Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neglect of Creativity in Education: A Moral Issue

  • Chapter
The Ethics of Creativity

Abstract

Teaching is not just a job like any other. Teachers belong to the only occupational group whose core responsibility is mentoring the next generation and shaping the future of the societies of which they are part. Thus, teachers have a special duty to their charges and to society. By entering the profession teachers accept the responsibilities associated with this duty whether they consciously seek them or not. They thus have moral obligations that are different in principle from the manual, technical, or professional obligations of most other occupations. This chapter will examine the dimensions of these moral obligations. Its purpose is not to cast teachers in the role of the villain or to castigate them for their moral failings, but to examine promotion/lack of promotion of creativity in the classroom from a rarely discussed perspective in order to gain new insights into the situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 24.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 37.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aljughaiman, A., & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers’ conceptions of creativity and creative students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baucus, M. S., Norton, W. I., Baucus, D. A., & Human, S. E. (2008). Fostering creativity and innovation without encouraging unethical behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72, 117–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekoff, M., & Pierce, J. (2009). Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brandau, H., Daghofer, F., Hollerer, L., Kaschnitz, W., Kellner, K., Kirchmair, G., Krammer, L., & Schlagbauer. A. (2007). The relationship between creativity, teacher ratings on behaviour, age, and gender in pupils from seven to ten years. Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 91–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1962). The conditions of creativity. In H. Gruber, G. Terrell, & M. Wertheimer (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Cognition (pp. 1–30). New York: Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, D. W., & Chan, L.-K. (1999). Implicit theories of creativity: Teachers’ perception of student characteristics in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commonwealth of Australia (1999). Higher Education Funding Report. 1999. Canberra: Government Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, C, Altman, W., & Garner, A. (2002). Inventing for Business Success. New York: Texere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J. (1997). Creativity: A bundle of paradoxes. Gifted and Talented International, 12, 8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A.J. (2009). Teachers’ antipathy to creative students: Some implications for teacher training. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 10, 86–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J. (2012). Creativity and education: An Australian perspective. International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 22(1), 9–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J., & Cropley, D. H. (2009). Fostering Creativity: A Diagnostic Approach for Higher Education and Organizations. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, D. H., & Cropley, A.J. (2005). Engineering creativity: A systems concept of functional creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (eds.), Faces of the Muse: How People Think, Work and Act Creatively in Diverse Domains (pp. 169–185). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, D. H., & Cropley, A. J. (2013). Creativity and Crime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J., Kaufman, J. C, & Runco, M. A. (eds.) (2010). The Dark Side of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V. L., D’Andréa, T., Affmito, R., & Westby, E. L. (1999). Predicting creative behavior: A reexamination of the divergence between traditional and teacher-defined concepts of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeFillippi, R., Grabher, G., & Jones, C. (2007). Introduction to paradoxes of creativity: managerial and organizational challenges in the cultural economy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 511–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fasko, D. (2000–2001). Education and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldhusen, J. R, & Treffinger, D. J. (1975). Teachers’ attitudes and practices in teaching creativity and problem solving to economically disadvantaged and minority children. Psychological Reports, 37, 1161–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and Intelligence. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimberg, C. L., Turk, D. S., & Mennin, R. G. (2004). Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Advances in Research and Practice. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henning, B. G. (2005). The Ethics of Creativity: Beauty, Morality, and Nature in a Processive Cosmos. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. L. (1959). Some limitations of teacher ratings as predictors of creativity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 50, 219–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karwowksi, M. (2007). Teachers’ nominations of students’ creativity: Should we believe them? Are the nominations valid? The Social Sciences, 2, 264–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H. (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 285–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makel, M. (2008). Help us creativity researchers, you’re our only hope. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 38–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. W. (2006). Moral creativity. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 20, 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. L., & Florida, R. (2009). Ontario in the Creative Age. Toronto: Martin Prosperity Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E., & Dawson, S. (2008). Teaching for creativity: Towards sustainable and replicable pedagogical practice. Higher Education, 56, 633–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S., & Forster, J. (1999). Creativity in the classroom. Gifted Education International, 14, 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity

    Google Scholar 

  • Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23(1) 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obuche, N. M. (1986). The ideal pupil as perceived by Nigerian (Igbo) teachers and Torrance’s creative personality. International Review of Education, 32, 191–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oral, G. (2006). Creativity of Turkish prospective teachers. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oral, G., & Guncer, B. (1993). Relationship between creativity and nonconformity to school discipline as perceived by teachers of Turkish elementary school children, by controlling for their grade and sex. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 20, 208–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C, & Seligman, E. P. (2004). Character Strengths and Virtues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pink, D. H. (2005). A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age. New York: Riverhead Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. (2012). The standard définition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 92–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M., & Johnson, D. (2002). Parents’ and teachers’ implicit theories of children’s creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 427–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., Johnson, D. J., & Bear, P. K. (1993). Parents’ and teachers’ implicit theories of children’s creativity. Child Study Journal, 23, 91–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C. L. (1999). Teachers’ biases toward creative children. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 321–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. J. W., & Carlsson, I. (2006). Creativity under the Northern Lights: Perspectives from Scandinavia. Inj. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (eds.), International Handbook of Creativity (pp. 202–234). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. (1995). Why no-one really wants creativity. In C. Ford & D. Gioia (eds.), Creative Action in Organizations: Ivory Tower Visions and Real Voices (pp. 161–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, A. G. (2003). Student teachers’ perceptions of student behaviours for fostering creativity: A perspective on the academically low achievers. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 13, 59–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilbury, D., Reid, A., & Podger, D. (2003). Action Research for University Staff: Changing Curricula and Graduate Skills towards Sustainability Stage 1 Report. Canberra: Environment Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1959). Explorations in Creative Thinking in the Early School Years: VIII. IQ and Creativity in School Achievement. Minneapolis: Bureau of Educational Research, University of Minnesota.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1965). The Minnesota Studies of Creative Thinking: Widening Horizons in Creativity. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51, 355–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hamburg, Germany

    Arthur Cropley

Authors
  1. Arthur Cropley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Clark University, USA

    Seana Moran

  2. University of South Australia, Australia

    David Cropley

  3. University of Connecticut, USA

    James C. Kaufman

Copyright information

© 2014 Arthur Cropley

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cropley, A. (2014). Neglect of Creativity in Education: A Moral Issue. In: Moran, S., Cropley, D., Kaufman, J.C. (eds) The Ethics of Creativity. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333544_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation