Teaching for Creativity by Science Teachers in Grades 5–10

  • Nasser S. Al-Abdali
  • Sulaiman M. Al-BalushiEmail author


This classroom observation study explored how science teachers (N = 22) teach for creativity in grades 5–10 in Oman. We designed an observation form with 4 main categories that targeted the instructional practices related to teaching for creativity: questioning strategy, teacher’s responses to students’ ideas, classroom activities to support creativity, and whole-lesson methods that foster creativity. An open-ended survey was also designed to explore participants’ justifications for their instructional decisions and practices. The findings indicate that the overall level of teaching for creativity was low and that participants’ performance was the highest for teacher’s responses to students’ ideas category and the lowest for classroom activities to support creativity category. We observed that a teacher-centered approach with instructional practices geared toward preparing students for examinations was dominant and that these science teachers were bound to the textbook, following cookbook-style activities. Participants believed that they did not have enough time to cover the content and teach for creativity and that they were not prepared to teach for creativity. Based on these findings, we recommend that programs be developed to prepare science teachers to teach for creativity.


Classroom observation study Classroom practices Creativity Imagination Questioning strategy Science processes Students’ ideas Teacher’s responses 



The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to Dr. Larry Yore for his valuable academic editorial editing and to Shari Yore for her technical editing as part of a special editorial assistance coordinated by IJSME.


