**13. Results**

Exercises 1–4, in their individual and combined applications, yielded the following results for the four conditions underlined by Torrance [35] and developed in contexts of schoolchildren in Mexico by Ramirez and colleagues [45], and also for investigative paradigm among primary school children in Chile by Lubart [38]; Lopéz and Navarro [23] indicate a *p*-value < 0.01 for general creativity for a comparative analysis of experiment and control groups in these categories.

Through Tables 1 and 2 we can observe the evolution of results before and after the program of nine activities for creative development. Through the evolution of means and standard deviations, the impact of the imaginative strategies in the narrative and the reflected drawing is observed in the context of a significant increase in the score in the experimental group.


**Table 1.** Mean and standard deviation calculated on EXCEL for pre-test variables of creativity for the individual components suggested in the literature following Torrance (1966).

**Table 2.** Standard deviation in post-test variables for individual Torrance components of narrative and graphic creativity for individually tested experimental and control groups.


Table 3 shows results of inferential analysis obtained from the differences following interventions related to each one of the variables, namely of verbal and figurative creativity. In the first column, the mean change score is presented; in the second, standard deviation; while in the third column, the significance of this difference is presented. In the follow-up test, the test scores of the TCTT and the PIC-J are not comparable to each other at intra-group level because they are measured on different scales of measurement. For this reason, only the differences observed at the intergroup level are analyzed (Table 3).


**Table 3.** Mean, standard deviation, and ANOVA results of intergroup differences in the creativity of the follow-up test (*PIC-N*).

Note: \*\*\* *p* < 0.001. \*\* *p* < 0.01 \* *p* < 0.05.

The results obtained from the narrative and graphic creativity in the monitoring test at the nomothetic level show significant differences between the EG and the GC in most of the creativity variables (Table 3). Specifically, the development of GE creativity is significantly greater than that of CG in narrative flexibility, special details and graphic creativity (*p* < 0.001); in the elaboration, the narrative creativity, the graphic creativity and in the general creativity (*p* < 0.01) and; in graphic originality (*p* < 0.05). The development of narrative fluency and the title of the GE is greater than that of the CG, but the difference between one and the other is not significant (*p* > 0.05).

A comparison of means was carried out using the Student's *t*-statistic, in order to evaluate the level of significance achieved after applying the strategies to the control group. Similarly, Pearson correlation and linear regression between each indicator were established, and the overall result for creative imagination of the experimental group was determined to verify the degree of association between them. For this analysis, we used the statistical program SPSS for Windows. The following graphs show the results according to the following criteria. In the X axis, there are six ranges that contain the direct scores distributed in intervals: Where the range of the number of is greater, the greater the score. The Y-axis represents the relative frequencies, which indicate the percentages of the absolute frequencies of subjects grouped in each interval. Subsequently, the level of significance of the totals in both groups are analyzed with the Student's T, which is established from the midpoint of the six intervals, in which the direct scores obtained by the subjects are distributed. Finally, we establish the Pearson correlation in the experimental group between the indicators of the narrative and graphic creativity in front of the general creativity as evidence of influence. The following is a summary of the results of the open research.

In Figure 1, the narrative creativity dimension, results were obtained in the first four ranks for the control group, with a higher percentage in the third. In the experimental group, however, no results appear in the first column, and show an increase in the fourth column, reaching maximum representation in the last one. This points to an increase in scores for the experimental group as opposed to the control.

**Figure 1.** Narrative Creativity.

As shown in Figure 2, in the context of graphic or image-based creativity, the experimental group achieved its highest performance in the third range, followed by in the fourth one where its highest percentages are noted. This, as well as what we see is the fact that it obtained high percentages in the last two columns, unlike as in the control group, shows its highest percentages in the first three columns, standing out in the second, and without showing results in the last two.

**Figure 2.** Graphic creativity (post-test).

As for general creativity (Figure 3), the control group scored in the first three ranges with their highest score in the third, unlike the experimental group that showed results from the second to the sixth range, but with the exception of the fifth.

**Figure 3.** General creativity post-test.

As observed, the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level between the narrative dimension of the test and that of overall or general creative imagination. This result is explained by the fact that the strategies designed have a high component of activities related to narrative representation: Seven activities out of nine focus on narrative creativity. This means that the component that had the highest incidence in relation to the PIC test was narrative creativity. It seems that narrative creativity has a high correlation with fluidity, flexibility, and narrative originality (see Table 4).


 *p* <

 *p* <

 *p* <

**Table 4.** Correlation Creativity Narrative to General Creativity.

Unlike the previous result, the graphic dimension does not have a high correlation with a general creative imagination scale (Table 5). The results sugges<sup>t</sup> that graphic originality and graphic design do not correlate more closely with total overall creativity (Appendix A). This means that the items of the PIC test, as well as the strategies employed, support the changes of creativity in terms of narrative rather than graphic creativity activity. However, as suggested in the discussion, the experiment demonstrates evidence of the importance of writing and narrative in general creative imagination.


**Table 5.** Correlation of graphic creativity to general creativity.

### **14. Post Test Qualitative Assessment**

It is important to note that a complete evaluation of children's creative capacities requires attending to other environmental, academic, familial, and social factors that may influence the overall development of the child. This implies including qualitative information from observation scales performed by teachers or from interviews with children, parents, and teachers, or taking quantitative measures of attitudes and interests, peer nominations, teacher nominations, supervisor evaluations, product judgments, self-reports of activities, or creative achievements [50]. Taking as reference the Renzulli–Smith student characteristics rating scale and the Monterde primary school pupil observation scale, we followed up on open interviews and discussion groups with tutors and teachers that attended the performance of the sample of students. The objectives were several: To have a closer look, although approximately, at their habits outside the school; inserting reflections on creativity in a wider framework of knowledge of the people who contribute to the children's formation and on the places that host them. We met and listened to the people who lived with the sample of children, as a way to establish a relationship of mutual trust and respect and to approach the peculiar reality of schools. Interviews

were conducted on the same school day, in which tests were applied to children, during recess or at a teacher-free time.

Tutors described boys and girls as generally restless and cheerful, and healthy in the broadest sense of the word. They defined them also as very autonomous in their daily chores. Most children come and go by themselves to school, are accustomed to go shopping from the age of seven, have their gang of friends with whom they go out, and know to organize their games.

In the opinion of the tutors, the areas in which children showed more creativity are organization of games using resources o ffered by the environment, the resolution of conflicts between themselves, and their crafts. The tutors agree that the environment in which they live o ffers endless resources for the promotion of their creativity. This, in addition to the freedom granted by their parents, helps them to become more aware of their skills and interests. Tutors considered autonomy as a fundamental aspect of the development of creativity. In their environment, children moved with confidence and responsibility; outside of it, during cultural visits for example, they seemed to lose their safety and sometimes appeared disoriented. In this case, the di fference between those who are accustomed to going out with the family and moving in di fferent contexts and those who are not, were noted. In general, they do not show special fears but are cautious and respectful of the unknown. There are no evident problems of discipline. Children manifest in general self-control and respect towards the school environment and the tutors.

The group of teachers who either attended or took care of the children reported positive attitude and motivation after the experience generated by this research project. Regardless of the disciplinary field in which they are found, the after-e ffects of artistic education can be adjusted to all educational processes. A majority of the teachers agreed that transdisciplinary performances were generally conducive to civic and ethical education, English, mathematics, and Spanish. A second group endorsed transdisciplinary plastic arts education for better development of precepts in civic formation and ethics, mathematics, and natural sciences. Likewise, this group of teachers expressed that they observed creative thinking skills in their fourth-grade students, which are similar to those that formed part of the conceptual framework of our research, especially to fluidity of thinking, originality, and elaboration. The rest of the qualities stated by the teachers have little relation to the qualities that reflect creative thinking abilities addressed in the conceptual framework of this research.

Most teachers agree that creativity does not consist of the perfect use of a technique to perform an artistic work, because they recognize the need of creativity to solve problems of daily life as well. Creative attitudes are often observed in students, in formats such as socializing and acquainting with new and unpublished objects or creations, followed by indications that they relate to knowledge from di fferent fields to express their opinion on a topic. It includes production of novel hypotheses and questions on introductory topics, in the same way they express gracious analogies about everyday situations. It is logical to assume that many teachers find it very di fficult to drive and follow up on experiences generating creative thinking skills in their educational plans if they themselves had no chance to experience them during their training processes in their respective training faculties, i.e., it is not enough to learn from the concept of memory or copy the characteristics of such thinking. It is necessary to make the activity existential [44].

Only two teachers were trained in concrete subjects of education and artistic appreciation, and a grea<sup>t</sup> majority are unaware that children could be educated through the creative imagination. Moreover, those who know him do not know how to do it. This awareness should lead to teachers using innovative strategies in the classroom, and to believe in education, because children can be educated in other ways.
