Schools can promote creative thinking by focusing on aesthetics,purpose, mobility, objectivity, and intrinsic motivation, and byencouraging students to work at the edge of their competence.

Creativity by Design

Purpose: StrS ture:

D. N. PERKINS

reativity is a messy and myth- ideational fluency measures and vari The second myth, that creativity de-ridden subject. Many of our ca- ous biographical measures of real- pends on great talent in a particularsual beliefs have prevented an world creative accomplishment are field, conflicts with everyday experi-

adequate understanding of creative unimpressive (Crockenberg, 1972; ence. It's not unusual to find individ-thinking and have thwarted efforts to Mansfield and Busse, 1981; Wallach, uals with great technical talent in anourish its development in schools, 1976a, b). Various other ability theo- field who are not notably creative.businesses, and homes. Before ad- ries of creativity also fall short empiri- Moreover, identifying creativity withdressing what creativity is, it's useful to cally or logically (Perkins, 1981, Chap- great talent suggests that we recognizeexamine two things creativity is not: a ter 9). as creative only the major innovatorssingle distinctive ability, and a matter like Beethoven or Einstein. But, clear-of talent. ly, creativity is a matter of degree: it

Intelligence as measured by IQ is can be modest as well as grand. More-one possible explanation for creativity D N. Perkins is Co-Director, Harvard Pro- over, if we only think of creativity onin terms of ability. However, within a Ject Zero, Graduate School of Education, the grand scale, we may miss opportu-profession, creative achievement cor- Harvard Uniersity, Cambridge, Massachu- nities to foster modest creativerelates poorly with IQ (Barron, 1%9; sets. achievements that can provide bothWallach, 1976a, b). Another ability the- This article uas prepared for the Wing- practical payoffs and personal rewards.

orv of creativity implicates "ideational spread Conference on Teaching ThinkingSkills, sponsored by ASCD, Wingspread What Creative Thinldng Is

fluency"--the ability to produce a Conference Center, Racine, Wisconsin,large number of appropriate and un- May 17-19, 1984 Some of the ideas dis- Creative thinking is thinking patternedusual ideas efficiently. Although plausi- crvsed here vere developed under Nation- in a way that tends to lead to creativeble, this theory has not withstood em- al Institute of Education Grant #NIE-G- results. This definition reminds us thatpirical testing. Correlations between 83-0028, Learning to Reason the ultimate criterion of creativity is

18 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

output. We call a person creative whenthat person consistently gets creativeresults, meaning, roughly speaking.original and otherwise appropriate re-suits by the criteria of the domain inquestion

There is no obvious reason thatcreative results should depend r, asingle trait like ideational flueny Thepattern of creative thinking Js not sim-ple and neat-not just a matter. iorinstance, of generating idea., and se-lecting among them. Rather. the pat-tern involves a number of componentsthat contribute to the creative out-come. These componel 1i can be cate-gorized accoilding to s-, general prin-ciples of creative il1,mlng.

1 Creativte tlnling inraolhes ac.,/ 'c1-ic as mudc as practical st(,,daardslCreative people strive for ()riginality.and for something fundamr ncal. far-reaching, and powerful Fil, instance,Einstein's contributions were <hapedsubstantiall' hby his intense c,.mmit-ment to parsimonious theories lackingany element of arbitrariness. the sameaesthetic led him to vie-w quantummechanics with distaste, desnite hisown early contributions to the devel-opment of the theory (Holton. 19-1--2).

