International Journal of Arts and Sciences
3(17): 1-10 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
A Classroom Climate for Creativity: Overcoming Pedagogical
Defensiveness
Charles E. Beck, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Abstract: Creating a climate for creativity requires a supportive communication climate where
students feel free to contribute. Students tend to follow one of the four dominant styles to
express their creativity: modifying, visioning, experimenting, and exploring. Communication
climate ranges from supportive to defensive. Supportive climates come from a focus on
description, problem orientation, spontaneity, empathy, equality, and provisionalism. The four
creativity styles parallel four of the supportive climates, while traditional pedagogy parallels
defensive communication. A workshop exercise provides a means of applying the concepts.
Keywords: Creativity Styles, Communication Climate, Pedagogy
Introduction
Creating a climate for creativity in the classroom requires both an understanding the nature of
creativity and an understanding of supportive communication climate where students feel free to
contribute. Among the various ways of examining creativity, this paper begins with a discussion
of creativity and the four dominant styles through which individuals tend to express their
creativity. Then it outlines the six dichotomies of communication climate, ranging from
supportive to defensive. Supportive climates come from a focus on description, problem
orientation, spontaneity, empathy, equality, and provisionalism. Four of the creativity styles
parallel four of the supportive climates, while traditional pedagogy tends to parallel defensive
communication. A brief workshop exercise provides a means of applying the concepts:
educators can learn the dichotomies that distinguish the supportive-defensive environments,
learn to identify the supportive and defensive patterns, and learn how to create replace
defensiveness so that creativity may emerge in a supportive environment.
Approaches to Creativity
By fostering creative thinking, educators can help students apply their knowledge and abilities to
new situations. Rote memorization, while providing a foundation, prepares people for entrylevel positions, saying in effect, “here’s the rules, just memorize and follow them.” For higherlevel functioning, students must use and adapt what they know to situations that do not match
low-level decisions. Recognizing and developing individual creativity provides a significant step
toward achieving higher-order thinking. Various theorists approach the topic of creativity from
different positions, ranging from clarifying the abstract dimensions of creativity, thought process
for creativity, preparing an environment for creative activity, and creativity styles.
International Journal of Arts and Sciences
3(17): 1-10 (2010)
CD-ROM. ISSN: 1944-6934
© InternationalJournal.org
From the abstract viewpoint, Anderson looks at creativity as three large processes [997]
•
•
•
creation
making something out of nothing
synthesis
relating two or more previously unrelated phenomena
modification altering something that currently exist
In terms of process, certain thought patterns, abilities, and attitudes can contribute to creative
thinking. As with any behavioral pattern, some students may be stronger than others in some
areas; but these types of patterns reflect the ability to become creative thinkers. Table 1 identifies
these practices.
Table 1: Thought Patterns for Creative Thinking
Active imagination
Flexibility
Curiosity
Independence
Trust own senses
Acceptance of own differentness
Tolerance for ambiguity
Openness to subconscious material
Ability to work an several ideas simultaneously
Ability to abstract from the concrete
[Adapted from Cropley, 2000]
The categories listed by Cropley do not exhaust the possibilities, but they do indicate the range
of behavioral patterns that contribute to creativity. To help students feel comfortable instructors
can create an environment where students feel comfortable. Fogarty suggests four broad
strategies for such an environment [998]
•
•
•
•
Set a safe emotional climate
Create a rich learning environment
Teach the mind-tools
Develop the skillfulness of learning [Fogarty, 1998]
The precept to “set an emotional climate” helps for students at all ages, for people at all levels
are reluctant to “look bad.” Students often withhold asking even basic questions for fear of
appearing incompetent. Introverts obviously tend to remain in the background; but even
extraverts tend to withhold if they fear looking incompetent or if they anticipate ridicule. At its
underlying base, the setting focuses on the human dimension so that the wider communication
processes can work in an organization (Robertson 1, 2003) An innovative culture reflects a
learning orientation [Miron et al., 2004] where a learning rich environment focuses on meeting
individual needs.
Creativity Styles
An alternate approach to creativity considers all individuals creative, but with differing
tendencies in their creative processes. According to Miller, each individual on is creative, but
tends to use information differently in approaching problems [Couger, 1995, pp 98-101].
Modifying Style
Visioning Style
Experimenting Style
Exploring Style
Adapt something to improve on what worked before.
Imagine an ideal solution over the long term
Combine and test ideas
Use metaphors to challenge our assumptions
Miller envisions these four styles interacting with Insights, perception, facts, and decision
making. Figure 1 depicts this interrelationship.
Visioning
Decision
Making
Insights
Modifying
Exploring
Perceiving
Facts
Experimenting
FIGURE 1: Creativity Styles [Adapted from Miller, in Couger, 1998]
To see the four creativity styles in action, individuals tend to ask particular questions, depending
on their particular style. Table 2 reflects these typical questions.
TABLE 2: Creativity Styles and Dominant Questions Asked
Creativity Style
Modifying
Visioning
Experimenting
Typical Questions Asked
How can we build on what we already have?
Can we adapt this idea?
Do we have all the facts?
What’s a short-term solution?
In a perfect world, what would this be?
Let’s imagine that . . .
How does this all fit together?
What is your long-term goal?
How can we test it out?
What if we combined . . .
Who’s on board?
What’s the process?
Why not?
Have you thought about starting from scratch?
What is this like?
What have we assumed here?
Exploring
Communication Climate for Creative Thinking
Although teachers may wish to create a climate of creativity, they must ensure that students
contribute to the process; otherwise, students merely remain passive in the educational process.
To get the best out of students requires a climate where each person feels free to express the idea.
This climate does not guarantee that every idea suggested will lead to action or implementation.
But it does mean that only when ideas are freely developed and free flowing can both the
individual and the organization take the idea and actually bring it to fruition. One very specific
training technique can set the sound foundation: examining the communication climate within
the organization. Only with an open climate will students feel free to develop ideas and to pursue
questions, without feeling put-down or feeling foolish in the process. In contrast, a defensive
climate stifle creativity: even good ideas will never be expressed because the climate in the
classroom keeps students from expressing new ideas.
As defined by Jack Gibb [961] communication climate ranges along a dichotomy between
supportive and defensive, where supportive leads to open communication and defensive to
closed. But rather than a single tendency, various sets of behaviors tend to foster either
supportive or defensive climates. Table 3 lists these six sets of dichotomies.
TABLE 3: Communication Climate Dichotomies
Defensive
Evaluation
Control
Strategy
Neutrality
Superiority
Certainty
Supportive
Description
Problem Orientation
Spontaneity
Empathy
Equality
Provisionalism
Description vs. Evaluation
In the first set of dichotomies, description focuses on a current state of affairs or a task at hand,
while evaluation judges the competence of the individuals. Preparation in creative thinking
requires a close description of events followed by free thinking [Boone and Hollingsworth,
1990), but to think freely and to express those thoughts requires organizational support. In
general, people dislike evaluations, a teacher or evaluator constantly “looking over their
shoulder.” If they fear evaluation, people use “safe” responses, rather than try new ideas.
Problem-Orientation vs. Control
The “do it my way” is evidence of control, a defensive climate. To foster creativity,
organizations need to focus on the problem itself, which means asking questions. Verberne
[1997] lists standard keywords for the questioning process:
Who?
Why?
When?
How
What if?
What about?
Focusing on problems means facing opposition -- standing up to those who merely want to
continue the status quo. Sternberg advocates the need to surmount obstacles to solving
problems: “Others will oppose ideas because they go against the current way of doing things, so
creative people expect and welcome opposition as a way to refine ideas” [2000].
Spontaneity vs. Strategy
Spontaneity requires that one break the mold – change the way things happen in an organization.
In the most general sense, spontaneity means breaking through our rational thought pattern.
Lizotte sees spontaneity as the process of getting “beyond all the “shoulds” and “spozed-to’s,”
retying up the lesser-used parts of the brain that prompt breakthrough ideas” [1998). The authors
of the article “Get the Creative Juices Flowing” list specific ways to enhance spontaneity (2000):
•
•
•
Think in reverse, challenge common assumptions.
Expand your perceptions - turn problems into opportunities by ignoring barriers.
Let ideas flow, no matter how absurd they seem.
This process of spontaneity actually follows the traditional guidelines for brainstorming as a
technique to stimulate new ideas. Although brainstorming may just happen, most inventive
thinking results from hard work and practice, followed by the confidence to see it through
(Fletcher, 1999). To reach conclusions, the creative thinker must first relax, then distance self
from the problem, allowing a subconscious search for solution (Boone and Holligsworth, 1990).
Empathy vs. Neutrality
The easiest approach for teachers is to take the ‘neutral” approach – “We treat everyone
the same.” While this approach sounds legitimate, it actually treats people as cogs in a machine.
Such an approach leads to a defensive climate. People eventually begin to assume “Why bother,
they don’t really care about us as individuals anyway.” If colleges want to consider individuals,
they must take time to let people be themselves. Educators typically have difficulty in
developing empathy since their profession directs them toward neutrality. Education leans them
toward the “scientific method,” a view that emphasizes, “treating everyone the same.” Using this
major tenet, faculty tend to forget, that treating everyone the same actually treats them as
interchangeable parts. Such a perspective creates a defensive rather than a supportive climate.
To compensate, managers must move beyond their “right brained” presupposition and engage
the left-brain – the emotional capabilities. Following Chatham (2000), managers can employ a
range of behaviors:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Get in touch with feelings, show positive emotions (passion, enthusiasm, sincerity).
Be open and genuinely share information.
Value achievement for its own sake and celebrate others' successes.
Take an interest in non-IT matters, such as current affairs and the arts.
Develop the ability to challenge diplomatically.
Be curious, expand your horizons, extend your locus of influence.
Learn how to motivate others and adopt an appropriate leadership style.
Empathy focuses on the most human element of any situation – an integral part of the way to
create a supportive climate for creativity.
Equality vs. Superiority
Superiority is built into the classroom. Teachers take a “superior” position based on
expertise (knowledge), which tends to create a defensive or closed environment. Students
recognize that they should “keep quiet” because the “real solution” comes from either the teacher
or the back of the book. In contrast, an open environment looks toward equality. Equality does
not mean that everyone has the same background, the same abilities, or the same expertise;
rather, equality believes that “we are all in this together!” Equality recognizes “a struggle
between current accepted practice and possibility” (Boone and Holligsworth, 1990). Only in an
organization open to new possibilities will the perspective of “equality” overcome the inherent
hierarchy that emphasizes superiority in organizations.
Provisionalism vs. Certainty
Certainty comes across as the position of a “know-it-all.” Certainty comes from those who
exude a sense of “I’ve been there and I’ve seen everything.” Although some people indeed have
a wealth of experience, have been through the mill, that doesn’t mean that these people really do
“know everything,” especially in a rapidly changing age. Science builds on the “provisional,”
meaning that Pluto is now no longer a planet, though it held that position for the past seventy
years.main “certain” that he or she “knows” all there is concerning your issues.
A provisional perspective, following the overused buzzword, entails thinking “outside the box.”
As Lizotte indicates, such thinking takes us beyond the conditioned boundaries of our mental
assumptions and preconceptions. Too often, we bog down in using our ‘logical’ minds to search
for ‘realistic’ solutions to problems. In the process, ideas stop flowing, we give up on many
problems, and we let our hopes and dreams fade away” (1998). For a true sense of
provisionalism, individuals and organizations must test the idea or seek collaboration of the
approach, acceptance by others from a different view (Boon and Holligsworth, 1990).
Provisional thinking does not presume to have “all the answers.”
Communication Climate, Creativity, and Pedagogy
When considering communication climate in terms of creativity styles, the four styles follow
four of the supportive dichotomies. The modifying style works closely with description,
building on the facts as currently arranged. The experimenting style focuses on problem solving,
combining and testing new ideas. Visioning is the ultimate spontaneity, imagining new
possibilities unconstrained by what has gone before. And the exploring style is provisional,
challenging assumptions and re-thinking the issue from the beginning. Table 4 aligns the
creativity styles with supportive communication.
TABLE 4: Communication Climate and Creativity
Communication Climate Dichotomies
Defensive
Evaluation
Control
Strategy
Certainty
Neutrality
Superiority
Creativity Styles
Supportive
Description
Problem Orientation
Spontaneity
Provisionalism
Empathy
Equality
Modifying Style
Experimenting Style
Visioning Style
Exploring Style
On further examination, the defensive half of the dichotomies also have parallels – traditional
pedagogical practices. All teachers must submit grades on student performance, so their job
places them in the evaluation role. Teachers manage the classroom, providing control in terms
of educational objectives and classroom discipline. Lesson planning is an inherent strategy,
preparing a meaningful sequence of activities. The teacher’s knowledge base leads to certainty
(teaching the facts), rather than a continual practice of the scientific method; and the subject
expertise leads to an inherent superiority of role betaeen teacher and student. Finally, teachers
tend to “treat everyone the same,” conveying neutrality rather than empathy for the students.
Table 5 adds traditional pedagogy to the Communication Climate Dichotomies.
Conclusion
Fostering creativity requires that educators recognize the nature of creativity, and how to provide
a climate that permits that creativity to emerge. Unless they become proactive, educators by
default will find that the defensive climate elements line up with the traditional pedagogical
practices. However, educators can enhance the creative process by understanding the
significance of communication climate in the creative process. Supportive climates encourage
openness to ideas, while a defensive process restricts people from presenting their ideas.
Communication climate builds on six dichotomies that describe organizational behavior.
Teachers who focus on the supportive end of the dichotomies will enhance creativity among their
students.
TABLE 5: Pedagogy, Climate, and Creativity
Traditional Pedagogy
Communication Climate Dichotomies
Defensive
Grading
Classroom control
Lesson Planning
Realms of Knowledge
Objectivity
Subject Expertise
Evaluation
Control
Strategy
Certainty
Neutrality
Superiority
Creativity Styles
Supportive
Description
Problem Orientation
Spontaneity
Provisionalism
Empathy
Equality
Modifying
Experimenting
Visioning
Exploring
References
Anderson, J. V. (1993). “Mind Mapping: A Tool for Creative Thinking.” Business Horizons
36:1 (Jan-Feb) 41-46.
Beck, C. E. (1999). Managerial Communication: Bridging Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Boone, L. W., and A. T. Holligsworth. (1990). “Creative Thinking in Business Organizations.”
Review of Business 12:2 (Fall) 3-12.
Chatham, R. (2000). “Engage Right Brain.” Computer Weekly (Mar 23) p. 26.
Creative Group. (200). “Take a Break to Beat Creative Block.” USA Today Magazine 129:2666
(Nov) 7.
Cropley, A. J. (2000). “Defining and Measuring Creativity; Are Creativity Tests Worth Using?”
Roeper Review 23:2 (Dec) 72-103?
Couger, J. Daniel. Creativity and Innovation in Information Systems Organizations. Danvers:
Boyd and Fraser, 1996.
Fletcher, W. (1999). “Ways to Tap the Wealth of Ideas.” Management Today (June) p. 36.
Fogarty, R. (1998). “The Intelligence-Friendly Classroom: It Just Makes Sense.” Phi Delta
Kappan 79:9 (May) 655-657.
“Get Creative Juices Flowing.” (2000). Association Management 52:10 (Oct) 26.
Gibb, J. R. (1961). “Defensive Comunication.” The Journal of Communication 14:3
Lizotte, K. (1998). “A Creative State of Mind.” Management Review 87:5 (May) 15-17.
Miron, E., M. Erez, and E. Naveh. (2004). “Do Personal Characteristics and Cultural Values that
promote Innovation, Quality, and efficiency compete oR Complement Each Other?”
Journal of Organizational Behavior 25; 175-199.
Robertson, E. (2003). Part 2: “How to Use a Communication Climate Model.” SCM 7:2
(Feb/Mar) 28-31
Sternberg, R. J. (2000). “Identifying and Developing Creative Giftedness.” Roeper Review 23:2
(Dec) 60ff.
Verberne, T (1997). “Creative Fitness.” Training and Development 51:8 (Aug) 68-71.
Attachment: Workshop Exercise
CLIMATE IDENTIFICATION
Classify the following statements as contributing to defensive or supportive climates.
Def
Sup
x
x
1. Haven't you finished that draft report yet?
x
x
2. I wonder what the professor has up his sleeve for this class.
x
x
3. How can we best resolve the schedule conflict for next week?
x
x
4. Do you really expect to get a waiver for missing that deadline?
x
x
5. Without a doubt that type of approach will never work for this project.
x
x
6. What athletic trips do you have in the next few weeks that may affect
your completing your portion of this research project on time?
x
x
7. Isn't it about time that you began adopting our recommended pattern for
placing tables in documents?
x
x
8. We need a course representative for the student awards committee.
x
x
9. How can we get more ideas for computer enhancement but still not get
behind on this project?
x
x
10. Stop by my office this afternoon so we can examine your class
performance.
x
x
11. The secretary never received a voucher for that expense; what
happened?
x
x
12. That proposed change will never make it with what we know about the
professor’s preferences.
x
x
13. We need to expand our ability to add more students to the class.
x
x
14. When will you get behind the new initiatives for the campus?
 2010 Charles E. Beck