Nowadays, the arts’ curriculum is continuously decreasing and its importance seems to be faded in the new education policies. Moreover, arts’ are often isolated from other curricular domains. It looks like creative learning processes are completely different from other learning areas. As Cross (2012) highlights instead of understanding creativity as something that we should teach, we should think about it as an inherent dimension of learning. This post aims to defend the idea that creativity exists within any area of knowledge, and specially when talking about language learning.

​

Vygotsky (1987) argued how basic are affect, emotion, and creativity towards human development. As we have said, from the social constructivist perspective, learning and teaching are closely linked to creativity. As Cross (2012), quoting from Lobman (2010), emphasizes, it is very interesting to understand the human being as a creative animal, since humanity has been able to create and transform the world. Creating makes us humans, then, how can we limit this aspect only to the arts area? Furthermore, in this creative process, not only reasoning is needed, the same as what happens with the Arts, emotion is a key factor. Precisely, this is particularly highlighted in language learning processes, since when picking on a language, words forms our expression of self and it has an effect on the relationship among us, the world and the others. (Cross, 2012). It is not just about the meaning of the words, but also about what feelings do they cause through sense that is what it is a creative process inherent to emotion and affect.

​

As in this post we are basing on Vygotskian notion of creativity, we should highlight that this process is social and cooperative. “Sense-making” and “meaning-making” arise from social mediation in what we call ZPD (“Zone of Proximal Development”). We personally found quite interesting how Cross (2010) explained the relationship between ZPD and creativity; he discussed that within this zone, in which the student stays between others’ regulation and self-regulation, creativity and improvisation is performed by the student. When using the L2 the students are constantly creating, they hear or learn a structure and then, when they use it, they don’t just imitate it, but they create something new from what already was. Language aims at creating word understanding and its “sense”.  “Sense” refers to how the L2 learner gets a feeling for the language, this is to say, how the words start sounding wright or wrong. According to Mahn and John-Steiner (2002), word meaning dominates over word sense until fluency is developed.

​

In conclusion, creativity is not an isolated concept that remains in the Arts’ field, but it also expands to any other area where learning is involved. While we are learning, we are creating new learning and new language. As English teachers, we have to be aware of this fact and enjoy the ZPD with our students, in which errors should be welcomed, because creativity and improvisation are happening. Furthermore, integrating not only creativity but also the Arts’ in all the subjects of the curriculum, will enhance our students’ creativity and it will take care of both, our students’ emotions and affectiveness.

​

References.

​

• Cross, R. (2012). Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum: the CLIL second language classroom. Australian Education Research. 39(4), 431-445.

​