“Out of our Minds: Learning to be creative”

Sir Ken Robinson

6th City of York Annual Education Lecture

Thursday 11th March 2004

“creativity is the process of having original ideas that are of value” “creativity is applied imagination, to be creative you have to engage in something, to

work in a medium” “creativity is not an option, we must be able to innovate”

“creativity is a function of intellect, of imagination”

Three initial questions: o Why is it important to promote creativity through the education system? o How do you do it? o What’s the problem? Why is it perceived as difficult? Why do so many people think

they are not creative? The global context:

o Currently the world is both homogeneous [all airports/motorways/McDonalds look the same] and has pockets of clear individuality, e.g. with regard to individual approaches to the passage of time: in Los Angeles an organisation that is 5 years old is well established, in Stratford an organisation that is 50 years old has not yet proved itself

o Creativity is a common theme in debate around the world in schools, business and industry. In Hong Kong, for instance, there is a recognition that the economic miracle has exhausted itself, so now what? Now we need creative thinkers

o Education is the problem: people have their innate creativity educated out of them. o The whole of education is now dominated by a model of intellectual learning that is

sure that high IQ is the apex of all human achievement o There is now a new social class “the creatives”

Historical context:

o Our education system is shaped to meet the needs of industry/commerce, based on a 19th century model. In the 1950’s there was a need for 80% manual labourers and 20% professional people, hence the grammar schools took 20% and provided them with an academic education

o World wide, most education systems have an established hierarchy of subjects with mathematics and language at the top and ‘arts’ somewhere near the bottom. Through the National Curriculum, Britain now has an institutionalised hierarchy of the only 10 subjects that are important in the world, these naturally dividing into two groups – core and foundation – with the core being more important than the others. There is also an assumption that children learn in four instalments [key stages]. This intellectual orthodoxy has now been adopted as a given and – combined with the high stakes assessment system – has stifled creativity

o 1999 – “All Our Futures” makes the case for creative and cultural development, asserting that creativity is a function of all education and not exclusive to the arts. It highlights three propositions: that education world-wide is facing a real revolution, that we need new resources to meet the revolution, that we need new strategies to implement the revolution

Overall, we now have a system of education that is predicated upon a 19th century model, bolstered by a false ethic of academic tradition

Key misconceptions: o creativity is a gift given to the few – no – we are all creative in some way o creativity attaches only to certain sorts of activities – no- most areas of human

endeavour are potentially creative o there’s nothing you can do about it – no – it is possible to teach people to be

creative – it can be improved o intelligence can be reduced to academic ability –no - if this were the case, there

would be no civilization, music, arts o intelligence is a single entity – no o IQ is the highest form of intellectual achievement - no

Intelligence is:

o Diverse and vibrant, the vibrant world is created by vibrant minds o Dynamic: when you open up a brain, you do not find 10 compartments for subjects o Unique: there is no one else like you

Conclusions: o People work most creatively when they are “in their element”, working in their

preferred medium. Education restricts opportunities and so many people never find their preferred medium, so assume they are not creative

o Different people have different strengths o The current hierarchy of subjects has to go, so that we rebalance the curriculum o Teaching is the heart of education o We can’t have creative education if teachers are not allowed to be creative o We should adopt an assessment model that supports achievement, not constricts it: it

should facilitate the curriculum, not lead it o We should get ‘back to basics’ but the right basics - not the ones we have now o Politicians think we move forward by doing better what we did in the past, not

recognising that this is a new agenda Sarah Morton 11. 3. 2004.

References: Book: Out of our minds: Learning to be creative, Ken Robinson [March 2001] The Robinson Report: All our futures: Creativity, Culture and Education [July 1999]