Exploring the Impact of Handcraft Activities on the Creativity of Female Students at the Elementary Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creativity has been one of the interesting issues in the field of education and has been subject of some studies. But studying the effect of using handcraft on the enhancing learners’ creativity at early stages of education has not been focused on in many studies. Therefore, in this study an effort was made to explore the effect of using handcrafts on the enhancement of the creativity among the learners at elementary schools. The participants in this study were 64 female students who were selected randomly from elementary school learners at grade five in Tehran. For data collection Torrens Creativity Test was used and data gathering was done through pre-test and post-test. Data was analyzed by using descriptive statistics and ANOVA analysis. The data analysis revealed that using handcraft as an instrument was significantly effective in enhancing students’ score in originality, flexibility and elaboration at the elementary grades, whereas; there was not any significant difference between their scores in fluency. The findings and their implications are discussed more in detail.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".