Research on Creativity in Israel

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511818240.011

11 - Research on Creativity in Israel

A Chronicle of Theoretical and Empirical Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Roberta M. Milgram and

Nava L. Livne

Edited by

James C. Kaufman and

Robert J. Sternberg

Show author details

Roberta M. Milgram: Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University
Nava L. Livne: Affiliation:
University of Utah
James C. Kaufman: Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
Robert J. Sternberg: Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Israel is a small country in which the academic and creative abilities of people are considered a major natural resource (Milgram, 2000). The identification and education of gifted and talented children and adolescents have been the focus of considerable interest in Israel for many years. The rationale underlying this interest is that a small country, bereft of natural resources, must place high priority on its human resources, that is, on the abilities and talents of its people. This chapter is divided into four sections. In the first section, we present a summary of research in Israel on topics of creativity. In the second section, we present a theoretical model of the structure of giftedness and creativity (Milgram, 1989, 1991) that has generated the bulk of theory-driven empirical research on creativity in Israel. In the third section we report on international research on learning style and creativity that included Israel, and in the fourth section we discuss new directions in research on creativity in Israel.

CREATIVITY RESEARCH IN ISRAEL

In an effort to include in this chapter as much of the research done in Israel on creativity as possible, we conducted a computerized search by using several electronic databases, including FirstSearch (ERIC and MEDLINE) and EBSCO (PsychINFO). We searched these databases for the years from 1970 to 2004, using creativity and Israel as the two leading keywords and combinations of creativity and Israel with other keywords. This search yielded fourteen studies that we considered appropriate to report in the current section.

Type: Chapter
Information: The International Handbook of Creativity , pp. 307 - 336

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818240.011 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Albert, R. S., & Runco, M. A. (1986). The achievement eminence: A model of a longitudinal study of exceptionally gifted boys and their families. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 332–357). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Altshuller, G. (1986). To find an idea: Introduction to the theory of inventive problem solving.Novosibirsk, Russia: NaukaGoogle Scholar

Altshuller, G. (1996). The theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ), (2nd ed.). Worcester, MA: Technical Innovation CenterGoogle Scholar

Baer, J. (1993). Why you shouldn't trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 1, 80–83Google Scholar

Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity in creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177CrossRef Google Scholar

Barak, M. (2004a, June 22–26). Implications of computer-based projects in electronics on fostering independent learning, creativity, and teamwork. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Learning Sciences, Santa Monica, CA

Barak, M. (2004b). Systematic approaches for inventive thinking and problem solving: Implications for engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20, 612–618Google Scholar

Barak, M., & Goffer, N. (2002). Fostering systematic innovative thinking and problem solving: Lessons education can learn from industry. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 12, 227–247CrossRef Google Scholar

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current practices of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4(4), 1–103CrossRef Google Scholar

Beer, J. (1991). Depression, general anxiety, test anxiety, and rigidity of junior high and high school children. Psychological Reports, 69, 1128–1130CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Clabby, J. F. (1980). The wit: A personality analysis. Journal of Assessment, 44, 307–310Google Scholar PubMed

Davidovich, N., & Milgram, R. M. (2004). Ariel Index of Teacher Effectiveness (AITE). [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar

Dunn, R., Dunn, K., and Price, G. E. (1975, 1979, 1981, 1984, 1989). Learning style inventory. Lawrence, KS: Price SystemsGoogle Scholar

Eberle, B. F. (1997). SCAMPER. Buffalo, New York: D.O.K. PublishersGoogle Scholar

Feldhusen, J. E. (1986). A conception of giftedness. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 112–127). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Professional development module: Talent identification and development. Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative LearningGoogle Scholar

Feldhusen, J. F. (Guest Ed.). (1995). Talent development [special issue]. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 18(2)Google Scholar

Gagné, F. (1995). From giftedness to talent: A developmental model and its impact on the language of the field. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 18, 103–111CrossRef Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligence.New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Gorodetzky, M., & Klavir, R. (2003). What can we learn from how gifted/average pupils describe their processes of problem-solving. Learning and Instruction, 13, 305–325CrossRef Google Scholar

Goldenberg, J., & Mazursky, D. (1999). The voice of the product: Templates of new product emergence. Creativity and Innovation Management 8(3), 157–164CrossRef Google Scholar

Goldenberg, J., & Mazursky, D. (2002). Creativity in product innovation. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Goldenberg, J., Mazursky, D., & Solomon, S. (1999). Creative sparks. Science, 255(5433), 1495–1496CrossRef Google Scholar

Gruber, H. (1982). Frames of mind. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1991). Original thinking in preschool children: A validation of ideational fluency measures. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 253–260CrossRef Google Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1996). The structure of giftedness: The domain of literature as an exemplar. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 31–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1998). Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire. Las Vegas: University of Nevada, College of Education; Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2000). Homework: Motivation and learning preference. Westport, CT: Bergin and GarveyGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004a). Creative thinking as a predictor of real-life problem solving in children, adolescents, and adults: A meta-analysis designed to validate ideational fluency measures. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004b). Preventing talent loss: Theory into practice. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., Milgram, R. M., & Rowell, L. L. (2004). Homework motivation and preference: A learner-centered homework approach. In Cooper, H. C. & Valentine, J. C. (Guest Eds.), Theory into practice. A special issue: Homework (Vol. 43, pp. 197–204). Columbus: Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar

Hong, E., Milgram, R. M., & Whiston, S. C. (1993). Leisure activities in adolescence as a predictor of occupational choice in young adults: A longitudinal study. Journal of Career Development, 19, 221–229CrossRef Google Scholar

Hong, E., Whiston, S. C., & Milgram, R. M. (1993). Leisure activities in career guidance for gifted and talented adolescents: A validation study of the Tel-Aviv Activities Inventory. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 65–68CrossRef Google Scholar

Horowitz, (2001). Advanced Systematic Inventive Thinking (ASIT)'s five thinking tools with examples. TRIZ Journal. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from www.triz-journal.com/archives/2001/08/cl

Horowitz, R., & Miamon, O. (1997). Creative design methodology and the SIT method. In Proceedings of DETC97, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference (pp. 1–10). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science

Kaufman, J. C. (2002). Dissecting the golden goose: Components of studying creative writers. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 27–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (Eds.). (2005). Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Kanter, R. M., Kao, J., & Wiersema, F. (1997). Innovation: Breakthrough thinking at 3M, DuPont, GE, Pfizer and Rubbermaid. New York: Harper Business PressGoogle Scholar

Klavir, R., & Gorodetzky, M. (2001). The processing of analogous problems in the verbal and visual-humorous (cartoons) modalities by gifted/average children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 205–215CrossRef Google Scholar

Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent boys. Roeper Review, 13, 184–187CrossRef Google Scholar

Koichu, B., Berman, A., & Moore, M. (2003). The effect of heuristic training in a regular classroom on mathematical reasoning ability of middle school students. Manuscript submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar

Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1968). Dimensions of meaning and their measurement. Psychological Review, 23, 1307–1329Google Scholar

Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1971). Symbol and sign. In Arnold, W., Eysenck, H. J., & Meili, R. (Eds.), Lexikon der psychologie (Vol. 3). Freiburg:HerderGoogle Scholar

Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1972). Psychology of the arts. Durham, NC: Duke University PressGoogle Scholar

Landau, E. (1973). The creative approach to psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 27, 566–578CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Landau, E. (1979). The young persons' institute for the promotion of art and science. In Gallagher, J. (Ed.), Gifted children: Reaching their potential (pp. 146–147). Jerusalem: KolleckGoogle Scholar

Landau, E. (1981). The profile of the gifted child. In Kramer, A. L. (Ed.), Gifted children: Challenging their potential, new perspectives, and alternatives (pp. 21–32). New York: Trillium PressGoogle Scholar

Landau, E. (1990). The courage to be gifted. New York: Trillium PressGoogle Scholar

Landau, E., & Maoz, B. (1978). Creativity and self-actualizing in the aging personality. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 32, 117–127CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Landau, E., & Wiessler, K. (1993). Parental environment in families with gifted and nongifted children. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 127, 100–105CrossRef Google Scholar

