Encouraging creativity in the classroom still a challenge despite MOE push, teachers say

SINGAPORE: When Singapore teens came out tops in a recent worldwide study on creative thinking, it took parents and teachers by surprise.

“I know that MOE (the Ministry of Education) is doing a lot of things to try to promote creativity during the lessons in the classroom,” said Claire, a Chinese language teacher in a primary school. 

“But for the syllabus nowadays, we’re still given a very neatly packed problem with a very neatly packed solution. So most of the kids don’t really have the chance to think outside the box.” 

In 2022, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) studied creative thinking among students for the first time. The results of the study – where students were tested on their capacity to generate diverse and original ideas – were released last month. 

More than half, or 58 per cent, of Singapore students were top performers. This was more than twice the OECD average and the highest among all 64 participating countries and economies. 

All five of the teachers CNA spoke to were surprised by the results of the PISA study. Even students themselves did not think they were creative – in the PISA study, just 64 per cent of them said they were confident of being creative, compared with the OECD average of 73 per cent. 

While students can generate good, original ideas in some areas of school life, teachers say encouraging creativity in the classroom is still a challenge. 

The names of teachers interviewed for this story have been changed at their request as they were not authorised to speak to the media. 

INTRODUCING INVENTIVE THINKING

In a post on LinkedIn, Singapore's director-general of education Liew Wei Li confessed to doubting the PISA results at first. 

“I thought we might be in the middle of the table, but none of us thought we would be heading the list,” she wrote. 

The results show that creative thinking can be taught, Ms Liew added, noting that the Ministry of Education (MOE) started incorporating inventive thinking into its curriculum, teaching and learning guides, and even exam syllabuses where possible 15 years ago. 

The national curriculum and school-based programmes are guided by "21st-century competencies", with inventive thinking as a key component, said MOE when the PISA study results were released. 

For example, primary school students can express their creativity through the way a story is told or their choice of words in composition writing, the ministry said. Secondary school students have design and technology lessons where they learn how to identify design needs, generate and develop ideas, and then come up with solutions. 

Co-curricular activities also provide a platform for students to collaborate and find innovative solutions to problems, it added. 

But a National Institute of Education (NIE) associate professor said the PISA study may not be an accurate reading of students' creativity levels. 

The tests are a measure of “Little C” creativity, or creativity in our daily lives, not “Big C” creativity, typically associated with major intellectual or technological leaps, said Assoc Prof Heng Tang Tang.

“If we’re talking about ‘Little C’, that is something many of us – including our students – can do decently well at.” 

Singapore should “exercise some caution” with the conclusions drawn from the PISA results, because the test format and constructs can shape outcomes, said Assoc Prof Heng. 

For example, the tests are conducted on a computer. This could be partly why Singapore students, who tend to be adept at navigating digital devices and online tools, had better results. 

CAN'T ALWAYS BE CREATIVE IN EXAMS

Teachers CNA spoke to lauded the scrapping of some exams – such as the mid-year papers for primary and secondary school levels – which has helped students to be more creative with alternate assessment methods like project work. 

But on MOE's push to encourage creativity in lessons, teachers said they have to balance this with providing "structure" for students. 

For example, when it comes to exam preparation, most teachers focus on ensuring that students' answers match the way exams are marked so that they do well. 

“The syllabus requires them to answer certain questions in a certain way … So we also teach the kids that they have to follow step by step, you can’t just write anyhow. That actually restrains them from thinking out of the box,” Claire said. 

For example, for Chinese language exams, more creative students might summarise a longer answer and merge multiple points into one sentence. But they may be required to have certain keywords in their answer to get full marks. 

“Actually the meaning behind it is about the same. But the problem is that we still will follow the marking scheme. So it’s a bit like you’re forcing them not to be creative.”  

A parent of a 15-year-old boy said that for subjects like mathematics, there is usually only one way to solve the question. 

“It’s very hard for kids to look at the question and say, let’s find another way of doing this," said Mr Aaron Koh. "You apply this formula, these are the steps, and then you get the answer. There’s no reason for you to even try another way.” 

Lily, who teaches English and literature in a secondary school, said she tells her students that there are no right answers, but there are wrong answers. 

“I tell them that you can have creativity in your interpretation, but what you need is strong justification for your interpretation,” she said, adding that it is easier to encourage creative expression in literature classes. 

But when it comes to essay writing in English, the marking scheme is clearly divided into 10 marks for content and 10 marks for language use, and she tells her students that it is easy to score marks as long as they stay on point. 

“My worry with kids is that they’re creative to the point of writing out of point,” she added. 

The approach that teachers can take also depends on the profile of the students, said Paulina, who also used to teach English and literature in a secondary school up until recently. 

While she had some “geniuses” among her students, she still had to cater to the majority. 

“I feel like the strategy to ensure that I can help the majority of the students is really to tell them: ‘This is the exam, this is what you should write in order to cater to the exam.’ So it was very uninspiring teaching.” 

Paulina thought at first that student-initiated learning – where children pursue their own interests and learn outside the curriculum – was a good idea.

While this is a ministry initiative, each school conducts this differently.

At Paulina's school, the projects students took on had conditions and outcomes to fulfil. For example, they had to contribute to society in some way. 

The requirements made the projects a chore for students and "completely ruined" their motivation, she said.

NIE's Assoc Prof Heng said that newer curriculums aim to give students opportunities to stretch their imagination and connect them to the real world.

“Further, Singaporeans’ risk aversion and preference to maintain harmony may stifle their creativity along the “Big C” domain or in other types of creativity, including artistic creativity.”