Fostering Students' Creativity and Critical Thinking - AWS (PDF)

Educational Research and Innovation Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking WHAT IT MEANS IN SCHOOL Co-funded by the European Union Educational Research and Innovation Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking WHAT IT MEANS IN SCHOOL Creativity and critical thinking are key skills for complex, globalised and increasingly digitalised economies and societies. While teachers and education policy makers consider creativity and critical thinking as important learning goals, it is still unclear to many what it means to develop these skills in a school setting. To make it more visible and tangible to practitioners, the OECD worked with networks of schools and teachers in 11 countries to develop and trial a set of pedagogical resources that exemplify what it means to teach, learn and make progress in creativity and critical thinking in primary and secondary education. Through a portfolio of rubrics and examples of lesson plans, teachers in the field gave feedback, implemented the proposed teaching strategies and documented their work. Instruments to monitor the effectiveness of the intervention in a validation study were also developed and tested, supplementing the insights on the effects of the intervention in the field provided by the team co-ordinators. What are the key elements of creativity and critical thinking? What pedagogical strategies and approaches can teachers adopt to foster them? How can school leaders support teachers’ professional learning? To what extent did teachers participating in the project change their teaching methods? How can we know whether it works and for whom? These are some of the questions addressed in this book, which reports on the outputs and lessons of this international project. ISBN 978-92-64-94313-1 Consult this publication on line at https://doi.org/10.1787/62212c37-en. This work is published on the OECD iLibrary, which gathers all OECD books, periodicals and statistical databases. Visit www.oecd-ilibrary.org for more information. 9789264943131 Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking WHAT IT MEANS IN SCHOOL Educational Research and Innovation V E R S I O N L A U N C H   Educational Research and Innovation Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking WHAT IT MEANS IN SCHOOL Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin, Carlos González-Sancho, Mathias Bouckaert, Federico de Luca, Meritxell Fernández- Barrerra, Gwénaël Jacotin, Joaquin Urgel and Quentin Vidal V E R S I O N L A U N C H  This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Please cite this publication as: Vincent-Lancrin, S. et al. (2019), Fostering Students' Creativity and Critical Thinking: What it Means in School, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/62212c37-en. ISBN 978-92-64-94313-1 (print) ISBN 978-92-64-68400-3 (pdf) Educational Research and Innovation ISSN 2076-9660 (print) ISSN 2076-9679 (online) The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law. Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/about/publishing/corrigenda.htm. © OECD 2019 You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to [email protected] Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at [email protected]  3 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Foreword We live in a world where the things that are easy to teach and test have also become easy to digitize and automate. In this respect, creativity and critical thinking become increasingly important, both to ensure that we harness technology and continue to work together towards a more sustainable and humane world. It is neither surprising that most curricula give them more emphasis, nor that teachers find them difficult to teach and test. Tomorrow’s schools need to help students think for themselves and work with others. They have to grasp the limits on individual and collective action, and become better at seeing and understanding our own perspectives, and the world around us. At work, at home and in the community, people will need a deep understanding of how others live, in different cultures and traditions, and how others think, whether as scientists or artists. People also have to become better at imagining new solutions, at seeing new possibilities, new connections, and turning them into new products or ways to better live together. This is why schools need to nurture students’ creativity and critical thinking, help them look at things from different perspectives, understand the limits of their and of others’ views, and help transform their ideas into innovative solutions: inquire, imagine, do and reflect, as our OECD rubrics on creativity and critical thinking put it. None of this is easy, and it will not be done overnight, but this book offers