Journal directory listing - Volume 51 Number 2 (2006/October) - 【Education】Special Issue on Creativity
Directory

What Do Academics Say and Think about “Creativity”? —An Analysis of Creativity Research Texts
Author: Yi-Ying Huang(Institute of Teacher Education, National Chengchi University)

Vol.&No.:Vol. 51, Special Issue on Creativity
Date:October 2006
Pages:51-70
DOI:10.3966/2073753X2006105103003

Abstract:

Creativity is currently one of the hottest issues in our society and especially among educators. But most studies of creativity, especially those dealing with the how-to-facilitate questions, take the definitions of creativity presented in the literature for granted. Little attention is paid to fundamental inquiries into the “what” and “why” of creativity, “where” and “when” creativity is present, as well as “whose” creativity is being facilitated. This paper thus aimed to analyze three noted research texts on creativity so as to explore the academic’s language on the existing state and characteristic of creativity and reveal the thoughts, that is, presuppositions, interests, expectations, embedded in their words. Through content analysis, coding and categorization, it was found that the creativity reflected from the academics’ words usually appears when human beings start guessing and hypothesizing. Behind their language, the academics’ thought on creativity is a kind of process, products, human’s capability, thought, actions, ideas, integration or problem-solving, of which characteristics are novel, original, appropriate, useful, untraditional, valuable, significant, and complex. And, such an image of creativity contains the academics’ huge interests on modernity, concern about the tradition of society, and awareness on breaking the limit of socialization.

Keywords:thought, research texts, creativity, language, academics

《Full Text》

APA FormatHuang, Y.-Y. (2006). What Do Academics Say and Think about “Creativity”? —An Analysis of Creativity Research Texts. Journal of National Taiwan Normal University: Education, 51, 51-70. doi:10.3966/2073753X2006105103003