Creativity has become a buzzword across all disciplines in education and across all phases. In this panel discussion, we will discuss the key tenets of what it means to be creative whilst also exploring the how creativity may be fostered in educational settings. The aim of the panel discussion is to offer tools, strategies, ideas, and food for thought on fostering creativity amongst learners so they may foster creativity amongst their own learners.

Creativity is a complex yet universal phenomenon (Shao et al., 2019). Most people feel confident in recognising creativity and what constitutes creativity, with many thinking that they are creative in some way or other. The internet is awash with quotes on creativity attributed to scientific geniuses, old masters, artistic highflyers, successful entrepreneurs, and celebrities. However, when it comes to defining "creativity" we seem to struggle to put into words what it is that is required to "be" creative, how to "do" creativity, and often end up linking creativity to aesthetic artfulness or the processes of making (Sefton-Green and Sinker, 2000). In the context of education, publications explore the relationship between creativity, technology, and education (Henriksen et al., 2018), the link between creativity and environmental sustainability (Cheng, 2019), the role that school environments play regarding the development of creativity in education (Ahmadi et al., 2019), and, more broadly, the relationship that creativity plays in contemporary education (e.g., Kaplan, 2019). Research has also been undertaken to consider student and pupil experience of creativity (e.g., Matraeva et al., 2020).

In this presentation, we will outline the role of creativity in education, and what it means to be a creative thinker and learner in the 21^st century. Rather than focussing on creativity among pupils, we emphasise the training and formation of future teachers and educationalists so that they will be equipped to foster creativity among their learners. Thus, we will share some of the practical strategies and initiatives used to train and support future educationalists in different educational contexts and country settings.

We begin by drawing on two main approaches to considering creativity: a socio-cultural manifesto (Glăveanu et al., 2020) and the third draft of the Creative Thinking Framework (OECD, 2019). Creativity is a psychological, social, and material phenomenon, is culturally mediated action, dynamic in its meaning and practice, meaningful and relational and fundamental for society (Glăveanu et al., 2020). And as such creativity, can be divided into "Big C" and "little c" creativity, thus deep expertise, higher level thinking on the one hand and everyday creativity on the other (OECD, 2019). We then introduce some specific examples from different countries and educational settings: Sweden, South Korea, Qatar, Chile, United States, China, and Aotearoa New Zealand.

We conclude our presentation with reflections on the complexity of educational settings and the dynamism of changing environments. We suggest that to prepare the next generation as twenty-first-century learners, we need to use creativity to rethink, restructure, recreate and reimagine solutions for a wide range of problems.

The presentation focuses specifically on the professional learning and development of educationalists in different countries. We show how the creative tasks and activities help improve adults' and children's learning, and under which conditions creativity becomes embedded in the professional learning and development of future educationalists. By focussing on a range of educational settings (initial teacher education for primary and secondary schools, educationalists training in and for higher education, library contexts), we demonstrate that fragmentation and difference in teaching and learning approaches may be an opportunity, as we learn from one another and develop professional development programmes in our contexts and settings.

The following sources/case studies will be used in the presentation: Sweden, South Korea, Qatar, Chile, United States, China, and Aotearoa New Zealand. Sweden: We describe how in a course in the final semester of the preschool teacher programme called Playworld and Play as Phenomenon and Tool in Preschool Education educators work consciously with different tools to stimulate their students’ meta reflection over their own learning processes and to help them see the connection between theory and practice when it comes to creativity, imagination, and play (Eriksson Bergström et al. in: Brown et al., 2024). South Korea: We present how a university, which trains elementary school teachers, has been working on a project to model how key competencies can be developed for pre-service teachers by using a resident art gallery within the university. The basic idea is to foster creativity through curriculum integration and collaboration around the exhibition (Ahn and Ohn in: Brown et al. 2024). Qatar: We offer an insight into the educational context of the Qatar National Library in Doha, where librarians engage in professional development aligned with typical teacher training activities to improve children’s literacy and cognitive development with the help of creative reflective activities and lucky-dip story bags (Bullough in: Brown et al., 2024). Chile: We report on teacher education in Chile, where creativity-related areas are given low importance in initial teacher training (Balbontín-Alvarado and Rivas-Morales in: Brown et al., 2024). United States: We show how students on a teacher education programme are not only taught culturally sustained pedagogy and critical thinking, but also focus on presenting their own understanding of social justice in creative assignments (Ramlackhan in: Brown et al., 2024). China: We present how creativity is taught to future kindergarten teachers through the Kindergarten Curriculum incorporating Chinese traditional culture in Shanghai Normal University TianHua college (Gao et al. in: Brown et al., 2024). Aotearoa New Zealand: We focus on the teaching practice of a dance educator in dance studies at the University of Auckland, where creativity comes in the form of the creative process of dancemaking (Knox in: Brown et al., 2024).

For teachers and educationalists to be able to foster creativity among their learners, we need to ensure that training programmes and professional development activities embed relevant activities. In most cases, educators find a way of modelling best practices and setting tasks that require creative-critical-reflective thinking and the active application of creativity. The case studies also show that an open discussion of what constitutes creativity is required, as definitions and understanding of creativity as a concept vary, not just across but also within different countries and educational settings. The framework of the direct juxtaposition of viewpoints from different countries enables educationalists to learn from one another and therefore continue their personal professional development in the context of didactics and pedagogy. What may work in one setting, for example the choreographic pedagogy in dance education does not necessarily work in another, and yet, it may. In this respect, we ourselves are required to look at the cases creatively and draw from them for our own circumstances. Ultimately, we suggest that a reform in education that propositions the interrelationships between education and the political, cultural and social spheres is essential. The case studies in this presentation offer vignettes to demonstrate various ways in which educators push boundaries to make this happen in different contexts around the world. In its entirety this presentation offers a step towards a greater recognition of the value of creativity for the future.

Ahmadi, N., Peter, L., Lubart, T., and Besançon, M. 2019. ‘School environments: Friend or foe for creativity education and research?’. In Creativity Under Duress in Education? Resistive theories, practices, and actions, edited by C. A. Mullen, 255–66. Cham: Springer. Brown, N., Ince, A., and Ramlackhan, K. (eds.). 2024. Creativity in Education: International Perspectives. London: UCL Press. Ahn, K. and Ohn, J.D.: 41-55. Balbontín-Alvarado, R. and Rivas-Morales, C.: 63-75. Eriksson Bergström, S., Menzel-Kühne, S. and Lundgren, M.: 13-30. Gao, M., Zhou, J. and Zhang, Y.: 139-161. Knox, S.: 167-190. Ramlackhan, K.: 113-131. Cheng, V. M. 2019. ‘Developing individual creativity for environmental sustainability: Using an everyday theme in higher education’, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33: 100567. Glăveanu, V. P., Hanchett Hanson, M., Baer, J., Barbot, B., Clapp, E. P., Corazza, G. E., Hennessey, B., Kaufman, J. C., Lebuda, I., Lubart, T. Monuori, A., Ness, I. J., Plucker, J., Reoter-Palmon, R., Sierra, Z., Simonton, D. K., Neves-Pereira, M. S., and Sternberg, R. J. 2020. ‘Advancing creativity theory and research: A socio-cultural manifesto’, Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(3): 741–5. Henriksen, D., Henderson, M., Creely, E., Ceretkova, S., Černochová, M., Sendova, E., and Tienken, C. H. 2018. ‘Creativity and technology in education: An international perspective’, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3): 409–24. Kaplan, D. E. 2019. ‘Creativity in education: Teaching for creativity development’, Psychology, 10(2): 140–7. Matraeva, A. D., Rybakova, M. V., Vinichenko, M. V., Oseev, A. A., and Ljapunova, N. V. 2020. ‘Development of creativity of students in higher educational institutions: Assessment of students and experts’, Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1): 8–16. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2019. PISA 2021 creative thinking framework: Third draft. Paris: OECD. Sefton-Green, J., and Sinker, R. (eds). 2000. Evaluating Creativity: Making and learning by young people. London and New York: Routledge. Shao, Y., et al. 2019. ‘How does culture shape creativity? A mini-review’, Frontiers in Psychology. Accessed 7 July 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01219.