Cropley,

A. (2004). Creativity in education and learning: a guide for teachers and

educators. Routledge.

(CH 1) CREATIVITY: BASIC CONCEPTS

1. KEY QUESTION 1: WHAT IS CREATIVITY?
A. Generally universal elements to definitions of creativity: novelty (departing from
the familiar), effectiveness (achieves an end), ethicality (not selfish or destructive)
B. Creativity as effect (creative products: tangible, and material), as cause (creative
people: psychological factors withing individuals); environment matters as a
catalyst and determiner (not passive).
C. Focus on Person and Process avoids subjective understandings of product ‘value’,
allows for emphasis on the human and benefit-focused concept of creative potential
D. Sublime Creativity (recognized/’validated’ and achieving acclaim) vs. Everyday
Creativity (‘ordinary’/not publicly acknowledged, as a personal characteristic);
“freeing the potential of ‘ordinary’ people” through exercises in creative acts

2. KEY QUESTION 2: HOW CAN IT BE STUDIED?

A. Quantitative and qualitative approaches (Cropley is a proponent of quantitative to
avoid ‘product’ or ‘person’ subjectivity’)
B. broad variety of methods (test-based, interviews, meta-analytic, case studies,
system-oriented, etc.); people and products (sublime and everyday); processes,
especially field-specific (with the scope of fields expanded to include more variety)
C. Key questions commonly studied:
i. Is everything that is different creative? (achieving surprise, quasi-/pseudo-
creativity; need for the element of ‘effectiveness’; ethical concerns/general
positive connotations of creativity)
ii. Is creativity the same in all fields? (domain-specific products often emphasized;
role of communication – each field having its own vocabulary, even semiotics;
Ludwig’s framework – impersonal vs. emotive, objective vs. subjective)
iii. Is simply letting ideas flow sufficient for creativity? (the role of inspiration,
“blind chance”/“luck of the diligent”/“self-induced luck,” and special
knowledge/the prepared mind
iv. Is creativity allied to psychopathology? (old issue; some similarities in divergent
thinking; possibility of empathetic correlations when creativity involves insights
into human existence/condition; acceptance of the ‘eccentric’)

3. KEY QUESTION 1: HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM INTELLIGENCE?

4. KEY QUESTION 1: WHAT IS ITS CONNECTION WITH EDUCATION?

A. Accepted validity of key points:
i. Creativity seems to be an inherent part of childhood – free of society
preconceptions (the tabula rasa model)
ii. Creativity in children is necessary for society – rising generations ability to “see
things differently, finding new approaches to old problems
iii. Creativity helps children learn and develop – offers classroom approaches that
are “interesting” and provide “more efficient way[s] of fostering learning and
personal growth”

FOR DISCUSSION:
• Which of the guiding questions were you most intrigued by? Why? What sticks
out to you from each section?
• Are there any aspects of the study of creativity (as outlined) that you found to be
particularly profound or problematic? Why?
• What are some ways that you see creativity as a factor in your field/major? Can
you think of examples of creative products, people or processes in specific areas,
even/especially in those not traditionally considered ‘creative’?
• As you look at the chart in Section 3, what do you notice? What do you wonder?
• Do you agree with the ‘validity’ of Cropley’s points about children/education as
guiding premises?