FOSTERING CREATIVITY WITH WISDOM

Anna Craft
The Open University, UK

Abstract:

Over the past five years, creativity has become a focus of attention for policy
makers in education. However, the increased interest in creativity has
occurred as if without reference to any value framework. This article suggests
that in fact an invisible underpinning value framework has been provided by
Western individualism, in turn both supporting and driven by the globalized
capitalist marketplace.
What could this mean for nurturing creativity with wisdom in schools?
Working from the stance that wisdom involves making thoughtful, wellinformed and appropriate judgments leading to sound courses of action with
regard to the consequences, this paper discusses some significant objections to
a market-driven model of creativity in education, discusses a possible
framework for understanding creativity in a way which emphasizes
responsibility as well as rights to expression and proposes wisdom as a
necessary element of pedagogy.

Key words:

Creativity, wisdom, responsibility

INTRODUCTION
The years since the late 1990s have seen an increased call for creativity
in education by policy makers in many parts of the world. This is the latest
in a number of waves of policy-makers interest in creativity, as documented
elsewhere (Bentley, 1998, Craft, 2002, 2005a, Jeffrey and Craft, 2001).

Faculty of Education and Languages, The Open University, Stuart Hall Building Level 2,
Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, United Kingdom.
E-mail A.R.Craft@open.ac.uk

Chapter

In England, this has led to a burgeoning of activity designed to nurture

the creativity of children and young adults in both formal and informal
learning contexts. Some of this has been characterized by creative
partnerships between expert professionals beyond the learning setting, and
those professionals engaged in supporting learning within the setting. Some
attention has also been paid to how adults can be better nourished in
enabling such creativity, with the commitment of some resources in this
direction also (for example through several funded projects, such as the
Creative Partnerships initiative). In general the increased emphasis on
creativity within society has been greeted by educators and creative
partners as a positive move.
The political call for creativity is one which often couches creativity as a
universal attribute, suggesting a need for greater creativity in order to both
survive as well as thrive in the 21st Century (Craft, 2002, Seltzer and
Bentley, 1999). This case is made explicitly in policy documents in some
parts of the world. In England, the 1997 White Paper, Excellence in Schools
(DFEE, 1997), focused on preparing young people successfully for the
twenty-first century, by recognising the different talents of all people. This
position was extended by the work of the National Advisory Committee for
Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE, 1999) which talked of the need
to provide young people with skills and approaches required by employers.
The report acknowledged that alongside high standards of academic
achievement, employers now required people who can adapt, see
connections, innovate, communicate and work with others (NACCCE,
1999, p.13).
Interestingly, the NACCCE Report brought together educational and
cultural policy-making in the context of learning and indeed brought
together two government departments: the Department for Education and
Skills, and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Whilst the two
arenas are related, they clearly are subtly different in their purposes and their
goals. Yet, proposals in the NACCCE Report provided a foundation for
other, more recent, educational policy moves in England, such as:
The funding of specialist schools from the mid 1990s as documented by
both the Department for Education and Skills (2005) and the Specialist
Schools Trust, itself established in 1987 (DfES, 2005, SST, 2005), and
within the Specialist Schools Trust, the emergence of specific Creative
Learning Projects, such as CLASS: Creative Learning and Specialist
Subjects.
Interest taken in creativity by the national schools inspection service,
OFSTED, in the early years of the 21st century (OFSTED, 2002, 2003a,
2003b).

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

The establishment of the generously-funded national programme,

Creative Partnerships (Creative Partnerships, 2005a) and flowing out of
this the Creative Action Research Awards (Creative Partnerships, 2005b).
The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority Creativity Project (QCA
2005a, 2005b).
Work at the National College for School Leadership from 2002 when it
was established, through a series of Leading Edge Creativity seminars
and projects still ongoing at the time of writing (November, 2005)
exploring the nature of leadership for creativity in schools, and ongoing
work (NCSL, 2005).
The publishing by DfES of the book, Excellence and Enjoyment, for
primary schools, in May 2003 (DfES, 2003), exhorting primary schools
to take creative and innovative approaches to the curriculum and to place
creativity high on their agendas, followed by materials (DfES, 2004) to
encourage this.
The introduction of Every Child Matters from 2003 (Every Child
Matters, 2003, 2005) a government initiative designed to ensure the
well-being of children and young people from birth to age 19, by
supporting them in being health, staying safe, enjoying and achieving,
making a positive contribution and achieving economic well-being; an
agenda which is, perhaps ALL about resilience, resourcefulness, and
lifewide creativity (Craft, 2002, 2005a).
And, as of late 2005, in England, the attention to creativity in education
by policy makers shows no sign of abating yet. In June mid-June 05, a
further review of creativity in schools was announced by the new Creative
Industries Minister James Purnell, as part of his major debate on how Britain
can become the worlds creative hub (DCMS, 2005). This Review, led by
Paul Roberts of the Improvement and Development Agency (IDEA), began
in the Autumn of 2005 and will run until February 2006 when advice to
Ministers is expected.
The picture is similar elsewhere in the world including Australia
(Australia Council for the Arts, 2005), Canada (as discussed by Woods,
2002), Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong as discussed by Fryer (2003),
Scotland (Learning and Teaching Scotland, 2005, Scottish Executive, 2004)
and moves are also being made in this direction in the United States in the
form of a national enquiry exploring creativity, education and the economy,
through Education Commission of the States (2005). Recent developments
in creativity in education particularly in relation to the arts in many countries
including Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Finland, France, Iceland, The
Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Serbia, Slovenia, Switzerland and the United
States of America are summarised by the International Federation of Arts
Council and Culture Agencies (2005).

Comment [P A1]: Could you add a foot note or

brief explanatory phrase for international readers.

Comment [P A2]: Anna, please check that you

have written all these national organisations out in
full first, then used abbreviated versions, for the
international audience. Thanks

Comment [P A3]: This is not in you references

Chapter

The establishment of creativity has occurred, in many parts of the world,

with direct reference to the value framework of Western individualism,
driven by the capitalist globalized marketplace. For example, the Scottish
Executive published on its website in April 2004 the following statement by
Frank McAveety, MSP, Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, regarding
creativity: The creativity of Scots - from the classroom to the boardroom is the edge we need in a competitive world. Our duty as an Executive is to
create the conditions that allow that creativity to flourish - whether in arts,
sciences, commerce or industry. .Creativity is as valuable in retail,
education, health, government and business as in culture. The cultural sector
should become the national dynamo of the creative impulse that can serve all
these areas (Scottish Executive, 2004). This was the precursor to the
establishment of a Commission in June 2004 comprising of representatives
from various sections of the cultural sector and chaired by James Boyle, to
refine the cultural and creative strategy for Scotland.
Such arguments and perspectives have been in emergence since the early
1990s, as the following quotation from a Canadian Ministry of Education
document on Year 2000 Framework Learning demonstrates: in view of
the new social and economic realities, all students, regardless of their
immediate plans following school, will need to develop a flexibility and a
versatility undreamed of by previous generations [and to].. employ critical
and creative thinking skills to solve problems and make decisions (Ministry
of Education, 1991, p.2, quoted in Woods, 2002 p79).
The case is made, also, in the Far East. For example, Ng and Lin (2004)
point out that in Singapore, one desired learning outcome for pupils at the
end of their schooling (i.e. pre-higher education), set in the context of being
able to think creatively and independently, is that they should have an
entrepreneurial spirit (The Ministry of Education, 1998).
Implied, it seems, in such policy statements, is the notion that
performance in the market place is itself seen an indicator of creativity. This
is a position adopted by some analysts also. Florida (2002), for example,
offering controversial comment on economic development, links the high
value placed on creativitywith the suggestion that in North America, it

is led by the growth of a Creative Class, i.e. engineers, architects,

scientists, artists, educators and entertainers, whose economic function
is to create new technology, new creative content and above all, new
ideas. Floridas thesis is that the group is growing in size and
influence, with an already profound impact on work and lifestyle, in
being both self-directed and high-achieving. He argues that urban
economic development occurs through plural and diverse inner cities
(with high populations of bohemians, ethnic minorities and gay people
for example) because creative workers are drawn to live in such

Comment [P A4]: See references, 'Singapore'

added. Should it be here too?

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

places. Although it has serious critics (for example, Malangi, 2004),

Floridas work has been influential in urban redesign and regeneration
in the United States.

OBJECTIONS TO A MARKET DRIVEN APPROACH TO

CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION
In some countries, such as England, the introduction of a focus on
creativity can be seen as representing a significant shift in emphasis from a
highly performative education focus introduced in the last decade of the
20th century, characterized by a compulsory school curriculum, very strong
guidance for some aspects of pedagogy, and a testing and inspection regime
which seemed to some to reduce the profession of teaching to that of a
technicist role (Ball, 2003, Craft, 2003, Jeffrey and Craft, 2001, Jeffrey and
Woods, 1998, Woods and Jeffrey, 2002). To the extent that recent calls for
creativity in education are seen as countering this performative culture, many
teachers and schools have welcomed it with open arms (Jeffrey and Woods,
2003, Woods and OShannessy, 2002).
However, it could be argued that there are some fundamental problems
with the market driven context to the focus on creativity, which elsewhere I
have called blind spots (Craft, 2005b); here referred to as problems. Both
problems stem from the market-driven foundation on which the call for
creativity in education is based.
The first problem is the question of culture. Policy statements calling for
increased creativity in some universalised form are made with no reference
to macro- or sub-cultural valuesa universalization of creativity (Jeffrey
and Craft, 2001). The lack of reference to values has been described as
culture blind (Ng, 2003). It is suggested, then, that creativity is called for
in the context of liberal individualism tied to a market economy (Craft,
2005a, 2005b, Ng, 2003). The discourse around creativity is one in which
high value is placed on individuality, thinking generatively outside of social
and other norms, and which also values highly innovative engagement with
the economy as both producer and consumer (Jeffrey and Craft, 2001).
The second problem concerns the consequences of emphasising the role
of creativity in selling ideas and products. One of the effects of promoting a
culture which encourages and rewards continual innovation in the context of
a market place, is that the drive to innovate further becomes an end in itself.
The re-furbishment, further development and re-use of old artefacts and
ideas seem subservient to the shiny mantra of making profit; where new and
fashionable is better than make do and mend. Designing products and
services not only to be out of fashion within a short time but also to cease

Chapter

working, so they have to be thrown away rather than repaired or restored, is

seen as unproblematic. I want to ask the question, then, how desirable is the
norm of innovation demanded by this global economy? To what extent is it
WISE for educators to play any role in further developing and sustaining the
throw-away culture?
These problems were raised, among others, in an earlier paper (Craft,
2003) in which I sought to open a debate about the extent to which educators
should accept the re-emphasis on creativity in the curriculum as
unproblematic. In that paper I named a variety of limits to creativity in
education which included social, environmental and ethical problems, and
also looked at some practical challenges that these pose for teachers. For
further development of these points, see Craft (2005b).
In this paper, however, I seek to explore some of the issues that face
teachers and schools in nurturing their students creativity. And in order to
address some of these questions of value from classroom perspectives, I
connect the question of wisdom with the job of nurturing creativity.

WISDOM AND CREATIVITY

As Ardelt (2005) notes in her introduction to Sternberg and Jordans
Handbook of Wisdom (Sternberg and Jordan, 2005), after twenty-five years
of research on the topic of wisdom, a uniform definition still does not exist.
In part this is because accounts are located in multiple domains and
perspectives, including the socio-cultural (Takahashi and Overton, 2005), the
philosophical (Osbeck and Robinson, 2005), the psychological (Kunzmann
and Baltes, 2005) as well as the implicit (Bluck and Gluck, 2005). Clearly,
too, definitions of wisdom are bounded by time and by space (Birren and
Svensson, 2005).
This article draws on the psychological literature, in which the existence
of several current dominant Schools of thought in the study of wisdom, has
been noted by Bassett (2006). The first, and perhaps the most influential in
terms of what wisdom could mean for learning, is the approach which
explores wisdom as intellectual functioning and expertiseencompassing
the Berlin School with the Berlin Wisdom Paradigm (Baltes and Staudinger,
2000) and also Sternbergs team formerly at Yale with the balance theory
(Sternberg, 1998, 2001, 2003, 2004).
Both the Berlin School and
Sternbergs work, emphasise the metacognitive skill elements of wisdom
concerning the practicalities and pramatics of lived life.
Another school of thought, by contrast, emphasizes varied personal
attributes of wisdom; exploring for example the role of age, gender,
educational attainment and occupation (for example, Ardelt, 2000, 2003,

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

Denney et al 1995, Webster 2003, Wink and Helson, 1997). These are a
diverse set of studies, from which little can be generalized, and this school
perhaps offers less insight in terms of learning, as the first school.
Finally a third approach sees wisdom in relation to Piagetian stage-theory
of development, as an aspect of post-formal development, framing wisdom
as exceptional self-development, enabled through a decentering of the ego
and the capacity to think dialectically recognizing alternative truths and
inherent contradictions (for example, Kitchener and Brenner, 1990, CookGreuter, 2000). This approach offers, then, a developmental trajectory given
its location within a developmental theory.
How wisdom may relate to creativity in the context of learning in
classrooms, is perhaps best informed by the first school of thought, which
sees wisdom as intellectual functioning and expertise. The potential
contribution of the third school is also considered later in the paper.

Wisdom as intellectual functioning and expertise

The notion of wisdom is described by leading researchers at the MaxPlanck Institute, Berlin and the International University, Bremen
(collectively referred to here as the Berlin School), as bringing together
characteristics of knowledge, mental capacities and virtue (Baltes and
Kunzmann, 2004, Baltes and Staudinger, 2000). This research group defines
wisdom as an expert knowledge system about fundamental problems related
to the meaning and conduct of life (Baltes and Stange, 2005, p.196)such
that appropriate courses of action are then determined, which take account of
multiple perspectives. This is not dissimilar to the definition cited by
Sternberg (2003) from the Websters New World College Dictionary, which
emphasizes appropriate and sound action informed by a mix of knowledge,
understanding and experience as follows: power of judging rightly and
following the soundest course of action, based on knowledge, experience,
understanding, etc. (Websters New World College Dictionary, 1997,
p.1533, cited in Sternberg, 2003, p.147).
Taking a laboratory approach to the exploration of wisdom, the Berlin
School identifies five criteria for labeling any action wise (Baltes and
Staudinger, 2000). Two they describe as basic criteria:
rich factual knowledge of human nature and human life course
rich procedural knowledge of possibilities for engaging with life
problems
The remaining three are seen as meta-criteria and are considered by the
group to be unique to wisdom (Baltes and Stange, 2005):

Chapter

lifespan contextualism (i.e. understanding of multiple contexts of life and

their inter-relationships in concurrent temporality as well as over the life
span)
value tolerance and relativism (i.e. understanding of differences between
individuals, group and wider social/cultural values and priorities)
knowledge about handling uncertainty (including limits in knowledge:
both ones own and collective, regarding the world at large). (Baltes and
Stange, 2005)
From their studies of wisdom-related knowledge, the activation of this
and the emotional, motivational and social dynamics of wisdom related
knowledge, the research group suggests that whilst wisdom can be
associated with aging, it is not an automatic outcome of growing older.
Their work contradicts the position advanced by the third school theorists
highlighted by Bassett (2005, in press) and discussed above, who view
wisdom in terms of postformal-operational thinking as proposed by Piaget
(1932).
By contrast, the Berlin School propose the need for a range of supportive
processes and conditions relating to personality, cognitive capacities,
environment and life history, which nurture a persons capacity to orientate
toward a common-good perspective as opposed to adopting a more selfcentred orientation.
In a world which could be seen as increasingly driven by liberal
individualist ideologies which provide the incubator for the development of
children and young people, this need for supportive processes and conditions
may provide a particular set of challenges for educators. Indeed, studies by
the research group at Harvard University known as the GoodWork Projecti,
working in conjunction with researchers at Claremont and Stanford
Universities, suggest a decreasing tendency to prioritise the common-good
perspective among ambitious young people seeking to excel, in three
professions studied (journalism, science and acting) (Fischman et al, 2004).
The research team, whose early conceptualizations of their project sited
within a wisdom-related framework, calling their initial work humane
creativity, note that common threads across all three professions was the
propensity to cut corners and bend rules, to see oneself as operating alone
rather than part of a community in which peers and others including
respected elders provide a set of reference points which inform their actions.
A salient theme in their findings is that younger workers are faced with
conflicts for which they have little guidance in struggling with these
conflicts they are loath to pas judgment on others; and they believe, in turn,
that they ought to be given latitude to do what they feel is right. (Fischman
et al, p.142).

Comment [P A5]: in press or 2005???? see

previous comment

Comment [P A6]: Please check formatting

requirements, particularly for pages in citations and
use of full stop

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

It seems, then, that the studies of both the Berlin School and the
GoodWork project at Harvard, suggest that whilst not age-related, the
development of wisdom (i.e. appropriate action taking account of multiple
forms of understanding and knowledge, and taking account of the multiple
needs and perspectives), is increasingly difficult to achieve in todays world.
It could be argued that the predominance of the capitalist marketplace has
served to erode the notion of service, of responsibility to others and, even,
possibly, as Margaret Thatcher famously commented, some twenty-five
years ago, in an interview in Womans Own Magazine, the very existence of
society.
Educators do, it seems, face an interesting dilemma. For with the
impetus to nurture creativity comes a set of assumptions which imply
individual engagement and success, which may run counter to wise action.
For, as Sternberg (2003) argues , wisdom is not just about maximizing
ones own or someone elses self-interest, but about balancing various selfinterests (intrapersonal) with the interests of others (interpersonal) and of
other aspects of the context in which one lives (extrapersonal), such as ones
city or country or environment or even God. Wisdom also involves
creativity, in that the wise solution to a problem may be far from obvious.
(p.152). Sternbergs balance theory of wisdom thus proposes wisdom in
terms of successfully balancing interests. It also recognizes that wise
solutions are often creative ones (p.158) and proposes that wisdom is
related to creatively insightful thinking (p.158).
Sternberg (2003) makes the point, however, that although wise thinking
must be, to some extent, creative, creative thinking need not be wise
(p.158). Earlier in the paper it was argued that, since the policy perspective
on the generation of creativity in classrooms by teachers and schools appears
to be value neutral, and lacks any moral and ethical framework, thus the very
encouragement of creativity in education raises some fundamental questions
and dilemmas (such as cultural blindness and over-marketisation). It could
certainly be argued that creativity, developed without wisdom, may not serve
children, their families and communities, and the wider social and cultural
groupings to which they belongand thus may be seen as a questionable
endeavour.
How might such studies of wisdom inform learning and teaching in
classrooms?

10

Chapter

WISDOM IN THE CLASSROOM?

As discussed earlier, the work of the Berlin School suggests that the
development of wisdom is not necessarily correlated with age, implying that
it may be developed in the classroom.
Claxton (2005) raises interesting questions around how wise action may
be developed in classrooms, suggesting it may be helpful to leave open the
question of the extent to which wise action or wise judgment has to draw
upon deliberate, systematic, conscious and even intellectual forms of
thought (ibid, p.1) he goes on to argue, Wise action may manifest in a
highly intuitive and spontaneous way, just as much asor perhaps even
more thanit requires explicit rationality. Wise action, at least as I use the
term, often has a light and contingent quality that ponderous rationalitythe
methodical weighing up of pros and cons, and so onoften lacks. (ibid,
p1). Claxton also notes that acting wisely involves the inclination to look
for wise solutions, and not just the cognitive ability to do so. (ibid, p.9).
Soif wisdom were involved in the job of nurturing creativity, and if
wisdom were to be a core objective in both learner creativity and the kinds
of pedagogies that might support this, what could this mean for learning and
teaching in classrooms? We could see this as playing out on the levels of
both pedagogy and learning.
Whether we are considering pedagogy or learning, Sternbergs balance
theory (2003) appears to offer a framework for the task of developing
creativity with wisdom in the classroom, for it emphasizes the multiplicity of
perspectives that need to be brought to bear. Wise action according to
Sternberg involves actively balancing intrapersonal, interpersonal and
extrapersonal interests. Although Sternberg suggests that creativity may not
necessarily involve wisdom, I would suggest that if we bring Wisdom to the
fore in nurturing creativity in the classroom, then effectively we encourage
both teachers and their pupils to consider the impact of their ideas not only
on themselves but on others, and with their wider environment. We are then,
encouraging the development of creativity with responsibility, paying
attention to the impact of our ideas in multiple ways. Doing this requires,
as Baltes and Staudinger (2000) note, knowledge of human nature and
knowledge of how to engage with problems which life brings with it. This
suggests a need for experience alongside the capacity to understand and to
balance perspectives.
As Baltes and Stange (2005) point out, being able to take on multiple
perspectives, also means being able to understand multiple contexts and
interrelationships between these, being able to accept value relativism, and
being comfortable with handling uncertainty.

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

11

Thus, the teacher who exercises creative pedagogy with wisdom,

considers the potential impact of her ideas not only on herself in terms of her
own personal satisfaction, but on others (pupils, colleagues and perhaps the
wider community) and also the wider context (for example the local area).
And pupils for whom wisdom is a component of their creativity as it is
nurtured, consider how their ideas will affect others and the wider context as
well as themselves. Classrooms and schools which nurture these capacities,
might, then, help adults and children to understand uncertainty, relativism,
interrelationship and human nature in the context of these. In schools where
a creative partnership has been formed such that teachers and creative
practitioners collaborate on supporting childrens learning, perhaps there is a
particular kind of opportunity to broaden out perspectives in this way.
But how might this be done in practice? Noting the essentially moral
ingredient to wise action, Claxton (2005) argues the need for a degree of
disinterestedness on the part of the actor which enables them to stand back
from the fray and see the predicament more objectively, and in more of its
all-round complexity (Claxton, 2005, p.5). He suggests this goes hand in
hand with a degree of responsibility rather than laissez-faire, and also the
ability of the wise actor not only to get out of the way, but also to
empathise (Claxton, 2005, p9).
Claxton proposes some possible
components and precursors, to developing wisdom in the classroom. One of
these is nurturing the disposition towards empathy (Claxton, 2005, p9).
He uses the term disposition in order to emphasise the inclination toward
such behaviour; as he puts it, To act wisely, one must deploy ones empathy
(for example) spontaneously and appropriately. (Claxton, 2005, p.9)and
cites practice in which the cultivation of empathy in primary classrooms has
been successful (Claxton 1999, 2002). He proposes the notion of protosagacityii in recognition of the role played by experience in making wise
judgements in any context, let alone the context of nurturing creativity.
The development of empathy may be particularly served by the
engagement within the classroom of a mix of experience and expertise, such
that young people meet a mix of perspectives as a matter of course. In this
way, creative partnerships, sometimes established in the service of nurturing
creativity, may also serve to develop some of the precursors for developing
creativity with wisdom. It has been suggested that the formation of creative
partnerships in nurturing learning in classrooms offer opportunities for reconceptualising the role of the classroom teacher in nurturing creativity, in
ways which address ethical, social and environmental responsibility in
fostering creative engagement through creative partnership between teachers
and artists or other creative practitioners (Craft, 2005). The framing and
development of partnership is explored by (Griffiths and Woolf, 2004) but as
partnership work continues to evolve, to include the early years (Churchill

12

Chapter

Dower, 2004) through to post-compulsory and higher education (Jeffery et

al, 2005), investigation into how such relationships are set up, nurtured and
sustained, how they relate to notions of teacher and artist, and their
contribution to nurturing the creativity with wisdom of all involved, could
form part of a future development and research agenda.
Other strategies which may facilitate the development of creativity with
wisdom both in pedagogy and learning include fostering a classroom
environment in which ideas are subject to exploration and critical scrutiny,
such that it is not the case that when it comes to creative endeavours,
anything goes but far from it. Introducing protocols within the classroom
can provide frameworks in which the evaluation of ideas and products
produced by children can occur in an unthreatening and supportive manner,
as work at Harvards Project Zero has demonstrated (Blythe, 1999 and
Blythe et al 1998).

CONCLUDING REMARKS
In this article the apparently value-free nature of creativity as portrayed
through policy development, has been highlighted, and the case made for a
need to develop creativity with wisdom, such that cultural blindness and
environmental disregard do not ultimately permeate the nurturing of
creativity in schools. Possible ways of achieving this in both pedagogy and
learning, have been explorediii.
However, implied within the notion of developing creativity with
wisdom, as the notion of progo-sagacity suggests, is the development of
the capacity for moral judgement. Whilst the Berlin School cited earlier in
the article may reject age- and stage- based approaches to thinking about the
developmental of wisdom, those in search of explanatory models of moral
development may be drawn to the third school of thought. This school
includes work on the notion of emergent wisdom (Bassett, 2005), as part of
a system of engagement which produces special, higher-level thinking or
intelligence that shifts thinking from egocentric to a deep recognition of
interdependence.
There are significant challenges in age- and stage- based theories such as
this, as highlighted by the developmental work of Kohlberg (1981, 1984),
whose age- and stage- based model of moral development was based on the
Piagetian model of logical-mathematical development (Piaget, 1932, Piaget
and Inhelder, 1969). It provides a useful reminder that the fostering of
creativity with wisdom may be integrally related to the nurturing of moral
development and there is therefore potential for teachers to highlight the
ethical and moral issues that arise from creativity. At the least this may

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

13

mean recognizing that, during the 20th Century in particular creativity was
resourced, developed and applied in what might be seen as undesirable and
unethical ways.
It could certainly be argued that the development of creativity with
wisdom is no less located in a view of western individualism than the notion
of creativity itself. What this paper argues for is the need to surface a moral
and ethical frameworkand with this the recognition of multiple
perspectivesinto the fostering of creativity in classrooms. It has suggested
that fundamentally we might seek in classrooms to ask ourselves as adults
and encourage children to ask, what ends their (and our) creativity serves;
and thus to foster creativity with wisdom. Writing Wisdom into the framing
of creative teaching and learning (and, perhaps, the researching of it) will
naturally involve the recognition and exploration of multiple approaches to
wisdom itself.

REFERENCES
Ardelt, M. (2000) Antecedents and effects of wisdom in old age: A
longitudinal perspective on aging well, Research on Aging, 22 (4), pp.
360-394.
Ardelt, M. (2003) Empirical assessment of a three-dimensional wisdom
scale, Research on Aging, 25 (3), pp 275-324.
Ardelt, M. (2005) Foreword, in: R.S. Sternberg, & J. Jordan, (Eds) A
Handbook of Wisdom:
Psychological Perspectives
(New York,
Cambridge University Press).
Australia Council for the Arts (2005) Education and the Arts Strategy, 20047. Available online at: www.ozco.gov.au/ (accessed 29 November
2005).
Ball, S.J. (2003) The Teachers Soul and the Terrors of Performativity,
Journal of Educational Policy, 18, pp. 215-228.
Baltes, P.B. & Kunzmann, U. (2004) Two faces of wisdom: Wisdom as a
general theory of knowledge and judgement about excellence in mind and
virtue vs. wisdom as everyday realization in people and products, Human
Development, 47, pp. 290-299.
Baltes, P.B. & Stange, A. (2005) Research Project 6. Wisdom: the
Integration of Mind and Virtue. Center for Lifespan Psychology.
Available online at:
www.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/en/forschung/lip/projekte/wisdom.htm
(accessed 29 November 2005).
Baltes, P.B. & Staudinger, U.M. (2000) Wisdom: A metaheuristic
(pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence, American
Psychologist, 55, pp. 122-136.
Bassett, C. (2005) Wisdom in three acts: Using transformative learning to
teach for wisdom., Proceedings of the Sixth International Transformative
Learning Conference (East Lansing, Michigan, October 2005).

14

Chapter

Bassett, C. (2006) Laughing at gilded butterflies: Integrating wisdom

development, and learning. In C. Hoare (Ed) Oxford Handbook of Adult
Development and Learning (NewYork: Oxford University Press).
Bentley, T. (1998) Learning Beyond the Classroom (London and New York,
Routledge).
Birren, J.E. and Svensson, C.M. (2005) Wisdom in History, in: R.J.
Sternberg & J. Jordan (Eds) A Handbook of Wisdom: Psychological
Perspectives (New York, Cambridge University Press) pp. 3-31.
Bluck, S. and Gluck, J. (2005) From the Inside Out: Peoples Implicit
Theories of Wisdom, in: R.J. Sternberg. & J. Jordan (Eds) A Handbook of
Wisdom: Psychological Perspectives (New York, Cambridge University
Press) pp. 84-109.
Blythe, T. (1999) Approaching Poetry: Entry Points to Understanding, in: L.
Hetland & S. Veenema (Eds) The Project Zero Classroom: Views on
Understanding (Cambridge, MA: Project Zero, Harvard University
Graduate School of Education) pp. 119-126.
Blythe, T. and the teachers and researchers of the Teaching for
Understanding Project (1998) The Teaching for Understanding Guide
(San Franscisco, Jossey-Bass).
Churchill Dower (2005) Three international case studies. Paper presented at
Documenting Creative Learning Symposium: What, How and Why?
University of Cambridge, England, April 2005.
Claxton, G.L. (1999) Wise Up: The Challenge of Lifelong Learning,
(London and New York, Bloomsbury).
Claxton, G.L. (2002) Building Learning Power: Helping Young People
Become Better Learners (Bristol: TLO Ltd).
Claxton, G. (2005) Wising Up, Keynote Paper presented at ESRC Seminar,
Creativity: Using it Wisely?, University of Cambridge, England, April
2005.
Cook-Greuter, S.R. (2000) Mature ego development: A gateway to ego
transcendence? Journal of Adult Development, 7 (4), pp. 227-240.
Craft, A. (2002) Creativity and Early Years Education
(London,
Continuum).
Craft, A. (2003) The Limits to Creativity in Education, British Journal of
Educational Studies, 51 (2) pp. 113-127.
Craft, A. (2005a) Creativity in Schools:
Tensions and Dilemmas.
(Abingdon, Routledge).
Craft, A. (2005b) Creativity in Schools: Tensions and Dilemmas. Keynote
Paper presented at ESRC Seminar Creativity:
Using it Wisely?
University of Cambridge, England, April 2005.
www.creativeCreative Partnerships (2005a) Available online at:
partnerships.com/ (accessed 29 November 2005).
Creative Partnerships (2005b) Creative Action Research Awards (CARA).
Available online at:
www.creative-partnerships.com/searchResults
(accessed 29 November 2005),
Denney, N.W., Dew, J.R., & Kroupa, S.L. (1995) Perceptions of wisdom:
What is it and who has it? Journal of Adult Development, 2 (1), pp. 3747.

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

15

Department for Education and Employment (1997) Excellence in Schools

(London, Her Majestys Stationery Office).
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2003), Excellence and
Enjoyment (London, Her Majestys Stationery Office).
Department for Education and Skills (2004) Excellence and Enjoyment:
learning and teaching in the primary years (London, Her Majestys
Stationery Office).
Department for Education and Skills (2005) Specialist Schools. Available
online at: www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/specialistschools/ (accessed 29
November 2005).
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (2005) Available online
at:
www.culture.gov.uk/global/press_notices/archive_2005/dcms083_05.htm
(accessed 29 November 2005).
Education Commission of the States (2005) Arts Education Initiative.
Available online at:
www.ecs.org/ecsmain.asp?page=/html/projectsPartners/chair2005/Huckab
ee.asp (accessed 29 November 2005).
Every Child Matters (2003), Available online at:
www.rcu.gov.uk/articles/news/everychildmatters.pdf (accessed 9
September 2005).
Every
Child
Matters
(2005),
Available
online
at:
www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/ (accessed 29November 2005).
Fischmann, W., Solomon, B. Greenspan, D., Gardner, H. (2004) Making
Good: How Young People Cope with Moral Dilemmas at Work
(Cambridge, Harvard University Press).
Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It is
Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life (New York:
BasicBooks)
Fryer, M. (2003) Creativity Across the Curriculum: A review and analysis
of programmes designed to develop creativity. A Report prepared for the
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Available online at:
www.ncaction.org.uk/creativity/creativity_across_the_curriculum.doc
(accessed 29 November 2005).
Griffiths, M. and Woolf, F. (2004) Report on Creative Partnerships
Nottingham Action Research (Nottingham, Nottingham Trent University)
International Federation of Arts Council and Culture Agencies (2005).
Publications on policy development in creativity in education. Available
online at:
www.ifacca.org/ifacca2/en/new/page04_publications.asp?whichpage=5&
pagesize=20 (accessed 29 November 2005).
Jeffery, G. et al, (2005) The Creative College: building a successful learning
culture in the arts (London, Trentham Books).
Jeffrey, B. and Craft, A. (2001) The Universalization of Creativity, in: A.
Craft, B. Jeffrey, M. Leibling (Eds) Creativity in Education (London,
Continuum) pp. 1-13.
Jeffrey, B. & Woods, P. (1998) Testing Teachers (London: Falmer Press)
Jeffrey, B. and Woods, P. (2003) The creative school: A framework for
success, quality and effectiveness (London, RoutledgeFalmer).

16

Chapter

Kitchener, K.S. & Brenner, H.G. (1990) Wisdom and Reflective Judgement:
knowing in the face of uncertainty, in R.J. Sternberg, (Ed), Wisdom: Its
Nature, Origins and Development (New York, NY, Cambridge
University Press) pp.212-229.
Kohlberg, L. (1981) Essays on Moral Development Vol. I (San Francisco,
Harper & Row).
Kohlberg, L. (1984) Essays on Moral Development, Vol. II (San Francisco,
Harper & Row).
Kunzmann, U. and Baltes, P. (2005) The Psychology of Wisdom:
Theoretical and Empirical Challenges. In R.J. Sternberg & J.Jordan
(Eds) A Handbook of Wisdom: Psychological Perspectives (New York:,
Cambridge University Press) pp.110-135.
Learning and Teaching Scotland (2005) Creativity in Education. Available
online at: www.ltscotland.org.uk/creativity/ (accessed 29 November
2005).
Malangi, S. (2004) The Curse of the Creative Class, in The Wall Street
Journal,
January
19
2004.
Available
online
at:
www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004573 (accessed 29 November
2005.
Ministry of Education Singapore (1998) The desired outcomes of education
in Singapore. wwwl.moe.edu.sg/desired.html (accessed 7 April 2004).
National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education
(NACCCE) (1999) All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education
(London, Department for Education and Employment).
National College for School Leadership (NCSL) (2005) Available online at:
www.ncsl.org.uk/research_and_development/leading_practice_seminars/r
andd-leading-current-creativity.cfm (accessed 29 November 2005).
Ng, A.K. (2003) A Cultural Model of Creative and Conforming Behaviour,
Creativity Research Journal, 15, 2 & 3, pp. 223233.
Ng, A.K. and Lin, K.H.K. (2004) Teaching attitudes, emotional intelligence
and creativity of school teachers in Singapore, submitted to Educational
Research Journal based in Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2002) The Curriculum in
Successful Primary Schools (London, Her Majestys Stationery Office).
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2003a), Expecting the
Unexpected: Developing creativity in primary and secondary schools.
Available online at:
www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs.summary&id=3377

(accessed 23 March 2006).

Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2003b) Improving City
Schools:
How the arts can help. Available online at:
www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs.summary&id=3378

(accessed 23 March 2006).

Osbeck, L.M. and Robinson, D.M. (2005) Philosophical Theories of
Wisdom. In R.J. Sternberg & J. Jordan, J. (Eds) A Handbook of Wisdom:
Psychological Perspectives (New York, Cambridge University Press)
pp.61-83.
Piaget, J. (1932) The Moral Judgment of the Child (London, Routledge &
Kegan Paul).

. Fostering creativity with wisdom

17

Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1969), The Psychology of the Child (London,

Routledge & Kegan Paul).
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and Department for
Education and Employment (DfEE) (1999) The National Curriculum
Handbook for secondary teachers in England (London, DfEE/QCA)
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) (2005a) Creativity: Find it,
promotePromoting pupils creative thinking and behaviour across the
curriculum at key stages 1, 2 and 3 - practical materials for schools
(London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority).
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) (2005b) Creativity: Find It!
Promote It! Available online at:
www.ncaction.org.uk/creativity/about.htm (accessed 29 November 2005).
Scottish Executive (2004) Cultural Policy Statement Available online at:
www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ncs04-00.asp
(accessed 29 November
2005).
Seltzer, K. & Bentley, T. (1999) The Creative Age: Knowledge and Skills
for the New Economy (London, Demos).
Specialist Schools Trust (SST) (2005) Review of History of Specialist
Schools in England. Available online at:
www.specialistschools.org.uk/about/historyofthetrust/default.aspa (accessed 29
November 2005).
Sternberg, R.J. (1998) A balance theory of wisdom, Review of General
Psychology. 2, 4, pp. 347-365.
Sternberg, R.J. (2001) Why schools should teach for wisdom: The balance
theory of wisdom in educational settings. Educational Psychologist 36, 4,
pp. 227-245.
Sternberg, R.J. (2003) Wisdom, Intelligence and Creativity Synthesized
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
Sternberg, R. J. (2004) What is Wisdom and How Can We Develop It? The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 1,
pp. 164-174.
Sternberg, R.J. & Jordan, J. (Eds) (2005) A Handbook of Wisdom:
Psychological Perspectives (New York, Cambridge University Press).
Takahashi, M. and Overton, W.F. (2005) Cultural Foundations of Wisdom:
An Integrated Developmental Approach, in: R.J. Sternberg & J. Jordan
(Eds) A Handbook of Wisdom: Psychological Perspectives (New York,
Cambridge University Press) pp. 32-60.
Webster, J.D. (2003) An exploratory analysis of a self-assessed wisdom
scale, Journal of Adult Development, 10, 1, pp. 13-22.
Wink, P. & Helson, R. (1997) Practical and transcendent wisdom: Their
nature and some longitudinal findings, Journal of Adult Development, 4,
1, pp. 1-14.
Woods, P. (2002), Teaching and learning in the new millennium, in C.
Sugrue & C. Day (Eds) Developing Teachers and Teaching Practice:
International Research Perspectives (London and New York,
RoutledgeFalmer) pp. 73-91
Woods, P. and Jeffrey, B. (2002) The Reconstruction of Primary Teachers
Identities, British Journal of Sociology, 23, pp. 89-106.
Woods, P. and OShannessy, J. (2002) Reintroducing creativity: day 10 at
Hackleton School. The Curriculum Journal, 13, 2, pp. 163-182.

18

Chapter

Anna Craft is Reader in Education at The Open University, United

Kingdom, and since 2003 has been Visiting Scholar at Harvard University,
USA. She convenes with Pam Burnard and Teresa Grainger the British
Educational Research Association Special Interest Group, Creativity in
Education. She is Founding Co-Editor of the international journal, Thinking
Skills and Creativity, and author of Creativity Across the Primary
Curriculum (RoutledgeFalmer, 2000), Creativity in Education (with Jeffrey
and Leibling, Continuum, 2001), Creativity and Early Years Education
(Continuum, 2002) and Creativity in Schools: Tensions and Dilemmas
(Routledge, 2005).
i

This is a large-scale, empirical project, spread over ten years, based at Harvard Universitys
Project Zero and working in collaboration with research groups at Stanford University and
The University of Chicago. Co-directed by Professors Howard Gardner, Mihaly
Csikszentmihaly and William Damon, it explores how professionals in the United States
succeed or fail in carrying out work that is excellent, ethical and engaging in the face of
powerful market conditions, and rapid changes in society. It has worked with 12000
subjects in nine domains and the results of the study have been written up in half a dozen
books and dozens of articles. More information about the GoodWork Project can be found
on the website: http://www.goodworkproject.org/
ii
A term developed by Jonathan Rowson in his doctoral work at Bristol University.
iii
Clearly another dimension of this would include how researchers can investigate creativity
with wisdom.