Singaporean Teachers' Perception of Activities Useful for Fostering Creativity

Journal of Creative Behavior

131

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

Ninety-five beginning teachers and 116 experienced teachersrated the degree of usefulness of activities for fostering cre-ativity on a 5-Likert scale (1 = not very useful, 5 = very useful).Three clusters (C) were elicited from their responses. C1 wasfeatured by moderate and high ratings of teachers for all thelearning activities. C2 was mainly characterized by student-centered independent and collaborative learning activities. C3was highlighted by student-directed independent learning ac-tivities. About two thirds of the experienced teachers and onefifth of the beginning teachers belonged to C1. Nearly half andone fourth of the latter compared to one fifth of the formerbelonged to C2 and C3, respectively. Implications of the find-ings for Singaporean education were presented.

Learning activities in the classroom: Nearly four decades ago,Torrance (1962, 1963) criticized the learning activities valuedby most teachers: Memorization and recognition of learnedmaterials. Such activities are contradictory to those that fostercreativity. Nonetheless, most students today still strive for aca-demic success in a competitive and crowded learning environ-ment by following closely strict instructions of the teacher(Weistein, 1991). They often engage in activities such as reci-tation, seatwork, teacher-directed small group discussions, andsharing time with structured instructions. Student-directedsmall group discussions that empower learners’ responsibili-ties and encourage independent learning rarely take place.

Creativity education — a socio-cultural perspective:Creativity is conceptualized within the framework of anindividual, her(his) society, and culture (e.g., Arieti, 1976;

A i - G I R L , T A N

Singaporean Teachers’Perception of ActivitiesUseful for Fostering Creativity

Volume 35 Number 2 Second Quarter 2001

132

Teacher Perception

Csikszentmihalyi, 1988). It is the result of an interaction be-tween persons and situations (Heinzen, 1994). Creativity edu-cation refers to individual and socio-cultural efforts to maximizethe development and contribution of human potentials. It goesbeyond the conventional educational objectives that aim atacquiring knowledge and skills (Takahashi, 1993). To be ableto perform creatively, individuals should acquire domain-rel-evant and creative skills, and possess intrinsic motivation(Amabile, 1983). They should be given the opportunity to per-form and exhibit their products, and to gain social recognition(Simonton, 1988). Learners should also be exposed to vari-ous cognitive and learning strategies (e.g., Fogarty & Opeka,1988), learning activities (e.g., Martin, 1996), and modes ofassessment (e.g., Bellanca, Chapman & Swartz, 1997; Fogarty& Stoehr, 1995). In addition to the individual domain, fosteringcreativity demands an unconventional learning environmentthat can facilitate active learner participation and involvement.The organizational environments of schools and classroomsinfluence individuals’ motivation to innovate, acquisition of theskills in innovative management, and setting up resources ina task domain (e.g., Hill & Amabile, 1993). In the classroom,students and teachers are two important groups that help es-tablish favorable conditions for fostering creativity. From thesocio-cultural perspective, intellectual fascinations of one gen-eration of intellectuals can inspire the ideas of the next gen-eration (Simonton, 1988). Accordingly, teachers arepredecessors who can stimulate students to generate creativeideas whereas fellow students are peers who can serve as evalu-ators and supporters for any creative and new ideas.

A student-centered approach to creativity education:Based on the assumption that an open and a flexible environ-ment is indispensable for fostering creativity, a student-cen-tered teaching approach is proposed (Taylor & Ellison, 1975).This teaching approach attempts to foster student enjoymentin school, classroom participation, independent development,democratic classroom control (self management), individual-ized instruction, self-concept, career development, multipletalent experiences (including creativity), etc. The student-cen-tered approach enhances empowerment, enjoyment, self-per-ception, and self-determination that can motivate learners.Individual differences and unique learning styles (Lambert &McCombs, 1998) are recognized. Students are given the op-portunities to interact with peers, to discover their strengthsand weaknesses, and ascertain strategies that match their


133

needs and learning styles (Tan, 1998a). The teacher valuesand promotes students’ properties such as task commitment,persistence, determination, curiosity, adventurousness, toler-ance for ambiguity, independence, nonconformity, self-confi-dence, and willingness to take risks (Cropley, 1992, 1997). Inaddition to acquiring information, students are expected to beactive, as well as acquire skills for using (productive thinking)and evaluating information (evaluative thinking) (Guilford,1975).

Fostering creativity, a national agenda: Creativity educa-tion has been an inspiration of Singaporean educators and lead-ers. Singapore is an island country with a scarcity of land (647.8sq. km) and a small pool of human resources (3.1 million resi-dent population) (Foo, 1998). To maintain its economic andtechnological success within its constraints, Singaporean lead-ers adhere to fostering creative, innovative, and entrepreneur-ial spirits among the young. The idea to initiate creativityeducation emerged in the sixties, evolved gradually in theeighties, and took its shape nation-wide in the nineties.

