THE COMMUNITY CREATIVITY COLLECTIVE: INTRODUCING AND REFINING A COMMUNITY-BASED MODEL FOR CREATIVE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT by JAY ZUELKE BRESLOW A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Education Studies and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 2015 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Jay Zuelke Breslow Title: The Community Creativity Collective: Introducing and Refining a Community- Based Model for Creative Curriculum Development This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Education Studies by: Dr. Ronald A. Beghetto Co-Chairperson Dr. Joanna Goode Co-Chairperson Dr. Lisa A. Mazzei Core Member Dr. Yong Zhao Institutional Representative and J. Andrew Berglund Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded March 2015 ii © 2015 Jay Zuelke Breslow iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Jay Zuelke Breslow Doctor of Philosophy Department of Education Studies March 2015 Title: The Community Creativity Collective: Introducing and Refining a Community- Based Model for Creative Curriculum Development Calls for more creative teaching and learning in classrooms are often matched by increasingly stringent accountability measures. Negotiating the creativity/accountability paradox is difficult for teachers, who are often isolated as they interpret, design, and deliver curriculum in their classrooms. This dissertation introduces and refines a 7-stage process called the Community Creative Collective (3-C) designed to generate solutions to three problems that derive from this paradox. First, narrowing of curriculum inhibits the ability of teachers to generate creative teaching and learning. Second, factors, including time constraints and teacher training, limit teachers’ ability to develop the creative habit. Third, inclusion of family and community members as co-creators of curriculum provides a potential source of creative curriculum development. Three research questions guide the exploration of the process: 1. How does the 3-C process allow teachers and community members to collaboratively generate creative teaching and learning opportunities for their students? 2. What are the distinguishing features of this collaborative curricular process? iv 3. How does such a process impact teachers’ interpretations of their role as interpreters, designers and deliverers of curriculum? Using a Design Based approach, these questions investigate the process as it was implemented in a 5th-grade classroom. The first question uses a case study methodology to trace the development of the 3-C process as it was developed and implemented. Findings demonstrated that communication at multiple stages impacted the generation of creative ideas. The second question uses qualitative data from documents, interviews, audio and video recordings and observations to extrapolate some of the distinguishing feature of the process. Key features included the Ideational Speed Dating (ISD) process for idea-generation, the 3-C process as a peak flow experience and the impact of parent and community expertise to generate creative classroom content. The third question uses interviews with the participating teacher to examine the impact of the 3-C process on her interpretation of her role in the classroom. The process influenced her view on family and community involvement, providing space through which tensions can be resolved and creative engagement can flourish. Finally refinements for future iterations are discussed in addition to implications for future research. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Jay Zuelke Breslow GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene DEGREES AWARDED: Doctor of Philosophy, Critical and Sociocultural Studies in Education, 2015 University of Oregon Bachelor of Arts, Psychology and Spanish, 2001, University of Oregon AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: How creativity can be encouraged and developed through collaboration. Family and community engagement in the educational process. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Research Associate, Educational Policy Improvement Center, 2014 - present Graduate Teaching Fellow, University of Oregon 2009-2014 Program Coordinator, James John SUN Community School 2005-2009 Program Coordinator, Centro LatinoAmericano, 2002-2004 GRANTS, AWARDS, AND HONORS: Clare Wilkins Chamberlin Memorial Research Award, The Community Creativity Collective (3-C): Introducing and refining a community-based model of creative curriculum development. University of Oregon, 2014 PUBLICATIONS: Beghetto, R. A., & Breslow, J. Z. (2013). A commanding survey of the creativity studies landscape: A review of Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7 (4), 417-418 vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is difficult to begin to write acknowledgements for a process as large as this one. As I wrote this dissertation I was reminded of classes, articles and conversations that I had with professors, friends and colleagues throughout the Ph.D. process. I was reminded of students and their families who inspired me to even begin this journey. The list is too long and the memories too profound to actually acknowledge in this short section what has gone into this dissertation. That being said, there are people who have played an integral role in helping me make this happen. First, I want to acknowledge Ron Beghetto for his mentorship and guidance. I’m not sure I know anyone who is more ethical or more professional than Ron. His work, his thinking and his encouragement are weaved throughout mine and I am humbled to have him as my Chair throughout this process. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. Goode, my co-Chair. Her unrelenting positivity and encouragement were a constant source of strength throughout the program. Thank you also to Dr. Mazzei and Dr. Zhao whose wisdom, advice and critiques helped me immensely. This project would not have been possible without Susan Dwoskin. I want to teach like Susan one day. I want to inspire students the way she does. I want to believe in students the way she does. I want to challenge students the way she does and I want to do it with the strength of character and the courage of convictions that she carries. Until that day I am happy to know that she is out there doing all of these things so that I can continue to watch, learn and follow. vii I also want to acknowledge Shadiin Garcia. She is the reason I started this program and her belief in me carried me for many years until I began to believe her, and thus, in myself. To Gabe, Isaiah and Leonard who I am so very happy to know and whose potential is the impetus to all work like this. And to Johnna, Beth, Arwen, Jeff Y, Peter, Anne, Johnny, Jose and the many others who make up my Eugene Family. To my cohort, Leilani, Danny, Casey, Zelda, Tina, Marko, Jonathan, Carla, Sabrina, Jim, and Divya whose conversations, edits, debates and study sessions helped form my thinking on so many things. To Dad, Mom, Forrest, Shayna, Shea, Jennie, Scott, Oscar and Atlas and all of my grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins. Your unyielding support inspires me, your strength through adversity humbles me. Everything that I have done and will do is a testament to the people that you are and the man you have raised me to be. Lastly, to Claire, you are my happiness and light. Thank you for everything you have done and continue to do. viii This dissertation is dedicated to my sisters and oldest friends Jennie and Shayna. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 II. SOCIOCULTURAL CREATIVITY, FAMILY/COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT ............................... 11 III. TESTING THE MODEL ....................................................................................... 41 IV. DISTINGUISHING FEATURES AND TEACHER INTERPRETATIONS ....... 118 V. REFINEMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS .............................................................. 162 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 178 A. PROCESS CODES FOR IDEATIONAL SPEED DATES .................................... 178 B. HYPOTHESIS CODES FOR IMPLMENTATION PLANNING MEETING ............................................................................................................... 179 C. DESIGN TEAM MEETING PACKET .................................................................. 180 D. FLOWERING FRACTION PLANT MATRIX ..................................................... 185 E. FLOWERING FRACTIONS WORKSHEET ......................................................... 186 REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................ 187 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Csikszentmihalyi’s Systems Model of Creativity ................................................... 14 2. Stages of Mumford’s Creative Process Model ...................................................... 43 3. Stages of the 3-C Model ........................................................................................ 44 4. Stages of Design-Based Research .......................................................................... 53 5. Examples of Flower Classification Sheets ............................................................