Hello Andrea,

On Oct 27, 2007, you wrote:


> Has anybody yet in this conversation defined 1. critical reading  

> and 2. creativity?


Here's more on defining creativity.  To begin  with, it's quite  
unlikely that we will agree on a definition.  There are more than 60  
of them in the psychological literature (Taylor, 1988),  and as far  
as I am aware there is no standardized measurement instrument for  
creativity. Some believe it is inherited; some believe it can be  
taught; some believe it can be nurtured or encouraged. I believe that  
some kinds of creativity can be taught or at least nurtured and that  
it involves a set of mental activities often closely aligned with the  
kind of mental activities we call critical thinking. Most of us would  
agree, I believe, that a key element is originality, but we might  
differ in describing the paths to it. And it may look different in  
different contexts, in the sciences, in the arts, in technology, and  
in the creative problem solving of daily living.

In the context in which I raised the issue of creativity, I was  
thinking of the application of new ideas, what some would refer to as  
innovation or ingenuity. It is this applied creativity that I believe  
Marc Tucker had in mind as something that Americans have historically  
valued and excelled at, that has been an element of American economic  
success, and that may be undervalued or lost now in the education  
systems' rush toward performance on high stakes standardized tests.

Are adult literacy education students  (including basic education,  
secondary education and ESOL) capable of  this kind of creativity? If  
so, should we nurture it? I believe they are and that we should.  In  
many GED programs I have seen, it is not nourished, usually not even  
acknowledged in program goals or objectives.  And I have never seen  
it measured. This indicates to me that, as a field, we do not value  
and support student creativity. I agree with Marc Tucker that, if we  
are interested in Americans' global competitiveness that we should  
value creativity, and of course, there are other good reasons to  
nourish creativity.

What do you think about this?


* Taylor, C.W. (1988). "Various approaches to and definitions of  
creativity", in ed. Sternberg, R.J.:  The nature of creativity:  
Contemporary psychological perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

David J. Rosen
djrosen at comcast.net