While struggling to ensure that every child could receivefundamental education in its early development after claim-ing independence in 1965, Singaporean leaders promotedthree aspects of educational reform in 1967: Creative imagina-tion, character building, and moral values. Education shouldimplant students with a set of balanced qualities among aca-demic achievement, creative thinking, personality, and moral-ity. An individual with the spirit of creative imagination isindependent in finding solutions, taking initiative, and makingjudgement. It is believed that creative imagination can bringforth innovations, which can facilitate adaptations to any chang-ing circumstances (Goh, 1972).

In the eighties, the aspiration of fostering creative mindsbecame more prevalent (Lim & Gopinathan, 1990). Schoolsystems and educational structures evolved towards theenhancement of high quality education. With this inspiration,principals were empowered a great degree of autonomy inappointing staff, devising school curricula, and choosing text-books. Several well-established secondary schools announcedautonomous school management (Tan, 1997). In addition,innovations in the areas of curriculum (Ang & Yeoh, 1990),pedagogy (e.g., multimedia systems) (Chin, 1983), and learn-ing activities (e.g., games, team teaching) took place. Towardsthe end of the eighties, the programs emphasizing higherorder thinking (i.e., problem solving, critical thinking, and

134

Teacher Perception

creative thinking) and effective learning were designed forsecondary school students with the help of foreign experts(e.g., Edward de Bono).

Singaporean education in the nineties is characterized byhigh academic achievement as shown by the results in the ThirdInternational Mathematics and Sciences Studies. In his speechat the opening of the Seventh International Conference onThinking (June, 1997), the Singaporean Prime Minister (Goh,1997) expressed the national desire to prepare the young forthe greater socio-economic challenges of the next millennium.He stressed that the old formulae for success (i.e., highacademic achievement) may not be feasible for the futuresuccess. Under the “Thinking Schools” and the “LearningNation” framework, schools, the National Institute of Educa-tion (NIE), the ministry of education, and other social institu-tions were urged to take part in a national commitment to fosterindependent, life-long learning, critical and creative, and prob-lem solving competencies.

Change of teacher roles in the elementary schools: Rec-ognizing the fact that cognitive development is a continuousprocess, programs that enhance thinking of secondary schoolstudents have been extended to elementary schools. Alongwith these programs, a two million Singapore dollar Informa-tion Technology (IT) Master Plan (April 1997; Teo, 1997)was launched with the aim to improve information technologyfacilities in schools and educational institutions. The NationalEducational program that focuses on implanting a sense ofbelonging and cohesiveness among students was launchedin May 1997 (Lee, 1997). For the past several decades, elemen-tary school teachers have been perceived as generalists(i.e., teaching English, mathematics, social studies, or sci-ences), assuming the roles of caregivers and disciplinaryadministrators.

With the new educational initiatives, teachers are encour-aged to contribute new ideas, infuse thinking skills into cur-ricula, as well as identify and nurture children’s creativepotentials. In February – April 1999, about seventy elementaryschool teachers participated in an 18-hour course on infusingthinking skills and strategies into the elementary curricula atthe NIE. The same course will be offered annually for teachersof all elementary schools. Parallel to the initiatives, courses onthinking have been offered to beginning teachers of variousprograms (Diploma, Bachelor degree, Post-graduate Diplomain Education).


135

Change in teaching culture in the late elementary schoolyears: Living in a modernized and an industrialized society,Singaporean elementary teachers experience a highly com-petitive, disciplined, and academic-oriented classroom culture.At the age of 10 (grade 4) Singaporean students take the firststreaming examination (school-based), and at the age of 12(grade 6) the second streaming examination (nation-wide).Based on the results of these examinations, children are allo-cated to various classes (grade 5 and grade 6) and secondaryschools. Informal grouping according to academic perfor-mance takes place in many elementary schools, at least oneyear before the first streaming examination. During theseschool years, teachers give students many school-designedexercises or worksheets in the subjects that will be examinedin the streaming examinations.

In addition, Singaporean students of these school yearsexperience changes in the physical setting of the learning en-vironment, learning styles, and learning expectations. Insteadof sitting in a cluster (grades 1 and 2), students sit individuallyin rows (grade 3 onwards). Given the constraint in the seatingarrangement, children’s interactions with their peers are lim-ited to teacher-directed activities (e.g., group competition, role-play, and riddles). In a class of 35 to 40, students’ physicalmovement is restricted to the change of instructional activitiesthat require the change of venue such as watching videos, learn-ing computer, and performing science experiments.

To ensure that students complete the syllabi and have ampletime to practice examination-related questions, teachers pre-fer recitation and seatwork to sharing time and student-directedsmall group activities. Structured questions that require shortresponses from students are posed during the instructionaltime. Once the teacher feels that the majority of the studentshave understood the content, s/he assigns textbook based orteacher-designed exercises followed by school-designedworksheets. Students are expected to self-discipline theirbehavior and to self-manage their work within the frameworkof explicit rules and regulations.

