The Benefits of Equalizing Standards and Creativity: Discovering a Balance in Instruction Angela Burke-Adams

The Benefits of Equalizing Standards and Creativity: Discovering a Balance in Instruction Angela Burke-Adams ow can standards-based education and creativ- gifted learners. Whereas standards are a black and white ity coexist? This question addresses the dilemma concept, consisting of clearly stated objectives with aligned regarding the current state of education. In a world assessments, creativity is a difficult term to define. Narrow Hwhere standards and high-stakes testing define the success definitions of creativity result in a restricted vision of the of the school, teacher, and individual child, how are instruc- concept. Creativity is often scrutinized as an intangible tional practices affected? In particular, is there a conflict component. Conflict regarding whether or not creativity regarding the needs of gifted students with the sequential, can be taught or is innate is greatly debated (Murdock, skill-based system presently in place? How might one pre- 2003). Likewise, creativity is often undervalued as a non- vent standards from overshadowing creativity and yet bal- productive characteristic and is looked upon as too subjec- ance a knowledge base with creative thinking skills? Can a tive to validate (Plucker, Beghetto, & Dow, 2004). reconstruction of linear teaching occur in order to nurture When evaluating standards and creativity, it is evident creativity in our brightest minds? that both concepts guide students in different ways and As one considers the possibility of an instructional bal- offer a variety of tools for learning. Creative thinking is dis- ance, it is evident that the topic of standards and creativity tinctively separate from sequential, analytical thinking asso- offers two opposite spectrums of thinking. When deter- ciated with standards and traditional education (Sternberg, mining how to equalize standards and creativity, it is essen- 2003). If only one of these learning components is utilized, tial to examine each component in relation to the needs of a balance in thinking styles may be affected. 58 winter 2007 • vol 30, no 1 The Benefits of Equalizing Standards and Creativity Learning Needs of skills and deserves recognition ogy, but also allows for individuality of Gifted Students (Kay, 1998). in learning to occur. When teaching standards, educators tend to focus on sequential teaching strategies (Harlen When determining how to inte- Benefits of Balancing & Crick, 2003). Schools are valuing grate creativity in a standards-based Standards and Creativity only a single way of demonstrating system, it is essential to consider the intelligence by acknowledging mem- learning needs of gifted students. It is Those in favor of high-stakes ory and analytical skills, even though evident that gifted learners need flex- accountability believe standards will creative skills are equally important ible parameters in their learning envi- provide incentives for educators and (Sternberg, 2003). A common belief, ronment to explore and take risks, provide objective data in which to however, is that if educational pro- and opportunities to expand beyond base educational decisions (Diamond grams focus entirely on creativity, the boundaries that confine their & Spillane, 2004). Proponents believe important knowledge and tradition curiosity (Mulhern, 2003). Similarly, the purpose of standards-based cur- in specific domains will be lost (Erez, riculum is to provide a sequence of gifted children thrive when they are 2004). objectives that will create greater offered choices and freedom in their When evaluating the traditional equality and equity in student per- learning, along with complexity and classroom, it is evident that the major- formance (Sandholtz, Ogawa, & opportunities for breadth and depth ity of time is spent on verbal skills Scribner, 2004). Many educators in the content (Betts, 2004). Gifted or expressing oneself using words. associate creative characteristics with students need opportunities to dream Imagistic thinking or the manipula- and express their creative abilities nonconformity, impulsivity, and dis- tion of images in the mind is often (Mulhern). organization (Ugur, 2004). disregarded (Mann, 2005). Looking at Unfortunately, a prescribed cur- In order to change attitudes regard- the strengths of standards and creativ- riculum that teaches basic skills often ing creativity, it is critical to look at ity, one may determine that standards lacks advanced and challenging cur- the benefits a balance will provide. emphasize sequential learning, while riculum for gifted learners (Betts, Creativity is necessary for an indi- creativity focuses on imagistic or spa- 2004). Standards focus on basic skill vidual to effectively problem solve. tial