واکاوی ادراک و تجربه زیسته معلمان دوره ابتدایی نسبت به خلاقیت
محورهای موضوعی : خلاقیت شناسی پرورشی
1 - گروه مطالعات برنامه درسی، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران.
2 - استادیار گروه مطالعات برنامه درسی دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: خلاقیت, ادراک, معلمان دوره ابتدایی, پدیدارشناسی.,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف اصلی از اجرای پژوهش، واکاوی ادراکات و مواجهات معلمان نسبت به خلاقیت در دوره ابتدایی بود. رویکرد پژوهش، کیفی است که با استفاده از روش پدیدارشناسی انجام گرفته است. جامعه پژوهشی شامل معلمان دوره ابتدایی شهر تهران در سال تحصیلی 1400-1399 بود. روش نمونه گیری در پژوهش حاضر، نمونه گیری هدفمند از نوع نمونه گیری موارد عادی بود. در نهایت با انجام 13 مصاحبه با معلمان مجرب و باتجربه، اشباع داده ها حاصل شد. ابزار جمع آوری داده ها، مصاحبه نیمه ساختارمند بود. این نوع مصاحبه به دلیل عمیق بودن و انعطاف پذیری برای پژوهش های کیفی مناسب است. به دلیل شرایط کرونایی و تعطیل بودن مدارس، مصاحبه حضوری امکان پذیر نبود. لذا، مصاحبه به صورت بر خط انجام گرفت. به منظور تجزیه و تحلیل داده های جمع آوری شده از روش هفت مرحله‌ای کلایزی استفاده شد. تحلیل عمیق دیدگاه ها در مورد مفهوم خلاقیت موجب شناسایی سه مضمون اصلی با عنوان 1- ماهیت خلاقیت؛ 2- دانش آموز خلاق و 3- معلم خلاق و سیزده مضمون فرعی شد. همچینین، واکاوی دقیق دیدگاه‌های معلمان در مورد روش‌های پرورش خلاقیت، منجر به استخراج دو مضمون اصلی با عنوان 1- عوامل مرتبط با معلم و 2- عوامل مرتبط با برنامه درسی و هشت مضمون فرعی شد. در نهایت بررسی دقیق و ریزبینانه دیدگاه‌های معلمان در ارتباط با موانع پرورش خلاقیت منجر به دسته‌بندی سه مضمون اصلی با عنوان1- موانع مربوط به دانش‌آموزان؛ 2- موانع مربوط به معلمان و 3- موانع مربوط به برنامه درسی و یازده مضمون فرعی شد.
Purpose: The present research was conducted with the purpose of analyzing the perception and lived experience of teachers regarding creativity in the elementary school. Methodology: The research approach is qualitative, which was carried out using the phenomenological method. The research community included elementary school teachers in Tehran in the academic year of 1399-1400. The sampling method in the present study was the purposeful sampling of the sampling type of normal cases. Finally, data saturation was achieved by conducting 13 interviews with experienced teachers. The data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. This type of interview is suitable for qualitative research due to its depth and flexibility. Face-to-face interviews were not possible due to the corona situation and school closures. Therefore, the interview was conducted online. In order to analyze the collected data, the seven-step Claysey method was used. Research findings: the in-depth analysis of views on the concept of creativity led to the identification of three main themes with the title 1- the nature of creativity; 2- creative student and 3- creative teacher and thirteen subthemes. Also, a detailed analysis of the teachers' views on creativity development methods led to the extraction of two main themes titled 1- factors related to the teacher and 2- factors related to the curriculum and eight sub-themes. Finally, a detailed and meticulous examination of the teachers' views regarding the barriers to fostering creativity led to the classification of three main themes under the title 1- Barriers related to students; 2- Barriers related to teachers and 3- Barriers related to curriculum and eleven sub-themes. Conclusion: The findings of this research can be used to create a targeted approach to verify teachers' belief systems and address their incomplete perceptions of creativity.
اميني، محمد. رحيمي، حميد و منتظر، مرجان. (1398). آسيب شناسي رشد خلاقيت دانش آموزان در نظام آموزشي ايران (مورد مطالعه: مدارس دوره متوسط اول کاشان)، ابتکار و خلاقیت در علوم انسانی، 9(1): 114-81.
چراغ چشم، عباس.(1386). بررسی شیوه‌های تریس مبتنی بر تکنیک های خلاقیت در آموزش و یادگیری دانش آموزان. دوفصلنامه تربیت اسلامی، 3(5): 36-7.
سام خانیان، محمد ربیع (1384). خلاقیت و نوآوری در سازمان آموزشی. تهران: انتشارات رسانه ی تخصصی.
قدمی، مجید و خسروجردی، زهرا (1394). خلاقیت در خانه و مدرسه. تهران: انتشارات مدرسه.
کاظمی، یحیی و جعفری، نرگس. (1387). بازدارنده‌های خلاقیت دانش آموزان : فعالیت‌ها و ویژگی های معلم. فصلنامه اندیشه‌های نوین تربیتی، 4(1 و2): 192-177.
هژبری، امیر و شفیع زاده، حمید. (1396). رابطه سبک مدیریت کلاس مبتني بر خلاقيت با کيفيت زندگي در مدرسه و اضطراب دانش آموزان. فصلنامه ابتکار و خلاقیت در علوم انسانی، 7(3): 132-107.
یاسمی، صدیقه. (1399). طراحی و اعتباربخشی الگوی مدرسه خلاق برای دوره ابتدایی. رساله دکتری رشته برنامه ریزی درسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی.
یارمحمدزهی، اسحاق. (1396). بررسی رابطه بین جو یادگیری، نگرش معلم به خلاقیت و خلاقیت در دانش آموزان پایه ششم مقطع ابتدایی. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شیراز.
Al-Nouh, N. A., Abdul-Kareem, M. M., & Taqi, H. A. (2014). Primary school EFL teachers' attitudes towards creativity and their perceptions of practice. English Language Teaching, 7(9), 74-90.
Anderson, R. C., Katz-Buonincontro, J., Bousselot, T., Mattson, D., Beard, N., Land, J., & Livie, M. (2022). How am I a creative teacher? Beliefs, values, and affect for integrating creativity in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 110, 103583.
Andiliou, A., & Murphy, K. P. (2010). Examining variations among researchers' and teachers' conceptualizations of creativity: A review and synthesis of contemporary research. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 201–219.
Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 447e463). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Beghetto, A., & Kaufman, C. (2013). Fundamentals of creativity. Educational Leadership: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD). Retrieved from http://www.ASCD.ORG.
Bereczki, E. O., & Kárpáti, A. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs about creativity and its nurture: A systematic review of the recent research literature. Educational Research Review, 23, 25-56.
Beghetto, R. A. (2009). In search of the unexpected: Finding creativity in the micromoments of the classroom. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 3(1), 2-5.
Cheung, R. H. P. (2012). Teaching for creativity: Examining the beliefs of early childhood teachers and their influence on teaching practices. Australasian journal of early childhood, 37(3), 43-52.
Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Creativity beliefs, creative personality and creativityfostering practices of gifted education teachers and regular class teachers in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14, 109-118.
Cachia, R., & Ferrari, A. (2010). Creativity in schools: A survey of teachers in Europe. European Commissions. Joint research centre (JRC). Institute for prospective technological studies (ipts). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Craft, A. (2001). An analysis of research and literature on creativity in education. A report prepared for the qualifications and curriculum authority.
Chan, D. W., & Chan, L. K. (1999). Implicit theories of creativity: Teachers’ perception of student characteristics in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal,12(3), 185–195.
Denise do Souza, F. (2000). Teacher & student perceptions of creativity in the classroom environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.
Frare, A. B., & Beuren, I. M. (2021). Fostering individual creativity in startups: Comprehensive performance measurement systems, role clarity and strategic flexibility. European Business Review, 33(6), 869–891.
Friese, S. (2019). Qualitative data analysis with ATLAS. ti. SAGE Publications Limited.
Gralewski, J. (2019). Teachers’ beliefs about creative students’ characteristics: A qualitative study. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 138–155.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill.
Horng, J.-S., Hong, J.-C., ChanLin, L.-J., Chang, S.-H., & Chu, H.-C. (2005). Creative teachers and creative teaching strategies. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 29(4), 352–358.
Hoff, E. V., & Carlsson, I. (2011). Teachers are not always right: Links between teacher ratings and students’ creativity scores, self-images and self-ratings in school subjects. The Open Educational Journal, 4, 120–129.
Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783–802.
Huang, X., Lee, J. C. K., & Yang, X. (2019). What really counts? Investigating the effects of creative role identity and self-efficacy on teachers’ attitudes towards the implementation of teaching for creativity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 84, 57-65.
Lee, I. R., & Kemple, K. (2014). Preservice teachers’ personality traits and engagement in creative activities as predictors of their support for children’s creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 26(1), 82–94.
Mullet, D. R., Willerson, A., Lamb, K. N., & Kettler, T. (2016). Examining teacher perceptions of creativity: A systematic review of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 9-30.
Moscovici, S. (2003). Social perceptions: Research in Social Psychology. Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes.
Rubenstein, L. D., Ridgley, L. M., Callan, G. L., Karami, S., & Ehlinger, J. (2018). How teachers perceive factors that influence creativity development: Applying a Social Cognitive Theory perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 100–110.
Paek, S. H., & Sumners, S. E. (2017). The indirect effect of teachers' creative mindsets on teaching creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1-14.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
Roy, J., & Carter, V. (2013). Elementary teacher perceptions of teaching practices that foster creative thinking in students. Inquiry: The University of Arkansas Undergraduate Research Journal, 14, 75-94.
Romo, M. & Alfonso, V. (2003). Implicit theories of Spanish painters. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 409- 415.
Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity Theories and Themes: Research, Development, And Practice. Boston, MA: Elsevier.
Runco, M. A., & Johnson, D. J. (2002). Parents' and teachers' implicit theories of children's creativity: A cross-cultural perspective. Creativity research journal, 14(3-4), 427-438.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Teacher expectancy effects: a brief update 25 years after the Pygmalion experiment. Journal of Research in Education, 1, 3-12.
Stone, D. L. (2015). Art teachers’ beliefs about creativity. Visual Arts Research, 41, 82–100.
Skiba, T., Tan, M., Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2010). Roads not taken, new roads to take: Looking for creativity in the classroom. In R. A. Beghetto, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Nurturing creativity in the classroom (pp. 252e269). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Smears, E., Cronin, S., & Walsh, B. (2011). A risky business: Creative learning in education. TEAN Journal, 2(1), 1-15.
Turner, S. (2009). Novel and engaging versus boring and stagnating: How do pupils and teachers alike perceive the state of creativity in secondary schools? In C. Turgeon (Ed.), Creativity and the child: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press.
Tsai, C. C. (2006). Teachers’ scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students’ views. Science Education, 91, 222–243.
Zarillo, J. (2012). Teaching elementary social studies: Principles and applications. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
Lincoln, Y.S. & E. G Guba, Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.
Verganti, R., Vendraminelli, L., & Iansiti, M., (2020). Design in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Abstract. Working Paper 20‐091. Harward Business School.
