跳至主要内容

Teachers’ and Teacher Students’ Conceptions of Learning and Creativity

Read full paper at:
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=51547#.VG2rM2fHRK0

The aim of this study was to explore what kinds of conceptions of creativity and learning Finnish teachers and teacher students expressed, and how these conceptions were related to the respondents’ epistemologies (conceptions of knowledge and learning). The participants (n = 89) answered an e-form, consisting of 3 open-ended questions (conceptions of learning, creativity and the connection between the two). In addition, there were 23 two-part Likert-type statements on epistemologies (Lonka et al., 2008) as well as 10 background questions. Mixed method approach was used to analyze the conceptions that the respondents’ expressed. Two qualitative categories of conceptions of learning came from previous research, Constructivity and active epistemology (Lonka, Joram, & Bryson, 1996). A new category also emerged: Collaborativity of learning. The answers about creativity were classified based on whether creativity was viewed as an inborn ability or something changeable, whether focus was on product or process, and whether creativity was seen as collaborative. The participants’ open-ended conceptions of learning reflected a view of learning as teacher-regulated assimilation, whereas their (structured) epistemologies higlighted reflection and deep-level learning. Creativity was viewed as something that can be improved, focusing on the collaborative process. A link between learning and creativity was identified. It shall be of interest to see, how such epistemic stands would be related to group work.
Cite this paper
Vedenpää, I. and Lonka, K. (2014) Teachers’ and Teacher Students’ Conceptions of Learning and Creativity. Creative Education, 5, 1821-1833. doi: 10.4236/ce.2014.520203. 
 

[1] Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357-376.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
[2] Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Creativity Research in English-Speaking Countries. In J. C. Kaufman, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The International Handbook of Creativity (pp. 10-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818240.002
[3] Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a Broader Conception of Creativity: A Case for “mini.c” Creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 73-79.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.73
[4] Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[5] Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K., & Dweck, C. (2007). Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention. Child Development, 78, 246-263.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
[6] Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications.
[7] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity, Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
[8] Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballantine Books.
[9] Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative Learning in Work Teams: Analyzing Cycles of Knowledge Creation in Practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punam?ki (Eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 377-404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.025
[10] Guilford, J. P. (1950).Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
[11] Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K., & Lipponen, L. (2004). Tutkiva Oppiminen. Järki, tunteet ja motivaatio oppimisen sytyttäjinä (Progressive Inquiry-Based Learning. How Reason, Emotions and Motivation Light up Learning). Porvoo: WSOY.
[12] Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the Age of Insecurity. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
[13] Hargreaves, D. H. (1999). The Knowledge-Creating School. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47, 122-144.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8527.00107
[14] Heikkilä, A., Niemivirta, M., Nieminen, J., & Lonka, K. (2011). Interrelations among University Students’ Approaches to Learning, Regulation of Learning and Cognitive and Attributional Strategies: A Person Oriented Approach. Higher Education, 61, 513-529.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9346-2?
[15] John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative Collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[16] Lonka, K., & Lindblom-Yl?nne, S. (1996). Epistemologies, Conceptions of Learning, and Study Practices in Medicine and Psychology. Higher Education, 31, 5-24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00129105
[17] Lonka, K., Hakkarainen, K., & Sintonen, M. (2000). Progressive Inquiry Learning for Children. Experiences, Possibilities, Limitations. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 8, 7-23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13502930085208461
[18] Lonka, K., Joram, E., & Bryson, M. (1996). Conceptions of Learning and Knowledge: Does Training Make a Difference? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 240-260.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0021
[19] Lonka, K., Olkinuora, E., & Mäkinen, J. (2004). Aspects and Prospects of Measuring Studying in Higher Education. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 301-323.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0002-1
[20] Lonka, K., Sharafi, P., Karlgren, K., Masiello, I., Nieminen, J., Biergegard, G., & Josephson, A. (2008). MED NORD—A Tool for Measuring Medical Students’ Well-Being and Study Orientations. Medical Teacher, 30, 72-79.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590701769555
[21] Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I—Outcome and Process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
[22] Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On Qualitative Differences in Learning: II—Outcome as a Function of the Learner’s Conception of the Task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115-127.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02304.x
[23] Ministry of Education and Culture (2009). Basic Education 2020—The National General Objectives and Distribution of Lesson Hours: 2009.
http://www.minedu.fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/2010/liitteet/okmtr01.pdf?lang=fi
[24] Moran, S. (2010). Creativity in School. In K. Littleton, C. Wood, & J. Kleine Staarman (Eds.), The International Handbook of Psychology in Education (pp. 319-359). England: Emerald.
[25] Muukkonen-van der Meer, H. (2011). Perspectives on Knowledge Creating Inquiry in Higher Education. Doctoral Thesis, University of Helsinki.
https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/24260/perspect.pdf?sequence=1
[26] Nieminen, J. (2011). Dimensions of University Student Learning in Medicine and Pharmacy. Doctoral Thesis, University of Helsinki.
https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/26494/dimensio.pdf?sequence=1
[27] Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
[28] OECD (2008). 21st Century Learning: Research, Innovation and Policy Directions from Recent OECD Analyses.
http://www.oecd.org/site/educeri21st/40554299.pdf
[29] Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of Innovative Knowledge Communities, and Three Metaphors of Learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557-576.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004557
[30] Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
[31] Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why Isn’t Creativity More Important to Educational Psychologists? Potentials, Pitfalls, and Future Directions in Creativity Research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83-96.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
[32] Richardson, J. (2004). Methodological Issues in Questionnaire-Based Research on Student Learning in Higher Education. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 347-358.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0004-z
[33] Sahlberg, P. (2009). Creativity and Innovation through Lifelong Learning. Journal of Lifelong Learning in Europe, 14, 53-60.
[34] Sahlberg, P. (2010). Rethinking Accountability in a Knowledge Society. Journal of Educational Change, 11, 45-61.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9098-2
[35] Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish Lessons. What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland? New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
[36] Sawyer, K. (2012). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
[37] Sawyer, K., & DeZutter, S. (2009). Distributed Creativity: How Collective Creations Emerge from Collaboration. Psychogy of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 3, 81-92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013282
[38] Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge Building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
[39] Sfard, A. (1998). On Two Metaphors of Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One. Educational Researcher, 27, 4-13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X027002004
[40] Sternberg, R. (1985). Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Creativity, and Wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607-627.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.607
[41] Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 3-15). USA: Cambridge University Press.
[42] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[43] Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the Classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 379-428.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
[44] Whitebread, D., & Pino Pasternak, D. (2010). Metacognition, Self-Regulation and Meta-Knowing. In K. Littleton, C. Wood, & J. Kleine Staarman (Eds.), The International Handbook of Psychology in Education (pp. 673-711). England: Emerald.                                               eww141120lx
标签：

