Sharma, Yogesh. (2010). Developing Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity among Class IX Students. Unpublished. Ph.D., Education. DAVV, Indore.

The following
were the objectives of the present study:

1.
To study the effectiveness of Strategy for Fostering Mathematical
Creativity in terms of Mathematical Creativity.

2.
To compare the adjusted mean scores of
Fluency aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering
Pre-Fluency aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

3.
To compare the adjusted mean scores of
Flexibility aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering
Pre-Flexibility aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

4.
To compare the adjusted mean scores of
Originality aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering
Pre-Originality aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

5.
To compare the adjusted mean scores of
Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity and
Traditional Method Groups by considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as
covariate.

6.
To study the Reaction towards Strategy
for Fostering Mathematical Creativity of students.

7.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Mathematics Anxiety and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of
students by considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

8.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Attitude towards Mathematics and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity
of students by considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

9.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Cognitive Styles and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students
by considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

10.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Curiosity and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

11.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Gender and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

12.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Intelligence and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

13.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Personality and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

14.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Self-Concept and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

15.
To study the effect of Treatment,
Risk-taking and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

16.
To study the effect of Treatment, Study
Habits and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students by
considering Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

The following were
the hypotheses of the present study:

1.
There is no significant difference in the Pre and Post mean scores
of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity Group.

2.
There is no significant difference in the adjusted mean scores of
Fluency aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering Pre-Fluency
aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

3.
There is no significant difference in the adjusted mean scores of
Flexibility aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering Pre-Flexibility
aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

4.
There is no significant difference in the adjusted mean scores of
Originality aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering Pre-Originality
aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate.

5.
There is no significant difference in the adjusted mean scores of
Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering Pre-Mathematical
Creativity as covariate.

6.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Mathematics Anxiety
and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

7.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Attitude towards
Mathematics and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

8.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Cognitive Styles and
their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

9.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Curiosity and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

10.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Gender and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

11.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Intelligence and
their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

12.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Personality and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

13.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Self-Concept and
their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

14.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Risk-Taking and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

15.
There is no significant effect of Treatment, Study Habits and
their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of students when Pre-Mathematical
Creativity is taken as covariate.

The sample for the Field
Stage comprised 111 class IX students. Out of 111, 59 students were in the
Experimental Group and rest in Control Group. These were from Swami Sant Dass
Public School and Sahibjada Ajit Singh Public School situated in Phagwara town
and Sarhali village of Kapurthala and Jalandhar District respectively. On the
other hand, there were two sections of class IX in Saint Soldier Divine Public
School, Phagwara, having a total of 52 students. Both these sections were
selected. These sections continued with traditional method and thus called
Control Group. The sample represented the Gender. There were 31 males and 28
females in Experimental Group. On the other hand, 32 males and 20 females were
in Control Group. Moreover, 82 students were from urban area and 29 were from
rural area. All these schools were affiliated to C.B.S.E., New Delhi. The
Medium of Instruction was English.

The variables assessed in this study were Mathematical Creativity,
Mathematics Anxiety, Attitude towards Mathematics, Cognitive Style, Curiosity,
Intelligence, Personality, Self-Concept, Risk-Taking, Study Habits and Reaction
towards Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity. For assessing Cognitive
Style, Intelligence, Personality, Self-Concept, Risk-Taking and Study Habits
the standardized tools were used. On the other hand, Mathematical Creativity,
Mathematics Anxiety, Attitude towards Mathematics and Reaction towards Strategy
for Fostering Mathematical Creativity were assessed with the help of
Mathematical Creativity Test, Mathematics Anxiety Scale, Attitude towards
Mathematics Scale and Reaction towards Strategy for Fostering Mathematical
Creativity Scale developed by the investigator. Moreover, non-standardized tool
were used to assess Curiosity.

Mathematical Creativity Test (MCT). MCT was developed by the
investigator to assess mathematical creativity. The MCT had a total of 20 items
pertaining to problem solving, problem posing, and overcoming fixation in
mathematical situations. The items of MCT were individually time limited. The
items were scored for fluency (F), flexibility (X), and originality (O). The
test-retest reliability of the MCT was .86 and the Cronbach’s alpha was .78.

Mathematics Anxiety Scale (MAS). The MAS developed by the
investigator was used as a measure of mathematics anxiety. The MAS comprises 44
items pertaining to cognitive and affective dimensions. There was no time limit
but generally students took 25 minutes. Moreover, there were 22 positive
statements and 22 negative statements. The weight age given for positive
statements was 1, 2 and 3 for yes, undecided and no, while, in case of negative
statements the weight age given was 3, 2 and 1 for yes, undecided and no. The
test-retest reliability and split-half reliability coefficients were reported
as .80 and .82 respectively. They also reported a criterion validity (The
mathematics achievement test developed by L.N. Dubey was used as a measure of
mathematics achievement) as –.74.

Reaction towards Strategy for Fostering Mathematical
Creativity Scale. The reaction towards strategy for fostering mathematical
creativity was assessed with the help of Reaction towards Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity Scale constructed by the investigator. There
were 24 statements related to different aspects of strategy for fostering
mathematical creativity, such as, cooperative learning, level of difficulty,
interest, and classroom environment. Against each statement a five-point scale
was given. The five points were Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Undecided (UN),
Disagree (D) and Strongly Disagree (SD). The students were asked to read each
statement carefully and put a tick mark on any one alternative that represents
their reaction towards that aspect of the strategy for fostering mathematical
creativity. There were 12 positive and 12 reverse statements. There was no time
limit for responding this reaction scale. However, students generally took 15 –
20 minutes.

Attitude towards Mathematics Scale: The Attitude towards
Mathematics operationally has been defined as a learned predisposition to
behave in a consistent evaluative manner toward the subject of Mathematics or
Mathematics related situation(s). The components of Attitude towards
Mathematics are cognitive, affective and performance. Attitude towards
Mathematics Scale (ATMS) comprised 42 items pertaining to cognitive, affective
and performance dimensions. There was no time limit but generally students took
30 minutes. There were 21 positive statements and 21 negative statements. For each
positive statement the weightage for Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree
and Strongly Disagree was 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively. On the other hand, for
each negative statement the weightage given for Strongly Agree, Agree,
Undecided, Disagree and Strongly Disagree was 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively.
The Test-Retest reliability and Split-half reliability coefficients were found
to be 0.74 and 0.88 respectively. The scale had Content Validity.

Design: Non-equivalent Control Group Design

Duration: The students of
Experimental Group were taught through the Strategy for Fostering Mathematical
Creativity developed by the investigator. Each day one period was taken. The
duration of one period was 35 minutes. This continued for one month and ten
days. On the other hand, no treatment was provided to Control Group. The
Control Group continued with the routine activities and Traditional Method was
used for teaching Mathematics.

Assessment of Dependent variable: Mathematical Creativity Test developed by the investigator was used as pre-test and post-test.

The moderate variables, namely, Personality, Study Habits, Attitude towards Mathematics, Intelligence, Mathematics Anxiety, Risk-Taking, Self-Concept, Curiosity and Cognitive Style were assessed during the experimentation.

The objective-wise data analysis was given
below:

1.
For studying the
effectiveness of Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity, the data were
analyzed with the help of Correlated t- test.

2.
For comparing the adjusted
mean scores of Fluency aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering
Pre-Fluency aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate, ANCOVA was employed for analyzing
the data.

3.
For comparing the adjusted
mean scores of Flexibility aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy
for Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by
considering Pre-Flexibility aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate, ANCOVA was employed for analyzing
the data.

4.
For comparing the adjusted
mean scores of Originality aspect of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy
for Fostering Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by
considering Pre-Originality aspect of Mathematical Creativity as covariate, ANCOVA was employed for analyzing
the data.

5.
For comparing the adjusted
mean scores of Mathematical Creativity of Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity and Traditional Method Groups by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate,
ANCOVA was employed for analyzing the data.

6.
For studying the Reaction towards Strategy for Fostering
Mathematical Creativity, data were analyzed by computing Mean, SD, CV and
Percentages.

7.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Mathematics Anxiety and
their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 3 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

8.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Attitude towards Mathematics
and their Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

9.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Cognitive Style and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 3 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

10.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Curiosity and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

11.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Gender and their Interaction
on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering Pre-Mathematical
Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2
Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

12.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Intelligence and their Interaction
on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering Pre-Mathematical
Creativity as covariate, 2 × 3
Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

13.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Personality and their
interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

14.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Self-Concept and their
interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 3 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

15.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Risk-taking and their
interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

16.
For studying the effect of Treatment, Study Habits and their
Interaction on Mathematical Creativity of the students by considering
Pre-Mathematical Creativity as covariate, 2 × 2 Factorial Design ANCOVA was used for analyzing the data.

The findings emerged from this study are
given below:

1.
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity was found to be
superior to Traditional Method in fostering Mathematical Creativity and its
components when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity
and its’ components separately.

2.
Students expressed favourable Reaction towards Strategy for
Fostering Mathematical Creativity.

3.
Mathematics Anxiety was not found to be a correlate of
Mathematical Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to
Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

4.
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity was found to be
better suited to students with Low Mathematics Anxiety than students with High
Mathematics Anxiety when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

5.
Attitude towards Mathematics was not found to be a correlate of
Mathematical Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

6.
Attitude towards Mathematics of students may not be taken into
account while selecting Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if
Groups are matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

7.
Cognitive Style was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

8.
Cognitive Style of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with respect
to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

9.
Curiosity was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

10.
Curiosity of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with
respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

11.
Gender was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical Creativity
when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

12.
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity was better suited
to Males rather than Females when Groups were matched with respect to
Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

13.
Intelligence was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

14.
Intelligence of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with
respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

15.
Personality was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

16.
Personality of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with
respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

17.
Self-Concept was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

18.
Self-Concept of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with
respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

19.
Risk-Taking was not found to be a correlate of Mathematical
Creativity when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical
Creativity.

20.
Students with Below Average Risk-Taking were benefited
significantly more from Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity than
students with Above Average Risk-Taking when Pre-Mathematical Creativity was
considered as covariate.

21.
Study-Habits was not found to be correlate of Mathematical Creativity
when Groups were matched with respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

22.
Study-Habits of students may not be considered while selecting
Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity if Groups are matched with
respect to Pre-Mathematical Creativity.

Keyword(s): Mathematical Creativity, Strategy for Fostering Mathematical Creativity, Analysis of Co-variance

- © 2017 All rights reserved