rlorfink(educ815)-2 annot bib

8/6/2019 Rlorfink(Educ815)-2 Annot Bib

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rlorfinkeduc815-2-annot-bib 1/22

RUNNING HEAD: Annotated Bibliography Lorfink

Creativity, Teaching and Time

An Annotated Bibliography

Rebecca L Lorfink

Drexel University



ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 2

Abstract

This annotated bibliography was developed to expand sources for a literature review in

the areas of creativity and time management within classroom teaching. Key words including

creativity, time management, classroom teaching, and measuring creativity were selected to

search for additional resources in this topic.Time management information in the area of

business is included due to a general lack of education specific research in the topic.




Introduction

The purpose of this annotated bibliography is to identify resources in the areas of time

management and creativity in preparation for a literature review on these topics. The literature

review will support a research proposal for a study to determine if a correlation exists between

effective time management skills and teaching creativity in secondary education within a

standards-based environment. This research will provide educators with another tool to

minimize obstacles in the creative process for teachers. A mixed-methods approach is

proposedfor this study for an in-depth investigation into the connection between these

characteristics.

As a former classroom teacher and current secondary administrator, I am interested in

research that investigates practical solutions to effectively meet the needs of today¶s students. I

am drawn to the needs of the 21st

Century student to remain competitive on the global stage.

Creativity and problem-solving skills, not just for students, but for teachers as well, has become

my primary area of interest. Well-planned, engaging, and creative lessons, combined with

rigorous standards for learning, will allow our students to be prepared in post-secondary

education and beyond. If a relationship is established between time management and the

teaching of creativity, such a determination can be utilized to improve the education climate of

today¶s secondary schools.

Creativity in Teaching

Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students.

Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), 447-457.




A study investigating the correlation between creative self-efficacy and classroom

environment, including teacher encouragement and feedback, was completed at the

University of Oregon. Participants at the middle and high school level totaling 1,322

students were predominantly Hispanic and male. Respondents completed a paper and

pencil likert-response survey to measure self-efficacy and motivational beliefs.

Researchers also gathered data on academic views, classroom experiences, and

participation on school activities. Data was analyzes using hierarchal regression and

analysis of variance, after classifying students into two performance groups. Conclusions

showed that students who hold stronger beliefs regarding academics also have a stronger

self-efficacy in the area of creativity. In addition, a student who feels encouraged by his

teacher to be creativity was more likely to perform in this manner. I initially chose to

review this study since it applied to secondary level students. Although the participants

do not match my own demographic group, the large sample size does permit some

generalization to students overall. The correlations were not surprising and I am

interested in the chosen method of data analysis as a model for my own research.

Davis, S. H. (Nov-Dec 2006). Unleashing creativity in your schools. Leadership, 36(2). 8-10

and 34-38.

This article discusses the imperative for creativity in school leaders. There is an ever-

present struggle between the push for innovation and change in the face of increasing

accountability and policy demands, while competition from charter schools raises the

need for creative solutions even further. Educators must possess a sense of urgency and

understanding, paired with curiosity and a sense of efficacy before creativity and

innovation become apparent. School leaders can provide the catalysts needed to bring




about change through creative solutions from all stakeholders, promoting distributed

leadership throughout the organization. Davis discusses multiple obstacles for creativity

including pressures for accountability, dwindling fiscal resources, and public pressure.

Twelve suggestions for leaders to encourage an atmosphere of creativity within a school

organization are also included in the article. While this article is not a review of a study,

it provides suggestions that may prove useful within the recommendations section of my

research. In addition, these recommendations are for leaders, not teachers, whom are the

focus of my proposed research.

De Souza, D. F. (2000).Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the classroom

environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.

This study, completed at the University of Connecticut, investigated teachers¶ and

students¶ own perceptions of characteristics that stimulate or inhibit the development of

creativity within the classroom. Qualitative data, in the form of interviews and focus

groups, were collected from seven teachers and thirty-one students in third and fourth

grades within public schools. The researchers sought to identify factors that enhance or

inhibit the development of creativity in students. Results indicated that both teachers and

students believe that the classroom environment enhances creativity when students are

given choices, different perspectives are welcome, self-confidence is encouraged, and

students¶ unique strengths and interests are reinforced. This study supports the findings

of the NACCCE report All our Futures (1999)which recommends that in order to develop

creative ability, teachers must encourage students¶ individual beliefs in their creativity,

while encouraging the confidence to take risks. This research into the perceptions of

elementary teachers will provide insight into my research participants as teachers,




although they will be at the secondary level. The identified factors can be used to

develop tools to quantify a classroom environment that emboldens creativity.

Diakidoy, I.-A.N., &Kanari, E. (1999).Student teachers' beliefs about creativity. British

Educational Research Journal, 25(2), 225-243.

This study from the University of Cyprus examines the opinions of student teachers about

creativity, creative outcomes, and factors related to creativity. The researchers used a

qualitative approach consisting of questionnaires with both closed and open questions

designed to conceptualize creativity. The survey was administered to forty-nine student

teachers at the end of their education enrolled in a program that emphasized creativity in

teaching. The authors find that student teachers believe that creative outcomes are not

necessarily the most appropriate outcomes. Creativity was viewed as manifested through

artistic and literary activity and seen as a skill that can be taught to students. The

classroom environment was important to the development of creativity in students and

schools were accused of not fostering the development of creativity enough. In addition,

creativity was viewed as an inherent characteristic similar to, although not succinctly

connected to, intelligence. Although my research subjects will be experienced educators,

the beliefs of student teachers at the end of their practical experiences in college, may be

similar to the participants with whom I will be working. These perspectives may be

useful in the development of my own tools and questionnaires. However, these particular

participants were educated specifically in creativity education, which will be a key

difference from my research.

Eason, R., Giannangelo, D. M., &Franceschini, L. A..(2009). A look at creativity in public and

private schools.Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(1), 130-137.




Based in the primary grades, this study compares the perspectives of teachers in public

and private schools on student creativity. These perspectives were also examined

through demographic lenses of age, experience, educational levels, and ethnicity. Forty ±

eight teachers, half in public schools and half in the private setting, all within a large

urban setting in Tennessee, completed the Early Childhood Creativity Rating Scale for

four randomly selected students. Analysis was completed using a two-way analysis of

variance (ANOVA), which showed slightly higher creativity results for private school

children. There was also an overall downward trend in creativity in the older children as

compared to the younger students. The research found that public school teachers were

more overwhelmed with administrative and safety issues and speculated that teachers

who are less stressed can spend more quality time in creative ways with students. As for

the demographic comparison, no significant correlationswere found in this study. The

age of the participants limits the application to my own work, as I will be focusing on

secondary education. The findings related to the downward trend as students age

matches other research in creativity in students.

Flowerday, T. & Schraw, G. (2000). Teacher beliefs about instructional choice: A

phenomenological study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 634-645.

This University of Nebraska in Lincoln study examined teachers¶ beliefs about

instructional choice within the classroom. The purpose was to describe what types of

choices teachers offer students, how they determine when and to whom to offer choices,

as well as why they offer certain choices. Thirty-six teachers from varied content areas

and grade levels were interviewed using phenomenological methods including a semi-

structured interview, which was recorded and transcribed to identify themes. The




researchers discovered that teachers perceive that providing choices to students in the

classroom increases student creativity, although primary reasons were in the areas of

student motivation, engagement, and interest. While this study is connected to creativity,

this was not the main goal of the research and will be a minor source for my own

research. Nonetheless, student choice will be a factor in teaching for creativity in my

own data collection.

Geist, E., & Hohn, J.. (2009). Encouraging creativity in the face of administrative convenience:

How our schools discourage divergent thinking. Education, 130(1), 141-150.

This qualitative study from Ohio University looks at how arts-based creative activities are

integrated into the curriculum. One researcher is the parent of a gifted child and openly

discusses how this perspective integrates into the research. The actual study consisted of

a qualitative comparison of two different early childhood classrooms through

observation. The authors concluded that creativity is fostered when the arts are integrated

into the curriculum, when training for pre-service teachers includes training in the arts,

and when teachers provide authentic encouragement rather than empty praise when

developing children¶s creative potential. Since this study focuses primarily on early

education and arts in the classroom, the information will not directly support a high

volume of my work. However, the information on appropriate encouragement may link

to characteristics of teaching at any level.

Hong, E., Hartzell, S. A., & Greene, M. T. (2009).Fostering creativity in the classroom: Effects

of teachers' epistemological beliefs, motivation, and goal orientation. Journal of Creative

Behavior , 43(3), 192-208.




This study from the University of Nevada in Las Vegas inspected teachers¶

epistemological view, motivation, and goal orientation related to instructional practices

that foster student creativity. One hundred and seventy-eight teachers of students in

third, fourth, and fifth grades took the Instructional Practices Questionnaire I (IPQ-I) that

measures perceived instructional practices, which facilitate the development of creative

thinking in students. Participants also used the Epistemological Beliefs in Teaching and

Learning (EBTL) Questionnaire, intended to measure teachers¶ opinions about student

learning. Additionally, participants responded to a Self- Assessment Questionnaire

(SAQ): Intrinsic Motivation and an Instructional Practices Questionnaire II (IPQ-II).

Results were classified to demonstratethat certain instructor characteristics have an effect

on teachers¶ abilities to foster creativity in students. These characteristics are the

teacher¶s orientation toward learning, personal motivation for creative work, and the

teacher¶s beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning. This is an important study

in the research around creativity in the classroom because it provides quantitative

evidence of teachers¶ traits on the development of learning, student achievement, and

improved student creativity. Even though the participants are in elementary grades, this

is an example of a quantitative study that provides support to my own research in creative

teaching. Specifically, the Instructional Practices Questionnaire I (IPQ-I)may be useful

in my own research as an instrument to measure creativity in instruction, rather than

general creative potential.

Horng, J.-S., Hong, J.-C., ChanLin, L.-J., Chang, S.-H., & Chu, H.-C.(2005). Creative teachers

and creative teaching strategies. I nternational Journal of Consumer Studies, 29(4), 352-

358.




This study explored elements which influence creativity in teaching using qualitative

methods including focus groups, interviews, observations, field notes and data

triangulation. The authors began with twelve GreaTeach (for creative instruction) award

winning teachers in a focus group, followed with in-depth interviews and observations of

three participants. The participants were also assessed using several measures of

creativity including the Creativity Fostering Teaching Index and Innovative Teaching

Strategies Measure. The resulting analysis led to multiple factors which creative teachers

possess including specific personality characteristics, family background and

experiences, dedication to the profession, and personal motivation. Humor and

collaboration with colleagues and a cooperative climate also were identified as fostering

creative instruction. In the classroom, these teachers acted as facilitators, used multiple

teaching technologies, and created open and welcoming classrooms. This study provides

a qualitative example for the follow-up interviews I intend to conduct in my mixed-

methods study. In addition, several measures of creativity were used that may be

possibilities for the quantitative portion of my study. The factors identified by these

authors match those in other literature, even though this study was completed in Taiwain,

rather than in a western school environment.

Jaskyte, K., Taylor, H., & Smariga, R.. (2009). Student and faculty perceptions of innovative

teaching. Creativity Research Journal, 21(1), 11.

In this University of Georgia study, forty-eight professors and fifty-two studentsobtained

through snowball and convenience sampling were interviewed in two stages regarding

perceptions of innovative teaching at the college level. The participants represented a

variety of disciplines and departments at the University. During the first stage of data




collection, participants free-listed characteristics, which were next turned into two

different quantitativesurveys, one for students and one for professors.While both students

and teachers identified similar innovative characteristics, the importance of these were

different for each group. Since the research was completed regarding college professors

and teachers, the generality to the secondary level is questionable. However,

characteristics of innovative teaching may be similar at the different levels and may be

useful in identifying such characteristics for my own research.

Jeffrey, B. & Craft A.. (2004) Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and

relationships. Educational Studies.30(1).77-87.

Jeffrey and Craft¶s 2004 qualitative study was based on the National Advisory

Committee on Creative and Cultural Education(Education, 1999). Data was collected at

an early learning facility in Western Europe known for its creative approaches over the

course of seven weeks. The data included interviews with various stakeholders,

photographs, newsletters, policies, test results, and broad field notes. The focus of the

study was the distinction between teaching creatively and teaching for creativity as

defined in the NACCCE report. The research demonstrated that the concepts are

interrelated as teaching creatively often leads to teaching for creativity as educatorsmodel

related processes for the students. These processes included providing relevant

experiences, using a hands¶ on approach, which engages the learner, while allowing the

student a degree of control over their own learning and content. I am interested in

further pursuing the difference between the definitions for creativity explored by this

research and will need to define the concept clearly in my own work. The link between




these two types found in the Jeffrey and Craft article matches my own beliefs about

teaching and learning from background experiences and prior knowledge.

Kampylis, Panagiotis; Berki, Eleni; Saariluoma, Pertti (2008).In-service and prospective

teachers' conceptions of creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(1), 15 ± 29.

This study was conducted in Greece to describe pre-service teachers¶ perceptions of

creativity in education. One hundred and thirty-two pre-service teachers completed the

Teachers¶ Conceptions of Creativity Questionnaire (TCCQ), a self-report

questionnairewithlikert-response questions. Findings showed that the participants view

creativity as a key factor on social and personal progress, which can be developed. In

addition, the study indicated that students can express creativity in different domains, but

many subjects in school do not provide enough opportunity for creative development.

The pre-service teachers felt that they lacked training regarding creativity and its

incorporation in the classroom, but believed that teachers can be influential in developing

student creativity. This article includes a comprehensive listing of research in this

particular area and types of creativity as defined in theory. This study supports the

research of Zapetakis, et. al. (2010) demonstrating the perceived importance of teacher

development in the area of creativity. This research also shows the lack of preparation

new teachers feel they receive in this critical area.

Mildrum, N. K., (2000, September). Creativity reigns (not reined) in the regular classroom. The

Education Digest, 66(1), 33-38.

The author tests a creativity curriculum model called the Ten Lessons in Creativity (TLC)

as part of a master¶s thesis at Johnson State College in Vermont. The model was




designed to teach creativity in the regular, non-gifted classroom, and was tested in six

regular education classrooms at the sixth grade level using mixed methods. One-hour

lessons in creativity occurred once per week over six to ten weeks and were taught

collaboratively with a gifted educator. The results indicate that children who participated

in lessons using the model demonstrated increased understanding of creative abilities and

attitudes through use of vocabulary, increased meta-creative awareness and creative

abilities, as well as development of attitudes related to creativity. These attitudes spilled

over into other areas of the classroom and students demonstrated improved self-

confidence in their creative abilities. This study is valuable as it relates to regular

education students and shows the use of explicit teaching of creativity, rather than

creative teaching, as defined by Jeffery and Craft (2004).

Olmo, B. G., (1977, March). Developing creativity in teaching: Testing hypotheses.The High

School Journal, 60 (6), 269-276.

This article is a summary of a study in which the author worked with a group of graduate

students in education, teachers of varied experience levels, on the development of lesson

plans based on creativity traits identified by Torrance (1970) and Guilford (1968). The

teachers began by researching and identifying traits of creative teaching and then worked

in small groups to design lessons for their students. The author developed several

hypotheses for teaching creativity including divergent thinking, brainstorming, and

diversity of perspectives, but did not feel that the data collected was rigorous enough to

make any solid conclusions. The discussion of the study is difficult to follow and does

not contain enough information to be useful in the development of my study.




Nonetheless, it is interesting to see a study within the topic from several decades ago to

gain a perspective of the development of creativity in teaching over the years.

Thompson, P. & Sanders, E.. (2010). Creativity and whole school change: An investigation of

English head teacher practices. The Journal of Educational Change.11(1).63-83.

In England, schools face accountability pressures and a need for creativity. There are

multitudes of ³opt-in´ programs that are available to schools on a voluntary basis. One of

these permits headmasters to join the Creative Partnerships program in which creative

professionals work with schools to improve the innovative culture in the organization.

This study provides a snapshot of forty such schools, ranging in size and locality, and

schools were at various levels of creative engagement. Researchers spent three days in

each school collecting qualitative data in the form of interviews and other voluntary

resources. The head teachers felt that such partnerships ³enlivened the prescribed

curriculum´ and ³enhance the quality of coursework´ (Thompson & Sanders, 69). There

are connections discussed between the change process in these schools relating to a top-

down leadership model and the focus of the analysis is on leadership. Ultimately, the

researchers felt that the Creative Partnerships model would be beneficial if it was a more

integrated program, rather than an added on luxury for students. While this is an

interesting model for teaching creativity and could be used in the recommendations

section of my own research, the model will not be used as a basis. Again, the drive for

creativity comes from another European study, a developing pattern in my research.

Measuring Creativity




Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth

using?. Roeper Review, 23(2), 72.

As a researcher, I will need to determine what aspects of creativity on which to focus as

well as what tools to measure this characteristic. Cropley¶s article outlines multiple

measures of different forms of creativity, along with the benefits and drawbacks of each

assessment. The statistical consistency of each exam is useful to future researchers such

as me. The examined tools measure creative products, creative thinking skills, personal

characteristics, motivation and attitudes, and include biographical inventories. Several of

the assessments evaluate children and would not be appropriate for measuring creativity

in teachers. The Torrance Test of Creative Thinking is the standard used in a great deal of

research and has been my chosen assessment in preliminary outlines. Nonetheless, two

additional assessments discussed in this article are being considered for my research:

Byrd¶s Creatix Inventory and Kirton¶s Adaptation-Innovation Inventory. Both are used

to obtain quantitative data on an adult¶s innovative thinking patterns using self-

assessment questionnaires. As I develop my proposal further, I will need to define the

type of creativity I will measure. This article is mostly useful to measure general

creativity, not creativity specific to teaching.

Sternberg, R. J. (2010).WICS: A new model for school psychology.School psychology

international, 31(6), 599-616.

This article outlines several psychometric theories of intelligence that stem from analysis

of cognitive testing including those of Galton, Cattell, Binet and Simon, Terman, and

Wechsler. Theories that are more recent are also discussed including that of Carroll.

Sternberg then proposes a new theory, consistent with John Dewey, in which wisdom,




intelligence, and creativity are synthesized (WICS). The Rainbow Project, completed in

2006, analyzed data from 793 college students in the areas of creativity and intelligence.

The combined assessments predicted college success 50% better than standard

assessments alone. Sternberg continued his work at Tufts University with the

Kaleidoscope Assessment, a voluntary section of the application process designed to test

creativity. Once again, this test, which did not correlate well to the SAT, predicted

student success at a practical university level. The last section of the article provides

information on what it means to teach creatively, to teach for intelligence, and to teach

for wisdom, along with practical suggestions for application in the classroom setting. The

author concludes that teaching for WICS improvesoverall school achievement and is only

one model useful in the teaching of critical thinking. Overall, this model is a strong

possibility for defining teaching for creativity in my own study under development. I

must identify the characteristics of teaching and locate appropriate assessments of these

characteristics before data collection. This definition must be based on a well-defined

theory, such as Sternberg¶s WICS model.

Time Management

Amabile, T. M., Jennifer S. Mueller, William B. Simpson, Constance N. Hadley, Steven J.

Kramer, and Lee Fleming. (2002). Time pressure and creativity in organizations: A

Longitudinal field study. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 02-073.

This study, completed at the Harvard Business School, examines the effect of time

pressure on creative tasks. Prior research had shown contradictory results in these areas




and the authors felt there was little research overall. The literature review portion of the

article is extensive and discusses the impact of intrinsic motivation on creativity, as

possible negating the impact of time pressure. Nontheless, creativity is a process which

needs time for trial and error and personal reflection, both of which are difficult in an

environment under high time stress. The study examined 177 participants¶ responses to

daily electronic questionnaires over the span of five to thrity weeks. The data was both

quanitative, using a likert scale, and qualitative, consisting of free-response. Through

statistical analysis, the authors concluded that time pressures impacted creativity.

Specifically, there was a significant negative relationship between creative processing

and time pressure. Contrary to the original prediction, the research demsonstrated a

strong posivite correlation between intrinsic motivation and time pressure. While this

study does not adress educction in any way, teachers are certainly under time pressure,

which may impact their ability to be creative. This study is an excellent example of a

mixed-methods study in the area of organizational behavior linked to creativity.

