Interaction of Communicative Creativity and Primary School Students’ Creativeness in the Context of Educational Environment

Introduction

Currently in psychological and pedagogical science, the environmental approach to the study of different features of a personality is widely used.  Amongst many Russian and foreign psychologists, this is reflected by the use of Vygotsky’s concept.  Vygotsky repeatedly argues about the social conditionality of the formation of higher mental functions and the consciousness of the child (Vygotsky, 1982). Analyzing the role of environment in the development of personality, Vygotsky pays a lot of attention to the process of interiorization (Vygotsky, 1984), zones of closest development (Vygotsky, 1991), and dialogue (Vygotsky, 1982). Elkonin also thought that the child’s personality is formed under environmental influence and interaction with social subjects (Elkonin, 1997).

Environmental approach to the study of personality has been widely studied by foreign psychologists including Bronfenbrenner. He distinguished four ecological systems having a specific impact on a child’s growth (Bronfenbrenner, 1989). In Manuilov’s work,  environmental approach is “an ability to organize environment and optimize its influence on a school student’s personality” (Manuilov, 1997). Environment is the basic ground for studying a child’s development and upbringing, which occur under a certain set of socio-cultural and interpersonal conditions. Such a domain is considered by teachers and psychologists as the educational environment.

A number of scientists have paid special attention to the definition of  “environmental approach”, analyzing its structure, i.e. functions, levels, types. Lerner pointed out that educational environment has an ability to define and form a human’s image and his/her place in the modern world (Lerner, 1995). According to Krylova, educational environment is one of the components of socio-cultural space “where different educational processes interact” (Krylova, 2000).

Also, several scientists have taken into consideration different typologies of educational environment. These typologies include:

1. School educational environment (Belyaeva, 2014; Bodenko, 1999; Zapyataya, 2011; Ivanilova, 2001; Mamysheva, 2011; Nikolayeva, 2010; Spitsyna, 2006; Taktuyeva, 2002; Ulanovskaya, 2002 etc.);
2. Family educational environment (Arslanova , 2008);
3. Educational environment of institutions of higher education (Makarova, 2000; Fadeeva, 2010);
4. Educational environment of the specialized “secondary school – the school of arts” (Yakovleva, 2005).

Qualitative analysis of the conditions and features of social environment in which a child develops, is a central task in the pedagogical system of Korchak.

In his popular work “How to Love a Child”, he distinguished and described four types of “educational environment”, based on freedom/dependence and activity/passivity.  The four types were: dogmatic, ideological, serene, and an environment stressing career-goals and image (Korchak, 2007, p.212).

The idea of the influence of educational environment on the child’s development was widely revealed in the concept of the famous scientist, biologist, and teacher Lesgaft. According to his opinion, social environment, especially the educational one, is the central source and factor of the child and his/her ability for development (Lesgaft, 2014).

According to Yasvin, educational environment presents a system of influences and conditions for the formation of a personality based upon   the existing reality as well as conditions for personality development, contained in social and spatial-objective surroundings (Yasvin, 2001).

Modern educational institutions fulfilling their role in the development of the child’s personality and future potential, pay special attention to the formation and improvement of students’ ability to actively present themselves, freely express their thoughts, be flexible and change style of communication according to the situation, and have a creative approach to any issue. In other words, there is an increasing need for the formation of students’ communicative creativity. The concept of “communicative creativity” is much broader and includes not only communicative development, but also the development of creative potential and speech/thinking activity. The latter implies that the development of thinking and speaking, are closely interrelated and mutually dependent.

The concept of “communicative creativity” is central to our research and includes both the process of creative communication and communicative activity of the individual, reflecting the originality and non-standard solutions of the individuals’ situations in interpersonal communication (Krest'yaninova, 2012).

In psychology, communicative creativity   implies the “system of psychological features of the individual, providing communication and communicative activity of a child with creative character”. The system of these features is presented by the complex of cognitive, motivational, emotional, and moral and spiritual characteristics of a child’s behavior (Martyshkina, 2006, p.59).   The cognitive component includes the individual’s ability to analyze his/her communicative behavior and communicative behavior of others. The motivational component means the active desire to get, create and transfer information, expressing interest in the partner’s personality and the communicative situation. The emotional-volitional component is characterized by an ability to regulate personal emotional state, emotional attitude to communication, and the lack of emotional tension and fear of interacting with other people. The personal component reflects personal characteristics defining creative communication ability. The defined elements are essential in determining the students’ communicative creativity and the level of its formation.

