Creative Teaching

Although the teacher-proof movement of the post-Sputnik 1960s has long been considered a failure, new versions of teacher proofing have gained adherents in the 1990s, as increasing numbers of schools continue to implement scripted curricula that turn teachers into script readers. These curricula often provide word-for-word scripts that teachers are strongly encouraged to follow, and include Slavin’s Success for All (Slavin & Madden, 2001), Engelmann’s Direct Instruction (Adams & Engelmann, 1996; Engelmann, 1980), and Hirsch’s Core Knowledge (Hirsch, 1987, 1996). Scripted instruction is particularly popular in urban districts; for example, beginning in 1997 the New York City Board of Education mandated Success for All reading instruction in low-performing schools (Goodnough, 2001, 2003). Scripted teacher-proof curricula do not rely either on teachers’ creative potential or their subject matter expertise; the message of these programs seems to be, if you can perform well from a script, you can teach. Yet critics of such programs note that the best teachers apply immense creativity and profound content knowledge to their jobs, both in advance preparation and from moment to moment while in the classroom. For example, Sizer’s Coalition for Essential Schools (Simon, 1999) has criticized scripted instruction, arguing that effective teaching requires teachers to know their students and respond to them individually. Although scripted approaches have documented improvements in test scores, critics argue that scripted instruction emphasizes lowerorder skills that are particularly easy to measure with standardized tests. Advocates of creative teaching argue that it results in deeper Creative Teaching: Collaborative Discussion as Disciplined Improvisation