  1. Akerson, V. L., Townsend, J., Donnelly, L., Hanson, D., Tira, P. & White, O. (2009). Scientific modeling for inquiring teachers network (SMIT’N): The influence on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science, inquiry, and modeling. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Balushi, S. M. (2009). Factors influencing pre-service science teachers' imagination at the microscopic level in chemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(6), 1089–1110. doi: 10.1007/s10763-009-9155-1.
  3. Aydeniz, M. & Bilican, K. (2014). What do scientists know about the nature of science? A case study of novice scientists’ views of NOS. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1083–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bachelor, P. & Michael, W. (1997). The structure-of-intellect model revisited. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 155–182). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beghetto, R. (2007). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussions? Prospective teachers’ response preferences. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 2(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belova, N., Eilks, I. & Feierabend, T. (2013). The evaluation of role-playing in the context of teaching climate change. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1 Supplement), 165–190. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9477-x.
  7. Berg, H., Taatila, V. & Volkmann, C. (2012). Fostering creativity—A holistic framework for teaching creativity. Development and Learning in Organizations, 26(6), 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng, V. (2001). Enhancing creativity of elementary science teachers—A preliminary study. Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 1–23.Google Scholar
  9. Chiu, M.-S. (2009). Approaches to the teaching of creative and non-creative mathematical problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 55–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choi, A., Klein, V. & Hershberger, S. (2014). Success, difficulty, and instructional strategy to enact an argument-based inquiry approach: Experiences of elementary teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi: 10.1007/s10763-014-9525-1.
  11. Craft, A. (2001). An analysis of research and literature on creativity in education. London, England: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.Google Scholar
  12. Creswell, J. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Donnelly, L. & Argyle, S. (2011). Teachers’ willingness to adopt nature of science activities following a physical science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elisondo, R., Donolo, D. & Rinaudo, M. (2013). The unexpected and education: Curriculums for creativity. Creative Education, 4, 11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fasko, D. (2000). Education and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3), 317–327.Google Scholar
  16. Ferrari, A., Cachia, R. & Punie, Y. (2009). Innovation and creativity in education and training in the EU member states: Fostering creative learning and supporting innovative teaching. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Communities.Google Scholar
  17. Gardner, H. (2011). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. Gay, L., Mills, G. & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  19. Heinze, A. & Erhard, M. (2006). How much time do students have to think about teacher questions? An investigation of the quick succession of teacher questions and student responses in the German mathematics classroom. ZMD-International Journal on Mathematics Education, 38(5), 388–398.Google Scholar
  20. Hendrix, R., Eick, C. & Shannon, D. (2012). The integration of creative drama in an inquiry-based elementary program: The effect on student attitude and conceptual learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 823–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hong, M. & Kang, N.-H. (2010). South Korean and the US secondary school science teachers’ conceptions of creativity and teaching for creativity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(5), 821–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ibrakovid, V. & Bognar, B. (2009). Creativity in teaching plant production. Educational Journal of Living Theories, 2(2), 232–256.Google Scholar
  23. Jang, S.-J. (2009). Exploration of secondary students’ creativity by integrating web-based technology into an innovative science curriculum. Computers & Education, 52, 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jeffrey, B. (2006). Creative teaching and learning: Towards a common discourse and practice. Cambridge Journal of Educational & Psychological Sciences, 36(3), 399–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kukliansky, I., Shosberger, I. & Eshach, H. (2014). Science teachers’ voice on homework: Beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi: 10.1007/s10763-014-9555-8.
  26. Lee, M.-K. & Erdogan, I. (2007). The effect of science–technology–society teaching on students’ attitudes toward science and certain aspects of creativity. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1315–1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liang, L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O., Adams, A., Macklin, M. & Ebenezer, J. (2009). Preservice teachers’ views about nature of scientific knowledge development: An international collaborative study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 987–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lin, Y.-S. (2011). Fostering creativity through education—A conceptual framework of creative pedagogy. Creative Education, 2(3), 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lotter, C., Singer, J. & Godley, J. (2009). The influence of repeated teaching and reflection on preservice teachers’ views of inquiry and nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20, 553–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Merrill, S. (2007). To again feel the creative voice. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(1), 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer, A. & Lederman, N. G. (2013). Inventing creativity: An exploration of the pedagogy of ingenuity in science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 113(8), 400–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ministry of Education (2013). Assessing students’ learning in science in grades 5–10. Muscat, Oman: Author.Google Scholar
  33. National Research Council (2012). In H. Quinn, H. A. Schweingruber & T. Keller (Eds.), A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  34. Neira, J. & Soto, I. (2013). Creativity and physics learning as product of the intervention with conceptual maps and Gowin’s v diagram. Creative Education, 4, 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newton, D. P. & Newton, L. D. (2009). Some student teachers’ conceptions of creativity in school science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 27(1), 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Park, S., Lee, S.-Y., Oliver, J. & Cramond, B. (2006). Changes in Korean science teachers’ perceptions of creativity and science teaching after participating in an overseas professional development program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Peters, K. (2008). Guided imagery in the classroom. Journal of the Virginia Writing Project, 29, 12–16.Google Scholar
  38. Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K. & Akerson, V. L. (2010). If we teach them, they can learn: Young students’ views of nature of science aspects to early elementary students during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 887–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rutland, M. & Barlex, D. (2008). Perspectives on pupil creativity in design and technology in the lower secondary curriculum in England. International Journal of Technological Distance Education, 18, 139–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seo, H.-A., Lee, E. & Kim, K. (2005). Korean science teachers’ understanding of creativity in gifted education. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, XVI(2/3), 98–105.Google Scholar
  41. Shanahan, M. & Nieswandt, M. (2009). Creative activities and their influence on identification in science: Three case studies. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(3), 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shin, M.-K., Yager, R., Oh, P. & Lee, M.-K. (2003). Changes in science classrooms after experiencing an international professional staff development program. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(4), 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Starko, A. (2010). Creativity in the calssroom: Schools of curious delight (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Sternberg, R. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Urhahne, D., Kremer, K. & Mayer, J. (2010). Conceptions of the nature of science—Are they general or context specific? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 707–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Watkins, M. & Pacheco, M. (2000). Interobserver agreement in behavioral research: Importance and calculation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(4), 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yager, S., Dogan, O., Hacieminoglu, E. & Yager, R. (2012). The role of student and teacher creativity in aiding current reform efforts in science and technology education. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 25(3), 1–24.Google Scholar
  48. Yager, R. & Weld, J. (1999). Scope, sequence and coordination: The Iowa Project, a national reform effort in the USA. International Journal of Science Education, 21(2), 169–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ad Dakhiliyah Governorate, Ministry of EducationNizwaOman
  2. 2.Curriculum and Instruction Department, College of EducationSultan Qaboos UniversityMuscatSultanate of Oman

Personalised recommendations