第三, APT 理論采用橫斷研究數據, 截取創造性表現側面, 揭示了創造力領域特殊/一般性特征, 其理論貢獻是明顯的, 但對創造力發展過程的思考仍有不足。APT 理論的主要提出者Kaufman 等對此也有清醒的認識, 提出了創造力的四 C 模型(the Four C Model of Creativity)。該模型從創造力發展的水平與貢獻的角度將創造力分為微創造力(Mini-c)、小創造力(Little-c)、專業創造力 (Pro-c) 和傑出創造力 (Big-C) 四個水平(Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009; Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007)。其中微創造力是指對經驗、事件和行動所做出的新奇的、具有個人意義的解釋; 小創造力是指在特質、過程和環境交互作用中, 個體或團體所產生的被特定的環境所認可的新穎和適用的產品; 專業創造力是指在創造性水平上超過了小創造力, 但未達到傑出創造力水平的創造力; 傑出創造力是指取得彪炳史冊的創造性成就。該理論認為, 隨著創造力被認可和貢獻程度的提高, 創造力經歷了一個由一般向特殊不斷轉化的過程, 創造力在微水平上具有更強的一般性, 隨著創造力向專業方向發展, 創造力具有越來越明顯的領域特殊性(Beghetto & Kaufman, 2009)。將APT 理論和四 C 模型綜合起來從橫向和縱向(發展)兩個維度來說明創造力的特殊/一般性問題是APT 理論的發展方向。

5 創造力遊樂場理論(APT)對創造教育的啟示

APT 理論為培養創造力提供了科學依據。首先要重視創造力先決條件的培養和開發, 如基本的認知能力、創新的內在驅力、鼓勵創造性想法的環境等, 為此要註重開發個體智力, 激發其動機, 創設有利環境, 這是基礎教育在培養創新人才方面要完成的任務。其次, 培養創新人才要註重一般主題層面人才的發現與技能的培養。APT理論中, 創造力在一般主題層面包括七大方面：言語藝術、視覺藝術、企業、人際、數學/科學、表演和問題解決。鑒於學生在這七方面的先天稟賦和後天積累不同, 要因材施教, 並在其優勢方面加強培養。在不同主題層面的創造力培養上, 要采取相應的措施。最後, 在領域和微領域(或任務)層面, 需要培養具體的創造技能。

在創造力的領域特殊/一般性研究方面, 盡管中國學者還沒提出系統性的觀點, 但在實踐上, 中國有些學者和學校在創造教育中摸索出來的規律與 APT 理論對創造力的理解有異曲同工之妙。如王瑞明和莫雷(2007a, 2007b)提出, 要培養兒童的科學創造力, 應該從科學思維能力、科學構思思維能力和科學驗證思維能力三個方面入手, 采用微觀發生法培養幼兒創造力。另外, 天津市耀華中學在創造教育中, 將課程分為基礎性課程、拓展性課程和研究性課程三大模塊, 並在目標、功能上對每個模塊提出不同的要求, 同時將活動課程以及社會實踐融合於三大模塊之中, 形成一個統一的課程體系。這一訓練方法在培養學生創造力方面取得了良好的成效(曲麗敏等, 2008)。

總之, APT 理論在創造力的領域特殊/一般性問題上邁出了具有實質性的一步, 不僅有助於我們科學地認識創造力的領域特殊/一般性, 加深對創造力的理解, 而且為教育實踐中培養學生的創造性提供了科學的指導。

參考文獻

曲麗敏, 陳曉明, 李莉, 林靜, 言承瓔, 黃薇, 徐秀清, 梅艷. (2008). 耀華中學試驗班課程設置與教學改革探索. 見 施建農. 超常兒童成長之路. 北京：科學出版社, 118–130.

王瑞明, 莫雷. (2007a). 論幼兒科學創造力的培養.教育研究與實驗, 4, 49–52.

王瑞明, 莫雷. (2007b). 幼兒科學創造力的結構與培養.教育導刊(幼兒教育), 6, 8–11.

張文新, 陳光輝. (2009). 發展情境論——一種新的發展系統理論. 心理科學進展, 17(4), 736–744.

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

Baer, J. (1993). Divergent thinking and creativity: A task-specific approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Baer, J. (1994). Divergent thinking is not a general trait: A multi-domain training experiment. Creativity Resource Journal, 7, 35–36.

Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergentthinking training. Journal of Creative Behavior, 30, 183–187.

Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity research journal, 11(2), 173–177.

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005a). Briding generality and specificity: The amusement park theoretical (APT) model of creativity. Roeper Review, 27(3), 158–163.

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005b). Whence creativity? Overlapping and dual aspect skills and traits. In J. C.

Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 313–320). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for "mini-c" creativity.

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 13–79.

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Do we have multi creative potential? ZDM Mathematics Education, 41, 39–44.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contempory psychological perspectives (pp. 325–339). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Feist, G. J. (2004).The evolved fluid specificity of human creative talent. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L.

Singer (Eds.), Ccreativity: From potential to realization (pp. 57–82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Feist, G. J. (2006). How developmental and personality influence scientific thought, interest, and achievement. Review of General Psychology, 10, 163–182.

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

Gardner, H. (1988). Creative lives and creative works: A synthetic scientific approach. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) The nature of creativity (pp. 298–324). New York: Cambridge University Press.

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

Henshon, S. E. (2009). Highly inventive explorer of creativity: An interview with Baer. Roeper Review, 31(3): 3–7.

Ivcevic, Z., & Mayer, J. D. (2009). Mapping dimensions of creativity in the life-space. Creativity Research Journal, 21(2-3), 152–165.

Kaufman, J. C. (2002). Narrative and paradigmatic thinking styles in creative writing and journalism students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36, 201–220.

Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Is creativity one thing or many things? In J. C. Kaufman, Creativity 101(pp. 53–82). New York: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2002). Could Steven Spielberg manage the Yankees? Creative thinking in different domains. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 12(2), 5–14.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004a). Sure, I』m creative—but not in math! Self-reported creativity in diverse domains. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22(2), 143–155.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004b). The Amusement Park Theoretical (APT) Model of Creativity. The Korean Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving, 14(2), 15–25.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2005). The Amusement Park Theory of Creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 321–328). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2006). Intelligent Testing with Torrance. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 99–102.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009a). How are intellectual styles related to creativity across multiple domains? In Li-fang Zhang, & R. J. Sternberg, Perspectives on the nature of intellectual styles (pp. 87–106). New York: Springer Publishing Company, LLC.

Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2009b). Is one dimension enough? A response to Simonton's varieties of (scientific) creativity. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(5), 453–454.

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12.

Kaufman, J. C., Cole, J., & Baer, J. (2009). The construct of creativity: Structural model for self-reported creativity ratings. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(2), 119–132.

Lerner, R. M. (2002). Concepts and theories of human development (3rd). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P., & Shen, J. (2003). The influence of CASE on scientific creativity. Research in Science Education, 33, 143–162.

Oral, G., Kaufman, J. C., & Agars, M. D. (2007). Examining creativity in Turkey: Do Western findings apply? High Ability Studies, 18, 235–246.

Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for the content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179–182.

Plucker, J. A., & Beghetto, R. A. (2004). Why creativity is domain general, why it looks domain specific, and why the distinction does not matter. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L.

Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 153–167). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn』t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–97.

Plucker, J. A., & Zabelina, D. (2009). Creativity and interdisciplinarity: One creativity or many creativities? ZDM Mathematics Education, 41, 5–11.

Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 3(3), 139–148.

Simonton, D. K. (2004). Creativity as a constrained stochastic process. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko, & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 83–102). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Simonton, D. K. (2007). Creativity: Specialized expentise or general cognitive processes? In M. J. Roberts (Ed.), Integrating the mind: Domain general versus domain specific processes in higher cognition (pp. 351–367). Hove, United Kingdom: Psychology Press.

Simonton, D. K. (2009a). Varieties of perspectives on creativity: Reply to commentors. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(5), 466–467.

Simonton, D. K. (2009b). Varieties of (scientific) creativity: A hierarchical model of domain-specific disposition, development, and achievement. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(5), 441–452.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implict theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). The domain generality versus specificity debate: How should it be posed? In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 299–306). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677–688.

Sternberg, R. J., Lubart, T. I., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2005). Creativity. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 351–370). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual. Lexington, MA: Ginn.

（原題：創造力遊樂場理論及其實踐涵義*；原載：心理科學進展 2010, Vol. 18, No. 4, 679–684 ；作者單位：劉桂榮 & 張景煥，山東師範大學心理學院, 濟南 250014；王曉玲 ，中國煙臺 SOS 兒童村, 煙臺 265500）