摘要
个体取向的创造力研究者认为,个体的内在特质(如动机等)是创造力的动力来源;社会心理学取向的研究者认为,社会环境因素对个体创造性行为的产生起根本的驱动作用。心理学的研究认为,个体的创造性特质具有相对的稳定性,而激发创造性的环境因素则比较容易发生变化。所以探讨影响创造性的环境因素及其作用机制,有助于我们在现实生活中激发创造性的行为,提高个体的创造性水平。教师是学校的一员,他们所感受到的学校组织创新气氛与其自身特质一样都会影响到其创造力的发挥,那么,作为外部环境因素的组织创新气氛以及作为个体特质的创造动机是如何影响创造力的,它们共同发挥作用的机制又是什么,这就是本研究要阐述的问题。
本研究系统梳理了国内外关于教师创造力影响机制的研究,同时对该领域已有研究存在的问题和不足进行了分析,进而提出了本研究要考察的问题。研究选取了1459名初中教师为被试,采用问卷调查法,利用方差分析、相关分析、结构方程模型和多层线性模型等统计方法考查了初中教师的创造力、创造动机以及学校组织创新气氛的特点以及三者之间的关系。
研究的主要结论如下:
1教师创造力的五个维度得分总体差异显著,其中教师利用资讯科技进行教学的能力表现最差,灵活教学能力表现最高。方差分析结果发现,在教师创造力各维度及总分上均存在学校类型差异,县办中学均明显高于乡镇中学,差异显著;在前瞻能力、知识创新能力、灵活教学能力、多元评价能力等维度以及教师创造力总分上,山东地区的教师比河北的教师创新教学能力高,差异显著。在灵活教学和知识创新维度上,教龄长的教师得分明显高于教龄短的教师,差异显著。在知识创新、资讯科技、灵活教学等维度上,本科学历的教师得分明显高于大专学历的教师,差异显著。
2学校组织创新气氛整体水平中等偏上,其中教师感知到的团队运作和组织领导行为最为强烈。方差分析发现,学校类型和学校所在地区存在交互作用,在镇办中学中,山东的学校与河北的学校没有显著差异,在县办和城市中学中,山东学校均高于河北的学校。此外,教师对创新气氛的感知并不受其教龄、学历等影响,其差异主要体现在任教于不同年级的教师身上,毕业班教师所感知到的创新气氛明显低于低年级教师。
3内部动机的寻求挑战开放维度得分明显高于奔涌体验得分,差异显著。外部动机中他人认同和他人回馈维度得分明显高于报酬和控制竞争维度得分,差异显著。教师创造内部动机各维度得分在学校类型、地区、教龄上均存在显著差异,县办中学高于镇办中学,山东高于河北,教龄长的教师高于教龄短的教师。外部动机的方差分析发现,男性比女性更喜欢竞争,经济较好地区的教师更喜为其创造提供更高的报酬。
4从个体知觉层面来看,教师内部创造动机在学校组织创新气氛和教师创造力的关系中起完全中介作用;教师创造增益性外部动机在二者关系中起部分中介作用;非增益性外部动机不利于创造力的发挥,所以不起中介作用。增益性外部动机可以转换为内部动机而促进创造力的发挥,而非增益性外部动机削弱内部动机而不利于创造力的发挥。
5从学校层面来看,内部动机正向预测了教师创造力,而非增益性外部动机负向预测了教师灵活教学能力。整体的学校组织创新气氛能够增强内部动机与教师创造力之间的关系。
The creativity researchers of individual orientation believe that the inherent characteristics of the individual (as motivation) are the power sources of creativity. Social psychology researchers believe that the social environmental factors are the fundamental driver on the selection of individual creative activity. Psychological studies have suggested that the creative characteristic of the individual is of relative stability, but the environmental factors to inspire creativity are more prone to change. So discussing the influence of environmental factors on creativity and the mechanism of it will help us inspire creativity in real life, raising the level of individual creativity. For teachers, the creative organizational climate of school will affect the exertion of their creativity as well as their individual characteristics. So how does the creative organizational climate of school and the creative motivation play on creativity? The mechanism of it will be discussed in this thesis.
First, the studies about the impact mechanism on teachers’creativity were discussed and the existing problems and deficiencies in this field were analyzed. Then the thesis presented the issues that would be checked. 1459 junior high school teachers had been selected to do the questionnaire survey. The main methods used in this research were ANOVA, HLM, correlation analysis and SEM. In this thesis, the relations among the teachers’creativity, teachers’creative motivation and the creative organizational climate of school would be discussed.
The main conclusions are as follows:
1 The five dimensions of teachers’creativity were significantly different. Research showed that junior high school teachers’ability to use the information technology was worst, while the ability of flexible teaching performed highest. The analysis of variance results showed that teachers in different kinds of schools performed different creativity. The teachers in country had lower creativity. In the dimensions of the forward-looking ability, knowledge innovative capability, flexible teaching ability, and multiple evaluation ability, teachers in Shandong performed better than teachers in Hebei. The teachers who had taught long scored higher on flexible teaching abilities and knowledge innovative capability than others. In the knowledge innovation, information technology, flexible learning, and other dimensions, college-level education teachers scored significantly higher than tertiary level education teachers, and the difference was significant.
2 Research showed that overall the school creative organizational climate was of middle-level, in which the team operation and the action of leadership were perceived most strongly by teachers. Through analysis of variance, the school creative organizational climate was affected greatly by regions. The backward region had significantly lower creative organizational climate. In addition, the years of teaching and the education didn’t affect the perception of teachers on the school creative organizational climate. While the differences were mainly embodied in different grades of teachers. The perception of senior grade teachers was significantly lower than low grade teachers.
3 Teachers particularly preferred seeking challenges. And the teachers who had rich and skilled teaching experience were more inclined to seek new challenges. The findings of extrinsic motivation revealed that teachers preferred to seek recognition and feedback from others, disliked competition or as a reward to measure their creative activities. In addition, analysis of variance found that men liked to compete than women and the teachers from rich areas asked for higher pay than poor areas.
4 At the level of individual, teachers’intrinsic motivation had complete mediator effect between the school creative organizational climate and teachers’creativity. Teachers’synergic extrinsic motivation had partly mediator effect between the school creative organizational climate and teachers’creativity. But the non-synergic extrinsic motivation was bad for the performance of creativity, so it didn’t have the mediator effect. Teachers’synergic extrinsic motivation could change into intrinsic motivation and accelerate the exertion of creativity, while the non-synergic extrinsic motivation would weaken intrinsic motivation and block the exertion of creativity.
5 At the school level, internal motivation positively predicted teachers’creativity. But the non-synergic extrinsic motivation negatively predicted the teachers’flexible teaching ability. The overall school creative organizational climate enhanced the relationship between the intrinsic motivation and the teachers’creativity.
引文
[1]张剑,郭德俊.个体创造性行为的动力来源探讨[J].心理与行为研究,2004,2(1):378~382
[2]俞国良.创造力心理学[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社.1998
[3] 林珈夙.校长领导风格、教师创意生活经验、教学创新行为与学校效能之关系[D].国立政治大学教育研究所硕士论文,1997
[4]林进材.对教师有效教学的建议[J].师友,1998,378,27~30
[5]张振成.创造思考教学的原则与策略[J].菁莪季刊,2001,12(4),66~69
[6]吴清山.创意教学的重要理念与实施策略[J].台湾教育,2002,614,2~8
[7]林伟文.国民中小学学校组织文化、教师创意教学潜能与创意教学之关系[D].国立政治大学教育研究所博士论文,2002
[8]王秋锰.台北市高级职业学校教师信息科技融入教学创新行为与影响因素之研究[D].国立台北科技大学技术及职业教育研究所硕士论文,2004
[9] 曾望超.国小教师创意教学与学生后设认知能力、创造力及问题解决能力之相关研究[D].国立高雄师范大学教育研究所硕士论文,2004
[10]Ritchhart, R. Creative teaching in the shadow of the standards[J].Independent School,2004, 63(2), 32~40.
[11]吴雪华.台北市国民小学教师创新教学能力与教学效能关系之研究[D].台北市立教育大学国民教育研究所硕士论文,2005
[12] 林崇德.教育为的是学生发展.北京师范大学出版社[M],2006:263~264
[13] Harrington D. M. The ecology of human creativity: a psychological perspective [M]. Theories of creativity. Edited by Runco M.A, Albert R. 1990
[14]Sternberg R.J, Kubart T. I. An investment theory of creativity and its development [J]. Human Development, 1991, 34: 1~32
[15]Sternberg R. J, O’Hara L. A, Lubart T. I. Creativity as investment. California Management Review, 1997, 40: 8~32
[16]Csikszentmihalyi M. Implications of systems perspective for the study of creativity [M]. Handbook of Creativity. Temberg, Roobert J, (Ed).1999
[17] Amabile T. M. Creativity in Context. Boulder, Co: Westview, 1996
[18]陈威豪.创造与创新气氛主要测量工具述评[J].中国软科学,2006,7:86~95
[19]傅世侠,罗玲玲.建构科技团体创造力评估模型[M ].北京大学出版社, 2005, 49~50
[20]Tesluk, P. E. , Farr, J. L. , & Klein, S. R. Influences of organizational culture and climate on individual creativity[ J ]. Journal of creative Behavior, 1997, 31: 27~41.
[21] Kanter, R.& Ackerman, P. L. Motivation and cognitive-abilities—An integrative aptitude treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1989,74,657~690
[22]陈晓.组织创新气氛影响员工创造力的过程模型研究[D].浙江大学硕士论文,2006
[23] Amabile, Conti & Coon,H.L.J.,et al. Assessing the work environment for creativity[J]. Academy of Management Journal. 1996
[24]黄振球.学校管理与绩效[M],台北:十大书院,1996:154
[25] Wayne k. Hoy & Cecil G Miskel.Educational Administration Theory, Research and Practice, 1996,140
[26] 曹艳琼.澳门小学学校组织气氛与教师工作满意度之研究,华南师范大学硕士论文,2002
[27] Hoy, Wayne K. Clover, Sharon I R. Elementary school climate: a revision of the OCDQ[J]. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1986, 22 (1): 93~110.
[28]马云献.高校组织气氛及其与教师工作绩效的关系研究[D].河南大学研究生硕士学位论文,2005
[29]Amabile, T. M. & Gryskiewicz, N. D. The creative environment scales: Work environment inventory [J]. Creativity Resarch Journal, 1989, 2: 231~252
[30]蔡宜贞,林珊如.学校组织创新氛围与教师工作动机之相关研究[A].政治大学创新与创造力研究中心主办第三届创新与创造力研讨会,台北,2006.1
[31]蔡启通. 组织因素、组织成员整体创造性与组织创新之关系[D]. 台湾大学商学研究所博士论文,1997
[32]吴静吉.创意发展组织因素量表之编制:以科技产业为例[J].应用心理研究,2002,15:225~247
[33]邱皓政.学校组织创新气氛的内涵与教师创造力实践:另一件国王的新衣[J]?应用心理研究,2002(15):191~224
[34]施建农译.创造力手册[M].北京理工大学出版社,2005:318, 9,253,248~251
[35]张剑.影响员工创造性绩效的组织情境因素及动机机制研究[D].首都师范大学博士学位论文,2003
[36]Torrance E. P. Creative Motivation Scale[M]. Athens, G. A. Georgia Studies of Creative Behavior, 1958
[37] Amabile T. M. The Social Psychology of Creativity [M]. New York: Spinger-Verlag, 1983: 106~182
[38]张文新,谷传华.创造力发展心理学.安徽教育出版社[M],2004,11:235~250
[39] 杨智先.教师工作动机、选择压力、社会互动与创造力之关系[D].台湾政治大学教育研究所硕士论文,2000
[40]陈秀娟译.生命的心流[M].台北:天下,1998
[41] Amabile、Conti & Coon,H.L.J.,et al. Assessing the work environment for creativity[J]. Academy of Management Journal. 1996, 39(5): 1154~1184
