F.N EX1- LORn TORY STUDY OF CREli. TIVITY -
IN -
T~CHING
STUDIES
I~J
FIFTH GfiliDE SOCIAL
A F DELle SCHOOL SYSTEM
ID 499
by
JEANNETTE GhLL
1-I.DVISER - DR. RUTH HOCHSTETLER
BALL STATE UNIVERSITY
MUNCIE, INDInN.n
l-'lliY 6, 1968
/'
-
The author wishes to thank Dr. Ruth Hochstetler
and Dr. Fay Clardy, Jr. for their aid in the
compilation and the evaluation of data in the
following study.
C~&~ter
I
11
III
~age
Introduction sod
nevi8w of
~ollec
ti,)n
of
t~e
~roLleffi.
nesearct
;:.nd iVa lua liou
;:)uillr:..ctry
~nd
t1-~~endix
biLllographi .
..
1
o
of Da ta .
.............
IV
v
nel~teQ
St~tement
•
.
.
• 1)
• • 1S
Conclusions .
25
. • . 33
•
•
j'l
CHbFTER I
Introduction and Statement of the Problem
Creative teaching has as its task the guidance and the
release of creative fotential.
n teacher is cre8tive in the
sense ttat he aevelors an etmosrhere that is
creativity of others
an
ideas are accerted.
at~osrhere
in which every child's
It is not assumed, ho~ever, thet
teachers can be divided into two groufs
ffiust also carefully
deter~ine
~ferate for a time in
c~n
~
the creative ond
Nor is it assumed that any cne te3cher will
teach creatively 911 the time.
teacher
to the
In 8ther words, the crertive teacher
fGnctions as a catalyst. l
the uncreative.
favora~le
8
It is felt
t~9t
s teacher
the roints at which he
routine way.2
be 0escribed as valuing
~ust
The more crestive
diverge~t
thinkine m0re
th2n copvergent thinking and an open-ended system more than a
closed syste~.3
The Ioint has been made that the more
crestive teccher also hDs a sense of security in uncertainty
and
8
tolerance for amt'igulty.4
FinGlly, a cre~tive teach~r
has a subjective attitude toward the subject matter and is
oriented to movement from the known to the
effifhasizing the form2tion of new ideas.5
un~nown,
thus
2
The importance af determining the extent to which
creative teaching Cbn be described rests on the value of
creativity itself.
This value is reflected by an abundant
consensus on the need for creativity in education.
This
consensus may be due to the fact that society is facing new
needs. 6
In the attempt to face new needs comes a warning
from an educational newsletter:
In today's world cre~tivity is not just a nice
thing to have. It is a grave necessity.
Imitating the past is not good enough; only
the creativ8 society will survive.7
Emphasis on creativity as
in~ovation
Gnd invention in our
schools then is necessary because "we c9nrwt predict what a
person will need tc know in the 21st century as
~ell
as in
the next third of this century,,8 and because it is recognized
that "our very survival defends upon the quality of the
cre2.tive imagination of our next generation."9
Recent recognition of the proposed need for creativity
in education is illustrated by the contrast of past Bnd
present attitudes loward creativity and its encauraeement.
In the past, the general impression has been that the successful development of creative ability should concern itself
with persons of unusual artistic, musical, or literary endawmanto
In the past, creativity has also teen regarded as a
spontaneous act with no consciously directed means for its
development.
However, cre~tivity is now regarded 33 a goal
of education. le In the categcry of recent developments ~re
s~ecific
admonishments as to the present state of education
3
since the recognition of the need for cre&tivlty.
~dmonishment
Cne such
begins --
We need to take a fresh, inventive, crestive
look into the curricula of schools and colleges.
It is clear that they sre geared to lIinput,·! but
not to "out;,utrl. ;,~e still emph",size .Ithe
dnplication of knowledge," but do Ilttle vdth
creative explicatio!1., im:[:licaUon, 2nd ap~lication.
We need more learning for doing. 11
This study is concerned with a possible discrepancy
between fact and opinion in the area of creative teaching.
Opinion, for the pllrpose of thls study, :i.s rerresented by the
educational philosophies of many schoal systems which extol
the virtues of cre£tivity 3nd stress the importance of
creativity in
F3ct is approached through an
teachin~.
attempt to measure the
particular system.
c~eutive
Fsct,
practices of teachers in
asks
rephr~sed,
&
"To whet extent
do elerrentG:ry teacr.ers atternrt to teach creatively:'·
This
q ues t ion, then, forrrs the core
5
r)f
the :r:robler; of th i s
The problem itself required an
sization of
&
irn~ediste
definition of cre3tivity.
can be defined in
IT20Y
either a
product, rersooality,
~rocess,
condition. 12
tucy .
synthe-
Cre0tivitv.
. , which
ways, is usually defined in terms of
~r
envi~on~ental
For the :r:urrcses of this study, however,
emphasis is pl&ced on crec:tiv:ity as
environmental cond1tion.
~hether
approaches which are conducive to
~r
2.
process and as 8.n
not a teacher employs
creztivi~y
Dnd whether or
not she establishes a climEte or environment whjch aids this
process are points Jf
e~rh2sis
for this study.
Neming the
point of view taken is, however, not particularly definitive.
In order to be more definite, a number of basic
assumptions were compiled:
1.
It is assumed that creativity deals with
newness in the sense of either a person~l
rediscovery of what has already been discovered Q!: the }:roduction of something
entirely new.13 This implies both the
transmission and the transformation of
kno't/ledge .14· -
2.
Such concepts as curiosity, imagination,
discovery, innovation, and invention are
indicative of creativjty, but cannot be
equated with it.15 Creativity enco~passes
them all; it is not li~ited to a single
function. 16
3.
Creetivity can not be copied. 17
4.
Creativity refers to what is going on
within the individual - his own way of
thinkin~, feeling, and doing.
As he
devises ways of expressing ideas or
feelings which to his knowledge have
originated ~ithin his own thinking and are
not forced by the environment, he is
develcping through the process of
creativity. The creative process then is
Q
assumed to be esse~tial to self-realization. 1u
5.
It is assumed that every individu&l possesses
the ability to be cre~tive. This ability,
however, varies with individuals in regard
to strength and/or area in ~hich they are
ca~able of expressing it.lS
6.
It is also assumed that creativity can not
be taught, but can be released snd guided.
No one ferson can tell another person how to
be c:r"?E. ti ve becb use the es sence lies 't none's
own Jnsjght, underst&ndings, ~nd feelings.,2Q
7.
The purpose of cre&tive education, it is
assumed then, is to guide creative processes
which must be guid.ed (encouraged, nurtllred,
allowed) .21
5
Li~it~ticns
The
st~dy
has certain
of the Study
limit~tions.
The decision was
made, fjrst of all, not to attemrt to measure evidence of
creative teaching in a]l aress of the curriculum.
Such a
task would be an imfossible one to perform with any degree of
accuracy or validity.
The most feasible apfroach, it was
felt, would be to concentrate on obtaining a measure for a
number of teachers in one sfecific area of the curriculum.
The area decided upon was social studies.
The choice \lias
largely due to the nature of social studies, since it is
"an integration 01 subject matter and conce.r:t formulation
which calls for a bE>lance and synthesis betwel2n social and
academic learning and between the immediate and the remote."22
Such a n a ree. should frovide a tr.f Ie oPI-iortuni ty for' creB ti ve
teaching. 23 The desire to heve subjects as alike as possible without reference to individual differences in attitude
and personality led to the choice of teachers in a specific
grade level in a public school system.
including children's
res~onses
~ith
the intention of
to questions concerning
practices in the classroom, grade level five was chosen.
