I watched the Ken Robinson TED talk (Feb 2006): ‘Schools Kill Creativity’ http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity?language=en
I found the TED talk by Ted Robinson very interesting with a humorous element, it left me feeling positive with a constructive attitude of embracing and encouraging creativity in the children of today who will be the creative, innovative and resourceful adults of tomorrow. Then I thought this was in 2006 and I’m not too sure what has changed except the cuts in Arts and Humanities funding. I feel as educators in a Higher Education establishment we are encouraging and hopefully inspiring the next generation of innovators and creatives and is this helped or hindered by assessments?

I feel the majority of the time assessments are necessary – they give the students guidance, structure and something to aim for. Without assessments, several questions can be raised such as; what are the students doing to achieve their degree , how would it be arbitrated whether they deserve the qualification and would it be a rather expensive 3 years (that would be better spent on a studio and materials) if no assessments/qualification was given? Although there a several holes in the concept and requirements of assessments eg: who assesses the work and why (art and design is exceedingly subjective), suitability for individuals (not everyone works and benefits from the same model of marking) and variations between different colleges. When I was a student I worked well to briefs – I felt it gave me an aim and direction. I preferred looser briefs that allowed your own style and creativity to shine through. I actually missed briefs when leaving education after 7 years, it is a large change having your own practise and not having briefs to follow and timed deadlines to adhere to.

This subject links in well with the debate I attended this week at Central saint Martins; Art School, Smart School? A Discussion hosted by Head of College (CSM) Jeremy Till and BA Fine Art Course Leader Mick Finch. The debate was in reaction to Radio 4 recently airing a one hour programme called Art School, Smart School? – it addressed some serious issues but not the whole context that arts schools now operate in – it presented a positive view of what the British art school once was and ended with an argument that all of this was being lost. The discussion which followed the Radio programme was thought-provoking – key issues which were raised by the students were; fees/finances, cross college access/red tape, lack of space, and a large topic was too many restrictions (assessments) a lack of rebellion and risk tasking. The discussion revolved around the current lack of the sense of what an arts school is meant to be – compared to what it apparently is and used to be in the 70s and 80s. The students said they are much more conscious of ‘financial issues’, ‘corporate feel’, ‘marking criteria’, ‘passing units’ and ‘pressures to get a job’ straight after graduating – that they do not have the freedom to take risks or have the same sense of ‘rebellion’ (that artists had in the 70s/80s arts schools discussed in Art School, Smart School?) that inspired change, creativity and a sense of unity. Between assessment units the students don’t have time to take risks – Ken Robinson is his Ted talk discusses how being creative and innovative requires risk-taking.

Image: Image: ‘Sculpture course at St Martins 1970s. Courtesy of the Central Saint Martins Museum and Study Collection’