Several authors have suggested that disciplinary cultures play an important role in shaping the teaching and learning practices of their members (Fanghanel 2013; Mårtensson, Roxå & Olsson 2011). Trowler (2008), for instance, argues that disciplines create powerful ‘teaching and learning regimes’ (TLRs) that govern pedagogical values, emphases, and approaches. This study seeks to explore the extent to which such TLRs influence the teaching and learning of creativity.
It is often asserted that universities have an obligation to foster creativity in their students (Walsh et al., 2013; Zacher & Johnson, 2014), yet studies have shown that creativity is only rarely incorporated into courses and curricula as an intentionally facilitated learning outcome (Jackson, 2008, Authors 2012; Authors 2015). By conducting an examination of undergraduate course outlines, this research provides a preliminary picture of the extent to which this finding holds across disciplinary communities at one institution. Using a modified version of an analytical tool developed by Jackson & Shaw (2006), we conducted a close reading of all publicly available outlines for the 2013-14 academic year. The intent was to determine how commonly instructors named creativity or related constructs amongst their learning objectives or assessment criteria, and whether the frequency of these references varied across disciplines, levels, and class structures. We also scrutinized the outlines for information about how, if at all, creativity is taught and assessed in these contexts. This presentation will discuss the results and limitations of this study, and encourage attendees to consider the place of creativity within their own institutional and disciplinary communities.
