Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue (한국심리학회지 : 문화 및 사회문제)

Korean Psychological Association of Culture and Social Issues (한국문화및사회문제심리학회)
권호 표지

College students' implicit theory of Korean creativity and creative environment

한국적 창의성과 창의적 환경에 대한 대학생들의 암묵적 이론

  • Received : 2007.12.01
  • Published : 2008.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the college students' implicit theory of Korean creativity. This study deals with the degree to which the students exploit the creativity, and the obstacles for them to exploit the creativity. Another purpose of this study is to explore their implicit knowledge of Korean creative environments. The results are as follows. The implicit knowledge of Korean creativity could be characterized by the following key words: 'flexibility', 'application', 'transformation', 'originality', 'perseverance', 'not being stereotyped', 'esthetic flavor' and 'understanding-new-by-exploring-old'. Students thought themselves to be more or less creative. Students in art and physical education, and male students estimated themselves more creative than other discipline and female. They thought that socio-institutional factors such as educational system focused on the college entrance test are the most serious obstacles against creativity. About half of the students thought the creative persons would have been raised in poor family whereas other students thought differently. The home environment of the creative person was thought to be characterized by the words such as democratic, free and encouraging. Creative persons were thought to be maladaptive school life, but good at peer relations. This study will be used as a pioneer research which suggest a model of Korean creativity.

본 연구에서는 우리나라 대학생들이 생각하는 한국적 창의성 개념과 대학생들이 창의성을 어느 정도 발휘하고 있는지, 그리고 창의성의 저해요인은 무엇이라고 생각하는지 조사하였다. 더불어 한국의 창의적 인물의 가정환경과 학교환경에 대한 대학생들의 암묵적 생각을 탐색하였다. 한국적 창의성은 융통/응용/변환, 독창성, 꾸준한 노력, 탈고정관념, 예술 심미 선호, 온고지신을 포함하였다. 대학생들은 스스로 창의성을 보통 이상(M=3.2)으로 발휘하고 있다고 생각하고 있었으며 전공별로는 예체능계열이, 성별에 있어서는 남학생들이 상대적으로 창의성을 더 많이 발휘하고 있다고 생각하였다. 창의성 저해요인으로는 입시위주의 교육제도와 융통성 없는 사회풍토를 포함하는 사회제도적 요인들을 가장 많이 지적하였다. 대학생들은 한국의 창의적인 인물들이 가난한 가정환경과 부유한 가정환경이라는 극단적인 경제 환경을 가졌을 것이라고 응답하였다. 다음으로 화목하고 민주적이고 자유로우며 지지받는 가정 분위기를 가졌다고 응답하였다. 학교생활 및 환경에 대해서는 창의적 인물들이 학교교육 및 학교생활에 부적응했다고 하는 응답이 가장 많았다. 그리고 교우관계는 긍정적이었다는 응답이 많았다. 본 연구는 한국적 창의성 모형을 제안하기 위한 탐색자료로 활용될 것이다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2006년 정부(교육인적자원부)의 재원으로 한국학술진흥재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(KRF-2006-321-B00116)

References

  1. 성은현 (2006a). 동서양의 창의성 차이 고찰: 창의적 문화와 환경, 성격, 사고, 산물을 중심으로. 영재와 영재교육, 5(1), pp. 45-62.
  2. 성은현 (2006b). 문화와 창의성. 인하대학교 국제학술대회 발표 자료집 - 아시아 교육의 기적-가정, 학교 그리고 문화적 맥락에서의 아동 발달.
  3. 성은현, 하주현, 류형선, 한순미, 이정규, 한윤영 (2007). 한국 대학생이 생각하는 한국과 미국의 암묵적 창의성에 대한 비교 연구. 영재교육연구, 17(2), pp.365-391.
  4. 정범모 (2001). 창의력이란 - 그 실체와 육성. 교육과학사
  5. 한순미, 김 선, 박숙희, 이경화, 성은현 (2005). 창의성-사람/환경/전략. 서울: 학지사.
  6. 한순미(2006). 환경은 창의성을 어떻게 조형하는가? 영재와 영재교육, 5(2), pp.167-188.
  7. Amabile, T. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  8. Amabile, T. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.
  9. Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  10. Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
  11. Chao, R. K. (1993). East and West: Concepts of the self as reflected in mothers' reports of their child-rearing, Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.
  12. Cropley, A. J. (1990). Creativity and mental health in everyday life. Creativity Research Journal, 3, 167-178.
  13. Cropley, A. J. (2006). Creativity: A Social approach. Roeper Review, 28(3), 125-130.
  14. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.
  15. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.313-335). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Dacey, J., & Packer, A. (1992). The nurturing parent: How to raise creative, loving, responsible children. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  18. Dacey, J., & Lennon, K. (1998). Understanding creativity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  19. Eysenck, H. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
  21. Gardner, H.(1993). Creating Minds. New York: Harper Collins.
  22. Gardner, H. (1997a). Extraordinary minds. New York: Basic Books.
  23. Gardner, K., & Moran, J. (1990). Family adaptability, cohesion, and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 3(4), 281-286.
  24. Grzeskowiak, S. (1996). Curiosity in small children and the childrearing style of their mothers. In A. Cropley & D. Dehn (Eds.), Fostering the growth of high ability: European perspectives. Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
  25. Hallman, R. (1967). Techniques of creative teaching. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1(3), 325-330.
  26. Harrington., D. M., Block, J. W., & Block, J. (1987). Testing aspects of Carl Rogers' theory of creative environment: Child rearing antecedents of creative potential in young adolescents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychological perspective(pp.1-38). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Hills, T.W. (1987). Children in the fast lane: Implications for early childhood policy and practice. Early Childhood Reasearch Quarterly 2(3), 265-273
  28. Hyson. M. C., Hirsh-Pasek, K, Rescorla, L., Cone, J, Martell-Boinske, L. (1991). Ingredients of parental "pressure" in early childhood. Jorunal of Applicated Developmental Psychology, 12, 347-365.
  29. John-Steiner, B. (1997). Notebooks of the mind: Explorations of thinking (Rev. ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  30. Kim, K.H. (2005). Learning from each other: Creativity in East Asian and American Education. Creativity Research Journal, 17(4), 337-347.
  31. Kim, J. & Michael, W.B. (1995). The relationship of creativity measurres to school achievement and to preferred learning and thinking style in a sample of Korean high school students. Educational and Psychological Measurment, 55, 60-74.
  32. Kyung Hee Kim (2005). Learning From Each Other: Creativity in East Asian and American Education. Creative Research Journal, 17(3).
  33. Lee, J.K. (1999). Historic factors affecting educational administration in Korean higher education. Higher Educational Review, 32, 7-23.
  34. Lubart, T. I. (1999). Creativity across cultures. In R. J. Sternberg(Ed.)(1999). Handbook of creativity. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
  35. Lubart, T. (2003). Psychologie de la Creativite. Paris: Armand Colin.
  36. Ludwig, A. M. (1992). Culture and creativity. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 46(3), 454-469.
  37. MacKinnon, D. (1961). The nature and nurture of creative potential. Psychologist, 17, 484-495
  38. Maduro, R. (1976). Artistic creativity in a Brahmin painter community. Research monograph 14. Berkeley: Center for South and Southeast Asia Studies, University of California.
  39. Mendecka, G. (1996). Attitudes of parents and development of creativity. In A. Cropley & D. Dehn (Eds.), Fostering the growth of high ability: European perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  40. Michel, M., & Dudek, S. (1991). Mother-child relationships and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 4(3), 281-286.
  41. Millward, L. J., & Freeman, H. (2002). Role expectations as constraints to innovation: The case of female managers. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 93-109.
  42. Moustakis, C. E. (1977). Creative life. New York: Van Nostrand.
  43. Ng, A. K. (2003). A Cultural Model of Creative and Conforming Behavior, Creativity Research Journal,. Vol. 15 Issue 2&3, 223-233.
  44. Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305-310.
  45. Rudowicz, E. (2003). Creativity and culture: a two way interaction. Scandinavian Joutnal of Educational Research, 47(3)
  46. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit Theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 49(3). 607-627.
  47. Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (1997). Are cognitive styles still in style? American Psychologist, 52(7), 700-712.
  48. Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C., Pretz, J. E. (2002). The Creativity Conundrum. Psychology Press, New York.London.Brighton.
  49. Sternberg, R., & Lubart, T. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.
  50. Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in Creativity. American Psychologist, July.
  51. Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth grade slump in creativity. Gifted child Quarterly, 12, 195-199.
  52. Torrance, E. P. (1995). The beyonders. In Why fly? A philosophy of creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  53. Treffinger, D. J., Ripple, R. E., & Dacey, J. S. (1968). Teacher's attitudes toward creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2(4), 242-248.
  54. Walberg, H., Rasher, S., & Parkerson, J. (1979) Childhood eminence. Journal of Creative Behavior, 13, 225-231
  55. Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. New York: Basic Books.
  56. Wollam, J. (1992). Equality versus excellence: The South Korean dilemma in gifted education. Roeper Review, 14, 212-217.
  57. Wright, C. (1987). Nurturing creative potential: An interactive model for home and school. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 12(1), 31-38