University education and creativity: an assessment from the student’s perspective

Abstract

Problem Statement: Universities are the institutions responsible for carrying out scientific research and raising highly qualified human power. Highly qualified human power are intellectuals equipped with knowledge andskills that lead to creative, inquiring and productive attitudes. The basic problem statement of this research is determined as: "What are the assessmentsof university students about creavity in university education?” Purpose of Study: The research aims to find out the perceptions, assessments, comments, expectations and suggestions of a group of fourth year university students. Methods: Designed as a qualitative research, aphenomenological methodology is followed in order to analyze the participants’ assessments through focus group interview. Findings and Results: Study provides findings related to the meaning and evaluation of creativity as well as creative and uncreative practices, perceived effect on student’s creativity potential and suggestions for university education as it is perceived by university students. Meaning of creativity is defined as a kind of imagination, thinking differently, completing what is lacking and being different than what is common. Factors influencing creativity are professors, environment, society, lifestyle, families, friends, traditional way of life, trial, books, films, acitivity groups, economic conditions, place of birth, different places, people, learning, observation, fashion, growing up in a small town, social media. The students think meeting with professionals from the sector, lessons to be more interesting, no attendance, obligation to lessons, attending hobby activity clubs, having more free time, no memorization, more practice, more contact with professors andencouragement by professors would enrich their creativity potential. Conclusions and Recommendations: The results indicate that students find their university education mostly as uncreative and experienced limited number of creative practices during their education and think that university education did not contribute to their creativity potential in general.