Fifth grade children were thought to be capable of unders tanding and answering any q ues tion i.neluded
j
n the interview,
if each question were carefully analyzed as to .ocabulary
level and possible ambiguity.
chosen for the sarre
re~son,
Grade six could hsve been
but was not, due to a ;reference
for and interest in the lower erade by the auttor, who was
also responsible for interviewing.
CHuFTER II
Review of Relcted Research
Over the past few ye5rs there have been many studies
of creativity.
All of these have been concerned with the
nature of the concept of creativity, the identification of
creative individuals, or some specific classroom applications
of creativity.
The data reported reflect a
s~ecific
instructiona 1 setting, or the findings are of a theoretica 1
rather than a practical nature.
Few of these publications
report practices relative to creativity which are representative of teaching in elementary schools.
There are,
however, seven studies reported in the past ten years which
appear to be pertinent to the determination of creative
teaching.
Of these seven stUdies three were found to hove a
direct relationship to the problem in this study.
The most
recent of the three, itA Survey of Eeliefs and Practices
Relative to Creativity," by William C. :""olf ,Jr. was published
in March, 1964 in the Journal of Educational Research.
The
purpose of this study was, first of all, to find out how
classroom teachers viewed the concept of creativity.
Wolf's
next concern was that of making a survey of learning experiences employed by teachers under the guise of creativity.
7
This study did not include the categorization of classroom
teachers as creative, less creative, or uncreative, nor
was the study interested in a particular area of the curriculum.
In a six state area, teachers were asked by a
mailed questionnaire, "what do you ttink 'creativity' is?"
and "w'ihat do you do in your classroom which you consider to
be creativeri".
study:
ficcording to the data collected in the
almost half of the responding teachers conceived of
crea ti vi ty as a persona 1 characteristic; one-fourth rela ted
it to a product or end; while one-fifth identified the
concept as a process.
The data,
ho~ever,
crepancy in tbe teachers' statements.
revealed a dis-
Manifestations of
creativity in the classroom did not seem consistent with
the teachers' view of creativity.
Inconsistencies of this
nature were blamed on vaguely conceived efforts to make
provision for "a nebulous concept ll in the school curriculum.
The data also reported a widespread acceptance of creativity
which Wolfe regarded as remarkable because the relationship
between creativity and elementary education is so very
recent.
Froffi the data, Wolfe constructed a response pattern
for the mythical "typical teacher".
This teacher -
1)
conceived of crea ti vi ty as e. persona 1 cha rac teris tic,
2)
described creative learning experiences which pervade the
entire elementary scheol curriculum, and
these experiences to
ex~edite
instruction in the classroom.
3) employed
specifjc learning and/or
Wolfe concluded that:
8
Creative
utilized
teachers
relstive
learning experiences are extensively
in today's elementary school; many
adhere to similar beliefs and practices
t04-creativity consistently in the
classroorr,"~
The next oldest of the three studies, "... Guide to
trinciples of Creutivity-in-Teaching with Suggestions for
Use in Elementery Social Studies" by Edwc:.rd F. stone was
completed in 1961.
Stone compiled, from a review of
literature, fifteen principles of creativity in teaching.
Using these principles he built into his stJdy seven illustrations of creative exreriences in social studies which he
obtained from the puLlic schools of Great Neck, New York.
The seven teachers, K-6, who provided the illustrations
were evaluated prior to the study
creative peDple.
3S
professional and
These were judged according to criteria
established by the investigation and supported by a jury of
school personnel.
Stone concluded by means of the illus-
trations that one could show a valid relationship to the
general principles through their successful application in
actual clbssroom situations.
The degree of relationship,
however, was not mentioned.
Stone then wrote a guide for
elementary teachers which he hoped would stimulate teachers
to work more creatively in the classroom.
The guide also
included:
• • .8 sumc~tion of the theory of the creative
process translated into a fur.ctionally suggestive
record of certain experiences that have been
offered children with successful results. 2 5
The purr-ose of the third study is apparent from its
Superi0r in Dem8nstr:ting
Cre~tjveness
in Teachi nf l'.
1j)7 issue of tho. Journ:?l of Educations] SesearC'h.
conclusions have teen thc most
B:nd found
stu~ies.
P':'nn's
of the threc
c~rnrr~hensive
closs relcti:nship between
9
The
hi~h
mean
scores jn cr9stiveness and general superi')rity in te?cbjnq.
He concluded that creativeness is essential ss
fector to
supe~ior
teaching
s~c('ess
~nd
~
contributing
that it is rro-
portiG~~lly lacking with teachers of inferjor 8biljty.26
Bond 21so
c~me
to the conclusion that:
It is highly suggestive th~t teachers lacking
strength in rl&nnlng and teaching creatively
take refuge in working with supplies snd
equip~ent and in testing pu[ils cn whst they
-~esum~blv hpve lprrno~
c.-!.
_ .... - )n
.. . . t~eir
L J.",,v~w~... d~/·
J:~";'
""
-,,-,,,,
'"
-'"
.
~
.j". '-"
The limited findjngs of
8
fourth study, one by Cnrol
F. Mershsll, h,:s m":!'je it riifficult t:: eql1Ete the stt1 dy,
!'Classroom Ferce:r,:ti':Ds of Hif!hly Cre,3tive
~e=chers
Howev~r,
it is of significance to the
i' ::.--es Gnt s tlJdy b9c? use :)f the re 13 ti oDs':.i
res;onses of
hi~h1y
found thEt
crc~tive
hi~hly
guided il
N(~
1t!E.S
f0und cetween
t~acters.
crentive teachers tended to
Ilfo11:J1,.;s directions,"
attec.I-t
r
and less creative
sugg8st~?d
•
Less Cre::::tive
in the E]e;rrentc::.--y 8('\;.ocl,'1 with the thr,ee studtes
glready described.
M~::.--sh911
::~.:1d
r.'Jade
"sits jn seat", 2nd "te::.:.C'h2r
in tLe study, hov:ever, to
exr:Ltin how either the "hie;hly cre<::tive"
O~
1'1ess c-restjve"
10
teachers were chosen or categorized. 28
The three remaining studies contain findiQgs which
msy be regarded
crea ti vely.
l~.
&S
pertinent considerations for teaching
Studies by three authors, !,'rank E. May, Janet
Gilbert, and DonE.ld J. Eadley, produced findings on the
relationship between intelligence and creativity while they
were investieating relbted problems.
The data used in
Gilbert's study, suprorted the previous findings of Getzels,
and Torrance who found that intelligence tests
Jac~son,
were not satisfactory instruments for identifying creative
stUdents.
Gilbert also hypothesized that on standardized
measures of achievement, the creative student
w~uld
do as
well or better than less creative studeGts, but that he
would not fbir as well on teacher marks. 2 9
was supp,orted.
This hypothesis
fI.ay's findings from a study of the crestive
thinking of seventh graaers agreed with those of Gilbert •
.hay found tha t wi th popul,,- tions thE. t are fairly homogeneous
with respect to intelligence, I.Q. scores are probably poor
predictors of creative-thinking ability.
between
I.~.
Correlations
scores snd creative thinking scores in the
study ranged between .08 and .30 with most of the correlations
approaching zero. 30
Hadley, in a study of the relationship
between creativity and anxiety, discovered additional
support for the findings of both Hay and Gilbert.
In his
study, hadley found that a group of children who are low in
anxiety and high in intelligence, were not similarly high
in creativity.
According to the data those with very low
11
anxiety exhibit a moderate amount of creativity; those with
a slightly higher amount of anxiety exhibit the highest
amount of creativity; and those with increasingly higher
anxiety exhibit increasingly less creativity.
Hadley also
found strong evidence that:
matter how much anxiety a child may feel,
the introduction of some common behaviors of
teachers which research indicates induce
anxiety will curtail creative production.3 l
~o
A
major accomplishment of publications on creativity
has been the labeling of sources of discouragement to
creativity.
is said to
One such source of discouragement to creativity
~e
the school itself.
