A PROCESS-ORIENTED CREATIVITY ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR COMPUTER GRAPHICS EDUCATION IN CHINA: INTEGRATING THE COMPONENTIAL THEORY OF CREATIVITY AND MULTI-SOURCE EVALUATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.830024Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Computer Graphics, Creativity Development, Digital Media EducationAbstract
Creativity assessment in computer graphics (CG) education has traditionally relied on product-oriented approaches, which may not fully capture the iterative and process-based nature of creative development. This study draws on the Componential Theory of Creativity. Based on this theoretical foundation, a process-oriented creativity assessment framework is proposed. The framework integrates cognitive, behavioral, and contextual dimensions of creative performance. To operationalize this framework, a multi-source evaluation system was developed, combining student self-report measures, expert-based Consensus Assessment Technique (CAT), and teacher interview data. A design-based research (DBR) approach, combined with a sequential mixed-methods design, was employed to iteratively construct and validate the framework within an authentic CG educational setting in China. A total of 126 undergraduate students and 3 instructors participated in an 8-week intervention.
Downloads
References
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-97996-000
Amabile, T. M. (2011). Componential theory of creativity. Harvard Business School. https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/12-096.pdf
Baer, J. (2022). Domain specificity in creativity research. Creativity Research Journal, 34(2), 123–135. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15326934crj1102_7
Baer, J., & McKool, S. S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment technique. In C. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of research on assessment technologies (pp. 65–77). IGI Global. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/assessing-creativity-using-consensual-assessment/19664
Bereczki, E. O., & Nagy, P. (2023). Who benefits from creative mindsets?: The effects of domain‐specific knowledge on the relationships between creative mindsets and creative performance in the context of ESL/EAL writing. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 57(4), 516–533. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jocb.599
Chen, P., Wang, R., & Ma, Y. (2025). Promoting junior high school students’ creativity in maker education: The design thinking approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 56, 101764. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871187125000136
Cohen, J. (2022). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Rev. ed.). Routledge. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1370285712602755592
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-11884-000
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3(4), 221–227. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0142694X82900400
Emami, M., Rezaei, S., Valaei, N., & Gardener, J. (2023). Creativity mindset as the organizational capability: The role of creativity-relevant processes, domain-relevant skills and intrinsic task motivation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 15(1), 139–160. https://www.emerald.com/apjba/article-abstract/15/1/139/48061/Creativity-mindset-as-the-organizational?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Fuchs, H., Benkova, E., Fishbein, A., & Fuchs, A. (2024). The importance of psychological and cognitive flexibility in educational processes to prepare and acquire the skills required in the twenty-first century. In S. Kot, B. Khalid, & A. ul Haque (Eds.), Corporate Practices: Policies, Methodologies, and Insights in Organizational Management (pp. 91–114). Springer Nature. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-97-0996-0_6
Giancola, M., Palmiero, M., & D’Amico, S. (2022). Field dependent–independent cognitive style and creativity from the process and product-oriented approaches: A systematic review. Creativity Studies, 15(2), Article 2. https://journals.vilniustech.lt/index.php/CS/article/view/15988
Guo, H., Zhou, Z., & Ma, F. (2025). Effect of training programs on the creativity of university students: A multi-level meta-analysis. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 56, 101779. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871187125000288
Guaman-Quintanilla, S., Alcivar, I., Caicedo, G., Everaert, P., & Chiluiza, K. (2025). How to set up a formal design thinking course that works? A practical guide for higher education settings. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 56, 101759. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187125000082
Harvey, S., & Berry, J. W. (2023). Toward a meta-theory of creativity forms: How novelty and usefulness shape creativity. Academy of Management Review, 48(3), 504–529. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amr.2020.0110
Karunarathne, W., & Calma, A. (2024). Assessing creative thinking skills in higher education: deficits and improvements. Studies in Higher Education, 49(1), 157-177.Kohn, N. W., et al. (2011). Conceptual combination and creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(2), 136–143. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03075079.2023.2225532
Le Masson, P., Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2017). Design theories, creativity and innovation. In The Elgar Companion to Innovation and Knowledge Creation (pp. 275-306). Edward Elgar Publishing.https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap/edcoll/9781782548515/9781782548515.00026.xml
Li, G., Chu, R., & Tang, T. (2024). Creativity self-assessment in design education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 52, 101410. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187124000324
Niu, W., & Sternberg, R. (2002). Contemporary studies on the concept of creativity: The east and the west. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(4), 269–288. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2002.tb01069.x
Palmiero, M., Nori, R., Aloisi, V., Ferrara, M., & Piccardi, L. (2015). Domain-specificity of creativity: A study on the relationship between visual creativity and visual mental imagery. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1870. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01870/full
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Tam, C. S. Y., Phillipson, S. N., & Phillipson, S. (2023). Culture, executive thinking style, and knowledge fixation in the development of creativity in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal, 35(2), 211–226. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10400419.2022.2057688
Wang, L., & Kamal, J. B. I. (2024). An analysis of intrinsic motivators about the effect of social media usage on artistic creativity in university in China. Creativity Studies, 17(2), 495–518. https://journals.vilniustech.lt/index.php/CS/article/view/20024
Wu, Y., & Koutstaal, W. (2020). Charting the contributions of cognitive flexibility to creativity: Self-guided transitions as a process-based index of creativity-related adaptivity. PLOS One, 15(6), e0234473. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234473
Xu, X., & Xiao, S. (2025). Cultural values and aesthetics in chinese and western oil painting: An investigation into their impact on artistic localization and integration influencing students’ outcomes. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 9(3), 1768–1776. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ajp/edwast/v9y2025i3p1768-1776id5688.html
Xu, L., & Yu, Y. (2023). Research on computer graphics and image design and visual communication design. 2023 4th International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET), 1–6. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10170356
