streamlined reflective action research for creative instructional improvement

This article was downloaded by: [University of Reading]On: 19 December 2014, At: 20:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational Action ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/reac20

Streamlined reflective action researchfor creative instructional improvementDon Ambrose a , Kathy Lang a & Marta Grothman aa Rider University , USAPublished online: 12 Apr 2007.

To cite this article: Don Ambrose , Kathy Lang & Marta Grothman (2007) Streamlined reflectiveaction research for creative instructional improvement, Educational Action Research, 15:1, 61-74,DOI: 10.1080/09650790601150840

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650790601150840

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/reac20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/09650790601150840

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09650790601150840

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Educational Action ResearchVol. 15, No. 1, March 2007, pp. 61–74

ISSN 0965-0792 (print)/ISSN 1747-5074 (online)/07/010061–14© 2007 Educational Action ResearchDOI: 10.1080/09650790601150840

Streamlined reflective action research for creative instructional improvementDon Ambrose*, Kathy Lang and Marta GrothmanRider University, USATaylor and Francis LtdREAC_A_215012.sgm10.1080/09650790601150840Educational Action Research0965-0792 (print)/1747-5074 (online)Original Article2007Taylor & Francis151000000March [email protected]

Busy educators find it difficult to work creatively in conditions imposed by ill-conceived, politicallycharged reform initiatives such as the No Child Left Behind Act. In order to keep up with researchfindings, emerging theories and practical recommendations in the creativity literature, they needaccessible, highly condensed distillations of the literature to help them improve their work. Theyalso need simplified investigative strategies to help them select, test and refine creative ideas that arebest suited to their unique classroom settings. Two veteran elementary school educators, a general-ist and a music specialist, used a highly condensed overview of creativity in a streamlined actionresearch initiative. From the process, they gained a broad grasp of creativity concepts, discoveredsome personal creativity strengths and weaknesses, and made some targeted improvements in theirclassrooms.

Keywords: Action research; Creativity; Education reform; Instructional strategies

Introduction

In most western, developed nations, the spotlight of scrutiny is on educators in thepublic education systems. Politicians, pundits and parents demand instructionalimprovement and accountability, with some justification. Unfortunately, the high-stakes-testing accountability measures that accompany these demands often impedecreative instruction because teachers feel pressure to take care of the easily measur-able basics first, and then address creativity with any time and energy they have leftover (Cohen et al., 1999; Cavicchi et al., 2001). The No Child Left Behind (NCLB)legislation in America represents a particularly onerous and insidious, ideologicallydriven set of constraints on teacher creativity (Meier & Wood, 2004; Apple, 2005).

*Corresponding author. Graduate Department, School of Education and Human Services, Collegeof Liberal Arts Education and Sciences, Rider University, 2083 Lawrenceville Road, Lawrenceville,NJ 08648-3099, USA. Email: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

62 D. Ambrose et al.

Driven by neo-liberal ideology (Apple, 2005), the NCLB establishes punitive auditsand inspections of superficial learning under the guise of transformative rhetoric.

Of course, given the heavy demands on teachers in today’s classrooms, there is littleleft over time or energy. Consequently, well-intentioned, talented educators findthemselves assuming technocratic roles, relinquishing autonomy and making incre-mental, easily measured, often trivial improvements. Under these conditions, teacherswith creative inclinations feel compelled to set aside their penchant for bold, creativedecision-making that could enrich students’ motivation and learning.

The rewards of teaching are primarily intrinsic. Some of the best of these rewardsemerge from the open-ended, complex nature of the teaching–learning process thatinvites creative decision-making from both teachers and students. Ideally, teacherswould devour the findings in the creativity literature and transmute these findingsinto creative learning experiences that motivate and enrich their students as well asthemselves. But, given time and accountability pressures, educators must find waysto streamline and simplify their pedagogical innovations while simultaneously ensur-ing that they do not diverge too far from the more pedestrian and often draconianlarge-scale district, state and national reform initiatives.

Most teachers unfortunately find themselves too busy to keep up with develop-ments in creativity research. Nevertheless, there are some useful creativity textbooksthat provide distillations of creative processes applicable to the classroom (forexample, Sternberg & Williams, 1996; Baer, 1997; Davis, 1998; Piirto, 2004; Starko,2005). Combining some of these distillations with the process of action research haspromise for keeping creative instruction alive because condensed readings and actionresearch both help conserve the time and energy of busy practitioners.

