Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

A Critique of Creativity and Complexity pp 159–183Cite as

Seeking Chaotic Order

The Classroom as a Complex Adaptive System

  • Chapter

  • 902 Accesses

Part of the book series: Advances in Creativity and Giftedness ((ACAG,volume 25))

Abstract

The vibrant, interdisciplinary science of complexity is illuminating the tendency of complex adaptive systems to oscillate along a continuum from chaos to order, occasionally finding a complexity-generating space somewhere between the two extremes. Awareness of the continuum can enable educators to understand more clearly their own career development, the intricacies of students’ learning processes, and the erroneous nature of many school reform initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ambrose, D. (1992). An analysis of the interdisciplinary theory summit conferences on optimal development of mind: Effective processes and emerging syntheses. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2005). Aspiration growth, talent development, and self-fulfillment in a context of democratic erosion. Roeper Review, 28, 11–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2009). Expanding visions of creative intelligence: An interdisciplinary exploration. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., Sriraman, B., & Cross, T. L. (Eds.). (2013). The Roeper School: A model for holistic development of high ability. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2012). How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., Sternberg, R. J., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2012). Confronting dogmatism in gifted education. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. W. (2007). Ideological success, educational failure? On the politics of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 108–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arends, D., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: Becoming an accomplished teacher. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. 1997. The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2013). Teaching for creativity: Domains and divergent thinking, intrinsic motivation, and evaluation. In M. B. Gregerson, H. T. Snyder & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Teaching creatively and teaching creativity (pp. 175–181). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Balzacq, T., & Jervis, R. (2004). Logics of mind and international system: A journey with Robert Jervis. Review of International Studies, 30, 559–582. doi: 10.1017/S0260210504006230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beabout, B. R. (2012). Turbulence, perturbance, and educational change. Complicity, 9, 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, G. D., and Hunter, W. J. 1993. Chaos theory: No strange attractor in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education 14, 61–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2006). Our impoverished view of educational reform. Teachers College Record, 108, 949–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2012). Narrowing curriculum, assessments, and conceptions of what it means to be smart in the US schools: Creaticide by design. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking (pp. 79–93). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. 1995. The manufactured crisis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, B. G. 1993. What does chaos theory have to offer educational administration? Journal of School Leadership 3, 579–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleakley, A. (2010). Blunting Occam’s razor: Aligning medical education with studies of complexity. Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 16 (4), 849–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boedecker, J., Obst, O., Lizier, J. T., Mayer, N. M., & Asada, M. (2012). Information processing in echo state networks at the edge of chaos. Theory in Biosciences, 131, 205–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York, NY: Science Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, T. (2012). The ultimate book of mind maps. London, England: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canestrari, A. S., & Marlowe, B. A. (2010). Educational foundations: An anthology of critical readings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P. (2010). Economic complexity and equilibrium illusion: Essays on market instability and macro vitality. London, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherkes-Julkowski, M. 1996. The child as a self-organizing system: The case against instruction as we know it. Learning Disabilities 7, 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L. M., Higgins, K. M., and Ambrose, D. 1999. Educators under siege: The killing of the teaching profession. The Educational Forum, 63, 127–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coloroso, B. (2002). Kids are worth it! Giving your child the gift of inner discipline. New York, NY: William Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai, D. Y., & Renzulli, J. S. (2008). Snowflakes, living systems, and the mystery of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 114–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Falk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action: Studies of schools and students at work. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doll, W. E. (1989). Complexity in the classroom. Educational Leadership, 7 (1), 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doll, W. E. (2012). Complexity and the culture of curriculum. Complicity, 9, 10–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowson, M., Cunneen, T., and Irwin, A. (1999). A chaotic look at students’ motivation: Exploring the interface between chaos theory and goal theory. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, 19 April-23 June, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. ERIC ED 430 185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 394–395). New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1993). The educational imagination (3rd ed.). New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1994). Cognition and curriculum reconsidered. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2012). Dogmatism, creativity, and critical thought: The reality of human minds and the possibility of critical societies. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking (pp. 37–49). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983). Learning to teach. In L. S. Shulman and G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 150–170). New York, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103 (6), 1013–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, D., Frey, N.,& Pumpian, I. (2012). How to create a culture of achievement in your school and classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontdevila, J., Opazo, M. P., & White, H. C. (2011). Order at the edge of chaos: Meanings from netdom switchings across functional systems. Sociological Theory, 29, 178–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gage, N. L. (1978). The scientific basis for the art of teaching. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garmston, R., & Wellman, B. (1995). Adaptive schools in a quantum universe. Educational Leadership 52 (7), 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershenson, C.. (2012). Guiding the self-organization of random Boolean networks. Theory in Biosciences, 131, 181–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goff, K. E. (1998). Chaos, collaboration, and curriculum: A deliberative process. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 14, 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, D. (1997). The case for theoretical pluralism . Educational Management and Administration 25, 371–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guess, D., & Sailor, W. (1993). Chaos theory and the study of human behavior: Implications for special education and developmental disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 27, 16–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, H. (1995). Jurassic management: Chaos and management development in educational institutions. Journal of Educational Administration 33, 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2010). Winner-take-all politics: How Washington made the rich richer–and turned its back on the middle class. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harjunen, E. (2011). Patterns of control over the teaching–studying–learning process and classrooms as complex dynamic environments: A theoretical framework. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1998). Emergence from chaos to order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, D. (1996). Chaos theory and educational administration: Imaginative foil or useful framework? Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations 11, 9–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis, R. (1997). System effects: Complexity in political and social life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis, R. (2012). Systemic effects revisited. Critical review: A journal of politics and society, 24, 393–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, F. P. (1994). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (1992). Models of teaching (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., and Weil, M. (2000). Models of teaching (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (Eds.). (2005). Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Killen, R. (2006). Effective teaching strategies. Melbourne, Australia: Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, A. (2000). Burnt at the high stakes. Journal of Teacher Education 51, 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., and Soloway E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. Elementary School Journal 94, 483–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumashiro, K. K. (2012). Bad teacher! How blaming teachers distorts the bigger picture. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, C. G. (1989). Santa Fe Institute studies in the sciences of complexity (Vol. 6), Artificial life. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18, 141–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levonen, J. J., & Tukiainen, M. (1996). Complex learning in computer environments: An introduction. Machine Mediated Learning, 5, 59–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litke, R. (1997). Domination and other kinds of power. In L. D. Kaplan & L. F. Bove (Eds.), Philosophical perspectives on power and domination (pp. 5–13). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lizier, J. T. (2012). The local information dynamics of distributed computation in complex systems. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2005). Classroom instruction that works: Researchbased strategies for increasing student achievement. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, M. (2008). Complexity theory and the philosophy of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40, 4–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzocchi, F. (2012). Complexity and the reductionism-holism debate in systems biology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Systems Biology and Medicine, 4, 413–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAndrew, D. A. (1997). Chaos, complexity, and fuzziness: Science looks at teaching English. English Journal, 86, 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, D., & Wood, G. (Eds.). (2004). Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. H., & Page, S. E. (2007). Complex adaptive systems: An introduction to computational models of social life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L. W. (1998). Leadership theory and student violence: Is there a relationship? NAASP Bulletin 82 (596): 50–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morowitz, H. J. (2004). The emergence of everything: How the world became complex. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, K. (2002). School leadership and complexity theory. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, K. (2008). Educational philosophy and the challenge of complexity theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40, 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, K. (2010). Complexity theory, school leadership and management: Questions for theory and practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38, 374–393. doi: 10.1177/1741143209359711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packard, N. H. (1988). Adaptation toward the edge of chaos. In J. A. S. Kelso, A. J. Mandell & M. F. Shlesinger (Eds.), Dynamic patterns in complex systems (pp. 293–301). Singapore: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polite, V. C. (1994). The method in the madness: African American males, avoidance schooling, and chaos theory. Journal of Negro Education 63, 588–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos. New York, NY: Bantam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York, NY: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rea, D. (2003). Optimal motivation for creative intelligence. In D. Ambrose, L. M. Cohen & A. J. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Creative intelligence: Toward theoretic integration (pp. 211–235). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rettig, M. D., & Canady, R. L. (2013). Teaching in the block: Strategies for engaging active learners. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, R. (2001). Millenium as opportunity: Chaos, creativity, and Guilford’s structure of intellect model. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheerens, J. (1997). Conceptual models and theory embedded principles on effective schooling. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 269–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, M., & Somers, M. (2006). Organizations as complex adaptive systems: Implications of complexity theory for leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 351–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory and research. New York, NY: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivey, M. (2008). The continuity of mind. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanford, B. D. (1996). The self-organizing system in theory and practice: The experience of the collaboratives for humanities and arts teaching. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 11, 249–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterling, A. (1992). Human creativity as a function of chaotic dynamics: Implications for research and practice in education. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subotnik, R., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Nielsen, M. (1998). Complexity theory: Inclusion of the affective domain in an interactive learning model for instructional design. Educational Technology 38, 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (1994). What matters in curriculum for gifted learners: Reflections on theory, research, and practice. In N. Colangelo (Ed.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 126–135). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J, & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York, NY: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, D. J. (1999). Small worlds: The dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer, R., & Zinga, M. (1998). Applying chaos theory to school reform. Internet Research 8, 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolin, S. (2008). Democracy incorporated: Managed democracy and the specter of inverted totalitarianism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Don Ambrose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Rider University, USA

    Don Ambrose

  2. The University of Montana, USA

    Bharath Sriraman

  3. Rider University, USA

    Kathleen M. Pierce

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ambrose, D. (2014). Seeking Chaotic Order. In: Ambrose, D., Sriraman, B., Pierce, K.M. (eds) A Critique of Creativity and Complexity. Advances in Creativity and Giftedness, vol 25. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-773-5_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation