RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR BRENDA G. STONE

Texas A & M University

A relationship between creativity and misbehavior in the classroom often has been presumed by educators, but actually has had little substantiation. The present study attempts to clarify the dynamics of that relationship by determining the extent to which creativity test scores predict identification of students by teachers and/or peers as misbehavers. Intercorrelations between creativity subtests and peer perception of creative behavior suggest that students high in elaboration and in originality are more likely to be described by peers as exhibiting creative behavior. Results generally failed to support that high creativity scores predict teacher identification of students as behavior problems. However, the sociometric variables of popularity and misbehavior were significantly correlated with high creativity scores. Implications for further study are discussed.

Early school histories of the world‘s acknowledged most creative individuals reveal chronic behavior problems and difficulty conforming to classroom expectations that resulted in “unrecognized abilities” and often disgrace (Illingworth, 1975). Wild, silly ideas that frequently stray off the beaten track, combined with an air of playfulness, often characterize highly creative children (Torrance, 1962). These characteristics, com- bined with the demands for convergent rather than divergent thinking pervasive in most classrooms, have been proposed to be the source of conflict for creative children. Wallach and Kogan (1965) found evidence to support the hypothesis that high creative ability may be associated with disruptive classroom behavior or poor social/interpersonal skills, es- pecially among girls.

Although many educators allude to the relationship between classroom behavior and creativity, a paucity of data supporting such a phenomenon exists. This study is a further investigation of that relationship. With a focus on the elementary school setting, assessments were made of creative thinking ability, teacher perceptions of classroom behavior, and peer evaluations. The research hypothesis proposed that children who ex- hibit behavior problems tend to be highly creative, and that, in fact, high levels of creativity may be predictive of classroom behavior problems.

METHOD Subjects

The subjects were 154 (76 girls and 78 boys) second-grade students from a relatively new (eight years old) primarily middle-class school in the suburbs of a large southwestern city. Every child enrolled in second grade at that school who was present on the day of testing was included in the study. Procedure

All children were administered the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (Figural, Form B), which was scored by the Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior. Homeroom teachers completed the Walker Problem Behavior Identification Checklist for each

’ The author wishes to thank Dr. William R. Nash of Texas A & M University for his assistance in ob-

Requests for reprints should be sent to Brenda G. Stone, Dept. of Educational Psychology, College of

taining funds for this study.

Education, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX 77483.

106

Creativity and Classroom Behavior 107

child.2 Further information was gained by having each child complete a sociometric “Guess Who” questionnaire designed by this investigator. The sociometric device con- sisted of nine questions; three questions dealt with popularity, three with creative think- ing, and three with misbehavior. The questions were phrased as follows: Guess Who

(popularity) you would like to you would like to you would like to

(creative thinking)

play a game with? work with on a project? have for a best friend?

has the most unusual ideas? always has a lot of ideas? has the most interesting hobbies?

acts the silliest? does their own thing instead of what they’re supposed to do? gets in trouble the most?

(misbehavior)

Utilizing the Veldman Fortran package, statistical analyses of correlations between variables and multiple regression analyses were attained.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Teachers rated students on five types of problem behavior (i.e., acting out,

withdrawal, distractibility, disturbed peer relations, and immaturity). The correlation of peer assessment of misbehavior with the teacher-rating subscales was consistently signifi- cant in a positive direction, with the exception of the teacher-rating subscale “withdrawal” (r=.30, p<.Ol for acting out, r=.49, p<.OOl for distractibility, r=.17 and .19 p<.05, respectively, for disturbed peer relations and immaturity). Since the sociometric instrument did not address introverted behavior problems, a lack of correla- tion was expected. Apparently, teacher and peer identification of misbehaving students coincide. Students rated by teachers as highly distractible or acting out were most likely to be seen as misbehaving by peers.

Peer nomination for creative thinking did not correlate significantly with any of the teacher ratings. It may be noted here that characteristics described as indicative of creativity by the sociometric instrument correlated only at a -10 level of significance with TTCT scores. Elaboration and originality appeared to be the strongest predictors of the peer criterion called creative thinking.

