Ben Bao
State University of New York, New York, USA
FutureFront Interdisciplinary Research Institute. Tokyo, JP
Renaissance 2023, 2(02); https://doi.org/10.70548/ra142105
Submission received: 4 September 2023 / Revised: 22 September 2023 / Accepted: 13 November 2023 / Published: 22 November 2023
Abstract: Against the backdrop of increasing global competition, cultivating high-quality talents with innovative thinking and creativity is crucial for national technological revitalization. However, there are some limitations in current higher education and talent training, such as an excessive reliance on assessing knowledge points and a lack of effective methods for innovation training, which impact the development of the country’s new quality productivity. This study proposes the integration of science and art education, relying on and transcending disciplines, aimed at exploring new footholds and development models in university talent training. In response to the challenges faced in higher education talent training, three progressive talent training plans are proposed: first, emphasizing solid foundations and focusing on mastering knowledge and its generation process; second, broadening the track by strengthening the integration of science and art; and third, stimulating creativity to pursue high-quality talent training. Through these strategies, a more open, interdisciplinary, and inclusive learning environment is established, thereby paving new paths for the cultivation of innovative talents.
Keywords: Science and Art, Innovative Talents, Interdisciplinary, Scientific Literacy, Broadening Tracks
In his report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: “We must adhere to the principle that science and technology are the primary productive forces, talent is the primary resource, and innovation is the primary driving force. We must deeply implement the strategies of revitalizing the country through science and education, strengthening the country with talent, and driving development through innovation, continuously opening up new fields and new tracks for development, and constantly shaping new momentum and new advantages for development” [1]. This report clearly points out the three principles and three strategies for innovative development, providing a clear direction for China’s peaceful rise amidst the great changes unseen in a century and fierce international competition, aiming for China’s technological revitalization and the dream of becoming a strong nation by achieving breakthroughs. Notably, in this strategic guideline for national rejuvenation and development, which consists of only a few dozen words, the keyword “innovation” appears twice. It is evident that innovation represents the core and crucial support for the future revitalization and development of China. However, innovation-driven development requires many socialist builders with innovative capabilities and thinking, which is why innovative talent is considered the primary resource and strategic foundation for national development.
As we all know, a country’s educational efforts, particularly higher education, serve as the main battleground for cultivating and nurturing the talent needed for national development. Talented individuals with innovative capabilities will open new fields and new tracks for national innovation and development. Therefore, the high-quality development of university higher education will play a crucial role in the strategy of revitalizing the country through science and education, strengthening the country with talent, and accelerating the development of new productive forces, thereby advancing high-quality development. However, the current higher education and talent cultivation in China still face numerous challenges and issues that have garnered widespread attention and discussion within the academic community.
Some scholars, from the perspectives of educational content and philosophy, have pointed out the insufficient emphasis on cultivating students’ abilities within the educational system, including thinking skills (particularly innovative thinking), practical abilities, exploratory abilities, and comprehensive abilities [2]. Due to the traditional education system’s focus on knowledge assessment and neglect of critical thinking, practical, and labor education [3], students lack a foundation in innovative learning and creative practice. The system overemphasizes learning outcomes while neglecting the learning process [4]. This exam-oriented teaching approach leads to fragmented knowledge acquisition, a lack of a solid foundation, and a narrow knowledge base, weakening students’ innovative awareness, causing them to be accustomed to fixed thinking patterns, lacking imagination, creativity, and passion for innovation [5]. As a result, some university students cannot pose meaningful questions [6], especially scientific ones with innovative significance.
Additionally, some scholars, from the perspective of faculty strength, have pointed out the current inadequacies in faculty resources related to innovative thinking and capabilities in higher education institutions [7]. In many cases, faculty members lack sufficient innovative thinking skills, making it difficult to provide effective innovation education and guidance to students. Consequently, within the existing university teaching model and system, it is challenging to offer the necessary guidance conditions and relaxed environment for cultivating innovative thinking and capabilities in university students [8]. Due to the lack of concrete methods for cultivating innovation skills and an innovation evaluation standard system, university students’ understanding of innovation is often vague, and their value orientation is biased [9].
Given these issues, how should universities further solidify the existing foundations of higher education in various disciplines, leverage the disciplinary foundations, transcend disciplinary boundaries, expand students’ horizons, and broaden learning methods to inspire students’ creativity and effectively cultivate innovative talent? This is a direction that every higher education worker should actively explore. Based on the current challenges facing higher education, this study analyzes and discusses how, in the process of talent cultivation at universities, guided by the educational policy of integrating moral, intellectual, physical, aesthetic, and labor education, the integration of science and art can be used as an educational model to further expand the pathways for cultivating innovative talent at universities.
I. Laying a Solid Foundation: Mastering Knowledge and Understanding Its Formation
The prerequisite for cultivating high-quality talent is to provide university students with a comprehensive education and a solid knowledge foundation during higher education, enabling them to possess complete knowledge reserves and a reasonable knowledge structure in various academic fields and future professional positions. This includes basic work skills and scientific literacy, allowing them to competently undertake professional tasks and responsibilities in the revival of national science and technology. The talent nurtured in universities will become key socialist builders and successors, who must possess comprehensive professional knowledge and a solid academic foundation, which is crucial for their future growth and academic careers.
However, in current higher education practices, teaching activities still focus on the delivery of knowledge points, neglecting a comprehensive understanding of knowledge, particularly the exploration of how knowledge is generated, its creative processes, and its significance for individual and societal development. In such a context, students tend to focus more on the rote memorization of knowledge rather than understanding how it is formed, what problems it can solve, and the profound significance of mastering and applying this knowledge. This leads to a fragmented and superficial grasp of knowledge, stopping at merely knowing the surface without understanding the essence, or “knowing what it is but not why it is so.” As a result, students’ knowledge reserves are incomplete and lack a solid foundation, making it difficult for them to effectively use their knowledge, critical thinking, and innovative abilities to solve problems when faced with the challenges of the professional world after graduation. This greatly limits their personal development and the roles they could play in various industries in the future.
Exploring how to accurately assess whether university students have comprehensively and deeply mastered knowledge in their academic fields within the current higher education system highlights the need for effective evaluation criteria. The “Outline of the National Action Plan for Scientific Literacy (2021-2035)” issued by the State Council in 2021 (hereinafter referred to as the “Outline”) provides a reliable benchmark for assessing the basic requirements of consolidating foundations, mastering knowledge comprehensively in academic fields, and possessing scientific literacy in higher education. The “Outline” first defines scientific literacy for citizens as “embracing scientific spirit, establishing scientific thinking, mastering basic scientific methods, understanding essential scientific knowledge, and having the ability to apply them to analyze, judge, and solve practical problems” [10]. It further points out enhancement actions for higher education, such as “promoting science education and popularization at the higher education stage, deepening reforms in science education and teaching in universities, promoting the construction of basic science courses, and strengthening the development of online open courses on scientific literacy.” The enhancement actions proposed in the “Outline” not only optimize the content and methods of science education but also provide direct guidance for cultivating students’ deep understanding of knowledge and its creation processes, thereby laying a solid foundation in their academic fields. Implementing these measures will effectively promote the comprehensive improvement of college students’ scientific literacy and lay a solid foundation for future societal innovation and development.
Many scholars, both domestic and international, have conducted in-depth research on the importance of understanding scientific knowledge and its creation process in education. These studies span various fields, including cognitive psychology, educational psychology, and educational philosophy. For example, Benjamin Bloom’s “Bloom’s Taxonomy” is an important tool for assessing the complexity of learning objectives and cognitive levels, progressing through six levels from knowledge recall to understanding, application, analysis, evaluation, and creation, emphasizing the cultivation of students’ higher-order thinking skills [11]. John Biggs introduced the concepts of “deep learning” and “surface learning,” emphasizing that teaching design should promote deep learning, meaning students should not only grasp knowledge but also understand its deeper meaning and underlying principles [12]. David A. Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory posits that learning is a process of transforming experiences into knowledge, highlighting that individuals deepen their understanding and application of knowledge through four stages: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation [13].
Based on the “Outline’s” requirements for scientific literacy and the views of experts and scholars from both China and abroad, we believe that the issue of solidifying the academic foundation and cultivating scientific literacy talent in higher education can be deepened into four distinct levels:
1. Understanding Essential Scientific Knowledge: In-depth discussions should focus on how to construct and optimize course content to not only cover basic theoretical knowledge but also include the latest developments in science and innovation fields. The emphasis should be on developing students’ abilities to understand and apply this knowledge to solve real-world problems, rather than just memorizing and repeating knowledge points.
2. Understanding the Process and Methods of Scientific Knowledge Creation: Explore how to integrate the process of scientific inquiry into teaching, including problem formulation and hypothesis, experimental design and implementation, data analysis, and conclusion extraction in scientific research methods. Emphasize practical aspects in teaching, encouraging students to experience and understand how scientific knowledge is generated through scientific exploration and research activities by engaging in experiments, projects, and case studies.
3. Understanding the Impact of Scientific Knowledge on Personal and Societal Development: This involves understanding the practical application of learning. Through interdisciplinary courses and thematic discussions, students should be guided to think about how scientific and technological advancements impact personal life and career development, social structures, economic development, cultural shifts, etc. Cultivate students’ critical thinking abilities, enabling them to understand and assess the “double-edged sword” effect of technological development and explore how to scientifically address the challenges and opportunities brought by technological progress.
4. Embracing Scientific Spirit, Establishing Scientific Thinking, and Mastering Basic Scientific Methods: At this level, higher education should not only impart knowledge but also cultivate students’ worldviews and values in science, including nurturing their curiosity and desire for exploration, skepticism and critical spirit, objective analysis abilities, persistent pursuit of truth, a realistic attitude, academic ethical responsibility, and mastery of basic scientific research paradigms. Additionally, through discussing major discoveries in the history of science, the thoughts of great scientists, and the processes of scientific discoveries, students’ love for science and their desire for scientific innovation should be stimulated.
By integrating these four levels of discussion and practice, the fundamental goal of higher education should be to cultivate well-rounded talent with a solid foundation in scientific knowledge, a deep understanding of the processes behind the creation of this knowledge, and the ability to flexibly apply this knowledge to solve real-world problems. This educational strategy emphasizes that university students’ learning should not be limited to mastering key points and content of scientific and technological knowledge; more importantly, they must deeply understand the formation and creation processes, contexts, and reasons behind this knowledge and truly achieve “knowing what it is and why it is so” through understanding and mastering the basic scientific methods. If the knowledge system mastered is likened to a pyramid, the wider the base and the more solid the foundation, the higher and more stable the pyramid can be built. Only by mastering a broad and systematic knowledge system rather than fragmented knowledge points can students steadily ascend in their “knowledge pyramid” and reach its highest peak. Therefore, solidifying the foundational knowledge that should be mastered in their academic fields and comprehensively understanding the process of knowledge generation and creation can open new pathways in university talent cultivation and address the key issues in higher education concerning building a strong country through science and education and achieving high-quality development.
II. Broadening Pathways: Strengthening the Integration of Science and Art
University education marks a critical stage of learning and growth in life. During this stage, students not only acquire rich knowledge and skills through higher education but also significantly enhance their social interaction, service, teamwork, and self-management abilities. Additionally, this stage effectively broadens their horizons, laying a solid foundation for pursuing career goals and realizing life aspirations, representing an elevation of their life journey. Therefore, universities are not merely places for knowledge transmission but also platforms for enlightening life, reshaping values, broadening perspectives, and promoting innovation. University education, while solidifying knowledge in specific academic fields, should also strengthen general education and open up “second classrooms.” By introducing interdisciplinary courses and learning projects, universities should encourage students to transcend the limits of a single discipline, exploring intersections of science, art, humanities, and other fields. Such cross-disciplinary learning not only expands students’ horizons and perspectives but also enhances their ability to analyze and solve complex problems, providing a solid foundation for broader career pathways.
However, under the current educational system, cultivating interdisciplinary knowledge and broadening pathways is a challenging task, primarily due to schools’ pursuit of exam-oriented education outcomes, the lack of capacity for interdisciplinary teaching, and the ability to assess innovation. These factors significantly weaken students’ initiative and enthusiasm for exploring interdisciplinary knowledge learning. This phenomenon is manifested in three aspects: first, students’ learning is often confined to their own academic fields, focusing only on familiar knowledge areas and exam-related content; second, schools lack systematic support and “empowerment” for interdisciplinary learning, leading students to rely solely on personal interest to learn innovative skills and interdisciplinary knowledge; third, long-term exam-oriented learning and fixed mindset practices cause students to lose curiosity and innovative spirit for new knowledge exploration. To break this deadlock and cultivate well-rounded builders of the nation who are adaptable and capable of facing complex and ever-changing challenges, it is essential to transcend disciplinary boundaries on the foundation of solid education in individual academic fields, pursuing interdisciplinary integration, including the intersection of science and art, and the integration of natural and social sciences. Among all cross-disciplinary fields, the integration of science and art has received significant attention in education, both domestically and internationally. Particularly in terms of broadening pathways, the advantages brought by this interdisciplinary field warrant deep exploration.
A. The Foundation of Science and Art Integration in Eastern and Western Cultures
The integration of science and art has deep roots in both Eastern and Western cultures. Over two thousand years ago, Zhuangzi wrote in the “Tianxia” chapter of *Zhuangzi*: “Discerning the beauty of heaven and earth, analyzing the principles of all things, observing the completeness of ancient knowledge,few can fully grasp the beauty of heaven and earth or the presence of the divine.” [14] This profound text, through metaphors of various schools and crafts, discusses the limitations of knowledge and wisdom, emphasizing that while every field has its unique value and applicable context, none can fully understand the mysteries of heaven and grasp the principles of all things. This clearly shows that the ancient Chinese intellectual community had long recognized the importance of integrating cross-disciplinary knowledge and skills to understand the complex world. From a contemporary perspective, the “beauty” of heaven and earth symbolizes the external harmony of things, viewing heaven and earth with an artistic eye; the “principle” of all things represents the internal rules governing external beauty, which could now be interpreted as the natural laws studied in scientific research. This understanding closely ties art and science together.
In Western thought, science and art also display inseparable connections. In ancient Greece, the liberal arts included grammar, rhetoric, logic, mathematics, geometry, music, and literature, where art and natural philosophy (science) were closely connected and inseparable. The Italian Renaissance painter Raphael’s (Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino) fresco *The School of Athens* depicts the flourishing of one of the oldest academic institutions in Western history over two thousand years ago. This work, considered the pinnacle of humanism and the Renaissance, uses a cross-temporal approach to bring together numerous great natural philosophers and artists from ancient Greece in a grand hall, including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (the three great philosophers of ancient Greece), Zeno, Zoroaster, Epicurus, Parmenides, Pythagoras, Archimedes, Ptolemy, and the young monarch Alexander the Great. Notably, two statues stand symmetrically on either side above the crowd: the statue on the left is Apollo, the “God of Music,” who “judges the beauty of heaven and earth” and is the god of world art; the statue on the right is Athena, the “Goddess of Wisdom,” who “analyzes the principles of all things,” teaching humans all survival knowledge and mastery tools, representing the “Goddess of Science.”
It is evident that there are numerous connections between science and art. Whether in Chinese or Western cultural traditions, art and science have been key forces driving human progress. They have not only enriched our understanding of the world but have also continuously sparked the pursuit of the unknown and new creations. This interdisciplinary integration is not just a historical phenomenon but also an indispensable foundation for future innovation, as expressed by the famous French realist novelist and founder of naturalistic literature, Gustave Flaubert, who said: “The further we advance, the more art needs to be scientific, and science needs to be artistic. They part at the foot of the mountain and meet again at the summit.” [15]
B. The Value of Integrating Science and Art Education
The value of integrating science and art education began to receive attention in the 1950s. An unexpected experiment took place amid the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union. In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched the world’s first artificial satellite, “Sputnik 1,” followed by the manned spacecraft “Vostok 1” in April 1961. This event sparked widespread attention globally, especially in the United States, causing a stir as the U.S. believed it should not lag behind the Soviet Union in aerospace technology. To find the cause of the lag, in 1967, Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education launched the “Zero Project.” The research findings showed that while the U.S. was ahead in science education, its art education was relatively lagging. In other words, the U.S. education system at the time was overly focused on rational intellectual education while neglecting the importance of aesthetic education. Simultaneously, the project found that the cultural and artistic backgrounds of scientific and technological personnel in the Soviet Union and the U.S. differed, which led to the U.S. falling behind in some technological fields, including space technology. The project’s conclusion emphasized the need to strengthen art education in talent cultivation to develop the artistic thinking space and image thinking of the human brain.
It is noteworthy that the theoretical core of the “Zero Project” is based on cognitive psychology developed in the mid-20th century. Through the creative research of psychologists such as Jerome Seymour Bruner and David P. Ausubel, this theory posits that learning is a process of forming and developing cognitive structures through active organization when facing problem situations, emphasizing the importance of cognitive processes. These research findings profoundly influenced educational reform in the U.S., prompting Congress to pass the “Goals 2000: Educate America Act” proposed by the Clinton Administration in 1994 [16]. From the inspiration and educational reforms of the “Zero Project,” it is evident that art education has a strong “transfer value,” meaning that the skills and cognitive abilities acquired through art education can be applied to other different but related fields. This value is particularly important in promoting students’ creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities.
In the 21st century, the integration of science and art education has received increasing attention. STEM education, which integrates Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, has become increasingly popular since the late 1990s, aiming to strengthen the connections between disciplines and enhance students’ comprehensive abilities. With a deepening understanding of educational diversity, Arts have been added to the STEM system, forming the STEAM education model, fully reflecting the importance of strengthening art education in promoting science education. This interdisciplinary educational model has not only greatly enriched the content of subject education and enhanced the perception of beauty but also stimulated students’ creativity and critical thinking skills, allowing them to unleash their full potential more comprehensively and enhancing their competitiveness in future academic development and careers.
C. The Mechanism of Integrating Science and Art
Why does integrating science and art stimulate innovation? We believe its fundamental principles and processes include the interaction and influence between the two. The impact of this interdisciplinary integration and its advantages in higher education are mainly reflected in the following five aspects:
1. Development of Cognitive Skills: Art education can cultivate students’ visual perception, spatial imagination, and abstract thinking abilities, providing essential foundational skills for scientific exploration and technological innovation. Scholars like Root-Bernstein have suggested that scientists use approximately twelve mental “tools,” including observation, imaging, abstraction, pattern recognition, analogy, bodily thinking, empathy (or role-playing), spatial thinking, modeling, playing, transformation, and synthesis [17]. These “mental tools” are critical for scientific creativity. For example, mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot attributed his imagination to his outstanding mapping and hand-drawing abilities, noting: “I switch daily between mathematics and art… I always start with a quick sketch, and soon I feel something is missing, aesthetically incomplete. It improves after some simple projections or inversions concerning a circle. After several transformations like this, almost every shape becomes more harmonious…” [18]. Similarly, neurohistologist Santiago Ramón y Cajal pointed out that the first condition for becoming a microscopist is knowing how to see and interpret what one sees; an artist and a microscopist cannot be separated [19]. Physicist Michael Faraday, who first discovered electromagnetic induction and created the world’s first AC generator, providing light for the world, based his groundbreaking invention on key breakthroughs in electric fields. Notably, “magnetic field lines” in electric fields are invisible to the naked eye, and even instruments cannot detect them. However, through artistic imagination, he “saw” this natural law clearly. Thus, artistic thinking plays a crucial and irreplaceable role in the “moment” of inspiration during scientific discovery.
2. Enhancement of Motor Skills and “Kinesthetic” Thinking: Art education encourages nonlinear thinking and creative problem-solving, helping students break free from traditional fixed thinking models and adopt more open and innovative approaches. Nobel Prize-winning chemist John E. Sulston attributed his success to his “knowledge of the hand,” considering himself a craftsman, creator, and practitioner [20]. Similarly, Leonardo da Vinci, best known for his artworks like *Mona Lisa* and *The Last Supper*, was also a scientist and inventor. His notebooks are filled with detailed studies of human anatomy, animals, plants, and flying machines. His profound understanding of human anatomy, facilitated by his excellent drawing skills, significantly contributed to his scientific innovations. *Mona Lisa* is renowned for her “eternal smile” because of Leonardo’s application of scientific knowledge of facial anatomy, and *The Last Supper* is grand and compositionally stable due to his clever use of the principles of perspective. Both masterpieces are exemplars of the combination of science and art.
3. Ability to Use Imagination and Analogy: The combination of art and science education enables students to find solutions to complex systems or abstract problems through imagination and analogy. Analogy involves identifying functional or procedural similarities in physically different entities. Without imagination, it is challenging to conduct analogy and achieve results. Art education often helps students “think outside the box” in novel and productive ways, fostering a broad range of analogy sources. For example, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck conceived the basic concept of quantum atoms by imagining electrons as vibrating strings rotating around the nucleus, inspired by the vibrating strings of musical instruments. These standing waves’ energy was confined in “packages” or “quanta.” Interestingly, Planck was an avid musician and an excellent pianist; he emphasized in his autobiography that a vivid intuitive imagination is essential for scientists in their intellectual exploration, as these creative ideas cannot be generated deductively but only through the imaginative power of artistic creation [21].
4. Enhancement of Emotional Empowerment and Social Skills: The integration of science and art not only enhances technical and rational thinking abilities but also strengthens emotional empowerment, emotional intelligence, aesthetic intelligence, and social skills. Through art and aesthetic education, students can better understand and express emotions, cultivate empathy—understanding others from their perspective—and master broader social interaction skills. Meanwhile, the teamwork spirit and problem-solving skills formed through science education combined with the creativity and leap-thinking fostered through art education enable students to work more efficiently and harmoniously in future workplace environments, enhancing their adaptability and influence in workplace and societal changes. This comprehensive education model helps students better understand and navigate interpersonal relationships and social changes in complex social structures, laying a solid foundation for their professional careers and personal development.
5. Artistic Activities Stimulate Creativity and Innovation: Artistic activities are driven by emotions and sensibility, and they stimulate creative thinking by providing space for free expression and emotions, generating innovative ideas in scientific research and technological development. Nobel Prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann pointed out that both artists and scientists undergo the same creative process [22]. Physicist and sculptor Robert R. Wilson described how he treated scientific discoveries as a process akin to making sculptures while designing accelerators. He felt that the beauty of theory and the beauty of scientific instruments were interconnected; scientific instruments should also be beautiful [23]. In the process of innovation and creation, the most important aspect is “incubation.” Although it is impossible to quickly find effective solutions to problems in the innovation process, “thought fermentation” is indeed crucial. When the beauty is perceived in a moment during “thought fermentation,” a pattern is discovered. Therefore, through continuous artistic practice and creative thinking, students can stimulate “nonlinear” and “unconventional” innovative thinking modes, which are essential for pushing the boundaries of science and technological innovation.
