Does education destroy creativity?

[Fiannan]

Okay, I certainly did not put my son up to this but when he graduated high school last week, and delivered the valedictorian speech for all assembled. He told the audience that "Schools today are like vampires sucking every drop of the creative spirit out of the students".

Again, I am not saying this was the most appropriate thing to say at the graduating ceremonies but he did get applause from students, most parents and even some of the teachers -- not the principal though.

So are schools today guilty as charged? Are the best students going unchallenged, the less bright feeling lost and the average student bored to tears as well? I remember reading an article from an American teacher who was "teacher of the year" where he said that kids in 1st. grade will all tell you that what they do well is sing, pretent, paint, etc. (fun, creative stuff) but if you ask typical seniors what they do best few will say anything about creative things. Is that good?

Just wanting people's thoughts here.

Edited June 14, 2008 by Fiannan

[Heavenguard]

Hmm, I don't know if I'd so much say that education destroys creativity, but rather what the focus of the education is. Personally, I just got my degree in fine arts, so I can't say that education destroyed it, however, I do agree that there is much more of a push for children and education to excel in the 'academic' departments, much more so than the fine arts departments.

More often than not, parents push for good grades for their kids in English, math, and sciences, and the others are a sort of oh-well consequence. Because of these expectations, the fine arts are almost always the first to suffer when there are financial issues in schools.

Personally, I know grades were always expected from me, but when it became inconvenient to take me to art classes (when I was a kid), it just not nixed. It was never inconvenient to get me to math class, though.

A much loved quote from a much loved movie, Mr Holland's Opus:

Vice Principal Wolters: I care about these kids just as much as you do. And if I'm forced to choose between Mozart and reading and writing and long division, I choose long division.

Glenn Holland: Well, I guess you can cut the arts as much as you want, Gene. Sooner or later, these kids aren't going to have anything to read or write about.

[WANDERER]

Anything can be taught creatively...including maths/science etc.

"I guess administrational constraints: time issues (over-burdened curriculum), national testing, standardised curriculums, funding dependent and driven by government-decided policies and results, and accountability to every facet of society or group that sees education as the band-aid to their problems can bleed the creativity out of teaching and learning." Whinge over.

Are the best students going unchallenged, the less bright feeling lost and the average student bored to tears as well? This is an interesting question about whether students are choosing to participate and contribute vs choosing to have a passive education.

I guess we can look at the developmental levels:

5 years: I like painting, drawing, singing.... egocentric

8 years: I like painting, but I don't like singing and I am definitely not joining the choir...peer comparison

senior students: I will talk about what I like based on your understanding of the topic (manga comics, music, cars, fashion...yes, they are the arts...)...peer group focus/ 'in' groups.

[Truegrits]

Does education destroy creativity?

I think ones creativity could get pushed aside, take second place, while getting an education. But destroy?

Just plain living...working, could hinder ones creative abilities.

No, I do not think education will destroy ones creativeness/imagination.

In fact, I think an education can open up endless possibilities for one to utilize their creativity.

[MorningStar]

I taught my son division using M&M's. He liked it. Of course, they're gone now and we'll have to buy some more.

[MarginOfError]

I suspect most of the participants on this board didn't attend elementary and high school in the No Child Left Behind era (more appropriately named Every Child Left Behind). In trying to make educational achievement an objective and measurable goal, a lot of the creative value of education is getting lost by the public school system's need for money. The problem is that education currently is focused on getting the right answer when focus should be placed on how you got any answer. Essentially, if you teach people to think, they'll come up with their own answers, and eventually, they'll discover creative ways to get to the right answer.

When I was in grad school I was required to prove that the area under the Normal (Bell) Curve was equal to 1. The traditional and well known proof requires converting to polar coordinates, but I don't really care for working in polar coordinates, so I chose to look for a different solution. Instead, I used a couple of calculus proofs, some properties of the Gamma Function, and integration by parts to develop my proof. When I turned it in my professor looked at the first line and said, "this isn't right." I assured him it was and asked him to take a closer look. He read it over and before long the entire department faculty was complimenting me for developing a proof that none of them had ever seen.

Moral of the story: give people the tools they need, show them how to use them, and let them create their own solutions.

[RachelleDrew]

It really depends on the school. Mine was severely lacking in the arts. We didn't have band when I was in school, it was cut to give more money to the football team. My freshman year the theater club had their production shut down mid-preparation because some of the evangelical parents in the area thought it was blasphemous to do "Jesus Christ Superstar" and the school buckled under the criticism and shut down production. My senior year the valedictorian of my class was told by the guidance counselor that art school was a waste of time, and refused to send her transcripts to the art institute when she tried to apply.

They are still in the middle of a lawsuit over that issue, and now have even less money for the arts. *smacks head*.

My school has always done okay in traditional academics, but for the kids who are more interested in the fine arts or even vocational programs they fail miserably. Obviously not all schools are like mine was, it really is up to the parents and school faculty to work together in order to make a creative, yet practical and academically challenging place to be.

Margin mentions no child left behind and is exactly correct. I remember AP/Honors courses and special ed. courses were cut my junior and senior year and we were all lumped into the same classes. It was insanity, there was no way that the teachers could even encourage basic learning in that environment, much less that of a creative caliber. The school sent us a letter after NCLB was passed ensuring all the parents that changes would be made to keep our school up to the "challenging standards" the new act set.

Instead of being challenged, I was ignored by the teachers who were trying desperately to bring the other kids up to speed. In several of my classes the AP/Honor's kids were paired up with the special needs kids to help them during class so that the teacher could focus on the majority of the class who was of average learning. I don't recall getting paid to be a special ed teacher, and I certainly don't remember getting a degree in special education. No Child Left Behind, what a crock.

Edited June 15, 2008 by RachelleDrew

[Fiannan]

We didn't have band when I was in school, it was cut to give more money to the football team.

I took an education class in grad school (part of my master's requirements) and most of the students there were going into secondary (middle and high school) education. The professor urged the students to try to get a background in football or basketball because many schools will hire you based on hw good a coach you are first and how good a teacher you are second.

I have known quite a few educators and whenever they have tried to change jobs or get a job in the first place they will tell stories of this sort of thing in interviews -- surprised more female teachers don't sue since they are obviously at a disadvantage in being hired in this case. Teachers with high honors, or inique backgrounds, can't get full time jobs because the first thing asked of them is "What sports can you coach". If they say they aren't that good at sports, aren't interested in sports, or site things like soccer or swimming, the tone of the interview becomes one of asking questions just to satisfy the requirement and they get a letter in a couple fo weeks thanking them for the interview and regretting to say that someone else was chosen.

[Guest Username-Removed]

I dont think education in itself stifles creativity. However, there are subjects that follow more "logical" lines than others.

It sounds to me, or at least the possibility, that there may be a subject or class that he was dissatisfied with. I for one have had a few of those and never could get to the creative stage with them.

But you turn me loose on story telling, writing, poetry, even business correspondance and ... whoa! Im all over that! I have my strengths and I have my weaknesses in education. Even with my strengths, my dyslexia (however minor it is) does hinder it.

Maybe he just had a difficult subject or class and never really reached the creative stage. We all have some mental and physical limitations. I know its a darn shame, and a bit dissapointing, when we are young and discover them. Its tought to know how to deal with them, especially when we've never dealt with them before.

[LegendadryPerc]

surprised more female teachers don't sue since they are obviously at a disadvantage in being hired in this case.

Is this an asumption that females aren't as good of coaches, aren't as likely to want to coach, or that schools don't seriously consider them as coaches as much as they do males?

ya, as has been said, simple answer: NCLB

I don't know if anybody else has noticed, but when kids watch TV for "too long", they get this dazed glassy eyed look, seem uninvolved with the program, and ssem bored but continue to watch. I have noticed the exact same look on the faces of most public school kids. (most, because I believe public school does meet the needs of some kids.)

