Identifying and Prioritizing Strategies for Realizing Reflective Creativity in Universities Using Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM)
Subject Areas : Creativity and innovation from psychological, epistemological, educational and pedagogical
Seyed Hedayat Davarpanah
1
,
Reza Hoveida
2
1 - Assistant Professor, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2 - دانشیار دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران
Keywords: Strategy, Reflective Creativity, University, Interpretive Structural Modeling,
Abstract :
Introduction: In the last few decades, several studies have emphasized the necessity of facilitating creativity in higher education and academic environments. However, researchers have rarely studied reflective creativity and how the university institution can creatively reflect on its procedures and activities and evaluate and revise them. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify and analyze the strategies for realizing reflective creativity in academic environments. Method: This research is based on purpose, applied and based on method, exploratory mixed (qualitative-quantitative). The potential participants of the present study included university professors and elites with significant expertise and scientific experience in the field of creativity in higher education. In the qualitative part, the data collection method were semi-structured interviews which was conducted with 25 interviewees using the purposeful sampling method of opting for key experts type and theoretical saturation as a criterion. Also, in the quantitative section, 9 experts responded to the researcher-made questionnaire extracted from the qualitative section using the focus group method. Finally, We employed thematic analysis in the qualitative part qualitative part and the ISM approach in the quantitative part for data analysis. Results:.The results of the qualitative part showed that the strategies for realizing reflective creativity in the university included: 1. Establishing institutional research offices; 2. futurology; 3. Acceptance of pluralism in different dimensions; 4. Free circulation of knowledge and information; 5. Supporting critique and theorizational chairs; 6. Holding open tribune; and 7. designing local creative evaluation systems. The results of the quantitative section also showed that according to experts, the identified strategies are placed in five levels. so strategies 5 and 6 as driver variables at level four; Strategies 1 and 4 as linkage variables at level three; And strategies 2, 3 and 7 were placed as dependent variables at levels two and one. Conclusion: This research has made it possible to better understand the issue and adopt appropriate policies and measures to realize reflective creativity in academic environments by identifying the strategies and leveling and determining the relationships between them.