Abstract
This paper describes a study of the influence of the Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE) programme on the scientific creativity of secondary school students. 1087 pupils from six suburban mixed comprehensive schools in England took part in the investigation. Three of the schools had participated in the CASE programme and three had not. Samples of students in years 7–11 from each school were given the Scientific Creativity Test for Secondary School Students, an instrument designed to tap various aspects of scientific creativity. The results indicated that the CASE programme did promote the overall development of scientific creativity of secondary school students, although the effects on different aspects of scientific creativity varied. As expected from previous work on delayed effects of CASE on academic achievement, the results indicated that the effects on creativity were not necessarily immediate, but tended to be long-lasting. Possible interpretations of these results are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adey, P. (1997). It all depends on context, doesn't it? Searching for general, educable, dragons. Studies in Science Education, 29, 45–92.
Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1994). Really raising standards – cognitive intervention and academic achievement. London: Routledge.
Adey, P., Shayer, M., & Yates, C. (2001). Thinking science: The curriculum materials of the CASE project (3rd ed.). London: Nelson Thornes.
Alexander, P. A. (1992). Domain knowledge: Evolving themes and emerging concerns. Educational Psychology, 27, 33–51.
Amabile, T.M. (1987). The motivation to be creative. In S. G. Isaken (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research: Beyond the basics (pp. 223–254). Buffalo, NY: Bearly.
Anderson, R. E., De Vito, A., Dyrli, O. E., Kellog, M., Kochendorfer, L., & Weigand, J. (1970). Developing children's thinking through science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Armbruster, B. B. (1989). Metacognition in creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 177–182).New York: Plenum Press.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 65–116). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bruch, C. B. (1988). Metacreativity: Awareness of thoughts and feelings during creative experiences. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 14(2), 112–122.
Garfield, E. (1989).Creativity and science, Part 2. The process of scientific discovery. Current Comments, 45, 3–9.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Haensly, P. A., & Reynolds, C. R. (1989). Creativity and intelligence. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 111–132). New York: Plenum Press.
Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–404.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1991). Beyond modularity: Innate constraints and developmental change. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.), The epigenesis of mind (pp. 179–198). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MacKinnon, D. (1970). Creativity: A multi-faceted phenomenon. In J. D. Roslansky (Ed.), Creativity: A discussion at the Nobel conference (pp. 17–32). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
Mooney, R. L. (1963). A conceptual model for integrating four approaches to the identification of creative talent. In C. W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 331–340). New York: Wiley.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.
Pesut, D. J. (1990). Creative thinking as a self-regulatory metacognitive process – a model for education, training and further research. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(2), 105–110.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Shayer, M. (1999). GCSE 1999: Added-value from schools adopting the CASE Intervention. London: Centre for the Advancement of Thinking.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1990). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Beaconville, IL: Scholastic Testing Services.
Welsch, P. K. (1981). The nurturance of creative behavior in educational environments: A comprehensive curriculum approach. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41(09), 3870A (University Microfilms No. 81-06456).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P. et al. The Influence of CASE on Scientific Creativity. Research in Science Education 33, 143–162 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025078600616
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025078600616