國小學生內在動機、學科知識與創造力表現關聯之研究：教師創造力教學的調節效果

The Relationship among Intrinsic Motivation, Subject Knowledge, and Creative Performance of Students: The Moderating Effect of Teachers' Creativities in Teaching Behavior

10.6172/BSE201211.3703004

蕭佳純(Chia-Chun Hsiao)

內在動機 ； 創造力表現 ； 創造力教學 ； 學科知識 ； intrinsic motivation ； creative performance ； creativity teaching ； subject knowledge

特殊教育研究學刊

37卷3期（2012 / 11 / 25）

89 - 113

繁體中文

大約近十年，社會科學領域的學者多已接受了組織現象是宏觀因素與微觀因素相互影響的多層次現象，並將此觀念應用於實證研究。但整體來看，多層次分析仍屬相對少數，國內教育界有關國小學童的創造力研究涉及多層次的論述更是少數。本研究以學生個體層次的內在動機、學科知識與教師層次的創造力教學為自變項，探討三者對學生創造力表現的影響，其中教師創造力教學包含提升創造力意向與增進創造力技能兩大構面，而學生的創造力表現則以共識評量技術邀請三大類型專家衡量之。本研究採用問卷調查法，針對43所學校中333位國小教師以及3,330位國小高年級學生的調查，使用階層線性模式分析變項之間的關係，分析步驟包括虛無模式、隨機參數迴歸模式、截距預測模式以及斜率預測模式。分析結果顯示內在動機、數理知識以及提升創造力意向對創造力表現有顯著的直接影響效果，且此影響為正向的影響效果。進一步的脈絡調節分析顯示，提升創造力意向於內在動機與創造力表現間具有正向的調節效果，代表內在動機高的學生原本創造力也會較高（正向關係），而在教師高度強調提升創造力意向的班級中，這樣的助益效果更強。但創造力意向在數理知識與創造力間扮演著負向的調節效果，代表教師的提升創造力意向教學對於高學科知識學生的加乘效果並不如低學科知識的學生。依據上述結果，本研究針對學生的創造力發展提出對學校及教師的相關建議。

Purpose: Improving creativity is an increasingly important national goal in Taiwan for meeting the challenges of knowledge-based economies. In recent years, numerous competitions for encouraging creativity were funded by public and private sectors, and several government programs targeted the cultivation of innovative power. The interest in multilevel research has just begun in Taiwan. The objectives of this research are twofold. Researchers of organizational behavior and administrative school management have increasingly emphasized the importance of multilevel research. Furthermore, psychologists from various fields have recently highlighted the importance of creativity in educational settings. Recent studies have also indicated that factors other than intelligence such as personality traits (e.g., intrinsic motivation and subject knowledge) or teachers' traits such as creativity teaching are predictors of students' creativities. Studies regarding creativity have identified critical individual and contextual variables that contribute to creative performance. However, the psychological mechanisms through which these factors influence creative performance were not systematically investigated. In this study, the influences of intrinsic motivation and subject knowledge are individual-level variables, and creativity teaching is a group-level variable when examining the creativity of students. Thus, the purpose of this study is to analyze elementary school students' creativities using multilevel analysis. Methods: The sample used in the study consists of 333 teachers and 3330 students from 43 elementary schools in Taiwan. Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used to test the moderating effect of creativity teaching for teachers because the individual level and teacher level are analyzed in this study. Findings: Findings showed that the intrinsic motivation, subject knowledge, and promotion of creative intentions directly affected the creativity of students. Conversely, the promotion of creative intentions had positive moderating effects on the relationship between intrinsic motivation and creativity. Furthermore, the promotion of creative intentions had negative moderating effects on the relationship between subject knowledge and creativity. Conclusions/Implications: The important relationship factors were the intrinsic motivation, subject knowledge, and the promotion of creative intentions. Furthermore, the promotion of creative intentions had different moderation roles. These findings have important implications for families, teachers, and especially for those immediately involved in nurturing the creativity of children such as parents and teachers. This study provides several discussions and suggestions based on these results.

1. 江美惠(2005)。創造性問題解決教學方案對資優學生創造力及問題解決能力影響之研究。資優教育研究，5(2)，83-106。
   連結：
2. 吳秀娟、潘裕豐(2007)。主題統整教學對國小學童創造力、問題解決能力及學業成就的影響之研究。資優教育研究，7(2)，71-103。
   連結：
3. 李秀姿、陳昭儀(2007)。創作性戲劇教學對國小資優生創造力與人際溝通影響之研究。資優教育研究，7(2)，19-46。
   連結：
4. 李堅萍、游光昭、朱益賢(2009)。國中科技教育運用Teresa M. Amabile工作動機原則與自我效能激發策略之研究。新竹教育大學教育學報，25(2)，129-159。
   連結：
5. 林偉文(2006)。學校創意守門人對創意教學與創造力培育態度與教師創意教學之關係。教育學刊，27，69-92。
   連結：
6. 洪素蘋、黃宏宇、林珊如(2008)。重要他人回饋影響創意生活經驗？以模式競爭方式檢驗創意自我效能與創意動機的中介效果。教育心理學報，90，303-322。
   連結：
7. 陳玉樹(2008)。創造力訓練課程成效分析：準Solomon四組設計。課程與教學，11(4)，187-212。
   連結：
8. 陳玉樹、胡夢鯨(2008)。任務動機與組織創新氣候對成人教師創意教學表現之影響：階層線性模式分析。教育心理學報，40(2)，179-198。
   連結：
9. 葉玉瑟、曾俊鋒、張妤婷(2008)。CPS教學對國小學生自然領域學習態度、創造力、後設認知與學習成效之影響。台中教育大學學報：教育類，22(2)，35-59。
   連結：
10. 劉昆夏、鄭英耀、王文中(2010)。創意產品共識評量之信、效度析論。測驗學刊，57(1)，59-84。
    連結：
11. 蔡執仲、段曉林、靳知勤(2007)。巢狀探究模式對國二學生理化學習動機影響之探討。科學教育學刊，15(2)，119-144。
    連結：
12. 教育部（2000）：國民中小學課程綱要的特色與挑戰。臺北：教育部。[Ministry of Education (2000). The challenge of general guidelines of grade 1-9 curriculum of elementary and junior high school education. Taipei: Ministry of Education.]。
13. 教育部（2010）：國民中小學校概況統計。臺北：教育部。[Ministry of Education (2010). The statistics of elementary and junior high school education. Taipei: Ministry of Education.]
14. Aljughaiman, A.,Mowrer-Reynolds, E.(2005).Teachers' conceptions of creativity and creative students.Journal of Creative Behavior,39(1),17-34.
15. Amabile, T. M.(1996).Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity.Bouler, CO:Westview.
16. Amabile, T. M.(1995).Attributions of creativity: What are the consequences.Creativity Research Journal,8(4),423-436.
17. Amabile, T. M.,Hill, K. G.,Hennessey, B. A.,Tighe, E. M.(1994).The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66(5),950-967.
18. Batey, M.,Furnham, A.,Safiullina, X.(2010).Intelligence, general knowledge and personality as predictors of creativity.Learning and Individual Differences,20,532-535.
19. Caroff, X.,Besancon, M.(2008).Variability of creativity judgments.Learning and Individual Differences,18,367-371.
20. Cartwright, D.(Ed.)(1951).Field theory in social science.New York:Harper & Row.
21. Choi, J. N.(2004).Individual and contextual predictors of creative performance: The mediating role of psychological processes.Creativity Research Journal,16,187-199.
22. Cropley, A. J.(2001).Creativity in education & learning: A guide for teachers and educators.London, UK:Kogan Page.
23. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1996).Creativity: Flow and the psychological discovery and invention.New York:HarperCollins.
24. Dollinger, S. J.(2007).Creativity and conservatism.Personality and Individual Differences,43,1025-1035.
25. Fraser, B. J.(1989).Twenty years of classroom climate work: Progress and prospect.Journal of Curriculum Studies,21(4),307-327.
26. Furman, A.(1998).Teacher and pupil characteristics in the perception of the creativity of classroom climate.Journal of Creative Behavior,32(4),258-277.
27. Garaigordobil, M.(2006).Intervention in creativity with children aged 10 and 11 years: Impact of a play program on verbal and graphic-figural creativity.Creativity Research Journal,18,329-345.
28. Gardner, H.(1993).Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, Gandhi.New York:Basic.
29. Glover, J. A.(Ed.),Ronning, R. R.(Ed.),Reynolds, C. R.(Ed.)(1989).Handbook of creativity.New York:Plenum.
30. Hamza, K., N.,William, R.(1996).Creating and fostering a learning environment that promates creative thinking and problem solving skills.East Lansing, MI:National Center for Research on Teacher Learning.
31. Heller, K. A.(Ed.),Mork, F. J.(Ed.),Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.),Stubotnik, R. F.(Ed.)(2000).International handbook of giftedness and talent.New York:Elsevier.
32. Hennessey, B. A.(2003).The social psychology of creative.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,47(3),253-271.
33. Hox, J.(2002).Multilevel analysis.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
34. Jeffrey, B.,Craft, A.(2004).Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships.Education Studies,30(1),77-87.
35. Kaufman, J. C.,Baer, J.,Cole, J. C.,Sexton, J. D.(2008).A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique.Creativity Research Journal,20,171-178.
36. Luke, D.(2004).Multilevel modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
37. MacDonald, N. M.,Bigelow, S.(2010).Teaching for creativity through fashion design.Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences,102(2),48-54.
38. Moneta, G. B.,Siu, C. M. Y.(2002).Trait Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, academic performance, and creativity in Hong Kong college students.Journal of College Student Development,43,664-683.
39. Morgan, S.,Forster, J.(1999).Creativity in the classroom.Gifted Educational international,14,29-43.
40. Oldham, G. R.,Cummings, A.(1996).Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work.Academy of Management Journal,39(3),607-634.
41. Peterson, R. E.(2002).Establishing the creative environment in technology education.Technology Teacher,61(4),7-10.
42. Rejskind, G.(2000).Tag teachers: Only the creative need apply.Roeper Review,22(3),153-157.
43. Robert, J. S.(Ed.)(1999).Handbook of creativity.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
44. Rutland, M.,Barlex, D.(2008).Perspectives on pupil creativity in design and technology in the lower secondary curriculum in England.International Journal of Technology and Design Education,18(2),139-165.
45. Shally, C. E.,Zhou, J.,Oldham, G. R.(2004).The effects of per-soal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here?.Journal of management,30,933-958.
46. Simonin, B. L.(1997).The importance of collaborative know-how: An empirical test of the learning organization.Academy of Management Journal,40,1150-1174.
47. Snijders, T.,Bosker, R.(1999).Multilevel analysis.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
48. Starko, A. J.(2000).Creativity in the classroom: School in the curious delight.Jersey city, NJ:LEA.
49. Sternberg, R. J.(1999).Successful intelligence: A broader view of who is smart in school and in life.International Schools Journal,XVII,19-31.
50. Sternberg, R. J.(1996).Successful intelligence.New York:Basic Books.
51. Sternberg, R. J.(ed.)(1999).Handbook of creativity.New York:Cambridge University Press.
52. Sternberg, R. J.(ed.)(1988).the mature of creativity.Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
53. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.)(1999).handbook of creativity.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
54. Sternberg, R. J.,Lubart, T. I.(1995).Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity.New York:Free Press.
55. Tan, A. G.(2001).Singaporean teachers' perception of activities useful for fostering creativity.Journal of Creative Behavior,35(2),131-148.
56. Torrance, E. P.(2004).Great expectations: Creative achievements of the sociometric stars in a 30-year study.The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education,16(1),5-14.
57. Vista, C.(2000).Teaching classroom educators how to be more effective and creative teacher.Education,120(4),675-680.
58. Wang, W. C.,Wilson, M.(2005).Exploring local item dependence using a random-effect facet model.Applied Psychology Measurement,29,296-318.
59. Wright, P. M.,Boswell, W.(2002).Desegregating HRM: A review and synthesis of micro and macro human resource management research.Journal of Management,28(3),247-276.
60. Zhao, J. J.,Zhao, S. Y.(2010).The impact of IQ＋EQ＋CQ integration on student productivity in web design and development.Journal of Information Systems Education,21(1),43-53.
61. 王瑞(2002)。創造思考教學策略對學生創造力之影響。台灣教育，614，24-28。
62. 吳明雄、許碧珊、張德正、張可立(2009)。高職高技術創造力學生團隊之創造歷程。教育與心理研究，32(2)，1-25。
63. 吳靜吉(2002)。華人學生創造力的發掘與培育。應用心理研究，15，17-41。
64. 林碧芳、邱皓政(2008)。創意教學自我效能感量表之編制與相關研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4(1)，141-169。
65. 邱皓政(2000)。工作動機的內生性與外生性：台灣與美國大學生工作動機取向的計量研究。應用心理研究，7，221-252。
66. 張惠博(2001)。九年一貫課程實施與教師專業成長。科學教育月刊，239，13-25。
67. 陳昭儀(2000)。傑出理化科學家之人格特質及創造歷程之研究。師大學報：科學教育類，45(1)，27-45。
68. 陳霞鄢、王振德(2004)。國小資優班教師創造力教學行為之研究。資優教育研究，4(1)，29-50。
69. 游健弘(2003)。CoRT創造思考教學對國小資優班學生語文創造能力學習成效之研究。資優教育研究，3(2)，37-63。
70. 黃惠君、葉玉珠(2008)。國中教師教學玩興、教學動機、教學快樂感受與創意教學之關係。教育與心理研究，31(2)，85-118。
71. 葉玉珠(2006)。創造力教學─過去、現在與未來。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological。
72. 葉玉珠、葉玉環、李梅齡、彭月茵(2006)。以創作性戲劇教學啟發幼兒創造力之行動研究。師大學報教育類，51(2)，1-27。

1. 范斯淳、林志軒(2018)。SCAMPER在國中生活科技課程之應用。科技與人力教育季刊，4(4)，1-19。
2. 官美卉(2022)。國小教師自我效能、工作投入對創意教學表現之影響。休閒運動健康評論，11(1)，26-37。
3. 劉光夏(2021)。大學藝術類數位影像創作課程學習者創意自我效能構念分析之探究。藝術教育研究，41，73-108。
4. 蕭佳純(2015)。國小學童科學創造力成長歷程之縱貫性分析。科學教育學刊，23(1)，23-51。
5. 蕭佳純(2016)。教師創意教學發展之縱貫性研究。特殊教育研究學刊，41(1)，63-90。
6. 蕭佳純(2017)。在職進修教師創意教學自我效能發展之縱貫性研究。教育科學研究期刊，62(3)，25-55。
7. 蕭佳純(2019)。國內運用創造力教學模式對學生創造力影響之後設分析。特殊教育研究學刊，44(3)，93-120。
8. 蕭佳純(2021)。創造力教學對學生學習行為、學習動機影響之研究：兼論教師信任、參與專業學習社群對創造力教學之影響。教育科學期刊，20(2)，69-94。
9. 蕭佳純、王佩雯(2016)。創意角色認定、工作動機及創造力教學技巧與創意教學行為關係之研究。教育科學研究期刊，61(2)，185-211。
10. 蕭佳純、張原誠(2016)。學生美感經驗、創意自我效能與創造力：教師創造力教學有效嗎？。教育實踐與研究，29(2)，65-104。
11. (2018)。創意自我效能、組織創新氣候對國中教師創意教學表現影響之跨層次研究。教育學報，46(1)，143-164。
12. (2024)。戲劇融入教學對國中生海洋環境素養及創造力的影響。科學教育學刊，32(1)，95-124。