by Gerard J Puccio, Ph.D.

First published September 2001.

Too little of our teaching in higher education is focused on nurturing students’ ability to think in creative ways. As a result, an educational system that should train students to become independent thinkers ends up creating individuals who readily conform to prevailing thought, individuals who take a reactive rather than a proactive approach to problem solving, and individuals who would rather follow than lead.

The educational experiences of many young people conditions them to take a passive approach to the learning process. They learn that the way to earn good grades and to make it through school successfully is to memorize information and to recall this information when called upon. Thus teachers often treat students as simple input-output systems; we pump information in, assess the information that comes out and do not concern ourselves with the extent to which the information has been internalized. This presents a serious threat to society. We are in danger of producing a generation that is unable to engage in higher-order thinking skills; a generation that becomes trapped too easily by their own knowledge and are unable to challenge their own assumptions so that new knowledge can be created.

Robert Fritz (1991), a composer, filmmaker and author, suggested that,

“The creative process has had more impact, power, influence, and success than any other process in history. All of the arts, many of the sciences, architecture, pop culture, and the entire technological age we live in exists because of the creative process” (p. 5).

In 1990 a study was published by the American Society for Training and Development. The main thrust of this nation-wide investigation was to identify the skills deemed necessary in today’s workplace. One of the seven basic skill sets identified by the research team was creative thinking and adaptability.

If creative thinking is considered to be critical to professional success, and I would further suggest that it is critical to success in one’s personal life, then institutions of higher education must sincerely consider the degree to which classroom experiences promote or undermine students’ creativity. In this fast-paced and ever-changing world we live in, creative thinking is not a mere luxury, it is a basic survival skill.

Let me be clear about my conception of creative thinking. Perhaps the most widely-held view of creative thinking is that it is the ability to produce original ideas that serve some purpose. That is unique ideas that solve a problem, create an opportunity, or produce some benefit (either tangible or intangible).

Noller (cited in Isaksen, Dorval, & Treffinger, 1994) used a formula as a way of defining creative behavior. This formula provides a useful framework for assessing how educational institutions perform in terms of producing students who are able to engage in creative thought. Noller’s formula is as follows:

C = fa(K, I, E)

In this formula ‘C’ represents creative behavior, which is a function (f) of the interaction among knowledge (K), imagination (I), and evaluation (E).

Thus for creative behavior to appear students must first master the knowledge of their particular discipline.

However, students cannot allow themselves, and we must do whatever we can to prevent them, from becoming trapped by their knowledge. I say this for several reasons. First, new information and ideas often quickly surpass what we know as fact today. Second, we need students to make contributions to their respective fields and not approach their discipline as if all the knowledge that can be created has been created.

To prevent this ‘in-the-box’ thinking we must encourage students to freely engage in the second part of this equation, that is imaginative thought. By the time most students enter higher education, the days of free imaginative thinking have been long gone. As educators we must awaken the imagination of all students. We must help them to look at problems from unique perspectives, to toy with ideas, and to be open to exploring unusual options.

Critical Thinking

Finally, to balance off original and imaginative thought, students must learn how to employ effective critical thinking. Critical thinking, for example, enables students to make more effective decisions about what original ideas to pursue. Also, effective critical thinking allows students to more skilfully identify problems and opportunities that are ripe for creative thought.

The ‘a’ in Noller’s formula stands for attitude. Without the proper drive the creative potential of an individual may go unrealized. Here we must ask ourselves the question as to whether our classroom environments enhance students’ motivation to think creatively or do we tend to undermine their drive to be creative?

In summary, if part of the mission of higher education is to advance society then it is absolutely necessary for us to take more seriously the issue of how well we produce students who can engage in creative thought. We must examine how well we nurture all three of the main ingredients in Noller’s definition. Without the appropriate balance of knowledge, imagination, and evaluation we may be in jeopardy of producing students who will not be the creative leaders of tomorrow.

References:

Carnevale, A. P., Gainer, Meltzer, A. S. (1990). Workplace basics: The skills employers want. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Fritz, R. (1991). Creating: A guide to the creative process. New York: Fawcett Columbine.

Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (1994). Creative approaches to problem solving. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Author

Gerard J Puccio, Ph.D.
Director of The International Center for Studies in Creativity
State University of New York College at Buffalo.