Imagine Creating Rubrics That Develop Creativity
English teachers are by nature rather imaginative, a trait that is not taught in a methods class or listed as a disposition in standards for teacher preparation. Whether as part of a learning activity or a “what if question posed in a literature discussion, imagination and creativity are integral parts of our classrooms and their inclusion is as natural to most of us as breathing. Sadly, when the beauty and fragility of imaginings are exposed to the harsh light of assessment, they evaporate in the heat of quantification.
Imagination may not be a concept listed in state performance standards, but authentic assessment is a focus of national and state curriculum reform. Teachers who recognize the important role imagination and creativity Omega Replica play in the learning process want to include these higher-level thought processes as part of authentic assessment. From creative problem solving to culminating performance events, curriculum design that includes assessment that captures critical thinking skills, problem solving abilities, and imaginative/creative capabilities is promoted by educators at all levels.
Yet, is imagination just an ephemeral wind that blows through the classroom and the minds of our students at will, or can teachers identify components and teach imaginative and creative thought processes? How are imagination and creativity linked? Jane Piirto in Understanding Creativity considers imagination to be a component of creativity. As defined in the Oxford English Dictionary, imagination is the “the faculty or action of forming ideas or images in the mind; the power of framing new and striking intellectual conceptions; the ability of the mind to be creative or resourceful; poetic genius.” How does the average English teacher measure poetic genius?
Measuring creativity in student work is a stumbling block for many teachers. While scoring rubrics have become a standard assessment tool for grading student projects, clearly articulated criteria for imagination or creativity remain elusive. An informal survey of rubrics I have found generously posted online reveals that the majority list creativity as the scoring criteria without clearly identifying the elements of creativity or the traits that differentiate between high and low levels. Rubrics designed to measure imagination and creativity usually fail because they attempt to quantify the product rather than assess student growth during the creative process.
Without a clear understanding of the role imagination and creativity play in assignments, students are often blindsided by a grade when teachers—even good teachers—attempt to assess creativity as a product. A teacher asked his English class to “imaginatively depict” the setting in Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” by drawing a map and tracing Rainsford’s movements throughout the story. A student, Maggie, innovatively created a facsimile of old map paper with tea, water, and folding, then borrowed her grandfather’s fountain pen. Envisioning the island and surrounding waters while incorporating but expanding on the elements Omega Replica Watches of the story, Maggie depicted an imaginative world with location markings, icons for flora and fauna, and enough detail to serve as a blueprint for the movie set design. When she received her grade, a rating of 3 out of a possible 5, she asked the teacher, “Why a 3?” His response: “You didn’t use color. Be creative!” Maggie later complained to friends, “If I had known color was the criteria, I would have used less imagination and more crayons.”
Yes, there can be a problem when teachers assess imagination and creativity as a product without clarifying the criteria that will be used.
Processing your request, Please wait....
