Using children's search patterns to predict the quality of their creative problem solving

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a computational model that implicitly predict the children’s creative quality of solutions by analyzing the query pattern on a problem-solving-based lesson. Design/methodology/approach A search task related to the competencies acquired in the classroom was applied to automatically measure children’ creativity. A blind review process of the creative quality was developed of 255 primary school students’ solutions. Findings While there are many creativity training programs that have proven effective, many of these programs require measuring creativity previously which involves time-consuming tasks conducted by experienced reviewers, i.e. far from primary school classroom dynamics. The authors have developed a model that predicts the creative quality of the given solution using the search queries pattern as input. This model has been used to predict the creative quality of 255 primary school students’ solutions with 80 percent sensitivity. Research limitations/implications Although the research was conducted with just one search task, participants come from two different countries. Therefore, the authors hope that this model provides detection of non-creative solutions to enable prompt intervention and improve the creative quality of solutions. Originality/value This is the first implicit classification model of query pattern in order to predict the children’ creative quality of solutions. This model is based on a conceptual relation between the concept association of creative thinking and query chain model of information search.

[1]  Mathias Benedek,et al.  Revisiting Mednick’s Model on Creativity-Related Differences in Associative Hierarchies. Evidence for a Common Path to Uncommon Thought , 2013, The Journal of creative behavior.

[2]  Raya Fidel,et al.  A Visit to the Information Mall: Web Searching Behavior of High School Students , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[3]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Determining the informational, navigational, and transactional intent of Web queries , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[4]  Dan Wu,et al.  An empirical study on Chinese adolescents' web search behavior , 2016, J. Documentation.

[5]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Using the taxonomy of cognitive learning to model online searching , 2009, Inf. Process. Manag..

[6]  Richard S. Mansfield,et al.  The Effectiveness of Creativity Training , 1978 .

[7]  Shun-ichi Kikuchi.  A report of my visit to INET '95 , 1995 .

[8]  Ingmar Weber,et al.  Who uses web search for what: and how , 2011, WSDM '11.

[9]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  A faceted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[10]  Özgür Ulusoy,et al.  How k-12 students search for learning?: analysis of an educational search engine log , 2014, SIGIR.

[11]  Ryen W. White,et al.  The search dashboard: how reflection and comparison impact search behavior , 2012, CHI.

[12]  Andreas Nürnberger,et al.  What are the real differences of children's and adults' web search , 2011, SIGIR '11.

[13]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  Collaborative Web Search: Who, What, Where, When, and Why , 2009, Collaborative Web Search: Who, What, Where, When, and Why.

[14]  Thomas Lee Rodgers,et al.  Identifying Quality, Novel, and Creative Ideas: Constructs and Scales for Idea Evaluation , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[15]  E. Torrance,et al.  Fostering Academic Creativity in Gifted Students. ERIC Digest #E484. , 1990 .

[16]  T. M. Amabile.  The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. , 1983 .

[17]  Elizabeth Foss,et al.  How children search the internet with keyword interfaces , 2009, IDC.

[18]  Christoph Hölscher,et al.  Web search behavior of Internet experts and newbies , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[19]  E. Torrance,et al.  The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking , 2012 .

[20]  Ryen W. White,et al.  WWW 2007 / Track: Browsers and User Interfaces Session: Personalization Investigating Behavioral Variability in Web Search , 2022 .

[21]  M. Mumford,et al.  The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review , 2004 .

[22]  Andrei Broder,et al.  A taxonomy of web search , 2002, SIGF.

[23]  Luanne Freund,et al.  Assigning search tasks designed to elicit exploratory search behaviors , 2012, HCIR '12.

[24]  Mariluz Guenaga,et al.  Detection of the Student Creative Behavior Based on Diversity of Queries , 2015, UCAmI.

[25]  J. Coney,et al.  Creative Thinking From An Information Processing Perspective: A New Approach To Mednick's Theory Of Associative Hierarchies , 1995 .

[26]  Evgeniy Gabrilovich,et al.  Computing Semantic Relatedness Using Wikipedia-based Explicit Semantic Analysis , 2007, IJCAI.

[27]  M. Volman,et al.  The Web as an Information Resource in K–12 Education: Strategies for Supporting Students in Searching and Processing Information , 2005 .

[28]  Douglas L. Dean,et al.  Identifying Good Ideas: Constructs and Scales for Idea Evaluation , 2006 .

[29]  Dania Bilal,et al.  Factors Influencing Children's and Adults' Information Seeking on the Web: Results of Two Studies. , 2001 .

[30]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Exploratory Search: Beyond the Query-Response Paradigm , 2009, Exploratory Search: Beyond the Query-Response Paradigm.

[31]  Dania Bilal,et al.  Differences and similarities in information seeking: children and adults as Web users , 2002, Inf. Process. Manag..

[32]  S. Mednick.  The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[33]  Paul R. Christensen,et al.  A factor-analytic study across the domains of reasoning, creativity, and evaluation. , 1959 .

[34]  Neesha Kodagoda,et al.  Effects of low & high literacy on user performance in information search and retrieval , 2008, BCS HCI.

[35]  Jaime Arguello,et al.  Grannies, tanning beds, tattoos and NASCAR: evaluation of search tasks with varying levels of cognitive complexity , 2012, IIiX.