Jonathan A. Plucker

Why Isn't Creativity More Important to Educational Psychologists? Potentials, Pitfalls, and Future Directions in Creativity Research

The construct of creativity has a great deal to offer educational psychology. Creativity appears to be an important component of problem-solving and other cognitive abilities, healthy social and emotional well-being, and scholastic and adult success. Yet the study of creativity is not nearly as robust as one would expect, due in part to the preponderance of myths and stereotypes about creativity that collectively strangle most research efforts in this area. The root cause of these stereotypes is the lack of adequate precision in the definition of creativity. The body of the article is devoted to specific suggestions for conceptualizing and defining creativity to maximize its potential contributions to educational psychology.

Handbook of Creativity: Psychometric Approaches to the Study of Human Creativity

The study of human creativity, although historically extensive, is in the midst of a second golden age as the century comes to a close. Authors and researchers from a variety of backgrounds publish hundreds of articles and books on creativity every year, conferences that cross disciplines frequently include sessions on creativity, and programs for increasing the creative productivity of young people and adults are introduced on a regular basis. And while several distinct approaches are used to examine creative phenomenon, a majority of work dealing with creativity relies on psychometric methods - the direct measurement of creativity and/or its perceived correlates in individuals. Indeed, practically all current work on creativity is based upon methodologies that either are psychometric in nature or were developed in response to perceived weaknesses of creativity measurement. As such, the psychometric studies of creativity conducted in the past few decades form the foundation of current understandings of creativity. Yet the psychometric approach is significantly more complex and comprehensive than its critics (and many of its proponents) would have us believe, and alternatives to the psychometric approach are wrought with many of the same difficulties posed during the direct measurement of creativity. A thorough review of psychometric techniques for the study of creativity benefits both those individuals attempting to measure creativity and those individuals studying creativity via other techniques.

Smart People or Smart Contexts? Cognition, Ability, and Talent Development in an Age of Situated Approaches to Knowing and Learning

Intelligence, expertise, ability and talent, as these terms have traditionally been used in education and psychology, are socially agreed upon labels that minimize the dynamic, evolving, and contextual nature of individual-environment relations. These hypothesized constructs can instead be described as functional relations distributed across whole persons and particular contexts through which individuals appear knowledgeably skillful. The purpose of this article is to support a concept of ability and talent development that is theoretically grounded in 5 distinct, yet interrelated, notions: ecological psychology, situated cognition, distributed cognition, activity theory, and legitimate peripheral participation. Although talent may be reserved by some to describe individuals possessing exceptional ability and ability may be described as an internal trait, in our description neither ability nor talent are possessed. Instead, they are treated as equivalent terms that can be used to describe functional transactions that are situated across person-in-situation. Further, and more important, by arguing that ability is part of the individual-environment transaction, we take the potential to appear talented out of the hands (or heads) of the few and instead treat it as an opportunity that is available to all although it may be actualized more frequently by some.

Replications in Psychology Research: How Often Do They Really Occur?

Recent controversies in psychology have spurred conversations about the nature and quality of psychological research. One topic receiving substantial attention is the role of replication in psychological science. Using the complete publication history of the 100 psychology journals with the highest 5-year impact factors, the current article provides an overview of replications in psychological research since 1900. This investigation revealed that roughly 1.6% of all psychology publications used the term replication in text. A more thorough analysis of 500 randomly selected articles revealed that only 68% of articles using the term replication were actual replications, resulting in an overall replication rate of 1.07%. Contrary to previous findings in other fields, this study found that the majority of replications in psychology journals reported similar findings to their original studies (i.e., they were successful replications). However, replications were significantly less likely to be successful when there was no overlap in authorship between the original and replicating articles. Moreover, despite numerous systemic biases, the rate at which replications are being published has increased in recent decades.

