Creativity and perceptions of the demigod teacher.

In addition to ideas about fostering creativity in schools, such as postulated by the Thomas Tallis school webpages http://www.creativetallis.com/, where there is a strong focus on creative environments, understanding creativity, as well as developing creative practice (the pages themselves reflect the need to construct external and virtual creative environments such as student zones, video diaries, student and teacher web forums and blogs) - aside from this sideways-thinking, I ask: will a pupil attain a much greater level of creativity, perhaps in spite of an amenable learning environment, if their teacher is in their eyes a demigod?

Assuming for now that this does not mean a crush, but that this perception must also follow from the majority of the class; boys and girls, and that the teacher may be mysteriously gifted in the eyes of other teachers too. To attain this universal level of respect in the school may be due to any combination of disinterestedness, expertise, wit, incisive observation, persuasive feedback, acute, peaceable humour, as well as tact, and tactile manipulation of the natural gullibility of pupils - culminating in a demigod status. This latter point allowing for the accidental case, where the teacher has attained a faux-demigod affection, but has nevertheless crafted this into a trustful, healthy, happy classroom…which is what matters.

If a teacher is perceived to be a demigod, what can’t be taught?

Let’s start with types of learning, starting with the most liberal and moving steadfastly to the most conservative.

• 
  
  Pupil-lead learning (when pupils take on the role of teacher). Since demigod teachers can’t be mimicked, pupils will nevertheless try to act up to their teacher’s expectations, as well as impress their peers. There are obvious pros and cons, but it must be better to assume the role of a demigod teacher than an uneducated footballer.
• 
  
  Learning to learn: natural academic insights that make academic thinking irresistible are the property of the teacher-god, whose enthusiasm as opposed to wincing reuse of university notes for revision, draws the pupils into their world of independent thinking: from which creativity floweth. Con: pupils become smug.
• 
  
  Learning/Acquiring skills: when pupils witness the skills of their teachers first hand, they see not dry, educational targets, but living, juicy, disinterested annexes of a person's success – ‘suave’ is a more down to earth term for ‘grace’ (incidentally one of Plato’s essential characteristics for a philosopher).
• 
  
  Learning the classics: essentially the god-teacher knows the classics or at least values the universal truths within, but moreover relishes pupils unearthing them as ancient models of creativity, that stand in for the teacher's modelling and instruction. Likewise, pupils see their teacher-god as embodying universal experience and truth, and consume the classics willingly.
• 
  
  Teacher-to-pupil (copying from the board): handwriting aside, the freedom of scrawling on a white board, is also a platform for creative self-awareness and possibly irony for the god-teacher. So instead of: “Learning Objective", it might be: “You just need to know this”. How can pupils forget good times with the white board?

Obviously being seen as teacher demi-god is a solution to many of the debates and problems in education. Yet many of us can't simply attain to it. Falling short, we are like those who shadow the lives of celebrities, with the same embarrassing consequences.