Landau, E., & Wiessler, K. (1998). The relationship between emotional maturity, intelligence, and creativity in gifted children. Gifted Education International, 13, 100–105CrossRef Google Scholar

Landau, E., & Wiessler, K., & Golod, G. (2001). Impact on enrichment program on intelligence, by sex, among low SES population in Israel. Gifted Educational International, 15, 207–213CrossRef Google Scholar

Livne, N. L. (2002). Giftedness in mathematics as a bi-dimensional phenomenon: Theoretical definition and psychometric assessment of levels of academic ability and levels of creative ability in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International, ⅹ, Telavis Retrieved July 28 2005, from www.tau.ac.il/education/toar3/archive/etakzir2003-5.htm

Livne, N. L., & Livne, O. E. (1999a). Multiscale Academic and Creative Abilities in Mathematics (MACAM) [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar

Livne, N. L., & Livne, O. E. (1999b). A scoring guide for the Multiscale Academic and Creative Abilities in Mathematics (MACAM) [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar

Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Milgram, R. M. (1999). Assessing academic and creative abilities in mathematics at four levels of understanding. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 30, 227–242CrossRef Google Scholar

Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004). Assessing cognitive complexity within levels of academic and creative abilities in mathematics using open-ended problems. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar

Livne, N. L., & Milgram, R. M. (1998). Tel-Aviv Activities and Accomplishments Inventory: Mathematics [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar

Livne, N. L., & Milgram, R. M. (2000). Assessing four levels of creative mathematical ability in Israeli adolescents utilizing out-of-school activities: A circular three-stage technique. Roeper Review, 22, 111–116CrossRef Google Scholar

Lovecky, D. V. (1992). Exploring social and emotional aspects of giftedness in children. Roeper Review, 15, 18–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396CrossRef Google Scholar

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: HarperGoogle Scholar

McGhee, P. E. (1979). Humor: Its origins and development. San Francisco: FreemanGoogle Scholar

McGuffog, C., Feiring, C., & Lewis, M. (1987). The diverse profile of the extremely gifted child. Roeper Review, 10, 82–89CrossRef Google Scholar

Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Milgram, R. M. (1983, 1987, 1990, 1998). Tel-Aviv Activities and Accomplishments Inventory (TAAI): Adolescent form [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (1983). A validation of ideational fluency measures of original thinking in children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 619–624CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (1989). (Ed.). Teaching gifted and talented learners in regular classrooms. Springfield, IL: ThomasGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (1990). Creativity: An idea whose time has come and gone? In Runco, M. A. & Albert, R. S. (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 215–233). Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (1991). (Ed.). Counseling gifted and talented children: A guide for teachers, counselors, and parents.Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (2000). Identifying and enhancing talent in Israel: A high national priority. Roeper Review, 22, 108–110CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (2003). Challenging out-of-school activities as predictor of creative accomplishments in art, drama, dance, and social leadership. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 305–315CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M. (2004). Real-Life Problem-Solving [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral Sciences. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Arad, R. (1981). Ideational fluency as a predictor of original problem-solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 568–572CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Davidovich, N. (2004a). Activities & Accomplishments in Teaching Inventory (AATI) [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Davidovich, N. (2004b). Real-Life Problem-Solving in Teaching. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Davidovich, N., Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Lieberman, N. (2004). Using individualized computerized units to advance the achievement of high school students in mathematics (Final technical research report). Jerusalem: Israel Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (1993). (Eds.). Teaching and counseling gifted and talented adolescents: An international learning style perspective. New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (1994). Creative thinking and creative performance in adolescents as predictors of creative attainments in adults: A follow-up study after 18 years. In Subotnik, R. F. & Arnold, K. D. (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 212–228). Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Hong, E. (1999). Creative out-of-school activities in intellectually gifted adolescents as predictors of their life accomplishments as young adults: A longitudinal study. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 77–87CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Hong, E., Shavit, Y. W., & Peled, R. (1997). Out-of-school activities in gifted adolescents as a predictor of vocational choice and work accomplishment in young adults. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 8, 111–120CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Livne, N. L. (2005). Creativity as a general and a domain-specific ability: The domain of mathematics as an exemplar. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J.. (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976). Group versus individual administration in the measurement of creative thinking in gifted and non-gifted children. Child Development, 47, 563–565CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Milgram, N. A., Rosenbloom, G., & Rabkin, L. (1978). Quantity and quality of creative thinking in children and adolescents. Child Development, 49, 385–388CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., Moran, J. D. III, Sawyers, J. K., & Fu, V. (1987). Original thinking in Israeli preschool children. School Psychology International, 8, 54–58CrossRef Google Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Price, G. E. (1993). The learning styles of gifted adolescents in Israel. In Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (Eds.), Teaching gifted and talented learners for learning style: An international perspective (pp. 137–148). New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar

Milgram, R. M., & Rabkin, L. (1980). A developmental test of Mednick's associative hierarchies of original thinking. Developmental Psychology, 16, 157–158CrossRef Google Scholar

Montague, M., & Applegate, B. (1993). Middle school students' mathematical problem solving: An analysis of think-aloud protocols. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16(1), 19–32CrossRef Google Scholar

Multifamilypro. (2001). Bringing creativity to your company. Palm Harbar, FL: The Sales & Marketing Magic Companies. Retrieved September, 2005, from http://www.smmonline.com/

Ohayon, Y. (1999). Preferred and actual homework motivation and preference in high and low creative thinking children. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University, IsraelGoogle Scholar

Ortar, G. (1973). Milta Intelligence Scale. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University School of Education and Israel Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar

Pearson, M., & Beer, J. (1990). Self consciousness, self esteem, and depression of gifted school children. Psychological Reports, 66, 960–962CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Price, G. E., & Milgram, R. M. (1993). The learning styles of gifted adolescents around the world: Differences and similarities. In Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (Eds.), Teaching gifted and talented learners for learning style: An international perspective (pp. 229–247). New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar

Raven, J. (1947). Progressive matrices. New York: Psychological CorporationGoogle Scholar

Raviv, D. (2002, June, 18–21). Eight-dimension methodology for innovative thinking. Paper presented at the Annual National Conference and Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). Montreal, Canada

Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools are places for talent development. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning PressGoogle Scholar

Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–92). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of Learning Science, 3(2), 115–163CrossRef Google Scholar

Spencer, M. J. (2000). Live arts experiences: Their impact on health and wellness (3rd ed.). New York: Hospital Audiences. Retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.hospitalaudiences.org/hai/pubs/monograph.pdfGoogle Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The nature of creativity.New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge, U. K.:Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Tannenbaum, A. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives.New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallCrossRef Google Scholar

Treffinger, D. J., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1996). Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 181–193CrossRef Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual research edition – Verbal tests, forms A and B – Figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel PressGoogle Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1972). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Figural Test. Lexington, MA: Personnel PressGoogle Scholar

Verschaffel, L. (1999). Realistic mathematical modeling and problem solving. In Hamers, J., Luit, J., & Csapo, B. (Eds.), Teaching and learning thinking skills (215–239). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger

Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction.New York: Holt, Rinehart & WinstonGoogle Scholar

Whitmore, J. R. (1986). Preventing severe underachievement and developing achievement motivation. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 18, 119–133CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1976a). Guidance for the gifted. Journal: School Guidance Worker, 32(1), 45–47Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1976b). Facilitating effects of humor on creativity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 318–322CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1977). Counseling the intellectually gifted child. Toronto: Toronto University PressGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A. (1979). Sociometry of humor: Objectifying the subjective. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 97–98CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1981). The psychology of humor [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: YahdavGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A. (1983). The influence of humorous atmosphere on divergent thinking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 68–75CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1984). Humor and personality [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: PapyrusGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A. (1988). Using humor to develop creative thinking. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 20, 99–116CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziv, A. (1990). Giftedness [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: KeterGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A. (1994). Personality and sense of humor.New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A. (1998). Gifted and talented [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: The Open UniversityGoogle Scholar

Ziv, A., & Gadish, O. (1990). Humor and giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13(4), 332–345CrossRef Google Scholar