A Creativity is often treated as a quality that organisations urgently need but struggle to identify. Employers ask for creative applicants, schools promise to develop creative learners, and governments praise creative industries. Yet prediction remains difficult. A person who produces an original idea in one setting may repeat familiar patterns in another. Creativity is not a single substance that can be measured like height or temperature.

B Traditional tests of creativity have often asked participants to generate many uses for an ordinary object, such as a brick or a paperclip. Responses are scored for fluency, originality and flexibility. These tasks are attractive because they are simple to administer and compare. However, they may reward speed and verbal confidence more than deep creative work. A quiet participant who develops one unusual solution slowly may appear less creative than someone who lists many obvious ideas quickly.

C Biographical indicators are also tempting. Some selection systems look for earlier achievements in art, science or entrepreneurship. Past achievement can be meaningful, but it is also shaped by opportunity. A student with access to mentors, materials and time may build an impressive portfolio, while another with equal potential may have had little chance to demonstrate it. Predicting future creativity from past products can therefore reproduce existing inequalities.

D Domain knowledge complicates the picture further. Popular accounts sometimes describe creativity as freedom from rules, but many innovations come from deep familiarity with a field. A jazz musician, for example, can improvise because she knows conventions well enough to bend them. At the same time, expertise can create habits that make alternatives harder to see. Knowledge is therefore both a resource and a constraint.

E Collaboration adds another difficulty. Creative outcomes are often credited to individuals, yet ideas may emerge through conversation, criticism and revision. In a design studio or laboratory, the final product may depend on people who asked useful questions as much as on the person who proposed the first idea. A test that isolates individuals may miss the social process by which creativity develops.

F Digital tools now promise to identify creative potential through data: patterns of search, editing histories, social networks or even eye movements. Such measures may reveal useful clues, but they risk confusing activity with insight. A person who revises a document many times is not necessarily more creative than one who changes it rarely. The trace left by work is not the same as the quality of thought behind it.

G This does not mean that creativity cannot be supported or assessed at all. It means that prediction should be modest. The most useful assessments combine evidence from different contexts and ask what conditions allow a person to produce original and valuable work. Instead of searching for a permanent creative type, institutions may do better to design environments in which more people can act creatively.

IELTS Reading

Result

Submit to Teacher

Vocabulary Mission

Admin / Central Progress

必要なテーブルSQL

Settings