concrete opportunities to make progress. It provides teachers and schools with new tools to build learning environments that give students opportunities to practice their creativity and critical thinking skills, without diminishing the value of subject-matter content and procedural knowledge. The book also provides policy makers with insights on how to support teachers in improving their practices and make their education systems more evidence-informed. All the resources presented in the book have been developed and tested in a network of schools and teachers from eleven countries. The work has also fed the development of the conceptual framework of “creative thinking”, the innovative domain of the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2021. The hundreds of teachers that participated in the work are committed that our education systems develop first-class humans, not second-class robots and believe in the value of international collaboration to serve that goal. Andreas Schleicher OECD Director for Education and Skills  FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 – 4 Acknowledgements This book was co-authored by Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin (Senior Analyst, OECD), Carlos González-Sancho, Mathias Bouckaert, Federico de Luca, Meritxell Fernández Barrera (Analysts, OECD), Gwénaël Jacotin (Statistician, OECD), Joaquín Urgel and Quentin Vidal (Consultants, OECD). Chapters were authored as follows: Chapters 1 and 2: Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin; Chapter 3: Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin and Joaquín Urgel, with inputs from Jillian Hogan (Studio Thinking, Modern Band Movement, Teaching for Artistic Behavior), Zemira Mevarech (Metacognitive pedagogy) and Keith Whitescarver (Montessori); Chapter 4: Carlos González-Sancho and Meritxell Fernández-Barrerra; Chapter 5: Mathias Bouckaert; Chapter 6: Carlos González-Sancho; Chapter 7: Federico de Luca; Chapter 8: Quentin Vidal, Federico de Luca, Gwénaël Jacotin and Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin; Technical Annex: Quentin Vidal and Federico de Luca. Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin edited the book. Jennifer Allain (Literate) copy-edited it. Sophie Limoges and Alison Burke (OECD) oversaw the publication process. The book is one of the outputs of a project of the OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) at the OECD Directorate for Education and Skills that was led and conceptualised by Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin. Madeleine Gereke provided invaluable assistance to the project, as well as Rhodia Diallo and Parissa Nahani (OECD) at its earlier stages. The instruments for the quantitative data analysis for a validation study were developed by Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin, Carlos González-Sancho, Gwénaël Jacotin and Nicolas Jonas (UNESCO, formerly OECD), and refined by Federico de Luca during the quantitative analysis. The database of the pilot data collection was built and cleaned by Gwénaël Jacotin, Judit Pál and Soumyajit Kar. The quantitative work was mainly carried out by Federico de Luca, Gwénaël Jacotin and Quentin Vidal. Larry Hedges (Northwestern University, United States) is gratefully acknowledged for his advice and feedback on the quantitative analysis of the pilot data. The scientific advisory board of the project was composed of: Paul Collard (Creativity, Culture and Education, United Kingdom), Jillian Hogan (Boston University, United States), Todd Lubart (University of Paris Descartes, France), Bill Lucas (University of Winchester, United Kingdom), Zemira Mevarech (Bar Ilan University, Israel), Katariina Salmela-Aaro (University of Helsinki, Finland), Barbara Schneider (Michigan State University, United States), and Ellen Winner (Boston University, United States). They provided invaluable advice throughout the project and are thankfully acknowledged. The pedagogical resources supporting and exemplifying how to foster creativity and critical thinking in school constitute key outputs of the project. They were co-designed by the OECD Secretariat, the scientific advisers to the project and the country teams that participated in the project (including teachers in the field). Each lesson plan mentions its author(s). Cassie Hague (consultant to the OECD) edited all lesson plans. As part of her design of the web application displaying all the pedagogical resources for teachers and other stakeholders, Gerri Burton (New Learning Ventures) contributed many ideas to the project and how to make the pedagogical resources more useful to teachers. Andreas Schleicher (OECD Director for Education and Skills), Deborah Roseveare (Head of CERI) and Dirk Van Damme (former Head of CERI) are thanked for the advice, support and encouragements they gave throughout the duration of the project. The European Union co-funded the project for two years as part of Creative Europe. Walter Zampieri (Head of Section for Cultural Diversity and Innovation, European Commission [EC]) and the different EC officers that followed and supported the project are gratefully acknowledged: Peggy Genève, Carmela Cutugno, and Dorota Nigge. The project co-ordinators of the country teams and the support of their education ministries (or other local educational authorities) were essential to make the project happen, and its implementation, successful. Acknowledgements in country teams are as follows.  