Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-lrf7s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-28T02:35:30.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Creativity in Business and Technology

Educational Technologies

from Part IV - Creativity in Business

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2017

By
Kylie Peppler
Edited by
James C. Kaufman ,
Vlad P. Glăveanu  and
John Baer
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Vlad P. Glăveanu
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Bergen, Norway
John Baer
Affiliation:
Rider University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

Abstract

Ever since the introduction of desktop computers in schools, the degree to which technology constrains or enables students’ creativity has been explored in a number of guises and continues to color our understanding of the current trends in education. Because a central objective of educational technology is to redesign our tools and environments to enable new forms of teaching that make learning more efficacious, educational technologies offer new ways to think about and to measure creativity, teach creative thinking, and deepen creative expression. This chapter offers a broad survey of creativity research within this domain, presenting the definitions and constructs that are most important to the conceptualization of creativity with educational technologies and suggesting future considerations for the study of creativity in this area.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity across Domains , pp. 381 - 402
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albors-Garrigos, J., & Carrasco, J. C. R. (2011). New learning paradigms: Open course versus traditional strategies. the current paradox of learning and developing creative ideas. In White, B., King, I., & Tsang, P. (Eds.), Social media tools and platforms in learning environments (pp. 53–79). Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-20392-3_4Google Scholar
Allen, B., Caple, H., Coleman, K., & Nguyen, T. (2012). Creativity in practice: Social media in higher education. Future challenges, sustainable futures. In Proceedings ascilite Wellington, 15–20.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013.Google Scholar
Aragon, C. R., Poon, S. S., Monroy-Hernández, A., & Aragon, D. (2009). A tale of two online communities: Fostering collaboration and creativity in scientists and children. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM conference on Creativity and cognition (pp. 9–18). ACM.Google Scholar
Baumer, E. P. S., Tomlinson, B., Richland, L. E., & Hansen, J. (2009). Fostering metaphorical creativity using computational metaphor identification. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 315–324). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017 from http://doi.org/10.1145/1640233.1640280Google Scholar
Benjamin, W., Chandrasegaran, S., Ramanujan, D., Elmqvist, N., Vishwanathan, S., & Ramani, K. (2014). Juxtapoze: Supporting serendipity and creative expression in clipart compositions. In the Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 26–May 1, Toronto, Canada. pp. 341–350.Google Scholar
Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: myths and mechanisms. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Burnap, A., Ren, Y., Papalambros, P. Y., Gonzalez, R., & Gerth, R. (2013, August). A simulation based estimation of crowd ability and its influence on crowdsourced evaluation of design concepts. In ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (pp. V03BT03A004–V03BT03A004). American Society of Mechanical Engineers.Google Scholar
Burningham, C., & West, M. A. (1995). Individual, climate and group interaction processes as predictors of work team innovation. Small Group Research, 26, 106–118. doi:10.1177/1046496495261006Google Scholar
Charles, E. S. & Shumar, W. (2007). Creativity, collaboration and competence: agency in online synchronous chat environment. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 118–126). New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1599600.1599621Google Scholar
Clements, D. H. (1986). Effects of Logo and CAI environments on cognition and creativity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 309.Google Scholar
Clements, D. H. (1991). Enhancement of creativity in computer environments. American Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 173–187. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.2307/1162883Google Scholar
Clements, D. H. (1995). Teaching creativity with computers. Educational Psychology Review, 7(2), 141–161.Google Scholar
Cordes, C. & Miller, E. (Eds.). (2000). Fool’s gold: A critical look at computers in childhood. College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper/Collins.Google Scholar
Dawson, S., Tan, J. P. L., & McWilliam, E. (2011). Measuring creative potential: Using social network analysis to monitor a learners’ creative capacity. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(6), 924–942. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.14742/ajet. 921Google Scholar
Donath, J. & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. bt technology Journal, 22(4), 71–82.Google Scholar
DiSalvo, C., Louw, M., Coupland, J., & Steiner, M. (2009). Local issues, local uses: Tools for robotics and sensing in community contexts. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 245–254). New York, NY, USA: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/1640233.1640271.Google Scholar
