Creative Intensive » Education

From Dracula to Hedy Lamarr – The Many Catalysts of Creativity

admin — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 06:30:18 +0000

NPR Correspondent Ira Flatow Presents

From Dracula to Hedy Lamarr – The Many Catalysts of Creativity

Tuesday, Nov. 13, 6-7pm
Location: The Avaya Auditorium, The University of Texas at Austin (first floor of the Applied Computational Engineering and Sciences building).

Ira Flatow, host of National Public Radioâ€™s â€œTalk of the Nation: Science Fridayâ€ show, will give a talk about how scientists, artists and others discover and develop their creativity at The University of Texas at Austin. The talk is sponsored by the Braden Distinguished Speakers Series of the Cockrell School of Engineering.

“Some people were born inventors, while others find their creative sides later in life,” says Flatow, whose two books include one on the stories behind great inventions. During his presentation, he will demonstrate the creative process involved in the discoveries and inventions of scientists, technologists and other professionals, such as musicians and writers. He will also describe how news and current events act as creative catalysts. Flatow earned an engineering degree at the State University of New York, and covered the first Earth Day as his introduction to science journalism. A science correspondent at NPR since 1971, he also has numerous TV credits, including six years as host and writer for the Emmy Award-winning â€œNewtonâ€™s Appleâ€ on PBS. His writings have appeared in publications ranging from Womanâ€™s Day to American Lawyer to The Los Angeles Times. Flatow also founded Talking Science, a non-profit organization that educates the public on science through the media.

Should be super interesting, will report back after the talk…

And here’s Ira talking to Nancy Andreasen, Chair of Psychiatry and Director of the Mental Health Clinic Research Center, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA on – Creativity, Learned or Innate?Â

Reward, Intrinsic Motivation and Creativity

admin — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:09:53 +0000

Article Reviewed: Hennessey B, Amabile T. Reward/Reality, Intrinsic Motivation and Creativity. American Psychologist. June 1998:674.

Hypothetical Conversation on Creativity, Reward and Motivation.

By Senior Editors Emily Hardy & Tim Ogletree

Imagine this…

INT. COFFEE SHOP – DAY
Robert Eisenberger sits alone, taking up a table for four. He hunches over his laptop with frustration riddling his face. Beth Hennessey and Teresa Amabile enter through a side door and get in line. Eisenberger notices them and waves.

EISENBERGER
Beth! Teresa!

BETH
Oh, hey there Robert. How are you?

EISENBERGER
Iâ€™m doing well, thank you.

TERESA
Are you working on something?

EISENBERGER
Yes, actually. My associate Judy Cameron and I have just recently wrapped up an experiment on the psychology of creativity. I’m just organizing our report.

TERESA
Wow, what theory were you testing?

EISENBERGER
Well, the experiments themselves were based on our argument that creativity and originality can be heightened by the suggestion of a reward or encouragement. It could also be termed Intellectual Property. Although, we canâ€™t take total credit for the idea. Rewarding creativity and innovative ideas can be dated back to 400 BC.

BETH
Interesting. What types of activities or tasks did you have your subjects perform?

EISENBERGER
We divided our subjects into three age groups, then gave each group a separate activity, such as filling in a circle, or generating a word, and told them that the best of each group would receive a small prize.
Would you like to sit down? Nobodyâ€™s with me.

BETH
Of course, thanks.

Beth and Teresa take their seats opposite Eisenberger.

TERESA
So, what did you find?

EISENBERGER
Our results as a whole backed up our theory.

BETH
I donâ€™t mean to come down on your work, but donâ€™t those seem like relatively simple tasks?

EISENBERGER
Well…

BETH
I mean, did you test anything that required a more advanced form of creativity, such as art or storytelling? Music or song writing? Your tests just seem a little too basic.

TERESA
I agree. Honestly, I donâ€™t believe that you can bribe or convince someone to be creative. Creativity needs to be intrinsic, it needs to be something from the heart, something desired.

EISENBERGER
Well, offering a reward can stimulate a desire for creativity and originality. It gives them something to look forward to and makes them work harder for what they desire.

TERESA
But thatâ€™s exactly it, they are desiring the reward, not creativity itself.

EISENBERGER
Well, you canâ€™t argue that rewards never positively influence creativity.

BETH
Oh, we arenâ€™t. We agree with that.
There will naturally be some instances where a certain reward or form of congratulations will enhance a simpler form of creativity.

TERESA
We are simply saying that working repeatedly for a reward under common or every day circumstances can be detrimental to both intrinsic motivation as well as creativity. For example, if a teacher were to constantly offer their students rewards or prizes for who can draw the best dragon, then they arenâ€™t drawing for drawingâ€™s sake. They are solely drawing for the prize, whether itâ€™s a cookie or an A or what have you.

EISENBERGER
You drive a convincing argument, I must admit. Iâ€™ll have to share your views with Cameron. But, unfortunately I have a meeting at 3, so I should get going. It was great seeing you both again.

BETH
Certainly, we enjoyed the chat.

TERESA
Yes, thanks for your company. Have a good meeting!

EISENBERGER
Oh, abstract experimental funding, it should be a blast.
Have a good day!

TERESA AND BETH
Ciao.

BETH
Interesting guy, isnâ€™t he?

END SCENE.

Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity

admin — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:14:54 +0000

Article Reviewed: Ruscio J, Whitney D, Amabile T. Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity: Verbal and Behavioral Predictors of Creative Performance. Creativity Research Journal. 1998;11(3):243.

By Senior Editors Johnna Wagner and Natalia Urbanowicz.

