The Misleading Definition of Creativity Suggested by AI Must Be Kept out of the Classroom

Bibliographic Data

ID22044310
AuthorsMark A Runco (0000-0002-5043-7900, Aalto University, corresponding author)
Year2025
Volume15
Issue9
Pages1141
Publication date2025-09-02
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEducation Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2227-7102 • E-ISSN: 2227-7102
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/educsci15091141
OpenAlexW4413933707
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited32

The advent of AI is likely to make it difficult to support the creativity of students. This article points to the specific problem whereby the pseudo-creativity of AI is misinterpreted as authentic creativity, which could in turn mislead educators. The result would be a failure to optimally support the authentic creativity of students. There are suggestions that AI can be creative, but also compelling reasons to reject that claim. These include the need for a self in creativity and the role of the self in the creative process. Self-expression, for instance, requires a self, as part of the process. Then, there is the intrinsic motivation that characterizes the human creative experience and may be involved in the problem finding that is critical for the creative process. Each of these positions is reviewed in this article. The curious thing is that, even with compelling reasons to distinguish the authentic creativity of students from the artificial creativity of AI, definitions of creativity seem to be changing. The unique feature of the present effort is its examination of the reasons why definitions seem to be changing, even when, according to creativity research and theory, they should not. This article describes, (a) the surprising and incorrect position that AI can be creative, and, (b) problems that would occur if this position is applied in the classroom. It then (c) attempts to explain why that position is in fact taking hold, as is suggested by the changes in how creativity is defined. This explanation requires looking beyond creativity theory to broad social contexts, which are economic, political, scientific, and technological. This article concludes with (d) recommendations for supporting the authentic creativity of students. The recommendations exclude ideas suggested by the misleading definition of creativity, described in (a) and were instead selected based on their relationships specifically with authentic creativity

Cognitive psychology · Creativity · Mathematics education · Computer Science · Creativity in Education and Neuroscience · Education and Learning Interventions · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access