Philip W. Jackson

Creativity and Intelligence: Explorations with Gifted Students

From time to time new insights into the nature of man bring increased atten tion to mans greatness, his potential for newness, his capacity for production, his quest for the unusual and the original, and his intriguing disposition toward an interplay of the serious and the playful. Recently the area of creativity, a term that has been defined in a variety of ways, has received rather widespread interest. Possibly this emphasis results because inquiry into the many dimen sions of the creative process now reveals facets of mans being to which in adequate attention has been given. Among the individuals who have been involved in research on creativity are Jacob W. Getzels and Philip W. Jackson, educational psychologists at the Univer sity of Chicago, and E. Paul Torrance, Director of the Bureau of Educational Research at the University of Minnesota. Undoubtedly the research findings of these three scholars are among recent major contributions to the field. Hence, to have accounts of their work readily available is a real boon. Creativity and Intelligence: Explora tions with Gifted Students, by Getzels and Jackson, and Guiding Creative Talent, by Torrance, contain several common elements. The next part of this discussion deals with a few of these parallels, followed by brief summaries of the separate books and suggested uses of the works. What are the common elements in the books? First, the three authors are con cerned about the inadequacy of the pres ent IQ tests in assessing the many dimen sions of mans higher mental processes. More specifically, the writers indicate that processes or traits related to creative thinking are not measured by the tradi tional intelligence tests. These research ers, therefore, sensing the need for the development and refining of tests de signed to measure creative thinking, have made important strides in pushing back the boundaries in an area which has highly significant implications. Second, a large percentage of the re search reported by Getzels and Jackson, and that by Torrance, involved schoolaged children and youth. Getzels and Jackson report one study in detail; Tor rance uses his work and the research studies of others as a basis for recom mendations regarding the assessing and guiding of creative ability. Third, the three authors indicate a wide knowledge about previous research and theory in the area of creativity. They

If we took Dewey's aesthetics seriously, how would the arts be taught?

First, a few words about the title of my remarks. Its question clearly implies that those of us who are in any way responsible for teaching the arts in our schools and colleges — a category that includes not only specialists in the arts but many who teach other subjects as well, hence the word “we” — do not as a group pay sufficient attention to Dewey’s views on the subject. We do not take his aestheticsseriouslyis my preferred way of putting it, for although we may pay homage to Dewey as one of the luminaries of the field and though we may even quote him from time to time, we do not listen carefully to what he has to say, much less try to put his ideas to work in our own teaching. Even art educators have largely ignoredArt as ExperienceDewey’s sole text on the subject of aesthetics and without doubt one of his greatest works. In a recently published history of the field ([Efland 1990]) the book goes unmentioned, nor does its name appear in one of art education’s most popular textbooks ([Chapman 1978]). In two other well-known texts ([Lowenfeld and Brittain 1982], [Feldman 1970]) it receives only the briefest of references. This persistent neglect stands in need of change. For not only do art educators have much to gain from readingArt as Experience and taking its lessons to heart, we all do.

Qualitative research and its public

1This is a revised version of a paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 1992.

New Dimensions in Creativity

Philip W. Jackson is Professor of Education, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. O. Stanley Stonesifer, Jr., Abraham Lincoln Junior High School, West Orange, New Jersey, was the recorder. RELATIVELY little research has been done in the area of identifying the creative among children. In order to help develop a broader concept of creativity, Dr. Jacob W. Getzels and Dr. Philip Jackson of the University of Chicago conducted experiments with 600 pupils in grades 6-12 at the University’s Laboratory School. The experiments involved two groups of students: the highly intelligent and the highly creative. After extensive experimentation some of their conclusions were: 1. The high IQ pupil tends to hold a self-image which is consistent with what he feels the teacher would approve. The highly creative pupil is more inclined not to conform (constructive nonconformists) strictly to this model. 2. The high IQ student tends to acquire goals which he thinks will lead to success in adult life. The creative student appears to place less value on these types of goals. 3. The sense of humor among the highly creative differed sharply from that of the highly intelligent. In summary, the high IQ students tended to converge on the stereotype and the conventional, whereas the highly creative tended

Eco on Dewey

This study seeks to examine Umberto Ecos views of the key ideas in John Deweys Art as Experience. Ecos proferred suggestion of transactional psychology as a corrective to Deweys views is criticized as a misreading of Deweys position.

The Highly Creative and the Highly Intelligent Adolescent: Some Exploratory Findings

We believe that every part of the program was necessary to its success. Subject matter emphasis, guidance and clinical assistance, the cultural program, work with parents-all contributed to the final outcome. By far the most costly part of the program resulted from the additional teacher time used for subject matter accomplishment, but this was imperative to the program. We have found that a thorough and solid educational and guidance program can succeed in discovering and developing abilities which otherwise may be lost to the nation, but we learned no easy way of accomplishing this. In three years we found no substitute for sound educational procedures that would enable young people to prepare themselves for college and careers. There were remarkable improvements in the scholastic work of some of the boys and girls, but we did not discover any dramatic devices or inspirational slogans that would keep these pupils at their studies year after year. Whatever was accomplished came as the result of hard, unceasing day-in and day-out work by teachers, counselors, and supervisors, as well as by the students themselves. The most important thing we have learned from three years of living with the project is that there can be the promise of a good life for an untold number of boys and girls for whom, heretofore, there has been little promise. What was done at George Washington High School can be done everywhere. ’