Matthew Worwood: What a student to believe they can shape the world with their ideas. Creative agency is more than talent. It’s the confidence and capacity act on creativity and your creative potential. But what helps that belief grow and what quietly shuts it down? And as AI becomes part of the learning process, will it strengthen students’ agency or slowly erode it?

Matthew Worwood: We’ll be exploring all of this and more with today’s guest, Dr. Margie Kowski.

Maceij Karwowski: Hello everyone. My name is Dr. Matthew Ward,

Cyndi Burnett: and my name is Dr. Cindy Burnett.

Matthew Worwood: This is the Fueling Creativity in Education Podcast.

Cyndi Burnett: On this podcast, we’ll be talking about various creativity topics and how they relate to the fields of education.

Matthew Worwood: We’ll be talking with scholars, educators, and resident experts about their work challenges they face, and exploring new perspectives of creativity.

Cyndi Burnett: All with a goal to help fuel a more rich and informed discussion that provides teachers, administrators, and emerging scholars with the information they need to infuse creativity into teaching and learning.

Matthew Worwood: So let’s begin. So today we are delighted to welcome to the show, Dr. Marj Kowski, a creativity researcher and editor in chief of the Journal of Creative Behavior. He’s a professor of psychology at the Institute of Psychology at the University of Warsaw, Poland. Majay Kowalski is a member of the Polish Academy of Sciences and a fellow former board member of the International Society for the Study of Creativity and Innovation.

Matthew Worwood: His research focuses on the educational psychology of creativity with particular attention to the intersection of creativity and learning students’, creative agency, and ways to improve creativity in the classroom. He’s also the author of More than 300 publications, including a recent book, creative Agency Unbound co-authored with another guest we had on the show, Dr.

Matthew Worwood: Ron Baggetto. And they’re also a forthcoming book, creative Agents in the classroom, co-edited with Alexandra Eska. So Maji, welcome to the show.

Maceij Karwowski: Of course. Hello, Matt and Cindy, and thanks for having me on the show. I’m a huge fan, so I’m happy to be here.

Matthew Worwood: Oh, that’s fantastic. We really appreciate that because we’ve been talking about bringing you on the show for the last couple of years ’cause it’s so important, you’d brought up earlier about, , the importance of creative research and being able to translate that to, in our case, teachers.

Matthew Worwood: Administrators and sometimes emerging scholars in the field of education as well. So you’re doing so much work in the classroom. This episode, we do wanna focus a little bit around creative agency and how we can kind of support that. So I was wondering if you could just get started by talking a little bit about what is creative agency and how does that kind of manifest from a behavioral perspective in the classroom?

Maceij Karwowski: Of course. So broadly speaking, I think that creative agency could be defined or understood as a sort of a complex beliefs that students, but also teachers or people in general have regarding their. And this.

Maceij Karwowski: Makes them somehow similar is that they all matter for creative behavior. In a sense they play a sort of motivational role. So one such category, which seems foundational is confidence. You might call it, creative self-efficacy, which is. Dynamic task related you, you might discuss creative self-concept, which is a little bit more stable trait like.

Maceij Karwowski: So the belief to what extent we feel that we’re able to somehow deal with the challenges we face, and that’s like a one story, this confidence issue. The other thing, which is extremely important, especially developmentally, but not only developmentally, is identity factor. So this sort of centrality or importance or value ascribed to creativity, how important is it to behave creatively or to think about oneself as a creative person?

Maceij Karwowski: So this is like, the second pillar of agency I would say. The third one, which is again, connected with the two, is risk taking. So the propensity to engage into the paths that are, you know, not well known to explore and to simply risk that not everything could go well. So, in a sense, again, that requires a, so a sort of probably feeling safely , to even take this route.

Maceij Karwowski: And the final one. Which in our work we explore quite intensively is related to self-regulation, actually. So how to translate our potential into our activities. , So in essence, creative agency as we define it, is a sort of umbrella term. That on the one hand you might say this is important on its own, like it holds a sort of autotelic meaning because it matters whether people believe they’re creative or not for their wellbeing, for their self.

Maceij Karwowski: But on the. And I think that’s equally important, especially when we think about school. It’s highly instrumental. So it plays a certain role in explaining the mechanisms of translating our hidden quite often, potentially into real world behavior. So this is a sort of motivational factors to put it very simple, maybe a little bit too simplistic, but if people don’t have this.

Maceij Karwowski: Agency, they don’t believe, they don’t have this confidence and they don’t value creativity. They can be, you know, as extremely effective or have high abilities, but that does not necessarily translate into their attempts, into their behavior. So in a sense, this is a motivational enabler that somehow.

Maceij Karwowski: Puts them into this activity. That’s why we believe it matters, and that’s why we believe it requires more scholarly attention.

Cyndi Burnett: So if we were going to look at this for teachers, and oftentimes when Matt and I go and work with teachers, the first thing we say is, how many of you consider yourself creative?

Cyndi Burnett: And oftentimes it’s maybe half the group thinks of themselves as creative. So for those that don’t think of themselves as creative, or when they see us coming, they say, oh gosh, I just. I’m just not creative. I just don’t think this is something that belongs in my classroom. Where do you start to make the connection for them that creativity does have value for everyone?

Cyndi Burnett: Do you think that, first of all, I mean, we think that, but do you think that, and then how do we bridge that for them so that they really understand their own creative agency? Yeah, I believe that’s an extremely important question. So first of all whether I agree or not, I fully agree.

Maceij Karwowski: I believe, being creative is part of being human. So of course it doesn’t mean that everyone creates big creativity outputs, but everyone is able and is doing that. Virtually all the time to connect the dots to go beyond what is given, et cetera. So creativity is part of our nature. So that’s, that’s one thing.

Maceij Karwowski: But the problem is that because of very different various issues, one of them being some myth and some associations of creativity with the arts, and especially high level arts, of course, many people. Don’t think that way and they think that this sort of democratization of this very construct is more like a postulate, but not necessarily what is happening.

Maceij Karwowski: I don’t think that’s true. I believe, creativity is here and simply speaking, when people. Under appreciate or somehow underestimate or their own creativity, and they do not see this link between their own behaviors or possibilities to behave and, and create functioning. Of course, they see very little reason to even exercise those things because that’s like something that’s even not within the considered set of the behaviors they trait, et cetera.

Maceij Karwowski: So of course, one thing. To provide this, broader, more complex, perhaps understanding of creativity as not only limited to, , great discoveries or great artworks, but also to human and to people, to people behaviors. Because if it’s not here, chances are that this potential will not be.

Maceij Karwowski: Of course how to do this, how to illustrate it. That’s the bigger question, and I believe we can think about it in very different ways. One being of course, like associating creativity with teachers everyday practice in the classroom. Because quite often many teachers,

Maceij Karwowski: claiming that they did not consider even something as creative what they have done previously. But in fact, now they can see how certain way of teaching or discussing with the students can contribute to their own or students’ creativities. So sometimes this is just a new perspective.

Maceij Karwowski: On the other hand, that’s also matters when we think about creativity as a sort of a goal. Teaching our students. That’s not only about making the education creative in that sense that it’s more, more innovative, more fancy or somehow, attractive. But also about like thinking in terms of how to support and how to inspire students creative thinking to achieve something that go beyond what is just learned.

Maceij Karwowski: So I believe this is a broader term, but generally speaking. It matters whether people believe or doubt in their own creative potential, I fully agree that about 50% of people, quite often we see, that in our research, tend to underestimate their potential.

Matthew Worwood: And I just wanted to unpack creative agency just a little bit more before we get into more of a conversation around creative agency and its relationship in the classroom. We know there’s conversations around domain general and domain specific. And so if someone was to score high for creative agency or have high levels of creative agency, should we assume that they’re gonna go and be creative no matter the domain?

Matthew Worwood: Or do we see , that maybe you can score, really do really well with creative agency in one domain, but perhaps in another domain for different reasons, perhaps ’cause of confidence you are less likely to do well in that domain.

Maceij Karwowski: That’s, again, an excellent question and no, quick answer.

Maceij Karwowski: So probably the most honest answer , would be, we dunno, on the one hand, lemme unpack it a little because on the one hand what we do know. Is that when we talking about this so-called as we quite often call it mini creativity, so this sort of creativity you many times discussed here on the show.

Maceij Karwowski: We do believe this is sort of general characteristics. So you know, curiosity. Divergent thinking, imagination. It matters for our learning, but it also matters for our creativity across many different domains. So in a sense, this is a sort of a general power that’s is engaged , in very different sorts or domains of creativity.

Maceij Karwowski: Even if, of course, those specific domains also require domain specific. Domain specific skills, abilities, and expertise. But when we talk about agency. We know from other works in educational psychology, not necessarily about creativity, but about student self-perception, about so-called academic self-concept that first of all it’s highly diversified, so there are like different domains and different

Maceij Karwowski: areas of self definition. And we do see that students, especially students, quite often quite early, differentiate their self-perception. So they think about themselves like I am or I am not a math person, science person, et cetera. And that’s fascinating and somehow that’s even a little bit disturbing when we realize that quite often students tend to quite early because of feedback from parents, teachers.

Maceij Karwowski: Observing peers tend to limit themselves in a sense to self define themselves as math people. For instance, even if their language skills are well above average, let’s say. So quite often this is. Narrow self-perception is visible quite early, like in six, seven years of, so whether it applies to creativity similarly at what extent this creative agency is domain, general Orca became

Maceij Karwowski: domain specific. Frankly, we don’t know. There are no such studies, or at least I’m not aware of them, but this is knowing what we know about this academic self concept. So related, all the different characteristic. I would say there might be this fundamental of like early sort of specialization that is not necessarily good.

Maceij Karwowski: It could be quite limiting. So that’s something to consider that this is something students learn probably from some social cues, be the parents feedback, teachers feedback, et cetera. So I would say for mini creativity, which seems quite general, what seemed to matter is this domain general agency probably.

Maceij Karwowski: We, we’ve got reasons to believe it informs creative activity quite generally, but it does not mean that it doesn’t matter when it applies to more domain specific areas.

Matthew Worwood: And I could I just stay? ’cause you’d mentioned mini C, little C pro C Mm. And I’ve kind of read sometimes we, we can see this creative confidence, in creative agency rather kind of like go up, go down during the teenage years, you’re talking about identity.

Matthew Worwood: There’s probably so many things that obviously we’re having to contend with. That obviously is also manifesting in a school environment. But, but just again, unpacking creative agency a little bit more. How does it interact with, as we progress in a field or as we get to better understand a field, the amount of skills and knowledge that’s required to produce that pro C level creativity?

Matthew Worwood: Do we suddenly see someone who might score really high for creative agency, for example, at the little C level, but then as they get more exposed to the pro c. Level and what’s required. Could their confidence then kind of, go down and therefore their create creative agency decline as well?

Maceij Karwowski: I believe it, not only can, this is quite likely it, such a trajectory will be observed because one thing with what, what matters, this is referring to, to send these questions about teachers is that if we clearly underestimate our agency of course. That’s concerning because probably we’ll see no reason , to engage.

Maceij Karwowski: But it doesn’t mean that this is like linear growing for development. In fact, we do know from different studies and from quite prominent theories in psychology that what builds our. Self-perception. There are different sources, but probably the most prominent source is so-called mastery experiences.

Maceij Karwowski: So previous successes. So in one sense, of course we learned that we can, based on the fact that we’ve done it before. So it was like we were able to achieve something. At the very same time, with time, with development, with progress, even if we objectively achieve more things become more and more complex and more and more difficult, and sooner or earlier, we’ll face some challenges on some problems, which means that it’s not like a linear progress, and people realize that, that perhaps they overestimated, they self perception. So what matters? It’s not only to make it, as high as possible. After all, we are not. Talking about like building sort of narcissistic self admiration in our students, but to make it as accurate as possible.

Maceij Karwowski: Because what we see is that, this level is one thing. But the accuracy is the other, and these accuracy somehow learned. So, I would say, fully likely that with time we will realize with, being more and more mature, that, well, I can figure out, for instance, several creative ideas how to solve sort of artificial problem, which is like mini slash little c.

Maceij Karwowski: Type of a task or even I can propose several relatively original and working solution to a certain math problem, to put it into school complex. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that I will be able such easily, revolutionize the field. And I believe everyone knows it. So on the one hand.

Maceij Karwowski: With expertise and facing those different sorts of tasks and challenges, people learn that, this process is not like uniformly, linearly growing. Sometime it’s stops or you even calibrate down your self perception when you see that well. I’m not that creative, especially regarding particular sort of task and particular domain.

Cyndi Burnett: So Maceij, I wanna move on into your work and as the author of over 300 publications, which congratulations. That is amazing. And I know you’ve got a new book you’re working on around mindsets that will come out in 2027.

Maceij Karwowski: I hope so. I hope so. Yeah. That’s the plan.

Cyndi Burnett: So I wanna talk about. This idea that schools kill creativity because there was a lot of literature and discussion in the sort of popular press as well around do schools cre kill creativity? And Matt and I have actually been having a conversation that’s been ongoing on the podcast of, do we need an evolution or do we need a revolution in education?

Cyndi Burnett: So given the depth and breadth of the work that you’ve done, I’m really curious your perspective, do school skill, creativity based on what you’ve uncovered.

Maceij Karwowski: Oh, this is a big topic, I believe, and a highly controversial one. And there are like two probably very strong opposite sides. And the louder it is.

Maceij Karwowski: The more attention it gets. So I would say that, , no one is really satisfied with the current state of the art in a sense. And I think that’s uncontroversial. So, so lemme start by saying that, obviously what. And what I hope could be done is to making schools more procreative and more supporting creativity.

Maceij Karwowski: So definitely schools worldwide because of, of course, systems differ, schools differ, teachers differ. So, a generic claim will always be a oversimplifying, but I think there is no controversy in saying that we all should do better in terms of support. But that being said, I believe that I’m in this slightly boring, perhaps camp of people who are claiming that it’s not as bad as we used to believe that looking at the evidence and to research results from various labs.

Maceij Karwowski: A huge study which included creativity measurement. Unfortunately, US didn’t participate in this particular creativity part. But anyway, what we see from those studies, and this is I believe, quite consistent, is that first of all.

Maceij Karwowski: The fact how students do in schools, like the school achievement for example, is pretty strongly or at least significantly correlated with the creative thinking, and it stays positive even when we control for several. Psychological characteristics which matter for both creativity and learning, like intelligence, certain personality traits like openness, et cetera.

Maceij Karwowski: So it seems that more creative students tend to do better at school or at least learn better. That’s the that one thing , which matters. You might say, well, fine. But perhaps this is a sort of byproduct, perhaps, of this typical education that, we’re all focusing on knowledge, we’re all focusing on tests.

Maceij Karwowski: So perhaps. This is like, a sort of accidental gain because simply speaking, even if we’re not focusing that much on students benefit from learning, that might be true, but my point would be. Creativity. Creativity, especially at those higher levels, requires knowledge. And schools is doing well.

Maceij Karwowski: School is quite effective in delivering knowledge still. Even when we’ve got ai, when we’ve got internet around, that’s not knowledge, that’s information. And by the way, quite often misinformation. So what school provides is a solid foundation for creative thinking because to think creatively is to think and to think is to operate.

Maceij Karwowski: On material and this material is delivered by school. So this is, I would say, one argument that, even if creativity is not the main focus on school teaching and learning, and quite often we criticize schools for testing standardized tests, lack of, , freedom to explore the data shows that it’s not that bad On the other hand.

Maceij Karwowski: I believe that matters, and this is related to this issue we discussed previously. So this confidence agency elements, what we see in those research and that. Probably should be a concern that even if this large study I mentioned, which was announced recently, like a year ago, so this results, what we see is that in several countries, students.

Maceij Karwowski: Are claiming that they do not have enough time to like provide the creative solutions or ideas, or that the creativity is not supported to the extent they would expect. So even if they can be creative. And they are creative and we see it in sort of hard tasks. Like when they, they solve problems at the very same time, they seem to think that, you know, it’s not enough and it’s not supported.

Maceij Karwowski: It’s not central. It’s not something that creativity is, is salient in schools. So I would say quite often.

Maceij Karwowski: Perhaps associated with the fact that, we tend to think about creativity in schools in terms of arts only, which is of course not the full picture because creativity should have its place. You know, biology or science classes, math classes, language classes, not only as a sort of extracurricular activities, but on also during regular classes.

Maceij Karwowski: And there are solid reasons to criticize the current state of how systems are organized, but that’s not that bad. Looking at the results, or at least I see like a no convincing.

Maceij Karwowski: That kill creativity is justified. Creativity is not that easy to be killed. To be frank, this is something that is here all the time and or if schools are killing creativity, I would say they are not particularly effective in this killing, given that what meta-analysis show is that our creativity quite clearly grows.

Maceij Karwowski: Development. So what would you assume if school? We can’t imagine a sort of control group for schools because schooling is everywhere. It’s massive. So of course there are public and non-public schools, et cetera, but those are not experimental designs. But given that we do see increase.

Maceij Karwowski: Creative thinking with development that those well identified classic sort of creativity slums are not that replicable and several researchers showing that they’re not that stable. I would say probably as usual, the reality is much complex and much more complicated that we used to think.

Cyndi Burnett: So Maceij I wanna know more about the development.

Cyndi Burnett: What are you referring to when you talk about development? Well, so the easiest of course, and the like mo most straightforward way, and this is exactly what I had in my mind was comparisons of results. Usual various divergent thinking tests. So this is the way how scholars usually measure creative potential.

Maceij Karwowski: This is not the whole creativity to be clear about. Anyway, you discuss with Kakar in, in one of the episodes. So, what we see, and this is how I refer to development, is that the older we are generally the higher the scores we. Up to a certain point and where this point is, that’s debateable I would say.

Maceij Karwowski: Unfortunately for us, we are not growing any longer, but at least in adolescence and at least in early adulthood now, there is , this clear increase, and on the one hand, this increase can be associated with growing knowledge, so we simply have more material to create from. And I believe knowledge should never be underestimated in its role because that’s not, the real creativity doesn’t matter whether in science or in the arts.

Maceij Karwowski: That’s not about finding unusual users for a break. That’s about like. Doing real work stuff. When we are measuring divergent thinking, we’re more interested in potential sort of artificial thing, hidden Latin. So one reason why it grows can be related to increase in knowledge. But my point is that if school would be such a disaster for our creative thinking, people who spent more time in school should be less rather than more creative.

Maceij Karwowski: They’re not, or so at least they are resistant to this, to those potentially negative findings. Of course, I know that’s just a part of the story and as I said, we can do better, but don’t be such a critical regarding what is happening. So I’m, I’m probably more on this evolutionary than revolutionary camp when it comes to changing.

Cyndi Burnett: So Maceij, I really appreciate your view, and I think it’s really interesting that you’re leaning toward evolution, so now I have to go and think about that. But I really wanna talk about AI and creativity and education, because I know you just. Co-authored an article from Matt and James Kaufman’s book around creativity and ai.

Cyndi Burnett: And I’m curious, do you see with this wave of ai, and it feels like a tidal wave do you see that impacting our knowledge that we’re acquiring in schools and how students are acquiring knowledge now, which is changing very rapidly? Do you see that impacting their level of creativity and their ability to create.

Maceij Karwowski: I definitely think so, although I am not sure whether, it’s only because of the way how they acquire knowledge, probably also. But I think that’s a sort of a broader and much more general issue that is happening and this issue is revolutionary indeed. I, think that what we see, what we observe, no one really knows what would happen, but.

Maceij Karwowski: Yeah, that’s something that, I think quite profound consequences for our, kids functioning. And in this, this chapter you mentioned, which we together with my colleague. Have written for Mat and the James edited book. , What we discussed here, we were a little bit concerned.

Maceij Karwowski: So we, we weren’t particularly on this positive side regarding , the role of ai. We were rather concerned and based on the research we conducted and some research conducted in other labs. We were discussing, the extent to, to which using ai, because of course generative AI makes everything faster, it seems to make everything more effective.

Maceij Karwowski: I said it seems to, because it’s not that obvious, it’s more effective. I mean, it’s quick, it’s fast. It seems to be able to do something, but in fact, it requires much more on us to assess what we see to like select and to divide it into what is interesting and what is not. And basically, as we know, because this is basically how LMS are created, the huge majorities is generally.

Maceij Karwowski: Average, let’s say, because that’s a stochastic sort of of things. But we know it. And given that we know the experience that we know, the knowledge, that we know the field, we can do this. Our children and students quite often don’t. And for them looking how they are functioning, I feel they are using quite labs, especially probably.

Maceij Karwowski: Previous generations used Google or they just search for something. So if we know, and we do know that there is a lot of hallucination over there and someone has no sufficient knowledge to recognize it, of course that’s something concerning that one thing. But I believe what is equally interesting, and we see it already in research, is that when you know.

Maceij Karwowski: LM is providing ideas , or suggestions or problem solving solutions. People quite often tend to doubt in their own. Creativity simply because, this is this, wow, it was so quick. So many, even if this is so quite often mediocre. Mediocre. So,, we might ask the question, what will be this influence of using those technologies on our motivation, on our self-perception?

Maceij Karwowski: We dunno yet. But I think what we see is something that is quite concerning. That’s one thing . On the other hand, of course, this is a great technology that could be very useful if you smart us with other other tools. And we’ve got in our lab and in fact our great colleagues, we’ve got some results.

Maceij Karwowski: For instance, just to give you a clue how we believe it could be useful. What we. Created was a sort of very simple, and at the very same time, very entertaining sort of museum exhibit in one of the science museums in Poland, in Warsaw. And that was very simple one. So kids, mainly kids, because most of the visitors are children, but not only there were whole families here they were asked to draw something.

