The document discusses the challenges and methodologies of assessing creativity in education, particularly within Singapore's Curriculum 2015 framework. It emphasizes the need for teachers to create supportive environments for fostering creative thinking and exploring effective assessment strategies, advocating for authentic performance tasks over traditional quantitative assessments. The author highlights the importance of teachers experiencing creativity firsthand to enhance their teaching practices and engage students in meaningful creative learning experiences.

1. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
Authentic Assessment for Creativity
as a 21st Century Pedagogy
John Yeo
People with the right skills, knowledge, and personal traits, who work through an effective process
in an environment that is conducive to creative thought, are more likely to produce creative
products – tangible and intangible outcomes that are new and useful.
(Puccio, Mance and Murdock, 2011, p.26)
INTRODUCTION
The Singapore Ministry of Education’s vision of Curriculum 2015 (Ministry of Education, 2010)
enumerates a set of broad student learning outcomes centred on 21st century skills and
competencies. With Curriculum 2015, there is a heightened interest amongst Singapore teachers
to learn more about creativity. Many may associate creativity with definitions such as ‘novelty and
usefulness’, ‘being innovative’, ‘thinking out of the box’ and other terms such as ‘problem solving’,
‘brainstorming’, ‘imagination’ and ‘generating new possibilities’. However, not many teachers are
confident on how to go about teaching and evaluating for creativity. Indeed, even as people view
creativity as a complex and multi-dimensional construct (e.g. Rhodes, 1961; Treffinger, Isaksen &
Firestein, 1983), its complexity, nonetheless, does not render it impossible to be assessed
(Treffinger, 1995).
The call for creative teaching in the local context is renewed while the challenge of assessing
creativity remains. Assessment of creativity is highly contentious amongst creativity theorists and
stems from how researchers and scholars conceptualise creativity. Esteemed as a desired outcome
of the 21st century competency, educators regard creativity as a cognitive skill that is transferable
across domains. Although the current modes of assessment have largely been quantitative, the
author argues that it is extremely valuable to teach and assess creative thinking skills through
using authentic performance tasks. Using authentic tasks can be a meaningful evaluative means to
ensure authentic performance to demonstrate students’ understanding of the developmental
nature of uncovering their personal, as well as collective, sense of creativity. This proposition is
also being supported by emerging research in teacher education that is shifting the constraints of
traditional testing towards higher quality performance of demonstrating real-world application of
knowledge in alignment to 21st century teaching and learning (Newmann & associates, 1996;
Shephard, 2000).
Treffinger (2005) described different ways in which he understood creativity: Creativity as the
potential for anyone to be able to think of new and useful ideas, to look at a problem in a new way
and find an original and workable solution, as well as to use one’s mind in a productive way to
generate and apply new ideas. In addition, Noller’s seminal work on the symbolic equation for
creativity (Isaksen, Dorval, Treffinger, 1994) C=Fa(KIE) offers much relevancy to education.
She suggested that Creativity (represented by ‘C’) is a function of ‘K’ (i.e. Knowledge), ‘I’ (i.e.
Imagination), and ‘E’ (i.e. Evaluation). More importantly, they constitute a function of ‘a’, which
represents the need for a positive attitude (p.6). Although Noller clarified that the equation should
not be so precise as to define the number of parts of knowledge, imagination and evaluation
(Campos, 2000), ‘E’ implies that creativity can be viewed as a measurable dimension of human
behaviour. Research further offers different instruments in which theorists utilised other definitions
of creativity to design a more concrete approach to evaluate this multi-dimensional concept. With
4
Yeo, J. (2011). Authentic assessment for creativity as a 21st century pedagogy. In K.H. Koh & J.Yeo (Eds.),
Mastering the art of authentic assessments: From challenges to champions, 37-54. Singapore: Pearson
Education South Asia.

2. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
these definitions in mind, the critical question for educators remains, “How can teachers better
teach and assess creativity?”
This chapter begins by examining one of the domains of the Curriculum 2015 (C2015) vision –
Critical and Inventive Thinking. The skills in C2015 evidently allow teachers to nurture “learning
environments that foster questioning, patience, openness to fresh ideas, high levels of trust, and
learning from mistakes and failures” (Thrilling & Fadel, 2009). The author however questions the
readiness of teachers – who were mostly educated in a markedly different learning environment of
the past – to embrace and facilitate creative learning in such an inviting and creative manner.
While teachers may acknowledge their role to better prepare students for the knowledge-based
economy that highly values creativity, teachers yearn for more support in helping them design
more authentic assessment tasks that capture important learning goals such as higher-order
thinking and subject-specific problem solving skills. In the extensive work with teachers, the
author noted that while many claim they know creativity, few understand what it really means to
experience a creative learning experience. He asserts that teachers themselves need to first
experience creativity – beyond simply acquiring the relevant knowledge and skills, finding their
personal ‘Aha’ before they are able to confidently facilitate creativity in their classrooms. He
proposes that such a self-discovery experience can well be situated within an in-service course
that foregrounds the Creative Problem Solving (CPS) methodology (Puccio, Murdock, & Mance,
2005). The ongoing assessment of the teacher’s ability to apply the repertoire of knowledge on
creativity and creative thinking skills to effectively negotiate different complex tasks can be a
powerful way for professional learning. Teachers may better appreciate the production of a truly
creative idea that may require several iterations between the different generative and exploratory
phases of learning. The design of the course and assessment then allows “appropriate
opportunities to rehearse, practice, consult resources, and get feedback on and refine
performances and products.” (Wiggins, 1998, p.24)
CONSIDERING MOE’S CURRICULUM 2015 THROUGH THE LENS OF CREATIVITY
Anchoring on Curriculum 2015, one of the desired student outcomes envision that every student
needs to embody attributes of an active contributor – one who is able to work effectively in teams,
is innovative, exercises initiative, takes calculated risks and strives for excellence. The curriculum
shifts to address a global call for equipping and preparing the students as leaders who soon need
to contend with problems that are characterized by complexity, novelty and ambiguity (Mumford,
Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000). Mumford et al. offered the suggestion that while
complex, novel, ambiguous problems can no longer be solved by routine solutions, individuals
need to reshape and rethink their prior knowledge. They further argued that creative problem
solving skills are critically important to leadership performance with their resounding conclusion,
“the skills involved in creative problem solving influence leader performance” (p.17).
Recognising that rapid globalisation, changing demographics and technological advances are fast
shaping the future, MOE has identified the domains of Global Awareness and Cross-cultural Skills,
Critical and Inventive Thinking as well as Information and Communications Skills to help our
students thrive in a fast-changing world. The skills are further explained and described as
benchmarks to clearly delineate what students should know and be able to do. Teachers can also
better articulate the competencies to be planned, taught and assessed across the curriculum.
While not denying how the other skills are closely interwoven to the research on creativity, this
chapter focuses primarily on understanding how the domain of Critical and Inventive Thinking
(CIT) can be explicated and connected to the teaching and learning of creativity. Developed by
MOE (2011), the following are the learning outcomes of CIT which delineate what a student should
know and be able to do: (1) generates novel ideas; (2) exercises sound reasoning and reflective
thinking to make good decisions; and (3) manages complexities and ambiguities. Table 4.1 lists
the specific standards and benchmarks of CIT that provides the ‘how’ for teachers to design their
curriculum. Even while standards overlap with many different frameworks that provide greater
clarity for 21st century skills, the author proposed that the extent to which creativity plays a role
in education could be better clarified across these different frameworks and models. Many of the
descriptions demonstrate implicit connections to how teachers may better understand and utilise
creativity.

3. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
The Creative Problem Solving: Thinking Skills model (2005) developed by Puccio, Murdock and
Mance is the pedagogical framework with which the Applied Creativity programme anchors upon.
The table below further illustrates the comparison of skills between the MOE’s C2015 CIT skills and
that of the CPS. It is the author’s analysis that the thinking and affective skills described by Puccio
et al. (2005) have close alignment with the standards and benchmarks prescribed by the C2015
vision of CIT skills.
Table 4.1: Comparison of the Standards & Benchmarks for MOE’s Critical and Inventive Thinking
with Thinking & Affective Skills of Creative Problem Solving
Standards and Benchmarks for
Critical and Inventive
Thinking as 21st Century
Competencies
Creative Problem Solving
Thinking Skills Affective Skills
Sound Reasoning and Decision-
Making
Refers to the development of well -
constructed explanations and well
substantiated conclusions through
analysis, comparison,
inference/interpretation,
evaluation and synthesis of
evidence and arguments.
• Extracting implications and
conclusions from facts,
premises, ethical issues, or
data;
• Constructing relationships
between the essential
elements of a problem; and
• Challenging social norms to
provide alternative theories
and explanation.
Assessing the Situation:
Diagnostic Thinking
• Making a careful
examination of a situation,
describing the nature of a
problem and making
decisions about appropriate
process steps to be taken.
Formulating the Challenges:
Strategic Thinking
• Identifying the critical
issues that must be
addressed and pathways
needed to move toward the
desired future.
Assessing the Situation:
Mindfulness
• Attending to thoughts,
feelings, and sensations
relative to the present
situation.
Formulating the Challenges:
Sensing Gaps
• To become consciously aware
of discrepancies between
what currently exists and is
desired or required.
Reflective Thinking
Refers to the questioning and
refining of thoughts, attitudes,
behaviour and actions.
• Suspending judgment;
• Reassessing conclusions and
considering alternatives; and
• Stepping back to take the
larger picture into account.
Formulating Solutions:
Evaluative Thinking
• Assessing the
reasonableness and quality
of ideas in order to develop
workable solutions.
Formulating Solutions:
Avoiding Premature Closure
• Resisting the urge to push for
a decision.
Curiosity and Creativity
Refer to the desire to seek and
learn new knowledge; and
generate relatively novel and
appropriate ideas or new products.
• Being resourceful, flexible and
adaptable;
• Willing to take risks and accept
mistakes; and
• Having the ability to envisage
possible futures.
Exploring the Vision:
Visionary Thinking
• Articulating a vivid and
concrete image of what you
desire to create.
Exploring Ideas:
Ideational Thinking
• Producing original mental
images and thoughts that
respond to important
challenges or opportunities.
Exploring the Vision:
Dreaming
• To imagine as possible your
desires and hopes.
Exploring Ideas:
Playfulness
• Freely toying with ideas.
Openness To Novelty*
• Ability to entertain ideas that
at first seem outlandish and
risky.
Managing Complexities and
Ambiguities
Refers to the modification of
thinking, attitudes, behaviour
Exploring Acceptance:
Contextual Thinking
• Understanding the
interrelated conditions and
Exploring Acceptance:
Sensitivity To Environment
• The degree to which people
are aware of their physical

4. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
and/or skills to adapt to diverse
demands and challenges in new,
unfamiliar contexts.
• Tolerating ambiguity;
• Considering and accepting
alternative perspectives,
solutions or methods;
• Taking on diverse roles;
• Multi-tasking; and
• Being resilient and focused on
pursuing goals despite
difficulties and unexpected
complications.
circumstances that will
support or hinder success.
Formulating a Plan:
Tactical Thinking
• Devising a plan that includes
specific and measurable
steps for attaining a desired
end and methods for
monitoring its effectiveness.
and psychological
surroundings.
Formulating a Plan:
Tolerance For Risks
• Not allowing oneself to be
shaken or unnerved by the
possibility of failure or
setbacks.
Tolerance For Ambiguity*
• To be able to deal with
uncertainty and to avoid
leaping to conclusions.
Tolerance For Complexity*
• Ability to stay open and
persevere without being
overwhelmed by large
amounts of information,
interrelated and complex
issues, and competing
perspectives.
SOURCE: Ministry of Education
(April, 2011)
SOURCE: Puccio, Murdock, & Mance (2011).
Note: *Affective skills that underlie all steps of CPS: Openness to novelty, tolerance for ambiguity and
tolerance for complexity.
With all the broad-based curriculum reform towards fostering creativity system-wide since the
early days of Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, it is timely to analyse how such initiatives have
helped our students think more creatively. It is also pivotal to study if teachers are more
knowledgeable about creativity and as a result, better equipped to plan, teach, and assess creative
thinking. These concerns need to be addressed in order to better foster a more sustainable
creative and reflective learning experience for our students and teachers. With the overarching
goals of C2015, teachers have the right to further challenge what creative teaching is. How might
they evaluate whether their attempts of creative teaching have had effected to student learning
that is more engaging and effective? The changing demands of the curriculum may also cause
teachers to feel an emerging tension. With efforts to improve teachers’ assessment literacies, what
then are some new thoughts on assessment for some of the 21st century competencies, such as
inventive thinking? How would these impact the design, structure and organisation of examination
and assessments? On one hand, most teachers recognise that alternative assessments will
enhance the quality of learning. Yet on the other hand, teachers do concede that facilitating for
new pedagogies will influence their own learning and practice – which in essence, is not always
easy or convenient.
TENSIONS OF FACILITATING CREATIVITY IN THE CLASSROOM
From the author’s experience with conducting workshops on facilitation, he asserts that the way
teachers act and the consequences they create, begins with the way they think. In the field of
facilitation, he is mindful that most teachers’ espoused theory of what they understand as good
teaching and facilitation may be inconsistent with their actual practices as reflected by their
theories-in-use. The author observed that during difficult situations in class (for example, dealing
with students’ misbehaviour, reluctance to participate in group work or managing students’
conflicts), many teachers, unfortunately, think in ways that lead them to take actions that could
create negative consequences detrimental to the creative learning process. Schwarz et al. (2005,
p.36) described this behaviour as a unilateral control model whereby teachers demonstrate values
and assumptions used in difficult situations that often result in undermining their own, as well as
their students’ effectiveness in learning. More specifically, with respect to the facilitating for idea
generation – a very important component in creative problem solving, most teachers do
acknowledge that students have a strong preference for learning creatively. Teachers recognise

5. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
that students may learn a great deal while enjoying the cooperative learning process in groups, if
given the opportunity to use their creative thinking abilities. While assessment remains the ‘top-of-
mind’ of most educational agendas, many become warily resistant towards ‘free play’ during
ideation and this could inhibit wild imagination if they have little certainty in how this may improve
students’ grades. Inevitably, some resort to over-controlling the brainstorming process that kills
students’ creativity and dampens their motivation for learning. Schwarz et al. (p.41) contrasted
the above type of behaviour with that of the mutual learning model. In this mutual learning model,
high quality results and productive relationships begin with the way teachers themselves re-
perceive their roles as facilitators before quality learning and co-creation of knowledge can take
place in the classroom. This may account for why teachers are perhaps more comfortable
evaluating the product (performance, reflection essay or proposal, model, oral presentation, etc.).
In the spirit of ‘Teach Less, Learn More’, the author questions if this underlying dilemma of
teachers’ core values and assumptions needs to first be addressed in order to ensure that learning
– both for teachers as well as students – can be more rewarding.
During in-service training sessions on facilitation for teachers, the author has often encountered
teachers who experience ‘mental blocks’ in their own facilitation of creative thinking. Clinical
interviews with selected teachers from different schools revealed that most teachers knew the
importance of staying open to ambiguity while staying true to the concept of divergent-convergent
thinking. However, actual facilitation made them realise that at times it could be more difficult to
practice the ideal. On reflection, most teachers found that they would either ‘kill’ seemingly-wild or
ridiculous ideas generated, at the first instant, or simply stop the ideation process at the first idea
that appears to be satisfactory. While some may enjoy supporting students’ during the ideation
process, others worry that the free-wheeling and novelty-seeking may run ‘out of control’. While
some admittedly recognised the challenge of making new connections during the ideation phase,
others lamented that they often struggle to encourage students’ flexible thinking and cross-
fertilisation of ideas. In addition, some teachers will intentionally ‘cut-short’ the necessary
divergence of ideas and quickly lead students towards converging for more logical or workable
solutions.
With the above concerns, the author then wonders how equipped and competent are teachers in
facilitating the creative process? Despite the earlier tensions described, wouldn’t it be great if they
too could taste the rewarding experience of seeing a truly innovative solution emerge? In addition,
Sternberg (1999) also questioned the processes through which existing prior knowledge can be
used to produce creative knowledge. In the attainment of creativity, he proposed that one might
experience conceptual replication (where the known is transferred to new settings), redefinition
(where the known seen in a new light), incrementation (where the known is extended), redirection,
reconstruction and re-initiation. With the above, it indicates that for teachers themselves to enjoy
the creative process, they need to experience too the last level of re-initiation that involves
something quite new, unlike the earlier levels that somewhat modify the present.
Furthermore, the complexities of evaluating the creative process in tandem with assessing the final
product may not be as easy. Teachers acknowledge the challenge of designing an engaging and
effective facilitation process and research also informs that such instructive roles of teachers need
be carefully reconsidered to better support students’ creative functioning. Teachers work hard to
help students fulfil the standards for descriptors pertaining to students’ ideas, such as ‘insightful
and/or innovative’, ‘well-supported’, ‘thoroughly analysed and evaluated’, and ‘organized
coherently’. Realistically, how comfortable are they to facilitate with Schwarz’s mutual learning
model that still encourages students to formulate new meanings and with the autonomy for
creative thinking – to suggest and implement useful innovative changes? It once again begs the
question of ‘how can creativity be taught and assessed’?
In conclusion, as Alvin Toffler wisely summed up, “The illiterate of the 21st century will not be
those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” Creativity
remains as a vital heartbeat of new educational process of “learning how to learn”. Going forward,
how can teachers themselves embody attributes such as having sound reasoning and decision-
making, practicing reflective thinking, inspiring curiosity and creativity, as well as effectively
managing complexities and navigating ambiguities? If we expect teachers to encourage students
to participate in the creation of knowledge from authentic learning, how then, can the teachers
themselves not experience the creative self-discovery process? The author therefore proposes that
authentic performance tasks be meaningfully integrated to evaluate students’ performance that
demonstrate quality learning of the various desired outcomes as defined by the set of 21st century
skill competencies as outlined in MOE’s Curriculum 2015.

6. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
DESIGN OF A CREATIVE PEDAGOGY USING CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING
This section focuses on the design of a professional learning programme for teachers that primarily
aims to help teachers deepen their understanding of the Creative Problem Solving process before
situating creativity within the curriculum. Centred largely on an experiential approach, teachers
will reflect and examine the impact on pedagogy and assessment of creativity in the field of
education. The three authentic tasks of this experiential approach employ evaluation methods
“directed at the demonstration of competence in real-world problems” (Posner, 2004, p.202). The
teacher first takes on the role as a participant before learning to be a facilitator of the Creative
Problem Solving process. The author believes that learning becomes most authentic when
assessment is embedded in the participants’ own doing, thinking and reflecting on their self-
discovery process – one which allows the participants to begin charting their own creative journey.
This programme is designed to help educators learn to document creative growth, learning and
achievements in new ways through use of authentic performance tasks. Each of the tasks typically
provide evidence of one’s understanding and ability to use or apply what one has learned.
Incrementally more challenging, each performance task also heightens the reflections concerning
the meta-cognitive component of instruction. The meta-cognitive dimensions of the authentic
assessment may include the participants’ reasons for their choice of strategies and thinking tools,
explanations of their planning and actions as perceived by the participant and/or the group
members, and their perceived changes in thought, feelings, and action during the in-class and
extended out-of-class learning. The deliberation of each task therefore provides space to allow
them to create new benchmark for future goals and efforts. Participants are encouraged to dive
into unresolved questions and challenges surrounding creativity, especially in relation to outcomes
as complex and varied as problem solving.
Treffinger (1987, cited in Treffinger, 1995) noted that with a growing emphasis on the importance
of creativity and thinking skills in education, the lack of systematic efforts to measure creativity
and problem solving remains as a common challenge. It is not the intention of this programme to
provide specific instruments to address the above challenge (refer to Appendix 4.1). But the
programme does provide for a learning space to use alternative assessment to draw participants
deeper into their own ways of understanding creativity. The planning of authentic tasks is
therefore intentionally designed to align with most of Treffinger’s (1987) eight roles for creativity
assessment. The roles of creativity assessment include:
1. Helping to recognise and affirm the strengths and talents of individuals and enabling
people to know and better understand themselves;
2. Expanding and enhancing understanding of the nature of human abilities and giftedness;
3. Providing ‘baseline’ data for assessing individuals or groups, guiding teachers in planning
and conducting appropriate and challenging instruction;
4. Providing pre-test and post-test data for group comparisons for research or evaluation;
5. Helping the instructor/facilitator discover unrecognised or untapped talent resources;
6. Providing a common language for communication among teachers about the nature of
creative abilities and skills;
7. Helping to remove creativity from the realm of mystery and superstition; and
8. Providing operational constructs to help advance theory and research on creativity.
As discussed, the Creative Problem Solving: Thinking Skills model takes centre stage in the design
of this programme (see Figure 4.1). Puccio et al. (2011) studied that the CPS process has been
refined for years and has been the subject of many research studies since its introduction by Alex
Osborn more than 50 years ago. There are alternative conceptions of this creative process in use
given the extent to which CPS has been widely expanded (see Basadur, 1994; Isaksen, Dorval, &
Treffinger, 1994, 2000; Miller, Behar, & Firestien, 2001; Parnes, 2004). The Thinking Skills model
is the first to articulate specific thinking skills associated with each step of the process. Along with
these thinking skills, some affective skills are also described to support the thinking skill associated
with each step (see Table 4.1).

7. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
SOURCE: Puccio, Murdock and Mance (2006).
Figure 4.1: Purpose of the Steps in Creative Problem Solving: The Thinking Skills model
AUTHENTIC PERFORMANCE TASK CONSIDERATIONS
Fundamentally, good educative assessment practice should help teachers as participants
experience the rich learning while working on the authentic task with ongoing constructive
feedback (Wiggins, 1998, p.21). The author suggests that for a professional learning programme
on creativity, authentic performance tasks would provide more situated opportunities for teachers
to integrate theories on creativity and practice. The choice of using authentic performance in this
course helps participants themselves to focus on the authentic tasks while they enjoy a process of
self-directed learning with “valid direction, intellectual coherence, and motivation” (p.21). Wiggins
(1998) offers the following three standards to ensure that authenticity is achieved in performance
tasks. Firstly, task needs to be realistic. In this course, the participants need to be realistic in
terms of the learning goals with the expectation that they need to apply what is learnt through
planning, facilitating and reflecting. The realism of the task is further set when participants need to
lead others to clarify their purpose while helping them to become clearer of their own creative
thinking as well as emotions. Secondly, the task designed requires judgement and innovation. The
participants are required to use the knowledge and skills to effectively solve the ‘unstructured’
problem. While CPS offers a directive map for guiding the facilitation process, the problem scenario
is an open challenge decided and owned by the participants themselves. The challenge of
managing group dynamics, facilitating others into focused conversation and leading the rest to
jointly decide on next steps are critical learning points of this programme. Thirdly, the ‘doing’ of
the subject (i.e. facilitation of creative thinking) is demonstrated as the knowledge of facilitating
for creative thinking is not only done during the programme, but further applied to their own
classroom context to improve future ‘performance’.
It was earlier discussed that the application of creative thinking might not be a comfortable
learning process. While teachers are stretched to ‘think out of the box’, the ongoing feedback to
the teachers’ creative learning process will support assessment as learning (p. 21). In light of
feedback coupled with distributed learning within group planning and evaluation, the process may
significantly increase teachers’ capacity for reflective practice. Clearly, this may help teachers
ASSESSING THE
SITUATION:
To describe and
identify relevant
data and to
determine next
process step
EXPLORING
THE VISION:
To develop a
vision of a
desired
outcome
FORMULATING
THE CHALLENGES:
To identify the
gaps that must
be closed to
achieve the
desired outcome
EXPLORING
IDEAS: To
generate novel
ideas that
address
significant
gaps/
challenges
FORMULATING
SOLUTIONS:
To move from
ideas to
solutions
EXPLORING
ACCEPTANCE:
To increase
likelihood of
success by
testing
solutions
FORMULATING A
PLAN:
To develop an
implementation
plan

8. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
themselves to first understand and internalise the reflective thinking standards within the Critical
and Inventive thinking skills of C2015 for students.
Figure 4.2: Instructional schema of the Applied Creativity programme
While this programme is largely experiential in nature, it is designed with the intention of
leveraging on Illeris’s (2003) three interrelated dimensions of learning – cognitive, emotional and
social. Through the cognitive dimension, knowledge, skills, understanding, meaning and
functionality are developed. Through the emotional dimension, patterns of emotion and motivation,
attitudes, sensitivity and mental balance are developed. Through the social dimension, potential
for empathy, communication, and co-creation are developed. For these reasons, the assessment
tasks in this programme are mostly open-ended. Teachers need to design for creative concepts
both individually, and on a group level, allowing for distributed learning. In the course evaluation
of past cohorts, the author found that teachers gave high interest ratings as many noted that the
tasks made them think hard and required them to actively participate in learning together.
PRE-COURSE ACTIVITY: HEIGHTENING SELF-AWARENESS
Treffinger (1995) proposed that the assessment of creativity needs to be regarded as an attempt
to recognise or identify creative characteristics or abilities among people, or to understand the
creative strengths and potentials of individuals. In order to teach about creativity or teach more
creatively, one needs to first experience and question his personal beliefs and knowledge of what it
means to learn creatively.
Teacher participants are first invited to take an online Emergenetics™ profiling instrument whereby
a personal narrative report is generated for the individual that explains his/her thinking and
behavioural preference as compared to the general population. The profiles will then be printed
and distributed during the early part of the course.
What does it mean to be creative? The author argues that Emergenetics™ can be a useful way to
support the discovering of personal creativity. From the experience of previous classes, the
exploratory nature of understanding the profile coupled with the post-profiling facilitation help
participants to appreciate their unique way of connecting with the world. In addition, the facilitated
activities further heighten teachers’ sensitivity to how they have been using their own creative
strengths as well as providing a rationale of some of their personal and professional challenges. As
a starting point for the creativity course, participants have found Emergenetics™ to be a helpful
way to more closely examine how one can be creative with the attributes matched to accurately
describe one. Interestingly, amongst the four distinct thinking attributes (Analytical, Structural,
Social and Conceptual) the age-old misconception that only those with a preference for Conceptual
thinking are creative, or at least, more creative, never fails to surface. During the facilitated
workshop, participants will reflect and recognise that people with different profiles approach the
same creative task differently; each bringing with them a novel way of thinking that serves a
unique purpose. This understanding of one’s unique sense of creativity is critical to better serve
the goals of this programme as it helps to sharpen how one better experiences personal and social
creativity. It further links and taps into all aspects of creative endeavours while consolidating the
learning and highlighting what matters to produce a creative product, individually and collectively.
The secondary purpose of profiling with Emergenetics™ is to allow the tutor to generate different
Whole Emergenetics team (WEteam™) grouping. The WEteam™ distributes participants into
heterogeneous groups of different combinations of thinking and behavioural preferences.
Pre-­‐course
ac+vity:
Heightening
Self-­‐
Awareness
Authen+c
Task
1:
Group
Evalua+on
of
CPS
Facilita+on
Authen+c
Task
2:
Individual
facilita+on
using
the
CPS
process
Authen+c
Task
3:
Adopt
a
Thinking
Tool
for
Lesson
Planning

9. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
Participants will recognise the educational value of working with diverse preferences, throughout
the course. The most immediate implications on why the current way of testing for students’ ability
to collaborate by the equal distribution of workload in groups is often a futile assessment practice.
Many in their reflections acknowledge that student interactions can take place more meaningfully if
they are first encouraged to trust and appreciate their own thinking and behavioural preferences
with no unnecessary casting of negative stereotypes. Group learning, then, using new curricular
materials and assessment instruments would be more meaningful if they provide opportunities for
planned creative learning experiences. These procedures permit one’s learning to lead to more,
making creative thinking systematic from both the teachers’ perspectives and that of the students’
– legitimate and rewarding.
Figure 4.3: Sample of Emergenetics™ profile (Used with permission)
While this piece of narrative reflection is ungraded, it provides a space for teachers to heighten
anticipation in preparation for the course. Upon a deeper examination of one’s personal beliefs and
values regarding what is creative, the narrative provides an opportunity to ask two essential
questions: what does it mean to be creative? How does the Emergenetics™ profile help me better
appreciate my personal creativity? For an application to a classroom context, Treffinger (1995)
proposed that analysing qualitative data as part of the creativity assessment efforts is a process
that needs to consider relevant context issues, possible biases and values while discerning the
meaning of information. While creative assessment might be regarded as a way to identify creative
abilities or to understand one’s creative strengths and potentials, the more critical questions
concerned with creative assessment in support of this activity would be: How might teachers
better foster creative dispositions in class leveraging on each child’s preference for learning? What
are some evident advantages for getting students to collaborate in heterogeneous groups?

10. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
AUTHENTIC TASK 1: GROUP EVALUATION FOR CPS FACILITATION
Posner (2004, p.181) purports that “All knowledge is in a sense social.” While learning is
essentially distributed, participants with a shared goal and different learning styles, interest and
experience can benefit from collaborative learning. This WEteams™ approach was found to be
particularly useful as teachers were able to bring together their different understanding and at the
same time, to design a meaningful and focused facilitation to apply their learning. After forming
WEteams™, the groups then select a thinking tool to design the facilitation process in their in-class
experience.
As part of the post-facilitation evaluation, each WEteam™ would write up their general reactions
from the class as well as the group’s debrief. In addition, teams are encouraged to reflect and
evaluate not only on the planning process which should include both the cognitive as well as the
affective aspects of the facilitation experience, but to also assess their abilities to help other teams
generate creative ideas around a given topic. Besides identifying some of the critical concerns they
faced during the facilitation process, they are encouraged to brainstorm for solutions and make
associations to how they can apply the tool in their classroom practice. Considerations may
include finding instructional opportunities with using various thinking tools as part of differentiated
instruction strategy or any other pedagogical applications. In addition, the teams bring into their
groups’ evaluation by working collaboratively as a WEteam™.
Ward (2007) raised an interesting assumption that creativity is a result of the interactive
combination of knowledge, intellectual skills, thinking style, personality, motivation and the
environment. This is very relevant to one of the tenets for assessment for learning, whereby
teachers play an important role in providing timely feedback. In the classroom context, teachers
need to model the ability to closely observe creativity-in-action in order to foster greater creativity
in the classroom. Ward (2007, p.xix) further proposed that applied creativity in an authentic
context could offer at least three benefits. Firstly, while teachers learn to adopt more creative
approaches towards learning, they may also better model such approaches for students. In
relation to designing authentic tasks for students, if teachers themselves experience the factors
that provoked or inhibited their personal creativity, the more competent they will be to help
students overcome blocks and pursue creative learning opportunities. In addition, Tan and Wong
(2007, p.494) recognised that the experience could heighten teachers’ appreciation of their own
roles as a facilitator of learner, rather than being the ‘sole provider’ of knowledge. This may imply
that teachers can better design for a more effective learning environment for the students.
AUTHENTIC TASK 2: INDIVIDUAL FACILITATION USING THE CPS PROCESS
To deepen the self-exploratory creative experience, this is an individual assignment that requires
the teacher to facilitate a full CPS process with any selected group of ‘safe-group’ participants (i.e.
students, colleagues, or friends). One of the goals of this programme is to enhance teachers’
confidence in applying various creative thinking tools while engaging in the iterative process of the
Dynamic Balance concept of divergence and convergence thinking using CPS. Assessment of
creative thinking cannot simply be a one-off activity. In particular for facilitation, extended practice
with a different context, challenges and audience, will help the teacher to gain new levels of
understanding. The facilitation skills of the teacher-facilitator largely depend on his/her ability to
help the group to be able to propose a creative (i.e. novel and useful) action plan. The teacher-
facilitator need not be the content expert. However, as the process driver, he/she should seek to
help the group build an awareness of relevant theories, social structures, systems and policies that
surround social or environmental issues. Dewey purportedly claimed that education ought to
address social issues and “enhance [the student’s] social insight and interest” so as they may be
able to contribute to and improve society” (Dewey, 1916, p.225, cited in Cremin, 1961, p.125).
Another goal of this task is for the teacher-facilitator to deepen his/her awareness of diversity of
learning preferences while helping the group to appreciate different perspectives and values of the
individual members in the midst of clarifying issues pertaining to their selected topic for
deliberation using the Creative Problem Solving.
This individual assessment is rubric-based and each assessment criterion may carry equal weight
(Appendix 4.2). While the major flaw in many current measurements of creativity is that most are

11. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
often uni-dimensional and tend to focus on a single aspect of the creative process, the criteria are
broad and allow for teacher-facilitator to display his/her understanding of CPS and facilitation skills.
It is useful to include criteria that relates to the testing of divergent thinking – fluency, flexibility,
originality and elaboration (Torrance, 1972). The teacher-facilitator will then be assessed based on
his/her performance with the products of the CPS facilitation process delivered. Table 4.2 provides
more explanation of the assessment criteria with suggested considerations for assessing the
facilitation.
Table 4.2: Assessment Criteria
Assessment Criteria Questions for Facilitation
Diagnosis of challenge:
Project task is carefully
examined with participants
acquiring accurate
understanding of relevant data
and able to identify salient
points and insights.
Did the teacher-facilitator
ü Use diagnostic thinking tools to help participants
focus on a community / environment-related project
that require some novel thinking?
ü Facilitate the identification and clarification of their
choice showing an understanding of the intricacies
and complexities of the challenge they will work with?
Generation of ideas:
Ideas are insightful and
innovative.
With the careful selection of appropriate divergent thinking
tools, did the teacher-facilitator help the group to generate
rich and diverse ideas?
Assess the idea generation outcome using the following
considerations:
ü Fluency:
Ability to produce many ideas for an open-ended
problem or question;
ü Flexibility:
Ability to take different approaches to a problem, think
of ideas in different categories, or view a problem from
different perspectives;
ü Originality:
Uniqueness, non-conformity in thought and action;
ü Elaboration:
Number of different ideas used in working out the
details of an idea.
Analysis of ideas:
Main ideas are well-supported
by relevant details and
examples. Ideas are
thoroughly analysed and
evaluated.
In the process of identify the specific project, had the
teacher-facilitator helped participants justify or defend their
choices with relevant information using the thinking tools of
CPS?
While facilitating participants’ planning process, was the
teacher-facilitator mindfully helping participants stay on task
and work towards fulfilling the objective/s they have decided
upon?
Well-designed action plan:
Ideas are presented and
organised coherently.
Did the teacher-facilitator help the group to create an
appealing proposal that is reader-friendly, comprehensive,
well-organized and coherent?
AUTHENTIC TASK 3: ADOPT-A-THINKING TOOL FOR LESSON PLANNING

12. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
While Authentic Task 2 provides assessment for learning to help teachers gain confidence with the
CPS process and tools, Task 3 assesses the teacher’s ability to design a meaningful lesson that
delivers quality outcome of the CPS process. This performance task consists of two parts: lesson
analysis and lesson design to heighten creative learning. Teachers are required to craft a lesson
plan in their subject area using one or two of the thinking tools in this course. Appendix 4.3 offers
the assessment rubrics for this creative lesson-planning task.
Teachers are provided with the following guiding questions:
a. Identify challenges in teaching a specific lesson. If you have taught this lesson before,
what are some past experiences you faced? If this is a new lesson, what are some
challenges you might anticipate?
b. What are the thinking tool(s) that might help you to teach this lesson unit more creatively?
Explain why the selected tool is a good fit for the lesson activity (particularly on how this
tool will bring about more effective and/or engaged learning).
c. Give an outline of this lesson that would be aligned to help you teach more creatively.
Propose the learning outcome or overview of scope & sequence of activities and how you
would anticipate your students learn more creatively with a deeper understanding of the
lesson.
REFLECTIONS ON THE CHALLENGES
This in-service professional learning course is recommended to be at least 25 hours. It is also
intentionally designed to take teachers away the hassle and bustle of school life in order to
experience and incubate on their learning process. Collaboratively, teachers immersed in this
programme learn in a physical and psychological conducive environment designed for productive
social interactions allowing teachers to experience their exploration for breakthrough solutions in a
‘protected’ setting. To heighten the creative engagement, special attention needs to be given to
Ekvall’s (1996) 10 creative climate dimensions: challenge and involvement, freedom, idea time,
idea support, trust and openness, playfulness and humour, debates whereby viewpoints and ideas
are appropriately challenged, low conflicts whereby little or no presence of interpersonal tension,
risk-taking, and dynamism.
This course is designed with the practitioner in mind. It is largely focused on the instruction and
facilitation of CPS, although the author is of the opinion that it would be ideal for participants to
also gain a deeper understanding in the theories of creativity. Given the constraints of time,
theoretical content coverage is significantly reduced; however, aspects of curriculum design will be
discussed while teachers are encouraged to seek more in-depth application back in the classroom.
Participants are constantly reminded that the course is designed to support a more informed
practice of enhancing and facilitating for creativity. While active inquiry requiring more in-depth
exploration by each WEteam™ is expected, aspects such as creative pedagogies, subject/domain
specific pedagogical content knowledge will be discussed during the course of learning. More
critically, the focus will be for teachers to experience and collaboratively construct their
understanding of creative learning, which is domain-general within the shared learning space.
From past courses conducted, participants appreciate the learning space to synthesize and connect
throughout the course. That being said, the author is of the opinion that the Professional Learning
Community in schools might offer a similarly rich opportunity for more in-depth and authentic
‘tinkering’.
While this course aims to help teachers confront and challenge some epistemological assumptions
underlying their beliefs on creativity, the sustainability of the learning depends much on the
teachers’ motivation and will to continue practicing creativity. The authentic assessment engages
teams to collaborate in safe learning environment during Tasks 1 and 2. Ongoing feedback is
provided during discussion on how one might circumvent facilitation challenges, while not
compromising the quality of creative learning. Being iterative in nature, teams continue to
brainstorm with other thinking tools to search for alternative solutions to some of the common
challenges faced. In essence, to be a skilful facilitator of creativity in the classroom, one needs to
constantly practice and reflect on the teaching and learning experience.

13. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
CONCLUSION
Assessment that is centred on 21st century competencies needs to ensure that learning is multi-
dimensional. When teachers themselves experience the programme and get a more nuanced
understanding of what creativity is, they may then better explore ways they can assess students’
creative learning. This chapter illustrates how they can better design assessment tasks that
provide for reflections that are deeper and more progressively organised. In addition, teachers can
learn to plan their instruction with greater confidence so that both the lesson objectives in teaching
for creativity, as well as assessment imperatives, can be realised.
Chong Lin Lin, a graduate of NIE’s Management and Leadership Studies (January 2011) noted:
In the heartbeat of CPS, one learns to generate many varied and unusual options while
focusing your ideas constructively. In my view, CPS is a very powerful tool because it
consists of both creative thinking and critical thinking.
The above quote is testimony from a teacher who thinks highly of CPS tools as a good and
powerful tool for developing skills in creativity and critical thinking if the teacher designs the
performance tasks to allow such skills to be practised. While teachers aspire to be more creative in
class and to begin assessing for creativity, they need to take into consideration that the
assessment of 21st century competencies is multi-dimensional. A well-designed assessment task
requires teachers to be convinced of how they may scaffold students’ learning towards enjoying
the process of learning while being fully conscious that their creative efforts can be reliably
assessed.
To conclude, this chapter has laid the groundwork for authentic assessments proposed for teachers
to experience creativity. Attempts should be made to extend more alternative assessments to
further support teachers’ own understanding of integrating creative teaching into their respective
subject areas. In this regard, more work can be done on the identification of appropriate ways to
assess artefacts of the creative problem solving process with an increased mastery of CPS tools
and more skilful facilitation experience using CPS. In the long run, the author suggests that when
teachers are more cognizant of their own beliefs around creativity, they themselves can become
skilled gatekeepers of a curriculum that best prepares the next generation with the creative
thinking skills needed in the 21st century.

14. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
REFERENCES
Amabile, T.M (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376.
Amabile, T.M., & Gitomer, J. (1984). Children's artistic creativity: Effects of choice in task
materials. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 10, 209–215.
Browning, G. (2006). Emergenetics: Tap into the new science of success. New York: HarperCollins.
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. (2005). Bridging generality and specificity: The Amusement Park
Theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27(3), p.158–163
Campos, V. (2000).Dr Ruth Noller: Contributions to creativity. Unpublished masters project, State
University of New York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
Collins, M.A., & Amabile, T.M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), In
Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, Culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J.
Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325-339). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New
York: HarperPerennial.
Davis, G. (2004). Creativity is forever (5th
ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education, p. 225, cited in L.A. Cremin, The transformation of
the school: Progressivism in American education 1876–1957 (New York: Vintage/ Random
House), 1961, p. 125.
Ekvall, G. (1996). Organisational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work
and Organisational Psychology, 5, 105–123.
Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Han, K., & Marvin, C. (2002). Multiple creativities? Investigating domain-specificity of creativity in
young children. Gifted Children Quarterly, 46(2), 98–109.
Illeris, K. (2003). Three dimensions of learning: Contemporary learning theory in the tension field
between the cognitive, the emotional and the social. Florida: Krieger.
Isaksen, S.G., Dorval, K.B., & Treffinger, D.J. (1994). Creative approaches to problem solving.
Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
Newmann F.M., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual
quality. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Ministry of Education. (2007). Teach less, learn more. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from Singapore:
Ministry of Education website: http://www.moe.gov.sg/bluesky/tllm.htm.
Ministry of Education. (March, 2010). Nurturing our young for the future: Competencies for the
21st
century. Retrieved on June 1,2011, from Singapore: Ministry of Education website:
http://www.moe.edu.sg/.
Ministry of Education. (April 29, 2011). Standards and Benchmarks for 21st
Century Competencies.
Retrieved on June 1, 2011 from Singapore: Ministry of Education Edumall website:
http://subjects.edumall.sg/cos/o.x?c=/subjects/pagetree&func=view&rid=6939.

15. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
Mumford, M.D., Zaccaro, S.J., Harding, F.D., Jacobs, To.O. & Fleishman, E.A. (2000). Leadership
skills for a changing world: Solving complex problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 11–35.
Plucker, J.A. & Beghetto R.A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain
specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In R.J. Sternberg, E.L. Grigorenko, & J.L.
Singer (Eds).Creativity. From potential to realization (pp.153-168). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the Curriculum. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Puccio, G.J., Murdock, M.C., & Mance, M. (2005). Current developments in creative problem
solving for organisations: A focus on thinking skills and styles. The Korean Journal of
Thinking & Problem Solving, 15, 43–76.
Puccio, G.J., Murdock, M.C., & Mance, M. (2011). Creative Leadership: Skills that drive change.
(2nd
Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage Publications, Inc.
Report of the Committee on University Admission System(1999). Preparing Graduates for a
knowledge economy: A new university admission system for Singapore.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–310.
Ruggerio, V.R. (1998). The art of thinking: A guide to critical and creative thought (5th
ed.). New
York: Longman.
Schwarz, R., Davidson, A.S., Carlson, M.S., and McKinney, S.C. (2005).The skilled facilitator
fieldbook.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shephard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29 (7),
pp.4–14.
Sternberg, R.J. (1961). A propulsion model of types of creative contributions. Review of General
Psychology, 3(2), 83–100.
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Creativity or creativities? International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies.63 (4-5), 370–382.
Tan, A.G. & Wong, S.S. (2007).Constructive creativity in education. In Tan, A.G. (ed.), Creativity:
A Handbook for Teachers, pp. 485–506. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
The Report of the 21st Century Literacy (2005). A Global Imperative. California: San Jose.
Torrance, E.P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Journal of
Creative Behaviour, 6. 236–252.
Treffinger, D.J. (1987). Research on creativity assessment. In S.G. Isaksen, Ed., Frontiers of
Creativity Research. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited, 103–109.
Treffinger, D.J. (1995). Assessing creativity: A creative challenge. Think, 5, 18–22.
Treffinger, D.J; Isaksen S.G. &Firestein, R.L. (1983). Theoretical perspectives on CPS and its
facilitation. Journal of Creative Behavior, 17, 9–17.
Treffinger, D.J; Isaksen S.G. & Steaddorval, K.B. (2006).Creative Problem Solving: An introduction.
(4th
ed.). Center of Creative Learning, Inc and Creative Problem Solving Group, Inc.
Ward, T.B. (2007). The multiple roles of educators in children’s creativity. In Tan, A.G. (ed.),
Creativity: A Handbook for Teachers, pp. xvii–iiv. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

16. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
Ward, T.B, Smith S.M, & Finke, R.A. (1999). Creative cognition. In Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.).Handbook
of creativity (chap. 10, pp.189–212). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessment to inform and improve student
performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

17. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st Century Pedagogy
Appendix 4.1
Applied Creative Problem Solving: Cognitive Tools for Creativity Course Overview
Course Outline
This programme is designed to be a one-week in-service training programme for educators.
While the course aims to provide an overview of the Creative Problem Solving (CPS) model
with its basic principles, components, stages, phases and tools, it also introduces Rhode’s
(1961) 4 Ps as an organising framework for studying and applying creativity and CPS.
Teachers would learn to understand their own thinking and behavioural attributes through
a personal profiling instrument.
This understanding will help participants appreciate the three building blocks of CPS:
Explore the Challenge, Generate Ideas, Prepare for Action. The most recent development
of the CPS model – Creative Problem Solving: The Thinking Skills model – approaches CPS
as a framework for teaching thinking; that is, each step of the process is designed to
engage a different thinking skill. By describing CPS as a framework that engages thinking,
we are now able to draw into the CPS model a diverse array of tools from such fields as
quality improvement, strategic management and decision-making. The purpose of this
course is to introduce participants to tools that engage the following forms of thinking:
diagnostic, visionary, strategic, ideational, evaluative, contextual, and tactical, so you can
gain insight into your areas of strength and opportunities for further development with
respect to your thinking and problem-solving skills.
Course Objectives
By the end of the course, teachers will be able to:
o appreciate thinking skills with a diverse set of problem solving, decision-
making and creativity tools;
o apply a variety of creative thinking tools to design more innovative
processes and products;
o expand their application of CPS to leading for more effective collaboration
between students; and
o apply the Creative Problem Solving: Thinking Skills model to assess
learning needs and to plan appropriate teaching interventions as a teacher.

18. Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
Appendix 4.2
Assessment Rubrics for Individual Facilitation of a CPS process (Authentic Task 2)
Levels of Performance
Exemplary Proficient Developing
Diagnosis of challenge:
Project task is carefully
examined; accurate
understanding of relevant
data and able to identify
salient points and insights.
Highly effective use of
diagnostic thinking tools
to help participants gain
good understanding of
the intricacies and
complexities of the
challenge.
Fairly effective use of
diagnostic thinking tools
to help participants gain
some understanding of
the intricacies and
complexities of the
challenge of the scope.
Fairly effective use of
diagnostic thinking
tools to help
participants gain some
basic understanding of
the challenge.
Generation of ideas:
Ideas are insightful and
innovative.
Excellent facilitation of
divergent thinking tools
that helped the
participants to generate
rich and diverse ideas
divergent thinking (i.e.,
fluency, flexibility,
originality and
elaboration).
Fairly effective facilitation
of divergent thinking
tools that helped the
participants to generate
adequate number of
qualities ideas for
divergent thinking (i.e.,
fluency, flexibility,
originality and
elaboration).
Inconsistent facilitation
of divergent thinking
tools that helped the
participants to generate
some useful ideas for
divergent thinking (i.e.,
fluency, flexibility,
originality and
elaboration).
Analysis of ideas:
Main ideas are well-
supported by relevant details
and examples. Ideas are
thoroughly analysed and
evaluated.
Excellent facilitation of
convergent thinking tools
that helped the
participants to stay focus
and apply affirmative
judgment while keeping
novelty alive with
objectives in mind most
of the time.
Fairly effective facilitation
of convergent thinking
tools that helped the
participants to stay focus
and /or apply affirmative
judgment while at times
struggle with keeping the
novelty alive and/or
objectives in mind.
Inconsistent facilitation
of convergent thinking
tools that might have
helped the participants
to stay focus but
process of useful
convergence appeared
to be challenging
particularly with
keeping novelty alive.
Well-designed action plan:
Ideas are presented and
organized coherently.
Participants were able to
devise a refined solution
plan that is relevant and
innovative and well
organized in actionable
steps.
Participants were able to
devise a solution plan
that is relevant and/or
innovative with some
broad actionable steps.
Participants were able
to concur with some
broad directions for
further refinement into
a feasible action plan.
Criterion

19. Experiencing Authentic Assessment for Creativity as a 21st
Century Pedagogy
1
9
1
9
1
9
Appendix 4.3
Assessment Rubrics for Creative Lesson Plan (Authentic Task 3)
Rationale for Lesson
Design
Use of Creative
Thinking Tool/s
Coherence of Lesson
Plan
Outstanding
(A)
Convincing and well
supported design rationale
for creative teaching.
Addresses context of the
lesson cohesively.
Good selection and
exceptional connection
between the creative
thinking tool/s and address
curriculum gap.
Provides rich opportunity for
students to construct,
create, design new
knowledge either
individually, or
collaboratively.
Viable and interesting
lesson plan. Innovative
approach designed with
keen consideration of the
flow of activities, tasks that
promotes Assessment for
Learning.
Merit
(B)
Clear shifts in the
curriculum to align creative
teaching elements and
strong lesson plan.
Good understanding of
creative thinking tool/s and
offer good fit to address
curriculum gap.
Provides sufficient
opportunity for students to
construct, create, design
new knowledge either
individually, or
collaboratively.
Workable lesson plan with
clear intended outcomes to
support creative learning.
Satisfactory
(C)
Curriculum intervention
measures at surface level.
Superficial understanding of
creative thinking tool/s.
Provides minimal
opportunity for students to
engage in complex creative
thinking and actions.
Basic lesson plan with
some student-centric
learning activities.