According to the given definitions, one can conclude that communicative creativity is studied as a process of creative communication itself and is the individuals’ feature which allows   change, rejection of stereotypes, and discovery and the use of solutions in communicative situations. Thus, taking into consideration the inseparability of these concepts, we can study the process of communicative creativity indirectly through the system of the individual’s features, i.e. through the communicative creativity.

A principled approach to the study of communicative skills and development of communicative creativity is presented in Vygotsky’s works, who defines communication and interaction with the environment as one of the meaningful factors in children’s development. According to Vygotsky’s concept, it can be concluded that creating conditions for effective development of children’s communicative creativity is the most important task as the effectiveness and quality of the process largely depend on the level of communicative skills of the communication subjects.

Going back to Yasvin’s idea, it can be admitted that an ideal variant of development is supposed to be the education of a “normal type” (according to Legaft) in an “ideological environment” (according to Korchak) which is the most positive for formation of the child’s communicative creativity.

Currently, many studies are devoted to the problem of the development of expertise in the educational environment and directed to the assessment of the quality of education and its influence on the child’s personality formation. But a considerably smaller number of studies aim at determining the role of educational environment in the peculiarities of the formation of the communicative creativity of primary schoolchildren.

The aim of our work is the theoretical study of the peculiarities of the formation of the communicative activity of primary schoolchildren in the context of the reality that is formed by a particular educational environment.

Methods

The following types of educational institutions of the Republic of Tatarstan took part in the study of communicative creativity of primary schoolchildren in different kinds of educational environment: secondary schools and physics and mathematics  specialized institutions. The total number of respondents is 100 children: 54 boys and 46 girls, all aged 9-10 (4th grade students).

In theoretical and empirical study of the influence of the qualitative characteristics of the educational environment on the communicative creativity of primary school students, the following methods were used: theoretical research methods, empirical (question-diagnostic, expert assessment, testing); statistical methods of empirical research results assessment (descriptive statistics, one-factor dispersive analysis, cluster analysis, qualitative analysis).

Diagnostically, in the measuring and identification of the features of communicative creativity of primary school students, the following types of educational environment testing methodology were used:

1. Assessment of the quality characteristics of the educational environment based on vector modeling of the educational environment according to Yasvin (2001, p.14)
2. Verbal creativity diagnostics (adaptation of Mednik’s test) (Mironova, 2006, p.127)
3. Johnson's creativity questionnaire (in Tunik’s adaptation) (Il'in, 2001, p.265)
4. “The diagnostic of communicative control” (Shneider) (2002, p.120)
5. Adapted modified version of Kettel’s children's personality questionnaire (Aleksandrovskaya, 1995, p.25).

Results

On the first stage of the research, complex expert assessment of the qualitative parameters of educational environment was carried out (Yasvin, 2001, p.14]. This methodology let us conduct diagnostics of the educational environment by the following “basic” parameters: modality, intensity, broadness, stability, and the degrees of awareness; and by additional parameters like activity, emotionality, dominance, generality, coherence, and mobility.

The career type of modality included the school of physics and mathematics. According to the expert analysis, it was revealed that this educational environment is characterized by high intensity and marked by in-depth study of particular subjects and lower breadth of educational environment, manifested in limited social contacts with other subjects of educational environment. The environment of such educational institutions is characterized by their intensity, which is reflected in the evaluation of the development of these school students. These students show an aptitude for dynamic change.

Specialized school was assigned to the creative type of educational environment in which the self-development of a free and active person takes place.

According to the results of the assessment of the qualitative characteristics of the educational environment, the comprehensive school has a dogmatic type of modality, which is characterized by high generality values and low activity, mobility, breadth, intensity and coherence. Educational institutions’ activity differs by stability, clear concept, strict regulations of educational process, the disciplinary system of the educational process and the lack of individualization.

The analysis of empirical data reveals the personality types and their frequency in different types of educational environment.

One of the basic assumptions is the idea of communicative creativity from the standpoint of holistic education, which indicates related characteristics or components to be  used as diagnostic. In other words, not particular components like cognitive, motivational, emotional-volitional and personal are diagnosed, but their set reflecting system characteristics of the individual in general. Such an individual includes characteristics mentioned above. To confirm this thesis, cluster analysis was used for the mathematical analysis of data.

The cluster analysis method presents a procedure of ordering into comparatively homogeneous classes a pairwise comparison of objects according to predefined and measured criteria. Cluster analysis solves the task of forming classifications, i.e., dividing a set of source data into groups or clusters.

Using diagnostic indicators (cognitive, motivational, emotional-volitional, and personal components of communicative creativity) as classification criteria, the procedure of cluster analysis of the initial sample was carried out. During the data analysis a cluster analysis of average data was used (K-means Clustering) along with the method of complete linkage (Complete Linkage), enabling the definition of compact clusters consisting of similar elements.

Based upon the results of cluster analysis, four types of primary school students with different variants of communicative creativity component combinations were defined. To give a complete characterization of each cluster, the average values of components were calculated.

Table 1 shows the average values of the indicators of communicative creativity of primary school students, which served as a classification criterion when conducting a cluster analysis on a sample of primary school children.

Table 1

Depending on content characteristics of each cluster, they were designated with the following names: “sensitive”, “demonstrative”, “capable”, “creative”.

Here is a qualitative analysis of each cluster, based on values of source indicators.

1. “Sensitive” includes 15 testees, which is 15% of the total number of testees. The main feature of this primary schoolchildren group is a low level of communicative creativity, reflected in a limited range of interests, selective activity, and difficulties in solving non-standard or creative tasks. Nevertheless, these children are characterized by their responsibility, neatness, credulity, and gentleness. They need love and attention from surrounding people. This explains  why they can easily make contact and be indulgent and kind in communication with others.
2. The biggest group, the “Demonstrative”, is almost half of all testees (49 primary schoolchildren – 49%). Such children show creativity only in particular types of activity, which are the most meaningful for them. Also, such students are characterized by increased excitability, and a striving for leadership, dominance, and authority. They like to command, rule other people, and control them. At the same time, when they are refused they experience violent reactions, the undermining of their mental balance and can experience failure for quite a long time.
3. The "Capable" group consists of 25 subjects, which is 25% of the entire sample. Primary school students belonging to this group are characterized by a high level of creativity which is manifest in their activity. They are rather quick to solve creative tasks, strive to receive, create and transmit information, find non-standard ways out of situations and problems, and at the same time they feel insecure about themselves and their abilities. Also, these children easily make contact and do not have any difficulties in communicating both with peers and adults. In addition, they are characterized by a high level of verbal intellect reflected in their ability to summarize, separate particular from general, and develop logics and abstract thinking.

The last group is presented by 11 students (11%) who form a class of “creative” children. They are characterized by a very high level of communicative creativity. Thus, they have a wide range of interests, flexible thinking, develop innovative ideas, solve problems, make immediate decisions, and switch from one type of activity to another without any difficulty. Consequently, they are also characterized by increased excitability, unstable attention, destructiveness, and increased activity. Nevertheless, they are very open and sociable and can easily make contact, and do not get lost in non-standard situations. These non-standard situations include public speech and activities involving risk-taking and thrill-seeking.

So, as the result of the cluster analysis, four types of primary school students, depending on intensity of communicative creativity indicators, were distinguished. These types are: “sensitive”, “demonstrative”, “capable” and “creative”.

With the help of more detailed analysis of the distinguished types, the occurrence frequency by type in different educational environment was studied. The results are given in Table 2.

Table 2

According to the data, the most frequent type in serene environments is “sensitive” (80% of all students). The vast majority in dogmatic environments is “demonstrative” type (70%). Similarly, in career environments, approximately 76% of all students are “demonstrative” personalities. The creative environment includes “capable” primary school students (55%).

Conclusion

Thus, the analysis of the features of the communicative creativity of younger school students in five educational organizations enabled us to determine the influence of the type of modality of the educational system on the level of development of the communicative creativity of younger school children. More than that, having divided source data of communicative creativity into groups proved (depending on the degree of formation of a particular component of communicative creativity) that there are certain types of speech-thinking and communicative activities of younger school children in different types of educational environment.

An indispensable pedagogical condition for cognitive and communicative development is the creation of a favorable educational environment for all school students. We need to offer modern models for the development of speech-cogitative activity of children that meet modern requirements for building models of the educational environment (Bayanova, Shishova, 2019; Khotinets, Medvedeva, 2021).

Ethics Statement

All diagnostic procedures have been conducted in complete accordance with  diagnostic standards – with the use of unified forms, instructions and stimulating materials. The results’ validity was provided by preliminary preparation of the experts during a series of seminars, devoted to elaboration of the agreed assessment.  Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by each parent.

Author Contributions

E.O. Shishova designed and directed the project, who developed the theoretical framework; A.Z. Akhatova performed the experiments, performed the analysis, drafted the manuscript; E.O. Shishova aided in interpreting the results and worked on the manuscript. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

This article has been supported by the Kazan Federal University Strategic  Academic Leadership Program (PRIORITY-2030).

References

1. Aleksandrovskaya, E.M., Gil'yasheva, I.N. (1995). Adaptirovannyj modificirovannyj variant detskogo lichnostnogo oprosnika R. Kettella: metodicheskie rekomendacii [Adapted modified version of R. Cattell's children's personality questionnaire: guidelines] (2nd ed.). Moscow: Folium.

2. Arslanova, S.M. (2008). Obrazovatel'naya sreda sem'i kak faktor formirovaniya psihologicheskih osobennostej lichnosti mladshego shkol'nika [The educational environment of the family as a factor in the formation of psychological characteristics of the personality of a junior schoolchild] (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow.

3. Bayanova, L.Ph., Shishova, E.O. (2019). Bilingual Education: The Model of Measuring Quality of Bilingual Learning Environment in Early Childhood. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie - Psychological Science and Education. 2, 37–49. https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2019240204

4. Belyaeva, P.I. (2014). Psihologicheskaya bezopasnost' lichnosti mladshego shkol'nika v obrazovatel'noj srede shkoly [Psychological safety of the personality of a junior schoolchild in the educational environment of the school] (Doctoral dissertation). Saint Petersburg.

5. Bodenko, L.A. (1999). Pedagogicheskie usloviya stanovleniya mladshego shkol'nika v obrazovatel'noj srede [Pedagogical conditions for the formation of a younger student in the educational environment] (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow.

6. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. Annals of Child Development, 6, 227.

7. El'konin, D.B. (1997). Psihologiya obucheniya mladshego shkol'nika [Psychology of teaching younger students]. Moscow: Institut prakticheskoj psihologii.

8. Fadeeva, A.N. (2010). Razvitie obrazovatel'noj sredy uchrezhdeniya dopolnitel'nogo obrazovaniya kak uslovie tvorcheskoj samorealizacii detej i podrostkov [Development of the educational environment of an additional education institution as a condition for the creative self-realization of children and adolescents] (Doctoral dissertation). Ul'yanovsk.

9. Il'in, E.P. (2001). Psihologiya tvorchestva, kreativnosti, odaryonnosti [Psychology of creativity, creativity, giftedness]. Saint Petersburg: Piter.

10. Ivanilova, S.I. (2001). Obrazovatel'naya sreda nachal'noj shkoly kak faktor razvitiya uchashchihsya [The educational environment of elementary school as a factor in the development of students] (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow.

11. Khotinets, V.Y., Medvedeva, D.S., Kozhevnikova, O.V. (2021). Psychological and pedagogical model of the development of speech-thinking activity of younger bilingual schoolchildren with speech generation difficulties. Vestnik Vyatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta - Herald of Vyatka State University, 2(140), 110–122.

12. Korchak, YA. (2007). Kak lyubit' rebyonka [How to love a child]. Moscow: U-Faktoriya.

13. Krest'yaninova, E.N. (2012). Kommunikativnoe tvorchestvo v sovremennom obshchestve [Communicative creativity in modern society]. Privolzhskij nauchnyj vestnik [Privolzhsky Scientific Bulletin], 2(6). Retrieved from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kommunikativnoe-tvorchestvo-v-sovremennom-obschestve

14. Krylova, N.B. (2000). Kul'turologiya obrazovaniya [Cultural studies of education]. Moscow: Narodnoe obrazovanie.

15. Leont'ev, A.N. (1975). Psihologicheskoe vospriyatie soznatel'nogo ucheniya [Psychological perception of conscious teaching]. In Deyatel'nost', soznanie, lichnost' [Activity, consciousness, personality], 235-302.

16. Lerner, I.Ya. (1995). Filosofiya didaktiki i didaktika kak filosofiya [Philosophy of didactics and didactics as a philosophy]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo ROU.

17. Lesgaft, P.F. (2014). Semejnoe vospitanie rebyonka i ego znachenie [Family education of the child and its importance]. Moscow: Direkt-Media.

18. Makarova, N.P. (2000). Deyatel'nost' detskogo muzeya kak faktor stanovleniya obrazovatel'noj sredy dlya mladshih shkol'nikov [The activities of the children's museum as a factor in the formation of the educational environment for younger schoolchildren] (Doctoral dissertation). Samara.

19. Mamysheva, Z.Z. (2011). Pedagogicheskie usloviya formirovaniya cennostnyh orientacij mladshih shkol'nikov v polikul'turnoj obrazovatel'noj srede [Pedagogical conditions for the formation of value orientations of junior schoolchildren in a multicultural educational environment] (Doctoral dissertation). Majkop.

20. Manujlov, Yu.S. (1997). Sredovoj podhod v vospitanii [Environmental method in education] (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow.

21. Martyshkina, N.V. (2006). Psihologicheskie osobennosti kommunikativnogo tvorchestva i razvitiya kommunikativnoj kreativnosti doshkol'nikov [Psychological features of communicative creativity and the development of communicative creativity of preschoolers] (Doctoral dissertation). Nizhnij Novgorod.

22. Mironova, E.E. (2006). Sbornik psihologicheskih testov. Chast' II: Posobie [Collection of psychological tests. Part II: Tutorial]. Minsk: Zhenskij institut ENVILA.

23. Nikolaeva, E.S. (2010). Formirovanie motivacii samopoznaniya u detej mladshego shkol'nogo vozrasta v obrazovatel'noj srede [Formation of motivation for self-knowledge in children of primary school age in the educational environment] (Abstract of Doctoral dissertation). Nizhnij Novgorod.

24. Shnajder, M. (2002). Diagnostika kommunikativnogo kontrolya [Diagnostics of communicative control]. In N.P. Fetiskin, V.V. Kozlov, G.M. Manujlov (Eds.), Social'no-psihologicheskaya diagnostika razvitiya lichnosti i malyh grupp [Socio-psychological diagnostics of development of personality and small groups] (pp. 120-121). Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Instituta Psihoterapii

25. Spicyna, O.A. (2006). Psihologicheskie usloviya formirovaniya kognitivnogo i povedencheskogo komponentov tolerantnosti u mladshih shkol'nikov v obrazovatel'noj srede [Psychological conditions for the formation of the cognitive and behavioral components of tolerance in primary school students in the educational environment] (Doctoral dissertation). Kazan.

26. Taktueva, L.I. (2002). Pedagogicheskie usloviya samoaktualizacii uchenika v obrazovatel'noj srede shkoly [Pedagogical conditions of self-actualization of the student in the educational environment of the school] (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow.

27. Ulanovskaya, I.M. (2002). CHto takoe obrazovatel'naya sreda shkoly? Kakie byvayut obrazovatel'nye sredy? Diagnostika obrazovatel'noj sredy shkoly [What is the educational environment of the school? What are the educational environments? Diagnosis of the educational environment of the school]. Nachal'naya shkola: plyus-minus [Primary school: plus-minus], 1, 3 – 13.

28. Vygotsky, L.S. (1982). Sobranie sochinenij v 6 tomakh, T. 1: Voprosy teorii i istorii psihologii [Collected works in 6 volumes. Vol. 1: Questions of theory and history of psychology], 376 – 385.

29. Vygotsky, L.S. (1984). Orudie i znak v razvitii rebenka [Tool and sign in the development of the child]. In L.S Vygotsky, Sobranie sochinenij v 6-ti tomakh. T. 6: Nauchnoe nasledstvo [Collected works in 6 volumes. Vol. 6. Scientific heritage] (pp. 5-90). Moscow: Pedаgogika.

30. Vygotsky, L.S. (1991). Pedagogicheskaya psihologiya [Pedagogical psychology]. Moscow: Pedаgogika

31. Yakovleva, A.D. (2005). Obrazovatel'naya sreda integrativnogo kompleksa «obshcheobrazovatel'naya shkola – shkola iskusstv» kak uslovie effektivnogo razvitiya lichnosti mladshego shkol'nika [The educational environment of the integrative complex "general education school - school of arts" as a condition for the effective development of the personality of a younger student] Nizhnij Novgorod.

32. Yasvin, V.A. (2001). Obrazovatel'naya sreda: ot modelirovaniya k proektirovaniyu [Educational environment: from modeling to design]. Moscow: Izd-vo «Smysl».

33. Zapyataya, O.V. (2011). Formirovanie social'nyh umenij mladshih shkol'nikov v obrazovatel'noj srede shkoly [Formation of social skills of younger schoolchildren in the educational environment of the school] (Doctoral dissertation). Krasnoyarsk.