Do Schools Kill Creativity: Traditional Education

Although many children were born with special talents or opportunities which could have enabled them to be creative, innovative, or fascinating, they grew up to be functional adults who cared about earning a lot of money instead of realizing their dreams. Traditional education supports people in becoming a part of society, helps to improve people’s lives, and teaches them values, knowledge, and beliefs. However, the traditional educational system has caused much controversy since the beginning of formal education because traditional education can hurt children’s ability to think creatively, innovate, and develop fascinating minds. Since the beginning of formal education, traditional education has never deviated from its standard curriculum, the goal of which is students’ socialization and memorization. The most serious problem is that many countries follow the same educational methods, which kill children’s creativity. Furthermore, many countries focus only on uniformity, memorization, and exam performance. Most schools don’t care about their students’ aspirations, although students may have great talents and creativity because these qualities are not practical for future generations. Traditional education should be changed to nurture children’s creativity, one of the most essential qualities for society’s future and the lives of its citizens. This essay will answer the question "How do schools kill creativity?".

Each country has its own norms, beliefs, and values to make its own culture and future success. Interestingly, however, most countries use the same standards of evaluation, which do not encourage creativity, only simplistically evaluate students’ fundamental grades and aptitudes and can kill their fascinating, curious minds and ability to think creatively. In the article “Pros & Cons of Standard Tests”, the author states that standard evaluation cannot measure students’ performance, such as their growth over the course of a year. Furthermore, it cannot evaluate students’ “soft skills”, such as creativity, cooperation, and motivation, because standard evaluation only judges specific skills such as reading, math, and writing. For instance, Sir Ken Robinson introduces a good example in a young girl named “Gillian Lynne” in the video “Do Schools Kill Creativity?”. Gillian’s parents take her to the hospital because she has difficulty in focusing on studying and is unable to sit still. The doctor attributed her problems to her potential to become a dancer. She went on to become one of the most famous dancers in the world. As the example demonstrates, traditional education does not care about what students want, and imposing the same standard of evaluation causes students to lose their unique opportunities and abilities.

The objective of traditional education is for children to grow up into functional adults who care about their careers so that they can contribute to society. In addition, it’s helpful to learn useful knowledge for the future. Nevertheless, traditional education has been a controversial topic due to its methods. In the article “How Schools Are Killing Creativity”, Line Dalile states that “It is our mission to ensure that the next generation will be full of inventors and mathematicians who will, in turn, bring humanity to another level”. According to Dalile, the current educational system believes that many scientists are needed to contribute greatly to society. Traditional education needs students to follow the curriculum to be successful people because it’s the best way to get good grades, knowledge, and eventually a job; however, these educational methods kill creativity and students' individual talents. Matthew Lynch, states that “The education system is not preparing students for the real world by stifling imagination. In teaching for tests, learning by memorization, and using a standardized curriculum, we have lost imagination and creativity. Students have learned to follow by rote and perform.” To support this argument, many students appear to be preparing to be robots, following the same curriculum. Employing the same educational methods causes all students to share common beliefs and values, discouraging students from thinking creatively because the standard curriculum does not value students’ interests, desires, and goals. For instance, the American educational system forces students to follow narrow pathways which allow little room for error and place more emphasis on fulfilling pre-set requirements, as cited by Saulat. Standard education focuses only on socializing students.

Students’ creativity is the most essential part of society. Without creativity, the world would lose their future, opportunities, and values. Nevertheless, many schools still believe that specific traditional areas of emphasis such as reading, writing, and mathematics are more important than creativity. Although traditional education has many advantages, such as good communication between teachers and students, it has numerous negative effects on students. Since students begin their education, they lose their motivation and interest in what they want. Isabelle Demers states that this is because all schools are not created equal, resulting in inconsistent academic performance and motivation. Lack of motivation causes depression, high-stress levels, and bad influences on relationships. Moreover, lack of motivation causes students to lack career direction. Having a dream is the most important thing for people’s future. However, traditional education is not preparing students for the real world by stifling imagination, as cited in the article “Is Education Killing Imagination?”. For instance, students cannot learn something significant in their lives while following the same standard curriculum. Moreover, Korean students study hard but work for low wages. Many students lose sight of where they want to go and what they want to be, even if they are studying hard.

As mentioned, traditional education hurts students’ creativity and curiosity. It also has many negative influences on students, such as lack of motivation and lack of career direction. This is why most people think that traditional education should be changed. However, some believe that traditional education does not need to be changed because it has several benefits. Traditional education can help people to be experienced in various technologies, develop good communications skills, broaden knowledge, and enlighten the discussion. Matthew Lynch points out that traditional education can reveal students’ strengths and weaknesses. “This would work well in a group project, where each individual could show both strengths and weaknesses”. Furthermore, many students can receive free education and participate in many events which provide important experiences.

Some people believe that traditional education helps in becoming a functional adult, giving people many of experiences and enforcing uniformity. but traditional education should be changed because it robs many of their creativity. Finland, known for its superior educational methods, has a different educational system. There is no standardized testing, no competition, only cooperation, and provides professional options in Finland, cites Mike Colagrossi. That’s why many different students express their creativity, which makes their lives better. The possibility of students’ losing their ability to think creatively is not a concern in Finland.

So do schools kill creativity? Essay shows that although most children were born with surprising talents and opportunities to grow into adults who care about their futures, dreams, and curiosity, they fear losing their abilities, opportunities, and dreams. Growing up a functional adult can make their future better because they can make a lot of money and have a good social life by learning how to socialize effectively. However, the most essential thing is not to lose one’s own dreams and abilities. Creativity is a treasure which can improve society and change the world for the better. Traditional education has many benefits; however, if it is not reformed, the world will lose its future.

References

1. (N.D) Pros & Cons of Standardized Tests. (2019, May 28). Retrieved from https://gradepowerlearning.com/pros-cons-standardized-tests/
2. Robinson, K. (n.d.). Do schools kill creativity? Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity
3. Dalile, L. (2012, June 10). How Schools Are Killing Creativity. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/a-dictator-racing-to-nowh_b_1409138?guccounter=
4. Lynch, M. (2016, September 05). Is education killing imagination? Retrieved from https://www.theedadvocate.org/is-education-killing-imagination/
5. Saulat, F. (2018, March 20). The Education Factory: How the U.S. Education System is Killing Creativity. Retrieved from http://georgiapoliticalreview.com/the-education-factory-how-the-u-s-education-system-is-killing-creativity/
6. Demers, I. G. (n.d.). Why Do High School Students Lack Motivation in the Classroom? Toward an Understanding of Academic Amotivation and the Role of Social Support. Retrieved 2006.
7. Myoung-jin, K., & Jeong-a, L. (2016). Students in Seoul have hard time with studying and low-wage work. Retrieved from http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/761463.html
8. Colagrossi, M. (n.d.). 10 reasons why Finland's education system is the best in the world. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/09/10-reasons-why-finlands-education-system-is-the-best-in-the-world