Teacher views of useful activities for promoting children’screativity: “What a teacher thinks teaching is . . . determinesthe direction, tone, and styles of the teacher . . . has a greatinfluence on how teachers teach: their conceptions of whatthey would like students eventually to become.” (Fern-stermacher & Soltis, 1986, pp.5-6).

Teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and educational philosophy

136

Teacher Perception

influence their instructional approach, classroom climate (e.g.,Baer, 1997; Esquivel, 1995), and roles that they may adopt. Arole is a person’s function, the part taken by her(him) in life orin any activity. It is the way in which s/he is involved. It con-veys what influence s/he has on an activity or situation. Ac-cording to the role-identity theory (McCall & Simmons, 1978),a person acts as an occupant of particular social positions orroles based on how s/he likes to see her(him)self and how s/he likes to be seen by others. Role identities determine aperson’s interpretations of the people, situations, and eventsthat s/he encounters in various social situations. Teacher rolesstate the position that teachers have in a society, in schools,and classrooms, and the ways they are expected to behave ina relationship with students and other related persons. In or-der to maintain the consistency of a role-identity, a personneeds role-support (see Tan, 1999). As such, we should beaware that teachers might not be able to “translate” theirpreferences, beliefs, and wishes into actual teaching, if theydo not receive ample social supports that enhance and con-firm their view. In turn, teachers may commit themselves tosocially accepted learning activities, even though they may notregard them as useful for enhancing creativity.

Research questions: We believe that teachers’ view of learn-ing activities useful for fostering creativity can to a certain ex-tent provide us information about the types of activities theymay undertake in the classroom, especially when the schoolculture supports creative learning and teaching. Recognizingthe importance of considering the teacher’s views of activitiesuseful for fostering children’s creativity, two main researchquestions were formulated. The first research question (RQ1)examined elementary student teachers’ perception of learn-ing activities useful for fostering creativity. The second researchquestion (RQ2) intended to find out whether teacher percep-tions of learning activities useful for fostering creativity are dif-ferent across groups (e.g., gender, beginning and experiencedteachers).

Participants: There were two principal groups of participants.The first group was comprised of 95 beginning teachers (73.7%female, and 26.3% male) at the NIE who ranged in age from20 to 29 years. The second group was composed of 116 expe-rienced teachers (85.3% female, and 14.7% male) between theages of 20 and 50 years from various elementary schoolsin Singapore. The beginning teachers had limited teaching

METHODOLOGY


137

Characteristics of the participants

Beginning Experiencedte achers teachers(N= 95) (N = 116)

Age 20-29 94 (98.9%) 37 (31.9%)30-39 1 (1.1%) 40 (34.5%)40-49 15 (12.9%)50 and above 24 (20.7%)

Gender Female 70 (73.7%) 99 (85.3%)Male 25 (26.3%) 17 (14.7%)

Years of Below 1 95 (100%)teaching 1-10 55 (47.4%)

11-20 26 (22.4%)20 and above 35 (30.2%)

Type of school Government 68 (58.6%)Independent 2 (1.7%)Special assisted 13 (11.2%)Others 30 (25.9%)Not specified 3 (2.6%)

Location City 107 (92.2%)of school Neighborhood 9 (7.8%)Subjects English 71 (74.7%)c 107 (92.2%)

Mathematics 66 (69.5%)c 98 (84.5%)Social studies 14 (14.7%)c 49 (42.2%)Mother tongues 7 (7.4%)c 7 (6.0%)Science 42 (44.2%)c 69 (59.5%)Others 32 (33.7%)c 40 (34.5%)

Level Elementary 1 — 16 (7.3%)Elementary 2 18 (18.8%)s 55 (25.2%)Elementary 3 14 (14.7%)s 33 (18.1%)Elementary 4 19 (20.0%)s 54 (24.8%)Elementary 5 18 (18.9%)s 48 (22.0%)Elementary 6 7 (7.4%)s 65 (29.8%)

Attended Yes 34 (35.8%) 67 (57.8%)thinking No 57 (60.0%) 48 (41.4%)course Not specified 4 (4.2%) 1 (0.9%)Used thinking Yes 61 (64.2%) 97 (83.6%)skills/strategies No 29 (30.5%) 16 (13.8%)

Not specified 5 (5.3%) 3 (2.6%)Note: c refers to teaching subjects that beginning teachers

will be educated.s refers to beginning teachers’ school experiences.

TABLE 1.

138

Teacher Perception

experiences, which included just several weeks of teachingpractice in various elementary schools. The experienced teach-ers were teachers from various types of elementary schools inSingapore. Teachers in Singaporean elementary schools teachacross subjects such as English, mathematics, science or so-cial studies, and across levels. In addition, the participants self-reported whether they attended thinking courses and whetherthey infused thinking strategies into lessons. Table 1 summa-rizes the characteristics of the participants.

Procedure: A questionnaire that was comprised of thirty-three learning activities was designed with reference to the re-sponses of several exploratory studies which took place fromAugust 1997 to the end of 1998. The learning activities includedin the present study constitute desirable learning activities (Tan,1988b, 1998c), common classroom activities, and activitiesthat may help generate ideas (Tan, 1998d). The questionnairewas administered to the teachers who attended thinkingcourses at the NIE from January to March 1999. The averageduration for completing the instrument was 15 minutes. Theparticipants rated the degree of usefulness of the activities forfostering elementary school students’ creativity on a 5-pointLikert scale. The number “1” on the scale meant “not veryuseful”, whereas the number “5” denoted “very useful”. Thesurvey was conducted in English.

RQ1: The Cronbach’s alpha reliability of the whole question-naire was high, 0.94. Mean and standard deviation of each itemwere computed. All items possessed a value of skewness withinthe absolute range 1.69 (±), and several items had a value ofkurtosis greater than 1.69 (#2, 4, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 30,32). A cluster analysis on the thirty-three items yielded twoclusters. The first cluster comprised 22 participants (14 begin-ning teachers and 8 experienced teachers). Except for fouritems (#1, 12, 14, 18) with a value of final cluster centering of4, all items had a value between 1 and 3. The second clusterconsisted of 189 participants (81 beginning teachers and 108experienced teachers). All items had a value of final clustercentering between 2 and 4. The distance between these twoclusters was 8.7. Results of the descriptive statistics on thethirty-three items belonging to the second cluster showed thateliminating the 22 cases belonging to the first cluster reducedthe number of items with a value of kurtosis higher than 1.69(#4, 8, 17, 19). A second cluster analysis on the thirty-threeitems with the 22 cases removed yielded three clusters.

RESULTS ANDDISCUSSION


139

The first cluster (C1) consisted of 83 participants, of which18 were beginning teachers and 65 were experienced teach-ers. Those numbers represent 22.2% and 60.2% of the begin-ning and experienced teachers, respectively, who were includedin this analysis. This first cluster was featured by moderate andhigh final cluster centers (3 or 4) of all items. The participantsbelonging to C1 may believe that almost all types of learningactivities (i.e., with little differentiated preferences) are usefulfor fostering the creative potential of children. The second clus-ter (C2) was composed of 63 participants of which 42 (51.9%of beginning teachers) were beginning teachers and 21 (19.4%)were experienced teachers. This cluster was characterized bylearning activities that do not promote rote and memorizinglearning. Sixteen items with a final cluster center 4 or 5 high-lighted student participation guided by teachers (e.g., #1, 2, 3,4), in collaboration with peers (e.g., #6, 8, 11), and non-struc-tured and independent student-directed activities (e.g., #5, 14,18). The third cluster (C3) was characterized by learning ac-tivities that encouraged student-directed individual and groupactivities (#1, 8, 12, 14, 18, 26). Twenty-one beginning teach-ers (25.9%) and 22 (20.4%) experienced teachers belongedto C3. Distances between final cluster centers of the threeclusters were 5.32 (C1-C2), 3.11 (C2-C3), and 5.59 (C1-C3).

Table 2 summarizes descriptive statistics, the results of in-dependent sample t-tests between beginning and experiencedteachers, and the final cluster centers of the thirty-three items.The items were grouped with reference to the results of theprevious study (Tan, 1998d) that investigated children’s per-ception of learning activities useful for promoting creativity.The children who participated in the study valued learningactivities that provide basic knowledge acquisition and thatemphasize recall and memorization (R), learning activities thatencourage collaboration (C), enhance motivation (M), andfoster independent learning (I). The same items were also cat-egorized by referring to Weinstein’s (1991) descriptions of learn-ing activities in the classroom with special attention being paidto the Singaporean context. Within the Singaporean classroomcontext, learning activities were grouped into teacher-directed(T) versus student-directed (S) learning approaches.

RQ2: In general, the experienced teachers rated the itemshigher than the beginning teachers did. Results of the two-independent samples t-test and K-S z test showed that begin-ning and experienced teachers possessed significantly different

140

Teacher Perception

TABL

E 2.

Des

crip

tive

stat

istic

s, s

igni

fican

t di

ffer

ent

findi

ngs,

and

fin

al c

lust

er c

ente

rs f

or l

earn

ing

activ

ities

use

ful

for

crea

tivity

.

Item

Item

con

tent

S/T

Act

Begin

ning

teac

hers

Expe

rienc

ed te

ache

rsFi

nal c

luster

cent

ers

no.

MSD

Rank

MSD

Rank

t-tes

tK-

S z

C1C2

C3

18C

onst

ruct

som

ethi

ngS

I4.