Data gathered by Spindler,
Getzels and Jackson, Torrance, Colem&n and Henry suggest
that the stUdent is being dominated by the school and instead of having his creativity nourished, his thinking,
feeling and reacting are restricted. In other words, he is
being stifled. 32 Two factors encountered in the school are
said to be responsible for the stifling.
is the work-play dichotomy.
The first factor
Day states that teachers
suppose that there should be no playing around in work and
so they do not give children many opportunities to learn
creatively because lIchildren enjoy creative experiences and
their I-leasure makes teachers uneasy. "33
The second factor
is that of sanctions against questioning and exploration.
According to the data gathered, teachers do recognize that
students need to ask questions and make inquiries about
their environment, however, children who do so are lIoften
12
brutally squelched" in order to "put the curious child in
his place. 1I34
ticcording to Shumsky, it is the intent of
ffiOSt teachers to "present a stereotyped, sugar-coated
portrai t and to avoid struggle and controversy. "35
Shumsky
indicates tb3t there &.re three types of teachers -
the
reretitive teacher, the main-idea teacher, and the creative
teacher. 36
Niel poses this question, "Do we really have to
stand by and watch the training of mediocrity'i"3?
8
itself.
second source of discouragement is said to be society,
A
major obstacle is society's success orientation.
The point is made that individuals are prepared by military
and civilian education only for success, not for coping
with frustration and failure.
The inhibiting effect of this
tendency "is seen again anQ again in the individual testing
of chi ldren on ta sks of crea ti ve thinking. 1138
.tl.nother
factor, although still dealing with success, has to do with
the current pressures of society on schools to maintain
high academic standards.
barron indicates that the response
by school people to this pressure
h~s
taken the form of
increased pressures on children for rote memorization of
facts. 3S
hnother factor within society which exerts pressure
on the student is his peer group.
Feer groups undoubtedly
value conformity, and equate divergency with abnormality.
In doing so, they exert relentless pressure on one another
to rid themselves of any divergent characteristics. 40
one of the most significant personal characteristics of
Yet
13
especially creative children seems to be the courage to
step beyond the established bounds.
Thus they have to fight
the peer group and often do so without teacher sup[ort. 41
I t would seem, then, the t the tea cher who a t tempts to teach
creatively must do battle with society in
child's peer
grou~,
~eneral,
the
and in some cases the school, itself,
and the teachers therein.
In the opposite vein, points of encouragement have
also teen shown by research.
Lists have been compiled
describing what iliUSt te done by a teacher to increase the
crea ti vi ty in his teaching.
These are not s tand-pb t
formula s, nor are they reco;r,mend 2. tions for the use of any
certain materials.
Particular materials cannot be recommended
because it has been concluded that too little is yet known
about the effects of various instructional media on
creativity.42
The creative teacher appr0aches ~nowledge
with the question me as a person r( 1143
"'what does the subject matt.er meCin to
Taylor summarizes the present state of
affairs by saying:
lt may be more effective at the present stage
to develop materials designed to remove hindrances
and to untrain for nO~4creativity than to directly
train for creativity.
In addition, Torrance has emphasized the importance of
learning how to rewCird creative behavior if children are to
think creatively. 45
hnd, according to Dale, the ultimate aim
of education should be to try to make stUdents alike enough
so that they can communicate with each other, yet different
enaUEh so th:t they ~ill h~vc something worth co~~unic3tin~.~6
The issue, then, has been eVG1usted.
h3ve been identified . .> rhil=so[hy of need
Su~~estions
exreriences.
enc~urape
have been
ih?t
ma~c
to imrlement or
s92~inEly
remfins to be
the thoughtflll rursuit
~f
The bErriers
t~s
rr~duce
~~d
belief in the rhilcs0;hy of need
~lready
formul&te~.
creative
cc~o~rlished
the rrccess
instill, most certainly to test,
teen
to
~nd
ultimately to
is to
~erhaps
u~h01d
fcrmul&tsd.
CHAfTER III
Collection snd Bvaluation of Data
lhe processes used in collecting Gnd evaluating data
in the present study were very simple.
They can be described
in order of the topics of selection, populstion,
instrumentatioh, and evaluation of responses, which immediately follow.
Selection:
A
letter was sent to each of the fifty-five
fifth grade teachers in the hetropolitan Schools of Muncie,
Indiana.
p~rpose
of the study and asked for their cooperation. (See
~nclosed
card.
This letter contained an explanation of the
s;;c~~iv)
in each letter was a stamped, self-addressed reply
On the reply card the receiver was to indicate his
willingness to
p~rticipate.
If the teacher
~ished
to
participate, he consented to a ten-minute interview.
The
teacher selected three of his students for individual interviews of approximately equal length.
The letter requested
that the teacher select a student who, in his estiffiation,
was a "good student", another whom he felt liked social
studies, Bnd a third student who was a "poor st1.Adent" in
his estiffiation.
The students were chosen in this manner in
order to obtain a cross-section of the students in each
individual classroom.
If a teacher returned a positive
16
reply he was
so that
c0nt~cted
2
time
~nd
for the
~&te
interviews could to set.
[cful&tion:
t~e
Fy
of the interviewing period which
8nd
extended frem J&l1.usry 23, lS6c through F'ebr:'1c.ry ,26,1<;62,
fcrty teachers
interviewed.
:JDe hunr1red forty students hed baen
:~nd
Due to a
d~screrancy
in the format of the
children's interview in the first three sets, where a set
consisted of one teacher und three of his students, these
sets were discounted in the evaluation of the
The
st~dy.
sacple used in this study was thus reduced to 37 teachers
and III students for Iurrcses of evslu9tion.
re~resented
the Muncie
This
s6~ple
t\o.'enty of the twenty-two elerr:entary schools in
Schools.
~etrop:lit~n
Interviews
conducted with each teacher
~ere
student in the school
Such
buildin~.
~reas
as
Q
~nd
each
teachers'
leunge, the nurse's cliniC, or the music room were used fur
interviewing.
nny room where it was ,elt that tje child
would receive a
utilized.
~jni~um
of distr&cting influence was
The length of an
jntervi~w
veried from seven to
twelve rJinutes.
Of the III students, 60 were boys
Of the "]7 Hqood students
The
of the
nu~ber
',
r~cr st~dents
of girls
excee~ed
c::: tegory Df the "g ood s t uden t
InstrumentEtion:
The
51 were girls.
12 "'"ere boys :.nc 25 1J.Jcre
s~bject grou~,
of the f:vorite
fs~~le;
l
e~d
24 were
m~le
s~d
l~
~irls;
were
24 were boys sod 13 were girls.
the nurrber of boys only in tte
I' .
instr~~ent
used with teoohsrs was a
17
one-pege interview guide.
with the children.
n
two-pdge interview outline was used
The items were a compilbtion of those
suggested for use by various authors, since no single available instrument seemed to be valid for use with children in
the measurement of their perception of classroom practices
and atmosphere.
following topics:
Items on the teacher-interview included the
(1) method used in teaching socia 1
studies; (2) resp:mse of students to preser,tation of subject
metter; (3) neture and number of social studies projects for
student participation during the school year; (4) emrloyment
of bnd success with the problem-solving a[proach; (5)
wi 11ingness to a t tempt "unusua 1 tI a cti vi ties
,~ bout
which they
n.ight feel "insecure" in terms of outcome; (6) excursions
or field trips taken by the class during the year; (7) role
playing and dralliatization used in social studies; (8) use
of study guides by the tea cher; ond (9) rea c tion to a chi Id
who is "individualistic and non-conforming".
Items on the
student-interview were related to the following topics:
(1)
freedom to disagree; (2) freedom to handle materials in the
classroom; (3) student-centered or teecher-centered classroom; (4) strength of impression of ,,;hat is Leing studied;
(5) response to the presentbtion of subject matter; (6)
group work; (7) view of society; (5) divergent thinking; and
(9) construction in the classroom.
Evaluation of Responses:
In the evaluation of each
questionnbire tte raw score assigned to each teacher was
determined by an equivalent to the number of positive responses he made on nine of eleven items included in the
18
teacher's
~
interviE~.
mean of 4.5.
A
fossible range
Two items included in the
no variance in teacher response.
student
~as
~as
from 0 to 9
intervie~
~ith
produced
The score assigned to each
also determined by an equivalent to the number
of positive responses on nine 3eparate items.
A
}earson
~roduct-~oment
(r)
~ith
.05 level of con-
fidence
w~s
then used to determine three separate correlations:
(1) the
ra~
scores of the IIgood studentll with the
of the teacher; (2) the
student 11
~i th
ra~
ra~
score
score of the IIfavorite subject
the raw score of the teacher; (3) the raw
score of tte "poor studentll wi til the raw score of the teacher.
Individual items were examined for significant response
patterns.
Finally, a composite score
~as
obtained for each
teacher by adding the teacher's raw score to one-third of
the scores for each set of three students interviewed per
teacher.
CR.,iTER IV
The
~0~;ut3tion
f~r
of the Fe:rscn lr)
e~ch
~f
the
three? e-rours of stucierts ':,1 th thei!' tes chen; !'eve:: ~ed the
the 1'","Jd students
II
,',ere
c~T'rel['
t:::d
'di
!' C' ',;
S (' 0 !' e s
:) b t ,<:,i rl e d fer t h 0 t esc be!' s;
ra~
scores
ott~incd
TWG~ty-six
c e rl t
~
methods in teaching
or thirty
the unit, in
me~sure
scci~~
~er
te3c~ing
teacher
~ll
.05
r
no ton e, 'b 1) t
st~~jes.
•
sccisl studies.
i~rressi2n
the
level.
2.
C 'J mt
si~ty-twJ
i rn t i:m
0
~O~
'f'
The rem:injng eleven
un 2n itc!::'
CD>S
~ent,
in 1f/h.ich
rer cent, of the
to
llse~
t~~~rj
scc13l
6:id detect s.n
i~dlvjd~,jls
"corr,rl.stely 3bsorb:::d il in their soci2l studies
th,~
~IJ h e !1
three coefficients
of student 3ttitude
strrcs;here of Ilsusrension" or
hO\o.'ever, fel t
.3 3
cent, rerorted the use :)f one method,
studies fourteen, Gr thirty-eight :re'!"
three, cr
seeros
r9'/J
of the thirty-seven te::ch2!'s, cr seventy
r or: 0 r t -2 d t he us e :) f
te~~hers,
(J) r
fGr the tS2chers.
found to he significsGt 2t the
~ere
th the
',vc!'e
worl~.
thjrty-seve~
t8~chers,
t their stUdents were !'r",rely or never
20
rr~je~ts,
yielded twe r ty-thra9
r~sit1ve
six t Y- bl D r e:' c e n t 0 f the t c : =1,
;:0
nrl f 0 1.1 r t e 8 n,
eight rer cent, neg:tJve reSrcns2s.
T'CS't-~/u4~
"nsc>'
........
_,
t't,onty-three
.,-,...
.....
,r,
n(·'C1~
''''"''".
_.::,.""
t; V""
-
reSr2ns2s,
tr~ j l' t
Y-
In the esse of the
\~n""
~.--.
__
D:~
~r ~b:ut
1I.1i....,p
_.1._
(':"'_.
2h
'-"u·t
__
-....- v
t,·'pntyw_
four ;.er cs!"t :)i' the tilirty-seven tesC''1ers rc;rcrt2c errrl::yi..'lg
the
rr~t18T
selving
~rrr~Gch
nIl inci:Lc3ted3 fC21ing ci'
,<
in the
they
fe~t
whi~h
they
c0nsj~ered
0"
unusual
activities in
~ut
~jtte~rted
o?:' t!iirty-t\·;r:; :;'er r:-ent c:!" t":e
Twanty-three
re~
OT'
::-n 2ctivity Hbich they
te:~.cheT's
hc'.d
cent
o~
sixty-t~D
the
~er
t?~ch2rs
hs~
fourteen or
thirty-ei~ht
Twelve
rr?~1e2YCUrsi:ns
twenty-fjve
not dune so.
cent oi the t:cchers
the use of role-playin e or dr::u(,tization in
re~~ining
~hich
Tb? rerraining
rem~injng
the
cbcut
the Dutcome of 2ctivitips in their classroom.
or sixty-eight
cl~ssrccm.
seventy-three rer cent of the tcochers
rero!'ted th::-,t they hE,d n:-:t
~b8Ut
att2~rtjnE
insecure in terms of the outcome.
twenty-seven
studias
"l'l'lcderate de€,ree of success."
f0r cent of the teachers rerorted
the c13ssroom
scci~l
SOCi:~ll
rer~rted
st')diesj
reI' cent, hOwever,
re,t:orte-::l th:Jt tilCY did not em:rloy either c;ctlv:lty in the
nrcc of
scci~l
studies.
Eleven or thjrty reI' cent cf the
21
teschers rerorted
stu~y
~uides;
th~t
ttey
;
the r c rr j
On the f')11o\;dnz
t3s~hers'
cent cf the t8?chers
;21'"
::.
n i n g t r: n::; r s; r 1" :) v: i rr co tel y t'.'! e n t y - s eve n
j
tern"
hI8'1tY-:Gl)1" :Jr six-ty-fiv·:; per cent
0
teschers r2icrted that
t~ey
"f0el thrc3 toned 11 by suche:: chi 11.
8,...
orde~
In
c~
s",:"e;estions fr:::m the study
cr thirty-five per cent of th
I'::!islikc 'l
extensive use
sixt82n ::r forty-thrc3
1)sin~
g 11 ide s i I
~~je
f'er
~
tesc~er
scc;re on s11 iterr.s he ShOll1d:
t:J have 3n entirely rositjve
(2) use E c0mbinsticn
methods in te:.chirr, scci::.,l studies;
~c)
ce
~bl'?
of
to i!2tect
En Co,tr::::sphere of Ilsus;ensicn on the r2rt :)f stlJde'1ts :)r ':Jf
indivjdu~ls
being currrletely sbsorbsd in tteir soc1?1
stllci'?s work "t tirres;
(c) use
~r')jccts
in his su::::i::l
in the cl3ssro:)m ". . Uch he cunsiderad unlls'.1s1 :;,!1d :::b8 1Jt
he
m~y
tri);:"s
feel insecure in terms of
C.S
~
le.s.rnir.r: ::2tivity;
dram~tiz3tion
( f"
~
)
US,?
field
\2) em:;:lcy role rL:iying or
in the s8cial studies cl?ss
consirjst'ed Eppr:Jpris te; (h)
study gvides;
outc:)~e;
',\)~lich
~c(:d
E r.d uc;e
~h2n
they yere
sugg~sti
C'ns fr..:.m
(i) hsve S ;;ositive attitude to\oJsrd the
,Iinc:!i vidu:; J j,stic S.!"ld n'")D-c:;nforming ii child.
StuClent Intervi'?\I.':
NinetV-.!"line stude!1ts or eightY-!1i!1.3 per
cent of the students whc were interviewed gave
f~ll
22
of ttejr ;r2soDt saci:l studies
des~ri~t1c~s
students
e~2ve~
studying in
W8r~
L i gh t
11
~r
0
rer~ent
soci~l
f' t h'" hi C 1 v e
\,'3 r
stu~i~s
enthusissm fer 30cisl
not
~ble
twelve
to rec311 whst they
: t the time of the
e " roc I' S t
Cn the
13020 student".
