Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity

GÖZEN, GÖKSU

Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity

Göksu GÖZEN (Yrd.Doç.Dr., Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü E-posta: Orcid Number: 0000-0001-9296-4904)

Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi

3 0

Yıl: 2017 Cilt: 50 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 225 - 253 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity

Öz:

Amaç ve Önem Öğrencilerin yaratıcılığını geliştirmenin, düşünebilen ve üretebilen bireyler yetiştirme hedefine ulaşmanın önemli bileşenlerinden biri olduğu göz önünde bulundurularak, bu çalışmada, öğrencilerin yaratıcılığını geliştirmede kılavuz rolüne sahip öğretmen ve öğretim elemanlarının kendi yaratıcılıklarına ilişkin öz-değerlendirmelerinin belirlenmesi ve bu değerlendirmelerin katılımcıların cinsiyeti, ebeveynlerinin eğitim durumu, uzmanlık alanları ve ebeveynlerinden ve geçmiş yıllardaki öğretmenlerinden beklentileri açısından incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem Araştırma verileri, Güzel Sanatlar, Eğitim Bilimleri, Fen Bilimleri ve Sosyal Bilimler alanlarında öğretmen ve öğretim elemanı olarak görev yapan 254 katılımcıdan elde edilmiştir. Veriler, araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen, katılımcıların yaş, cinsiyet, eğitim durumu, uzmanlık alanı, ebeveynlerinin eğitim durumu ve yaratıcılığı öğretebilmenin temelinde yaratıcı düşünebilen bir birey olma gerekliliğinin bulunduğu varsayımından hareketle, yaratıcı olup olmadıklarına ilişkin öz-değerlendirmelerini sorgulayan yedi kapalı uçlu madde ile ebeveynlerinden ve geçmiş yıllardaki öğretmenlerinden, yaratıcılıklarının gelişimini destekleyebilecek nitelikte davranışları açısından beklentilerini sorgulayan iki açık uçlu maddeden oluşan bir anket ile 2015 yılında elde edilmiştir. Katılımcıların öz-değerlendirmelerinin cinsiyet, ebeveynlerinin eğitim durumu ve uzmanlık alanları ile ilişkisi ki-kare (?2) bağımsızlık testi ile incelenmiştir. Katılımcıların, ebeveynlerinden ve geçmiş yıllardaki öğretmenlerinden beklentilerine ilişkin elde edilen nitel veriler ise betimsel analiz tekniği ile çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular Katılımcıların kendi yaratıcılıklarına ilişkin öz-değerlendirmelerinin, cinsiyet (?2(1)=1.640, p>.05) ve uzmanlık alanlarıyla (?2(4) =7.566, p>.05) manidar bir ilişki göstermediği, diğer taraftan babanın eğitim durumu (?2(2)=20.195, öğretmenlerinden beklentileri ile ilişkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. p<.05) ve katılımcıların kendi ebeveynlerinden ve

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları Eğitim, Özel

Yaratıcılığı Öğretmek için Yaratıcı Olmak: Yaratıcılıklarına İlişkin Öğretmenlerin ve Öğretim Elemanlarının Öz-Değerlendirmeleri

Öz:

This study examined teachers’ and instructors’ self-assessments regarding their own creativity which is thought to be helpful in understanding their needs to become more creative teachers to foster creativity in classroom. The data were collected in 2015 through a questionnaire developed by the researcher. Creativityrelated self-assessments of teachers and instructors were analyzed with respect to gender, parents’ educational status, and specialty by using chi-square (2) tests. Descriptive analysis was used to reveal participants’ responses to the open-ended items on their expectations from their teachers and parents in terms of behaviors they had exhibited in the past that could have supported the enhancement of creativity. The findings revealed that self-assessments of creativity are not found to be statistically significant in terms of participants’ specialties and gender; however, as the educational level of fathers’ gets higher, the self-perceptions of creativity tend to be more positive. Considering the qualitative analysis, it was found out that participants expected their parents to encourage them to get engaged in more activities, have freedom of the mind, not impose restrictions, and be respectful and sensitive to children’s interests, talents and differences. The attitudes expected from teachers provided students with the opportunity to think freely, flexibly and originally, not imposing limitations and rules, and adopting an instructional approach that integrates into the learning environment a wide range of materials. Results have been interpreted to arise through the cultural issues and it is suggested that new generations need to be trained in more universal education and training systems to be more creative teachers, where cultural limitations affecting social, emotional and personal development areas are minimized

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları Eğitim, Özel

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

Abraham, A. (2016). Gender and creativity: an overview of psychological and neuroscientific literature. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 10(2), 609-618.
Aljughaiman, A., & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers' conceptions of creativity and creative students. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 39(1), 17- 34.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: SpringerVerlag.
Aslan, N. ve Arslan Cansever, B. (2009). Eğitimde Yaratıcılığın Kullanımına İlişkin Öğretmen Tutumları. TÜBAV Bilim Dergisi, 2(3), 333-340.
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75–105.
Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom. The Open Education Journal, 4(1), 58-66.
Bloom, B. S., & Sosniak, L. A. (1981). Talent development. Educational Leadership, 39(2), 86-94.
Bramwell, G., Reilly, R. C., Lilly, F. R., Kronish, N., & Chennabathni, R. (2011). Creative teachers. Roeper Review, 33(4), 228-238.
Chan, D. W. (2005). Self-perceived creativity, family hardiness, and emotional intelligence of Chinese gifted students in Hong Kong. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 47–56.
Craft, A. (2008) Tensions in creativity and education: Enter wisdom and trusteeship? In A. Craft, H. Gardner, & G. Claxton (Eds.), Creativity, wisdom, and trusteeship: Exploring the role of education (pp. 16-34). London: Sage Ltd.
de Souza Fleith, D. (2000). Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the classroom environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.
Diakidoy, I. A. N., & Kanari, E. (1999). Student teachers’ beliefs about creativity. British Educational Research Journal, 25(2), 225-243.
Dudek, S, Z., &Verreault, R. (1989). The creative thinking and ego functioning of children. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 64-86.
Emir, S., ve Bahar, M. (2003). Yaratıcılıkla İlgili Öğretmen ve Öğrenci Görüşleri. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(1), 91-110.
European Commission (2008). Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the council concerning the European year of creativity and innovation 2009 (COM (2008) 159, final). Brussels: European Commission.
Freitas, L., Lantz, J., & Reed, R. (1991). The creative teacher. Nurse Educator, 16(1), 5-7.
Fryer, M., & Collings, J. A. (1991). Teachers' views about creativity. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(2), 207-219.
Goldsmith, R. E., & Matherly, T. A. (1988). Creativity and self-esteem: A multiple operationalization validity study. Journal of Psychology, 122, 47-56.
Goncalo, J. A. & Staw, B. M. (2006). Individualism-collectivism and group creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(1), 96-109.
Gowan, J. C., & Bruch, C. (1967). What makes a creative person a creative teacher?. Gifted Child Quarterly, 11(3), 157-159.
Hallman, R. J. (1967). Techniques of creative teaching. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1(3), 325-330.
Hardy, J. H., & Gibson, C. (2015). Gender differences in the measurement of creative problem-solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(2), 153-162.
Hargreaves, D. J. (1977). Sex roles in divergent thinking. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47, 25–32.
Henderson, S. J. (2003). “The Correlates of Inventor Motivation, Creativity and Achievement.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. School of Education, Stanford.
Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (1996). Family and human development across cultures: A view from the otherside. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Kampylis, P., Berki, E., & Saariluoma, P. (2009). In-service and prospective teachers’ conceptions of creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(1), 15-29.
Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Self-reported differences in creativity by ethnicity and gender. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), 1065-1082.
Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(4), 785.
Lucas, B. (2001). Creative teaching, teaching creativity and creative learning. In A. Craft, B. Jeffrey, & M. Leibling (Eds.), Creativity in Education, Part One: Creativity and Individual Empowerment (pp. 35-44). London: Continuum.
Morais, M. F., & Azevedo, I. (2011). What is a creative teacher and what is a creative pupil? Perceptions of teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 12, 330-339.
Norton, J. L. (1994). Creative thinking and the reflective practitioner. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 21(2), 139.
OECD (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Students’ skills in tackling real-life problems. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Paguio, L. P., & Hollett, N. (1991). Temperament and creativity of preschoolers. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 975-982.
Poole, M. (1980). Creativity across the curriculum. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305- 310.
Richardson, A. G. (1985). Sex differences in creativity among a sample of Jamaican adolescents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 424-426.
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96.
Savage, J. & Fautley, M. (2007). Creativity in secondary schools. Exeter, UK: Learning Matters.
Schmidt, C. P., & Sinor, J. (1986). An investigation of the relationships among musical audition, musical creativity, and cognitive style. Journal of Research in Music Education, 34(3), 160-172.
Silvia, P. J., Wigert, B., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Assessing creativity with self-report scales: A review and empirical evaluation. The Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 19-34.
Tezci, E. ve Gürol, A. (2003). Oluşturmacı Öğretim Tasarımı ve Yaratıcılık. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 50-55.
Torrance, E. P. (1963). Education and the creative potential. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1965). Rewarding creative behavior: Experiments in classroom creativity. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why to fly? A philosophy of creativity. New Jersey: Norwood Alex.
Yenilmez, K. ve Yolcu, B. (2007). Öğretmen Davranışlarının Yaratıcı Düşünme Becerilerinin Gelişimine Katkısı. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, 95-105.

APA	GÖZEN G (2017). Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. , 225 - 253.
Chicago	GÖZEN GÖKSU Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. (2017): 225 - 253.
MLA	GÖZEN GÖKSU Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. , 2017, ss.225 - 253.
AMA	GÖZEN G Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. . 2017; 225 - 253.
Vancouver	GÖZEN G Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. . 2017; 225 - 253.
IEEE	GÖZEN G "Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity." , ss.225 - 253, 2017.
ISNAD	GÖZEN, GÖKSU. "Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity". (2017), 225-253.

APA	GÖZEN G (2017). Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 50(2), 225 - 253.
Chicago	GÖZEN GÖKSU Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi 50, no.2 (2017): 225 - 253.
MLA	GÖZEN GÖKSU Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, vol.50, no.2, 2017, ss.225 - 253.
AMA	GÖZEN G Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi. 2017; 50(2): 225 - 253.
Vancouver	GÖZEN G Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi. 2017; 50(2): 225 - 253.
IEEE	GÖZEN G "Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity." Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 50, ss.225 - 253, 2017.
ISNAD	GÖZEN, GÖKSU. "Being Creative for Teaching Creativity: Teachers’ and Instructors’ Self-Assessments Regarding Creativity". Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi 50/2 (2017), 225-253.