Why are children generally considered more creative/imaginative? Despite adults having more experiences to draw from!

I really liked this week's readings on creativity and imagination! Vygotsky offers an interesting perspective on how creativity can also be seen as an everyday and scientific concept. He says everyone uses creativity and imagination and that it is not limited to a few individuals who propose inventions and discoveries. It is in some way our ability to make connections, especially between things that are seemingly unrelated. He also says that richer the person's experiences, social interactions, richer their imagination and ability to make connections (since the elements used to be creative are often rooted in reality). However, in the society, why are children then considered as the ultimate expression of imagination and creativity in most cases? Adults definitely have more experiences, maturity and knowledge, but why then do we place limits on our imagination?
                                        Image result for adult vs child creativity

I think Vygotsky spends some time answering this question but not all. Our education system I think is partially the answer. Most often there is an element of evaluation and judgement in our education. We are expected to be in a particular way and I think that definitely limits our imagination. Vygotsky gives the example of how we expect students to write essays in a particular way, use a specific type of language and write on a topic chosen by the instructor, not the student. There is also a lot of emphasis on reason and logic, especially as we grow up. And creativity sometimes need not have a well accepted logic, especially at first glance. Moreover, I think there is a lot of pressure to perform and competition (comparisons), that it limits the freedom of thoughts/ideas, since the focus is on meeting societal standards.  This is especially true in India because there are so many people and limited resources, so everyone is part of the race. Moreover, due to the British system of education, it primarily focuses on mass producing individuals who are similar to each other and suitable for the industries as workers. I am also wondering if this is why ''functional fixedness'' is higher in adults? where we are taught/trained to see specific uses of objects, while children use various objects for different purposes (especially in play)? When I look at my niece playing or drawing, it feels like she is in her own world, it almost reminds me of Csikszentmihalyi's concept of flow, where she is so absorbed and happy in what she is doing, that in itself becomes rewarding.

I am still wondering what Vygotsky would have to say about flow? or even the Ah ha moment that is commonly cited in creativity literature (that happens after incubation)? 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ZPD vs. Scaffolding

Reading Wood et al.'s (1976) original article in which they introduce the metaphor of "scaffolding" really makes clear how different this is from ZPD.  There is no collaboration (perhaps a better word is co-operation) between the expert and the child... the expert guides the child's actions through controlling their immediate problem-solving experience. The model of scaffolding assumes that the expert is, in a sense, all-knowing in relation to the problem and is not an active participant in the actions of problem-solving.  Vygotsky's theory really seems to require a much more dynamic social interaction or series of social interactions. I also question to what extent a tutor operating in this way can engage with a child's everyday and scientific concepts in a meaningful way. Having read Smagorinsky's (2018) article once more, it is hard not to be convinced of his position. He confirmed with Anna Stetsenko at CUNY (who earned her PhD in Psychology at Mosco...
Read more

Can scientific concepts be taught as everyday concepts? My middle school physics teacher

Image
I began reading the chapter on the development of scientific concepts and it was interesting to see how Vygotsky differentiates between scientific and everyday concepts. Scientific concepts are simply learned or received in completed form (most commonly introduced as a term along with its definition) which in turn leads to understanding, learning, and comprehension. Whereas, everyday concepts do not have a formal definition, need not be universal but still helps us understand the functioning of the society and the world in which we live. When reflecting on all this, I was reminded of a middle school physics teacher I had (Sadly, we had her only for one year), who would not introduce new concepts as 'words' and definitions but instead, would begin class with a demonstration. One of which is depicted below. I so vividly remember her explaining inertia through this method:                                 ...
Read more

Learning from teaching vs Impactful experiences from child’s play

I remember very little about my past schooling and I am not sure if it is because I have this belief that we should spend little time reminiscing on the past and looking towards the future or is it that my classroom experiences were all “traditional” and are not stored in my active memory. The latter would seem applicable as I really do remember more key events from my “play times” but very few from the formal school settings. Lev S. Vygotsky states: “In play a child is always above his average age, above his daily behavior; in play it is as though he were a head taller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifying glass, play contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form; in play it is as though the child were trying to jump above the level of his normal behavior” (1967, 16). The interpretation of the above quote can and has taken many forms but I do not agree that children learn more from play and interactions with their peers than in a formal environment. My ...
Read more