Peeters, M. A. G., & Rutte, C. G. (2005). Time Management Behavior as a Moderator for the Job

Demand-Control Interaction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(1), 64-75.

Peeters and Rutte examined the relationships between time management and burnout

among elementary teachers. Completed in the Netherlands, 123 elementray teachers

completed a questionnaire over a three-week time period related to time management,

demands of work, and automony. The conclusions included practical advice for

educators. Specifically, improved time management, goal prioritization, and progress

self-monitoring can decrease emotional exhaustionand burnout. Macan¶s 1994 Time

Management Behavior Scale was utilized in this study and will be my chief measuremnt




of time management. This study directly deals with time management in the educational

setting and will be an important connection to my own work.

Zampetakis, L. A., Bouranta, N., & Moustakis, V. S. (2010). On the relationship between

individual creativity and time management. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1), 23-32.

This study, published in 2010, examined the correlation between time management skills

and creativity in 186 Greek undergraduate university students. Creativity was measured

using a sum of scores from Gough¶s (1979) Creative Personality Scale and a self rating of

creativity based on the work of Zhao and George (2001). Time management scores

measured behavior, tenacity, disorganization, and perceived control of time combining

several measures from multiple sources. A positive correlation was reported between

self-perceived creativity and planning behaviors, while creativity negatively correlated to

a preference toward disorganization. Creativity was only assessed through measurements

of self-evaluation, rather than using standardized methods such as the Torrance Test of

Creativity. This particular study was the initial catalyst for my proposed research. While

the participants were students and not teachers, the findings ignited my interest in the

practical nature of time mangagement and the possible implications on creativity in

teaching. I plan to include a more standard rating of creativity in conjunction with self-

ratings to gain a more robust measure in study.

Accountability

Jones, B. D. &Egley, R. J. (2004).Voices from the Frontlines: Teachers¶ Perceptions of High-

Stakes Testing, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(39).




This study originated from the University of South Florida in St. Petersburg and

investigated teachers¶ perceptions on Florida¶s high-stakes testing program. The authors

used a survey of 708 teachers and classified responses into concerns and praises of high-

stakes testing. The study finds that that most teachers do not believe high stakes testing

is moving schools in the correct direction and conclusions indicated more negative effects

than positive. One of the noted negative effects was a decrease in both teacher and

student motivation. This study is provides insight into teachers¶ beliefs about

standardized testing and its effect on student motivation, which has been linked to

creativity.




References

Amabile, T. M., Jennifer S. Mueller, William B. Simpson, Constance N. Hadley, Steven J.

Kramer, and Lee Fleming. (2002). Time pressure and creativity in organizations: A

Longitudinal field study. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 02-073.

Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students.

Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), 447-457.

Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth

using?. Roeper Review, 23(2), 72.

Davis, S. H. (Nov-Dec 2006). Unleashing creativity in your schools. Leadership, 36(2). 8-10

and 34-38.

De Souza, D. F. (2000).Teacher and student perceptions of creativity in the classroom

environment. Roeper Review, 22(3), 148-153.

Diakidoy, I.-A.N., &Kanari, E. (1999).Student teachers' beliefs about creativity. British

Educational Research Journal, 25(2), 225-243.

Eason, R., Giannangelo, D. M., &Franceschini, L. A..(2009). A look at creativity in public and

private schools.Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(1), 130-137.

Flowerday, T. & Schraw, G. (2000). Teacher beliefs about instructional choice: A

phenomenological study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 634-645.

Geist, E., & Hohn, J.. (2009). Encouraging creativity in the face of administrative convenience:

How our schools discourage divergent thinking. Education, 130(1), 141-150.




Sternberg, R. J. (2010).WICS: A new model for school psychology.School psychology

international, 31(6), 599-616.

Thompson, P. & Sanders, E.. (2010). Creativity and whole school change: An investigation of

English head teacher practices. The Journal of Educational Change.11(1).63-83.

Zampetakis, L. A., Bouranta, N., & Moustakis, V. S. (2010). On the relationship between

individual creativity and time management. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1), 23-32.

rlorfink(educ815)-2 annot bib

Documents