¶ … Classroom Imagine a classroom like that straight out of Dickens' Hard Times, where the teacher does nothing but insist upon facts! "Facts alone are wanted in life," writes Dickens (3). Facts are all that matter, are all that the children need to remember. There is no need for creativity, no reinforcement of the imagination. And as a result the children are stifled and stymied. Their creative impulse is crushed beneath the iron-heeled boot of the instructor who insists over and over again on facts and nothing but the recitation of facts. He denies the children that very fundamental aspect of growth, which is the creativity. Such a situation is one that every teacher aims to avoid, at least one should hope. But just why is creativity so important to the learning process?

Creativity is important because it is a "precious" and "inexhaustible resource" as Richard Florida states. Moreover, it is fostered by other creative people, which, as Florida goes on to point out, is why cities are typically some of the most creative places. This knowledge should be implemented in the classroom, which is in a way like a mini-polis. The students are citizens of this mini-polis and the teacher is like the mayor. Everyone works together to follow the rules of the classroom with the goal of the classroom being the common good of all involved -- namely that education takes place and everyone rises as a result of the lessons studied and learned. What happens if some in the class decided to break away and be creative -- that is, follow the beat of their own drum? That depends on how the teacher or the class is set up to respond. Does the teacher reward creativity or punish it? Does the class know how to utilize the creative impulse and guide it towards a positive end, or does it merely become enchanted by the impulse and never really use it to produce anything whole or practical? There can be so many different answers to these questions depending upon the range of one's experience -- but in essence the idea is clear: creativity is a great blessing for any society but it must be put to good use; it must be appreciated; and it must be encouraged. There is a lot of untapped potential in all of us -- but if our instructors are only interested in getting us to perform rote memorization tasks in which we are able to spout off facts and never given to learn the creative aspect of our own natures then we as a society will never grow, will never create wonders, and will sorely disappoint the next generation when they come of age and ask what their fathers did for them in their day and age when it was their time to make something of themselves.

Creativity is not just a gift -- it is a duty. We are responsible to ourselves and each other in terms of being creative: we are a species that procreates: we make life, we make laws, we make art, we make entertainment, we make buildings and cities and parks. We essentially make the world around us. But we do that by learning the basic rules of the world, which are in effect created too. So when we create we mirror the greater creative impulse of -- call it, the universe, God, nature -- whatever you like -- but call it the greater creative impulse one must, because it is that which we echo.

Thus, why not bring more creativity into the curriculum? Why not free up teachers and allow them to approach their students in terms of lessons and studies in a unique and individualistic manner -- a way which works for them and for their students? Why must everyone follow the same tune when it is common sense that everyone is different and that everyone has his or her talents? A curriculum should be a guide -- not a stone. It should be like a light in the dark -- but it should not serve as a bushel that puts out the light. Every teacher is hired for a reason -- because there is something in him or her that shows a light inside, and a desire to spread that light to others. If that is there, surely there is also a method in there too -- a natural way forward, a creative way forward. A curriculum can help to guide that way, but should it not also allow for some freedom to follow different, sudden and unexpected courses that arise in every class?...

Should these opportunities to deepen our understanding of ourselves and the world in which we leave be shunned because they are not on the curriculum? Or should they rather be embraced and appreciated for what they are -- opportunities to relate lessons to other experiences, to relate real life to whatever lesson brought us to its doorstep, no matter where the door takes us?
This is what creativity in the classroom is all about, and it should -- it must -- be given a chance. Without it, we are back in Hard Times, with Dickens' cruel task master insisting that the world is bleak and full of black and white and nothing else. The reality is -- and Dickens well knew it -- that the world is full of colors -- wonderful, delightful colors, because the creative impulse throughout the world made it so and we delight in it for a reason. There is a transcendent quality in the creative impulse that students and teachers alike can follow and thereby embrace the one, the good, the true, and the beautiful that the ancient philosophers deemed the noblest of all ends (Plato).

Plato not only encouraged creativity among his "students" he insisted upon it, arguing that this was the only way to enjoy the "life well-lived" -- which was happiness. He engaged them in creative dialogue, bouncing questions off them and allowing them to pursue lines of inquiry that were not his own. But he always managed to adhere to a line of consistency, in that a thing could not be true and false at the same time -- that truth does not contradict itself. This principle guided him and his students -- but along the way there were all sorts of creative outbursts that made the "Dialogues" so popular for so many generations of readers and students afterwards. In fact, the Socratic method of teaching is inspired by Plato's Dialogues and it is thanks to this allowance of creativity by the first great classical teacher, Socrates, that we are able to even have a discussion about the power of creativity in the classroom in the first place. Had Socrates not insisted upon creativity, and encouraged his students to assert themselves, to ask questions, and to try to understand their own natures and the nature of the physical and metaphysical world, then it is quite possible that none of us would be here today. Socrates set the tone and standard -- and it is up to us to remember that tone and that standard and not get lost in the modern era's love of the bureaucratic method, which does nothing but insist upon facts, facts, and more facts.

John Calhoun says that we need to get "more creative about creativity" and he is right: creativity is something that happens both inside and outside the box -- but it should not kept in one or the other. The box should be seen as something fluid, so that creativity happens like osmosis, with people interacting with others both within and without the classroom. There is no reason for students within the walls of the class to be afraid of the outside world or to fear upsetting others. We learn to respect ourselves and others through interaction: interaction necessitates risk. That is just the way it is.

But that risk cannot be taken unless we allow it to happen -- and every creative action is that way -- even the act of devising a curriculum. Why should it be accepted that because one curriculum is made by one set of individuals that it is the best curriculum for everyone? Everyone is different with different needs, and while basics and mechanics can and need to be taught in order for creativity to have some tools, the tools should not be over-emphasized to the detriment of the substance of the artist -- the creator -- the student and/or teacher within (and without) each classroom. It should be remembered that Socrates had no curriculum but the truth and that what we know as curriculum today only came about later, after a homogenization process took hold and like-minded persons…