Encouraging Creativity in Online Courses

Muhammad Farkhan Fauzi

1507042030

Starko, 1995 states that It is easy to consider the essential role of creativity in bringing joy and meaning to the human condition – without creativity we have no art, no literature, no science, no innovation, no problem solving, no progress. Creative people are in high demand in today’s world (Stevens and Burley, 1999). If adults are to be successful and prosper, innovative thinking and behaving must be encouraged. Therefore it is imperative that students continue to receive opportunities to develop divergent thinking skills (e.g. thinking outside the box) (Slavkin, 2004). Creativity is an important component of problem solving, other higher cognitive abilities, social and emotional well-being, and academic and adult success (Slavkin, 2004). “Creativity is important to society but it traditionally has been one of psychology’s orphans” (Sternberg & Lubart, 1999, 4). It is still common that traditional classroom educators -- due to demands on time,  upport issues,and/or curriculum requirements -- hold to the tenet that “learning is a mechanistic experience” (e.g. input/output) (Slavkin, 2004). Therefore, students may lack the opportunity to think abstractly or creatively. Are there strategies, techniques or methods that can encourage student creativity in online courses? This paper explores creativity and offers reminders concerning the tips and strategies available for online educators. Review of Literature Creativity Begins in the Brain, The frontal lobe of the brain focuses on processes such as decision-making, judgment, planning, creativity, and problem solving (Sprenger, 2002; Lucas, 2004). Brains need time to digest and adapt new information. One thing that attracts the brain is novelty, it may be the result of the brain dealing with survival (Sprenger, 2002). Something new and different is examined by the brain to make sure it is safe (Carper, 2000). Novelty and curiosity can boost attention (Lucas, 2004). Brain-based theory advocates the need for enriched environments (not necessarily physical environments) to encourage learning. Research performed by neuroscientists has indicated that enriched environments encourage the growth of dendrites, which relates to learning (Sprenger, 2002). Neuroscientists have offered learning principles to enhance enrichment in the classroom such as:

•  Give the brain something to do that it is capable of doing

• Provide repetition (consistently and with some intensity) so that brain neurons fire repeatedly enabling them to become more efficient

• Give timely feedback

•  Adapt learning to the student

(Tallal, 1999). Enriched environments engender student self-confidence, which leads to creativity.       Learning Theory Supports Creativity Contemporary learning theory acknowledges human learning to be a complex, constructive
process with learners building onto their own knowledge similar to a contractor building a house (Starko, 1995). Learning in pursuit of a goal makes the learning purposeful. Tying information to prior knowledge and understanding can make it meaningful. Since connections created by each student must be original and goal-oriented, learning must by definition be appropriate (meeting the goal) (Starko, 1995). Each learner builds an individual cognitive structure that is unique and
full of personal associations. Meaningful learning is viewed as essentially creative (Caine & Caine, 1991). Creativity: Definition, Theories, Myths, Virtues
Although a standard definition for creativity is still not agreed upon, a common definition is found or inferred from a wide range of studies (Slavkin, 2004). It involves the production of original, useful products as determined by that field (Sternberg & Lubart, 1999). Perkins (1988) defined creativity as a result that is both original and appropriate with appropriateness related to the cultural context in which the creativity is based (Sternberg, 1990). Czikszentmihalyi (1990) proposed that creativity was not a characteristic of people or products but an interaction among an
individual, product, and environment. Gardner professed that individuals are “creative” in a particular domain-specific ways. He advocated that the creative individual was a person who regularly solved problems, designed products, or defines new questions within a domain that was perceived novel but ultimately became accepted in that particular cultural setting (Gardner, 1993). Implicit theories of creativity include themes of originality and utility (Sternberg, 1985). Jung
(1972) advocated the importance of personal experience and the unconscious mind in framing creative production. The Creative Problem-Solving Model (Osborn, 1963) proposed a theory and a process to determine ways to use creativity appropriately. Each version of the process included a series of steps that involved both divergent (finding many ideas) and convergent (drawing conclusions, narrowing the field) stages (Starko, 1995). Creativity is both a communication tool (e.g. literature) and a technique for problem solving (e.g. inventors of modern lighting). In fact, the identification of a problem or “problem finding” underlies all types of creativity (Starko, 1995). Myths and stereotypes of creative individuals include 1) people are born creative or uncreative, 2) creativity is limited to the arts and music, 3)
creativity is intertwined with negative aspects of psychology and society (e.g. to be identified as creative the individual must be made, weird or neurotic), 4) creativity is a fuzzy, soft construct, 5) constraints inhibit creativity, 6) a person must be relatively young to make significant creative contributions, 7) creativity is enhanced with a group, and 8) creativity should not be marketed (Slavkin, 2004).
There are two different types of creativity: real-time and multi-stage. Real-time creativity is improvisational, impromptu, and spur-of-the-moment. Multi-state creativity involves the passage of time; students need sufficient time to generate and select ideas (Mau, 1997).

Psychologists and educators have discussed virtues of creativity and its relationship to the intellectual, educational, and development of intellect and talent in children (Slavkin, 2004). Contributions of creativity have been noted in areas as diverse as workplace leadership (Tierney, Farmer and Graen, 1999), healthy coping and emotional growth (King & Pope, 1999) and the maintenance of healthy relationships (Livingston, 1999). Creativity can reduce conflict and violence while promoting conflict resolution (Kovac, 1998). Creativity research related to
technology has also been garnering more attention (Kappel & Rubenstein, 1999). Students enrolled in a variety of online classes may pursue this breadth of applications. Creativity: Challenges and Benefits to Students
Giving students opportunities to be creative means allowing them to find and solve problems and communicate ideas in “novel” and “appropriate” ways (Starko, 1995). Learning occurs best when learners are involved in setting and meeting goals as well as linking information to their experiences in unique ways. To encourage students to find and solve problems in ways that facilitate original ideas, students need tools to communicate novel thinking to enhance their learning. Inviting innovation from online students may be met with psychological roadblocks. Some
students are not ready to think in a different way. To challenge their beliefs and worldviews may be a source of frustration. Other students begin the class with poor self-esteem concerning their creativity. They may have been told by teachers or significant others that they are not creative (Slavkin, 2004). When asked to demonstrate creativity, students may need to reconstruct their
own definitions of creativity through hands-on activities, interviews, experimentation, and play to see their potential and personal innovativeness (Slavkin, 2004).
One way to begin an online course and engage the student is to request they assess their creativity. Such an assessment can help understand student perceptions of their creativity level the online classes.

Students can benefit from creativity exercises, showing greater self-efficacy and improved ability to identify and express creativity within him- or herself (Slavkin, 2004). Findings from a pre/postcreativity exercise survey indicated that an overwhelming majority of students felt that the coursework gave them greater insight into themselves and their abilities to tap into unappreciated and underutilized aspects of self. This newly-recognized part of their personality carried over into
other classes, into the workplace and into their personal relationships (Livingston, 1999; Stokes, 1999). In addition, students believed that their leadership abilities were enhanced (Tierney, Farmer, and Graen, 1999) Tips for Online Educators
Perrone (1994) describes common elements of learning activities that most engage students intellectually. Coincidentally, they echo key attributes of creativity: finding interests and problems, looking in new ways, communicating personal ideas, and creating new products andsolutions to problems.

References

Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1991). Teaching and the human brain. Alexindria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Carper, J. (2000). Your miracle brain. New York: HarperCollins.
Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The domain of creativity: In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.).
Theories of creativity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Eberle, R. F. (1977). SCAMPER. Buffalo, NY: DOK.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.

Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents: Their nature, use and development. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Ltd.

Jung, C. G. (1972). The spirit in man, art, and literature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Kappel,

T. A. & Rubenstein, A. H. (1999). Creativity in design: The contribution of information. IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management, 46: 132-143.

King, B. J. and Pope, B. (1999). Creativity as a factor in psychological assessment and healthy psychological functioning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 72, 200-207.

Lucas, R. W. 2004. The creative training idea book: Inspired tips and techniques for engaging and effective learning. New York: AMACOM.

Kovac, T. (1998). Creativity and prosocial behavior. Studia Psychologica, 40, 326-330. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning January 2005 Vol. 2. No. 1.56

Livingston, J. A. (1999). Something old and something new: Love, creativity and the enduring relationship. Bulletin of the Menniger Clinic, 63, 40-52.

Mau, R. Y. (1997). The role of assessment in developing creativity. REACT, 2. Retrieved December 20, 2016, from http://eduweb.nie.edu.sg/REACTOld/1997/2/7.html.

McDermott, C. (1999). Beyond the silence. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Michalko, M. (2001). Cracking creativity: The secrets of creative genius. Berkley, CA: Ten Speed Press.

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination (3 rd ed.). New York: Scribner’s.

Perkins, D. N. (1988). Creativity and the quest for mechanism. In R. J. Sternberg and E.E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thought (pp. 309-336). New York: Cambridge University
Press.

Perrone, V. (1994). How to engage students in learning. Educational Leadership, 51(5), 11-13.

Prince, G. (1968). The operational mechanism of synectics. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2, 1-13.

Runco, M. (1993). Creativity as an educational objective for disadvantaged students. Storrs, CT: National Research Center for on the Gifted and Talented.

Schlichter, C. (1986). Talents Unlimited: Applying the Multiple Talents approach in main-stream and gifted programs. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for
the gifted and talented (pp. 352-389). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

Slavkin, M. L. (2004). Authentic learning: How learning about the brain can shape the development of students. Toronto: ScarecrowEducation.

Sprenger, M. B. (2002). Becoming a “wiz” at brain-based teaching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Starko, A. J. (1995). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers.

Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of the mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1999). Buy low and sell high: An investment approach to creativity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1: 1-5.

Stevens G. and Burley, B. (1999). Creativity + business discipline = higher profits faster from new development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16: 455-468.

Tallal, P. (1999). How new knowledge about the brain improves school learning [Audiotape]. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Tierney, P.,

Farmer, S. M., and Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee
creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52: 591-620.