A methodology for highly streamlined creative action research

Action research provides a useful way for educators to improve their work by enablingthem to proactively investigate their instructional and decision-making processes, toreflect on those processes and to devise ways to improve them. Action research is afocused method of on-going, reflective and iterative analysis and decision-making inwhich a busy teacher targets one or a few work processes that he or she would like toimprove. After targeting the processes, the teacher-researcher plans and implementssome specific interventions for improvement, monitors the results of the interven-tions, and then makes on-going refinements based on the results of the monitoring(Livingston & Castle, 1989; Oja & Smulyan, 1989; Cochrane-Smith & Lytle, 1993;Keating et al., 1998; Bhattacharya et al., 2000; Ginns et al., 2001). Some formalresearch instruments can be used in the monitoring, but much of the assessment relieson the intuitive, reflective judgment of the experienced professional. Teacherresearchers collect objective data to the extent possible, usually in the form of simpli-fied checklists, journal notations, audiotape, videotape or peer observations. Theintent, however, is not to produce a body of generalizable findings for widespreadconsumption, but to solve specific problems pertaining to the teacher’s own uniquecontext—his or her classroom. The credibility of the process largely rests on the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Action research for creative instruction 63

notion that a committed, informed teacher has more intimate, nuanced knowledge ofthis setting than does anyone else, and he or she can produce credible investigativefindings if guided by targeted questions and a streamlined investigative framework.

As collaborators in an instructional-improvement project, we employed an actionresearch process designed to preserve and enhance creativity in our classrooms. Thescope of improvement initiatives in our schools encompassed much more thancreativity so we had to streamline the process even more than we preferred. Ideally,we would have employed one of the more in-depth treatments of creative teaching(for example, Baer, 1997; Davis, 1998; Piirto, 2004; Starko, 2005) as the basis forour thinking about instructional improvement. But with our time constraints, we hadto find a source that distilled the essence of creative instruction even further. Fortu-nately, a very brief book by Sternberg and Williams (1996) provided a quick readwhile giving a broad overview of possibilities for creative instructional improvement.

In their book, Sternberg and Williams provide 25 thumbnail-sketch recommenda-tions for developing creativity in the classroom. These are outlined in Table 1.

Two of us, public-school teachers Kathy and Marta, used these recommendationsto guide our action research while a university-based investigator, Don, served as anadvisor and process guide. More specifically, we (Kathy and Marta) assessed ourclassrooms for conduciveness to creativity and made specific plans to enhancecreativity in our respective settings. We employed the following action plan to guideour analyses and decisions:

1. Select three of the 25 ‘ways to develop creativity’ outlined by Sternberg and Will-iams that are best addressed in the classroom and briefly describe how they areaddressed.

2. Select three of the 25 ‘ways to develop creativity’ that are least addressed in theclassroom setting and briefly describe how they are neglected or undermined.

3. Select one of the three ways to develop creativity that is least addressed. Use theproductive thinking (brainstorming) process to generate ideas for improvement.Select the best idea from the productive thinking list and develop it into an actionplan for improvement.

4. For a period of at least one month, implement the action plan. Record the resultsin the form of journal notations and use the results to guide on-going reflectionsabout the effectiveness of the plan. Continuously refine classroom processes onthe basis of these reflections. Action research is on-going, so at the end of the timeperiod assess current progress and plan next steps for the future.

Both of these action research initiatives took place in progressive, suburban publicschool districts, one in New Jersey and the other in Pennsylvania. By progressive, wemean districts that are striving to employ constructivist, student-centered classroomprocesses that encourage active learning, as opposed to traditional, teacher-centeredinstruction. The intent is to engage students actively in their own learning as opposedto treating them as passive receptacles for factual information bits. Admittedly, thesedistricts have far to go to reach this ideal, but they are moving toward progressiveconstructivism.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

64 D. Ambrose et al.T

able

1.

