An Encore with Ed Catmull and Pixar-Unleashing Creativity

Ed Catmull, president of Disney Animation and Pixar, has written a new creativity book that is lighting a fire.

I have nothing to add to Tavis Smiley's wonderful interview with Dr. Catmull, but I would like to highlight a phrase that Catmull uses near the end:  "In spite of the words we use..."

Catmull touches on something here - we give lip service to the idea of making it safe for risk and failure, but most of us fail to live it.  We need to live our words.

Give yourself the gift of fourteen minutes of interview time.  You, your students, and the fine arts profession will be the better for it.

http://www.pixarpost.com/2014/05/ed-catmulls-pbs-interview-with-tavis.html

References:

Catmull, E. and Wallace, A. (2014). Creativity, inc.: Overcoming the unseen forces that stand in the way of true inspiration. New York, NY: Random House.

Motivation! - Creativity Lessons with Teresa Amabile, Part 3

Creativity and innovation expert Teresa Amabile has much to offer Fine Arts Professional Learning Communities.  In Growing up Creative, she describes creativity as a fine soup. Domain skills are the stock, creative thinking and working skills are the seasonings, and intrinsic motivation is the fire (1989, p. 46).  Dr. Amabile understands that motivation is both essential and undervalued, so she devotes an entire chapter to this element of creativity.

Amabile contends that "people will be most creative when they feel motivate primarily by the interest, enjoyment, satisfaction, and challenge of the work itself - and not by external pressures" (1989, p. 51).  Intrinsic motivation is personal.  there are no intrinsically interesting activities - there are only activities which might be interesting for a particular person at a particular point in time (1989, p. 54).  Amabile describes the hallmarks of intrinsic motivation as interest, competence, and self-determination.  She goes on to cite several studies in which creativity was enhanced under conditions of intrinsic motivation.  It turns out that extrinsic motivation will usually compel us to take the safest path, the simplest routine, or the proven algorithm.  This does not encourage innovation.  The pressure of extrinsic motivation can also cause stress, or it can cause us to prematurely criticize potential solutions.

Fans of Daniel Pink will find this to be very familiar.  His book Drive describes autonomy, mastery, and purpose as the formula for motivation.  For those not familiar with Pink's work, his TED talk is a great introduction (http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation).

Fine arts educators must be mindful of the balance between content standards and intrinsic motivation.  We must interpret the standards broadly, with the best interests of developing creative students in mind.  We must design activities and assessments with the goal of improving creative behavior.

We must also be wary of the effects of extrinsic motivation.  This is particularly dangerous in the field of music, where large-group competitions have become the measuring stick for success in many parts of the country.  These competitions may develop or promote many fine qualities in our students, but we need to be clear-eyed about the fact that individual creative thinking is probably not one of them.

How does collaboration play a part in all of this?  We can hold each other accountable to make sure we design assessments and activities that maximize intrinsic motivation. Sometimes we don't know what we don't know, and it takes an open and honest team to keep us on the path to creativity.

Let's band together to make every schoolhouse a more creative place!

References
Amabile, T. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. New York, NY: Crown Publishers.

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Creativity Lessons with Teresa Amabile, Part 2

Best-selling author Teresa Amabile describes three major ingredients for creativity:  domain skills, creative thinking and working skills, and intrinsic motivation.  Each of these is essential in order to produce original ideas or products that have value.

In today's standards-driven educational environment, fine arts educators can get caught up in teaching content to the detriment of teaching process.  This can be harmful to the development of creativity.  Amabile writes "There are some special working styles, thinking styles, and personality traits that enable people to use their domain skills in new ways" (1989, p. 46).  She suggests that originality is improved when one consciously sets out to do something out of the ordinary.

In addition to a conscious effort to develop an original idea, a respectful attitude of craftsmanship is helpful.  Amabile asserts that this working style is marked by:

1. a dedication to doing the work well
2. an ability to concentrate effort and attention for long periods of time
3. an ability to abandon unproductive ideas and temporarily put aside stubborn problems
4. a persistence in the face of difficulty
5. a willingness to work hard (1989, p. 47).

Thinking styles are also important.  Amabile observes that many creative persons have several of the following thinking styles:

1. breaking set patterns of thinking
2. understanding complexities
3. keeping options open
4. suspending judgment
5. thinking broadly 
6. remembering accurately
7. breaking out of scripted habits of acting
8. perceiving freshly
9. using tricks to help think of new ideas (1989, pp. 48-49).

These process-oriented goals are more subtle than content standards.  They are harder to measure, and therefore, are harder to demonstrate to an evaluating administrator.  

That doesn't make them less essential.  

A fine arts Professional Learning Community could function as a support network to help educators keep these processes on their teaching radar.  PLC work sessions could start with questions about how you supported creativity this week.  Collaboration can help us stay on track the same way that a workout buddy can hold us accountable for our physical fitness goals.

Creativity is the nexus between the core of our domain and the needs of society at large.  Let's keep these creative processes at the forefront of our curricula.  Let's think carefully about how we will know if students are learning these skills and dispositions (PLC Question #2).  Let's collaborate to find solutions when students don't learn these essential skills and dispositions (PLC Question #3).  

Finally, let's collaborate to support each other and advocate for our discipline.  Society is desperate for creative work, and we are the resident experts in every schoolhouse in the country.  Be proud, and be important!

References
Amabile, T. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. New York, NY: Crown Publishers

Creativity Lessons with Teresa Amabile, Part 1

Teresa Amabile is currently a professor at the Harvard Business School, where her research includes individual productivity, team creativity, and organizational innovation.  Her book The Progress Principle is an Amazon top 100 seller in both Organizational Learning and Creativity.  She has numerous publications on creativity, including Creativity in Context and Growing up Creative.  Her research yields practical recommendations for arts educators.

In Growing up Creative, Dr. Amabile describes three ingredients for creativity:  skill in the domain, creative working and thinking skills, and intrinsic motivation.  These ingredients correspond closely to Professional Learning Community Question #1:  What knowledge, skills, and dispositions do our students need to have?

Amabile correctly points out that we sometimes overlook domain skill, because we take it as given.  However, it is the prime requisite for creativity.  One cannot be creative in a domain in which one has no knowledge or skill.  Einstein's remarkable creativity in physics and his average skill on violin do not imply any particular advantage as a dancer.

Arts educators are sometimes hesitant to prescribe specific knowledge and skills on the basis that prescription inhibits creativity.  In fact, the opposite is true.  We must not shy away from the fact that we must provide foundational training.  We must decide on the particular mix of knowledge and skills that students must have, and we must collaborate so that students receive those foundational skills, regardless of who is teaching the course.  Because these skills are foundational, we must have evidence about whether each student has mastered them, and we must pledge extra time and support to students who have not yet attained mastery.

And yes, this means that we assess learning and use that evidence to guide instruction.  Amabile has recommendations for assessment in art, which will be explored in a later segment.

Happy Independence Day!

References

Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Amabile, T. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. New York, NY: Crown Publishers

Amabile, T. and Kramer, S. (2011). The progress principle: Using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press

"Secrets of the Creative Brain" and Fine Arts PLCs

Nancy Andreasen's Secrets of the Creative Brain article in The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/06/secrets-of-the-creative-brain/372299/) was widely posted on Twitter this week.  Dr. Andreasen is one of our most respected creativity researchers, with expertise in creative writing, psychology, and neuroscience.

By her own admission, Andreasen studies what she calls Big C creativity - the processes and products of our most distinguished creative geniuses.  This is in contrast to Little C creativity, which might be described as the creativity inherent in all of us.  Andreasen is also unusual in the field in that she writes extensively about the role of mental illness in creativity.  This article delves into that topic, and interested readers can find an even more thorough treatment of the subject in Andreasen's The Creative Brain:  The Science of Genius.

As a fine arts educator, I am skeptical about making a qualitative distinction between Big C and Little C.  I'd like to think that creativity lives on a spectrum, and that Big C geniuses are simply better at creativity than average people.  I am sympathetic to Sir Ken Robinson's contention that creativity is the exclusive province of neither special people (such as geniuses), nor special activities (e.g., the arts).  I'd also like to believe that educators can enhance creativity without bringing on mental illness.

I am concerned that by focusing on genius and insanity as creative necessities, we reinforce the Muse myth.  In The Myths of Creativity:  The Truth About How Innovative Companies and People Generate Great Ideas, David Burkus disabuses us of many traditional notions about creativity, including the divine inspiration myth.  While I am aware that creative geniuses often describe their process as something like an out-of-body experience, I am reminded of the quip that artists are never more creative than when they are writing their autobiographies.

So, what can fine arts educators learn from Andreasen's work?  To be fair, The Creative Brain includes a chapter called "Building Better Brains," and musical study is included in her recommendations.  While Andreasen is focused on Big C, she is also aware that education can improve Little C.  In Secrets of the Creative Brain, Andreasen also asserts that "creative people are better at recognizing relationships, making associations and connections, and seeing things in an original way - seeking things that others cannot see."

Fine arts education can enhance these abilities.  Effective arts instruction develops imagination.  It teaches the elaboration of ideas.  It requires persistent problem solving.  It can focus students on those things that Andreasen finds essential to creativity - relationships, associations, connections, and originality.

By all means, let's study and celebrate our creative geniuses.  But we do our students and our society a great disservice when we paint a picture of creativity that requires muses and mental illness.  We can teach creativity, and we must teach creativity.

References:

Andreasen, N. (2005).  The creative brain: The science of genius. New York, NY:  Plume Books

Andreasen, N. (June 25, 2014). Secrets of the Creative Brain. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/06/secrets-of-the-creative-brain/372299/

Burkus, D. (2013). The myths of creativity: The truth about how innovative companies and people generate great ideas. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Capstone Publishing.

A Master Class with Pixar, Part 4 - Hindsight is Not 20-20

We've heard it a thousand times.  Hindsight is 20-20.

Edwin Catmull.  Photo by Deborah Coleman, Pixar

Ed Catmull, co-founder of Pixar, disagrees.  "Hindsight is not 20-20.  Not even close.  Our view of the past, in fact, is hardly clearer than our view of the future" (2014, p. 177).

