Creativity in the Classroom

Case Studies in Using the Arts in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education

By Paul McIntosh, Digby Warren

Intellect Ltd

Copyright © 2013 Intellect Ltd
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-84150-516-9

Contents

Apologies for absence,
Acknowledgements,
Introduction: The Current Educational Climate: Why the Creative Arts and Humanities are so Important to Creativity and Learning in the Classroom Paul McIntosh,
PART I: Encouraging Creativity in the Classroom,
Chapter 1: Using the Creative Arts for Collaboration Babs Anderson and Jo Albin-Clark,
Chapter 2: Introducing Arts-based Inquiry into Medical Education: ‘Exploring the Creative Arts in Health and Illness’ Louise Younie,
PART II: Using Performance,
Chapter 3: Using Cinema to Enhance the Relevance of Economics to Students’ Lives Gherardo Girardi,
Chapter 4: Fascinatin’ Rhythm: Tapping into Themes of Leadership and Management by Making Music Dave Griffiths,
Chapter 5: A Dramatic Approach to Teaching Applied Ethics Craig Duckworth,
PART III: Using Poetry,
Chapter 6: Using Poetry to Create Conditions for Dialogue in a Postgraduate Course on Managing Diversity Christina Schwabenland,
Chapter 7: Teaching and Using Poetry in Healthcare Clare Hopkinson,
Chapter 8: Gaining a Wider Perspective on Life in Medical Education Mark Rickenbach,
PART IV: Using Imagery,
Chapter 9: Beyond Words: Surfacing Self in End-of-life Care Using Image-making Sue Spencer,
Chapter 10: Fashion Students Engaging in Iconic Designs in a Business World Ruth Marciniak, Debbie Holley and Caroline Dobson-Davies,
Chapter 11: Storytelling and Cycles of Development Karen Stuart,
Chapter 12: Developing Refl ective Learning Journals Audrey Beaumont,
Chapter 13: The Overlooked: Landscapes, Artistry and Teaching Paul Key,
Chapter 14: Mirror Mirror: Experiential Workshops Exploring ‘Self’ in Social Work Education and Practice Debbie Amas, Judy Hicks and Roxanna Anghel,
Chapter 15: The Labyrinth: A Journey of Discovery Jan Sellers,
PART V: Learning Technologies and Assessment,
Chapter 16: Alternatives to the Essay: Creative Ways of Presenting Work for Assessment Emma Bond and Jessica Clark,
Chapter 17: Creativity-mediated Training, Social Networks and Practitioner Enquiry in Higher Education Jouaquin Paredes, Agustin De La Herran and Daniel Velazquez,
Conclusion: Arts-based Inquiry as Learning in Higher Education: Purposes, Processes and Responses Digby Warren,
Index,

CHAPTER 1

Using the Creative Arts for Collaboration

Babs Anderson
(Liverpool Hope University)

Jo Albin-Clark
(Edge Hill University)

Introduction

The academic study of the Early Years of Childhood, from birth to eight years of age, encompasses a diverse learning community with a wide range of students, from foundation degree students, who may have significant practical experience and training yet few formal academic qualifications, to Early Childhood Studies students, who may have little or no experience of caring for young children at the beginning of their undergraduate course at university.

The content of Early Childhood (and Early Years) courses include aspects of academic disciplines such as history, philosophy, psychology and sociology in addition to applied areas, such as leadership and management, with an Early Years focus. The concept of critical pedagogy utilizing interdisciplinary spaces, while promoting the strengths of each component discipline (McArthur 2010), is one that rests easily within the subject area, focusing on emancipatory ideals in advancing social recognition of the value of studying Early Childhood so that any perceived lack of status of not only the subject area itself but also those who work within its remit can be addressed. Harvey and Norman (2007) suggest that university assessment procedures need to recognize learning within the workplace as valid, and this would appear to benefit the links between theory and its application in practice.

However, structuring courses at university around intended learning outcomes set by the teaching team or tutor, such as advocated by Biggs and Tang (2007), may not provide for the students’ engagement with their own learning, incorporating their own ideas of what they would need and wish to know, as the learning outcomes for their course of study have been predetermined and transmitted as such explicitly to them. Additionally Blackmore (2009) examines the need for a more complex investigation into what constitutes valued knowledge in student-lecturer learning interactions rather than a simple reliance on student evaluations as unilateral sources of participant perspectives.

Hockings (2009) suggests that for a small but significant number of students, student-centred learning is ineffective, and one example of this is that when students are overwhelmed by competing claims on their time and energy they actively seek surface-level learning approaches in order to reduce their stressors. She argues further that to increase the educational potential for these students, the ‘teacher’ needs to have a clearer perspective on the historical sociocultural backgrounds of the students, recognizing the variance of experience, beliefs, attitudes and sense of identity within the student population.

Recognition of the teacher’s expertise as a negotiator of a projected learning journey initiated by the interests of the learner has long been a cornerstone of Early Childhood pedagogy, both in this country and internationally (Waller 2009; Rodd 2006), and it would appear that there is much to learn in teaching and learning in Higher Education in the creation of independent autonomous and self-directed learners, following a pedagogy based on experiential learning, like that we employ for our youngest children.

The influence of the Reggio Emilia approach

As part of the teaching, training and professional development of Early Childhood teachers and practitioners, core aspects of many modules offered in our institutions include the influence of international approaches. The educational approach of the city of Reggio Emilia in Northern Italy is world renowned and referred to in almost reverential tones in the world of Early Childhood education. We wished to explore aspects of this approach that might be compatible with our own contexts, recognizing also that it is not replicable outside of its origins.

As Early Childhood lecturers and teachers, it was a rite of passage for us to travel to Reggio Emilia on an international study week in 2010 and understand first-hand its pedagogy and practice. Our wish was to engage in reflective dialogue and reflexive action to understand how our own thinking could be deepened and challenged. The aim was to consider how our work as lecturers could be enriched and perhaps transformed. ‘Our job is to learn why we are teachers’ (Rinaldi 2006: 139). We were intrigued as to how we could use this experience to extend and deepen the quality of our work with our diverse groups of students.

It is important, however, to set this approach in its historical sociocultural context in order to fully appreciate the origins and development of the Reggio Emilia approach to Early Childhood education and care. Reggio Emilia is historically a wealthy region, and after the devastation of the Second World War, a group of parents decided that they wanted to build a school within the community that was significantly different in its primary aim and sought to raise their children to think for themselves and be valued as strong and competent learners (Rinaldi 2006). A young Reggio Emilia teacher named Loris Malaguzzi (1920–1994) saw something extraordinary in this way of viewing young children and in response developed a city-wide approach that continued throughout his whole career. Indeed, his influence is still core to the approach today. His view of a child’s limitless capacity as a learner, together with the philosophy of ‘The Hundred Languages’ (Edwards et al. 1993) in which a myriad of means of self-expression are recognized and promoted, enables children to explore their thoughts in multiple creative and expressive ways. The schools in this approach are characterized by aesthetically organized spaces, including an atelier (studio or laboratory) with an emphasis on open-ended, recycled and natural resources. This grows from the kitchen at the heart of the school and a light-filled central space, termed piazza that mimics the central squares of Italy as a place to meet and converse within the family of the school. The staffing of the schools is significant in that the pedagogical team is made up of a pedagogista, a coordinating and advisory role, and an atelerista, a trained artist. The cooks are seen as part of the pedagogical team and teachers work in pairs. There is no imposed curriculum, assessments or inspections; only a very slim volume termed ‘Indications’ that outlines the philosophical approach. Teaching evolves from children’s responses, and these projects (Vecchi 2010) grow over months and sometimes years.

There are three significant inferences that informed our future enquiries as Early Childhood university lecturers. First, we have a distinct view of a child as a protagonist of their own learning and a citizen with rights, rich in potential (Dahlberg and Moss 2005). Second, the adult role is defined in response to this as primarily within the pedagogy of listening (Rinaldi 2006). This view of teaching is to create provocations, to organize an aesthetic learning environment and engage in a co-construction of learning between children and adults within a social construct. Third, the concept of teacher/researcher and the reciprocal nature between these roles is illuminated from the use of documentation of thinking and learning to make that learning visible. This documentation takes the form of narrative commentary, photographs and video that describes and interprets the children’s learning. This documentation is also explored as a means of professional development and as way for the whole community to share and understand young children’s worlds. These inferences created our enquiries.

Collaborations using creative arts

In the case studies that follow, we aimed to use our contact sessions with students to create enquiries into collaborative aesthetic expression and its connections with student and lecturer learning. We also wished to make the distinction between cooperative group learning and collaborative group learning clear. In our view, cooperative group learning involves working together to achieve a goal, whereas collaborative group learning requires the possibility of adjusting one’s own intention to take account of the input of another or others and thus requires a higher level of self-awareness, self-belief, motivation and negotiation. Dweck (2006) proposes two observable mindsets with regard to learning from perceived failure in which one sees either a setback or failure as a learning opportunity. In negotiation in groups, the possibility of an individual’s suggestions being rejected is present but so too is the possibility of seeing that another’s suggestion has potential. The willingness to proceed in this situation requires a commitment from the students to engage with the process and an awareness of the lecturer of how to support their students through these challenges.

Case study 1

Exploring children’s thinking over time through documentation and its potential as a form of professional development for university students was an aspect that was developed in response to the learning experience at Reggio. Detailed observations of a two-year-old child in terms of his interests and explorations were used as a vehicle for engaging in professional dialogue between two staff members with pedagogical roles within a local authority in understanding and co-constructing meanings within an ethical framework. This took the form of an analytical commentary that ran alongside descriptions of his learning depicted in a series of photographs and video.

Another layer was then developed to support the learning of university undergraduates on a BA Honours Early Years Leadership degree studying a module on international perspectives. Students had the opportunity to explore the documentation of the child’s learning alongside the analytical commentary with the underpinning pedagogy of the Reggio approach. Thus, photographs and video are used as interpretive illustrations of the everyday experiences of a child at nursery.

The value of this exercise revealed other interpretations and nuances through the shared reflection that may not have been possible if this were completed as an individual task. The collective reflective dialogue that this provoked between students resulted in another layer of understanding being inferred from the original child observation and analysis, demonstrating the creative processes of understanding and the significance of a social construct within it. Unfortunately, in a busy and unpredictable play-based learning environment with many demands on attention, not to mention the presence of very young children, this sort of dialogue can be underexploited for the Early Years practitioner or teacher. The university learning environment can provide this provocation of intellectual curiosity, with space to think and challenge, and therefore allow students to learn from others, to make connections, examine them and develop new definitions.

The benefits of this are clear, and can be gained on many levels. Sharing documentation of their learning with children adds other multiple perspectives and provides opportunities for rich thinking and talk, importantly including the chance for children to represent and revisit ideas and experiences. Recognizing that definitions of creativity and its stages have many parallels with this sort of meta-learning and the concept of ideas needing to incubate and simmer (Bruce 2008), while also being reviewed and revisited, are cogent to the Reggio approach.

This documentation was able to demonstrate the stratum of understandings (Bronfenbrenner 1979) of learning at teacher, advisor, lecturer and student levels. This complexity yet accessibility of thinking firstly enabled an exercise of child observation to be analysed and understood from two perspectives through a reflective dialogue. Secondly, university students had a first-hand learning experience that demonstrated creative approaches that had evolved beyond the descriptive. Students commented that this teaching allowed them to see and understand the process of learning and supported their ability to articulate its complexities in an accessible way. Teaching at the university level in this example was a co-construction between tutor and students that valued first-hand observations, explored the potential of professional dialogue and, most significantly, creatively built a multi-layered interpretation with each fresh analysis. This collaboration was a creative process and demonstrates a vibrant vehicle for teaching and learning. The role of the lecturer here is that of a provoker of thought, reflection and dialogue that seeks to find new meanings and understandings, ultimately engaging in meta-learning.

Case study 2

Examining the theoretical aspects of team building within the framework of leadership is an important element of a number of courses, such as the Foundation Degree in Early Years Leadership and the taught components of Early Years Professional programmes. For students on these courses, it is essential that they have not only a theoretical knowledge and understanding of leadership, but also recognize their own skills and identify areas for development. The use of practical experiential sessions alongside more theoretical knowledge-based information-led sessions makes the material more accessible to the students by enabling them to experience the embodiment of the given concepts. The intention is also to give the students ownership of their own learning so that insights from practical sessions are not predetermined but the result of a learning journey with the lecturer seen by both student and the lecturer as facilitator with expertise rather than as instructional expert.

One such example arose with a group of students on the Early Years Professional programme. The cohort had created a group identity over a period of weeks, so each individual had developed a public persona within the shared space. This varied according to a wide range of characteristics, including how comfortable they were with the formal teaching environment of mostly tables and chairs arranged to view the whiteboard controlled by the lecturer.

The group was provided with a basic range of resources, masking tape and a large amount of newspaper and were given the task of designing a den. The students were free to use as much or as little of the given resources or to add to these with objects found in the seminar room. Interestingly, the furniture itself was commissioned to form an infrastructure by each group. Once each group were satisfied that their den was complete, they viewed the other dens, talking to their colleagues and asking questions. This open-ended activity was photographed with the informed permission of the students in order to document the process of planning, design and creation of the group den. The students were then encouraged to analyse these processes by group reflection on the phenomenon (Schön 1983). This enabled each individual to recognize how they had responded to the activity and supported their reflections as to whether this was a customary response or whether the activity had provoked an unexpected reaction. Aspects of leadership and team development were clearly evident in these analyses.

One unexpected response arose, which gave rise to thoughtful discussions later for the whole group, requiring them to re-evaluate their attitudes. One student arrived late for the session, due to unforeseen circumstances. This lack of presence, initially physical, had an impact on her full engagement with the collaborative project. The absence of ownership became apparent through missing the planning phase and the challenge of engaging with the group intention deliberated within this phase was clear, both in the physical way the student positioned herself on the outskirts of the activity and her elucidation of the reasons for this distance in the discussions afterwards. An example of an unintended learning outcome, this offered the opportunity for a collaborative enquiry into the implications for this insight.

Case study 3

An established group of postgraduate students were given the opportunity to explore their experiences so far in their course through a walk on campus in which they collected a number of found objects that represented their ideas, such as a found sweet wrapper and a flower head. The intention of the session therefore was that of object analysis, moving from a personal, implicit meaning to an overt shared meaning for a wider audience, accepting of student identity (Finnigan 2009).

(Continues…)Excerpted from Creativity in the Classroom by Paul McIntosh, Digby Warren. Copyright © 2013 Intellect Ltd. Excerpted by permission of Intellect Ltd.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.