I have analized it, and blame it on the "something exciting is coming up next" syndrome. However boring the TV show may be, there is always the play on natural human curiousity (the force behind our desire to learn) by the hints that it might get interesting, or the comercials for the next show, and how interesting it's going to be. Often this interesting "coming up" thing turns out to be just as boring, but there's always the potential, and sometimes, the desire is fulfilled. School is like this. There is always the carrot dangling of some 5 min. activity that is really really fun, but the majority of school time is boring. Taking the most creative and knowledge hungry years of ones life, and preventing learning, by making the kids follow rules and protocal that require lots of sitting still, standing in line, raising your hand, etc. Given the teacher student ratio, these rules are understandable, but hardly arguable as even time where students are allowed to learn to their hearts content. Even the "education" part of it prevents learning, as it is so stuctured, and as has been mentioned, stuck on right answers, etc., that few oportunities are open for the kid to be free to just explore and learn about something. Add to that NCLB, and even good creative teachers practically sit there in handcuffs, reduced to little more than puppets. While law makers who have never and never will even ever see the kids, let alone know their unique talents and needs, direct the now robotic teachers, on exactly how to phrase the questions, "because that is how they will be asked on the test."

Education does not suck creativity, but the huge beurocratic anomaly that our public school system has become, often passing over the kids it is supposedly "for" - it would take a nice stretch of the imagination to call that "education", lol!

[WANDERER]

I was rather 'lucky' to have the opportunity during my schooling to not have a teacher ....I did a version of correspondence education within a non-traditional school type setting (PACE/for those who recognise it). It was a very frustrating experience not having a teacher. It's actually rather boring being in a classroom of one. Well technically there was a group of children within a grade level, but we all sat in our little walled-off offices planning our daily program of work and following the course booklets. There were parent supervisors, but no 'real' teachers. I actually found this far more mind-numbing than the mainstream educational system...even if it meant that I could work above grade level without behavioural distractions and administrational time wasting and plan what I wanted to do and how much.

[mightynancy]

A child only loses his creativity if his parents let it happen. I went to public schools, and yes, for the most part, creativity wasn't fostered (there were exceptions). However, our mom always made sure we had exposure to the arts. She gave us opportunities to be creative - artistically and in the problem-solving realm. School is only part of a child's education.

I also think it's dangerous to paint "education" with a broad brush, as though all educators are part of some monolithic conspiracy to steal your money and make your children into idiots. While not working. And whining. I honestly don't know how we have the time to conspire! We're amazing.

[prisonchaplain]

Ten years ago I would have said the OP was a bit extreme. Today I would say that in most cases, yes, creativity is stifled. And, as one poster mentioned, the reason is primarily the new focus on producing increasing standardized testing scores. Generally, this approach puts focus on the child at the 40-percentile. This child could be pushed over the line to passing, thus produce a "success" for the teacher and the school and the district. Students above 60 don't need the help, and students much below 40 require too much help, and truly do get left behind.

Sad to say that Prez. Bush has converted me away from "measurable outcomes" and so-called results-oriented public education. Give us back music and art and drama, and take away those stifling, time-consuming, "blood-sucking" standardized tests!

Edited June 15, 2008 by prisonchaplain
format

[Guest lauracooke78]

I believe that the public education system (I'm in Australia) should focus on reading, writing and maths. And branch out in the later years. I don't believe that the schools have a "responsibility" to encourage creativity if it is out of the above fields. Creativity is a responsibility for parents to foster and pay for. There is too much rubbish being taught in schools that don't matter and if schools put reading, writing and maths first and music and physical education second and then other creative things third, there would be room for it all. But, in this world of political correctness, sex education, social education and social engineering is the name of the game.

[siouxz72]

As usual, I agree with mightynancy (shout out) on this one. Creativity is only as stifled as the parents let it be. My middle and high school students have many opportunities to engage in the arts, be it choir (and a very excited child about "show" choir once she gets to high school) to Art classes to foreign language classes. It's really true what they say about a knowledge of art and music helping with more traditional courses. It helps our children think outside the box and therefore do better on the standardized testing.

on another tangent... man do I hate those tests!! If there wasn't the THREAT of my kids being held back for failing them I would highly encourge the "let's make a pretty picture" method of filling in the bubbles. grrr!!

[checkerboy]

Ok having been an art teacher let me say that the public education system is what stifles creativity. Education itself is great. But honestly let's look at some great people in history. Einstein had to know math, but he was also probably the most creative person ever because he thought outside the box. Take any scientist that made a breakthrough in history and he/she had to be creative to get there.

