{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019747235387045814, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.366834170854271, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Creativity, Content, and Policy

Creativity, content, and policy have multiple relationships. Creativity and disciplinary content are inextricably linked. In dealing with creativity, the first education policy choice is whether to recognize and act on that fact. Care is needed in using the term creativity in advocacy contexts, lest the relationship between creativity and content become obscured or forgotten altogether. Creativity is central to the arts, and thus arts education is a natural curricular place to develop creativity. However, the development of creative potential requires work over time. Creativity development in all fields requires serious sustained study and practice with certain goals in mind. Other kinds of study may be valuable, but they will not develop creativity. If we want to develop creative potential in schools, we must want the necessary structures and means for its development as much as we want the results. A number of major adjustments are required. Necessary means include the provision of environments that philosophically and operationally support creativity, increased respect for local knowledge, and altered approaches to assessment and evaluation. Major policy decisions face us. Can we make the adjustments necessary?