“科技創造力測驗”的發展與常模的建立

The Development of "Technological Creativity Test" and the Construction of Its Scoring Norm

10.7108/PT.200412.0127

葉玉珠(Yu-Chu Yeh)

科技創造力 ； 國小學童 ； 測驗 ； 常模 ； technoloical creativity ； pupil ； test ； norm

測驗學刊

51卷2期（2004 / 12 / 01）

127 - 162

繁體中文

「科技創造力」乃個體在科技領域中，產生一適當並具有原創性與價值性的產品之歷程。此一能力不但是知識經濟與科技掛帥的今日社會之基石，更是九年一貫課程改革所欲培育的最重要能力之一。本研究嘗試改進以往擴散性創造思考測驗的缺失、融入特定領域知識的理念、兼重思考過程的選擇及結果的合理性、強調產品導向的概念，並參考科技創意競賽的評分方向，編製了一份適用國小學童的「科技創造力測驗」。「科技創造力測驗」包含「字詞聯想」與「書包設計」二分測驗，測驗時間為三十分鐘；其評量指標分為五個向度：流暢、變通、獨創、精進與視覺造型，但以加權總分代表創造力。本研究歷時二年，進行三次的預試與修訂，最後以1839位國小中高年級學童（高雄市：N=727；澎湖縣：N=511；台北市：N=601）為樣本，進行信效度的考驗與常模的建立。研究結果發現，所發展的「科技創造力測驗」具有良好的信度與效度。國小學童「科技創造力測驗」的得分與其自然科成績及學習動機、學業成績、創意個人特質、創意學校因素及年級均有顯著正相關。

”Technological Creativity” refers to the process in which an individual generates a culturally appropriate as well as an original and valuable product in technology. Technological creativity is not only a basic ability in this epoc of knowledge economics and technology, but also an important competence greatly emphasized in the current educational reform. Here in this study, I have tried to develop a test that is suitable for measuring pupils' technological creativity based on the suggestions of improving divergent thinking tests, the concepts of incorporating domain knowledge, the emphasis of integrating both the selection of thinking process and the reasonableness of results, and the scoring approaches of related competitions. The Technological Creativity Test developed in this study includes two subtests, namely, Remote word association and Schoolbag design; its test time is 30 minutes. Though there were five scoring dimensions (fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, and visual art), a weighted score was used to represent technological creativity. This study took two years to complete. After three pretests, 1839 3rd to 6th graders (Kaohsiung: N=727; Penghu: N=511; Taipei: N=601) were used to test the reliability and validity of the developed test as well as to establish its scoring norm. The findings suggest that the Technological Creativity Test has good reliability and validity, and it is related to pupils' grade level, learning motivation of the subject ”Nature”, GPA, personal traits of creativity, school environment, and age.

1. 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)
   連結：
2. Amabile, T. M.(1988).A model of creativity and innovation in organizations.Research in Organizational Behavior,10
3. Amabile, T. M.(1996).Creativity in context.
4. Amabile, T. M.,Conti, R.,Lazenby, J.,Herron, M.(1996).Assessing the work environment for creativity.Academy of Management Journal,39(5)
5. Cropley, A. J.(2000).Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using?.Roeper Review,23(2)
6. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1997).Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life.
7. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1990).Flow: The psychology of optimal experience.
8. Dasgupta, S.(1996).Technology and creativity.
9. Dudek, S. Z.,Strobel, M. G.,Runco, M. A.(1993).Cumulative and proximal influences on the social environment and children's creative potential.The Journal of Genetic Psychology,154(4)
10. Fleith, D. S.(2000).Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the classroom environment.Roeper review,22(3)
11. Gruber, H. E.,Davis, S. N.(1988).The nature of creativity.
12. Guilford, J. P.(1950).Creativity.American Psychologist,5
13. Hennessey, B. A.,Amabile, T. M.(1988).Storytelling: A method for assessing children's creativity.Journal of Creative Behavior,22
14. Houtz, J. C.(1990).Cognition, curriculum and literacy.
15. Huber, J. C.(1998).Invention and inventivity as a Special kind of creativity, with implications for general Creativity.Journal of Creative Behavior,32(1)
16. Jassen, D. H.(1997).Instructional design models for well-structured and ill- structured problem solving learning outcomes.Educational Technology Research and Development,45(1)
17. Krieghbaum, H.(1968).Science and the mass media.
18. Lesner, W. J.,Hillman, D.(1983).A developmental schema of creativity.The Journal of Creative Behavior,17(2)
19. Majoribanks, K.(1994).amily, schools and children's learning: A study of children's learning environment.International Journal of Educational Research,21
20. Mayer, R. E.(1999).Fifty years of creativity research.
21. Morgan, S.,Forster, J.(1999).Creativity in the classroom.Gifted Educational International,14
22. Okuda, S. M.,Runco, M.A.,Berger, D. E.(1991).Creativity and the finding and solving or real-world problems.Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,9
23. Oldham, G. R.,Cummings, A.(1996).Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work.Academy of Management Journal,39(3)
24. Plucker, J. A.,Runco, M. A.(1998).The death of creativity measurement has been greatly exaggerated: Current issues, recent advances, and future directions in creativity assessment.Roeper Review,21(1)
25. Ram, A.,Leake, D. B.(1995).Goal-driven learning.
26. Rodd, J.(1999).Encouraging young children's critical and creative thinking skills: An approach in one English elementary school.Childhood education,75(6)
27. Runco, M. A.(1991).Divergent thinking.
28. Simonton, D. K.(1975).Soiocultural context of individual creativity: A transhistorical time-series analysis.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,32(6)
29. Soh, K.(2000).Indexing creativity fostering teacher behavior: A preliminary validation study.Journal of Creative Behavior,34(2)
30. Stemberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I.(1999).Handbook of creativity.
31. Torrance, E. P.(1974).Torrance tests of creative thinking: Directions manual and sorting guide.
32. 吳靜吉、高泉豐、丁興祥、葉玉珠、程炳林(1992)。建立「拓弄思語文創造思考測驗乙式」常模。
33. 吳靜吉、高泉豐、陳甫彥、葉玉珠(1993)。建立「拓弄思圖形創造思考測驗甲式」常模。
34. 吳靜吉、陳嘉成、林偉文(1998)。創造力量表簡介。
35. 林人龍(2000)。創意與實踐:在行動中思考-有關「生活科技」學習活動設計的想法與釋意。生活科技教育，33(9)
36. 林幸台(1985)。威廉斯創造力測驗修訂報告。特殊教有究學刊，11
37. 洪文東(1999)。科學的創造發明與發現。
38. 洪文東(1997)。創造性思考與科學創造力的培養。國教天地，123
39. 洪振方(1998)。科學創造力的探討。高雄師大學報，9
40. 洪榮昭、朱永裕、鄭廉鐙(2002)。科技創作能力發展分析-以第二屆「POWER TECH:全國少年科技創作競賽」為例。台灣教育，614
41. 張一蕃、黃登宬(1997)。日本創造力暨科技大學考察報告。科學發展月刊，26(8)
42. 聯合報
43. 張珮甄(2002)。國小五年級學童性別、出生序、家庭結構、情緒、創意個人特質與其科技創造力之關係。
44. 教育部(2002)。創造力教育白皮書。
45. 教育部(2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。
46. 陳俐妤(2002)。性別、多元智能融入自然領域教學對國小四年級學童應用多元智能於自然科學習及其科技創造力之影響。
47. 陳龍安(1984)。創造思考教學對國小資優班與普通班學生創造思考能力之影響。
48. 劉士豪(1998)。年齡、性別、成就目標、目標導向與創意生活經驗、創造力之關係。
49. 蔡擇文(2003)。國小五年級自然科融入STS教學對學生學習態度、批判思考與科技創造力之影響。
50. 簡惠燕(2000)。國小學童在科學問題解決過程中創造力與後設認知之相關研究。
51. 譚克平(1999)。創造力定義之探討和台灣與香港國中學生數學創造性解題之比較。

1. 洪珮華、林榮泰(2017)。敘事文本影響小學生角色設計創造力初探。設計學研究，20(1)，45-71。
2. 黃淑嫆、莊麗珠(2008)。幼兒教師對創意教學態度之研究。幼教研究彙刊，2(1)，151-166。
3. 賴慕回、詹博元、陳德貴、張天民、徐昊杲(2008)。「電機電子技術創造力測驗」量表之編製。測驗學刊，55(2)，407-434。
4. 賴志樫、周家卉(2011)。臺灣與英國科技課程對提升臺灣國中生科技創造力的效果比較研究。課程與教學，14(3)，97-122。
5. 林坤誼(2012)。科幻小說與科幻影片對激發國中生產品設計創意的效益。教育科學研究期刊，57(3)，121-151。
6. 羅珮文、黃博聖、游勝翔、陳學志、施依伶、林緯倫(2017)。兒童封閉式創造力潛能測量：「兒童版中文詞彙遠距聯想測驗」之編製及信、效度研究。測驗學刊，64(3)，237-258。
7. 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。
8. 蕭佳純(2014)。國小學童參與科展的歷程、內在動機與科技創造力成長的縱貫性分析。教育實踐與研究，27(2)，33-66。
9. 蕭佳純(2014)。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。特殊教育研究學刊，39(2)，87-107。
10. (2007)。台灣創造力教育研究之回顧。教育曙光，55(3)，47-59。
11. (2024).An Analytical Study on Establishing Norms for Creativity among Pre-service TCSOL Teacher Education Students in Taiwan.教育研究與發展期刊,20(2),61-132.