Assignment Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Basic,-Comparative-Analysis-Of-The-Ci

1. 1
Senzo Xulu
214355888
412 Capita Selecta on Approved Topic
Dr H Israel
25-01-15
A basic, comparative analysis of the Civil Engineering curricula offered at six
South African Universities, with focus on the presence of creativity within the
modules taught
I understand that plagiarism is the presentation of someone else’s ideas as my own.
These ideas or words can come from a classmate, an ex-student, an encyclopedia,
book, journal, magazine, newspaper, the Internet, or even a pamphlet. When I have
consulted such sources, they have been carefully and fully acknowledged, both in my
assignment, and on my Reference Page. I have not plagiarised in this assignment.
I understand that if I am found to have committed plagiarism, I will have to face
disciplinary action.
Signed:…………………………………………………..
Full Name:……………………………………………….
Date……………………………………………………...

2. 2
Table of Contents
1.1 Abstract 3
1.2 Key Terms 3
1.3 Introduction 3
1.4 Problem Statement 5
1.5 Rationale 6
1.6 Aims 7
1.7 Hypothesis 7
1.8 Research questions 7
1.9 Central Research question 7
2. Literature Review 7
2.1 The Concept of Creativity 7
2.2 Engineering & Creativity 9
2.3 Education in South Africa 12
2.4 Creativity in Schools 14
3. Research Methodology 17
3.1 Design 17
3.2 Sample 17
3.3 Methods 18
4. Data Analysis 18
5.1 Discussion 24
5.2 Conclusion 25
5.3 References 27

3. 3
1.1 Abstract
South Africa, as well as the rest of the world, is in dire need of a new breed of
engineer (Waghid, 2000; National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Zhou, 2012). The
envisaged form of this engineer is one that allows engineers to apply their skills in
playing a pivotal role in solving some of the world’s biggest problems (Gregory,
1972; Waghid, 2000; National Academy of Engineering, 2005; 2008; Ahmad, 2009;
Zeng et al., 2011). Although a lot of framing has been done on how these engineering
professionals ought to be, producing them seems to be the most contentious issue.
Within the engineering industry, there is an increasing amount of pressure on
engineering graduates to possess innovative qualities and attributes that will enable
them to creatively solve engineering problems. This has led scholars to believe that
creativity is the integral characteristic required to produce this new mould of engineer
(Gregory, 1972; National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Zeng et al., 2009; 2011;
Zhou, 2012). Within the academic sphere, namely the institutions of higher learning, a
reassessment of the kind of training that is given to prospective engineering
professionals has had to be done. This study evaluates the objectives set by
engineering schools for their graduates to be more innovative versus the presence or
focus of creative content in their actual curricula. It looks at the curricula offered at
six South African engineering schools and explores the evidence presented in each
case.
1.2 Key terms
Creativity, engineering curriculum, engineering creativity, education, creative arts in
education
1.3 Introduction
It can be said that creativity is perhaps the most distinct attribute of the human race
(UNESCO, 2001:40). Its significance to humanity is also underpinned in the value it

4. 4
adds to social transformation and economic development – the amount of research
and study into this area across various disciplines attests to that (Gilson et al., 2005;
National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Ahmad, 2009; Zeng et al., 2009; 2011;
National Planning Commission, 2011; Zeng et al., 2011; Marrocu & Paci, 2012). If
one were to consider the historic advancements that have changed history, they can all
be considered as a result of continued and sustained interventions of creativity
(Gregory, 1972; National Academy of Engineering, 2008). Whether viewed through a
global, national or personal lens, creativity is the single element that is cited as
integral to the progress of these aspects (UNESCO, 2001; Eisner, 2002; Robinson,
2006; National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Ahmad, 2009; Zeng et al., 2009;
Upitis, 2011; National Planning Commission, 2011; Zhou, 2012). Inseparably tied to
the above thoughts is the question that has always surfaced when creativity has been
the topic of discussion: What makes a person creative? Or perhaps, in the light of
Picasso’s famous quote: every child is born artistic, what is it that causes a person to
remain creative? Author and academic, Sir Ken Robinson, firmly believes that the
core is education (Robinson, 2006). He boldly claims that the reality is that we are
systematically educated out of our creativity, which is what this study aims to
investigate (Robinson, 2006).
The notion that education and creativity go hand in hand is a concept that
Robinson and other prominent authors have aimed to bring to the forefront of the
much spoken about reformation of the schooling system. The idea that engineering
education ought to be synonymous with creativity is an argument far less explored,
although the review of literature in this paper will bring to light what has been said
with regards to that and to what extent. Of course, the transformation of the educating
of engineers is unlikely to take place without the transformation of education itself. In
South Africa, transformation has been a constant theme within the education system
since the introduction of the new ‘democratic’ curriculum in February 1995 (Faker &
Waghid, 2004:53). The challenge with transformation is to ensure that those who are
administering the transforming are firstly transformed themselves. It can be said that
the need of creative exposure at both primary and tertiary level was not a priority of
the newly birthed Education System. Though the need for a vast improvement in the
standards of mathematics and science was recognized, linking creative exposure to
this need never occurred. The fact that creativity is not bound to a specific kind of

5. 5
person or domain or field, as was previously thought, meant that a qualification in
Engineering, for example, would have to be seen in a different light (Life & Wild,
1981; Cropley, 2000; UNESCO, 2001; National Academy of Engineering, 2005;
Robinson, 2006; Gullat, 2007; National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Perl, 2008;
Shuster, 2008; Casakin & Kreitler, 2009; Zeng et al., 2009; Zhou, 2012; LaMore et
al., 2013). Traditionally, an engineer was never required or expected to actively be
creative in his or her role. But the more we realize that development, both
infrastructural and societal, relies heavily on this profession the more it becomes
apparent that the engineer of today cannot do without creativity. And thus, the
responsibility to produce these kinds of engineers falls squarely on the shoulders of
the engineering schools that prepare them for the professional world. The
investigation of engineering schools’ curriculum content will express the manner in
which they have taken to the responsibility, especially in producing creative
engineers.
1.4 Problem Statement
Engineering, as with most STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics)
careers, has often been believed to stand solely on the foundations of science and
mathematics (Gregory, 1972; Life & Wild, 1981; Cropley, 2000; Lawless, 2005;
National Academy of Engineering, 2008; Shuster, 2008; Ahmad, 2009). This belief
also reflects the stance of the South African education system, the South African
government as well as the industry itself (Department of Education, 2008; du Toit,
2009; National Planning Commission, 2011; Zhou, 2012). Although not completely
unfounded, this kind of thinking is problematic in the sense that what an engineer is
expected to do is fundamentally incongruent with the manner in which he or she is
prepared (by the education system) to do it (Waghid, 2000:264). Issues such as
national development, advances in technology and infrastructure – among many
others – fall squarely on the shoulders of the engineer (National Academy of
Engineering, 2008:4). In order for this modern day engineer to fulfill his or her
vocation with the capacity to meet the needs of the times, creativity needs to be the
key weapon in their arsenal (Gregory, 1972; Cropley, 2000; National Academy of
Engineering, 2005; 2008; Zeng et al., 2009; 2011; Zhou, 2012). Institutions of higher

6. 6
learning have the opportunity to instill creative thinking in engineering graduates
through the curricula that they design for their engineering qualifications. If these lack
creative content, then it is unlikely that the engineers of the future will possess the
creativity required.
1.5 Rationale
If the engineer envisaged by the National Academy of Engineering of America is to
become a reality, which is one that has:
(1) strong analytical skills;
(2) practical ingenuity;
(3) creativity;
(4) communication;
(5) mastery of the principles of business and management;
(6) leadership;
(7) sense of professionalism;
(8) high ethical standards; and are
(9) life-long learners;
then the manner in which they are educated needs to be revolutionized (Gregory,
1972; Cropley, 2000; Waghid, 2000; Zhou, 2012). If creativity is to be one of their
defining characteristics, then it needs to be intrinsic to their education as well. In the
light of this, a notable extent of study has been dedicated to discovering the most
effective means of fostering and nurturing creativity in the education system. The
ideal scenario is for children to be exposed to the arts from an early stage, or have
Early Exposure to the Arts (EEA) (UNESCO, 2001; Eisner, 2002; Robinson, 2006;
Ruppert, 2006; Upitis, 2011). In the absence of EEA, the most effective remedial
action is developing engineering qualifications that do not deprive “its students of
essential competencies for engineering success in the global marketplace and for
career enrichment and advancement” by showing a low level of interest in creativity
(Waghid, 2000:264). Several creative assessment tools and measurements are used to
assess the creative thinking of professionals and the consistent trend is that those who
received EEA not only score higher, but have a propensity to succeed more in their

7. 7
chosen fields (Charyton & Snelbecker, 2007; Marrocu & Paci, 2012; LaMore et al.,
2013). If the South African engineer of the 21st
Century is going to be able to deliver
on the demands made by the National Development Plan, then it is vital for research
to be done to assess whether they are receiving sufficient exposure to creativity in
their engineering modules.
1.6 Aims
The main objective of this study is to ascertain the extent to which engineering
schools include creativity in the design and structure of their curricula. The second,
through the findings of the above-mentioned aim, is to articulate the role that the
South African education system plays in fostering creativity in its learners, some of
whom would become engineers in the future.
1.7 Hypothesis
The curriculum plan from primary to tertiary does not adequately prepare an engineer
to be creative.
1.8 Central Research Question
Does the Civil Engineering curricula taught at South African universities prepare its
graduates to be creative?
1.9 Research Questions
1. What is the significance of creativity to engineers?
2. What role does education play in developing creativity?
3. What kind of curriculum structure would prepare engineers to be more
creative?
2. Literature Review

8. 8
2.1 The Concept of Creativity
Although the shroud that once covered creativity has largely been removed through
research and literature, there are still many challenges facing the modern day
researcher who seeks to delve into the depths of one of the human mind’s most
complex phenomenon (Gregory, 1972; Tornkvist, 1998; Giraldo, 2009; Zeng, Proctor
& Salvendy, 2009). Many of the studies that have been undertaken, especially with
the intent of defining creativity, often do so with the objectives of that particular study
in mind (Marrocu & Paci, 2012:384). One of the main causes for the varying
approaches and understandings of creativity is that various disciplines have intrinsic
paradigms that inevitably cause them to view creativity through their own conceptual
lens. According to Tornkvist:
Psychology has focused on the individual's creativity and tried to
identify the cognitive capacities and/or traits of personality that make
up a creative person.
Social psychology has studied the process of creativity as an interaction
within a given context.
Sociology (and organization theory) has emphasized creativity as an
environmental process and studied efficient communication networks
made up of prominent personalities with broad and deep knowledge
(Tornkvist, 1998:5)
Table 1: Various Definitions of Creativity
Author Definition Year
Gregory The process which results in a novel work that is
accepted as tenable or useful or satisfying by a
group at some point in time
1972
The Cultural
Strategy group
The capacity to think problems afresh or from first
principles; to be reflexive; to experiment; to be
unconventional; to visualize future scenarios; to
look at situations in an integrated way, laterally and
with flexibility
1998

9. 9
Gilson,
Mathieu,
Shalley, &
Ruddy
Behavior and activities that are directed at
developing novel solutions that might work for
various tasks
2005
Robinson The process of having original ideas that have value 2006
Casakin &
Kreitler
A cognitive process of innovative problem solving
by means of which original outcomes are produced
2009
Giraldo A multifaceted phenomenon which results in the
production of new and useful ideas, rather than as a
unitary, individual component of cognition,
personality or perception
2009
Zeng, Proctor &
Salvendy
Novel & appropriate productions 2009
Nonetheless, when one begins to survey the academic landscape of available
definitions, it begins to become clear that there is a common ground of consensus.
Table 1 above, is a tabulation of several definitions gathered as part of the literature
review of this study and presents the case that although definitions differ in context
and motivation, they ultimately share two common characteristics. These attributes,
which are the most widely accepted two-aspect criteria of creativity,
are novelty and appropriateness (Guilford, 1966; Gregory, 1972; Cropley, 2000; Niu,
2007; Giraldo, 2009; Zeng, Proctor & Salvendy, 2011; Zhou, 2012; Shen & Lai,
2013). Novel in the sense that the creative product or idea is “original, surprising and
germinal” and/or demonstrates “ingenuity or inventiveness” (Guilford, 1966; Cropley,
2000). Appropriateness refers to the applicability and value of the creative product
(National Academy of Engineering, 2005; Robinson, 2006; Hokanson, 2007; Perl,
2008; Casakin & Kreitler, 2009; Zeng et al, 2009). This two-pronged understanding
of creativity has gone a long way in research to make creativity more
comprehendible.
2.2 Engineering & Creativity
There has been interest in exploring the role and effect of creativity in fields that are
traditionally not considered conducive to creativity, or for creative individuals to
thrive (Gregory, 1972; Goffee, 2000; UNESCO, 2001; Gilson et al., 2005; Tiwana &

10. 10
McLean, 2005; Shuster, 2008; Zeng et al., 2009; 2011; Upitis, 2011; Marrocu & Paci,
2012; LaMore et al., 2013). Among the various definitions of creativity provided
above, the two common features that research have consensus on are novelty and
appropriateness. Empirical evidence has been accumulated to substantiate that “both
novelty and appropriateness are indispensable in defining creativity across various
domains” (Zeng et al., 2011:31). One such domain is the field of engineering.
Though engineering creativity is a term used by a few authors (Gregory, 1972;
Charyton & Snelbecker, 2007; Chakrabarti, 2013), the concept of creativity in
engineering has been widely explored (Life & Wild, 1981; Cropley, 2000; National
Academy of Engineering, 2005; 2008; Gullat, 2007; Perl, 2008; Shuster, 2008;
Casakin & Kreitler, 2009; Zhou, 2012; LaMore et al., 2013). It is fuelled by the
notion that ultimately, the primary characteristic of an engineer must be the ability to
solve problems (Gregory, 1972; DoE, 2008; National Academy of Engineering, 2008;
Zhou, 2012). This is coupled with the task of engineers to “modernize the
fundamental structures that support civilization” (National Academy of Engineering,
2008:22), and to aid sustainable and inclusive economic growth (National Planning
Commission, 2011). Creativity and innovation are the cornerstones to the solving of
social problems. Thus the need for creativity in engineers is one that will enable them
to respond to social, political and cultural challenges in a new way (National
Academy of Engineering, 2005; 2008; Ahmad, 2009; Zeng et al., 2011; Zhou, 2012).
In Grand Challenges for Engineering, the National Academy of Engineering
envisages a future where the engineering profession is committed to “applying the
rules of reason, the findings of science, the aesthetics of art and the spark of the
creative imagination” in order to continue the tradition of engineers forging a better
future for society (National Academy of Engineering, 2005:2). There seems to be no
ground to dispute the fact that the two are complementary. The only dispute or
contention is around the factors that have seemed to stifle or reduce the two from
flourishing, which can often be to linked to the way in which potential engineers are
trained.
In South Africa, as well as in many countries abroad, there is an alarming
shortage of engineers (Lawless, 2005; du Toit & Roodt, 2009; Manpower Group,
2013). In their most recent Talent Shortage Survey, the Manpower Group found that
countries such as Argentina, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Germany,

11. 11
Guatemala, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Sweden, Turkey, the UK as well as South Africa, all reported that engineering was
either their first or second most difficult career to fill (2013:37 - 47). The variety of
socio-economic realities of the countries mentioned seem to eliminate the third world
or developing nation label as being responsible for the shortage. Two of the countries
cited above (Canada and Ireland) have been listed in the top ten first world1
countries
(Countries of the first world, n.d.). This gives an indication that the problem is a result
of other factors.
In South Africa, the pervasive understanding is that it is a result of the
shortcomings of an education system that does not advocate enough for mathematics
and science (du Toit & Roodt, 2009; National Planning Commission, 2011). As a
separate issue, there is need for serious concern and attention given to the state of our
mathematics and science. According to a 2014 article on News24 by the World
Economic Forum, South Africa’s mathematics and science levels were placed last out
of 148 countries (News24.com, 2014:9). Despite this, researchers are in agreement
that the kind of engineers that the industry and society needs cannot be produced
solely on the principles of science and mathematics alone (Gregory, 1972; Life &
Wild, 1981; Cropley, 2000; Lawless, 2005; National Academy of Engineering, 2008;
Shuster, 2008; Ahmad, 2009). The Vice President of ECSA (Engineering Council of
South Africa) was once quoted as saying “it takes about 10 to 11 years to educate and
train an engineer; starting with good mathematics and physical science education at
secondary school level and ending when the three years’ work experience is
completed” (du Toit & Roodt, 2009:39). In Educating the Engineer of 2020, the
National Academy of Engineering cites the example of what happened to American
engineering when they pursued the same ends:
With the increasing complexity of engineering problems, the basis of
engineering education shifted to the fundamentals of science and
mathematics (in the middle of the twentieth century in the United States).
1 First World Countries in terms of their Gross National Income. The GNI based on purchasing-

12. 12
This led to engineers who were more capable and flexible and more able
to bring better products to market more quickly, thereby immeasurably
improving the standard of engineering practice. As time has progressed,
however, a disconnect between engineers in practice and engineers in
academe has developed and grown. The great majority of engineering
[lecturers], for example, have no industry experience. Industry
representatives point to this disconnect as the reason that engineering
students are not adequately prepared, in their view, to enter today’s
workforce (National Academy of Engineering, 2005:12).
The fundamental issue that affects the quality and, arguably so, the quality of
engineers is not the amount of analytical and deductive learning but rather the lack of
the acknowledgement of creativity in the pedagogical approach of educating
engineers (National Academy of Engineering, 2005; Ahmad, 2009).
2.3 Education in South Africa
The Education System of South Africa is one of the most widely spoken and written
about attributes of the country since it has always, in good ways or bad, reflected the
intentions of those in power. During the apartheid era, it was used as an instrument of
oppression to deliberately curtail and frustrate the progress of black students. It was
the model that did the opposite of what a schooling system should do, which in the
words of Greenstein is “uplifting individuals so that they may contribute to the
development of the economy and society, which in turn, can lead to the development
of previously marginalised individuals and communities” (1995:200). This ideal
helped to shape the new Department of Education as democracy was ushered into
South Africa in 1994. Void of a solution at the time, it was without a doubt that the
consensus was that curriculum reform was a necessity in order to negate some of the
shortcomings of the previous system (Fakier & Waghid, 2004; Labuschagne, 2004;
van der Berg et al., 2011; DBE, 2014; 2014).
The ‘how’ part came when the Department of Education (DoE) gazetted the
Education White Paper I on Education and Training, which was the new
government’s maiden attempt at overhauling the entire system of education in line

13. 13
with the Constitution of 1996 (Fakier & Waghid, 2004:53). The chosen vehicle:
Outcomes Based Education or more commonly referred to in its acronymic form,
OBE. The uncompromising mandate that was formulated for OBE was concise and
appropriate: to alleviate the crisis in education (Fakier & Waghid, 2004; DBE, 2014).
In a nutshell, when the OBE system was introduced it brought with it concepts such
as “continuous assessment and authentic learning experiences” which ultimately
meant that the classroom would change from being teacher-centred to learner-centred
(Labuschagne, 2004:2). This shift was in line with the beliefs of the origins of OBE
that assumed that “all students have the capacity to learn and succeed whether gifted,
disabled or in-between” which means that “schools, therefore, control the conditions
that determine whether or not learners are successful” (Fakier & Waghid, 2004:55).
The direct implication of this is if the school does not or is unable to create a
conducive enough environment for the learner, the likelihood of their success is
diminished. In the South African context, that hypothesis holds a lot of truth as the
socio-economic rift that divides the schools seems to widen by each passing schooling
year. This happens despite the fact that education has historically received a large
percentage of the national South African budget, the portion in 2014 amounting to
R254billion – 20% of the total budget (southafrica.info, 2015).
More recently, in the post-OBE era, the National Curriculum Statement (NCS)
was implemented but due to challenges arising in the implementation of the system, it
was amended once more to incorporate the Curriculum and Assessment Policy
Statements (CAPS) (Oxford Press, n.d.). In the words of the DBE (Department of
Basic Education):
CAPS embodies the vision for general education to move away from a
racist, apartheid, rote model of learning and teaching to a liberating,
nation-building and learner-centred outcomes-based initiative. At the
centre of its vision are learners who will be inspired by the values of a
society based on respect for democracy, equality, human dignity, life and
social justice (2014:24,25).
This statement captures one of the prevailing nuances of the education system in
South Africa in that intention and postulation far outweigh implementation and

14. 14
practice. The reality is that, in the absence of the inexhaustible statistics and literature
available on this topic, how is it that the education system can genuinely expect it’s
pupils to succeed when pupils are permitted to pass with a minimum of either 30 or
40% in 6 subjects and the provision to get less than 30% in the 7th
(DBE, 2014:24)?
2.4 Creativity in Schools
The stance that South Africa has taken on the importance of education to economic
development is unambiguous, as outlined in the National Development Plan.
Admirably, the National Planning Commission has made it clear that it is through
quality education that the expansion of highly skilled professionals, who will enhance
the innovative capacity of the nation, will emerge (National Planning Commission,
2011:263). The predicament is that the ideal education system that this same
Commission envisages is one that “provides all learners with an excellent education,
especially in literacy, mathematics and science” (National Planning Commission,
2011:264). If innovation, and ultimately creativity is what the state calls for, then
there is need of a different approach. Perhaps key to the exclusion of creativity in the
desired pedagogical paradigm of South Africa are the myths cited by Blamires &
Peterson, where they refer to Sharp’s findings. The sixth myths identified by Sharp
are the assumptions that:
(1) creativity is confined to arts and culture, leading to the underrecognition of the
role and significance of creativity in fields such as design, technology, engineering
and science;
(2) knowledge transfer across domains is unproblematic;
(3) creativity equals fun;
(4) creativity is an elite trait, restricted to a few very talented individuals;
(5) education for creativity can be provided through unstructured play and
unsupported activity; and
(6) creativity does not require a high level of subject knowledge (Blamires &
Peterson, 2014:154).
It is difficult to comment on, beyond the scope of this study, whether South Africa

15. 15
promotes impartiality when it comes to creativity in education.
Central to this discussion is the manner in which creativity is fostered or
nurtured in education. The unanimous answer is the arts (UNESCO, 2001; Eisner,
2002; Robinson, 2006; Ruppert, 2006; Upitis, 2011). There are many definitions of
what the arts actually are, but for this study the definition developed by Upitis will be
adopted2
. It states that the arts can primarily include “fine and performing arts –
painting, sculpting, writing poetry, playing an instrument, singing, dancing, acting
and creating mixed media productions” (Upitis, 2011:1). These can then further
categorized into “visual arts, dance, dramatics and music” (Ruppert, 2006; Gullat,
2007). The crux of the discussion of arts in schools lies in the benefits of the arts as
posited by many a scholar. Table 2 below is a tabulation of some the commonly used
benefits, though the list is not in any way complete. The significance regarding the
mentioned benefits is that they demonstrate that the arts do not merely make an
individual creative - the arts in fact support and are key in the development of the
whole child or individual (Flory, n.d.; UNESCO, 2001; Eisner, 2002; Robinson, 2006;
Ruppert, 2006; Ahmad, 2009; Upitis, 2011).
Table 2: The Benefits of Creativity
Author Benefits Year
UNESCO 1) attention to perception & expression
2) building of language
3) critical thinking
4) time management
5) problem solving skills
2001
Ruppert 1) language skills
2) mathematics skills
3) thinking skills
4) social skills
5) motivation to learn
6) a positive school environment
2006
Upitis 1) creativity & imagination
2) engagement in other subject areas
2011
2 with the exclusion of filmmaking, due to its impracticality to the South African
context.

16. 16
3) meta cognition
4) social skills
Despite the amount of research available to substantiate these findings, it is not
uncommon to find education systems that simply have a clear bias towards the STEM
subjects (Robinson, 2006; du Toit & Roodt, 2009; National Planning Commission,
2011). The African situation is a sad reality and UNESCO cite Pierre Guingane as
having observed that “the almost total absence of arts education in today’s schools is
seriously detrimental to the mental and psychological balance of Africans, who not
only lose the cultural and aesthetic values of their traditional environment but are also
left untrained in those of modern civilization” (UNESCO, 2001:7). In the same paper
entitled Cultural Heritage, Creativity and Education for all in Africa, there is an
appeal made by the then Director-General of UNESCO that puts the African situation
into context:
A more balanced kind of education is now needed, with scientific,
technical and sports disciplines, the human sciences and art
education placed on an equal footing at the different stages of
schooling… The time has come to give all school-going children the
benefit of such teaching… [There is a need] to take appropriate
administrative, financial and legal measures to ensure that the
teaching of the arts…is compulsory throughout the school cycle
(UNESCO, 2001:40 – 41).
The main challenge of education in the 21st
Century is to make the greatest number of
people able to adapt and respond to the rapidly changing world (UNESCO, 2001;
Ahmad, 2009). We can no longer rely on the analytical and deductive nature of the
sciences to yield the kind of school-leaving individuals that can meet those demands
(National Academy of Engineering, 2006; Shuster, 2008). Where the arts are present,
creativity thrives (Upitis, 2011:4) and where creativity thrives, then innovation is
more likely to occur – innovation is identified as key to solving the social problems
our society faces today (National Academy of Engineering, 2006; 2008; Ahmad,
2009; Zeng et al., 2009; National Planning Commission, 2011).

17. 17
3. Research Methodology
3.1 Design
When conducting research within the social sciences and ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions
are being posed, the investigator has little control over events, and the focus is on a
contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context, the case study method is
often the preferred strategy (Yin, 2009:1). When taken on as a rigorous research
approach, the case study contributes uniquely to our knowledge of individual,
organizational, social, and political phenomena that shape and define the world in
which we live (Yin, 1983:3). Because the desire to implement the case study arises
from a need to “understand complex social phenomena”, the complex and multi-
faceted nature of creativity makes it an ideal subject to investigate in this manner
(Cropley, 2000; Casakin & Kreitler, 2009; Giraldo, 2009; Yin, 2009:3; Lemons,
2011; Zeng et al., 2011). The essence of a case study as posited by Schramm, and
with great relevance to this study, is that:
the central tendency among all types of case study, is that [they try] to
illuminate a decision or set of decisions: why they were taken. how they
were implemented, and with what result (Schramm,1971:6).
3.2 Sample
The sampling method that will be employed for this study is the diverse-case method
that requires the selection of a set of cases – minimum two – that are intended to
represent a diverse set of cases (Gerring, 2007:98). The National Development Plan
places infrastructure at the core of the development of South Africa. This is pertinent
to the definition of the role of an engineer by du Toit & Roodt, which states:
Engineers are at the core of two key areas of development enterprise in
the country:

18. 18
1) building & maintaining infrastructure in the public sector,
2) contributing towards economic growth in the private sector (du Toit &
Roodt, 2009:10),
Thus the specific curriculum content that will be investigated will be that of the Civil
Engineering qualification, as civil engineers are integral in the infrastructural
development of a country.
3.3 Methods
To increase the precision and reliability of the empirical research, the data source
triangulation method, which is using more than one data source or collecting the
same data at different occasions, will be used (Runeson & Host, 2009:196). Data will
be collected from three sources:
1) curriculum outlines from the respective universities
2) reports and articles from the Council on Higher Education and Department of basic
Education as well as
3) data from literature.
4. Data Analysis
The majority of the data was taken from the curriculum outlines of the respective
engineering schools’ civil engineering qualifications available online. The raw data
was then taken and translated into graph form as illustrated by Figure 1 through to
Figure 6. The first three Figures depict data for the curriculum outline of the National
Diploma of Civil Engineering qualification at Nelson Mandela Metropolitan
University, Tshwane University of Technology and Central University of
Technology. Figure 4 through to Figure 6 represent the curriculum outline of the
Bachelor of Science in Engineering in the field of Civil Engineering qualification at
the University of Cape Town, the University of KwaZulu Natal and the University of
Witwaterstrand. Table 3 represents a tabulated form of data retrieved from the
Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) syllabus information. Lastly,

19. 19
data was taken from a report from the Council of Higher Education (CHE) discussing
the proposal for undergraduate curriculum reform in South Africa (CHE, 2013). The
data, namely Table 4 and Figure 7, represents the graduation and enrolment figures of
engineering graduates. The modules were regarded as creative or non-creative based
on the evaluation of the respective module outcomes. A drawing module from Nelson
Mandela Metropolitan University, for example, would be considered as a creative
module as one of the outcomes is to “develop the skill of visualising an object in three
dimensions” (nmmu.ac.za, n.d.). The Applied Mechanics module from the same
university aims for its students to be able to “investigate the stability of an
engineering structure; identify and suggest effective remedial measures or methods to
achieve stability in an engineering structure” (nmmu.ac.za, n.d.). This kind of module
would be considered a non-creative module. The basic premise for a module to be
considered as creative is for it to either teach or actively require engineering students
to apply creative thinking.
Figure 1: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NDip)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Creative
Modules
Non‐
Creative
Modules

20. 20
Figure 2: Tshwane University of Technology (NDip)
Figure 3: Central University of Technology (NDip)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Creative Modules
Non‐Creative Modules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Creative Modules
Non‐Creative Modules

21. 21
Figure 4: University of Cape Town (BSc)
Figure 5: University of the Witwaterstrand (BSc)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Creative Modules
Non‐Creative Modules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Creative Modules
Non‐Creative Modules

22. 22
Figure 6: University of KwaZulu Natal (BSc)
Creative Arts STEM
Grade R 2hrs 7hrs
Grade 1 - 2 2hrs 7hrs
Grade 3 2hrs 7hrs
Grade 4 - 7 1,5hrs 9,5hrs
Grade 8 - 9 2hrs 9,5hrs
Table 3: The Instructional hours per week of Creative Arts subjects vs. STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering & Mathematics) subjects. Data sourced from Department of Basic Education.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Creative Modules
Non‐Creative Modules

23. 23
Table 4: Graduation within 5years in selected qualifications (%) : Students entering university for
the first time in 2006
Figure 7: Undergraduate university Engineering graduates vs enrolments 1989 ‐ 2010

24. 24
5.1 Discussion
The discussion on the data that has been collected can be appreciated through the lens
of the hypothesis proposed in this paper, which states: The curriculum plan from
primary to tertiary does not adequately prepare an engineer to be creative. Beginning
with Table 3, which depicts the proposed instructional hours by the CAPS syllabus of
creative arts subjects versus STEM subjects; it can be seen what the Department of
Basic Education (DBE) believes are the cornerstone subjects for developing South
African pupils. It sadly paints the picture of how theory, ever so often, can exist so far
from actual reality. The DBE claims that one of their aims is “equipping learners,
irrespective of their socio-economic background, race, gender, physical ability or
intellectual ability, with the knowledge, skills and values necessary for self-fulfilment,
and meaningful participation in society as citizens of a free country” (DBE, n,d.:4).
Considering the benefits of the creative arts on the developing child individual (Flory,
n.d.; UNESCO, 2001; Eisner, 2002; Robinson, 2006; Ruppert, 2006; Ahmad, 2009;
Upitis, 2011), many of the objectives of the DBE can only be met if more focus and
time was given to correct teaching of the creative arts. The result, as discussed in the
review of literature, would enable all students – not only the naturally creative – to
have a higher propensity towards creative and innovative thinking.
As a remedial action, one would imagine that where the schooling system
from Grade R to 12 failed to effectively expose future engineers to creativity and
innovation, the engineering schools at institutions of higher learning would take it
upon themselves to rectify the error. Instead, the scenario is that an average of just
18% of the curriculum modules of a National Diploma in Civil Engineering – across
three universities – are creative in nature. Some of the creative modules that were
counted included modules such as Stormwater Design or Structural Design, which
could easily be construed as more technical than creative. The ratio found in the BSc
Civil Engineering degree curricula was even lower, at an average of 16% of creative
modules across the three universities. This slight drop in ratio may be attributed to the
fact that the BSc qualification is offered at traditional universities, whereas the NDip
qualification is found at comprehensive universities or universities of technology. The
point to be drawn here is that traditional universities are possibly less likely to alter

25. 25
their curriculum design, as they have been around for much longer as opposed to the
comprehensive universities that were created as a result of two or more institutions of
higher learning merging, which is a more recent phenomenon. These universities are
more likely to be aware of the curriculum needs of a 21st
Century engineer, although
the numbers are still dismal.
Table 4 and Figure 7 show the extent of the engineering crisis that exists
within institutions of higher learning in South Africa. One can argue that this is a
result of a failing engineering curriculum. Waghid’s Reconceptualising of
Engineering Education gives one of the most concise definitions of such a
curriculum, where he quotes Cropley and Cropley (1998:21) in saying:
Any engineering curriculum that does not show a consistent level of
interest in creativity is depriving its students of essential competencies
for engineering success in the global marketplace and for career
enrichment and advancement. They [Cropley and Cropley] argue that
creativity involves both divergent (such as synthesizing, transforming,
inferring, constructing, or shifting context) and convergent (recognising,
recalling, reapplying, or conforming) thought processes. Creative
engineering education occurs "when convergent thinking is equated with
knowledge of facts and accuracy for example, complemented by
divergent thinking equated with production of new ideas and finding of
unexpected combinations, for instance" (Waghid, 2000:264).
There is no doubt that on the basis of the evidence presented, engineering curricula in
South Africa do not show a consistent level of interest in creativity. The irony is that
it is these very engineering departments that say that they aim to produce engineering
professionals that are “characterised by the ability to solve problems, develop
components, systems, services and processes through creativity, innovation and the
application of fundamental and engineering principles” (NMMU, 2014:14).
5.2. Conclusion
Consider an 18-year-old South African pupil who has ambitions of becoming an

26. 26
engineer. Having gone through the South African education system (and not choosing
Art for Grade 10 - 12), he/she should have received approximately 399 hours of
creative arts instruction. In that same time, that pupil would have received the
equivalent amount of hours of instruction of Maths, Science & Technology between
Grade 8 and 9. When this pupil enrolls for an engineering qualification at a South
African university, no more than 20% of their 3 to 4 year qualification will comprise
of modules that will allow them to exercise or nurture their creative potential. Is it
possible for this potential engineer to be expected to creatively solve the present and
emerging social problems? The evidence brought forth by this study suggests that it is
unlikely for them to do so.
In the context of the problem in its entirety, highlighting the lack of creative
modules in engineering qualifications only unravels a few threads in the sizeable
tapestry that is the national education system crisis. Many other factors could attribute
to the dismal state of the South African education system, which this study does not
mention. Engineering graduate numbers have continued to plummet over the past 20
years and the problem that is consistently cited is sub-standard maths and science (du
Toit & Roodt, 2009; National Planning Commission, 2011). If this were the case,
despite the fact that mathematics and science continually receive a sizeable portion of
the education budget, there would surely be more of an improvement by now. The
famous quote by Albert Einstein comes to mind: Insanity is doing the same thing over
and over and expecting different results. It must be said, however, that this study in
no way attempts to suggest what this new engineering curricula should be like.
Further research is required to be done here. The crux of that matter lies in the
disparity of what engineering schools purport their curricula to be and what students
are actually taught. This chasm is further widened by the unrealistic expectation of the
engineering industry on graduates to possess qualities that they have not received
sufficient exposure to. Realistically, it may take months to effect an apparently simple
organizational change and years to achieve a really basic change in attitude. And
both are required for the development of the most favourable environment for
engineering creativity (Gregory, 1972:288). For the engineering schools in South
Africa to create such an environment, a more concerted effort is needed to redress the
lack of creative content in the engineering curricula.

27. 27
5.3. References
Ahmad, S. (2009). Science, Engineering and Technology Education: Innovative
Paradigm Shift. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation,
[online] 5(1), pp.3-13. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/097324700900500101
[Accessed 10 Jun. 2014].
Blamires, M. and Peterson, A. (2014). Can creativity be assessed? Towards an
evidence-informed framework for assessing and planning progress in creativity.
Cambridge Journal of Education, [online] 44(2), pp.147-162. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2013.860081 [Accessed 2 Jun. 2014].
Carson, S., Peterson, J. and Higgins, D. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor
structure of the creative achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal,
17(1), pp.37--50.
Casakin, H. and Kreitler, S. (2010). Motivation for creativity in architectural design
and engineering design students: implications for design education. Int J Technol Des
Educ, [online] 20(4), pp.477-493. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-009-
9103-y [Accessed 7 Jun. 2014].
Chakrabarti, A. (2013). Understanding influences on engineering creativity and
innovation: a biographical study of 12 outstanding engineering designers and
innovators. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, [online] 1(1),
pp.56-68. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.754643 [Accessed 2
Jun. 2014].
Charyton, C. and Snelbecker, G. (2007). General, artistic and scientific creativity
attributes of engineering and music students. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3),
pp.213--225.

28. 28
Cropley, A. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth
using?. Roeper Review, [online] 23(2), pp.72-79. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554069 [Accessed 2 Jun. 2014].
Department of Basic Education, (n.d.). CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT POLICY
STATEMENT LIFE SKILLS- FOUNDATION PHASE.. pp.6,7.
Department of Basic Education, (2014). Annual Report 2013/14. Pretoria: Department
of Basic Education, pp.7,8.
Department of Basic Education, (2014). Education Statistics in South Africa 2012.
Pretoria: Department of Basic Education, p.24.
Department of Education, (2008). Classification of Educational Subject Matter.
Pretoria: Department of Education.
Du Toit, R. and Roodt, J. (2009). Engineers in a developing country. 1st ed. Cape
Town, South Africa: HSRC Press.
Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Fakier, M. and Waghid, Y. (2004). ON OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION AND
CREATIVITY IN SOUTH AFRICA. International Journal of Special Education,
19(2), pp.53-55.
Flory, A. (n.d.). Exploring the Benefits of Art in Elementary Education.
Gerring, J. (2015). Techniques for choosing cases. In: Case Study Research:
Principles and Practices, 1st ed. Cambridge University Press, p.98.
Gilson, L., Mathieu, J., Shalley, C. and Ruddy, T. (2005). Creativity and
Standardization: Complementary or Conflicting Drivers of Team Effectiveness?. The
Academy of Management Journal, [online] 48(3), pp.521-531. Available at:
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20159673?uid=3739368&uid=2&uid=4&sid=
21104134326567 [Accessed 30 May. 2014].

29. 29
Giraldo, L. (2009). Verbal and Visual Skills in Creative Thinking: A Test of the
Independence Hypothesis. University of Florida.
Goffee, R. (2000). Innovation and creativity in business. RSA Journal, [online]
148(5492), pp.113-119. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41378894 [Accessed
30 May. 2014].
Greenstein, R. (1995) Education policy discourse and the new South Africa.
Perspectives in Education, 16(1): 193 - 204.
Gregory, S. (1972). Creativity and innovation in engineering. 1st ed. London:
Butterworths.
Gullatt, D. (2007). Research links the arts with student academic gains. 71(3), pp.211-
-220.
Hocevar, D. (1979). The Development of the Creative Behavior Inventory.
Hokanson, B. (2012). Measuring creativity: two studies. PhD. University of
Minnesota.
Kaufman, J. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman Domains of
Creativity Scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
[online] 6(4), pp.298-308. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029751
[Accessed 3 Jun. 2014].
Labuschagne, E. (2004). Factors to consider in the transition from a teacher–centred
model to a learner-centred model in a computer-rich learning environment.
University of Pretoria.
LaMore, R., Root-Bernstein, R., Root-Bernstein, M., Schweitzer, J., Lawton, J.,
Roraback, E., Peruski, A., VanDyke, M. and Fernandez, L. (2013). Arts and Crafts:
Critical to Economic Innovation. Economic Development Quarterly, [online] 27(3),
pp.221-229. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891242413486186 [Accessed 20
Mar. 2014].

30. 30
Lawless, A. (2007). Numbers and needs in local government. SAICE, Midrand, South
Africa.
Lemons, G. (2011). Diverse Perspectives of Creativity Testing: Controversial Issues
When Used for Inclusion Into Gifted Programs. Journal for the Education of the
Gifted, [online] 34(5), pp.742-772. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162353211417221 [Accessed 2 Jun. 2014].
Life, E. and Wild, R. (1981). The Development of Creative Engineers. Oxford Review
of Education, 7(1), pp.3--9.
Magnani, R. (1997). Sampling Guide. 1st ed. [ebook] Washington: Academy for
Educational Development. Available at:
http://www.ais.up.ac.za/health/blocks/tnm800/EssentialTNM800/DayThree/ExtraSam
pling/SamplingGuide.pdf [Accessed 9 Jun. 2014].
Manpower Group, (2013). Talent Shortage Survey Research Results 2013. Talent
Shortage Survey. Milwaukee: Manpower Group, pp.37-47.
Marrocu, E. and Paci, R. (2013). Regional Development and Creativity. International
Regional Science Review, [online] 36(3), pp.354-391. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0160017612461915 [Accessed 30 May. 2014].
National Academy Of Engineering, (2005). Educating The Engineer Of 2020:
Adapting Engineering Education To The New Century. Washington: National
Academies Press.
National Planning Commission, (2011). National Development Plan: Vision for 2030.
Nationsonline.org, (2014). Countries of the First World. [online] Available at:
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/first_world.htm [Accessed 9 Jun. 2014].
News24, (2014). SA has worst maths, science education in world. [online] Available
at: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/SA-has-worst-maths-science-
education-in-world-20140602 [Accessed 9 Jun. 2014].

31. 31
Niu, W. and Sternberg, R. (2006). The philosophical roots of Western and Eastern
conceptions of creativity. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 26(1-
2), p.18.
NMMU, (2014). FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROSPECTUS 2015. 1st ed. [ebook] p.14.
Available at: http://ebeit.nmmu.ac.za/ebeit/media/Store/documents/home/2015-
EBEIT-Prospectus.pdf [Accessed 16 Dec. 2014].
Oxford Press, (2015). Oxford University Press Southern Africa | Schools | Curriculum
Information. [online] Oxford.co.za. Available at:
http://www.oxford.co.za/page/schools/curriculuminformation/index#.VLoHMYqUdk
K [Accessed 11 Jan. 2015].
Perl, M. (2008). Developing creativity and innovation in engineering and science.
International Journal of Modern Physics A, 23(27n28), pp.4401--4413.
Robinson, K. (2006). How Schools Kill Creativity. [video] Available at:
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity [Accessed 25
May. 2014].
Robinson, K. (2008). Changing Education Paradigms. [video] Available at:
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms [Accessed
25 May. 2014].
Runeson, P. and Host, M. (2008). Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study
research in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering, 14(2), p.196.
Ruppert, S. (2006). Critical evidence. 1st ed. [Washington, D.C.: National Assembly
of State Arts Agencies in collaboration with the Arts Education Partnership.
Schramm, W. (1971). Notes on Case Studies of Instructional Media Projects.. 1st ed.
[ebook] California, p.6. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED092145.pdf
[Accessed 15 Jan. 2015].

32. 32
Shen, T. and Lai, J. (2013). Exploring the Relationship between Creative Test of
ATTA and the Thinking of Creative Works.
Shuster, M. (n.d.). The arts and engineering [Focus on Education]. IEEE Control
Systems Magazine, [online] 28(4), pp.96-98. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/mcs.2008.924881 [Accessed 5 May. 2014].
Silvia, P., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R. and Kaufman, J. (2012). Assessing creativity
with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. Psychology of Aesthetics,
Creativity, and the Arts, 6(1), p.19.
Southafrica.info, (2015). Lion's share of Budget for education. [online] Available at:
http://www.southafrica.info/business/economy/policies/budget2014c.htm [Accessed
17 Jan. 2015].
Tornkvist, S. (1998). Creativity: can it be taught? The case of Engineering Education.
European Journal of Engineering Education, 23(1), pp.5--12.
The Cultural Strategy Group, (1998). A strategy for realising the potential of the
Cultural Industries. Department Of Arts, Culture, Science And Technology.
Tiwana, A. and Mclean, E. (2003). Expertise integration and creativity in information
systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), pp.13--43.
UNESCO, (2001). Cultural heritage, creativity and education for all in Africa. In:
Regional Conference on Arts Education. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization, p.40.
Upitis, R. (2011). Arts Education for the Development of the Whole Child.
van der Berg, S., Taylor, S., Gustafsson, M., Spaull, N. and Armstrong, P.
(2011). Improving Education Quality in South Africa. Stellenbosch, p.1.
Waghid, Y. (2000). Reconceptualising engineering education: Creating spaces for
outcomes and dialogical agape. Higher Education, 40(3), pp.259--276.

33. 33
Yin, R. (2009). CASE STUDY RESEARCH Design and Methods. 2nd ed. London,
pp.1,3.
Zeng, L., Proctor, R. and Salvendy, G. (2009). Integrating Creativity in IT Product
and Service Development into Ergonomic Design Practices. Proceedings of the
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, [online] 53(19), pp.1507-
1511. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/154193120905301909 [Accessed 10
Jun. 2014].
Zeng, L., Proctor, R. and Salvendy, G. (2011). Can Traditional Divergent Thinking
Tests Be Trusted in Measuring and Predicting Real-World Creativity?. Creativity
Research Journal, [online] 23(1), pp.24-37. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.545713 [Accessed 10 Jun. 2014].
Zhou, C. (2012). Fostering creative engineers: a key to face the complexity of
engineering practice. European Journal of Engineering Education, [online] 37(4),
pp.343-353. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.691872
[Accessed 17 May. 2014].