Rec

omm

enda

tion

s fo

r de

velo

ping

cla

ssro

om c

reat

ivit

y

A. P

rere

quis

ites

for

cre

ativ

ity

B. B

asic

cre

ativ

ity

tech

niqu

esC

. Tea

chin

g ti

psD

. Avo

idin

g ro

adbl

ocks

to c

reat

ivit

y

1. M

odel

ing

crea

tivi

ty1.

Que

stio

ning

ass

umpt

ions

1. A

llow

ing

tim

e fo

rcr

eati

ve t

hink

ing

1. E

ncou

ragi

ng s

ensi

ble

risk

-tak

ing

2. B

uild

ing

self

-eff

icac

y2.

Def

inin

g an

d re

defi

ning

pro

blem

s2.

Tea

chin

g an

d as

sess

ing

cre

ativ

ity

2. T

oler

atin

g am

bigu

ity

3. P

rom

otin

g th

e ge

nera

tion

of

new

idea

s3.

Rew

ardi

ng c

reat

ive

idea

s an

d pr

oduc

ts3.

Allo

win

g an

d em

brac

ing

mis

take

s

4. C

ross

-fer

tiliz

ing

idea

s4.

Ide

ntif

ying

and

ove

rcom

ing

obst

acle

s

E. A

ddin

g co

mpl

ex, c

reat

ivit

yen

hanc

ing

tech

niqu

esF

. Usi

ng c

reat

ive

role

mod

els

G. E

xplo

ring

env

iron

men

tsH

. Pro

mot

ing

long

-ter

m p

ersp

ecti

ves

1. E

ncou

ragi

ngse

lf-r

espo

nsib

ility

1. P

rovi

ding

pro

file

s of

cre

ativ

epe

ople

1. R

ecog

nizi

ng o

ne’s

fit

wit

h th

e en

viro

nmen

t1.

Gro

win

g cr

eati

vely

ove

r ti

me

2. P

rom

otin

g se

lf-r

egul

atio

n2.

Enc

oura

ging

cre

ativ

e co

llabo

rati

on2.

Dis

cove

ring

exc

item

ent

2. P

rose

lyti

zing

for

cre

ativ

ity

3. D

elay

ing

grat

ific

atio

n3.

Im

agin

ing

othe

r po

ints

of

view

3. S

eeki

ng s

tim

ulat

ing

envi

ronm

ents

4. C

apit

aliz

ing

onst

reng

ths

Not

e. A

dapt

ed w

ith

perm

issi

on f

rom

Ste

rnbe

rg a

nd W

illia

ms

(199

6, p

. 5).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Teachers face high expectations and heavy workloads in both districts. Asexperienced classroom-based teachers both of us feel the extrinsic pressure to meetstandards, yet we value creativity for its intrinsic rewards as well as its potential forinstructional improvement. The following sections describe the results of our actionresearch initiatives. In order to preserve the essence of the reflective process, most ofour action research is reported in first-person format.

Improving creativity in Kathy’s elementary generalist classroom

My work setting is a third-grade classroom in a suburban New Jersey public school:the newest and largest of four elementary schools in the district with a K-5 studentbody of 725. My classroom includes 24 students of varying abilities and interests. Iam responsible for teaching all of the content areas, and the third-grade curriculumis demanding and ever expanding. The New Jersey core curriculum contentstandards, new district programs and the federal NCLB legislation also have addedheavy demands on teacher decision making.

The creativity recommendations best addressed at the outset in my generalist classroom

I believe that I effectively teach the students how to be self-responsible by using myown experiences for reference (see recommendation E-1 in Table 1). The studentsknow that I am going to graduate school and I often discuss my experiences withthem. For example, when I invest less than my best effort in a project, I honestly sharethis with them, and we discuss ways that I can improve my efforts in the future. It isdifficult for students to accept responsibility and they often externalize it, blamingtheir parents for not reminding them about important tasks. I am proud to say that,several months into the school year, the students regularly take responsibility for theirown actions.

Allowing for mistakes is the second creativity recommendation that I addressparticularly well in my classroom (see recommendation D-3 in Table 1). Again, Imodel this for my students by pointing out some of my own mistakes throughoutthe day. Being open about my weaknesses makes me vulnerable, but I feel thatstudents must come to value the learning experiences that come with errors, and Ido not want them falling prey to paralyzed perfectionism. Of course, extraattention to my own mistakes also helps me improve my teaching. Embracingmistakes as learning experiences is making my classroom more of a risk-free zonefor creative thinking.

