「團隊創造力互動歷程模式」之建構－科學領域教學團隊的創意互動

Exploring the Process of Generating Group Creativity within a Science Teacher Group

10.6251/BEP.201909_51(1).0005

劉家瑜(Chia-Yu Liu)；林偉文(Wei-Wen Lin)；吳昭容(Chao-Jung Wu)

科學教學創新 ； 教學團隊 ； 團隊創造力 ； Group creativity ； Scientific creative teaching ； Teacher learning group

教育心理學報

51卷1期（2019 / 09 / 01）

109 - 134

繁體中文

科學教師要能創新教學以提升學生學習興趣與效能，除了其個人特質與領域知能，教學領域中的社會組織－即教學團隊，亦扮演著支持或抑制創意表現的關鍵角色。本研究檢視一科學領域教學團隊的討論歷程，釐清成員們如何透過對話以擴展想法、促進理解，並探究團隊創造力之發生軌跡。本研究於七次參與觀察及四次半結構式訪談後，建構團隊創造力互動歷程模式。團隊對話文本採紮根理論為基礎的分析方式，依序找出團隊討論歷程的28個第一階意義分類及九個第二階意義分類；接著，以曼－惠特尼U考驗確認團隊創造力歷程之基本及特殊對話元素；其後，以訪談資料補足與修正模式。最後，依據研究結果建構團隊創造力互動歷程模式，成員會以基本對話元素穩定團隊運作，並以「目標性的脈絡」、「擴展」、「理解」、「暫停」、「訊息精緻化」等五個非線性固定的循環階段，促進團隊創造力的發生。最後亦討論此模式應可為有意參與或籌組社群的科學教師及團隊帶來實質助益。

Creative teaching is becoming essential in sparking student's interests and enhancing their performances. To improve teaching, teacher learning group is a good way to support teacher competence development. However, few studies have focused on how teachers make effective dialogue and generate creativity with others within a teacher learning group. Thus, we adapted Csikszentmihalyi's systems model to reveal the way of the dialogue within a middle school science teaching group affected the developing process of group creativity. The mixed-method approach was adopted and data from video recordings and semi-structured interview during 2016-2017 were collected. We used constant comparative analysis to analyze the data. First, twenty-eight dialogue elements of group creativity in first order and nine in second order were identified. Next, a serial of Mann-Whitney U tests was conducted to examine the general and unique dialogue elements. After modifying by the interview data, the Interactional Group Creativity Model was constructed. In this model, group members would discuss fluently with the general dialogue elements. Furthermore, group creativity would be promoted with the unique dialogue elements, which are contained in five stages: 1. Goal-oriented context stage: Group members achieve shared understanding in group goals and directions; 2. Expanding stage: Group members demonstrate multiple teaching ideas proposing, alternative solution raising, and teaching resources sharing to broaden the group's thinking and knowledge; 3. Understanding stage: Group members perform illustration seeking, explaining, and feedback to reinforce group's knowledge basis in this stage; 4. Suspending stage: By distracting their attentions temporarily, group members consider more possibilities and developed appropriate ideas; 5. Information elaborating stage: Within the spiral circulation of the two stages, ideas and information are elaborated through contextualization and combination. It is noteworthy that the five stages are nonlinear but circles that might be generated within single or multiple stages. Group creativity developed and elaborated in the spiral circulation between the five stages. Based on the results, relevant empirical and theoretical research have been discussed, and the practical suggestions for scientific teacher groups have also been proposed.

1. 林裕豐, Y. F.,游瑩如, Y. J.,楊美珠, M. C.,秦義雯, Y. W.,陳曼青, M. C.,姜振田, J. T.(2016)。從高瞻計畫到教卓團隊金質獎談及教師專業學習社群發展實作課程－校園植物生態文創。中等教育，67(1)，137-159。
   連結：
2. 張雨霖, Y. L.(2016)。從「教創意‧適性學」到「適性教‧學創意」。中等教育，67(1)，36-55。
   連結：
3. Association for Science Education=ASE(1999).ASE survey on the effect of the national literacy strategy on the teaching of science.Hatfield:ASE.
4. Beaton, A. E.,Martin, M. O.,Mullis, I. V. S.,Gonzalez, E. J.,Smith, T. A.,Kelly, D. L.(1996).Science achievement in the middle school years: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science. Study (TIMSS).Chestnut Hill, MA:Boston College.
5. Creswell, J. W.,Plano Clark, V. L.(2007).Designing and conducting mixed methods research.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
6. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1996).Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention.New York:Harper Perennial.
7. Erez, A.,Lepine, J. A.,Elms, H.(2002).Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self‐managed teams: A quasi‐experiment.Personnel Psychology,55(4),929-948.
8. Finke, R. A.,Ward, T. B.,Smith, S. M.(1992).Creative cognition theory, research and application.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
9. Harvey, S.,Kou, C. Y.(2013).Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups.Administrative Science Quarterly,58(3),346-386.
10. Hoever, I. J.,van Knippenberg, D.,van Ginkel, W. P.,Barkema, H. G.(2012).Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity's potential.Journal of Applied Psychology,97(5),982-996.
11. Holsti, O. R.(1969).Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities.Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
12. Hsu, Y. S.,Lin, Y. H.,Yang, B.(2016).Impact of augmented reality lessons on students’ STEM interest.Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning,12(2),1-14.
13. Imants, J.(2002).Relationships in the study of learning communities.School Effectiveness and School Improvement,13(4),453-462.
14. Johnston, J.(2007).Can children be creative in science?.Creative Teaching & Learning,8(1),42-47.
15. Kind, M.,Kind, V.(2007).Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science.Studies in Science Education,43,1-37.
16. Lee, T. W.,Mitchell, T. R.,Sablynski, C. J.(1999).Qualitative research in organizational and vocational psychology, 1979-1999.Journal of Vocational Behavior,55(2),161-187.
17. Leonard, D. A.,Swap, W. C.(1999).When sparks fly.Boston:Harvard Business School Press.
18. Lincoln, Y.,Guba, E.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.Beverlt Hill, CA:sage.
19. Lohman, M. C.,Finkelstein, M.(2000).Designing groups in problem-based learning to promote problem-solving skill and self-directedness.Instructional Science,28(4),291-307.
20. McCall, G.(Ed.),Simmons, J.(Ed.)(1969).Issues in participant observation: A text and reader.London:Addison-Wesley.
21. Reiter-Palmon, R.,Herman, A.,Yammarino, F.(2008).Creativity and cognitive processes: Multi-level linkages between individual and team cognition.New York, NY:Elsevier.
22. Reiter-Palmon, R.,Robinson, E.(2009).Problem identification and construction: What do we know, what is the future?.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,3,43-47.
23. Reiter-Palmon, R.,Wigert, B.,Vreede, T.(2012).Handbook of organizational creativity.London, UK:Elsevier.
24. Runco, M.(Ed.)(1994).Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity.Norwood, NJ:Ablex Publishing Corporation.
25. Sawyer, R. K.(2007).Group genius: The creative power of collaboration.New York:Basic Books.
26. Sawyer, R. K.(2001).Creating conversations: Improvisation in everyday discourse.Cresskill, NJ:Hampton Press.
27. Sawyer, R. K.(2012).Extending sociocultural theory to group creativity.Vocations and Learning,5(1),59-75.
28. Sawyer, R. K.,DeZutter, S.(2009).Distributed creativity: How collective creations emerge from collaboration.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts,3(2),81-92.
29. Scribner, J. R.,Sawyer, R. K.,Watson, S. T.,Myers, V. L.(2007).Teacher teams and distributed leadership: A study of group discourse and collaboration.Educational Administration Quarterly,43(1),67-100.
30. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.)(1988).The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives.New York:Cambridge University Press.
31. Teddlie, C.,Tashakkori, A.(2009).Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences.Thousand Oaks. CA:Sage.
32. Tsai, W.,Chi, N.,Grandey, A. A.,Fung, S.(2012).Positive group affective tone and team creativity: Negative group affective tone and team trust as boundary conditions.Journal of Organizational Behavior,33,638-656.
33. Ward, T. B.(Ed.),Smith, S. M.(Ed.),Vaid, J.(Ed.)(1997).Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery, and change.Washington D.C:American Psychological Association Press.
34. Wenngren, J.,Ericson, A.,Parida, V.(2016).Improving team activities in the concept development stages: Addressing radical development and open-ended problems.Journal of Promotion Management,22(4),496-510.
35. West, M. A.,Hirst, G.,Richter, A.,Shipton, H.(2004).Twelve steps to heaven: Successfully managing change through developing innovative teams.European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,13,269-299.
36. 徐志文, C. W.,張雨霖, Y. L.(2015)。以階層線性模式分析學校組織創新氣氛、教師教學效能對創造力教學之影響。創造力的研究與實踐，台北=Taipei: