The question of whether school enhances creativity or kills it, has been emerging during last decade with solid regularity. Although we see impressive growth in start-ups, technological innovations and novel creations poping up almost on daily basis, it is hard to say, whether this happens due to, or as opposition to a traditional school environment.

Some authors (e.g., Cropley, 2009; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009; Sahlberg, 2010), argue that traditional, or prevailing, educational system is not supporting creative development and quantitative growth of innovative ideas among school students. According to Sahlberg (2009), standartisation of education plays inhibiting part in students - and also teachers - creative growth: individual testing, predefined results, and heavy fact-orientation leave little space for creativity and original, out-of-box ideas. The other factor, according to Sahlberg (ibid), that sets barriers for creativity in the classroom environment, is teachers' perception of themselves as non-creative personalities - in fact, it is often the outcome of standartized, less autonomous educational system.

Although qualitative results of Estonian students seem rather encouraging (e.g. PISA, 2006, 2009; TIMSS), there is a troubling tendency of constant competitiveness within school environment that negatively affects psychological climate in the schools, with students' chronic exhaustion, worsening working climate, increasing number of student violence (Ruus et al., 2008). This echoes with Sahlberg (2009), who sees competition between schools and individuals as an obstacle to creativity - mainly due to the fact, that it is originality and novelty driven, but initiated by the urge for better funding and gaining some advantage over others. 

In Estonia, the competitiveness between schools is two-fold problem. One half of the problem, it is widely accepted, annual rankings of schools based on medalist graduates and results of state exams are published regularly in media, and competition between students starts even before first-graders reach the school. The other part of the problem is rather hidden and not so widely acknowledged - it is the Russian-speaking schools in Estonia. The problem of Russian-speaking minorities, and its integration into Estonian society, has been actual for over two decades, with educational system often seen as a some sort of altar - plans to implement fully Estonian-speaking state education in schools were introduced several years ago, yet only now it has started slowly to be implemented. This brings forth controversial opinions, evaluation and attitude towards the educational reforms - some see them as politically motivated and rather damaging for students, others see them as part of integration process and incorporation of Russian-speaking minority into European cultural and educational room.

The main objective of this study is to evaluate how do students and teachers in both Russian and Estonian speaking schools evaluate their school environments, in terms of supporting creativity and originality. The focus is on subjective interpretation of classroom and school environments, in order to provide insights for both language groups - all this to answer the question: what can both groups learn from one another's experience, cultural background, and teaching traditions.

* Estonian State Curricula for Gymnasium/ Secondary Schools. (2010). https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/13272925 * Loogma, K., Ruus, V.-R., Talts, L., & Poom-Valickis, K. (2009). Õpetaja professionaalsus ning tõhusama õpetamis- ja õppimiskeskkonna loomine. OECD rahvusvahelise õpetamise ja õppimise uuringu TALIS tulemused. [Teacher´s Professionalism and Development of Effective Teaching and Learning Environment]. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikooli haridusuuringute keskus, web publication: http://www.hm.ee/index.php?048181 * Realo, A. (2003). Comparison of public and academic discourses: Estonian individualism and collectivism revisited. Culture & Psychology, 9, 47-77. * Ruus, V.-R., Henno, I., Eisenschmidt, E., Loogma, K., Noorväli, H., Reiska, P., & Rekkor, S. (2008). Reforms, developments and trends in Estonian education during recent decades. In J. Mikk, M. Veisson, & P. Luik (Eds.), Reforms and Innovations in Estonian Education (pp. 11–26). Frankfurt am Main, et al: Peter Lang Publishers House. * Ruus, V.-R., Veisson, M., Leino, M., Ots, L., Pallas, L., Sarv, E.-S., & Veisson, A. (2007). Students' well-being, coping, academic success, and school climate. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(7), 919–936. * Sahlberg, P. (2010). Rethinking accountability in a knowledge society. Journal of Educational Change, 11(1), 45–61. * Sahlberg, P. (2009). The role of education in promoting creativity: potential bariers and enabling factors. In E. Villalba (Ed.), Measuring creativity: Proceedings for the conference, “Can creativity be measured?”Brussels, May 28-29, 2009 (pp. 337–344). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.