Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Creativity in European Schools #FLRI


Published on

A presentation supporting our research project into creativity in European schools

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Creativity in European Schools #FLRI

  1. 1. Interviews with educational stakeholders and analysis of Good Practices on Creativity and Innovation in Education and Training in the EU Member States <ul><li>Drs. Sue Cranmer and Carlo Perrotta, Futurelab </li></ul><ul><li>Dr. Shakuntala Banaji, Researcher/Lecturer, Centre for the Study of Children,Youth and Media, Institute of Education, University of London </li></ul>'Creativity in EU Schools'
  2. 2. Introduction <ul><li>This study is IPTS funded: </li></ul><ul><li>investigating how targeted educational stakeholders recognise and conceptualise the importance of Creativity and Innovation in compulsory schooling in the EU 27 member states </li></ul><ul><li>Parallel project: Creativity in Schools in Europe: A Survey of Teachers </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
  3. 3. Research questions <ul><li>The main research questions to be addressed by the study are: </li></ul><ul><li>What is the level of creative learning and innovative teaching taking place in school, according to educational stakeholders? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the link between educational policies on Creativity and Innovation and the educational practices according to educational stakeholders? </li></ul><ul><li>Identify examples of best practices of creative learning and innovative teaching in Europe? </li></ul>
  4. 4. Educational stakeholder interviews <ul><li>Data collection </li></ul><ul><li>90 semi-structured interviews (30 – 60 minutes, mainly in English) – school inspectors, teacher trainers and academics </li></ul><ul><li>10 best practices – interviews and analysis of additional documents and data (website, resources for learners and teachers, reports etc) </li></ul><ul><li>Initial analysis – UK and Greece </li></ul>
  5. 5. Barriers to creativity and innovation <ul><li>England: </li></ul><ul><li>Gap between policy and practice </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Creativity’ named in curriculum; often seen as ‘marginal’ by teachers </li></ul><ul><li>Pressure to teach to the test </li></ul><ul><li>Gap between teaching practices – group work, project work, peer evaluation and SATS/GCSE results </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers – shortage of time; overwork; confidence to take risks, crowded PGCEs </li></ul><ul><li>ICT mainly complementing traditional methods, filtering/blocking </li></ul>
  6. 6. Barriers to creativity and innovation <ul><li>Scotland: </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum for Excellence being introduced August 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>More optimistic picture </li></ul><ul><li>Some schools remain more traditional: teachers play it ‘safe’, stand in front of class, stay in control, lack confidence to take risks </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment procedures under review – challenge is to align to CfE, assess elements of creativity, process not just the product </li></ul><ul><li>ICT – quite positive, schools can be remote, ICT programmes developed for students to be national/international learners (though slow/patchy) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Barriers to creativity and innovation <ul><li>N Ireland: </li></ul><ul><li>Much more optimistic now – new curriculum allowing for creativity </li></ul><ul><li>Previously much stifled by adoption of English National Curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>Some parts of NI still suffer from aftermath of years of social unrest </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers in NI suffer from English press coverage which is very negative </li></ul>
  8. 8. Barriers to creativity and innovation <ul><li>Greece 1: </li></ul><ul><li>Vagueness in what teachers understand by ‘creativity’ </li></ul><ul><li>Can be ‘darker’ </li></ul><ul><li>New curriculum 2003, ‘creativity’ mentioned frequently </li></ul><ul><li>Policy/practice gap </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers say they don’t know how to support it or assess it, lack confidence, time, energy, training </li></ul><ul><li>ICT used to complement traditional methods </li></ul>
  9. 9. Barriers to creativity and innovation <ul><li>Greece 2: </li></ul><ul><li>More positive, yet still policy/practice gap </li></ul><ul><li>“ chasm” between objectives at macro level and micro level in schools </li></ul><ul><li>Little space in classroom for ‘creativity’ </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers – lack confidence, climate doesn’t support them trying out new approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment – to evaluate traditional content knowledge in traditional ways </li></ul><ul><li>ICT – Government providing training, some teachers’ uses are a bit more innovative </li></ul>
  10. 10. European good practices <ul><li>National </li></ul><ul><li>The Netherlands: Value in the Valley </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
  11. 11. What is it? <ul><li>Launched in 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>Students from different fields of study and different levels of education (secondary vocational, university) + employers </li></ul><ul><li>Aiming to become innovative professionals in the area of renewable energy </li></ul><ul><li>Addressing global challenges in creative and interdisciplinary ways, finding innovative ways of solving problems </li></ul>
  12. 12. How does it work?
  13. 13. <ul><li>An online space to coordinate projects and share information and knowledge on specific subjects </li></ul>
  14. 14. 3 key assumptions <ul><li>Learning and working should be more intertwined; the difference between schools and companies gradually declines </li></ul><ul><li>The key to knowledge creation is cooperation and co-creation by students, lecturers and experts from the working field </li></ul><ul><li>Implementing a new educational concept starts with transforming culture, bringing together the best of the worlds of education and work. </li></ul>
  15. 15. Local <ul><li>Greece: Can we “see” the sound? </li></ul>
  16. 16. What is it? <ul><li>2 instances: first in 2000/2001 and then in 2005. It involved Greek pupils in the fifth and sixth grades (10-12 years old) in cross-curricular learning </li></ul><ul><li>The pupils were provided with a range of musical instruments and tools, including computer equipment and software </li></ul>
  17. 17. The aims <ul><li>to provide pupils with the support and the tools to liberate their creative potential and imagination </li></ul><ul><li>“ Pupils should not spend their whole energy and time to study the work of others but they should have energy and time to create, explore and question” (Kamplys and Berki, 2006: 195). </li></ul>
  18. 18. A clear pedagogical vision <ul><li>Montessori method </li></ul><ul><li>A multisensory and participatory approach to “unlock the natural disposition that every child has towards discovery” </li></ul><ul><li>A democratic and emancipatory view of creativity: creativity as a liberating force </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>Best practices require energy and dedication from individuals or groups </li></ul><ul><li>They struggle to stimulate significant innovations at a systemic level... </li></ul><ul><li>...but illustrate the plurality of local, national and cultural understandings of C&I </li></ul><ul><li>Fostering creativity in practice requires a clear pedagogical vision, it cannot be improvised </li></ul>