Freedom and Play (paper)

Catalysts for creativity

John F. Feldhusen and Sandra K. Hobson (Dec. 1972)

This is a really refreshing paper, that manages to capture the enthusiasm and possibility that can be engendered by playfulness and freedom.

To quote them:

Freedom is important in creative thinking... Torrance suggested that two kind of freedom are necessary ingredients for a creative atmosphere: freedom from threat of evaluation and freedom from inhibiting sets or directions. Sets are internalized predispositions that operate subconsciously to inhibit or facilitate behaviour... ...He suggested that if we force an individual to act according to someone else's values, we limit his creative ability... ...and his natural tendencies to explore his environment.

To create an atmosphere of almost total freedom we used several procedures. To begin with, we let the children dress anyway they wished. They could come barefoot if they wished. At the begining we announced that they would be completely free, even to stay away if they lost interest. We encouraged them to express their feelings about us or anything we were doing at anytime. We let them move about whenever they wanted to explore the studio. They were free to desert the group activities and talk out whenever they wished. Special attempts were made to avoid negative evaluations among pupils or between leaders and pupils. Ample opportunity for role-playing gave the children freedom to express their ideas through the guise of another person.

In our program, we encouraged playfulness and humour at all times. When children realised that they were free to express themselves as they wished, fun, humour, silliness and goofing came naturally. Our joining in their playfulness was supportive. Finally, playing charades and viewing performances in video playback also created a sense of fun and humour.

This sounds like a utopia for the 16 fifth to seventh graders who attended these sessions twice a week for six weeks one summer. I like the style of the authors - it has me considering my study in different ways. Possibly not the way they might have intended, but I don't think they would mind! The warmth in the story made me smile. I will let their conclusions speak for themselves:

From this experience and from the other types of evaluation presented earlier, we formulated a set of general conclusions.

First, we concluded that we survived quite well. We came out of the sessions unscathed, even though we started as novices in this kind of learning situation in which total freedom prevails. We entered into the venture with trepidation. We had not taught in this way before and feared that complete freedom might breed complete chaos. It did not. The children were orderly and close to us and enjoyed the sessions.

Second, it was fun. The children were funny and productive. It was fun to see them doing their thing, open up, and generate ideas.

Third, we and the experienced some discomfort during the first few weeks. We felt that we should be "working" and producing "something". There was also a feeling that work and fun are really not compatible. But in time we seemed to get over these feelings.

Fourth, we saw individual children open up and express themselves more freely during this brief program of creative freedom. The unfolding of individual children seemed to be an intensely personal thing, undoubtedly dependent on each childs background and experience. We believe that this personal unfolding paves the way to more and better thinking.

Fifth, working with children in this way fostered warm interpersonal relationships. These relationships afforded a richly rewarding affect, added to the pleasure of working together, and reduced anxiey among all of us. Use of first names also brought us closer together.

Sixth, and finally, we concluded that we have just scratched the surface. We have much more to do in our effort to understand creative behaviour, how it develops, and how to teach it. Our major concern at this stage was to specify teachers' behaviours and pupils' activities that would be productive of creative thinking. It remains to be seen whether the system can be replicated by others who wish to teach creative thinking. Above all, it remains to be shown that the system, if replicable, helps children become better creative thinkers.