Teaching for creativity: from sage to guide to meddler

Reference: Erica McWilliam (2009) Teaching for creativity: from sage to guide to meddler,Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 29:3, 281-293

Abstract: This paper serves three purposes. First, it makes a case for seeing creativity as a keylearning outcome in our times, and thus the core business of education. It then goes on
to examine the nexus of creativity and pedagogy, showing the conceptual work done to
demonstrate creativity as a learnable set of dispositions and capabilities. Finally and
most importantly, the paper argues the value of a pedagogical approach the author calls
“Meddling-in-the-Middle”, in augmenting and enhancing the repertoires of “Sage-onthe-Stage” and “Guide-on-the-Side” in order to build students’ creative capacity.
Examples are given of what these meta-approaches might look like in relation to the
teaching of Shakespeare. The author concludes by arguing the important connection
between Meddling pedagogy and creative capacity building.

Notes: A culture of teaching that values obedient attentiveness or busy work for its own sake,rather than the attention and busy-ness that speaks of productive engagement, is death to
proactive, self-managing learning. Fortunately, active engagement, rather than listening
and regurgitating, reflects the learning preferences of the present generation of learners,
who are more likely in informal environments to try things out rather than follow
instructions “from above”. If teachers can understand the value of being “usefully
ignorant” about learning options and possibilities, at the same time as they are expert in
their disciplinary field and their pedagogical practice, who are active and inventive in the
classroom, who challenge and support, who do not make things too easy, and who are not
the only source of authority, who use processes of discovery, critique, argument and
counter-argument effectively, who enjoy learning themselves and who do not rush to
rescue their students from complexity – such teachers will contribute immeasurably to the
creative capacity of their students now and in the future.

Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning

Reference: Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS One, 6(2), e16782.

Abstract: The way we talk about complex and abstract ideas is suffused with metaphor. In five experiments, we explore how these metaphors influence the way that we reason about complex issues and forage for further information about them. We find that even the subtlest instantiation of a metaphor (via a single word) can have a powerful influence over how people attempt to solve social problems like crime and how they gather information to make ‘‘well-informed’’ decisions. Interestingly, we find that the influence of the metaphorical framing effect is covert: people do not recognize metaphors as influential in their decisions; instead they point to more ‘‘substantive’’ (often numerical) information as the motivation for their problem-solving decision. Metaphors in language appear to instantiate frame-consistent knowledge structures and invite structurally consistent inferences. Far from being mere rhetorical flourishes, metaphors have profound influences on how we conceptualize and act with respect to important societal issues. We find that exposure to even a single metaphor can induce substantial differences in opinion about how to solve social problems: differences that are larger, for example, than pre-existing differences in opinion between Democrats and Republicans.

Note: The best series of studies that I'm aware of in terms of understanding how people shape their reasoning when exposed to controlled metaphors. I'm glad it's being cited often in the last four years: https://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar?cites=10748680439318539033 

Teaching Creativity in Engineering

Reference: Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014). Teaching Creativity in Engineering Courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(3), 417-449.

Abstract
The ability to engage in a creative process to solve a problem or to design a novel artifact is essential to engineering as a profession. Research indicates a need for curricula that enhance students' creative skills in engineering.

Our purpose was to document current practices in engineering pedagogy with regard to opportunities for students' creative growth by examining learning goals, instructional methods, and assessments focused on cognitive creative skills.

We conducted a critical case study of engineering pedagogy at a single university with seven engineering courses where instructors stated the goal of fostering creativity. Data included instructor and student interviews, student surveys, and course materials. For qualitative analysis, we used frameworks by Treffinger, Young, Selby, and Shepardson and by Wiggins and McTighe.

One aspect of creativity, convergent thinking (including analysis and evaluation), was well represented in the engineering courses in our case study. However, instruction on generating ideas and openness to exploring ideas was less often evident. For many of the creative skills, especially those related to divergent thinking and idea exploration, assessments were lacking.

An analysis of pedagogy focused on goals, instruction, and assessments in the engineering curriculum revealed opportunities for growth in students' creative skill development. Designing assessments that motivate students to improve their creative skills and to become more aware of their own creative process is a key need in engineering pedagogy.

Notes: Interesting in principle, the conclusion seem contentious, i.e.: that more/new assessments are needed -and that assessments motivate students.

Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela’s Contribution

Reference: Hallowell, R. (2009). Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela’s Contribution to Media Ecology: Autopoiesis, The Santiago School of Cognition, and Enactive Cognitive Science. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Assocation, 10.

Abstract: This paper provides an overview of the major body of work in the biology of cognition produced by the Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela. In addition to a review of their work together, Varela’s “enactive” approach to cognition is discussed. Insights from these studies are related to the field of media ecology. In their early work together Maturana and Varela developed the idea of “autopoiesis” (self- production) as the primary feature that distinguishes living things from non-living things. From their theory of autopoiesis in biology, they develop a naturalistic, non-transcendental and observer-dependent interpretation of cognition, language, and consciousness. They argue against any absolutely objective world; instead they claim that we bring forth a world with others through the process of our living in human created worlds that arise through language and the coordination of social interaction. Implications of this view for media ecology are considered.

Notes: I first read Maturana and Varela's work as an undergraduate student of design (thanks to Fernando Shultz mainly), and what surprises me today, twenty years later, is how marginal these ideas still are, across science and in design circles. For example, even in a South American online forum where design issues are discussed, a simple comparison is quite telling:

• 39 results for "philippe starck" site:foroalfa.org
• 4 results for "humberto maturana" site:foroalfa.org

In other words, a clown is ten times more popular with designers than an intellectual who has deep contributions for understanding fundamental issues behind humans and design.