Role of Teachers in making youth creative

Chapter II

Literature Review

This chapter will focus on different role of teachers in making youth creative. An

overview of teacher’s role will be discussed; this includes what are the roles of teachers towards

students, and the overall make up of teacher’s role in making students creative. How creative

teachers motivate students for creative learning. Finally the role of teachers in making youth

creative will be investigated.

Introduction

Creativity

Enhancing students' Creativity is one of the strategic ways of improving their entrepreneurial

capacity and performance. Creativity has been described as an innovative strategy of solving

problem that emphasizes originality. Creativity is seen as the most distinct of all human

attributes, and when properly developed and harnessed, can develop an individual's creative

imagination (Utim, 2011). Teacher creativity is essential to facilitate effective learning. Halliwell

(1993) suggests creativity as part of normality as part of everyday actions and ideas. This kind of

creativity is necessary to facilitate effective teaching in the daily teaching learning process where

a teacher is able to overcome common problems faced by learners, such as being frightened to

ask question or to do presentation, being shy to discuss within group, being hesitated to play role,

and being afraid of making mistakes. Creativity makes learning engaging, exciting, and increases
the learning rate. It helps students greatly in their all-round development (social, intellectual and

emotional) (Usman, 2010).

There are many theories of the analysis of teachers leadership, characteristics associated with the

concept, functions and leadership styles. It was found that the behavior of teachers have

influence on the climate and organizational culture conducive to creativity (Mumford &

Gustafson, 1988; Mumford et al., 2002).

Theories of teacher’s leadership and their impact on the student’s creativity

Burns (1978), assumed two teachers leadership styles that are extremes, in which one end assigns

transactional leadership and the other transformational. The first one, characterize relationship

between teachers and students, based on the ‘something for something’ exchange. The second

one, going beyond the exchange and provide outside instrumental motivation of action.

Intellectual stimulation in this kind of leadership is expressed by encouragement, observing and

asking questions, providing support for individual development needs of the group members.

Creative behavior is a multistep process of problems recognition, generating ideas and solutions,

support of the idea of forming and its implementation. Creativity (i.e. creation of new and useful

ideas) is therefore an important element of the innovative behavior. Transformational leader

responds to the need of making changes in the organization, including those radical, in response

to signals of new trends, because he understands the directions of potential changes.

Transformational leaders tend to make changes so that an organization run by them was

competitive and achieves better and better results. At the same time, they can use the potential of

their students, seeking to ensure that the development of the organization make a common goal

and motive of action of entire work team. At the same time teachers, organizing organizational
culture, have contribution to the creation of standards, ensure compliance, create a vision of the

future of the organization and its development path (Bass et al., 1996 fo Sokol 2014, 2015).

Bass (1985, 2002) and also Bass & Avolio (1994) conducted the study, which is currently the

most popular, and relate to teachers leadership and also refers to the development of creativity in

students. It is worth noting that the Bass concept does not treat the two types of leadership as so

called extreme, but as a completely independent style. They are based on different assumptions

and ways of motivating. Transformational leadership consist on dimensions such as: idealized

influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration

(Pieterse et al., 2009).

Student’s creativity increases students’ learning (Theobald, 2006). Students’ creative learning

can increase because of their own innate desires to perform or accomplish a task; however,

students’ creative learning may be affected by external factors such as rewards or incentives

(Bain, 2004; Theobald, 2006). Students’ creative learning is not entirely dependent on their own

motivation. Teachers’ play a vital role in increasing students’ creative learning through

motivational support (Schuitema, Peetsma, & Oort, 2016; Theobald, 2006; Thoonen, Sleegers,

Peetsma, & Oort, 2011). Teachers can increase students’ creativity to learn by support of

students’ autonomy, relevance, relatedness, competence, teachers’ interests in the subject, and

self-efficacy (Ferlazzo, 2015; Schiefele & Schaffner, 2015; Schuitema et al., 2016; Zhang,

Solmon, & Gu, 2012).

Factors motivate student’s creativity

Teachers’ behavior, traits and skills are the most important factors that affect the student’s

creativity to participate actively in the classroom. Research conducted in the area reports that
teachers’ traits such as supportive, understanding, approachable, friendliness through

positive nonverbal behavior; giving smiles and nodding for acknowledging students answers

(Siti Maziha, Nik Suryani & Melor, 2010); affirmative and open-mindedness (Dallimore,

Hertenstein & Platt, 2004; Fassinger, 1995; 2000) act as motivators for students creativity and

foster their active participation in the classroom.

Creative teachers lead to creative students

In the fourth industrial era, critical thinking and creative thinking abilities are the main focus of

learning (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2014; Narmaditya et al., 2018). The underlying reason is that

critical thinking enables students to be more skilled in composing an argument, checking the

credibility of sources, or making decisions. Second, the development of creativity in an

enjoyable learning process is considered more supportive of students’ non-academic talents and

strengths. As a primary figure in the classroom, teachers need to have creativity and innovation

in their learning and delivering their materials. According to Gu (2017); Selkrig and Keamy

(2017) noted that creative teachers have various solutions in dealing with classroom problems

and promoting students’ creativity in achieving educational goals.

Several studies have documented that teacher creativity and innovation are directly proportional

to student’s creativity in the classroom. For instance, Rasmi (2012) remarked that the student’s

creativity in the classroom is primarily determined by teacher creativity. Indeed, Ayob et al.

(2013); Pishghadam et al. (2012) confirmed that teacher creativity can promote a meaningful

learning atmosphere and encourage students to be skilled in solving problems. This implies that

teachers need to continue nurturing their creativity by frequently participating in professional

training activities, continuing studies, diligently reading relevant research, and always having
discussions with other teachers on improving learning quality (Arifani & Suryanti, 2019; Liu et

al., 2020).

The next question is that what and how is the teacher’s creativity? According to Rasmi (2012),

teacher creativity in the classroom consists of creative teaching, teaching for creativity, and

creative learning. These three things are interrelated and support each other in teachers’ success

in teaching in the classroom. Creative teachers are also characterized by the use of techniques,

tools, materials, and methods in the learning process, such as the use of original materials or

other realities to improve student understanding; provide various examples so that students

understand more, help students better use teaching aids, and means of meaningful learning

(Ayob et al., 2013). Meanwhile, creative learning is defined as a learning model that develops

students’ creative thinking and behavior (Ayob et al., 2013; Jeffrey & Craft, 2004; C. Zhou &

Luo, 2012).

In the entrepreneurial education subject, teacher creativity is crucial in promoting students’

creativity, leading to students’ intention and activities on entrepreneurship. Mason and Arshed

(2013) concluded that entrepreneurship education in schools equips entrepreneurship knowledge

for students and produces graduates with the mindset, creativity, and skills to identify and create

opportunities and develop businesses in the future. Therefore, teachers should be more creative

in designing entrepreneurship education to achieve the forecasted goals (Samuel & Rahman,

2018). Thus, teacher creativity affects entrepreneurship education (Hamidi et al., 2008; Lin,

2011; Oosterbeek et al., 2010).

Role of teacher
The role played by teachers becomes a very important component and in fact it can be said that

they are in way our nation builders. For any student, education and character are the basic

foundations and it is laid by teachers as well as parents. The basic role for any teacher is to create

a very interesting and creative classroom for students. Students must feel comfortable with the

teacher and at the same time, teacher must encourage students and develop creativity. Students

should be taught the right path and knowledge or matter should be conveyed in such a manner

that students would find it very easy to understand. The system approach (Rassekh and

Vaideanu, 1989) to education, which relates organization, operation and evaluation of the

teaching learning process, also highlights the importance of teachers and learners who are the

important component for efficiency and quality of educational process of what actually happens

in the classroom. It attaches particular importance to the interaction between the components of

this process: objectives, contents, learning methods, teaching resources, organization of

instruction, the process of learning and evaluation.