Creative results do not just bubbleup from some fecund swamp in themind Creative individuals tend to val-ue stated qualities and try quitestraightforwardly to achieve them.Getzels and Csikszentmihalvi (19'6)have documented this trend in cre-ative student artists Various studieshave identified similar explicit com-mitments in creative scientists (Hel-son, 1971; Mansfield and Busse, 1981,Pelz and Andrews, 1966. Roe. 1952a,1952b, 1963; Perkins, 1981)

2. Creative thinking depends oni at-tention to purpose as mudch as toresults. Creative people explore alter-native goals and approaches early inan endeavor, evaluate them critically.understand the nature of the problemand the standards for a solution. re-main ready to change their approachlater, and even redefine the problemwhen necessary

For an apt example of the latter,NASA scientists during the early days

of the space program tried to solve theproblem of heat of re-entry by devis-ing a substance that could withstandthe heat. They failed in their quest andhad to abandon this definition of theproblem. Their ultimate solution-theablative heat shield that burns away asthe space vehicle penetrates the atmo-sphere, taking the heat with it-turneduV ide down the original goal of find-nig a heat-resisting substance. The at-tention creative artists give to choos-ing what work to undertake has beendocumented by Getzels and Csikszent-mihalvi (19'6) for student artists.Skilled practitioners' understanding ofproblems has been extensively dem-onstrated for problem solving in sci:ence and mathematics. In brief. ex-perts perceive probleins in terms ofpossible solution paradigms. whereasnovices perceive the same problemsin terms of superficial surface features.(Chi, Feltovitch, and Glaser, 1981; Lar-kin, 1983; Larkin, McDermott. Simon,and Simon. 1980. Schoenfeld andHerrmann, 1982).

3. Creatie thinkilng dependso onl Ino-biliti more than fluency. As notedearlier, efforts to relate measures ofideational fluencv to real world cre-ative achievement have been disap-pointing. Instead, when difficultiesarise, creative people man make theproblems more abstract or more con-crete, more general or more specificThev mav use analogies-as CharlesDarwin did when he arrived at thenotion of natural selection by readingMalthus on population growth andcontemplating the intense strugglethat would result from human overpo-pulaton-or they may project themselves into different roles-the viewerof a painting rather than the painter.the user of an invention rather thanthe inventor.

Clement (1982, 1984-) has docu-mented the role of analog- in skilledsolving of math and physics problems.Working backwards from ansvwer tosolution is a widespread tactic inskilled problem solving (Newell andSimon. 19-2). Reformulating a prob-lem in various ways is one tactic usedin Schoenfeld's successful demonstra-tions of teaching mathematical prob-

"Teachingcreativity mustmean ...opening up forstudents theflavor and textureof creativeinquiry andhoping they gethooked."

lem solving (Schoenfeld. 1982:Schoenfeld and Hermann. 1982)These sorts of mobility are, of course.features of high competence as muchas of creativity

4. Creati v th/inking depends onuorking at the edge nmbre than at tiecenter of ones competence Creativepeople maintain high standards. ac-cept confusion. uncertaint . and thehigher risks of failure as part of theprocesses. and learn to view failure asnormal. even interesting. and chal-lenging. An anecdote about Mozartillustrates performance under pres-sure. Mozart supposedly wrote theoverture to Don Gioranni in a blitzeffort the night before the operaopened. Although the orchestra per-formed it opening night without re-hearsal, the overture was well re-ceived. Of course. manr- artists havetaken risks of another sortn, venturing

SEP'IEMBER 1984

I..

19

El"Creative peoplefeel that they,rather than otherpeople or chance,are in control ofa situation."

well beyond the accepted canons oftaste. Many works now considered no-table received a dim reception from apublic accustomed to more conven-tional styles, as happened, for instance,with Stravinsky's Rite of Spring andManet's Dojeuner sur I'herbe andOlympia.

The career of Marie Curie presents astriking case of persistent researchconducted under sometimes appallingconditions (Perkins, 1981, Chapter 8;Reid, 1974). Of course, dedication tosuccess and the stamina to withstandsetbacks are characteristic of manysorts of achievement, not just creativeachievement.

5. Creatite thinking depends asmuch on being objectitve as on beingsubjective. Creative people considerdifferent viewpoints, set final or inter-mediate products aside and comeback to them later, so that thev canevaluate them with more distance,seek intelligent criticism, and subjecttheir ideas to practical and theoreticaltests

Evidence on the relevance of criti-cism and the willingness to seek it outcomes from my own studies of thepractices of professional and amateurpoets (see Perkins, 1981, Chapter 4).Contrary to tile popular image of poetsas utterly private individuals, manvroutinely sought feedback from col-leagues. Moreover, these poets pro-duced poetry judged by a panel ofcritics to be better than those who didnot seek criticism.

6. Creative thinking depends on in-trinsic, more than extrinsic, mnotitation. Creative people feel that they,rather than other people or chance,choose what to do and how to do itThey perceive the task as within theircompetence (although perhaps closeto its edge); view what thev are undertaking as worthwhile in itself, not just ameans to an end; and enjoy the activi-ty, its setting, and context

Numerous studies discussed bvAmabile (1983) argue the importanceof intrinsic motivation. In one studyshe biased the attitudes of a group ofpoets by asking them to list their rea-sons for writing before they composedhaikus. The instructions for one group

of poets led them to mention pragmatic reasons, such as holding a job as aprofessor, whereas the instructions forthe second group produced a list ofintrinsic reasons, such as writing forthe sake of the art or for self-explora-tion. Remarkably, this simple prelimi-nary activity produced a (presumablytemporary) set that influenced thequality of the haikus the poets wroteimmediately thereafter As rated byjudges who did not know which poetshad received which treatments, thehaikus produced by the intrinsicgroup ranked considerably higher.

In summarv, it seems reasonable tosay the more these six principlesguide one's thinking, the more cre-ative it will be. However, not all theprinciples specifically reflect creativityas much as intellectual competence ormotivation in general. For example,the abiliry to grasp the nature of aproblem quickly is characteristic ofskilled problem solvers, whether notably creative or not. The willingnessand even desire to work at the edge ofone's competence is striking in cham-pion athletes, who may or may not heparticularly creative. Other characteristics, on the other hand, are specifical-ly associated with creative performance, such as attention to purpose oran emphasis on originalit.

The creative pattern of thinking isan interesting mix of strategies, skills,and attitudinal factors. For instance.attention and effort are allocated incertain ways--to purposes, to transformations of the problem, to gatheringand processing feedback, to the originalitv and other aesthetic qualities ofthe product. At least to some extent,such allocational patterns can beviewed as strategies that teachersmight directly encourage in studentsOn the other hand, there are aspectsof skill involved, such as the ability toquickly grasp the nature of a problemBy and large, only considerable expe-rience in the domain in question willimpart such expertise. Finally, an indi-vidual would not maintain creativebehavior without some commitmentto aesthetic principles, without an in-volvement in the problem for its ownsake, without pleasure in pushing a

EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

problem into different patterns, and son

How Education Falls ShortThere are many books and coursesdesigned to teach creativity. but thecase for their effectiveness is thin Areview by Mansfield, Busse, and Kre-pelka (1978) examined the literatureon several courses for definitive evi-dence of gains and transfer. In general,the results were disappointing Someundramatic gains occurred on tasksclose to the training task; tr. sfer waslittle in evidence.

The six characteristics of creativethinking discussed earlier help to ex-plain why brief special-purpose in-struction may have little impact oncreativity Most such instruction focus-es on strategies of creative thinking.These strategies prohahly help, butcreativity benefits from skill as well.

The skills described in the six prin-ciples of creative thinking require e:;tensive practice in a particular held.Although extreme competence maxynot be necessaryn-, indeed max even becounterproductive, moderate skillseems essential. Thus. some efforts toimpart creative problem solving maxfalter not so much because thex fail togive enough emphasis to the creativeside of the matter hut because thex donot provide sufficient guidance andexperience on the competence side.

Moreover, attitudes as well are criti-cal to creative thinking. Thev' cannotbe taught directly, any more than onecan teach students to like Shakespeare.Teaching creativity must involve ex-posing students to the flavor and tex-ture of creative inquiry and hopingthey get hooked

Another problem with special-pur-pose programs is the very limited timeusually invested. We seem to assumethat normal education equips studentswith the knowledge base for a creativepattern of thinking and that thev needonly a few quick tips about how tomarshal existing knowledge andknow-how to creative ends Experi-ence does not bear this out.

The deeper difficulty max be thatschooling in general works against thecreative pattern of thinking Accord-

ingly, instruction designed to fostercreativity has to make up for the short-comings of normal instruction. Whilethe usual reasons-that schooling istoo "right answer" oriented apd haslittle tolerance for the maverick-arerelevant, the-y are part of a much morepervasive syndrome. The six generalprinciples of creative thinking yield agood map of the problem

1. Attention to aesthetics Outside ofliterature and the arts, conventionalschooling pays little attention to theaesthetics of the many products ofhuman inquiry that are addressed-for instance, scientific theories, mathe-matical systems, historical syntheses.How often, for example, do teacherspoint out the beaut-, of Newton's lawsor the periodic table? How often dothey highlight the originalits of think-ing of history as shaped hv geographyrather than skillful and willful leaders,or the originality of proving a theoremby reductio ad ahsurdum rather thanby a constructive proof? Likewise, howoften do teachers comment on theaesthetics of students' work in mathand science?

2. Attention to purpose. Most assign-ments are so narrow that studentshave little opportunirt to generate. oreven select among, different purposes.The treatment of scientific theories.for instance, often concentrates on theresult to the exclusion of the broaderpurposes of explanation and under-standing that motivated their initialdevelopment. For example. whatrange of phenomena spurred Newtonto develop his laws, and where, his-torically. did that concern come from?How do Newton's laws affect our ev-erxdav lives? Some instruction in ph\x-ics gives full play to such question.but much does not.

3. Mobiliott. Most schooxl problemsare so narrow and convergent that.except for "working back'wards," mo-bility doesn't count for much. Mobilitn-applies most when a task presentsmajor choices--for instance, selectinga problem. revising a problem, choos-ing between empirical and theoreticalmethods, or in a more humanisticcontext, choosing to treat a writingassignment either discursively or as a

dialogue or drama, or trying to distillfrom one's knowledge a particular the-sis to defend. For the most part, schoolproblems lack the elbow room forexercising mobility.

4. Wor'ing at the edge of one'scompetence. Especially gifted studentsmay become discouraged if thev donot find school challenging enough.But perhaps the broader difficult,' isthis: school does not challenge stu-dents to be creative. If thev have themotivation, students can work at theedge of their competence in otherdirections-by precision. remember-ing all the facts, solving textbook prob-lems- ut not so much in the direc-tion of creative accomplishment.

5. Objectivit. Schools npicallv dohighlight objectivity, although not al-waxs very successfullv in the arts.

6. Intrinsic motiltoion. It's no newsthat conventional schooling does notdo a venr good job of fostering intrin-sic motivation. Teachers, understand-ably discouraged by inattentive stu-dents and an often unsupportivesocietv. often project an offhand ormechanical attitude toward knowl-

"Creativethinking dependson attention topurposes asmuch as results."

SEPTEMBER 1984

I'

21

edge and teaching. Students pick thisup and project it back, continuing thevicious circle. Also, textbooks usuallygive little play to the most interestingfeatures of subject areas. Finally, stu-dents have few opportunities to selectthe problems they address or the di-rection their instruction takes.

In summary, conventional school-ing gets a mixed report card for itsinfluence on creative thinking. lMost ofthe problems trace back to two perva-sive practices Schooling generallypresents knowledge as a given, ratherthan as the product of a creative effortto accomplish something. And school-ing generally poses to students tasksthat do not exercise or even allowcreative effort.

Knowledge as DesignedRather than GivenCourses that focus on creative think-ing. address strategies, skills, and atti-tudes and offer plent- of time-on-taskcan have a significant impact on cre-ative thinking. Such courses, slippedinto the curriculum where possible,would be worthwhile. But bhv far thebetter, although more difficult, path isto revise normal schooling to fostercreative thinking in all subjects.

As noted earlier, part of the proh-lem is that conventional instructionusually presents knowledge as given,when it should encourage a view- ofknowledge as the product of creativeeffort. An approach well suited to thisaim can be summed up in threewords: knowledge as design

The notion is that pieces of knowl-edge are designs shaped by humanimnention, designs not so unlike ascrewdriver or a can opener Althoughthis stance may seem peculiar at first, itoffers a powerful metaphor for unify-ing the range of human productiveactivities under a common frameworkTo put it succinctly, virtually any prod-uct of human effort. including knowl-edge, can be understood better withthe help of four design questions:What is the purpose? What is the struc-ture? What are some model cases(concrete examples that bring the mat-ter in question closer to perceptual

experience)? What are the argumentsfor or against the design?

For instance, we can easily see athumbtack as a structure adapted to apurpose. The purpose: temporarily at-taching materials, usually paper, tosurfaces like bulletin boards and walls.The structure: a short point and a widehead. A model case: an actual thumb-tack. The argument: why is the head sowide? So the thumb can push it, and soit holds paper well with its breadth.Why is the point so short? So thethumb can push the tack all the way in,and so that it isn't hard to remove. Asthis simple example shows, the designquestions require that we understandthe thumbtack as a design and fromfour perspectives at the same time:purpose, structure, model, and argu-ment.

The design perspective is a flexibletool because abstract concepts canalso be treated as designs. Considerthe organization of a sentence as aninvention The purpose: to package lin-guistic information in an orderly waythat promotes production and com-prehension The latter can be demon-strated by stripping syntax. sentence,and phrase divisions from text, whichmakes it much harder to read. The

structure: nouns, verbs, adjectives, andso on put together in accordance withthe rules of grammar. Model cases: thesentences in this paragraph, for in-stance. The argument: the structure ofa simple sentence makes a neat pack-age of information-what thing (thesubject) exercises what action (theverb) on what other thing (the directobject) with what qualifications on thethings (adjectives) and on the action(the adverbs)? The grammatical order-ing and the case endings help thehearer to discern what does what towhat, and which qualifiers limit whichthings and actions.

This example is far too sketchy toserve students well, of course. It is butan outline of what would be necessaryfor a thorough view of sentences froma design perspective. But perhaps itconveys a sense of how the designperspective could be used to discussgrammer.

Now consider a very different exam-ple-the Pythagorean theorem. Thestructure: the square of the hypote-nuse of a right triangle equals the sumof the squares of the other two sides.Model case: perhaps the most familiarmodel case is a right triangle with

EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP22

"The passive view of knowledgefostered by conventionalinstruction seems replaceable bythe more active perspective ofknowledge as design."

squares constructed on all three sides.7t1e argumyent: one of the mans proofsof the Pythagorean theorem is basedon just such a construction

As to purpose, this theorem hascome to have a number of importantpurposes in mathematical contexts Itprovides the basis ftr measuring dis-tance in an n-dimensional Caretesiancoordinate system As such. it under-lies vector calculus concepts such asthe dot and cross products The Ps-thagorean theorem plays a role inapplying the calculus to compute thelengths of curves in space The troubleis that it is difficult to conves this w ide-ranging import to students encoulnter-ing the theorem for the first time

This difftcultv is a pervasive prob-lem in mathematics instruction, wherequite commonly the purposes of new-I! introduced concepts and theoremsdo not become full- apparent untilmuch later in the instructional se-quence. But having some grasp of thepurpose of anything is crucial to un-derstanding it as a design and indeed,to feeling it to be important. Mathe-matics teachers must forecast andmake vivid for students the import ofmathematical findings and conceptswhen thes are introduced, even bs use(f analogy and even if the message isnot fully understood

Virtuallv every other topic dealt wxithin schools can be viewed as a designand discussed as such; for example.historical claims. mathematical nota-tions, Newton's laws, short stories andpoems, legal codes, biological orga-nisms, mathematical algorithms, news-

paper layout. and moral principles. Ifall knowledge were presented anddiscussed from the perspective of de-sign, education would yield a muchmore creative view of know-ledge

Learning to DesignIf design provides a useful ,-a- ofthinking about knowledge. it offers aneven greater hold on the nature ofcreative thinking. One can views cre-ative thinking as the process of design-ing something and provide advice onhow to do so. This might be done inmans wass; I will describe one

Over the past few vears. I ha ehelped to develop a course on think-ing skills for the -th grade level inVenezuela (Final Report, Project Intel-ligence, 1983) The course consists ofsix lesson series The series on inven-tive thinking (Perkins and Laserna.1983) begins with nine lessons thatteach students strategies for analyzingevervdav designs (like chairs andtacks). evaluating them. planning im-provements, and inventing useful gad-gets that do not already exist. It contin-ues with a second set of six lessonsthat takes the same approach to dailyprocedures, such as shopping, whichcan also be viewed as designs Thelesson series emphasizes most of thesix characteristics of creative thinkingidentified earlier.

The extensive summative evaluationof the course. which yielded generallyfavorable results, included a designtask administered both to studentswho had received the first nine inven-

ti-e thinking lessons and the otherlesson series and to control studentsThe students' designs were rated on anumber of dimensions by two iudgesThe treatment group outperformedthe control group considerably on anumber of measures. For instance.treatment students included in theirdesigns an average of two features tohelp solve the given problem, whilecontrol group students incorporatedan average of only 1.2. Treatment stu-dents described their designs in muchmore detail. an average of 83 words ascompared to the control students' av-erage of 46. Treatment students alsoincluded much more detail in theirsketches in a number of categories ofdetail (Final Report. Project Intelli-gence. 1983).

Obviously. these results do not im-ply that students learned to be creativein the course of nine lessons Thetreatment was not long enough norcomprehensive enough to warrantsuch a conclusion. But the students doappear to have learned some patternsof creative thinking as they apply tosimple design tasks. The results sug-gest that with continued treatment toincrease such skills and extend themto other contexts. creative thinkingmight be enhanced.

Wide-Ranging Products ofInquiryOne of the most interesting features ofthe above experiment is that it empha-sized working on uhole creative prod-ucts-the designs of simple objects.After all in real life. the outcome of a

SEPTEMBER 1984 23

creative endeavor is almost always acomplex product rather than a briefanswer to a question. School knowl-edge also deals largely in complexproducts. Theorems, theories, defini-tions, classification systems, argu-ments, analyses, field notes, interpreta-tions, and evaluations are among manyproducts of inquiry found in the studyof the various disciplines. However,although students learn about schol-ars' products of inquiry, they do verylittle creating on their own. Studentsfunction primarily as consumers ofproducts of inquiry, not producers.

A look at the kinds of productsstudents normally attempt quickly re-veals the limits. Broadly speaking, stu-dents are asked to produce threekinds of things: short answers, as ingrammar or arithmetic exercises orfill-in-the-blank quizzes;problem solu-tions, as in physics or mathematics;and essays. The first of these hardlydeserves to be called a product at all.Solving given problems does involvesubstantive thinking, but it is only asmall part of the activity of the math-ematician or scientist, who also rou-tinely formulates problems, devisesclassification systems, constructs defi-nitions, analyzes phenomena, and soon.

The essay is in principle an enor-mously flexible medium of expres-sion. However, students do not knowhow to exploit its flexibility, and teach-ers do little to help them. Most stu-dents compose essays by writing whatthey know about a given topic. This"knowledge telling" approach, as re-searchers have called it (Bereiter andScardamalia, in press), is a very nar-row, not very creative use of the essayvehicle.

The narrow range of products ofinquiry produced by students reflectstradition and convenience more thannecessity. Here are some examples ofassignments that call for rather differ-ent written products: an analysis, aprediction with argument, a classifica-tion system, a plan.

1. Anatysis of a tool according tophysical principles. After learningabout basic physical principles such asthe lever and the inclined plane, pick a

"Conventionalschooling gets amixed reportcard for itsinfluence oncreativethinking."

tool-for instance, a screwdriver or ahammer-and write an analysis ofhow the tool works by identifying thephysical principles underlying it. Manytools involve several such principles.

2. Prediction of a political event.Wait for an international incident, andthen predict what actions the nationsinvolved will take over the ensuingweeks. Base your predictions on asmuch information as you can find innewspaper accounts, plus historicalanalogies. Give not only your predic-tion but the argument for it. Then seewhat happens. If your prediction doesnot pan out, explain at what pointevents diverged and suggest why.

3. A classification systern for sourcesof slang Slang words enter the lan-guage in many ways. Special dictionar-ies often give their derivations. Afterlearning some important characteris-tics of classification systems, use thesespecial dictionaries as resources todesign a classification system for theways slang words arise

4. Strategic planning in historv Se-lect a famous battle, and learn as muchas vou can about it. Then using hind-sight, make the best plan you can forthe strategy of the losing side. In lightof this plan, might the losing side havewon, or was the loss an inevitableconsequence of resources and posi-tion? Present not only your plan butalso your argument on this point.

As these examples show, it's rela-tively easy to formulate both short

assignments, like analyzing a tool, andterm projects, like the strategy plan-ning project above, that engage stu-dents in designing products of inquiry.Note also that the rubric of designleads to a much broader concept ofcreative activity. When we think ofcreativity in school contexts, we usual-ly think of creative writing and art,which are far too narrow. As soon asone thinks in terms of design, onerealizes that all sorts of things in thevarious subject matters are designedand hence can become objects of cre-ative thinking for students. According-ly, a drastic expansion in the range ofproducts of inquiry asked of studentsshould be a key element in promotingcreative thinking in schools.

Of course, an emphasis on productsof inquiry is not enough. Just becausestudents work on such products doesnot mean that they will do so creative-ly. But we can help them by providinginstruction in various strategies, skills,and attitudes appropriate to creativethinking and design.

In summary, creative thinking turnsout to have a discernible pattern thatwe can put to work throughout educa-tion. The passive view of knowledgefostered by conventional instructioncan be replaced by the more activeperspective of knowledge as design.Students can learn about the art andattitudes of design, and they can workon a far greater range of products ofinquiry than they normally do.

Although questions certainly remainabout creative thinking, it is no longerso mysterious as to excuse neglect onthe grounds of ignorance. The onlyexcuse is inertia- education's favoritebut not a good one. With a vigorouspush, perhaps we can set schools inmotion toward worlds of invention,which now seem not so far away.E]

References

Armabile, T M. 77he Social Psychology ofCreativity New York: Springer-Verlag,1983

Barron, F. Creative Person and CreatiteProcess New York: Holt, Rinehart. & Win-ston, 1969

24 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Bereiter, C., and Scardamalia, M. "Cogni-tive Coping Strategies and the Problems ofInert Knowledge." In Thinking and Learn-ing Skills, Volume 2 Current Research andOpen Questions Edited by S Chipman. JW Siegel, and R. Glaser

Chi, M, Feltovich, P, and Glaser. R."Categorization and Representation ofPhysics Problems by Experts and Novices."Cognitite Science 5 (1981): 121-152

Clement, J "Analogical Reasoning Pat-terns in Expert Problem Solving" In Pro-ceedings of the Fourth Annual Conferenceof the Cognitite Science Society Ann Arbor.Mich: University of Michigan. 1982.

Clement, I "Non-formal Reasoning inExperts' Solutions to Mathematics Prob-lems." Paper presented at the annual meet-ing of the AERA, New Orleans, April 1984

Crockenberg, S B 'Creativirn Tests: ABoon or Boondoggle for Education?' Re-tiew of Fducational Research. 19'2, 42( 1),27-45

Final Report, Project Intelligence 7heletvelopment of Procedures to FnEtanceThinking Skills Cambridge. Mass I harvardUniversity and Bolt Beranek and Ne'wman,Inc. 1983

Getzels, I., and Csikszentmihalvi. M TheCreative Vision A Longitudinal Studr ofProblem Finding in Art New York JohnWiley & Sons, 1976

Ilelson, Ravenna "Women Mathemati-cians and the Creative Personality" four-nal of Consulting and Clinical P.sdcbolog¥36 (19'1) 210-220

lolton, G 'On Trying to UnderstandScientific Genius " The American Scholar-i (Winter 1971-72): 95-110

Larkin, J "The Role of Problem Repre-sentation in Physics" In Mental ModelsEdited bv D Gentner and A. S Stevens.tlillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1983

Larkin, J. McDermott, J. Simon. ) ; andSimon, Ii "Modes of Competence in Solv-ing Physics Problems " Cognitie Science -4(1980): 31'7-345

Mansfield, R S, and Busse, T V TheP.schologt, of Creatruri't and Discoter,Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1981

Mansfield, R S. Busse, T V: and Kre-pelka, E J. "The Effectiveness of CreativityTraining " Reviiewu of Educational Research48,4 (1978) 517-536

Newell, A., and Simon, H ttuman Prob-lem Sohling Englewxood Cliffs. NJ: Pren-tice-Hiall, 1972

Parnes, S J. Noller, R B.. Biondi, A M.Guide to Creative Action New York:Charles Scribner's Sons, 19"

Pelz, D C, and Andrews, F M Scientistsin Organizations Producti e Climatesfor

SEPrEMBER 1984

Research and Development. New York:John Wiley and Sons, 1966.

Perkins, D. N The Mind's Best Work.Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UniversityPress, 1981.

Perkins, D N "General Cognitive Skills:Why Not?'" In Thinking and LearningSkills, Volume 2. Current Research andOpen Questions. Edited by S. Chipman. JN. Siegel, and R. Glaser Hillsdale, NJ.:Erlbaum, in press.

Perkins, D N. and Laserna, C. InventiveThinking Lesson Series VI, Project Intelli-gence Course Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniversity and Bolt Beranek and Newman,Inc., 1983

Reid, R. Marie Cure. New York: SaturdayReview Press, 1974

Roe, A. "A Psvchologist Examines 64Eminent Scientists." Scientific American187.5 (1952a): 21-25

Roe, A. The Making of a Scientist NewYork: Dodd, Mead & Co, 1952b

Roe, A. "Psychological Approaches toCreativity in Science." In Essays on O fati-it' in the Scences. Edited by M. A Colerand H. KI Hughes. New York: New YorkUniversity, 1963.

Schoenfeld, A H. "Measures of Problem-Solving Performance and of Problem-Solv-ing Instruction." Journal for Researdc inMathbematcal Education 13,1 (1982): 31-49.

Schoenfeld, A. H., and Herrmann. D. J."Problem Perception and KnowledgeStructure in Expert and Novice Mathemati-cal Problem Solvers." Journal of E.pteri-mental Psycholog: Learning, Memor, andCognition 8.5 (1982): 484-494

Wallach, M. A. "Psychology of Talent andGraduate Education." In Individuality inLearning. Edited by Samuel Messick &Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,19

7 6a.Wallach. M. A. "Tests Tell Us Little About

Talent" American Scientist 64 (197 6b): 57-63

A RANDOM HOUSE, INC.

ARTISTRY IN TEACHINGLouis J. Rubin, University of Illinois

"I consider ARTISTRY IN TEACHING to be of almost startling reletvnce in this day ofpreoccupation with 'excellence' and teacher motivation. "

Marine Greene, Teachers College. Columbia U'niversity

"If more professors in teacher education would attend to some of the principles Rubinhas defined, improvement in the teaching profession would result."

Robert 0. Hahn. California State University Laos Angeles

Imagination .. perception ... passion ... invention ... qualities not found oftenenough in today's educators. In this lively and inspiring new book. Louis Rubin offersboth encouragement and specific suggestions for the improvement of teacher perfor-mance.October 1984, 192 pages paperbound

FOR EXAMINATION COPIES. PLEASE WRITE TO:RANDOM HOUSE. 400 HAHN ROAD. WESTMINSTER. MD. 21157

Copyright © 1984 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.