(3.230.173.249) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/21 04:53
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:詹秀美
研究生(外文):Shiou-Mei Chan
論文名稱:國小資優班創造思考教學實施現況與成效研究
論文名稱(外文):Current Status and Effectiveness of Creativity Teaching
指導教授:吳武典吳武典引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wu-Tien Wu
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:特殊教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:特殊教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2003
畢業學年度:91
語文別:中文
中文關鍵詞:創造力創造思考創造思考教學問題解決能力自我實現資優教育能力編班
外文關鍵詞:creativitycreative thinkingcreativity teachingproblem-solving abilityself-actualizationgifted educationability grouping
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:35
  • 點閱點閱:412
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:9
國小資優班創造思考教學實施現況與成效研究
摘 要
本研究的主要目的為:(1) 探討國小資優班實施創造思考教學的現況,(2) 探討國小資優班學生的創造思考表現,(3)探討資優班創造思考教學實施狀況與學生創造思考表現之間的關係。
研究對象為我國的國小資優班,樣本為取自台灣北、中、南三區的18名資優班教師與212名資優班學生 (包括集中式智優班與資優資源班兩種班級型態)。研究工具為研究者自編的「創造思考量表」、「創造思考測驗」、「新編問題解決測驗」、「少年自我實現量表」和林幸台與王木榮修訂的「威廉斯創造性傾向量表」。
本研究的主要發現如下:
一、 國小資優班創造思考教學實施現況
1. 國小資優班教師普遍具備適當之創造思考教學基礎知識,但是創造思考教學實施上所需運用的進階知識和教學技巧仍有待充實。
2. 國小資優班教師在創造思考教學實施上最主要的困難為環境條件,其次是教學實施方式。
3. 畢業於特教系的資優班教師在創造思考教學知識基礎上優於非特教系畢業之教師。
4. 資優資源班在教師知識基礎、教師創造性人格特質、創造思考教學實施方式及教學情境條件上優於集中式智優班。
二、 國小資優班學生的創造思考表現
1. 資優班學生的創造思考能力優於普通班學生。
2. 資優班學生的問題解決能力優於普通班學生。
3. 資優班學生的創造性傾向優於普通班學生。
三、 創造思考教學實施狀況與學生創造思考表現的關係
1. 教師創造思考教學知識基礎程度不同之資優班學生在各項創造思考表現上皆無顯著差異。
2. 教師創造性人格特質較高之資優班學生的創造思考能力優於教師創造性人格特質較低之資優班學生。
3. 創造思考教學之課程與教學實施狀況不同之資優班學生在各項創造思考表現上皆無顯著差異。
4. 學校與社會環境條件較佳之資優班學生的創造思考能力和問題解決能力上優於學校與社會環境條件較差之資優班學生;教學情境條件不同的資優班學生之創造思考表現沒有顯著差異。
5. 教師專業背景不同之資優班學生在各項創造思考表現上皆無顯著差異。
6. 集中式智優班學生的創造思考能力與自我實現傾向優於資優資源班學生。
7. 歸納而言,當前國小創造思考教學之實施狀況,以資優教育安置型態以及學校和社會環境兩項條件和資優班學生之創造思考表現有最明顯之關係;集中式班級型態似比分散式資源班更有利於資優學生創造力的發展。
根據研究結果,本研究針對資優教育的實施及未來的研究提出若干建議。
關鍵詞:創造思考教學、創造思考、創造力、問題解決能力、資優教育、安置型態、教室氣氛、創造性傾向、自我實現
關鍵詞:創造思考教學、創造思考、創造力、問題解決能力、資優教育、安置型態、教室氣氛、創造性傾向、自我實現
Current Status and Effectiveness of Creativity Teaching
In Elementary Gifted Classes
Shiou-Mei Chan
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was threefold: (1) to investigate current status of creativity teaching in Taiwan elementary gifted classes; (2) to investigate the cognitive and affective creativity performance of gifted students from those gifted classes; (3) to explore the relationships between the status of creativity teaching and gifted students’ creativity performance.
The Inventory of Creativity Teaching was administered to 18 teachers of elementary gifted classes; while other four instruments, including Verbal Test of Creative Thinking, Test of Problem-Solving, Chinese Form of Williams Test of Creativity, and Scale of Self-Actualization for Adolescents, were administered to 212 grade 6 gifted students from those classes.
The major findings of this study were as the following:
I. The current status of creativity teaching in Taiwan elementary gifted classes:
(1) The majority of the gifted class teachers had possessed proper basic concepts about creativity teaching, but still not enough in advanced knowledge and instructional skills.
(2) The main difficulty of implementing creativity teaching came from environmental obstacles;
(3) Teachers majored in special education showed better knowledge base of creativity teaching than those with other majors.
(4) Gifted resource rooms showed higher level of teachers’ knowledge base of creativity teaching, teachers’ creative personality traits, curriculum and instructional practice of creativity teaching, and instructional situation fostering creative thinking than self-contained classes.
II. The performance of gifted students:
Students from gifted classes showed higher level of creative thinking ability, problem-solving ability and creative characteristics than that of those from regular classes.
III. The relationships between the status of creativity teaching and gifted students’ creativity performance:
(1) There was no significant difference between gifted classes with teachers scoring higher on knowledge base and those scoring lower on students’ creativity performance.
(2) Gifted class students with teachers scoring higher in personality traits demonstrated higher level of creative thinking ability than those with teachers scoring lower in personality traits;
(3) There was no significant difference between different gifted classes with different practices of creative teaching on students’ creativity performance.
(4) Students from gifted classes with higher level of school and social environmental conditions fostering creative thinking showed better creative thinking ability and problem-solving ability than those from lower level of school and social environmental conditions; there was no significant difference between different gifted classes with different instructional situation on students’ creativity performance.
(5) There was no significant difference between gifted classes with special education major teachers and those with other majors on students’ creativity performance.
(6) Students from self-contained gifted classes showed higher level of creative thinking ability and self-actualization than those from resource rooms.
(7) In conclusion, although environmental conditions and teachers’ professional background are both crucial factors on gifted students’ creativity performance, the former seems to be more important than the latter; the self-contained grouping practice seems to be more beneficial to gifted students’ creativity development than the resource room program.
Based on the above research findings, some suggestions for gifted education and future studies are made.
Keywords: creativity teaching, creative thinking, problem-solving ability, creative characteristics, self-actualization, creativity performance, gifted education, ability grouping.
目 錄
第一章 緒 論
第一節 問題背景與研究目的……………………………..…….. 1
第二節 研究問題 ……………………………………..………….8
第三節 名詞釋義………………………………………..……….10
第四節 研究限制………………………………………..……….13
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 創造思考教學的內涵………………………………….. 15
第二節 創造思考教學的實施…………………………………...24
第三節 創造思考教學與學生創造思考表現的關係…………...37
第四節 我國創造思考教學的發展與研究 ……………………. 47
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究對象…………………………………………………50
第二節 研究架構…………………………………………………52
第三節 研究工具…………………………………………………55
第四節 研究程序…………………………………………………73
第五節 資料處理…………………………………………………74
第四章 研究結果與討論