Building self-efficacy is the third way in which I best nurture creativity in the class-room (see recommendation A-2 in Table 1). Before beginning a lesson, the studentsand I often discuss the difficulty of the pending task, and the value of stretching theircapacities. We employ relaxation techniques and humor to alleviate some of the stressthat comes with challenge. One somewhat humorous approach to building efficacy ismy requirement that students eliminate the word ‘can’t’ from their classroomvocabulary. This reminds them about the importance of positive thinking.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


The creativity recommendations least addressed at the outset in my generalist classroom

Making more connections across the curriculum is one of the creativity recommen-dations in Sternberg and Williams (1996) that I need to address (see recommendationB-4 in Table 1). My students and I could be more creative, and hopefully learn more,if I break down the barriers between disciplines and find more cross-disciplinaryconnective themes.

Another problem is my over-reliance on commercial assessment tools (seerecommendation C-2 in Table 1). I use them primarily to meet district needs forprogrammatic and assessment consistency between classrooms and schools.Commercial, standardized achievement tests, which assess students’ proficiency vis-à-vis subject-area learning objectives, establish guideposts that help teachers maintainsome instructional consistency across the same grade levels. The down side is thatthey tend to promote a uniform approach to instruction that inhibits creativity.

The third area that I often neglect is growing creatively over time (see recommen-dation H-1 in Table 1). Too often, time constraints and the expectation that I shouldpace my instruction to remain on the same page as other teachers at the grade levelpressure me to mechanically move through the curriculum without really exploringwhat it has to offer. I really would like to address students’ interests pertaining to partic-ular aspects of the curriculum. I need to find a better balance between curriculumdemands for pacing content coverage and the need for creative discovery processes.

My selected target for action research

In order to encourage creativity in my teaching, I decided to conduct action researchto enhance creativity in my instructional and assessment strategies. The following ismy brainstormed list of possible strategies for improvement:

1. Collaborate with other third-grade teachers to find out how they are meetingcurriculum objectives.

2. Meet with the other third-grade teachers in my school to discuss alternativemethods of assessment.

3. Discuss instructional and assessment ideas with other teachers in the district,perhaps during professional development days.

4. Discuss forms of assessment with the students and let them generate ideas forassessment.

5. Show students a rubric that is used within the district and have students use thisrubric to self-assess their own work (e.g. a writing rubric). Rubrics are scoringguides that specify criteria for an assignment and clarify what studentperformance would look like at different levels of proficiency for each criterion,from exceptional through proficient, all the way down to weak performance.

6. Engage students in discussions of what they feel is important to assess and helpthem create their own rubrics.

7. Have students meet in groups, both in and out of the classroom, in order topromote creative collaboration.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


8. Encourage students to share their own answers to a question as opposed toguessing what is in the teacher’s head.

9. Meet with the curriculum supervisors to get their advice about appropriate usesfor alternative assessment methods.

10. Ask the media specialist for resources about a particular subject, and have herconduct a few lessons so students benefit from another teaching style.

11. Collaborate with the computer teacher to engage students in the creation of self-designed multimedia projects. Use the results as alternative assessments.

12. Examine all the assessments that are currently being used at the grade level.Further refine the most promising of these.

13. Research multiple intelligences more thoroughly to better understand howstudents learn. Use this information to generate ideas for assessment.

14. Better determine the strengths and weaknesses of my students to find what formsof assessment would be most effective.

15. Discover students’ interests and what they would like to learn about particularcurriculum areas.

16. Ask students to conduct experiments as assessments in place of some written tests.17. Improve the variety of materials and supplies in the classroom.18. Have students create more of their own research questions.19. Encourage students to imagine themselves within the material they are learning

(e.g. imagining themselves in a Lenni Lenape village). Have them explain thethoughts and impressions that emerge from these imaginings.

20. Allow students to create their own problems to solve and allow them more timefor problem-solving.

While I believed that many of these brainstormed ideas would assist me inenhancing creativity in the classroom, I narrowed my focus to item 13, creating amulti-media project. My reasons included the following. First, working with comput-ers in school motivates my students. Second, the project should improve students’computer skills, thereby meeting another curriculum goal while addressing students’creativity. Third, and most important, the multi-media project should allow thestudents to use a variety of resources and creative processes while demonstrating theirknowledge about a particular subject area. The multi-media project involves the stepsof researching information, organizing it into outlines, and then presenting it throughstudent-created sound and graphics. In essence, I thought the project would enableme to assess students’ comprehension of curriculum material while engaging them inhighly creative, intrinsically motivating, skill-building processes.

I conducted this action plan in conjunction with a unit about the solar system.Before I began the unit, I explained this new version of assessment to the students.With my guidance, which was influenced by the district’s curriculum objectives, thestudents generated their own learning objectives for the unit. I asked them to imaginethat they were space explorers writing a scientific report on their findings about aparticular planet. Throughout the unit, students collaborated with one another togenerate ideas and to maintain their focus on project development.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


My students accomplished a lot during this process. In the introductory phases weenjoyed an overview exploration of the solar system, and examined possible learningobjectives. I explained the scope and purpose of the project and briefly discussed theparameters of the computer experiences. We explored aspects of the solar systemthrough the use of various sources, such as videotapes, the science textbook, CD-ROMs and a variety of reading materials. I modeled note-taking strategies so studentscould effectively organize both the content they would acquire and the research ideasthey would generate along the way. Together, we generated ideas for assessment andbrainstormed many interesting subtopics that the project could include. The projectwas ongoing as Don, Marta and I completed this article.

My initial impressions were that the students were highly motivated by theiractive and creative roles in project planning. The opportunity to create a multimediaproject motivated them to learn more about the solar system so they would haveadequate material for project completion. In addition, they had many goodsuggestions for assessment. I was pleased to see how motivated they were to directtheir own learning.

I must admit, however, that it was difficult at first to give up some of my controlover the objectives. When a teacher spends most of her time thinking inside the box,it can be uncomfortable to step outside its borders. My research helped me under-stand that I still can exercise general control over the learning process whiledelegating some of the specifics to my students. Relinquishing some control makesme a more effective educator.

The next steps of this project, and similar future projects, will entail continuedgeneral guidance and closer collaboration with the computer teacher who isinstrumental in the technical aspects of multimedia work. In addition, collaborationwith other third-grade teachers might encourage them to try such projects whileenabling me to capitalize on their suggestions for further refinement. Finally, I hopethat this project will inspire curriculum designers to consider incorporating morealternative assessments when they develop curriculum guides.

Improving creativity in Marta’s music specialist classes

In contrast with Kathy’s work as a generalist with a single group of students, I teachvocal music to many more students from kindergarten through fifth grades. Eachgroup visits my spacious, well-equipped classroom once every six school days for 45minutes. Fourth-level and fifth-level students also attend a one-hour chorus rehearsalonce every six days.

My curriculum engages students in learning to read rhythm and pitch through theKodaly method, which is very useful for helping students master technical musicskills. The curriculum treats other elements of music education as secondary to musicreading. While instructors can be creative with this method when they use it on a day-to-day basis with each group of students, it is difficult to be creative when music isoffered only once a week, as it is in my school. Consequently, a teacher who valuescreativity must make instructional adaptations.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


The creativity recommendations best addressed at the outset in my music specialist classes

I effectively generate creative collaboration in my music classes (see recommendationF-2 in Table 1). Typically, I teach a concept to the class and have students work insmall groups to apply that concept to music in a creative way. For example, if I amteaching about phrases in music, I break students into groups assigned the task ofcreating dances that reflect the different phrases of a song. If we are reviewingdifferent rhythms, students work in small groups to create and perform rhythmiccompositions. Creativity becomes contagious in these group settings. One creativeperson in the group often inspires creative behavior in others, which in turn spreadsto other groups as they observe the innovation and enthusiasm of the first group.

My classroom environment also lends itself to building self-efficacy (see recom-mendation A-2 in Table 1). Music is performance-related, so students are oftenfearful of making mistakes. Consequently, I work hard to create a safe environment,and often hold classroom discussions on this topic. In spite of our best efforts, somestudents still are afraid to take a risk, so I start with tasks in which the risk of failureis small and build from there. Students gradually develop propensities for risk-takingand stronger senses of efficacy.

