Notes on assignment:
Thank you for your effort on this assignment. You could have earned a much higher grade if you had covered all the requested topics and cited the required two peer-reviewed papers. If you would like to resubmit your essay with the additional topics I will regrade your essay. Please let me know if you do.
Here is my specific feedback:
It was great to read about your creative experience – balancing work, school, and personal life is tricky, and I enjoyed learning about your description.
You needed to discuss the two following points, which represent half of the content points: “#3: Describe the development of creativity as a concept. a. How has it been studied in the past? b. How has it been understood? #4: Include a discussion of two to three specific theories of creativity.”
You needed to cite two peer-reviewed papers and discuss them with comprehension. I am posting my video on how to find peer-reviewed papers in the library – please watch it and do it – it’s easier than you think.
Revise needed:
The Nature of Creativity Introduction Throughout history, the idea of innovation has been investigated and interpreted in a variety of different ways. The ability to come up with something fresh or unique was first referred to as “creativity” in the 19th century. However, substantial research into creativity did not begin until the middle of the 20th century. At that time, psychologists and other academics began looking into the processes and factors that underlie creative thinking in an effort to better understand what makes for creative thinking. Many different works have been applied to the study of creativity. One such framework is the psychoanalytic approach, which views creativity as the expression of unconscious emotions and desires. Other methods concentrate on the mental activities that contribute to creative thinking, such as problem-solving, idea production, and divergent thinking. These methodologies place a strong emphasis on the part that individual characteristics like intelligence, personality, and determination play in the creative process. The Investment Theory of Creativity and the Componential Model of Creativity are two distinct theories of innovation. According to the Investment Theory of Creativity, creativity is the result of the interaction between three important factors: domain-relevant skills, creativity-relevant processes, and intrinsic motivation. Individuals who have a high degree of domain-specific expertise, engage in flexible and persistent thinking, and are motivated by the intrinsic rewards of creative work are more likely to be creative, according to this theory. This theory was developed by psychologists.
2
On the other hand, the Componential Model of Creativity suggests that creativity is the result of the interaction between several components. These components include knowledge that is specific to a domain, the ability to think creatively, intrinsic motivation, and environmental factors such as social support and resources. This theory places a strong emphasis on both the knowledge and skills that are particular to a given subject in the process of creative thinking, as well as the role that environmental factors play in facilitating and encouraging creative work. A Creative Experience Resulting in a New or Useful Process in My Life I found it difficult to balance my academic work with other commitments, such as my job and my social activities, as a graduate student with numerous responsibilities. I started looking for a productivity system that would enable me to organize my tasks and keep moving toward the objectives I had set for myself. Following a string of unsuccessful attempts with well-known methods, I resolved to find my very own individualized approach. The process consisted of several stages of incubation and refinement, which, in the end, resulted in a novel and useful process that increased my productivity and enabled me to accomplish my objectives. During the development stage, I conducted research and tests on a variety of productivity systems, analyzed their advantages and disadvantages, and identified the components of each system that could be modified to meet my specific requirements. During this phase, I tried out a number of different methodologies, including the Pomodoro technique, the Eisenhower matrix, and the GTD (Getting Things Done) method. However, I discovered that none of these platforms offered a comprehensive solution to my requirements.
3
During the process stage, I had to synthesize the information that I had collected during the incubation stage, and I also had to design a new productivity system that would address the challenges that I was facing. To figure out this process, I had to go through several rounds of trial and error, during which I tested and improved the method over the course of several weeks. The result was a bespoke productivity system that met all of my requirements and inclinations while incorporating aspects of several different approaches to the same problem.
