SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yıldız Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 11 Sayı: 1

Exploring Knowledge, Perceptions, and Observable Behaviors Related to Scientific Creativity in Early Childhood

Erken Çocuklukta Bilimsel Yaratıcılığa İlişkin Bilgi, Algı ve Gözlemlenebilir Davranışların İncelenmesi

Beyza Akçay Malçok(KIRKLARELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9576-3219
Aslı Yıldırım(ANADOLU ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8535-3715
Pages
42–56
Publication Date
2026-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Interview findings revealed that most children had difficulty describing activities related to science, creativity, and scientific creativity; however, they were able to make limited inferences about scientific creativity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to examine the knowledge, perceptions, and observable behaviors of 60–72-month-old children attending preschool regarding scientific creativity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 12 children aged 60-72 months attending a preschool during the 2023-2024 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Interview findings revealed that most children had difficulty describing activities related to science, creativity, and scientific creativity; however, they were able to make limited inferences about scientific creativity.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023-2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Bilimsel yaratıcılık · Okul öncesi dönem · problem çözme

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the knowledge, perceptions, and observable behaviors of 60–72-month-old children attending preschool regarding scientific creativity. In the study, which was conducted using a basic qualitative research design, data were collected using a semi-structured interview form and a "Scientific Creativity Observation Form" prepared by the researchers. The study group consisted of 12 children aged 60-72 months attending a preschool during the 2023-2024 academic year. The data were analyzed using the descriptive analysis method. According to observation findings, it was determined that children demonstrated behaviors related to problem solving, domain knowledge, scientific inquiry, and creative thinking components. However, indicators related to higher-order cognitive skills such as making connections, hypothesizing, reasoning, and information gathering were found to be limited. Interview findings revealed that most children had difficulty describing activities related to science, creativity, and scientific creativity; however, they were able to make limited inferences about scientific creativity. The results indicate that the components of scientific creativity are observable, but there is a need to include learning experiences that support these components more frequently in educational settings. Accordingly, it is recommended that future studies be conducted with different age groups and using different methods to support the development of scientific creativity in early childhood.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, okul öncesi eğitime devam eden 60-72 aylık çocukların bilimsel yaratıcılığa ilişkin bilgi, algı ve gözlemlenebilir davranışlarını incelemektir. Temel nitel araştırma deseninde yapılan çalışmada veriler, araştırmacılar tarafından hazırlanan yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme formu ve “Bilimsel Yaratıcılık Gözlem Formu” kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Çalışma grubunu 2023-2024 eğitim öğretim yılında okul öncesi eğitim kurumuna devam eden 60-72 aylık 12 çocuk oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma verileri betimsel analiz yöntemi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Gözlem bulgularına göre çocukların problem çözme, alan bilgisi, bilimsel sorgulama ve yaratıcı düşünme bileşenlerine yönelik davranışlar sergiledikleri belirlenmiştir. Ancak ileri düzey bilişsel becerilere yönelik ilişki kurma, hipotez, akıl yürütme, bilgi toplama gibi göstergelerin sınırlı düzeyde olduğu belirlenmiştir. Görüşmeler sonucunda çocukların büyük çoğunluğunun bilim, yaratıcılık ve bilimsel yaratıcılığa yönelik etkinlikleri tanımlamakta zorlandıkları; ancak bilimsel yaratıcılığa ait çıkarımlarda bulundukları görülmüştür. Sonuçlar, bilimsel yaratıcılığa ait bileşenlerin gözlemlenebilir olduğunu ve bilimsel yaratıcılığın bileşenlerini destekleyecek öğrenme deneyimlerine daha fazla yer verilmesi gerektiğini göstermektedir. Bu doğrultuda, erken yıllarda bilimsel yaratıcılığın gelişimini desteklemek için farklı yaş gruplarıyla farklı yöntemlerde çalışmaların yapılması önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Malçok, B. A., Yıldırım, A. (2026). Exploring Knowledge, Perceptions, and Observable Behaviors Related to Scientific Creativity in Early Childhood. Yıldız Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 1, 42–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/1626611

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (61)

  1. Aktamış, H., & Ergin, Ö. (2007). Bilimsel süreç becerileri ile bilimsel yaratıcılık arasındaki ilişkinin belirlenmesi. HU J Educ, 33(33), 11-23
  2. Arslan, E. (2022). Validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAUSBED, 51(1), 395-407.
  3. Astutik, S., Bektiarso, S. S., & Nuraini, L. (2017). Developing scientific creativity test to improve scientific creativity skills for secondary school students. Int J Soc Sci Humanit Invent, 4(9), 3970-3974.
  4. Atesgoz, N. N., & Sak, U. (2021). Test of scientific creativity animations for children: Development and validity study. Think Ski Creat, 40, 100818.
  5. Ayas, M. B. (2020). Alana özgü yaratıcılık: bilimsel yaratıcılık örneği ve göstergeleri. Yeni Türkiye Dergisi, 116, 266-277.
  6. Beghetto, R., & Kaufman, J. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts, 1(2), 73-79.
  7. Bhat, B. A., & Siddiqui, M. H. (2017). Developing scientific creativity test for senior secondary school students. AIJSH, 7(5), 87.
  8. Bi, H., Mi, S., Lu, S., & Hu, X. (2020). Meta-analysis of interventions and their effectiveness in students’ scientific creativity. Think Ski Creat, 38, 100750.
  9. Bingham, A. (1983). Çocuklarda problem çözme yeteneklerinin geliştirilmesi. A. F. Oğuzkan, çev. İstanbul: Millî Eğitim Basımevi.
  10. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  11. Caballero García, P., & Fernandez, T. G. (2018). Makerspaces and scientific creativity level of middle school students. GJAE, 8(2), 75-83.
  12. Chin, M. K., & Siew, N. M. (2015). The development and validation of a figural scientific creativity test for preschool pupils. Creat Educ, 06(12), 1391-1402.
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
  14. Creswell, J. W. (2016). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher. Sage College Publishing.
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract, 39(3), 124-130.
  16. Dhir, T. (2014). Problem solving ability and science process skills as the influential factors of scientific creativity. International Journal of Research Pedagogy and Technology in Education and Movement Sciences, 3(2), 11-17.
  17. Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: Online creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. Ward, S. Smith, & S. Vaid, editors. Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery, and change içinde (ss. 461-492). Washington: American Psychological Association Press.
  18. Eshach, H., & Fried, M. N. (2005). Should science be taught in early childhood? J Sci Educ Technol, 14(3), 315-336.
  19. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2), 75-91.
  20. Gülhan, F., & Şahin, F. (2018). Fen bilimleri dersine STEM entegrasyonu etkinliklerinin 5. Sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılıklarına etkisi. SUJE, 8(4), 40-59.
  21. Gupta, P., & Sharma, Y. (2019). Nurturing scientific creativity in science classroom. Resonance, 24(5), 561-574.
  22. Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Fokialis, P. & Kabouropoulou, M. (2012). Thinking about creativity in science education. Creat Educ, 03(05), 603-611.
  23. Hebebci, M. T. & Usta, E. (2022). The effects of integrated STEM education practices on problem solving skills, scientific creativity, and critical thinking dispositions. Particip Educ Res, 9(6), 358–379.
  24. Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. IJSE, 24(4), 389-403.
  25. Huang, C. F. & Wang, K. C. (2019). Comparative analysis of different creativity tests for the prediction of students’ scientific creativity. Creat Res J, 31(4), 443-447.
  26. Huang, P., Peng, S., Chen, H., Tseng, L., & Hsu, L. (2017). The relative influences of domain knowledge and domain-general divergent thinking on scientific creativity and mathematical creativity. Think Ski Creat, 25, 1-9.
  27. İnel Ekici, D., & Tanır, H. (2020). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılık düzeylerini etkileyen faktörler üzerine nitel bir araştırma. IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (8), 35-50.
  28. Jo, S. M. (2009). A study of Korean students’ creativity in science using structural equation modeling. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Arizona.
  29. Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (2005). Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  30. Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (2009). Is one dimension enough?: A response to Simonton’s varieties of (scientific) creativity. Perspect Psychol Sci, 4(5), 453-454.
  31. Kind, P. M., & Kind, V. (2007). Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Stud Sci Educ, 43(1), 1–37.
  32. Kiras, B., & Bezir Akçay, B. (2016). Yedinci sınıf vücudumuzda sistemler ünitesinin öğretiminde aktif öğrenme yöntemi uygulamalarının öğrencilerin bilimsel yaratıcılığına etkisi. Int J Act Learn, 1(2), 1-20.
  33. Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cogn Sci, 12(1), 1-48.
  34. Liang, J. (2002). Exploring scientific creativity of eleventh grade students in Taiwan. [Doctoral Thesis]. University of Texas.
  35. Lin, C., Hu, W., Adey, P., & Shen, J. (2003). The influence of CASE on scientific creativity. Res Sci Educ, 33(2), 143-162.
  36. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry: Establishing Trustworthiness. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  37. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: Revised and expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Franscisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  38. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2017). Nitel veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  39. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2024). Okul öncesi eğitim programı. https://tegm.meb.gov.tr/dosya/okuloncesi/guncellenenokuloncesiegitimprogrami.pdf Accessed June 11, 2026.
  40. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. National Academy Press.
  41. OECD. (2019). PISA 2022 Creative Thinking Framework. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/creative-thinking/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf Accessed June 11, 2026.
  42. Oğuz, V. (2012). Proje yaklaşımının anasınıfına devam eden çocukların problem çözme becerilerine etkisinin incelenmesi. [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Ankara University.
  43. Okere, M. I., & Ndeke, G. C. (2012). Influence of gender and knowledge on secondary school students’ scientific creativity skills in Nakuru District, Kenya. European J Educ Res, 1(4), 353-366.
  44. Park, J. W. (2004). A suggestion of cognitive model of scientific creativity (CMSC). J Korean Assoc Sci Educ, 24(2), 375-386.
  45. Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. J Res Sci Teach, 2, 176–186.
  46. Rajnish. (1998). Scientific creativity of traditional, model, and Navodaya school students in relation to certain psychological and socio–demographic variables. [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Punjab University.
  47. Rosli, N. E. F., & Phang, F. A. (2021). Relationship of scientific creativity and problem solving physics of form four students. Jurnal Pendidkan Bitara UPSI, 14(1), 39-47. Malay.
  48. Sak, U., & Ayas, M. B. (2013). Creative scientific ability test (C-SAT): A new measure of scientific creativity. Psychol Test Assess Model, 55(3), 316-329.
  49. Sidek, R., Halim, L., Buang, N. A., & Mohamad Arsad, N. (2020). Fostering scientific creativity in teaching and learning science in schools: A systematic review. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA, 6(1), 13.
  50. Siew, N. M., & Chin, M. K. (2018). Design, development, and evaluation of a problem-based with cooperative module on scientific creativity of pre-schoolers. J Balt Sci Educ, 17(2), 215-228. doi:10.33225/jbse/18.17.215
  51. Siew, N. M., Chin, M. K., & Sombuling, A. (2017). The effects of problem-based learning with cooperative learning on preschoolers’ scientific creativity. J Balt Sci Educ, 16(1), 100-112.
  52. Siew, N. M., Chong, C. L., & Lee, B. N. (2015). Fostering fifth graders’ scientific creativity through problem-based learning. J Balt Sci Educ, 14(5), 655-669.
  53. Tekindal, S. (2021). Nicel, nitel, karma yöntem araştırma desenleri ve istatistik. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  54. Xu, S., Reiss, M. J., & Lodge, W. (2026). Enhancing scientific creativity through an inquiry-based teaching approach in secondary science classrooms. Int J Sci Educ, 48(4), 619-636.
  55. Yang, K. K., Lin, S. F., Hong, Z. R., & Lin, H. (2016). Exploring the assessment of and relationship between elementary students’ scientific creativity and science inquiry. Creat Res J, 28(1), 16-23.
  56. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  57. Yıldız Taşdemir, C. (2021). Is scientific creativity possible in early childhood? T&PICD, 1(1), 71-82.
  58. Yıldız, C., & Guler Yıldız, T. (2021). Exploring the relationship between creative thinking and scientific process skills of preschool children. Think Ski Creat, 39, 100795.
  59. Zainuddin, Z., Suyidno, S., Dewantara, D., Mahtari, S., Nur, M., Yuanita, L., & Sunarti, T. (2020). The correlation of scientific knowledge-science process skills and scientific creativity in creative responsibility-based learning. Int J Instr, 13(3), 307-316.
  60. Zulkarnaen, Z., Supardi, Z. I., & Jatmiko, B. (2018). The role of knowledge mastery and science process skills to increase the scientific creativity. Unnes Sci Educ J, 7(2).
  61. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry: Establishing Trustworthiness. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.