Cognitive Reasoning from STEM to STEAM: Creativity

Part II: The Creative Palette 

    Arts classrooms have long been a safe place for students to exhale their creative side amongst a school day that can often be very by the (text) book. The act of creating something is a personal one, not just on an emotional level but also on a brain-based level too. Original, authentic creations are cognitive thumb prints that speak of an individual’s creative process. To truly understand the creative process means unpacking the process of problem solving. One uses creativity in the process of problem solving to design the path that takes them from vision to fruition. For example, to conceptualize a piece of art or solve a math problem one must be creative with their prior knowledge of concepts, tools and methods. When one takes this perspective on creativity it sheds its artistic exclusivity and becomes applicable to a diverse range of environments. It becomes an approachable skill to apply to a wide range of professions, a tool in designing new solutions through the curation of existing problems.

In order for the creative process to thrive in K-12 education it needs to be supported by a learning environment that understands the importance of cognitive discomfort in forming healthy habits of mind. Promoting the creative process with the integration of the arts can nourish characteristics linked to personal and professional success. To pinpoint these traits, a team at the Harvard School of Education examined the regular processes and habits of mind of artists. They developed a framework called "8 Studio Habits of Mind" (also known as the Studio Thinking Project). The list includes the following traits:

• persistence
• the ability to connect ideas of person to community relevance (connected to service learning)
• observation
• reflection (inward and outward)

These habits of mind are the foundation for whole brain competencies such as resilience, evaluation and analysis. Further, when students become observers of art, the critical thinking skills of interpretation and communication are developed. Each of these are traits crucial for student autonomy and achievement.

When one takes the perspective that creativity is crucial to the problem solving process the case for arts integration becomes further justified. The lasting question becomes when do we start demanding a curriculum that acknowledges creativity’s worth in the development of the whole-brain child and push back against the hypocrisy of applauding students who construct, design and build creative solutions to the world’s problems while measuring their intellectual worth with impersonal, stagnant and bias assessments.

Brain Fact:

In the field of neuroscience, finding the specific areas of the brain engaged in creativity remain a challenge to researchers. Two areas believed to be part of creativity are the hippocampus and the hypothalamus (areas linked to emotion and memory). These images show creativity engaging three main networks across the hemispheres: the executive attention network, the imagination network, and the salience network.

Cognitive Reasoning for STEM to STEAM

This series of posts are taken from a paper I wrote born from the need for reasoning over belief. I have always believed arts has a place in STEM yet sought to connect the cognitive proof. These posts are a combination of two papers I wrote on the neuroscience and cognitive functions involved in creativity and arts integration. My intentions with these posts is to share the connections and research I have done with my STEAM colleagues so that you may have fact-based reasoning to strengthen your voice for integrating the arts into STEM. Here is the conversation...

A list of references

Part I: The Canvas

The recognition of the arts as being critical in the development of the whole child has been a challenging one amongst the test-centered timeline of the new millennium. With the passing of No Child Left Behind in 2001, American education turned its priority to improving school performance with an emphasis on math, reading and the language arts (better known as the tested subject areas). In 2006, scrutiny and concern about the state of American education and the future of American representation in science, technology engineering and math was established by a U.S. National Academies report and resulted in the Department of Education increasing its emphasis on K-12 STEM education as if Sputnik had just launched all over again. In 2009, the Common Core Standards were released and spotlighted the priority on tested subject areas and rigorous efforts to improve test scores spread across the country. Despite the grit of American schools to answer to these many calls of the DOE, a 2011 National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) showed a dismal two point increase in the test scores of eighth graders in science. Additionally, and more importantly to this cause, the NAEP study revealed that students were having difficulty with problem solving and critical thinking skills.These pinpointed gaps in cognitive skills is where the arts has a place to move from a sidelined priority on a cart to its reasoning for being imperative in the integration of K-12 American education. In the following posts we will look at the brain-based power of creativity, the neuroscience of the arts and a general view of arts integration to present the reasoning for STEM to STEAM.

Cognitive Reasoning from STEM to STEAM: Creativity

Part II: The Creative Palatte 

    Arts classrooms have long been a safe place for students to exhale their creative side amongst a school day that can often be very by the (text) book. The act of creating something is a personal one, not just on an emotional level but also on a brain-based level too. Original, authentic creations are cognitive thumb prints that speak of an individual’s creative process. To truly understand the creative process means unpacking the process of problem solving. One uses creativity in the process of problem solving to design the path of vision to fruition. For example, to conceptualize a piece of art or solve a math problem one must be creative with their prior knowledge of concepts, tools and methods. When one takes this perspective on creativity it sheds its artistic exclusivity and becomes applicable to a diverse range of environments. It becomes an approachable adjective for thinking, assembling and a process to apply to a wide range of professions where new solutions are curated for existing problems.

In order for the creative process to thrive in K-12 education it needs to be supported by a learning environment that understands the importance of cognitive discomfort in forming healthy habits of mind. Promoting the creative process with the integration of the arts can nourish characteristics linked to personal and professional success . A team at the Harvard School of Education examined the regular processes and habits of mind of artists to develop a framework called "8 Studio Habits of Mind" (also known as the Studio Thinking Project). The team observed the following traits during the creative process:

• persistence
• the ability to connect ideas of person to community relevance (connected to service learning)
• observation
• reflection (inward and outward)

These habits of mind are the foundation for whole brain competencies such as resilience, evaluation and analysis. When students become observers of art, the critical thinking skills of interpretation and communication are developed. Each of these are crucial for student autonomy and achievement.

In the field of neuroscience, finding the specific areas of the brain engaged in creativity remain a challenge to researchers. Two areas believed to be part of creativity are the hippocampus and the hypothalamus (areas linked to emotion and memory). These images show creativity engaging three main networks across the hemispheres: the executive attention network, the imagination network, and the salience network.

When one takes the perspective that creativity is crucial to the problem solving process the case for arts integration becomes justified. The lasting question becomes when do we start demanding a curriculum that acknowledges creativity’s worth in the development of the whole-brain child and push back against the hypocrisy of applauding students who construct, design and build creative solutions to the world’s problems while measuring their intellectual worth with impersonal, stagnant and bias assessments.