Teaching students to be creative is
often seen as a difficult thing.
We feel the need as teachers to direct this process as a way of better
controlling outcomes so that they are more easily measurable. We create specific rubrics that tell
students how many points will be lost for certain infractions, we create
arbitrary rules to guide the types of products that we will be comfortable
putting a number grade on. Not
surprisingly, this approach rarely leads to inspired work; rather, it only
creates compliance.
I fell into creativity as a result
of my perceived isolation as a child.
I was looking for a way to express myself in ways that could communicate
my feelings in ways that I seemed unable.
Poetry was something that I learned outside of “school”, and that I did
almost exclusively in my “free time”.
It would be anathema to bring what I was doing into a classroom, because
it wouldn’t be mine any longer.
After college, I enrolled (read; Lucked Into) an MFA program in Poetry.
The writing workshop was the first time that my art was being judged in
authentic ways, by like-minded individuals. The worth of what I was doing became paramount, and the
criticism I received (believe me there was plenty of it) was easy for me to
accept, I knew I had work to do.
 |
| Courtesy 19 Entertainment, FreeMantleMedia |
When I watch television now, and I
see the rash of reality shows that deal with talent competitions, I’m often
struck by how they represent the opposite of the true creative process. Shows like American Idol and Project
Runway create challenges for the competitors, whether it’s designing Women’s
Outerwear using only Twizzlers, or picking the right song to perform on Barry
Manilow Week. The constraints that
are placed on the competitors are often arbitrary and strange, and the
critiques that are given are usually equally disturbing. There is a certain amount of anger in
the judges, they seem to feel a strong need to put everything into two distinct
categories. The performance or
piece is either the best thing they have ever seen/heard, or a complete
disaster that requires the shaming of the player. Putting forth an effort that the judges deem to be poor,
almost always results in them becoming seemingly offended at the contestant.
Notice here that I don’t say
Artist. They are players or
competitors only. The irony is
that they are competing for a title that is supposed to verify that they are in
fact, true artists. Let us for a
few seconds look at the track records of some of these so-called winners. American Idol, considered the premiere
singing competition in the world, has been miserable in its supposed aim,
finding talented individuals that will become stars. In 11 seasons, the show has produced only 3 contestants that
have arguable staying power.
Likewise, Project Runway has yet to find mainstream sustainable success
for any of its winners. I would
argue that this is because the assessment techniques, and the work products
created are not as much a function of an aspiring artist, but simply a
compliant show character.
My biggest concern as an educator,
and as an artist, is the effect that these shows are having on the
perceptions of creativity in our students. More than anything else, these shows espouse the idea that
you can bypass the very important phase of the creative process that requires hard
work, refinement, and adequate time for self-reflection needed to become a
functioning artist.
Our district is in the process of
rolling out a series of “loops” to replace and improve the standard ways of
planning that most students have been exposed to over their education. The loops allow students to enter the
process at any point, and to begin to see that the creative process (as all
loops lead to creating something, whether tangible or not) is rarely a linear
event.
The
loops that we use are currently in development, and are hosted on the high
school’s Media Center website. You
can explore the work that Deb Gottsleben and Anne Piascik have done HERE. In addition to the research loop, John
Madden, Instructional Leader at MHS, has developed a series of other loops for
other processes, such as an Identity Loop and a Critical Thinking Loop among others.
The
goal here is to begin looking at the reality of being creative, that it is a
way of thinking and problem solving, not just arbitrarily jumping through
teacher-provided hoops. It requires authenticity, a desire to improve for the
sake of improvement, and feedback that is not simply punitive and mean.
Only
when we begin looking at authentic modes of inquiry can we begin to create the
problem-solving, creative artists we will need, to begin changing the perception and efficacy of publicly-educated students in this country.
As always, a few questions:
1.
How can we create better environments for
“authentic” experiences for students?
2.
What can be done to counteract the onslaught of
inputs that tell our kids that taking the risk to be creative is a punishable
offense?
3.
How can we more effectively spread the idea of
looping in our educational system?
No comments:
Post a Comment