Maceij Karwowski: And this drawing, which was like a typical creativity task, this drawing was immediately assessed. In terms of creativity by well trained AI model, we created, in fact, it was created in Roger Lab in at Penn State. And what we have done, we’ve done like a huge experiment with 40,000 participants over a year.

Maceij Karwowski: So that was a very large naturalistic experiment. When half of our participants received such AI feedback. The drawing was ready and the other half, so a sort of control group received this feedback. So this information regarding how creative, their idea and the ultimate drawing was slightly later after two drawings actually.

Maceij Karwowski: So it was like delayed. And what we observed, and that was quite fascinating, was that students or. Actually who received this immediate feedback, they were able to immediately learn from it and to improve. So I can imagine that AI can be extremely useful. Helping us to become more creative, not because it is generating ideas for us, and unfortunately this is the way how we are using it, but, you know, to, to providing a feedback even better.

Maceij Karwowski: Not only a, numerical score, but a sort of a comment, like a real feedback. This is what, what teachers do, don’t they? That’s like a feedback regarding your strategy, your effort, the, the way you’re dealing. So I would say. We need definitely solid research on AI because it’s just two years or three years.

Maceij Karwowski: Yeah, that’s just the beginning. But what we see on the one hand could be quite concerning when we discuss the influences on our self-perception or our motivation. Many people say, and I think that’s reasonable that quite often we stop thinking because we’ve got a machine that we believe will do this for us, and that’s would be unfortunate.

Maceij Karwowski: On the other hand, when used smart. And you know, using it for such a help, like with this, this feedback that could be extremely effective. So probably what we need to understand is how our students really collaborate with each other and with ai, how to prompt it properly. Probably it can be just forbidden.

Maceij Karwowski: It’s here and it’ll be here. So the question is how to use it most effectively.

Cyndi Burnett: Thank you. I think that feedback piece is really interesting. So I think that’s definitely something we’re gonna have to talk about in our debrief map. But we are actually running outta time, so we wanna make sure we get in that last question with you, Maceij, which is, can you tell us about your most creative educational experience, what it was and the impact it had on you?

Maceij Karwowski: Oh, wow. Educational experience and I think I was. Fortunate enough to have many great teachers during my during, during my especially high school years. So, probably there were , several artistic opportunities I had. But frankly, when I think about it, I also think that the, that it wasn’t.

Maceij Karwowski: Necessarily associated with school as such, it was rather this particular period of, high school. Or, adolescence or teens. So I remember, the time , it was during my high school years when I was, like playing in a rock band in a high school. And rock is probably not the.

Maceij Karwowski: Well, it was, it was really hard music. It was sort of a hardcore, so closer to, you know, rage against the machine for our listeners or public enemy or, or biohazard. So, so I still have my tattoos from that time and still remember why I’m mentioning that

Maceij Karwowski: school experience because.

Maceij Karwowski: To give several concerts in our high school. And I remember that my teachers looking at that right now, I can imagine, , how exotic it must have been for them, but they were pretty supportive for them. That was , so it was like, okay, young people are, well, they’re doing guards. That’s not necessarily the type of music we are listening.

Maceij Karwowski: Quite the opposite. That, looked. I think, but I never felt like, discouraged. That was something that this open and we are quite often discussing it in, in the creativity community that what is really needed is this, you know, maybe not feeling of being always supported, but this feeling of making mistakes and the feeling that, you know, that.

Maceij Karwowski: That you’re being hurt. And I had , this impression, this, this feeling that this sort of radical music of, of young people was welcoming. And that was, that’s quite surprising when I think about it, 30 years later or, or something. So pre perhaps not necessarily school experience as such, but something that is closely related in my mind to my school years.

Matthew Worwood: I, I love it. And, and we are out of time, but there’s so many opportunities to talk about creative agency and, and you transition from, I’m gonna be a rockstar to, okay, maybe I’m not gonna be a rockstar, but we’ll hold it there. And this was a wonderful conversation and if it resonated with you.

Matthew Worwood: And you think you’re just at the beginning of your journey of creativity and education, or perhaps you know, an emerging scholar who is searching for direction in this space. This is an absolute wonderful episode, I think, to share with them. So share it, start a conversation and help bring more people into this conversation around creativity and education.

Matthew Worwood: My name’s Dr. Matthew Ward.

Cyndi Burnett: And my name is Dr. Cindy Burnett.

Cyndi Burnett: This episode was produced by Cindy Burnett and Matthew War. Our podcast assistant is Ann Fernando, and our editor is she Ahmed.