Ever wonder why some people are more creative than others? What factors contribute to that creativity? Like you, many others have asked the same questions which has resulted in a study of one hundred and fifty one psychology students at Brandeis University. The study was intended to cover a variety of types of creativity including problem solving (participants were given random materials and were told to build a fifteen inch structure), art (participants were told to make a collage using only supplied materials), and writing (participants were told to write an American Haiku poem). The researches used many different techniques to follow the participantsâ€™ thought processes:

Videotaping the participants while they worked
Having the participants fill out a questionnaire
Telling 2/3 of the participants to think out loud as they worked

Researchers discovered that there was no difference in creativity between those who were told to think aloud and those who were not. Gender of the participant did not make a difference nor did the order in which the tasks were performed.

Each task yielded its own major creativity predictors. In the structure building task, the two strongest predictors of creativity were the participantsâ€™ attention to certain parts of the task (structure stability) and the number of times they second-guessed themselves. Much like the structure task, the collage activity showed that attention to certain aspects of the activity such as the planning process or even the participantsâ€™ playfulness during the task proved to be a strong behavioral predictor, and â€œAha!â€ moments and changes in train of thought were positive predictions whereas speaking negatively of oneself or oneâ€™s project showed negative effects on creativeness. Following the pattern of the other two activities, the poetry portion of the study also showed a prediction pattern in the participantsâ€™ involvement with the task like their enjoyment and concentration.

To sum, peopleâ€™s potential for creativity can be somewhat predictable if we study their behavior patterns and verbalizations while completing a task. Negative thoughts and uncertainty put a damper on creativity causing us to become frustrated and much less likely to produce anything of value.

The study shows that our involvement in, attentiveness to, and process of completing an activity is directly related to our intrinsic motivation, which, in turn, plays a major role in how creative we are.

In an article from the Sydney Morning Gerald the author states:

â€œBut when their intrinsic motivation is undermined, they’re likely to substitute quantity for quality, they’re likely to learn less about complex tasks and be less creative.â€

This research suggests that the more interest and curiosity we have in what we are working on, the more creative our outcome will be. Participants that were truly thinking about and enjoying the activities that they were asked to do were noticeably more creative than those who performed the tasks merely for the sake of completion.

People like Picasso and Mozart donâ€™t just set out to paint a picture or write a song with no motive. They have a keen interest and a deep passion for those activities and that fervor drives them to create more than just a paint-by-number or a childrenâ€™s sing-along. Their strong intrinsic motivation is what sets them apart from the average artist and ordinary musician. Intrinsic motivation is the driving force of creativity, and the foundation of anything we create.

Get a Ph.D. in Happiness

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:30:47 +0000

Who doesnâ€™t want to be happy? Turns out you can now get a Ph.D. in Happinessâ€¦Check this article from The New York Times:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1606395,00.html

I also found these interesting…
“The New Science of Happiness” from Time Magazine:
http://tinyurl.com/3353kz

Dilbert’s formula for happiness:
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/03/happiness_formu.html

Finding utopia on a wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia

Sign me up…

clipped from www.time.com

Getting Serious About Happiness

Studying happiness is hard. What one man loves another loathes. One woman’s
joy is another’s junk. Social scientists, therefore, have generally left the
contemplation of smiles and satisfaction to poets and philosophers. But
that’s changing. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a leading expert on well-being, is
establishing what he calls the world’s first Ph.D program focusing
on positive psychology and the analysis of happiness, at Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, Calif. “Even though the
things that make people happy seem ephemeral and immaterial, they are the
most important things in life, and they have not been studied very
seriously,” says Csikszentmihalyi, a professor of psychology and management and author of Flow: the Psychology of Optimal Experience.

Malcolm Gladwell – Age Before Beauty

admin — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 06:36:30 +0000

On February 21st 2006, Malcolm Gladwell gave a great talk about creativity. The event was part of the New Yorker Nights, a series hosted by the Columbia University Arts Initiative and The New Yorker. Gladwell is the author of:

The Tipping Point and Blink

Here, in three parts, is Gladwell’s lecture:

Age Before Beauty – Part 1

Age Before Beauty – Part 2

Age Before Beauty – Part 3

And check this out, I found out you can download Gladwell’s audio books for free (14 days cancelable trial) through audible.com

Sir. Ken Robinson on creativity and education

admin — Wed, 27 Dec 2006 06:18:51 +0000

Here’s a great speech on creativity by education guru and the author of Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative, Sir. Ken Robinson from TED conference 2006:

Click here to view the embedded video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4964296663335083307

And an interview with Robinson about the importance of nurturing innovative solutions in the classroom from

BusinessWeek, Feb 23, 2006
By Jessie Scanlon

How do you define creativity?

Ultimately it’s the process of having original ideas, but there are several steps. The first step is imagination, the capacity that we all have to see something in the mind’s eye. Creativity is then using that imagination to solve problems — call it applied imagination. Then innovation is putting that creativity into practice as applied creativity.

That seems pretty straightforward. What do people not understand?

There are several common misconceptions. The first is that people think that only some are creative. It’s in the nature of human beings that we are creative. The second misconception is that creativity is about design and marketing. What the TED conference shows is that creativity is central to the practice of science and business and more. Creative initiatives should help you find what you are passionate about. The third is that you can’t do anything about it. You can cultivate creativity.

Full article here…

Another great video of Sir Ken Robinson is from the London Business Forum (25 minutes). In addition to a funny story about his encounter with Paul McCartney he asks these three important questions:

1. Why is it essential to promote creativity?
2. Why is necessary
3. What would you do about it?

Click here to view the embedded video.

http://jump.webstreaminghost.com/wm/sfb/lbf_ken_high.wvx

For articles about and by Robinson, visit:
http://www.sfb.co.uk/cgi-bin/profile.cgi?s=65&t=5&a=9

And finally, more on TED conference 2006 from Kate’s blog:
http://www.mynameiskate.ca/2006/03/transformation_.html