~ere
wor~;
1)
d e "1 t s ", t h:r e e
j~terview.
1'.' e:r e
item c::ncert'1irg the student I s
se~~:)!'"l(:1
sixty-seven or sixty
stu~ies,
per~ent
of the; stlJdents SE:td th:'t th::y (lid '!C't "excited" ?"h::::ut "Jhst
th2Y studjed in sc;cisl sturlies, the r'2sairdnC' forty ;.ercent
or forty-four' students ssid they h:::.d ilnever" been exci ted
about
soci~l
studies durjng this schoel
y~ar.
Itew
nU!'!lbers three ena f::::ur on the jnterview were :{llesti::-ns used
divereently.
ene
~C'rce~t,
Cn the third item, fifty-fivs
m~de
res:~nses
rerce~~
of the
ver~ert
rather then
c()n~ernin§':
land
~r
~1ver~e~t
w~ich
t~irteen
were indjcstive :f
thinkinq.
E
On thn
f!"icndshir in
or
indicate~
thj~ty-t~::
n
item
f::rei?n
see~ed
m~re
reSrOr'lSC's
nG~r}y
c~nverg~nt
t~tnkjna.
Thirty-six
rercent of the students resrnnded cfftrm?tjv21y
during this schoal yesr.
eight rercent
f~urth
[crcent of the students
ninety-seven st 1Jdents,
which
fifty-
resrans2s indicative of con-
~~de
the est2blishrr10 :1t cf
f8u~teen
resI0nses
stu~e~ts
~h1ch
stu~ents,
m~de
The rem3injng seventy-five or
neE~tive
resronses.
~inety-seven
or
si~ty-
23
eighty-seven ;crccnt
felt free t:
r~r0rtedly
clessmstes ever tcrics under
discussi~n
'I'h-== Y"2mainJng fuurt'?en stllcsnts
tete;l rilj
feel
n:~t
fifty-one rercent
c frc2d:rr1.
s~ch
rerorte~
in social
stu~ies.
h:elve }:'2T'Cent
CY'
with
dis~grec
~f
the
Fifty-seven students or
thst they felt free to cxrlore
end exreriment with things in the c12ssrcom; however, ftfty-
students or forty-nine percent, did not feel this
f~ur
freed(~m.
F'orty-fcur students or
they did work j n s;rall
~roup
g1"~ur:
Sixty-seven
~ork.
,9.1
out forty
I='cr(~ent
s tn sod s 1 st'Jci as
~tudents
c;
nc
s8id
enj:;yed
or sixty rercent,
ssi~
that
Cn the finsl item in t ho student
they dicj enjoy grcup work.
u~
intervj_2'.t!, seventy-six students or
percent viewed their classroom
8S
,TrI~rC'ximstely
sivty-nine
being student-centered.
The
remaining thirty-fjve students, thjrty-one rercent jndicated
th2t they
In
thou~ht
their
clsssr~om
wss t83cher-centered.
to the jnfarmeti0n
~dditi~n
~ained
en each of the
nine items, the data rev821ed that students Ierceived some
indlvidusls
5S
"helrful"
Dnd
lIencourc~ing'l.
~.tcut
thirty-one
rercent of the studects attrjbuted tho role of the most
helpful rers8n to
less thon
!1!10
one d
~ne
3S
E
frienrl; sixty-eight rercent to the teacher;
rorcent to "myself"; ::n:d one [crcent cJnsinered
most helrfu1.
In
th~'?
lstter cDse, thEt cf the
mcst encour:ging flg:ure, forty rercent of tr:e students
attributed this rc18 to the tee,cher;
twenty-thrcE~
percent to
s friend; 2nd thirty-seven r er'.;ent ccns i nered "myself" or
" no one'l
2S
most enccursgin€,.
24
Gomtosite Scores:
Seventeen of the thirty-seven teachers
or forty-six percent received composite scores above the
mean of 9.8 while twenty of the thirty-seven teachers or
fifty-four percent, received a composite score telow the
mean.
the distribution of the scores indicated one very
creative teacher, nine moderately creative teaCllers, twelve
less cre&tive teachers, and fifteen who used very little
creativity in the teaching of social studies as evidenced
by their composite score.
No teacher was found to be
cOffipletely lacking in crebtivity since the lowest composite
score was
5.67.
Summary 2nd Conclusions
lhe
of this study has been to investigate the
pur~ose
question -
Do eleITientary teachers attempt to teach
creatively?
If so, to what extent?
The area in which the
investigation was carried out was fifth-grade social
studies.
Indivicuol interviews were conducted with thirty-
seven fifth grade teachers of the
~uncie
hetropolitan
Schools and with three students from each of their classrooms.
reachers were asked to choose one student whom they
perceived
E.S
a I'good student l ' , one student who, it was felt
I1liked socisl stu.dies ll , and one whom they feltwc;s a t1poor
student. I'
.-.t the end of the interviewing period an
eva lua tion wa s
n~C.
de of the res:t:onses to the q ues tionna ires
from thirty-seven teachers end one hundred eleven students.
C&lcul~tion
of the Pearson (r) revsbled correlations between
the teacher scores and each group of students which were
significant at the
.05 level.
On the item
an~lysis
of the
teacher interviews, four of nine practices regarded as
indicstive of creativity in teaching were not employed by
a majority of the teachers.
Twenty-three of the thirty-
seven teachers felt that they could not detect an atmosphere
of "suspension l ' indicative of who were completely absorbed
in their social
st~dies
work.
Twenty-eight of the thirty-
seven teachers admittedly did not use the problem solving
ar:proach in the social studies class.
thirty-seven teachers
h~d
Twenty-seven of the
not attempted anything
~hich
they
considered unusual or in which they were unsure of the
outcome.
fwenty-five of the thirty-seven teachers, for
whatever reason, have not made an excursion with their class
this year.
The following conclusions seem to be justifiable from
the do. ta obtained in this study:
(a) the classroom a tmo-
sphere in social studies in a large numler of cases could
be termed "inadeq ua te "; (t) there is an infreq uen t use of
problem solving in social studies, the use of which is
advocated for other subject areas; (c) practices of
teac~ers
lean toward the conventional and teachers seem reluctant
to attempt anything which they might consider unusual.
Teachers seemingly desire to feel secure in their teaching
and are reluctant to try methods about which they might
feel insecure or unsure; (d) a majority of the teachers in
this study felt that the effort of making arrangements for
a
field trip are greater than the advantages of an excursion.
It was concluded from the item analysis of the stUdent
interviews that according to the students interviewed:
Co.)
Students do not receive a great deal of encouragement to
apply divergent thinking to social stUdies problems; (b) Des pi te the ta ct tba t s tuderlts enj oy g roup-work in socia I
studies, group work is not employed by teachers; (c)
27
Industrial arts, which involves construction activities,
is a minimal portion of the social studies program.
Do teachers
element~ry
att6m~t
to teach creatively in the
classroom, as indicated by their teaching in
social studies(
It would seem
'~:ise
to conclude from the
scores the t the problem can not be answered "yes" or "no".
No teacher was found to be completely lacking in the atility
to teach creatively.
~ll
of the teachers with the exception
of one had at least two areas, however, in which definite
could be made in order to improve thejr standing on
ch~nge
a creBtivity scale.
lhe act of teaching creatively, then,
c& n be put on a continuum from "highly crea ti ve" to
extremely low in creativity, or "uncreative", with most
teaching falling somewhere in between.
The greatest
number of teachers were found slightly below the mean.
Suggestions for Further Research
~
number of interesting questions and points for
future exploration were encountered durins the collection
of data for the study.
1.
~hat
Some of these were as follows:
is the influence of race and socia-economic
level on individual creativity?
Is one race or
socio-economic level more likely to engage in
creative activities than another race or socioeconomi cleve 1 c(
2.
What can be done to emphasize the creative process
instead of only the end product so that stUdents
28
will recei\e a more accurate and direct picture
of the tot&l
3.
~rocess?
What are the challenges in creativity?
How much
emphasis should be placed on determining the
instructional media that would be most effective
in putting across the process?
4.
Will students tend to be more flexible, imaginative,
and creative if they are exposed to a wider
variety of instructional materials?
5.
Is an open system necessarily conducive to creative
thinkicg?
~hat
effect does an open system have on
divergent thinking?
6.
How can professional
peo~le
adapt the processes
to increase divergent thinkicg to the elementary
cIa s sroom~i
7.
How successful are creativity workshops in improving a te&cher's ability to teach creatively
as measured by increase in number of creative
practices before and after the workshop?
8.
To what extent do the findings of stUdies with
essentially the sallie format, but different items
on interviews or questionnaires, differ from one
another'?
For example, if the questionnaires in the
present study consisted only of the very direct
twenty ideas compiled by Torrance, would the
conclusions be the same as were drawn in the present
study?
29
With so many unanswered questions and so much promise of
future development and need, the field of creativity has
become a fascinating one for persons in a wide variety of
professions.
30
FOOTiWTES
lCharles S~mner Crow, Cre2tive Education (New York:
Inc., 1937), p. 226.
~rentice-Hall,
2;;.lice Miel, Creativity in Teaching (Belmont, California:
Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1966), p. 8.
3Jacob W. Getzels and Fhilip W. Jackson, Cre8tivit~ and
Intelligence - 1xplorations with Gifted Students (New York:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962), p. 14.
4hie 1, p. 164.
5~braham Shumsky, Creative Teaching in the Elementary
School (New York: Af~leton - Century - Crofts, 1965), p. 53.
6Calvin W. Taylor and Faul Torrance, "Education and
Creativity", CreativiiY: Frogre~~ and Potential (New York:
McGraw Hill Book Co., 1964), p. 50.
7.r..dgar Dale, "Education for Creativity", The News
Letter, Vol. XXX No.3 (December, 1964), p. 1.
8 Ibid •
9Reginald 1. Archambault, "Education and Creativity",
Journal of General Education, Vol. XVII No.3 (October, 1966),
p. 55. lCRobert C. Wilson, "Creativity,lr iducation for the
Gifted, NSSE 57th Yearbook - Part 11 (Chjcago: University
of Chicago Press, 1958), p. 108.
llfi. Hurwi tz, ftCrea ti vi ty :~ues tions ,5nd .hnswers,"
School Arts, LXV (January, 1966), p. 16.
12£. Faul Torrance, "Creativity: What Research Says
to the Tea cher. II 1~i:Ji., Dept. of CIa ssroom Tea chers American
1ducational hesearch hssociation, No. 28 (April, 1963), p. 2.
131)a Ie, p. 1.
14Archambault, p. 202.
15Torrance, p. 4.
16F'rederick S. Breed, Education and the New Realism
(New York: The IvlacmillBn Co., 1939), p. 9l.
In'del, p. 61.
31
18Murray J. Lee and Doris M. Lee, "Creative Experiences:
l-'roviding for Creative Living", The Child and his Curriculum
(New York: Appleton - CeQtury - Crofts, Inc., 1960), p. 503.
19Ibid., p. 501.
20 Ibid •
21 Crow , p. 227.
22ShumSky, p. 208.
23lbid.
24wi llia m C .....olf Jr., "A Survey of be lieLs and
fractices Relative to Creativity," The Journ::.l of Educational
Research, Vol LVII No.7 (t-iarch, 1964), p. 3d4.
25Edward .Fred Stone, ",h Guide to Frinciples of
Creativity - In-- Teaching with Suggestions for Use in
.l:;lementa ry Soch,l Studies (Fa rts I a nd II), II Disserta tion
Abstracts, Vol. AXIl l-'t. 1 (July - October, 1961), p. 507.
26J esse ~. Bond, II l • na ly si s of Observed Trc::i ts of
Teachers rtated Superior in Demonstrating Creativeness in
Teaching," Journ&l of ~duco.l.ional Research, Vol 1111 i~o. I
(September, 1959), p. 11.
27Ib"d
'
__1_., p.o.
28Carol F. harshall, "Classroom Ferceptions of Highly
Creative and Less Creative Teachers in the Elementary School,"
Dissertation abstracts, Vol. XXIII Pt. 4 (April - June, 1963),
p. 369129Janet H. Gilbert, tlCreativity, Critical Thinking, arrl
Ferforrr..ance in Social Studies," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol.
XXII l-'t. 2 (November, 1961 - }ebruary, 1962), p. 1872.
3 0 Frank B. ~Iay, "Crea ti ve Thinking: A Fa ctoria 1 Study
of Seventy-Grade Children," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol. XXII
Ft. 2 (November, 1961 - February, 1962), p. 1&76.
3 1Donald J. Hadley, "Experimental Rela tionships
between Creativity and Anxiety," Dissertation .f-bstracts, Vol.
XXVI Pt. 3 (November - Lecember, 1965), p. 2566.
3 2David E. Day, "Crea ting a Clima te For Crea ti vi ty, It
School and Society, Vol. XCIV (October 15, 1966), p. 330.
33Ibid.
3 4 Taylor, p. 98.
32
35Shumsky, p. 49.
3 6 Ibid., p. 55.
371'Uel, p. IdO.
38Lbura L.irbes, Spurs to Creative 'leaching (New York:
p: 26.
G. F. futne~'s Sons, 1959),
391' rb nk ba rron, "l< reeing Ca pa ci ty to be Crea ti ve, 11
New Insights end the Curriculum (v.;a shington: Associa tion
~upervision and Curriculum Development, 1963), p. 292.
4eIbia., p. 31b.
41Teylor, p. 99.
42Torrance, p. 17.
4-3 u"h urns k y, p. 1.7
'"t •
44Calvin w. Taylor, fossible fositive and Negative
Effects of Instructional Nedia on Creativity (Salt Lake
City: university of Utah, 1960), p. 1.
45iorrance, p. 16.
46Dale, p. 3.
lil-'J-ENDIX
34
eva lua tion of the crea ti venES:-; (a ccoroing to a pa r ti Cllla r lis t of
factors) of the three stud8uts
interJiE~gd
and his/her own descrip-
tion of his/her own p&rticu]br aprroach to social studies.
teachers will be asked the same questions.
All of the
The interview should last
from five to ten minut2s.
Us.§_oLlnfortl}§;.li.QrL~
(1) The purpose of this study is not to make
judgments as to good or bad teaching in social studies.
Its purpose
is to determine the prsvclence of certain factors in social studies
teaching that receive the label Ilcreative".
(2) The names of
teachers and students will not appear anywhere in the report.
results of the study arc
~o
The
be ta"bula ted in a chi square table which
of course presumes anonymity.
Please notice at this time the enclosed card.
Bfter marking it
appropriately pleasQ drop it in a mailbox by Jonuary 20, 1968.
Reply
must be immediateJ
Once again 7 your cooperation will be greatly appreciated.
do not forget your sign&ture on the enclosed postcard.
Sincerely,
"
Please
described as whjch of the followinga"
u.."lit
b"
do
pro,ject
soc:.1alized
not anyone cLettlod} but
e.
problem solving
c.
(If ,you use the uni t af,prOB(.:h')
combina tion of methods
B
Do YCYU feel. obliga ted to include every
subject area in the t..m.i t?
