The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Barriers to Creativity in Engineering Education: A Study of Instructors and Students Perceptions
Abstract
This paper studies “creativity” in engineering education, by examining the perception of instructors and students. We aim to identify factors that impede a creative environment (creativity blockers). The study entails a review of established research in the fields of psychology and educational psychology to identify factors which create an educational environment conducive to creativity. These factors are formalized in the Ten Maxims of Creativity in Education, a set of criteria that constitute an educational environment conducive to fostering creativity in students. These maxims form the basis for our work in examining the contemporary engineering education. Extensive surveys are designed, created, distributed, and statistically quantified to study the perceptions of engineering educators and students, in comparison to nonengineering educators and students. The results unfortunately show that current engineering students experience almost none of the Ten Maxims of Creativity as part of their academic experiences.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity.
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1001 · Cited by 1,094
Cited by
Learning environments that support student creativity: Developing the SCALE
Richardson, C., & Mishra, P. (2018) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2017.11.004 · Cited by 365
Teaching Creativity in Engineering Courses
Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20048 · Cited by 281
Taylor, C. L., Esmaili Zaghi, A., Kaufman, J. C., Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2020) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20310 · Cited by 57
Work in Progress: Assessing Creativity of Alternative Uses Task Responses: A Detailed Procedure
Alhashim, A., Marshall, M., Hartog, T., Jonczyk, R., Dickson, D., van Hell, J., Okudan-Kremer, G., & Siddique, Z. (2020) · 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings · doi:10.18260/1-2--35612 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Kazerounian, K., & Foley, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Mechanical Design
- Publisher
- ASME International
- Published
- 2007-02-28
- Volume
- 129
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 761-768
- ISSN
- 0161-8458 (ISSN-L)
- 1050-0472
- 1528-9001
- OpenAlex
- W4235184069
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Barriers to Creativity in Engineering Education: A Study of Instructors and Students Perceptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1115/1.2739569
- The paper
- Kazerounian, K., & Foley, S. (2007). Barriers to Creativity in Engineering Education: A Study of Instructors and Students Perceptions. Journal of Mechanical Design. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2739569
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.