36.8

01

4.23

.94

14

54

14Le

arn

outs

ide

the

clas

sS

I4.

07.9

52

4.22

.73

24

44

26Su

gges

t new

idea

sS

I4.

03.7

13

3.97

1.00

64

44

1G

ames

S/T

M3.

95.8

44

3.99

.97

44

44

12D

o pr

ojec

t wor

kS

I3.

86.8

65

3.98

.84

54

44

8G

roup

dis

cuss

ion

SC

3.84

.80

63.

84.9

711

.54

44

6So

lve

puzz

leS

C3.

83.9

97

3.95

.95

74

43

17Ro

le p

lay

S/T

C3.

77.9

38

3.85

.85

9.5

***

43

3

30Sh

are

idea

sS

C3.

631.

019

3.60

1.06

17.5

44

3

2Ri

ddle

sS/

TM

3.58

1.05

10.5

3.85

.85

8*

44

3

32W

rite

dow

n id

eas

SC

3.58

1.03

10.5

3.71

1.04

184

43

25A

ct/s

how

and

tell

S/T

M3.

451.

1212

.53.

83.8

813

**4

43

4Le

arn

com

pute

r ski

llsT

R3.

451.

0012

.54.

11.9

33

***

***

44

3

3Li

sten

to s

tory

TM

3.44

.95

143.

85.8

29.

5**

44

3

11G

roup

com

petit

ion

S/T

C3.

421.

1115

3.84

.80

11.5

***

44

3

5Ve

rbal

pre

sent

atio

nS

I3.

321.

0016

3.19

.88

14**

*4

43

33So

lve

a pr

oble

mS

I3.

211.

2517

3.59

1.10

19.5

**

44

3

9A

sk q

uest

ion

SI

3.11

1.27

183.

591.

1119

.5**

43

3


141

TABL

E 2.

(Con

tin

ued

).

Item

Item

con

tent

S/T

Act

Begin

ning

teac

hers

Expe

rienc

ed te

ache

rsFi

nal c

luster

cent

ers

no.

MSD

Rank

MSD

Rank

t-tes

tK-

S z

C1C2

C3

23W

rite

an e

ssay

/co

mpo

sitio

nS

I3.

001.

0719

3.58

.88

21**

***

43

3

21Q

uiz

TC

2.96

1.39

203.

63.9

316

***

*4

33

10Vi

deo

show

TR

2.76

1.24

21.5

3.34

.97

23**

***

43

3

16Re

ad a

boo

kS/

TC

2.76

1.25

21.5

3.60

.95

17.5

***

***

43

3

7Li

sten

to jo

kes

TM

2.75

1.26

233.

391.

0322

***

**3

33

15C

orre

ct m

ista

kes

TR

2.57

1.35

243.

121.

3125

**4

33

24Re

st/r

eces

sS

M2.

461.

5525

3.21

1.40

24**

***

43

2

20Te

ache

r dem

onst

ratio

nT

R2.

031.

2426

3.03

1.11

27**

*4

23

31M

enta

l sum

TR

1.98

1.34

273.

081.

2626

***

***

42

2

13Sp

ell w

ords

cor

rect

lyT

R1.

951.

3628

2.89

1.27

28**

***

*4

22

19D

o w

orks

heet

TR

1.91

1.23

292.

831.

0029

***

***

32

2

29Re

med

ial c

lass

/tui

tion

TR

1.71

1.24

302.

591.

2432

***

***

32

2

27Le

arn

gram

mar

TR

1.60

1.31

312.

671.

1730

***

***

31

2

22Te

st/e

xam

inat

ion

TR

1.53

1.25

322.

631.

2531

***

***

31

2

28Re

mem

ber m

ultip

licat

ion

tabl

esT

R1.

261.

1133

2.49

1.39

33**

***

*3

12

Not

e:*

< .0

5, *

* <

.01,

***

< .0

01. C

= c

olla

bora

tion,

I =

inde

pend

ent l

earn

ing,

M =

mot

ivat

ion,

R =

rec

itatio

n/m

emor

izat

ion.

S =

Stu

dent

-dire

cted

, T =

Tea

cher

-dire

cted

, Act

= A

ctiv

ity.

142

Teacher Perception

perceptions of activities that demand recitation and memori-zation which are often teacher-directed. The mean differencebetween these two groups was between 1 and 1.3 (see the sev-eral last items in the rank in Table 2). Because the beginningand experienced teachers differed in several attributes (e.g.,gender distribution and age), we wished to find out the extentto which those factors may have contributed to the differenceswe observed, and hence conducted separate analyses for the189 participants. The data were analyzed using independentsamples t-tests. Almost no significant differences in the per-ception of the learning activities were observed across gendergroups except for five items (#3, 4, 11, 14, 32; .01 < p < .05),which female participants rated significantly higher than themale participants. Younger participants (age 20-29 years) ratedeight items (#4, 7, 16, 20, 27, 28, 31; .01 < p < .05) significantlylower than participants 30 years and above. For further analy-sis, we selected participants who attended thinking coursesonly and computed the t-tests for beginning and experiencedteachers. The same method was employed for analyzing par-ticipants who did not attend any thinking courses, who infusedthinking skills and strategies, or who did not infuse thinkingskills and strategies into the lessons. We found that the num-ber of significantly different items between the beginning andexperienced teachers was higher among the participants whodid not attend thinking courses (17 items; #4, 5, 7, 11, 13, 16,19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33; .01 < p < .001) thanamong the participants who attended thinking courses (5items; #2, 4, 7, 10, 22; .01 < p < .05). Similarly, the number ofsignificantly different items between the beginning and expe-rienced teachers was higher among the participants who didnot infuse thinking strategies (16 items; #4, 10, 11, 13, 16, 19,20, 21, 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33; .01 < p < .001) than amongthose who infused strategies (10 items; 2, 4, 5, 7, 20, 22, 23,28, 29, 31; .01 < p < .05). It seems that thinking courses andteacher’s commitment to employing teaching skills and strat-egies can narrow the gap between the beginning and experi-enced teachers in viewing the types of useful learning activitiesfor fostering creativity.

Common perceptions: Teachers’ perceptions containsources of information about what they believe, and what theyperceive as useful, manageable, and interesting. If we assumethat items which did not show significant differences are teach-ers’ “common perceptions”, then the beginning and experi-enced teachers may have common perceptions of nine items.


143

These items were learning activities that foster independentlearning (#12, 14, 18, 26), demand collaboration (#6, 8, 30,32), and motivate students (#1). All these activities are stu-dent-directed, namely students are given the responsibility toorganize the activities. They have to ensure that their knowl-edge and skills are sufficient for the completion of the task. Ifthe activities encourage team spirit or collaboration, studentshave to develop social skills and leadership competence tohandle various behaviors of the group members. In addition tothe skills needed to complete that task, students learn how tomanage time and behaviors of their contemporaries. They alsolearn to translate their new and original ideas to the codes andmodes of communication of their fellow students.

Low ratings: Except item 18 (construct something) anditem 30 (share ideas), in general the beginning teachers’ rat-ings for all items were lower than those of the experiencedteachers. The relative low ratings may be interpreted that thebeginning teachers had less deterministic perceptions of learn-ing activities useful for fostering creative thinking than did theirexperienced counterparts. The beginning teachers seemed tobe receptive to the new educational initiatives that emphasizestudent-centered education. This argument is evidently sup-ported by the high percentage of the beginning teachers forclusters C1 and C2 which “denied” teacher-directed rote memo-rization (R). The final cluster center for constructing something(#18), an item of individual learning, was the highest amongall, 5, making it a significant item for C2 — more than half ofthe beginning teachers belonged to this cluster.

Less differentiated views: The experienced teachers, how-ever, did not seem to have a differentiated view of the learningactivities. Sixty percent of the experienced teachers seemedto regard all learning activities as useful activities for promot-ing children’s creative thinking (C1). Experienced teachers inelementary schools are trained to be generalists who can teachacross classes and subjects. We may infer that experiencedteachers, who assume their roles as teachers and are qualifiedfor teaching two or more subjects (English, mathematics,social studies, or sciences) and all levels (P1 to P6), have tobelieve in the usefulness of all kinds of learning activities. Foreach subject and at each level, teachers are faced with chil-dren of various backgrounds with various learning needs andcapacities. It may be difficult for experienced teachers todecide which learning activities are extremely useful for which

144

Teacher Perception

groups of students. Future surveys should specify the charac-teristics of specific groups of students. With the introductionof creativity education, the teacher education institution andthe Ministry of Education should re-assess the curricula ofteacher education programs. It is important for teachers toacquire domain-relevant expertise and creative skills so thatthey can integrate these skills into the lessons. Generalists areless likely to be proficient than specialists in selecting the ap-propriate domain-relevant strategies and creative skills.

Serious versus “fun” learning: Though creativity educa-tion has already been introduced to schools and teachersare encouraged to infuse higher order thinking skills and strat-egies into the curricula, Singaporean schools have not re-vamped their assessment system. The two streamingexaminations that take place in elementary four and six re-main in the system. Until now, the format of the examinationhas not been changed substantially. Students are required torecall and remember facts. It is thus understandable that theexperienced teachers valued teacher-centered learning activi-ties significantly more than the beginning teachers. Seriouslearning instead of “fun” learning is still the main feature ofSingaporean classrooms. In general in a two-period lesson (30minutes per period) teachers spend about 5 minutes reiterat-ing previous learning and introducing the day’s lesson, 15 min-utes content delivery, 20 minutes individual or group work, and20 minutes assigning homework or school designedworksheets. It is therefore not surprising to notice that theexperienced teachers strongly endorsed the learning activitiesthat enhance rote memorization.

