Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2015.25.2.321

Are We Really Open to Creativity?: Elementary Gifted Students' Perceptions on Anti-Creativity Bias  

Lee, Taehee (Incheon National University)
Han, Ki-Soon (Incheon National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Gifted/Talented Education / v.25, no.2, 2015 , pp. 321-337 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to examine elementary gifted students' perceptions on bias against creativity utilizing concept mapping approach. Twelve elementary gifted students participated in the group brainstorming and produced 55 final statements. Based on these statements, the multi-dimensional scale and hierarchial cluster analysis using dissimilarity matrix were performed. Average stress value was .30 which is appropriate for a two-dimensional concept mapping study. In addition, a questionnaire survey using likert 6 points scale was carried out targeting 132 elementary gifted students to analyze the degree of sympathy on their anti-creativity bias perception. The findings are as follow: First, four categories were concluded dividing gifted students' perceptions on bias against creativity from the hierarchial cluster analysis with X-Y coordinate matrix, these were 'Contradictory attitudes to creativity', 'Low evaluation for creativity', 'Forced to predetermined rules and ideas', and 'Aversion to new things'. Second, elementary gifted students were sympathetic to the order 'Forced to predetermined rules and ideas'(M=4.16), 'Aversion to new things'(M=3.68), 'Contradictory attitudes to creativity'(M=3.55) and 'Low evaluation for creativity'(M=3.30). This study aims to examine, analyze and categorize various relevant factors related to elementary gifted students' perceptions on bias against creativity. Implications of the study related to the present and future creative education were discussed in depth.
Keywords
elementary gifted student; bias against creativity; concept mapping; gifted and talented education; creativity;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 교육과학기술부 (2011). 2009 개정교육과정에 따른 초.중등학교 교육과정 총론(교육과학기술부 고시 제 2011-261호).
2 김순남, 이병환, 황향숙 (2003). 창의성 교육 실태 분석과 교육 정책적 과제. 중등교육연구, 51(2), 41-68.
3 성은현, 한순미, 하주현, 이정규, 류형선, 한윤영, 박병기 (2008). 한국적 창의성과 창의적 환경에 대한 대학생들의 암묵적 이론. 한국심리학회, 14(1), 367-390.
4 요로다케시 (2003). 바보의 벽. 서울: 재인.
5 이정모 (2011). 한국교육 미래 비전: 창의성 개념의 21세기적 재구성. 서울: 학지사.
6 이춘근 (2007). 이런 상사가 창의성을 죽인다. LG경제연구원 보고서.
7 임선하 (2007). 창의성 교육: 반성적 접근. 창조교육논총, 9, 55-86.
8 Cropley, A. (2009). Teachers' antipathy to creative students: some implications for teacher training. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 10, 86-94.
9 Evans, J (1991). Creativity thinking in the decision and management science. OH: South Western Publishing Co.
10 Gol, A. R., & Cook, S. W. (2004). Exploring the underlying dimensions of coping: A concept mapping approach. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 155-171.   DOI
11 Johnsen, J. A., Biegel, D. E., & Shafran, R. (2000). Concept mapping in mental heath uses and adaptations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 67-75.   DOI
12 Kane, M., & Trochim, W. M. K. (2007). Concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage Publication.
13 Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2001). The Real Reason People Won't Change. Harvard Business Review, Nov, 1-10.
14 Mueller, J. S., Concalo, J., & Kamder, D. (2011). Recognizing creative leadership: Can creative idea expression negatively relate to perceptions of leadership potential? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 494-498.   DOI
15 Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. (2012). The bias against creativity: why people desire yet reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 21(1), 13-17.
16 Paulson, B. L., & Worth, M. (2002). Counseling for suicide: Client perception. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80, 86-93.   DOI
17 Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Phi Delta Kappa, 60, 180-184.
18 Runco, M. A. (1992) Creative thinking in the fifth grade. In J. F. Wakefield (Ed), Creative thinking: Problem-solving skills and the arts orientation (pp. 13-26). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
19 조연순, 정지은(2012). 국내 창의성 교육 연구 동향 분석: 창의성의 범주 및 수준을 중심으로. 영재교육연구, 22(2), 333-352.   DOI
20 전경원 (2000). 창의성 저해 요인 조사연구: 유아교육과 여학생을 중심으로. 열린유아교육연구, 5(1), 163-180.
21 차석빈, 김홍범, 오홍철, 윤지환, 김우곤 (2008). 사례를 통해 본 다변량 분석의 이해. 서울: 백산출판사.
22 최석민 (2006). 초등학교 창의성 교육 접근 방식에 대한 비판적 검토. 초등교육연구, 19(2), 1-21.
23 최윤정, 김계현 (2007). 고학력 기혼여성의 진로단절 위기 경험에 대한 개념도 연구. 상담학연구, 8(3), 1031-1045.
24 최한나, 김삼화, 김창대 (2008). 청소년이 지각한 또래관계 역량. 상담학연구, 9(1), 181-197.
25 최한나, 김창대 (2008). 좋은 슈퍼비전 관계에 대한 슈퍼바이저의 인식 차원. 한국심리학회지: 상담 및 심리치료, 20(1), 1-21.
26 한국교육과정평가원 (2010a). 창의성 신장을 위한 교수.학습 방안 연구. 연구보고 RRI 2010-2.
27 한국교육과정평가원 (2010b). 창의성 교육 국제비교 연구. 연구보고 CRO 2010-3.
28 한국교육과정평가원 (2010c). 창의성 제고를 위한 교육과정 개편 방안 연구. 연구보고 RRC 2010-3.
29 한국교육과정평가원 (2011). 창의적 인재 육성을 위한 중등학교 교육 개선 연구. 연구보고 RRC 2011-2.
30 한기순(2005). 창의성 영역문제의 탐색 및 재접근. 영재교육연구, 15(2), 1-34.
31 한기순, 김홍희 (2011). 창의.인성교육에 대한 초등 교사들의 인식의 개념도. 영재와 영재교육, 10(1), 49-72.
32 한기순, 유경훈 (2013). 우리는 진정 창의성을 원하는가?: 반창의성 편향에 관한 담론. 창의력교육연구 13(3), 53-70.
33 Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. NY: Free Press.
34 Runco, M. A. (2010). Creativity has no dark side. In D. H. Cropley, A. J. Cropley, J, C. Kaufman & M. A. Runco (Eds.), The dark side of creativity. NY: Cambridge University Press.
35 Runco, M. A., & Pritzker, S. T. (Eds). (1999). Encyclopedia of creativity Vol. 1. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
36 Staw, B. M. (1995). Why no one really wants creativity. In C. Ford, & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), Creative action in organizations: Ivory tower visions and real world voices. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage Publication, Inc.
37 Trochim, W. M. K. (1989). An Introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 1-16.   DOI
38 Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8(1), 1-10.   DOI