[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Registration::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
Registered in

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

..
Open Access Policy
..
:: Volume 11, Issue 1 (2019) ::
RME 2019, 11(1): 50-61 Back to browse issues page
Comparison the Effectiveness of Direct and Indirect Instruction on Learners’ Creativity
H Hosseinimehr , GH Entesarfoomani , M Hejazi * , H Asadzadeh-Dahraei
Department of Psychology, Islamic AzadUniversity, Zanjan Branch,Zanjan,Iran , masod1357@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (3859 Views)
Introduction: learners’ creativity in this era has attracted researchers and educational planners’ attention to study about this subject and in this regards, educational plans can be designed in a way that provide an appropriate basis to increase Learners’ creativity. The present study with the aim of comparing the effectiveness of direct and indirect instruction on enhancing Learners’ creativity has been conducted.
Methods: This research was an extension of the whole pretest-posttest multi-group test with control group.The population included male Learners at 10th grade of experimental secondary school of Rasht city during 2017 to 2018. 400 students were selected through multi- phasic random cluster sampling method. For screening subjects with low creativity, Abedi’s creativity questionnaire was used.Finally 60 Learners with weak creativity randomly were divided into two groups containing 40 subjects (experimental group) and 20 subjects (control group). To analyze data SPSS was used and the results were reported in terms of descriptive statistical methods and covariance analysis.   
Findings: The results showed that the mean scores in direct instruction increased from (61.60) to (67.30) and indirect from (43.30) to (64.90), and there were a significant difference, but the mean scores of the control group in pre-test was (55.85) and in post-test was reduced to (52.25). In analyzing data covariance, direct and indirect instruction with effect size of (0.92) significantly increased Learners’ creativity in the experimental group in comparison of the control group (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Considering that, direct and indirect instructional methods have positive effect on creativity So that they enhance learners’ creativity thus using these methods are recommended to educational centers
Keywords: Instruction, Creativity, lecturing, Problem Solving
Full-Text [PDF 594 kb]   (1220 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Applicable | Subject: Educational psychology
References
1. Nobahar F. [Comparison of the effect of two methods of teaching group discussion and problem solving On the amount of learning and teaching lessons Social education of female students of fifth grade city of Esfarayen Unpublished].[dissertation]. Tehran: Allameh Tabataba'i University; 2012. [Persian]
2. Khoshnagsh N. [Investigating the relationship between creativity and self-regulation and academic Performance of university students Birjand. Unpublished].[dissertation]. Birjand: Birjand University; 2012. [Persian]
3. Tabatabaee Z, Ojinejad AR, Qaltash A. [The Relationship between Social Intelligence with Entrepreneurship Skills and Creativity among Technical High School Students in Shiraz]. Journal Management System 2015; 6 (21): 85-102. [Persian]
4. Bryant C. [Creativity and Technology]. Evaluative Art Education 2011; 63 (2): 43-8. [DOI:10.1080/00043125.2010.11519061]
5. Mahzounzadeh Bushehri F. [Relationship between problem solving skills and students' creativity with the role of mediation Academic Self-Efficacy: Structural Equilibrium Modeling]. Journal of Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2017; 6 (4): 27-50. [Persian]
6. Kathleen MG & Pamela JC. Research in communication education: Directional needs. Central States Speech Journal 2009 ; 32(4): 219-226. [DOI:10.1080/10510978109368100]
7. Doig B, Groves S, Machackova J. Lesson Study-Could it work for you?. Proceedings of the International Symposium Elementary Maths Teaching: The Development of Mathematical Understanding; 2009 Aug 23 - 28. Charles University Prague, Prague. Czech Republic; 2009.
8. Ghaziardakani R, Maleki H, Sadeghi A, Dortaj F. [Designing a inquiry-based curriculum pattern in curriculum elementary Social Studies to Grow Thinking and Creativity in Students]. Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2018; 7(3): 63-106. [Persian]
9. Scheiner CW, Baccarella CV, Bessant J, Voigt KI.Thinking patterns and guts feeling in Technology identification and evaluation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2015; 11 (7): 112-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2013.12.003]
10. Mango C. Aaaessing the relationship of scientific thinking, self-regulation in research, and creativity in a measurement model. The International Journal of Research and Review 2011; 6 (1): 17-47.
11. Regazzoni D, Russo D. Triz tools to enhance risk management. Procedia Engineering 2011; 9 (3): 40-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.03.099]
12. Shabani M, Maleki H, AbbasPour A, Sadipoor E. [Effectiveness of training based on creative problem solving on creative thinking among the employees of Kosar credit institute]. Journal of Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2016; 6 (4): 149-170. [Persian]
13. Nawaz Q, Hussain L, Abbas A, Javed M. Effect of cooperative learning on the academic and Self concept of the students at elementary school level. Gomal University Journal of Research 2014; 30 (2): 127-135.
14. Hajihoseinlou K, Khalegh Khah A, Zahed Bolbolan A, MoeniKia M. [The Effect of Cooperative Learning with Achievement Groups on Self-Efficacy and Self-Concept of Student's Mathematics]. Educational Psychology 2017; 13 (43): 117-137. [Persian]
15. Ranjdoost S, Eivazi P. [The relationship between emotional intelligence of teachers and High School Student's Creative Thinking]. Research in Curriculum Planning 2013; 10 (36): 113-125. [Persian]
16. Khan SA. [The effect of cooperactive learning on academic achievement of low achievers in English language in India]. Language in India 2012; 11 (3): 232-243.
17. Salibi J, Hassani F, Niusha B[ A Study on the Efficacy of a Combination of Critical Thinking and Critical Thinking on Self-Directed Learning among High-School Students in Qom]. Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2015; 4 (3): 55-75. [Persian]
18. Asadzadeh H. Theories and teaching methods. 2nd ed.Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University Press; 2017. [Persian]
19. Robertson G, Lang H. Instructional approaches: a framework for professional practice. Regina, SK: Saskatchewan Education;1991.
20. Moore C. Educational Theories (Effective instructional Strategies: from theory to practice). [Sadipour E, & Farhang M Trans]. 1st ed. Teheran: Didar; 2017.
21. Saif AA. [Modern Educational Psychology]. 7th ed. Tehran: Publishing Duran; 2018. [Persian]
22. Dorataj F, Korde Noghaei R.[Theories of Education].1st ed. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University; 2016. [Persian]
23. Afrasiabifar A, Najafi Doulatabad S, Mosavi A. [Comparing the effect of feedback lecture and conventional lecture on the students' learning and satisfaction to teach intensive nursing cares. JNE 2014; 3 (3) :69-78. [Persian]
24. Joyce B, Will M, Calhoun E. Teaching Patterns 2015. Translated Behrangi. 1st ed.Tehran: Kamale Tarbiat; 2015.
25. Fathi Azar E. Methods and teaching techniques. 3th ed. Tabriz: Tabriz University Press; 2012.
26. Taher M, Norouzi A, Taqhizadeh Remi F. [Efficacy of Problem-Solving Skill Training in the Treatment of Test Anxiety of students].jcmh 2015; 1 (1) :1-9. [Persian]
27. Lou SJ, Tsai HY, Tseng KH, Shih RC. [Effects of Implementing STEM-I Project-Based Learning Activities for Female High School Students]. International Journal of distance Education Technologies 2014; 12 (1): 52-73. [DOI:10.4018/ijdet.2014010104]
28. Demir BK, Tevfik I. [The effects of argumentation based science learning approach on crative thinking skills of students]. Educational Research Quartely 2015; 1 (49): 165-183.
29. Saatchi M, Kamkari K, Asgarian M. [Psychological tests].1st ed.Tehran: Virayesh; 2010. [Persian]
30. Torabi F, Saif D. [The role of thinking styles in predicting the dimensions of creativity in brilliant talented students Excellent]. Journal of Behavioral Sciences 2012; 6 (4): 349-376. [Persian]
31. Saif AA. [Measurement, Assessment and Educational Evaluation]. 7th ed. Tehran: Duran; 2016. [Persian]
32. Conway S, Medina M, Davis T, Webb R. The Impact of Problem-Solving Feedback on Team-Based Learning Case Responses.American journal of pharmaceutical education 2013;77(9):1-5.
