Cilt 10 Sayı 71 (2022)

Araştırma Makalesi

Heykel ve Görsel Sanatlar Eğitimi Öğrencilerinin Kaufman Yaratıcılık Alanlarının İncelenmesi

Yayımlandı 30.04.2022

  • Orhan Doğru Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı
Cilt 10 Sayı 71 kapak

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı heykel ve görsel sanatlar eğitimi alanında öğrenim gören üniversite öğrencilerinin yaratıcılıklarını demografik değişkenler ve okul faktörleri açısından incelemektir. Bu kapsamda çalışmada karşılaştırmalı ilişkisel tarama araştırma modeli kullanılarak; heykel ve resim öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin yaratıcılıkları karşılaştırmalı yaklaşımla incelenmiştir. Bu araştırmanın çalışma gurubunu Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Kocaeli üniversitesi, Mersin Üniversitesi, Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Selçuk Üniversitesi öğrenim gören 148 heykel ve resim öğretmenliği anabilim dalı öğrencileri oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma verilerinin toplanmasında Kaufman Yaratıcılık Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizine göre görsel sanatlar öğretmen adaylarının heykel ve görsel sanatlar eğitimi alanında öğrenim gören üniversite öğrencilerinin yaratıcılıklarının yüksek düzeyde olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca öğrencilerin fakülte türü, sınıf düzeyi, cinsiyetlerine ve başarılarına göre yaratıcılık düzeylerinde anlamlı farklar bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler Görsel sanatlar öğrencisi, heykel, yaratıcılık, kaufman yaratıcılık alanı, demografik faktörler, okul faktörleri

Abstract

Investigation of Kaufman Creativity Fields of Sculpture and Visual Arts Education Students

The aim of this study is to examine the creativity of university students studying in sculpture and visual arts education in terms of demographic and school factors. In this context, using the comparative relational survey research model in the study; the creativity of sculpture and painting teaching students was examined with a comparative approach. The study group of this research consists of 148 sculpture and painting teaching department students studying at Akdeniz University, Anadolu University, Erciyes University, Kocaeli University, Mersin University, Necmettin Erbakan University, Marmara University, Selçuk University. Kaufman Creativity Scale was used to collect research data. According to the analysis of the data, it is seen that the creativity of the university students studying in the field of sculpture and visual arts education of the visual arts prospective teachers were at a high level. In addition, significant differences were found in the creativity of the students according to their faculty type, grade level, gender and achievement.

Keywords Visual Arts Student, Sculpture, Creativity, Kaufman Creativity Field, Demographic Factors, School Factors

PDF

Kaynakça

  1. Abramowitz, J. S. ve Jacoby, R. J. (2015). Obsessive-compulsive and related disorders: A critical review of the new diagnostic class. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 11, 165–186. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153713. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153713
  2. Abra J. C. ve Valentine-French S. (1991). Gender differences in creative achievement: a survey of explanations. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs. 117, 233–284.
  3. Abraham, A. (2018). The neuroscience of creativity. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316816981
  4. Akca, F. ve Kavak, G. (2021). Scale of Visual Creativity in Art: A study on scale development and construct validity. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES), 3(3), 439-456. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.94 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.94
  5. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of personality and social psychology. 45(2), 357 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
  6. Benedek, M. , Jauk, E. , Sommer, M. , Arendasy, M. , ve Neubauer, A. (2014). Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: The common and differential involvement of executive functions in intelligence and creativity. Intelligence, 46, 73– 83. 10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.007
  7. Benson C. (1993). The Absorbed Self: Pragmatism, Psychology and Aesthetic Experience. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf
  8. Bicer, A. (2021). A Systematic Literature Review: Discipline-Specific and General Instructional Practices Fostering the Mathematical Creativity of Students. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST), 9(2), 252-281. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1254
  9. Chen, Q., Beaty, R. E., ve Qiu, J. (2020). Mapping the artistic brain: Common and distinct neural activations associated with musical, drawing, and literary creativity. Human brain mapping, 41(12), 3403–3419. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25025
  10. Cropley AJ. Creativity and mental health in everyday life. Creativity Research Journal. 1990;3(3):167–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419009534351
  11. Curriculum Development Council (CDC). (2000). Learning to learn: The way forward in curriculum development. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Printer.
  12. de Aquino, M., Verdejo-Román, J., Pérez-García, M., ve Pérez-García, P. (2019). Different role of the supplementary motor area and the insula between musicians and non-musicians in a controlled musical creativity task. Scientific reports, 9(1), 13006. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49405-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49405-5
  13. Duffin, J.M. ve Simpson, A.P. (2002). Encounters with Independent Graduate Study: Changes in Learning Style. Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 05-312.
  14. Erinç, S. (1998). Sanat Psikolojisine Giriş. Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi.
  15. Ersan, M. (2021). Tasarımcı Kimliği ile Bruno Munari. 10.Uluslararası Sosyal Beşeri ve Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi. 317-324.
  16. Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., ve Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Effect and Counter-Effect of Entreprenurship Education and Social Context on Student’s Intentions, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Vol:24, No:2, 509-523.
  17. Feist G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and social psychology review. (2) 290–309. 10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5
  18. Finney, S. J., ve DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock, ve R. D. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314). Charlotte: Information Age.
  19. Galleguillos P., Olmedo E. (2017). Autoeficacia académica y rendimiento escolar: un estudio metodológico y correlacional en escolares.[Academic self-efficacy and academic performance: a methodological and correlational study in students). ReiDoCrea 6, 156–169.
  20. Glăveanu V. P. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology. 28, 79–93. 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007
  21. Glăveanu V. P. (2014). The psychology of creativity: a critical reading. Creativity 1, 10–32. 10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02
  22. Glaveanu V., Lubart T., Bonnardel N., Botella M., de Biaisi P. M., Desainte-Catherine M., et al. (2013). Creativity as action: findings from five creative domains. Frontiers in Psychology. 4:176 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00176
  23. Goff, K., ve Torrance, E. P. (2002). Abbreviated torrance test for adults. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
  24. Hirt ER, Devers EE, McCrea SM. I want to be creative: Exploring the role of hedonic contingency theory in the positive mood-cognitive flexibility link. Journal of personality and social psychology. 2008;94(2):214 10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.94.2.214 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.94.2.214
  25. Howard, T. J., Culley, S. J., and Dekoninck, E. (2008). Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Design Studies. 29, 160–180. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001
  26. Jose, P. E., Wilkins, H. ve Spendelow J. S. (2012). Does Social Anxiety Predict Rumination and Co-Rumination Among Adolescents? Journal of Clinical Child veAdolescent Psychology, 41(1), 86–91 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2012.632346
  27. Kara, S. (2020). Görsel sanatlar öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik tutumları ve öğretmenlik öz yeterlik inançlarının incelenmesi. [Investigation of visual arts teachers' attitudes towards teaching profession and theır self-efficacy beliefs]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (54) , 49-73 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.651393
  28. Kara, S. (2021). An investigation of Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) competencies of pre-service visual arts teachers. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), 4(3), 527-541. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.184
  29. Karimi, S., Biemans, H.J.A., Lans, T., Mulder, M., ve Chizari, M. (2012). The Impact of Entreprenurship Education on Students Entreprenruail Intentions and Opportunity Identification Perceptions, Proceeding of 26th Annual RENT Conference, Lyon, France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2275638
  30. Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., ve DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of personality, 84(2), 248-258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12156
  31. Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the muses: Development of the Kaufman Domains Of Creativity Scale (K–DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 298–308 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029751
  32. Kaufman, J. C. ve Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C Model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
  33. Kenett, Y., Anaki, D., ve Faust, M. (2014). Investigating the structure of semantic networks in low and high creative persons. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 407 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00407 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00407
  34. Kibici, V. B. (2022). An Analysis of the Relationships between Secondary School Students' Creativity, Music Achievement and Attitudes. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES), 4(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.304 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.304
  35. Kleibeuker, S. W., De Dreu, C. K. ve Crone, E. A. Creativity development in adolescence: Insight from behavior, brain, and training studies. New directions for child and adolescent development. 2016;151:73–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20148
  36. Kozhevnikov, M. , Kozhevnikov, M., Yu, C. J. , ve Blazhenkova, O. (2013). Creativity, visualization abilities, and visual cognitive style. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 196–209. 10.1111/bjep.12013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12013
  37. Lebedeva, N., Schwartz, S. H., Van De Vijver, F., Plucker, J., ve Bushina, E. (2019). Domains of Everyday Creativity and Personal Values. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 2681. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02681 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02681
  38. Lunke, K. , ve Meier, B. (2018). New insights into mechanisms of enhanced synaesthetic memory: Benefits are synaesthesia-type‐specific. PLoS ONE, 13(9), e0203055 10.1371/journal.pone.0203055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203055
  39. Lunke, K., ve Meier, B. (2019). Creativity and involvement in art in different types of synaesthesia. British journal of psychology. 110(4), 727–744. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12363 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12363
  40. Mace, M.-A., and Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the creative process: a grounded theory analysis of creativity in the domain of art making. Creativity Research Journal 14, 179–192. doi: 10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_5
  41. Mahmutoğlu, S.A. (2019). Görsel sanatlar öğretmenlerinin özel alan yeterliklerinin incelenmesi (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  42. Margrett, J. A., ve Marsiske, M. (2002). Gender differences in older adults’ everyday cognitive collaboration. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(1), 45–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250143000319
  43. Moutsios, R.A.ve Simpson, A., (2005). The transition to postgraduate study in mathematics: a thınking styles perspectıve. Proceedings of the 29 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 3, 329-336.
  44. Mursid, R., Saragih, A. H., ve Hartono, R. (2022). The Effect of the Blended Project-based Learning Model and Creative Thinking Ability on Engineering Students' Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST), 10(1), 218-235. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2244 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2244
  45. National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE). (1999). All our futures: Creativity, culture and education. Sudbury: Department for Education and Employment.
  46. Nori, R., Signore, S., ve Bonifacci, P. (2018). Creativity Style and Achievements: An Investigation on the Role of Emotional Competence, Individual Differences, and Psychometric Intelligence. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1826. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01826 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01826
  47. O’Byrne, W.I., Radakovic, N., Hunter-Doniger, T., Fox, M., Kern, R., ve Parnell, S. (2018). Designing Spaces for Creativity and Divergent Thinking: Pre-Service Teachers Creating Stop Motion Animation on Tablets. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology (IJEMST), 6(2), 182-199. DOI:10.18404/ijemst.408942 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.408942
  48. Plucker J. A., Beghetto R. A., Dow G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologist? Potential, pitfalls and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychology 39 83–97. 10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
  49. Reiter-Palmon R, Mumford MD, Threlfall KV. (1998). Solving everyday problems creatively: The role of problem construction and personality type. Creativity Research Journal. 11(3):187–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1103_1
  50. Ritter, S. M., Gu, X., Crijns, M., ve Biekens, P. (2020). Fostering students' creative thinking skills by means of a one-year creativity training program. PloS one, 15(3), e0229773. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229773 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229773
  51. Rudowicz E. (2003). Creativity and culture: a two way interaction. Scandinavian journal of educational research. 47, 273– 290. 10.1080/00313830308602 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830308602
  52. Runco, M. A., and Dow, G. (1999). Problem finding, in Encyclopedia of Creativity, Vol. 2, eds M. A. Runco and S. R Pritzker (New York, NY: Academic Press), 433–435.
  53. Salthouse T. A. (2012). Consequences of age-related cognitive declines. Annual Review of Psychology., 63, 201–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100328
  54. San, İ. (2017). Sanat ve eğitim yaratıcılık temel kuramları sanat eleştirisi yaklaşımları. Ankara: Ütopya Yayınları
  55. Sarıçam, U., ve Yıldırım, M. (2021). The Effects of Digital Game-based STEM Activities on Students’ Interests in STEM Fields and Scientific Creativity: Minecraft Case. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 5(2), 166-192. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.136
  56. Scott G, Leritz LE, Mumford MD. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal. 16(4):361–88. 10.1080/10400410409534549 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549
  57. Stankov, L., Morony, S., Kleitman, S.ve Lee, Y.P. (2012). Confidence, Self-efficacy, anxiety and Self-concept as Predictors of Achievement in Confucian and European Countries. Unpublished manuscript. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.11.002
  58. Sternberg, R. J., ve Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms In Steinberg R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (3–15). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807916.003
  59. Sünbül, A. M. (2000). Yaratıcılık ve sınıfta yaratıcılığın geliştirilmesi. S.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10, 82-94.
  60. Sünbül, A. M. (2002a) Yaratıcılık ve Birey. Eğitime Yeni Bakışlar I, 163-180 (Editör: Dr.Ali Murat Sünbül). Konya: Mikro Yayınevi.
  61. Sünbül, A. M. (2002b). Yaratıcılığın Geliştirilmesi. Eğitime Yeni Bakışlar I, 183-195. (Editör: Dr.Ali Murat Sünbül). Konya: Mikro Yayınevi.
  62. Takeuchi, H. , Taki, Y. , Hashizume, H. , Sassa, Y. , Nagase, T. , Nouchi, R. , ve Kawashima, R. (2011). Failing to deactivate: The association between brain activity during a working memory task and creativity. NeuroImage, 55, 681–687. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.052 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.052
  63. TEDMEM (2013). İnovasyon odaklı toplumlarda sanat eğitimi. https://tedmem.org/mem-notlari/inovasyon-odakli-toplumlarda-sanat-egitimi, 12.02.2021
  64. Ward TB, Finke RA, Smith SM. (1995). Creativity and the Mind. New York: Plenum Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3330-0
  65. Ward TB, Smith SM, Vaid J. (1997). Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10227-000
  66. Yılmaz, O. (2001). Sanat Eğitiminde Yaratıcılığın Sanat Derslerine Yansıması, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Eskişehir Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  67. Yokochi, S., and Okada, T. (2005). Creative cognitive process of art making: a field study of a traditional Chinese ink painter. Creativity Research Journal. 17, 241–255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2005.9651482
  68. Yurt, E. ve Sünbül, A. M. (2012). Effect of modeling-based activities developed using virtual environments and concrete objects on spatial thinking and mental rotation skills. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(3), 1975 - 1992.
  69. Yurt, E., ve Sünbül, A. M. (2014). A Structural Equation Model Explaining the Mathematics Achievements of the 8th Grade Students, Educational Sciences: Theory ve Practice, 14(4), 1629-1653
  70. Yurt, E. (2011). Sanal ortam ve somut nesneler kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen modellemeye dayalı etkinliklerin uzamsal düşünme ve zihinsel çevirme becerilerine etkisi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.