Written by Heidi Groth
Students today are free from independent thinking that pushes them to use their God-given creativity.
While that may seem a bit harsh, consider carefully the type of curriculum that students experience in our schools. Do our classroom procedures, assignments, assessments, and facilities encourage students in their creativity or do we lead them by the hand to the answer that we want? It is too often a priority for a teacher to cover specific information during the year rather than teach and encourage students to use their critical thinking skills. In further efforts to form students into the kind we want, we reward students based on their compliance rather than performance. The children who are easy on the teacher or can regurgitate the information are praised; children who disrupt the class with their tangential questions and do not complete their worksheets are the ones who are failing.
Are we punishing students for thinking outside the box?
Too often the pressure to perform as well as the public school overwhelms our curriculum. Classrooms are driven away from open-ended activities fueled by student interest into units of study that can be measured. “Those who believed that knowledge is complex, and that students are unique, opposed efforts to assess students’ knowledge via a single test. Further, doubts that standardized tests can provide an objective and unbiased assessment also had an impact on respondents’ opposition to standardized tests.” (Magee & Jones, 2012, p. 79)
The lesson plan in the classroom is preparing students for school rather than for life. Assessments like matching, true and false, and multiple choice offer no outlet for the students who naturally think differently. The natural desire to think outside the box is quashed because we would like to get on with our lesson. However, students who are able to creatively problem solve and apply critical thinking skills are more apt to succeed against peers who rely on memorized facts or figures.
Society has been flooded with ribbons, trophies, and ceremonies designed to reward students; unfortunately, those rewards are often given for students meeting a preconceived list of expectations rather than using them to celebrate students who challenged themselves to work using their creativity. Young people then become dependent on an outside source to tell them what to do rather than think for themselves.
This is especially harmful with regard to personal relationships and responsibility. “Asserting your own identity within the structure of a community in a healthy way takes time, patience, and mistakes along the way.” (Anthony, 2012, p. 54)
Children have been trained to look to adults for the answer. They are losing the ability to establish lasting meaningful relationships with others. Instead of finding intrinsic joy in connecting to others, individuals crave extrinsic rewards to affirm their misplaced and fragile self-esteem.
Recess would be a great time for students to learn how to interact with one another and explore their personal limits. Sadly, many of our playgrounds today are made so safe that they remove opportunities to explore. “The contemporary elementary school playground is designed as though playground activity contributes nothing to thinking, relating, and creating.” (Bruya, 1988, p. 10) Playground implements are carefully designed, installed, and maintained to ensure an activity space that is free of danger but does not challenge them to play creatively.
Students would be well served to have play spaces crafted to promote creativity and cooperation. Manipulative materials such as PVC pipes, cardboard boxes, sidewalk chalk, and tarps would provide students with equipment that could be imagined into a wonderland. Imaginative play naturally calls for participation, so those imaginative activities would push children to work and experiment together; it is beneficial for educators to remember that learning does not happen only within a classroom.
Schooling should be designed to prepare students to use their God-given abilities in the world around them. Students should have the confidence to take risks both personally and professionally. Confidence in risk-taking is not taught but earned.
Curriculum should be primarily built around activities that foster critical thinking: encouraging students to have reasoning behind their answers and teaching children how to think through a process instead of providing them with a product.
Heidi Groth (’06) currently teaches kindergarten at Christ-St. John’s–West Salem WI.
References
Anthony, M. (2012). When Friendship Hurts, Scholastic Instructor, Winter 2012, 53-57.
Bruya, L.D. (1988). Play Spaces for Children: A New Beginning, American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 2(1), 1-243.
Magee, R.G. & Jones, B.D. (2012). Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 12, 71-82.
I’m too far removed by now from the professional world of education to comment here from that perspective, but I missed any mention here of the necessary caution for Christians of all ages about thinking outside the box: Genesis 3:1. That was the original thinking outside the box. Please don’t see this as a reactionary, shallow condemnation of all such thinking, or a lack of appreciation of its value. I write as one who has instinctively thought and spoken outside the box all my life. But as a seasoned Christian and a former Christian educator I know that we need to consistently have the caution flag ready for all such thinking. Every aspect of our lives has a Biblical, Christian dimension to it, and likewise is threatened by Satan’s approach in Genesis 3:1, which he has been remarkably able to continue using with such great success down through the ages. So, when encouraging thinking outside the box, we need to keep that caution in mind, as well as its counterbalance: “We demolish every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (II Cor. 10:5)
Very deep philosophical thought Jonathan. “Thinking out of the box” simply means to use creativity, to be different in a solution when presented with a problem or question. There is never the idea that when being creative you do things against the word of God.
When I teach Introduction to Engineering Design that type of thinking is stressed and modeled and a framework presented. Never has the thought come to our class, “In order to be creative I have to do something sinful.”
The antithesis would be, “There is only ONE right answer.” When we practice engineering we there is NEVER one right answer. The way of salvation has ONE right answer but that is not included in this educational thought line.
Andrew, your reply sounds like I came across as suggesting an INTENT to think, speak or act against God’s will. That was not at all my thought. But the danger I see is that unless we are consciously on guard against the inherent dangers – from a Biblical, Christian perspective – in thinking outside the box, we can so easily fall victim to the errant thinking that lurks around such corners. Thus caution and awareness was my concern. Also, the field in which one works makes a large difference in this regard. Your field of Engineering Design would seem to pose significantly less threat to Biblical solidity – and more importance for creative thinking – than, for example, the humanities do, where a solid Scriptural anchor is especially essential in a field known for its wide open approach to issues of the human mind and soul. Gay marriage and transgender endorsements would be obvious current examples of thinking outside the box in that field. I am not suggesting that WELS individuals are leaning in those directions, but they do illustrate my point. “So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!” – I Cor. 10:12
I love your opening–it really gets the readers attention. It is so worth it to teach students to teach themselves–prepare them for their future–for jobs that haven’t even been invented yet. It is work for a teacher to redesign lessons and assessments to promote creativity, problem solving and critical thinking. But when you re-work your lessons a little bit at a time, soon you, the teacher begin to naturally plan, think and teach that way. AND, the students, after a period of adjustment, begin to look forward to your new lessons as well.