بررسی مؤلفه‌های اصالت، روانی و انعطاف‌پذیری کتاب شیمی پایة یازدهم: مطالعه‌ای بر مبنای نظریه خلاقیت گیلفورد

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، صندوق پستی 14665-889 تهران، ایران

2 گروه آموزش شیمی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، صندوق پستی 14665-889 تهران، ایران.

3 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد گروه آموزش شیمی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، صندوق پستی 14665-889 تهران، ایران

چکیده

پیشینه و اهداف: خلاقیت مهارتی‌ آموزش‌دادنی است که کتاب‌های درسی نقش مهمی در پرورش آن دارند. تحلیل کتاب‌های درسی، این فرصت را فراهم می‌کند تا علاوه بر ارزیابی وضعیت موجود، برنامه‌هایی برای بهبود کیفیت یادگیری فراهم آورد. هدف از این پژوهش، بررسی کتاب شیمی پایة یازدهم از نظر توجه به مؤلفه‌های اصالت، روانی و انعطاف‌پذیری به‌عنوان بخشی از عناصر توسعة خلاقیت از دیدگاه گیلفورد است. روش‌ها‌: این پژوهش از نوع توصیفی-پیمایشی بوده و با روش تحلیل محتوای کمی انجام‌شده است. از کتاب شیمی پایة یازدهم چاپ سال 1401 به عنوان جامعة آماری استفاده شد و نمونة آماری این پژوهش، همان جامعة آماری بود. برای سنجش محتوا، با توجه به مؤلفه‌های اصالت، روانی و انعطاف‌پذیری، فرمی استاندارد و مناسب طراحی شد. روایی­ صوری و محتوای فرم مذکور، توسط متخصصان موضوعی، برنامه درسی و آموزش شیمی بررسی شد که در سطح قابل‌ قبول تشخیص داده­شد. برای سنجش پایایی، از ضریب همبستگی هولستی استفاده گردید که مقدار این ضریب، 78/0 به‌دست آمد. یافته‌ها: میزان توجه به شاخص‌های اصالت، روانی و انعطاف‌پذیری در کل کتاب بر اساس درصد فراوانی مؤلفه‌ها به ترتیب، %77/0، %93/1، %80/0 است. نتیجه‌گیری:  این بی‌توجهی به مؤلفه‌های خلاقیت، نشان‌دهنده ضعف نسخه فعلی کتاب در پرورش مهارت ذکرشده است. با توجه به اهمیت این مهارت برای مواجهه با مسائل و چالش‌های آینده، بازنگری و توجه خاص به بسترهای پرورش و ارائه آن در کتاب درسی پایة یازدهم پیشنهاد می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of originality, fluency, and flexibility in the 11th grade chemistry textbook: A study based on Guilford's creativity theory

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sepideh Norouzi 1
  • Elnaz Rashtizadeh 2
  • Rouya Sadeghianpour 3
1 Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, P.O. Box 14665-889 Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Chemistry Education, Farhangian University, P.O. Box 14665-889 Tehran, Iran
3 Master's student, Department of Chemistry Education, Farhangian University, P.O. Box 14665-889 Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and Objective: Creativity is a teachable skill, and textbooks are essential for nurturing it. Analyzing textbooks enables us to evaluate the current landscape and develop programs to enhance learning quality. This study aims to assess how well the 11th-grade chemistry textbook incorporates originality, fluency, and flexibility as components of creativity development. Materials and Methods: This research is a descriptive survey employing quantitative content analysis, focusing on the 11th-grade chemistry textbook published in 2022. The study sample was identical to the statistical population. To evaluate the content, a form designed by researchers was developed based on originality, fluency, and flexibility. Subject matter experts, curriculum specialists, and chemistry educators reviewed its formal and content validity, finding it acceptable. Holsti’s correlation coefficient was used to assess reliability obtaining a reliability level of 0.78. Findings: The focus on the indicators of originality, fluency, and flexibility throughout the book was 0.77%, 93.1%, and 0.8%, respectively. The current textbook’s neglect of creativity components highlights its weakness in developing essential skills. Conclusion: Given the importance of this skill for addressing future issues and challenges, it is recommended to review and give special attention to the contexts for nurturing and developing it in the 11th-grade textbook.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Flexibility
  • Fluency
  • Originality
  • Gilford Creativity Index

مراجع

Abasnejad, S. (2008). Mental, behavioral, and personality traits of creative individuals. 1st National Conference on Creativity Studies and Innovation in Iran, Tehran, Iran. [Link]
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357. [Link]
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in organizational behavior, 36, 157-183. [Link]
Amani, V., Yaghoubi, M., Zarei-Nejad, A., & Tatari, A. (2024). A review of creativity- and technology-based teaching strategies and methods in chemistry education. Research in Chemistry Education, 7(2), 91-119. [Link]
Bayat, Z., & Mousavi, S. M. (2020). Content analysis of Chapter 2 of the Chemistry 2 textbook for 11th grade based on Guilford’s creativity factors. 11th National Conference on Chemistry Education in Iran, Isfahan, Iran. [Link]
Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2015). The systems model of creativity: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Springer.
Delavar, A. (2009). Research methods in psychology and educational sciences (28th ed.). Virayesh Publishing. [Link]
Deng, L., Wang, L., & Zhao, Y. (2016). How creativity was affected by environmental factors and individual characteristics: A cross-cultural comparison perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 28(3), 357-366. [Link]
Eisner, E. W. (1993). Forms of understanding and the future of educational research. Educational Researcher, 22(7), 5-11. [Link]
Gange, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of School Learning. Little, Brown and Company Press. [Link]
George, A. (2009). Quantitative and qualitative approaches to content analysis. In The content analysis reader (pp. 144-155). [Link]
Golestaneh, M., & Nazari-Zadeh, S. F. (2025). Content analysis of the 10th-grade chemistry textbook based on Plsek’s creativity model. Journal of Chemistry Education, 7(1), 1-26. [Link]
Gu, X., Ritter, S. M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2024). Online creativity training: Examining the effectiveness of a comprehensive training approach. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 34(1), 403-426. [Link]
Guilford, J. P. (1966). Intelligence: 1965 model. American Psychologist, 21(1), 20. [Link]
Hernández-Torrano, D., & Ibrayeva, L. (2020). Creativity and education: A bibliometric mapping of the research literature (1975–2019). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, 100625. [Link]
Holman, J., Goetz, E. M., & Baer, D. M. (2020). The training of creativity as an operant and an examination of its generalization characteristics. In New developments in behavioral research: Theory, method and application (pp. 441-471). Routledge. [Link]
Hosseini, A. M., Yahyaei, Z., & Amani, V. (2020). Content analysis of the first chapter of the 12th-grade chemistry textbook based on William Romy's model. 11th National Conference on Chemistry Education in Iran, Isfahan, Iran. [Link]
Kaplan, D. E. (2019). Creativity in education: Teaching for creativity development. Psychology, 10(2), 140-147. [Link]
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.).
Koppett, K. (2023). Training to imagine: practical improvisational theatre techniques for trainers and managers to enhance creativity, teamwork, leadership, and learning. Routledge.
Kowang, T. O., Albakri, K. B. M., Yew, L. K., Fei, G. C., & Long, C. S. (2018). Characteristics of creative students versus academic performance. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 8(2), 69-79. [Link]
Le, D. M., Hang Nguyen, P. T., Thao Pham, G., Anh Phan, T. N., Quynh Le, T. P., & Bao Bui, K. H. (2022). Factors affecting the creativity of high school students. Journal of Education Theory and Technology. [Link]
Moradi, N. H. (2017). Textbook content analysis (5th ed.). Aeezh Publications. [Link]
Mumford, M. D. (2003). Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 107-120. [Link]
Oreizi, H. R., & Abedi, A. (2003). Content analysis of elementary school textbooks based on achievement motivation. Educational Innovations, 2(3), 29-54. [Link]
Oula, E., Ramazani, P., & Amani, V. (2023). Investigating the extent of attention to creativity in the Chemistry (1) textbook for 10th grade in the second level of secondary education from the perspective of Guilford’s model. Educational and Instructional Studies, 12(1), 125-554. [Link]
