The Factor Structure of Creative Problem-Solving in Design Studio-Based Learning in Architecture
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Creative problem-solving (CPS) is the ability to generate new and valuable ideas for solving problems. Fluency, flexibility, and originality are the three main components of CPS that can provide architects with effective solutions. The conceptual research framework revealed the traits of CPS fluency, flexibility, and originality through creative self-reports. It identified the correlation of these components in constructing undergraduate architecture students' CPS skills. This study aimed to examine the factor structure of CPS in architecture education by confirming the factor structure of a set of observed variables. Based on the minimum, 655 respondents will be surveyed using multistage random sampling from a pool of 4,000 undergraduate architecture students in Thailand (Hair et al., 2010). All indicators affect the factor of CPS at a significant level of .01. Fluency has the highest factor loading at 0.912, having many solutions (0.736) and creating wide-range solutions (0.659). Originality is the second factor and factor loading is 0.788. Finding unusual ideas (0.798) and providing rare solutions (0.739) is essential. Flexibility is the lowest factor, loading at 0.688. Even though its indicator combines different solutions (0.927), it has the highest factor loading. The second item to note is complex problem solutions (0.732). This self-report investigates the relationship between CPS traits and the learning styles of architecture students. These findings could be useful for creating studio-based learning plans that encourage students to consider various solution options. Flexibility leads to different ideas, while originality generates unique solutions.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The contents and data in published articles in the Journal of Education and Innovative Learning are considered the ideas and responsibility of the author(s). The Editorial team does not necessarily agree with any ideas or hold mutual responsibility of them. Plagiarism is not permitted, even for academic purposes. However, proper citation must be given whenever referencing the articles.
References
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity and innovation in organizations. Harvard Business School Background Note 396-239.
Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. I. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom. The Open Education Journal, 4(1), 58-66. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874920801104010058
Britz, J., & Richard, N. (1992). Problem-solving in the early childhood classroom. National Education Association.
Casakin, H., Davidovitch, N., & Milgram, R. (2010). Creative thinking as a predictor of creative problem solving in architectural design students. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016965
CEA. (2019, January-June). Creative Economy and Craft Industry in Thailand. CEA OUTLOOK 01 Creative Economy Prospects, (12-17). https://resource.tcdc.or.th/ebook/CEA.Outlook.01.EN.pdf
Ciravoğlu, A. (2014). Notes on architectural education: an experimental approach to design studio. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 7-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.146
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444-454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
Guilford, J. P. (1958). Can Creativity Be Developed?. Art Education, 11(6), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.2307/3184459
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.), Pearson.
Higgins, J. M. (2006). 101 Creative Problem-Solving Techniques: The Handbook of New Ideas for Business. New Management.
Hokanson, B. (2017). Developing creative thinking skills: An introduction for learners. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315674872
Hong, J.-C., Hwang, M.-Y., & Chen, Y.-L. (2013). A study of the creative problem solving process by architectural designers: A Perspective of I-Ching BaGua. In X. Luo, A. A. Almohammedi, C.-H. Chen, S. Guan, & D. Pamucar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on the Modern Development of Humanities and Social Science (413-415). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/mdhss-13.2013.108
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Hutchinson, E. D. (1931). Materials for the study of creative thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 28(5), 392-410. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070088
Ibrahim, N. L. N., & Utaberta, N. (2012). Learning in architecture design studio. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 30-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.342
Ioannou, O. (2018). Opening up design studio education using blended and networked formats. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, 47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0129-7
Isaksen, S. G., & Treffinger, D. J. (2004). Celebrating 50 Years of Reflective Practice: Versions of Creative Problem Solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 38(2), 75-101. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2004.tb01234.x
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? A review of the Torrance tests of creative thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2
Lubart, T. (2016). Creativity and convergent thinking: Reflections, connections and practical considerations. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 4, 7-15. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2016-4-7-15
Lubart, T. (2017). The 7 C's of Creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(4), 293-296. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.190
Lubart, T. I. (1994). Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and Problem Solving (289-332). Academic Press.
Nijstad, B. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & Baas, M. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 34-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463281003765323
National Strategy Secretariat Office. (2017). National Strategy 2018-2037 (Summary). http://bic.moe.go.th/images/stories/pdf/National_Strategy_Summary.pdf
Olteteanu, A.-M. (2016). A cognitive systems framework for creative problem solving [Doctoral dissertation, Universität Bremen]. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/297281346.pdf
Osborn, A. F. (1952). Wake up your mind; 101 ways to develop creativeness. Scribner.
Ostime, N. (1998). RIBA handbook of architectural practice management. RIBA.
Park, J. H., Niu, W., Cheng, L., & Allen, H. (2021). Fostering Creativity and critical thinking in college: A cross-cultural investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 760351. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.760351
Ravenell, E. (2018). The Osborn-Parnes creative problem-solving procedure. GRIN Verlag
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence. Creativity and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 607-627. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.607
Sternberg, R. J. (2010). Teaching for creativity. In R. A. Beghetto, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Nurturing creativity in the classroom, 394-414. Cambridge University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1017/CBO9780511781629.020
United Nations Economist Network. (2023). New economics for sustainable development - creative economy. https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/orange_economy_14_march.pdf
Wieth, M. B., Francis, A. P., & Christopher, A. N. (2019). Use of a creative problem solving (CPS) approach in a senior thesis course to advance undergraduate publications. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 749. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00749