Do you ever d,etect an a tmospb6u.'(~
thel~
";suspcnsion" or individua Is being
0<'
completely
ab~orbed
examples,>
Could you plea se desc:ei\"e HI€ soci£' 1 stl.ldiE!S projects in
in
the2u.C(~\:;~:;;:'
How would you descd.bo
Do you
y~)U
have hod in employing the problem
a?proach~
e~er
attempt 5ctivities in jour classroom which you consider
unusual and ",bout which
Can
Explain--specific
engaged'~
which your Glass has
solving
social studies work?
'y1:)1l
tell ':u.e about an
any role playing or
i-:-l to:rm3 of ov,tcome
you~
e:~r.ur;~:lon
In what capacity have
insecure?
ycnlr class has made this year'?
they have
dl'am&.tiz~~ti('Hl
fE~el
en~aged
About
in?
used s:tudy g',l1.des?
yQU
in; interviewed on & scale of 1-4 (one 1s
Classify each of trle stuclent2
the highest rattng :lnd:!.e.atlng)oss'::tss:L:m. of this ch[;..racteristlc to a great
degree)
av
b.
c"
do
ver1)al facilil:y
verbal flueuc,:,
flexibili ty
unique ~nd workable ideas when presented
routine problsffis
or1~inalitY--trodGce3
-
tith
What is your recjctlon to
6
interviewed to be described
ue~ Q~
ch:LJ.(
~s
1.\fbo
ebB
this way?
be ()escl'ibed
tJS:
quieseent'l \I/lth=
36
ne
·V·~$
~.QM"'..r"
~,.!t1;rr}
by
}f'Ol~
.r.·r,:r~·
.:J\:'m$('n~
t(;
W(~:rk:~j1L'
t TY
!~orl~ '1:~";';
f)fT:
I~gnir~?
..~{:
"~~ • • t""''l~JV·",
;~:}-=-2f.r
;.r>:)~~2:
t'c nC ,c, r~
~.
If
Vf.~;;'
'co?
11e )'0 '\.1 f~;H"Jl fr*~1;" 'tv i';')q:la'r~'1 anc f ~,;q:"~,,~,,,,'i;n:,:'nt 111~1';~h
th<.';' 1/';1,cHiSE";)OtU th:l.tS '"vn."rr,.1
·'::S
"'v 1"'iv(l,
... ",,,,,~<.,,,"
".n_.....~.
~ ....~ .'
y'1}\,~
.4r6
ttl)
~1·'!rar.i
dSf:id~
~'o,r
.iftSt..!~t:f;.:'t·!on~r::
Y('.H1J'!H~:tf
ro~: Io·~.!
t·n
C:'~{';(;J
ii'
€'
~,~_l',
;'i~l")'e
"'::il~~
),~·,u
y,~~s,
'Fba?
'~~~t1t~j
_ _ _ .......lIo,oI.oo .._ _ ....... I·
•
thtng~~
["'~;
~n(:,)ul"aged
i>&<&-
on your' o'!;rn in
on -y",'.l;;;' "wn)
X!J~H.lL\r('h
1~K"
:t.r(~
~"i}U
allt,1w'ed
hrH' ytH. \;jou1d 2:lko to d(l
s.('Hlle~,
thi rag?
you enoouraged to
~re
D~'\l
YOUT
cle.!u;rtt.at~gt
a~k
fH~k
i.l!
_
qUDSt~01S
10 ~
~;.f
........._-..C?-',,'W .•
1n class?
(1l:'.H~~;tjons
)'08
j
ves
---.~
Does anyone?
__yes
no
n
r~o
, .... ...)' 6S
Dc::qu.
Y~H~r-
lftaaohf:u" t;..",lj 'Dye
cve~·:,··-<;i~.i~g
she
no
-----....
~HH!2
• _ _rlO
1.n the
t(,ztbO~"5?
--no
Can Y"'iU t€tll f?~~lI.0·";;!..(jt);l>.~~ e-ach cthe<' hoft!
thing 10 lrla~ls?
.. -.)1 os ----.. niil
.
y~u
think o:r :lael about
s():~e"",
\,ben you and yOUi' cla!tSl;1atl)S hr:tV·;j a problem to silve do you decidE
what to do yourselj'e~ ~'r does your tl.'l~.{;h('il" decide fOJ' Y0lol?
---_.
tea~her
37
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
breed, rrederick S. E,duca tioD a nd The New Rea lism.
York: The }~cffiillan Co., 1935.
Crow, Charles S. Creative Education.
hall, Inc., 1937.
New York:
New
Frentice-
uetze Is, Ja cob W., G. nd J&ckson, 1 hi lip W. Crea ti vi tv and
Intelligence - EXQlorations with Gifteq Students.
New York: ~iley, 1962.
Gowan, John C., ed. Creativity:
New York: ~iley, 1967.
Its
~ducational
Implications.
Gruber, Howard E.; lerrell, Glenni and Wertheimer, Michael.
Contemlorary .fip:proaches to l,;reative Thinking. New
York: Atherton Press, 1963.
Lee, Nurray .I., and Lee, Doris t<:. The Child and His
Curriculum. New York: hrpleton - Century - Crofts,
Inc., 1960.
Narksberry, h&.ry Lee. foundation
Harper &nd how, Inc., 1963.
Miel,
QQ
~~lice.
Creetivity in Ie&.(!r~ing.
~adsworth fublishing Co.,
1966.
Creativity.
New York:
Eelmont, California:
Creativity in 'leaching: InvitGitions and
Instances. belmont, California: Wadsworth Fublishing
Co ~, 1961.
farnes, 3idney J., and Harding, Harold F., eds. 2 Source
Book for Creative thinking. New York: Chcrles
Scribner's Sons, 1962.
ho trick, Ca Lharine.
wha t is Crea ti ve l'hinking.
fhilosophical Library ~ssociaticn, 1955.
1\eed,
New York:
Develoring Creative Talent - ~'-I.n b.dventure in
'lhinkirrg. New York: Vantage Fress, 1962.
r:;.
Seidel, G. J. The Crj_sis of Creativity.
Notre Dame Press, 1966.
r~otre
Dame, Ind.:
ShumSh. y, nbraham. Creative fe&.ching in ihe Blementary
School. New York: Appleton - Century - Crofts, 1965.
38
Srr.ith, JiSmeS .~. Creative Tes.ching of §Qcial ;3tudies in the
Lleruentsry School. Doston: hllyn ond bacon, 196'/.
Setti:lK Conditions for Creative Teaching in the
61ementE.ll School. boston: ./"l.11yn end Bacon, 1966.
Tay lor, Co. 1 vin ',,>/., ed. CreE:. ti vi ty : Frogres s
~ew York:
McGraw - Hill, 1964.
&
nd Foten tia 1.
Torra nce, E. 1-8 ul. l;eve lafme:; t and .i..VE:. Ilia tion af B~corded
Frogrbmmed Lxperiences in Creative Thinking.
~inneapolis:
University of Minnesota Fress, 1964.
Von Fange, iugene K. frofessional Creativity. ~nglewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Frentiee - Hill, Inc., 1559.
iies ley, Bruce E. Teaching the Socia 1 Studies.
D. C. Heath and Co., 1942-.----lirbes, Laura. Slurs to Creative Teaching.
P. Futnam's Sons, 1959.
bos ton:
New York:
u.
Yearbooks
barron, Frank. "Crea tive Vision and 8xpressi.on, I' New
InSights and the Curriculum. 1963 Yearbook of the
Association for Supervision and Curriculuffi Development.
~dited by ~"lexander rrazier.
~\ashingt()n, L. C.:
b. S. C. D. Fublications, 1963.
Franseth, Jane. "l'reeing Capacity to be Crec~tive,I' New
Insights and the Curriculum. 1963 Yearbook of the
Association for Surervision and Curriculum Development.
bdited by alexander ~razier. W6shington, G. C.:
~. s. C. D. Publications, 196~.
wilson, rio bert C. "CreCi. ti vi ty ,II Ed uca ti ::m f<ll: the Gifted.
Fifty-seventh Yearbook of the Nationsl Society for the
Study of Lducation, PErt III. ~dited by Nelson E.
Henry. Chicago, Illinois:. University of Chicago
rress, 195cL
[-{eports
}\nderson, Harold H., ed. Interdisciplinary ~~ymposia on
Crea ti vi U. i~ew York: He rper fress, 1959.
Conant, James B.; strang, huth; and Willy, Paul. Creativity
of Qifted and Talented Children. Addresses to the
~rr.erican rissociation for Gifted Children, New York.
New York: Dureau of Fublications, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 19591
39
farber, Seyn:our l/~. c;n( wilson h. H. L., eds • .t-Ian. and CiviliZe tion: ~on[lict and Creb ti vi ty; .!l Sy muosi urn. l~ew
York: Iv.clIrsw - Hill, 1963.
Ghiselin, Brewster. The CrEative Frocess, ~Symposium.
berkeley: University of California Press, 1952.
laylor, Ce,lvin '.N. Possitle Positive and Negativ~ Effects of
Instructionc.l .t-iedia Qll Creativity. h.SCD eND';.) Project.
Sc,lt L&.r.:e City, Utah: NaticGal Educationsl l,ssociation
}ublic~tion, 1960.
Studies
Bond , Jesse A.
"t~na ly sis of Observed Tra i ts of Tea chers
Rated Superior in 0err:onstrating Creativeness in
TE?a ching. II J our!l~l of 1:;d uca tic'na 1 .Rese'a rch. Ll I 1
(3eptember, 1955), 7-12.
"ri Ibert, Jc:net E.
"Crea ti vi ty, Cr i tica 1 Thinki ng and
Ferformbnce in tJocial Studies.'1 Dissertation ~bstracts.
LIll No. 1 (~epteffiber, 1959), p. 11.
Greif, Iv.:> F. "l-,n Inves tiga tion of the Effect of a Dis tinct
L(Lpha sis on Crea ti ve ano Cri tica 1 Thinking in tea cher
i.ducation." Dissertation Abstracts, XXII, rt. II
(jovember,.1961 - february, lS62), 1076.
Hadley, .0onald J.
'ILxperim~nta 1 Rela tionships between
Crea ti vi ty and .i-.n:d.ety. 'I Dissert::. tion Abstracts, XXVI,
(November, 1965 - December, 1965), 2586.
H&rris, Richard H. liThe lJevelopment and Valj_dation of a
Test of Creative Acility." Doctoral Dissertation
Series, Fublica tion 1,0. 13, 927. Ann .~rbor, Michigan:
University ~icrofilms, 1955.
Harsha 11, C& rol F. "CIa ssroom F erceptions of Highly Crea ti ve
end Less Creative Teachers in the £lement&ry School.'1
Dissert&tion ~bstracts. XXIII, Ft. IV (April, 1963 June, 1963), 3691.
N&y, rrL.nk b. "Creative Thinking: l'. Bacterial Study of
Seventh-Grade Children." 1issertbtion ~bstracts.
XAII, ft. 2 C~ovemter, 1961 - February, 1962), 1276.
Stone, Edward F. "n GiJide to frincirles of Crea ti vi ty - In teaching ~ith 3u;gestions for Use in Element&ry Social
,studies. I! Lissert&tion fibstr&cts. XXII, 507.
liJodtke, K. E., and ""allen, N. E. "Teacher Cl8ssroom Control,
Fupil CreatiVity, and fupil Classroom Dehavior."
Journal of .t;xperimental Education. AXXIV (Fall, 1965),
59-65.
40
l\rticles
... rchamba ul t, Regina Id D. "Ed uca tion and Crea ti vi ty. "
Journal of General .c;ducbtion, AVIII, No.3 (October,
1966). Earron, It'rbnk.
I'Creati'vity: What Research Says Jibout It."
N£J-"> Journal, L (Barch, 1961), 17-19.
Dole, Eagar. "Education for Creativity." The News Letter,
Vol. 30, No.3 (December, 1964), 1-3.
Day, Do. Vid. B. "Crea ting a Clima te for Crea ti vi ty. I'
and Societ2, ALIV (October 15, 1966), 330-4.
School
l<orslund, Janet.l:.:. "Inquiry into the Nature of Creative
of Creative Teaching." JO!!rnal of Education, XIV
(h~ril, 1961), 72-82.
Hallman, R. J.
"Commonness of Creativity." Educational
Theory. Vol. 13 (rlpril, 1963), 132-6.
harris, Kenneth. "Don't Stifle Your Students' Nonconformity." NLi> Journal, LV (October, 1966), 24-26.
Hearn, N. E. "Change for the Sake of Change: Why Not'(
fHCE; l-'rojects to Advance Creativity in Education. I'
N&tional Elementbry Frincipal, ~LVI (September, 1966),
50-2.
Hughes, L. E.
lI~duca tion for Crea ti vi ty ," Overview, I I
(July, 1961), 33-9.
Hurwi tz, f>..
"Crea ti vi ty : "iues tions and Answers."
Arts, LAV (January, 1966), 30-3.
School
Lessinger, L.
"Characteris tics of Crea ti ve Tea chers. "
Journal of Secondary Education, XAXVIII (Ns.rch, 1963),
182-6.
"r os tering Creb ti vi ty ."
LAXVII (l-larch, 1967), 97.
:r.:a rksberry 1 H. L.
]Lns tructor,
Peabody, Scholl S. "Cultivation of Creativity."
of Educ&.tion, ALIV (J:.;arch, lS67), 282-5.
rlhodes, 1vlel.
I'.r'.n Analysis of Creativity."
Vol. 42, No.7 (april, 1961).
Journal
Jhi Delta
~~,
Rubin, 1. J.
"l ea ching for Crea ti vi ty . II Ca lifornia J ourna 1
of Secondc~ EdUCation, AAXV (December, 1960), 4l6-91.
41
Se linger, A. W. "f-roj ec t tipproa ch to Identifying and
Encouraging 3tucent CreativitY,1I Californi~ .education.
(February, 1966), 11-12.
,st&nistreet, G. Iv:.
IIReal Hearling of Creativity,"
llJ.. (September, 1960), d.
Instructor.
Taylor, C. W.
III::ffects of Instructional Media on Creativity."
Educational Leader, AlA (npril, 1962), 453-56.
'l'rabue, 1'1.. 1,.• "Observations on Creativity.1I
}orum, X.iVII (November, 1962), 55-65.
,~eir
Educational
, E. C. "Choice and Creativity in Teaching and Learning."
Phi Delta Kappan, ALIII (June, 1962), 408-10.
Wilson, .n. C.
"Developing Creativity in Children."
Educator, 11..11..)(.1 (September, 1960), 19-23.
"""olf, 'vdlliam C.
"Survey of Beliefs and Frsctices helative
to Crea ti vi ty. II Journ& 1 of Educa tione> l Research,
L'J.VI1 (March, 1964), 304-85.
'Welman, tI..
IICultural F&.ctors and Creativity." Journal of
Secondary Education, AXXVII (December, 1962), 454-60.
Tape Becordings
Sornson, He len H.
"i-.re You a Crea ti ve lea cher? II Commencement
Semin&r, ball State Jniversity. fhonotape recorded in
Muncie, Indiana, June 3, 1961. ball State University,
Teaching Materials Service.
Sornson, Helen H.
"Interes t and Crea ti vi ty. 11 } honotape
recorded in Kuncie, Indiana, 1'I.pril 14, 1964. Ball
.state University, Teaching Eaterials SE~rvice.