learning. Two types of learners can levels and are rapidly changing the Society benefits from creative individ- emerge from school systems. Linear instructional styles of teachers, who uals in the areas of science, technology, thinkers hesitate to venture beyond are moving away from innovative and art, which lead to an interactive the parameters of the lesson and pre- methods, to more traditional ones of world (Ugur, 2004). Creativity also fer structure, whereas creative or free drill and recitation to ensure high- contributes to workplace leadership, thinkers have imaginative intelligence stakes test scores are raised (Moon, vocational professions, healthy psy- and are curious to discover what lies Brighton, & Callahan, 2002). This chological well-being, coping, and beyond the given boundaries (Ugur, results in the creation of one-size- emotional growth (Plucker et al., 2004). Each type of learner is valuable, fits-all models of classrooms. Due to 2004). Although standards-based but both need to be given equal merit. the pressure to incorporate standards, education fulfills the need for a When exploring the potential of the curriculum is narrowed as nontest knowledge base, there are numerous spatial thinkers, strengths such as items are eliminated. Teachers are opt- benefits to incorporating creativity in grasping complex systems, discovering to implement teaching strategies the curriculum, which includes pro- ing relationships, and demonstrat- that will prepare students for tests, viding students with opportunities to ing high levels of creativity may be which tend to depress the talents and practice nonconventional modes of observed. These learning attributes are potential of gifted students (Moon et thinking that enhance motivation. critical for producing innovative ideas al.). Furthermore, standardized tests and finding unique problem-solving may not measure the content gifted Instructional Styles techniques; however, they appear to programs wish to focus upon, includ- be the opposite skills valued in stan- ing extensions beyond the objectives When focusing on instruction in dards-based education (Mann, 2005). required by the state (Feng, VanTassel- the classroom, it is evident that bal- Standards emphasize answering ques- Baska, Quek, Bai, & O’Neill, 2005). ancing standards and creativity not tions correctly, instead of conceptu- Creativity is as important as mastery only equalizes classroom methodol- ally understanding a topic (Sandholtz gifted child today 59 The Benefits of Equalizing Standards and Creativity et al., 2004). Due to this mismatch in Solutions for becomes limited. Because of the time instruction and thinking styles, gifted Achieving a Balance spent in preparation for tests, creativ- students who think differently from ity is compromised, along with stu- the linear educational approach are at dent choice to explore topics in-depth Based on current teaching trends, risk for underachievement and even- (Erez). Freedom of thought and the how do we prevent standards from tually underemployment (Mann). generation of unique ideas are critical consuming teaching goals, objec- aspects within the learning environ- tives, and time? How can teachers ment, although these areas are rarely Identification keep their students’ creativity and observed in traditional classrooms of Gifted Students their own individual creativity intact? (Ugur, 2004). Three components, including teacher To continue, reflection time that Considering how instructional behavior, learning environment, and allows ideas to incubate and formu- instructional strategies, may be used strategies are currently being nar- late is crucial in order for students to to achieve this equilibrium. rowed, how might identification pro- creatively develop innovative prod- cedures become minimized? When To begin, one of the greatest con- ucts (Sternberg, 2003). Students need identifying students with gifted troversies regarding creativity in edu- time to analyze and critique their own abilities, it is common for teachers cation is whether or not it is teachable. ideas in order to redefine problems to initially look at standards-based According to Murdock (2003), cre- (Sternberg, 2003). Extraordinary ideas assessments, particularly as a screen- ativity is teachable. Creativity does, may take years to evolve and thinking tool for the nomination process. however, require specific instruction time is critical for creative thoughts to Unfortunately, spatial strengths are (Kay, 1998). Knowledge of creativity emerge (Kay, 1998). Unfortunately, rarely demonstrated on achievement affects how it is taught, even though time for reflection is minimal in fast- tests that fail to include nonverbal teachers who have a strong under- paced classrooms oriented towards components (Mann, 2005). Without standing of the

Load more