5 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Brazil: At Ayrton Senna Institute: Laura di Pizzo (Project coordinator, Ayrton Senna Institute), Viviane Senna (President), Tatiana Filgueiras (Executive Director of EduLab21), Mozart Neves (Director of Innovation and Political Liason), Maria Clara de Paula Couto (Implementation Manager 2017), Cesar Augusto A. Nunes (Specialist), Katia Mori (Specialist). The Santa Catarina State Department of Education, the Chapecó Municipality Department of Education, and Santa Catarina State´s Industry Federation (FIESC) were fully engaged in the project operated under a formal partnership with the Ayrton Senna Institute, who also counted on Fundação Itaú Social as a Supporting Partner. France: At the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research (CRI): Jean-Philipe Maître and Filippo Pirone (project co-ordinators), Ange Ansour, and François Taddéi; at La Main à la pâte Foundation: Elena Pasquinelli (project coordinator) and David Jasmin; at the Ministry of Education, Isabelle Robin, Bénédicte Galtier and Florence Lefresne. Hungary: At T-Tudok Centre for Knowledge Management and Educational Research and Education Authority, Budapest: Szilvia Németh (project coordinator) and Anita Kaderják; At T-Tudok Centre for Knowledge Management and Educational Research:, Judit Kádár Fülöp, Judit Lannert, Daniel Vince, Dezső Máté; At the University of Pécs: Attila Lengvárszky, Péter Lengyel, and Endre Raffay; at the Step by Step Programme Hungary, Bertalanné Zágon and Éva Deák; At the Educational Authority, Budapest: Sándor Brassói, László Ostorics and László Pongrácz. India: At Learning Links Foundation: Anjlee Prakash (CEO), Usha Bhaskar (project coordinator), Sakshi Singh; Subject Experts from National Council of Education, Research and Training (NCERT) supported the project; At the Ministry of Human Resource Development: Shri S.C. Khuntia. The Netherlands: At the Kohnstamm Institute (University of Amsterdam): Marieke Buisman (project coordinator), Marianne Boogaard and Liselotte van Loon; At the SLO: Marc van Zanten; At ILO (University of Amsterdam): Marie-Thérèse van de Kamp; at the Ministry of Education: Rosa van der Tas (project supervisor), Jeanne Van Loon and Rien Rouw. Russian Federation: At the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”: Marina Pinskaya (project coordinator), Aleksandra Mikhailova, Nadezhda Avdeenko, Stas Khanin, Aleksandr Smirnov, Alexander Sidorkin, and Isak Froumin; The Ministry of Education and Sberbank Charitable Foundation «Investment to the Future» supported the project. Slovak Republic: At Constantine the Philosopher University: Vladimíra Kurincová Čavojová (project coordinator); Dana Malá (data collection coordinator); Eva Ballová Mikušková (data processing); Katarína Szíjjártóová (coordination with schools). Collection of contextual data was done with the help of other colleagues from the Department of School and Pedagogical Psychology and Department of Pedagogy. At the Ministry of Education: Matej Šiškovič, Michal Kozák. At the Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Dagmar Repčeková. Spain: At the Madrid Department for Education: Ismael Sanz Labrador (Director General of Innovation), Luis Pires Jiménez (project coordinator, Assistant Director of Innovation), Antonia Muñiz de la Arena (pedagogical coordinator), and María Ángeles Díez Santos and Maryan Puga Zuccoti (data co-ordinators). Thailand: At the Equitable Education Fund (EEF): Vicharn Panich (Chairman) and Kraiyos Patrawart (project coordinator); At Sripatum University at Chonburi (SPUC), Thanyawich Vicheanpant (Lead Researcher); At the Research Institute for Policy Evaluation and Design (RIPED) (University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce): Weerachart Kilenthong; At the Ministry of Education: Mr. Nataphol Teepsuwan (Minister of Education, 2019-present), Mr. Teerakiat Jareonsettasin (Minister of Education, 2016-2019) and Mr. Boonrak Yodphet (Secretary General, Office of Basic Education Commission). United Kingdom (Wales): At the Arts Council of Wales: Diane Hebb (project coordinator, Director – Arts engagement) and Sian James (project manager); At Wavehill Ltd.: Mair Bell (research coordinator) and Endaf Griffiths (Director). At the Welsh Government (Department for Education): Kirsty Williams AM (Minister for Education), Steve Davies (Director, Education Directorate), John Pugsley (Head of Arts), and Richard Thurston (Deputy Chief Social Research Officer). At Creativity, Culture and Education (CCE): Diane Fisher-Naylor (Director of Programmes). United States: At the Vista Unified District (California): Matt Doyle (project coordinator, Assistant Superintendent Innovation), Craig Wiblemo (data coordinator), Robert Crowell (assessment coordinator), Anne Fennell and Craig Gastauer (action research leads); At the National Center for Montessori in the Public Sector (NCMPS): Keith Whitescarver (Executive Director), Jacqueline Cossentino (Director of Research), Katie Brown (Project Manager), Phil Dosmann and Katie Grabowski; Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and Furman University are acknowledged for allowing schools to participate; At the Education Department: John Easton (former President of the Institute of Education Sciences), Thomas Brock (former Commissioner of the National Center for Education Research), Peggy Carr, Dana Kelly and Daniel McGrath (National Center for Education Statistics).  FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 – 6 The project has benefited from the advice and encouragements of the CERI Governing Board, collectively, and of many of its past and present members, individually. They are all thanked. Finally, the work would not have been possible without the contribution of all the teachers, students and school principals who participated in the study in many different ways. They are too many to be acknowledged individually, even for those who made an extraordinary contribution, but the improvement of education worldwide depends on the implication of all stakeholders committed to support the improvement of the educational enterprise through research and innovation. The report is dedicated to them.  7 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Table of Contents Foreword 3 Acknowledgements 4 Executive summary 13 Chapter 1. Overview 15 Why creativity and critical thinking matter 16 Fostering creativity and critical thinking in education: Project objectives 17 Better understanding creativity and critical thinking 19 Rubrics to support creativity and critical thinking in teaching and learning 21 Lesson plans to support creativity and critical thinking 23 Professional development plans 28 Feedback from the fieldwork 29 Take-aways and next steps 31 Notes 33 References 33 Chapter 2. Creativity and critical thinking: From concepts to teacher-friendly rubrics 35 Creativity and critical thinking: Two distinct skills that matter 36 Definitions, theories and dimensions of creativity and critical thinking 42 Using rubrics to improve teaching, learning and assessment 48 Development of the OECD rubrics: The convergence process 57 How teachers and teams used the rubric(s) in the field 58 Summary and conclusion 61 Notes 63 References 63 Annex 2.A1. OECD domain-specific rubrics on creativity and critical thinking 69 Annex 2.A2. Examples of rubrics used or designed by project teams in participating countries 72 Chapter 3. Eleven signature pedagogies related to the fostering of creativity and critical thinking 75 Signature pedagogies: What are we talking about? 76 1. Creative Partnerships (all subjects) 77 2. Design Thinking (all subjects) 79 3. Dialogic teaching (all subjects) 81 4. Metacognitive pedagogy (maths education, all subjects): CREATE 83 5. Modern Band movement (music education) 85 6. Montessori (all subjects) 87 7. Orff Schulwerk (music education) 85 8. Project-Based Learning (science education, all subjects) 90 9. Research-based learning (science education) 92 10. Studio Thinking (visual arts education) 93 11. Teaching for Artistic Behavior (visual arts education) 94 References 95  FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 – 8 Chapter 4. Creativity and critical thinking in everyday teaching and learning 99 A framework to design learning experiences that nurture creativity and critical thinking 100 What could it look like? Examples from lesson plans across subject areas 105 Key insights 123 Notes 125 References 126 Chapter 5. Teacher professional development plans 129 Introduction 130 Teacher professional development plans: the key ingredients 130 Individual follow-up 133 Peer dialogue 135 Lessons learnt 138 References 140 Chapter 6. Teacher attitudes and practices around creativity and critical thinking 141 Introduction 142 Shaping teachers’ attitudes and practices for fostering innovation skills 142 Teacher attitudes towards creativity and critical thinking 145 Teachers’ instruction and assessment practices around creativity and critical thinking 153 Teachers’ reports on the intervention 156 Key insights 161 Notes 162 References 163 Annex A. List of tables available online 166 Chapter 7. Effects of the project on students’ outcomes and development of survey instruments 167 The OECD-CERI project 168 The research questions 169 Development and validation of the instruments 170 The study group 171 Measuring the effects of the intervention with students 182 A snapshot of class level analysis 186 Conclusions 190 Notes 192 References 193  9 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Chapter 8. Country Team Notes 195 Brazilian Team 197 Dutch Team 203 French (CRI) Team 209 French (Lamap) Team 213 Hungarian Team 217 Indian Team 223 Russian Team 229 Slovak Team 235 Spanish (Madrid) Team 241 Thai Team 245 UK (Welsh) Team 251 US (Montessori) Team 257 US (Vista) Team 261 Notes 265 List of Figures Figure 1.1. Theory of action of development phase of the project 19 Figure 1.2. Theory of action for an OECD validation project on creativity and critical thinking 32 Figure 2.1. Critical skills for the most innovative jobs, by type of innovation 37 Figure 2.2. Most societies support the fostering of creativity and critical thinking in education 40 Figure 2.3. Skills for innovation: Three skills categories 41 Figure 2.4. How and how frequently teachers in the intervention used the OECD rubrics 58 Figure 2.5. How and how frequently intervention teachers used the OECD rubrics, by team 59 Figure 6.1. Theory of action of the OECD-CERI project on creativity and critical thinking 143 Figure 6.2. Teachers’ sense of self-efficacy at baseline 146 Figure 6.3. Teachers’ ranking of vignettes at baseline 147 Figure 6.4. Teachers’ beliefs about creativity and critical thinking in school 148 Figure 6.5. Changes in teachers’ self-efficacy and vignette rankings 151 Figure 6.6. Change in teachers’ beliefs about creativity in school 152 Figure 6.7. Change in teachers’ beliefs about critical thinking in school 152 Figure 6.8. Teachers’ instruction practices at baseline 154 Figure 6.9. Teachers’ assessment practices at baseline 155 Figure 6.10. Change in teachers’ instruction practices 155 Figure 6.11. Intervention teachers: Changes in teaching practice 157 Figure 6.12. Intervention teachers: Collaboration with peers 159 Figure 6.13. Intervention teachers: Perceived changes in students 160 Figure 7.1. Share of students by length of data collection’s time frame and team 173 Figure 7.2. Share of students by duration of the intervention with students, team and educational level 174 Figure 7.3. Share of girls in the different samples and PISA 2015 reference data, by team and educational level 175 Figure 7.4. Share of students with an immigrant background in the different samples and PISA 2015 reference data, by team and educational level 175  FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 – 10 Figure 7.5. Socio-economic status of students, by team 176 Figure 7.6. Share of students who correctly ranked the vignettes on creativity at the beginning of the project, by team 177 Figure 7.7. Share of students who correctly ranked the vignettes on critical thinking at the beginning of the project, by team 178 Figure 7.8. Share of students who correctly ranked the vignettes on critical thinking at the beginning of the project, by team and educational level 178 Figure 7.9. Students’ relative self-perception of their creativity at the beginning of the project, by team 179 Figure 7.10. Students’ relative self-perception of their critical thinking skillsat the beginning of the project, by team 180 Figure 7.11. Share of control students, by team and educational level 180 Figure 7.12. Example of the effect of the propensity score matching on the STEM scores at the beginning of the project for primary students in the Thai team 181 Figure 7.13. Pre-post change in STEM scores at class level, by group 188 Figure 8.1. Teachers largely adopted the project rubrics, Brazilian Team 198 Figure 8.2. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Brazilian Team 199 Figure 8.3. Students participating in the project, Brazilian Team 201 Figure 8.4. Teachers largely adopted the project rubrics, Dutch Team 204 Figure 8.5. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Dutch Team 205 Figure 8.6. Students participating in the project, Dutch Team 207 Figure 8.7. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, French (CRI) Team 210 Figure 8.8. Students participating in the project, French (CRI) Team 212 Figure 8.9. Teachers’ enthusiastic beliefs around teaching and learning creativity and critical thinking, less around assessing them, French (Lamap) Team at baseline 214 Figure 8.10. Students participating in the project, French (Lamap) Team 216 Figure 8.11. Teachers’ sense of preparedness decreased as their awareness increased, Hungarian Team 218 Figure 8.12. Teachers largely adopted the project rubrics, Hungarian Team 218 Figure 8.13. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Hungarian Team 219 Figure 8.14. Students participating in the project, Hungarian Team 221 Figure 8.15. Teachers’ enthusiastic beliefs around creativity and critical thinking, Indian Team at baseline 224 Figure 8.16. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Indian Team 225 Figure 8.17. Students participating in the project, Indian Team 227 Figure 8.18. Teachers largely adopted the project rubrics, Russian Team 230 Figure 8.19. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Russian Team 231 Figure 8.20. Students participating in the project, Russian Team 231 Figure 8.21. Teachers’ enthusiastic beliefs around creativity and critical thinking, Slovak Team at baseline 236 Figure 8.22. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Slovak Team 237 Figure 8.23. Students participating in the project, Slovak Team 239 Figure 8.24. Teachers’ enthusiastic beliefs around creativity and critical thinking, Spanish (Madrid) Team at baseline 242 Figure 8.25. Students participating in the project, Spanish (Madrid) Team 244 Figure 8.26. Teachers’ sense of preparedness increased, Thai Team 246 Figure 8.27. Teachers largely adopted the project rubrics, Thai Team 247 Figure 8.28. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, Thai Team 248 Figure 8.29. Students participating in the project, Thai Team 250  11 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Figure 8.30. Teachers’ pedagogical approaches changed and students’ attention increased, UK (Welsh) Team 252 Figure 8.31. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, UK (Welsh) Team 253 Figure 8.32. Students participating in the project, UK (Welsh) Team 255 Figure 8.33. Teachers’ enthusiastic beliefs around creativity and critical thinking US (Montessori) Team at baseline 258 Figure 8.34. Students participating in the project, US (Montessori) Team 260 Figure 8.35. Effects of the intervention on students’ outcomes, US (Vista) Team 262 Figure 8.36. Students participating in the project, US (Vista) Team 264 List of Tables Table 1.1. OECD rubric on creativity and critical thinking (domain-general, comprehensive) 22 Table 1.2. OECD rubric on creativity and critical thinking (domain-general, class-friendly) 23 Table 1.3. Design criteria for activities that foster creativity or critical thinking skills 25 Table 2.1. OECD rubric on creativity and critical thinking (domain-general, comprehensive) 50 Table 2.2. OECD rubric on creativity and critical thinking (domain-general, class-friendly) 51 Table 2.3. OECD assessment rubric: Creativity 53 Table 2.4. OECD assessment rubric: Critical thinking 55 Table 2.A1.1. Class-friendly rubric (Science) 69 Table 2.A1.2. Class-friendly rubric (Maths) 69 Table 2.A1.3. Class-friendly rubric (Visual Arts) 70 Table 2.A1.4. Class-friendly rubric (Music) 70 Table 2.A1.5. Class-friendly rubric (Language Arts) 71 Table 2.A2.1. Continuum of critical and creative thinking for teachers (US [Vista] team) 72 Table 2.A2.2. Student self-assessment continuum of critical and creative thinking (US [Vista] team) 73 Table 4.1. Distribution of OECD repository of lesson plans for creativity and critical thinkin by key characteristics 107 Table 4.2. Examples of teaching techniques to promote some aspects of creativity and critical thinking skills 109 Table 4.3. Examples of tasks per discipline to foster creative and critical thinking skills 112 Table 4.4. Creativity and critical thinking in the science lesson plan Evaporative cooling 115 Table 4.5. Creativity and critical thinking in the mathematics lesson plan A world of limited resources 117 Table 4.6. Creativity and critical thinking in the visual arts lesson plan Graffiti: Perceptions and historical connections 118 Table 4.7. Creativity and critical thinking in the music lesson plan Musical poetry 120 Table 4.8. Creativity and critical thinking in the interdisciplinary lesson plan My region: What if? 121 Table 7.1. Number of students who completed an instrument at the beginning of the project and share of those who also completed the corresponding instrument at the end of it, by team 172 Table 7.2. Positive and negative statistically significant results associated with the effect of the intervention with students 183 Table 7.3. Positive and negative significant results associated with the effect of the interventio with students for the different subgroups of interest 185 Table 7.14. Profiles of the most successful pedagogical activities 189  FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 – 12 List of Boxes Box 1.1. One example of a lesson plan fostering critical thinking and creativity: What controls my health? 26 Box 4.1. “Creative in what?” Arguments for domain-specific creativity 102 Box 5.1. Plans and actions to introduce the project’s ideas and tools to teachers in Brazil and the Netherlands 132 Box 5.2. Linking content to professional practice and collaborative workshops to foster teachers’ active learning in Spain 133 Box 5.3 The accompaniment of teachers in Hungary, India, the Netherlands and Wales 134 Box 5.4. Fostering instructional and classroom management skill in the Netherlands and Thailand 134 Box 5.5. Promoting the emergence of a professional learning community in Brazil 136 Box 5.6. Peer dialogue to foster collective reflection among teachers in the Vista District (United States) 137 Box 5.7. Engaging school and system leadership in Brazil 138  13 – FOSTERING STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY AND CRITICAL THINKING © OECD 2019 Executive summary Critical thinking and creativity are becoming increasingly important in the labour market, and contribute to a better personal and civic life. People will increasingly have to contribute to and absorb innovation. Moreover, with artificial intelligence and robotics possibly leading to automation prospects for a sizeable share of the economy, skills that are less easy to automate such as creativity and critical thinking become more valued. Even if there was no economic argument, creativity and critical thinking contribute to human well-being and to the good functioning of democratic societies. Most curricula in OECD countries include in one form or another critical thinking and creativity as students’ expected learning outcomes. However, teachers often find it unclear what creativity and critical thinking mean and entail in their daily teaching practice. The OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) carried out a project on “Fostering and Assessing Creativity and Critical Thinking in Education” which aimed to develop a shared professional language on creativity and critical thinking in education and thus eventually facilitate its teaching, learning and formative assessment across countries within a given curriculum. Over a five-year period (including two school years of fieldwork and data collection), the OECD coordinated and worked with an international network of schools and teachers in 11 countries representing a wide variety of cultures and approaches to education. This report presents the findings of the project. A series of OECD rubrics on creativity and critical thinking were developed and field trialled for both language and usage. They provide a first element of language that is both teacher-friendly and aligned with the research literature on creativity and critical thinking. The rubrics were incrementally developed during the project and improved based on teachers’ and project co-ordinators’ feedback following the field trial. The domain-general and domain-specific rubrics describe four sub-skills involved in creativity and critical thinking: inquiring, imaging, doing and reflecting. The conceptual rubrics help teachers to better understand creativity and critical thinking, and to be more intentional and consistent in their teaching to nurture those skills. They are used to design new lesson plans, improve existing lesson plans and to discuss with students what creativity and critical thinking entail. The assessment rubrics articulate different levels of proficiency in creativity and critical thinking. They are used to assess student work or their learning process, in a formative or summative way. Experts and teachers in the network also developed additional resources to exemplify how these goals translate in practice. These resources are available online as a repository of pedagogical resources on creativity and critical thinking. They include: a set of design criteria for lesson plans, about 100 peer-reviewed examples of lesson plans as well as other pedagogical resources highlighting different ways of fostering students’ creativity and critical thinking. Examples of signature pedagogies that teachers could use in their practice were also highlighted. It is important to provide teachers with robust professional development plans drawing on training sessions, individual feedback and participation in a professional learning community, both through face-to-face meetings and digital platforms. Most teachers worked in collaboration with their peers to adapt the project materials to their local context and exchanged with colleagues about their experiences in the classroom. School principals evaluated the collaboration dynamics that the project sparked among teachers very positively. Around 75% of principals in intervention schools estimated that the project led to collaboration between teachers in unusual and positive ways, and that the project provided professional development opportunities that their teaching staff would not have otherwise had.