taught to write their letters just-so, and encouraged to memorize various facts for the purposes of regurgitating them at a later point. The phrase "teach to the test" has been huge in Colorado over the last decade since CSAP entered the vernacular. No creativity allowed there. And I have yet to see where creative thought is valued in the ACT, SAT, GRE, etc.