Abstract
The purpose of the current study is to investigate the impact of different teaching strategies (Williams’ Creative Thinking Teaching or Didactic Teaching) on senior high school students’ academic achievement, learning motivation, and creativity in history course. The experimental teaching lasted for six weeks. The study used a comparison group quasi-experiment design and a mixed-method (embedded experimental model) approach. The pretest and post-test were administrated to investigate the students’ academic achievement, learning motivation, and creativity. Afterwards, focus group interviews were conducted.The participants were senior high school second graders (N=140, M=16 years). Four classes were randomly assigned to either the experimental group (Williams’ Cognitive-Affective Interaction Model, N=75) or the comparison group (didactic teaching approach, N=65). The measuring instruments included history midterm and final exams, the Chinese version of Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT), and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Descriptive statistics, paired sample t-test, independent sample t-test, and ANCOVA (Analysis of Covariance) were utilized to examine the quantitative data. The main findings are as follows:
(a) Academic achievement: The results of t-tests and ANCOVA indicate that there was no significant difference in history academic scores between the experimental and the comparison groups.
(b) Learning motivation: The results of t-tests show that both the experimental and the control groups experienced significant improvements in overall scores of MSLQ. Additionally, the paired sampled t-test indicates that the overall scores and all factors of MSLQ significantly improved in the experimental group. In the comparison group, only the “work value” improved significantly. ANCOVA results show that only the “self-efficacy” in the experimental group was significantly higher than that of the comparison group. There was no significant difference in other factors and overall scores between the two groups.
(c) Creativity: In the verbal test of TTCT, the t-test results show that the overall scores and all the three facets (fluency, flexibility, and originality) in the experimental group enhanced significantly and are higher than those in the comparison group. Oppositely, the overall scores in the comparison decreased significantly while all factors have no significant difference. In the figural test of TTCT, the t-test results show that the overall scores and all the four facets (fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration) in the experimental group enhanced significantly and were higher than those in the comparison group. Regarding the comparison group, the factors fluency and originality improved significantly, and factors flexibility and elaboration had no significant difference, whereas overall scores declined significantly. ANCOVA results illustrate that both the scores (overall, fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration) of the verbal or the figural tests in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the comparison group.
Some discussions, suggestions for educational sectors, and implications for future research are offered.
| Date of Award | 2021 |
|---|---|
| Original language | Chinese (Traditional) |
| Supervisor | Hsu-Chan Kuo (Supervisor) |