대표어
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/seven-questions-about-creativity-and-creative-thinking_0aa52128-en.html
권호기사보기
| 기사명 | 저자명 | 페이지 | 원문 | 기사목차 |
|---|
국회도서관 홈으로
정보검색
소장정보 검색
결과 내 검색
동의어 포함
-
-
목차보기
Title page 1
Contents 6
Foreword 4
Acknowledgements 5
Executive summary 12
Introduction 14
Insert 17
01. What makes "creative ideas" creative? 28
1.1. Are creative ideas always appropriate? 29
1.2. Originality and value: which is more important for determining creative ideas? 33
1.2.1. Differences across tasks 35
1.3. Creative ideas: greater than the sum of their parts? 36
Key findings and implications 37
References 37
02. Divergent and convergent thinking: which tasks led to more creative ideas on the PISA test? 40
2.1. Do divergent thinking tasks generate creative ideas? 41
2.2. Which ideation process led to more creative outcomes? 46
2.3. Are last ideas always better in an idea generation process? 48
Key findings and implications 50
References 51
03. Is creative thinking domain-specific, a more general skill - or both? 54
3.1. Did students perform consistently across creative thinking tasks? 55
3.2. Who are the creative all-rounders and what characteristics do they share? 58
3.2.1. Students' socio-demographic background (gender, socio-economic status) and academic performance 59
3.2.2. By personality traits and attitudes 61
Key findings and implications 65
References 66
04. Are there cross-cultural differences in creative thinking? 68
4.1. Appropriateness, originality and value of ideas across country-language groups 70
4.1.1. Differences by domain context 73
4.2. What makes an idea creative? The relative importance of appropriateness, originality and value within creative ideas across cultural-linguistic contexts 74
4.2.1. Are creative ideas highly appropriate, original and valuable in all country-language groups? 74
4.2.2. Variation in holistic creativity scores explained by appropriateness, originality and value across country-language groups 77
4.3. Measuring creativity across cultures: a final word 80
Key findings and implications 81
References 82
05. Thinking outside or inside the box? Patterns in idea flexibility and fixations in problem-solving tasks 84
5.1. How diverse are students' ideas in problem-solving tasks? 85
5.1.1. Food Waste: a social problem-solving task in a familiar context 85
5.1.2. The Exhibit: a harder scientific problem-solving task 90
5.2. Are there differences in idea fixations across different student groups and socio-linguistic contexts? 96
5.2.1. By gender and socio-economic status 97
5.2.2. By socio-linguistic context 99
Key findings and implications 102
References 103
06. Gender differences in creative thinking: are girls really better than boys at thinking creatively? 104
6.1. Do gender differences in creative thinking persist across different scoring methods and across country-language contexts? 106
6.2. Are gender differences in creativity more pronounced in certain domains? 110
6.3. Do the data support the greater male variability hypothesis in creative thinking? 114
Key findings and implications 116
References 117
07. Does socio-economic disadvantage hinder students' creativity? 120
7.1. Which scoring criteria do disadvantaged students struggle with most? 121
7.1.1. Are there cross-cultural differences in the relationship between socio-economic status and creative thinking scores? 125
7.2. Are socioeconomic differences more pronounced in some types of task? 127
7.3. What factors might moderate the relationship between socio-economic status and creative thinking performance? 129
7.3.1. Self-efficacy beliefs 129
7.3.2. Diverse life experiences: Multilingualism and immigration status 130
Key findings and implications 134
References 135
Annex A1. Sample sizes and sampling methodology in the PISA CT Rescoring project 138
Annex A2. Scoring methods and coding design in the PISA CT Rescoring project 138
Annex B. Figures and tables available online 145
Annex C1. Full C-K schema for Food Waste task 153
Annex C2. Comprehensive node category list for Food Waste task 153
Annex C3. Full C-K schema for The Exhibit task 153
Annex C4. Comprehensive node category list for The Exhibit task 153
Figure A. PISA 2022 creative thinking competency model 17
Figure B. Science Fair Poster task 19
Figure C. Illustration Titles task 20
Figure D. 2983 task 21
Figure E. Save the Bees task 22
Figure F. Food Waste task 23
Figure G. Save the River task 24
Figure H. The Exhibit task 25
Figure 1.1. High-scoring holistic creativity responses tend to be highly appropriate 30
Figure 1.2. Holistic creativity scores and appropriateness scores are strongly correlated 32
Figure 1.3. High-scoring holistic creativity responses also tend to have high originality and value 33
Figure 1.4. The most creative answers are more original than they are valuable 35
Figure 2.1. Nearly half of all student responses in 'generate diverse ideas' tasks contained at least one creative idea 42
Figure 2.2. The share of student responses containing creative ideas varies across country-language groups 43
Figure 2.3. Only one quarter of responses to 'generate creative ideas' tasks were creative 46
Figure 2.4. Divergent thinking tasks consistently led to more student responses with creative ideas 47
Figure 3.1. Few students across country-language groups manage to be creative all-rounders 57
Figure 3.2. Some country-language groups have more creative all-rounders than others 58
Figure 3.3. Creative all-rounders are more likely to be girls, be from an advantaged socio-economic background, and score more highly in reading than non-all-rounders 61
Figure 3.4. Creative all-rounders report stronger attitudes and beliefs associated with creativity 62
Figure 3.5. Creative all-rounders report higher levels of assertiveness and perseverance, but lower levels of stress resistance 63
Figure 3.6. Students that report strong attitudes and socio-emotional skills associated with creativity are more likely to score highly across creative tasks 64
Figure 4.1. Appropriateness scores contribute most to the average idea score, followed by value then originality scores 72
Figure 4.2. Ideas in creative expression tasks tend to be more original than valuable, whereas ideas in problem solving tasks tend to be the opposite 74
Figure 4.3. Most relatively creative responses are highly appropriate, in all country-language groups, though the share varies 75
Figure 4.4. Relatively creative responses tend to be more highly valuable than original, though not in all country-language groups 77
Figure 4.5. The relationship between holistic creativity scores and response appropriateness, originality and value scores varies significantly by country-language group 78
Figure 4.6. Appropriateness, originality and value explain most - but not all - of the variation in holistic creativity scores 79
Figure 5.1. Food Waste task 86
Figure 5.2. Nearly half of all student ideas in Food Waste fall within the same sub-branch of the C-K tree 87
Figure 5.3. Cross-cultural variability is relatively stable in Food Waste 89
Figure 5.4. The Exhibit task 91
Figure 5.5. Over half of all ideas in The Exhibit correspond to two sub-branches of the C-K Tree 92
Figure 5.6. There is significant cross-cultural variability in the share of ideas across sub-branches in The Exhibit 94
Figure 5.7. Students found it harder to suggest ideas in different sub-branches in The Exhibit than in Food Waste 95
Figure 5.8. Share of ideas in sub-branches within the international fixation path for Food Waste and The Exhibit 97
Figure 5.9. Girls and advantaged students are more likely to suggest ideas within the fixation path than boys and disadvantaged students 98
Figure 5.10. At least two thirds of ideas within each country-language group corresponds to the international fixation path for the Food Waste task,... 100
Figure 5.11. At least two thirds of ideas within each country-language group corresponds to the international fixation path for The Exhibit task,... 101
Figure 6.1. In no country-language group do boys significantly outscore girls on average 106
Figure 6.2. There are relatively more girls than boys amongst top performers, and relatively many more boys than girls amongst low performers 108
Figure 6.3. Girls significantly outscore boys in tasks in all domains, on average, and in most country-language groups 112
Figure 6.4. Girls are more confident than boys at being creative, in general, but report far less confidence than boys in creative scientific or invention tasks 113
Figure 6.5. On average, girls are overrepresented amongst the top 10% of performers in creative thinking tasks 114
Figure 6.6. On average, boys are overrepresented amongst the lowest 10% of performers in creative thinking tasks 115
Figure 7.1. Disadvantaged students struggle the most in coming up with appropriate ideas 123
Figure 7.2. Disadvantaged students scored comparatively lower in 'generate creative ideas' tasks than in 'generate diverse ideas' tasks, relative to advantaged students 124
Figure 7.3. Socio-economic status explains a larger proportion of the variation in holistic creativity scores than students' mean response idea sum scores 126
Figure 7.4. Tasks differ in how much socio-economic status influences student creativity scores 127
Figure 7.5. Self-efficacy beliefs moderate socio-economic disparities in standardised holistic creativity scores in all country-language groups 130
Figure 7.6. Students with an immigrant background tend to achieve lower scores than students without an immigrant background 131
Figure 7.7. Mathematics and reading scores explain most of the differences in scores by immigrant background 132
Boxes 11
Box A. PISA CT Rescoring project: Data and scoring approaches used in the study 15
Box 1.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 29
Box 1.2. Caution on interpreting the data in this chapter 31
Box 2.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 41
Box 2.2. Research spotlight: Strategies for teaching students to think creatively 44
Box 3.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 56
Box 4.1. Caution on interpreting the data in this chapter 69
Box 4.2. Which score data are used in this chapter? 71
Box 5.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 86
Box 5.2. Identifying international fixation paths in students' thinking 96
Box 6.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 105
Box 6.2. How big of a score difference? 107
Box 6.3. Cross-cultural variation in gender differences across the different dimensions of creativity 109
Box 6.4. Gender differences in engagement with the PISA 2022 creative thinking test 110
Box 7.1. Which score data are used in this chapter? 122
Box 7.2. Treatment of non-appropriate ideas for some analyses in this chapter 123
출판사 책소개
Student responses on the PISA 2022 creative thinking test are a rich source of data. The CT Rescoring Project applied new scoring methods to PISA 2022 creative thinking data in 14 countries and economies to identify the most creative responses in the sample and shed new light on key questions about creativity and creative thinking. This report examines what makes ideas creative across country-language groups, what cognitive processes lead to more creative ideas, and how successfully students can think creatively in multiple tasks, as well as the characteristics of high-performing students. Policy implications from the key findings are also described.
MARC 보기
오류 데이터 정정요청
*표시는 필수 입력사항입니다.
알림톡 발송
| 전화번호 |
|---|
개인정보 수정 바로가기
연속간행물 권호 선택
우편복사 안내
- ◾ 도서관을 방문하지 못할 경우 인터넷, 팩스 등으로 자료 복사를 신청하고, 복사물을 우편·팩스 등으로 제공받는 서비스
- ◾ 대상자료: 일반도서, 연속간행물 및 학위논문
- ※ 고서, 고잡지, 훼손될 우려가 있는 자료, 마이크로폼 자료 및 신문 등 제외
- ◾ 신청 책수: 1인 5책 이하(1일 기준)
- ◾ 신청 절차: 자료 검색 → 우편복사 목록담기 → 복사 범위 입력 → 우편복사 주문서 입력 → 접수 및 확인
- ※ 저작권법에 의거하여 부분 복사(전체 페이지 수의 1/3 범위 이내)만 가능
- ◾ 복사 범위 입력 예시: (연속 페이지) 1-30, (부분 페이지) 25, 30-40
| 번호 | 발행일자 | 권호명 | 제본정보 | 자료실 | 원문 | 신청 페이지 |
|---|
도서위치안내(서울관)
도서위치안내: / 서가번호:
0
확인
우편복사 목록담기를 완료하였습니다.
내서재에 담기
새로운 서재
*표시는 필수 입력사항입니다.
저장
저장 되었습니다.