«February 2015 Volume 5 Issue 1 ISSN: 2146-7463 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND INSTRUCTIONAL STUDIES IN THE WORLD February 2015, ...»
Table 4: Frequency Analysis of Question 4 Originality Answers and Frequencies score 0 Everything would be flying in the air (25), There would be no life (17), 1 Humans couldn’t travel (9), We couldn’t eat (9), Houses would fly (6), 2 Cars would fly (5), We couldn’t drink water properly (5), Trees would fly in the air (5), All waters of the Earth would fly (5), Transportation would be easier (3), There would be no environmental problems (3), Objects would crash with people (2), We couldn’t pour liquid into glass (2), We couldn’t do sports (1), We couldn’t sleep (1), There would be more inventions (1), Animals would fly in the sky (1), Humans would not get older (1), Transportation would be hard (1), Trees wouldn’t have fruits (1), We couldn’t write (1), Breathing would be difficult (1), We wouldn’t be buried in the soil (1), Things wouldn’t stay in their places (1), There wouldn’t be climate events (1) Question 5: “How many different methods maximum can you use for dividing a square into four equal pieces?
Please specify drawing below.” Students’ answers are given in Table 5.
Table 5: Frequency Analysis of Question 5
Question 6: “If you were given two types of napkins, how would you test to see which one is better? Please list all probable methods, tools and procedures you can mention with a simple language.” Answers are displayed in Table 6.
Table 6: Frequency Analysis of Question 6 Originality Answers and Frequencies score 0 I would test with water (36), I would check which one is softer (10), I would check plies (10).
2 I would check its roller (9), I would check its thickness (9), I would check its endurance by pulling (6), 4 I would smell it (3), I would check its size (3), I would compare their weight (2), I would stick it into tables and put a ball to check its tearing (1), I would wrinkle like a ball and measure its radius (1), I would place a piece of ice and see which one is of poor quality according to the one which falls first (1), I would toss them and measure lengths of falling time (1), I would tear it in pieces and count (1), I would rub them (1), I would use as handkerchief (1) Question 7: “Please design an apple picking machine. Draw the machine and specify name and function of each part”. Examples of students’ drawings are revealed in Figure 2. It was observed that the students designed apparatus similar to vacuum cleaner, human arm (robot), sticks for falling apples and other devices for shaking the trees. It can be said that the students designed the apple picking machine by using flexibility property of realia. It can be argued that drawings besides verbal answers allow observing creativity more clearly.
Picture 1: Machines that draw students to Question 7
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONIt seems that administering Hu and Adey’s scientific creativity test (2002) is easier than administering the other creativity tests. Since it is impractical to produce a product by using pen and paper, the test’s capacity to measure all dimensions is limited. Comparison of previous academic success of participant students with fluency and authenticity of their answers seems to support the argument that there is a positive still weak relationship between academic success and creativity. On the other hand, it is obvious that variety of students’ responses is high. It might support the literature in that knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for creativity.
It is one of the main objectives of science education to support scientific creativity. To this end, the creativity 81 Copyright © International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications / www.ijonte.org
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND INSTRUCTIONAL STUDIESIN THE WORLD November 2014, Volume: 4 Issue: 4 Article: 10 ISSN: 2146-7463 tests can be applied more times. As a result, testing and using of the creativity tests may provide concrete contribution for reaching to goals.
Electrical appliances, transport and communication means, pieces of art, books, programs, foods and even most laws are products of human creativity. Doubtlessly, production and exportation as fundamentals of a developing economy can also be improved thanks to creativity. Failure to bring up individuals who are able to think creatively causes using of many innovations in technology, law, sociology and many other fields by derivation, which in turn results in inability to produce required solutions satisfactorily.
The path taken in traditional education is alien to the society, technology, and innovations. Moreover, stereotyped questions and knowledge affect students’ creativity negatively. Taking into consideration that only those who are good at mathematical operations can achieve in university entrance exams, many individuals are lost despite their potentials in various fields. Consequently, teachers should create a learning environment where students can feel and produce authentic ideas in order to develop creativity at school (Demirci, 2007).
WJEIS’s Note: This article was presented at World Conference on Educational and Instructional Studies WCEIS, 06- 08 November, 2014, Antalya-Turkey and was selected for publication for Volume 5 Number 1 of WJEIS 2015 by WJEIS Scientific Committee.
REFERENCES Aktamış, H. (2007). Fen eğitiminde bilimsel süreç becerilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılığa etkisi: ilköğretim 7. sınıf fizik ünitesi örneği. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Aral, N. (2004). Çocukta yaratıcılığın gelişimi. Çoluk Çocuk Dergisi. 36, 23-24.
Aktamış, H. ve Ergin, Ö. (2006). Fen eğitimi ve yaratıcılık. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 77-83.
Aktamış,H. ve Ergin, Ö. (2007). Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri İle Bilimsel Yaratıcılık Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesi.
Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 11-23.
Aslan, E. (2001). Torrance Yaratıcı Düşünce Testinin Türkçe Versiyonu. M.Ü. Atatürk Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14, 19-40.
Atasoy, B., KadayıfçI, H., & Akkuş, H. (2007). Öğrencilerin Çizimlerinden Ve Açıklamalarından Yaratıcı Düşüncelerinin Ortaya Konulması (Çizimler Ve Açıklamalar Yoluyla Yaratıcı Düşünceler). Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(4), 679-700.
Bailin, S. (1988). Achieving Extraordinary Ends : An Essay on Creativity. Boston. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Besis, P. ve Jaquı, H. (1973). Yaratıcılık nedir? İstanbul: Reklam Yayınları.
Bowden, C. L. (1994). Bipolar Disorder and Creativity. In: Shaw MP, Runco MA, (Eds). Creativity and affect.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp; 73-86 Choe, I. S. (2006). Creativity—A sudden rising star in Korea. In J. C. K. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 395–420). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Çeliker, H. D. ve Balım, A. G. (2012). Bilimsel Yaratıcılık ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlanma Süreci ve Değerlendirme Ölçütleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(2), 1-21.
Çellek, T. (2003). Sanat ve Bilim Eğitiminde Yaratıcılık. Pivolka, 8, 4–11.
Demirci, C. (2007). “Fen Bilgisi Öğretiminde Yaratıcılığın Erişi ve Tutuma Etkisi”. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 65-75.
Erdoğdu, Y. (2006). Yaratıcılık Değerlendirme Ölçeğinin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, 61- 79.
Getzels JW, ve Csikszentmihalyi M. (1972). The creative artist as an explorer. In: McVicker Hunt J, editor.Human intelligence. Transaction Books; Oxford: ss, 182–192.
Hu, W. ve Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403.
Kırışoğlu, O. (1991). Sanatta eğitim, (görmek, anlamak, yaratmak). Ankara: Eğitim Kitapevi.
Özden, Y. (1993). Yaratıcılığı Geliştirme Düşünmeyi Öğrenme Öğretme Biçimleri. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
MEB. (2013). İlköğretim Fizik dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
Özkök, A. (2005). Disiplinler Arası Yaklaşıma Dayalı Yaratıcı Problem Çözme Öğretimi Programının Yaratıcı Problem Çözme Becerisine Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 159-167.
Öztürk, Ş. (2004). Eğitimde Yaratıcı Düşünme. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18, 77-84.
Parkhaust, H. B. (1999). Confusion, Lack Of Consensus And The Defination Of Creativity As A Construct. Journal Of Creative Behavior, 33(1), 1-22 Rıza, E. T. (2000). Çocuklarda ve Yetişkinlerde Yaratıcılık Nasıl Uyarılır?, Yaşadıkça Eğitim Dergisi, 68, 5-12.
Senemoğlu, N. (2013). Gelişim, Öğrenme ve Öğretim: Kuramdan Uygulamaya (23. Baskı). Ankara:
San, İ. (1979a). Yaratıcılık, iki düşünce biçimi ve çocuğun yaratıcılık eğitimi. Ankara Ünversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(1-4), 177-190.
San, İ. (1979b). Sanatsal Yaratma ve Çocukta Yaratıcılık, Ankara, T.C. İş Bankası yayıncılık.
San, İ. (1985). Sanat ve Eğitim. A.Ü.E.B.F. yayını,2.basım, Ankara Shaughnessy, M. F. (1995). On the Theory and Measurement of Creativity. Retrieved October 24, 2014, from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED381576 Starko, A., J. (2001). Creativity in the classroom schools of cruous delight. (2. baskı). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Sternberg, R. J. ve Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677-688.
Sternberg R. J, ve O’Hara L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In: Sternberg RJ, editor. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: ss. 251–272.
Tekindal, S. ve Tekindal B. (2009) Eğitimde Yaratıcılığı Ölçme. Milli Eğitim, 182, 106-122
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Test of Creative Thinking, Verbal Tests Forms A And B (Figural A&B), Scholastic Service Inc. Il, Bensenville.
Torrance, E. P. ve Goff, K. (1989). A quiet revolution. Journal of Creative Behavior. 23(2), 136-145.
Yenilmez, K. ve Yolcu, B. (2007). Öğretmen Davranışlarının Yaratıcı Düşünme Becerilerinin Gelişimine Katkısı, Manas Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, 95-105.
Yenilmez, K. Ve Yolcu, B. (2007). Öğretmen Davranışlarının Yaratıcı Düşünme Becerilerinin Gelişimine Katkısı.
Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, 95-105.
84 Copyright © International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications / www.ijonte.org