European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.888749
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE
PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN SECONDARY CLASSES:
A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Muhammad Kamran1i,
Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas2,
Congman Rao1
1
Faculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, 5268 Renmin Street,
Changchun City, Post Code: 130024, Jilin Province, China
2Assistant Professor Lahore Leads University, Pakistan
Abstract:
The main aim of the present study was to find out the views of Pakistani secondary
science teachers about the necessity of creativity at the secondary level. The study was
qualitative in nature and conducted among 14-secondary science teachers in Pakistan.
14 detailed interviews were administered for the data collection after that the data were
analyzed through coding and the thematic process of Miles and Huberman (1994). In
last, the findings of the study were concluded which showed that due to intrinsic and
extrinsic reasons the teachers considered creativity very necessary at the secondary
level.
Keywords: creativity, secondary science teachers, reasons
1. Introduction
1.1 Creativity as an important factor
It is extremely important that to say that teaching profession is the cause of the
advancement of nations (Kamran, Abasimi & Congman, 2015). Creativity is the best
solution to all problems in education, but unluckily in the practical fields, only a little
and shallow place is offered to it. Further, in past days, creativity was only considered
through the Western philosophies and no other perceptions got a proper value but now
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group
838
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
there is a requirement to see the creativity through other views as well (Newton &
Newton, 2014). Although creativity is the essential 21st-century skill, unfortunately, it
never understood properly and exactly in the way as it should be (Azzam, 2009).
Creativity is not a fresh and today's phenomenon (Carruthers, 2002) but it evolved
through the stages of stone into the modern technological stage. As the speedy progress
and changes resulted in technologies, various complications and problems also evolved
which needs creativity (Newton & Newton, 2014) for its solution. Limited resources
further create the economic challenges which again need creativity to cope with
(Shaheen, 2010).
When we discuss creativity then discrimination between the two terms- teaching
creatively and teaching for creativity is an important commentary. The former focuses
on the teacher's ability to build such methods, factors, and lessons that motivate the
learners. While the latter focuses on how to foster and cultivate the learners' own
creative thinking. Both are used quite extensively in the creativity field. The term
creative learning is more suitable and helpful than teaching for creativity to discuss
creativity because the former is broader than the later (Jeffrey & Craft, 2004). Some
researchers and educationists have stated that one popular problem is that creativity is
the field of special people only (Newton & Newton, 2014), however, other researchers
(e.g. Boden, 2004, Runco, 2008) claimed that every person can be creative and creative
behavior can be found in every person. The second problem about creativity which
attracted most of the researchers was that creativity had been attached with the arts
only (Newton & Newton, 2014). But actually, creativity is polymorphic which covers
several fields (Boden, 1994), not only the arts.
Many writers such as Mellou (1996), Runco (1990) and Edwards and Springate
(1995) explained that teachers can encourage creativity by applying special methods
and techniques. Runco (2003) claimed that teachers should motivate an interest in
children and encourage them to construct their own concepts of knowledge. Several
elements e.g., the pressure on teachers and lack of training in early years can affect the
encouragement of creativity in early years (David, 2003; Downing, Johnson & Kaur,
2003).
2. Statement of the problem
Creativity is a basic phenomenon which is very important and necessary in schools,
therefore, Sharp (2004) stated that creativity achieved an official status as one of the
greatest purposes in English schools. However, it brings many questions in mind that
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
839
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
whether creativity is necessary at the secondary school level? If yes then what are the
basic reasons behind it?
It is suitable to adopt the democratic definition of creativity because in this way
every child can be counted for creativity because creativity is related to an individual's
personality and emotional life (Sharp, 2004) therefore it will be of greater importance if
creativity could be understood in the views of Pakistani secondary science teachers and
to further examine their views that why they consider creativity important at secondary
level.
The past research shows that the views and beliefs of teachers about creativity
were affected by several factors. Some teachers show sympathy to creativity while
others not. Some take it necessary at secondary level while others deny it. This produces
a gap for the present research problem. This research problem needs to be understood
by the researchers in the creativity field. This disagreement led us to dig more into the
matter about the problem under investigation to explore the beliefs of 14 such
secondary science teachers.
2.1 Objective of the study
This main aim of this article was to examine those reasons that were described by the
secondary science teachers in Pakistan to confirm the placement of creativity at the
secondary level in Pakistan.
2.2 Research Question
According to secondary science teachers, what are the basic reasons that placement of
creativity is necessary at the secondary level in Pakistan?
2.3 Conceptual framework
The following conceptual frame was designed by the researchers from the broad view
of the literature.
Extrinsic
Reasons
Creativity
Secondary
Science
Teachers’
views
Placement of
Creativity at
secondary level
Intrinsic
Reasons
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
840
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
3. Literature Review
With regards to creativity, Sharp (2004) in her review study stated that creativity
achieved the official acknowledgment as one of the principal aims in English schools.
Gardner (1999) in his research work used the "elite definition of creativity" which stated
that creative people are special (intelligent) and they make difference by putting great
tasks in science, social science, music and/ or art. This type of creativity is reserved only
for special individuals. While Futures (1999) stated that creativity is "democratic", as
opposed to Gardner's view (1999) and stated that creativity is the right of each person
and cannot be applied only to special and intelligent people. It can be said that this is
the most beneficial definition of creativity in relation to education because every person
can be considered for creativity. Most experts agree that creativity is different from
intelligence because children who get higher marks on intelligence tests are not
essentially highly creative. When you will talk to parents about their children's
creativity then they will undoubtedly think that you are talking about artistic or musical
ability (Sharp, 2004) because most people relate creativity with arts exclusively
although creativity relates to all the fields (Newton, 2012).
The Robinson Report (i.e Futures, 1999) claims that, while there are firm relations
between the arts and creativity, but linking creativity solely with the province of the
arts is awkward because it can cancel the role of creativity in other areas, such as
science, mathematics and various other fields, therefore, it is suitable to adopt the
democratic definition of creativity because, in this way, every child can have a room for
creativity. Mellou (1996) suggests that the creative environment, creative programs, and
creative teachers are extremely necessary for creativity enhancement. Many experts in
the field of creativity such as Craft (2000), and Runco (1990) stated in their studies that
teachers try to cultivate creativity by asking open-ended questions, and, by admiration
of the child who gives unexpected answers to teachers. Runco (2003) stated that
teachers should be devoted to children's creative potential and they should inspire the
children and should lead them to make their own answers and clarifications about
knowledge and questions which they asked because the children/students need their
own conceptions for creativity. Several elements i.e pressure on teachers and a lack of
training can retract the creativity (David, 2003 & Downing et al., 2003).
Various studies have been done in the field of creativity. All the studies were
narrowly related to the mentioned topic because there was only limited literature in the
area of creativity in which the current researchers were interested. We hope that the
mentioned literature reviewed would make sense to the readers although its relevance
is limited this very article will open the doors for the future researchers.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
841
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
4. Research Method
4.1 Participants and context of the study
Secondary level is an important base for any education system; therefore, the target
respondents for the mentioned study were secondary science teachers in Dera Ismail
Khan and Tank City. Secondary science education is considered the third early
education in Pakistan after primary and middle stage education. Purposive sampling
was used because only that teacher was considered fit for the study that was qualified
with bachelor or master degree in science, therefore, only science teachers were chosen
for interviews. Teachers were approached by using the permission from the principal or
headmaster/headmistress of the concerned institution. 14 teachers (9 females, 5 male)
agreed to be interviewed in detail whose interviews were then recorded in researcher's
personal cell phone by their permission. The demographic information was shown in
Table 1 below.
Table 1: Demographic Information of teachers
Teacher penname
Gender
Teaching experience in years
Subject taught
1.
Alfaama
F
3
Science
2.
Abhaama
F
4
Science
3.
Ajaala
F
9
Science
4.
Asaama
F
6
General Science
5.
Ajaada
F
5
General Science
6.
Adaaba
F
2
Biology
7.
Azlaana
F
3
General Science
8.
Aiqaan
M
8
Science
9.
Armaghana
F
2
Science
10. Azjaana
F
3
Science
11. Albaan
M
7
Science
12. Alqaan
M
6
Science
13. Aosaaf
M
1
Science
14. Adnanaaz
M
5
Science
4.2 Research design
The qualitative researchers in various studies already described the teachers' beliefs
with regards to creativity e.g it was mentioned in the study of Sak (2004), Fleith (2000),
and Lilly and Bramwell-Rejskind (2004) therefore seeing the past research studies we
(the current researchers) followed the present case and preferred to choose the
qualitative method to determine the teachers beliefs involved in secondary science
education and thought that if qualitative method can bring novel and beautiful results.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
842
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Therefore, in-depth 14 semi-structured interviews were conducted face to face with
selected 14 teachers (9 females, 5 male). The qualitative design of semi-structured
interviews was thought to be more suitable as it permits the researcher to enter into the
interviewees' life to dig up deep the matter (Patton, 2002; Chan &Yuen, 2015).
