Advertisement

Interchange

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 129–144 | Cite as

Open Type Tasks as a Tool for Developing Creativity in Secondary School Students

  • Aydar M. Kalimullin
  • Vyacheslav V. Utemov
Article

Abstract

The relevance of the present study is due to the importance of developing creativity which is considered to be the target and the result of education. Modern society demands from individuals non-standard actions and approaches, flexibility, an ability to formulate new ideas and original ways of thinking when solving urgent problems in the course of life. Facilitating the formation of a personality with a strong intellectual potential capable of creative thinking is set as one of the priorities in the federal and regional documents that determine the direction of educational institutions’ development. The generalized cognitive ability to create and solve tasks is the specific feature of intelligence. The tasks are used in the educational process as a means of presentation, consolidation and acquisition of new knowledge. Thus, the aim of our research is to explore whether using the system of open type tasks can be an effective way of improving the level of creativity development in secondary school students. The main methods in this experiment are modeling the system of open type tasks and the system analysis of large samples of experimental data based on assessment according to a two-point scale of four parameters: the optimality of ideas suggested by students, the efficiency of students’ reasoning, the originality of their answers and the degree of the investigation of solutions. Our experimental research made it possible to design new methods of developing creativity in secondary school students.

Keywords

Creativity Development of creativity Open type tasks The criteria of open type tasks assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work has been completed in accordance with the Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth of Kazan Federal University.

References

  1. Altshuller, G. S. (2004). Creativity as an exact science. Petrozavodsk: Scandinavia.Google Scholar
  2. Ammosova, N. V. (2000). Teaching mathematics students of pedagogical faculties to the development of the creative person of the schoolboy when teaching Maths. PhD Thesis. Astrakhan, p 18Google Scholar
  3. Asadullin, R. M., Teregulov, F Sh, Koletvinova, N. D., & Egamberdieva, N. M. (2016). Fundamental and applied education—a new look. IEJME-Mathematics Education, 11(1), 23–33.Google Scholar
  4. Bogoyavlenskaya, D. B. (2002). Psychology of creativity. Moscow: Academy.Google Scholar
  5. Davydov, V. V. (1986). Problems. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  6. Druzhinin, V. N. (1996). Psychodiagnosis general abilities. Moscow: Academy.Google Scholar
  7. Elkonin, D. B. (1989). Selected psychological works. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  8. Episheva, O. B., & Krupich, V. I. (1990). To teach students to learn mathematics: forms of educational activity. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  9. Gavrilova, V. N. (2010). Pedagogical conditions of development of creativity in students of 711 grades of secondary school in the extracurricular activities in Physics. PhD Thesis. Cheboksary.Google Scholar
  10. Gilford, J. (1967) Measurement of creativity. Exploration in creativity. N.Y., P. 34–47.Google Scholar
  11. Guilford, J. (1969). The three sides of the intellect: Psychology of thinking. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
  12. Krutetskiy, V. A. (1986). Psychology: textbook for students. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  13. Makhmutov, M. I. (1975). Problem-solving training: basic questions of the theory. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  14. Matyushkin, A. M. (2003). Thinking, learning, creativity. Moscow: Publishing House of MPSE.Google Scholar
  15. Rubinstein, S. L. (2006). Fundamentals of general psychology. Saint Petersburg: Peter.Google Scholar
  16. Sabirova, E. G., & Zakirova, V. G. (2016). Formation of mathematical terminology in junior school children. IEJME-Mathematics Education, 11(6), 1787–1795.Google Scholar
  17. Strahov, I. V. (1968). The Psychology of creativity. Saratov: Publishing House of Saratov.Google Scholar
  18. Sukhomlinsky, V. A. (1987). Bibliography. Moscow: Rad.Google Scholar
  19. Taylor, C. W. (1988). Various approaches to and definitions of creativity. The nature of creativity (pp. 99–126). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. The Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (2010). Federal state educational standard of general education: Feder. law RF dated December 17, 2010. No 1897-FZ.Google Scholar
  21. Torrance, E.-P. (1964) Guiding creative talent. W.J., p 112.Google Scholar
  22. Tunick, E. E. (1998). Diagnosis of creativity, torrance test, methodological guide.. Saint Petersburg: Imaton.Google Scholar
  23. Unt, I. E. (1990). Characterization and differentiation of training. Moscow: Education.Google Scholar
  24. Wollach, M. A., & Kogan, N. A. (1965). A new look at the creativity— intelligence distinction. Journal of Personality, 33, 76–79.Google Scholar
  25. Zakirova, V. G., & Shilova, Z. V. (2016). Integrative connection of mathematics and economics. IEJME-Mathematics Education, 11(8), 3021–3036.Google Scholar
  26. Zankov, L. V. (1999). Selected pedagogical works. Moscow: Pedagogy House.Google Scholar
  27. Zinovkina, M. M. (1989). Formation of creative technical thinking and engineering skills in students of technical colleges. PhD Thesis. Moscow.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kazan (Volga region) Federal UniversityKazanRussia
  2. 2.Department of EducationVyatka State UniversityKirovRussia

Personalised recommendations