Forsyth, D. R. (2013). Group dynamics. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Main Library: HM 716F672010

[Abstract] Supporting creative collaboration in the classroom is considered an important objective by current education research, as growing evidence suggests that this practice is linked with the quality of learning and the development of problem solving skills. Drawing on recent advances in group creativity research, social cognition and network science, we propose a theoretical framework for studying creative collaboration that integrates the concepts of group flow and social presence. Our key hypothesis is that in order for a group to enter the creative state of flow, members must be able to develop a "we-intention", in which the actions of the individuals and those of the collective are merged (social presence). According to our model, this is a staged process, beginning with the co-construction of a shared frame within the group and culminating with the creation of a novel artifact or concept. A further assumption is that the emergence of such optimal group state is associated with structural changes in the dynamics of group interaction, which can be effectively investigated using social network analysis techniques.

Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461-494). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Main Library: BF 408 A47 1983

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Main Library: BF 411 A43 1996
URL: Amazon

Sanchez-Ruiz, M., Santos, M. R., Jimenez, J. J. (2013). The role of metaphorical thinking in the creativity of scientific discourse. Creativity Research Journal, 25(4), 361-368.

[Abstract] This article critically reviews the extant literature on scientific creativity and metaphorical  thinking. Metaphorical thinking is based on a conceptual transfer of relationships or mapping, from a well-known source domain to a poorly known target domain, which could result in creative outcomes in sciences. Creativity leads to products that are deemed to be novel and originals as well as useful and adaptive. After reviewing the concepts of metaphor and analogy and the types of metaphor identified in the literature, the relationships traditionally theorized between metaphors and creativity from different scientific disciplines were discussed, with special focus on the psychology of creativity. The empirical study of the links between creativity and metaphors can contribute to a better understanding of the scientific process. Promising lines for future research are advanced, such as the exploration of the relationship between the presence of certain types of metaphors in scientific theories and the level of creativity of such theories.

Theory verification is only a small aspect of scientific practice. Researchers and educators need to consider ways of engaging students that involve them in seeking to understand and explain natural phenomena. Science is the practice of trying to make sense of the world around us. 

Article Link: Click
[Abstract] 

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (pp. 213-242). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

1. writing strategies
    1) reflexivity and representations in writing
    qualitative researchers today acknowledge that the writing of a qualitative text cannot be separated from the author, how it is received by readers, and how it impacts the participants and sites under study. All writing is "positioned " and within a stance.  Writings are co-constructions, representations of interactive processes between researchers and researched. The silence is contradictory to qualitative research that seeks to hear all voices and perspectives. 
    Qualitative researchers need to position themselves in their writings. This is the concept of reflexivity in which the writer is conscious of the biases, values, and experiences that he or she brings to a qualitative research study. (One characteristics of good qualitative research is that the inquirer makes his or her "position" explicit: a. talks about his or her own experiences with the phenomenon being explored; b. how these part experiences shape the researcher's interpretation )
    2)Audience for our writings
    A basic axiom holds that all writers write for an audience. (Phenomenological study)One form was a general structure, four paragraphs in length, an approach that they admitted lost its richness and concreteness. Another form consisted of case synopses, each reporting the experiences of one individual and each two and a half pages in length.
    3)Encoding our writings
    The words we use encode our report, revealing how we perceive the needs of our audiences. Researchers encode qualitative studies for audiences other than academics. 
    4)Quotes in our writings
    In addition to encoding text with the language of qualitative research, authors bring in the voice of participants in the study in the way of ample quotes (short eye-catching quotations, take up little space; embedded quotes, quoted phrases within the analyst's narrative; longer quotation used to convey more complex understandings ).

2. Overall and embedded writing strategies(p. 221)
    1) Narrative writing structure: suggesting maximum flexibility in structure but emphasizing core elements that might go into the narrative study.
    Overall structure: Two different narrative structures: a. provides narratives of a chronology of the lives of thre    
    

Maloch, B., Worthy, J., Jouran, M., Hampton, A., Hungerford-Kresser, H., & Semingson P. (2013). Portraits or practice: A cross-case analysis of two first-grade teachers and their grouping practices. Resarch in the Teaching of English, 47(3), 277-312.

[Abstract] This interpretive study provides a cross-case analysis of the literacy instruction of two first-grade teachers, with a particular focus on their grouping practices. One key finding was the way in which these teachers drew upon a district-advocated approach for instruction-an approach to guided reading articulated by Fountas and Pinnell (1996) in which students are instructed in small groups based on reading level-as a resource for their sense-making. Analysis indicated that the two teachers enacted the practice in distinct ways based on their experiences and personal characteristics. Findings further suggested that, reminiscent of research on ability groups conducted mainly in the 1970s and 1980s, instruction and materials in both classrooms were qualitatively different between lower groups and higher groups. Although we do not implicate the practice of guided reading per se, we call for close examination of modern manifestations of ability-grouped practices and explorations of alternatives to such practices.

Nickerson, R. S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). Handbook of creativity (392-430). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative Cognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (189-212). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Weisberg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (226-250). New York: Cambridge University Press.

The development of theories concerning the mechanisms underlying creative thinking: Guilford’s pioneering psychometric theory; Gestalt psychology, experimental psychology, Darwinian Theory, Social-psychological perspective, investment perspectives, and modern cognitive science. The role of knowledge in creativity (a tension between knowledge and creativity) : 1)too much knowledge can leave one in ruts, the relationship between knowledge and creativity is assumed to be shaped like an inverted U (maximal creativity occurring with some middle range of knowledge); 2) knowledge is positively related to creativity, creative thinking builds on knowledge (foundation view)
        10-year-rule in development of master-level work in creative fields (ability to do creative work depends on deep knowledge of one’s chosen field); Deep immersion in one’s chosen field is necessary before innovation is produced→ extensive domain-specific knowledge is a prerequisite for creative functioning;James: knowledge is only in the very loosest sense related to true creativity, and may be detrimental to it; Guilford & DeBono: the role of divergent thinking in the development of new ideas, produce new ideas by breaking away, or diverging, from previously established ideas; Koestler: creative thinking to break out of the boundaries set by knowledge, in the form of habit; Amabie: thinking style: breaking out of your old patterns of thinking about something; breaking out of scripts, which is much of the same thing; perceiving freshly→ change one’s old ways; Campbell: Darwinian perspective, creative ideas are the results of a ‘blind’ process; Simonton(1995): problem solving is a random process; only by falling back on the less disciplined resource can be creator arrive at insights that are genuinely profound.
        A consistency of opinion concerning the need for creative thinking to go beyond the bounds of knowledge in order to produce true advances.The relation between education and creative achievement is curvilinear; past experience can interface with effective adjustment to novel situations; using one's past experience results in negative transfer in new situations.
        Tension between knowledge and creativity:

• The U-shaped relation between education and creativity: (Simonton, 1984) Examination of the lives of more than 300 eminent individuals, eminence was plotted as a function of level of education, found that the relationship was curvilinear, an inverted U, with the peak of eminence occurring at about midway through undergraduate training; fewer of more years of training were associated with lower levels of eminence.
• Past experience and negative transfer: (Luchins and Luchins, 1959; French and Sternberg, 1989) Past success trapped the knowledgeable participants into habitual modes of thought, and when the world changed, so that the previously successful solution did not work, incapable of adapting; Surface changes and deep or conceptual change, experts were affected by deep changes and had a harder time adjusting to them than did the novices. 

        Development of mater-level performance in creative fields: the 10-year rule (Hayes, 1989)

• Even the most noteworthy and "talented" individuals required many years of preparation before they began to produce the work on which their reputations were built (composers, painters, poets)
• Hayes (1989) proposed that preparation, in the sense of immersion in a discipline, is required for creative achievement.  A long period of time in a domain seems to be a necessary condition for notable contribution.

        The Years of "Science": Practice, Practice, Practice

Zhao, Y. (2012). World class learners: Educating creative and entrepreneurial students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Crowin.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

[Abstract]The reflective and interrogative processes required for developing effective qualitative research questions can give shape and direction to a study in ways that are often underestimated. Good research questions do not necessarily produce good  research, but poorly conceived or constructed questions will likely create problems that affect all subsequent stages of a study. In qualitative studies, the ongoing process of questioning is an integral part of understanding the unfolding lives and perspectives of others. This article addresses both the development of initial research questions and how the processes of generating the refining questions are critical to the shaping of a qualitative study.

Just received the email from AEAR, our paper has been accepted! It is a good news for me. Anyway, it's my first conference paper. See me in Philadelphia in April 2014!