IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 47, NO. 2, MAY 2004 157

Guest Editorial21st Century Trends That Influence

Constructing Creative Classroom EnvironmentsI. INTRODUCTION

T EACHING awakens the artist in all of us. We think aboutpainting and recall Corot and his colleagues, the early Im-

pressionist painters, who created masterpieces after seeing anout-of-focus photograph for the first time. These artists madesense out of that photograph when they perceived the shim-mering shadows and experienced the blurred distortions as abasis for the creation of wonderful new paintings. The resultswere two-dimensional worlds that invited the viewer to stepback and then walk right in. If the Impressionist artists shared asecret, it was that the reality of the shifting, shimmering brushstrokes would be different for each of us.

Stunning similarities exist in the student’s response to theprofessor’s artistic efforts in creating the optimally creativeclassroom environment. The Impressionist artist pushed theboundaries of art with new approaches and in that shift madea dramatic impact on society for generations. Similarly, engi-neering and science professors continue to push the boundariesfor change. We are designing new structures and cultures thatare conducive to creativity and invention when we think aboutcreating new ways to teach and when we recognize that today’sstudent is different from the student of the past.

There is something new and daring about the professor in the21st Century classroom. An individual may be creative in thefield of engineering while that same individual may exhibit farless creativity in a management position in an organization. Itmay also be reasonable to assume that in the human conditionof the community of engineering education, invention is a cre-ative front where individuals focus their enthusiasm and mentalenergy; on the other hand, they may not be or may even ac-tively resist being creative on the managerial fronts. Considerthe mechanisms and ways of thinking discussed in this editorialthat address how today’s professors cultivate inventiveness intheir classrooms.

II. 21st CENTURY INFLUENCES

A. The Cognitive Explosion

We continue to seek ways to understand the complex natureof problem identification and the decision-making processes.There are many illustrations of the dramatic impact of increasedawareness of cognitive processes on learning. Some examplesinclude advances in the understanding of the neurological in-fluences on the physical process of learning, the accelerateduse of computational models for learning, and the evolving

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TE.2004.827212

definitions of creativity and invention. There may be a gen-eral agreement that science accelerates the rate of invention;nevertheless, the precise physical mechanisms through whichinvention occurs is still very much an open question. Needlessto say, invention drives technological innovation, which in turndrives entrepreneurship, productivity, and economic growth.

B. An Empirical Approach to Classroom Analysis

Increased sophistication in the professor’s abilities to gather,process, and interpret data on student learning facilitatesacademia’s capacity to interpret data-measuring student per-formance and creativity. Today’s professors need to recognizethat a thorough grounding in both quantitative and qualitativeresearch models is necessary. Moreover, they need to establishcross-disciplinary research teams to link those who understandpsychology and neurology with those who understand howthey should teach, how engineering students learn, and howuniversities operate.

C. The Changing Character of the Student

Today’s student is a different individual from the past. Thischaracter shift includes some observable behavioral and attitu-dinal responses that impact success in the classroom. The 21stCentury student’s upbringing not only includes pressure to ma-ture and perform at an earlier age but also, in some cases, revealsa state of anxiety or sadness that disrupts their daily choicesand class work. We can create safe learning communities in ourclassrooms that are nurturing and help the student focus. Oneengineering professor reports, “I am cognizant of the fact thatmy approach in the classroom includes a sensitivity to the factthat different students may have different learning styles, and Ihave to adjust as best as possible.”

In addition to recognizing the shift in the character of today’sstudent, diverse student backgrounds and group dynamics arerecognized by faculty as a powerful force in the classroom.When teaching the teachers about defining creativity, enhancingcreative classroom environments, and challenging students,many variables are considered. Factors include individualbackground characteristics and the make-up of the class interms of gender, race, age, religion, disabilities, and academicbackground.

D. The Technology Classroom

Million-dollar classrooms do not include cookbook ap-proaches to being creative or to teaching creativity. Thereare, however, specific classroom conditions that may enhancecreativity. Unfortunately, at many colleges and universities, the

0018–9359/04$20.00 © 2004 IEEE

158 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 47, NO. 2, MAY 2004

technology plan for the classroom has often been a purchasingplan rather than a focused initiative to integrate technologyinto the institution’s educational plan in a way that enhancesteaching, learning, and creativity.

E. Lifelong Learning for Professors

A more sophisticated approach to lifelong learning includesnot only recognizing the student’s “readiness level,” but alsobeing aware of our personal abilities within our life cycle andpersonal career path. When we as professors are asked to citepeople that have had the strongest impact on us, we often iden-tify teachers that recognized our creative talent by both chal-lenging us in inventive ways and sticking with us as we madeour way towards exploring new possibilities.

III. CLASSROOM PRACTICE AND EXERCISES

We teach in the five-year interdisciplinary Electromechan-ical Engineering program at Wentworth Institute of Technology(WIT), Boston, MA. Our educational research activities andour classroom experiences allow us to compile a set of recom-mended classroom practices and exercises that we believe tobe favorable to creating a classroom environment that is con-ducive to enhanced creativity, inventiveness, and entrepreneur-ship. Outlined here are illustrations of practices that highlightour recommendations.

• Try not to impose too much conformity on students. We havecome to conclude that creativity is stifled by a rigid educationthat constantly force students to comply. For example, we letthe students select their design projects and do not assignthem preselected ones.

• Encourage risk-taking by the student. We often point out toour students that, historically, inventors have tried hundredsof things that did not work. Our grading of the design projectsreflects our valuation of risk-taking and effort.

• Be an advocate. The Electromechanical faculty committeeassumes the role of advocacy of students and shields themfrom impediments as much as possible by navigating themthrough the bureaucratic red-tape regulations that may hindertheir creativity.

• Make the students well aware of the patenting process.We have invited patent attorneys to present comprehensivelectures to our students on the patenting process. At everyopportunity, we revisit the subject in our classrooms. Weassign Internet patent search exercises, and we urge ourstudents to explore the local depository of the U.S. Patent andTrademark Office (USPTO) at the Boston Public Library.

• Capture the students’ attention by collaborating with in-dustry professionals. Examples of a leader speaker seriescosponsored by the Management and Electromechanicalprograms include the following.

1) An engineering strategy consultant discussed ways tolead in engineering.

2) A vice-president of engineering at a mid-size computermanufacturing company facilitated a business plan

mini-seminar for students interested in engineeringstart-up business ideas.

3) Following a computational model for psychologicalassessment, a psychologist supervised students withthe opportunity to challenge and analyze the validityof a personality profile.

• Apply pressure on students if necessary, with some safe-guards. Students who do not exhibit satisfactory motivationor progress with their project receive some pressure from thefaculty. Pressure is applied conservatively on those studentswhile substantial support is provided at the same time. Wefind that low to moderate (but not excessive) pressure stim-ulates the student’s creative design and progress.

• Attempt to give students the “training of the mind” forproblem identification and the ability to generate projectsbased on societal need. At the start of each design course,we run drills of project idea(s) generation and problemformulation.

• Encourage students to think outside of their comfort zone andexpertise. One psychology professor utilized her paintingbackground in a student-demonstrated watercolor tree exer-cise designed to encourage creativity in teamwork. Partici-pating students learned that the presence of one expert doesnot necessarily produce the most amazing work or guaranteesuccess. The most beautiful and innovative “tree” resultswere generated by the team of students who had no previouspainting experience.

• Encourage students to experiment. Every technical coursein our curriculum has a laboratory section; in the designcourses, just about every project culminates in the construc-tion of a physical prototype. WIT spends a generous portionof its operational budget on (teaching) laboratory mainte-nance and upgrade.