In correlating teacher perceptions with creativity test subscales, the investigator found a multiple correlation significance only between distractibility and creativity (r=.18, p<.05). Most of the variability in the multiple correlation was attributable to flexibility. Based on these findings, there appears to be little, if any, relationship between what teachers perceive as problem behavior and high levels of creativity. Creativity scores did not predict teacher identification of students as behavior problems.

* Although this checklist is normed for upper elementary age students, the investigator felt that it provided a simple system for separating misbehavers from others as well as identifying types of misbehavior and therefore seemed appropriate to the purpose of this study.

108 Psychology in the Schools, January, 1980, Vol. 17, No. I

Correlations between creativity test performance and peer perceptions suggested that children with high flexibility or originality received high popularity ratings. The strongest correlations (p <.001) from this comparison were found through multiple cor- relation statistics. Popularity (r=.36) and misbehavior (r=.25) appeared to be the most predictable by creativity scores. Fluency and elaboration contributed more than other creativity subtests to the misbehavior correlation, while flexibility and elaboration con- tributed the most to popularity prediction. Originality seemed to have less predictive power for popularity and misbehavior in the multiple correlation.

Neither teacher nor peer evaluations of behavior had striking correlations to creativity test performance. Within the sociometric data, however, children with unusual ideas were both significantly @<.01) popular and classified as misbehaving.

Although this study represents a limited sample of elementary school children, it ad- dresses one facet of the dilemma surrounding the creative child. Apparently the creative seiond graders of this study tended to be viewed by peers as popular and misbehaving. Teachers frequently saw those students as distractible, but they revealed no other persis- tent classification. The hypothesis being tested was only partially supported, which leaves many questions unanswered.

Two important questions proposed by this investigator are: (a) Would verbal creativity tests produce different correlations? and (b) Are peers more accurate identifiers of behavior problems than teachers? In exploring the first question, a study by Kaltsounis and Higdon (1977) concluded that, with junior high school students, verbal flexibility and originality were significantly related to school offenses (i.e., being reprimanded by the principal at least five times during an academic year). No differences were found between conforming and nonconforming students based on figural creativity test scores. Perhaps assessment of verbal creative thinking abilities would, then, lead to findings more suppor- tive of the hypothesis.

Accuracy of peer perceptions has recently begun to be recognized. Peer nomination of students for a gifted program proved to be the most reliable nomination in a study by Jenkins (1978). It seems possible that peers might be more objective observers of teacher- child interactions centered around discipline, and that peers also have access to obser- vations when teachers are not present, thereby giving them more reliable data on which to make evaluations. The present study did not, however, support peer identification of creative behavior if Torrance’s scales define creativity.

The evidence of this correlational study leads one to believe that a nebulous relationship between creativity and classroom behavior exists. Further definition of the relationship is germane to the nurturance of creative thinking.

REFERENCES ILLINGWORTH, R. S. Lessons from childhood. (Excerpt from article presented at the First World Council

for Gifted Children in London, 1975, as quoted in N/S-LTI-G/T Bulletin, 1977 (July), 4 (7). p. 3. JENKINS, R. C. W. The identifiation ofgifted and talented students through peer nomination. Storrs: The

University of Connecticut, 1978. KALTSOUNIS, B., & HIGDON, G . School conformity and its relationship to creativity. Psychological

Reports, 1977, 40, 715-718. RICHTER, J., & SCANDRETTE, 0. Relationship between teacher personality ratings and student academic

success. Journal of Educational Research, 1971, 65, 127-131. TORRANCE, E. P. Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1962. TORRANCE, E. P. Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking, Figural Form B. Lexington, MA: Ginn, 1974. Walker Problem Behavior Identifiation Checklist. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services, 1976. WALLACH, A., & KOGAN, N . Modes ofthinking in young children: A study of the creativiry-intelligence dis-

tinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1965, 73-92.