I also have been successful in moving from an excessive emphasis on a predeter-mined product to a stronger emphasis on creative, collaborative processes (seerecommendation F-2 in Table 1). When I first began to employ cooperative learning,students’ grades strongly depended on a specific outcome at the end of the activity. Iwas unhappy with the way in which this stifled creativity. Students simply would workquickly and mechanically to complete the task, and would become frustrated withmore creative group members who were holding up the process. Now I go beyond theproduct to emphasize effort and creative process in my assessment. Consequently,creatively engaged groups are recognized for their progress toward a worthy goal evenif they have not yet reached the goal. If a group has worked hard but has not generateda positive outcome, we have a brief class meeting about why this happened and howthey can improve.

The creativity recommendations least addressed at the outset in my music specialist classes

I need to improve significantly in the areas of defining and redefining problems andidea generation (see recommendations B-2 and B-3 in Table 1). I do not allowstudents to choose their own projects, and I do not let them change direction in themiddle of a project. This lack of choice also obviously precludes opportunities forstudents to evaluate their choices in a meaningful manner. It is difficult to sustain aproject for more than a couple of lessons due to the large gap between lessons and mylimited time with each group of students. Consequently, there is little opportunity forchoice or for changing the direction of short-range projects. In addition, provision ofchoice and project flexibility requires time for the teacher to get to know more aboutstudents’ interests and to establish routines. My infrequency of contact with eachgroup is a big inhibiting factor.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


I also have failed to grow creatively (see recommendation H-1 in Table 1).Students tire of the same old routine in my classroom and become complacent. Myearlier attempts to promote creativity in my classes now seem to have ossified intovariations on well-worn themes. I am stuck for new ideas and feel that my curriculumhas become excessively mechanistic. The logic of skill building by teaching one noteat a time has its place. Students will leave elementary school able to read music. Butwill they leave with a love of music, with an appreciation for sound and what itexpresses? Will they seek out musical opportunities in the future and approach themwith any sort of gusto? Finally, I have failed to grow creatively because I havedifficulty giving up control. Use of cooperative groups was a big step for me.

My selected target for action research

I felt the need to explore some of the instructional models and strategies to which Ihave been exposed recently in graduate classes. Some of these seemed particularlyconducive to creativity. Moreover, I wanted to grow creatively in a general sense bycontinuing to collect instructional ideas in an eclectic way. Consequently, my actionresearch became a broad search for strategies, augmented by informal testing of theefficacy of selected strategies. The following is my brainstormed list of possiblestrategies for improvement:

1. Try each new instructional model I have learned in at least one lesson plan.2. Analyze each lesson plan for elements that can be revised to allow for more

creativity.3. Explore different questioning techniques.4. Actively solicit instructional ideas from other teachers, both within and outside

my specialization.5. With appropriate guidance, have students design some of the music lessons.6. Develop some interdisciplinary projects in which I can collaborate with other

teachers.7. Look for opportunities to conserve instructional time so I can devote more time

to creative projects. Perhaps I have more available time than I thought.8. Pay more attention and actively solicit ideas during professional workshops.9. Allow students to create physical movements to accompany a concert song.

10. Have students visualize the stories and concepts embedded in the songs they aresinging in chorus sessions.

11. Add appropriate expressive elements, such as dynamics and tempo changes, tosome of the musical selections.

12. Find out more about my school district’s vision, direction and initiatives in othercurricular areas and consider these as springboards for my own creative thinkingabout music teaching.

13. Assess the current music curriculum for compatibility with the district’s vision.14. Meet with the head of curriculum to explore his ideas about creativity in the

music curriculum.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


15. Visit the classrooms of other music teachers to observe their best practices, andto jump-start my own processes of creative association pertaining to creativemethods.

16. Have students take notes in the form of pictures: something like watered-downversions of the visual-metaphorical symbolism to which I have been exposed ingraduate classes.

17. Model the use of metaphor to capture the essence of music pieces.18. Use mind maps to make my thinking and planning more open-ended.

Many of the items in my brainstormed list encouraged me to gather and test instruc-tional models that I had not previously employed in my music classroom. The initialphases of this action research process reinforced my belief that a broad, eclecticapproach to finding and testing new methods would encourage both me and mystudents to grow creatively.

I started the exploration by testing the integrative model in which students forminvestigative teams, each charged with using student-generated questions to guidetheir research into a specific aspect of a topic. After carrying out their research, eachgroup maps its findings onto a large matrix that provides a graphic organizer forcomparison and contrast of all the groups’ discoveries. In the final phase of theprocess, the students discover patterns of similarity and difference in the collectedinformation. My class used the integrative model to gain an overview of the fourmusical instrument families, with each group of students researching one of thefamilies. I was excited by the high level of student motivation during this process.

I also experimented with my questioning techniques, with some success. For exam-ple, in years past while my third-level students studied the four families of musicalinstruments, they viewed a filmstrip and filled in a guided study worksheet becausethe material is somewhat advanced for them. After going over the material theyproduced in the worksheet, I typically used actual instruments to demonstrate someof the similarities and differences between instrument families and used this as thebasis for a lecture on the families. During my action research, I made a very slightadjustment in an effort to discern the effects of modifications to my questioning strat-egies. Instead of simply demonstrating and lecturing, I asked the students to ‘Tell mesomething you learned today that I can show you on my instrument.’ They most defi-nitely went from being passive learners to being active participants in the learningprocess.

My future plans for continuation of the research include the use of mind maps,both teacher generated and student generated. These will serve as conceptualorganizers to help students derive and remember musical concepts and processeswhen exposed to exemplary musical performances such as those of the PhiladelphiaOrchestra. I expect that the maps will give students better guidance than my usualdiscussions about how to behave and what to listen for in the performances.

Also in the future, the chorus is performing a song that is particularly beautiful andlyric. I intend to have chorus members visualize the text and then attempt to adddynamics and tempo changes to help them better appreciate and perform the music.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Finally, all of my lesson plans are on my computer. I plan to go through each of thelessons for the coming year and contemplate changes that would encourage creativethought. I do each lesson more than once with different groups of students, so I willhave opportunities to reflect on processes, refine them and record my newlydiscovered best practices in my lesson-plan computer files.

Patterns and opportunities in streamlined creative action research

The need to provide a safe atmosphere for students’ risk-taking is one pattern thatemerged from both action research processes. This was most evident in our (Kathy’sand Marta’s) assessments of our best creative practices. Obviously, we were sensitiveto the creativity suppressing effects of extrinsic influences and sanctions before ouraction-research experiences. Our exposure to the recommendations in Sternberg andWilliams (1996) simply reinforced this awareness.

Final comments from the leader of the exploratory introductory graduate course that initiated Marta’s and Kathy’s studies

I was interested in the inclination of both Kathy and Marta to employ broad-scopeexploratory approaches to creative improvement as opposed to selection of isolated,specific and clearly defined improvement initiatives. Marta’s eclectic experimentationwith diverse models and strategies was broader in scope and less focused than Kathy’smultimedia project, but both initiatives incorporated diverse strategies with potentialfor encouraging students’ creativity. This could be due to the broad, exploratorynature of the graduate course work that inspired the action research projects. One ofthe courses entailed hands-on experiences with a wide range of instructional modelsand strategies. The open-ended exploration also could be due to the omnivorousnature of educators who are inclined to actively and creatively improve their work. Inany case, an initial broad-scope approach is consistent with the concern for discoveryand the capacious nature of problem-finding processes that are described in thecreativity literature (for example, Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi, 1976; Treffinger et al.,2000). It is probably wise for veteran educators to employ broad initial approaches intheir explorations of creativity, and then select those that are most appropriate for theunique demands of their students and their classroom contexts. Beginning teachersare more likely to benefit from the guidance of more specific, precisely definedinvestigations.

Finally, it is noteworthy that both Kathy and Marta selected ‘growing creativelyover time’ as a weakness. The recommendation to grow one’s own creativity pertainsto the notion that we cannot effectively encourage others to be creative if we are notcreative ourselves. Also, it implies that creativity is a life-long process of personalexploration driven by interests and problems unique to each individual. Professionalswho are caught up in the mechanics of their work often approach each problem theyconfront from the same mind set, using the same conceptual tools. In contrast,professionals with a creative approach to their work tend to look for innovative angles

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


to problem solution, and collect diverse new ideas that they test and refine on the job.This latter approach holds the most promise for long-term improvement, but itrequires an open-minded, ambiguity embracing attitude. Part of this attitude is recog-nition by professionals that their work environments are too complex to ever masterfully. This is especially true of educators who must cope with 25 active, ever-chang-ing, complex minds that are shaped by a multilayered, multidimensional and unpre-dictable environment. Consequently, educators’ work performance never will beperfect. Assuming that they are caring and committed professionals, this motivatesthem to continually seek improvement, which requires them to grow their owncreativity throughout their careers.

The teacher researchers’ desire to grow their own creativity also may derivesomewhat from the confinement they feel from reform initiatives such as the NCLB,which establish punitive environments, encourage emphases on superficial learningand de-professionalize educators (see Meier & Wood, 2004; Apple, 2005). In orderto be creative, educators need professional autonomy. They need to work in contextsthat afford them some of the creativity-generating contextual conditions thatSternberg and Williams (1996) recommend for student creativity. They needadministrators and policy-makers to tolerate ambiguity, risk-taking and mistakes incurriculum design and implementation while promoting instructional ideageneration, collaborative interdisciplinary connection-making and appreciation ofdiverse viewpoints.

The process of action research, combined with streamlined, easy-to-digestdistillations of promising creativity-enhancing classroom practices, can enable busyeducators to keep the creative spark alive, both in their students and in themselves.This can take place when teachers use the creativity distillations to informally andintuitively assess pros and cons in their current practices, brainstorm lists of possibleinstructional improvement initiatives, select and implement the most promising ofthese initiatives, continuously assess the evolution of the initiatives, and use theirassessments to artfully refine their work. Without proactive approaches to creativeinstruction, today’s increasingly directive teacher-accountability systems may confineeducators to ever-more mechanical and technocratic roles in the future.

References

Apple, M. W. (2005) Audit cultures, commodification, and class and race strategies in education,Policy Futures in Education, 3, 378–399.

Baer, J. (1997) Creative teachers: creative students (Needham Heights, MA, Allyn & Bacon).Bhattacharya, B., Cowan, J. & Weedon, E. (2000) Action research: a means to more effective

teaching and learning, Innovations in Education and Training International, 37, 314–322.Cavicchi, E., Lucht, P. & Hughes-McDonnell, F. (2001) Playing with light, Educational Action

Research, 9, 25–49.Cochrane-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1993) Inside outside: teacher research and knowledge (New York,

Teachers College Press).Cohen, L. M., Higgins, K. M. & Ambrose, D. (1999) Educators under siege: the killing of the

teaching profession, The Educational Forum, 63, 127–137.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Davis, G. A. (1998) Creativity is forever (4th edn) (Dubuque, IA, Kendall Hunt).Getzels, J. W. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976) Concern for discovery in the creative process, in: A.

Rothenberg & C. R. Hausman (Eds) The creativity question (Durham, NC, Duke UniversityPress).

Ginns, I., Heirdsfield, A., Atweh, B. & Watters, J. J. (2001) Beginning teachers becomingprofessionals through action research, Educational Action Research, 9, 111–133.

Keating, J., Diaz-Greenberg, R., Baldwin, M. & Thousand, J. (1998) A collaborative actionresearch model for teacher preparation programs, Journal of Teacher Education, 49, 381–390.

Livingston, C. & Castle, S. (Eds) (1989) Teachers and research in action (Washington, DC,National Educational Association).

Meier, D. & Wood, G. (Eds) (2004) Many children left behind: how the No Child Left Behind Act isdamaging our children and our schools (Boston, Beacon Press).

Oja, S. N. & Smulyan, L. (1989) Collaborative action research: a developmental approach (New York,Falmer Press).

Piirto, J. (2004) Understanding those who create (3rd edn) (Scottsdale, AZ, Great Potential Press).Starko, A. J. (2005) Creativity in the classroom: schools of curious delight (Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence

Erlbaum).Sternberg, R. J. & Williams, W. M. (1996) How to develop student creativity (Alexandria, VA,

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development).Treffinger, D., Isaksen, S. & Dorval, B. (2000) Creative problem solving: an introduction (Sarasota,

FL, Center for Creative Learning).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f R

eadi

ng]

at 2

0:50

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

streamlined reflective action research for creative instructional improvement

Documents