The OECD report Quality in teaching (1994) defines teacher quality in five dimensions:

Knowledge of substantive areas and content

Pedagogic skill including the acquisition and ability to use a repertoire of teaching strategies

Reflection and ability to be self-critical, the hallmark of teacher professionalism

Empathy and commitment to the acknowledgement of the dignity of other

Managerial competence, as teachers assume a range of managerial responsibilities within and

outside the classroom. (OECD, 1994, p. 13-14)

Creative Pedagogy
Theorists have proposed viewing creative pedagogy in terms of three elements: creative

teaching, teaching for creativity, and more recently, creative learning (Anderson, 2002; Beghetto,

2016; Lin, 2011; NACCCE, 1999). Creative teaching encompasses the teacher’s creativity in

planning, implementing, and assessing lessons and instructional units, as opposed to following a

scripted or packaged curriculum or simply employing premade instructional materials. Teaching

for creativity means that a teacher’s planned activities are intended to promote student creativity.

Creativity training exercises are a straightforward example of this, but lessons which integrate

creativity training, such as teaching a brainstorming strategy as part of a problem-based learning

experience, would also be defined as this type of teaching. Creative learning refers to creative

ideas and insights that occur as part of the learning process. For example, a young student

learning about expanded form in mathematics might have the creative insight that she can solve

single-digit-by-double-digit multiplication problems more quickly by mentally expanding the

two-digit factor (in effect, “creating” the distributive property). A summary of literature on

creative pedagogy follows.

Creative teaching

Beghetto (2017) referred to creative teaching as teaching with creativity and defined it as

“applying principles and techniques of creativity to subject matter teaching” (p. 551). He

described the knowledge necessary for creative teaching as highly specialized, because it

requires knowledge of how to teach particular content to particular students. Anderson (2002)

wrote that teachers require autonomy for creative teaching and recommended that school leaders

promote teachers’ autonomy by enabling them to develop their own curricula and to modify

prescribed curricula. Many professional and popular books have been written to help teachers do

this. For example, the Problem-Based Learning in the Science Classroom series by NSTA Press,
the Easy Make and Learn Projects series by Scholastic Publishing, and many simulations by

Interact Publishing offer curriculum and curriculum extensions for teaching and assessing

regular school subject matter in a creative way. Websites such as TeachersPayTeachers.com,

ReadWriteThink.org, and Pintrest.com offer additional examples that teachers can use to inspire

creative lessons in a sort of virtual collaboration. Popular press and edited books also offer

general principles for making one’s teaching more creative (e.g., Boss, 2018; Burgess, 2012;

King W., & King, H., 2018; Renzulli & Waicunas, 2016). Creative teaching has mostly been

discussed theoretically, as few studies have examined it empirically (Beghetto, 2017). This study

contributes to the literature on creative teaching by providing examples of products,

performances, and services that are outcomes of some creative teaching practices.

Teaching for creativity

Jeffrey and Craft (2004) described creative pedagogy as an integrated process, building on the

National Advisory Committee’s statement that, “teaching for creativity involves teaching

creatively” (NACCCE, 1999, p.90). Jeffrey and Craft warned that distinguishing teaching for

creativity from creative teaching might lead to an artificial dichotomy that could reduce the

effectiveness of advocating for either. They also acknowledged that a benefit of this distinction

was the attention drawn to teaching for creativity that had previously been lacking in research

and practice. Beghetto (2017) defined teaching for creativity as “nurturing students’ creativity in

the context of specific subject areas or nurturing creativity itself in training programs” (p. 551)

He described the knowledge necessary to do this successfully as a combination of knowledge

about creativity and knowledge of techniques for teaching people how to be (more) creative.

Creativity training programs are known to positively affect creativity. Scott, Leritz, & Mumford,

(2004), and Tran, Ho, Mackenzie, and Le (2017) reported that professional development in
creative pedagogy is effective for increasing teachers’ use of techniques that promote students’

creativity. However, many teachers have not been taught how to teach for creativity, and their

confidence in their ability to do so varies (Aish, 2014; Bereczki & Kárpáti, 2018).

Creative learning

Creative learning is the involvement of creativity during the learning process. Beghetto (2016)

defined creative learning as “a combination of intra-psychological and interpsychological

processes that result in new and personally meaningful understandings for oneself and others” (p.

4). Creative learning has usually been discussed in relation to the student experience (e.g.,

Beghetto, 2016; Lin, 2011), which is not the focus of this study. However, the teacher’s response

to students’ expressions of creative learning is something that the teacher controls. A teacher

who rejects or dismisses a student’s creative idea may “kill the idea softly”, reducing the

student’s likelihood of offering up creative ideas in the future (Beghetto, 2013). Repeated or

severe experiences of such rejection may engender creative mortification, where students’

aspirations toward being an adult creator are quashed by negative feedback that they are unable

to view in a manner that is conducive to positive change (Beghetto & Dilley, 2016). Selkrig and

Keamy (2017) advocated for teachers to become aware of their own creative learning in order to

better understand and improve their creative pedagogy.

Student’s beliefs about creativity-supportive classroom environments

The classroom’s physical and social environment can affect students’ expression of creativity,

and teachers are instrumental in determining whether that environment is one that promotes or

quashes creative impulses (Beghetto, 2013; Beghetto & Kaufman, 2014; Davies, Jindal-Snape,

Collier, Digby, Hay, & Howe, 2013; Yi, Hu, Plucker, and McWilliams, 2013). Researchers have
reported that schools that promote student creativity support student agency and student

involvement in decision making (Craft, Cremin, Hay, & Clack, 2014) and show respect and

caring for students (Cremin, Barnes, & Scoffham, 2006). Teachers have described a classroom

that supports creativity as one that uses methods such as brainstorming, collaborative learning,

choice and differentiation (Adams, 2013; Fleith, 2000; Liu & Lin, 2014) and autonomous

learning in an open and friendly atmosphere (Fleith, 2000; Henriksen & Mishra, 17 2015; Liu &

Lin, 2014). They also describe a classroom that supports creativity as enabling unstructured

learning (Fleith, 2000) and connecting learning to the real world and to multiple disciplines

(Henriksen & Mishra, 2015). These observations and teacher perspectives are in alignment with

Cropley’s (1995) list of creativity-fostering behaviors, though his list also includes encouraging

mastery of factual knowledge, promoting student self-evaluation, and helping students learn to

cope with frustration and failure.

Students’ perspectives on supports and barriers to teaching for creativity

Aljughaiman and Mower-Reynolds (2005) recommended research on the

“administrative/parental/political pressures felt by teachers to address issues of accountability

and demands for increased standardized test scores” (p. 30). Lack of time, lack of or inadequate

training, and pressures related to standardized tests are consistently reported as barriers to

teaching for creativity (Adams, 2013; Aish, 2014; Cheng, 2010; Eason, Giannangelo, &

Franceschini, 2009; Edinger, 2008; Fairfield, 2010; Hansen and Feldhusen, 1994; Jones & Egley,

2004; Olivant, 2015). Curricular restrictions, time constraints, and large classes also negatively

affect teachers in gifted programs who wish to teach for creativity, even when these teachers

have training and are interested in promoting student creativity (Chan & Yuen, 2014). Modern or

“Gen Z” students and their teachers desire a greater focus on creativity in the classroom (Adobe,
2016). Teachers who believe they are able to teach for creativity report that they work with open,

supportive principals and have time for collaboration (Adams 2013; Edinger, 2008). Louis and

Marks (1998) reported that teachers who were observed to use more authentic teaching

strategies, including connecting instruction to the outside world (c.f. Cropley, 1995), tended to

have stronger, collaborative professional communities with shared values around their goals for

18 student achievement. The current study provides additional details about the supports that

teachers describe as useful for promoting students’ creativity.

There are many significant ways through which teachers have a remarkable impact on the

student’s life. They not only are the role models but help the pupils with the right guidance to

move their heads towards a better future. Let’s dive into detail and discuss.

Provide Right Guidance

Teachers evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of their students and guide them to follow the

best practices. They not only bring out the best from the students but teach them valuable and

creative life skills too like communication, compassion, organization, and presentation. Teachers

are the ones who motivate the students to be creative do better in every domain and help them

achieve life goals. Through their guidance, the students know to differentiate between right and

wrong.

Act as Role Models

Teachers are the ultimate role models in a student’s life. In their academic life, students come

across different types of teachers. A great teacher is always supportive and compassionate

towards his students and appreciates their achievements in every field. They have a precious
connection with the students and always encourage them to do better. Teachers are their role

models who always hold a positive attitude in life and so help their students to follow the same.

Shape the Society

Teachers are dedicated learners who can not only teach but listen to the student’s problems and

try mentoring them to the best of their ability. Skilled teachers handle things patiently and can

shape the academic goals of the youths. They rarely do it for recognition rather they follow their

heart! The concept of powerful education and teaching students valuable skills are directly

proportional. Teachers know the cause and contribute towards shopping for a better tomorrow.

Change Lives for Better

It’s not always the “good” students that teachers cross paths with. Rather there are many aimless

pupils too who are careless about life and least bothered about academics. A brilliant teacher is

equally compassionate to them and helps them change for the better. They even encourage

students to be full of spirit during their lows and these are responsible to change the lives of the

students for the better. (Bhattacharjee, 2021)

While some people think it’s easy, the role of a teacher is very challenging and equally

important. It is their responsibility to impart the correct knowledge and in the right manner. They

have to teach methodically for which they prepare their lessons beforehand. Thus, they are able

to motivate their students through the use of accurate techniques.Good teacher gives homework

to their students also checks it regularly for a better practice. Further, they plan meticulously for

a better teaching pattern. At the beginning of the year, they plan the whole syllabus out for a

smooth teaching experience.

In addition to teaching, a teacher is also a good organizer. They have to organize various

activities that take place in school throughout the year. Further, they have to take care of other

little yet important things, like the seating arrangement, classroom activities and more.

Moreover, they also supervise a lot of tasks and activities in school. For instance, attendance,

homework, behavior is also supervised by teachers. They are responsible for maintaining the

discipline and decorum of the students.Most importantly, they guide the students every step of

the way. They have to make sure they do not favor a specific student and give equal attention to

all. In fact, teachers have to decide how they divide the attention towards students who need it

more than others.

Thus, it is fair to say that our teachers are the ones who make this world a better place. They

make this world a better place by enhancing student’s lives. Moreover, teachers are the ones who

play the role of so many people in a child’s life. They are a mentor, a parent, a friend, and more

which makes all the difference in one’s life. (Google)

Recent Researches in Pakistan

Bashir S., Humera A., Batool S B conducted a research on student’s creativity in 2020 in the

Journal of Arts and Social Sciences under the title Creative Abilities of Students and Teaching

for Creativity; A Comparative Study of Public and Private Schools of Lahore City. This study

was designed to explore the creative thinking abilities of primary school students in Pakistan.

The study also explored teachers’ perceptions about the creative abilities of students. Multistage

sampling was applied to select the sample. Four primary schools (2 from public sector and 2

from private sector) from Lahore city were selected randomly to collect the data. 100 students

and 100 teachers were selected by applying cluster sampling. Torrance Tests of Creative
Thinking (TTCT) were conducted to identify the abilities of students related to creativity. A

questionnaire was developed to identify the perceptions of teachers regarding the development

of creativity among students. Reliability of the questionnaire was .855. Independent sample t-

test was applied to identify the difference between the creativity of public and private sector

school students and perceptions of teachers. Findings show that students who were studying in

private schools are more competent in creative writing and have more expressive ability than

public school students. Teachers of private schools were using the methods and techniques more

effectively for teaching creativity. The study has important implications for the development or

otherwise of creativity in primary schools in Pakistan.

Recent research in USA

Seyedahmad Rahimi & Valerie J. Shute in 2021 also conducted a research on students creativity

under the title First inspire, then instruct to improve students’ creativity in Computers &

Education jouranal. . In this study, researcher investigated the effectiveness of a creativity-

support system that was developed in the level editor of an educational game called Physics

Playground. The goal was to improve college students’ creativity. Participants (n =114) were

randomly assigned to one of four conditions and instructed to create as many creative game

levels as possible in about two hours. The four conditions included: (1) Inspirational – with

supports that provided access to a website with example levels, a brainstorming tool, and a

remote association activity; (2) Instructional – with supports that provided specific instructions to

first design as many levels as possible, then pick four of the levels, and enhance them using a

tool called SCAMPER; (3) Both – with both inspirational and instructional supports; and (4) No
Support, which did not include any creativity supports. The major finding from this research was

that the both condition was significantly more effective than the other conditions in improving

students’ creativity measured by the creativity of the game levels created by the students.

Creativity in higher studies

In the context of higher education, creativity can be viewed from various perspectives. One of

the approaches to the study of creativity in higher education is related to the introduction of a

competence approach and is based on the consideration of creativity as the correlation of several

structural components: methodological, procedural, personal, and panoramic (Erpenbeck, 2000).

Under this approach, creative competence is defined as the ability to effectively and inventive

work, actualized knowledge and experience in conditions of uncertainty with the aim of solving

specific practical problems, readiness for the adaptive use of acquired knowledge, self-education

and self-improvement (Epstein, 2005). Depending on the subject, creativity in higher education

is studied in four aspects: personal (the creativity of staff and students), group (communication,

cooperation), procedural, institutional (factors and environmental conditions).

In all studies, which in any way affect the question of development skills and personality traits

that are associated with creativity, noticed the importance of the culture, environment and other

conditions. Development of the creative economy, human capital and stimulating innovations

requires collaboration between higher education, economy, and cultural policies (Gilmore,

2016). John Baer states that skills, knowledge, attitudes do not develop in a vacuum, they always

vary by domain, so the question about development of creativity firstly is a question of domains

to be used. Research conducted on the issue of creativity of collaborative teams indicated that

closeness can be beneficial for group creativity when perspective taking is not included
(Katsikopoulos, 2018). The major possibilities for developing creativity during university studies

are teaching activities and supportive climate, study program.

The high need for active, creative young specialists in the labor market and the lack of well-

established mechanisms for identifying and developing creativity among students made this

study necessary.

References

J. Erpenbeck, M. Sauer. Das Forschungs-und Entwicklungsprogramm «Lernkultur

Kompetenzentwicklung». Arbeitsgemeinschaft Qualifikations-Entwicklungs Management
(Hrsg.): Kompetenzentwicklung 2000: Lernen im Wandel – Wandel durch Lernen. Munster.
2000.
R. Epstein. Generativity theory and creativity. M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.),
Theories of creativity (Rev. ed.). Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ, 2005.
Creativity in higher education. Report on the EUA Creativity Project. 2007. Online
available from https://eua.eu/downlo ads/publications/creativity%20in%20higher%20education
%20 %20report%20on%20the%20eua%20creativity%20project%202006-2007.pdf Accessed
date 03.10.2018.
A. Gilmore, R. Comunian. Beyond the campus: higher education, cultural policy and the
creative economy, International Journal of Cultural Policy, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1-9, 2016. doi:
10.1080/10286632.2015.1101089
J. Baer. Creativity Doesn't Develop in a Vacuum. New Directions for Child and
Adolescent Development, Special Issue: Perspectives on Creativity Development, Vol. 151, 9-
20, 2016. doi: 10.1002/cad.20151
P. Oztop, K. Katsikopoulos, M. Gummerum. Creativity through Connectedness: The
Role of Closeness and Perspective Taking in Group Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, Vol.
30, No. 3, 266-275, 2018. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2018.1488347
 Bashir, Samra & Batool, Syeda. (2020). Bashir S., Humera A., Batool S B., (2020).

Creative Abilities of Students and Teaching for Creativity; A Comparative Study of Public and

Private Schools of Lahore City, Journal of Arts and Social Sciences. VII (2), 35-42..

Google. (n.d.). Retrieved from toppr: https://www.toppr.com/guides/speech-for-students/speech-on-

teachers/

Bhattacharjee, M. (2021, November 10). What is the Role of a Teacher in a Student's

Life?
Eason, R., Giannangelo, D. M., & Franceschini, L. A.. (2009). A look at creativity in public and

private schools. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 130-137. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2009.04.001

Aljughaiman, A., & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers' conceptions of creativity and creative

students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17-34. doi:10.1002/j.2162- 6057.2005.tb01247.x

Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Personal and environmental factors affecting teachers’

creativityfostering practices in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 69-77.

doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.003

Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom?

Teachers’ work and student experiences in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106,

532-575. doi:www.jstor.org/stable/1085627

Edinger, M. J. (2008). An exploratory study of creativity-fostering teacher behaviors in secondary

classrooms (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.

Cropley, A. J. (1995). Fostering creativity in the classroom: General principles. In M. Runco (Ed.),

The creativity research handbook Vol. 1, 83-114. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
 Aish, D. (2014). Teachers' beliefs about creativity in the elementary classroom (Doctoral

dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 1566193678)

Tran, T. B. L., Ho, T. H., Mackenzie, S. V., & Le, L. K. (2017). Developing assessment criteria of a

lesson for creativity to promote teaching for creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 25, 10-26.

doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2017.05.006

Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A

quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361-388. doi:10.1080/10400410409534549

Renzulli, J. S., & Waicunas, N. (2016). An infusion-based approach to enriching the

standardsdriven curriculum. In S. M. Reis (Ed.) Reflections on Gifted Education: Critical Works by Joseph

S. Renzulli and Colleagues (pp. 411-428). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

King, W. & King, H. (2018). The wild card: 7 steps to an educator’s creative breakthrough. San

Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting.

Burgess, D. (2012). Teach like a PIRATE: Increase student engagement, boost your creativity, and

transform your life as an educator. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting.

Boss, S. (2018). Project based teaching: How to create rigorous and engaging learning

experiences. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

National Association for Gifted Children and The Council of State Directors of Programs for the

Gifted (2015, November). 2014-2015 State of the states in gifted education: Policy and practice data

[pdf]. Retrieved from www.nagc.org

Lin, Y. (2011). Fostering creativity through education – a conceptual framework of creative

pedagogy. Creative Education, 2, 149-155. doi:10.4236/ce.2011.23021

 Beghetto, R. A. (2008). Prospective teachers' beliefs about imaginative thinking in K-12

schooling. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3, 134 - 142. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2008.06.001

Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.) The

Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 447-466). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press

Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Killing ideas softly? The promise and perils of creativity in the classroom.

Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and

Psychology, 15, 6-23. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.6 67

Beghetto, R. A. (2017). Creativity in teaching. In J. C. Kaufman, J. Baer, & V. P. Glăveanu (Eds.).

The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity Across Different Domains (pp. 549-564). New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Beghetto, R. A., & Dilley, A. E. (2016). Creative aspirations or pipe dreams? Toward

understanding creative mortification in children and adolescents. New Directions for Child and

Adolescent Development, 151, 85-95. doi:10.1002/cad.20150

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies,

25, 53–69. doi:10.1080/13598139.2014.905247

Anderson, D. R. (2002). Creative teachers: Risk, responsibility, and love. Journal of Education,

183, 33-48. doi:10.1177/002205740218300104

Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M., & Ijsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship

education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic Review, 54(3), 442–454.
 Lin, Y.-S. (2011). Fostering creativity through education – A conceptual framework of creative

pedagogy. Creative Education, 2(3), 149–155.

Hamidi, D. Y., Wennberg, K., & Berglund, H. (2008). Creativity in entrepreneurship

education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 304–320.

Samuel, A. B., & Rahman, M. M. (2018). Innovative teaching methods and entrepreneurship

education: A review of literature. Journal of Research in Business, Economics and Management,

10(1), 1807–1813.

Mason, C., & Arshed, N. (2013). Teaching entrepreneurship to university students through

experiential learning: A case study. Industry and Higher Education, 27(6), 449–463.

Zhou, C., & Luo, L. (2012). Group creativity in learning context: understanding in a social-cultural

framework and methodology. Creative Education, 3(4), 392–399.

Seyedahmad Rahimi, Valerie J. Shute, 2021 First inspire, then instruct to improve students’

creativity, Computers & Education, Volume 174, ISSN 0360-1315,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104312.

Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: distinctions and

relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77–87.

Arifani, Y., & Suryanti, S. (2019). The influence of male and female ESP teachers’ creativity

toward learners’ involvement. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 237–250.

Pishghadam, R., Nejad, T. G., & Shayesteh, S. (2012). Creativity and its relationship with teacher

success criatividade. Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 3(2), 204–216.

 Ayob, A., Hussain, A., & Majid, R. A. (2013). A review of research on creative teachers in higher

education. International Education Studies, 6(6), 8–14.

Rasmi. (2012). Fostering creativity : A four elemental model of creative pedagogy. Journal of

Education and Practice, 3(12), 190–201.

Selkrig, M., & Keamy, K. (2017). Creative pedagogy: A case for teachers’ creative learning being

at the centre. Teaching Education, 28(3), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2017.1296829

Gu, C. (2017). On the relationships between creative learning, creative teaching, and roles of

creative teachers. In Handbook of Research on Creative Problem-Solving Skill Development in Higher

Education (pp. 494–512). Central China Normal University, China, IGI Global.

Narmaditya, B. S., Wulandari, D., & Sakarji, S. R. B. (2018). Does Problem-based Learning

Improve Critical Thinking Skill?. Journal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 37(3).

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies,

25(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2014.905247

OECD (1994) Quality in Teaching. OECD, Paris

OECD / Human Resources Development Canada (1997) Literacy Skills For The Knowledge

Society. Further Results from the International Adult Literacy Survey. Paris: OECD (Organization for

Economic Co-operation and Development), Human Resources Development Canada

Fassinger, P. A. (2000). How classes influence students’ participation in college classrooms.

Journal of Classroom Interaction. 35, 38-47

Fassinger, P. A. (1995). Professors’ and students’ perception of why students participate in

class. Teaching Sociology. 24, 25-33

 Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H. & Platt, M. B. (2004). Classroom participation and discussion

effectiveness: student-generated strategies. Communication Education. 53, 103-115

Siti Maziha Mustapha, Nik Suryani Nik Abd. Rahman & Melor Md. Yunus. (2010). Factors

influencing classroom participation: a case study of Malaysian undergraduate student. Procedia Social

and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 9: 1079- 1084. WCLTA 2010

Ferlazzo, L. (2015, September 14). Strategies for helping students motivate themselves.

Retrieved October 6, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/strategies-helping-studentsmotivate-

themselves-larry-ferlazzo

Zhang, T., Solmon, M. A., & Gu, X. (2012). The role of teachers’ support in predicting students’

motivation and achievement outcomes in physical education, Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,

31(4), 329-343.

Schiefele, U., & Schaffner, E. (2015). Teacher interests, mastery goals, and self-efficacy as

predictors of instructional practices and student motivation. ScienceDirect, 42, 159-171.

Schuitema, J., Peetsma, T., & van der Veen, I. (2016). Longitudinal relations between perceived

autonomy and social support from teachers, and students’ self-regulated learning and achievement.

Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 32-45. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.006

Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Harvard University Press

Theobald, M. A. (2006). Increasing student motivation: Strategies for middle and high school

teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Utim, S. M., "The role of Home Economics Teachers in promoting Entrepreneurship Among

Youths for the actualization of Vision 2020", Journal of women in Colleges of Education (JOWICE), vol.15,

no. 1, pp. 48-52, 2011.

 Halliwell, S. 1993. Teacher Creativity and teacher education. In Bridges, D. (Ed).

Developing teachers professionally: reflections for initial and in-service trainers. Roudlege.

Usman, L.S., "Effect of Global Economic Meltdown on Family Survival: Implications for

Home Economics Education", Journal of Women in Colleges of Education (JOWICE), Vol.14,

no. 1, Pp.134-138, 2010.

Mumford, M.D., Gustafson, S.B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application,

and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27–43.

Mumford, M.D., Scott, G.M., Gaddis, B., Strange, J.M. (2002). Leading creativepeople:

Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13,705–750.

Burns, T., Stalker, G. M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. Tavistock. London.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectation. Free Press. New

York.

Bass, B.M. (2002). Developing Potential across a full range of leadership: Cases on

transactional and transformational leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum. New York.

Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. (1995). The full range transformational leadership manual for

the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Mindgarden Inc. Redwood City.

Pieterse, A.N., van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., Stam, D. (2010). Transformational

and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological

empowerment. Journal of Organization Behavior, 31(4), 609-623.