Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

Investigating the Viewpoint of Students of Shahed University about the Academic Members’ Attention to Creativity in Teaching

Majid Abbasian Mirza Master of Educational Planning

Hamed Bakhshi Master of Educational Planning

Reza Hosseinpour Assistant Professor at University of Imam Hossein, , ([email protected])

Abstract

The purpose of this research, is to investigate the viewpoint of students of Shahed University about the academic members’ attention to creativity in teaching in academic year 2014-2015. Research method is descriptive and survey. In this research six components have been considered as creativity components in teaching method such as: mental flexibility, curiosity, growth and emergence of skills, self-actualization, success and using modern teaching methods. Statistical population of all bachelor students at the faculty of humanities, basic sciences and faculty of technical and of Shahed University was 2026. The research sample was determined 322 by using Morgan table. Research tool was a research-made questionnaire being a combination of Randsepp questionnaire and another research-made questionnaire. For data analysis, descriptive statistical methods (mean and standard deviation), inferential (One-sample T test, analysis of variance and Scheffe) were used. Among the respondents’ statements about applying creativity in teaching method that are based on components of (mental flexibility, curiosity, growth and emergence of skills, self-actualization, success and using modern teaching methods), there is a significant difference according to faculties of Shahed University. This research showed that from the viewpoint of students at the faculties of humanities, basic sciences, technical and engineering, university professors’ creativity in teaching is more than average. Also among faculties, professors at faculty of humanities act more creatively than other faculties in teaching.

Keywords: creativity in teaching, academic members, Shahed University.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1783

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

Nowadays universities have many usage for comprehensive development particularly for the development of dominant culture in society. Universities- that the destinies of countries is in the hands of their products- have basic usage in different fields of production, dissemination and training of efficient forces and also development of culture in society. Nowadays creativity is considered as one of the most popular issues among common people and educated people. Most academic officials worldwide, are experiencing extreme thirst to provide creativity-centered methods and contents. We should not provide creativity as an unattainable, expensive and far- fetched imaginations. This imagination is supposed to destroy the root of creativity forever. In real world the role of factors helping the delay or damage of creativity are a lot. This is despite the fact that, naturally creativity seeks an appropriate context for its growth and development. Confronting with inhibiting factors, creativity may stand motionless and perhaps it may reach a point that will be turned off forever (Mahboubi et al, 2009). One of the main problems in educational system especially the educational system of Iran, is failure to achieve educational objectives. Education in the epigraph of its task, often has basic and useful objectives. For example it intends to train creative, innovative and virtuous people, who have social and political growth. But realistically looking at the result, we see that they are weak in all dimensions or the maximum they have grown up in one or two dimensions and rarely can we find people growing up in all dimensions (Kazemi, 1995). The purpose of teaching is to increase learning capacity and good teaching leads to a good learning. Those learners will learn well, who develop the strategies of good learning and acquiring education in themselves. Our current methods are mostly for blocking the students’ minds with duplicate contents and is also for memory improvement and it has been far from its purpose, which is the purpose of thinking (Badri Grgari, 2011). In the beginning of new century along with the changing and dynamic world, dynamism, mobility and flexibility of universities based on humanitarian and logical principles arising from major social policies, has become more important than ever in order to meet the multiple needs of nation. Undoubtedly, universities in terms of their responsibilities need planning, prospective and continuous quality control and improvement of methods, to maintain their endogenous dynamism, (International Institute of Educational Planning IIEP, 2003-2004).

Since the awareness of educational process, interaction between teacher and student and teaching subject, literally calling as teaching method, is so important that curriculum experts, have known its teaching and educational methods as the first important factor in achieving their objectives. Hence, it is necessary that every university should update its curriculum, educational content, and teaching method, research quality, and service providing and also managing the campus and always should expose itself to new experiences (Lanksher et al, 2000). Teaching method is one of the main elements that plays an effective role in achieving educational objectives (Adibnia, 2013). One of the creative teaching methods, is the innovative teaching method. Innovation is the third family representative of information processing model. And has initiated the teaching of metaphorical thinking as a learning model, and encourages students to invent new and creative issues (Joyce, 2009). Teaching style has major effects on learning ability of learners. The main role of teaching is to train good learners (Behrangi, 1998). In the past few decades, features of university lecturers and its relation to their function of teaching-learning process, has attracted

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1784

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

the attention of many scientists and researchers in the field of education; because much of the learning of students or effectiveness of education should be searched in teaching-learning circumstances, mainly in the classroom. In this case university professors should be regarded as the most effective and efficient components in the academic education. And their professional behavior and performance would be embodied in their teaching method (Mehrmohammadi et al, 2005: 18). Therefore, if the use of teaching method by professors of higher education, carries out with a specific planning and is based on scientific findings, it could be a major step toward their professional act and will lead to the modification and improvement of educational environment. Achieving this, requires applying a modern teaching model (Ahmadi et al, 2011: 50). In proper using of teaching methods, those teachers who benefit creativity in this field would be successful. In addition they must have the necessary knowledge and believe in the necessity of correct performance of duties and commitment to them (Mehrmohammadi, 2000).

Ghaedi (1994) by investigating and comparing the teaching methods quality of academic members at faculties of educational sciences in Tehran has achieved these findings: Academic members by using various educational methods, provide suitable examples and force students to get engaged in class activities; in contrast the use of teaching design and continuous evaluation of students are in a low level. Farmihani Farahani (1993) in his research showed that there is a relation between the professors’ expertise in teaching of some courses and the quality of educational performance and lack of expertise, has the most effect in reducing the quality of their performance. Asgarian (1991) in his research found that the use of non-specialist professors, is one of the factors causing problems for students in the field of specialized training.

Tang (1997) in investigating the factors associated with effective teaching in a university in the northeast of America, selected 35000 university students as sample and evaluated 126 academic members from their viewpoint. The results indicated that 12 estimated factors including: clear educational materials, professor’s quality of response to students’ questions, professor’s polite interaction with students, professional behavior, having mastery on teaching subject, having high expectation and other cases are observed well in every classroom. And in general all professors’ teaching at this university was effective. Kulik and Mckeachie (2004) have expressed that in a high quality teaching if professors as well as the students discuss about issues, students will evaluate the discussions and will learn the process of thinking about ideas and contents. This provides a context to train the students’ intellectual skills. Therefore, due to specific cultural conditions and the country’s current educational system- which poorly is in line with creative training- this research in Iran is essential. Other reasons to choose the present topic are: Implementation of innovation and creativity in educational teaching methods, especially at universities and investigating the effect of creativity and innovation in teaching on developing creative thinking in line with foreign research. In this research we seek to answer the following key question: How is the level of applying creativity in academic members’ teaching at faculties of Shahed University? 5 Tang 6 Kulik and Mckeachie

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1785

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

Methodology Research method in this study from its objective is applied method. Because it has been done in order to solve the issues and problems promptly and to take necessary measures. So through which obstacles and problems with careful and systematic planning could be eliminated or their severity could be prevented. On the other hand, in terms of data collection method this research is a descriptive-survey research. In this research viewpoint of students about the professors’ attention to creativity in teaching at Shahed University have been measured by descriptive- survey method. Statistical population of present research includes all male and female students in bachelor program at faculties of humanities, technical & engineering and basic sciences, which is based on a comprehensive plan in the academic year 2014-2015 at Shahed University, and its number is equal to 2026 undergraduate students in bachelor program which were chosen using Krejcie and Morgan Table and reliability 95% and stratified random sampling method is 322 students that have been chosen from the sample population. In this research for gathering data, a research-made questionnaire which is a combination of Randsepp questionnaire translated by Moghimi and a series of questions prepared by researcher have been used. Research tool is a researcher-made tool to measure the professors’ attention to creativity and the researcher has achieved it during the study of theoretical foundations and prior research and its reliability has been studied using the Likert Scale by 5 experts in the field of curriculum and philosophy of education. Its stability has been obtained in a preliminary research by studying 30 students and by using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.

This research tries to investigate the viewpoint of students toward the professors’ creativity in teaching. At first by using library resources, theoretical foundations were studied and related research were gathered and after obtaining the agreement of experts about appropriate components (reliability) and as well as implementing a test, the preliminary tool was prepared. After completion, the final questionnaire based on gender and type of faculty, was distributed among university students and the sample opinion was surveyed.

Table 1: Cronbach’s alpha study viewpoint of students with regard to the creativity in professors teaching Scale Cronbach’s alpha coefficient Tool 0.93 Creating Curiosity 0.76 Using Modern Teaching Methods 0.78 Mental Flexibility 0.73 Growth & Emergence of Skills 0.91 Success 0.89 Self-actualization 0.82

For analyzing data obtained from questionnaire and according to the research questions, to describe current situation and classifying the research groups in terms of different characteristics and describing the characteristics of population, descriptive statistical methods such as (frequency, percent, diagram, indices of central tendency (mean and standard variation) have

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1786

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

been used. In order to help in making a relation between research variables, inferential statistical methods such as independent T and other methods, with regard to the assumption of applying these tests have been used. They have been used in a way that we can conclude via them, and to achieve this purpose SPSS statistical software version 21 was used.

Findings How is the level of applying creativity in academic members’ teaching at faculties of Shahed University? Table 2: Respondents frequency distribution according to academic members’ attention to the students’ creativity based on faculty Number Mean Standard Standard Error Deviation Humanities 139 102.58 18.66 1.58 Technical 100 96.01 18.10 1.81 Basic 83 102.12 13.34 1.49 Total 322 100.42 17.47 .97

Table 3: Results of Variance Analysis about the attention of academic members to the students’ creativity based on faculty Sum of Degree of Mean of F Level of Squares Freedom Squares Significance Within-group 2839.30 2 1419.65 4.759 .009 Variance Between-group 95155.41 319 298.9 Variance Total 97994.71 321 To study the presence of a significant difference among viewpoint of students about creativity according to the variable of faculty, the one way analysis of variance or ANOVA test was used and the results are presented in a table and include the following findings: The obtained level of significance has been calculated sig=0.009, since the significance (sig=0.009) is less than our desired significance level (sig=0.05), therefore we conclude that there is a difference in the level of applying creativity in the teaching of academic members in faculties of comprehensive plan at the university. In other words there is a significant difference between viewpoints of students about the difference in the level of applying creativity in academic members’ teaching in faculties of comprehensive plan at the university based on type of the faculty. Results based on Table (2) and Scheffe post hoc test (Table 3) suggest that, in the level of using creativity in teaching by academic members at the faculties of comprehensive plan in this university, at first academic members of faculty of humanities had the most attention and then faculty of basic sciences and at the end faculty of technical and engineering had the least attention to the level of applying creativity in teaching by academic members at the faculties of comprehensive plan in this university. The academic members’ attention in applying creativity in teaching is higher than average.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1787

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

Table 4: Comparing the mean scores of students about Academic Members’ Attention toward the creativity of students. The mean range of 5 values (m=3) Tool Mean T SD SE T Significant Level Students 3.34 .58 .032 103.19 0.000 Creativity

Investigating the results presented in Table (4) suggest that: there is a significant difference between sample mean and hypothetical population mean in the significant level 0.01 (t=103.19), about academic members’ attention to the students’ creativity. Cutting line is scored in this way: (mean 1: creativity: too low. Mean 2: creativity: low. Mean 3: creativity: average. Mean 4: creativity: high. Mean 5: creatvity: too high). Results suggest that from viewpoint of students: academic members’ attention to creativity of students was significant. Because the mean is higher than 3).

Table 5: Results of Scheffe Test: academic members’ attention to Creativity of students based on faculty.

Multiple Comparison Khalaghiat Scheffe (I) V (J) V2 Mean Standar Level of Confidence Level 95% 2 Differenc d Error Significanc Lower Higher e e Limit Limit Humanities Technical & 6.57 2.26 .01 1.01 12.14 Engineering Basic Sciences .46 2.39 .98 -5.42 6.36 Technical & Humanities -6.57 2.26 .01 -12.14 -1.01 Engineering Basic Sciences -6.11 2.56 .06 -12.41 .19 Basic Humaniries -.46 2.39 .98 -6.36 5.42 Sciences Technical & 6.11 2.56 .06 -.19 12.41 Engineering The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

The results of Scheffe test show that academic members’ creativity based on faculty was different. Thus, Scheffe test has confirmed the significant difference of academic members’ creativity based on faculty in binary comparisons between the ideas of students at faculties of humanities, basic sciences and technical engineering. Thus, professors’ creativity at the faculty of humanities is higher than faculty of basic sciences and at the faculty of basic sciences is higher than the faculty of technical & engineering.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1788

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

Results & Discussion The main question of this research was that « How is the level of applying creativity in academic members’ teaching at faculties of Shahed University? ». Statistical analysis have showed that there is a difference about applying the level of creativity in the teaching of academic members in faculties of humanities, basic sciences and faculty of technical & engineering. Also academic members at faculty of humanities have had the highest level of creativity in teaching, then faculty of basic sciences and at the end faculty of technical & engineering have had the lowest level of attention. According to the obtained mean, the level of applying creativity in the academic members’ teaching in this university at faculties of humanities, basic sciences and technical & engineering is evaluated higher than average. Results of the present study to some extent correspond to the findings of Amin Mohebbi et al (2013) reassert. The results of his research entitled as «The status of Creative Teaching from Viewpoint of the Students at the faculty of Nursing & Midwifery in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences» showed that from the viewpoint of students, at the faculty of nursing and midwifery in Mashhad, professors’ creativity status in teaching is favorable. Also among the majors of this university, professors in midwifery, act more creatively than the other majors of studies.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1789

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

References 1. Rahim Badrigargari (2011); «Comparing the Effects of Teaching method based on Creative Thinking and Traditional Teaching Method in the Learning of Social Studies of By Students», Journal of Educational Sciences, 4th year, No. 16, Winter 2013, p. 107-120. 2. Mohammadreza Behrangi (1998); «Studying the Viewpoints of Teachers at Junior High school/Guidance School Course about Teaching Methods»; Journal of Educational Research, University of Tarbiat Moallem, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2. 3. Alireza Pirkhaefi (2012); « The Relationship of Meta-Cognitive components of creativity with Mental Health in Students», Scientific & Research Two-quarterly of Social Cognition, First Round, No. 2 4. Mahdi Zarei (2000); «Studying the Effective Factors in Scientific Quality Growth of University Academic Members from the Viewpoint of Academic Members», Thesis, Master, . 5. Mostafa Asgarian (1991); «The Effect of Teacher’s Management in Teaching-Learning process», Journal of Educational Research, No. 2, p. 78. 6. Hassan Gharibi, Yousef Adib, Eskandar Fathiazar, Touraj Hashemi, Rahim Badrigargari, Zoleikha Gholizadeh (2013); «Effectiveness of Strategic Thinking on Question Asking By Male Students of Fifth grade Elementary School in Sanandaj», Research Center for Humanities and Cultural Studies, 4th year, No. 1, pgs. 79-92. 7. Yahya Kazemi (1995), «Generalities of Teaching methods and Skills Emphasizing the Application in Iranian Schools», Tehran Jahad Daneshgahi Publication. 8. Hossein Karimimonaghi, Mahmoud Bakhshi (2013), «Do Modern Teaching Methods have Necessary Effectiveness in Teaching Medical Science in Iran? Systematic Review», Strides in Development of Medical Education, Journal of Center of Medical Education Development & Studies, 10th round, No. 2, pgs. 153-162. 9. Kamran Ganji, Hassan Dinarvand, Hamid Aboutalebi (2012), «The Effectiveness of Teaching Question Asking Skills and Explaining to Teachers on the Creativity of Secondary/High School Students», Innovation & Creativity in Humanities, Round 2, No. 3. 10. Yahya Ghaedi (1994), «Studying & Comparing the Quality of Teaching Methods of Academic members at Faculty of Educational Sciences in Tehran», Allameh Tabataba’i University. 11. Mohsen Farmihanifarahani (1993), «Specialized Relationship of Academic Members with their Teaching Issue at Faculties of Educational Sciences and Basic Science», Master Thesis, Psychology Faculty of Educational Sciences at Allameh Tabataba’i University. 12. Taher Mahboubi (20080, «Pathology of Innovation and Creativity at University», , 12th year, No. 1, spring 2008. 13. Sakineh Mohebbiamin, sani Jafar, Hosseini, Mahmoud Saeidirezvani, Amir Aminyazdi (1993), «The Status of Creative Teaching from the Viewpoint of Students at Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences», Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences, round 13, No. 6.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1790

Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND January 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926

14. Shahnaz Mohagheghian, Gholamreza ahmadi, Zohreh Saadatmand (2012), «Recognizing and Applying Modern Teaching Methods among professors of Humanities Department», Research on Curriculum, 9th year, 2nd round, No. 8, Series 35, pgs. 48-58. 15. Mahmoud Mehrmohammadi (2000), «References in Research within the Realm of Education», Publication of Educational Research Center. 16. Mahmoud Mehrmohammadi, Mohsen Zolfaghar (2004), «Students’ Evaluating the Teaching Quality of Academic members of field of Humanities at Universities of Tehran», Journal of Behavior, No. 6, pgs. 17-28. 17. Nasser Mozaffari, Mohammadali Mohammadi, Behrouz Dadkhah (2010), «Characteristics of Effective Teaching from the Viewpoint of Students at Ardabil University of Medical Sciences», Scientific & Research Journal of Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, 12th year,. 18. Adibnia Asad & etc spring(2013), Comparison The Effect of Problem- Solving And Discovery Teaching Methods on The Social Problem- Solving Skills Of Female Students, Research in curriculum planning, A Quarterly Journal of Science and Research, Islamic Azad university- Khorasgan (Isfahan) Branch,Vol10,No9 (continues 36),pages63-78. 19. Joyce B & etc, (2009), Learning Models, Means for Teaching, Translated by Mehrmohammadi M. Abedi L, Tehran, Samt publication 20. Kulik, J.A. & Mckeachie, w.J. (2004). The Evaluation of Teachers in Higher education, Review of Reseach in Education, 3:210-228. 21. Lankshear, C., Snuder, I., & Green, B. (2000). Teachers and techno literacy Sydney: Allen and UNWIN. 22. Tang Thomas Li-Ping (1997).Teaching evaluation in a public institution of higher: Factors related to the overall to teaching effectiveness. Available in: http://www.finddarticles. Com.

http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1791