Limitations and suggestions: According to the role-iden-tity theory (McCall & Simmon, 1978; Petkus, 1996), role-iden-tity, role-performance, and role-support are in a cyclicalrelationship. A person with a given role (e.g., a creative teacher)undertakes role- performances (e.g., encouraging pupils tovoice out their own viewpoint and share unconventional ideas)that are designed to elicit role-support (e.g., verbal recogni-tion from pupils and colleagues) which reinforce the role-iden-tity. A teacher needs support from colleagues, principals, andparents, as well as co-operation from pupils in order to sustainher(his) motivation in taking a role. While convincing them-selves and students of the innovative learning activities, teach-ers are likely to experience role-conflict, stress, and difficultyin coping with the new teaching environment. Future studies


145

should examine teachers’ perceptions of role-support that theyneed for conducting creative lessons. A research-design thatcaptures actual classroom experiences should be introducedto explore difficulties in and advantages of adopting uncon-ventional learning activities, teacher roles in teaching, and sub-sequently the types of role-supports that teachers desire.

The present study obtained teachers’ perceptions of activi-ties useful for fostering children’s creativity. Similar studiesshould be conducted to uncover the relation between children’sand teachers’ views of activities useful for nurturing creativity.The effectiveness of the study can be enhanced if we alsoexamine teachers’ self-concept, self-esteem, job satisfaction,and teacher motivation in fostering various types of creativity.

Creative individuals possess skills to generate ideas. They havemany ideas (Clapham, 1997), and strong interest in their work.They are eager to learn new knowledge and skills (Amabile,1983; Simonton, 1994), are risk taking (Sternberg, 1996), andare persistent or hard working (Heinzen, Mills & Cameron,1993). Activities that are relaxing and can bring forth “fun”should be regarded as important for inducing creative think-ing. It is not an easy task to convince schools and teachers toincrease variations in activities, to allow flexibility in studentbehaviors, and to be open to unconventional classroom set-tings that encourage risk-taking behaviors. Fear of taking risksand committing mistakes can be one of the hindrances toattempting new experiences. Unless the criteria of assessingstudents’ behaviors and achievement are modified to accom-modate unusual ideas and unexpected behaviors, teachers andstudents are likely to maintain their current mindsets.

A successful educational reform demands co-operation andcommitment of educators and students. Educators’ views andstudents’ views of any reform programs should be equally con-sidered and investigated. Fostering creativity demands peren-nial patience and determination. It also calls for earlyrecognition of creative potentials and cultivation of learninghabits such as spirit of discovering, love for knowledge, andpersistence. Socio-cultural supports among students, betweenstudents and teachers, and among teachers are importantfor an open learning environment. Unless we recognize theimportance of teacher and student perceptions of learningactivities and examine the effectiveness of their views inpractice, a stimulating learning culture will not be created.

CONCLUSION

146

Teacher Perception

AMABILE, T. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Spring-Verlag.

ANG, W. H., & YEOH, O. C. (1990). 25 years of curriculum development. InJ. S. K. Yip & W. K. Sim (Eds.), Evolution of educational excellence:25 years of education in the Republic of Singapore (pp. 81-105).Singapore: Longman.

ARIETI, S. (1976). Creativity: The magic synthesis. New York: Basic Books.

BAER, J. (1997). Creative teachers, creative students. Boston, MA: Allyn& bacon.

BELLANCA, J., CHAPMAN, C., & SWARTZ, E. (Eds.) (1997). Multipleassessments for multiple intelligences. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing Co.

CHIN, L. S. (1983). The project on innovative teaching methods — anoverview.Singapore Journal of Education, 5, 2, 43-48.

CLAPHAM, M. M. (1997). Ideational skills training: A key element in creativitytraining programs. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 1, 33-44.

CROPLEY, A. J. (1992). More ways than one: Fostering creativity in theclassroom. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

CROPLEY, A. J. (1997). Fostering creativity in the classroom: Generalprinciples. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook(Vol. 1, pp. 83-114). Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press.

CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systemsview of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp.325-339). New York: Cambridge University Press.

ESQUIVEL, G. R. (1995). Teacher behaviors that foster creativity (Specialissue: Toward an educational psychology of creativity). EducationalPsychology Review, 7, 2, 185-202.

FERNSTERMACHER, G. D., & SOLTIS, J. F. (1986). Approaches toteaching. New York: Teachers College Columbia University.

FOGARTY, R., & OPEKA, K. (1988). Start them thinking: A handbook ofclassroom strategies for the early years. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing Co.

FOGARTY, R., & STOEHR, J. (1995). Integrating curricula with multipleintelligences: Teams, themes, and threads. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing Co.

FOO, S. L. (Ed.) (1998). Facts and pictures. Singapore: Ministry ofInformation and the Arts.

GOH, C. T. (1997). Shaping our future: Thinking schools and a learningnation: A speech given by the Prime Minister Singapore at the openingof the 7th International Conference on Thinking at the Suntec Cityconvention center ballroom June 2, Speeches, 21, 3, 12-20.

GOH, K. S. (1972). The economics of modernization and other essays.Singapore: Asia Pacific Press.

GUILFORD, J. P. (1975). Creativity: A quarter century of progress: In I. A.Taylor & J. W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp. 37 – 59).Chicago, Illinios: Aldine Publishing Co.

HEINZEN, T. E. (1994). Situational affect: Proactive and reactive creativity.In M. P. Shaw & A. Mark (Eds.), Creativity and affect: Creativityresearch (pp. 127-146). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

REFERENCES


147

HEINZEN, T. E., MILLS, C., & CAMERON, P. (1993). Scientific innovationpotential. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 3, 261 – 269.

HILL, K. G., & AMABILE, T. M. (1993). A social psychological perspectiveon creativity: Intrinsic motivation and creativity in the classroom andworkplace. In S. G. Isaken, M. C. Murdock, R. L. Firestein & D. J. Treffinger(Eds.), Understanding and recognizing creativity: The emergence ofa discipline (pp. 400-423). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex PublishingCorporation.

LAMBERT, N. M., & MCCOMBS, B. L. (Eds.) (1998). How pupils learn:Reforming schools through learner-centered education. Washington,D. C.: American Psychological Associations.

LEE, H. L. (1997). Developing a shared sense of nationhood: A speech givenby the Deputy Prime Minister Singapore at the launch of the NationalEducational Program at TCS TV Theatre May 17. Speeches, 21, 3,41-52.

LIM, S. T., & GOPINATHAN, S. (1990). 25 years of curriculum planning. InJ. S. K. Yip & W. K. Sim (Eds.), Evolution of educational excellence:25 years of education in the Republic of Singapore (pp. 59-80).Singapore: Longman.

MARTIN, H. (1996). Integrating mathematics across the curriculum.Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing Co.

MCCALL, G. L., & SIMMONS, J. L. (1978). Identities and interactions. NewYork: The Free Press.

PETKUS, E. JR (1996). The creative identity: Creative behaviour from thesymbolic interactionist perspective. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30,3, 188-196.

SIMONTON, D. K. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.

SIMONTON, D. K. (1994). Greatness: Who makes history and why. NewYork: The Guilford Press.

STERNBERG, R. J. (1996). Developing creativity in students and teachers.In J. Georgas & M. Manthouli (Eds.), Europe: Theory, research, andapplications (pp. 211-223). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.

TAKAHASHI, M. (Ed.) (1993). Sozoryoku Jitei (Dictionary of Creativity. Itsoriginal English title is Business Creation Bible). Tokyo: Modogakuen.

TAYLOR, C. W., & ELLISON, R. L. (1975). Moving toward working models increativity: Utah creativity experiences and insights. In I. A. Taylor & J.W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp. 191-223). Chicago,Illinios: Aldine Publishing Co.

TAN, J. (1997). Independent schools in Singapore: Implications for socialand educational inequalities. In J. Tan, S. Gopinathan & W. K. Ho (Eds.),Education in Singapore: A book of readings (pp. 275-291). Singapore:Prentice Hall.

TAN, A. G. (1998a). Fostering students’ creativity using learner-centeredstrategies. SRL (The society for reading and literacy) News Magazine,10, 4, 8-9.

TAN, A. G. (1998b). An exploratory study of Singaporean primary pupils’desirable activities for English lessons. Education Journal, 26, 1, 59-76.

TAN, A. G. (1998c). Exploring primary pupils’ desirable activities inmathematics lessons. The Mathematics Educator, 3, 2, 26-37.

148

Teacher Perception

TAN, A. G. (1998d). Singaporean children’s views of desirable activities anduseful activities for fostering creativity. Educational Research Journal,13, 2, 1-24.

TAN, A. G. (1999). Teacher roles in promoting creativity. Teaching andLearning, 19, 2, 42-51.

TEO, C. H. (1997). Opening the frontiers in education with informationtechnology: A speech given by the Minister for Education Singapore, atthe launch of the Masterplan for IT in Education at Suntec City April 28.Speeches, 21,2, 92-98.

TORRANCE, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall.

TORRANCE, E. P. (1963). Education and the creative potential.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

WEINSTEIN, C. S. (1991). The classroom as a social context for learning.Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 493-525.

Ai-girl, Tan, Nanyang Technological University, 469 Bukit Timah Road,Singapore 259756. Email: [email protected]

Documents

Singaporean Teachers' Perception of Activities Useful for Fostering Creativity