According to an article written by Anthony Brandt and D. Eagleman (2017), a school teacher L. Esola had drawn an apple on the board and ask the students to draw their own versions. As it were, a bunch of the students merely copy what already was drawn. But what was expected was simply their own version, however, they were thought other dozen of ways of which an apple could be drawn. Then the student take their time to mimic styles of the like of “Surrealism, Impressionism and Pop Art, as they use watercolour, Mosaic and line drawing and many more method to get their drawing done.

Surrealism, is 20th century style of drawing and as a movement in art and literature, with the images and event unconnected put together in a strange and impossible way just like dream to express what is happening deep in the mind-like the “surrealist painters’.

On the other hand, is the “Impressionism”, a style in painting developed in France in the late 19th century that uses colour to show the effect of light on things just to suggest an atmosphere instead of the exact details, like the “impressionist landscape drawing”.

Nevertheless, with this various method of application, the teacher did not intend to stop at what look like “imitating existing paradigms”, which is a typical example or pattern to copy. However, accordingly the task tends to leads to “Anything Apple” assignment through which the student were free to mix and match any technique in any way they like.

At other time the teacher draw an apple again on the board, and guess what happen, this time no student copy the teacher. On the contrary, the classroom become a gallery of alternative apples of which all the student tends to take what they have learnt to launch in their various direction of apple drawing.

According to A. Brandt and D. Eaglemen, education in creativity often lies in “sweet sport between unstructured play and imitating models” of which the sweet spot tends to give the student what one might called the historical precedent to build upon. The same is true that while it may give the student the historical precedent to build upon, but it does not condition or constrain their choices-And often student tends to learn best of what has come before with the goal to refashioning it. (Op cit.

As it were, breaking the mode of the past tends to convey two lessons, which is to show the students how to mine the past for a new ideas and to teach them not to be intimidated by what has come before. The other creative way to display the understanding of the historical past is often through the very description of what would have happened if on the contrary the event had gone otherwise.

The facts must be known, to be able to demonstrate a solid platform in of “what is “through the creation of “what if “

Read more on ;-http://www.philoedublog.com/