Lorna Smith considers why creativity in English matters.

I have long been interested in the concept of ‘creativity’ in secondary English — so much so that I wrote a book about it. My research was prompted by noting there is zero reference to ‘creativity’ (or any other word using the ‘create’ root) in the current National Curriculum for English. This is despite ‘creativity’ having been one of the four central concepts in the previous National Curriculum (QCA, 2007) — its absence seems deliberate. It was also puzzling: other secondary National Curriculum subjects do include ‘creativity’: art and design contains six references; mathematics has one. 

Instead, Key Stage 3 English has fourteen references to ‘knowledge’, and Key Stage 4 has ten. This is knowledge explicitly associated with skills, vocabulary and grammar: there is no sense of knowledge of one’s self, of others, of the world around us, even though such knowledge — often referred to as ‘personal growth’ — can be traced right back to the origins of English as a secondary subject, when a strong link between personal growth and creativity was expressed. English was defined by Newbolt as an ‘art, a means of creative expression, arecord of human experience’ (Newbolt, 1921:11) and, for me and many others, that still holds true. 

What does the Curriculum and Assessment Review Final Report say about creativity?

We are awaiting a new National Curriculum in England. The draft is due out for consultation in September, the latest stage in a process that began in July 2024 when the Curriculum and Assessment Review was established and invited input from across the sector. Interested parties responded to that invitation, calling for creativity to be reinstated. (For example, two submissions — a joint statement from NATE and the UKLA, another from the English Association – each mention creativity six times.)

The Review’s Final Report was published last year. I was excited to see ‘creativity’ feature in preliminaries, including two references to ‘creative industries’, and the statement that ‘creative’ subjects contributing to a balanced education. Even more inspiring is the statement that teachers should be allowed professional autonomy to be ‘creative’. Overall, a Control + F command returns fifty-three hits across its 197 pages.

Yet there’s a ‘but’. When it comes to sections devoted to subject specialisms, it is noteworthy that although ‘create’ words feature in art (four times), computing (two), design and technology (four), dance (two) and science (one), there are — again — zero references in English. This suggests there was — again — a conscious choice not to include ‘creativity’, which gives rise to questions concerning whether and how creative practice in English is envisaged by the Report’s authors. 

What is the place of creativity in English in other countries?

The omission of creativity in the CAR Final Report is particularly surprising given its prominence in other jurisdictions whose English curricula have been recently refreshed (Wales, Canada and Australia). A brief exploration of these provides an indication of what creativity might mean and how it’s valued. Of course, a basic word count is only a proxy indicator, but together they imply that creativity is central to secondary English beyond England. 

In Wales, the development of ‘enterprising, creative contributors’ is seen as one of the four overarching purposes of the 2022 curriculum. English sits within the Language, Literature and Communication Area of Learning, which has over thirty references to why and how learners might experience creativity — including the idea that they should be supported to ‘be creative and to persevere when facing challenges’ and that experiencing literature can ‘spark learners’ imagination and creativity’.

In Ontario, Canada, English is one of nineteen secondary subjects. The Grade 9 English curriculum was refreshed in 2023 (with Grades 10, 11 and 12 to come). In the Vision and Goals introduction are three references to ‘create’ in verb form, which presents students asactive meaning-makers: they are to ‘research, synthesize, and organize information to create literary and persuasive texts reflecting their thoughts, feelings, and ideas’; ‘think critically about the texts they read and create’; and become ‘skilled at understanding, using, and creating texts in many different forms. In the Elements of the Grade 9 course section, there are a further seventeen references to creativity as a transferable skill and to howstudents should develop as skilled, confident creators and users of language. 

In Victoria, Australia, the 2024 curriculum is presented as a wheel within which English is one of eight subject areas. The wheel’s rim is made up of four ‘capabilities’, including ‘critical and creative thinking’, suggesting that creativity encircles every subject. English itself has four aims, two of which refer to creative practice and position students as agents who ‘learn to purposefully and proficiently listen to, speak about, read, view, write, create and reflect on a range of texts’ and ‘create meaning’ appropriately using standard Australian English. 

What does this mean for the new National Curriculum? 

As suggested by this brief review of curricula from outside England, the definition of ‘creativity’ has subtle differences: is the creative process or product more important? Is creativity chiefly associated with creative writing, or manifested in other ways? Perhaps, then, it is not the term ‘creativity’ that matters, but the content; or maybe we should consider the term in the plural — creativities — as suggested by Andrew McCallum (2012).

Of course, the absence of ‘creativity’ in the CAR Final Report does not necessarily mean it will be absent from new National Curriculum. When I read the draft on publication, the most pertinent questions for me will be not the number of references to ‘creativity’ (although I will be counting), but what the document will mean for English teachers’ practice, how creativity will be (or not) enacted in their classrooms, and how learners will experience our subject. These things are crucial for all our futures — but unquantifiable. 

Featured image: iStock/amtitus