Sadly those breakthroughs are few and far between these days.

One problem I see rampant is the "Color in the Lines" syndrome. If anything stifles creativity it is putting restrictions on expression. The thing is that as we get older we stop imagining. When was the last time you turned an ordinary day to day object into a spaceship?

And just a little story here that demonstrates public education's lack of understanding of how children think. I knew a kid that loved shop class. He was really good at it. Halfway through the semester he was removed from the shop class and placed in a remedial math class because he wasn't passing. Let me ask you, do you think this kid is gonna excel in high school? Do you think taking away the one reason he probably went to school is gonna help him learn math better?

It is sad that for all the psychology that goes into curriculm preparation no one has gotten it yet. I noticed that a majority of my students in the ceramics class I taught had not one ounce of creativity left in them. They came and put in their time in my class and worried more about what grade they were gonna get rather then if they could tap into the latent creativity that was slowly dying within them. Alot of them would hurry and finish a project so they could spend the rest of the time studying for a math or science test. Talk about screwed up priorities.

Sometimes I want to scream at the stupidity that we have to deal with.

[mightynancy]

Ten years ago I would have said the OP was a bit extreme. Today I would say that in most cases, yes, creativity is stifled. And, as one poster mentioned, the reason is primarily the new focus on producing increasing standardized testing scores. Generally, this approach puts focus on the child at the 40-percentile. This child could be pushed over the line to passing, thus produce a "success" for the teacher and the school and the district. Students above 60 don't need the help, and students much below 40 require too much help, and truly do get left behind.

Mind your generalizations. I can tell you first-hand that there ARE schools that offer every service to the lowest-performing students to help each child be successful. I work in one. Our special education teacher and our reading specialist are both dedicated individuals who spend a great deal of extra time to get the kids what they need. We do NOT abandon a child because he just isn't going to make the grade. If I had feelings, they'd be hurt by that assertion. We help him do the best that HE can. Not because there's something in it for us, like a gold star on our NCLB chart. We do it because it's right, it's our passion, it's our job.

Sad to say that Prez. Bush has converted me away from "measurable outcomes" and so-called results-oriented public education. Give us back music and art and drama, and take away those stifling, time-consuming, "blood-sucking" standardized tests!

Here, here!

[pam]

test

[NateHowe]

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a teacher.

First, teachers are some of the most creative people your children will encounter. To effectively cover the material required in the time allotted with the materials provided is impossible without active application of creativity.

Second, I am a musician. I can honestly say that in my field, I hear plenty of musical garbage. Most of that garbage comes from well-meaning amateurs who feel that their "creative license" entitles them to ignore musical rules. They end up regurgitating other people's material or creating a product that sounds wrong rather than creative. Talented musicians who produce good music, on the other hand, do not ignore the rules, but intentionally break them when it serves their purposes. You have to understand functional harmony in order to break the rules with creative style.

Third, I am a poet. Have you read any high school poetry lately? Mostly painful. With education, including significant exposure to the great poets of the past and present, a young poet is enabled to use his or her creativity to create a good product, rather than a poorly rhyming singsong rant.

Education takes raw creativity and gives it context, and thus meaning.

[LegendadryPerc]

A child only loses his creativity if his parents let it happen. I went to public schools, and yes, for the most part, creativity wasn't fostered (there were exceptions). However, our mom always made sure we had exposure to the arts. She gave us opportunities to be creative - artistically and in the problem-solving realm. School is only part of a child's education.

I also think it's dangerous to paint "education" with a broad brush, as though all educators are part of some monolithic conspiracy to steal your money and make your children into idiots. While not working. And whining. I honestly don't know how we have the time to conspire! We're amazing.

It's not that creativity just isn't fostered. It's not that only math and reading are taught. Going to a school and learning math and reading, and getting everything else from somewhere else, would be just fine. It's that creativity is stifled. Creativity IN math and reading is discouraged (in the cases I've seen!) Math is taught to be something that is merely memorized and students are disciplined for reading books when they should be ummm... waiting in line?

It may be dangerous to paint education with a broad brush, but NCLB has made it pretty safe to paint public schools with said brush.

[Fiannan]

Are American schools increasingly authoritarian?

Let's see, there are schools banning tag for encouraging aggression, schools banning hugging as a form of sexual harassment, schools with "zero-tolerance" that have suspended students for bringing a knife to cut meat with at lunch, possessing tic-tacs since they can resemble drugs, encouraged teachers to review fictional writings to make sure they are not violent, sexist or racist, and sent kids home with suspensions for saying homosexuality is a sin during debates on current events.

Then of course there's the lack of emphasis on critical thinking and analysis...

[Guest lauracooke78]

I saw a great documentary once about one american teacher in a dis-advantaged part of town. Every single student until coming into her class was failing in everything. Her method of teaching all aspects of the basics was to use music and singing. ie...She had different tunes and ryhms and even used rap to teach different equations for maths etc. After being with her for a year, all were passing and some were excelling. Very interesting I think.

[mightynancy]

It may be dangerous to paint education with a broad brush, but NCLB has made it pretty safe to paint public schools with said brush.

I disagree. I teach math in a public school, and the kids do a lot of creative problem-solving! I don't spoon-feed them. I till the earth, add water, and the kids grow their own seeds. WHOA! A metaphor! Dang, that's creative; I'm terribly sorry. For those of you who went to public school, a metaphor is a device in which a writer calls a thing something else for effect. In this metaphor, by saying that I till the earth, I mean that I give the kids some preparation for the concept I'm about to teach. I add water - that would mean that I give the children something new to think about. The seeds in my metaphor are the children's own ideas and connections. Do I steer the conversation back on topic when necessary? Of course. My sub notes (the folder I leave for a substitute) include instructions to let the kids discuss the new material and make new connections. You should see the bright eyes when the lightbulbs (metaphor!) come on.

I really ought to quit opening the threads where y'all want to bash public educators. I understand that there are some lousy teachers out there - I had a few. I know I am not the only educator who cares about her kids for more than a test score, but in these threads, there is no acknowlegement of any excellence anywhere in public education. I see my error - I am calling your brush too broad when what I mean is that your vision is too narrow. Vent away. Peace out.

[RachelleDrew]

I disagree. I teach math in a public school, and the kids do a lot of creative problem-solving! I don't spoon-feed them. I till the earth, add water, and the kids grow their own seeds. WHOA! A metaphor! Dang, that's creative; I'm terribly sorry. For those of you who went to public school, a metaphor is a device in which a writer calls a thing something else for effect. In this metaphor, by saying that I till the earth, I mean that I give the kids some preparation for the concept I'm about to teach. I add water - that would mean that I give the children something new to think about. The seeds in my metaphor are the children's own ideas and connections. Do I steer the conversation back on topic when necessary? Of course. My sub notes (the folder I leave for a substitute) include instructions to let the kids discuss the new material and make new connections. You should see the bright eyes when the lightbulbs (metaphor!) come on.

I really ought to quit opening the threads where y'all want to bash public educators. I understand that there are some lousy teachers out there - I had a few. I know I am not the only educator who cares about her kids for more than a test score, but in these threads, there is no acknowlegement of any excellence anywhere in public education. I see my error - I am calling your brush too broad when what I mean is that your vision is too narrow. Vent away. Peace out.

I didn't see anyone bashing teachers, but the system that they are under. As a teacher you must certainly recognize the enormous problems in the academic world.

Teachers are increasingly overworked and underpaid. I'm sure everyone in this thread realizes this. Criticism of the educational system is not necessarily criticism of the educators.

Don't be so quick to take offense. I didn't see any posts in here that said teachers were the problem.

For the record, I attended a public school and i'm well aware of what a metaphor is.

[pam]

But many when talking about public education also place teachers under that umbrella. I see where mightynancy could get this. Having been a PTA President twice..I've sat in many meetings where people bash the public education system...and who do they turn to do this? The teachers. Many put blame on the teachers for their perceived or even insightful thoughts on public education.

So before we think mightynancy is being overly sensitive...put yourself in the shoes of the teachers who get the brunt of many of the complaints.