Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:35:47.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Facilitating the development of creativity using special collections and archives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2019

Lesley Ruthven
Lesley Ruthven*
Affiliation:
Special Collections & Archives Manager, Goldsmiths University of London, New Cross SE14 6NW, UK Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

How can special collections and archives (SCA) services contribute to the development of creativity in higher education students? An understanding of how creativity is developed can help those who work with special collections and archives to better design sessions that facilitate this development. Creativity is defined, put in context, and discussed as a metacognitive process. SCA as an environment that can contribute to the development of creativity is explored, along with the importance of the learner voice and pedagogical tools that allow for the facilitation of metacognitive experiences.

Type
Research Article
Information
Art Libraries Journal , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 9 - 12
Copyright
© ARLIS, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article is adapted from a paper delivered in July 2018 at the ARLIS/UK & Ireland Conference, at the Architectural Association, London.

References

1. Hargrove, Ryan A., “Assessing the long-term impact of a metacognitive approach to creative skill development,” International Journal of Technology and Design Education 23:3 (2013): 492CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Clarke, Angela, and Cripps, Peter, “Fostering creativity: a multiple intelligences approach to designing learning in undergraduate fine art,” International Journal of Art & Design Education 31:2 (2012): 114CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Wallas, Graham, The Art of Thought (New York: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1926)Google Scholar.

4. Dineen, Ruth and Collins, Elspeth, “Killing the goose: conflicts between pedagogy and politics in the delivery of a creative education,” International Journal of Art & Design Education 24:1 (2005): 44–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. Marshall, Julia, “Thinking outside and on the box: creativity and inquiry in art Practice,” Art Education 63:2 (2010): 17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. Hartman, Hope J., “Introduction,” in Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research and Practice (New York: Springer, 2001), xiCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7. Proust, Joëlle, “Metacognition,” Philosophy Compass 5:11 (2010), 989CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8. Mackey, Thomas P. and Jacobson, Trudi E., Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners (Chicago: ALA Neal-Schuman, 2014), 2Google Scholar.

9. Ibid., 5.

10. Ibid., 2.

11. Mackey and Jacobson, Metaliteracy, 1.

12. Hargrove, “Assessing the long-term impact,” 493.

13. Ibid., 492.

14. Ibid., 493.

15. Dineen and Collins, “Killing the goose,” 46.

16. Alex Ryan and Daniella Tilbury, “Flexible pedagogies: new pedagogical ideas,” in Flexible Pedagogies: Preparing for the Future (Higher Education Academy, 2013), accessed 27 Sept 2018, https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/resources/npi_report.pdf

17. Ryan and Tilbury, “Flexible pedagogies,” 15.

18. Ibid., 5.

19. Loi, Daria and Dillon, Patrick, “Adaptive Educational Environments as Creative Spaces,” Cambridge Journal of Education 36:3 (2006), 373CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Ibid.

21. Dineen and Collins, “Killing the goose,” 46.

22. Originally developed by Lyman, Frank Lyman. F. T., “The responsive classroom discussion: the inclusion of all students,” Mainstreaming Digest (College Park: University of Maryland Press, 1981), 109–113Google Scholar.