Finding creativity in the extrinsically motivated environment of architecture students

References

• Amabile, T. M. (1983a). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1983b). A consensual technique for creativity assessment. In The social psychology of creativity (pp. 37–63). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview press.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J., Kaufman, J. C., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Extension of the consensual assessment technique to nonparallel creative products. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 113–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, J., & McKool, S. S. (2009). Assessing creativity using the consensual assessment technique. In C. Schreiner (Ed.), Handbook of research on assessment technologies, methods, and applications in higher education (pp. 65–77). Hersey, NY: Information Science Reference (IGI Global).
   Google Scholar
• Barnett, R., & Coat, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press. McGraw Hill Education.
   Google Scholar
• Beghetto, R. A. (2005). Does assessment kill student creativity? The Educational Forum, 69, 254–263.
   Google Scholar
• Casakin, H., & Kreitler, S. (2010). Motivation for creativity in architectural design and engineering design students: Implications for design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20, 477–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative assessment techniques to support student motivation and achievement. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Covington, M. V., & Müeller, K. J. (2001). Intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation: An approach/avoidance reformulation. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 157–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Covington, M. V., & Wiedenhaupt, S. (1997). Turning work into play: The nature and nurturing of intrinsic task engagement. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 101–114). New York, NY: Agathon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daugherty, M. K. (2013). The prospect of an” A” in STEM education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14, 10–14.
   Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorling, D. (2015, June 30). Government policies are turning education into a production line. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/30/government-policies-education-production-line-testing-children-schools
   Google Scholar
• Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Dweck, C. S., Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2014). Academic tenacity: mindsets and skills that promote long-term learning. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennessey, B. A., Amabile, T. M., & Mueller, J. S. (2011). Consensual assessment. In S. Pritzker & M. Runco (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 253–260). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press/Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. (2006). Creativity in higher education: What’s the problem? Higher Education, 7, 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Jahnke, I., Haertel, T., & Wildt, J. (2017). Teachers’ conceptions of student creativity in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54, 87–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., Cole, J. C., & Sexton, J. D. (2008). A comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 171–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, K. H. (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the torrance tests of creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 285–295. Retrieved from http://kkim.wmwikis.net/file/view/Kim_2011_Creativity_crisis.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinman, M. (2008). The beauty of “some rights reserved”: Introducing creative commons to librarians, faculty, and students. College & Research Libraries News, 69(10), 594–597.
   Google Scholar
• Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 289–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingston, L. (2010). Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111, 59–62.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17, 484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McWilliam, E., & Dawson, S. (2008). Teaching for creativity: Towards sustainable and replicable pedagogical practice. Higher Education, 56, 633–643.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyedele, L. O. (2010). Sustaining architects’ and engineers’ motivation in design firms: An investigation of critical success factors. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 17, 180–196.
   Google Scholar
• Rampersad, G., & Patel, F. (2014). Creativity as a desirable graduate attribute: Implications for curriculum design and employability. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 15, 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serraino, P. (2016). The creative architect: Inside the great midcentury personality study. New York, NY: Monacelli Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shalley, C. E. (1991). Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, J. D., & Gupta, N. (2015). Let the evidence speak again! Financial incentives are more effective than we thought. Human Resource Management Journal, 25, 281–293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonton, D. K. (2009). Varieties of perspectives on creativity: Reply to commentators. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 466–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 87–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truong, A. (2014, May). Google tops this list of companies that offer the best pay and perks. Fast company. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/3031005/most-innovative-companies/google-tops-this-list-of- that-offer-the-best-pay-and-perks
   Google Scholar
• Woehr, D. J., Loignon, A. C., Schmidt, P. B., Loughry, M. L., & Ohland, M. W. (2015). Justifying aggregation with consensus-based constructs: A review and examination of cutoff values for common aggregation indices. Organizational Research Methods, 18, 704–737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, C. C., Wan, C. S., & Chiou, W. B. (2010). Dialectical thinking and creativity among young adults: A postformal operations perspective. Psychological Reports, 106, 79–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, J. (1998). Feedback valence, feedback style, task autonomy, and achievement orientation: Interactive effects on creative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 261–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, E. (2009). Reconceptualizing the role of creativity in art education theory and practice. Studies in Art Education, 50, 382–383.
   Google Scholar