The conclusion of this report is:
Teachers’ Conceptions of Creativity and Creative Students
Abdullah Aljughaiman, Teachers College of Alhasa
Elizabeth Mowrer-Reynolds, College of Education, University of Idaho
...
Conclusions
One last point for consideration addresses the adequacy
of the regular classroom teacher to recognize and identify creative
students, and/or to teach in ways designed to promote
creativity in all students. Pre-service training programs do
little to broaden knowledge of the phenomenon of creativity.
Commercial programs designed to promote creative thinking
and problem solving are not part of most pre-service education
programs and are most often acquired through professional
development programs. Teachers feel ill-prepared to
foster creativity when they do not know how to define creativity,
recognize creativity, appreciate creative behaviors, or are
overburdened with the demands of teaching content driven
curricula toward high stakes testing.
Steps must be taken to
ensure that adequate training and resources are provided for
teachers at all levels of teacher preparation and practice, so
that creative and regular students alike will have their creative
talents actualized.(my boldface)
(
http://www.nrcgc.org/publisher/mower-reynolds_1-25-05_-_teachers%27_conceptions%5B1%5D.pdf)
Please note that there is an extensive list of references at the end of this article.
The conclusion seems to indicate that the fault (if there is a fault to be found) is inherent in teacher training and not necessarily in the teachers themselves. Does this reflect the current general consensus as far as you know? I would appreciate your commentary on this issue if you care to comment.
Lastly, I have not researched the background of either of the authors and cannot determine if the host site (www.nrcgc.org) has any inherent biases.
= new reply since forum marked as read