• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제33권2호
• /
• pp.242-257
• /
• 2014

Researchers have employed a diversity of definitions and measurement methods for creativity. As a result, creativity research is underrepresented in the literature and the findings of different studies often prove difficult to draw into a coherent body of understanding. With regard to assessment, there are some important problems both in creativity research and practice, such as originality bias and Big-C creativity bias in teachers' perceptions about creativity and creative thinking, and additive rather than multiplicative scoring systems of creativity assessment. Drawing upon most widely accepted conceptions of the creativity construct, I defined 'student's scientific creativity' as the ability to make a product both original and useful to the student in terms of little-c creativity, and 'scientist's scientific creativity' as the ability to come up with a product both original and useful to the science community in terms of Big-C creativity. In this study, an 'Assessment Formula for Scientific Creativity' was developed, which is consisted of the multiplication of originality and usefulness scores rather than the sum of the two scores, and then, with scores calculated from the assessment formula, the scientific explanations generated by children were categorized into four types: routine, useful, original, and creative types. The assessment formula was revealed to be both valid and reliable. The implications of the assessment formula for scientific creativity are examined. The new assessment formula may contribute to the comprehensive understanding of scientific creativity to guide future research and the appropriate interpretation of previous studies.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제38권4호
• /
• pp.439-452
• /
• 2019

This study aims to compare self- and peer-assessments of science-gifted elementary students' scientific creativity. A science-gifted program on the Pascal's principle was implemented to 40 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center for two weeks. After that, students presented their results from a scientific creativity task using the principle in class. The task was to devise a new and useful tool using the principle, and it included the students' self-assessment about their idea. During presentation, students were asked to assess the works of peers and write down the reasons that they gave the scores they gave. Shortly, student self- and peer-assessments about students' scientific creativity outcomes were compared. Based on two essential components of creativity, ideas that satisfy both originality and usefulness can be counted as scientifically creative. The main results of this study are as follows: First, the average scores of student self- and peer-assessments were 71.5 and 61.9. Second, the standard deviations of student self- and peer-assessments were 14.47 and 5.79. Third, among scientific creativity, originality, usefulness scores, only originality had a significant correlation between student self- and peer-assessment (r=.42). Fourth, the students were categorized into four groups according to the levels of their scores by student self- and peer-assessment. And the frequencies of peer-assessment group had a significant difference at p<0.05 level, according to self-assessment group (Chi Square=4.0000, df=1, p=0.0455). Fifth, through a case study by group, the results suggesting that self-assessment could be affected by the students' self-efficacy and perfectionism and such effect could also influence peer-assessment have been found. The result showed that how the student self- and peer-assessment of scientific creativity are different and what the students' thoughts on the evaluation of scientific creativity are. The findings suggested that there are several things to consider for the educators to make efforts to construct consistent assessment methods for scientific creativity.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제37권4호
• /
• pp.440-454
• /
• 2018

This study aims to compare student self-, teacher-, and objective assessments of elementary science-gifted students' scientific creativity. A science-gifted program on the topic of Hydraulic Machine was implemented to 40 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center of an education office in Seoul, Korea for four weeks. The products of the students' activities were assessed by three types of 'Student Self-Assesment', 'Teacher-Assesment', and 'Objective Assessment using Formula'. Based on two essential components of creativity, the scientific creativity is divided into two parts of originality and usefulness. Ideas that satisfy both components can be counted as scientifically creative. The main results of this study are as follows: First, the scores of each week and the average of the overall four-week scores on scientific creativity were significantly correlated. Student self-assessment (r=.687), teacher-assessment (r=.715), and objective assessment (r=.724) appeared consistently over instructional periods. Second, the average scores of student self-, objective, and teacher-assessments were 73.15, 35.72, and 26.60, respectively. The result of student self-assessment on scientific creativity tended to be higher than those of formula and teacher. Third, among the three types of assessment on scientific creativity, a strong correlation appeared between teacher- and objective assessment (r=.974), but neither between student self- and objective (r=.161) nor between student self- and teacher- (r=.213). Fourth, the scores on originality component had a positive correlation between teacher- and objective assessment (r=.713). The scores of student self- and teacher-assessments had a significant correlation too (r=.315), but not between student self- and objective assessment (r=.279). Fifth, the scores on usefulness component did not have a significant correlation between student self- and teacher-assessment (r=.155). Sixth, there was no significant difference on scientific creativity between student self- and objective assessment [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=1.667, p<.197]. Not between student self- and teacher-assessment either [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=1.616, p<.204]. On the contrary, there was a significant difference between teacher- and objective assessment [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=32.593, p<.000]. Seventh, the students were categorized into four groups according to the levels of their scores by student self- and teacher-assessment. The result showed that factors influencing student self-assessment are inherent in the personality traits of gifted individuals, such as self-esteem and perfectionism. The findings suggested that there are challenges for the educators to make efforts to construct consistent assessment methods for scientific creativity.

