Math Creative Problem Solving Ability Test for Identification of the Mathematically Gifted Middle School Students

중학교 수학 영재 판별을 위한 수학 창의적 문제해결력 검사 개발

  • Published : 2007.06.30


The purpose of this study was to develop a math test for identification of the mathematically gifted on the basis of their math creative problem solving ability and to evaluate the goodness of the test. Especially, testing reliability and validity of scoring method on the basis of fluency only for evaluation of math creative problem solving ability was one of the main purposes. Ten closed math problems and 5 open math problems were developed requiring math thinking abilities such as intuitive insight, organization of information, inductive and deductive reasoning, generalization and application, and reflective thinking. The 10 closed math test items of Type I and the 5 open math test items of Type II were administered to 1,032 Grade 7 students who were recommended by their teachers as candidates for gifted education programs. Students' responses were scored by math teachers. Their responses were analyzed by BIGSTEPS and 1 parameter model of item analyses technique. The item analyses revealed that the problems were good in reliability, validity, item difficulty and item discriminating power even when creativity was scored based on the single criteria of fluency. This also confirmed that the open problems which are less-defined, less-structured and non-entrenched were good in measuring math creative problem solving ability of the candidates for math gifted education programs. In addition, it was found that the math creative problem solving tests discriminated applicants for the two different gifted educational institutions.

본 연구의 목적은 중학교 수학 영재를 수학 창의적 문제해결력 검사로 판별할 때, 유창성만을 기준으로 수학 창의적 문제해결력을 채점하는 방식의 신뢰도와 타당도를 검증하는데 있다. 이를 위해서 수학영역에서의 직관적 통찰능력, 정보의 조직화 능력, 추론능력, 일반화 및 적용능력, 추상화능력, 공간화/시각화 능력, 반성적 사고력을 요구하는 문항들로 구성된 검사를 개발했다. 고급한 수학적 사고력을 요구하며 정답이 하나인 폐쇄적인 수학문항 10개와 다양한 답이 가능한 개방적인 수학 문항 5개를 영재교육기관의 교육대상자 선발과정에 지원한 중학교 1학년 1,032명에게 실시했다. 교사들은 각 문제에 대해 타당한 답을 제시한 빈도로 유창성을 채점했다. 학생들의 반응을 Rasch의 1모수 문항반응모형을 기반으로 한 BIGSTEPS로 분석했다. 문항반응 분석결과, 유창성만으로 측정한 창의성을 기준으로 한 영재교육대상자 선발의 신뢰도, 타당도, 난이도, 변별도가 모두 양호한 것으로 나타났다. 특히 덜 정의되고, 덜 구조화되고, 신선한 문제일수록 영재교육대상자 선발과정에 지원한 학생들의 수학 창의적 문제해결력을 평가하는데 양호한 문제임이 확인되었다. 이 검사는 영재교육원 지원생들이 영재학급 지원생들보다 창의적 문제해결력에서 더 우수함을 확인해주었다. 이로써 유창성만을 기준으로 수학 창의적 문제해결력을 채점하는 방식이 효율적이며, 타당하고 신뢰로울 수 있음을 확인해 주었다.



  1. 김홍원, 김명숙, 방승진, 황동주 (1997). 수학 영재 판별 도구 개발 연구(II) - 검사 제작 편- . 한국교육개발원 연구보고 CR97-50. 서울: 한국교육개발원
  2. 김홍원, 김명숙, 송상헌 (1996). 수학 영재 판별 도구 개발 연구(I) - 기초 연구 편 -.한국교육개발원 연구보고 CR96-26. 서울: 한국교육개발원
  3. 송상헌 (1998). 수학 영재성 측정과 판별에 관한 연구. 박사학위논문. 서울대학교
  4. 이강섭, 황동주 (2003). 일반창의성(도형)과 수학창의성과의 관련 연구: TTCT; Figural A와 MCPSAT; A를 바탕으로. 수학교육. 41(1). 1-9
  5. 조석희 (2003). 창의적 문제해결력. 박성익 외(편저). 영재교육학원론 (pp. 249-269). 서울: 과학교육사
  6. 황동주 (2005). 수학 영재 판별의 타당도 향상을 위한 수학 창의성 및 문제 해결 력 검사 개발과 채점 방법에 관한 연구. 박사학위논문. 단국대학교
  7. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag
  8. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Colorado: Westview Press, Inc
  9. Balka, D. S. (1974). Creativity ability in mathematics. Arithmetic Teacher, 21(7). 633-636
  10. Bauer, G. R. (1971). A study of the effects of a creative classroom, creative problems, and mathematics educators on the creative ability in mathematics of prospective elementary teachers. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. Indiana University
  11. Dailey, L. & Mumford, M. D. (2006). Evaluative Aspects of Creative Thought: Errors in Appraising the Implications of New Ideas. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 385-398
  12. Evans, E. W. (1964). Measuring the ability of students to respond to creative mathematical situations at the late elementary and early junior high school level. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. University of Michigan
  13. Foster, J. (1970). An exploratory attempt to assess creative ability in mathematics. Primary Mathematics, 8, 2-7
  14. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. NYC: McGraw-Hill
  15. Haylock, D. W. (1984). Aspect of mathematical creativity in children aged 11-12. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, London University, London, Great Britain
  16. Haylock, D. W. (1985). Conflicts in the assessment and encouragement of mathematical creativity in school children. International. Journal of Mathematics Education, Science, and Technology, 16(4), 547-533
  17. Haylock, D. W. (1987). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18(1), 59-74
  18. Isaaksen, S. G., Dorvel, K. B., & Treffinger, D. (1994). Creative approaches to problem solving. Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company
  19. Kim, H., Cho, S., & Ahn, D. (2003). Development of mathematical creative problem solving ability test for identification of the gifted in math. Gifted Education International, 18(2), 164-175
  20. Kim, Y. (1998). The Torrance tests of creative thinking: Norms-technical Manual of the Korean version. ChungAng Aptitude Press
  21. Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. The University of Chicago Press
  22. Livacre, J. M. & Wright, B. D. (2003). A user's guide to BIGSTEPS Rasch-model computer programs.
  23. Mackinnon, D. W. (1970). Creativity, a multi-faceted phenomenon. In J. D. Roslansky (Ed.), Creativity: a discussion at the novel conference. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp.29. Quoted in R. J. Sternberg & T. I. Lubart. Defying the crowd. New York:The Free Press. 1995
  24. Mainville, W. E. Jr. (1972). A study of the effects of mathematics activity materials upon certain aspects of creative thinking ability of prospective elementary school teacher. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. University of Marine
  25. Maxwell, A. A. (1974). An exploratory study of secondary school geometry students:problem solving related to convergent-divergent productivity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Tennessee
  26. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3). 220-232
  27. Pehkonen, E. (1995a). Use of open-ended problems in mathematics classroom. Research Report 176. Helsinki University, Finland. Dept. of Teacher Education
  28. Pehkonen, E. (1995b). On pupils' reactions to the use of open-ended problems in mathematics. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 3(4). 43-57
  29. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it, Second Edition. NJ: Princeton University Press
  30. Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3). 180-184
  31. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A Comprehensive Plan for Educational Excellence. CT: Creative Learning Press, Inc
  32. Roe, A. (1953). The making of a scientists. NYC: Dodd, Mead. Quoted in R. W. Woodman & L. F. Schoenfeldt. An interactionist model of creative behavior. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(4). 279-290. 1990
  33. Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg(Ed.). Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press
  34. Urban K. K. (1995). Creativity: a componential approach. paper presented at the post conference china meeting of the 11th world conference on gifted and talented children. Beijing, China, August 5-8
  35. Wallach, M. A. (1985). Creativity testing and giftedness. In F. D. Horowitz, & M, O'Brian(Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives. Washington, D. C.: APA
  36. Wallas, G.(1926). The Art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace
  37. Zosa, E. D. (1978). The construction of a test to measure creative ability in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia University Teacher's College