Encouraging Childrens Participation in the Creative Arts - Research Paper Example

 Encouraging Children’s Participation in the Creative Arts Abstract Creativity is now recognized to be an essential trait that needs to be developed in individuals in order to survive this fast-changing world. This trait needs to be developed from childhood. This means that the school curriculum should incorporate creativity development. This research paper aims to investigate mainstream schools as to its establishment of opportunities for children, specifically, Key Stage 2 children to be creative in their learning within their literacy lessons. It will probe the extent of the inclusion of creative activities throughout the lessons The qualitative methods of interview, questionnaire distribution and direct observation were used for this study. The use of multiple data-collection methods contributes to the trustworthiness of the data. 10 Key Stage 1 practitioners were selected to answer questionnaires that determine their thoughts on creativity and if it was incorporated in their curriculum. They were also tasked to observe 10 literacy lessons in various classes to see if creativity is encouraged in such lessons, following an observation sheet based on Torrance’s (1962) guidelines in encouraging creativity development. Also, 10 Key Stage 2 pupils were interviewed as a group regarding their views and concerns on the integration of creativity in their classes. It was found that there is a lack of creativity development in the curriculum as reported by the practitioners and the children interviewed. The lessons observed were likewise wanting of creative flair. The practitioners believed that incorporating creative activities will make children more interested and engaged in class, leading to their improved performance. However, there is a lack of support from the school administration with regards to the inclusion of creativity development in the curriculum. The lessons observed did not encourage creativity enough in the children, and so the children did not seem engaged and just run through the motions of the class. It was evident that the desire for a more creative curriculum be implemented This research, although limited in the number of participants, has reached the conclusion that there are gaps in creativity development incorporation in the school curriculum and is recommended that teachers be thoroughly trained in this aspect. Learning to be creative themselves will help them teach creatively and this will redound to the benefit of their students. Since this study is in the exploratory stage, it is also recommended that a large-scale study with more participants be conducted in schools to understand the extent of lack of creativity development so the proper interventions may be designed and implemented. Glossary EYFS – Early Years Foundation Stage NACCCE - National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education QCA - Qualifications and Curriculum Authority SEED - Scottish Executive Education Department Introduction This research will investigate literacy lessons due to the limited time frame it would be impossible to conduct a review of all the curriculum subjects. It is to check if plans for children to use their imagination are being conducted more in their learning throughout the curriculum. Therefore one aspect of the curriculum will be explored. In order to investigate the gap between creativity and learning children will be interviewed to ascertain their views on this topic. Furthermore, practitioners within the setting will be asked to put forward their views and opinions on the curriculum in the form of a questionnaire. Additionally 10 lessons will be observed to see if strategies of creativity are integrated in the child’s learning. This dissertation is an attempt to discuss what the view of creativity means for primary practitioners, and how it might be put into practice across a range of curricular areas. Wilson (2005) advocates that, in the last part of the twentieth century and the early twenty – first creativity in education has increasingly become a focus in curriculum and pedagogy. It is now embedded in the Foundation Stage and the National Curriculum for Schools in England. Margaret Donaldson (1978 cited in Wilson, 2005) had an explicit notion about a creative education whereby she stated that large numbers of children leave school with a bitter taste of defeat in them, not having mastered those basic skills which society demands, much less having become people who rejoice in the exercise of creative intelligence. Wilson (2005) concludes that in order to overcome this scenario it is important for teachers to enhance opportunities for children to be creative within the classroom. As Albert Einstein (cited in Craft, 2002) reported as having once said that imagination is more important than knowledge as imagination could embrace the world with new and unique ideas. Wilson (2005) further developed Craft ‘s (2002) point when she states that practitioners need to express and articulate on behalf of children they must learn to sponsor creativity to promote the highest level of thinking and originality thus trying to produce and develop through a creative curriculum (Craft, 2002). The clear definition of creativity is debatable; some even go so far as to argue that there is no clear definition for the term creativity (Compton, 2007). However, others have input what they define as creativity. According to the Reggio Emilia approach Thornton (2005), states that creativity is essential to successful learning as it enables children to make connections between the different areas of learning which in turn extends their understanding (Rinaldi, 2007). Hood (2008) states that Creativity is a state of mind in which all of our intelligences are working together, he goes on to predict that it involves the basic senses within a human whereby seeing, thinking and generating ideas can be incorporated into any subject at school or in any aspect of life (Hood 2008). Therefore it is essential that children are regularly asked questions and given the opportunity to ask questions in order to further stimulate their creative learning thus increasing their self – esteem and confidence (Hood, 2008). Creativity is a quality which can have many advantages as it can be used within many aspects in the child’s later life (Cullingford, 2007). Thus, it is important that educators incorporate the development of creativity in their classrooms since creative thought processes and imagination are paramount in aspects of children’s development throughout the school curriculum (Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001; Craft et al, 2001). Parnes (1963 cited in Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001) advocates, that creativity is the process of reflecting upon previous experiences, responding to stimuli and essentially building up unique ideas. However, the emphasis on the curriculum has limited children’s exposure to more creative activities in school (Hynds, 2007). Many educators are still stuck with the notion that the key to developing intelligence is transmitting knowledge learned from the past, so the disciplines of traditional subject areas are given priority to fill students’ cognitive capacities (Brown et al, 1989). As educational philosophies evolved, so did teaching methods. The theories of Piaget, Vygotsky, Gardner, and other contemporary theorist’s such as Craft and Jeffery have expanded educator’s thinking that intellectual development should not neglect the child’s innate creativity (Wilson, 2005). Aim To investigate mainstream schools if they have established opportunities for Key Stage 2 children to be creative in their learning within literacy lessons. The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether creativity is widely included within the child’s learning and to what extent planning is used to integrate this throughout literacy lessons, and not just purely for the creative and performing arts aspects (Craft & Jeffrey 2004). Due to the timeframe of this research, only literacy lessons will be observed because looking at broader subject areas may need a considerable amount of time. One lesson may be planned different to another therefore the research may become void. To achieve this aim it is broken down in achievable objectives stated below. Objectives To investigate if there is a gap between creativity and learning in the curriculum by critically reviewing different theorist’s views of promoting creativity and the use of imagination within the child’s learning. To implement an informal interview with a group of 10 children in year 2 to ascertain their views on the opportunities they have to be creative. To question 10 practitioners in key stage 1 for their thoughts on the curriculum and if the child is engaging in enough creativity in their learning. To observe 10 lessons conducted by the practitioner to see if strategies of creativity are integrated in the child’s learning. To critically analyse and evaluate the findings from the study conducted and form a set of recommendations and conclusions. The purpose of objective 1 is to establish the gap between creativity and learning in the curriculum by critically reviewing different theorist’s views of promoting creativity and the use of imagination within the child’s learning existing research in this area will be critically evaluated (Bell, 2008). Following this objective 2 will conducted with an informal interview with 10 children in year 2 which will determine their opinions on creativity and how it is being used in the curriculum (Cohen, et al, 2007). On the other hand Objective 3 will be relying on primary research whereby 10 practitioners will be questioned to ascertain their thoughts on the subject (Cohen et al, 2007). Finally Objective 4 helps put theory into practice with an observation of a lesson conducted by the practitioner to see if strategies of creativity are integrated in the child’s learning (MacNaughton et al, 2001). Rationale Duffy, (1998) states that, past experience has shown that children are lacking opportunities to link creativity to their learning. As Montessori (1870) acknowledged, children’s underpinning knowledge comes from play (Broadhead, 2006; Cossentino, 2006; Isaacs, 2007). In an effort to incorporate creativity in the curriculum, as proposed by the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE, 2000), schools in the UK have agreed to revise their curriculum to be more flexible, offer greater scope for creativity to meet the changing needs of students and society. Scottish Executive Education Department, (2006) reports that being creative, is an initiative to be developed across the curriculum, and intends that children use creative approaches, be imaginative, take risks, question and explore possibilities. The revised curriculum will also provide teachers more flexibility to design what they teach to meet the needs of their students, thus encouraging more creative approaches (SEED, 2006). This study will try and find out to what extent this is true. The research will investigate the school curriculum and if plans for children to use their imagination are being conducted more in their learning. Widening children’s experiences to be creative in the planning is very important in order for them to use their imagination (Duffy, 1998). Identifying possible barriers that could affect a child’s development and learning need to be assessed so that children are able to fulfil their goals and become confident and independent learners (Kirkup, 2006; McKenna, 2004) thus the importance of a creative classroom is by far the key to all planning (Starko, 2001). Theoretical Framework The National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE) has advocated the incorporation of creativity in the curriculum of schools, knowing its significance in children’s growth and development (NACCCE, 1999). Responding to NACCCE’s report, Jeffrey and Craft (2004) clarified the distinction between teaching creatively and teaching for creativity, as these two concepts refer to different meanings – teaching creatively may be associated with effective teaching while teaching for creativity may be associated with “learner empowerment” (Jeffrey and Craft, 2001). NACCCE agrees that both concepts are related. Their position claims that when children are exposed to environments where teachers’ creative abilities are engaged, these children are likely to develop creative abilities themselves (Jeffrey and Craft, 2001). NACCCE’s (1999) teaching for creativity principles include encouraging children to be aware and believe in their own creativity. Identifying these children’s specific creative abilities and developing in them the usual capacities and sensitivities of creativity such as curiosity, being more knowledgeable about the creative processes further develops creativity. Of course, providing the children several opportunities to be creative is achieved using a hands-on learning approach (Craft and Jeffrey, 2004). Woods (1990) proposed a framework that better explains the relationship between teaching creatively and teaching for creativity with these features of creative teaching: relevance, ownership, control and innovation. This means when children are learning about something relevant and interesting to them, they become more engaged in the learning process. When the learning environment encourages them to keep asking questions, raise problems and issues complemented by opportunities to debate and discuss their thinking, it draws these learners into the heart of both the teaching and learning process as a co-participant (Thornton, 2000). This leads to ownership of the knowledge gained (Pollard and Filer, 1996), therefore once they have ownership of the knowledge, it gives them a sense of control as to which learning strategies to apply to learning contexts. Having control gives them opportunities to be more innovative (Diakidoy and Kanari, 1999). Jeffrey and Craft (2004) add that engagement is strong when the learner is included in decisions about what knowledge is to be investigated, how to investigate it and how to evaluate the learning process. The collaborative partnership between teacher and learner is also known as the ‘learner inclusive’ approach (Jeffrey and Craft, 2003). The learner’s experience and imagination play a great role in the process of investigating knowledge, using tools such as “possibility knowledge” (Woods and Jeffrey, 1996) and possibility thinking (Craft, 2002). Such an approach to creative teaching and learning is manifested in Reggio Emilia schools. Its founder, Loris Malaguzzi (1998), believes that creativity should not be considered a separate mental ability, but a characteristic of our way of thinking, knowing and making choices (Malaguzzi, 1998). Children naturally express such creativity in their natural communication. Their communications may be expressed in various forms or “languages”– in words, drawing, artwork, three-dimensional constructions, music and movement. Young children do not express their ideas in just one form but move naturally and easily between “languages”. Valentine (2000) expresses that in Reggio Emilia schools, teachers encourage the children to use as many different languages as possible. This concept of diversity in thinking and communication form is comparable to Howard Gardner’s (1983) multiple intelligences. In a study observing the effects of creative teaching and learning (Fawcett & Hay, 2004), the children were deeply involved in the learning and creative process. This was because the children delighted in other people respecting their ideas which they pursue, people giving them freedom and space to explore. They became more independent, investigative and imaginative. They solved problems together instead of running to an adult for help. They resolved issues within themselves and due to their involvement in the project, confidence and self-esteem grew (Fawcett & Hay, 2004). Malaguzzi (1998) most appropriately expressed that creativity seems to come into view from multiple experiences therefore it can express itself through cognitive and imaginative processes (Duffy, 2006) Csikszentmihalyi (1997) claims that the experience of children engaged in creative learning as being deeply involved in their task is called “Flow”. This is a common experience of creative people. Flow is an optimal experience, “an almost effortless yet highly focused state of consciousness” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). It is a way of being lost in the creative process, once an individual gets out of this flow and is satisfied with the experience, the professes that a child may indulges in feeling happy, Csikszentmihalyi (1997) further explains that more flow one experiences in life, the more likely he is to feel happy overall, as his creative potentials are optimized. Craft (2008) states that creativity is a natural force innate in an individual that grows and develops when it is freely expressed and nurtured. Young children start out thinking of endless possibilities with little knowledge of hindrances. When they are allowed to explore things on their own, they find creative ways to learn about their world. Too many restrictions and expectations to conform to established standards may curtail one’s natural hunger for discovery and adventure and simply forces one’s creativity to stagnate (Singer, 2003). It takes a creative teacher who employs innovative teaching and learning methods to whet a child’s appetite for learning (Jeffrey, 2006). The educators in the Reggio Emilia schools epitomize the ideal teachers who teach creatively for creativity to flourish in their learners. NACCCE may have had the Reggio Emilia system in mind when they proposed that creativity be infused in the curriculum. Using creative and fun teaching strategies puts children into “flow”, as they become deeply engrossed in the learning experience. They become more and more motivated to gain more knowledge about their world as their minds become filled with ideas they eagerly want to try out and confirm (Basom & Frase, 2004). Further theorists will be discussed in the literature review, which will look at this topic in more depth. Literature Review Introduction The aim of this literature review is to clarify the relationship between creativity and what influence it has on literacy lessons within the school curriculum thus promoting a child’s learning further. McIntyre (2001) suggests that the design and execution of the National Curriculum is detrimental to children’s creative development (Cremin, 2006; Craft & Jeffery, 2004). Fischman et al (2006) states that, a good quality curriculum has to offer prime importance to creativity he further advocates that educational policies are giving little importance to child development through creativity. However, certain steps have been taken to ensure its role in school curriculum (Kelly, 2004). Consequently the introduction of the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) has encouraged creativity within the education system by educating practitioners on the importance of promoting and praising creativity from an early age (Cropley, 1999; Cole, 2008). Early years are very significant in everyone’s life in that it is primarily receptive in nature. Young children absorb as much information and knowledge that are provided It is essential that educators are aware of this and take appropriate action to promote creativity in the early years as Csikszentmihalyi (1990; 1996) agrees that creativity in adulthood is dependent on the childhood experiences gained in school life. Creativity is possible in all areas of human activities. It has received a high degree of attention from educationist and scholars. They propounded that an ideal school curriculum should promote the children’s creativity, it is creativity that generates learning. It is seen as significant in learning and teaching throughout the curriculum (Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001). Consequently early childhood education is vital in building a great groundwork for the child’s educational accomplishments (Overall, 2007). Overall (2007) assert, it would be desirable that the child learns through the most effective ways as put forward by (Fischman et al, 2006) if children are to learn creatively, the teachers have to employ innovative teaching strategies Cremin (2006) suggested that this may not always be the case as children’s innate capabilities can be weakened by a below average teaching plan. It has always alleged that the students’ creativity is not properly nurtured inside the classroom. Teachers can make use of a wide variety of approaches to enhance the teaching-learning process as a dynamic teacher goes for imaginative approaches which are interesting and effective (Cremin, 2006). Definition of creativity A historical approach to creativity is as follows: the ability to see things in new ways; boundary breaking and going beyond the information given; thinking unconventionally; making something unique or original; and combining unrelated things into something new (Schirrmacher, 1988 cited in Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001 ). Torrance (1965 cited in Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001), an advocate in creativity research, defines creativity as the “process of sensing problems or gaps in information, forming ideas or hypotheses and communicating the results”. A more contemporary approach to creativity which has come to light as defined by the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE) requires a balance of skills, knowledge and understanding in order for children to experiment they further out line that imaginative activity is fashioned to produce outcomes which are both original and of value (Compton, 2007; Craft, 2006) thus suggesting that the use of imagination is essential in creativity (Prentice, 2000). Creativity allows children to express their ideas and feelings, by carrying out investigation thus making sense of the world in a practical way through play. It also gives children the experience of making choices and decisions by promoting independence and perseverance (McTavish, 2008). Thornton and Brunton (2007) further support this as investigations encourage children to develop thinking and reasoning skills and enable them to make connections between different areas of knowledge, thus incorporating creativity into knowledge and understanding of the world is vital. Schirrmacher (1988) explains that creativity may be explained in terms of product, process, skill set of personality traits or set of environmental conditions. As a product, it is viewed as a new invention, creation or thought, like the works of creative geniuses such as Mozart, Plato, Galileo, Newton and Einstein, among others. In this explanation, creativity seems to be difficult to achieve for ordinary people (Schirrmacher, 1988). As a process, creativity is more inclusive, as coming up with a product is not a requirement and everyone can do creative processing that includes “thinking, speaking, playing, writing, dancing, singing, playing a musical instrument, experimenting with objects, transforming materials and manipulating ideas and objects.” (Schirrmacher, 1988). Engaging in the creative process brings a feeling of fulfillment to the person even if the creative expression does not result in a product. Creative individuals are identified by a set of personality traits. Researchers on creativity have come up with their own lists from their own research. Torrance (1962) has identified seven indicators of creativity as follows: curiosity, flexibility, sensitivity to problems, redefinition, self-feeling, originality and insight. Originally, these indicators were given to identify highly creative children. However, upon further analysis, such indicators likewise describe highly creative adults. Dewey (1952) suggested that children learn from direct experiences (Mooney, 2000; Moon, 2004) creativity is a manifestation of movement towards self – actualisation. Maslow (1968) has put forward that people with a high level of self-actualising creativity tend to do everything creatively. He believed the ability to express ideas freely without self criticism is essential for this type of creativity. Creativity is a fundamental characteristic inherent in human nature (Denny, 2005; Dowling, 2008; Starko, 2001). Johnson (1972) has compiled a number of research in the field of creativity, and has come up with the main dimensions of creative achievement as intellectual leadership; sensitivity to problems; originality, ingenuity, unusualness; usefulness, appropriateness; and breadth. In terms of explaining creativity developing from a set of environmental conditions, it may be concluded that the greater one’s background of experiences with people, places, objects and life, in general, the greater the scope of possibilities to draw from in the expression of creativity. On the other hand, if one is inexperienced and is not exposed to a variety of life experiences, their creative thinking may be limited to the small environment familiar to them (Schirrmacher, 1988 cited in Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001). Furthermore Kolb (1968) introduces the concept of learning styles and experiential learning; professing each child learns differently through various experiences and it is the role of the practitioner to meet the child’s individual learning preferences (Clausen-May, 2005; Slack, 2007). Froebel’s (1782) theory gives the child an opportunity to direct their own learning this can increase the child’s motivation (Prentice, 2000; Huleatt, 2007; Clarke, 2008) this is further developed by Piaget who had an influence on child initiated play and children’s cognitive thinking (Cunningham, 2006; Singer, 2003). Historical theorists’ views on creativity In an effort to incorporate creativity in the curriculum, as proposed by the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE, 2000), schools in the UK have agreed to revise their curriculum to be more flexible, offer greater scope for creativity to meet the changing needs of students and society. SEED (2006) reports that Being Creative, an initiative to be developed across the curriculum, intends that children use creative approaches, be imaginative, take risks, question and explore possibilities. The revised curriculum will also provide teachers more flexibility to design what they teach to meet the needs of their students, thus encouraging more creative approaches (SEED, 2006). Such an educational approach very closely resembles the Constructivist Theory of Education. Constructivist theory is gaining more attention, recognition and acceptance in many educational institutions. It premises on the belief that learners “construct” their own learning, and in effect, have better retention of it. “In the Constructivist theory the emphasis is placed on the learner or the student rather than the teacher or the instructor.  It is the learner who interacts with objects and events and thereby gains an understanding of the features held by such objects or events.  The learner, therefore, constructs his/her own conceptualizations and solutions to problems.  Learner autonomy and initiative is accepted and encouraged.” (Van Ryneveld, n.d., n.p.). Brewer (2001) reports that as early as the sixteenth century, there were already individuals advocating for more experience-based learning. John Comenius (1592-1670), known as the “Father of Modern Education” recommended a holistic, integrated, hands-on curriculum and was the first to use pictures in textbooks. This introduction to an innovative approach, at that time, has caught on with other educators (Brewer, 2001). In the seventeenth century, Jean-Jacques Rosseau ( 1712-1778) began to focus on the learner’s nature instead of the subject matter to be learned. He theorized that learning by discovery is much more effective than being merely “spoon-fed” information. He also empowered the learner by advising that the more a learner is able to control the environment, the more effective the education (Brewer, 2001). Rosseau believed that education should conform to the child’s nature, and explained that people develop through various stages. Different forms of educational strategies should be adjusted to be appropriate to each developmental stage (Brewer, 2001). Among others, these prominent men in the history of Education have vast influence on constructivist theory. However, the men who were honored to be credited for its foundation are Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. The theories of Piaget and Vygotsky were based on their predecessors’. “Piaget believed that children create knowledge through interactions with the environment. Children are not passive receivers of knowledge; rather, they actively work at organizing their experience into more and more complex mental structures.” (Brewer, 2001, p.6). He insists that children need to use all their cognitive functions. These theories were designed to form minds which can be critical, can verify, and not accept everything they are offered. Such beliefs reflect his respect for children’s thinking. Vygotsky (1978) believed that children’s intellectual development is influenced more by social context than by individual experiences. His theory places a great deal of emphasis on effective social interaction. Taken together, both Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories are known as Constructivist Teaching Practices and Principles where Piaget’s emphasize Cognitive constructivism and Vygotsky’s emphasize Social Constructivism. The integration of the ideas of Piaget and Vygotsky has proven to be an effective fusion (Brewer, 2001). Cognitive Constructivist Theories put much premium on knowledge from experiences and Social Constructivist theories point to the importance of teacher explanations, support and demonstrations. Cognitive Constructivists value the individual’s questioning with open ended-questions and Social Constructivists encourage multiple viewpoints in understanding a problem. Cognitive Constructivists promote individual discoveries and Social Constructivists encourage students’ collaboration in learning and social interaction. Cognitive Constructivists identify and foster skills needed to manage learning, and acknowledge collaborative learning as supportive in the increase of individual metacognitive skill. Social Constructivists create an atmosphere of joint responsibility for learning. (Bonk & Cunningham, 1998). Creativity and Play Play can be a useful tool for developing creativity and develop skills in organising a creative and imaginative environment (Broadhead, 2004; Overall, 2007). Csikszentmihalyi (1996) advocates for children to become engrossed in an activity and express their thoughts and views creatively the activity in hand must be acquired to their taste and interests. He termed this “autotelic” suggesting that children’s interests are paramount in enabling them to channel their creativity (Barret, 2006; Basom & Frase, 2004). Therefore it is nessesary to plan activities according to children’s interests. Duffy, (2006) provides an insight into play; asserting it as a means of self-exploration which enables children to understand the world around them through first hand experiences. In line with this Griffiths, (2004) implies play is a child’s work and through play children can build on their creative impulses thus enabling them to develop further. As aforementioned (MacIntyre, 2001) states play has no clear focus, regardless of this Neuam & Tallack (1997) emphasises play has a purpose which is often subtle; therefore parents and practitioners alike feel a sense of uncertainty regarding creativity within the child’s curriculum. For this reason practitioners and parents habitually fail to appreciate play as a tool for supporting children’s thinking and imagination (Overall, 2007). Millou (1994) states that when children are involved in play; they are very close in enhancing their creativity thus further improving their imaginative impulses. Play and creativity have been linked in numerous ways as theoretically; pretend play fosters the development of cognitive and affective processes that are important in the creative act (Russ, 2003). In a longitudinal study carried out by Claxton (2006), he stated that the quality of fantasy and imagination in play predicted divergent thinking over time (Abbott, 2001). Rudolf Steiner, an influential theorist, professes that play and imitations are important as play strengthens the imagination and supports all aspects of development (Burney, 2008). He advocates that the curriculum combines creativity and practical activity therefore giving children practical life experiences such as gardening, cooking and cleaning this giving them the opportunity to develop their knowledge and understanding of the world (Cossentino, 2006). Routine played a significant role in Steiner’s theory as he advocated children require a routine to feel secure in order to know the day to day planned activities that are set for them within their setting (Prentice, 2000). An influential piece of research is the Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE) project. The EPPE project is a longitudinal study investigating the effects of pre-school education carried out by a number of professionals (Sylva et al, 2004). According to the EPPE project it is vital that a balance of activities are planned throughout the child’s learning as drama and role – play need to have an equal part in literacy and language lessons. Thus providing the best opportunities for adults to extend children’s thinking (Sylva et al, 2004). Hence the EPPE project is implying that adults and children should work side by side when initiating activities (Sylva et al, 2004). In disagreement, Wood and Bennet (1997) highlight that there is an unavoidable relationship between play and learning, thus play is considered to be such an educationally powerful process hence the leaning through play will occur spontaneously regardless of the presence of the adult. This may become difficult when working with older children as teachers have set rules and policies to follow and have to meet targets for each individual child (Kelly, 2004). So play may not be as spontaneous as professed by (Wood and Bennett, 1997) if teachers are finding it difficult to keep up to date with assessments and OFSTED regulations (Kelly, 2004) Additionally opportunities for creativity and play are reduced just as children are becoming ‘master players’, challenges Wood (2007) as one major factor that influences play opportunities is lack of time. Wood (2001) inputs that short provision of time, proves detrimental to children’s achievement as adults are often under pressure to intervene and make children stop what they are doing, be it in the middle of a very engaging and educational activity. This being the case then that child will remain a step behind what could have been achieved in that particular lesson (Wood, 2001). Lindqkist (2001) expresses agreement with this notion and states that this needs to be dealt with as this is not an intervention on the practitioners part but one on the part of poor planning and lack of time. Gardner’s view on Multiple Intelligences and Creativity Gardner’s studies (1993) of multiple intelligences have found creative abilities in several intellectual domains. It appears that creative expression is a fundamental aspect of intelligence in all these domains. Gardner envisions his ideal of what schools must uphold is to provide the basis for enhanced understanding of our several worlds – the physical world, the biological world, the world of human beings, the world of human artifacts, and the world of the self (Gardner, 1999). On the other hand, scholars question the scientific value of Gardner’s theories. White (2004) argues, Gardner's examples of high levels of development in the intelligences reflect his own value judgments. He has in mind the achievements of selected poets, composers, religious leaders, politicians, scientists, novelists and so on. However it is Gardner’s value judgments, not his experimental discoveries as a scientist that are his starting point (Gardner, 1999). This belief is greatly influenced by the use of scientific methods and sophisticated statistical analyses to unearth truths. White (2004), claims that Gardner (1999) has not come up with conclusions to some of his work therefore it may not be convincing. Still, Gardner argues that each of his intelligences have been extensively looked upon and backed up with valid research he feels that there are many theories which have still not been tested out (Gardner, 2005). Sternberg’s work on intelligence (1996) agrees with the work of Gardner. Sternberg has extended to include creative and practical intelligence and found out that it does not follow that intelligent people are creative and practical. Many bright individuals fail to come up with original ideas. This just strengthens Gardner’s theory that people have other kinds of intelligences other than the cognitive intelligence traditionally upheld. The Rose Review versus the Cambridge Review Recent Research A controversial report by the NACCCE noted that creative and cultural education is not appropriately implemented by the national curriculum (Brundrett, 2004; Cowley, 2005). Similarly the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA)¸ agree that the national curriculum should enable children to respond positively to opportunities in a creative context (Brundrett, 2004). QCA (2004) put forward that practitioners need to be able to plan tasks and activities that give children opportunities to be creative thus allowing them to use and develop their imaginative skills (Brundrett, 2004). In conjunction with Brundrett (2004) and Cullingford (2007) strengthens this point implying that children think more deeply about the notion of creativity, as imagination and creativity interlink with one another. By encouraging creativity and the use of imagination, practitioners are promoting children’s abilities to explore and grasp opportunities to make new and reformed connections (Cullingford, 2007). Craft (2003) emphasises the impact the national curriculum has on the children’s learning stating that the curriculum should enable them to think and become more creative. In spite of this Craft (2003) concludes that the National Curriculum is a cross – curricular thinking skill, but on the contrary, even though the framework is devised it is up to the practitioner to reflect and make connections throughout the curriculum. A drawback from policy developments is that practitioners need to change teaching methods to abide by new strategies which may lead to problems in curriculum continuity (Craft, 2003). Mindham (2005) researched the importance of creativity from an early age and found that development involves imagination, invention and creativity. However, there are still various elements undermining the teaching methods which are used in schools. In view of Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, educators must be guided on the range of activities, techniques and materials available in the hopes of encouraging a creative and developmentally-appropriate educational approach (Mindham, 2005). Claxton (2006) advocates that at primary level creativity should not just be related to art as a subject but as an activity that can be incorporated within other subjects in the curriculum. Practitioners’ attitudes and beliefs on creativity need to be addressed in order to enhance creativity within the classroom (Claxton, 2006). Individual needs have to be taken into consideration as all children may not adept in the different elements and phases that contribute to creativity (Claxton, 2006). Jeffrey (2008) also suggests that where achievable, the practitioner should focus on children’s strengths in creative activities in order to build up their confidence and development. An effective curriculum for young children should be rooted in principles of child development and learning. It incorporates appropriate activities that promote all areas of child development (Brewer, 2001). It is therefore a holistic program that addresses the developmental needs of not of a fragmented child, but of a whole child. Its emphasis is not solely on academic activities, which would consequently overlook other areas of development that are likewise significant. Moreover, a child-centered program becomes meaningful when it draws from the children’s needs and learning styles, life experiences, interests, and ideas (Brewer, 2001). Many theorists believe that children learn best through exploration, hands-on experiences, and purposeful play thus developing concepts deductively through first hand experiences (Brewer, 2001). Brewer (2001) states that, children learn skills and acquire deeper understanding when they are socializing with other children in direct experiences. Young children build knowledge as they interact with the world around them by combining new experiences with previous knowledge and perceptions (Hunt, 1961). They construct, adjust, and expand their concepts over time as they organize a variety of experiences and make connections among them (Kostelnik & Howe, 1991). John Dewey (1952) proposed that curriculum be linked to real-life experiences and organized around activities that interest and engage children actively (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992). Dewey (1952) asserted that children’s interests naturally progress into appropriate learning activities and extend to various areas of study. Isenberg and Jalongo (2001) as implied by the guidelines for appropriate curriculum, the concept of integration can also be attributed to the integrated nature of development; that is, development in the different domains does not occur in isolation; rather they influence one another (Bredekamp and Rosegrant, 1992). An integrated curriculum allows the young child to perceive the world around him more clearly. Furthermore, it provides opportunities for in-depth exploration of a topic and learning that has a thorough coverage. More choices and therefore more motivation to learn and greater satisfaction with the results; thus the children are involved more active learning; therefore it give the practitioner an opportunity to learn along with the children and model lifelong learning (Brewer, 2001). There are several positive effects of integrating creative activities in the curriculum. Woods (2003) gives three reasons. Firstly, creativity enhances each child’s skills and abilities. It boosts the self-esteem of a child especially when he or she does not succeed in academic areas. Creativity develops the child’s flexibility of thinking and broadens his or her imagination through self-expression. Expression of creativity is non-threatening and non-evaluative. It acknowledges the fact that each child’s work is different from one another (Woods, 2003). Secondly, it promotes positive attitudes towards learning (Woods, 2003). Children are more involved if the approach is interesting and presented in a creative manner than by merely presenting the topic. They are not passive and non-responsive students. Instead, they are active learners and participants of the learning process (Woods, 2003). Thirdly, children learn concepts and ideas from creative activities (Woods, 2003). They experience pure enjoyment in such activities because these are retained in their memory. In addition, it provides numerous interactions with other children and promotes socialization among peers. Most importantly, learning through creative activities will develop a well-rounded child. Other children who may not succeed in academic subjects may find it successful in creative arts (Gardner, 1983). In many ways, children have proven that they indeed are capable of many things originally unexpected of them. The Constructivist philosophy believes that children are not passive recipients of knowledge, rather, they actively work at organizing their experience into constructing their own learning (Brewer, 2001). Constructivists are consistent in their belief that children’s capabilities in terms of learning can even match that of adult’s. Because of their clarity of thinking, unobstructed by pressures put on by society, they may even surpass the learning abilities of adults. “Children are seen as active and competent in their own learning, fully participatory in co-constructing their learning through social interactions, as opposed to this somehow being shaped by more knowledgeable others.” (Mitchell & Wild, 2004). Therefore, a more active and constructivist curriculum is recommended to encourage creativity development in children. Conclusion Encouraging children’s participation in the creative arts should begin in childhood, as this is the crucial time when creativity emerges. The research finding that elementary schools have something to do with the sudden drop in a child’s creativity is disappointing. School authorities need to address this concern because it is evident that creativity is lacking within schools and practitioners are finding it difficult to incorporate this aspect within all subjects within the curriculum (Mindham, 2005; Claxton, 2006). Furthermore, research has suggested that imagination and creativity are both interlinked with one another giving children to explore widely within other areas of curriculum and not just art (Cullingford, 2007; Brundrett, 2004). Further research will be conducted in the form of questionnaires, observations and an interview in order to investigate this topic. Methodology Choice of research design This research used the qualitative methods of interviews, questionnaires and observations. The use of multiple data-collection methods contributes to the trustworthiness of the data. This practice of relying on multiple methods is called “triangulation,” a term taken from surveying and navigation. The purpose of triangulation is not “the simple combination of different kinds of data, but the attempt to relate them so as to counteract the threats to validity identified in each” (Berg, 1995). Although multiple data collection method is the most common form of triangulation in qualitative research, triangulation in order to increase confidence in research findings may also involve the incorporation of multiple kinds of data sources and multiple theoretical perspectives (Denzin, 1988). The interview method involves questioning or a discussion of issues with one or more people.  