Fostering creative thinking through

education: Drivers, barriers and indicators of progress

Most education stakeholders agree that creative thinking is a key competency for life and work in contemporary societies. From this perspective, much attention is shifting to curricula. Integrating creative thinking in curricula recognises that creativity is not a competency restricted to a talented few, but one that can be taught and learnt, and that all learners can develop. Curricula and standards provide the reference framework for what students should learn and teachers teach in a system, and their reform is commonly the first step to adapt education to evolving social demands (OECD, 2020[30]).

Nonetheless, successful curricular reform requires careful attention to implementation. Successful reform builds on empowering educators and school leaders to take ownership of the new goals and move them forwards, and intentional, coherent policy efforts are needed to build capacity towards this end. Capacity is necessary for teachers to develop a shared understanding of what creative thinking is and how to teach it; and at the level of institutions and larger systems, which define the conditions for educators to effectively experiment, collaborate and gradually innovate their practice (Gouëdard et al., 2020[18]).

What the data tell us

• Creative thinking, or related terms (e.g. creativity, innovation), are increasingly present in curricula internationally, although its integration varies across domains. Creative thinking is most referenced in relation to arts and language subjects (about 90% of jurisdictions’ curricula for both primary and secondary education), followed by technology, science and mathematics, which include references to creative thinking in the curricula of about 80% of jurisdictions.

• Asked about the main challenges facing the integration of creative thinking in education, policymakers across PISA 2022-participating jurisdictions flagged an overcrowded curriculum/lack of teaching time (53% of jurisdictions), a lack of assessment focus on creativity (52%) and a lack of teacher training or pedagogical resources (51%) as the main obstacles.

• References to creative thinking in curricula rarely come together with system-level guidelines (e.g. learning progressions, rubrics) or evaluations signalling what creative thinking is and how it is learnt. Only few jurisdictions report having such instruments in place (24%) or being currently in the process of developing them (10%).

• Results from the PISA questionnaire show that teacher qualifications and training requirements refer to students’ creativity in less than 70% of jurisdictions where such requirements exist. References to assessing students’ creativity are even rarer, and only present in less than half of jurisdictions with data available.

• Many jurisdictions seek to build teachers’ and schools’ capacity to foster the creativity of their students. Most commonly, means of support include the provision of teaching materials and professional development opportunities for teachers (between 64% and 69% of jurisdictions). Other support mechanisms include funding for creativity-related projects (54%) and for equipment and infrastructure (45%). Despite existing evidence on their positive contribution to teachers’ professional learning, support for cross-sectoral collaboration and practitioner research is less commonly available. Only 42% and 39% of jurisdictions, respectively, offer such type of support.