评论

发表评论

此博客中的热门博文

Does Immigration Promote the Investment of the Monopolistic Firm?

In the present paper, we examine the effect of increasing uncertainty of immigrants’ growth on the optimal timing of investment of a firm that has a monopolistic power over the labor market. It is revealed that when the uncertainty of immigrants’ growth is more than a threshold level, increasing uncertainty of immigrants’ growth accelerates the optimal timing of firms’ investment and enhances the economic growth, even if the uncertainty of immigrants’ growth is formulated by the geometric Brownian motion, which is in sharp contrast to the standard result that an increase in the uncertainty postpones the optimal timing. With an increase in the immigrants over the past ten years, workforces in the host countries have been growing significantly to the extent that the immigrants represent 70% of the increase in the workforce in Europe, and 47% in the United States as OECD indicates. In the present paper, we attempted to investigate the effect of increased uncertainty caused by the growi...
发表评论
阅读全文

Education Policy Implementation: A Mechanism for Enhancing Primary Education Development in Zanzibar

Education is one of the fundamental rights of individuals; therefore, the government of a country needs to develop and strengthen educational policy and quality as well as to ensure that everyone has equal access to basic education. The improvement of access and quality of education in the world is becoming as an essential factor in development, whereas the basic education (primary school), is acknowledged as a foundation of the higher educational development for every country. To fulfill this goal, governments introduce several policies and procedures; however, it requires some reforms and participation from the politician, policymakers, and other stakeholders to re-examine educational policy so that it can lead to multiplication and betterment of the reforms. Educational reforms actually focus on accountability. A positive educational development and reform is very challenging and needs more effort and strategy on how to use and utilize the resources effectively as such it can achie...
发表评论
阅读全文