Advertisement

SOUTH KOREAN AND THE US SECONDARY SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS OF CREATIVITY AND TEACHING FOR CREATIVITY

  • Miyoung HongEmail author
  • Nam-Hwa Kang
Article

ABSTRACT

This study examined science teachers’ conceptions of creativity in science education, pedagogical ideas, and contextual factors perceived as constraints on teaching for creativity and any differences in the conceptions of teachers from South Korea and the United States. Participants in the study consisted of 44 South Korean and 21 US secondary science teachers. Data was collected from open-ended and Likert-type questionnaires. Results indicated that each individual teacher’s conception was considerably limited, but the teachers’ conceptions of creativity as a whole group were consistent with the literature. In terms of teaching methods for creativity, the teachers commonly emphasized problem-based or project-based inquiry which was consistent with the literature. The South Korean teachers tended to consider ethics as a more important criterion for judging creativity than the US teachers and emphasized providing thinking opportunity for fostering creativity, while the US teachers emphasized environmental or emotional support. Possible sources of these differences were discussed. The commonly mentioned constraints included pressure of content coverage for high-stakes tests, difficulties in assessing creativity, and class size. Suggestions for professional development of teachers and further research questions were made based on the findings.

KEY WORDS

conceptions of creativity science teachers teaching for creativity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. Available at http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online.Google Scholar
  2. Baer, J. & Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Creativity research in English-speaking countries. In J. C. K. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 10–38). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Ideational code-switching: Walking the talk about supporting student creativity in the classroom. Roeper Review, 29, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bleakley, A. (2004). ‘Your creativity or mine?’ A typology of creativities in higher education and the value of a pluralistic approach. Teaching in Higher Education, 9, 463–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boden, M. A. (1991). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  6. Bohm, D. (1998). On creativity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Choe, I. S. (2006). Creativity—A sudden rising star in Korea. In J. C. K. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 395–420). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Craft, A. (2000). Creativity across the primary curriculum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Craft, A. (2003). The limitation to creativity in education: Dilemmas for the educators. British Journal of Educational Studies, 51, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cropley, A. J. (2001). Creatively in education & learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Eisenhart, M., Shrum, J., Harding, J. & Cuthbert, A. (1988). Teacher beliefs: Definitions, findings, and directions. Educational Policy, 2(1), 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gibson, H. (2005). What creativity isn’t: The presumptions of instrumental and individual justifications for creativity in education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53, 148–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gow, G. (2000). Understanding and teaching creativity. Tech Direction, 59(6), 32–34.Google Scholar
  15. Hashweh, M. Z. (1996). Effects of science teachers’ epistemological beliefs in teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson, P. W. & Messick, S. (1967). The person, the product, and the response: Conceptual problems in the assessment of creativity. In J. Kagan (Ed.), Creativity and learning (pp. 1–19). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  17. Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Creativity. Change, 39(4), 55–60.Google Scholar
  18. Kim, K. H. (2005). Learning from each other: Creativity in East Asian and American education. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kind, P. M. & Kind, V. (2007). Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Studies in Science Education, 43, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kwang, N. A. & Smith, I. (2004). The paradox of promoting creativity in Asian classroom: An empirical investigation. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 130, 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lim, W. & Plucker, J. A. (2001). Creativity through a lens of social responsibility: Implicit theories of creativity with Korean samples. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35, 115–130.Google Scholar
  22. Lubart, T. I. (1990). Creativity and cross-cultural variation. International Journal of Psychology, 25, 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lubart, T. I. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 339–350). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S. & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Science Report: Findings from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grade. Chestnut: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
  25. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Education & Human Resources Development of Korea (2007). National science curriculum. Retrieved December 2, 2007, from http://cutis.moe.go.kr/edu/edu-pro/
  27. National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (1999). All our futures: Creativity, culture and education. London: DFEE.Google Scholar
  28. National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  29. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ng, A. K. & Smith, I. (2004). The paradox of promoting creativity in Asian classroom: An empirical investigation. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 130, 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nickerson, R. S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 392–430). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners thinking differently and why. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  33. Niu, W. (2006). Development of creativity research in Chinese societies: A comparison of Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. In J. C. K. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 374–394). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Nott, M. & Wellington, J. (1995). Critical incidents in the science classroom and the nature of science. School Science Review, 76(276), 41–46.Google Scholar
  35. Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R. & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 692–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.Google Scholar
  37. Park, S., Lee, S., Oliver, J. S. & Crammond, B. (2006). Changes in Korean science teachers’ perception of creativity and science teaching after participating in an overseas professional development program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research method. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A. & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Plucker, J. A. & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 35–61). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Rickards, T. (1999). Creativity and the management of change. Massachusetts: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  42. Rubenstein, D. J. (2000). Stimulating children’s creativity and curiosity: Does content and medium matter? Journal of Creative Behavior, 34, 1–17.Google Scholar
  43. Runco, M. A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ruzgis, P. & Grigorenko, E. L. (1994). Cultural meaning systems, intelligence, and personality. In R. J. Sternberg & P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Personality and intelligence (pp. 248–270). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Explaining creativity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Starko, A. J. (2005). Creativity in the classroom. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Introduction. In J. C. K. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 1–9). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Cultural dimensions of giftedness and talent. Roeper Review, 29, 160–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tan, A. G. & Law, L. C. (2004). Creativity for teachers. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Academic.Google Scholar
  51. Torrance, E. P. (1967). Scientific views of creativity and factors affecting its growth. In J. Kagan (Ed.), Creativity and learning (pp. 73–91). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  52. Urban, K. K. (1995). Creativity: A component approach model. Paper presented at the World Conference on the Education for the Gifted and Talented, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  53. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT. (Translated, newly revised, and edited by A. Kozulin)Google Scholar
  54. White, R. T. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. New York: Falmer.Google Scholar
  55. Yoo, Y. & Sohn, Y. (2001). A study on the analysis of actual conditions and reform measures in light of applying the 7th national curriculum. Journal of Science Education Kyungpook National University, 25, 11–30.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea Institute for Curriculum and EvaluationSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Science and Mathematics EducationOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations