延宕交叉相關與潛在成長模式在創造力傾向與科技創造力關係間之分析

Cross-lagged Panel Correlation and Latent Growth Modeling in the Relationship between Creativity Tendency and Technology Creativity

10.6172/BSE.201407.3902004

蕭佳純(Chia-Chun Hsiao)

延宕交叉相關 ； 科技創造力 ； 創造力傾向 ； 潛在成長模式 ； cross-lagged panel correlation ； technology creativity ； creativity tendency ； latent growth modeling

特殊教育研究學刊

39卷2期（2014 / 07 / 01）

87 - 107

繁體中文

就世界各先進國家的教育改革而言，雖然其強調的重點不盡相同，但發展學生的科學或科技創造力可說是先進國家的共同趨勢。然有關創造力的相關研究卻顯少從科技創造力的縱貫性發展著手，因此，探討臺灣國小學童科技創造力成長趨勢及影響因素的重要性不言而喻。本研究採用延宕交叉相關與潛在成長模式來探討國小學童創造力傾向與科技創造力之間的因果機制，以及創造力傾向對科技創造力發展的影響。本研究採用問卷調查進行縱貫性研究，研究資料來源為488位國小五年級學童，利用兩年時間共進行四波調查。首先，在延宕交叉相關分析結果顯示，創造力傾向與科技創造力具有交互影響關係，且創造力傾向扮演啟動者的角色。其次，在潛在成長模式的分析結果顯示，國小學童的創造力傾向呈現先減少、後增加的成長趨勢，是受到第一次測量結果的影響。而在科技創造力表現的部分，是呈現先上升、後下降的趨勢。創造力傾向對於科技創造力的影響具有因果關係存在，而創造力傾向的初始狀態對科技創造力的初始狀態及成長速率有顯著正向的影響效果。此外，創造力傾向的成長速率愈快，其科技創造力成長速率也會愈陡峭。由此，本研究得出以下幾點結論：一、創造力傾向與科技創造力間具有交互影響機制與因果方向性；二、國小學童創造力傾向與科技創造力呈現不同的潛在成長變化；三、創造力傾向對於科技創造力起始狀態與成長速率具有影響。依據上述結果，本研究並分別針對教育實務及未來研究給予建議。

Purpose: Aspects of educational reform that are emphasized in various advanced countries worldwide differ according to country; however, the development of the science or technology creativity of students is considered a common trend in advanced countries. Although a large amount of relevant research has been conducted on creativity, few studies have focused on the longitudinal development of technology creativity. The importance of exploring the growth trend of technology creativity and the factors affecting elementary school pupils in Taiwan is self-evident. Researching these issues was therefore the purpose of this study. Methods: Both cross-lagged panel correlation and latent growth modeling were used in this study to determine the causal mechanism between the creativity tendency and technology creativity of elementary school pupils in Taiwan, as well as the effects of creativity tendency on the development of technology creativity. A questionnaire survey was administered preceding longitudinal research, and data were acquired from 488 G5 pupils in an elementary school. In addition, four times of investigation are preceded in 2 years for this study. Results/Findings: The results of the analysis of cross-lagged panel correlation, creativity tendency, and technology creativity indicated a mutually influential relationship, and creativity tendency played the role of a starter. The results of latent growth modeling revealed an initially decreasing, then increasing creativity tendency growth trend for the pupils; this is considered as the effect of the first measured results. Conversely, the growth trend of technology creativity initially increased and subsequently deceased. Thus, creativity tendency revealed a causal relationship with the effects of technology creativity, whereas the initial state of creativity tendency exerted significantly positive effects on the initial state and growth rate of tech nology creativity. Furthermore, when creativity tendency exhibited a faster growth rate, the growth rate of technology creativity increased. Conclusions/Implications: First, mutual cause and effect mechanisms were observed between creativity tendency and technology creativity. Second, the creativity tendency and technology creativity of the elementary school pupils in Taiwan exhibited distinct latent growth changes. Third, creativity tendency exerted effects on the initial state and growth rate of technology creativity. Based on these results, suggestions aimed at enhancing educational practice and future research are proposed.

1. 吳齊殷、李文傑(2003)。青少年憂鬱症狀與偏差行為併發之關係機制。台灣社會學，6，119-175。
   連結：
2. 巫博瀚、陸偉明(2010)。延宕交叉相關與二階層線性成長模式在台灣青少年自尊的發現。測驗學刊，57(4)，541-565。
   連結：
3. 李介至、陳泉源、梁滄郎(2010)。防禦悲觀者的動機分析及在成就平價後之情緒適應：以潛在成長模式分析為例。教育心理學報，41(4)，733-750。
   連結：
4. 李偉清(2012)。國小資優生創造傾向量表之編製研究。特殊教育研究學刊，37(1)，79-102。
   連結：
5. 林宴瑛、程炳林(2007)。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習策略之潛在改變量分析。教育心理學報，39(2)，173-194。
   連結：
6. 侯雅齡(2009)。幼兒科學創造力評量方法之發展：嵌入式評量設計。教育科學研究期刊，54(1)，113-142。
   連結：
7. 胡夢蕾(2006)。我國創造力與人格特質研究之回顧與探析。教育學刊，26，215-239。
   連結：
8. 陳俊瑋(2011)。學生教育抱負與學習成就關係之研究：長期追蹤資料之分析。當代教育研究季刊，19(4)，127-172。
   連結：
9. 黃芳玫、吳齊殷(2010)。台灣國中學生個人特質、家庭背景與學業成績：追蹤調查資料之研究。經濟論文叢刊，38(1)，65-97。
   連結：
10. 葉玉珠(2000)。創造力發展的生態系統模式及其應用於科技與資訊領域之內涵分析。教育心理學報，32(1)，95-121。
    連結：
11. 葉玉珠(2004)。「科技創造力測驗」的發展與常模的建立。測驗學刊，51(2)，127-162。
    連結：
12. 蕭佳純(2012)。國小學童科學學習動機、父母創意教養與科技創造力關聯之研究。教育科學研究期刊，57(4)，103-133。
    連結：
13. Amabile, T. M.(1996).Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity.Bouler, CO:Westview.
14. Barron, F.,Harrington, D. M.(1981).Creativity, intelligence, and personality.Annual Review of Psychology,32,429-476.
15. Beeko, E. O.(2005).Pittsburgh, PA,University of Pittsburgh.
16. Bollen, K. A.,Curran, P. J.(2006).Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective.New York, NY:Wiley.
17. Claxton, A. F.,Pannells, T. C.,Rhoads, P. A.(2005).Developmental trends in the creativity of school-age children.Creativity Research Journal,17(4),327-335.
18. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1996).Creativity: Flow and the psychological discovery and invention.New York, NY:HarperCollins.
19. Daniel, M.(2007).Can creativity be improved by an attention-broadening training program? An exploratory study focusing on team sports.Creativity Research Journal,19(2-3),281-291.
20. Edwin, C. S.,Emily, J. S.,John, C. H.(2005).The creative personality.Gifted Child Quarterly,49,300-314.
21. Florida, R.(2004).Americas looming creativity crisis.Harvard Business Review,37,122-134.
22. Fraine, B. D.,Van Damme, J. V.,Onghena, P.(2007).A longitudinal analysis of gender difference in academic self-concept and language achievement: A multivariate multilevel latent growth approach.Contemporary Educational Psychology,32,132-150.
23. Glover, J. A.(Ed.),Ronning, R. R.(Ed.),Reynolds, C. R.(Ed.)(1989).Handbook of creativity.New York, NY:Plenum.
24. Helson, R.(1999).A longitudinal study of creative personality in women.Creativity Research Journal,12,89-101.
25. Hwang, W. Y.,Chen, N. S.,Dung, J. J.,Yang, Y. L.(2007).Multiple representation skills and creativity effects on mathematical problem solving using a multimedia whiteboard system.Educational Technology & Society,10(2),191-212.
26. Kaufman, J. C.(Ed.),Bear, J.(Ed.)(2005).Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Kaufman, J. C.,Bear, J.(2008).Gender differences in creativity.Journal of Creative Behavior,42(2),75-105.
28. Kaufman, J. C.,Bear, J.,Gentile, C. A.(2004).Differences in gender and ethnicity as measured by ratings of three writing tasks.Journal of Creative Behavio,39,56-69.
29. Kaufman, R. B.,Beghetto, J. C.(2009).Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity.Review of General Psychology,13,1-12.
30. Kim, T. Y.,Hon, A. H. Y.,Crant, J. M.(2009).Proactive personality, employee creativity, and newcomer outcomes: A longitudinal study.Journal of Business and Psychology,24,93-103.
31. Maddux, W.,Galinsky, A.(2009).Cultural borders and mental barriers: The relationship between living abroad and creativity.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,96(5),1047-1061.
32. Magoun, D.,Eaton, V.,Owens, C.(2002).IT and the attitudes of middle school girls: A follow-up study.National Educational Computing Conference,San Antonio, TX:
33. Mason, W. A.(2001).Self-esteem and delinquency revisited (again): A test of Kaplan's self-derogation theory of delinquency using latent growth curve modeling.Journal of Youth and Adolescence,30,83-102.
34. Mellou, E.(1996).The two-conditions view of creativity.Journal of Creativity Behavior,30(2),126-149.
35. Menard, S.(Ed.)(2008).Handbook of longitudinal research: Design, measurement, and analysis.Amsterdam, Netherlands:Elsevier.
36. Shedish, W. R.,Cook, T. D.,Campbell, D. T.(2001).Experimental and quasi-experimental design for generalized causal inference.Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin.
37. Shevlin, M.,Millar, R.(2006).Career education: An application of latent growth curve modeling to career information-seeking behavior of school pupils.Journal of Educational Psychology,76,141-153.
38. Starko, A. J.(2000).Creativity in the classroom: School in the curiousdelight.London, UK:LEA.
39. Sternberg, R. J.(1999).Successful intelligence: A broader view of who is smart in school and in life.International Schools Journal,XVII,19-31.
40. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.)(1999).Handbook of creativity.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
41. Wai, J.,Lubinski, D.,Benbow, C. P.(2005).Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youths: An age 13 to 33 longitudinal study.Journal of Educational Psychology,97(3),484-492.
42. Wang, X.(2003).Beijing, China,Beijing Normal University.
43. Weiner, B.(1990).History of motivational research in education.Journal of Education Psychology,82(4),616-622.
44. Williams, F. E.(1980).Creativity assessment packet(CAP): Manual.Buffalo, NY:D.O.K..
45. 方瑋、邱發忠(2009)。軍事組織創造傾向量表的發展。復興崗學報，95，173-204。
46. 毛連塭(1995)。創造力研究的心理學觀。創造思考教育，7，1-6。
47. 王立永、李小平、張金秀(2006)。大學生創造性傾向特點之研究。高校保健醫學研究與實踐，3(3)，14-17。
48. 余民寧(2006)。潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS的應用。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:高等教育=Higher Education。
49. 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。
50. 吳靜吉、曾敬梅、王涵儀、林志哲、林偉文(2004)。台灣創造力教育實施現況。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Department of Education。
51. 林幸台(2002)。青少年的創造力發展。應用心理研究，15，63-67。
52. 林幸台(1995)。威廉斯創造力測驗修定報告。特殊教育研究學刊，11，133-149。
53. 林俊瑩、黃毅志(2006)。社會網絡與心理幸福因果關聯的方向性之探討：台東師院追蹤調查資料的貫時性分析。臺灣社會教育學研究，6(1)，1-39。
54. 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。
55. 洪久賢、溫秀玲、蔡長艷、宋慧娟(2003)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會=National Science Council。
56. 洪文東(2002)。創造型兒童之思考特性與科學創造力的關聯性。屏東師院學報，16，355-394。
57. 洪榮昭、康鳳梅、林展立(2003)。傑出科技創作學童創造特質分析─以機器人競賽為例。師大學報：科學教育類，48(2)，239-254。
58. 師保國、許晶晶(2009)。家庭環境對大學生創造性傾向的預測作用。首都師範大學學報（社會科學版），2009(5)，71-77。
59. 張春興(2013)。教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:東華=Tung Hua。
60. 葉玉珠(2006)。創造力教學─過去、現在與未來。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychology。
61. 葉玉珠、吳靜吉、鄭英耀(2000)。影響科技與資訊產業人員創意發展的因素之量表編製。師大學報：科學教育類，45(2)，39-63。
62. 劉世南、郭誌光(2003)。創造力實踐的基礎建設：評量方法的發展。資優教育季刊，86，10-20。
63. 蔡笑岳、朱雨潔(2007)。中小學生創造性傾向、智力及學業成績的相關研究。心理發展與教育，2007(2)，36-41。

1. 張雨霖(2016)。從「教創意．適性學」到「適性教．學創意」。中等教育，67(1)，36-55。
2. 鄭博文,廖錦文(2019)。經濟弱勢學生學習態度與學業表現之縱貫研究。教育實踐與研究，32(1)，71-105。
3. 鄭博文、廖錦文、江耀宗、石宜正(2017)。臺灣身心障礙青少年健康與快樂感之縱貫性研究。特殊教育學報，45，89-110。