Owen, J. L., & Dudley, J. E. (2007). A content analysis of the treatment of informative and reinforcing feedback in Contemporary communication Theory Textbooks. American communication journal, 9(4), 1-18. [Link]
Pllana, D. (2019). Creativity in Modern Education. World Journal of Education, 9(2), 136-140.
Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2018). What is co-creation? An interactional creation framework and its implications for value creation. Journal of business research, 84, 196-205. [Link]
Rawat, K. J., Qazi, W., & Hamid, S. (2012). Creativity and education. Academic Research International, 2(2), 264. [Link]
Ritter, S. M., Gu, X., Crijns, M., & Biekens, P. (2020). Fostering students’ creative thinking skills by means of a one-year creativity training program. PloS one, 15(3). [Link]
Robinson, S., & Stubberud, H. A. (2014). Teaching creativity, team work and other soft skills for entrepreneurship. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 17(2), 186. [Link]
Rokh-Sefid, N., & Ameri, L. (2018). Content analysis of the Chemistry (3) textbook for 12th grade based on Fry’s method. 5th Scientific-Research Conference from the Teacher’s Perspective, Minab, Iran. [Link]
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92-96. [Link]
Saif, A. A. (2023). Modern educational psychology (34th ed.). Doran Publishing. [Link]
Salimi, L., & Asareh, A. (2013). Content analysis of the 8th-grade science textbook based on Guilford’s creativity factors. Journal of Educational Content Analysis, 2(4), 73-102. [Link]
Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational psychology. McGraw-Hill Education. [Link]
Shaheen, R. (2010). Creativity and education. Creative education, 1(03), 166. [Link]
Smolensky, E. D., & Kleiner, B. H. (1995). How to train people to think more creatively. Management Development Review, 8(6), 28-33. [Link]
Sobhani, E., Sheikhi, H., Moradi, S., & Rahimi-Khonari, A. (2022). Investigating the relationship between personality traits and creativity. 11th National Conference on Law, Social and Human Sciences, Psychology and Counseling, Tehran & Shirvan, Iran. [Link]
Sulthana, T. (2023). Effect of Creative Personality on Self-Awareness and Self-Acceptance. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 11(2). [Link]
Ta’i-Semirami, A., Ghobadi, F., & Kamili-Fard, F. (2020). Content analysis of the Chemistry (1) textbook for 10th grade. 11th National Conference on Chemistry Education in Iran, Isfahan, Iran. [Link]
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Developing creative thinking through school experiences. In A source book of creative thinking. Scribner. https://doi.org/10.1037/13134-000 [Link]
Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2022). Fostering students’ creativity and critical thinking in science education. In Education in the 21st Century: STEM, Creativity and Critical Thinking (pp. 29-47). Springer International Publishing. [Link]
Walia, C. (2019). A dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 237-247. [Link]
Wechsler, S. M., Saiz, C., Rivas, S. F., Vendramini, C. M. M., Almeida, L. S., Mundim, M. C., & Franco, A. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 114-122. [Link]
Wu, H. Y., Wu, H. S., Chen, I. S., & Chen, H. C. (2014). Exploring the critical influential factors of creativity for college students: A multiple criteria decision-making approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 11, 1-21. [Link]
Yang, K. P., & Mao, X. Y. (2007). A study of nurses’ spiritual intelligence: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International journal of nursing studies, 44(6), 999-1010. [Link]
Yazdani, M., Taheri, M., Mohammadi, Z., & Jafari, M. (2023). What is educational content and how is it developed? 12th International Conference on Management and Humanities Research, Tehran, Iran. [Link]
Zabelina, D. L., & Robinson, M. D. (2010). Creativity as flexible cognitive control. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(3), 136. [Link]
Zhang, L. F. (2002). Thinking styles: Their relationships with modes of thinking and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 22, 331-348. [Link]

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار