Creativity in the digital age.

What does being creative in the digital age mean?

There are a range of digital tools that can be used creatively. Photoshop can be used for exploring identity through the arts.

Digital technology can be integrated into painting or art- here is a clip showing how this is occuring in NZ.


Music can be composed or developed without knowing how to write music.



Music, images and information can be downloaded, altered or added to and created into something new. (I won't go into copyright here).



While these tools are useful and expand thinking about what it might mean to be creative in the digital age, it is global collaboration that is the exciting development. Being able to work collaboratively with others with a similar interest or passion (see the long tail), has the potential to lead to increased creative capability globally. In the past it may have been by chance or hard work that you find people who have similar ideas and interests to yourself, now via social networks you can develop these. Interesting to apply the ideas from Wikinomics (Don Tapscott's latest book), to the idea of creativity and education.

Users of technology typology.

Americans (USA) sort into 10 distinct groups of users of information and communication technology according to this Pew report

To summarise, here are the 10 groups identified. There is greater detail in this report.

Group name: Omnivores; 8% of USA adult population

Omnivores 8%
They have the most information gadgets and services, which theyuse voraciously to participate in cyberspace and express themselves online and do a range of Web 2.0 activities such as blogging or managing their own Web pages.

Connectors 7%
Between featured-packed cell phones and frequent online use, they connect to people and manage digital content using ICTs – all with high levels of satisfaction about how ICTs let them work with community groups and pursue hobbies.

LacklusterVeterans 8%
They are frequent users of the internet and less avid about cell phones. They are not thrilled with ICT-enabled connectivity.


Productivity Enhancers 8%
They have strongly positive views about how technology lets them keep up with others, do their jobs, and learn new things.

Mobile Centrics 10%
They fully embrace the functionality of their cell phones. They use the internet, but not often, and like how ICTs connect them to others.

Connected But Hassled 10%
They have invested in a lot of technology, but they find the connectivity intrusive and information something of a burden.

Inexperienced Experimenters 8%
They occasionally take advantage of interactivity, but if they had more experience, they might do more with ICTs.

Light But Satisfied 15%
They have some technology, but it does not play a central role in their daily lives. They are satisfied with what ICTs do for them.

Indifferents 11%
Despite having either cell phones or online access, these users use ICTs only intermittently and find connectivity annoying.

Off the Network 15%
Those with neither cell phones nor internet connectivity tend to be older adults who are content with old media.

Which one are you? Take the test here

PEW INTERNET & AMERICAN LIFE PROJECT 1615 L ST., NW – SUITE 700 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036

Creative lesson starters.

The internet provides a range of thought provoking material. Here are a couple that could be useful:

Social studies or media studies:-

EPIC 2015- a short movie that looks at possible effects of journalists losing control of the media. Could be balanced with ideas from the long tail.

For maths-

The quadratic equation is one of the first challenging equations that students have to memorise and learn- this song has really helped at least one 16 yr old boy learn this equation.

It is not just the technology

Something to think about when setting up your learning environment- it is not just the giving of information that is important, it is the way that your students interact. This slideshow shows this idea. This slideshow is called 3 types of teachers and developed by Jessen Felix . I found it through Chris Craft.

Howard Gardner's Five minds for the future.

Howard Gardner's latest book divides 'intellectual approaches' into 5 types of minds for the future. These are:

1. The disciplined mind- schooled in basic subjects like art, history... and master of one


2. The synthesizing mind- able to make sense of disparate information


3. The creating mind- asking new questions and finding imaginative answers


4. The respectful mind- an appreciation of different cultures


5. The ethical mind- responsibility as worker and citizen.

This is an interesting way to divide 'minds' and instead of developing a heirachy as Bloom and Bereiter have done, he has different categories of mind. The focus of this is for management in the work place, rather than education (not that it should make a difference).

I would consider respectful and ethical to be in the same type of category- but that may be because I am a social studies educator from NZ. I would also like to see a focus on being connected through networks, which I see as more than synthesizing, and essential in the creating process.

Students co-constructing curriculum and contexts.

I believe it is important that students are involved in constructing the classroom curriculum that they are going to learn. In New Zealand, our national curriculum is flexible enough to allow students to have a big say in the contexts that will suit their learning needs and interests. It is not that difficult to do, and can be done with year 11-13 students where high stakes qualifications are included. Kath Murdoch and James Beane are two people who have inspired me in this area.

I was interested to read Marc Prensky's blog this week, advocating the inclusion of students at teacher education conferences. This is an idea worth further consideration.

I wonder how we could include a much stronger student voice in the process of the current tweak of our national curriculum.

Of course, this all assumes that we are ready to share or give up some of the power associated with being the teacher at the chalkface (or smartboard). Chris Sessums looks at the locus of control in his blog this week.

Professional learning vs professional development.

It seems that professional development is a thing of the past for teaching and professional learning is the what should be happening now. It was a few months ago that I was pulled up for referring to 'professional development', and have been mulling this over and reading ever since. I feel that maybe the sun is rising above the fog.

I understand that this change, specifically within teaching, is part of the change in reclaiming (or claiming) of teaching as a profession. The push in the context of a move from a percieved technocratic view of teaching, where teachers are 'trained' in the 'art and craft' of teaching, towards a learned and research based profession. The term 'professional development', in this context perhaps reflects the model where outside influences will 'develop' the teacher's skills, through delivering short courses. This compares to a 'professional learning' model where the teacher is at the core of the learning, learning may not be based on preset outcomes, but it is ongoing, involve collaboration and be long term.

Although governing bodies in New Zealand and England are moving towards using the term 'professional learning', there appears to be a flip flopping between the two terms.

The long tail

I heard an interview with Chris Anderson on the radio yesterday. (Yes, realtime! Still do this sometimes). He was talking about the 'long tail'. In New Zealand education, this refers to the group of students for whom school is not meeting their learning needs and are not achieving. In economic terms (which is where Chris comes from), it refers to products that are sold that are not mainstream, but are economically viable due to the internet. The result of the long tail is that there is greater diversity in products available. Therefore the internet is catering for a much wider diversity in interests and thinking than was available previously. This idea when crossed into education is exciting! encouraging diversity. This links into the idea of personalised learning environments that Stephen Downes and Derek Wenmoth discuss in their blogs.

I am still thinking about the implications of the long tail- both tails.

Beyond Blooms taxonomy

Bloom's taxonomy has been useful tool in developing educational tasks for the past 40 years. It was based on an underlying assumption that the mind behaves like a filing cabinet. This assumption is being challenged as the implications of learning in the digital age is explored further.
As an alternative, Bereiter and Scardamalia (1998) suggested 7 levels of approach to knowledge.

1- Knowledge as individuated mental states. Knowing that one person may know things that someone else does not.
2- knowledge as itemizable mental content. Telling knowledge in the order in which it comes to mind.
3- knowledge as representation. Telling knowledge taking into account the listener/ reader.
4-knowledge as viewable from different perspectives.
5- knowledge as personal artifacts. Viewing oneself as constructing knowledge.
6- knowledge as improvable personal artifacts. Viewing a theory in terms of what it can and can't do, what its strengths are and where it needs improvement.
7- knowledge as semi-autonomous artifacts. knowledge objects, like other constructed objects, take on a life of their own and can be considered independently of their personal relevance.
Full paper.

I find this a useful schema when thinking about teaching for understanding, particularly of conceptual understanding.

Connectivism

George Siemens proposes a learning theory for digital age. While it still has some of the underpinning aspects of constructivism, it is fundamentally different. It takes into account one key idea espoused by Bereiter- that knowledge does not exist within one person's mind. This learning theory is worth a look.
George is a regular blogger.