Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2012.22.3.663

A Validation Study of the Creative School Environment Perceptions Scale and A Study of Group Differences  

Jo, Son-Mi (University of Incheon)
Publication Information
Journal of Gifted/Talented Education / v.22, no.3, 2012 , pp. 663-677 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to verify validity of Creative School Environment Perceptions (CSEP) scale developed based on the scale developed in 2010 by Mayfield and Mayfield. Factor analysis was used to assess construct validity. Another purpose of the study was to investigate factors related to students' perception of creative school environment through use of the group differences. The research participants were 203 elementary school students and all of them were 5th and 6th grade students. Factor analysis indicated that CSEP scale consist of three factors: creativity support, work characteristics, and creativity blocks. In addition the correlation between CSEP scale and the previous scale were investigated to verify the validity of CSEP scale. The results showed that the convergent validity were obtained. Independent-sample t test was performed to test for specific loci of significant between group differences in gender, grade, and the level of ideational behavior. The finding showed that 6th grade students said that their environment hinder creativity. Students with the high level of ideational behavior perceived their school environment was supportive while students with the low level of ideational behavior perceived their school environment was obstructive. Therefore teachers should understand students' perception of creative school environment using CSEP scale and should change students' perception of creative school environment through considering grade and the level of ideational behavior.
Keywords
Creative school environment perceptions scale; Gender; Grade; Ideational behavior;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 김혜숙 (1999). 창의성 진단 측정도구의 개발 및 타당화. 교육심리연구, 13(4), 269-303.
2 Williams, S. (2001). Increasing employees' creativity by training their managers. Industrial and Commercial Training, 33, 63-68.   DOI
3 김혜숙 (2004). 창의적 가정.학교 환경 진단 척도의 수정과 확증적 요인분석. 영재와 영재교육, 3(2), 69-84.
4 김혜숙 (2005). 창의적 환경 측정도구들의 이론적 차원과 측정학적 타당성 검토. 영재와 영재교육, 4(1), 47-69.
5 김혜숙 (2010). 창의적 수행능력 관련변인에 대한 구조모형: 개인적 특성, 과제, 심리적 과정특성 및 환경 변인의 관계. 영재와 영재교육, 9(2), 103-125.
6 민지연, 서은진 (2009). 창의적 교실 분위기와 창의성 및 동기간의 관계. 교육심리연구, 23(4), 787-800.
7 박병기, 박상범 (2007). 창의적 성향.환경.과정 척도(C-DEPs)의 개발 및 타당화. 교육심리연구, 21(4), 905-922.
8 박병기, 박상범 (2009). 통합창의성이 내재된 다차원 창의적 환경 척도(ICEMCEs)의 개발 및 타당화. 교육심리연구, 23(4), 839-862.
9 이병희 (2008). 창의적 행동의 영역일반 구조모형 검증. 박사학위논문. 한국교원대학교.
10 이재천, 김범기 (1999). 과학교사에 의해 조성되는 심리적 학습환경이 학생들의 과학 성취도에 미치는 효과. 한국과학교육학회지, 19(2), 315-328.   과학기술학회마을
11 한순미 (2006). 환경은 창의성을 어떻게 조형하는가? 영재와 영재교육, 5(2), 167-188.
12 홍미영, 강남화, 김주아 (2010). 중학생의 과학 교실 학습 환경에 대한 인식. 한국과학교육학회지, 30(1), 68-79.   과학기술학회마을
13 홍세희 (2000). 구조 방정식 모형의 적합도 지수 선정기준과 그 근거. 한국심리학회지: 임상, 19(1), 161-177.
14 Abra, J. (1994). Collaboration in creative work: An initiative for investigation. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 205-218.
15 Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
16 Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
17 Brace, N., Kemp, R., & Snelgar, R. (2003). SPSS for psychologist: A guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18 Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154-1184.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5-32.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 235-258.   DOI
21 Conger, J. A. (1993). Training leaders for the twenty-first century. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 3, 203-218.
22 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: HarperCollins.
23 Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7, 286-299.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Forrester, V., & Hui, A. (2007). Creativity in the Hong Kong classroom: What is the contextual practice? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2, 30-38.   DOI
25 Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
26 Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R .E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
27 Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Climate for creativity: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 19(1), 69-90.   DOI
28 Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Creativity 101. New York, NY: Springer
29 Huan, V. S., Yeo, L. S., & Ang, R. P. (2006). The influence of dispositional optimism and gender on adolescents'perception of academic stress. Adolescence, 41, 533-546.
30 Jo, S. M. (2009). A study of Korean students' creativity in science using structural equation modeling, Retrieved July 21, 2009, from http://gradworks.umi.com/3355938.pdf
31 Krogh, G. (1998). Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40, 133-153.
32 Mathisen, G. E., & Einarsen S. (2004). A review of instruments: Assessing creative and innovative environments within organizations. Creativity Research Journal, 16(1), 119-140.   DOI
33 Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2010). Developing a scale to measure the creative environment perceptions: A questionnaire for investigating garden variety creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 22(2), 162-169.   DOI
34 Runco, M. A., Plucker, J., & Lim, W. (2001). Development and psychometric integrity of a measure of ideational behavior. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 393-400.   DOI
35 Stafford, S. (1998). Capitalizing on careabouts to facilitate creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 7, 159-176.   DOI
36 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper collins College.
37 West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355-387.   DOI