what i'm wondering is less about whether schools are killing creativity and more about whether they just aren't able to foster creativity in the first place. as evidence by the posts from theaferist, FDG and une_authre, it would almost seem like the creative process (or at least their perception of it) is based on being challenged. by not being challenged, a person isn't given the opportunity to think of something in a new way.
in ivy's post, both her and her sister were challenged -- her sister was in a strict environment that posed challenges, and ivy was in a more free reign environment which posed its own equal challenges.
so, schools that do not challenge their students kills a certain amount of creativity.
i think some people in this thread think of creativity in different ways too.. does creative mean being challenged and forced to think of something in a new way, or is it something more short term like handing in an assignment that has a 'creative' flare to it..
this
website suggests there is 2 types of creativity:
Adaptive/resourceful and, innovation/original
the innovation/original type of creativity seems like more of a victim due to how schools function.
how to fix the problem? maybe, challenge students to force them to be adaptive/resourceful so they will have the brain abilities to be more innovative/original in the first place.