Running head: EVALUATION OF ERNEST BOYER’S ESSAY ON INGENUITY
Evaluationof Ernest Boyer’s Essay on Ingenuity
Evaluationof Ernest Boyer’s Essay on Ingenuity
Reportson college education show that schoolroom undertakings extend beyondthe diffusion of information from instructors to learners. Boyer’sarticle on creativity in the classroom focuses on numerous factorsthat obstruct the successful realization of education goals. Boyer(1995) reveals that students and teachers fault each other forlacking interest or attention to tutelage. The author begins byhighlighting the scenario that raises conflict between lecturers andcollege students. Lack of interest in learning among students standsout as the dominant element in the first few paragraphs of thearticle. Students no longer demonstrate interest to learn, or ratherpay attention to lectures. The article identifies the mismatchbetween interests of students and those of professors as the criticalaspect behind this challenge. Such conflict seems to present thegreatest challenge among lecturers, most of who complain thatteaching students is becoming increasingly difficult. On the otherhand, the article points at the students’ interest in getting goodgrades in school by adhering to the formula of success. The discourseassesses Boyer’s article by highlighting the points made ordisregarded as well as taking a standpoint on the accuracy of theeditorial.
Strengthof the Article
Besideshighlighting the diminishing interest among students to engage inactive learning, the article is quick to reveal various factors thatlead to this awful situation. Teachers have a greater role to play toinitiate active learning among students, especially during lectures(Hennessey,2015).Lack of concern for students among professors seems to be the keycontributory factor towards less interest among students to learn(Starko,2013).The article therefore poses a vital challenge to lecturers to putmore effort in engaging students outside classrooms to cultivateinterest and create a good rapport. In addition, the article mentionsthe issue of lack of personal initiative among students to learnoutside the lecture hours. The author puts it clear that moststudents are only interested in grades and not actual learning(Boyer,1995).This kind of observation challenges students to consider individualdetermination and initiative to learn.
Theauthor succeeds in balancing the argument on why creativity lacks inclassrooms by focusing on both lecturers and students. In otherwords, the balanced approach in highlighting the underlying problemmakes the article realistic and reliable. Boyer (1995) posits thatstudents are no longer willing to put any effort in learning, butmore interested in achieving impressing grades (Boyer,1995).The author however is quick to note the small percentage of optimismin students’ learning, with emphasis on lecturer’s attitude andthe ability to connect with learners. The entire article illuminatesvarious factors that lead to active participation of students andcreativity in the classroom where both lecturers and students have arole to play. The recognition of the learners’ optimism as well asinstructors’ capacities show that the author is willing to providean objective assessment of the challenges and opportunities thatexist in the classroom (Beji,2016).On the other hand, the author utilizes numerous and credible sources,which makes it easy to back information. Furthermore, the outsidematerials help in providing diverse perspectives on the topic as wellas reinforce any new data. The writer uses a list of conveyedthoughts and cited sentences, which help to build reliability andsupport ideas with more examples from learners or instructors whopresent different images of the college life (Beji,2016).This means that the article is credible and persuasive in conveyinginformation.
Shortcomingsof the Article
Despitelooking at the issue of lack of creativity in classrooms, the articlehas two major shortcomings. To begin with, the author fails toaddress possible reasons why professors demonstrate lack of concernfor students outside lecture hours. The article lays blame onlecturers without considering the element of workload. The lecturermay be facing the challenge of huge workload due to high number ofstudents the institution expects him/her to handle at a time. Again,the professor may be struggling with many lectures allocated to himby the administration, which may contribute to exhaustion (Park& Choi, 2014).In this case, the author fails to address some of these reasonsbehind lecturers’ inefficiency and competence in facilitatingcreativity in classrooms, hence making the article inadequate.
Thearticle also lays the blame on the colleges’ and universities’administrations for not concentrating on lower level division.Although it is true that this level requires competent professors tocreate strong foundation of learning, the article fails to addressthe possible challenges these institutions may be facing to act theway they do. The author ignores the element of inadequacy of teachingstaff in the market to meet the existing demands. There may be ashortage of lecturers in technical subjects, which leads tooverworking of the available labor force (Cropley,2016).Failure to point out this element leaves the article incomplete in asense that the reader does not understand why lecturers in somesubjects fail to attract the interest of students while others do sowith ease.
Lackof creativity in classroom is a serious challenge that requires theattention of all stakeholders in education. Although it is importantto get good grades, it is clear from the article that students areshowing less interest in engaging in active learning, which consistsof personal research and class discussions. To realize the intendedgoals of education, both teachers and students need to have a commonfocus and create an enabling environment for real learning. Thetransfer of knowledge is important in this case, where lecturers andstudents need to have more time to interact. The article, therefore,serves as a revelation and lays the basis for further research anddiscussion on how to initiate creativity in the classroom. Boyer(1995) raises the challenging issues that learners experience as wellas the solutions that might enhance creativity and education atschools.
Fromthe onset, the author presents an important aspect of how the currentcrop of learners fails to realize the intended goals of education.The article places emphasis on failure of both students and lecturersin initiating the culture of real learning in colleges anduniversities. However, there is need for detailed research on howlecturers can become more engaged in students’ affairs outside thelecture room, as well as how students can have interest in engaginglecturers and putting personal effort in learning. The articleexplores some misconceptions and issues that develop in classes andprovide resolutions that individuals can utilize to inhibit thechallenges. The use of credible sources to strengthen information andback instructors or learners’ perceptions help to advance theessay’s credibility and accuracy. In this regard, Boyer’seditorial shows how creativity can become a comprehensive tool inresolving issues.
Beji,Y. (2016). The importance of reading in creativewriting. InternationalJournal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS) ISSN2356-5926, 3(1),247-257.
Boyer,E. (1995). The basic school: A community for learning. Ewing. NJ:California Princeton Fulfillment Services.
Cropley,D. H. (2016). Creativity in engineering. In MultidisciplinaryContributions to the Science of Creative Thinking(pp. 155-173). Springer Singapore.
Hennessey,B. A. (2015). If I were secretary of education: A focus on intrinsicmotivation and creativity in the classroom. Psychologyof Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,9(2),187.
Park,E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces:traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. HigherEducation,68(5),749-771.
Starko,A. J. (2013). Creativityin the classroom: Schools of curious delight.Routledge.