Perspectives of Creativity from Psychology

As one might expect, the treatment of “creativity” as found in the modern psychological literature from the middle of the last century is vast and complex and touches multiple disciplines and their interconnections. But if studied carefully, a general understanding of the major facets is possible and can help frame instructional pedagogies for teaching. An excellent perspective on this can be found in the second edition of the Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (Kaufman & Sternberg, 2019). It contains the writings of eminent scholars from many related fields and includes chapters on assessment (3), divergent thinking (11), theory (16), classrooms (27), play (28), aesthetics (33) and imagination (34). Each is especially meaningful for pedagogical content in music. A separate, shorter, and perhaps more accessible publication based on much of this same content has been recently published (Kaufman & Sternberg, 2021).

The book by Sawyer (2012) is an especially good summary of the scholarship on creativity. The author’s background as a jazz pianist as well as an education and psychology scholar is a strong foundation for this book. His historical structure of three “waves” of research that focus on individual difference and socio-cultural influence is useful as are the many dimensions of the creativity literature identified to help summarize both personal and social attributes. These include individual difference, incremental and consistent hard work, motivation, persistence, risk-taking, self-efficacy, social interaction, collaboration, formal and informal settings for learning, agency, and personal identity, among others.

Saywer also places the historic notions of preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification—often attributed to Wallas (1926)—in context with several other theories that offer more detailed explanations that include problem finding, generating and combining ideas, and network building. Sawyer’s chapters on computer simulation, education, and neuroscience might be important for music teachers in building a foundation for their work.

Feldman, Csikszentmihalyi, & Gardner (1994), published a short collection of chapters providing a meaningful perspective on creativity research stressing the role of social and cultural contexts. The opening chapter, co-authored by all three scholars, conceptualized three primary subsystems interacting: the person with cognitive and affective processes, the domain consisting of organized bodies of knowledge about a specific topic, and the field made up of people that arbitrate the structure of the domain such as critics, historians, and curators. This “systems approach” is then explained in detail by each author in subsequent chapters. Although the intention may seem focused on the explanation of the highest levels of creative achievement, the so called “Big-C,” this same conceptualization might be applied to work with emerging creative learners.

Much of the writing in the recent psychology literature underscores the power of creativity across an entire schools’ curriculum. For example, Gardner’s powerful theory of multiple intelligence is important:

I have defined the creative individual in ways paralleling my definition of intelligence. Specifically, the creative individual is one who regularly solves problems or fashions products in a domain, and whose work is considered both novel and acceptable by knowledgeable members of a field. (Gardner, 2011, p. xxxvi)

This may be of great interest to those on school-wide committees that may be charged with reforming curricula in many disciplines and in bolstering interdisciplinary understanding. Decisions to adopt a school-wide perspective using learning philosophies and theories of learning might be powerful way to support a music teacher’s methodology and pedagogy.