In conclusion, the integration of science and art not only enriches the thinking methods and perspectives of academic fields but also greatly promotes the cultivation of students’ innovation abilities. By combining art education with science education, we can cultivate students who are well-rounded in knowledge, rich in imagination, broad in vision, and highly adaptable. Such students are believed to be able to demonstrate unique creativity and problem-solving skills in their future careers, playing vital roles in national innovation development and technological revitalization.
III. Stimulating Creativity: Pursuing High-Quality Talent Development
In the context of intensifying international competition and conflicts today, cultivating high-quality talent with innovative and creative thinking is crucial for national revitalization and technological progress. President Xi Jinping emphasized at the National Education Conference in 2018 that we must adhere to the principle of “comprehensive development in morality, intellect, physique, aesthetics, and labor,” fully cultivating socialist builders and successors [24]. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to cultivate well-rounded talent proficient in science and technology and with humanistic cultivation and aesthetic appreciation.
The current education model often relies on “standardized” tests (such as IQ tests) to select and cultivate top talent. However, numerous studies and cases have shown that there is almost no direct correlation between creativity and pure intelligence. The “Terman Genetic Study of Genius,” initiated by Stanford University psychologist Lewis Terman in the 1920s, is particularly well-known. Terman conducted a long-term follow-up study of a group of youth with extraordinarily high IQs, attempting to explore the relationship between IQ, creativity, success, and life achievements. The results were surprising: high IQ alone did not necessarily predict outstanding creativity or life achievements. In fact, several distinguished individuals, including four Nobel Prize winners—Luis Walter Alvarez, William Shockley, Richard Feynman, and James Watson—were not accepted for participation in the study because their IQs did not meet the average admission standard set by the study (151). In the control group, participants with higher IQs showed no significant advantage in career success or honors. Terman’s research challenged traditional notions, revealing that IQ is neither the only nor the best indicator for measuring creativity and success, providing profound insights for modern higher education in pursuing high-quality talent development.
Cultivating top-notch innovative talent requires the aid of art education, which is the “extra prerequisite” for developing top talent. The internationally renowned neuroanatomist and Nobel Prize winner in Physiology or Medicine, Santiago Ramón y Cajal, believed that the difference between great scientists and ordinary people lies in their “rich and restless imagination, devoting energy to literature, art, philosophy, and all spiritual and physical amusements. Observers from afar may think they are dispersing and consuming energy, but in reality, they are channeling and enhancing energy… A researcher should have… an artistic temperament that drives him to seek and admire the quantity, beauty, and harmony of things” [25]. Therefore, cultivating high-quality talent requires a clever integration of science and art education to stimulate their creativity.
Integrating science and art to cultivate high-quality talent requires a series of specific educational strategies and methods, which can be divided into three main aspects:
1. Promoting Students’ Visual Perception Abilities and Enhancing “Visual Thinking”: Visual arts are considered one of the most effective ways to cultivate mental tools because they can promote the development of students’ observation, pattern recognition, spatial imagination, geometric thinking, memory, and other abilities. These courses may involve specific training in visual thinking, including computer-aided design, painting, drawing (or mapping), sculpture, etc. [26]. Some scholars have found that drawing, compared to using computer-aided design programs, better stimulates the fluency of ideas [27], while visualization and modeling skills can also be enhanced through art courses, including sculpture and drawing classes [28]. Many medical students, after becoming doctors and nurses, have proven to benefit from drawing courses [29]. Therefore, integrating science and art can enrich students’ “visual thinking,” enhancing the key cognitive abilities related to spatial imagination and multidimensional thinking required in scientific research and technological innovation, enabling them to handle complex scientific problems more effectively and propose creative solutions.
2. Strengthening Students’ Auditory Perception Abilities and Enhancing “Auditory Observation”: A paper by American medical educators Salvatore Mangione and Linda Z. Nieman, published in 1999, explored heart auscultation skills among internal medicine and family medicine interns. In an experiment involving 868 participants, one of the findings was that trainees who played musical instruments had significantly better auscultation skills than those who did not [30]. In his autobiography and work notes, Albert Einstein often described immersing himself in the beauty of violin playing to perceive spaces and realms that scientific reasoning processes could not reach when pondering scientific theories [31]. In 2008, scholars like John Jonides conducted an enlightening experiment exploring the impact of music on college students’ memory. The results showed that students who had received years of music training performed significantly better in remembering words than those who had not received such training. This suggests that students with music training had acquired more effective strategies and habits for learning and retaining information (such as repeated practice). This improvement may explain the results shown by many other studies that students who participate in music or other art activities for a long time often perform better in academic scores and standardized test scores than those who do not participate in these activities [32]. Therefore, incorporating music courses into science education is crucial for enhancing students’ auditory observation abilities and innovative thinking. Music training not only enhances sensitivity to sounds but also helps students discover new patterns and ways to solve problems in scientific reasoning, possibly related to stimulating talents in the right brain.
3. Enhancing Students’ Physical Perception Abilities and Strengthening “Kinesthetic Thinking”: Dance courses can improve students’ physical coordination, spatial perception, sense of rhythm, and movement memory abilities. Research by Scott Grafton and Emily Cross shows that dance training enhances kinesthetic thinking and physical perception by activating brain regions associated with observing and executing actions, especially the premotor and parietal areas. These areas are active both when observing and practicing, demonstrating neural integration between observation and execution. Notably, the action observation network responds more strongly to trained dance sequences, reinforcing the effectiveness of learning through observation. Early dance exposure enhances neural connections between observation and practice, helping improve training consistency. Therefore, incorporating dance courses into science education can train students’ “kinesthetic thinking.” Students learn to control and perceive their bodies and better understand complex concepts related to space and time. Dance training helps students develop creative problem-solving skills in practice, and this physical learning experience is also valuable for scientific research and technological innovation.
The internationally renowned psychobiologist and Nobel Prize winner Roger W. Sperry’s research revealed that the left and right hemispheres of the brain have different functions: the left brain dominates logic and analysis, suitable for scientific research; the right brain is responsible for creativity and imagination, related to artistic creation [33]. The deeds of many top scientists in history have demonstrated that the talent for using the right hemisphere of the brain can provide inspiration and innovation sparks for scientific research, such as physicists Isaac Newton and Max Planck, as well as China’s “Two Bombs, One Satellite” father Qian Xuesen, geophysicist Li Shiguang, and Nobel Prize winner Lee Tsung-Dao. They not only achieved extraordinary success in science but also proved that the combination of science and art is essential for promoting innovative thinking and capabilities.
In reality, scientific thinking and artistic thinking share many common characteristics, but each has its unique nature. Scientific thinking aims to pursue truth, often using rational and logical thinking for judgment and analysis, and focuses more on tangible, detectable experimental evidence. In contrast, artistic thinking aims to pursue beauty, often employing perceptual, imaginative, and non-logical thinking for perception and appreciation, emphasizing imagination and the sensory impressions gained from jump-thinking and abstract thinking. Although the ways of scientific thinking and artistic thinking differ, their ultimate goals are the same: to discover and create beauty. Science educates people to pursue truth, guiding students to explore the laws of nature continuously; humanities educate people to pursue goodness, making students understand caring and have a sense of responsibility toward their country; art educates people to pursue perfection, allowing students to appreciate and perceive the beauty of the universe. If any element of truth, goodness, and beauty is missing, the learning process cannot be considered complete.
Therefore,in cultivating high-quality talent, we should skillfully integrate science and art education to comprehensively develop students’ “visual thinking” abilities, “auditory observation” abilities, and “kinesthetic thinking” abilities while stimulating their cross-innovation abilities in scientific exploration and artistic creation. Through this interdisciplinary education model, students can find a balance between scientific rigor and artistic creativity, so when facing complex problems, they can not only use scientific methods for analysis and resolution but also open up new thinking paths and innovative solutions through the artistic perspective. This combination of science and art enriches students’ learning experiences and provides them with a broader perspective, enabling them to demonstrate unique development and innovation capabilities in global competition.
IV. Conclusion
The fundamental purpose of education goes beyond mere knowledge transmission; the key to education lies in teaching students how to learn and think and, more importantly, in understanding how to apply what they have learned. Therefore, cultivating students’ abilities is crucial. As Albert Einstein articulated: “The value of education… is not in learning many known facts, but in training your mind to think about things that are not taught in textbooks.” The core mission of higher education is to stimulate students’ potential by guiding them to explore unknown fields, thereby cultivating future social builders with innovation, social responsibility, and a global vision. The examples and analyses presented above fully demonstrate the importance and long-term strategic significance of strengthening interdisciplinary learning and stimulating students’ creativity while laying a solid foundation of knowledge in broadening pathways and cultivating high-quality talent. Only by breaking traditional disciplinary boundaries and providing students with diversified learning and innovation practice platforms can their potential be fully realized, allowing them to demonstrate exceptional innovation capabilities and problem-solving wisdom when facing the complex challenges of future society and actively participating in national construction.
References
[1] Guangming Online. (2022, October 6). Xi Jinping emphasizes that science and technology are the primary productive forces, talent is the primary resource, and innovation is the primary driving force. Retrieved March 13, 2024, from https://m.gmw.cn/baijia/2022-10/16/36090950.html
[2] Jiang, L. (2007). On the reform of university teaching models based on the cultivation of innovative talent. *Modern University Education, 2007*(5), 102-105.
[3] Lu, Z. (2016). Research on problems and countermeasures in the implementation of undergraduate entrepreneurship and innovation education. *Education Review, 2016*(3), 89-92.
[4] Yu, H. (2019). The model and value of college students’ innovative behavior: Based on grounded theory research on highly innovative undergraduate elite talent. *Higher Education Research, 2019*(09), 68-77.
[5] Yue, X. (2004). My views on the cultivation of college students’ innovation ability. *Higher Education Research, 2004*(01), 84-91.
[6] Tang, A. (2005). On the research of problems in higher education. *Higher Education Research, 2005*(05), 67-70.
[7] Lin, Y., & Zeng, C. (2016). Analysis and construction of innovation and entrepreneurship education in universities. *Heilongjiang Higher Education Research, 2016*(05), 108-110.
[8] Gao, X. (2000). Reform university teaching models to cultivate a large number of innovative talent. *Higher Education Research, 2000*(6), 45-47.
[9] Zhong, B., & Gong, J. (2022). Evaluation of students’ innovation ability: Core elements, problems, and prospects—A systematic review based on Chinese core journal papers. *China Distance Education, 2022*(9), 34-68.
[10] State Council. (2021, June 3). Notice of the State Council on printing and distributing the outline of the National Action Plan for Scientific Literacy (2021-2035). Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2021-06/25/content_5620813.htm?eqid=accef5dc0000662b00000006645b103d
[11] Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. *Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology, 41*(4), 47-56.
[12] Biggs, J., Tang, C., & Kennedy, G. (2022). *Teaching for quality learning at university* (5th ed.). UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
[13] Kolb, D. A. (2014). *Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development*. London: FT Press.
[14] Zhang, F. (Ed.). (2009). *Annotations on “Tianxia” chapter of Zhuangzi in four commentaries*. Beijing: Huaxia Publishing House.
[15] Séginger, G. (2016, April 20). Louis Bouilhet et Flaubert. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from https://hal.science/hal-01305084/document
[16] Public Law. (2004, December 3). *Goals 2000: Educate America Act*. Retrieved February 25, 2024, from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-10707/pdf/COMPS-10707.pdf
[17] Root-Bernstein, R. S., & Root-Bernstein, M. (2001). *Sparks of genius: The thirteen thinking tools of the world’s most creative people*. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
[18] Mandelbrot, B. B. (2012). *The fractalist: Memoir of a scientific maverick*. New York: Pantheon Books.
[19] DeFelipe, J., & Jones, E. G. (1992). Santiago Ramón y Cajal and methods in neurohistology. *Trends in Neuroscience (TINS), 15*(7), 237-246.
[20] The Nobel Prize. (2002, April 21). John E. Sulston biographical. Retrieved April 21, 2024, from https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2002/sulston/facts/
[21] Planck, M. (1949). *Scientific autobiography and other papers* (F. Gaynor, Trans.). New York: Philosophical Library.
[22] Weisburd, S. (1987). The spark: Personal testimonials of creativity. *Science News, 132*, 298-300.
[23] Wilson, R. R. (1992). *Starting Fermilab*. Washington: Universities Research Association.
[24] People’s Daily Online. (2018, September 11). Adhering to the path of socialist education development with Chinese characteristics: Cultivating socialist builders and successors with comprehensive development in morality, intellect, physique, aesthetics, and labor. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from http://politics.people.com.cn/n1/2018/0911/c1024-30284697.html
[25] Ramón y Cajal, S. (1951). *Precepts and counsels on scientific investigation: Stimulants of the spirit* (J. M. Sanchez-Perez, Trans.). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association.
[26] Uttal, D. H., & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why, and how? In B. Ross (Ed.), *Psychology of learning and motivation* (Vol. 57, pp. 147-181). Oxford: Academic Press.
[27] Won, P.-H. (2001). The comparison between visual thinking using computer and conventional media in the concept generation stages of design. *Automation in Construction, 10*, 319-325.
[28] Halpine, S. (2004). Introducing molecular visualization to primary schools in California: The STArt! teaching science through art program. *Journal of Chemical Education, 81*(10), 1431-1436.
[29] Grossman, S., Deupi, J., & Leitao, K. (2014). Seeing the forest and the trees: Increasing nurse practitioner students’ observational and mindfulness skills. *Creative Nursing, 20*(1), 67-72.
[30] Mangione, S., & Nieman, L. Z. (1999). Pulmonary auscultatory skills during training in internal medicine and family practice. *American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 159*(4), 1119-1124.
[31] Florides, P. S. (1979). Einstein—His life and work. *Hermathena, 1979*(127), 7-32.
[32] Jonides, J. (2008). *Learning, arts, and the brain: The Dana Consortium report on arts and cognition*. New York/Washington, D.C.: Dana Press.
[33] Sperry, R. W. (1977). Forebrain commissurotomy and conscious awareness. *Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 2*(2), 101-126.