Interviews can also give us more data which is sometimes not possible with the
questionnaires (Chan &Yuen, 2015) or other survey instruments. So the researchers in
the current study desired to use the interviews because it allows the respondents to give
extra information (Gay, Mills & Airasian, 2012). The interview questions were adapted
from the studies/theses of Alsahou (2015) and Shen (2014) that were conducted on
creativity and its related areas.
4.3 Data collection and data analysis
For the current research study, 14-semi-structured interviews were administered face to
face with selected 14 secondary science teachers (9 females, 5 male). An interview guide
with an open ended design was used. Some extra and follow-up questions were also
asked during the interview for more interpretation (Chan &Yuen, 2015) because
sometimes the respondents want to give more detail about the problem under
investigation. According to the main objective of the study, mainly the following one
question was asked in the interview. “In your perception, is creativity necessary at
secondary level? If yes, in which way? If not, then why not? Please explain it briefly.
Before the interviews were started, the interview questions were showed to some
of the respondents because they wanted to see it. All the interviews were audio
recorded in the researcher's own cell phone with the consent and agreement of the
respondents and transcribed the whole data word by word after the interviews were
recorded. All the scripts of the interviews were analyzed according to the coding
method of Miles and Huberman (1994). The codes were then divided according to the
categories aroused from the research question, and finally, themes were created as was
done in Chan and Yuen (2015) and Saldana (2009) (as shown in Table 2).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
843
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Table 2: Major, sub-categories, themes, and codes
Major category
Sub-category
Themes
Codes
Basic level for
Intrinsic
boosting creativity
Reasons
Source of learning
Secondary Science
Teachers Views
V-R-B-L
V-R-SLearning
Reasons for the placement of
Base for scientific
V-R-B-S-
creativity at secondary level
approach
App
Preparation for
Extrinsic
V-R-P-Ad-
advance level
Reasons
Level
Prohibition of rote
V-R-P-R-
learning
Learning
5. Findings
The findings were mainly categorized according to the mentioned research question of
the study. The themes helped in forming the codes. All the themes supported the
findings that were drawn from the interviews and it gave much support to the teachers'
views about creativity.
5.1 Placement of creativity at secondary level in Pakistani schools (Research
Question)
To place creativity at the secondary level is necessary and important because the
secondary level is the start of any students' academic life. If the students get much
attention towards creativity at these starting years, their creative thinking will be much
polished in further years. This evidence was stated by (Alfaama) in her interview as:
Obviously, creativity is necessary at secondary level because this is the basic level where
creativity is necessary. When you give some knowledge at this basic level it will
brainstorm them (students) and they (students) will think about different aspects of life.
So obviously it is very important at the secondary level.
(Alfaama)
The students learn many things from the book but sometimes they also learn
from the surrounding environment to achieve the creative behavior. For this, they need
creative thinking which can be getting at secondary school level. This evidence was
found in the comments of Azlaana as:
Through creativity we can evaluate many things in our students that's why creativity
is the best thing (which is necessary at the secondary level). It must be in curriculum and
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
844
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
should be placed in the system. Because you can say that students learn many things
from the book but sometimes they learn different things rather than books. Students make
models i.e they do different things. They do something new. They need some additional
knowledge.
(Azlaana)
Azjaana stated that the learning opportunities for the student are greater in doing the
practice in the laboratory because when the student does practically they learn more
creatively. Therefore, there is a room for creativity at the secondary level to pursue
practicality. This was shown in her comments as:
Yes, of course through creativity the students will learn more. The students don't get
much information. When they perform the practical the students learn more and their
knowledge is improved more.
(Azjaana)
Another important opinion which came from one of the teachers during the
interview was that students should have a creative mind at the secondary level and
teachers should work hard on it. Teachers should provide possible opportunities for it.
This was stated by Albaan as:
Yeah, it is really very imperative at the secondary level. They should have creative mind
at this level and teachers should create things in their mind that is why science
(chemistry) isn't only a simple teaching subject but it's a thing that is really related to
day-to-day practical life and I think there are some students; they are looking very much
creative but since lack of resources they are not showing their creativity. They are unable
to express themselves because their conditions are not as suitable as it should be.
(Albaan)
It was also shown that creativity is really necessary and important at secondary
level because at this level, the students are in preliminary ages and if the teachers did
not help them at this very level then they become habitual to rote learning which is not
so fruitful in the scientific field and a big hurdle to creativity. So creativity should have
a place in schools at secondary level. This was explained by Adnanaz in his comments
as:
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
845
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Of course, creativity is very necessary at this level because as it is a base for science
because if we will not consider creativity at this class (secondary level) then students will
consider it a boring subject in their minds and hurdles will be produced for them because
after secondary level they study science at advanced level. So if you will not make them
understand the basics of science through creativity so he/she will not study science
creatively. So creativity at the secondary level is very necessary because the secondary
level is the start of science so you have to make every topic easy (for students) and
understandable according to the minds of students so that they could not go through rote
learning and memorize science through rote learning.
(Adnanaz)
6. Discussion
While with regards to creativity, in the previous literature some studies suggested that
some teachers didn't feel well with the creative traits in their students (Cropley, 1992;
Davis & Rimm, 1994; Fasko, 2000; Westby & Dawson, 1995) which means that their
beliefs to creative traits (creative students) were somehow not well adjusted. This
misconception towards creativity can also be found within the study of Westby and
Dawson (1995) where teachers seemed to view the creative students' trouble making,
disruptive and difficult to manage in the regular classrooms especially in science
lessons. In contrast to this assumption, in the current study, the teachers highly valued
the creativity in their students at the secondary level and firmly they felt the great
motivation to cultivate creativity in students at secondary level so the current study
findings showed a great respect for creative students. These teachers at the secondary
level observed the great potential of creativity in their students, and they believed that
they were able to manage the creative students in their science lessons. Further, they
use specific ways when necessary to guide the creative students at the secondary level
and they know how to lead creative students so that they could produce better creative
products. It seems that this positive belief towards creativity and creative students
could be due to the teachers' well academic background, professional training and
greater experience in science education at secondary level. So this system of belief of
Pakistani secondary science teachers towards creativity at secondary level could be
referred to as "balanced beliefs" that were also supported by studies of Chan and Yuen
(2015), Seo, Lee, and Kim (2005) and Lee and Seo (2006). In the mentioned past studies,
the authors named these positive beliefs as "balanced beliefs about creativity" and
admitted that when a "balanced beliefs towards creativity" possessed by teachers, then
its positive results in students' creativity in science lessons. Science teachers that were
interviewed in this current study made a positive impact on teachers about the
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
846
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
placement of creativity in secondary schools. All the teachers' views about the
placement of creativity at secondary level were encouraging, motivated and positive.
6.1 Implications
Generally, the findings of this article gave useful insights to future researchers about the
placement of creativity at secondary level e.g, how to frame their beliefs about the
placement of creativity. The teachers also accepted to shape positive their beliefs
towards creativity and its placement at the secondary level.
The solid and rigorous implications that were suggested by this article for
teachers and future researchers are: (i) all teachers should pay attention to creativity
and its related issues at secondary level; (ii) all teachers need to understand the
importance of creativity at secondary level; (iii) all teachers should pay attention to the
curriculum at secondary level to notice the placement of creativity; (iv) the government
should pay attention to schools especially in improving the environment; (iv)
professional training should be run by the government among teachers to make the
environment more conducive for creativity in classroom.
6.2 Limitations
The current research study was limited to 14 secondary science teachers only who were
involved directly in science education in their schools and they had experience in
science teaching for several years. The small sample size (N=14) limits the
generalizability of the current research results (Chan and Yuen 2015). The current
research study can only be perceived as a qualitative small-scale research. Due to time
and resource limitations, a larger and more representative group of teachers were not
feasible in the current research study although there are definitely many more teachers
with or without a background in science education that can make it a priority to
cultivate creativity in their students but that sample was beyond the scope of the
present research. More specifically, the interview method can lead to the subjective
results in the current research, because it was based on teachers' self-reporting beliefs
towards creativity (Chan and Yuen 2015). Finally, it is suggested by the current
researchers for the future studies to using other research techniques, such as classroom
observations, focus group interviews, quantitative surveys, content analysis and/or
review studies which would help them to confirm the teachers' reported beliefs about
creativity.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
847
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
References
1. Alsahou, H. (2015). Teachers' beliefs about creativity and practices for fostering
creativity in science classrooms in the State of Kuwait.
2. Azzam, A.M. (2009). Why Creativity Now? A Conversation with Sir Ken
Robinson. Educational Leadership. 67(1), 22-26.
3. Boden, M.A. (1994). Precis of the Creative Mind: Myths and mechanisms. Brain
and Behavioural Science, 17, 519-531.
4. Boden, M.A. (2004). The Creative Mind - Myths and Mechanisms. London:
Routledge.
5. Carruthers, P. (2002). Human creativity. British Journal of the Philosophy of
Science, 53, 225–249.
6. Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2015). Teachers' beliefs and practices for nurturing
creativity in students: Perspectives from teachers of gifted students in Hong
Kong. Gifted Education International, 31(3), 200-213.
7. CRAFT, A. (2000). Creativity across the Primary Curriculum: Framing and
Developing Practice. London: Routledge.s
8. Cropley, A. J. (1992). More ways than one: Fostering creativity. Ablex Publishing.
9. David, T. (2003). What do we know about teaching young children?. British
Educational Research Association.
10. Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (1994). Gifted education: Matching instruction with
needs. Education of the gifted and talented, 1-24.
11. de Souza Fleith, D. (2000). Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the
classroom environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.
12. Downing, D., Johnson, F., & Kaur, S. (2003). Saving a Place for the Arts. A Survey
of the Arts in Primary.
13. Edwards, C. P., & Springate, K. W. (1995). Encouraging Creativity in Early
Childhood Classrooms. ERIC Digest.
14. Fasko Jr, D. (2000). Creativity and education. Creativity Research Journal,
2001(13), 317-327.
15. Futures, A. O. (1999). National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural
Education. Department for Education & Employment.
16. GARDNER, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st
Century. New York, NY: Basic Books.
17. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies
for analysis and applications Boston: Pearson.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
848
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
18. Jeffrey, B. & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity:
distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies. 30(1), 77-87.
19. Kamran, M., Abasimi, E., & Congman, R. (2015). Comparative Study of the
Attitudes of Education and Non-Education Students towards the Teaching
Profession in Gomal University, Pakistan. International Education and Research
Journal, 1(4), 52-56.
20. Lee, E. A., & Seo, H. A. (2006). Understanding of creativity by Korean elementary
teachers in gifted education. Creativity Research Journal, 18(2), 237-242.
21. Lilly FR and Bramwell-Rejskind G (2004). The dynamics of creative teaching. The
Journal of Creative Behavior 38: 102–124.
22. Mellou, E. (1996). Can creativity be nurtured in young children?. Early child
development and care, 119(1), 119-130.
23. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Newton, L.D., ed. (2012). Creativity for a New Curriculum: 5-11. London:
Routledge/David Fulton.
25. Newton, L. D., & Newton, D. P. (2014). Creativity in 21st-century education.
Prospects, 44(4), 575-589.
26. Patton MQ (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
27. Runco, M. A. (1990). The divergent thinking of young children: implications of
the research. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 13(4), 37-39.
28. Runco, M. A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 47(3), 317-324.
29. Runco, M.A. (2008). Creativity and Education. New Horizons in Education. 56(1),
96-104.
30. Sak U (2004). About creativity, giftedness, and teaching the creatively gifted in
the classroom. Roeper Review 26: 216-222.
31. Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Seo, H. A., Lee, E. A., & Kim, K. H. (2005). Korean science teachers'
understanding of creativity in gifted education. Journal of Secondary Gifted
Education, 16(2-3), 98-105.
33. Sharp, C. (2004). Developing young children's creativity, what can we learn from
research?
34. Shaheen, R. (2010). Creativity and Education. Creative Education. 1(3), 166-169.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
849
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
35. Shen, Y. (2014). Elementary school teachers' interpretation and promotion of
creativity in the learning of mathematics: A grounded theory study (Doctoral
dissertation, The University of Nebraska-Lincoln).
36. Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the
classroom?. Creativity Research Journal, 8(1), 1-10.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
850
Muhammad Kamran, Shah Syed Manzar-Abbas, Congman Rao
SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS' VIEWS ABOUT THE PLACEMENT OF CREATIVITY IN
SECONDARY CLASSES: A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Creative Commons licensing terms
Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 8 │ 2017
851