The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Promoting a mixed-design model of scientific creativity through digital storytelling—the CCQ model for creativity
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Background This study presents the development of three research tools of scientific creativity. Our aim is to evaluate the development of student creativity while students write digital stories. Three models are linked to create a new model, called Creative, Cognitive, Qualitative Model for Creativity (CCQ tool). Our research tool examines how creativity can be standardized, first by researchers’ views and then by teachers and students’ creative products. The first tool is based on two existing tools; the Scientific Creativity Structure Model (SCSM) and the TTCT Figural Subscales, and on new characteristics, the effective learning environments, as we have developed them in the CREATIONS Program. We have tried to expand this tool by combining its key elements to the theoretical framework of creativity, as we have approached it in the CREATIONS and the STORIES Programs. The second tool “Students’ Creativity Evaluation Model” is a new tool that derives from empirical data and Grounded Theory methods. It examines the expected, original, and innovative ways of students’ thinking. The third tool “Experts’ Creativity Evaluation Model” allows us to examine the role of experts thinking on writing a story. It aims at tracking experts’ model of thinking and is viewed in comparison to the students’ creative model of thinking. We create a qualitative tool as we believe that a qualitative method delves deeper into students’ internal mechanisms of creativity. Results Twelve students’ stories from classrooms of different countries which participate to STORIES Program are analyzed indicatively by two independent researchers. The results seem to indicate that digital storytelling increases scientific creativity among students. Conclusions The main difference between expert and students’ approaches is that experts’ stories follow an up to bottom approach, while it is the opposite for students’ creative process. It has to be mentioned that almost all of the stories combined science with creative thinking. Students transformed their personal values into stories; therefore, this creative procedure was influenced by social, cultural, and ethnographical characteristics. The contribution of our research is that it offers a research tool that not only measures creativity but also studies the cognitive mechanisms involved in creative thinking.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In constructing digital stories, students learnt to use technological tools and media to establish AI concepts through a digital story creation platform (Smyrnaiou et al., 2020).”
From Using digital story writing as a pedagogy to develop AI literacy among primary students (2022) · cites this paper as Smyrnaiou et al., 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology.
Shelley, M., & Krippendorff, K. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288384 · Cited by 24,333
Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology
Krippendorff, K. (2019) · doi:10.4135/9781071878781 · Cited by 15,448
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012) · APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. · doi:10.1037/13620-004 · Cited by 10,299
Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019) · Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences · doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103 · Cited by 2,910
Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences
(2019) · doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4 · Cited by 1,082
Craft, A. (2005) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203357965 · Cited by 863
Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1 · Cited by 613
A scientific creativity test for secondary school students
Hu, W., & Adey, P. S. (2002) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690110098912 · Cited by 607
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching
Sudjarwo, S., & Sunyono, S. (2018) · Cited by 600
Research and trends in STEM education: a systematic review of journal publications
Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6 · Cited by 580
Boden, M. A. (2009) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v30i3.2254 · Cited by 527
Making sense of “STEM education” in K-12 contexts
Nelson, T. H., Lesseig, K., & Slavit, D. (2018) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0127-2 · Cited by 309
Creative cognition as a window on creativity
WARD, T. (2007) · Methods · doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2006.12.002 · Cited by 217
Stenhouse, L. A. (1968) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 211
The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking - Figural or Verbal: Which One Should We Use?
Kim, K. H. (2017) · Creativity. Theories – Research - Applications · doi:10.1515/ctra-2017-0015 · Cited by 138
Aktamış, H., & Ergin, Ö. (2008) · Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching · Cited by 122
Perry, M., & Medina, C. L. (2011) · Journal of Curriculum Theorizing · doi:10.63997/jct.v27i3.100 · Cited by 120
Creative learning conversations: producing living dialogic spaces
Chappell, K. A., & Craft, A. (2011) · Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00131881.2011.598663 · Cited by 102
Conceptual framework of STEM based on Japanese subject principles
Yata, C., Ohtani, T., & Isobe, M. (2020) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-020-00205-8 · Cited by 95
Human Understanding, Vol. I: The Collective Use and Evolution of Concepts.
Martin, R. M., & Toulmin, S. E. (1973) · Philosophy and Phenomenological Research · doi:10.2307/2106966 · Cited by 91
An integrative semiotic framework for information systems: The social, personal and material worlds
Mingers, J., & Willcocks, L. P. (2014) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2014.01.002 · Cited by 83
The Renaissance of Qualitative Methods
Gobo, G. (2008) · Forum qualitative Sozialforschung · doi:10.17169/fqs-6.3.5 · Cited by 46
Where Does Creativity Fit into a Productivist Industrial Model of Knowledge Production?
Ghassib, H. B. (2010) · Gifted and Talented International · doi:10.1080/15332276.2010.11673540 · Cited by 42
Human Understanding, Volume I: The Collective Use and Evolution of Concepts
Toulmin, S. E. (1977) · Cited by 41
INNOREGIO: dissemination of innovation and knowledge management techniques
Hu, H., & Ma, M. (2000) · Cited by 30
Learning from the parallel pathways of Makers to broaden pathways to engineering
Foster, C., Wigner, A., Lande, M., & Jordan, S. S. (2018) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-017-0098-8 · Cited by 20
Seventh Grade Students’ Scientific Creativity Test: A Preliminary-Study on Earth Science Context
Samsudin, A., Setyadin, A. H., Suhendi, E., et al. (2018) · IOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · doi:10.1088/1757-899x/288/1/012012 · Cited by 13
Scientific Creativity: Idealism versus Pragmatism
Mumford, M. D., Hester, K. S., & Robledo, I. C. (2010) · Gifted and Talented International · doi:10.1080/15332276.2010.11673550 · Cited by 12
Smyrnaiou, Z., GEORGAKOPOULOU, E., SOTIRIOU, M., & SOTIRIOU, S. (2017) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.2593119 · Cited by 8
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Sharma, A., & Mahrshi, M. V. (2017). Construction and standardization of scientific creativity test. International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied Sciences. 5 (6), ISSN 2349-4476. www.ijetmas.com.
- Simonton, D. K. (2012). Assessing scientific creativity: Conceptual analyses of assessment complexities. In National Research Council. (2014). Science of Science and Innovation Policy: Principal Investigators' Conference Summary. National Academies Press.
Cited by
Using digital story writing as a pedagogy to develop AI literacy among primary students
Ng, D. T. K., Luo, W., Chan, H. M. Y., & Chu, S. K. W. (2022) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100054 · Cited by 266
Metadata
- Authors
- Smyrnaiou, Z., Georgakopoulou, E., & Sotiriou, S.
- Affiliations
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- Ellinogermaniki Agogi (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Smyrnaiou, Zacharoula
- Venue
- International Journal of STEM Education
- Published
- 2020-06-16
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2196-7822 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3035324673
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 17.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of STEM Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Horizon 2020 (731872, 66591)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Digital Storytelling and Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- scientific creativity, digital storytelling, effective learning environment, science education
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
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.