• Emphasize and try to instill in students the importance ofperseverance as being a key trait of creative engineering. Weuse historical examples. Thomas Edison is a fine exampleof an individual with an inventive mind who was helped byhis dedication to hard work. The process of persevering islike playing ball—just about everyone can play, but with theappropriate cultivation, one can learn to play a lot better.

• Encourage students to change their routines and think lat-erally. One good vehicle to achieve lateral thinking is touse an interdisciplinary approach to problem solving. Forexample, a pure but complex mechanical solution may bereplaced with a much simpler electromechanical solution (orvice versa).

IV. FINAL THOUGHTS

While we do not know what goes on in the mind of the cre-ative student, or the precise mechanism through which inventionand creativity occur, we can still identify practices and patternsof conditions that run through various creative students and leadto a creative classroom.

The plethora of advances in science and technology providethe young engineer with a large body of knowledge. This body

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 47, NO. 2, MAY 2004 159

of knowledge appears more often than not as a huge clutter ofunrelated precedents and facts. In the new culture of a creativeclassroom, emphasis is placed on not only building the engi-neering body of knowledge and on its analysis, but also on thesynthesis of new innovative solutions. Alternatively speaking,as engineering educators, we strive to develop minds that arelikely to break the divide between the huge clutter of facts andnew syntheses.

When we consider ways to awaken creativity in theclassroom, we not only create optimally inventive learningenvironments, we also reawaken the artist in ourselves. Theprofessor’s role in the classroom is like that of a painter. We areprovided with the fascinating opportunity to treat the classroomas a canvas. Each class is an evolving work-in-progress wherewe shape the classroom elements as the semester progresses.Each class is a picture that tells a story of the academic inter-

actions between professor and student. While the professorpaints with brush strokes that vary in style and approach toeach class, one thing remains the same—the creative responseof our students.

BARBARA A. KARANIAN, ProfessorWentworth Institute of TechnologyHumanities, Social Sciences and Management DepartmentBoston, MA 02115 USAe-mail: Karanian@WIT.edu

LOUTFALLAH GEORGES CHEDID, Associate ProfessorWentworth Institute of TechnologyElectronics and Mechanical Engineering DepartmentBoston, MA 02115 USAe-mail: Chedidg@WIT.edu

Barbara A. Karanian holds the B.A. degree in both psychology and fine arts from the Collegeof the Holy Cross, Worcester, MA, and the Ph.D. degree in educational studies in organizationalbehavior from Lesley University, Cambridge, MA.

She has taught extensively in the discipline of psychology and applied psychology for almosttwo decades. Her specialization is teaching industrial–organizational psychology and leadershipcourses to engineering, architecture, design, and construction management students. She iscurrently a Professor at Wentworth Institute of Technology (WIT), Boston, MA, and the onlynonengineer on the Electromechanical Engineering Committee. In an independent consultingcapacity, she works with changing organizations. Leadership and organizational transformationprojects have included work with small start-up companies as well as larger more establishedindustry players. While her research interests focus on leadership, gender, and the engineer’sresponse to education and work, she has investigated amateur and professional athletes intransition as well as gender depictions in advertisements.

Dr. Karanian was awarded a Teaching Fellowship in Leadership at the Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cam-bridge, MA.

Loutfallah Georges Chedid received the B.S. degree in electronics engineering technology fromWentworth Insitute of Technology (WIT), Boston, MA, the M.S. degree in electrical engineeringfrom Tufts University, Medford, MA, and the Ph.D. degree in manufacturing engineering fromWorcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Worcester, MA. He is currently pursuing studies and re-search at Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.

He is on the faculty of Electronics and Mechanical Engineering of WIT, and he has taughtin the interdisciplinary electromechanical engineering program for the last seven years. He hasmore than 17 years of combined teaching and industry experience. During his teaching career,he has supervised more than 250 student design projects, and his students have won top designawards. His research interests include educational research, design theory, sensor development,heat treatment of metals, and lean manufacturing.