This chapter considers how creativity has been conceived within international educational policy. It begins by tracing how creativity was aligned to innovation as a key theoretical construct within the Knowledge-Based Economy thesis. It illustrates how this KBE thesis drew on key creativity discourses which emerged in the late nineteenth-century educational critiques. The chapter then discusses how the OECD’s promotion of this understanding of creativity within the second phase of its policy-making reduced both creativity and education itself to a narrow vocationalist understanding. The chapter identifies a third phase within OECD policy: the ‘humanist turn’. Within this humanistic pivot, creativity is reconciled with imagination to act as a bulwark against contemporary social and economic insecurity and to distinguish humans from machines. It ends by using the OECD’s attempts to measure creativity within this third phase to highlight how this conception of creativity is both theoretically inconsistent and practically unrealisable.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Creativity and International Education

  • Mark Connolly

摘要

This chapter considers how creativity has been conceived within international educational policy. It begins by tracing how creativity was aligned to innovation as a key theoretical construct within the Knowledge-Based Economy thesis. It illustrates how this KBE thesis drew on key creativity discourses which emerged in the late nineteenth-century educational critiques. The chapter then discusses how the OECD’s promotion of this understanding of creativity within the second phase of its policy-making reduced both creativity and education itself to a narrow vocationalist understanding. The chapter identifies a third phase within OECD policy: the ‘humanist turn’. Within this humanistic pivot, creativity is reconciled with imagination to act as a bulwark against contemporary social and economic insecurity and to distinguish humans from machines. It ends by using the OECD’s attempts to measure creativity within this third phase to highlight how this conception of creativity is both theoretically inconsistent and practically unrealisable.