TL;DR: This paper argued that creativity is different from general intelligence and that teaching in a way that encourages and rewards creativity can improve school performance, and that children can learn to make certain kinds of decisions that will enhance their creativity.
Abstract: Schools generally undervalue creativity. Perhaps teachers think creativity is no different from general intelligence or that schooling cannot or should not value creativity, or perhaps they do not know how to teach for creativity. This essay first argues that creativity is different from general intelligence; second, that teaching in a way that encourages and rewards creativity can improve school performance; and third, that children can learn to make certain kinds of decisions that will enhance their creativity. Creativity can be of different kinds and it is important that teachers reward all kinds of creativity.
TL;DR: For example, this paper examined gender differences in fifth-and sixth-grade students' self-reports of confidence, motivation goals (task mastery, ego, and work avoidance), and learning strategies (active and superficial) in whole-class and small-group science lessons.
TL;DR: In this paper, a Likert style questionnaire consisting of 60 adjectives was administered to 451 undergraduates from Beijing, Guangzhou, Taipei and Hong Kong and the results show that the core characteristics of creativity identical in all the samples are: "originality", "innovativeness", "thinking" and "observational skills", "flexibility", "willingness to try", "self confidence", and "imagination".
Abstract: Aspects of creativity concepts across different Chinese populations were examined. A Likert style questionnaire consisting of 60 adjectives was administered to 451 undergraduates from Beijing, Guangzhou, Taipei and Hong Kong. The results show that: (a) the core characteristics of creativity identical in all the samples are: “originality”, “innovativeness”, “thinking” and “observational skills”, “flexibility”, “willingness to try”, “self confidence”, and “imagination”; (b) the Taipei sample, unlike the other three samples, does not associate “wisdom”, “assertiveness”, and “individualism” with creativity; (c) in all Chinese populations the three factors labeled innovative, dynamic, and intellectual were distinguishable in the concept of creativity; (d) “artistic” and “humorous” were missing in the Chinese perception of creativity; (e) creativity characteristics received relatively low ratings on the desirability scale.
TL;DR: In this article, a cognitive study and a quantitative model together examine how changing positive and negative experiences affect these confidences and ultimate decisions and find that human self-confidence, not their confidence in AI, directs the decision to accept or reject AI suggestions.