Learning researcher urges schools to make room for creativity in every subject

A German learning researcher is calling for a broad overhaul of classroom teaching, arguing that creativity should be built into every school subject rather than confined to art and music lessons. Professor Anja Mohr made the case in a recent interview, pointing to results from the international PISA assessment as one of her central arguments for change.

Mohr, who studies how children learn, said schools should function as places where pupils regularly produce something that did not exist before, whether that is a drawing, a piece of writing or their own method for solving a problem. She said knowledge, practice and effort remain essential parts of education, describing herself as "quite old-fashioned" on that point.

But she argued that a wrong turn or an unconventional approach taken by a student should not automatically be marked down with a poor grade. "An error, a sideways move, must not immediately mean a bad grade," she said, warning that pupils who learn mainly to meet fixed expectations risk losing the ability to ask questions.

Mohr's comments touch on a long-running debate in German education circles about whether classroom practice still rewards independent thinking or whether it increasingly trains students to reproduce expected answers. She suggested that creativity is too often treated as the exclusive domain of art and music classes, while subjects such as mathematics, science and languages are taught in ways that leave little space for original thought or experimentation.

She said the tendency to delegate creative thinking to a narrow set of subjects undercuts the broader goal of education, which she described as preparing children to generate their own ideas and approaches rather than simply absorbing information handed to them by teachers.

Her argument draws in part on findings from the PISA study, the international assessment coordinated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development that measures the reading, mathematics and science skills of 15-year-old students across dozens of countries. Mohr cited the study's results as evidence supporting her view that current teaching methods need to change, though she did not specify individual figures or rankings in the remarks reported.

PISA results have repeatedly shaped education policy debates in Germany in past cycles, prompting discussions among school administrators, teachers' unions and state education ministries about curriculum design, teacher training and classroom methods. Mohr's remarks add to that debate by focusing specifically on how much room is left for pupils to experiment, make mistakes and follow unconventional paths without being penalized academically.

She stopped short of proposing a specific set of policy changes or curriculum reforms, framing her position instead as a broader principle that should guide how teachers approach lessons across all disciplines. Her comments suggest that assessment practices, not just lesson content, would need to shift if schools were to give students more latitude to explore ideas that do not immediately align with expected answers.

Mohr's position reflects a view held by some education researchers that overly rigid grading systems can discourage students from taking intellectual risks, particularly in subjects seen as having clear right and wrong answers, such as mathematics. By contrast, she suggested, creative output is more readily accepted and encouraged in art and music classrooms, where experimentation is often built into the curriculum.

The remarks were made during an interview in which Mohr was asked to describe what kind of place a school should ideally be. Her answer centered on the idea that pupils should regularly be asked to produce something original, whether a solution to a problem or a creative work, as part of ordinary classroom activity rather than as an occasional special project.

No specific timeline or institutional proposal accompanied her comments, and she did not name particular schools or education authorities that she said should adopt her approach. Her remarks were presented as a professional assessment based on her research into how children learn, rather than as a formal policy recommendation directed at any single government body.