Creativity training programs in primary education: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Teachers and practitioners need access to high-quality evidence-based programs and/or practices to improve creativity or divergent thinking.

“In this sense, in order to improve creativity or divergent thinking, teachers and practitioners need, among other factors, to have access to high-quality evidence-based programs and/or practices, but those types of interventions can only be identified by systematic reviews, which are widely believed to provide the best evidence to inform decision-making (Stewart et al., 2012).”

• cites Stewart et al., 2012 sourcePartly supported

  The section “Avoiding bias in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews” says systematic reviews are widely promoted as providing the best evidence for decision-making. It does not address teachers, creativity or divergent thinking, or say that evidence-based interventions can only be identified through systematic reviews. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Interventions to improve creativity or divergent thinking can only be identified by systematic reviews, which are widely believed to provide the best evidence to inform decision-making.

“In this sense, in order to improve creativity or divergent thinking, teachers and practitioners need, among other factors, to have access to high-quality evidence-based programs and/or practices, but those types of interventions can only be identified by systematic reviews, which are widely believed to provide the best evidence to inform decision-making (Stewart et al., 2012).”

• cites Stewart et al., 2012 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction section ‘Avoiding bias in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews’ says systematic reviews are widely promoted as providing the best evidence to inform decision-making. It does not discuss creativity or divergent-thinking interventions, or say that such interventions can only be identified by systematic reviews. No page number is supplied in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

The final sample of studies reviewed was 6.

“The final sample of high methodological quality studies reviewed was 6.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The six included studies are of high methodological quality.

May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

The meta-analytic estimate of the overall effect size of the combined studies was 0.48 (95% CI 0.34, 0.62), a moderate effect.

“The meta-analytic estimate of the overall effect size of the combined studies shows moderate effect across all studies.”

• Also stated in: § 3. Results · plain

  “The meta-analytic estimate of the overall ES of the combined studies was 0.48 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.34, 0.62).”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The effect sizes from the different creativity or divergent thinking measures used in the included studies are comparable and can be pooled in a single meta-analysis.
• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The included CTPIP are sufficiently similar to be combined into a single overall effect estimate.
• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The included studies provide unbiased estimates of the CTPIP effect, with no publication bias or other small-study effects.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The dominant statistical analyses were bivariate (e.g., t-test, U test), and the standardized test most frequently used to measure creativity or divergent thinking was TTCT.

“The dominant statistical analyses were bivariate (e.g., t-test, U test), and the standardized test most frequently used to measure creativity or divergent thinking was TTCT (Torrance, 1990).”

• cites Torrance, 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Specifically, 90% of the children in the experimental group improved scores after the intervention, in contrast with only 43% of the children in the control group.

“Specifically, 90% of the children in the experimental group improved scores after the intervention, in contrast with only 43% of the children in the control group.”

May combine two claims.

Most CTPIP include a wide variety of activities based on a previous cognitive process, which are relatively challenging from a contextual perspective and include practical exercises to apply the strategies acquired.

“a wide variety of activities based on a previous cognitive process, which are relatively challenging from a contextual perspective and include a series of practical exercises to apply the strategies acquired (Scott et al., 2004);”

• cites Scott et al., 2004 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The total of studies selected belong to 2 countries (Spain and Italy), and they were parts of journal publications.

“The total of studies selected belong to 2 countries (i.e., Spain and Italy), and they were parts of journal publications.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The duration of the CTPIP analyzed was variable, ranging between 5 sessions of 1 h each and 9 months, 2 sessions per week of 2 h each.

“The duration of the CTPIP analyzed was variable, ranging between the 5 sessions of 1 h each and 9 months, 2 sessions per week of 2 h each.”

May combine two claims.

In terms of total sample, 615 participants were examined in these studies (M = 102.5 participants), with a range between 60 and 224 participants.

“In terms of total sample, 615 participants were examined in these studies (M = 102.5 participants), with a range between 60 and 224 participants.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The studies were published between 2002 and 2020, and the publication languages were English (n = 4) and Spanish (n = 2).

“The studies were published between 2002 and 2020, and the publication languages were English (n = 4) and Spanish (n = 2).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

CTPIP carried out in extracurricular contexts included in this review agree that in the school context, intervention proposals should also be designed and worked by the group's class teachers in the classroom to significantly increase motivation and the strengthening of creative thinking skills focused on the characteristics of creativity or divergent thinking.

“CTPIP carried out in extracurricular contexts included in this review agree that in the school context, intervention proposals should also be designed and worked by the group's class teachers on in the classroom to significantly increase motivation and the strengthening of creative thinking skills focused on the characteristics of creativity or divergent thinking.”

May combine two claims.

The results make apparent positive effects of the intervention in improving creativity, which vary according to the aspect of creativity evaluated.

“The results make apparent the positive effects of the intervention in improving creativity, which vary according to the aspect of creativity evaluated.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

CTPIP were implemented mainly in school time, and the sessions were led by the group's class teacher under the supervision of the researchers.

“CTPIP were implemented mainly in school time, and the sessions were led by the group's class teacher under the supervision of the researchers.”

May combine two claims.

As for the total score on the creativity test, a shift towards a higher score is observed in the experimental group, while the control group experiences a minimal change with a slight decrease in the total score on the test.

“As for the total score on the creativity test, a shift towards a higher score is observed in the experimental group, while the control group experiences a minimal change with a slight decrease in the total score on the test.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Sampling techniques were mainly non-probabilistic.

“Sampling techniques were mainly non-probabilistic.”

May combine two claims.

Q-statistic (750.70; p < .001) shows that the effect sizes are heterogeneous, while I2 = 98.38% also means that the data are heterogeneous, confirming that the effectiveness of CTPIP differed across studies.

“Qstatistic (750.70;p < .001)shows that the ES are heterogeneous, while I 2 = 98.38% also means that the data are heterogeneous, confirming therefore that the effectiveness of CTPIP differed across studies.”

May combine two claims.

Most CTPIP have been implemented by teachers under the supervision of researchers during school time, with variable duration, including a wide variety of procedures, practices, strategies, techniques, resources and/or activities.

“the results show that most of CTPIP have been implemented by teachers under the supervision of the researchers during school time, with a variable duration, including a wide variety of procedures, practices, strategies, techniques, resources and/or activities (e.g., playful, dialogical, artistic, cooperative activities).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Each CTPIP focused on different procedures, practices, strategies, techniques, resources, and activities to achieve the expected impact.

“Regarding the most relevant characteristics of the CTPIP identified, each of them focused on different procedures, practices, strategies, techniques, resources, activities, etc., to achieve the expected impact”

May combine two claims.

This systematic review with meta-analysis of all CTPIP in school-aged children studies released between 2000 and 2021, using rigorous inclusion criteria designed to align with evidence-based practices movement, yielded a moderate positive effect and significant impacts for creative or divergent thinking skills.

“This integrated and comprehensive systematic review with meta-analysis of all CTPIP in school-aged children studies released between 2000 and 2021, using rigorous inclusion criteria designed to align with evidence-based practices movement, yielded a moderate positive effect and significant impacts for creative or divergent thinking skills.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The standardized tests used in the included studies (e.g., TTCT) validly measure creativity or divergent thinking.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Our findings are generally consistent with previous reviews focusing on CTPIP.

“our findings are generally consistent with previous reviews focusing on CTPIP”

May combine two claims.

The creative thinking skills most influenced by CTPIP are flexibility and originality, while fluency and elaboration are the most resistant to change.

“The creative thinking skills that seem to be most influenced by the CTPIP are flexibility and originality, while fluency and elaboration are the most resistant to change.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Valgeirsdottir & Onarheim (2017) propose a methodological research standard consisting of three criteria: measure creativity of participants both pre- and post-training, use an attention-placebo control group, and ensure a sufficient sample size.

“Indeed, Valgeirsdottir & Onarheim (2017) propose a methodological research standard consisting of three criteria (i.e., measure creativity of participants both pre-and post-training, use an attention-placebo control group, and ensure a sufficient sample size), to which researchers can look when designing and planning future research of the effectiveness of CTPIP.”

• cites Valgeirsdottir & Onarheim, 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Creativity can be developed through training and facilitated through creative environment and interventions.

“There is evidence to suggest that creativity can be developed through training and facilitated through creative environment and interventions (Gutman & Schoon, 2013).”

• cites Gutman & Schoon, 2013Not checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

The school offers an environment rich in interactive experiences and expressive possibilities, which can be optimal for the promotion of creativity or divergent thinking.

“The school offers an environment rich in interactive experiences and expressive possibilities, which can be optimal for the promotion of creativity or divergent thinking (Segundo et al., 2020;Beghetto & Kaufman, 2014).”

• cites Segundo et al., 2020Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Beghetto & Kaufman, 2014 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The reliability of the coding was 92%, and it was never below 90% for any single item.

“The reliability of the coding was 92% (it was never below 90% for any single item).”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The search for relevant literature was based on a wide variety of sources to ensure inclusion of all relevant studies, published and unpublished.

“To this end, the search for relevant literature was based on a wide variety of sources to ensure the inclusion of all those studies, published and unpublished, related to the topic of the review.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

At the second and third screening levels, all remaining studies were examined in pairs, a screening guide was used, and discrepancies were resolved by further review and discussion by the review team.

“However, all the studies remained were examined in pairs at the second and third screening level, and a screening guide was used in these screening levels.Based on the review's inclusion and exclusion criteria, discrepancies were resolved by further review of the respective titles, abstracts and full text, and discussion by the review team.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Data and information from the selected sample of studies were extracted and coded independently by two reviewers, who resolved their differences, and it was verified by another research team member.

“Data and information from selected sample of studies were extracted and coded independently by two reviewers, who resolved their differences, and it was verified by the other research team member.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The decrease in control groups' scores may be due to factors such as impoverishment of creativity or divergent thinking in the absence of stimulation, negative impact of the promotion of other more academic skills throughout the school year, or teachers' negative perceptions of students' behaviors associated with creativity or divergent thinking.

“These results may be due to multiple factors, such as the impoverishment of creativity or divergent thinking in the absence of stimulation, the negative impact of the promotion of other more academic skills throughout the school year, or even teachers' negative perceptions of students' behaviors associated with creativity or divergent thinking, as already evidenced by Gajda et al. (2017).”

• cites Gajda et al. (2017) sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The period covered by the review extends from 2000 onwards until March 2021, so literature published before and after those dates has not been included.

“the period covered extends from 2000 onwards until March 2021, so literature published before and after that dates has not been included in the review”

May combine two claims.

The amount of gray literature included is limited, despite the use of different search engines, which may have increased the threat of publication bias.

“the amount of gray literature included is limited, despite the use of the different search engines that collect this type of literature, which may have increased the threat of publication bias”

May combine two claims.

Researcher bias in selecting studies may have influenced the final sample, although its effects were attempted to be attenuated by the parallel development of the selection process by two reviewers, resolving any dissonance with the participation of the other research team member.

“researcher bias in selecting studies may have influenced the final sample, although its effects were attempted to be attenuated by the parallel development of the selection process by two reviewers, resolving any dissonance with the participation of the other research team member”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Flexibility and originality are the skills most characteristic of creativity or divergent thinking.

“These results support the findings of Prieto et al. (2002), who state that flexibility and originality are the skills most characteristic of creativity or divergent thinking.”

• cites Prieto et al. (2002)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.