How Do Education Professionals Understand Creativity ? A Study of The Implicit Theories on Creativity in a Sample of Educators

Year 2014, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 41 - 48, 31.12.2014

Laura Estefania Castro-fajardo Andrea Santamaria Karen L. Bernal-hernandez Félix Antonio Gomez-hernandez María Caridad Garcia-cepero

Abstract

This study explores implicit theories on creativity in a group of educators, and some associated myths and beliefs, such as: “The school can do nothing to develop creativity”, “childhood is the golden age of creativity”, and “school kills creativity”. The sample was composed by educators graduated from the undergraduated program of Early Chile Education and the graduated students from the Masters Education of the School of Education at the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana of Bogotá (Colombia). The analysis of the 110 answers, found that to define creativity, educators utilize the concepts of transformation, expertise, innovation, and problem solving. Most participants indicate that the most creative age is childhood, which confirms the “golden age” myth. Regarding the relation between creativity and schools, educators believe that schools can and must develop creativity, but they need specific conditions to achieve this. Based on these results it is important to stress the importance to develop pre-service and in-service teaching programs that allow educators to overcome these false beliefs and to understand how to foster creativity in educational settings.

Keywords

Creativity, education, false beliefs, myths, implicit theories

References

• Aigeneren, M. (1999) Análisis de contenido una introducción. Available from: http://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/index.php/ceo/article/viewfile/1550/1207.
• Bermúdez, M. (1982) El análisis de contenido procedimientos y aplicaciones. Ciencias sociales, 24, 71-80.
• Contini, N. (2014). La creatividad como recurso de afrontamiento en la vida cotidiana. Available from: http://www.palermo.edu/cienciassociales/publicaciones/pdf/Psico1/1%20PSICO%20002.pdf
• García Cepero, M. C., & McCoach, D. B. (2009). Educators' Implicit theories of intelligence and beliefs about the identification of gifted students. Universitas psychologica, 8(2), 295-310.
• García, M., Sanz, M., Vilanova, S. (2011)Contenido y naturaleza de las concepciones de profesores universitarios de biología sobre el conocimiento científico. Revista electrónica de Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 10 (1), 23-39.
• Gardner, H. (2005). Las cinco mentes del futuro. Barcelona: Paidós Asterisco. Gómez-Hernández, F.A. (2013) Creatividad, mentiras y educación. Revista Javeriana, 791 (149), 28-34.
• Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. México: Editorial Mc Graw Hill.
• Jiménez, A., Correa, A. (2002) El modelo de teorías implícitas en el análisis de la estructura de creencias del profesorado universitario sobre la enseñanza. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 20 (2), 525-548.
• Martín, M. R. (2014). Análisis de contenido. Estadística y metodología de la investigación. Available from: http://www.uclm.es/profesorado/raulmmartin/Estadistica_Comunicacion/AN%C3%81LISIS%20DE%20CONTENIDO.pdf Parra, J., Marulanda, E., Gómez-Hernández, F.A. Y Espejo, V. (2005) Tendencias de estudio en cognición, creatividad y aprendizaje. Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Pozo, J. (2006) Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Barcelona: Grao.
• Robinson, K. (2006). Do schools kill creativity? TED Conference, Monterey, California [Online] retrieved 11 October 2014 from TED.com
• Sternberg, R., & Lubart, T. (1999) Handbook of Creativity. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (2000). A for mação social da mente: o desenvolvimento dos processos piscológicos superiores. [Trad. José Cipolla Neto et al.] 6. ed., São Paulo: Martins Fontes.