Facts Are More Important Than Novelty Replication in the Education Sciences

Despite increased attention to methodological rigor in education research, the field has focused heavily on experimental design and not on the merit of replicating important results. The present study analyzed the complete publication history of the current top 100 education journals ranked by 5-year impact factor and found that only 0.13% of education articles were replications. Contrary to previous findings in medicine, but similar to psychology, the majority of education replications successfully replicated the original studies. However, replications were significantly less likely to be successful when there was no overlap in authorship between the original and replicating articles. The results emphasize the importance of third-party, direct replications in helping education research improve its ability to shape education policy and practice.

Development and Psychometric Integrity of a Measure of Ideational Behavior

Although creativity is an important part of cognitive, social, and emotional activity, high-quality creativity assessments are lacking. This article describes the rationale for and development of a measure of creative ideation. The scale is based on the belief that ideas can be treated as the products of original, divergent, and creative thinking-a claim J. P. Guilford (1967) made years ago. Guilford himself assessed ideation with tests of divergent thinking, although through the years scores from these tests have only moderate predictive validity. This may be because previous research has relied on inappropriate criteria. For this reason, the Runco Ideational Behavior Scale (RIBS) was developed. It can be used as a criterion of creative ideation. Most items describe actual behaviors (i.e., overt actions and activities) that clearly reflect an individuals use of, appreciation of, and skill with ideas. Results obtained using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis are reported in this article. These suggest the presence of 1 or 2 latent factors within the scale. Based on the theoretical underpinnings of the scale, a 1-factor solution was judged to be more interpretable than a 2-factor solution. Analyses also supported the discriminant validity of the RIBS.

The Death of Creativity Measurement Has Been Greatly Exaggerated: Current Issues, Recent Advances, and Future Directions in Creativity Assessment.

Current work on creativity is based on methodologies which either are psychometric in nature or were developed in response to perceived weaknesses of creativity measurement. However, psychometric perspectives on creativity are still a vibrant and vital area of study. Considerable evidence of validity (or lack thereof) has been gathered for a diverse set of instruments and assessment techniques, and the resulting improvement in measurement quality has opened the door to several exciting areas of research. We review some of the current issues, describe recent advances, and suggest future directions for psychometric approaches to creativity research.

We Recruit Them, But Then What? The Educational and Psychological Experiences of Academically Talented Undergraduates

As universities actively compete for the best and brightest students, educators may wonder about the nature of these gifted students and what awaits them in college. Yet, research on the programs and opportunities provided for talented undergraduates at institutions of higher education is limited, leaving researchers to question what universities are doing for bright students. The purpose of this review is to examine recent research on academically talented undergraduates, both on the nature of the undergraduates themselves and the programs provided for them at public institutions of higher education. Areas in need of additional research are discussed.

The Relationship Between School Climate Conditions and Student Aspirations

Researchers frequently report that student aspirations are related to several educational outcomes, including academic performance, affective health, attrition, and leadership skills. Yet few have reported explorations of school climate characteristics that may or may not be related to aspirations. To provide more information on scholastic conditions that might be manipulated in order to increase student aspirations, the author administered the Secondary School Aspirations Survey to 1,170 students from two New England high schools. The results of a multivariate analysis of variance and post hoc discriminant analyses indicated that the students reporting high aspirations (i.e., inspiration and ambition) perceived a more supportive school climate than the students with low aspirations did, especially with respect to conditions related to mentoring, self-confidence, and excitement.

Wherefore Art Thou, Multiple Intelligences? Alternative Assessments for Identifying Talent in Ethnically Diverse and Low Income Students:

The recent popularity of Multiple Intelligences (MI) theory corresponds with current efforts to move away from the use of standardized measures of achievement and ability to more authentic assessment techniques, including portfolio and performance-based assessment. Gardner and his colleagues have strongly encouraged the application of MI theory to performance-based assessment. This study investigates the reliability and validity of a battery of instruments based on MI theory, including teacher checklists and performance-based assessment activities. The purpose in developing the instruments was the identification of talent in culturally diverse and/or low income kindergarten and first grade students. Results suggest acceptable evidence of reliability but raise questions about the validity of the assessments. This study has implications for both future research efforts and the application of MIbased, performance measures to the assessment and identification of talent.