Embracing Creativity in K-12 Engineering Pedagogy

  • Alestra Flores MenéndezEmail author
  • Helen Min


This exploratory chapter proposes placing an explicit focus on creativity as part of K-12 STEAM education, specifically within the context of engineering. We examine how three key elements of an applied arts pedagogy, promoting divergent thinking, reframing failure as a natural part of the creative design process, and incorporating reflection, can enrich the engineering design cycle. We propose that broadening the scope of engineering education to foster creativity may have the potential to attract a larger number of participants to the discipline of engineering.


  1. Andreasen, N. C. (2005). The creating brain: The neuroscience of genius. Washington, DC, USA: Dana Press.Google Scholar
  2. Babaci-Wilhite, Z. (2013). A study of escalating debates on the use of global or local language in education. In Education, dominance and identity (pp. 121–132). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boy, G. A. (2013, August). From STEM to STEAM: Toward a human-centred education, creativity & learning thinking. In Proceedings of the 31st European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics (p. 3). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  4. Connor, A. M., Karmokar, S., & Whittington, C. (2015). From STEM to STEAM: Strategies for enhancing engineering & technology education.Google Scholar
  5. Crick, F., Byrne, J. V., & George, M. (1995). The impact of Linus Pauling on molecular biology.Google Scholar
  6. Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York City: Random House.Google Scholar
  8. Felder, R. M. (1988). Creativity in engineering education. Chemical Engineering Education, 22(3), 120–125.Google Scholar
  9. Gilhooly, K. J., Fioratou, E., Anthony, S. H., & Wynn, V. (2007). Divergent thinking: Strategies and executive involvement in generating novel uses for familiar objects. British Journal of Psychology, 98(4), 611–625. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gillen, J. (2014). Educating for insurgency: The roles of young people in schools of poverty. Oakland, CA: AK Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012, August). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.Google Scholar
  12. Hetland, L. (2013). Studio thinking 2: The real benefits of visual arts education. New York City: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  13. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education. Committee on K-12 Engineering Education, National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council of the National Academies.Google Scholar
  14. Kaufman, S. (2013). Ungifted: Intelligence redefined. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaufman, S., & Gregoire, C. (2015). Wired to create: Unraveling the mysteries of the creative mind. USA: Perigee Books.Google Scholar
  17. Kazerounian, K., & Foley, S. (2007). Barriers to creativity in engineering education: A study of instructors and student’s perceptions. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(7), 761–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Keating, D. P. (1980). Four faces of creativity: The continuing plight of the intellectually underserved. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24(2), 56–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. USA: Crown Business.Google Scholar
  20. Kim, Y., & Park, N. (2012). The effect of STEAM education on elementary school student’s creativity improvement. In Computer applications for security, control and system engineering (pp. 115–121). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. E. (1974). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. MIT Alfred P. Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
  22. Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: Background, federal policy, and legislative action.Google Scholar
  23. Little, P., & Cardenas, M. (2001). Use of “studio” methods in the introductory engineering design curriculum. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(3), 309–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Milner, A. R. (2015). Universal human rights and STEM education. School Science and Mathematics, 115(6), 257–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Oakley, B. A. (2014). A mind for numbers: How to excel at math and science (even if you flunked algebra). New York City: J. P. Tarcher.Google Scholar
  26. Park, N., & Ko, Y. (2012). Computer education’s teaching-learning methods using educational programming language based on STEAM education. In Network and parallel computing (pp. 320–327). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Popova, M. (2016). The art of thought: A pioneering 1926 model of the four stages of creativity. Brain Pickings. N.p., 2013. Web. 12 Aug 2016.Google Scholar
  28. Robinson, K. (2006). Do schools kill creativity? TED.Google Scholar
  29. Seelig, T. (2012). inGenius: A crash course on creativity. Carlsbad: Hay House, Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55(1), 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Simonton, D. K. (2006). Origins of Genius.Google Scholar
  32. Sternberg, R. J. (2008). The WICS approach to leadership: Stories of leadership and the structures and processes that support them. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 360–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 2(1), 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. The Nature of Creativity, pp. 43–75.Google Scholar
  35. Vinovskis, M. (2015). From a nation at risk to no child left behind: national education goals and the creation of federal education policy. Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  36. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought.Google Scholar
  37. Winner, E., Hetland, L., Veenema, S., Sheridan, K., Palmer, P., & Locher, I. (2006). Studio thinking: How visual arts teaching can promote disciplined habits of mind. New Directions in Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 189–205.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of California BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations