183
References
Akin, Ő . (1990). Necessary Conditions for Design Expertise and Creativity. Design
Studies 11(2): 107-113.
Altshuller, G. (1973). Innovation Algorithm. Worcester, MA: Technical Innovation
Center.
Altshuller, G. (1984). Creativity as an Exact Science. New York: Gordon and Breach
Science Publishing.
Altshuller, G. (1989). Search for New Ideas. Kishinev: Kartya Moldovenyaske.
Altshuller, G. (1994). And Suddenly the Inventor Appeared. Worcester, MA: Technical
Innovation Center.
Amabile, T. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer.
Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in Context. Boulder: Westview Press.
Amabile, T. (1997). Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing what you Love and
Loving what you Do. California Management Review 40: 39-58.
Amagioni, F.; Schiaffonati,V. and Somalvico, M. (1999). Dynamic agencies and scientific discovery. AISB 99 Symposium on AI and Scientific Discovery. Edinburgh.
Ancona, D. and Caldwell, D. (1998). Rethinking Team Composition from the Outside in.
In Neale, M; Mannix, E. and Gruenfeld, D. (1998). Research on Managing Groups and
Teams. Greenwich: JAI Press.
Ancona, D. and Caldwell, D. (1992). Bridging the Boundary: External Activity in
Performance: Administrative Science Quarterly 37: 634-665.
Ancona, D.; Bresman, H. and Kaeufer, K. (2002). The Comparative Advantage of X-
Teams. MIT Sloan Management Review 1: 1-3.

184
Angyal, A. (1941). Foundations for a Science of Personality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Arreola, R. (2006). Monster on the Foot of the Bed: Surviving the Challenges of
Marketplace Forces on Higher Education. To Improve the Academy 24: 2-28.
Avnet, M. (2009). Socio-Cognitive Analysis of Engineering Systems Design: Shared
Knowledge, Process and Product. Unpublished PhD Thesis. MIT.
Baer, J. (1997). Creative Teachers, Creative Students. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Baillie, C. and Walker, P. (1998). Fostering Creative Thinking in Student Engineers.
European Journal of Engineering Education 23(1): 35-43.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination (Ed.). U of Texas: Caryl Emerson and
Michael Holguist, Austin.
Banaji, S. (2005). Rhetorics of Creativity. Centre for the Study of Children. Youth Media.
Barab, S. and Squire, K. (2004). Design-Based Research: Putting a Stake in the
Ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 13(1): 1-14.
Barron, F. and Harrington, D. (1981. Creativity, Intelligence and Personality. In M.
Rosenzweig and L. Porter (Eds.), Annual Review of Psychology 32: PP. 439-476.
Beckmann, J. and Guthke, J. (1995). Complex Problem-solving, Intelligence and
Learning Ability. In P. Frensch and J. Funke (Eds.), Complex Problem-solving: The
European Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Beder, T. (1999). Beyond Technicalities: Expanding Engineering Thinking. Professional
Issues in Engineering 125(1): 12-18.
Berglund, A.; Daniels, M.; Hedenborg, M and Tengstrand, A. (1998). Assessment to
Increase Students’ Creativity: Two Case Studies. European Journal of Engineering
Education 23(1): 45-54.

185
Bernstein, B. (1973a). Class, Code and Control. Vol. 1. London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Bernstein, B. (1973b). Class, Code and Control. Vol. 2. London. Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, Code and Control. Vol. 4. London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Bhaskar, R. and Simon, H. (1977). Problem-solving in Semantically Rich Domains: An
Example from Engineering Thermodynamics. Cognitive Science 1: 193-215.
Biggs, J. and Collis, K. (1980). The SOLO Taxonomy. Education News 17(5): 19-23.
Biglan, A. (1973a). The Characteristics of Subject Matter in Different Areas. Journal of
Applied Psychology 57(3): 195-203.
Birdwhistell, D. (2000). “Creativity with 3 rd
and 5 th
Graders: The Effects of Standards of
Production and Extrinsic Rewards. An Introduction to Present Research. Washington and Lee Journal of Science 1(2): 1-9.
Birth, K. (1999). Any Time is Trinidad Time. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Bitcon, J. (1993). Survey Heralds New Job Prospects for Engineers. IEAust Media.
Blaikie, N. (2003). Analyzing Quantitative Data. London: Sage Publications.
Boden, M. (1990). Precis of “The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms”: London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Bolter, D. (1984). Turing’s Man: Western Culture in the Computer Age. Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press.
Bonner, B.; Baumann, M. and Dalal, R. (2002). The Effects of Member Expertise on
Group Decision-Making and Performance. Organizational Behaviour and Human
Decision-Making Processes 88(2): 719-736.

186
Born, M. (1956). Physics in my Generation: A Selection of Papers. London: Pergamon
Press. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Bowden, J. and Marton, F. (1998). The University of Learning: Beyond Quality and
Competence.
Braunschweig, B. (2002). TRIZ and the Evolution of CAPE Tools. In J. Grievink and J. van Schijndel (Eds.), European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering vol. 12. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science
Brehmer, B. (1995). Feedback Delays in Dynamic Decision-making. In P.A. Frensch and J. Funke (Eds.), Complex Problem-solving: The European Perspective. pp. 103-
130. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Broadbent, D. (1977). Levels, Hierarchies and the Locus of Control. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology 29: 181-201.
Brolin, C. (1992). Creativity and Critical Thinking. Tools for Preparedness for the Future.
Krut 53: 64-71.
Brown, A. (1992). Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in
Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings. The Journal of the Learning
Science 2(2): 141-178.
Brualdi, A. (1999). Traditional and Modern Concepts of Validity. USA: Eric Clearing
House on Assessment and Evaluation.
Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Boshier, R. and Huang, Y. (2008). In the House of Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning (SoTL), Teaching lives Upstairs and Learning in the Basement. Teaching in
Higher Education 13(6): 645-656.
Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo Academics . Cambridge: Polity Press.

187
Bunting, I. (2004). The Higher Education Landscape Under Apartheid. Available Online
@ www.chet.org.za Accessed on 07/07/09.
Burbules, N. (2000). The Limit of Dialogue as a Critical Pedagogy. Revolutionary
Pedagogies, Peter Trifonas, Ed.
Burgin, M. (2005). Super-recursive Algorithms. Springer: Monographs in Computer
Science.
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis.
London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Busov, B.; Mann, D. and Jirman, P. (1999). Case Studies in TRIZ: A Novel Heat
Exchanger. Available @ http://www.triz-journal.com.
Byrne, K. (2009). Foreword in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Challenging
Assumptions. Proceedings of the National Academy’s Second Annual Conference.
Cahan, D. (1985). The Institutional Revolution in German Physics 1865-1914. Historical
Studies in the Physical Sciences 15: 1-65.
Cannon-Bowers, J. and Salas, E. (1998). Individual and Team Decision-Making under
Stress: Theoretical Underpinnings. In Cannon-Bowers, J. and Salas, E. (Eds.). Making
Decisions under Stress: Implications for Individual and Team Training. Washington, DC:
APA Press.
Cannon-Bowers, J.; Salas, E. and Converse, S. (1993). Shared Mental Models in
Expert Team Decision-Making. In Castellan, N. Individual and Group Decision-Making.
Current Issues.
Castells, M. in Muller, J.; Cloete, N. & Badat, S. (2001). Challenges of Globalization:
South African debates with Manuel Castells. Cape Town: Maskew-Miller Longman.
Castells, M. (1998). The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Vol. 3: End of
Millennium. Oxford: Blackwell.

188
Campbell, K. (1981). “The Metaphysics of Abstract Particulars”. Midwest Studies in
Philosophy 6: 477-488.
Caplan, D. (2009). Experimental Design and Interpretation of Functional Neuroimaging
Studies of Cognitive Processes. Human Brain Mapping 30(1): 59-77.
CCPS (1992). Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures (2 nd
Ed.). American
Institute of Chemical Engineers.
Ceruti, M. (1986). Constraint and Possibility. The Evolution of knowledge and knowledge of evolution. New York: Gordon & Breach.
Ceruti, M. (1989). The Creative Dance. Milano: Feltrinelli.
Chang, P. and Hsiau, S. (2002). Implementation of an Innovative Curriculum to cultivate
Technological Creativity in Engineering studies. Proc. Natl. Counc. 12(2): 64-72.
Council of Higher Education (CHE) (2007). The Report of the Institutional Evaluation.
Available @www.che.org. Accessed 12\2\2008.
Chen, C., Jiang, B. and Hsu, K. (2005). An Empirical Study of Industrial Engineering and Management Curriculum Reform in Fostering Students’ Creativity. European
Journal of Engineering Education 30 (2): 191-202.
Cheng, V. and Hui, A. (2002). Creativity Enhancement: Six Days Summer Camp. Hong
Kong: Free Communication Limited.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). The Era of Open Innovation. MIT Management Review 44 (3):
35-41.
Cheung, C. (2002). Thinking Styles and Achievement in Mathematics and Language
Learning. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Clapham, M. and Schuster, D. (1992). Can Engineering Students be trained to think more creatively? Journal of Creative Behaviour 26(1): 156-162.

189
Clapham, M. (1997). Ideational Skills Training: A Key Element in Creativity Training
Programs. Creativity Research Journal 10(1): 33-44.
Cohen, L. Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (Eds.). (2000). Research Methods in Education.
London: Routledge-Falmer.
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a Design Science of Education. In E. Scanlon and T. O’Shea
(Eds.), New Directions in Educational Technology. PP. 15-22. New York: Springer-
Verlag.
Colton, S. and Bundy, A. (1999). On the notion of interestingness in automated mathematical discovery. AISB 99 Symposium on AI and Scientific Creativity. Edinburgh.
Cotton, J.; Vollrath, D.; Leningnick-Hall, M. and Froggatt, K. (1990). Managing
Creativity. Academy of Management Review V(11): 6-22.
Court, A. (1998). Improving Creativity in Engineering Design Education. European
Journal of Engineering Education 23 (2):141-154.
Cox, V. (1987). “An Application of Cognitive Science to Understanding Problem-solving
Activity for Well Structured Problems: Cognition, Algorithms, Metacognition and
Heuristics”. Proceedings ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, New
York.
Craft, A. (2000). Teaching Creativity: Philosophy and Practice. London: Routledge.
Craft, A. (2001). An Analysis of Research and Literature on Creativity Education.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA).
Creswell, J. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. London: Sage Publications.
Cropley, A. (1992). Fostering Creativity in the Classroom. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cropley, A. (1997). Creativity: A Bundle of Paradoxes. Gifted and Talented International
12 (1): 8-14.

190
Cropley, H. (2000). Fostering creativity in engineering undergraduates. High Abilities
Studies 11(2): 207-219.
Cropley, A. (2001). Creativity in Education and Learning: A Guide for teachers and educators: London: UCL Press.
Cropley, A. (1995). Creativity. In M. Amelang (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology VIII,
Differences in Behaviour and Performances, Part 2 Differential Psychology and
Personality Research. PP. 329-373. Hogrefe: Goettingen.
Cropley, A. and Cropley, D. (1998). “Teaching Engineering Students to be Creative –
Program and Outcomes. Australian Association of Engineering Education, 9 th
Annual
Conference.
Cropley, A. and Cropley, D. (1999). “Creativity and Cognition: Producing Effective
Novelty. Roeper Review 21: 253-260.
Cropley, A. and Cropley, D. (2000). Teaching Engineering Students to be Creative –
Program and Outcomes. Australia: University of Hamburg.
Cropley, A. and Cropley, D. (2008). Resolving the Paradoxes of Creativity: An Extended
Phase Model. Cambridge Journal of Education 38 (3): 355-373.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, Culture and a Person: A Systems View of
Creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity. PP. 325-339. Cambridge:
University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). The Domain of Creativity. In M. Runco and R. Albert
(Eds.), Theories of Creativity. PP. 190-212. Newbury Park: Sage.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and
Invention. New York: Harper Perennial.
Curriculum Development Council (2001). Learning to Learn: The Way Forward in
Curriculum Development. Hong Kong: Government Printer.

191
Daniels, D. and Zemelman, M. (2004). Creating Supportive Environments. A Handbook for Working with Beginning Teachers. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Dansereau, D. (1986). “Technical Learning Strategies”. Proceedings ASEE/IEEE
Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, New York.
Davies, T. (2001). Entrepreneurship Development in South Africa: Redefining the Role of Tertiary Institutions in a Reconfigured Higher Education System. South African
Journal of Higher Education 15(1): 32-39.
Davis, G. (1991). Teaching Creativity Thinking. In Colangelo, N. and Davis, G. (Eds.).
Handbook of Gifted Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
De Bono (1970). Lateral Thinking for Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dede, C.; Nelson, B.; Ketelhut, D.; Clarke, J. AND Browman, C. (2004). Design-Based
Research Strategies for Studying Situated Learning in a Multi-User Virtual Environment.
Available @ http://www.gse.harvard.edu. Accessed on 13\12\2009.
Dede, C. (2004). If Design-Based Research is the Answer, What is the Question?
Journal of the Learning Sciences 13(1): 105-114.
Dekker, D. (1995). Engineering Design Processes, Problem-solving and Creativity.
Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, pp. 16-19.
Design-Based Research Collective DBRC (2003). Design-Based Research: An
Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher 321): 1-9.
Dewey, J. (1915). The Subject-Matter of Metaphysical Inquiry In John Dewey: Middle
Works: 1899-1924 (Ed.) J.A. Boydston. PP3-13. Carbondale: University of Illinois Press.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy in Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Dewey, J. (1931). Philosophy and Civilization. New York: Minton, Balch.

192
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as Experience. New York. Minton. Balch.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Dillon, P. (2006). Creativity, Integrativism and a Pedagogy of Connection. Thinking
Skills and Creativity 1: 69-83.
Du Pre’, R. (2004). Position, Role and Function of the University of Technology in South
Africa. Vanderbijlpark: Vaal University of Technology Press.
Eifert, J. (1998). Responding to a Changing World: 21 st
Century Curriculum at Rose-
Human Institute of Technology. Realizing the New Paradigm for Engineering Education
Proceedings.
Engeström, Y. (2001). “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical
Reconceptualization”. Journal of Education and Work 14(1): 133-156.
Ensor, P. (2004). Curriculum. Available Online @ www.chet.org.za. Accessed 07\07\09.
Ensor, J.; Cottam, A. and Band, C. (2001). Fostering Knowledge Management through the Creative Work Environment: A Portable Model for the Advertising Industry. Journal of Information Science 27(3): 147-155.
Ernst, E. and Peden, I. (1998). Realizing the New Paradigm for Engineering Education.
Engineering Education Conference Proceedings 1(1).
Evans, P. (1999). The Key to Creativity. London: Grafton.
Facaorau, C. (1985). Creativity in Science and Technology. Bern: Huber.
Feldman, D.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Gardner, H. (1994). Changing the World, A
Framework for the Study of Creativity: London: Praeger Publishers.
Fischer, G. (1999). Social Creativity: Bringing Different Points of View Together.
Automated Software Engineering 5(4): 447-464.

193
Fischer, G. (2000). “User Modeling in Human-Computer Interaction”. Dordrecht: Kulwer
Academic Publishers. Fischer, G. (2001). Social Creativity: Bringing Different Points of
View Together. Automated Software Engineering 5(4): 447-464.
Fischer, G. (2001). Learning in Communities: A Distributed Intelligence Perspective.
Available on www.ci-journal. Accessed on 12\7\2009.
Fischer, G.; Scharff, E. and Ye, Y. (2004). “Fostering Social Creativity by Increasing
Social Capital”. In Huysman, M. and Wulf, V. (Eds.). Social Capital and IT (in Press).
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. And how it’s transforming Work,
Leisure and Everyday Life. London: Basic Books.
Florida, R. and Tinagli, I. (2004). Europe in the Creative Age: London: DEMOS.
Florman, s. (1987). The Civilized Engineer. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Fogler, H. and LeBlanc, S. (1995). Strategies and Creative Problem-solving. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Fogler, H. (1983). “The Design of a Course in Problem-solving”. AICHE Annual
Conference. AICHE Symp. Ser.
Forrester, V. and Hui, A. (2007). Creativity in the Hong Kong Classroom: What is the
Contextual Practice? Thinking Skills and Creativity 2: 30-38.
Forsyth, D. (2006). Group Dynamics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Foss, S. (1993). Beyond Persuasion. A Proposal for an Invitational Rhetoric. Prospects
Heights, IL; Waveland.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum Publishing.
French, M. (1994). Invention and Evolution: Design in Nature and Engineering. New
York: Cambridge University Press.

194
French, W. and Bell, C. (1995). Organizational Development: Behavioural Science
Intervention for Organizational Improvement (5 th
Ed.). Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
International.
Freud, S. (1957). ‘Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of his Childhood. London: Hogarth
Press.
Fritz, M. (1994). Why OBE and the Traditionalists are Both Wrong. Educational
Leadership 51(6): 79-82.
Fritz, R. (1991). Creating. New York: Fawcett.
Fuller, G. (1998). Cultivating Science: Negotiating Discourse in the Popular Texts of
Stephen Jay Gould. In Veel, R. (Ed.) Reading Science. London: Routledge.
Gadamer, H. (1989). Truth and Method. New York: Continuous Press.
Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary Genius: an inquiry into laws and consequences. London:
Macmillan.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. London:
Fontana Press.
Gardner, H. (2006). Frames of Mind. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. London:
Fontana Press.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The theory into practice. New York: Basic
Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21 st
Century.
New York: Basic Books.
Gawain, T. (1974). Reflection on Education for Creativity in Engineering. International
Association for Engineering Education Transactions in Education 17: 189-192.

195
Geertz, C. (1983). Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In R.
Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary Field Research: A Collection of Readings. PP. 37-59.
Prospects Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Gearhart, S. (1982). The womanization of Rhetoric. Women’s Studies International
Quarterly 2(1): 195-201.
Gearhart, S. (1979). The Wanderground. Wtertown, MA: Persephone Press.
Giroux, H. (2001a). Something’s Missing: Cultural Studies, Neoliberalism, and the
Politics of Education Hope. Strategies 14(2): 227-252.
Gluskinos, U. (1971). Criteria for Student Engineering Creativity and their Relationship to College Grades. Journal of Educational Measurement 8: 189-195.
Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
Goldsmith, M. (1980). Einstein: The First Hundred Years. London: Pergamon Press.
Gordon, W. (1961). Synectics. New York: Harper and Row.
Gosh, S. (1996). An Exercise in Inducing Creativity in Undergraduate Engineering
Students through Challenging Examinations and Open-Ended Design Problems. IEEE
Trans. Educ. 36(1): 113-119.
Gray, J. (1998). False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. London: Granta
Books.
Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (Eds.). (1991). Design at Work: Cooperative Design of
Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Greene, M. (1981). The Humanities and Emancipatory Possibility. Journal of Education
163(4): 287-305.
Grodzinsky, Y. and Santi, A. (2008). The Battle for Broca’s Region. Trebds in Cognitive
Science 12(12): 474-480.

196
Groner, M.; Groner, R. and Bischof, W. (1983). Approaches to Heuristics: A Historical
Review. In R. Groner, M. Groner and W. Bischof (Eds.).Methods of Heuristics. PP. 1-18.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gruber, H. and Wallace, D. (1999). The Case Study Method and Evolving Systems
Approach for Understanding Unique Creative People at Work. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.),
Handbook of Creativity. PP. 313-335. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guildford, J. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist 5: 444-454.
Guildford, J. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill.
Guildford, J. (1970). Creativity: A Quarter Century of Progress. In I. Taylor and J.
Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in Creativity. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Gruenfeld, D.; Martorana and Fan, E. (2002). What do Groups Learn from their
Worldliest Members? Direct and Indirect Influence in Dynamic Teams. Organizational
Behaviour and Human Decision-Making Processes 82(1): 45-59.
Hankins, G. (1986). “Expert Systems and the Learning Process”. Proceedings
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, New York.
Hanson, T. (1987). Engineering Creativity. Newhall, CA: INCOSE.
Hare, A. and Hare, S. (2003). Team Models and Team Size. Paper Presented at the
Annual Meeting of the American Association, Atlanta Hotel. Available
Online@www.allacademy.com.
Harel, D. and Feldman, Y. (3 rd
Ed.) (2004). Algorithms: The Spirit of Computing.
London: Pearson Education.
Harper, B.; and Hedberg, J. (1997). Creating motivating interactive learning environments: A constructivism view. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Perth,
Australia.

197
Hawking, S. (2007). A Briefer History of Time. London: Bantam Press.
Hellriegel, D.; Slocum, J. and Woodman, R. (2001). Organizational Behaviour (9 th
Ed.).
Australia: South-Western College.
Henry, J. (2004). Creative Collaboration in Organizational Settings In D. Miell and
Littleton, K. (Eds.), Collaborative Creativity: Contemporary Perspectives. London: Free
Association Books.
Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC). (2007). Draft Audit Report of the Vaal
University of Technology. Available Online@www.che.ac.za.
Herrman, W. (1987). Creative Teachers, Creative Students. Freiburg, Germany: Herder.
Hillman, J. (1982). Anima Mundi : The Return of Soul to the World: Spring: An Annual of
Archetypical Psychology and Jungian Studies 1(1): 174-188.
Hoegl, M. and Parboteeah (2007). Creativity in Innovative Projects: How teamwork matters. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 24(1): 148-166.
Hoadley, C. (2004). Methodological Alignment in DBR. Educational Psychologist 39(4):
203-212.
Hollnagel, E. & Woods, D. (2006). Epilogue: Resilience engineering precepts. In E.
Hollnagel, D. D. Woods & N. Leveson (Eds), Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts (pp. 347-358) . Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Hoorn, J. (2002). A Model for Information Technologies that can be Creative. UK:
Loughborough.
Howitz, F. (2007). The Skills Shortage: Myths and Realities? Paper presented at the
HRDA Conference, June 2007.
Hoyt, D. (1965). Predicting Academic Succes for Nursing Students. Nursing Research
14(4): 341-344.

198
Hsiao, H. and Liang, Y. (2003). World Transactions on Engineering and Technology.
Education 3(2): 403-411.
Hung, Y. (2002). Using Computer Mediated Communication to Enhance Students’
Critical Thinking. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of
Hong Kong.
Ihsen, I. (1998). Creativity, Complexity and Self-similarity: The Vision of the Fractual
University. European Journal of Engineering Education 23(1): 13-22.
International Entrepreneurship 2009 @ www.internationalentrepreneurship.com
Jackson, S. (1996). The Consequences of Diversity in Multidisciplinary Work Teams.
New York: New York University Press.
Jackson, N. (2004). “How can Creativity be Taught? Personal Accounts of Teaching to promote Students’ Creativity. Available on http://www.heacademy.ac.uk\1418.htm.
Jackson, N. and Shaw, M. (2006). “Subject Perspectives on Creativity” In Jackson, N.
(2006) Eds. Developing Creativity in Higher Education: An Imaginative Curriculum.
London: Routledge: 89-108.
Jackson, N. (2008). Tackling the Wicked Problem of Creativity in Higher Education.
ARC Presentation at the ARC Centre for the Creative Industries and Innovation.
International Conference, Brisbane, 2008.
Jackson, N. and Sinclair, C. (2010). Developing Students’ Creativity: Searching for an
Appropriate Pedagogy. Unpublished Manuscript. Available on http://.heacademy.ac.uk.
Jardine, D. (2008). On the While of Things. Journal of the American Association for the
Advancement of Curriculum Studies 4(1): 1-17.
Jeffrey, B. and Craft, A. (2001). ‘The Universalization of Creativity’. In Craft, A.; Jeffrey,
B. and Leibling, M. (Eds.), Creativity in Education. London: Continuum.

199
Jenlink, P. (2004). Education, Social Creativity and the Evolution of Society. World
Futures 60: 225-240.
Johnson-Laird, P. (2006). How we Reason. Oxford: Oxford University.
John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative Collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jordaan, J. & Jordaan, W. (1989). Man in Context. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Kalantzis, M. and Cope, B. 2008. New Learning: Elements of a Science of Education .
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kampylis, P.; Berki, E. and Saariluoma, P. (2009). In-Service and Prospective Teachers
Conceptions of Creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity 4: 15-29.
Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The Object of Activity: Making Sense of the Sense-Maker. Mind,
Culture and Activity 12(1): 4-18.
Karnes, F. and Collins, E. (1978). States Definitions on the Gifted and Talented. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 22: 44-62.
Kast, F. and Rosenweig, J. (1985). Organization and Management: A Systems and
Contingency Approach (4 th
Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kauffmann, S. (1979). Intelligent Testing with the WISC-R. New York: Wiley.
Kelly, A. (2004). Design Research in Education: Yes, but is it Methodological? Journal of the Learning Sciences 13(1): 115-128.
Kearney, R. (1988). The Wake of Imagination: Toward a Postmodern Culture.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

200
Kearney, M. (2002). Classroom Use of multimedia-supported predict-observe-explain tasks to elicit and promote discussion about students’ physics conceptions. Unpublished
PhD dissertation, Perth: Curtin University of Technology.
Kemnitzer, S. (1999). Creativity in Engineering Education: Preparing Students for the
Twenty First Century. Available Online@ www.engnet. Accessed on 21\05\2007.
King, N. and Anderson, M. (1990). “Innovation in Working Groups”. In West, M. and
Farr, J. (Eds.). Innovation and Creativity at Work. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Klein, G. (1998). Naturalistic Decision-Making. Human Systems IAZ XI (3): 16-19.
Klimoski, R. and Mohammed, S. (1994). Team Mental Models: Construct or Metaphor.
Journal of Management 20: 403-437.
Knight, P. and Yorke, M. 2004. Learning, Curriculum and Employability in Higher
Education.
London: Taylor and Francis.
Korten, D.C. (1995). When Corporations Rule the World. West Hartford: Kumarian
Press.
Kraak, A. (2006). “Accidental Drift” in South African Universities of Technology:
Beneficial or Detrimental? Perspectives in Education 24(3): 135-152.
Kraak, A. (2008). Incoherence in the South African Labour Market for Intermediate
Skills. Journal of Education and Work 22(3): 197-215.
Kreitner, R. and Kinicki, A. (1995). Organizational Behaviour (3 rd
Ed.). Chicago: Irwin.
Krueger, R. (1988). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 3 rd
Edition.
London: Sage Publications.

201
Kryssanov, V.; Tamaki, H. and Kitamura, S. (2001). Understanding Design
Fundamentals: How Synthesis and Analysis Drive Creativity, Resulting in Emergence.
Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 15: 329-342.
Kryssanov, V.; Tamaki, H. and Kitamura, S. (2000). A Prolegomenon to a Semiotic
Theory of Creativity. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on
Industrial Electronics, Control and Instrumentation, IECON-2000. Nagoya: 2583-2588.
Kurfiss, J. (1988). Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice and Possibilities. ASHE-
ERIC Higher Education Report 2: Washington DC: Association for the Study of Higher
Education.
Landman, A.; Swanepoel, E and Bodenstein, H. (1982). Fundamental Pedagogics for the Student and the Teacher. Cape Town: Juta.
Langan-Fox, J; Anglim, J. and Wilson. (2004). Mental Models, Team Mental Models and
Performance: Process, Development and Future Directions. Human Factors and
Ergonomics in Manufacturing 14(4): 331-352.
Laszlo, E. (1994). The Choice of Evolution or Extinction? New York: G.P. Putnam’s
Sons.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leake, D. (1996). Case-Based Reasoning: Experiences, Lessons and Future
Directions. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.

202
Lee, J. and Lee, S. (2002). Case Studies in TRIZ: FBC (Fluidized Bed Combustion)
Boiler’s Tube Erosion. Available @ http://www.triz-journal.com.
Lewin, K. (1942). Field Theory and Learning In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field Theory in
Social Science: 60-86. New York: Harper and Row.
Leinhardt, T. (1992). Analysis of Arithmetic for Mathematics Teaching. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lewis, T. (2004). Creativity on the Teaching Agenda. European Journal of Engineering
Education 29(3): 415-428.
Li, J. (2005). Unleashing Innovation: A Socio-Cognitive Approach. Druid Tenth
Anniversary Summer Conference 2005 on Dynamics of Industry and Innovation:
Organizations, Networks and Systems.
Lochhead, J. and Whimbey, A. (1987). Teaching Analytical Reasoning through Thinking
Aloud Pair Problem-solving. In Stice, J. (Ed.), Developing Critical Thinking and Problemsolving Abilities, New Directions for Teaching and Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Lubart, T. (1990). Creativity and Cross-cultural Variation. International Journal of
Psychology 25: 39-59.
Ludwig, A. (1992). Culture and Creativity. American Journal of Psychotherapy XLVI (3):
455—469.
Ludwig, A. (1995). The Price of Greatness. New York: Guilford Press.
Luhmann, N. (1990). Social Systems. Foundations of a General Theory. Mulino:
Bologna.
Lyotard, J. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.

203
McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
McLaren, P. (1999). A Pedagogy of Possibility: Reflecting upon Paulo Freire’s Politics of
Education. Education Researcher 28: 49-54.
Macy, J. (1991). Mutual Causality in Buddhism and General Systems Theory. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Magee, C. (2003). Advancing Inventive Creativity through Education. The LEMELSON
MIT.
Maillardet, F. What Outcome is Engineering Education Trying to Achieve? In Baillie and
Moore (2004). Effective Learning and Teaching in Engineering. New York: Routledge-
Falmer.
Mann, D. (2001). System Operator Tutorial 1-4. The TRIZ Journal. Available on www.triz-journal.com .
Mann, D. (2002). Hands-On Systematic Innovation. Ieper, Belgium: Crex Press.
Masi, J. (1989). Teaching the Process of Creativity in the Engineering Classroom. IEEE
Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings, pp. 288-292.
Mahboub, K.; Portillo, M.; Liu, Y. and Chandraratna, S. (2004). Measuring and
Enhancing Creativity. European Journal of Engineering Education 29(3): 429-436.
Martins, N. (1999). Managing Employee Trust during Transformation. Paper presented at VI European Congress of Psychology, Rome.
Martinsen, O. (1995). Cognitive Styles and Experience in Solving Insight Problems:
Replication and Extension. Creativity Research Journal 8: 291-298.
Mathews, J. and Jahanian, S. (1999). A Pedagogical Strategy fro Gradual
Enhancement of Creative Performance of the Students. European Journal of
Engineering Education 24(1):49-58.

204
Mathieu, J.; Heffner, T.; Goodwin, G.; Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J. (2000). The
Influence of Shared Mental Models on Team Process and Performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology 85(2): 273-283.
Mayer, R. (1992). Thinking, Problem-solving and Cognition. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Mbeki, M. (2009). Architects of Poverty: Why African Capitalism Needs Changing.
Johannesburg: Picador Africa.
McConnell, D. & Sharples, M. (1983) Distance Teaching by CYCLOPS: an Educational
Evaluation of the Open University’s Telewriting System, British Journal of Educational
Technology, 14, 2, pp. 109-126.
McGregor, D. (2002). Theory X and Theory Y. Workforce 8(1): 32-34.
McKenna, S. and Sutherland, L. (2006). Balancing Knowledge Construction and Skills
Training in Universities of Technology. Perspectives in Education 24(1): 15-24.
McConnell, D. & Sharples, M. (1983) Distance Teaching by CYCLOPS: an Educational
Evaluation of the Open University’s Telewriting System, British Journal of Educational
Technology, 14, 2, pp. 109-126.
McCown, R.; Driscoll, M. and Roop, P. (1996). Educational Psychology: A Learning-
Centered Approach to Classroom Practice. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Mead, G. (1938). The Philosophy of the Act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Merton, R.; Fiske, M. and Kendall, P. (1956). The Focused Interview. A Manual of
Problems and Procedures. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.
Messick, S. (1992). The Interplay of Evidence and Consequences in the Validation of
Performance Assessments. Educational Researcher 23(2): 13-23.

205
Mettes, C.; Pilot, A.; Roossink, H. and Kramers-Pals (1981). Teaching and Learning
Problem-solving in Science: Part 11: Learning Problem-solving in a Thermodynamics
Course. J. Chem. Educ. 58(1): 51-70.
Meyer, J. (2009). Helping Students: Integrating Learning, Metalearning and Threshold
Concepts. Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Challenging Assumptions.
Proceedings of the National Academy’s Second Annual Conference.
Meyer, W.; Moore, C. and Viljoen, H. (1989). Personality Theories: From Freud to
Frankl. Isando: Lexicon Publishers (Proprietary) Limited.
Millar, G. (2002). The Torrance Kids and Mid-Life. Westport, CT: Ablex.
Mitchell, C. (1998). Creativity is about being free… European Journal of Engineering
Education 23(1): 23-34.
Mitchell, J. (2004). The Six Myths of Creativity. Avalaible Online@Airtime.com.
Accessed 02/05/2009.
Moffatt, M. Coming of Age in New Jersey. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press.
Monteiro, M.; Lees, B. and Branki, C. (1998). A Review of Engineering Design Support
Systems and Models. In Jacucci, G.; Olling, G.; Preiss, K. and Wozny, M. (Editors).
Globalization of Manufacturing in the Digital Communications Era of the 21 st
Century:
Innovation, Agility, and the Virtual Enterprise. PP. 857-868. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Montuori, A. and Purser, R. (1997). Social Creativity: The Challenge of Complexity.
Pluriverso 1(2): 78-88.
Morin, E. (1983). Method, Order Disorder Organization. Milano: Feltrinelli. New York:
Simon & Schuster.

206
Morin, E. (1992). The Concept of System and the Paradigm of Complexity. In M.
Maruyama (Ed.), Context and Complexity. Cultivating Contextual Understanding. PP.
125-136. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Muffatto, M. and Roveda, M. (2002). Product Architecture and Platforms: A Conceptual
Framework. International Journal of Technology Management 24(1): 1-16.
Muller, J. and Taylor, N. (1993). Into other Wor(l)ds: Curricular Knowledge in the
Making. In Taylor, N. (Editor), Inventing Knowledge: Contests in Curriculum
Construction. Johannesburg: Maskew Miller Longman.
Murphy, N. (1990). Scientific Realism and Postmodern Philosophy. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 41(1): 291-303.
Muller, J. and Taylor, N. (1990) In Taylor, N. (1990). Inventing Knowledge: Contests in
Curriculum Construction. Johannesburg: Masker Miller Longman.
Murray, D. (2008). Borrowing Brilliance: The Six Steps to Business Innovation by
Building on the Ideas of Others. London: Random House Business Books.
Naidoo, R. Universities in the Marketplace: The Distortion of Teaching and Research In
Barnett, R. (2005). Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research,
Scholarship and Teaching. New York: Open University Press.
Oakes, G., Felton, A. and Garner, K. (2006). From the Formal to the Innovative: The
Use of Case Studies and Sustainable Projects in Developing a Design Process Model for Educating Product\Industrial Designers. European Journal of Engineering Education
31 (5): 567-579.
Olesko, K. The Foundations of a Canon: Kohlrausch’s Practical Physics In Kaiser, D.
(2005) Pedagogy and the Practice of Science: Historical and Contemporary
Perspectives. London: The MIT Press.
Opie, C. (2004). Doing Educational Research. London: Sage Publications.
Orloff, M. (2003). Inventive Thinking through TRIZ. Berlin: Springer.

207
Page, D. and Murthy, D. (1990). A Programme to Integrate Engineering, Creativity and
Management in Undergraduate. European Journal of Engineering Education 15(1): 369-
381.
Pagels, H. (1988). Dreams of Reason. The Computer and the Rise of the Sciences of
Complexity. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2003). Critical and Creative Thinking. San Francisco: The
Foundation of Critical Thinking.
Pauw, K., Bhorat, H., Goga, S., Ncube, L., Oosthuizen, M. and Van der Oosthuizen, C.
(2006). Graduate Unemployment in the Context of Skills Shortages, Education and
Training: Findings from a Survey. A Working Paper 9603. University of Cape Town
Development Policy Research Unit.
Perry, W. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Peters, T. (2003). Re-imagine: Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age. New York:
Penguin Company.
Pitso, T. (2000). Curriculum 2005: Examining the Evidence in the Vanderbijlpark North
District of the Gauteng Education Department. Unpublished Masters’ Degree
Dissertation. University of the Witwatersrand.
Pitso, T. (2007). Rhetorics of Creativity: Sensing Engineering Undergraduate Limits in
Universities of Technology (UoTs) in South Africa. The International Journal of Learning
14 (8): 57-68.
Pitso, T. (2008). Engineering Sustainable Futures. International Multi-Conference on
Engineering and Technological Innovation Peer-Reviewed Proceedings 2(1): 42-46.

208
Pitso, T. (2009). Research as Potentially Apolitical: Possible Impossibility or Impossible
Possibility? South African Journal of Higher Education 23(1):155-164.
Pitso, T. (2009). New Challenges, New Thinking: A Case for Inventive Problem-solving in Engineering Undergraduates. International Multi-Conference on Engineering and
Technological Innovation Peer Reviewed Proceedings 1(3): 201-206.
Pitso, T. (2010). Unleashing Ideality Entrepreneurship in Engineering Undergraduate
Curriculum. A Case for One University of Technology in South Africa. Presented at the
2010 New Generation University Conference held in Vanderbijlpark.
Plucker, J. (1999). Is the Proof in the Pudding? Reanalysis of Torrance’s (1958-to
Present) Longitudinal Data. Creativity Research Journal 12: 103-114.
Polivinkin, A. (1985). Laws of Organization and Evolution of Technique. VPI, Volgograd.
Polivinkin, A. (1991). Theory of New Technique Design: Laws of Technical Systems and their Applications. Moscow: Informelektro.
Popkewitz, T. (1991). A Political Sociology of Educational Reform: Power/Knolwedge in
Teaching, Teacher Education and Research. New York: Bantam Books.
Pratt, D (1998). Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult and Higher Education. Florida:
Krieger Publishing Company.
Pretti, A. and Miotto, P. (1997). The Contribution of Psychiatry to the Study of
Creativity: Implications for AI Research. In Veale, T. (Editor). Proceedings of the
International Mind 11 Conference Computational Models of Creative Cognition.
Amsterdam: Benjamin.
Process Instrumentation (2009): Learning Guide: Second Semester. Vanderbijlpark:
VUT.
Proctor, T. (2002). Creative Problem-solving for Managers. London: Routledge.

209
Plsek, P. (1996). Models for the Creative Process. Available
Online@http://www.directedcreativity.com. Searched on 15/04/2010.
Ramphele, M. (1993). A Bed called Home: Life in Migrant Labour Hostels of Cape
Town. Cape Town: David Phillip.
Rantanen, K. & Domb, E. (2002). Simplified TRIZ: new problem-solving applications for
Engineers and Manufacturing Professionals. London: St. Lucie Press.
Renzulli, J. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Reexamining a Definition. Phi Delta
Kappan 60(3): 180-184.
Renzulli, J. (1992). A General Theory for the Development of Creative Productivity through the Pursuit of Ideal Acts of Learning. Gifted Child Quarterly 36: 170-182.
Resnick, L.; Levine, B. and Teasley, S. (1991). Perspectives on Socially Shared
Cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Reymen, I. (2001). Improving Design Processes through Structured Reflection: A
Domain independent Approach, SAI Report 2001/1, Stan Ackermans Institute,
Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Rouse, W.; Cannon-Bowers and Salas (1992). The Role of Mental Models in Team
Performance in Complex Systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics 22(6): 1296-1308.
Rouse, W. and Morris, N. (1986). On Looking into the Black Box: Prospects and Limits in the Search for Mental Models. Psychological Bulletin 100: 349-363.
Rogers, C. (1977). Carl Rogers on Personal Power. London: Constable & Company.
Rugarcia, A.; Felder, R.; Woods, D. and Stice, J. (2000). The Future of Engineering
Education: 1. Vision for a New Century. Chem. Engr. Education 34(1): 16-25.
Runco, M. and Albert, R. (Eds.). (1990). Theories of Creativity. Newbury Park: Sage.

210
Runté, R. (1995). Is Teaching a Profession? In Thinking about Teaching: An
Introduction. Toronto: Harcourt Brace.
Ryhammar, L and Brolin, C. (1999). ‘Creativity Research: Historical Considerations and
Main Lines of Development’. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 43(2): 259-
273.
Salamatov, Y. (1999). TRIZ: The Right Solution at the Right Time. Enschede: Grafisch
Bedirijf van der Schaaf.
Salas, E.; Kosarzycki, M.; Tannebaum, S. and Carnegie, D. (2005). Aligning Work
Teams and HR Practices. In R.J. Burke and Cooper, C. (Eds.). Reinventing Human
Resources Management: Challenges and New Directions (pp. 133-149). New York:
Routledge.
Salas, E.; Rosen, M.; Burke, C.; Goodwin, G. (In Press). The Wisdom of Collectives in
Organization: An Update of the Teamwork Competence. In Salas, E.; Goodwin, G. and
Burke, C. (Eds.) Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary
Perspectives and Approaches. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salas, E.; Rosen, E.; Burke, M. and Fiore, C. (2004). Tightly Coupling Cognition:
Understanding how Communication and Awareness Drive Coordination in Teams. The
International C2 Journal 2(1): 1-32.
Salas, E.; Rosen, M.; Burke, C.; Goodwin, G. and Fiore, C. (2006). Team Effectiveness and Performance. The International C2 Journal 3(1): 45-69.
Säljö, R. (1979). Learning about Learning. Higher Education 8 (4): 443-451.
Salomon, G., & Almog, T. (1998). Educational psychology and technology: A matter of reciprocal relations. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 222–241.
Sampson, E. (1977). Psychology and the American Ideal. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 35: 767-782.

211
Sampson, E. (1978). Scientific Paradigms and Social Values: Wanted – A New
Scientific Revolution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36: 1332-1343.
Sampson, E. (1981). Cognitive Psychology as Ideology. American Psychologist 36:
730-743.
Sampson, E. (1983). Justice and the Critique of Pure Psychology. New York: Plenum
Press.
Sampson, E. (1993). Celebrating the Other. A Dialogue Account of Human Nature.
Boulder: Westview Press.
Sandoval, W. and Bell, P. (2004). Design-Based Research Methods for Studying
Learning in Context. Educational Psychologist 39(4): 199-201.
Savransky, S. (2000). Engineering of Creativity. New York: CRC Press.
Schank, R. and Foster, D. (1995). The Engineering of Creativity: A Review of Boden’s
The Creative Mind. Artficial Intelligence Journal 79: 129-143.
Scholastic Testing Service (STS) (1990). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Illinois:
STS.
Schön, D. (1996). Reflective Conversations with Materials. In T. Winograd (Ed.),
Bringing Design to Software. New York: ACM Press.
Schoon, I. (1992). Creative Achievement in Architecture: A Psychological Study. Leiden:
DSWO Press.
Schwarzkopf, D. (1981). Creativity and Mental Health in Everyday Life. Available @ www.informaworld.com. Accessed 12\06\2007.
Schwartz, C. (1987). Personality and the Unification of Psychology and Modern
Physics: A Systems Approach. In J. Arononf, A. Rubin and R. Zucker (Eds.), The
Emergence of Personality. New York: Springer.

212
Senge, P. (2001). The Dance of Change: The Challenges of Sustaining Momentum in
Learning Organizations. New York: Doubleday.
Shalin, N. (1991). The Pragmatic Origins of Symbolic Interactionism and the Crisis of
Classical Science. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 12 (1): 223-251.
Sharples, M. (1983). The Use of Computers to Aid the Teaching of Creative Writing,
AEDS Journal, 16, 2, pp. 79-91.
Sharples, M. (2000). The Design of Personal Mobile Technologies for Lifelong Learning.
Computers and Education, 34, 177-193.
Shraples, M; Jeffrey, N.; Du Boulay, J.; Teather, D.; Teather, B. and Du Boulay, G.
(2002). Socio-cognitive Engineering: A Methdology for the Design of Human Centred
Technology. London: University of Birmingham Press.
Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data. London: Sage Publications.
Sklobosvsky, K. and Sharipov, R. (1995). Theory, Practice and Application of Inventive
Problems Decision. Obninsk: Protva-Prin.
Slabbert, T. (2003). Urban Economic Review and Economic Sustainability. Vaal
Research Group.
Slater, P. (1991). A Dream Deferred. America’s Discontent and the Search for a New
Democratic Ideal. Boston: Deacon.
Smith, K. (1986). “Artificial Intelligence and Learning How to Learn”. Proceedings
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, New York.
Smith, K. (1987). Educational Engineering: Heuristics for Improving Learning
Effectiveness and Efficiency. Eng. Educ. 274: 1-9.
Smith, G. and Carlsson, I. The Creative Process. A Functional Model Based on
Empirical Studies from Early Childhood to Middle Age In Psychological Issues
Monograph 57. New York: International Universities Press.

213
Smoliar, S. (2003). Marvin Minsky: The Society of Mind. In Clancey, W.; Smoliar, S. and
Stefik, M. (2003). Contemplating Minds: A forum for Artificial Intelligence. Boston:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.S
Snyder, B. (1967). Creative Students in Science and Engineering. Universities Quarterly
21: 205-218.
Spearman, C. (1927). “The Abilities of Man”. London: Macmillan.
Srinivasan, R. and Kraslawski, A. (2006). Application of the TRIZ Creativity
Enhancement Approach to Design of Inherently Safer Chemical Processes. Chemical
Engineering and Processing 45: 507-514.
Stake, R. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.
Standler, R. (1998). Creativity in Science and Engineering. Available @ www.rbso.com accessed on 07 July 2007.
Starko, A. (2005). Creativity in the Classrooms: Schools of Curious Delight (3 rd
Ed.).
New York: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Stein, M. (1992). Creativity Programs in Socio-historical Context. In S. Parnes (Ed.),
Source Book for Creative Problem-Solving. Buffalo. PP. 85-88. New York: Creative
Education Foundation Press.
Sternberg, R. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Sternberg, R. (1994). Thinking Styles: Theory and Assessment at the Interface between
Intelligence and Personality. In Sternberg, RJ, Ruzgis, P. (Editors). Personality and
Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R (ed). (1999). The Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

214
Sternberg, R. and Frensch, P. (Eds.). (1991). Complex Problem-solving Principles and
Mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sternberg, R. and Lubart, T. (1991). Creating Creative Minds. Phi Delta Kappan 72:
608-614.
Sternberg, R. (1995). Conceptions of Expertise in Complex Problem-solving: A
Comparison of Alternative Conceptions. In P. Frensch and J. Funke (Eds.), Complex
Problem-solving: The European Perspective. PP. 295-321. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Stevenson, J. (2004). Developing Technological knowledge. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education 14(1): 5-19.
Stewart, E and Bennett, M. (1991). American Cultural Patterns: A Cross-cultural
Perspective (Revised Edition). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Stouffer, W., Russell, J. and Oliva, G. (2004). Making the Strange Familiar: Creativity and the Future of Engineering Education. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for
Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.
Sui, M. (2000). A Study of the Relationship between the Colour Vision Deficienc and
Creativity of Design and Technology Students. Korean Journal of Thinking and
Problem-solving 10(1): 21-30.
Sui, M. (2002). Reception of Users: Respecting the Perspectives of Users of Creative
Thinking in Design. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem-solving 12(2): 7584.
Surma, B. and Braunschweig, B. (1996). Case-Base Retrieval in Process Engineering:
Supporting Design by Reusing Flowsheets. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 9(4): 385-391.
Suzuki, D. (2009). Doing Business in a New Climate: A Guide To measuring, Offsetting
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation.
Tatsuno, S. (1990). Created in Japan. From Imitators to World-class Innovators. New
York: Harper Business.

215
Taylor, I. (1959). The Nature of the Creative Process. New York: Hasting House.
Thaver, L.(2006). “At Home”, institutional culture and higher education: Some
Methodological Considerations. Perspectives in Education 24(1): 1-15.
Tom, A. (1997). The Deliberate Relationship: A Frame for Talking about Faculty-Student
Relationships. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research 43(1): 3-21.
Törnkvist, S. (1998). Creativity: Can it be taught? The Case of Engineering Education.
European Journal of Engineering Educatio 23 (1): 5-12.
Torrance, E. (1966). Torrance Tests of Creativity. Princeton: Personnel Press.
Torrance, E. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Lexington: Ginn & Company.
Torrance, E. (1990). Torrance’s Tests of Creative Thinking: Manual for Scoring and
Interpreting Results. Scholastic Testing Service. Inc.
Torrance, E. (1984). The Torrance’s Tests of Creative Thinking Streamlined Manual
Figural A and B.
Torrance, E. (1988). The Nature of Creativity as Manifest in its Testing. In R. Sternberg
(Ed.). The Nature of Creativity. PP. 43-75. Cambridge: University Press.
Torrance, E. and Wu, T. (1981). A Comparative Longitudinal Study of the Adult Creative
Achievements of Elementary School identified as Highly Intelligent and as Highly
Creative. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly 6(1): 1-9.
Vallas, S. (2005). Theorizing Teamwork under Contemporary Capitalism. In Keister, L.
(Ed.). Worker Participation: Current Research and Future Trends. (Research in the
Sociology of Work, Volume 16). Emerald Group Publishing Limited (pp. 2-24).
Valle, R. (1981). Relativistic Quantum Psychology: A Reconceptualization of What We
Knew. In R.S. Valle and R. Von Eckartsberg (Eds.), The Metaphors of Consciousness.
PP. 419-436.

216
Valtanen, J.; Berki, E.; Kampylis, P. and Theodorakopoulou, M. (2008). Manifold
Thinking and Distributed Problem-Based Learning: Is there Potential for ICT Support?
Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference E-Learning 2008. Amsterdam:
Netherlands.
Van Gundy, A. (1993). Techniques of Structured Problem-solving. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Van Oers, B. (1998). From Context to Contextualizing. Learning and Instruction 8(6):
473-488.
Van Rossum, E. and Taylor, I. (1987). The Relationship between Conceptions of
Learning and Good Teaching. A Scheme for Cognitive Development. Paper presented to the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Washington, DC.
Vinacke, W. (1953). The Psychology of Thinking. New York: McGraw Hill.
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1975). Perspectives on General Systems Theory. New York:
Braziller.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between Learning and Development: From Mind to
Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Usher, R. and Edwards, R. (1994). Postmodernism and Education. London: Routledge.
Wallach, H. (1976). On Perception. New York: Quadrangle/New York Times Book co.
Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. London: Jonathan Cape.
Wang, F. and Hannafin, M. (2005). Design-Based Research and Technology-Enhanced
Learning Environments. Educational Technology Research and Development 53(4): 5-
23.
Wankat, P. and Oreovicz, F. (2007). Teaching Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill.

217
Weiner, R. (2000). Creativity and Beyond: Cultures, Values and Change. Albany NY:
State University of New York Press.
Weisberg, R. (1986). Genius, and Other Myths. New York: Holt Co.
Weisberg, R. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Wertheimer, M. (1945). Productive Thinking. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Wiggins, G. (2006). A preliminary Framework for Description Analysis and Comparison of Creative Systems. Journal of Knowledge Based Systems 19(7): 449-458.
White, J. (2004). ‘Howard Gardner: The Myth of Multiple Intelligences. London: Institute of Education.
Whitelock, Faulkner and Miell (2008). Promoting in PhD Supervision: Tensions and
Dilemmas. Thinking Skills and Creativity 3: 143-153.
Williams, D. (1953). “The Elements of Being”. Review of Metaphysics 7: 3-18.
Winberg, C. (2005). Continuities and Discontinuities in the Journey from Technikon to
University of Technology. South African Journal of Higher Education 19(2): 1-13.
Woods, D. (1980). “Using Troubleshooting Problems for Learning”. Chem. Educ. 88:
130.
Woods, D. (1983). “Workshop in Using Troubleshooting Problems for Learning”. ASEE
Annual Conference, 1983.
World Bank (2002). Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary
Institution. Washington DC: World Bank.
Yamada, H. and Tam, A. (1996). Prediction Study of Adult Creative Achievement:
Torrance’s Longitudinal Study of Creativity Revisited. Journal of Creative Behavior 30:
144-149.

218
Yokomoto, C. and Ware, R. (1990). “Facilitating Student Awareness of the Complexity of Expertise”. Proceedings ASEE Annual Conference. ASEE, Washington DC.
World Bank (2002). Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary
Institution. Washington DC: World Bank.
Yip, W. (1998). The Difference between Traditional Learning Environment and
Information Enriched Environment on the Acquisition and Transfer of Higher-Order
Thinking in a Biological Context. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Hong Kong: The
University of Hong Kong.
Zwicky, F. (1948). The Morphological Method of Analysis and Construction. New York:
Wiley-Inter-Science.

219
Appendix A1
1.
What is the meaning of creativity to you?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________
2.
Do you think creativity should be developed in your classrooms and why?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
3.
How often do you engage in classroom activities that compel you to think creatively?
Never Rarely Often
If rarely or often, elaborate on the activities you engage in:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________

220
4.
Have you ever been trained on specific creative problem-solving techniques or models such as
TRIZ?
Yes No
If yes, elaborate on kind and nature of problem and application of TRIZ:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
5.
How often do you debate, discuss and disagree on certain learning content? (Need for consensus on response)
Never Rarely Often
If rarely or often elaborate:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________
6.
Do you think you are capable of contributing new, improved or alternative engineering processes or procedures? (need for consensus response)
Yes No

221
If yes or no elaborate
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________
7.
Do you think you should learn to think creatively? (Need for consensus response)
Yes No
Elaborate:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________
8.
Do you think your classroom activities are doing enough to encourage you to think creatively?
Yes No
Elaborate:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______

222

223
1.
Do you hold a formal qualification in either engineering education or curriculum?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
2.
Have you ever attended any course or learnshop on engineering education or curriculum? If yes, elaborate on dates, venue, quality and transferability to own context
..................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................
3.
Since the adoption of OBE in 2004, have you ever attended any learnshop or trained on OBE and its implications for how you are teaching and assessing?
---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.
Have you ever been trained on how to encourage discussion, debate and dissent in your teaching without losing focus of the outcomes of learning? If yes elaborate on application in your teaching
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

224
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________
5.
Have you ever been trained on how to use Case Studies and Projects in your teaching? If yes, comment on application in your teaching
6.
What are your normal teaching ways in final year undergraduate study?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
____
7.
How do you approach teaching and assessment in your final year undergraduate classes? Is it also the same way you approach first and second undergraduate classes?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

225
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________
8.
What do you consider as the role of learners in your own teaching?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
____
9.
What do you consider as your role in teaching?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
10.
How do you think assessment should take place in the final year of engineering undergraduate studies?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

226
__________________________________________________________________________________
____
11.
What is the meaning of creativity to you?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________
12.
Do you think it should be stimulated in final year undergraduate classes?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________
If yes, how should creativity be stimulated in final undergraduate classes?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
13.
What are the factors or things that make it difficult for you to encourage creativity in final year undergraduate classes?

227
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________
14.
What do you think should be done to encourage creativity in final year undergraduate classes?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
____
15.
Would it be worth your while to expose yourself to some literature on creativity?

228
Appendix A2
The Observational Protocol
Themes Covered and key aspects of each theme
1. Distributed Tentativeness (trust)
•
Willingness to learn
• Readiness to verify facts and share them
•
Dealing with disconfirmation data
• Coping with learning anxiety
Purpose
Check dominance of discussion, leadership challenges, and learning receptivity irrespective of position or role
2. Aligned Intent (shared mental models)
•
•
Shared and understood meaning (problem, solution)
Shared goals (common understanding of what needs to be achieved)
How team actors deal with group dynamics, harness them towards a specific goal, reduce competition and foster co-operation
3. Genuine Dialogic Reconstruction
•
Creation of safe conversations
•
Participants have a sense of being valued and wanted (each view counts for something)
Check how team actors deal with verbal strategies that seek to silence or reduce the value of others views or force others into a particular view, carefully watch for these conversation safety violations, intervene when dialogue is in danger of degenerating into unproductiveness by focus groups meetings
4. Sensitiveness
•
Respect for the views and contribution of all team actors
Check the general atmosphere of the discussion for development and growth of collective goal, responsibility and accountability
•
Discussion and debates based on integrity (meeting the demands of fairness)

229
Appendix B
TTCT
Activities 1-3: Ask and Guess
The first three activities are based on a given picture and test the candidates’ abilities to ask relevant questions about things they see but do not understand and hazard guesses as to the possible causes and consequences of what is happening or might have happened in the picture.
Activity 4: Product Improvement
The candidates are shown a stuffed toy monkey – the kind you can buy in ordinary stores. The toy monkey is about six inches tall and weighs about 168g (six ounces). Candidates are expected to think about the cleverest, most interesting and unusual ways of changing the toy monkey so that children could have improved fun playing with it.
Activity 5: Unusual Uses (Tin Cans)
The candidates are expected to come up with interesting and unusual ways of using tin cans for something of value. The tin cans size is unimportant as long as it is a tin can.
Activity 7: Just Suppose
The candidates are given an improbable situation, in this case, it is suggested that a great fog fell over the earth and all that people could see of other people are their feet. The candidates are then requested to explain what would transpire and how that would change life on earth.
All these activities are timed and spaces are provided on the test sheet for candidates to complete on.
Candidates are, however, encouraged to use extra paper as and when such a need arises. The scoring of the TTCT can be done by lecturers or educators as long as they stick to the Scoring and Interpreting
Results manual.
A study conducted to find out how trained and untrained scorers would perform, that is, the reliability of their scoring shows that the mean reliability coefficients for the verbal tests are: Fluency, 0.99; flexibility,
0.95 and originality, 0.91. This means that a person who meticulously applies the manual instruction should not find it difficult to score the TTCT accurately.

230
Appendix C
Letter of Permission
Research Committee Chairperson
I am a PhD student in curriculum studies at the University of the Witwatersrand and request permission to conduct research on creativity within the final year engineering undergraduates. The main purpose of the study is to facilitate, through a Sequential, Transformative Mixed (Invitational Engagement)
Research methods, the selection and implementation of a creativity conception that may foster engineering creativity in these classrooms. Invitational Engagement Research method is a combination of Action Research, Bahktin’s Model of Engagement and the pre- and post measures of an experimental design (see appendix).
The study will cause minimal interruption in the scheduling of classroom activities as it involves what is taking place in the classroom during the normal course of learning with some changes on classroom activities that are directly related to the syllabus of the students.
I have already held discussions with three of your lecturers in the final year undergraduate classes and have shown keen interest in the study as it relates directly to OBE curriculum enactment challenges.
It is my wish to cooperate fully with whatever specifications attached to this request.
Warm regards,
Teboho Pitso

231
Appendix D
Letter of Consent
I (name in full)……………………………………………….hereby agree to participate in the research that is conducted by Teboho Pitso for his PhD studies. I am fully aware that my contribution as a research participant in this study will form part of the main body of this PhD study and that the information elicited in this research will be used for educational purposes only.
I also participate voluntarily in this research and reserves the right to withdraw from it as and when I feel violated or when my human dignity is compromised in any way. I also understand that my name and that of the institution shall remain anonymous in the research and the thesis.

Appendix E
Creativity Model (Pilot Phase)
Micro-level macro-level
Pattern of evolution
T
Resources\inputs a) Natural resources Nature of the problem b) Time resources -contradiction c) Space resources d) System resources e) Energy resources
-diagnosis
-trimming
-analogy
-synthesis f) Human resources
-genesis
Outcomes
1.
Is the system working near-perfect?
2.
What does it mean to say it works near-perfect?
T
232

233
Appendix F
CASE STUDIES
Greening your Institution
Three critical resources are necessary for the normal and optimal operation of your institution – water, energy and paper. It is estimated that on average one South African uses 156 litres of water per day and it takes an average of 11, 000 litres of water to make one pair of jeans and almost 400, 000 litres of water are used to produce one car. Given that South Africa is already importing water through the Midlands Projects from Lesotho and has erratic weather patterns, water has become a critical resource that needs careful use.
Based on the information above, calculate the average water usage in your institution per month and also suggest ways of reducing water wastage and promoting prudent use of water.
Secondly, try to find out how much energy is used in your institution per month and translate that to the amount of coal and water used to produce that energy per month and, suggest ways of raising awareness on prudent use of energy and alternative energy sources. NB. Check the viability of the alternative energy sources and the trade offs necessary for implementability in your institution.
Thirdly, try to find out how much paper is used in your institution per month and translate that to the number of trees that are chopped to produce that paper and, suggest ways of reducing paper wastage and alternatives to paper.

234
Appendix G
The Conference Presentations Abstracts
Co-author (Name Withheld)
Computer Systems and Process Instrumentation
Teboho Pitso
Learning Development
Vaal University of Technology biki@vut.ac.za
Title:
Acoustic Leak Detection in Water Distribution Network: The Prospects of
Commercialization.
Abstract
South Africa already imports water from places such as Lesotho which makes water a scarce resource in this country. One of the ways water is lost and needs to be improved is through timely detection of water leakages throughout the water distribution network.
One of the major contributors in revenue water loss is the pipeline leakages. The South
African water industry has invested in equipments that detect and localize leaks in the water distribution systems. However; in terms of the local municipalities’ by-laws in
South Africa, water leakages that occur within residential and private areas are the responsibility of the owner. Without an accurate means of detecting these leaks, the residential and private owners are at the mercy of business entities that charge exorbitant prices to detect and fix these pipeline leakages. This article explores water leak detection at a micro-level where cheaper, reliable and easy-to-use water leak detectors can be produced together with advanced pipeline sealing products.

235
The framework of such an invention is the acoustic method. The principle of acoustic is that whenever a leak is present in a water pipeline, noise is generated and will travel along the pipeline. Through the acoustic leak detection method, the distance traveled by the noise in the pipeline can be calculated and such sound wave data can be captured and calculated by an electronic device to pinpoint the exact location of the leak. Factors such as pipe size and length, materials and surrounding conditions are crucial variables in determining the accuracy and reliability of the acoustic-based devices. We share preliminary challenges on the accuracy of leak noise correlator in pinpointing leaks.

236
Co-author (Name Withheld)
Computer Systems and Process Instrumentation
Teboho Pitso
Learning Development
Vaal University of Technology biki@vut.ac.za
Title:
Unleashing Ideality Entrepreneurship in Engineering Undergraduate Curriculum: A Case for One University of Technology (UoT) in South Africa
Abstract
Based on the understanding that the absorption rate of new recruits by the economy has dwindled to under 4% (Davies, 2001) and the labour anomaly that shows that increasingly the UoTs engineering graduates are joining the unemployment queue despite the fact that the economy shows a need of such skills at its intermediate level which is a claimed niche of UoTs (Howitz, 2007; Pauw et al, 2006), I developed a
Creativity Model that sought to unleash the ideality entrepreneurship of engineering undergraduates. Ideality Entrepreneurship refers to opportunity-seeking actions and efforts through continuous systematic investigation of the near-perfect status of an existing technology or system that could lead to improvement, retiring or re-inventing and possible venture creation (Pitso, 2009). Ideality entrepreneurship thus subsists on inventiveness which refers to creative problem-solving or creation to improve existing technology (Taylor, 1959). 24 Power Engineering undergraduates were exposed to the
Creativity Model, for a semester, which they used to seek-out the higher designs of
Eskom energy mix which is still 90% coal-based. The 24 undergraduates were pre-and post-tested on their creative thinking abilities through the standardized Torrance’s Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) which measures undergraduates’ fluency, flexibility and originality of generated ideas. The test results show that the fluency and flexibility ideas of the undergraduates increased substantially while the originality ideas improved modestly after exposure to the Creativity Model. The modest improvement on the originality ideas of undergraduates points to the entrenched curricular assumptions that have been shaping UoTs learning which inclines towards reproductive learning.