Creativity and Art Education Gaps Between Theories and Practices

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Creativity in the Twenty First Century book series (CTFC)

Abstract

Theories of creativity from different disciplines map onto teaching strategies within the fine art field. In particular, the outcomes of historical studies by psychologists and experimental studies within cognitive science have significant resonance with some long-standing methods of teaching artists. Through a series of interviews with experienced teachers of studio art in the UK university context, and analysis of written material to support teaching, this chapter recognizes the need for a more systematic exploration of how creative thinking may have been embedded in the teaching of artists. We identify the presence of practical strategies, field knowledge, artistic identity, and the importance of ‘space’ within the accounts of teaching and the documents considered. We note that notions of identity and space are not clearly present within existing models of creativity, but aspects of them reflect tolerance for ambiguity. We conclude by reflecting that this space within conceptions of fine art education is a gap that needs attention and that the field that generates the creative practitioners of the future should understand creativity.

Keywords

Practical Strategy Creative Industry Field Knowledge Quality Assurance Agency Creative Practice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westfield Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ascott, R. (1964). A groundcourse for art in education. In F. Allen (2011) (Ed.), Documents of contemporary art 18 (pp. 51–53). London: Whitechapel Gallery/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Austerlitz, N. (2007). Mind the gap: Expectations, ambiguity and pedagogy within art and design higher education. In L. Drew (Ed.), The student experience in art and design higher education: drivers for change (pp. 127–148). Cambridge, UK: Jill Rogers Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Blair, B. (2008). Redefining the project. In L. Drew (Ed.), The student experience in art and design higher education: Drivers for change (pp. 81–83). Cambridge, UK: Jill Rogers Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Boden, M. (1990). The creative mind: myths and mechanisms. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.Google Scholar
  6. Cornock, S. (1984). Learning strategies in fine art. Journal of Art and Design Education, 3(2).Google Scholar
  7. Cornock, S. (1985). Forms of knowing in the study of the fine arts. In D. G. Russell, D. F. Marks, & J. T. E. Richardson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd international imagery conference, Wales, 1985. Human Performance Associates: Dunedin.Google Scholar
  8. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperPerennial. (1st published by HarperCollins, 1996.).Google Scholar
  9. Dickie, G. (1971). Aesthetics, an introduction. New York: Pegasus.Google Scholar
  10. Elkins, J. (2001). Why art cannot be taught. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  11. Ericcson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.Google Scholar
  12. Fortnum, R., & Pybus, C. (2014). Editorial. Journal of Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 13(2).Google Scholar
  13. Hetherington, P. (Ed.). (1994). Artists in the 1990s: Their education and values. London: Tate Gallery Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Hiller, S. (1996). An artist on art education. In P. Hetherington (Ed.), Issues in art and education: Aspects of the fine art curriculum. London: Tate Gallery Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Itten, J. (1975). Design and form: The basic course at the Bauhaus and later (revised ed.). London: Wiley/Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  16. Joint report of the National Advisory Council on Art Education and the National Council for Diplomas in Art and Design (The Second Coldstream Report). (1970). The structure of art and design education in the further education sector. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  17. Landry, C. (1995). The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Lubart, T. I., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). An investment approach to creativity. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 260–302). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Milner, M. (1950). On not being able to paint. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  20. National Association for Fine Art Education (NAFAE). (2014). AGM and national symposium 2014: 45 years of fine art education: Drawing the line? http://www.nafae.org.uk/news-and-events/nafae-agm/agm-2014/ Accessed 25 May 2014.
  21. Nochlin, L. (1971). Why have there been no great women artists? Art News, 69, 22–39.Google Scholar
  22. Pollock, G. (1996). Feminist perspectives in fine art education. In P. Hetherington (Ed.), Issues in art and education: Aspects of the fine art curriculum. London: Tate Gallery Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Quality Assurance Agency (2008). Subject benchmark statement: Art and design. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Subject-benchmark-statement—Art-and-design-.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2015.
  24. Quinn, M. (2012). Utilitarianism and the art school in nineteenth-century Britain. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
  25. Report of a Joint Committee of the National Advisory Council on Art Education (The First Coldstream Report). (1960). First report of the national advisory council on art education. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  26. Richardson, M. (1948). Art and the child. London: University of London Press.Google Scholar
  27. Robertson, C. (2008). The invention of Annibale Carracci. Milan: Silvana Editoriale Spa.Google Scholar
  28. Rogers, A., & Kilgallon, S. (2009). Making space to create. In Dialogues in Art and Design: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Group for Learning in Art and Design (GLAD) (pp. 182–189). Brighton, UK: ADM HEA.Google Scholar
  29. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  30. Simonton, D. K. (1975). Sociocultural context of individual creativity: A transhistorical time-series analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1119–1133.Google Scholar
  31. Simonton, D. K. (1977). Creative productivity, age and stress: A biographical time-series analysis of 10 classic composers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 791–804.Google Scholar
  32. Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (1995). The creative cognition approach. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  33. Weisberg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Williamson, B. (2013). Recent developments in British art education: ‘Nothing changes from generation to generation except the thing seen’. Visual Culture in Britain,. doi: 10.1080/14714787.2013.817845.Google Scholar
  36. Woolley, M. (2013). Making space: The past present and future of the creative environment. In H. Briit, K. Walton, & S. Wade (Eds.), Futurescan 2: Collective voices (pp. 26–33). Sheffield: The Association of Fashion Textile Courses.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Coventry UniversityCoventryUK
  2. 2.Royal College of ArtLondonUK

Personalised recommendations