You are here:

Early Childhood Student Teachers’ Observation and Experimentation of Creative Practices as a Design Processes ARTICLE

, , Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Rovira i Virgili University

NAERJ Volume 4, Number 2, ISSN 2254-7339 Publisher: University of Alicante

Abstract

In this paper, we address the guidance of student teachers in initial training in schools as an invaluable opportunity to raise creative learning awareness. The objective of this present research is to develop guidance strategies for guiding the identification of creative practices and for analyzing that moment as a “way of knowing”. We analyze how to mentor future teachers so they feel willing to promote student engagement and creative thinking through their own practices. We adopted a case study approach guided by multimodal principles. We found that triangulation of individual interviews, focus group discussions and a diary of class observation was a useful strategy in the guidance of student teachers in initial training in schools. Results show these strategies allowed them to become more accepting of unpredicted or undesired results, as they approached their sessions’ designs as forms of experimentation. We argue it is essential to guide future educators in the critical analysis of the “standard classroom”, helping them design creative alternatives through collaborative experimentation.

Citation

de Oliveira, J. & Gallardo-Echenique, E. (2015). Early Childhood Student Teachers’ Observation and Experimentation of Creative Practices as a Design Processes. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research (NAER Journal), 4(2), 77-83. University of Alicante. Retrieved August 17, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Abrami, P.C., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D.I., Wade, C.A., & Persson, T. (2014). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A
  2. Sefton-Green, J., & Bresler, L. (2011). Theories and histories: Creative learning and its contexts. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.) , The Routledge International Handbook of Creative Learning (pp. 9–14).
  3. Shaheen, R. (2010). Creativity and Education. Creative Education, 1(3), 166–169.
  4. Thurlings, M., Evers, A.T., & Vermeulen, M. (2014). Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, XX(X), 1-42.
  5. Van Dijk, T.A. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 62–86). London, UK: Sage.
  6. Vygotsky, L.S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97.
  7. Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  8. Yuen, A.H.K., Law, N., & Wong, K.C. (2003). ICT implementation and school leadership: Case studies of ICT integration in teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 158–170.
  9. Ball, A.F. (2002). Three decades of research on classroom life: Illuminating the classroom communicative lives of America’s at-risk students. Review of Research in Education, 26(1), 71–111.
  10. Banaji, S. (2011). Mapping the rhetorics of creativity. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Creative Learning (pp. 36–44). London/New York: Routledge.
  11. Banaji, S., & Burn, A. (2007). Creativity through a rhetorical lens: Implications for schooling, literacy and media education. Literacy, 41(2), 62–70.
  12. Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Creativity beliefs, creative personality and creativityfostering practices of gifted education teachers and regular class teachers in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 109–118.
  13. Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. Abingdon: Routledge.
  14. Craft, A., Gardner, H., & Claxton, G. (2008). Creativity, wisdom and trusteeship: Exploring the role of education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  15. Darras, B. (2011). Creativity, creative class, smart power, social reproduction and symbolic violence. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of creative learning (pp. 90–98).
  16. Drotner, K.(2011). The cult of creativity: Opposition, incorporation, transformation. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.) , The Routledge international handbook of creative learning (pp. 71–80).
  17. Hayes, D. (2011). Ways of knowing and teaching: How teachers create valuable learning opportunities (pedagogical capital) by making knowledge the means and not just the ends in classrooms. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of creative learning (pp. 200–210). London/New York: Routledge.
  18. Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, learning: A multimodality approach. London: Routledge.
  19. Johnston, K., & Hayes, D. (2008). “This is as good as it gets”: Classroom lessons and learning in challenging circumstances. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 31(2), 109–127.
  20. Jones, K. (2011). Capitalism, creativity and learning: Some chapters in a relationship. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.) , The Routledge international handbook of creative learning (pp. 15–26).
  21. Kress, G. (2006). Meaning, learning and representation in a social semiotic approach to multimodal communication. In A. McCabe, M.O’Donnel l, & R. Whittaker (Eds.), Advances in Language and Education (pp. 15–39). London:
  22. Li, Y. (2009). The perspectives and experiences of Hong Kong preschool teacher mentors: Implications for mentoring. Teacher Development, 13(2), 147–158.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.