Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Chapter 2 UNDERSTANDING CREATIVITY
INTRODUCTION
Creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon that requires a multitude of approaches in order to be understood. A variety of factors such as individual, situational, social and cultural all work together to determine a creative outcome. Today there is a greater emphasis placed on creativity by society than ever before. Seen as a unique human quality that differentiates human beings from the animal kingdom, the role and value of creativity is a powerful force in social transformation and economic growth in a rapidly changing and competitive society. The striving towards, and achieving of, new goals, through creative innovation is accordingly a must in order for organizations to ensure survival and avoid the risk of failure in the 21st century (Andriopoulos & Dawson 2009:24; Gundry 2007:1; Kaufman & Baer 2006:164; Kaufman & Sternberg 2010: xiii & 49; Matlin 2009:385; Weisberg 2006:70; Ward & Kolymyts 2010:93; Zeng, Proctor & Slavendy 2011:24).
What is creativity and how can it be defined? According to Kaufman & Sternberg (2010: xiii), creativity can refer to a person, a process, a place or a product. It can be found in geniuses and in young children. It has been studied by psychologists, economists and all types of scholars from Aristotle to Einstein. After more than six decades of intensive research, there is still debate on how creativity can be measured, improved and utilized. The intangible nature of creativity makes it difficult to define and has resulted in a number of definitions. Many theorists and researchers do, however, agree on, and include, components of novelty or originality in their definitions (Andriopoulos & Dawson 2009:24; Kaufman & Baer 2006:164; Kaufman & Sternberg 2006:2; Kaufman & Sternberg 2010:xiii; Matlin 2009:385; Runco 2007: ix; Weisberg 2006:70). A concise definition that encapsulates the essence of creativity for the purpose of this research is cited by Sternberg (1999: xiii) in the first handbook of creativity to be published. He defines creativity as “… the ability to produce work that is both novel (i.e. original, unexpected) and appropriate (i.e. useful, adaptive concerning task constraints)”. Most definitions of creativity comprise three elements, first that the creative idea must represent something new, innovative or different. Secondly, that the creative ideas must be of good quality and thirdly, that the creative response must be appropriate to the task at hand. A creative response is thus seen to be novel, good and relevant (Kaufman & Sternberg 2010: xiii).
In the past two decades, the notion of creativity in education has gained increasing universal significance spanning numerous cultures around the world. Much work has been undertaken by policymakers, practitioners and researchers from their own particular perspectives that range from conceptual understanding to classroom practicalities (Beghetto 2010:449; Craft, Cremin & Burnard 2008: xix). Partly, as a response to rapid social, technological, economic and environmental change, research conducted in the United Kingdom has highlighted the concept of creativity as being within the reach of all human beings across a wide spectrum (Craft & Jeffrey 2008:577). Creativity has become embedded in the Foundation Stage Curriculum and the National Curriculum for schools in England (Craft 2009:5). Countries that have endorsed the creativity initiative realize the importance of developing their students’ creative potential as both a good investment in their own future and that of their country (Craft & Jeffrey 2008:577).
In South Africa, the Department of Basic Education endorses the importance of developing learners’ creative potential. One of the main aims of the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) states that it aims to produce learners who are able to “identify and solve problems and make decisions using critical and creative thinking” (Department of Basic Education 2011d:9).
Whilst many approaches to the studying of creativity have been devised by theorists in an attempt to understand its diversity, complexity in interdisciplinary nature, this chapter will highlight and broadly review the relevant developments in creativity research as they may be deemed appropriate in the education of young children. A more in-depth review of the cognitive theory of creativity with particular reference to Maltin’s cognitive theory of problem-solving and creativity, will also be used as a springboard for researching creativity in technology education in chapter three.
A BRIEF HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CREATIVITY RESEARCH
According to Weisberg (2006:90), an interest in the origin of new ideas dates back many thousands of years, when it had been believed that truly novel ideas producing creative leaps forward must have come from extraordinary sources. Creative ideas seen to be gifts from the Gods originated with the Greeks and attracted scholars such as Plato and Aristotle. In more recent times, beliefs about the sources for creative ideas has moved away from the supernatural to the internal processes of thought, i.e. divergent thinking, unconscious thinking, psychopathological thinking and intuitive leaps of insight. It is interesting to note that the Freudian conception of the unconscious has also been applied to creativity (Herbert 2010:11 & 31; Weisberg 2006: 92).
In the late nineteenth century, a different conception of the role of the unconscious thinking in creativity was proposed by Poincaré (1854-1912), a world-renowned mathematician and scientist who centred on the phenomena of illumination and incubation in unconscious thinking. According to his theory, illumination is described as a sudden appearance in consciousness of a creative idea or solution when one has not consciously dwelled on the matter. Incubation is described as unconscious thinking about the problem while consciously thinking about something else (Weisberg 2006: 93-94). Elaborating on Poincaré’s theory, is Wallas’s (1926) well-known 4 stage model of creativity that includes the processes of preparation, incubation, illumination and verification (Weisberg 2006:94 & 397-398). These stages are still referred to in many modern theories of creativity today and will be used in this research to develop a creativity assessment model for technology.
According to Runco and Albert (2010:3), the field of creativity as it exists today emerged mainly as a result of the pioneering efforts of American Psychologists, J.P. Guilford (1950) and E. Paul Torrance (1962). Both theorists concentrated on the notion of divergent thinking, which is described as breaking away from past, i.e. diverging from the old to produce novel ideas and multiple ideas (Weisberg 2006:95-96), as a basis for defining creativity. These theorists devised psychometric tests that aimed to assess this type of thinking using the traditional indices of fluency, originality, flexibility and elaboration (Runco 2010:414; Sternberg 2006:87). Torrance’s contribution to creativity research is still widely recognized today. Based on the original Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) which produced scores in the original areas of fluency (how many different responses have been produced, flexibility (how many categories of responses were produced), originality (how novel and unique the responses were) and elaboration (how detailed and developed they were) (Kaufman & Sternberg 2007: 56-57), the TTCT tests, although more streamlined (Plucker & Makel 2010:53), are still used to assess creative talent today (Sternberg 2006:87). Although much criticism has been levelled at the reliability and practical value of the traditional divergent testing instrument, the practical implications of the research results highlight the value of divergent thinking and underscore the important role that adults such as parents and teachers should play in encouraging, modelling, valuing the divergent thinking of their children and providing opportunities for its practice (Runco, Millar, Selcuk & Cramond 2010:361-368).
THEORIES OF CREATIVITY
Since the pioneering efforts on divergent through production, the study of creativity has generated many new approaches (Kozbelt, Beghetto & Runco 2010:20). There is much to be learned about creativity both by looking back on what has been researched before, and by looking forward with new research and theories that are being developed (Runco & Albert 2010:3).
A comparative review of major contemporary theories of creativity reveals a multitude of theoretical perspectives with different assumptions and methods that operate at different levels of analysis (Kozbelt, Beghetto & Runco 2010:20-21). Due to the nature of this study it is not possible to discuss all the different theories. Only selected theories deemed relevant to this study will be discussed.
Classifying and Comparing Theories: Type and Orientations
In an attempt to review the diverse and complex theories of creativity in order to characterize their commonalties whilst recognizing their important differences, Kozbelt, Beghetto & Runco (2010:20-47) identify ten major categories of theories, some of which are known in creativity literature and some of which are not. It is acknowledged that there is as much within-category variation in the type of theories as there is difference between the different categories. An example of within- category variation pertains to the orientation of the theory, i.e. more scientific versus more metaphorical. Scientifically oriented theories have the underlying goal of mapping empirical reality of creative phenomena of aspiring to meet traditional scientific standards in the search for objective truths that have universal applicability, whilst in contrast, the more metaphorical oriented theories offer an alternative and more speculative stance. They focus on provoking new understanding, possibilities and hypothetical modes of what if thinking that relate more to everyday life (Kozbelt, Beghetto & Runco 2010:21-22). While it is beyond the scope of this research to explore all theories fully, a brief review of those theories that are seen to encapsulate the main distinguishing features of creativity in terms of their relevance to education and the teaching of technology in the Foundation Phase will be discussed.
Guilford’s Theory (1950)
According to Weisberg (2006:464) the core of the creative thought process is arrived at once the person begins to think about the problem or challenge at hand and consciously works towards the goal of solving it. In this context, he makes reference to Guilford (1950) who focused on the generation of ideas, i.e. the more ideas generated, the greater the chance of producing a creative and useful outcome. According to this traditional theory, the following indices typify the creative thinker and thinking processes as follows:
a) Fluency
A fluent thinker is described as having the capacity to produce multiple ideas in a certain period of time that are relevant to a particular situation (Weisberg 2006: 464).
b) Flexibility
A creative thinker will exercise flexibility and will break away from habitual ways of thinking, seek new ways of thinking and come up with novel ideas (Weisberg 2006: 464).
c) Originality
A creative thinker will produce original ideas not previously perceived by many other people. In Guildford’s view, a person who produces a number of original ideas is likely to produce creative solutions to problems.
d) Elaboration
Guilford took these measures of fluency, flexibility and originality and combined them into divergent thinking, a mode of thinking which, in his view, plays a critical role in the creative process where the person produces ideas that diverge from the more usual.
CHAPTER ONE PROBLEM FORMULATION, AIMS AND RESEARCH DESIGN
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 CREATIVITY AND TECHNOLOGY
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1.5 RESEARCH DESIGN
1.6 PRECEDENTS IN THE STUDY/PARALLEL WORK IN THE PROPOSED AREA OF STUDY
1.7 ELUCIDATION OF CONCEPTS
1.8 CHAPTER DIVISIONS
1.9 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER TWO UNDERSTANDING CREATIVITY
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 A BRIEF HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CREATIVITY RESEARCH
2.3 THEORIES OF CREATIVITY
2.4 PROBLEM-SOLVING AND CREATIVITY ACCORDING TO MATLIN
2.5 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER THREE UNDERSTANDING TECHNOLOGY IN THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 THE ORIGINS AND DEVELOPING PHILOSOPHY OF TECHNOLOGY
3.3 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION CURRICULA
3.4 THE NATURE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN SCHOOL CURRICULUM
3.5 TECHNOLOGY AND THE IMPORTANCE OF DESIGN
3.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 A THEORETICAL BASIS FOR QUALITIATIVE RESEARCH
4.3 THE RESEARCH DESIGN
4.4 DATA COLLECTION
4.5 DATA ANALYSIS
4.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER FIVE PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 THE NATURE OF ASSESSMENT IN TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVITY
5.3 A SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA
5.4 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER SIX SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 OVERVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATION
6.3 SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
6.4 ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS: ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS
6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
6.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
6.7 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE STUDY
6.8 CONCLUSION
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
