Whatever happened to creativity? Policy legacy - telling the story of a school
Author(s):
Pauline Moger (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2013
Network:
21. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Format:
Paper

Session Information

ERG SES G 05, Innovation and Creativity and Education

Paper Session

Time:
2013-09-10
09:00-10:30
Room:
A-105
Chair:
Mustafa Yunus Eryaman

Contribution

Research objective - to explore and develop a critical understanding of the policy discourses relating to creativity and their conceptual and empirical legacy, framed in the co-existence between education and culture, within a neo-liberal political framework. Very little research is undertaken on policy legacy per se. Academic focus tends to be placed on understanding and evaluating current initiatives. The research focus addresses that imbalance.

Changes in policy direction under UK cooalition Government for the education and cultural sectors have resulted in withdrawl of high profile initiatives and programmes developed under New Labour, designed to bring together education and culture (Ward 2010). In addition the introduction of the English Baccalaureate (Ebacc) risks marginalising arts subjects that might be held to develop creativity. Some remain committed to the rhetoric and underpinning philosophy developed during New Labour's time in office (Ball 2012, Wright 2012, Ozga 1999).

Research questions:

* What is currently being discussed about creativity and by whom? How does this  relate to the legacy of policy on creativity?

* Do we have champions and dissenters? Is so in which spheres do they operate? What is their key agenda?

* Does co-existence between the education and cultural sector still operate? How does this relate to the legacy of policy on creativity?

*Where does the legacy of policy on creativity sit within the broader political framework and in particular neo-liberalism?

The research explores how creativity continues to be perceived (Sternberg 1999) and interpreted within education settings, informed by the legacy of policy on creativity. This is supported through a critical understanding of the broader political framework and value system encapsulating creativity. In doing so, this paper asks to what extent does the UK education policy, position innovation as important for the development of the 21st century knowledge society? Complex layers of inter-play between sectors, shapers and actors in our society exist, through which the researcher meaningfully examines policy legacy. It is a critical moment in time for policy legacy, given the speed of economic change and challenge to both institutional and individuals beliefs and values. The research captures and analyses data to deepen understanding of policy discourses relating to creativity. 

Policy discourse relating to creativity is examined through a specific education lens, realised by undertaking a case study in an education setting. In order to explore legacy, identifying an example of legacy and connecting to the "journey" undertaken by individuals within an institution is required. The identified secondary school, located in the North East of England, has pupils aged 11 to 18 years. The school took part in New Labours flagship programmes and demonstrates an established record of partnership with the creative and cultural sector. The school has designed, developed and launched a new curriculum strand - creativity in Autumn 2012 across year groups. This paper considers the tension, as revealed in one school's "story" between the desire to foster creative competencies and innovative skills and the need to prepare pupils for academic assessments that may or may not measure or support these. 

Method

The research draws upon an ethnographic approach to answer the research objective and questions (Atkinson 1997, Hammersley 2006, Walford 2009, Walcott 1995). As the case study involves an education setting, ethnomethodology, phenomenology and symbolic interactionism influence the ontological and epistemological thinking of the researcher in terms of underpinning theory (Aikin 2006). The case study key sample includes Year Seven pupils, teachers, and senior management within a secondary school. This broadens out to the settings stakeholders and other figures connected to policy more generally. parents, representatives from the cultural sector, policy makers and those who influence policy are included in the sample in relation to interviews. The school setting is a rich arena where qualitative and quantitative data can be gathered and the creativity legacy is being "played out" in real time with real actors (Coffey 1996). Recognising the breadth and depth of available data to capture, adopting a qualitative approach is appropriate. A mixed methods approach weighting given to qualitative methods is required to strengthen the process of data gathering, analysis and meeting the research aim.

Expected Outcomes

The paper aims to develop a methodology for research into legacy and will feed into collaboration with researchers in Durham University's School of Education on the future role of creativity and innovation in education. The research intends to inform policy debate and be discursive in relation to whether the legacy of policy on creativity steers education toward a new position. This recognises and explores the current re-modelling of education in the UK and Internationally. The apparent lack of creativity rhetoric in UK Coalition policy is being challenged by high profile players, a move that could influence the policy community and direction of neo-liberal thinking. Discourse from the research is intended to inform the debate on creativity in the sphere of cross sector partnership working between education and the cultural sector and to what purpose this serves. This acknowledges the continuing neo-liberal trend globally to develop a 'good and productive citizen'. The role creativity plays is this process is part of the research finding.

References

Aikin, S.F. (2006). Pragmatism, Naturalism, and Phenomenology. Human Studies, 2993), 317-340 doi: 10.2307/27642756 Atkinnson, P. e.a. (Ed). (2007). Handbook of Ethnography (paperback.ed). London: SAGE. Ball, S.J.(2012). global education inc: new policy networks and the neo-liberal imagery. London: New York Routledge. Coffey, A.(1999). The ethnographic self: fieldwork and the representation of identity. London: SAGE. Hammersley, M. (2006). Ethnography: problems and prospects. Ethnography of Education 1 (1). Ozga, J. (1999). Policy research in education settings:contested terrain Buckingham Open University Press. Sternberg, R.J. (Ed). (1999). Handbook of creativity: Cambridge University Press. Walford, G. (2009). For ethnography. Ethnography and Education 4 (3). Ward, S.C. (2010). Understanding Creative Partnerships; An examination of policy and practice. (PhD), Durham. retrieved from http://ethesis.dur.ac.uk/525/1/Thesis. pdf Wolcott, H.F. (1995). Fantasies of empowerment: mapping neo-liberal discourse in the coalition governments schools policy. Journal of Education Policy, 27 (3)

Author Information

Pauline Moger (presenting / submitting)
Durham University
School of Education
Durham

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.