Scholarly record
KNOWLEDGE OF EARLY EDUCATION TEACHERS ABOUT CREATIVITY AND THE MODEL OF THE IDEAL STUDENT
Abstract
By creating the right conditions for developing creative potential and creative activity of children we should eliminate various blockades that inhibit this development, share knowledge about the work and practice cognitive skills, necessary for creative thinking. To make this possible, it is important that teachers were able to accurately identify and then develop and stimulate the creative potential of each student. It is important, whether they have professional knowledge or base on current knowledge and their own theories. Depending on one's views about the possibilities of the child and his abilities teacher shapes his expectations and educational impact. The educational environment created by the teacher and accepted style of educational activities support these abilities that the teacher sees, recognizes as important for school learning and performance of the individual child. Greater opportunities for developing their abilities and raising the level of school achievements have this student, whom the teacher perceives as capable, creative, with great development opportunities [1], which does not necessarily coincide with the child's real image. The teacher's student image, therefore, directs the diagnosis, ability to recognize children's creative abilities, determines the adopted communication patterns, selection of educational content, work methods, the scope of individualization in the approach to children, anticipated ways of achieving their achievements and assessment methods. Analysis of the results of Polish research indicates that in Polish schools, teachers describing the image of an ideal student do not always choose the characteristics of a creative student. A creative student is not synonymous with the desired student, but he is not the opposite. Teachers, however, prefer a responsible student with a high personal culture than an original student who is independent in thinking [2]. Teachers overestimate the student's intellectual properties and underestimate personality traits. On the other hand, they reject socially undesirable student behavior and disregard the students' intellectual passivity. The aim of the research was to determine what knowledge about creativity of the surveyed teachers and whether it helps to appreciate the creative behavior of students and what is the image of a child as an ideal student in the opinion of the studied teachers, which can be a model of interpretation of pedagogical reality and the design of everyday pedagogical practice. I also tried to determine whether the ideal student is a creative student, or does the teachers' knowledge of creativity result in the choice of creative behavior in the image of the ideal student? The research used the diagnostic survey method and 108 Polish early school teachers were examined. A questionnaire was used to study the state of knowledge of early school education teachers about various aspects of creativity.The surveyed teachers views on: creativity, features of creative people, determinants of creativity, their own creative potential and ways to develop and stimulate students' creativity. It was determined to what extent teachers' knowledge about creativity may influence their educational practice. Research results indicate that a significant proportion of teachers surveyed refer to colloquial knowledge, hidden theories about creativity, which is not favorable for supporting the creative attitudes of pupils and creating appropriate conditions for their development by teachers. Teachers' knowledge about creativity is not enough, especially about the creative process. Meanwhile, it is the knowledge and understanding of various aspects of creative learning by the teacher that allows you to modify your daily activities to give them the characteristics of creativity. Based on the results of the assessment of their creative potential, most teachers claim to be creative, but the indicated manifestations of their creativity do not always confirm this view. Teachers value the creative behavior of students, the child's independent and creative cognitive activity, but at the same time they rarely indicate such attributes of creativity as originality, openness, independence, resilience and perseverance. This is not conducive to developing children's creativity, which is necessary in a dynamically developing world.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References25
Bałachowicz J., Obraz kreatywnego i idealnego ucznia w poglądach nauczycieli, [w:] I.Adamek , J. Bałachowicz (red.), Kompetencje kreatywne nauczyciela wczesnej edukacji dziecka, Oficyna Wydawnicza Impuls, Kraków, 2013.
Wiechnik R., Obraz ucznia idealnego w percepcji nauczycieli szkół podstawowych, Psychologia Rozwojowa, 3-4, 2000, p.255-267.
Lachowicz-Tabaczek K. (2004), Potoczne koncepcje świata i natury ludzkiej, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne, Gdańsk 2004.
Carr M., Kurtz-Costes B.E., Is being smart everything? The influence of student achievement on teachers” perceptions, “British Journal of Educational Psychology”, 64, 1994, p. 263-276.
Bałachowicz J., Style działań edukacyjnych nauczycieli klas początkowych. Między uprzedmiotowieniem a podmiotowością, Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej TWP, Warszawa, 2009.
Bałachowicz J., Obraz kreatywnego i idealnego ucznia w poglądach nauczycieli, [w:] I.Adamek , J. Bałachowicz (red.), Kompetencje kreatywne nauczyciela wczesnej edukacji dziecka, Oficyna Wydawnicza Impuls, Kraków, 2013.
Bałachowicz J. (2009), Style działań edukacyjnych nauczycieli klas początkowych. Między uprzedmiotowieniem a podmiotowością, Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej TWP, Warszawa, 2009.
Malinowska D., Wiedza potoczna nauczycieli o twórczości. In: Psychologia twórczości. Nowe Horyzonty, Cz. II. Związki poglądu na twórczość z kreatywnością. [w:] S. Popek, R.E.,Bernacka, C. W. Domański, B. Gajda, D. Turska, A. Zzawadzka (ed.), Nowe perspektywy twórczości, Wydawnictwo UMCS, Lublin, 2009.
Tokarz A. ,Słabosz A. , Cechy uczniów preferowane przez nauczycieli jako wymiar aktywności twórczej w szkole. Cz.II: Uczeń idealny i twórczy w preferencjach badanych nauczycieli. Edukacja.Studia. Badania. Innowacja, 3(75), 2001, p. 36-48.
Wiechnik R., Obraz ucznia idealnego w percepcji nauczycieli szkół podstawowych, Psychologia Rozwojowa, 3-4, 2000, s.255-267.
Pufal-StruzikI., Twórczy uczeń w nauczycielskich naiwnych teoriach natury ludzkiej.[w:] W. Dobrołowicz, K.J. Szmidt, I. Pufal_Struzik, U. Ostrowska, J. Gralewski (red.), Kreatywność kluczem do sukcesu w edukacji,Wszechnica PolskaSzkoła Wyższa TWP, Warszawa 2006
POPEK , S., Człowiek jako jednostka twórcza, UMCS, Lublin 2001.
Wetsby E.L., Dawson V.L., Creativity: Assert or burden in the classroom?, „Creativity Research Journal”, nr 8, 1995,s. 1-10.
Ng, A.K., Smith I., The paradox of Promoting Creativity in the Asian Classrom:an Empirical Investigation, “Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs”, 130, 2004, p.307-330.
Cropley A.J. , Nauczyciel wobec twórczego dziecka, [w:] M. Malicka (red.), Twórczość, czyli droga w nieznane, WSiP, Warszawa, 1989.
Karwowski M.,Jazurek D., Mój idealny uczeń… oby tylko nie był zbyt kreatywny? Zastosowanie metodologii choice-based conjoint do badania postzregania uczniów kreatywnych i pożądanych w klasie szkolnej. [w:] M.Karwowski, A. Gajda (red.), Kreatywność (nie tylko) w klasie szkolnej, Wydawnictwo Akademii Pedagogiki Specjalnej, Warszawa 2010.
Wiechnik R., Obraz ucznia idealnego w percepcji nauczycieli szkół podstawowych, Psychologia Rozwojowa, 3-4, s.255-267.
Wetsby E.L., Dawson V.L. (1995), Creativity: Assert or burden in the classroom?, „Creativity Research Journal”, nr 8, 1-10.
Marek E., Jak nauczyciele rozwijają twórczą aktywność uczniów w kształceniu zintegrowanym’[w:] S. Smak, S. Włoch (red.), Pedagogika kreatywna wyzwaniem edukacji XXI wieku, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego, Opole, 2010.
Popek , S., 2001. Człowiek jako jednostka twórcza, Lublin: UMCS Wetsby E.L., Dawson V.L. (1995), Creativity: Assert or burden in the classroom?, „Creativity Research Journal”, nr 8, 1 -10.
Cropley A.J. , Nauczyciel wobec twórczego dziecka, [w:] M. Malicka (red.), Twórczość, czyli droga w nieznane, WSiP, Warszawa, 1989.
Czelakowska D., O kreatywności uczniów, „Życie Szkoły”, 9, 2002, p. 531.
Turska D., Skutecznośc ucznia, Wydawnictwo UMCS, Lublin, 2006.
Uszyńska-Jarmoc J., Od twórczości potencjalnej do autokreacji w szkole, Trans Humana, Białystok 2007.
Czaja-Chudyba I., Myślenie krytyczne w kontekstach edukacji wczesnoszkolnej - uwarunkowania nieobecności, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Pedagogicznego, Kraków 2013
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.



