At the present time ‘creativity’ and ‘innovation’ are actively promoted by European governments across diverse educational sites. There are multiple initiatives to investigate ways in which creative approaches to learning might be instantiated (e.g. European Commission, 2011; Craft, 2003). This of course begs the question as to how ‘creativity’ and 'innovation' are to be understood.  The first part of this paper, therefore, explores some of the meanings associated with these concepts, identifying dominant tropes (such as 'flexibility') before analysing lexical, empirical and stipulative understandings of creativity and innovation in recent discourse (Baird,1991).

Having identified some key issues, we then report on a research project, currently underway, that is concerned with creative practice in four secondary schools in Scotland.  The research project is funded by Creative Scotland, the national body responsible for promoting creativity in Scotland, and is concerned with the effects of introducing an artist to work along-side teachers and young people in an interdisciplinary context in schools.  The project is a partnership between researchers at the University of Stirling, an arts centre, and a local authority Creative Learning Partnership.  We are interested in the effects of this creative assemblage for teachers’ continuing professional development, young peoples’ development of criticality and ways in which each project can be evaluated through the development of criteria that are emergent within each project.

Here we wish to draw upon findings from this project so as to raise questions as to how creativity and innovation are conceptualised, the kinds of learning that teachers undergo, and the kinds of knowledge that is produced though such a process.  We hope to explore these issues though a focus upon some of the dilemmas encountered in this project, especially in relation to issues of uncertainty and the limits of knowing.

In order to make sense of these findings we draw upon a broad range of theoretical perspectives that afford insight into the kinds of epistemic culture (Knorrr Cetina) that are the upshot of such approaches.  In particular we will draw upon the writings of Law (2004) and Deleuze and Guattari (1987).  

Baird, R. D. 1991 Category Formation and the History of Religions, Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Boltanski, L. and Chiepello, E. 2005 The New Spirit of Capitalism, E. trans. G. Elliott, London and New York: Verso. Craft, A. 2003 ‘The Limits to Creativity in Education: Dilemmas for the Educator’ British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 51, No. 2 , pp. 113-127. Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1987 A Thousand Plateaus, London & New York: Continuum. European Commission, 2011 Design for Innovation, policy available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/design-creativity/index_en.htm Accessed 26/1/2013. Knorr Cetina, K. 2007 Culture in global knowledge societies: knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32 (4), 361-375. Knorr Cetina, K. 2001 Objectural practice, in T. R. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds) The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge, 175–88. Lather, P. 2007 Getting Lost: Feminist Efforts Toward a Double(d) Science, Albany New York: SUNY Press. Law, J. 2004 After Method: Mess in Social Science Research, London and New York: Routledge.