A wide distribution is implied because virtually every individual has the mental capacity to construct the personal interpretations that are involved.
Creativity is, then, something we can find in every child, not just the gifted or highly intelligent. The following topics were out of favour in the research: therapy, free will, intuition, humour and brainstorming. One of the most important trends suggests that creativity research is becoming more rigorous. Rigour, in the scientific sense, specifically refers to objectivity, and this in turn indicates that there is more quality control, more agreement about techniques to ensure that empirical work is reliable and valid and less opportunity for bias and unjustified speculation.
This may explain why some topics, such as free will and intuition, are not often studied or the studies are not often published. The benefits of this rigour are numerous. It should lead to greater respect from the other sciences, draw support and pay off in proven applications.
One presupposition of the objective view is that we need to be very certain about creativity. Runco there we can be most certain. However, there are a number of problems with this view. One reflects the possibility that creative expression is sometimes personal and not easily compared with normative standards.
The creative efforts of children, for example, are often original and meaningful for youngsters but not in comparison with some larger norms.
Clearly, when interested in children, it is creative potential that is the primary concern, rather than unambiguous creative performance. This line of thought can be further clarified by examining originality. Originality is without a doubt required for creativity, but an original idea or solution might lack the aesthetic appeal or adaptiveness that characterises truly creative ideas. Moreover, the originality and adaptiveness, for that matter of anything is most convincing when it is compared with objective standards.
This suggests that ideas given by one child can or should be compared with his or her peers in order to determine originality. However, this of course brings us back to the problem of objectivity: if creativity is defined only against certain social standards, creative efforts must be expressed, shared and socially recognised, and this precludes much of the work of children.
I have suggested that the view of creativity as manifest only in socially recog- nised performances requires something in addition to creativity. In particular, it requires expression and eventual recognition Runco, I further proposed that it would be more realistic to clearly distinguish creativity and expression from each other. My own view is that creativity can be defined in terms of personal construc- tions and the requisite cognitive processes, and these processes should be considered separate from expressiveness to maintain precision within our language.
In addition, parsimony is an important premise of the scientific method, and that too suggests that creation be kept distinct from expression and social recognition. Creativity can be defined in very literal terms. The basic idea is that any thinking or problem solving that involves the construction of new meaning is creative. That may sound contrary to theories of creativity which emphasise orig- inality and usefulness, but there is no incompatibility if you keep in mind that a personal construction will likely be original and useful to that one individual.
Many examples of this kind of personally meaningful construction can be found in the writings of Jean Piaget; one of his most accessible descriptions is his short book aptly titled To Understand is to Invent.
Importantly, although Piaget described new under- standings as constructions and structures, he did not use the term creativity. He looked to invention which I am tying to creative insight as required for personal and authentic understanding.
Without invention, Piaget felt that the individual was simply memorising information, but not understanding it. The definition of creativity as construction of personal meaning is also consist- ent with the notion that creativity is a kind of self-expression and self-actualisation. Education for Creative Potential Each of these concepts emphasises the individual, the self. Equally significant is the premise in each that creativity is widely distributed.
A wide distribution is implied because virtually every individual has the mental capacity to construct personal interpretations.
Runco and Torrance , for example, each recently discussed the distribution of creativity in disadvantaged children. Creativity is often found in gifted children, of course, and only a wide distribution will include disadvantaged and gifted children. Admittedly, there are different kinds of disad- vantages and different kinds of giftedness, but that extends the distribution even further. Creativity and the potential for self-actualisation are not just for the eminent.
Some individuals are extremely unfortunate in their basic neurological endow- ments and some clinical populations have great difficulty tying their ideas to reality. Both presumably have low levels of creative potential. A difficulty being realistic will preclude creativity if we define it such that ideas must be original and adaptive, fitting or somehow appropriate.
Unrealistic ideas are not adaptive. Still, an over- whelming portion of the population has a functional neuroanatomy and does focus on ideas that are tied to reality.
In this light, the vast majority of the population has the potential to construct personal meaning. It may be mundane and everyday creativity, but it can be creativity nonetheless. A great deal of evidence now suggests that creativity is not just found in professional fields, but is instead often apparent in the natural environment. Richards et al. Many existing theories are, as noted above, focused on objective performances and achievements.
They tend to be product oriented. The theory of personal creativity is, on the other hand, focused on the creative process and the mechanism that underlies creative behaviour.
There are other notable differences between the theory of personal creativity and other existing theories Runco, , but this difference is especially important for our current purposes because it leads directly to educational implications. If creativity is defined in terms of objective performances and actual achievement, children i.
In other words, their creativity is often not impressive enough when compared with adult creative achievements. If we are unable to recognise their potentials, we certainly will not be able to fulfil them.
On the other hand, the theory of personal creativity is connected to certain other views of creativity and development. There is the parallel between this theory and that of Piaget, mentioned briefly above. A slightly more detailed examination with help to clarify my thinking about personal creativity, confirm its distinctiveness and suggest specific educational implications.
In Piagetian terms, assimilation is the key to creative thinking. It is there that the individual takes liberties with information. No wonder Piaget felt that imaginat- ive play was primarily assimilatory. I have several times described personal creativity as interpretive, but it can also be described as assimilatory. Along the same lines, it de-emphasises the cognitive structural changes that Piaget felt were the result of accommodation. Admittedly, structural changes may be related to certain kinds of creative insights, but they are the quick insights, the a-ha Gruber, , sudden recognition of a solution or piece to a puzzle.
These are most often entirely convergent. Original interpretations are assimilatory, while convergent insights involve accommodation. Assimilation occurs when the individual changes infor- mation; accommodation occurs when the individual reorganises structures to take new information into account. Book by Mark A. Get A Copy.
Unknown Binding , pages. Published January 15th by Not Avail first published December 31st More Details Other Editions 3. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Creativity Research Handbook , please sign up.
Be the first to ask a question about Creativity Research Handbook. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list ». Community Reviews. Showing Rating details.
All Languages. More filters. It will bring the scholar up to date and bring the newcomer up to speed about what has been done in creativity research. These volumes cover long-standing areas of study, such as development and creativity, as well as new applications of creativity research, including economic research and studies of stress and creativity.
Each chapter is thorough and focuses on reliable research. No other source will bring anyone up to date quite so well as The Creativity Research Handbooks. Cognitive psychologist Mark Runco is a leading creativity researcher whose empirical work focuses on idea generation and divergent thinking. To help people fulfill their capacity for creativity, he has devised a battery of tests that measures creative potential and performance. Acar, M. Runco, and H.
0コメント