Effects of Mind Mapping and Synectics on the Whole Brain Learning and Creative Production of High Ability Pupils.
ABSTRACT
The scientific and technological transformation of any nation depends largely on the maximization of the whole brain potentials of the citizenry; particularly, special education of the high ability persons.
Studies have shown that many high ability children under achieve their potentials due to the use of inappropriate learning strategies and method of instruction often based on the left brain processing style.
Therefore, this study investigated the effects of training in mind mapping and synectics techniques on whole brain learning and creative production of high ability pupils. The study was guided by nine specific purposes, seven research questions, and eight null hypotheses.
The study was a quasi-experimental research, with a non-equivalent pretest–posttest control group design involving two treatment groups, and one control group.
One hundred and sixty-nine high ability pupils identified in 34 government approved primary schools in Nsukka urban area using validated Test Score and Teacher Nomination identification instruments composed the population for the Study.
Three sample schools with large number of high ability pupils were selected through purposive sampling technique, and assigned to treatment conditions using simple random sampling technique of simple toss of the coin.
In all, twenty-one high ability pupils in the three sample schools constituted the sample for the study. The independent variables studied were mind mapping and synectics, while the dependent measures were whole brain learning and creative production.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE —- —- — — —- i
CERTIFICATION PAGE —- — — —- ii
APPROVAL PAGE —- —- — — —- iii
DEDICATION —- —- — — —- iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS —- — — —- v
TABLE OF CONTENTS —- — — —- vi
LIST OF APPENDICES —- — — —- ix
LIST OF FIGURES —- —- — — —- x
LIST OF TABLES —- —- — — —- xi
ABSTRACT —- —- — — —- xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background of the study —- —- —- — 1
Statement of the problem —- —- —- — 10
Purpose of the study —- —- —- — 11
Significance of the study —- —- —- — 11
Scope of the study —- —- —- — 13
Research questions —- —- —- — 14
Hypotheses —- —- —- — 15
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Conceptual Framework —- —- —- — 17
Concept of Ability —- —- —- — 17
High ability children —- —- —- — 18
Concept of Creativity —- —- —- — 23
Creative Production —- —- —- — 28
Whole Brain Learning —- —- —- — 32
Whole Brain Creativity —- —- —- — 37
Mind Mapping —- —- —- — 40
Concept of Synectics —- —- —- — 44
Schematic Diagram of Conceptual Framework—- — — 49
Theoretical Framework —- —- — — 50
Theory of Brain Hemisphericity —- —- — — 50
Ned Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model —- —- — 50
Theory of Multiple Intelligences —- —- — 52
Enrichment Triad Model —- —- — 54
Synectics Theory —- —- — 55
Cognitive Constructivism —- —- — 57
Strategies Integration Model —- —- — 59
Related Empirical Studies —- —- — 61
Studies on Whole Brain Learning —- —- — 61
Studies on Creative Production —- —- — 66
Studies on Mind Mapping —- —- — 68
Studies on Synectics —- —- — 73
Studies on High Ability —- —- — 77
Gender Influence on Creativity —- —- — 81
Summary of Literature Review —- —- — 87
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHOD
Design of the Study —- —- — — 89
Area of the Study —- —- —- — 90
Population of the Study —- —- —- — 90
Sample and Sampling Techniques—- —- — — 90
Instrument for the Study —- —- — — 91
Development of the Instruments—- —- — — 93
Validation of the Instruments —- —- —- — 94
Trial Testing of the Instruments —- —- — — 95
Reliability of the Study —- —- — 95
Development of the Training Programmes —- — 96
Validation of the Training Programmes —- —- — 97
Trial Testing of the Training Programmes —- —- — 97
Experimental Procedure —- —- — 97
Control of Extraneous Variables—- —- — — 98
Method of Data Analysis —- —- —- — 100
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
Research Question 1 — —- —- — 101
Research Question 2 —- —- —- — — 102
Research Question 3 —- —- —- — — 102
Research Question 4 —- —- —- — — 103
Research Question 5 —- —- —- — — 104
Research Question 6 —- —- —- — — 105
Research Question 7 —- —- —- — — 106
Hypothesis 1 —- —- —- —- — 108
Hypothesis 2 —- —- —- —- — 109
Hypothesis 3 —- – — —- —- — 110
Hypothesis 4 —- —- —- —- — 111
Hypothesis 5 —- —- —- —- — 112
Hypothesis 6 —- —- —- —- — 113
Hypothesis 7 —- —- —- —- — 113
Hypothesis 8 —- —- —- —- — 114
Summary of the Findings —- —- —- — 114
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Discussion and interpretation of the findings —- —- — 116
Conclusions —- —- —- — 125
Educational Implications —- —- —- — 126
Recommendations —- —- —- — 129
Limitations of the Study —- —- —- — 130
Suggestions for Further Studies —- —- — — 131
Summary of the Study —- —- — — 132
REFERENCES —- —- —- —- — 135
APPENDICES —- —- —- —- — 149
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
The Nigerian school children manifest varying exceptional abilities. Some show below average learning ability, while others with high abilities over achieve so much that they need differentiated and individualized instructional programmes in order to benefit from regular educational programme and then maximize their vast human potentials.
The United States Department of Education describes high ability as exceptionally advanced performance or the potential for outstanding performance in intellectual, creative, leadership, artistic, or specific academic fields (Callahan, 2009).
In a specific sense, Renzulli and Reis (1997) view high ability as natural talent or superior aptitude for the four major content areas; such as: English Language, Social Studies, Maths, and Science; and other less traditional subject areas.
High ability could be classified under several categories. The Blue Print on Education for the Gifted and Talented Persons (1986) differentiated between high intellectual ability as defined above and talent, which is explained as evidences of positive exceptionality and creativity manifested in the process of doing things.
Gardner (1983) in his Theory of Multiple Intelligences identified eight separate kinds of intelligibility; Guilford (1988) in his Structure of the Intellect claims that there are 180 intelligences, while Renzulli in Woolfolk (1995) distinguished between academic high ability and creative/productive high ability.
Likewise, Adesokan (1990) and McGrail (2005) agree that the high ability children are the largest group of underachievers in education.
The reasons for this dismal outcome are not far-fetched since most regular classroom teachers are inexperienced in providing the instructional needs of high ability children, others lack training in modification of curriculum, and tend to stick to left brain method of instruction.
REFERENCES
Abang, T. B. (2005). The exceptional child: Handbook of special education. Jos: Fab Educational Books.
Abi-El-Mona, I. & Adb-El-Khalick, F. (2008). The Influence of mind mapping on eighth graders’ science achievement.
Adesokan, E. O. (1990). Giftedness: Developing the potential of the gifted and talented at home and at school. Akure: Fagbamigbe Publishing Ltd.
Adeyanju, G. A. (2002). Creativity: Learning and learning style. Zaria: Isola and Sons Ai, X. (1999). Creativity and academic achievement: An investigation of gender differences. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 329-337.
Akinboye, J. O. (2001). Creativity, innovation, and success. Ibadan: String-Holden Akinlaye, F. A. (1996). Teacher-directed inquiry guided discussion and students learning outcomes in some aspects of social studies. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis. University of Ibadan.
Join Our Newsletter!
Don’t miss this opportunity
Enter Your Details
Be the first to comment