AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

ISSN Print: 2156-1540, ISSN Online: 2151-1559, doi:10.5251/ajsms.2013.4.2.63.70

2013, ScienceHu, http://www.scihub.org/AJSMS

Teachers Promotion of Creativity in Basic Schools

Kingsley Nyarko, Wiafe Akenten and Inusah Abdul-Nasiru,
University of Ghana, Psychology Department, P. O. Box LG 84, Legon,
kingpong73@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to find out the role of teachers in fostering creativity among basic
school students in Ghana. The sample was drawn on 172 teachers, with different teaching
qualifications and experience between the ages of 20 and 60 years. The findings show that
teachers at the basic level of education promote creativity among students through motivation,
divergent thinking, and the promotion of a conducive learning environment. Again, it was found
out that teachers view the promotion of creativity as a joint responsibility of parents and teachers.
Finally, although teachers agree that creativity is fostered through motivation, there was no
statistically significant difference between teachers who view creativity to be intrinsically
motivated and those who view it to be extrinsically motivated. The implications of the findings are
examined.
Keywords: Creativity, motivation, divergent thinking, environment, parents, teachers, basic
school students
INTRODUCTION
Natural selection, an aspect of the theory of evolution
(Darwin, 1859) suggests that the survival of living
species, especially human beings, to a large extent
depends on their ability to adapt to their environment.
Over the years, the ability of nations and societies to
live productively and meaningfully in their respective
environments has been made possible by the instinct
of survival. Survival in the world, especially in the
earlier centuries required individuals to devise means
to make them live efficiently and effectively in their
environments. Thus, those who survived in the earlier
centuries were those who might have been thinking
outside the box. This is because following the status
quo or being static in ones thoughts never brings
about change and progress. That was the reason
why Darwin indicated that those who are likely to
survive within any ecology are those individuals who
are fit; thus survival of the fittest (Darwin, 1859).
st

In the 21 century, as a result of globalization and

fierce competition among competitors and nations,
governments, educators, and other stakeholders
have been ferreting out ways, not only to survive, but
to make live more meaningful and productive
(Grainger & Barnes, 2006; United Nations, 2008).
The quest to improving the environment and the
living standards of the citizenry has led to civil society
questioning the relevance of current educational
practices. This is because some scholars and

educators hold the view that current educational

practices fail to prepare students to be original in their
thoughts, and thus prevent them from deviating from
the status quo or standard practice. They therefore
conclude that the classroom is not the ideal
environment to foster creativity; since in most cases it
stifles it (Robinson, 2009; Sarason, 1990; Sharan &
Chin Tan, 2008; Sternberg, 2006).
According to these scholars, this is due to the fact
that much of what pupils do in school is driven by a
mindset of a specific answer and one principal way to
arrive at it. Therefore, as children grow older, the less
they have the courage to try other ways of thinking
and the more they try to avoid being wrong.
Documented research in educational psychology
(Alexander, Murphy, & Woods, 1994; Dent, 1995;
Kauffman & Hamza, 1998; Pintrich, Marx, & Boyle,
1993; Postman, 1993; Torrance & Safter, 1990), in
addition to life experiences, workplace experiences,
and individual insights, revealed deficiencies in
educational teaching methods and strategies in which
creative thinking and problem solving are taught at all
educational levels.
As indicated previously, in a world dominated by
increasing technological advancements, creativity
has become an essential facet; human skills and
peoples powers of creativity and imagination are
principal resources in a knowledge driven economy
(Robinson, 2000). As we continue to observe and

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

experience changes in societies, the ability to live

with uncertainty and deal with convoluted issues in
our environments have become crucial and
organizations and governments are now more
concerned than ever to promote creativity (Grainger
& Barnes, 2006). Creativity is thus becoming a nonnegotiable subject in the transformation and
sustenance of progress in our societies.

also emphasized the value of a whole school

commitment to creative education. The more
teachers fathom the significance of creativity and its
relationship to learning and motivation, the better
equipped they are to enhance their students
creativity.
Although, there have been empirical studies on the
role of teachers in promoting creativity elsewhere in
the world (Tan, 1999; Fryer, 2003, 2008), there has
not been one conducted in the country. In their study
on creativity, Nyarko, Assumeng, and Atindanbila
(2012), examined the origin and understanding of
creativity among basic school teachers. The current
study will thus help educators and policy makers to
implement intervention programmes to enable our
schools to produce creative minds in the country. The
study is different from other prior studies because,
apart from finding out how teachers promote
creativity in schools, it also provides the views of
teachers regarding the place of parents and
motivation in the fostering of creativity in pupils.

The question to be asked after examining the

centrality of creativity in societies is how to nurture
creative exploits in pupils in the country? As a result
of the effect of nurture on child development, it is
believed that practices within the environment of
pupils have the faculty of instilling in them creative
potentials. In his ecological systems theory,
Bronfenbrenner (1979) underscores the impact of the
environment in influencing the behaviour of
individuals. Also Csikszentmihalyi (1996) has
emphasized the importance of the environment in
promoting creativity. Also, the Componential Theory
of Creativity assumes that all humans with normal
capacities are able to produce at least moderately
creative work in some domain, some of the time
and that the social environment (the work
environment) can influence both the level and the
frequency of creative behavior (Amabile, 1997,
p.42).

In line with the above reviewed studies, the

researchers sought to 1) find out how basic school
teachers in Ghana promote creativity among their
pupils, 2) determine whether teachers view the
fostering of creativity to be the preserve of only
teachers or parents or both, 3) ascertain whether
teachers see creativity to be intrinsically or
extrinsically motivated, and 4) ferret out if there will
be differences in the fostering of creativity between
teachers who view creativity to be intrinsically
motivated and those who view it to be extrinsically
motivated.

Thus processes and structures that are rolled out by

educational authorities and teachers have the
capacity of producing significant improvements on
their students. When teachers motivate their pupils,
provide opportunities for them to think divergently,
and also create for them an enabling environment for
them to engage in creative activities, they are more
likely to unearth the creative potentials in them.
Amabile (1999) suggested that a persons intrinsic
motivation is crucial to creativity. She argued that
extrinsic motivation such as money is much less
effective: Money doesnt necessarily stop people
from being creative, but in many situations, it doesnt
help (p. 6). According to (Amabile, 1997; Drazin et
al., 1999), people are most likely to be creative when
they love what they do and do what they love. Mestre
(2002) indicated that novice learners find it difficult to
engage in flexible thinking, thus it is necessary to
support their diverse thinking in our quest to fostering
their creative potentials.

Flowing from the above, it is hypothesized that 1)

teachers are likely to promote creativity through
motivation, the promotion of divergent thinking, and
creation of a conducive environment, 2) teachers are
more likely to view creativity as a joint responsibility
between teachers and parents than the preserve of
only teachers or parents, 3) teachers are more likely
to view creative pupils as intrinsically motivated than
extrinsically motivated, and 4) teachers who view
creative pupils to be intrinsically motivated are more
likely to promote it than those who view it to be
extrinsically motivated.
METHOD

Torrance (1995, 1965) has established in his studies

across cultures that creativity flourishes where it is
valued. Similarly, Fryer (1996) discovered that
teachers in the United Kingdom who were very eager
in promoting the creative potential of their students

Sample: The sample of the study was drawn on 172

teachers, consisting of 61 females (35.5%) and 111
males (64.5 %) who were randomly selected from
some basic education schools from the Ashanti- and
Greater Accra regions in Ghana. Their ages ranged

64

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

Promoters of creativity: The teachers were asked a

closed-ended question to find out elements in the
environment that foster creativity in children. The
question was, which of the following individuals
promote creativity in children? The available options
were, 1) teachers, 2) parents, and 3) both teachers
and parents. Teachers were coded as 1, parents
were coded as 2, and both teachers and parents
were coded as 3.

between 20 and 60 years and had taught between 3

and 40 years in basic schools. Again, 89 (51.7%)
teach in private schools, whereas 83 (48.3%) teach in
public schools. 42 (24.4 %) of the teachers have
senior high school education, 73 (42.4 %) training
college education, 44 ( 25.6%) university education,
and 13 (7.6%) with other educational qualifications.
Furthermore, 127 (73.8%) are professional teachers,
whereas 45 (26.2 %) are non-professional teachers.
Finally, 51 (29.7%) teach at the lower primary, 51
(29.7%) teach at the upper primary, and 70 (40.7%)
teach at the junior high school.

Motivation: In finding out from the teachers whether

creativity is intrinsically or extrinsically generated, a
close-ended question was asked. The question was,
is creativity intrinsically motivated or extrinsically
motivated? Intrinsic motivation was coded as 1,
whereas extrinsic motivation was coded as 2.

Procedure: The researchers started the data

gathering process by seeking the approval of the
head teachers of the participating schools. After the
head teachers had agreed to the request, the
teachers were informed about the objectives of the
study and the guarantee of their confidentiality.
Those who were convinced of the studys objectives,
and agreed to take part were randomly selected to
form the sample of the study. The questionnaires
were administered by research assistants, and
participants were given a week to complete them.
After the completion of the questionnaires by
participants, they were thanked for availing
themselves to be part of the study.

Teacher fostering of creativity scale (Nyarko et

al., 2012): The teacher fostering of creativity scale
developed by Nyarko et al. (2012) was used to
measure the teachers promotion of creativity in the
pupils. It is a 15- item scale with a 5 point response
format ranging from 1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly
agree. It measures how teachers reinforce creative
acts, encourage diverse opinions and thinking, and
provide a conducive learning atmosphere in the
classroom for the exhibition of creative acts. Some of
the items on the scale include, reward pupils`
unusual ideas through praises and other rewards,
assist pupils to examine issues from different
perspectives, and provide an atmosphere that
allows pupils to freely express their ideas, views, and
thoughts during discussion. The original scale has a
reliability of 0.87, and those of the subscales are:
reinforcement of creative acts 0.60; encouragement
of diverse thinking, 0.88; and provision of a
conducive learning environment, 0.80. The overall
reliability of the scale for the current study is 0.85,
and the subscales have the following reliabilities:
reinforcement of creative acts 0.55; encouragement
of diverse thinking, 0.85; and provision of a
conducive learning environment, 0.67.

Measures: The research design used for the study

was a survey which necessitated the use of a
questionnaire in collecting the data. This instrument
asked for specific information about the status of the
teachers such as their age, gender, qualification
status, level of completed education, level of class
they teach and the type of school they teach (i.e.
whether private or public). The main measures were
on their promotion of creativity, individuals who
promote creativity, and type of motivation that fosters
creativity.
Promotion of creativity: In finding out how the
teachers promote creativity among their pupils, an
open-ended question was asked. The question was,
how do you promote creativity among your pupils?
Some of the answers given by the participants are, I
promote creativity of my pupils through praises, I
promote the creativity of my pupils through rewards,
I promote the creativity of my pupils through
motivation, I promote the creativity of my pupils by
allowing them to express their views and opinions
freely, I promote the creativity of my pupils by
allowing them to engage in constructive debates, I
encourage them to look at issues from different
perspectives, I create an atmosphere devoid of fear
and intimidation in the classroom.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA

In analyzing the data, descriptive and inferential
statistics were used. Descriptive statistics was used
to find out how teachers promote creativity, their view
on whether creative pupils are intrinsically or
extrinsically motivated, and whether teachers or
parents or both teachers and parents are the
promoters of creativity. Descriptive statistics was
utilized because it provides an understanding of the
data via their frequency distribution, mean, and
standard deviation.

65

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

Additionally, t-test was utilized to find out the

differences in the fostering of creativity by teachers
who view creativity to be intrinsically motivated and
those who view it to be extrinsically motivated. That is
whether teachers who view creativity to be
intrinsically motivated will foster creativity more than
those who view creativity to be motivated
extrinsically.

Frequency Valid Percent

teachers

4.10

parents

1.20

teachers and parents

163

94.80

Total

172

100.00

RESULTS
Teachers promotion of creativity: The table below
(table 1) shows how teachers foster creativity in their
pupils. The descriptive statistics show that 81 of the
teachers representing 47.1% use motivation in
promoting creativity among their pupils. 60 teachers,
representing 34.9% promote the creativity of their
pupils through the promotion of divergent thinking.
Finally, 31 of them, representing 18% promote
creativity in their pupils by creating a conducive
learning environment for them.
Table 1 Teachers promotion of creativity
Frequency
motivation
promotion
thinking

of

creation
of
environment
Total

Teachers view on whether creativity is

intrinsically or extrinsically motivated: From the
table below (table 3), it is evident that teachers differ
in relation to whether creative pupils are intrinsically
or extrinsically motivated. It shows that 96 of the
teachers, representing 55.8% are of the view that
creative children are intrinsically motivated, whereas
76 of them representing 44.2% view creative children
to be extrinsically motivated.

Percent

81

47.10

divergent

60

34.90

conducive

31

18.00

172

100.00

Table 3 Teachers view on whether creativity is

intrinsically or extrinsically motivated
Frequency

Percent

intrinsic motivation

96

55.80

extrinsic motivation

76

44.20

Total

172

100.00

Type of motivation as a determinant of teachers

fostering of creativity: The table below (table 4)
addresses the main hypothesis of the study which
states that teachers who view creativity to be
intrinsically motivated are more likely to promote
creativity among their pupils than teachers who view
creativity to be extrinsically motivated. The results
show that there is no significant difference in the
fostering of creativity between teachers who view
creative pupils to be intrinsically motivated (M=
63.31, SD= 6.04) and those who view creative pupils
to be extrinsically motivated (M= 63.15, SD= 5.23), t
(170) = .191, p>0.05.

Promoters of creativity: The table below (table 2)

reveals teachers views on individuals who promote
creativity. It shows that teachers are of the view that
the promotion of creativity is not only the preserve of
teachers. The descriptive statistics indicates that 163
of the teachers, representing 94.8% view the
promotion of creativity as a shared responsibility
between teachers and parents, whereas 7
representing 4.1% and 2, representing 1.2% of them
view the promotion of creativity to be the
responsibility of teachers and parents respectfully.
Table 2 Individuals who promote creativity in
pupils

Table 4 t-test of type of motivation as a determinant of teachers fostering of creativity

Type
of Frequency
Mean
Standard
Degree
of t-test
Motivation
deviation
freedom
Intrinsic
96
63.31
6.04
170
.191
motivation
Extrinsic
76
63.15
5.23
motivation
p> 0.05

66

significance
.85

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

enough to voice their opinions and explore new

ideas. In fact, every child has creative potentials that
can be expressed under certain favourable
conditions. One way to get students comfortable
enough to do this is for teachers to model creativity
and show their own interests. Hennessey (1997)
suggests teachers show students that you value
creativity, and that you not only allow it but also
actively engage in it.

The study was principally carried out to find out how

Ghanaian basic school teachers promote creativity
among their pupils. The first hypothesis was to figure
out the ways that teachers use to foster creativity in
their pupils. It was specifically stated that teachers
are more likely to promote the creativity of their
students through motivation, divergent thinking, and
the creation of a conducive learning environment.
The results show that the teachers foster creativity in
their students by motivating them, encouraging them
to engage in divergent thinking in their deliberations,
and providing them with a conducive learning
environment. This finding corroborates that of
Amabile (1999) that suggested that a persons
intrinsic motivation is crucial to creativity. She
bickered that extrinsic motivation such as money, is
much less effective: Money doesnt necessarily stop
people from being creative, but in many situations, it
doesnt help (p. 6). It is therefore very significant, in
fostering creativity in students, to build on their
natural interests, passions, and the value derived
from the things they do. According to (Amabile, 1997;
Drazin et al., 1999), people are most likely to be
creative when they love what they do and do what
they love. Intrinsic motivation is essential in fostering
creativity in people because it involves not only the
personal interests and personalities of individuals, but
also how interesting the tasks are, and the value
derives from them.

Furthermore, to promote creativity, it is very

necessary for teachers to foster divergent thinking in
the pupils. Again, to promote diverse and flexible
thinking, it is critical for learners to generate diverse
problems. In learning by problem posing, it is not
useful for learners to repeatedly generate similar
problems (Hirashima, Yokoyama, Okamoto, &
Takeuchi, 2006). Runco (2003) argues that teachers
should show an interest in childrens creative
potential and encourage children to construct their
own personal interpretations of knowledge and
events. Because novice learners find it difficult to
engage in flexible thinking (Mestre, 2002), it is
necessary to support their diverse thinking in our
quest to fostering their creative potentials.
The second hypothesis was to find out the teachers
view about persons who are likely to promote
creativity among the pupils. It was hypothesized that
teachers are more likely to view the promotion of
creativity as a joint responsibility between teachers
and parents. This hypothesis was supported by the
gathered data since the results show that 163 of the
teachers, representing 94.8% view creativity as a
joint effort between teachers and parents, whereas 7,
representing 4.1% view creativity to be the sole
responsibility of teachers, and 2, representing 1.2%
view creativity to be the sole responsibility of parents.
This finding supports those studies that have
established the need for parents to be involved in the
education of their children (e.g., Nyarko, 2010, 2011).

On the issue of the promotion of a conducive learning

climate by the teachers, the result is consistent with
the result of other studies. For instance, Fleith (2000)
found out that in a climate in which fear, one right
answer, little acceptance for a variety of students
products, extreme levels of competition, and many
extrinsic rewards are predominant, it is difficult to
foster high levels of creativity. In fact, the motivation
to be creative rests partly within individuals, but an
individuals social environment also influences
creativity. A positive climate can create an
atmosphere in which creativity and innovation
flourish, whereas a negative one can hinder such
efforts. According to Scott (1965), creative behavior,
a product of the creative individual in a specifiable
contemporary environment, will not occur until both
conditions are met. . . . An unfavorable contemporary
environment will inhibit creative behavior no matter
how talented the individual (p. 213).

When parents become keenly interested in the

education of their children, especially partnering with
teachers, their joint efforts are likely to help in the
identification, nurturing, and fostering the creative
potentials of the children. Lareau (1989, p.253) found
that teachers view their educational activities as
embedded in a larger context and that in order for
classroom work to be effective, it must be supported
by parental involvement in the home. According to
her, parents can help support educational growth
(Lareau, 1989). Using studies by Epstein (1982,
1987) and other teacher surveys she indicated that
teachers want more parent involvement in schooling

In order to avoid stifling the creativity of students, the

teacher needs to provide a friendly and comfortable
environment that students can feel comfortable

67

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

and that parent involvement can increase student

learning, of which creativity is an integral component.

However, the effect of motivation on creativity has

yielded inconsistent results. Whereas researchers
(e.g., Amabile, 1996; Ryan & Deci, 2000) have
underscored the undermining effect of extrinsic
motivation on creativity, others (e.g., Eisenberger &
Rhoades, 2001) have established the enhancing
effect of extrinsic motivation on creativity. In fact,
Eisenberger and Rhoades (2001) found that students
who were promised of a reward for creative acts
increased their creative tasks performance. The
findings of this study show that the teachers do not
see intrinsic and extrinsic motivations as polar
opposites, and that students have to be motivated
only intrinsically to promote their creative drive, but
also extrinsically. This finding demonstrates that
teachers and educators should see intrinsic and
extrinsic motivations as playing a complimentary role
in fostering creativity. In Ghana, where majority of the
citizenry faces economic challenges, neglecting
extrinsic motivations in the promotion of creativity
could be detrimental in nursing the creative potential
in our children.

Thirdly, on the hypotheses finding out from the

teachers whether creativity is intrinsically or
extrinsically motivated, the result indicates that 96 of
the teachers, representing 55.8% view creativity to be
intrinsically motivated whereas 76, representing
44.2% view motivation to be extrinsically motivated. It
appears from the finding that the teachers are split in
their view regarding whether motivation is driven by
forces outside of the person or internally driven by
the persons themselves. Although, the literature
suggests that creative potentials spring from within
the person, extrinsic motivation cannot be overruled
entirelyalthough it does not help (Amabile, 1999).
Fourthly, the hypothesis that posited that teachers
who view motivation to be intrinsically motivated are
more likely to promote it than those who view it as
extrinsically motivated was not supported by the data.
Since it is extant in the literature that intrinsic
motivation relates to creativity, the researchers were
of the view that the teachers were more likely to rely
on intrinsic factors such as interest in the activity
being done, value to be derived in the activity, and
the relevance of the activity in fostering creativity as
juxtaposed with external factors such as rewards and
praises. For over 30 years, psychologists have
studied intrinsic motivation as a wheel upon which
creativity is enhanced (Amabile, 1996). This
orientation is based on the fundamental assumption
that when people enjoy the work itself, they process
information flexibly, experience positive affect, and
become willing to take risks and persist in efforts to
develop and refine ideas (Elsbach & Hargadon, 2006;
Shalley, Zhou, & Oldham, 2004).

The findings of this study have brought to the fore the

critical role of teachers in the country in promoting the
creative exploits of students. It is therefore
recommended that trainee teachers in our colleges of
education, as well as those from our tertiary
education are given the necessary training in skills
and competencies that enable creativity to thrive in
our schools. They should be provided with skills in
motivating children, how to create an enabling
learning atmosphere in the classroom, and not
restricting the thinking trajectories of the pupils.
Teachers in the country, especially, at the basic level
must be trained to teach creatively. These are pillars
that can unearth, nurture, and hold the creativity of
our children.

Also, Lepper and Green (1973) have indicated in

their study that when children are rewarded on tasks
that are intrinsically challenging, the extrinsic rewards
tend to undermine their effort on the task. Although,
intrinsic motivation could provide a fertile ground for
creativity to flourish, it might not be enough due to
personality and cultural differences. According to
(Ryan & Deci, 2000; Silvia, 2008), when employees
are motivated intrinsically, they are drawn to original
perspectives and new discoveries, which attract,
engage, and sustain their interest. But, what is novel
to an individual might not necessarily be useful to
others. In the view of Silvia (2008, p. 58), interest
attracts people to new, unfamiliar things, and many of
these things will turn out to be trivial.

Secondly, the Ghana Education Service should make

the promotion of creativity, especially at our basic
schools a major priority. They should move away
from talking about creativity, and begin acting
creativity. That is they should put in place
interventions in our basic schools that encourage
creativity, and not to undermine it.
Thirdly, school authorities together with teachers
have to put in place avenues that enable them to
collaborate with parents in the fostering of creativity
among school pupils. This is because since children
spend more time at home than in school, parents
must have an idea about certain creative potentials in
their children which the teachers are oblivious to.
This collaborative interaction will be to the mutual

68

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

REFERENCES

benefit of both parents and teachers, as well as the

wider society.

Alexander, P.A., Murphy, P.K., & Woods, B.S. (1994).

Unearthing academic roots: Educators perceptions of
the interrelationship of philosophy, psychology, and
education. Manuscript submitted for publication.
(Personal collection, M.K. Hamza)

Finally, since the results also indicate that there is no

statistical difference between teachers with regard to
whether creativity is intrinsically motivated or
extrinsically motivated, it is expected that teachers
use both in fostering creativity among pupils, and
desist from fixating on one. However, as much as
possible, it is better as teachers to promote the
inherent interest, value, and enjoyment that are
derived from activities that we engaged in.

Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO:

Westview Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in
organizations. California management review, 40 (1),
39-58.

Aside the recommendations deduced above, it must

be noted that the study was not conducted without
limitations. The first limitation has to do with the
locations of the schools used in the study. The
sample was drawn on schools that are located in the
cities, and thus the views of teachers in rural schools
are not captured. It is expected that future studies
seek the views of teachers from rural schools. Finally,
it would have been informative if the views of the
students have been sought simultaneously with that
of the teachers to give a clearer picture of how
teachers foster creativity in pupils. Irrespective of the
limitations, the study has shown some of the ways
through which creativity can be fostered in children in
our schools.

Becker, H.J. & Epstein, J. L. (1982). Parent Involvement: A

Survey of Teacher Practices.

CONCLUSION

Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999).

Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A
sense making perspective. Academy of Management,
24, 286 -307.

Elementary School Journal. 83(2): 85-102.

Darwin, c. (1859). On the origin of species by means of
natural selection. London: Murray.
Bronfenbrenner,
U.
(1979).
Ecology
of
human
development: Experiments by nature and design.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the
Psychology of discovery and invention. New York,
Harper.
Dent, Jr., H.S. (1995). Job shock: Four new principles
transforming our work and business. New York: St.
Martins Press.

There is no denying the relevance and practical

benefits of creativity to society. The contribution of
creative ideas and products to the advancement of
society has led to the call for the enhancement of
creativity in our schools. As the findings of this study
have shown, teachers, as well as parents have
respective roles to play to ensure that the creative
potentials of pupils are unraveled, nurtured, and
harnessed to the benefit of the pupils in particular,
and society in general.

Elsbach, K. D., & Hargadon, A. B. (2006). Enhancing

creativity through mindless work: A framework of
workday design. Organization Science, 17, 470-483.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects
of reward on creativity. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 18 (4), 728-741.
Epstein, J. L. (1987). Toward a theory of family-school
connections:
Teacher
practices
and
parent
involvement. In Hurrelman, F. X. Kaufman, & F.Losel
(Eds.), social intervention: Potentials and constraints.
Berlin: W. de Gruyter.

In order to achieve this in our schools and since

creativity is the production of something new and
beneficial to society, the school has to lead. This
leadership that the school, and in particular teachers
have to offer should be manifested in the creation of
an enabling learning atmosphere, promotion of
divergent thinking, and motivation. When school
children are operating in an environment that
rewards, and not punish departure from the status
quo, where their views and expression of arts are
appreciated and respected, and are motivated in their
exhibition of novelty, their creative prowess will grow
and flourish.

Fleith, D. (2000). Teacher and Student Perceptions of

Creativity in the Classroom Environment. Roeper
Review, 22 (3), 148-153.
Fryer, M. (2008). Creative teaching and learning in the UK.
In F. Morais & S. Bahia. (Eds.), Criatividade: Cenceito,
Necessidades e Intervencao. Braga, Portugal:
Psiquilibrios.
Fryer, M. (2003). Creativity across the curriculum: A review
and analysis of programmes designed to develop

69

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2013,4(2): 63-70

creativity. London, UK: Qualifications & Curriculum

Authority.
Fryer, M. (1996). Creative Teaching and Learning. London:
Paul Chapman Publishing.

Pintrich, P.R., Marx, R.W., & Boyle, R.A. (1993). Beyond

cold conceptual change: The role of motivational
beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process
of conceptual change. Review of Educational
Research, 63, 167-199.

Grainger, T., & Barnes, J. (2006). Creativity in the Primary

Curriculum in J. Arthur, T.

Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: The surrender of culture

to technology. New York: Random House.

Grainger & D. Wray. (eds.), Learning to Teach in the

Primary School London:

Robinson, K. (2009). The element. How finding your

passion changes everything. New York: Viking Books.

Routledge.pp.209-225.

Runco, M.A. (2003). Education for creative potential.

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3),
31724.

Hennessdy, B. A. (1997). Teaching for Creative

Development: A Social-Psychological Approach.
Needman Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Robinson. K. (2001). Out of Our Minds Capstone: London

Hirashima, T., Yokoyama, T., Okamoto, M., & Takeuchi, A

(2006). Interactive learning environment by posing
arithmetical word problems as sentence-integration. In
ICCE2006 Workshop Proceedings of ProblemAuthoring, -Generation and -Posing in a ComputerBased Learning Environment (pp. 1-8). International
Conference on Computers in Education 2006, Beijing,
China.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory

and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and well-being. American Psychologist,
55, 68-78.

Kauffman, D., & Hamza, M. K. (1998). Educational reform:

Ten ideas for change, plus or minus two. Society for
Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE)
1998; Published Conference Proceeding.

Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2004). The

effects of personal and contextual characteristics on
creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of
Management, 30, 933-958.

Lareau, A. (1989). Family-School Relationships: A view

from the classroom. Education Policy, 3, no. 3, 245259.

Sharan, S. & Chin Tan, I. (2008). Organizing schools for

productive learning. New York: Springer.

Sarason, S. (1990). The Unpredictable Failure of

Educational Reform. Can we change the course before
its too late? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Silvia, P. (2008). Interest: The curious emotion. Current

Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 57-60.

Mestre, J. P. (2002). Probing Adults Conceptual

Understanding and Transfer of Learning via Problem
Posing. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,
23, 9-50.

Sternberg, R. (2006). Creativity is a habit. Education Week,

February 22.
Tan, A. G. (1999). Teacher roles in promoting creativity.
Teaching and learning, 19, 43-51.

Nyarko, K. (2010). Parental home involvement: The

missing link in adolescents academic achievement.
Educational Research, 1 (9), 340-344.

Torrance, E. P. (1965). Rewarding Creative Behavior.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Nyarko, K. (2011). Parental school involvement: The case

of Ghana. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational
Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 2 (5), 378381.

Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why Fly? Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Torrance, E.P., & Safter, H.T. (1990). The incubation model
of teaching: Getting

Nyarko, K., Assumeng, M., & Atindanbilla, S. (2012). The

understanding and origin of creativity among Ghanaian
basic school teachers. Research Journal in
Organizational Psychology & Educational Studies 1(3)
149-154.

beyond the aha! Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.

United Nations (2008). The challenge of assessing the
creative economy: towards informed policymaking.
www.unctad.org/creative-economy.

70