Creativity and the doctor of philosophy: the case for creativity education within doctoral programs
Abstract
Doctoral education is an increasingly prevalent part of the worldwide higher education landscape. Although there are variations in how programs are constructed and delivered, there is general agreement that evidence of creativity is expected in the final thesis. Despite the significant attention the supervisory process has received in the literature, students’ views on creativity as it applies to their candidature have not been extensively explored. This article reports on interviews with a sample of 12 current doctoral students in the areas of the arts, social sciences, and education from the theoretical perspective of the systems model of creativity. Interview participants were invited to reflect on the concept of creativity, and the factors which support or constrain their potential to be creative. The findings reveal that on reflection, students are able to identify the creative elements of their work, however the findings also indicate that creativity education should be given greater focus in doctoral programs, in order to embed this important concept and process to support students’ learning journey.
Keyword : creative thinking, critical thinking, creativity, doctoral education, graduate studies, risk-taking
How to Cite
Daniel, R. (2024). Creativity and the doctor of philosophy: the case for creativity education within doctoral programs. Creativity Studies, 17(1), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2024.17082
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Baptista, A., Frick, L., Holley, K., Remmik, M., Tesch, J., & Åkerlind, G. (2015). The doctorate as an original contribution to knowledge: Considering relationships between originality, creativity, and innovation. Frontline Learning Research, 3(3), 55–67.
Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2016). An exploration of darkness within doctoral education: Creative learning approaches of doctoral students. In Ch. Zhou (Ed.), Handbook of research on creative problem-solving skill development in higher education (pp. 260–282). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0643-0.ch012
Brodin, E. M. (2016). Critical and creative thinking nexus: Learning experiences of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 971–989. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.943656
Brodin, E. M. (2018). The stifling silence around scholarly creativity in doctoral education: Experiences of students and supervisors in four disciplines. Higher Education, 75, 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0168-3
Brodin, E., & Avery, H. (2014). Conditions for scholarly creativity in interdisciplinary doctoral education through an Aristotelian lens. In E. Shiu (Ed.), Creativity research: An inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary research handbook (pp. 273–294). Routledge.
Brodin, E. M., & Frick, L. (2011). Conceptualizing and encouraging critical creativity in doctoral education. International Journal for Researcher Development, 2(2), 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/17597511111212727
Cardoso, S., Santos, S., Diogo, S., Soares, D., & Carvalho, T. (2022). The transformation of doctoral education: A systematic literature review. Higher Education, 84, 885–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00805-5
Carter, S., Smith, K., & Harrison, N. (2021). Working in the borderlands: Critical perspectives on doctoral education. Teaching in Higher Education: Critical Perspectives, 26(3), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1911098
Clarke, G., & Lunt, I. (2014). The concept of “Originality” in the Ph.D.: How is it interpreted by examiners? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870970
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2014). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), The systems model of creativity: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pp. 161–184). Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_10
Das, S. (2012). On two metaphors for pedagogy and creativity in the digital era: Liquid and solid learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677594
Davies, I., Fülöp, M., & Navarro Sada, A. (2007). Opportunities and challenges: European PhD students researching citizenship. REICE: Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 5(4), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2007.5.4.010
Dominguez-Whitehead, Y., & Maringe, F. (2020). A cross-national analysis of PhD models. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 22(3), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-01-2020-0003
Frick, L. (2011). Facilitating creativity in doctoral education: A resource for supervisors. In V. Kumar & A. Lee (Eds.), Doctoral education in international context: Connecting local, regional and global perspectives (pp. 123–137). Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Frick, B. L., & Brodin, E. M. (2020). A return to wonderland: Exploring the links between academic identity development and creativity during doctoral education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(2), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1617183
Güss, C. D., Ahmed, S., & Dörner, D. (2021). From da Vinci’s flying machines to a theory of the creative process. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1184–1197. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966790
Hitchings, R., & Latham, A. (2020). Qualitative methods I: On current conventions in interview research. Progress in Human Geography, 44(2), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519856412
Kaufman, J. C. (2016). The psych 101 series. Creativity 101. Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826129536
Kleiman, P. (2008). Towards transformation: Conceptions of creativity in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290802175966
Liu, X., Zou, Y., Ma, Y., & Gao, W. (2020). What affects PhD student creativity in China? A case study from the joint training pilot project. Higher Education, 80, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00463-8
Livingston, L. (2010). Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(2), 59–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632910903455884
Meng, Y., Tan, J., & Li, J. (2017). Abusive supervision by academic supervisors and postgraduate research students’ creativity: The mediating role of leader–member exchange and intrinsic motivation. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(5), 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2017.1304576
Power, M. (2018). Creativity, risk and the research impact agenda in the United Kingdom. European Review, 26(S1), S25–S34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798717000515
Runco, M., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Speers, L., & Wilson, N. (2018). Embedding an everyday culture of creativity: Making creativity work in a university context. In L. Martin & N. Wilson (Eds.), Palgrave books. The Palgrave handbook of creativity at work (pp. 523–542). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77350-6_25
Thurlow, S., Morton, J., & Choi, J. (2019). You can’t be Shakespearean talking about the institutionalisation of sex offenders: Creativity and creative practices of multilingual doctoral writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43, 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.11.002
Whitelock, D., Faulkner, D., & Miell, D. (2008). Promoting creativity in PhD supervision: Tensions and dilemmas. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3(2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2008.04.001
Wisker, G., & Robinson, G. (2016). The “Creative-minded supervisor”: Gatekeeping and boundary breaking when supervising creative doctorates. In M. Fourie-Melherbe, R. Albertyn, C. Aitchison, & E. Bitzer (Eds.), Postgraduate supervision – Future foci for the knowledge society (pp. 335–348). Sun Press. https://doi.org/10.18820/9781928357223/20
Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2016). An exploration of darkness within doctoral education: Creative learning approaches of doctoral students. In Ch. Zhou (Ed.), Handbook of research on creative problem-solving skill development in higher education (pp. 260–282). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0643-0.ch012
Brodin, E. M. (2016). Critical and creative thinking nexus: Learning experiences of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 971–989. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.943656
Brodin, E. M. (2018). The stifling silence around scholarly creativity in doctoral education: Experiences of students and supervisors in four disciplines. Higher Education, 75, 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0168-3
Brodin, E., & Avery, H. (2014). Conditions for scholarly creativity in interdisciplinary doctoral education through an Aristotelian lens. In E. Shiu (Ed.), Creativity research: An inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary research handbook (pp. 273–294). Routledge.
Brodin, E. M., & Frick, L. (2011). Conceptualizing and encouraging critical creativity in doctoral education. International Journal for Researcher Development, 2(2), 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/17597511111212727
Cardoso, S., Santos, S., Diogo, S., Soares, D., & Carvalho, T. (2022). The transformation of doctoral education: A systematic literature review. Higher Education, 84, 885–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00805-5
Carter, S., Smith, K., & Harrison, N. (2021). Working in the borderlands: Critical perspectives on doctoral education. Teaching in Higher Education: Critical Perspectives, 26(3), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1911098
Clarke, G., & Lunt, I. (2014). The concept of “Originality” in the Ph.D.: How is it interpreted by examiners? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870970
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2014). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), The systems model of creativity: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pp. 161–184). Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_10
Das, S. (2012). On two metaphors for pedagogy and creativity in the digital era: Liquid and solid learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677594
Davies, I., Fülöp, M., & Navarro Sada, A. (2007). Opportunities and challenges: European PhD students researching citizenship. REICE: Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 5(4), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2007.5.4.010
Dominguez-Whitehead, Y., & Maringe, F. (2020). A cross-national analysis of PhD models. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 22(3), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-01-2020-0003
Frick, L. (2011). Facilitating creativity in doctoral education: A resource for supervisors. In V. Kumar & A. Lee (Eds.), Doctoral education in international context: Connecting local, regional and global perspectives (pp. 123–137). Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Frick, B. L., & Brodin, E. M. (2020). A return to wonderland: Exploring the links between academic identity development and creativity during doctoral education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(2), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1617183
Güss, C. D., Ahmed, S., & Dörner, D. (2021). From da Vinci’s flying machines to a theory of the creative process. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1184–1197. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966790
Hitchings, R., & Latham, A. (2020). Qualitative methods I: On current conventions in interview research. Progress in Human Geography, 44(2), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519856412
Kaufman, J. C. (2016). The psych 101 series. Creativity 101. Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826129536
Kleiman, P. (2008). Towards transformation: Conceptions of creativity in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290802175966
Liu, X., Zou, Y., Ma, Y., & Gao, W. (2020). What affects PhD student creativity in China? A case study from the joint training pilot project. Higher Education, 80, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00463-8
Livingston, L. (2010). Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(2), 59–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632910903455884
Meng, Y., Tan, J., & Li, J. (2017). Abusive supervision by academic supervisors and postgraduate research students’ creativity: The mediating role of leader–member exchange and intrinsic motivation. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(5), 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2017.1304576
Power, M. (2018). Creativity, risk and the research impact agenda in the United Kingdom. European Review, 26(S1), S25–S34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798717000515
Runco, M., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Speers, L., & Wilson, N. (2018). Embedding an everyday culture of creativity: Making creativity work in a university context. In L. Martin & N. Wilson (Eds.), Palgrave books. The Palgrave handbook of creativity at work (pp. 523–542). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77350-6_25
Thurlow, S., Morton, J., & Choi, J. (2019). You can’t be Shakespearean talking about the institutionalisation of sex offenders: Creativity and creative practices of multilingual doctoral writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43, 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.11.002
Whitelock, D., Faulkner, D., & Miell, D. (2008). Promoting creativity in PhD supervision: Tensions and dilemmas. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3(2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2008.04.001
Wisker, G., & Robinson, G. (2016). The “Creative-minded supervisor”: Gatekeeping and boundary breaking when supervising creative doctorates. In M. Fourie-Melherbe, R. Albertyn, C. Aitchison, & E. Bitzer (Eds.), Postgraduate supervision – Future foci for the knowledge society (pp. 335–348). Sun Press. https://doi.org/10.18820/9781928357223/20