Connecting Creativity in Public Schools with the Constitution

What’s the connection between the North Carolina Constitution and creativity?  Based on what I heard at the 25^th Annual Emerging Issues Forum last week in Raleigh, the connection is both fundamental and practical. 

Governors, academics, authors and activists provided their perspective on the proposition that creativity is “America’s single greatest advantage in an increasingly competitive global marketplace.”   The conference sought to advance “policies and practices that would enhance creativity’s impact on North Carolina’s economy.”  As the conversation turned to public schools, and it frequently did, the focus was on whether our schools foster creativity and approach it as a teachable skill, or whether, instead, creativity is squelched through policies and practices like the testing program, graduation requirements, and outdated instructional methods.  The consensus was that we’ve over-emphasized left-brain skills and we need to attend more to right-brain thinking to prepare students for success.

So how does an understanding of the North Carolina Constitution advance our discussion on creativity as a necessary part of the public school education?

For starters, the story behind the creation of the fundamental right to education is, itself, all about creativity and innovation.  Reverend Samuel S. Ashley came as a missionary to Wilmington, North Carolina in April of 1865 – just as the Civil War was coming to a close  -- to create schools for Freedmen.  In situations that could hardly be more dire, he fought tenaciously for education demonstrating extraordinary resourcefulness in building schools, recruiting teachers, and raising funds.  He brought this conviction to the floor of the constitutional convention in 1868 when he moved to amend the declaration of rights by adding “the people shall have a right to the privileges of education and it shall be the duty of the state to guard and maintain that right.”

This became one of our fundamental rights and our NC Supreme Court has interpreted that the framers of the constitution (including Ashley) intended “that every child have a fundamental right to a sound basic education which would prepare the child to participate fully in society as it existed in his or her lifetime.”  This kind of standard breathes so that we get the best of both worlds:  we hold onto the passionate conviction of Ashley of the need for education but apply it to contemporary standards. 

And when we think about these standards, the North Carolina Supreme Court explicitly tells us that test scores are not enough to measure the constitutional right to education – we must use additional ways to assess whether our students are ready for further education or to compete in the job market. The experts who spoke at the Forum clearly demonstrated how participants in today’s society need fundamental right brain skills as much as left-brain abilities.  So if creativity is so important, doesn’t this mean that we must find a way to address it (and assess it) in order to meet constitutional standards? 

Our state constitution is where we have placed our fundamental principles as a state.  When Ashley became the first elected superintendent of public instruction, he often cited the constitution in his efforts to garner support for improvements needed in the system of public schools and to remind people of the agreed-upon principles.  We can continue to do so. Telling the stories helps us remember the kind of creativity and innovation that are a part of our legacy.  Being clear on constitutional interpretation allows us to see how constitutional standards are relevant to these policy discussions.  And notice that when we make these efforts to pay attention to the stories, integrate constitutional analysis, and look at issues in a new way, we are employing the kind of creative thinking that we seek to further for the state.  That’s at least part of what the Constitutional Tales are about.