Torrance Journal for Applied Creativity

The Levels of Service approach focuses
on developing all children’s talent—the
potential for significant contributions (in
original or creative ways) in any domain
of inquiry, expression, or action, over
an extended period of time—and is so
vital for survival and success in the 21st
Century (Schroth, 2013; Treffinger,
Young, Nassab, & Wittig, 2004). Using
the talents and efforts of parents, teachers,
administrators, specialists, and other
members of the general public, the Levels
of Service approach tailors services to
meet each child’s skills, talents, and needs
(Schroth, Collins, & Treffinger, 2011;
Treffinger, Young, Nassab, & Wittig,
2004).
The Autonomous Learner
Model (ALM) also provides a vehicle
through which students may work to
build their creative thinking and problem
solving skills (Betts, 2006; Betts &
Kercher, 1999). Based upon the concept
that children work best when pursuing
those interests in which they are passionately
involved, the ALM permits different
children to work on different tasks
(Betts, 2004; Betts, Toy, & Vasquez,
2006). Teachers who plan to provide
most creative thinking and problem
solving skills themselves would do well
to review various means of differentiating
instruction (Smutny & von Fremd,
2010; Tomlinson, 2003). Using student
readiness levels, interests, and learning
profiles, differentiated instruction permits
teachers to meet students’ needs in
ways that provide an appropriate level of
challenge for all (Schroth, Helfer, Beck,
& Swanson, 2011; Tomlinson, 2014).
By thinking about how the teaching of
creative thinking and problem solving
skills might fit within the day, teachers
assure that such instruction occurs. No
single program model will work best for
all schools, classrooms, or children. Each
administrator, teacher, and parent must
consider the unique resources and needs
facing him or her and make the best
decision possible for the children served
(Schroth, 2014).
24
Creative Problem Solving (CPS) and
the Creative Arts
Two methods of teaching
Torrance found useful for building
children’s creative thinking and problem
solving skills were CPS and the creative
arts. Each of these is an attractive entry
point for the novice teacher, as a wealth
of materials have been developed for
creative thinking and problem solving
skills to be taught in a manner to optimize
student growth (Torrance, 1962;
Torrance & Torrance, 1973). Both CPS
and the creative arts are also intellectually
rigorous and nuanced, permitting even
the most seasoned veteran opportunities
to craft novel, innovative, and appropriate
instructional experiences for children
(Schroth & Helfer, 2011; Smutny &
von Fremd, 2009; Treffinger, Isaksen &
Stead-Dorval, 2006). Using one of these
teaching methods to introduce creative
thinking and problem solving skills, and
then to build upon these competencies,
allows children the opportunity to develop
these abilities (Torrance & Torrance,
1973). The rich and comprehensive
resources available for each of these ways
are also helpful, as they provide teachers
wanting to improve their practice ample
examples and materials to do so.
Creative Problem Solving
First developed during the
1950s by Parnes and Osborne, CPS is
a proven way of building the creative
thinking and problem solving skills
of learners of any age (Osborn, 1963;
Parnes, 1967; Treffinger, Isaksen, &
Stead-Dorval, 2006). CPS is a flexible
and dynamic process (Treffinger, Isaksen,
& Stead-Dorval, 2006; Treffinger, Selby,
& Schoonover, 2013). Those using the
process can begin at any point and may
revisit those parts as necessary (Schroth
et al., 2011; Treffinger, Isaksen, &
Stead-Dorval, 2006). CPS consists of
four main components and eight specific
stages, which may be used in unison
or individually (Treffinger, Isaksen, &
Stead-Dorval, 2006). The components
consist of Understanding the Challenge,
Generating Ideas, Preparing for Action,
and Planning Your Approach (Treffinger,
Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval, 2006). The
specific stages are framing problems, exploring
data, constructing opportunities,
generating ideas, developing solutions,
building acceptance, appraising tasks, and
designing process (Treffinger, Isakesen,
& Stead-Dorval, 2006). A variety of
tools exist to help with each of the stages,
such as brainstorming, SCAMPER (i.e.,
substitute, combine, adapt, modify, put
to another use, eliminate, and reverse),
ALoU (i.e., advantages, limitations, overcome
limitations, and unique features),
and many others (Treffinger & Nassab,
2000).
CPS can be used with students
of any age, with any subject, and at any
time (Schroth et al., 2011; Treffinger,
Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval, 2006). A third
grade teacher, for example, who is exploring
continuity and change with her students
may use a variety of CPS strategies
and tools as part of that process (California
Department of Education, 1998).
If her overarching goal is for students
to demonstrate basic economic reasoning
skills and an understanding of the
economy of the local region, she might
suggest the children work in groups to
develop a product using local resources
with appeal to consumers in the area. To
begin this process, the children engage
in a brainstorming exercise, focusing on
generating as many products as possible,
welcoming unusual options, withholding
criticism from ideas generated, and
combining ideas to create new options
(Treffinger & Nassab, 2000; Treffinger,
Selby, & Schoonover, 2013). Once a list
of possible products is generated, the students
could use SCAMPER to hone and
improve some of the popular ideas, this
time engaging in a more critical approach
(Treffinger, Isaksen, & Stead-Dorval,
2006; Treffinger & Nassab, 2000).
Finally, when one or two of the potential
products are selected as most popular,
the children might use ALoU to analyze
each and to determine the one to use for
producing a prototype (Schroth, Collins,
& Treffinger, 2011; Treffinger & Nassab,
2000).