Creative Assessment and Creatively Assessing

Literature Review
MAAE Curriculum Studies; ARTE 7041 Professor Katherine Smith
University of Cincinnati

Introduction

Creativity has gained significant importance in the educational field, becoming a crucial 21st-century learning objective within K-12 schools. The rapid advancement of technology has highlighted design thinking as a powerful approach to nurturing innovative thinkers, which is essential for the future workforce. Consequently, creativity has been recognized as a core learning objective in K-12 education (Aflatoony et al., 2018). Educators now seek effective ways to foster and evaluate students’ creative thinking abilities across disciplines. Integrating creative assessment and design thinking as a cross-disciplinary problem-solving approach has proven to enhance students’ development of innovative skills (Aflatoony et al., 2018; Crean, 2018; Beghetto, 2019; Long et al., 2022). However, assessing creativity poses significant challenges, demanding a standardized approach across all disciplines (Aflatoony et al., 2018; Long et al., 2022; Long & Wang, 2022). In response to these challenges, there is growing awareness of the value of creative formative assessment as a pedagogical tool to address issues brought on by new digital technologies like AI (Beghetto,2019; Bolden et al., 2020; Nikolic et al., 2023). By understanding the educational context of creativity as a skill to be developed and improving ways to assess it, educators can strengthen creativity across all disciplines to develop innovative citizens of the future. The following review explores the multifaceted concept of creativity assessment in education, aiming to contribute to a deeper understanding of its importance in educational contexts and its potential impact on students’ future success.

Creativity in Education

Creativity remains a challenging concept to define unanimously and, thus, difficult to assess. In education, design thinking has been widely adopted as a framework to foster innovation and creative problem-solving abilities among students (Aflatoony et al., 2018; Crean, 2018). Aflatoony, Wakkary, and Neustaedter (2018) conducted a case study evaluating students’ learning in a secondary level design thinking course. Their study emphasized the significance of evaluating design thinking skills through participant observation, open-ended questions, and document analysis, revealing students’ improved creative skills over time. Crean (2018) further explores creativity as a process and learnable skill, investigating the systems and environments that enhance creativity while acknowledging classroom restrictions. Their research considers future international assessments on creativity in contrast with the United Kingdom’s current academic measures of school success, addressing the disconnect between contemporary thoughts on creativity and educational policies. In the context of the increasing significance of creativity as an imperative skill set, it becomes essential for educators to embrace and acknowledge its influence in classrooms. To adequately prepare young minds for future success, fostering creative thinkers requires thoughtful modifications to traditional skills and assessment approaches.

Methods and Challenges of Creativity Assessment in Education

Researchers debate assessment strategies and methods to develop effective and valid measurements of creativity for alternative creative assessments in the classroom (Bolden et al., 2020; Long & Wang, 2022; Long et al. 2022). Long and Wang (2022) argue that creativity assessments offer valuable benefits, aiding in defining characteristics of creative students and identifying expected outcomes. In contrast to traditional assessments, which can be limited in focus and potentially influenced by ethical biases, creative assessments take a more comprehensive and inclusive approach, thereby contributing to a more democratic education system (Long & Wang, 2022). One specific approach proposed by Long and Wang (2022) is the subjective creativity assessment (SCA), which relies on judges' subjective judgment to evaluate creative work. The SCA method provides a means to assess creativity in a nuanced and context-sensitive manner (Long & Wang, 2022). Bolden et al. (2020a) conduct a scoping review exploring creativity assessment in K-12 schooling, emphasizing the importance of well-defined criteria and the value of self-assessment and reflection in supporting creativity. This need stems from the requirement of teachers to both nurture and assess creativity as a core learning goal (Bolden et al., 2020). In addition, the review by Long et al. (2022) critically examines the literature on creativity assessments in education, revealing a predominance of divergent thinking tests, self-report questionnaires, and product-based subjective techniques (Long et al. 2022). Despite innovations in creativity assessment, there is a need for greater diversity in assessment methods. Connecting the assessment of creativity with modern psychometrics and assessment theories as well as focusing on authentic assessment as contextual and meaningful learning can positively influence student achievement in other assessments, including standardized tests (Long et al., 2022). Emphasized in the above articles is a need for robust and reliable creativity assessments that align with the broader objectives of education.

Creativity Assessment in the 21st Century: Artificial Intelligence

Preparing students for the challenges of the 21st century requires a heightened emphasis on human-generated creativity and its assessment in the classroom. A shift in pedagogical approach is driven by the emergence of new digital and technological advancements such as AI. The use of effective creative assessments can overcome many ethical issues AI presents, while also allowing for the integration of new strategies to create meaningful and collaborative educational environments. In Nikolic’s article (2023), ChatGPT, an advanced chatbot capable of passing assessments autonomously, has sparked concerns about assessment authenticity, human creativity, and plagiarism detection (Nikolic et al., 2023). Other AI programs along with ChatGPT are forcing a shift in the traditional paradigms of educational assessment. Educators must now be creative in assessment methods and strategies, as well as embrace AI as a potential opportunity to support creative thinking skills (Nikolic et al., 2023). AI can also aid in the assessment processing of large groups by utilizing learning algorithms to objectively and efficiently score testing data. With large-scale testing, the implementation of human-artificial intelligence (AI) augmented scoring has the plausibility of learning to match expert ratings of creativity from human judges (Beghetto,2019). AIs potential can address the considerable time and effort needed to impanel a set of human experts to judge individual responses (Beghetto,2019). Plucker (2022) investigates AI’s roles in creativity assessment that brings in non-psychologists, such as computer scientists and engineers, contributing to increased creativity scholarship. Although promising, Plucker (2022) agrees with Beghetto (2019) in considering AI’s inability to process conceptual issues and context, and further development is needed to tailor towards individuals. Creative assessment of creative and personalized learning still involves context created by human experience that has yet to be addressed by machine-learning technologies on a larger scale.

Sociocultural Approach to Creativity and Assessment

When delving into creativity assessment, it becomes crucial to capture the individual student's experience and their distinct approach to the creative process, moving beyond rigid standardized testing boundaries (Miles & Springgay, 2020; Zbainos & Sagia, 2022; Long & Wang, 2022 Beghetto,2019). A forward-looking perspective on curriculum and pedagogy advocates for greater collaboration, creativity, and social orientation, challenging traditional assessment models and enhancing student engagement (Miles & Springgay, 2020). Zbainos and Sagia (2022) propose the dynamic assessment of creativity, which combines the sociocultural and creative cognition research, enabling examiners to actively engage with examinees beyond conventional question-and-answer formats, resulting in a change in abilities. Their approach considers environmental and cultural influences on creative expression and integrates cognitive strategies as symbolic tools. This approach advocates for comprehensive evaluations of creative potential, surpassing the reliance on static creativity tests. Similarly, Beghetto (2019) stresses the importance of capturing additional process and experiential data during problem-solving for comprehensive evaluation. Long and Wang (2022) emphasize how efficient creativity assessments can raise awareness among stakeholders and foster creative educational experiences both inside and outside of the classroom. Plucker (2022) explores the criteria of transparency and homogenization in assessments, focusing attention on the need for context-specific approaches and advocating for quality standards in the field. It is essential to address ethical and philosophical implications of creative assessment and democratize creativity in education (Long et al., 2022).

Creativity and Connections to Career Success

The educational system's goal is to foster successful future citizens of the 21st Century, adapting to the rapid technological changes that demand greater creativity and innovation. To effectively prepare students, there is a pressing need for assessing the evolving values and societal requirements in developing human creativity (Fernández-Díaz et al., 2021; Plucker, 2022). Fernández-Díaz et al. (2021) investigate the inevitability of the future society who must collaborate with diverse individuals in various environments,and continually employ technology, all of which involve innovation and adaptability (Fernández-Díaz et al., 2021). Their study reveals that individuals with higher levels of creativity and resilience are more prepared to achieve professional success. Plucker (2022) reviews the significance of identifying and measuring creativity in the workforce with many businesses investing resources in talent development to focus on innovative skills. In K-12 education, educators and policymakers are recognizing this need, and are seeking ways to assess creativity as an alternative to high-stakes testing (Plucker, 2022). The demonstration of assessment scores predicting future behaviors and desirable outcomes is vital for enhancing the credibility and utility of creativity measures (Plucker, 2022). Overall, the significance of creativity in career development is underscored as well as its implications on individuals’ processional trajectories. Assessment of and in creativity needs to evolve further to provide efficient data to develop an innovative 21st century society.

Conclusion and Further Research Possibilities:

The reviewed collection offers a comprehensive exploration of creativity assessment in education, encompassing the assessment of creativity itself. The study identifies five key themes, including the integration of existing creative methods, current research on creativity assessment in education, the use of AI in creative evaluation, a sociocultural perspective of creative evaluation, and the interplay between creativity and career success. The prominence of efficiently evaluating creativity within educational contexts is accentuated. Cultivating efficient and dependable data would lead to anticipated outcomes in highly valued creative aptitude. Educators play a crucial role in facilitating creativity in their students, which is proven to impact their future success positively. Further research is needed to create focused formative creative assessments tailored to specific developmental age groups, ensuring inclusivity and cultural responsiveness across diverse educational environments. The overlooked influence of student background and culture on their creative expression is due to the fairly recent emergence of creativity as a learned skill. Therefore, a thorough examination of the long-term impact of creative assessment in education is still warranted. In addition, exploring the intersection of creativity with other determinants of academic and career success would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their combined influences. Future investigations in this direction could yield valuable insights for educational practices and policies.

References:

Aflatoony, L., Wakkary, R., & Neustaedter, C. (2018). Becoming a Design Thinker: Assessing the Learning Process of Students in a Secondary Level Design Thinking Course. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 37(3), 438–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12139

Beghetto, R. A. (2019). Large-Scale Assessments, Personalized Learning, and Creativity: Paradoxes and Possibilities. ECNU Review of Education, 2(3), 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531119878963

Bolden, B., DeLuca, C., Kukkonen, T., Roy, S., & Wearing, J. (2020). Assessment of Creativity in K‐12 Education: A Scoping Review. Review of Education, 8(2), 343–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3188

Crean, O. (2018). Creativity assessments. Journal of Illustration, 5(2), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1386/jill.5.2.235_1

Fernández-Díaz, J. R., Gutiérrez-Ortega, M., Llamas-Salguero, F., & Cantón-Mayo, I. (2021). Creativity and Resilience as Predictors of Career Success. Sustainability, 13(4489), 4489. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084489

Long, H., Kerr, B. A., Emler, T. E., & Birdnow, M. (2022). A Critical Review of Assessments of Creativity in Education. Review of Research in Education, 46(1), 288–323. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X221084326

Long, H., & Wang, J. (2022). Dissecting Reliability and Validity Evidence of Subjective Creativity Assessment: A Literature Review. Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1399–1443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09679-0

Nikolic, S., Daniel, S., Haque, R., Belkina, M., Hassan, G. M., Grundy, S., Lyden, S., Neal, P., & Sandison, C. (2023). ChatGPT versus engineering education assessment: A multidisciplinary and multi-institutional benchmarking and analysis of this generative artificial intelligence tool to investigate assessment integrity. European Journal of

CREATIVE ASSESSMENTS AND CREATIVELY ASSESSING Thueneman 9

Engineering Education, 48(4), 559–614.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2023.2213169

Plucker, J. A. (2022). The Patient is Thriving! Current Issues, Recent Advances, and Future Directions in Creativity Assessment. Creativity Research Journal, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2110415

James Miles & Stephanie Springgay (2020) The indeterminate influence of Fluxus on contemporary curriculum and pedagogy, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 33:10, 1007-1021, DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2019.1697469

Zbainos, D., & Sagia, C. (2022). Dynamic Assessment of Creativity for Diagnostic Purposes: Combining the Sociocultural Approach to Creativity and Creative Cognition in Practice. European Psychologist, 27(3), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000476