Today’s Living Inquiry was a success! While there are many cohorts within the Elementary program, we rarely ever get to interact cross-cohort. Having this opportunity to get to know other people from another cohort was a fun and engaging experience. I got to learn a new strategy from a couple SEL TCs after I told them that some of my Grade 1 students struggle in writing in their planners. They suggested that I print out some slips of paper to give to those students, because often times they cannot see the board or get distracted by those walking in front of the board. That was a great suggestion, my only concern is that if I do that for one student, I would most likely have to do it for all of my students. Nonetheless, I will have this discussion when I get back to my practicum classroom next week! Overall, Living Inquiry was a great opportunity to socialize and connect with other TCs with similar interests. Thank you to Yvonne Dawydiak and Claire Rushton for organizing this.

Our inquiry class will be analyzing “Does Assessment Kill Student Creativity?” by Ronald A. Beghetto.

Prior to reading

My first reaction to this question is yes, assessment does kill student creativity, but only to a certain extent. I believe that the type of assessment will have an impact on how students will approach the activity. For example, if the assessment is summative and has strict criteria that is written only by the teacher, then students will feel bounded by the set criteria and will be less inclined to use their creativity. If the assessment is being done in a low-risk environment and/or criteria is set collaboratively between the teacher or student, or even fully by the students, then creativity can thrive.

During the reading

Beghetto’s discussion on classroom goal structures and how it discourages student creativity is a valued point that most likely many people, including myself, have experienced throughout elementary. He argues that performance goal-related structures are examples of when the teacher only shows to the class examples of the best work or uses comparisons among students. In these environments, students not only feel less inclined to use creativity, but they also experience high levels of anxiety, exert less effort, and engage in self-sabotaging behaviours, such as cheating.

In contrast to this is the mastery goal structure, which emphasizes on concepts such as self-improvement, skill development, creativity, and understanding. Students are more likely to adopt healthy motivational beliefs and mastery-oriented achievement behaviours. In turn, students develop more positive attitudes towards learning with more risk taking, which overall foster creativity.

In order to promote creativity within students, Beghetto suggests various things that teachers can do. Much to my agreement, he argues that assessments do not necessarily diminish student creativity, but rather it is how students perceive the goal messages sent by the teacher that matters. Teachers should not compare student-to-student work but instead, give students information on how they are doing compared to their own past performances. Overall, teachers should create a safe and encouraging environment where students feel confident in taking risks in order to help drive their creativity.

After reading

This reading provides for an interesting yet informative viewpoint on assessment. I have been in classrooms where teachers only show one or two examples of the “best” work. When teachers have done this, I have found that most of the time, every student will copy the same student, out of fear of doing something different and getting a bad mark. Beghetto offers a view that creativity within students can be fostered and that assessment does not need to undermine it. As he says, teachers can make a purposeful effort to ensure that assessment does not have to kill creativity, as long as they are aware of how they use assessment in the classroom.

Reference:

Beghetto, R.A., (2005). Does assessment kill student creativity? The Educational Forum, (69) 2 p254-263