[42] Bharadwaj S, Menon A. Making innovation happen in organizations: individual creativity mechanisms, organization creativity mechanisms or both[J]? Journal of Production Innovation Management, 2000, 17: 424~434
[43] Scott, S. G & Bruce, R.A. Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual innovation in the workplace [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1994, 37(3):580~607
[44] 尹启铭. 产品创新自由度、企业策略与技术政策之关系-台湾信息电子业实证研究[D]. 政治大学企业管理研究所博士论文, 1989
[45] 蔡明宏,刘晓雯. 创造力工作环境特质与信息科技特征对组织创新之影响-本国数字文化产业之实证分析[G]. 第七届产业管理研讨会论文集, 1998. 133~167
[46] 张鸿文. 高科技研究机构工作群体环境与创新关系之研究[D]. 政治大学企业管理研究所硕士论文, 1986
[47] 李信萤. 个人创造力、组织创新气候与创新绩效相关之研究[D]. 台湾中央大学企业管理研究所硕士论文, 2002
[48]郑英耀、王文中.影响科学竞赛绩优教师创意行为之因素[J].应用心理研究,15:163~187
[49]郭德俊,黄敏儿,马庆霞.科技人员创造动机与创造力的研究[J].应用心理学,2000,6(2):8~13
[50] 林碧芳.中小学教师创意教学自我效能感与创意教学行为的结构方程模式之检验[D].东海大学教育研究所 2004 年硕士论文.
[51] 林伟文、詹志禹、吴静吉.学校创意组织文化量表编制[A].论文发表于政治大学创新与创造力研究中心主办之 2004 年第二届创新与创造力研讨会,台北.
[52]Ekvall, G., & Ryhammar, L. The creative climate: Its determinants and effects at a Swedish university [J]. Creativity Research Journal, 1999, 12(4), 303~310
[53]Sternberg, R.J., & Lubart, T.I. Defing the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity [M]. NY: Press, 1995
[54] Shin, S. & Zhou, J. Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: Evidence from Korea [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2003,46: 703~714
[55] George, J. M. & Zhou, J. When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001, 86: 513~524
[56] Aiello, J. R., Risi, D. T., Epstein, Y. M. & Karlin, R. A. Crowding and the role of interpersonal distance preference [J]. Sociometry, 1977: 271~282
[57] Amabile, T. M., Mueller, J.S. & Simpson, W. B., et al. Time pressures and creativity in organizations: A longitudinal field study [M]. HBS Working Paper, 2003:02~073
[58] 刘翠翠.小学教师创造力培养观、教学监控能力与创造性教学行为的关系[D].山东师范大学硕士论文,2007
[59] 郭伯良.班级气氛对农村儿童社会行为及其与社会适应关系[D].香港中文大学,2004.
[60] James, L. R. & Brett, J. M, Mediators, moderators and tests for mediation[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984, 69 (2):307~321
[61]温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰,刘红云.中介效应检验程序及其应用[J].心理学报,2004,36(5):614~620
[62]Csikszentmihalyi, M. Motivation and creativity: Towards a synthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition [J]. New Ideas in Psychology, 1988, 6: 159~176
[63]洪素蘋.重要他人回馈、创意自我效能、内外部动机对创意行为的影响:社会认知理论为基础的结构方程模式检验[D].国立交通大学教育研究所硕士学位论文,2004
[64]薛贵,董奇,周龙飞,张华,陈传生.内部动机、外部动机与创造力的关系研究[J].心理发展与教育,2001,1:6~11
[65] 周军红.学校组织气氛与教师工作满意度的相关性,煤炭高等教育[J],1997,(4):108~109
[66] Fiedler, F. E. &R. J. House. Leadership theory and research: A report of progress. In C. L. Cooper & L. Roberston (Eds) [M], International review of industrial and organization psychology. London: Wiley.1998:73~92