中美航空院校学生创新思维差异与培养措施研究—基于中国民航大学和美国佛罗里达理工学院的问卷调查
Differences and Training Measures of Creative Thinking between Sino-US Aviation Academy Students—Based on the Questionnaires of CAUC and FIT

作者: 沈丹阳 :中国民航大学经济与管理学院,天津 ;

关键词: 中美航空院校创新思维测评影响因素培养措施Sino-US Aviation University Creative Thinking Testing Affecting Factors Training Measures

摘要:
本文以创新思维为研究对象,以中国民航大学和美国佛罗里达理工学院的问卷调查为基础,以创造性思维测验和威廉斯创造力倾向测验量表测试为研究工具,研究中美航空学生在创新思维水平上的差异;本文还借助多层次模糊综合评价模型判断影响创新思维的关键因素,从而探讨创新思维培养的有效措施。研究表明,虽然中国被试的整体创新思维水平不如美国被试,但中国被试的变通性普遍较强,具备较大的创新潜力。知识储备水平和国际化视野是影响创新思维发生的关键,问题导向性自主学习、坚持不懈的探索和实践动手能力则是影响创新思维转化的核心,应增加立体化、综合性案例,融入开放式、设计性实验,引导学生科学使用思维导图等,从而培养学生的创新思维。

Abstract: Based on a questionnaire survey of both the students from Civil Aviation University of China, and the students from Florida Institute of Technology, the level difference between Sino-US Aviation academy students on creative thinking is tested by using the TCI and WFPT tools. The affecting factors and training measures of creative thinking are also studied by using a multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model. It is found that the Chinese subjects’ overall level of creative thinking is lower than that of USA subjects, but the flexibility of the Chinese subjects is generally great and shows a great potential for innovation. It is also found that the levels of knowledge and the international perspective are the key factors on creative thinking, while the problem-oriented learning, unremitting exploration, and the practical ability are the core of the creative thinking. In order to upgrade the level of creative thinking, the comprehensive cases studies and open designed experiment should be introduced into teaching, and the scientific use of mind maps should be guided.

文章引用: 沈丹阳 (2016) 中美航空院校学生创新思维差异与培养措施研究—基于中国民航大学和美国佛罗里达理工学院的问卷调查。 教育进展, 6, 183-193. doi: 10.12677/AE.2016.65028

参考文献

[1] 黄志超, 于亚鹭, 陈晓霞. 高校开放性实验教学对培养大学生创新意识与能力的探讨[J]. 新疆医科大学学报, 2008, 31(10): 1480-1481.

[2] 周志太. 讨论课培养学生的创新思维能力[J]. 淮北煤炭师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版), 2009, 30(6): 140-144.

[3] 张水中. 浅谈中学数学教学中如何培养学生的思维能力[J]. 学周刊, 2013(34): 107.

[4] Mayer, R.E. (1999) Fifty Years of Creativity Research. In: Sternberg, R.J., Ed., Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge, 449-460.

[5] Torrance, E.P. (1966) Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Directions Manual and Scoring Guide. Figural Test Booklet A. Lexington, British Library: Personnel Press.

[6] Welsh, G.S. (1959) Welsh Figure Preference Test. Consulting Psychologists Press, Mountain View.

[7] Karwowski, M. (2008) Measuring Creativity Using the Test of Creative Imagination (TCI). Part 2. On Validity of the TCI. New Educational Review, 15, 216-231.

[8] Mednick, S.A. (1968) The Remote Associates Test. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 2, 213-214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1968.tb00104.x

[9] 宋晓辉, 施建农. 创造力测量手段——同感评估技术(CAT)简介[J]. 心理科学进展, 2005, 13(6): 37-42.

[10] 栗玉波. 创造性思维测验(TCI)中文版修订[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 郑州: 郑州大学, 2012.

[11] 李雪. 经管类大学生创新能力培养模式研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工程大学, 2013.

[12] 卢琼, 陈荟婷, 尹立, 李震, 韩伟. 开放式设计性实验教学对医学生创新思维能力的培养[J]. 当代医学, 2010, 16(10): 160-162.

[13] 王挺. 知识多元性和激活深度对创新思维的影响[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2014.

[14] 董博清. 基于思维导图的中学物理教学实证研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2013.

分享
Top