Journal directory listing - Volume 64 (2019) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【64(3)】September (Special Issue: Creativity, STEAM and Maker Education)

(Special Issue) Revolutionary Drawing: Measuring Adaptive and Innovative Creativity Author: Jon-Chao Hong (Department of Industrial Education/ Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University), Kai-Hsin Tai (Department of Industrial Education/ Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University), Po-Hsi Chen (Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling/ Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University), Shao-Zu Su (Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling/ Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University)

Vol.&No.:Vol. 64, No.3
Date: September 2019
Pages:143-168
DOI:10.6209/JORIES.201909_64(3).0006

Abstract:
Creativity measurement has been the subject of empirical research for decades, with the most prominent notions about the creative process being Torrance’s Tests on Creative Thinking (TTCT). However, those studies focused on divergent thinking measurement. To integrate divergent and convergent thinking measurements, the present study developed a novel image-based creativity measure, named “revolutionary drawing,” in which images replace the conventional response scale, to examine the interrelatedness of creative thinking types: adaptive creativity or innovative creativity. The target sample of this study was 332 teachers who had joined the creative development program, from whom 324 valid data were collected for analysis to test the hypotheses. Our evidence indicated that the two types of creativity were negatively correlated. Moreover, three of the four sub-abilities of innovative creativity, cross-category, multiple-direction, and reverse thinking, were positively inter-correlated. Only originality thinking, the fourth sub-ability of innovative creativity, was not correlated to the other three sub-abilities of innovative creativity. The two sub-abilities of adaptive creativity, diffusive thinking and enriched thinking, were positively correlated. The results of this study revealed that females performed better than males with respect to age differences in innovative creativity. The younger participants performed better than the older participants, but on adaptive creativity, only participants aged under 30 performed better than participants aged 40 and over. The findings of this study suggest that revolutionary drawing could be used for testing innovative creativity and adaptive creativity as cognitive processes for divergent and convergent thinking.

Keywords:adaptive creativity, convergent thinking, creativity assessment, divergent thinking, innovative creativity

《Full Text》 檔名

References:
  1. Abdulla, A. M., & Cramond, B. (2017). After six decades of systematic study of creativity: What do teachers need to know about what it is and how it is measured. Roeper Review, 39(1), 9-23. doi:10.1080/02783193.2016.1247398
  2. Ai, X. (1999). Creativity and academic achievement: An investigation of gender differences. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 329-337. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1204_11
  3. Albert, R. S. (1996). Some reasons why childhood creativity often fails to make it past puberty into the real world. New Directions in Child Development, 72, 43-56. doi:10.1002/cd.23219967205
  4. Althuizen, N., Wierenga, B., & Rossiter, J. (2010). The validity of two brief measures of creative ability. Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 53-61. doi:10.1080/10400410903579577
  5. Baas, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood- creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus? Psychological Bulletin, 134(6), 779-806. doi:10.1037/a0012815
» More
APA FormatHong, J.-C., Tai, K.-H., Chen, P.-H., & Su, S.-Z.(2019). Revolutionary Drawing: Measuring Adaptive and Innovative Creativity. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 64(3), 143-168. doi:10.6209/JORIES.201909_64(3).0006