  Human creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon with cognitive, attitudinal,
intrapersonal interpersonal, practical, socio-cultural, economic, and
environmental aspects. It can be challenging to incorporate creativity in
classrooms. Teachers tend to inhibit creativity by focusing on reproduction of
knowledge, obedience and passivity in class, and correct responses, which are
easier to evaluate than creative ones. Teaching in such a way as to discourage
creative answers and approaches may lead to higher scores on standardized tests
(with all the sociological, marketplace, and political consequences that
entails). Teachers claim to value creativity, but to hold negative attitudes
toward, and show little tolerance of, attributes associated with creativity,
such as risk taking, impulsivity, and independence. When teachers do encourage
creativity, it is often the case that neither teacher nor students knows what
the expectations are. Moreover, students fear that they will be critically
judged if they produce something in which they have invested at a personal
level. Despite the potentially threatening aspects of encouraging creative
classrooms, no other investment in education could be more important and
rewarding. The phrase 'creative potential' is generally used to refer to how
likely a given individual is to manifest creative works in the future, as
assessed by scores on creativity tests. The concept of potentiality and its
relationship to actuality and context has been studied in depth by physicists.
This chapter explores how the physical conception of potentiality can shed
light on the notion of potential as it applies in the classroom, and in
particular, on how we conceive of and actualize students' creative potential.
We then discuss methods that will help optimize the creative potential of
students in less threatening ways.
