Advertisement

Sociocultural Perspectives on Creativity, Learning, and Technology

  • Vlad Petre Glăveanu
  • Ingunn Johanne Ness
  • Barbara Wasson
  • Todd Lubart
Chapter
Part of the Creativity Theory and Action in Education book series (CTAE, volume 3)

Abstract

In this chapter we focus on the links between creativity, learning, and technology in education. More specifically, we propose and exemplify a unitary, sociocultural framework of creative learning based on the notions of position and perspective. We start by specifying some general principles of sociocultural theory, in particular the interdependence between person and context and the way in which psychological processes “extend” into the world through the means of action, interaction, and communication. Following this, we outline the perspectival model of creativity and learning, focused on how re-positioning and perspective-taking lead to new, creative insights, and relate it to various uses of technology in education, including technology mediated creative learning practices and immersive technology. In the end, we reflect on the consequences of these uses for how we understand, theorise, and cultivate creative learning in and beyond the classroom.

Keywords

Creativity Learning Technology Sociocultural theory Virtual world Second life 

References

  1. Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Learning as a creative act. In T. Kettler (Ed.), Modern curriculum for gifted and advanced learners (pp. 111–127). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Buckingham, D. (2003). Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Buckingham, D., & Sefton-Green, J. (1994). Cultural studies goes to school: Reading and teaching popular culture. London, UK: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  4. Buisine, S., Guegan, J., Barré, J., Segonds, F., & Aoussat, A. (2016). Using avatars to tailor ideation process to innovation strategy. Cognition, Technology & Work, 18(3), 583–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burant, T. J., & Rios, F. (2010). Seeing you, seeing me: Social perspective-taking as learning. Woodring College of Education. Retrieved from http://cedar.wwu.edu/education_facpubs/15
  6. Burkhardt, J.-M., & Lubart, T. (2010). Creativity in the age of emerging technology. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(2), 160–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole, M. (1996). Culture in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  9. Daniels, H. (2008). Vygotsky and research. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). London, UK: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  11. Gillespie, A. (2005). GH Mead: Theorist of the social act. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35(1), 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gillespie, A., & Martin, J. (2014). Position exchange theory: A socio-material basis for discursive and psychological positioning. New Ideas in Psychology, 32, 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gillespie, A., Corti, K., Evans, S., & Heasman, B. (2017). Imagining the self through cultural technologies. In T. Zittoun & V. P. Glăveanu (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of imagination and culture (pp. 301–318). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, 17(1), 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glăveanu, V. P. (2014). Distributed creativity: Thinking outside the box of the creative individual. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glăveanu, V. P. (2015). Creativity as a sociocultural act. Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(3), 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glăveanu, V. P., & Beghetto, R. A. (2017). The difference that makes a ‘creative’ difference in education. In R. A. Beghetto & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creative contradictions in education (pp. 37–54). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glăveanu, V. P., & Gillespie, A. (2015). Creativity out of difference: Theorising the semiotic, social and temporal origin of creative acts. In V. P. Glăveanu, A. Gillespie, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Rethinking creativity: Contributions from social and cultural psychology (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Glăveanu, V. P., Gillespie, A., & Valsiner, J. (Eds.). (2015). Rethinking creativity: Perspectives from cultural psychology. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guegan, J., Buisine, S., Mantelet, F., Maranzana, N., & Segonds, F. (2016). Avatar-mediated creativity: When embodying inventors makes engineers more creative. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guegan, J., Nelson, J., & Lubart, T. (2017). The relationship between contextual cues in virtual environments and creative processes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(3), 202–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guegan, J., Collange, J., & Lubart, T. (in press). (Social) identity and creativity in virtual settings: Review of processes and research agenda. In I. Lebuda, & V. P. Glăveanu (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of social creativity research. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  24. Hargreaves, D. (2000). Knowledge management in the learning society. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  25. Hillman, T., & Säljö, R. (2016). Learning, knowing and opportunities for participation: Technologies and communicative practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(2), 306–309.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1167080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoever, I. J., Van Knippenberg, D., Van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education of the 21st century. Chicago, IL: MacArthur Foundation.Google Scholar
  28. John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: a Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist, 31(3–4), 191–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2009). Commentary: Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kumpulainen, K., Mikkola, A., & Jaatinen, A.-M. (2014). The chronotopes of technology-mediated creative learning practices in an elementary school community. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 53–74.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2012.752383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Laurillard, D., Oliver, O., Wasson, B., & Hoppe, U. (2009). Implementing technology-enhanced learning. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 289–306). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lindgren, R. (2012). Generating a learning stance through perspective-taking in a virtual environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1130–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Literat, I., & Glăveanu, V. P. (2016). Same but different? Distributed creativity in the internet age. Creativity: Theories–Research–Applications, 3(2), 330–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lozano, S. C., Martin Hard, B., & Tversky, B. (2006). Perspective taking promotes action understanding and learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(6), 1405–1421.Google Scholar
  36. Lubart, T. (2005). How can computers be partners in the creative process. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(4), 365–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lubart, T., Guegan, J., Buisine, S. Burkhardt, J.-M., Collange, J., Nelson, J., … Bonnardel, N. (2018). Creativity in virtual space. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  38. Martin, J. (2005). Perspectival selves in interaction with others: Re-reading GH Mead’s social psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35(3), 231–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Miaskiewicz, T., & Kozar, K. A. (2011). Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes? Design Studies, 32(5), 417–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ness, I. J. (2016). The room of opportunity: Understanding how knowledge and ideas are constructed in multidisciplinary groups working with developing innovative ideas. PhD thesis, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.Google Scholar
  42. Ness, I. J. (2017). Polyphonic orchestration—facilitating creative knowledge processes for innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 20(4), 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ness, I. J., & Glăveanu, V. P. (in press). Polyphonic orchestration: The dialogical nature of creativity. R. Beghetto, G. Corazza Dynamic perspectives on creativity: New directions for theory, research, and practice in education. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Ness, I. J., & Riese, H. (2015). Openness, curiosity and respect: Underlying conditions for developing innovative knowledge and ideas between disciplines. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 6, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Newman, F., & Holzman, L. (1999). Beyond narrative to performed conversation. In L. Holzman (Ed.), Performing psychology: A postmodern culture of the mind (pp. 87–110). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. (2003). Production blocking and idea generation: Does blocking interfere with cognitive processes? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 531–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Peppler, K. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2007). From SuperGoo to scratch: Exploring creative digital media production in informal learning. Learning, Media, and Technology, 32, 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Säljö, R. (1999). Learning as the use of tools: A sociocultural perspective on the human-technology link. In K. Littleton & P. Lights (Eds.), Learning with computers: Analysing productive interaction (pp. 144–161). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Säljö, R. (2009). Learning, theories of learning, and units of analysis in research. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 202–208.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903029030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shweder, R. A. (1991). Thinking through cultures: Expeditions in cultural psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Suppes, P. (1971). Computer-assisted instruction at Stanford (Technical Report 174, Psychology and Education Series, Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences). Stanford: Stanford University. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.360.7541&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  53. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  54. Valsiner, J. (2014). An invitation to cultural psychology. New Delhi, India: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language (trans: Kozulin, A.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  57. Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wake, J., Guribye, F., Wasson, B. (in press). Learning through collaborative design of location-based games. International Journal of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning.Google Scholar
  59. Wasson, B., & Ludvigsen, S. (2003). Designing for knowledge building (ITU Report Series, p. 19). Oslo, Norway: UniPub.Google Scholar
  60. Wasson, B., & Vold, V. (2012). Leveraging new media skills for peer feedback. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 255–264. Retrieved from  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S., & Hoppe, U. (Eds.). (2003). Designing for change in networked learning environments. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  62. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178–192). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wertsch, J. V., & Stone, C. A. (1985). The concept of internalization in Vygotsky’s account of the genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 162–179). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Zittoun, T., & Gillespie, A. (2016). Imagination in human and cultural development. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vlad Petre Glăveanu
    • 1
  • Ingunn Johanne Ness
    • 2
  • Barbara Wasson
    • 2
  • Todd Lubart
    • 3
  1. 1.Webster University GenevaBellevueSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of BergenBergenNorway
  3. 3.Paris Descartes UniversityParisFrance

Personalised recommendations