第一節 國小資優班創造思考教學實施現況……………………77
第二節 國小資優班學生的創造思考表現….…………………..111
第三節 創造思考教學實施狀況與學生創造思考表現的關係…119
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論………………………………………………………..137
第三節 建議………………………………………………………..141
參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………………148
附錄一︰新編問題解決測驗題本與計分標準
附錄二︰語文創造思考測驗題本與計分標準
附錄三︰創造思考教學量表
附錄四︰少年自我實現量表
附錄五 創造思考教學量表評量項目選答百分比統計
附錄六 創造思考教學量表認知與實際差距統計
表 目 次
表3-1-1 資優班研究樣本人數分配一覽表………………………………………50
表3-1-2 語文與數學創造思考測驗樣本人數分配一覽表………………………51
表3-1-3 新編問題解決測驗常模樣本……………………………………………51
表3-3-1 新編問題解決測驗預試項目分析………………………………………58
表3-3-2 新編問題解決測驗常模樣本項目分析…………………………………60
表3-3-3 新編問題解決測驗內部一致性信度係數………………………………61
表3-3-4 新編問題解決測驗折半信度係數………………………………………62
表3-3-5 問題解決測驗學科效度考驗樣本………………………………………62
表3-3-6 新編問題解決測驗與學科成績的相關係數(四年級)………………62
表3-3-7 新編問題解決測驗與學科成績的相關係數(五年級)………………62
表3-3-8 新編問題解決測驗與學科成績的相關係數(六年級)………………62
表3-3-9 不同年級學生之新編問題解決測驗
平均數﹑標準差與人數摘要…………………………………………...63
表3-3-10不同性別學生之新編問題解決測驗
平均數﹑標準差與人數摘要…………………………………………...63
表3-3-11創造思考測驗(語文式)項目分析………………………………………65
表3-3-12創造思考測驗(語文式)內部一致性信度係數…………………………65
表3-3-13創造思考測驗(語文式)分量表與總分之相關…………………………66
表3-3-14資優班與普通班學生創造思考測驗平均數﹑標準差與人數摘要…...67
表3-3-15 資優班與普通班學生創造思考測驗變異數分析摘要………………..67
表3-3-16 創造思考教學量表內部一致性信度係數……………………………..70
表3-3-17 創造思考教學量表折半信度係數……………………………………..70
表4-1-1 教師對創造思考教學之認知的評量結果……………………………..78
表4-1-2 「創造思考教學量表」的實際狀況評量結果…………………………84
表4-1-3 「創造思考教學量表」認知與實際差距之統計結果…………………92
表4-1-4 教師專業背景不同之資優班的創造思考教學實施狀況
平均數、標準差及樣本人數與變異數分析摘要…………………104
表4-1-5 班級型態不同之資優班的創造思考教學實施條件平均數、
標準差及樣本人數…………………………………………………107
表4-1-6 教師任教年資與班級型態的卡方檢定摘要……………………….109
表4-1-7
表4-2-1 資優班與普通班學生的創造思考能力平均數、
標準差及樣本人數與變異數分析摘要……………………………112
表4-2-2 資優班與普通班學生問題解決能力之比較……………………….114
表4-2-3 本研究資優班學生在威廉斯創造性傾向量表
與少年自我實現量表之得分………………………………………..116
表4-2-4 資優班與普通班學生在威廉斯創造性傾向量表
與少年自我實現量表之得分比較…………………………………..117
表4-3-1 教師創造思考教學知識高低分組之學生創造性表現
變異數分析摘要………………………………………………………120
表4-3-2 教師創造性人格特質高低分組之學生創造性表現
變異數分析摘要……………………………………………………….122
表4-3-3 創造思考教學實施方式高低分組之學生創造性表現
變異數分析摘要……………………………………………………….124
表4-3-4 創造思考學校與社會環境條件高低分組之學生創造性表現
變異數分析摘要……………………………………………………….127
表4-3-5 創造思考教學情境條件高低分組之學生創造性表現
變異數分析摘要……………………………………………………….128
表4-3-6 教師專業訓練背景不同之資優班的學生創造思考表現
平均數、標準差及樣本人數與變異數分析摘要……………………..130
表 4-3-7 智優班與資源班學生的創造思考表現平均數、標準差
及樣本人數與變異數分析摘要………………………………………..132
圖 目 次
圖2-3-1:Treffinger的「創造性學習模式」…………………………………30
圖2-3-2:產出性思考的組織與架構………………………………………….39
圖3-2-1:本研究架構圖……………………………………………………….54
參考文獻
一、中文部份
毛連塭(1995 ):資優教育─課程與教學。台北市: 五南圖書公司。
毛連塭(1997):創造學的孕育與發展。資優教育季刊,63期,8-12頁。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安與林幸台(2000)︰創造力研究。台北市︰心理出版社。
王文科(1996):亟待調整的資賦優教育異師資的培育策略。載於: 中華民國特殊教育學會、國立台灣師大特教系所編印:開創資優教育的新世紀,51-66頁。
王文科(1997):資優教育發展的盲點與轉機。載於:台灣省政府教育廳編印:台灣省國民中小學資優教育實施概況,1-4頁。
王敏曄(1997):教師對學生創意表現、創造力之歸因及其相關因素之研究。 國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
王振德(1998):資優教育課程發展及其相關問題。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育二十五週年研討會論文專輯,103-115頁。
王振德(1996a):國民中小學資優教育課程與教學實況調查研究。特殊教育研究學刊,14期,207-227頁。
王振德(1996b):資優教育的師資培育。載於:國立教育資料館編印:教育資料集刊,21輯(資優教育專輯),125-143頁。
朱敬先(1988): 教學心理學。台北市: 五南圖書公司。
吳武典(1998):世界性的思維, 本土化的行動─資優教育的發展與展望。載於: 中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育二十五週年研討會論文專輯,19-39頁。
吳武典(1997):教育改革與資優教育。資優教育季刊,63期,1-7頁。
吳武典(1996):資優教育的研究與課題。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會、國立台灣師大特教系所編印:開創資優教育的新世紀,1-19頁。
吳武典(1996):我國資優教育政策分析與調查研究。特殊教育研究學刊,14期,179-206頁。
吳武典、王天苗與Retish, P. (1987):殘障兒童與家庭交互影響之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,3期,1-28頁。
吳武典、林繼盛(1987):加強家庭聯繫對兒童學習效果與家庭氣氛的影響。教育心理學報,18期,97-166頁。
吳武典、蔡崇建(1986):國中資優學生的認知方式與學習方式之探討。特殊教育研究學刊,2期,219-230頁。
吳思華(2002):台灣創造力教育發展與推動。載於:國立台北師範學院主編:創造能力課程開發國際學術研討會手冊,91-99頁。
吳靜吉、林偉文、林士郁、陳秋秀、曾敬梅、王涵儀、徐悅淇(2002):國際創造力教育發展的趨勢。資優教育研究,2卷,1期,1-26頁。
吳靜吉(2002):創造力的研究取向之回顧與展望。載於:國立台北師範學院主編:創造能力課程開發國際學術研討會手冊,7-20頁。
呂金燮(2002):資優兒童問題解決能力實作評量之建構研究。特殊教育研究學刊,19期,279-308頁。
呂素雯(2002):自然科創造性問題解決教學對國小六年級學童問題解決能力、態度及學習成就之影響研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所論文。
林幸台(1998):創造智能。載於:中華資優教育學會編印: 資優教育教師專業知能研討會─多元智能與成功智能的理論與實務會議手冊,124-134頁。
林幸台等(1994):創造思考教學目標之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,10期,303-318頁。
林幸台、王木榮(1994):威廉斯創造力測驗指導手冊。台北市:心理出版社。
林清山譯(1990): 教育心理學─認知取向。台北市: 遠流出版公司。
林偉文(2002): 國民中小學學校組織文化、教師創意教學潛能與創意教學之關係。國立政治大學教育學系博士學位論文。
洪榮昭、林雅玲、林展立(2002):國中小創意教師教學策略與成效之研究。載於:國立台北師範學院主編:創造能力課程開發國際學術研討會手冊,125-145頁。
施乃華(2002):創造思考教學成效之後設分析。國立彰化師範大學商業教育學系碩士論文。
陳美芳(1997): 從「想」出發─思考能力訓練的的內涵與方式摡覽。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育的革新與展望─開發潛能培育人才,345-355頁。
陳昭儀(1991):二十位傑出發明家的生涯路。台北市:心理出版社。
陳昭儀(1997):聰穎的孩子, 智慧的父母。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育的革新與展望-開發潛能培育人才,579-591頁。
陳龍安(1998):創造思考教學的理論與實際。台北市:心理出版社。
陳龍安(2002):創造力訓練課程設計與實施。載於:國立台北師範學院主編:創造能力課程開發國際學術研討會手冊,185-214頁。
陳龍安(1994):創造思考教學的實施與檢討。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會、國立台灣師大特教系所編印:開創資優教育的新世紀,143-213頁。
陳龍安(1994):創造思考教學的實施與檢討。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會、國立台灣師大特教系所編印:開創資優教育的新世紀,143-213頁。
張玉成(1993):思考技巧與教學。台北市:心理出版社。
張玉成(1993):教師發問技巧及其對學生創造思考教學能力影響之研究。台北市:教育部教育計畫小組編印。
張昇鵬(1994) :資賦優異學生後設認知能力與創造思考能力關係之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,13期,221-240頁。
彭震球(1996): 創造性教學之實踐。台北市: 五南圖書公司。
彭瓊慧(2002): 我國資優教育之回顧與後設分析研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文。
詹志禹(2001):「創造力教育政策白皮書」子計畫:小學創造力教育政策與環境之評估。 教育部專題研究計畫報告。
詹志禹(2002):台灣地區中小學創造力教育的實況條件與政策推展。載於:國立台北師範學院主編:創造能力課程開發國際學術研討會手冊,51-63頁。
詹秀美(1990):影響創造力的環境因素。資優教育季刊,34期,15-20頁。
詹秀美(1995):國小資優班學生與普通班學生自我實現與創造性情意特質之相關研究。特殊教育研究學刊,13期,261-271頁。
詹秀美(1999):國小智優班、美術班與普通班創造思考教學實施狀況的比較研究。台中師院學報,13期, 頁。
詹秀美(2001):國小資優班與普通班創造思考教學實施狀況的比較研究(未出版)。
詹秀美、吳武典 (1989):問題解決測驗。台北:心理出版社。
蔡典謨(1986):只有歷史能告訴我們誰是真正資優。資優教育季刊,21期,31-34頁。
蔡典謨(1998):充實模式之設計與實驗研究。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育二十五週年研討會論文專輯,85-102頁。
蔡典謨(1997):幫助孩子成功的教養方式。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育的革新與展望-開發潛能培育人才,567-578頁。
蔡典謨(1997):充實模式之設計與實驗研究。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育二十五週年研討會論文專輯,85-102頁。
盧台華(1994):資優教育教學模式之選擇與運用。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會、國立台灣師大特教系所編印:開創資優教育的新世紀,105-121頁。
二、英文部份
Albert, R. S., & Runco, M. A. (1999). A history of research on creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 16-31). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ali, A. S. (2001). Issues involved in the evaluation of gifted programmes. Gifted Education International, 16(1), 79-91.
Barron, F. (1988). Putting creativity to work. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity:Contemporary psychological perspectives. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Buckmaster, L. R., & Davis, G. A. (1985). ROSE: A measure of self-actualization and its relationship to creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 19(1), 30-37.
Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs, 78, 584.
Clark, B. (1992). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at school. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Collins, M. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 297-312). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23(2), 72-79.
Cropley, A. J. (2001). Creativity in education and learning: A guide for teachers and educators. Lodon, UK: Kogan Page.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999) Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313-335). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, G. A. (1986). Creavity is forever(2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Davis, G. A. , & Rimm, S. B. (1997). Education of the gifted and talented (4thed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
De Souza Fleith, D. (2000). Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the classroom environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.
Eyre, D., Coates, D., Fizpatrick, M., Higgins, C., McClure, L., Wilson, H., & Chamberlin, R. (2002). Effective teaching of able pupils in the primary school: The findings of the oxford shire effective teachers of able pupils project. Gifted Education International, 16(2), 158-169.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. Journal of Creative Behaviors, 29(4), 255-268.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Strategies for teaching the gifted. In J. Van Tassel-Baska, Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners(2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Feldhusen, J. F.,& Kolloff, P. B. (1986). The Purdue three-stage enrichment model for gifted education at the elementary level. In . J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Center.
Feldman, D. H. (1999) The development of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 169-186). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Fiedler, E. D., Lange, R. E., & Winebrenner, S. (2002). In search of reality: Unraveling the myths about tracking, ability grouping, and the gifted. Roeper Review, 24(3), 108-111.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B. & Smith, S. M. (1992): Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
Flaherty, M. A. (1992). The effects of a holistic creativity program on the self-concept and creativity of third graders. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 26 (3), 165-171.
Freeman, J. (1991). Gifted child grown up. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Gallagher, J. J. (2002). Gifted education in the 21st century. Gifted Education International, 16(2), 100-110.
Gallagher, J. J., & Gallagher, S. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Gentry, M., Rizza, M. G., & Gable, R. K. (2001). Gifted students’ perceptions of their class activities: Differences among rural, urban, and suburban student attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(2), 115-129.
Grotzer, T. A., & Perkins, D. N. (2000). Teaching intelligence: A performance conception. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 492-515). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Guilford, J. P. (1977). Way beyond the IQ. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation , Inc.
Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents: Their nature, uses, and development. Buffalo, NY: Bearly.
Hansen, J. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(3), 115-121.
Hasirci, D., & Demirkan, H. (2003). Creativity in learning environments: The case of two sixth grade art-rooms. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(1), 17-41.
Herrmann, N. (1991). The creative braining. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(4), 275-295.
Hunt, E. (1994). Problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving (2nd ed.) (pp. 215-232). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Isaksen, S. G., & Parnes, S. T. (1985). Curriculum planning for creative thinking and problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 19(1), 1-29.
Isaksen, S. G., Puccio, G. J., & Treffinger, D. J. (1993). An ecological approach to creativity research: Profiling for creative problem solving. Journal of Creative Behavior, 27(3), 149-170.
Joffe, W. S. (2001). Investigating the acquisition of pedagogical knowledge: Interviews with a beginning teacher of the gifted. Roeper Review, 23(4), 219-226.
Koshy, V. (2001). Teaching mathematics to able children. London, UK: David Fulton Publishers.
Landvogt, J. (2001). Affecting eternity: Teaching for talent development. Roeper Review, 23(4), 190-196.
Leaper, D. (2000). Developing an extension programme in mathematics. Gifted International, 16(2), 150-157.
Li, R. (1996). A theory of conceptual intelligence. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Lubart, T. I. (1994). Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving (2nd ed.) (pp. ,289-332). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Magyari-Beck, I. (1993). Creatology: A post-psychological study. Creativity Research Journal, 7(2), 183-192.
Maker, C. J. (2001). Discover: Assessing and developing problem solving. Gifted Education International, 15(3), 232-251.
Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Martndale, C. (1989). Personality, situation, and creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning & C. R. Reynolds (Eds), Handbook of creativity. New York: Plenum Press.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Mayer, R. E. (1999) Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 449-460). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Montgomery, D. (2001). Teaching the more able: An update. Gifted Education International, 15(3), 262-280.
Morgan, S., & Forster, J. (1999). Creativity in the classroom. Gifted Education International, 14, 29-43.
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, M. S., Baughman, W. A., & Markers, M. A. (1994). Creativity and problem solving: Cognition, adaptability, and wisdom. Roeper Review, 16(4), 241-246.
Mumford, M. D., Decker, B. P., Connelly, M. S., Osburn, H. K., & Scott, G. (2002). Beliefs and creative performance: Relationships across three tasks. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(3), 153-181.
Nickerson, R. S. (1999) Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 392-430). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nickerson, R. S. (1994). The teaching of thinking and problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving (2nd ed.) (pp. 409-449). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2000). The transition from childhood giftedness to adult creative productiveness: Psychological characteristics and social supports. Roeper Review, 23(2), 65-71.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 161-169.
Piirto, J. (1992). Understanding those who create. Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
Piirto, J. (1999). Talented children and adults: Their development and Education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Plucker, J. A., & Renzulli, J. S. (1999) Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 35-61). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Purcell, J. H., Burn, D. E., Tomlinson, C. A., Imbeau, M. B., & Martin, J. L. (2002). Bridging the gap: Atool and technique to analyze and evaluate gifted education curricular units. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(4), 306-321.
Reid, C., Udall, A., Romanoff, B., & Algozzine, B. (1999). Comparison of traditional and problem solving assessment criteria. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(4), 252-264.
Rejeskind, E, G. (1982). Autonomy and creativity in children. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 16(1), 58-67.
Renzulli, J. S. (1992). A general theory for the development of creative productivity through the pursuit of ideal acts of learning. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 170-182.
Renzulli, J. S., & Dai, D. Y. (2001). Abilities, interests, and styles as aptitudes for learning: A person-situation interaction perspective. In R. J. Sternberg, & L. Zhang(Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 23-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1991). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for the development of creative productivity. In N. Colangelo and G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Robertson, S. I. (2001). Problem solving. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Rogers, K. B. (2002). Grouping the gifted and talented: Questions and answers. Roeper Review, 24(3), 103-107.
Rosemarin, S. (2001). The evaluation of a pullout program for gifted children in Israel. Gifted Education International, 15(3), 316-324.
Rosemarin, S. (2002). Teachers attitudes towards giftedness-a comparison between American and Israeli teachers. Gifted Education International, 16(2), 179-190.
Schatz, E. M. & Buckmaster, L. R. (1984). Development an instrument to measure self-actualizing growth in preadolescents. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 18(4), 263-272.
Schubert, D. S., & Biodi, A. M. (1977). Creativity and mental health: III. Creativity and adjustment. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 11, 186-197.
Shallcross, D. J. (1981). Teaching creative behavior: How to teach creativity to children of all ages. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Smutny, J. F., Walker, S. Y., & Meckstroth, E. A. (1997). Teaching young gifted children in the regular classroom: Identifying, nurturing, and challenging ages 4-9. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing Inc.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Cognitive psychology. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Identifying and developing creative giftedness. Roeper Review, 23(2), 60-65.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.)(1988). The nature of creativity:Contemporary psychological perspectives. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., Forsythe, G. B., Hedlund, J., Horvath, J. A., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W. M., Snook, S. A., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999) The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3-15). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1993). Creative Giftedness: A multivariate investment approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37(1), 7-15.
Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (2000). Intelligence and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 611-630). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (1999) Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251-272). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Strom, R. D., & Storm, P. S. (2002). Changing the rules: Education for creative thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(3), 183-200.
Swiatek, M. A., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2003). Elementary and middle school student participation in gifted programs: Are gifted students underserved? Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 118-130.
Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A. I. (1994). Creativity and collaborative learning: A practical guide to empowering students and teachers. Baltimore, ML: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Torrance, E. P., & Goff, K. (1990). Fostering Academic creativity in gifted students. ERIC clearinghouse, ED321489.
Treffinger, D. J. (1986). Research on creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(1), 15-19.
Treffinger, D. J. et al. (1993). Programs and strategies for nurturing creativity. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monk, & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 555-567). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press Ltd.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2001). The talent development process: What we know and what we don’tknow. Gifted Education International, 16(1), 20-28.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1994). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Vernon, P. E. (1989). The nature-nurture problem in creativity. In Glover, G. A., Ronning, R. R., Reynolds, CR. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Weinebrenner, S. (1992). Teaching gifted kids in the regular classroom: Strategies and techniques every teachers can use to meet the academic needs of the gifted and talented. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing Inc.
Weiner, P. R. (2000). Creativity and beyond. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Wheatley, G. H. (1977). The right-hemisphere’s role in problem solving. Arithmetic Teacher, 36-39.
Whimbey, A., & Lochhead, J. (1999). Problem solving & comprehension (6th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Williams, F. E. (1986). The cognitive-affective interaction model for enriching gifted programs. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Center.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 吳武典(1996):我國資優教育政策分析與調查研究。特殊教育研究學刊,14期,179-206頁。
2. 陳美芳(1997): 從「想」出發─思考能力訓練的的內涵與方式摡覽。載於:中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育的革新與展望─開發潛能培育人才,345-355頁。
3. 吳武典(1997):教育改革與資優教育。資優教育季刊,63期,1-7頁。
4. 吳武典(1998):世界性的思維, 本土化的行動─資優教育的發展與展望。載於: 中華民國特殊教育學會主編:資優教育二十五週年研討會論文專輯,19-39頁。
5. 呂金燮(2002):資優兒童問題解決能力實作評量之建構研究。特殊教育研究學刊,19期,279-308頁。
6. 吳靜吉、林偉文、林士郁、陳秋秀、曾敬梅、王涵儀、徐悅淇(2002):國際創造力教育發展的趨勢。資優教育研究,2卷,1期,1-26頁。
7. 吳武典、蔡崇建(1986):國中資優學生的認知方式與學習方式之探討。特殊教育研究學刊,2期,219-230頁。
8. 王振德(1996b):資優教育的師資培育。載於:國立教育資料館編印:教育資料集刊,21輯(資優教育專輯),125-143頁。
9. 王振德(1996a):國民中小學資優教育課程與教學實況調查研究。特殊教育研究學刊,14期,207-227頁。
10. 毛連塭(1997):創造學的孕育與發展。資優教育季刊,63期,8-12頁。
11. 錢明賽. 1993b. 根菜及莖菜採後處理與貯藏技術(二). 食品工業25(10):14-21.
12. 錢明賽. 1993a. 根菜及莖菜採後處理與貯藏技術(一). 食品工業25(9):18-22.
13. 錢明賽、張長泉、廖銘隆、楊瑞森. 1982. 儲存中生薑、紅蔥、大蒜發芽及腐爛之抑制. 食品工業研究所研究報告255:1-21.
14. 吳武典、林繼盛(1987):加強家庭聯繫對兒童學習效果與家庭氣氛的影響。教育心理學報,18期,97-166頁。
15. 陳如茵、蔡美珠、錢明賽. 1996. 溫度及處理方式對調理蔬果櫥架期之影響. 中國園藝42:249-261.
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