Creativity and the Urban Teacher: A STEM-Related Professional Development Program

  • Akesha Horton
  • Danah Henriksen
  • Punya Mishra
  • Christopher Seals
  • Kyle Shack
  • Candace Marcotte
Part of the Creativity Theory and Action in Education book series (CTAE, volume 3)


We examine the urban context of learning for the fellows in a partnership between Michigan State University (MSU) and Wipro Limited, a leading global information technology, consulting and business services company, which resulted in the Wipro Urban STEM Fellowship Program at Michigan State University (MSUrbanSTEM) program. This grant-funded fellowship provided full tuition scholarships and stipends for 124 highly motivated teachers in Chicago Public Schools (CPS) who demonstrated a passion for teaching STEM. The fellows were divided up into three cohorts. Each cohort participated in an innovative yearlong integrated learning experience to build STEM teachers’ capacity to lead and inspire transformative, innovative practices in urban K-12 schools. In this chapter, the fellows’ instructors explore how to support these teacher participants in their efforts to foster creativity in an era of intensified authority, control, and resistance. By engaging in creative pedagogies explicitly connected to disciplinary knowledge, the program aims to disrupt traditional ideologies around teaching. The mission of the MSUrbanSTEM program is to empower K-12 math and science teachers in CPS to create transformative, innovative, and multimodal instructional experiences through project-based and experiential learning experiences. Each educator participant was encouraged to engage in inquiry around how the ideas of wonder, improvisation, invention, and reflection connected with his or her subject-matter expertise. As reported by way of this case example of teacher creativity, these strategies supported the activities the teachers engaged in throughout the year. The fellowship itself provided a foundation for fellows to develop projects for reshaping aspects of their teaching practice.


Creativity Invention Innovation Multimodality project-based learning STEM TPACK Urban education 


  1. Bell, H., Limberg, D., Jacobson, L., & Super, J. T. (2014). Enhancing self-awareness through creative experiential-learning play-based activities. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 9(3), 399–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Black, P. (2015). Formative assessment—an optimistic but incomplete vision. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(1), 161–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cochranea, T., Antonczakb, L., Keeganc, H., & Narayana, V. (2014). Riding the wave of BYOD: Developing a framework for creative pedagogies. Research in Learning Technology, 22, 133–146. Scholar
  4. Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2009). Habits of mind across the curriculum: Practical and creative strategies for teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association of Curriculum and Development.Google Scholar
  5. Craft, A. (2003). Creativity across the primary curriculum: Framing and developing practice. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. London, UK: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23(2), 72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cropley, D. H. (2015). Promoting creativity and innovation in engineering education. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(2), 161–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davis, J., & Gardner, H. (1993). The arts and early childhood education: A cognitive developmental portrait of the young child as artist. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 191–206). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. (2012). Nurturing affinity spaces and game-based learning. In Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 129–153). New York: Cambridge University Press. Scholar
  11. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glover, J. A., & Sautter, F. (1977). Relation of four components of creativity to risk-taking preferences. Psychological Reports, 41(1), 227–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hargreaves, A. (1997). Rethinking educational change with heart and mind. Alexandria, VA: Association of Curriculum and Development.Google Scholar
  14. Henriksen, D. (2011). We teach who we are: Creativity and trans-disciplinary thinking in the practices of accomplished teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, East Lansing MI. Michigan State University. Retrieved from ProQuest.Google Scholar
  15. Henriksen, D., & Mishra, P. (2015). We teach who we are: Creativity in the lives and practices of accomplished teachers. Teachers College Record, 117(7), 1–46.Google Scholar
  16. Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Mehta, R. (2015). Novel, effective, whole: Toward a NEW framework for evaluations of creative products. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 23(3), 455–478.Google Scholar
  17. Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Deep-Play Research Group. (2017). Between structure and improvisation: a conversation on creativity as a social and collaborative behavior with Dr. Keith Sawyer. TechTrends, 61(1), 13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Horton, A., Shack, K., & Mehta, R. (2017). Curriculum and practice of an innovative teacher professional development program. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 36(3), 237–254.Google Scholar
  19. Kaimal, G., Drescher, J., Fairbank, H., Gonzaga, A., & White, G. P. (2014). Inspiring creativity in urban school leaders: Lessons from the performing arts. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 15(4), 1–22. Retrieved from Scholar
  20. Karp, A. (2017). Mathematically gifted education: Some political questions. In R. Leiken & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics education (pp. 239–255). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Bouck, E. C., DeSchryver, M., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Wolf, L. G. (2011). Deep-play: Developing TPACK for 21st century teachers. International Journal of Learning Technology, 6(2), 146–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Levine, A. (2007). Educating researchers. New York, NY: The Education School Project.Google Scholar
  25. Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  26. Mannay, D. (2010). Making the familiar strange: Can visual research methods render the familiar setting more perceptible? Qualitative Research, 10(1), 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Matsko, K. K., & Hammerness, K. (2013). Unpacking the “urban” in urban teacher education: Making a case for context-specific preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(2), 128–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Milner, H. R., IV. (2012). But what is urban education? Urban Education, 47(3), 556–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviors: What really matters? Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37, 3–15.Google Scholar
  31. Pegg, A. E. (2010). Learning to lead the risk-conscious organization: An empirical study of five English primary school leaders. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13, 121–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Perry, J. A. (Ed.). (2016). The EdD and the scholarly practitioner. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  33. Plucker, J. A., & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In R. E. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 35–61). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  36. Runco, M. A., & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 243–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2011a). Structure and improvisation in creative teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Sawyer, R. K. (2011b). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Seals, C., Mishra, P., Henricksen, D., Mehta, R. (2015). Teacher creativity scale. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  40. Shulman, L. S. (1999). Taking learning seriously. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 31(4), 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Starko, A. J. (2013). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Summers, I., & White, D. E. (1976). Creativity techniques: Toward improvement of the decision process. Academy of Management Review, 1(2), 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wolf, L. G. (2009). Quickfires explained. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akesha Horton
    • 1
  • Danah Henriksen
    • 2
  • Punya Mishra
    • 2
  • Christopher Seals
    • 3
  • Kyle Shack
    • 3
  • Candace Marcotte
    • 3
  1. 1.Indiana UniversityMontgomeryUSA
  2. 2.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  3. 3.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations