Measuring Creativity-Supportive Climate in the Classroom: The Impact of Environmental Conditions on Creativity Development During Elementary School

Author(s):

Caroline Theurer(presenting / submitting)Frank Lipowsky

Conference:

ECER 2012

Network:

03. Curriculum Innovation by Schools and Teachers

Format:

Paper

Session Information

03 SES 03 A, Supportive Learning Environments

Parallel Paper Session

Time:

2012-09-18

17:15-18:45

Room:

FFL - Aula 4 A

Chair:

Adam Handelzalts

Contribution

Theoretical and Empirical Framework

Creativity can be regarded as a skill to solve problems in an unusual but inventive and efficient way and, therefore, can be a meaningful prerequisite for learning processes (Runco, 2004). It is considered to be an educational goal (Serve, 2000) and it is a widespread consensus that creativity is an important facet of human personality which should be fostered. Though, in German-speaking countries, there is still a research gap on investigating creativity and its predictors for elementary school age on a longitudinal database.

It is assumed that there are multiple determinants on creativity: In addition to (unstable and stable) individual factors like motivation, intelligence or traits (e.g. openness, unconventionality, perseverance or curiosity) it depends on domain specific skills. Beyond these individual factors, external conditions can determine whether somebody acts creatively or not (Cropley, 1991; Urban, 1993).

In an educational setting, characteristics on class level (e.g. acceptance of unconventionality, enhancing imaginativeness or trustful relationships towards classmates and teachers) are considered to compose a creativity-supportive climate and therefore might affect creativity development (Cropley, 1991). So far, there is only little empirical evidence for these theoretical assumptions.

Current empirical results indicate that the creativity development from first to second grade is unequal and unstable (r_tt ≈ .10) and that it cannot be explained by intelligence (Theurer, Kastens, Berner, & Lipowsky, 2011). Further analyses revealed major differences in the development between classes and showed class affiliation to be an explaining variable for individual’s creativity (Theurer, Berner, & Lipowsky, submitted). These results might indicate an influence of classroom characteristics on individual creativity development.

Research Questions

The study aims at explaining children’s creativity development. Thus, it is investigated how creativity develops during elementary school. In addition to this, it is particularly interesting which external conditions within the classroom contribute to it. Hence, the following questions are to be answered:

Is it possible to measure creativity-supportive climate in the classroom objectively and reliably?
How does creativity develop during elementary school?
Does creativity-supportive climate affect students’ creativity development?

Method

Method The sample derives from the PERLE-Project (Greb, Lipowsky, & Faust, 2007) and consists of approximately 730 elementary school children. Creativity was assessed at the beginning of first, at the end of second and at the end of fourth grade by using the “Test for Creative Thinking – Drawing Production” (Urban & Jellen, 1996). The creativity-supportive climate was measured by video-based observation of Arts-, Mathematics-, and German-lessons (N = 63). Since this approach needed a high-inferent rating, two raters were trained on the basis of an observer-manual which was developed upfront by integrating theoretically relevant classroom characteristics. The raters evaluated (1) to what extent the lessons fostered the students’ ideation, (2) in which way teachers handled unconventionality and (3) how trustful the interactions between teachers and students did appear. Each dimension was differentiated in three, respectively four items, so a total of ten items had to be rated. The judgments were given for the first and the second half of the lessons separately. The agreement between the two rater’s judgments was constantly checked on by calculating the relative generalization-coefficients (Ysewijn, 1997) to check on the inter-rater-reliability. The underlying video studies took place in first and second grade.

Expected Outcomes

First Results After the preparatory training and an additional short training phase the two trained raters reached high agreement on all items. Thus, on the basis of the manual it is possible to measure creativity-supportive classroom-climate. In all three subjects there was sufficient or even good concordance between the rater’s judgments for the items. Taking a subject-specific look at the data reveals highest agreement for the German-lessons. During four years of primary school, the children’s creativity development is unstable and individually different: The creativity score at the beginning of elementary school does not affect the creativity score at the end of elementary school, which means that creativity in first grade is no predictor for creativity in fourth grade. This result emphasizes the need for identifying the predictors of creativity. Discussion The study shows that elementary school children’s creativity development is unstable. The reasons are to be examined. With the presented manual it is possible to objectively and reliably assess classroom characteristics which – from a theoretical perspective – are crucial for a creativity-supportive climate. In the next analytical steps the last research question will be answered by checking if the creativity development is affected by the creativity-supportive climate.

References

Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, (55), 657–687. Serve, H. J. (2000). Fundamente (grund‐)schulpädagogischer Kreativitätsförderung. [Basements of Fostering Creativity in (Elementary) School.] In H. J. Serve (Ed.), Kreativitätsförderung [Fostering Creativity] (pp. 10–26). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider‐Verl. Hohengehren. Cropley, A. J. (1991). Unterricht ohne Schablone: Wege zur Kreativität. [Class Without Former Plate: Tracks Toward Creativity.] München: Ehrenwirth. Urban, K. K. (1993). Neuere Entwicklungen in der Kreativitätsforschung. [Recent Trends in Creativity Research.] Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 40, 161–181. Theurer, C., Kastens, C., Berner, N. & Lipowsky, F. (2011). Die Kreativität im frühen Grundschulalter und ihr Zusammenhang mit der Intelligenz. [Creativity in Early Elementary School and Its Relationship Towards Intelligence.] Zeitschrift für Grundschulforschung, 4(2), 83─97. Theurer, C., Berner, N., & Lipowsky, F. (submitted). Die Entwicklung der Kreativität im Grundschulalter: Zur Messung der Kreativität im PERLE-Projekt. [Creativity Development During Elementary School: On the Measurement of Creativity Within the PERLE-Project.] Greb, K., Faust, G., & Lipowsky, F. (2007). Projekt PERLE: Persönlichkeits- und Lernentwicklung von Grundschulkindern [The PERLE-Project: Personality and Learning Development of Elementary School Children]. Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung, 2(1), 100–104. Urban, K. K. & Jellen, H. G. (1996). Test for Creative Thinking - Drawing Production (TCT-DP). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger. Ysewijn, P. (1997). Programm für Generalisierbarkeitsstudien 2.0.D. [Programme for Generalization-Studies 2.0.D.] Neuchâtel, Switzerland: Institute de Recherche et de Documentation Pedagogique (Shareware): Downloaded on 20th November 2009 at http://www.irdp.ch/methodo/generali.htm

Author Information

Caroline Theurer (presenting / submitting)

University of Kassel

Kassel

Frank Lipowsky

University of Kassel, Germany

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.