Multilevel analysis of relationship between creativity, goal orientation and class structure

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Psychology and Education , University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Ph.D in Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present study was to find a model for exploring the role of student level and class level factors on creativity. Methods: in the present quantitative research, 300 female high school students were selected using stratified random sampling. The research tools included Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (1995), The Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), and Achievement Goal Questionnaire (AGQ) (1998). Results: Multivariate analysis showed that at the school level, the average creativity of different classes is significantly diverse, and 48% of the variance of creativity at the student level explains 52% of the variance at the class level. Conclusion: In fact, the class variable is more important than student level and is the best predictor of student creativity.

Keywords

References

Ching, Y. S. and Chann. L. (2004). The Relationship among creative, critical Thinking and Thinking Style in Taiwan ltinght School Students. Journal of instructional Psychology , 31 :33-45.
Chu-ying Chiena and Anna N.N. Huib (2010). Creativity in early childhood education: Teachers’ perceptions in three Chinese societies, Thinking Skills and Creativity 5 (2010) 49.for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Craft, A. and Jeffrey, B. (2008). Creativity and performativity in teaching and learning: tensions, dilemmas, constraints, accommodations and synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 34 (5): 577–584.
George, J.M. and Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3): 513–524.
Gutman, L. M. (2006). How student and parent goal orientations and classroom goal structures influence the math achievement of African Americans during the high school transition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31: 44–63.
Kaplan,H.,andAssor,A.(2012).Enhancing autonomy-supportive I-Thou dialogue in schools:conceptualization and socio-emotional effects of an intervention program. Social Psychology of Education,Doi:10.1007/s11218-012-9178-2.
Kaufman,J.C. and Sternberg,R.J. (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity (Eds), NewYork:Cambridge University Press.
Lazio, A., Wilson, K. and Simons, R. (2010). University Students' Perceptions of the Learning Environment and Academic Outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Pages 27-52 | Published online: 25 Aug 2010
Lyke, Jennifer A., Kelaher Young and Allison, J. (2006). Cognition in Context: Students’ Perceptions of Classroom Goal Structures and Reported Cognitive Strategy Use in the College Classroom.
Medley, C., Maher, M.L., Hruda, L.Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L. and Freeman, K.E. and et al. (2000). Manual practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 27–52.
Moneta, Giovanni B (2011), Need for achievement, burnout, and intention to leave: testing an occupational model in educational settings, Journal Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 274- 78.
Wolters, C.A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations to Predict Students' Motivation, Cognition, and Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 96(2): 236-250.
 
Empowering Exceptional Children
Volume 8, Issue 4
October 2018
Pages 7-15

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 07 October 2018
  • Accept Date: 07 October 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics