Some interesting points the good Sir makes. I think the general gist isn't that schools stifle creativity so much as rules, ignorance and institutionalization do.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Do Schools Kill Creativity?
- Thread starter WyrmDL
- Start date
I had a similar experience in high school. One of my teachers lent me "Critical Path," the autobiography of Buckminster Fuller, who was a remarkably creative person:
http://www.amazon.com/Critical-Path-R-Buckminster-Fuller/dp/0312174918
As an Amazon Associate, TalkBass may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via links on this site.
Sorry, I missed that, for all the obvious reasons. I get it now.Sure, naturally--my line there was just spoofing on an old NRA (pro-gun) slogan.
I imagine that all depends on how you look at it. I wouldn't call encouraging regular attendence at school "corporate BS", I'd call it trying to clarify a correlation between attendence and grades to someone that thinks there is a larger conspiracy to crush their creativity.
Mike
Schools here suck. I can't comment because I'm pretty sure why they suck violates all kinds of TB religion/political rules.
But some of the few gems I can comment on here include: misappropriating $40,000, allowing athletic teams to practice the last 2 hours during the school day (Which means athletes take 8 less classes than regular students), they frequently violate religious freedoms, our newest Director of Schools is a failed principal, our school board agrees with Texas in that they feel like they can edit history to make it fit their propaganda, etc.
And yes I do believe the education system here kills creativity.
1. no art/music programs
2. uniforms
3. doesn't approve of free will or free thinking
etc
But some of the few gems I can comment on here include: misappropriating $40,000, allowing athletic teams to practice the last 2 hours during the school day (Which means athletes take 8 less classes than regular students), they frequently violate religious freedoms, our newest Director of Schools is a failed principal, our school board agrees with Texas in that they feel like they can edit history to make it fit their propaganda, etc.
And yes I do believe the education system here kills creativity.
1. no art/music programs
2. uniforms
3. doesn't approve of free will or free thinking
etc
I totally see where you are coming from here. but for a student who has a steady 3.4 GPA, and who rarely misses school, they shouldn't start saying I'm gonna fail if I keep playing music and missing ONE day of school for a show.
Is that statement completely true? No.
Is it generally true? Pretty much...
Of course, it doesn't have to be like that. It just is now.
Is it generally true? Pretty much...
Of course, it doesn't have to be like that. It just is now.
I have to say I feel I disagree here if we're going along college level as well. I was talking to someone online while going to a community college and they were going to a university, paying far more money and learning the same exact stuff I was.
However on the topic of elementary - high school, I wouldn't know.
Institutionally enforced conformity & social class structures in Western societies whose power brokers tub-thump the virtues of individualism?
The state of affairs you've described - and the fact that each of us is wired differently - is why I'm attracted to the Montessori method of largely self-directed learning which respects & nurtures the innate intelligence and creativity of young children while simultaneously encouraging their social development and empathy towards others:
"Concepts
* Inner guidance of nature. All children have inherent inner directives from nature that guides their true normal development.
* Freedom for self-directed learning. The Montessori method respects individual liberty of children to choose their own activities. This freedom allows children to follow their inner guidance for self-directed learning.
* Planes of development. The natural development of children proceeds through several distinct planes of development, each one having its own unique conditions and sensitive periods for acquiring basic faculties in the developmental process.
The first plane (ages 06) involves basic personality formation and learning through physical senses. During this plane, children experience sensitive periods for acquiring language and developing basic mental order.
The second plane of development (612) involves learning through abstract reasoning, developing through a sensitivity for imagination and social interaction with others.
The third plane (1218) is the period of adolescent growth, involving the significant biological changes of puberty, moving towards learning a valuation of the human personality, especially as related to experiences in the surrounding community.
The fourth plane (18+), involves a completion of all remaining development in the process of maturing in adult society.
* Prepared environment. The right precise conditions around children allow for and supporting their true natural development. For young children, the environment must be prepared in this way by providing a range of physical objects that are organized and made available for free, independent use, to stimulate their natural instincts and interests for self-directed learning.
* Observation and indirect teaching. The teacher's role is to observe children engaged in activities that follow their own natural interests. This indirect teaching to control the environment, not the child, contrasts sharply with the ordinary teacher's role of implementing a pre-determined curriculum. For example, a Montessori method class has the teacher resolving misbehavior by refocusing the child to some positive activity, rather than engaging in the ordinary system of rewards and punishments.
* Normalization. During the 06 plane of development, children have the ability to shift their fundamental being from the ordinary condition of disorder, inattention, and attachment to fantasy to a state of perfect normal being, showing such external behavior as spontaneous self-discipline, independence, love of order, and complete harmony and peace with others in the social situation. This psychological shift to normal being occurs through deep concentration on some physical activity of the child's own free choice.
* Absorbent mind. The young child (06) has an absorbent mind which naturally incorporates experiences in the environment directly into its whole basic character and personality for life. This mental faculty, which is unique to young children, allows them to learn many concepts in an effortless, spontaneous manner. It also allows them to undergo the key phenomenon of normalization to return to their true natural development. After the age of about six, this absorbent mental faculty disappears.
* Work, not play. Children have an instinctive tendency to develop through spontaneous experiences on the environment, which Dr. Montessori referred to as 'work'.[36] In this sense, the children's normal activity is attached to reality in the present moment, rather than idle play through such means as toys and fantasy.
* Multi-age grouping. Children learn from each other in a spontaneous manner that supports their independent self-directed activity. The ordinary Montessori classroom therefore consists of a mixed-aged group, such as 26 (primary level) or 612 (elementary level)."
Kill is probably the wrong word anyway, but it just so happens to be the one the OP used.
Given free reign over the language, I'd go back and say that American Civic Society dissuades people from being creative by de-incentivising it. Its much easier to follow the beaten path down a proven road to success in whatever non-humanities industry you choose. Look at any thread here when it comes to people asking about college educations. Check the disdain for the "useless" liberal arts education, despite the fact that, one imagines, the courses offered under that banner of education would be better equipped to tapping into creativity than, say, a civic engineer.
Now, one could argue that A) its a process that helps sort the wheat from the chaff, and B) that you can apply creativity to anything, whether you're Joe the Accountant or playing in Joe's Garage with the Mothers of Invention.
You could also bring up the fact that creativity is needed to power innovation in the marketplace.
But those are only two facets to the umbrella term "creativity," and on the whole I don't think it is supported by our society.
Now, the idea of creativity and "being creative" certainly sells well over here, as Steve Jobs can attest.
Society itself tries to kill creativity.
The majority of the population is just not that smart or creative, and they dont really care for those who are. From their point of view its a survival strategy.
Oh, society wants the fruit of your labor, they just dont want you around reminding them that they need you for it. Having you around reinforces the idea that they are too lazy to exercise the creative muscle. And you better believe its a muscle. Everybody has it, but only a few of us exercise it.
So school as an extension of society as a whole will try to kill you; but its no different from the rest of the world that wants your creative side to sit down and shut up and quit making everbody else look like the slackers they are.
The majority of the population is just not that smart or creative, and they dont really care for those who are. From their point of view its a survival strategy.
Oh, society wants the fruit of your labor, they just dont want you around reminding them that they need you for it. Having you around reinforces the idea that they are too lazy to exercise the creative muscle. And you better believe its a muscle. Everybody has it, but only a few of us exercise it.
So school as an extension of society as a whole will try to kill you; but its no different from the rest of the world that wants your creative side to sit down and shut up and quit making everbody else look like the slackers they are.
#1 isn't so good. But to be fair, I did take music as a class just to **** about in (so did most of the people who took it in that class). I am surprised they don't have music and arts. Tho both of which can be taught or done outside of school time.
#2, does it matter?
#3, I don't know how much I agree with that, tho it could be different on your side of the pond.
People can be creative in a huge manner of different ways. I'm in my 21st year of education (7 primary, 6 secondary, 8 university), I need to take creative approaches to problems on a daily basis.
If someone else kills your creativity, you probably weren't that creative in the first place.
For the most part, music and art are being removed from schools here one or two classes a year. The only music classes left here are band and choir. The only art left is a basic art class that isn't mandatory anymore.
The uniform bit doesn't really make much a difference so much as it does bother me.
And free thinking is almost punished below the University level here. They want you to come up with a set answer to the problem they present you with, and they want you to get to that answer their way.
At the university level, that all changes, and that's why my state (and county) has one of the worst Education ratings in the country. We have been in the bottom half as long as I can remember and a few years ago we were 41 or 43 out of 50.
One of the very least creative, expressive or original things anyone can do is whine about how their school, the establishment or society in general are suppressing people's creativity, expression or originality. 
Then again, the video linked in the OP is excellent - thought provoking and very funny at times. Thanks for sharing the link.
Then again, the video linked in the OP is excellent - thought provoking and very funny at times. Thanks for sharing the link.
School uniforms used to bother me too until I realized their value in levelling a school's social playing field (no rich kids showing up the poor ones) thus forcing students to distinguish themselves via accomplishments instead of scoring unearned points with their classmates because their rich daddy bought them this or that.
I don't know the circumstances (no need to spell them out), but I imagine a school wouldn't want to get in a situation where they treated one student who missed a day unnecessarily differently than another. Encouraging one student to pursue his dream of music by missing some class and discouraging another who is maybe not as good a student requires making a judgement call about a student's likelihood of succes at the chosen extracuricular..a judgement call they simply aren't qualified to make and certainly not one their attorney would approve of.
That's been their advertised intent since I wore my first one in 1983. It's decently effective, too. That aside, well-to-do people will be well-to-do no matter what you make them wear and that fact isn't lost on anyone in school. Additionally, people who recognize academic achievements will do so no matter what you're wearing, as well. Relax.
Mike
Mike
One of the very least creative, expressive or original things anyone can do is whine about how their school, the establishment or society in general are suppressing people's creativity, expression or originality.
Then again, the video linked in the OP is excellent - thought provoking and very funny at times. Thanks for sharing the link.
I'd say discussing the issue and possible solutions is more creative than ignoring the problem
The rich kids simply buy the more expensive branded school uniforms. They really make no difference.
That depends on the school. My children attend private school and everyone has to buy the same uniform, same brand, from the same store. The uniform does discourage some stratification based on outward appearance, but if anyone thinks kids don't notice who takes the bus and who gets dropped off in a Mercedes, they simply aren't thinking this through.
Mike
