Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the effectiveness of STEAM design processes on middle school students’ creativity

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Creativity has an important role in many scientific processes which constitute a large and complex structure. It is difficult to identify and measure. Students’ creativity can be enhanced through specific education programs. The aim of this study was to develop a science, technology, engineering, art, mathematics (STEAM) design process program for teaching 7th grade middle school students to enhance their verbal and figural creativity. The study lasted 11 weeks. Pre-test/post-test quasi-experimental method with a nonequivalent control group was used. Study Group (n = 34) was presented a teaching approach focused on STEAM education, while the control group (n = 34) was taught based on the science curriculum and science textbook. Nine different STEAM design activities were developed. The data were collected with the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking. The SPSS Program was used in analyzing the data. At the end of the study, significant differences were determined in favor of the study group in both verbal and figural creativity. As a result of the study, recommendations for implementation of STEAM design processes were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Aslan, A. E. (2001). Torrance test of creative thinking Türkçe Versiyonu. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi. The Turkish Version of Torrance Test of Creativity. M.Ü Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal, 14, 19–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, S. (2000). Does the need for high levels of performance curtail the development of creativity in design and technology project work? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 255–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baek, Y., Park, H., Kim, Y., Noh, S., Park, J.-Y., Lee, J., et al. (2011). STEAM education in Korea. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 11(4), 149–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belardo, C., Burrows, A. C., & Dambekalns, L. (2017). Partnering science and art: Pre-service teachers’ experiences for use in pre-collegiate classrooms. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 75(3), 215–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bequette, J. W., & Bequette, M. B. (2012). A place for art and design education in the STEM conversation. Art Education, 65(2), 40–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). Massachusetts: Pearson Education, Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunsell, E. (2012). The engineering design process. In E. Brunsell (Ed.), Integrating engineering and science in your classroom (pp. 3–6). Arlington: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnard, P. (2015). Re-) positioning creativities in relation to effective arts pedagogy: UK perspectives on teaching for creativity and teaching creatively in the arts. In J. Fleming, R. Gibson, & M. Anderson (Eds.), How arts education makes a difference (pp. 249–264). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Veri analizi el kitabı [handbook of data analysis]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Personal and environmental factors affecting teachers’ creativity-fostering practices in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 69–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chand, I., & Runco, M. (1992). Problem finding skills as components in the creative process. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 155–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charyton, C. (Ed.). (2015). Creative engineering design: The meaning of creativity and innovation in engineering. In Creativity and innovation among science and art (pp. 135–152). Springer, London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Y., Lim, Y., & Son, D. (2017). A semantic network analysis on the recognition of STEAM by middle school students in South Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(10), 6457–6469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, M. M. (2004). The convergent validity of the torrance tests of creative thinking and creativity interest inventories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 828–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conradty, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2018). From STEM to STEAM: How to monitor creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 30(3), 233–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daud, A. M., Omar, J., Turiman, P., & Osman, K. (2012). Creativity in science education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 467–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2003). Understanding design: 150 Reflections on being a designer. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (2005). Thirty-five years of research on perceptual strengths: Essential strategies to promote learning. The Clearing House, 78, 273–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dym, C. L. (1994). Engineering design: A synthesis of views. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E., & Powell, K. (2002). Art in science? Curriculum Inquiry, 32(2), 131–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fard, A. E., Asgary, A., Sarami, G. R., & Zarekar, A. (2014). A comparative study of the effect of computer-based instruction and problem-solving instruction on the students’ creativity. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2(2), 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feist, G. J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 273–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, N. S. (2008). A module to foster engineering creativity: An interpolative design problem and an extrapolative research project. Chemical Engineering Education, 42(4), 166–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. J. (Ed.). (1985). Teaching the gifted child (3rd ed.). Newton: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Fokialis, P., & Kabouropoulou, M. (2012). Thinking about creativity in science education. Creative Education, 3(5), 603–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawlader, M. N. A., & Poo, A. N. (1989). Development of creative and innovative talents of students. The International Journal of Applied Engineering Education, 5(3), 331–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, D. (2017). Creating STEAM with design thinking: Beyond STEM and arts integration. The STEAM Journal, 3(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herro, D., & Quigley, C. (2016). Exploring teacher perceptions of STEAM: Implications for practice. Journal of Professional Development in Education (PDE)., 43(3), 416–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herro, D., Quigley, C., Andrews, J., & Delacruz, G. (2017). Co-measure: Developing an assessment for student collaboration in STEAM activities. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(26), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoachlander, G., & Yanofsky, D. (2011). Making STEM real: By infusing core academics with rigorous real-world work, linked learning pathways prepare students for both college and career. Educational Leadership, 68(3), 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innamorato, G. (1998). Creativity in the development of scientific giftedness: Educational implications. Roeper Review, 21(1), 54–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, F. (2001). Imagination in art and in science. The Kenyon Review, 23(2), 113–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jho, H., Hong, O., & Song, J. (2016). An analysis of STEM/STEAM teacher education in Korea with a case study of two schools from a community of practice perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1843–1862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolly, A. (2014). STEM vs. STEAM: Do the arts belong. Education week: Teacher. http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2014/11/18/ctq-jolly-stem-vs-steam.html. Retrieved July 2015.

  • Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. S. (2012). A study on relation and importance of art education and STEAM education. Journal of Korean Society of Basic Design and Art, 13(5), 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H. (2017). The torrance tests of creative thinking-figural or verbal: Which one should we use? Creativity. Theories–Research-Applications, 4(2), 302–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B. H., & Kim, J. (2016). Development and validation of evaluation indicators for teaching competency in STEAM education in Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1909–1924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D. H., Ko, D. G., Han, M. J., & Hong, S. H. (2014). The effects of science lessons applying STEAM education program on the creativity and interest levels of elementary students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(1), 43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Park, N. (2012). Development and application of STEAM teaching model based on the Rube Goldberg’s invention. Computer Science and Its Applications (pp. 693–698). The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kind, P. M., & Kind, V. (2007). Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Studies in Science Education, 43(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity (KOFAC). (2012). Policy directions of STEAM education: Introductory training of KOFAC STEAM. Seoul: Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, S. B., Nam, D., & Lee, T. W. (2011). The effects of convergence education based STEAM on elementary school students’ creative personality. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on computers in education, ICCE 2011 (pp. 783–785).

  • Land, M. H. (2013). Full STEAM Ahead: The benefits of integrating the arts into STEM. Procedia Computer Science, 20, 547–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P., & Shen, J. (2003). The influence of CASE on scientific creativity. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 143–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linsey, J. S., Clauss, E. F., Kurtoglu, T., Murphy, J. T., Wood, K. L., & Markman, A. B. (2011). An experimental study of group idea generation techniques: Understanding the roles of idea representation and viewing methods. Journal of Mechanical Design, 133(3), 031008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madjar, N., & Shalley, C. E. (2008). Multiple tasks’ and multiple goals’effect on creativity: Forced incubation or just a distraction? Journal of Management, 34(4), 786–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manches, A., & Plowman, L. (2017). Computing education in children’s early years: A call for debate. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 191–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, G. W. (2001). The torrance kids at mid-life. Westport: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. (2001). Einstein, picasso: Space, time, and the beauty that causes havoc. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In J. Strobel, S. Purzer, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Research into practice (pp. 35–60). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. (2006). TIES STEM education monograph series, attributes of STEM education. Baltimore: TIES.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noh, S. W., & Ahn, D. S. (2012). Seeking for a direction to advancement of STEAM for elementary school. The Journal of Educational Research, 10(3), 75–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, J., Lee, J., & Kim, J. (2013). Development and application of STEAM based education program using scratch: Focus on 6th graders’ science in elementary school. Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering (pp. 493–501). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, A. (1957). Applied imagination. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Byun, S. Y., Sim, J., Han, H., & Baek, Y. S. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions and practices of STEAM education in South Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1739–1753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, C., & Mishra, P. (2018). Learning environments that support student creativity: Developing the Scale. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, C. F., & Kakela, P. J. (2006). Creating a space to learn: A classroom of fun, interaction, and trust. College Teaching, 54(1), 202–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., Acar, S., & Cayirdag, N. (2017). A closer look at the creativity gap and why students are less creative at school than outside of school. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 242–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Said-Metwaly, S., Fernández-Castilla, B., Kyndt, E., & Van den Noortgate, W. (2018). The factor structure of the figural torrance tests of creative thinking: A meta-confirmatory factor analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 30(4), 352–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and productivity. Academy ofManagement Journal, 38(2), 483–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, D. A. (2006). How the arts develop the young brain. School Administrator, 63(11), 26–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, D. A., & Pilecki, T. (2013). From STEM to STEAM: Using brain-compatible strategies to integrate the arts. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, A., & Ashworth, E. L. (2018). Emotionality and STEAM integrations in teacher education. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 11–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taljaard, J. (2016). A review of multi-sensory technologies in a science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) classroom. Journal of Learning Design, 9(2), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thuneberg, H. M., Salmi, H. S., & Bogner, F. X. (2018). How creativity, autonomy and visual reasoning contribute to cognitive learning in a STEAM hands-on inquiry-based math module. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 153–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1966). The torrance tests of creative thinking-norms-technical manual research edition-verbal tests, forms A and B-figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton: Personnel Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1969). Creativity. What research says to the teacher, series no. 28. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking: Norms-technical manual. Bensenville: Scholastic Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unified Arts Committee. (1944). A unified arts experiment. The School Review, 52(7), 413–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vande Zande, R. (2010). Teaching design education for cultural, pedagogical, and economic aims. Studies in Art Education, 5(3), 248–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vossen, T. E., Henze, I., De Vries, M. J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2019). Finding the connection between research and design: The knowledge development of STEM teachers in a professional learning community. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09507-7. (online first).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. (2012). A new era of science education: Science teachers’ perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (3494678).

  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H., & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendell, K. B., Connolly, K. G., Wright, C. G., Jarvin, L., Rogers, C., Barnett, M., & Marulcu, I. (2010). Incorporating engineering design into elementary school science curricula. In American Society for engineering education annual conference and exposition, Louisville, KY.

  • White, C., Wood, K., & Jensen, D. (2012). From brainstorming to C-sketch to principles of historical innovators: Ideation techniques to enhance student creativity. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(5), 12–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynn, T., & Harris, J. (2012). Toward a STEM + Arts curriculum: Creating the teacher team. Art Education, 65(5), 42–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Prof. Dr. Ayse Esra Aslan, who has the legal right to use the test in Turkey and the validity and reliability study, for training in scoring Torrance Tests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Science Education, Yildiz Technical University, 34220, Istanbul, Turkey

    Gulbin Ozkan & Unsal Umdu Topsakal

Authors
  1. Gulbin Ozkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Unsal Umdu Topsakal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gulbin Ozkan.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ozkan, G., Umdu Topsakal, U. Exploring the effectiveness of STEAM design processes on middle school students’ creativity. Int J Technol Des Educ 31, 95–116 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09547-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09547-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation