Schools are increasingly suspected of ‘stifling creativity’. Among the myths that persist within academic institutions, one is particularly persistent and harmful: that of the ‘ right answer" .

Article updated on 20 March 2026.

School stifles creativity, claims Sir Ken Robinson, in a famous TED talk which, incidentally, I have shared on this blog.

I have come to realise this through my experience as a trainer, whether working with students or teachers.  This detrimental effect of the school system is not the result of a conscious desire to stifle the creativity of either students or teachers.  But it is the very structure of academic institutions and certain myths that permeate them which ultimately nip any hint of creativity in the bud.

The myth of the ‘right answer’ is toxic to creativity

One of those myths that stifles creativity in both children and teachers is that of the ‘ right answer ».

As if every problem had a single, valid, sound and verifiable answer.  This myth of the single correct answer is not unrelated to a certain thirst for the absolute, for a single, revealed truth.

It also reflects a deep-seated and equally misleading structure of our thinking: binary thinking. For if there is only one correct answer, that means all the others are false, mistaken – in a word: wrong. This leads straight into Manichaeism, where everything is either true or false, black or white, 1 or 0.

I also believe that, beyond the realm of knowledge, this myth fuels populism with its tendency to offer simple, one-off solutions to complex and multifaceted problems.

Why does this single ‘correct’ answer stifle creativity?

In the single correct answer, there is only one mode of thinking at work: the analytical, logical mode of thinking. A particular action automatically leads to a particular result. If the result of my calculation matches that of the teacher, I have the ‘ right answer » (in Belgium, one would say « I have good, sir!« ).

It’s a bit like an electrical circuit – and that was also the principle behind the l’Electro, remember: when you found the only correct answer, the electrical connection was made and the light came on.  This concept of a correct answer fits well with the technology behind how the Electro works: there can indeed be only one response contact for each question contact.

Throughout every creative exercise, on the other hand,  there is two types of thinking at work, which follow one another and complement each other.

Divergent thinking and convergent thinking

Divergent thinking: it’s the QUANTITY of ideas that matters

In a brainstorming session, what matters is gathering as many ideas as possible.  We don’t care about their quality.  What we want is to get as many as possible.  Because, as Nobel laureate Linus Pauling said, quoted in Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, « To come up with a good idea, you need to have lots of ideas" .

Everything is therefore in place to avoid cognitive filters: value judgements, inhibitions, and so on.

The model corresponding to this stage is net fishing : we try to catch as many fish as possible.

Convergent thinking: it is the QUALITY of ideas that matters

On the other hand, in the second phase of the creative process or a brainstorming session, it is the the quality of ideas is what matters.  We try to identify, amongst the multitude of ideas put forward, those that will mark a break with current practices – the famous innovation or disruption.  The model for this second phase is the pot fishing : I only keep the fish that meet my criteria.

Cette deuxième phase apportera elle aussi sont lots de bonnes idées, de bonnes réponses à une question ou à un problème.  Et l’on choisira la « best answer "to this problem, to this question.  And not the " right answer" .

The " right answer“In most cases, this is a response of the type ‘ incremental ": We improve on what already exists, but we don't create anything new."

However, the very purpose of creativity and innovation is to develop original, innovative solutions to an ever-increasing number of complex problems.

The habit of always having the right answer feeds our ‘cognitive greed’

The " right answer “also reinforces a character trait that stifles curiosity and inventiveness, namely that of ‘” cognitive greed ».

In his book La démocratie des crédules, Gérald Bronner describes the satisfaction of having found a “ right answer  ’ which spares us the trouble of looking any further.  As soon as we’ve found what we consider to be a ‘right answer’, our curiosity is satisfied.  We no longer feel the need to invest any more time and energy in a response that might be more complex but also more innovative and rewarding.

Dans un monde dominé par la complexité, noyé sous le flux incessant de l’information en multicanal, il est peut-être temps de préparer les humains à construire leur propre savoir.  Non pas en anonnant des réponses toutes faites, mais en s’entraînant à considérer de multiples solutions alternatives.

Towards creative pedagogies

Of course, there are situations where there is only one correct answer: 2 + 3 will always equal 5.  But this kind of mathematical or logical answer has little to do with our world, which is made up of complex human relationships, conflicting or even opposing systems of thought or belief, and systemic, globalised problems.

Is there a single right way to manage traffic everywhere? Is there a good solution for caring for patients in healthcare facilities? Is there one and only one way to approach language teaching?

Or is there finally room for a more open approach to teaching?  For an educational approach that is more open to the creativity of both pupils and teachers?

Initiatives are emerging to bridge the gap between schools and businesses.  Training young people in creative thinking and complex problem-solving, at Design Thinking… seeking innovative solutions would be a more sustainable and effective approach…

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter It's free and you won't miss any of our publications.