This article addresses educational challenges posed by the future of work, examining “21st century skills”, their conception, assessment, and valorization. It focuses in particular on key soft skill competencies known as the “4Cs”: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In a section on each C, we provide an overview of assessment at the level of individual performance, before focusing on the less common assessment of systemic support for the development of the 4Cs that can be measured at the institutional level (i.e., in schools, universities, professional training programs, etc.). We then present the process of official assessment and certification known as “labelization”, suggesting it as a solution both for establishing a publicly trusted assessment of the 4Cs and for promoting their cultural valorization. Next, two variations of the “International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Skills Framework” are presented. The first of these comprehensive systems allows for the assessment and labelization of the extent to which development of the 4Cs is supported by a formal educational program or institution. The second assesses informal educational or training experiences, such as playing a game. We discuss the overlap between the 4Cs and the challenges of teaching and institutionalizing them, both of which may be assisted by adopting a dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs—playfully entitled “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”—for pedagogical and policy-promotion purposes. We conclude by briefly discussing opportunities presented by future research and new technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

With the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), the field of creativity faces new opportunities and challenges. This manifesto explores several scenarios of human–machine collaboration on creative tasks and proposes “fundamental laws of generative AI” to reinforce the responsible and ethical use of AI in the creativity field. Four scenarios are proposed and discussed: “Co‐Cre‐AI‐tion,” “Organic,” “Plagiarism 3.0,” and “Shut down,” each illustrating different possible futures based on the collaboration between humans and machines. In addition, we have incorporated an AI‐generated manifesto that also highlights important themes, ranging from accessibility and ethics to cultural sensitivity. The fundamental laws proposed aim to prevent AIs from generating harmful content and competing directly with humans. Creating labels and laws are also highlighted to ensure responsible use of AIs. The positive future of creativity and AI lies in a harmonious collaboration that can benefit everyone, potentially leading to a new level of creative productivity respecting ethical considerations and human values during the creative process.

In previous work on so-called pseudo-haptic textures, we investigated the possibility of simulating sensations of texture without haptic devices by using the sole manipulation of the speed of a mouse cursor (a technique called speed technique). In this paper, we describe another technique (called Size technique) to enhance the speed technique and simulate texture sensations by varying the size of the cursor according to the local height of the texture displayed on the computer screen. With the size technique, the user would see an increase (decrease) in cursor size corresponding to a positive (negative) slope of the texture. We have conducted a series of experiments to study and compare the use of both the size and speed technique for simulating simple shapes like bumps and holes. In Experiment 1, our results showed that participants could successfully identify bumps and holes using the size technique alone. Performances obtained with the size technique reached a similar level of accuracy as found previously with the speed technique alone. In Experiment 2, we determined a point of subjective equality between bumps simulated by each technique separately, which suggests that the two techniques provide information that can be perceptually equivalent. In Experiment 3, using paradoxical situations of conflict between the two techniques, we have found that participants' answers were more influenced by the size technique, suggesting a dominance of the size over the speed technique. Furthermore, we have found a mutual reinforcement of the techniques, i.e., when the two techniques were consistently combined, the participants were more efficient in identifying the simulated shapes. In Experiment 4, we further observed the complex interactions between the information associated with the two techniques in the perception and in the decision process related to the accurate identification of bumps and holes. Taken together, our results promote the use of both techniques for the low-cost simulation of texture sensations in applications, such as videogames, internet, and graphical user interfaces.