Arts to the rescue

Here's a very interesting article on collaboration between arts and engineering.


Engineering has made great advantages in the past several decades, but to really move forward, more collaboration with other disciplines is needed. For creativity, arts is a great option.

In  the above article, a student has a very insightful comment: "Engineers tend to make very small, incremental improvements on things that have already been done, and they don't really allow their creativity to take full force," [...] "Artists can teach you to be more open to new things and to think about things in different ways."

This is exactly what I have observed in our work too. I, the engineer, see my students designing things that are not very different from what they have seen before; and while we are able to increase the level of innovation of their designs, we do not see radical new or different designs.

The idea of how differently engineers and artists (and psychologists) think, and how to harness the benefits of that, can be extended to our research too. We all three have very different approaches to things. With minor simplifications it boils down to this:

Engineer: Identify the problem
Psychologist: Explain the reason behind the problem
Artist: Solve the problem

Hopefully this mix will result in more than just incremental improvements in creativity in design education.

How To Be Creative

The image of the 'creative type' is a myth. Jonah Lehrer on why anyone can innovate—and why a hot shower, a cold beer or a trip to your colleague's desk might be the key to your next big idea. (An article from the Wall Street Jounal.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203370604577265632205015846.html

Brene Brown: The Power of Vulnerability

"Vulnerability is kind of the core of shame, and fear, and our struggle for worthiness. But it appears it's also the birth place of joy, of creativity, of belonging, of love." Brene Brown.

A great talk that links vulnerability with creativity:

Is class room the proverbial box?

There is a very interesting article in New York Times about the link between mind and body, and how what we do can effect how creative we can be. In one of the examples the researchers tell how thinking literally inside a box (made big enough for a person to fit in) reduces ones ability to come up with creative answers to a problem. In their experiment participants were randomly divided into groups, some sat inside this box and some outside the box (next to it). The participants were asked to solve the same problem. Results showed how people sitting outside the box were able to also think outside the box, i.e. come up with more creative solutions.

Extending the finding to class room teaching, is the class room the box? Does the class room prevent creative thinking? What would a class room that simulated "outside the box" look like?

Twelve Things You Were Not Taught in School About Creative Thinking

Another interesting post regarding education and creativity:

http://www.creativitypost.com/create/twelve_things_you_were_not_taught_in_school_about_creative_thinking

Innovations in 2011

Popular Science came out with their list of products again. What all creativity can do! One of my favorites is the inverted chain saw - clever! The designers that came up with this concept really had to restructure the problem and let go of the traditional chainsaw concept.

In past work we have shown that innovative products tend to possess certain characteristics and that the competition is unable to catch the innovators even after a few years in the market. Specifically, innovative products tend to hit on average three of the 13 innovation characteristics when compared to the competition. Below is a table with three past PopSci award winning products analyzed against these characteristics.


The chain saw above, by the way hits modified physical layout (chain on the inside), modified physical demands (no exposed chain, less kickback), and additional function (gripping branch while sawing).

Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Here's an interesting article from the New York Times. Some excerpts:

Politicians and educators have been wringing their hands for years over test scores showing American students falling behind their counterparts in Slovenia and Singapore. How will the United States stack up against global rivals in innovation?

...it turns out, middle and high school students are having most of the fun, building their erector sets and dropping eggs into water to test the first law of motion. The excitement quickly fades as students brush up against the reality of what David E. Goldberg, an emeritus engineering professor, calls “the math-science death march.” Freshmen in college wade through a blizzard of calculus, physics and chemistry in lecture halls with hundreds of other students. And then many wash out.

Studies have found that roughly 40 percent of students planning engineering and science majors end up switching to other subjects or failing to get any degree.

Please find the whole article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/why-science-majors-change-their-mind-its-just-so-darn-hard.html?src=me&ref=general