Why Creativity Isn’t in IQ Tests, Why it Matters, and Why it Won’t Change Anytime Soon Probably

et al. 2020

J of Engineering Edu

Background Creativity is increasingly recognized as an important skill for success in the field of engineering, but most traditional, post‐secondary engineering education programs do not reward creative efforts. Failing to recognize creativity or creative efforts can have particularly negative effects for those students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), who may exhibit enhanced divergent thinking ability yet struggle in the traditional educational environment. Purpose/Hypothesis This study was conducted to investigate how ADHD characteristics, academic aptitude, and one important component of creativity (divergent thinking) contribute to academic performance in engineering programs and how traditional markers of academic performance and ADHD characteristics predict divergent thinking. Design/Method Undergraduate engineering students (n = 60) completed measures of ADHD symptoms and divergent thinking. Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and grade point average (GPA) were collected from university records, and hypotheses were tested using a series of multivariate regression models. Results Verbal SAT scores were the only positive predictor of overall GPA and engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics did not significantly predict overall GPA but negatively predicted engineering GPA. ADHD characteristics were the only positive predictor of divergent thinking ability. Conclusions ADHD characteristics negatively predict academic performance (i.e., GPA) in engineering programs but are more predictive of divergent thinking ability than traditional markers of academic performance.

Section: Implications For Engineering Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divergent thinking and academic performance of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder characteristics in engineering

Taylor

Zaghi

et al. 2020

J of Engineering Edu

“…The literature is lacking regarding the relationship between creativity and equity in schools and provides little beyond the call to action and suggestion for schools to include teaching about equity into their courses. There have been other calls for creativity to be infused with education because of assessment issues (i.e., creativity tests show remarkably fewer minority differences; Kaufman, 2010Kaufman, , 2015Luria, O'Brien, & Kaufman, 2016) The review of the literature also begins to provide a framework to describe equity and equitable thinking as a construct that is measureable and teachable-either as a of the broader construct of creativity or possibly as a stand-alone construct. The framework will not only inform educational practices and policies to improve equity in schools, but also serves to increase our understanding of both creativity and equity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the relationship between creativity and equitable thinking in schools

Luria

Psychology in the Schools

2017

This paper reviews the relationship between creativity and equitable thinking and the individual differences in personality, demographic, and experiential factors that influence both concepts as they affect each other. Given the nationwide push to increase equity in public schools, interventions beyond teaching about equity are becoming progressively more vital to school improvement. The work suggests that schools may be able to increase equitable thinking and, accordingly, community equity by employing creative thinking strategies in classrooms.

“…Relying solely on FSIQ, misinterpreting the meaning of FSIQ scores, or placing a disproportionate importance on the FSIQ has led to the minimization of other measures and aspects of giftedness and, more specifically, creativity. Such an absence is first found within the IQ tests themselves; even as tests have expanded to reflect broader conceptions of intelligence, they still overlook creativity . Such an omission is understandable; measures of intelligence and creativity have traditionally not been highly correlated …”

Section: Giftedness Creativity and Intelligencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such an absence is first found within the IQ tests themselves; even as tests have expanded to reflect broader conceptions of intelligence, they still overlook creativity. [15][16][17] Such an omission is understandable; measures of intelligence and creativity have traditionally not been highly correlated. [18][19][20] However, recent years have seen a rise in arguments that creativity and intelligence are not so conceptually distinct.…”

Section: Giftedness Creativity and Intelligencementioning

confidence: 99%

Creativity in gifted identification: increasing accuracy and diversity

Luria

O’Brien

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

2016

Many federal definitions and popular theories of giftedness specify creativity as a core component. Nevertheless, states rely primarily on measures of intelligence for giftedness identification. As minority and culturally diverse students continue to be underrepresented in gifted programs, it is reasonable to ask if increasing the prominence of creativity in gifted identification may help increase balance and equity. In this paper, we explore both layperson and psychometric conceptions of bias and suggest that adding creativity measures to the identification process alleviates both perceptions and the presence of bias. We recognize, however, the logistic and measurement-related challenges to including creativity assessments.