Duverger, P., & Steffes, E. M. (2012). The reliability of crowdsource grading in a creative marketing project context. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 20(2), 39Google Scholar
Emirbayer, M. and Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. M., & Amabile, T. (2009). Creativity, improvisation and organizations. In The Routledge companion to creativity, 13–24. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hennessey, B. A. (1989). The effects of extrinsic constraints on children’s creativity while using a computer. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 151–168.Google Scholar
Hill, W., Stead, L., Rosenstein, M., & Furnas, G. (1995, May). Recommending and evaluating choices in a virtual community of use. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 194–201). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://www.sigchi.org/chi95/proceedings/papers/wch_bdy.htmGoogle Scholar
Hocevar, D. (1981). Measurement of creativity: Review and critique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 450–464.Google Scholar
Horton, J., & Ryba, K. (1986). Assessing learning with Logo: A pilot study. Computing Teacher, 14(1), 24–28.Google Scholar
Ito, M., Horikoshi, M., & Kodama, M. (2009) A cross-sectional survey of age and sense of authenticity among Japanese. Psychological Reports, 105, 575–581.Google Scholar
Jahnke, I. (2011). How to foster creativity in technology enhanced learning? In Social media tools and platforms in learning environments (pp. 95–116). Heildelberg, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Jain, A., Lupfer, N., Qu, Y., Linder, R., Kerne, A., & Smith, S. M. (2015). Evaluating TweetBubble with ideation metrics of exploratory browsing. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 53–62). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
Kafai, Y. & Peppler, K. (2011). Youth, technology, and DIY: Developing participatory competencies in creative media production. In Gadsden, V. L., Wortham, S., and Lukose, R. (Eds.), Youth cultures, language and literacy. Review of Research in Education, 35(1), pp. 89–119.Google Scholar
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. doi:10.1080/ 10400410802059929Google Scholar
Kerne, A., Webb, A. M., Smith, S. M., Linder, R., Lupfer, N., Qu, Y., Moeller, J., Damaraju, S. (2014). Using metrics of curation to evaluate information-based ideation, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (ToCHI), 21(3).Google Scholar
Kittur, A. (2010). Crowdsourcing, collaboration and creativity. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students, 17(2), 22–26. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://xrds.acm.org/article.cfm?aid=1869096Google Scholar
Lai, C. L. & Hwang, G. J. (2014). Effects of mobile learning time on students’ conception of collaboration, communication, complex problem–solving, meta–cognitive awareness and creativity. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organization, 8(3/4), 276–291.Google Scholar
Lewis, T. (2009). Creativity in technology education: Providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(3), 255–268.Google Scholar
Lin, C. F., Yeh, Y. C., Hung, Y. H., & Chang, R. I. (2013). Data mining for providing a personalized learning path in creativity: An application of decision trees. Computers & Education, 68, 199–210.Google Scholar
Linder, R., Lupfer, N., Kerne, A., Webb, A. M., Hill, C., Qu, Y., & Kellogg, E. (2015). Beyond slideware: How a free-form presentation medium stimulates free-form thinking in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 285–294). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2757251Google Scholar
Loveless, A. (2002). Literature review in creativity, new technologies and learning. A NESTA Futurelab Research report - report 4. 2002. Retrieved on April 18, 2017. from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190439/documentGoogle Scholar
Michael, K. Y. (2001). The effect of a computer simulation activity versus a hands-on activity on product creativity in technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 13(1), 31–43.Google Scholar
Miller, K. (2009) Schizophrenic performance: Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and virtual virtuosity. Journal of the Society for American Music, 4, 395–429.Google Scholar
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.Google Scholar
Mishra, P. & Henriksen, D. (2013). A new approach to defining and measuring creativity: Rethinking technology & creativity in the 21st century. TechTrends, 57(5), 10.Google Scholar
Moss, J. (1966). Measuring creative abilities in junior high school industrial arts. Washington, DC: American Council on Industrial Arts Teacher Education.Google Scholar
Ohler, J. B. (2013). Digital storytelling in the classroom: New media pathways to literacy, learning, and creativity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Peppler, K. (2014). New creativity paradigms: Arts learning in the digital age. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Peppler, K., Downton, M., Lindsay, E., & Hay, K. (2011). The nirvana effect: Tapping video games to mediate music learning and interest. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(1), 41–59.Google Scholar
Peppler, K., Fields, D., Kafai, Y., & Glosson, D. (2011). Articulating creativity in a new domain: Expert insights from the field of e-textiles. Published in the ACM Cognition & Creativity Conference Proceedings. ACM: Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Peppler, K., & Solomou, M. (2011). Building creativity: Collaborative learning and creativity in social media environments. On the Horizon, 19(1), 13–23.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., Holden, J., & Neustadter, D. (2008). The criterion problem and creativity in film: Psychometric characteristics of various measures. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2, 190–196. doi: 10.1037/a0012839Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., Kaufman, J. C., Temple, J. S., & Qian, M. (2009). Do experts and novices evaluate movies the same way? Psychology & Marketing, 26, 470–478. doi:10.1002/mar.20283Google Scholar
Rasula, J. (2009). From corset to podcast: The question of poetry now. American Literary History, 21, 660–673.Google Scholar
Resnick, M., Ocko, S., & Papert, S. (1988). LEGO, Logo, and design. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 14–18.Google Scholar
Resnick, M. & Rosenbaum, E. (2013). Designing for tinkerability. In Honey, M. & Kanter, D. (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators (pp. 163–181). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Resnick, M. & Siegel, D. (2015). A different approach to coding: How kids are making and remaking themselves from Scratch. Bright. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from https://medium.com/bright/a-different-approach-to-coding-d679b06d83a#.uzibrebuuGoogle Scholar
Richey, D., and Kratzert, M. (2006). “I Too Dislike It”: The Evolving Presence of Poetry on the Internet. Evolving Internet Reference Resources, 41. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Riedl, C., Blohm, I., Leimeister, J. M., & Krcmar, H. (2013). The effect of rating scales on decision quality and user attitudes in online innovation communities. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(3), 7–36.Google Scholar
Rosen, D., Schmidt, E. M., & Kim, Y. E. (2013). Utilizing music technology as a model for creativity development in K-12 education. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition (pp. 341–344). New York, NY, USA: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/2466627.2466670Google Scholar
Salgian, A., Nakra, T. M., Ault, C., & Wang, Y. (2013). Teaching creativity in computer science. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 123–128). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/2445196.2445238Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Student communities for the advancement of knowledge. Communications of the ACM, 39(4), 36–37.Google Scholar
Sefton-Green, J. & Sinker, R. (2005). Evaluating creativity: Making and learning by young people. Routledge.Google Scholar
Shneiderman, B. (2000). Creating creativity: User interfaces for supporting innovation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interactions, 7(1), 114–138.Google Scholar
Shoshani, Y., & Hazi, R. B. (2007). The use of the internet environment for enhancing creativity. Educational Media International, 44(1), 17–32.Google Scholar
Smith, B. K. (2006). Design and computational flexibility. Digital Creativity, 17(2), 65–72.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). WICS: A theory of wisdom, intelligence, and creativity, synthesized. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swan, L., Tanase, D., & Taylor, A. S. (2010). Design’s processional character. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 65–74). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/1858171.1858186Google Scholar
Thang, B., Sluis-Thiescheffer, W., Bekker, T., Eggen, B., Vermeeren, A., & de Ridder, H. (2008). Comparing the creativity of children’s design solutions based on expert assessment. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 266–273). New York: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/1463689.1463765Google Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1972). Predictive validity of the Torrance tests of creative thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(4), 236–252.Google Scholar
Weld, D. S., Adar, E., Chilton, L., Hoffmann, R., Horvitz, E., Koch, M., & Mausam, M. (2012). Personalized online education – a crowdsourcing challenge. In Workshops at the Twenty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1–31). Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~weld/papers/weld-hcomp12.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wiburg, K. M. (1987). The effect of different computer-based learning environments on fourth grade students’ cognitive abilities (Educat.D.). United States International University, United States – California. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://search.proquest.com/docview/303495976/abstractGoogle Scholar
Yang, H L. & Cheng, H H. (2010). Creativity of student information system projects: From the perspective of network embeddedness. Computers & Education, 54(1), 209–221. Retrieved on April 18, 2017 from http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.004.Google Scholar
Zervos, K. (2007). The virtualization of poetry and self. epoetry.paragraphe.info, 1–16.Google Scholar
Zhao, Z., Badam, S. K., Chandrasegaran, S., Park, D. G., Elmqvist, N., Kisselburgh, L., & Ramani, K. (2014). skWiki: A multimedia sketching system for collaborative creativity. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 26–May 1, Toronto, Canada. pp. 1235–1244.Google Scholar
Zheng, S., Bromage, A., Adam, M., & Scrivener, S. A. (2007). Surprising creativity: A cognitive framework for interactive exhibits designed for children. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition (pp. 17–26). New York, NY: ACM. Retrieved on April 18, 2017, from http://doi.org/10.1145/1254960.1254964Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×