University STEM students' perceptions of creativity in non-routine problem-solving
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The primary purpose of this study is to investigate students' perceptions about the characteristics of creativity and engagement in solving non-routine problems. It involved 64 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) university students, who participated in a two-year research project in New Zealand during which participants were given opportunities to utilise puzzle-based learning in their courses. Comparing open-ended responses of two surveys, this article focuses on student perceptions about attributes of creativity in non-routine problem-solving. These results have pedagogical implications for tertiary stem education. References A. J. Baroody and A. Dowker. The development of arithmetic concepts and skills: Constructive adaptive expertise. Routledge, 2013. URL https://www.routledge.com/The-Development-of-Arithmetic-Concepts-and-Skills-Constructive-Adaptive/Baroody-Dowker/p/book/9780805831566. S. A. Costa. Puzzle-based learning: An approach to creativity, design thinking and problem solving. implications for engineering education. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA), 2017. doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.7365. N. Falkner, R. Sooriamurthi, and Z. Michalewicz. Teaching puzzle-based learning: Development of transferable skills. Teach. Math. Comput. Sci., 10(2):245–268, 2012. doi:10.5485/TMCS.2012.0304. A. Fisher. Critical thinking: An introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2011. URL https://www.cambridge.org/us/education/subject/humanities/critical-thinking/critical-thinking-2nd-edition/critical-thinking-introduction-2nd-edition-paperback?isbn=9781107401983. E. C. Fortes and R. R. Andrade. Mathematical creativity in solving non-routine problems. The Normal Lights, 13(1), 2019. URL http://po.pnuresearchportal.org/ejournal/index.php/normallights/article/view/1237. P. Gnadig, G. Honyek, and K. F. Riley. 200 puzzling physics problems: With hints and solutions. Cambridge University Press, 2001. URL https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/physics/general-and-classical-physics/200-puzzling-physics-problems-hints-and-solutions?format=AR&isbn=9780521774802. J. P. Guilford. Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. J. Creative Behav., 1(1):3–14, 1967. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.1967.tb00002.x. J. P. Guilford. Characteristics of Creativity. Illinois State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Springfield. Gifted Children Section, 1973. URL https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED080171. G. Hatano and Y. Oura. Commentary: Reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research. Ed. Res., 32(8):26–29, 2003. doi:10.3102/0013189X032008026. S. Klymchuk. Puzzle-based learning in engineering mathematics: Students\T1\textquoteright attitudes. Int. J.Math. Ed. Sci. Tech., 48(7): 1106–1119, 2017. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2017.1327088. B. Martz, J. Hughes, and F. Braun. Developing a creativity and problem solving course in support of the information systems curriculum. J. Learn. High. Ed., 12(1):27–36, 2016. URL https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1139749.pdf. Z. Michalewicz, N. Falkner, and R. Sooriamurthi. Puzzle-based learning: An introduction to critical thinking and problem solving. Hybrid Publishers, 2011. B. Parhami. A puzzle-based seminar for computer engineering freshmen. Comp. Sci. Ed., 18(4):261–277, 2008. doi:10.1080/08993400802594089. URL http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&id. G. Polya. How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press, 2004. URL https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691164076/how-to-solve-it. M. A. Runco. Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice. Elsevier, 2014. URL https://www.elsevier.com/books/creativity/runco/978-0-12-410512-6. A. H. Schoenfeld. Mathematical problem solving. Elsevier, 2014. URL https://www.elsevier.com/books/mathematical-problem-solving/schoenfeld/978-0-12-628870-4. C. Thomas, M. Badger, E. Ventura-Medina, and C. Sangwin. Puzzle-based learning of mathematics in engineering. Eng. Ed., 8(1):122–134, 2013. doi:10.11120/ened.2013.00005. M. O. J. Thomas. Developing versatility in mathematical thinking. Med. J. Res. Math. Ed., 7(2):67–87, 2008. A. Valentine, I. Belski, and M. Hamilton. Developing creativity and problem-solving skills of engineering students: A comparison of web and pen-and-paper-based approaches. Eur. J. Eng. Ed., 42(6):1309–1329, 2017. doi:10.1080/03043797.2017.1291584. G. Wallas. The art of thought. Solis Press, 1926.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle