STUDY OF TEACHERS’ AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS’ AWARENESS AND PRACTICES IN FOSTERING CHILDREN CREATIVITY.

  • Lecturer at Mettu University, Institute of Education and Professional Development Studies, Department of Early Childhood Care and Education.
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

In order to cope up with fast changing world, creativity development from early life is essential. Thus, primary school teachers are required to foster children ability in discovery, solving problems, being creative in writing, art, music, developing their self-confidence as learners and maturing socially and emotionally. In establishing classroom and school environment conducive to creative thinking of children, teachers and school principals have great roles and responsibilities. The purpose of this study was to examine teachers’ and school principals’ awareness and practice in fostering children creativity. A total of 54 samples (45 teachers, 3 principals, 3 vice principals, and 3 supervisors) were selected from Debre Tabor Town elementary school teachers, principals, vice principals, and supervisors (281, 7, 4, and 4 respectively). Stage random sampling technique was used to select samples from the population. Data were collected through questionnaire, observations and focus group discussion. Results revealed that the level of teachers’, Principals’ and supervisors’ awareness of characteristics of creative person such as tendency to practice with alternative solutions, synthetic ability, insight ability, sensitivity to problems, tolerance of anxiety, passionate involvement in tasks, affective pleasure in challenge, tolerance of ambiguity, risk taking, openness to experience, unconventional values, curiosity, preference for challenges and complexity, and independence of judgment was below the average. And also regarding their familiarity with statements indicating characteristics of creative person, teachers were more familiar with self- confidence (M=4.98 , S=0.51) and least familiar with tolerance of ambiguity (M=2.65, S=0.79). Under affective processes teachers were more familiar with statements indicating affective fantasy in play (M=4.10` , S=0.66) and least familiar with affective pleasure in challenge (M=2.99, S= 0.61). From cognitive processes, teachers were more familiar with practical contextual ability (M=4.91, S= 0.58) and least familiar with tendency to practice with alternative solutions (M=3.56, S= 0.52). Regarding children creativity, teachers were focused more on the products than processes – missing to consider what is happening in children’s mind. The school observation showed that 33.3% (N =1) of the school has not stored children creative products and 66.7 % (N=2) of the schools have stored some of children products. Inversely, 66.7% (N=2) of the school never used different colors in children creative products and 33.3 % (N=1) of the schools used different colors. The focus group discussion result also showed that, there were lack of materials provision like different color chalk, marker, play materials, charts and the like. In measuring children creativity, teachers have been focused more on product. Teachers had been motivating children more to recall what they have learnt rather than motivating them to communicate their idea, imagination and creative work with other students. Suggestions were made on the ways of promoting teachers awareness and practice in fostering children creativity by organizing training for them, providing required materials and support.


  1. Amabile, T.M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard business review, 76 (5), 76-87.
  2. Baek, Y.K. (2008). What hinders teachers in using computer and video games in the lassroom? Exploring factors inhibiting the uptake of computer and video games. Cyberpsychology &Behavior, 11(6), 665-671.
  3. Beghetto, R.A. (2007). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussion? Prospective teachers’ response preferences. Thinking skills and creativity, vol. 15, no. 3, 158-177.
  4. Besemer, S. P. &Teffinger, D. J., (1981). Analysis of creative products: Review and synthesis. The journal of creative behavior, Vol. 15, no. 3, 158-177
  5. Bottino, R.M. (2003). ICT, national policies, and impact on schools and teachers’ development. Paer presented at the ICT and the teacher of the future.
  6. Craft, A. (2001). An analysis of research and literature on creativity in education,
  7. Craft, A. (2003). Creativity in schools: tension and dilemmas. London: Routledge.
  8. Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: tension and dilemmas. London: Routledge.
  9. Davidson, D.H. (2003). Developing creativity. Cooperating extension service. Manoa.
  10. Discussion Document and Proceedings of the Consultative Conference on Education (2009). Creativity and the Arts in the primary school. Iris national teachers organization.
  11. Esquivel, G.B. (1995). Teachers behaviors that foster creativity. Educational psychology review, 7(2), 185-202.
  12. Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., and Punie, Y. (2009). Innovation and creativity in education and training in the EU members state: Fostering creativity learning and supporting innovative teaching – literature review on innovation and creativity in E&T in the EU member states. European commission joint research center.
  13. Glaveanu, Vlad Petre (2011) Children and creativity: a most (un)likely pair?Thinking skills and creativity, 6 (2). pp. 122-131.
  14. Glaveanu, Vlad Petre (2011) Children and creativity: a most (un)likely pair?Thinking skills and creativity, 6 (2). pp. 122-131.
  15. Jackson, N. (2002). A guide for busy academics: Nurturing creativity. York, UK: LTSN Generic center. Retrieved October 2014, from http://www.palatine.ac.uk/files/1029.pdf
  16. Kleiman, P. (2008). Towards transformation: conceptions of creativity in higher education. Innovation in education and teaching international, Vol. 45, No. 3, 209-217.
  17. Knight, P. (2002). The idea of a creative curriculum. Retrived November 4, 2014, from http://www.palatine.ac.uk/files/999.pdf
  18. Lemons, G. (2005). When the horse drinks: enhancing everyday creativity using the elements of improvisation. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 25–36.
  19. McCammon, L.A., O’Farrell, L., Saebø, A.B. & Heap, B. (2010). Connecting with their inner beings: an international survey of drama/theatre teachers’ perceptions of creative teaching and teaching for creative achievement. Youth Theatre Journal, 24, 140–159.
  20. Moe, Moh, and Mowa (2010): Policy document for Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE). Ultimate printing press.
  21. Moe, Moh, and Mowa (2010): Strategic operational plan and guidelines for early childhood care and education in Ethiopian. Ultimate printing press.
  22. Runco, M.A. (1990). The divergent thinking of young children: Implications of the research. Gifted child today (GCT), 13(4), 37-39.
  23. Runco, M.A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian journal of education research, 47 (3), 317-324.
  24. Russ, S. (1996). Development of creative processes in children. New directions for child development, 72, 31-42.
  25. Ryhammar, L. & Brolin, C, (1999) ‘Creativity research: historical considerations and main lines of development’ in Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol.43, no.3, pages 259-273
  26. Sawyer, R.K. (2000). Improvisation and the creative process: Dewey, Collingwood, and the aesthetics of spontaneity. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 58(2), 149-161.
  27. Sharp, C. (2004). Developing young children’s creativity: what can we learn from research? Topic, 32, 5-12.
  28. Simplicio, J.S.C. (2000). Teaching classroom educators how to be more effective and creative teachers. Education, 120 (4), 675-680.

[Kasahun Tadesse. (2017); STUDY OF TEACHERS’ AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS’ AWARENESS AND PRACTICES IN FOSTERING CHILDREN CREATIVITY. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 5 (Jan). 2975-2985] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com


kasahun
Mettu University

DOI:


Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/3100      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/3100