• 영재교육연구
• /
• 제24권6호
• /
• pp.1053-1071
• /
• 2014

이 연구는 영재를 위한 창의성 프로그램 개발과 적용 그리고 영재의 선발에 이용될 수 있는 문제설정에서의 수학적 창의성 평가에 대한 이론적 고찰과 관찰을 통해 개선된 창의성 평가 요인을 제안하기 위한 것이다. 이를 위해 대학부설과학영재교육원 소속의 초등수학영재 19명에게 주어진 문제를 풀어보고 그 문제와 관련된 우수한 문제를 만들도록 요구하였다. 영재학생뿐만 아니라 예비교사 및 전문가 집단이 각각 영재가 만든 문제를 평가하고 우수한 문제의 특징을 기술하도록 하였다. 이를 통해 문제설정에서의 수학 창의성 평가의 요인을 융통성, 독창성, 원 문제와의 유사성, 문제의 복잡성, 정교성으로 제안한다.

• 한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.181-196
• /
• 2011

In mathematical modeling tasks, where students are exposed to model-eliciting for real and open problems, students are supposed to formulate and use a variety of mathematical skills and tools at hand to achieve feasible and meaningful solutions using appropriate problem solving strategies. In contrast to problem solving activities in conventional math classes, math modeling tasks call for varieties of mathematical ability including mathematical creativity. Mathematical creativity encompasses complex and compound traits. Many researchers suggest the exhaustive list of criterions of mathematical creativity. With regard to the research considering the possibility of enhancing creativity via math modeling instruction, a quantitative scheme to scale and calibrate the creativity was investigated and the assessment of math modeling activity was suggested for practical purposes.

• 한국학교수학회논문집
• /
• 제8권3호
• /
• pp.327-341
• /
• 2005

수학적 창의성은 일반적 창의성에 기반을 두고 수학적 특성을 고려하여 연구되어야 하며, 그 평가방안에 대해서도 이러한 연구 방향과 일관되어야 할 것이다. 본고에서는 수학적 창의성을 인지적 측면에서의 수학적 창의력과 정의적 측면에서의 수학적 창의적 태도로 나누어 생각한다. 다음으로 두 측면에서의 평가에 관한 선행연구를 고찰하고, 지향해야 할 수학적 창의성의 평가방안을 모색한다.

• 한국수학교육학회지시리즈E:수학교육논문집
• /
• 제21권2호
• /
• pp.271-282
• /
• 2007

Producing tools for actively meeting social needs in a radical changing society due to the development of modern technology has been shifted from physical ability to intelligent ability. The prominence of educating creativity is perceived as a good preparation in order to deal with them. Considered that assessment which is systematic activity to collect, analyze, diagnose, and judge information of a series of instruction practices is means to impart evidence and feedback of teaching learning practices, education and assessment is placed on reciprocal relationship. Nevertheless, there has been some tendency of neglect of assessment, comparing education for upbringing creativity. In this paper model of pencil and paper problem is discussed focusing on the sub-components of creativity and problem solving as one of the variety of means to extend mathematical creativity.

• 한국초등수학교육학회지
• /
• 제17권3호
• /
• pp.503-522
• /
• 2013

2009개정 교육과정부터 현장에서 창의성 교육에 대한 관심이 상당히 높아지고 있고, 평가에서도 '수학적 지식과 기능을 바탕으로 창의적으로 사고하는 능력'을 강조하고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 문제해결로서 수학창의성을 평가하는 비교적 간단한 방안을 제안한다. 수학적 창의성을 확산적 사고에 초점을 맞추어 유창성, 융통성 및 독창성 요인으로 측정하는 것은 수학이라는 본연의 특징을 반영하지 못한다는 비판도 있지만 지필고사로서는 창의적 산물의 두 가지 기준인 신기성(새로움)과 적절성(가치) 중에서 후자를 반영하기 힘들었다. 본 연구에서 수학적 문제해결에서 학생들이 제출한 해에 서로 다른 가중치를 부여하여 창의성의 적절성을 측정하는 방안에 대한 고려들을 연구하였다. 첫째, 학생과 교사가 생각하는 우수한 해의 특성은 무엇인가? 둘째, 두 집단 간 우수한 해의 판단은 일치하는가? 두 가지 의문에 대해 두 집단 모두 우수한 해는 '풀이과정이 간단하고 이해하기 쉽다.'로 요약되었으며, 반면 나쁜 풀이는 그 반대로 '풀이가 복잡하고 이해하기 힘었다.'로 약될 수 있었다. 그리고 본 연구에서 제시한 두 가지 문제해결에서 두 집단 모두 우수한 해의 순서는 일치하였다. 아울러 두 집단이 평가한 우수 해의 일치가 의미하는 바와 해의 차등화 방안에 대한 논의를 통해 수학창의성 평가 방안을 제안하였다.

• 한국수학교육학회지시리즈C:초등수학교육
• /
• 제5권2호
• /
• pp.71-94
• /
• 2001

The purposes of this study were to design small group collaborative learning models for developing the creativity and to analyze the effects on applying the models in mathematics teaching and loaming. The meaning of open education in mathematics learning, the relation of creativity and inquiry learning, the relation of small group collaborative learning and creativity, and the relation of assessment and creativity were reviewed. And to investigate the relation small group collaborative learning and creativity, we developed three types of small group collaborative learning model- inquiry model, situation model, tradition model, and then conducted in elementary school and middle school. As a conclusion, this study suggested; (1) Small group collaborative learning can be conducted when the teacher understands the small group collaborative learning practice in the mathematics classroom and have desirable belief about mathematics instruction. (2) Students' mathematical anxiety can be reduced and students' involvement in mathematics learning can be facilitated, when mathematical tasks are provided through inquiry model and situation model. (3) Students' mathematical creativity can be enhanced when the teacher make classroom culture that students' thinking is valued and teacher's authority is reduced. (4) To develop students' mathematical creativity, the interaction between students in small group should be encouraged, and assessment of creativity development should be conduced systematically and continuously.

• 한국지구과학회지
• /
• 제24권3호
• /
• pp.150-159
• /
• 2003

본 연구에서는 지구과학 지식과 창의력을 동시에 적용해야 해결할 수 있는 지구과학 창의력을 평가할 수 있는 문항의 개발 방법을 제시하고자 하였다. R&D과정을 거친 본 연구의 결과는 첫째, 조작적 정의를 통해 창의력과 과학창의력간의 인지능력 차이를 명료화하였고 둘째, 과학창의력을 구성하는 하위 요소들 중에서 문항 개발이 가능하다고 판단된 유창성, 융통성, 정교성, 독창성을 선정하여 각각에 대한 조작적 정의를 내린 후 각 요소들에 대한 평가와 채점의 준거를 제시하였다. 셋째, 평가도구의 구비 조건인 타당도, 신뢰도, 변별도, 난이도를 검증하기 위하여 3번의 현장검증을 실시하였으며, 본 연구에서 개발한 지구과학창의력 평가도구는 각 하위 요소별로 2문항씩 총 8문항으로 구성되어 있다. 넷째, 문항합치도 지수 평균은 .99, 문항 내적 합치도 지수인 Cronbach ${\alpha}$값은 .79, 각 문항별 평가자간 신뢰도는 0.78,각 하위 요소별 평가자간 신뢰도는 0.75, 변별도 지수인 점이연상관 지수는 .19, 문항 난이도 지수는 .00이었다. 이와 같이 평가도구의 구비조건들이 허용 범위 내에 있는 것으로 볼 때 본 연구에서 개발한 지구과학 창의력 평가도구는 유용한 것으로 판단할 수 있다.