Divergent Thinking Across the Curriculum

Draft Ideas 2-5-11

What is Divergent Thinking?

• Thinking that moves away from one idea in new directions, often leading to innovative ideas and answers.

• Generating many new ideas from one idea.• It’s often contrasted with “Convergent Thinking” which

involves pulling together information from many sources into one idea.

• Convergent thinking is often associated with “getting the right answer” while divergent thinking is associated with developing new or unexpected answers.

Role in Creativity

• Divergent thinking tests are often used as a measure of creativity, as reported by Kuhn and Holling (2009).

• This may have been due to the difficulty early on to think about ways to study creativity in a laboratory. – “Once established, tests of divergent thinking became, for

the sake of convenience, tests of creativity; and findings using these scales were often discussed, without badly needed qualifying remarks, as if applicable to creativity in general.” (Arne & Riarne, 2010)

Role in Creativity• Newer research suggests that divergent thinking is not a

definition of or synonym for creativity, but likely a predictor of creativity.

• Dineen, Samuel, and Livesey (2005) suggest that creativity requires both divergent/productive thinking, leading to novel ideas, “and convergent/reproductive thinking, to ensure appropriateness.”(Reported in Kampylis et al., 2009)

• A review of the literature on 72 experiments linking creativity – and divergent thinking specifically – to brain activity suggests that divergent and convergent thinking are integrally connected, and usefulness in considering them in an “either or” fashion may be limited. (Arne & Riarne, 2010)

Role in Creativity

Divergent thinking ability is not equivalent to creative ability, but it is indicative of the

potential for creative performance according to Runco (2001. p. 346).

http://www.dixonsclass.com/Lissa/4.%20Flexibility%20and%20Originality%20in%20Children%27s%20Divergent%20Thinking..pdf

Brainstorming

• Show a brainstorming map

“What if” Questions?

• Photo of Students questioning

Re-imagining objects

• Photo of Using a hairbrush as a microphone or something

Beyond Creativity

• Research by Kuhn and Holling (2009) suggests all cognitive abilities studied, except memory, were statistically significant predictors of divergent thinking.

• Processing speed was most strongly related to divergent thinking. (Strict time limits on the assessments might have influenced this finding.)

• Some gender differences were seen – girls showing more divergent thinking – although results were mixed, suggesting that gender differences may vary with social environment.

Neurocognitive Basis• Divergent thinking – accepted as just one component of creativity,

itself seems to be composed of different cognitive or mental processes.

• EEG studies to not confirm an often reported special role of the right hemisphere in divergent thinking. (Arne & Riarne, 2010) In fact they find no evidence for laterality.

• A closer look at frequency ranges associated with types of brain functioning reveals little consistent data to shed light on the process; it’s described as “hit and miss” by Arne & Riarne (2010).

• Functional neuroimaging studies consistently report activation of prefrontal regions, however attempts at further localization have pointed to a wide variety of areas, further supporting the idea that a wide range of mental processes are involved (Arne & Riarne, 2010).

• Arne & Reiarn conclude that a multitude of processes and brain regions are involved in the computation of ideational combinations (2010).

• Further, before we can better understand the neurocognitive basis of creativity and related skills – including divergent thinking – there is a need for current models on the neural basis of creativity to be developed further (2010).

Measuring Divergent Thinking

• Number of ideas• Originality of Ideas• Ideational flexibility – a heterogeneous pool of

ideas

Development of Divergent Thinking Ability

• Ideation is a cognitive process, but independent of IQ; effort and strategy play a role, as concluded by Runco (2001.)

• Runco also posed the question of the role of specific stimuli – audio, visual, mixed, three-dimensional (2001.)

Classroom Implications

• While progress continues on the research front in order to understand what mental processes underlie creative thinking skills, they continues to be a focus in the classroom:

The Learning Experience

• Four key conditions for creative learning are proposed by Lucas (2001). Below, we’ve suggested links between each of these and Brain Targets proposed by Hardiman:

• challenge (BT 5)• appropriate feedback (BT 6)• the ability to live with uncertainty (BT1)• and the elimination of negative stress (BT 1)

Creating the Right Environment • An international study for IBM analyzed factors important

for creating the right working environment for stimulating and sustaining creativity. They identified three things: – Increasing levels of local empowerment, and this was greatly

influenced by the degree of Risk-Taking, Freedom, Idea-Time, and Debate.

– Focusing more on consumer needs (rather than technology) when driving innovation, and this was greatly influenced by higher levels of Idea-Support and Freedom.

– -Approaching, rather than avoiding, ambiguous innovation projects, and this was influenced mostly by reduced levels of Conflict and higher levels of Risk-Taking and Idea-Time.

BT-1

• To the extent that creativity and divergent thinking are related, these conditions for creativity seem to translate effectively into a school environment in the following ways: – Support student leadership in identifying challenges

and inquiries– Focus on answers and products rather than processes

to get there– Embrace ambiguous questions by encouraging risk-

taking and providing enough time for exploration.

Other BT 1 Considerations

BT- 5: Teaching for Application

• The Arts

BT- 5: Teaching for Application

• The Sciences

BT- 5: Teaching for Application

• The Humanities

BT-6 Evaluation

• Diagnostic assessment was held to increase learner confidence and intrinsic motivation, leading to increased creativity, according to research by Dineen, Samuel, & Livesey (2005).

• Summative assessments, however, undermined the creative process.– ‘Students haven’t got the feeling throughout the course

that they can develop and actually go off down blind alleys ... they’re much more constantly under surveillance’ according to a study subject reported in Dineen, Samuel, Livesey (2005).