Modeling the structural equations of creativity based on the secure teacher-student relationship mediated by personality traits

Subject Areas : Instructional Excellence of management

fahimeh Hosseini ¹ , Gholamreza Sharifirad ^{2 *} , Javad saadatmandan ³

1 - Department of Educational Psychology,Qo.c., Islamic Azad University , Qom, Iran.
2 - Professor, Department of Health Education and Health Promotion, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran
3 - Department of Mathematics, Qo. C., Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran

Received: 2025-03-27 Accepted : 2025-07-02 Published : 2025-09-01

Keywords: Creativity, secure relationship, secure teacher-student relationship, personality traits,

Abstract :

Background and Objectives: Creativity and its influencing factors are among the most important issues that require special attention from researchers, planners, and all educational stakeholders. One of the most basic and important goals in this section is learning and ways to increase student learning. Creative learning is one of the new ways of learning if it can raise the level of knowledge in the society. And a society in which the circulation of affairs is based, information and scientific indicators, The University of Knowledge is the axis, if it is evident in many of the modern societies, In fact, creativity can be called as a key factor in different dimensions of social, political, cultural and especially academic life. Because if it is believed, Torrance (1989), human beings need more creative power in children today in order to survive and continue the life of organizations in the future. According to social learning theories, it can be said that students' creative attitude is a learning that is gradually created as a result of teacher-student interaction. Creativity is not a tool or a single phenomenon, but a concept in the form of a scientific label, which will be used for various and diverse human actions or actions, If it can lead to new or valuable results. Today, in schools and all centers of higher education, attention to creativity, innovation and the training of creative people has been placed in the main educational programs and lessons.Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to model the structural equations of creativity based on the secure relationship between teacher and student through the mediation of personality traits.

 Methods: The present study is a descriptive study of the correlation, concordance, and prediction type and is of the structural equation modeling type. The statistical population of this study consisted of all students aged 9-12 studying in District 4 of Tehran in 1402 AH. The sampling method in this study was cluster. The Cochran formula was used to select the sample size, and using this formula, 400 people were selected as a sample with a probability of 432 people. After selecting the sample, Abedi's creativity tools, Murray and Zovak's teacher-student relationship (2011), and Costa and McCrae's (1992) Neo-Five-Factor Personality Questionnaire (short form) were administered among them. To answer the research hypotheses, statistical tests of correlation coefficient and regression were used, and to examine the fit of the data with the conceptual model, the statistical method of structural equations was used. SPSS26 and AMOS 24 software were used to analyze the data. Findings: According to the results, it can be seen that there is a significant correlation between the variables of the research hypothetical model at the confidence levels of 99 percent (P<0.01) and 95 percent (P<0.05), and the structural equation model can be used. Before analyzing the data related to the hypotheses, they were examined to ensure that the data of this study estimated the underlying assumptions of the structural equation model. For this purpose, five structural equation assumptions were examined, including missing data, univariate and multivariate outliers, univariate normality, multivariate normality, and multiple collinearity.

Conclusion: The results showed that creativity can be predicted based on the relationship between teacher and student with the mediation of personality traits. According to the findings of the research, it can be said that teachers use more interactive styles because of the use of new teaching methods and safe and constructive interactions with students. Therefore, with the increase in the relationship between the teacher and the student, creativity increases, and if the teachers have a good relationship, they can make the students participate in creative activities. Among many factors, a safe teacher-student relationship is very important in fostering students' creativity. The effect of teacher interaction in the classroom can be evaluated from two aspects: Affective relationship with the student and educational and learning relationship,Inventing the right conditions for creativity requires that the teacher is sincere and satisfied in inventing the lesson in the classroom So that the student can have his own ideas and opinions with a sense of security. The results of the investigation have been carried out, indicating whether the teachers have a good interaction with the students; Students develop creativity. Also, teachers who have a warm, friendly and accepting personality, provide the possibility of increased creativity. Therefore, considering the significant effect of the secure teacher-student relationship on the creativity and personality traits of students, it is suggested that the cognitive training program for promoting creativity be included as part of the in-service programs of school counselors, so that they can use it to improve the level of motivation of students and increase their academic engagement.

.

References:

حسینمردی، علی اصغر؛ قربان شیرودی، شهره؛ زربخش بحری، محمدرضا؛ تیزدست، طاهر. (1399). تدوین مدل ساختاری برای پیش بینی پیشرفت تحصیلی بر اساس اشتیاق تحصیلی، اشتیاق به مدرسه و احساس تعلق دانش آموزان به مدرسه باواسطه گری انگیزش پیشرفت تحصیلی. فصلنامه سبک زندگی با محوریت سلامت، 4(ویژه نامه)، 131- 128.
حق¬شناس، حسن. (1378). هنجاریابی آزمون شخصیتی NEO. فرم تجدیدنظر شده. فصلنامه اندیشه و رفتار، 3(1)، 38-48.
حقیقت، شهربانو. (1377). بررسی ویژگی‌های شخصیتی دانش‌آموزان خلاق و تعیین رابطه میان خلاقیت،پیشرفت تحصیلی، هوش، طبقه اجتماعی و جنسیت در گروهی از دانش‌آموزان سال سوم راهنمایی در شهر شیراز. شورای تحقیقات آموزش و پرورش استان فارس.
دروی پور، روزیتا؛ عصاره، علیرضا؛ نصری، صادق؛ آرمند، محمد. (1401). رابطه سواد رایانه‌ای و سواد تحلیلی با خلاقیت در دانش‌آموزان: نقش تعدیل کننده جنسیت. ابتکار و خلاقیت در علوم انسانی، 12(1)، 176-147.
رحیمی احمدآبادی، عطاران؛ رحیمی احمدآبادی، فتوت؛ و اسماعیل پناه نامقی، اکرم. (1400). بررسی عوامل جمعیت شناختی و عزت نفس در زنان قربانی خشونت همسرآزاری مراجعه کننده به پزشکی قانونی خراسان رضوی در سال 95 و لزوم بررسی آن بصورت قانونی. مجله دانشکده پزشکی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، 6۳(2)، 2۳79-2۳69.
زاهدی، سکینه؛ و فخری، زهرا. (1401). تحلیل ساختار عاملی سیاهه(راهبرد های یادگیری و مطالعه) در دانشجویان. دو فصلنامه پژوهش های آموزش و یادگیری، 2(6)، 82-67.
سرمد، زهره؛ حجازی، الهه؛ و بازرگان، عباس. (1390). روش تحقیق در علوم رفتاری. انتشارات آگاه.
سهرابی، نازنین؛ سهرابی، نادره. (1381). بررسی مقایسه اي میزان خلاقیت و فشارهاي روانی در سه گروه معتادان، قاچاقچیان مواد مخدر و نمونه عادي و بررسی ارتباط خلاقیت و فشارهاي روانی. همایش سراسري اعتیاد و چالش ها، 1(1)، 1-19.
شریفی، طیبه؛ اصغری، فریده؛ غضنفری، احمد؛ احمدی، رضا. (1400). مدل یابی تأثیر ویژگی‌های شخصیتی بر انگیزش ورزشی با میانجی‌گری تعهد ورزشی. مجله علوم پزشکی رازی. ۲۸(۳)، ۲۵۶-۲۴۶.
شهنی ییلاق، منیجه؛ سهرابی، فریبا؛ شکرکن، حسین. (1384). تأثیر آموزش بارش مغزی بر خلاقیت دانشجویان دختر دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز با کنترل هوش. مجله علوم تربیتی و روان شناسی، 12(1)، 1-26.
صفری میاندره، شیوا؛ فلاحی نصرت آبادی، طاهره. (1394). بررسی تأثیر خلاقیت بر یادگیری.کنفرانس جهانی افق های نوین در علوم انسانی. آینده پژوهی و توانمند سازی شیراز، 1(4)، 123-145.
عابدی، جمال. (1372). خلاقیت و شیوه‌ای نو در اندازه گیری آن. فصلنامه پژوهش‌های روانشناختی، 2(1)، 46-54.
عجم، علی اکبر؛ صباغیان، زهرا. (1397). بررسی رابطه بین میزان خلاقیت معلمان درس علوم با حل مشکلات درسی دانش‌آموزان. پژوهش‌های تربیتی، 4 (14)، 149-166.
قریب طزره، سحر؛ جوادی پور، محمدغ نوروزعلی، کرمدوست. (1401). رابطه بین سبک‌های یادگیری و خلاقیت با خودکارآمدی تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان دوره متوسطه اول. دوماهنامه علمی- پژوهشی راهبردهای آموزش در علوم پزشکی، ۱۵(۴)، ۳۳۰-۳۴۰.
کرمی، رویا. (1398). مقایسه کیفیت رابطه معلم- دانش آموز و تصور از خویشتن در دانش آموزان نوجوان پسر زورگو و عادی شهر میانه. پایاننامه برای دریافت درجه کارشناسی ارشد رشته روان شناسی عمومی، گرایش منابع انسانی، گروه روانشناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه زنجان.
کفایت، محمد. (1373). بررسی ارتباط شیوه ها و نگرش های فرزندپروری با خلاقیت دانش آموزان سال اول دبیرستان های اهواز. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد روانشناسی دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز.
گروسی فرشی، میرتقی. (1380). رویکردهای نوین در ارزیابی شخصیت. تبریز: انتشارات جامعه پژوه.
گروسی فرشی، میرتقی؛ آرش مانی؛ و بخشی پور، عباس. (1385). بررسی ارتباط بین ویژگی های شخصیتی و احساس شادکامی در بین دانشجویان دانشگاه تبریز. فصلنامه روانشناسی دانشگاه تبریز، 1(1)، 158-143.
لک، بشقاب؛ و عباسی، حسن. (1400). تحلیل یادگیری دانش آموزان از طریق ورزش صبحگاهی با استفاده از روش های داده کاوی. نشریه فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات ایران، 13(49)، 39-56.
میرانی سرگزی، نرگس؛ هیدری آسروان، محمدجواد؛ عسکری، مهتاب؛ و نوشنواهش، رویا. (1400). کرونا و چالش های آموزش مجازی در ایران. دومین کنفرانس روانشناسی، علوم تربیتی، علوم اجتماعی و مشاوره، 2(2)، 169-186.
هرندی زاده، الهه؛ نعیمی، امیر؛ پزشکی راد، غلامرضا؛ نامدار، راضیه. (1389). بررسی خصوصیات استاد خوب از نظر دانشجویان دانشکده کشاورزی. فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی در آموزش عالی، 16(4)، 41-55.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2022). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review,
prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of management, 40(5), 1297-1333. ‏
Bandura, A. (1997). Self - efficacy: The exercise of control, New York: W. H. Freeman.
Binti Othman, F. (2009). A study on personality that influences teaching effectiveness. Research report submitted in
partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Business Administration. Buelow, MT., & Cayton, C.(2020). Relationships between the big five personality characteristics and performance on behavioral decision making tasks. Personality and Individual Differences, 160(4), 109-931.
Cai, W., Khapova, S., Bossink, B., Lysova, E., & Yuan, J. (2020). Optimizing employee creativity in the digital era: Uncovering the interactional effects of abilities, motivations, and opportunities. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(3), 10-38.
Clayson, D. E., & Sheffet, M. J. (2006). Personality and the student evaluation of teaching. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(2), 149-160.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 853–863. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.853.
Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1985). Hypochondriasis, neuroticism, and aging: When are somatic complaints unfounded? American Psychologist, 40(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.1.19.
Cutchin, G. C. (1999). Relationships between the Big Five personality factors and performance criteria for in-service high school teachers. Dissertation Abstracts Internationa, 59(2), 22-63.
De Vries, H. (2021). Space for STEAM: new creativity challenge in education. Front. Psychol, 12(4), 58-69.
Fagan, P. J., Wise, T. N., Schmidt, C. W., Ponticas, Y., Marshall, R. D., & Costa, P. T. (1991). A comparison of five-factor personality dimensions in males with sexual dysfunction and males with paraphilia. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(3), 434–448. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5703_4.
Forster, M., Maur, A., Weiser, C., & Winkel, K. (2022). Pre-class video watching fosters achievement and knowledge retention in a flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 179(3), 1043-1099 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104399.
Judge, T. A. Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36–51.
Lee, K., & Ashton, M.C. (2018). Psychometric Properties of the HEXACO-100. Assessment, 25(5), 543–556.
Mashburn, A. J., & Pianta, R. C. (2006). Social relationships and school readiness. Early Education & Development, 17(1), 151–176.
McCrae, RR.(2022). Cross-cultural research on the five-factor model of personality. Online readings in psychology and culture, 4(4),1-12.
McDonald, J. K., West, R. E., Rich, P. J., & Hokanson, B. (2020). Instructional Design for Learner Creativity. In Handbook of Research in Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 375-399). Springer, Cham.
Miller, T. R. (1991). The psychotherapeutic utility of the five-factor model of personality: A clinician's experience. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(3), 415–433. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5703_3.
Mori, S., & Tanabe, Y. (2012). Effects of perceived teacher personality on student class evaluations. Kinki University Center for Liberal Arts and Foreign Language. Education Journal (Foreign Language Edition), 3(1), 163-181.
Murray C., & Zvoch K. (2011). The Inventory of Teacher-Student Relationships: Factor structure, reliability, and validity among African American youth in low-income urban schools. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(4), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431610366250
Murray, H. G., Rushton, J. P., & Paunonen, S. V. (1990). Teacher personality traits and student instructional ratings in six types of university courses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 250-261.
Mutén, E. (1991). Self-reports, spouse ratings, and psychophysiological assessment in a behavioral medicine program: An application of the five-factor model. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(3), 449–464. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5703_5.
Patrick, C. L. (2011). Student evaluations of teaching: Effects of the Big Five personality traits, grades and the validity hypothesis. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(2), 239-249.
Pervin, L. A., Cervone, D., & John, O. P. (2005). Personality: Theory and research. New York: Wiley.
Saunders, R. (2002). A Synthetic Approach To The Study Of Creative Behavior. Department Of Architectural And Design Science Faculty Of Architecture University Of Sy Dney.
Sette, S., Spinrad, T. L., & Baumgartner, E. (2013). Links among Italian preschoolers’ socioemotional competence, teacher-child relationship quality, and peer acceptance. Early Education & Development, 24(6), 851–864.
Sheikh Zeineddin, H., Farrokhi, NA., Abaspour Azar, Z.(2018). Mediating role of psychological capital in the relationship between personality features with marital adjustment in students. Journal of Applied Psychology, 12(3), 439–462.
Shu, Yu, Shin-Jia Ho, and Tien-Chi Huang. (2020). The Development of a Sustainability-Oriented Creativity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship Education Framework: A Perspective Study. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(3), 1-7.
Tanabe, Y., & Mori, S. (2013). Effects of perceived teacher personality on student class evaluations: A comparison between Japanese instructors and native English speaking instructors. International Journal of English Linguistics, 3(3), 53-65.
Tisu, L., Lupșa, D., Vîrgă, D., & Rusu, A. (2020). Personality characteristics, job performance and mental health: the mediating role of work engagement. Personality and Individual Differences, 153(3), 1096-1044.
Tormey, R. (2021). Rethinking student-teacher relationships in higher education: a multidimensional approach. Higher Education, 82(5), 993-1011.
Torranc, E. (1998). Can we teach children to think creativity? Journals of creative behavior, 6(4),114-143.
Torrance, E.P. (1990) Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Scholastic Testing Service, Bensenville.
Vagos, P., & Carvalhais, L. (2022). Online Versus Classroom Teaching: Impact on Teacher and Student Relationship Quality and Quality of Life. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(5), 828774-828774.
Zhang, Y., Rosen, S., Chen, M., Du, J., Cheng, L., Liu, C.(2021). Students' perception of classroom environment in China and its relationship to creativity of students who have visual impairments. Journal of Developmental & Physical Disabilities, 1(33), 65-84.