Exploring creativity as a component of the manufacturing or making process: implications for assessment

Creativity is acknowledged to be an essential feature of design and technology (D&T). However, the current literature which explores aspects of creativity in D&T tends to portray the creative process as residing more in the design or problemsolving arena, as distinct from the action of manufacturing or making an end product. (Atkinson. 2002, Barlex. 2003, Davies T. 2002b, Davies L. 2002a, LTS. 2001, Rutland. 2002). This paper will set out to explore whether aspects of creativity are actually present within the manufacturing or making domain. It will investigate whether the creative process is an action which can only occur in the process of manufacture or making, or if the creative process can be implicitly embedded within the actual finished product itself. The paper will argue that there are two distinct forms of activity involved in the process of manufacture, which I will term ‘artistic craftsmanship’ and ‘technical craftsmanship’. The first type, it will be argued, involves a creative process whereas the second involves a skill process. By exploring the distinction between ‘artistic craftsmanship’ and ‘technical craftsmanship’, moreover, the paper will explore whether creative endeavour can be recognised as an implicit value inherent within some end physical form. For example, does Michelangelo’s ‘David’, as an actual physical object, exhibit some inherent quality that in itself, demonstrates some form of creativity. Would a copy be considered creative? The paper will finish by considering the implications for the assessment of an end product. If ‘artistic craftsmanship’ is not inherent and embedded in the end product, the assessment of the finished product alone can take account of only ‘technical craftsmanship’ displayed in the quality of the product. Creative aspects, it will be argued, are not displayed in the product alone, and cannot, therefore, be assessed in the product alone.