Catmull describes the cat who no longer sits on a hot stove - but no longer sits on a cold one either.  We tend to over-generalize our learning experiences.  We also have selective memories.  "And we do not always make the right selections.  We build our story - our model of the past - as best we can.  We may seek out other people's memories and examine our own limited records to come up with a better model.  Even then, it is still only a model - not reality" (Catmull, 2014, p. 178).

How many times have we defended the Professional Learning Community process against the past?  Education does have a reputation for being a swinging pendulum.  However, I think Catmull is right in that we keep the memories that reinforce our story. 

I was talking to a veteran teacher about SMART goals, and she made a reference to how "we were doing this thirty years ago."  Her model of reality is that of the reform-weary veteran.  I do not agree with her assessment.  Goals and objectives might date back to Madeline Hunter, if not earlier, but education was famous for having a fixed-time paradigm rather than a fixed-learning one.  Phil Schelecty said that "it used to be that dropouts weren't a problem.  They were a solution.  School ran fine if the right kids dropped out."  Perhaps my hindsight is faulty, but I don't recall that once upon a time, schools were committed to all kids learning at high levels, and provided time and opportunity if they didn't hit the mark right away.

We also suffer from poor hindsight in matters of student discipline.  I often find that punishment proponents have a "heads I win, tails you lose" approach to evaluating the effectiveness of punishment.  If a student is punished, and behavior improves, the cause is attributed to punishment.  If the student doesn't improve, the cause is rarely attributed to the failure of punishment - it is usually attributed to the stubbornness of the student.

What if we took Catmull at his word and acknowledged that our hindsight is faulty?  Wouldn't that change the tone of our school improvement discussions?  Imagine a school improvement presentation that opened with the power of the magician.  Illusions work because our brains fill in the gaps.  We do the same thing with hindsight.  When we acknowledge that everybody's hindsight is faulty, we can have productive conversations about the good old days.  Better yet, we can put the good old days to rest, because we are not moving backward in time.  Today's students don't need yesterday's solutions, and we don't know what tomorrow's solutions are.  All we can do is tap everybody's ideas to maximize creativity, because the future hasn't been made yet.

References
Catmull, E. and Wallace, A. (2014). Creativity, inc.: Overcoming the unseen forces that stand in the way of true inspiration. New York, NY: Random House

A Master Class with Pixar, Part 3 - Using Creativity and Progress to Sell the PLC Process

Who wouldn't want to work at Pixar?

Ed Catmull, Pixar's co-founder, tells us "...we value self-expression here.  This tends to make a big impression on visitors, who often tell me that the experience of walking into Pixar leaves them feeling a little wistful, like something is missing in their work lives - a palpable energy, as feeling of collaboration and unfettered creativity, a sense, not to be corny, of possibility" (2014, p. x).

The Professional Learning Community literature is replete with articles, presentations, and books about motivating reluctant educators.  What is Pixar doing that schools are not?

School improvement must become creative work.

America has a long tradition of educational crisis - real or imagined.  From Sputnik to the Common Core State Standards debate, our educational system is defined by a swinging pendulum of policy and a stalled car of progress.  Student achievement has remained stubbornly mediocre through all the tempests.

No more.  We must issue a clarion call, and arts educators must take a leadership role, because only creative problem solving will overcome educational inertia.  

Catmull teaches us that "If there are people in your organization who feel they are not free to suggest ideas, you lose.  Do not discount ideas from unexpected sources.  Inspiration can, and often does, come from anywhere" (2014, p. 316).

I suspect that arts educators are among the silent geniuses of their buildings.  The arts are engaging and effective.  Students connect to school through the arts.  They find their niche and their voice.  And yet, this is not mere entertainment.  Arts educators teach valuable knowledge, skills, and dispositions.  Students become skilled in a medium.  They learn persistent problem solving.  They learn confidence.  However, because they do not teach math and English, they are not always welcome at the curriculum table.  The fact of the matter is that the "core" subjects would do well to emulate the arts rather than the other way around.

Some schools are turning the tide.  Milwaukee realized that it cannot teach empty chairs, so it decided to return the arts to its schools.  Check out the NPR story at http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/06/23/323033486/to-boost-attendance-milwuakee-schools-revive-art-music-and-gym. (Misspelling of Milwaukee is in the actual URL).

I believe educators want all students to learn at high levels, but they play the blame game when they become disenfranchised.  Creative organizations avoid this.  Catmull teaches us that "If there is more truth in the hallways than in meetings, you have a problem" (2014, p. 317).  Let's re-frame our work as creative problem solving and marshal all our resources.  According to Teresa Amabile, steady progress  on meaningful work is what really motivates people.

Tomorrow's problems won't be solved by yesterday's answers.  Creativity is required.  Arts educators, let's lead the charge to bring creativity to the school's meeting rooms and let's empower our students to be creative so that we may hand them the torch when our time has passed.

References

Amabile, T. and Kramer, S. (2011). The progress principle: Using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press

Catmull, E. and Wallace, A. (2014). Creativity, inc.: Overcoming the unseen forces that stand in the way of true inspiration. New York, NY: Random House