33. Gouldfried MR, Davison GC.Clinical Behavioral Therapy [Ahmadi OloonAbadi A ,Trans]. 1992. 1st ed. Tehran: Nashre Daneshgahi; 1992.
34. Treffinger DJ, Selby EC, Isaksen SG. Understanding individual problem solving style: A key to learning and applying crative problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences 2008; 18 (4): 390-401. [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.007]
35. Bashlideh K. Research methods and statistical analysis of research examples with spss and Amos 2nd ed: Ahwaz. Shahid Chamran University; 2017. [Persian]
36. Kani U. [The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on the Creative Thinking and Critical Thinking Disposition of Students in Visual Arts Education]. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning 2018; 12 (1).
37. Tan R.Contradiction-oriented problem solving for innovations: five opportunities for China's Companies. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2015; 4 (3): 1-19. [DOI:10.1186/s13731-015-0017-5]
38. Bocksted TJ, Druehl C, Mishra A. Problem-Solving effort and success in innovation contests: The role of national wealth and national culture. Journal of Operations Management 2015; 36: 187-200. [DOI:10.1016/j.jom.2014.12.002]
39. Srikoon S, Bunterm T, Nethanomsak T, Tang KN. [Effect of 5P model on academic Achievement, creative thinking, and research characteristics]. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 39 (3): 488-495. [DOI:10.1016/j.kjss.2018.06.011]
40. Sdouh W.The effect of using the strategies if brainstorming and computer education in Academic Achievment and the development creative thinking skill of sixth Grade student's. European Scientific Journal 2013; 9(13)
41. Niu W, Sterenberg RJ. Societal and school influence on student creativity: The case of China. Psychology in schools 2003; 40 (1): 103-114. [DOI:10.1002/pits.10072]
42. Kazempour E. [The Effect of Combined Art Education in Math on Student's Learning and Creativity]. Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2016; 6 (1): 73-90. [Persian]
43. Van Plet A. Hey J. Using TRIZ and human-centered design for consumer product development. Procedia Engineering 2011; 9 (2): 688-693. [DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.03.156]
44. Haji Hajiyakhchali AR. [The Impact of Creative Problems Solving Learning (CPS) on Scientific Thinking, Creativity and Innovation in Students of Shahid Chamran University]. Unpublished [Dissertation]. Ahwaz: Shahid Chamran University; 2010. [Persian]
45. Hashemi SE, Shayan Amin S, Haji Hajiyakhchali A, Naami A.[The Impact of Learning the Problem Solving Process Creative on the creativity and innovation of the district's four gas transmission Operations staff ]. Innovantion and Creativity in Human Sciences 2017; 7 (2): 59-82. [Persian]
46. Sulaiman F. The Effectiveness of PBL Online on Physics Student's Creativity and Critical Thinking: A Case Study at University Malaysia. International Journal of Education and Research 2013; 1 (3): 1-8.
47. Abdolmaleki S, Ahmadi GA. [Studying the effect of problem solving model on student's Academic creativity and performance In Chemistry]. jsli 2013; 5 (1): 1-21. [Persian]
48. Hajrezayi B, Roshani alibinasi H, Shahalizade M, Zeynali M, Badali M. [Effectiveness of blended learning on critical thinking skills of nursing students]. JNE 2015; 4 (1) :49-59. [Persian]
Send email to the article author



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Hosseinimehr H, Entesarfoomani G, Hejazi M, Asadzadeh-Dahraei H. Comparison the Effectiveness of Direct and Indirect Instruction on Learners’ Creativity. RME 2019; 11 (1) :50-61
URL: http://rme.gums.ac.ir/article-1-733-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 11, Issue 1 (2019) Back to browse issues page
پژوهش در آموزش علوم پزشکی Research in Medical Education