It is useful to collect data which may not be accessible through observation or questionnaires (Blaxter et al, 2006). Robson (2002) points out how the interview is a flexible and adaptable research tool.  In face to face interviews, there is the possibility of following up interesting responses.  Frey and Mertens-Oishi (1995) comment how respondent participation can be enhanced by the interviewer sensitively guiding the questioning, and being able to answer any questions which the respondent may ask.  Oppenheim (1992) suggests that the response rate is higher in interviews than in questionnaires, due to the fact that participants become more involved. Campbell et al. (2004) describe questionnaires as: “…a very versatile data-gathering method; they are cheap, easy to administer, whether it be to three people or 300, and can be used to gather a great variety of data of both quantitative and qualitative nature.” (Campbell et al, 2004, p. 146). Cohen et al. (2000) also praise the use of questionnaires for their efficiency. They allow an efficient use of the researcher’s time, as they can collect a significant amount of information in one attempt, rather than conducting interviews over a period of weeks. Gillham (2000) also highlights that questionnaires make efficient use of the respondent’s time, as they can complete the questionnaire at a time that is suitable to them and does not require the researcher and respondent to match free periods of time to conduct the research. For this study, direct observation of classes was implemented. Direct observation offers a more detached perspective of the behaviors/ phenomenon observed. The researcher objectively observes rather than take part and be immersed in the observed situation (Trochim, 2006). The research methods used are guided by questions/ items gathered from the research literature. Construction of research design Sample The sample selected for this research project are 10 key stage 1 practitioners within the school and 10 key stage 2 pupils. For the questionnaires, the practitioners are the respondents. All 10 questionnaires will be distributed within this staff, if insufficient questionnaires are given back, the head teacher and deputy head will each be given a questionnaires as they have been teaching within this age group for many years. The questionnaires are purposefully designed for the practitioners to determine their thought on creativity within a literacy lessons therefore analysis of the feedback is used accordingly to compare and contrast different opinions (Bell, 2005). The following questionnaire is to be distributed among the teacher participants to answer: Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly Disagree Children have enough opportunities to be creative. Providing a creative curriculum is time consuming. Creative activities involve getting messy. Incorporating creative activities will make students more interested in the lessons and therefore perform better in class. Children’s interests, ideas and suggestions in alternative educational strategies must be considered in the planning of lessons. Encouraging creativity in the classroom empowers children to do their best. There is a difference between teaching creatively and creative teaching. Imagination is important in the development of children’s higher order thinking. The school administration is supportive of the incorporation of creative activities in the curriculum. Furthermore 10 lessons conducted by the practitioner will be observed, gaining a basic concept of strategies used to incorporate creativity within literacy lessons and to what extent planning is playing a part in how the lesson is delivered (Hood, 2008). A more knowledgeable understanding of key themes within the lessons will be explored further enhancing the perception of creativity (MacNaughton et al, 2001). Following this an evaluation will be made based on the information, if inadequate points have been observed a different practitioner will be observed to broaden the research further giving a deeper understanding of planning and underpinning the validity of the research (Cohen et al, 2007). The following items are to be observed in the lessons. It serves as a checklist in how creativity is incorporated in the lessons and observers should tick off the items which are observable in the 10 lessons. These items are based on Torrance’s (1962) writings on encouraging creativity: Observed Behaviors in the Lessons Yes No Creative thinking is valued in the classroom. Self-initiated learning is encouraged and evaluated Skills of constructive criticism are being developed. Resources for working out ideas are made available Teacher is adventurous-spirited herself/himself. Questions are treated with respect Acquisition of knowledge in a variety of fields is encouraged. Imaginative ideas are treated with respect The children are taught to value their creative thinking Occasionally pupils do something “for practice” without the threat of evaluation. Pupils are shown that their ideas have value Evaluation is tied in with causes and consequences. Forcing a set pattern is avoided. Tolerance of new ideas is developed. Manipulation of objects and ideas is encouraged. Interviews were a means of collecting and recording information from 10 children on their views and concerns of how much integration of creativity has within the curriculum. An informal interview took place outside of the classroom this was to enable that children felt comfortable within the surroundings as learning to communicate is a significant step towards independence and self – reliance by communicating their ideas, children are able to demonstrate their curiosity and express their creativity (Thornon & Brunton, 2007). The following questions are considered in the informal open-ended/ semi-structured interviews: Do you think that playing and having fun in lessons is important? What would you like your fun lessons to involve? How do you think that can be included in your lessons? Would you feel more creative if those activities are included? Why? How would you learn better about the lesson if those strategies are added? Do you have opportunities to engage in those activities in your school right now? How would you feel if the teachers’ strategies would change to accommodate all your ideas? How do you think it would affect your performance as students if creative teaching and learning are done in your classes? The secondary research from theoretical perspectives will be used to getting an understanding of what historical and contemporary research has proposed as aforementioned theory around the issue of creativity will be selected and evaluated against an assessment schematic. Procedure Cohen et al (2007) indicates that it is very important to get consent from relevant practitioners before starting any sort of research in a school setting. In order to get positive feedback questionnaires were hand delivered to the practitioners and they were given a brief oral explanation of the study. The feedback will be assessed once questionnaires are complete. As Bailey (1995) suggests, if inadequate results are shown or not many practitioners have responded; additional practitioners will be asked to participate. It is important to keep track of all questionnaires handed out and handed in; the response rate was excellent as all questionnaires were completed. Every effort was made to encourage people to complete them, by explaining the importance of the feedback (Bell, 2005). Before observations can take place, consent also needs to be obtained taking into consideration confidentiality as the practitioner would like to be assured on how the information will be used (Bell, 2005). The observations will take place during literacy hour ascertaining the opportunities the children will have to be creative within this lesson as aforementioned if relevant points have not been addressed another practitioner will be observed. Furthermore interviews will be done but as mentioned it is vital that consent is received and confidentiality is maintained at all times as children’s name should not be raised in the research (MacNaughton et al, 2001). An informal interview took place outside of the classroom so that the children feel relaxed and are able to share their experiences and how they feel about creativity as a whole and how much of this is being used in schools today (Fleith, 2000; Jalongo, 2003). The children were given an activity to keep their minds focused as aforementioned they should not feel as though they are being tested (Thornton & Brunton, 2007; Denny, 2005). On completion of the study participants will have access to the findings; this is good practice as suggested by MacNaughton et al (2001) involvement of the participants from the start of the study until the end is very important as they make the foundations of the research in order to achieve the aim. Data Analysis Data will be collected and transferred onto Microsoft Excel where graphs and charts will be produced. Bell (2005) suggests that ranking scales and multiple choice questions prove easier to put across on graphs and charts hence making it simpler to analyse to gain an outcome from the proposed study. Additionally open- ended questions will be evaluated with the findings on the literature review linking theory to practice and how effective this is within schools (Cohen et al, 2007). Furthermore the information ascertained from the observations will be critically evaluated against theory and how effective the practitioners teaching methods were to include creativity within the literacy lessons (Scoffham, 2003). Finally a comparison will be made with children’s opinions during the interview and how much of their needs are being incorporated within the school curriculum linking to theoretical points of view. Brundrett (2007) states that, a basic notion of creativity has more meaning that just a term comprised within schools and the experiences that they offer children. As aforementioned data and information collected from practitioners and the children will abide by confidentiality policies and no information will be disclosed to third parties this will solely be used for research purposes (Bell, 2005). Findings and Analysis A. Teacher Questionnaire Following the completion of interview, observation and questionnaires all data was collated and analysed. Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly Disagree 1. Children have enough opportunities to be creative. 10% 40% 20% 10% 20% 2. Providing a creative curriculum is time consuming. 20% 50% 0 30% 3. Creative activities involve getting messy. 40% 20% 20% 20% 4. Incorporating creative activities will make students more interested in the lessons and therefore perform better in class. 50% 40% 10% 5. Children’s interests, ideas and suggestions in alternative educational strategies must be considered in the planning of lessons. 20% 40% 30% 10% 6. Encouraging creativity in the classroom empowers children to do their best. 20% 60% 10% 10% 7. There is a difference between teaching creatively and creative teaching. 20% 60% 20% 8. Imagination is important in the development of children’s higher order thinking. 60% 30% 10% 9. The school administration is supportive of the incorporation of creative activities in the curriculum. 30% 20% 40% 10% On gathering the data from the questionnaire posed to the practitioners it is evident that the majority of teachers who believed children have limited opportunities to be creative were the younger generation of educators. Interestingly this finding was in concurrence with that of the literature review which revealed the older generation to hinder creativity due to their rigid practices (Mindham, 2005). 1. Children have enough opportunities to be creative. Fig. 1. Children have enough opportunities to be creative. Half of the respondents agreed that children have enough opportunities to be creative, however, 30% disagreed, leaving 20% unsure. This implies that the practitioners are aware that children are exposed to opportunities to harness their creativity either through direct or indirect ways. Directly, through their own provision of experiences that promote creativity, and indirectly, through an environment that offers possibilities that awake children’s creative thinking. The 30% who disagreed do not see such. They believe children are not afforded enough experiences that foster creative thought. The curriculum, for instance is wanting of activities that help children use their imagination more, as lessons mostly present academic concepts that children are just expected to accept and process. 2. Providing a creative curriculum is time consuming. This leads us to the next question and once again the majority of questioned stating providing play opportunities is a time-consuming process. This is evident in (Fig 2) whereby 70% of the questioned agreed that providing a creative curriculum is in fact time-consuming. Contrary to this 30% of the participants disagreed with the statement and their views are further Fig. 2. Providing a creative curriculum is time consuming strengthened by Moyles, (2008) and Basom & Frase (2004) who advocate creativity does not have to be time consuming rather it is a way of life. In addition to this the fact that the majority of teachers who disagreed with this statement where again the younger generation of the workforce further supporting the theory put forward by (Wassermann, 2000) that the younger workforce is in tune with their creativity and truly understand the value if providing a creative environment 3. Creative activities involve getting messy. Fig. 3. Creative activities involve getting messy. When questioned to what extent doess creativity invlove getting messy; 40% agreed and 40% disagreed. Furthermore 20% were unsure (Fig 3). This suggests that there is a even splitt in the views of the practitioner towards creative activites inloving mess. However, the fact that 20% strongly disagreed and 20% disagreed that activites were not creative unless they invloved getting messy is very promising as reaserch by (Russ, 2003) highlights that creative activites do not have to be messy rather they must encourage chldren to think in new and diverse ways thus captialzing on thier strengths. 4. Incorporating creative activities will make students more interested in the lessons and therefore perform better in class. (insert pie chart) Fig. 4. Incorporating creative activities will make students more interested in the lessons and therefore perform better in class. For this question, a whooping 90% agreed that including creative activities highly encourage students to be more participative and perform better in class. 10% remained unsure. The responses imply that practitioners recognize the effectivity of the incorporation of creative activities or activities that stimulate creative thought. This validates Woods (2003) contention that creativity enhances children’s skills and abilities, boosts self-esteem and promotes positive attitudes towards learning. 5. Children’s interests, ideas and suggestions in alternative educational strategies must be considered in the planning of lessons (insert pie chart) Fig. 5. Children’s interests, ideas and suggestions in alternative educational strategies must be considered in the planning of lessons Majority of the respondents (60%) agreed to this statement, implying that they may subscribe to a more child-centered philosophy. 30% is unsure, perhaps fence-sitting on whether to give children the empowerment to contribute to their lesson planning or not. 10% disagree, meaning for this respondent, teachers have the ultimate knowledge in what goes in the lesson plans. However, as Jeffrey and Craft (2004) conclude, engagement is strong when the learner is included in decisions about what knowledge is to be investigated, how to investigate it and how to evaluate the learning process. The collaborative partnership between teacher and learner is also known as the ‘learner inclusive’ approach (Jeffrey and Craft, 2003). This is what is needed more in the classroom. 6. Encouraging creativity in the classroom empowers children to do their best. (insert pie chart) Fig. 6. Encouraging creativity in the classroom empowers children to do their best. Again for this item, majority agreed (80%), meaning practitioners recognize the power of creativity to motivate children to do better, if not their best. 10% was unsure if creativity does empower children, and the remaining 10% disagreed. Creativity development in schools is highly dependent on the teacher. Children learn best through various innovative strategies employed by teachers. On the other hand, Cremin (2006) contend that children’s innate capabilities may be hampered from developing by a below average teaching plan. It has always alleged that the students’ creativity is not properly nurtured inside the classroom. Teachers can make use of a wide variety of approaches to enhance the teaching-learning process as a dynamic teacher goes for imaginative approaches which are interesting and effective (Cremin, 2006). This, then, becomes empowering for children to do their best. 7. There is a difference between teaching creatively and creative teaching. (insert pie chart) Fig. 7. There is a difference between teaching creatively and creative teaching. Majority (60%) of the respondents was unsure of this item. Perhaps the terms used were confusing enough, and one can only understand it if he or she reads between the lines and extract the true difference or similarity of “teaching creatively” and “creative teaching”. The remaining respondents were split with 20% agreeing to the statement and the other 20% disagreeing to it. Teachers have to understand the difference: teaching creatively may be associated with effective teaching while teaching for creativity may be associated with “learner empowerment” (Jeffrey and Craft, 2001). 8. Imagination is important in the development of children’s higher order thinking. (insert pie chart) Fig. 8. Imagination is important in the development of children’s higher order thinking. More than half (60%) agreed that imagination is indeed important in a child’s thinking. 30% was unsure and only 10% disagreed. Imagination is something that stirs a person’s thinking, and perhaps the 30% were unsure if this meant higher order thinking already. The remaining 10% who disagreed may think that imagination is mere playful thinking and does not have anything to do with higher order thinking usually associated with critical thinking, analysis and problem solving. Mindham (2005) researched the importance of creativity from an early age and found that development involves imagination, invention and creativity. These are definitely part of higher order thinking. Furthermore, the learner’s experience and imagination play a great role in the process of investigating knowledge, using tools such as “possibility knowledge” (Woods and Jeffrey, 1996) and possibility thinking (Craft, 2002). 9. The school administration is supportive of the incorporation of creative activities in the curriculum. (insert pie chart) 9. The school administration is supportive of the incorporation of creative activities in the curriculum. Half of the respondents disagreed to this statement reflecting that school administrators are not supportive of creative activities in the curriculum. 20% was unsure of school administration support and 30% agreed that their school administrators supported the inclusion of creative activities. This data suggests practitioners’ discontent in not being fully able to incorporate creative activities for their students, as it is not totally endorsed by the school administration. This implies schools’ need to heed the call of NACCCE to incorporate creativity development in their goals for the children. As the Scottish Executive Education Department, (2006) reports, being creative, is an initiative to be developed across the curriculum, and intends that children use creative approaches, be imaginative, take risks, question and explore possibilities. The revised curriculum should be able to provide teachers with more flexibility to design what they teach to meet the needs of their students, thus encouraging more creative approaches (SEED, 2006). Overall the feedback from the questionnaire suggested that practitioners believe that children are having opportunities to be creative through messy at times, such as those that involve the use of paint. However, they are limited due to the rigid curriculum. Furthermore the responses from the questionnaires show that some creative activities can be time-consuming. Regardless of this, many practitioners are realising that the experiences children gain from such creative endeavors are valuable and worth the effort. Contrary to this the findings from the questionnaire suggest that not enough is being done to provide children with creative learning experiences. Teachers need all the support they can get from the school administrators to help them carry out the challenge of instilling creativity in the students from their early years. B. Observation of Lessons The following chart summarizes the results of the practitioners’ observation of the 10 literacy lessons: Observed Behaviors in the Lessons Yes No Creative thinking is valued in the classroom. 40% 60% Self-initiated learning is encouraged and evaluated 50% 50% Skills of constructive criticism are being developed. 20% 80% Resources for working out ideas are made available 70% 30% Teacher is adventurous-spirited herself/himself. 30% 70% Questions are treated with respect 60% 40% Acquisition of knowledge in a variety of fields is encouraged. 40% 60% Imaginative ideas are treated with respect 30% 70% The children are taught to value their creative thinking 20% 80% Occasionally pupils do something “for practice” without the threat of evaluation. 10% 90% Pupils are shown that their ideas have value 40% 60% Evaluation is tied in with causes and consequences. 40% 60% Forcing a set pattern is avoided. 30% 70% Tolerance of new ideas is developed. 30% 70% Manipulation of objects and ideas is encouraged. 50% 50% The observed behaviors in the classroom have been rated both positively and negatively by the observers. The positively-rated behaviors (garnering 60% and above) are the following: Resources for working out ideas are made available. Questions are treated with respect The negatively-rated behavors observed are the following (garnering 60% and above): Creative thinking is not valued in the classroom. Skills of constructive criticism are not being developed. Teacher is not adventurous-spirited herself/ himself. Acquisition of knowledge in a variety of fields is not encouraged. Imaginative ideas are not treated with respect. The children are not taught to value their creative thinking. Pupils do not do something “for practice” without the threat of evaluation. Pupils are not shown that their ideas have value Evaluation is not tied in with causes and consequences. Set patterns are not avoided. New ideas are not tolerated to be developed. The behaviors observed that split the observers to positively and negatively rate are the following (garnering 50%-50%): Self-initiated learning is encouraged and evaluated. Manipulation of objects and ideas is encouraged. Sorting out the behaviors this way makes it apparent that the observers are not content with the creativity development going on in the lessons, as 11 out of the 15 observed behaviors were rated negatively. Only two behaviors were rated positively and the remaining two were split into positive and negative ratings. From this limited observation attempt, it can already be assessed that there is a great lack of creative strategies, attitudes and behaviors in the classrooms observed. This is enough evidence to push schools to implement more creative activities and that includes thorough teacher training in creative teaching strategies. The sample observation described in Appendix 1 (Sample Evaluation of a lesson) clearly shows that the story time session is rigid and does not take on a novel approach. The children remained seated throughout the story rather than physically taking part in the story and becoming at one with the characters thus developing a better understanding of the story. Jalongo (2003) and Millou, (1994) believe that when children actively take on the role of a character they gain a deeper understanding of the story. Furthermore the fact that the session was cut short due to a lack of time may have negative effects on the children’s learning and development. As Nurse (2007) and Overall ( 2007) contend, creativity and learning are not planned processes. They are spontaneous activities that require time and space. C. Interview with Children The interview highlights the views of children which are often disregarded in policy making (Brundrett, 2004). In concurrence with the findings of the observation it is evident that the children are upset with the fact that the activities they enjoy are not provided or offered very seldom in their school (Appendix 2). Furthermore, the children generally express that they enjoy creative activities that involve play. Claxton (2006) and Craft (2006) advocate that play is an integral aspect of creativity and creativity is an integral aspect of play. Therefore, it suggests that the two are intertwined with one another thus it is imperative that children are not deprived of such opportunities (Jeffrey, 2006). The children also gave examples of creative activities such as more role-playing and games to motivate them to learn and go to school everyday. They recounted how happy they were in reception school when they were preschoolers enjoying the fun activities while learning many new concepts and skills. They expressed the wish that the same strategies be used by their current teachers in their primary classes. They claimed that being provided creative activities through various, innovative teaching strategies will help them improve their school performance. One child even predicted that he will get better grades because he likes what he is doing. This interview should awaken teachers who have become complacent in their teaching strategies to give a doze of life to their methods. It is imperative that they make learning fun and exciting for their students in order to achieve their goals of improved student performance in their classes. Conclusion In fulfilling the objectives originally set for this study, it is clear that this study has unearthed the reality that most children crave school activities that promote creativity. They prefer teaching and learning strategies that engage them through play and imagination and not limit them to lectures, quizzes and examinations as has been practiced in traditional educational institutions. Jeffrey & Craft (2003) have been instigators of creative teaching and have been instrumental in urging institutions to incorporate creativity-promoting activities in the curriculum. This is supported by Wilson (2005) who claims that sponsoring creativity development is tantamount to promoting the highest level of thinking and originality through a creative curriculum. In reality, however, in various literacy classes, teachers have been observed to be uninspired in terms of encouraging the creative spirit to flow in their lessons. The negatively-rated behaviors observed imply that most teachers still adhere to traditional methods of lecturing, providing worksheets for children to do and giving quizzes and examinations to assess children’s learning. Teachers are more directive and expectant of their students to be more passive and accepting of the information shared and activities tediously prepared beforehand. One reason for this may be compliance to a rigid curriculum that excludes creative strategies and activities that may otherwise “distract” learners from the more academic lessons that are believed children need to learn. As a result, children miss out on harnessing their creative potentials. Cullingford (2007) believes that creativity is a necessary quality that can provide the learner with many advantages, as it can be used in many aspects in the child’s later life. This makes it all the more crucial for educators to incorporate the development of creativity in their classrooms as early as now when their students are young. Creative thought processes and imagination need to be honed because they are paramount in various aspects of the children’s development (Isenberg & Jalongo, 2001; Craft et al, 2001). In the future, being creative will land them jobs in advertising, IT, film, writing and many other fields that thrive on fresh, innovative and creative ideas. “Out-of-the-box” thinking are welcome in these careers. The stepping in of NACCCE (1999) in its advocacy to promote creativity through the school curriculum encourages children to be aware and believe in their own creative potentials. In doing so, and in taking steps to develop the usual capacities and sensitivities of creativity such as being curious, being inquisitive and following up on their own creative ideas further fires up the creative spark. This should be encouraged by their teachers with the provision of hands-on learning experiences (Craft and Jeffrey, 2004). Allowing children to be children by letting them play and indulge in their imagination as a teaching-learning strategy, has been found to develop children’s creativity. Wood (2003) enumerates the advantages of this: enhancement of children’s skills and abilities; broadening imagination through self-expression; positive attitude towards learning; more engagement and participation; better memory retention of concepts; better interactions with others; and sheer enjoyment in the creative learning process. Much can be learned from constructivist philosophy which puts much value in play and imagination, and have designed curriculums around these. Here, children are allowed to explore and discover their world with hands-on experiences. They engage in various projects and experiments and do a lot of art work. Academic subjects such as Math, Science, Language Arts, etc. are not the only ones given priority, but also other non-academic subjects that necessitate creativity such as Arts, Music, etc. Evidences of success in implementing a constructivist curriculum abound especially in Reggio Emilia schools. Recommendations The study obviously presented gaps in teaching and promotion of creativity in children. This entails thorough training of teachers and practitioners in creativity development not only for their young students, but also for themselves. The saying “if you don’t have it, you can’t give it” truly applies in this situation. More practical than theoretical knowledge should be passed on to teachers regarding effective creative strategies in teaching and also, in harnessing the creative potentials of students. Schools are recommended to research on current trends and strategies to develop creative teachers in order for them to teach creatively. There abound opportunities for growth in creativity development courses that are now sprouting in the internet, specialized seminars and workshops and even in some universities. With the broadening horizons of teachers seeking creativity development should come the awakening of school administrators to the necessity of incorporating more creative strategies and activities in their curriculum and thus, support the efforts of their teachers to come up with a more creative curriculum. Inclusion of non-conventional methods in teaching such as role-playing, improvisation, cooking, more experiments, field trips, film showing, and fun but educational games will surely whet students’ appetite for more learning and even tap their dominant intelligences, as proposed by Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory. Admittedly, this study has a lot of limitations such as time constraints and lack of participants to make the results generalizable to the whole population of teachers and students. It only hopes to represent a sample of the actual situation in education today. It is recommended that in future research similar to this, these factors be considered so as to come up with more reliable and valid studies. It would be ideal to conduct a similar study sponsored and endorsed by the government, a wide-range research on the state of creativity development from the EYFS level up to Key Stage 1 at least. This would give a wider perspective of how creativity development is valued and to what extent it is being included in the curriculum. It would further investigate if creativity development is limited in the education of children and the causes and possible consequences or interventions to correct it. Coming from a simple and humble research, these recommendations may be quite ambitious, but not impossible if educational leaders and advocates are serious in instilling creativity in the future leaders of this world, while they are still young and in school. Just think of the big difference it will make! Additional References: Berg, B. (1995). Qualitative research methods for social sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., Tight, M. (2006) How to Research. Third Edition. Berkshire; Open University Press. Campbell, A, McNamara, O and Gilroy, P (2004) Practitioner Research and Professional Development in Education, London: Paul Chapman. Cohen, L, Manion, L and Morrison, K (2000) Research Methods in Education, 5th Ed. London: Routledge Falmer Denzin, D. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Frey, JH., Mertens-Oishi, S.(1995) How to Conduct Interviews by Telephone and in Person. London; Sage. Gillham, B (2000) Developing a Questionnaire, London: Continuum Oppenheim, AN. (1992) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London; Pinter. Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research. Second Edition. Oxford; Blackwell. Torrance, E.P., Guiding Creative Talent. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,1962 Trochim, W.M.K. (2006) Qualitative Methods, Retrieved on August 1, 2010 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualmeth.php Appendices Appendix 1 – Sample Observation of a lesson. 10 Lessons were observed with regard to the incorporation of creativity. This is a sample lesson observed and the corresponding observation checklist based on Torrance’s (1962) guidelines in encouraging creativity development: Observing a Literacy lesson in a Year 2 classroom where the teacher is reading the children a book which will further develop their understanding of the worksheet she has planned for them to do. 10:30 – Children are seated on the carpet and the teacher is sitting at the front of the class. The teacher begins by talking about a new book that they are going to start reading as a class; The Twits. The teacher starts reading the story and the children are very excited and enthusiastic of the adventure the Twits are having. The teacher stops reading and asks the children what they think so far. Child A puts her hand up and replies “they are funny and come up with thrilling tricks.” The teacher was very impressed with this answer and gave the child a sticker. The teacher continues to read the story. Some of the children are listening very carefully but some are getting a little fidgety. The teacher stops reading and explains to the children the work that they will be doing. She shows them a sheet with a picture of Mr Twit and asks them to describe him as a group. 11:00 – The children get up and go to their tables, each table is given a sheet and a pen. The children set out writing words on to the sheet to describe Mr Twit. After 20 minutes the children are stopped and each table is asked what they have put down Child B read out his tables ideas “disgusting, ugly, smelly, old” he was praised for his contribution. 11:20 – The children were asked to do the same for Mrs Twit; a different child from each table was chosen to do the writing. Again feedback was asked from each table. 11:45 – The children were asked to clear up their tables and to come and sit on the carpet. Child C asked “can you read some more of the book please.” The teacher replied and said “yes” the children were very excited and sat on the carpet quietly to listen to the rest of the story. 12:00 – The bell for dinnertime rang and this was the end of the session. Observed Behaviors in the Lessons Yes No Creative thinking is valued in the classroom. x Self-initiated learning is encouraged and evaluated x Skills of constructive criticism are being developed. x Resources for working out ideas are made available x Teacher is adventurous-spirited herself/himself. x Questions are treated with respect x Acquisition of knowledge in a variety of fields is encouraged. x Imaginative ideas are treated with respect x The children are taught to value their creative thinking x Occasionally pupils do something “for practice” without the threat of evaluation. x Pupils are shown that their ideas have value x Evaluation is tied in with causes and consequences. x Forcing a set pattern is avoided. x Tolerance of new ideas is developed. x Manipulation of objects and ideas is encouraged. x Appendix 2 – Interview This interview took place outside the classroom with 10 children; a number of different play equipment was set out thus giving them an opportunity to talk about what they are doing. This interview lasted 30 minutes. Student: Children this session, I have set out some play equipment for you to play with Child I: Yes, I want to do painting. Student: You can each choose something that you want to do, and then swap and have a go with something else. Child C: This is fun! (The children are given the opportunity to play without any interference.) Student: So children do you think that playing and having fun in lessons is important? Child A: Yes, because then I would come to school every day. Child B: And me, and it would be really fun in class. Child E: That would be so so so fun; because school is normally boring and lessons are not fun. Student: What would you like to have in your fun lessons to involve? Child C: More acting, I want to be an actor when I grow up. Child E: I don’t think it’s fair because reception have a home corner and we don’t, I want to do dressing up. Child A: And me that would be wicked Child H: Shall we tell miss if we can. Student: So you all would like a home corner in your classroom All Children: Yes Child J: Because our classroom is so boring all we do is work and don’t have fun things like sand and water play. Child G: I know, how come though. That is not fair. Child E: It’s because we are big children and have to do hard work. We are not allowed to have those things. Child C: That’s not fair. Student: Ok. How do you think those activities can be included in your lessons then? Child F: If we have a lot of role-playing, like playing characters in stories…. Or even as a way to explain some science things.. like.,. uhm… one plays the sun and one plays the earth and how they move around each other to make us understand night and day? Child J: Mrs. X lets us draw our ideas about what she talks about in class and then we talk about those drawings! You know, I understand her lessons more after that discussion of our pictures. Child G: Or rapping! We can do rap sessions of some lessons… that would be cool!! Child A: I know! We’d remember it better. Student: Do you think you’d be more creative if those activities were added? All children: Yes!! Student: How? Care to tell me? Child E: We get to think of many ideas and we’d enjoy thinking about those than simply be given things to memorize and asked about over and over and over. Child A: I like using my imagination. Student: What does using your imagination do to you? Child A: I get to think of fun things… those that cannot be possible… really cool! Student: Oh wow! Now do you think you’d learn better using your imagination and doing all those stuff you mentioned you want your teachers to include in your lessons? Child I: Oh yes! I promise! Student: Ok, tell me, how. How would you learn better about the lesson if those strategies were added? Child H: Ummmm….we’d remember something better if it was fun.. if its boring, we forget. Those things we want in our class, they’re really fun for us…. Lots of fun in learning them too! Child C: Remember in reception classes when we used to have lots of storytelling with puppets then do lots of artsy stuff to make us remember the story better? It’s like that. Child E: Its no fun just sitting down all day and listen. I’d rather move around while listening. I won’t get a sore bum too! Student: Hahahaha! I see…Do you have some of those activities or similar ones in your school now? Child I: Sometimes we do. Child C: Mr. Y is one cool teacher! He’d bring interesting things like a tropical fruit or a strange musical instrument or anything we’ve never seen in our lives yet then he’d ask us to give a wild guess what it is after we think of all the possible answers. Then amazingly, he uses it to start our lesson which is related to that object. So any time we’d see that object, we’d remember our lesson and how fun it was to discuss it. Child A: You mean just like Show and Tell when we were in reception? Child C: Something like that, yes.. sometimes, we bring stuff ourselves. Then we work in groups to play some games related to the lesson. Child A: I’m soo jealous! We don’t have much fun in school… it’s all study time and no play there! Student: How would you feel if the teachers’ strategies would change to accommodate all your ideas? Child A: That would be swell!!!! I’d feel happy to be in school every day of the week! Child H: It would be exciting. Child I: I know learning would be so much more fun. It would make me look forward to what my teachers can come up with. Child J: Oh I wish they would! But would that not be against their rules? Child C: might be too hard for them to do. Child E: It’s a challenge… for them and for us kids Student: Ok, I see you all want it. Now, how do you think it would affect your performance as students if creative teaching and learning are done in your classes? Child B: I guess I’d do much better… especially if there are games!!! Child D: Me too!! Child E: My grades would be higher I think coz I like what I’m doing. Child F: Pretty good! I’d be on top of my game then. Child H: I am perfectly sure I’d do much better in school! Student: Thank you everyone for sharing your thoughts. Appendix 3: Results of the Teacher Questionnaire: Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly Disagree 1. Children have enough opportunities to be creative. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 2. Providing a creative curriculum is time consuming. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 3. Creative activities involve getting messy. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 4. Incorporating creative activities will make students more . interested in the lessons and therefore perform better in class Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 5. Children’s interests, ideas and suggestions in alternative educational strategies must be considered in the planning of lessons Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 6. Encouraging creativity in the classroom empowers children to do their best. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 7. There is a difference between teaching creatively and creative teaching. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 8. Imagination is important in the development of children’s higher order thinking. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x 9. The school administration is supportive of the incorporation of creative activities in the curriculum. Teacher 1 x Teacher 2 x Teacher 3 x Teacher 4 x Teacher 5 x Teacher 6 x Teacher 7 x Teacher 8 x Teacher 9 x Teacher 10 x Read More