Teachers' implicit pedagogical knowledge in the field of technical creativity

Pavlína Částková; Michal Mrázek; Dominika Provázková Stolinská; Veronika Kavková; Jiří Dostál

doi:10.60923/issn.1970-2221/23026

Authors

Pavlína Částková Palacký University Olomouc

Pavlína Částková works at the Department of Technical and Information Education at the Faculty of Education, Palacký University in Olomouc, Czechia. Her teaching and research focus on assessment in technical education and the development of pupils’ technical creativity. She participated in the experimental verification of the “Human and Technology” educational area and is currently involved in the development of the RVP ZV under the Ministry of Education in Czechia.
Michal Mrázek Palacký University Olomouc

Michal Mrázek works at the Department of Technical and Information Education, Faculty of Education, Palacký University in Olomouc. His professional activity focuses on technical education in lower and upper secondary education. Primarily, he focuses on the topics of instructional learning of psychomotor skills development and machining of materials in technical education. Concurrently, he is working on issues of research methodology in education with an overlap to technical fields. He is currently involved in a state project focusing on the development of a competency profile for graduates of teacher education programmes with a technical focus.
Dominika Provázková Stolinská Palacký University Olomouc

Dominika Provázková Stolinská works at the Department of Primary Education at the Faculty of Education, Palacký University in Olomouc, Czechia. Her teaching and research focus on teachers’ implicit pedagogical knowledge in primary education, with an emphasis on classroom processes, educational communication, and the development of teacher competencies. She has participated in national and international research projects and is involved in revising the national curriculum.
Veronika Kavková Palacký University Olomouc

Veronika Kavková is affiliated with the Department of Psychology and Psychopathology at the Faculty of Education, Palacký University in Olomouc, Czechia, where she teaches psychology-related courses with an emphasis on educational psychology to students across disciplines. In addition, she provides professional psychological counselling for students and academic staff at the Faculties of Education and Science. Her interests include educational psychology and the socio-psychological aspects of learning and development.
Jiří Dostál Palacký University Olomouc

Jiří Dostál is a professor at the Faculty of Education of Palacký University in Olomouc, where he teaches didactically, technically and informatics-oriented subjects. He is an expert in curriculum design at the elementary school level. In the field of pedagogical theory, he focuses on research-oriented teaching, including integration tendencies of various subjects (STEAM concept). As part of his project activities, he has participated in more than 30 projects (TAČR, GAČR, ESF, FRVŠ, Visegrad Fund, Norway Grants), either as a principal investigator or co-investigator.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.60923/issn.1970-2221/23026

Keywords:

technical creativity, technical education, implicit knowledge, teachers, primary school

Abstract

Technical creativity represents a critical competence for navigating the challenges of the 21^st century; however, its systematic cultivation within primary education remains insufficiently addressed. Given their formative role in early learning environments, primary school teachers significantly influence pupils’ creative engagement through their implicit pedagogical knowledge—tacit, experience-based understandings that inform instructional decision-making. This study examines how such implicit knowledge shapes teachers’ conceptualizations of technical creativity and its integration into pedagogical practice. Employing a quantitative research design, data were collected via a rigorously validated questionnaire instrument. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses, including non-parametric tests and Pearson correlation coefficients, were applied to identify relevant patterns and associations. The findings revealed two central thematic domains: teachers’ perceived knowledge and their attitudinal orientation toward technical creativity. The study highlights the necessity of addressing both cognitive and affective dimensions within pre-service and in-service teacher education.

References

Bahar, A. K., Maker, C. J., & Scherbakova, A. (2021). The role of teachers' implementation of the Real Engagement in Active Problem Solving (REAPS) model in developing creative problem solving in mathematics. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 30(2), 26–39. https://doi.org/10.21505/ajge.2021.0013

Castillo, J. (2002). A note on the concept of tacit knowledge. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492602111018

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539

Collins, A. (1978). Explicating the tacit knowledge in teaching and learning. Bolt Beranek and Newman.

Craft, A., & Hall, E. (2009). Changes in the landscape for creativity in education. In A. Wilson (Ed.), Creativity in primary education (pp. 5–21). Learning Matters.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE.

Částková, P. (2020). Technická výchova a gender na základní škole pohledem budoucích učitelů. Technika a vzdelávanie, 9(2), 30–35.

Částková, P. (2022). Crafts creativity and its development from the primary school teachers’ perspective. AD ALTA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 12(2), 26–31. https://doi.org/10.33543/12022631

Částková, P., Dostál, J., Kropáč, J., & Janu, M. (2019). Tvůrčí technické činnosti a tvořivost žáků ZŠ z pohledu genderu. Journal of Technology and Information Education, 11(2), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.5507/jtie.2020.001

Částková, P., Provázková Stolinská, D., Kavková, V., & Dostál, J. (2024). Technická tvořivost na 1. stupni základní školy jako nadstandard. Pedagogická orientace, 34(1–2), 158–185. https://doi.org/10.5817/PedOr2024-1-2-158

Dienes, Z., & Perner, J. (1999). A theory of implicit and explicit knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(5), 735–808. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99002186

DuPriest, D. (2017). Creativity in the classroom. National Education Association.

Elliott, J. G., Stemler, S. E., Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Hoffman, N. (2011). The socially skilled teacher and the development of tacit knowledge. British Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920903420016

Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49(8), 709–724. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.709

Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(1), 113–136. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709900158001

Evans, J. D. (1996). Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing.

Fraser, S., Beswick, K., & Crowley, S. (2019). Making tacit knowledge visible: Uncovering the knowledge of science and mathematics teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102907

Goffin, K., & Koners, U. (2011). Tacit knowledge, lessons learnt, and new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(2), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00798.x

Haldin-Herrgard, T. (2000). Difficulties in the diffusion of tacit knowledge in organizations. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(4), 357–365. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930010359252

Herbig, B., & Müller, A. (2014). Implicit knowledge and work performance. In S. Billett, C. Harteis, & H. Gruber (Eds.), International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (pp. 781–806). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8902-8_29

Hislop, D. (2009). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Hong, E., Hartzell, S., & Greene, M. T. (2009). Fostering creativity in the classroom: Effects of teachers' epistemological beliefs, motivation, and goal orientation. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(3), 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01314.x

Honzíková, J. (2008). Nonverbální tvořivost v technické výchově. Západočeská univerzita v Plzni.

Honzíková, J., & Sojková, M. (2014). Tvůrčí technické dovednosti. Západočeská univerzita v Plzni.

Chráska, M. (2016). Metody pedagogického výzkumu: Základy kvantitativního výzkumu (2., aktualiz. vyd.). Grada.

Janík, T. (2005a). Zkoumání subjektivních teorií pomocí techniky strukturování konceptů (SLT). Pedagogická revue, 57(5), 477–496.

Janík, T. (2005b). Znalost jako klíčová kategorie učitelského vzdělávání. Paido.

Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(1), 236–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.1.236

Jyotsna, H. (2022). Creativity is creativity. The Management Accountant, 57(4), 52–52.

Karwowski, M., & Lebuda, I. (2017). Creative self-concept: A surface characteristic of creative personality. In G. J. Feist, R. Reiter-Palmon, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity and personality research (pp. 84–101). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316228036.006

Kennedy, I. (2022). Sample size determination in test-retest and Cronbach alpha reliability estimates. British Journal of Contemporary Education, 2(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.52589/BJCEFY266HK9

Koubek, P. (2021). Subjektivní teorie řídící jednání učitelů: Vícečetná případová studie v kontextu profesního rozvoje učitelů. Masarykova univerzita. https://doi.org/10.5817/CZ.MUNI.M210-9810-2021

Lieberman, M. D. (2000). Intuition: A social cognitive neuroscience approach. Psychological Bulletin, 126(1), 109–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.109

Maker, C. J., Bahar, A. K., Alfaiz, F. S., & Pease, R. (2022). Developing and assessing creative scientific talent that is transformational through Real Engagement in Active Problem Solving (REAPS). Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 31(1), 5–21.

Mareš, J. (1996). Učitelovo pojetí výuky. Masarykova univerzita.

McAdam, R., Mason, B., & McCrory, J. (2007). Exploring the dichotomies within the tacit knowledge literature: Towards a process of tacit knowing in organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270710738906

Mládková, L. (2012). Sharing tacit knowledge within organizations: Evidence from the Czech Republic. Global Journal of Business Research, 6(2), 105–115.

Newton, L. D., & Newton, D. P. (2014). Creativity in 21st-century education. Prospects, 44(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-014-9322-1

Nonaka, I., & Nishiguchi, T. (Eds.). (2001). Knowledge emergence: Social, technical, and evolutionary dimensions of knowledge creation. Oxford University Press.

OECD. (2022). Creative thinking. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/innovation/creative-thinking

Orzea, I. (2009). The importance of tacit knowledge within the organization. Annals of the University of Oradea: Economic Science Series, 18(4), 414–416. http://steconomiceuoradea.ro/anale/volume/2009/v4-management-and-marketing/073.pdf

Pavlicek, A. (2009). The challenges of tacit knowledge sharing in a wiki system. In P. Doucek, G. Chroust, & V. Oškrdal (Eds.), IDIMT-2009: System and humans – A complex relationship. Proceedings of the 17th Interdisciplinary Information Management Talks (pp. 391–397). Trauner Verlag.

Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. University of Chicago Press.

Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. University of Chicago Press.

Potters, O. T. A., van Schijndel, T. J. P., Jak, S., & Voogt, J. (2023). Two decades of research on children's creativity development during primary education in relation to task characteristics. Educational Research Review, 39, Article 100532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100532

Poudel, D. (2017). Taking tacit knowledge seriously in strategy-as-practice. In T. Ahram, W. Karwowski, & C. Parker (Eds.), Advances in human factors, business management, training and education (pp. 1019–1031). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42070-7_93

Roučová, E. (2007a). Diagnostika studentova pojetí učiva o technice a didaktice. In R. Jandová (Ed.), Svět výchovy a vzdělávání v reflexi současného pedagogického výzkumu: Sborník příspěvků XV. konference České asociace pedagogického výzkumu (pp. 1–7). Pedagogická fakulta Jihočeské univerzity. https://capv.cz/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/6_roucova.pdf

Roučová, E. (2007b). Prekoncepty k didaktice technické výchovy u studentů učitelství pro primární školu [Dissertation thesis]. Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci.

Roučová, E. (2013). Vnímání pojmu technická gramotnost u studentů učitelství pro primární školu a učitelů na primární škole. Journal of Technology and Information Education, 5(3), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.5507/jtie.2013.032

Runco, M. A. (2023). Creativity in psychological, biological, and social development. In B. Halpern-Felsher (Ed.), Encyclopedia of child and adolescent health (1st ed., pp. 32–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818872-9.00202-8

Sánchez-Dorado, J. (2023). Creativity, pursuit and epistemic tradition. Synthese, 201(6), 109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04197-4

Shim, H. S., & Roth, G. L. (2008). Sharing tacit knowledge among expert teaching professors and mentees: Considerations for career and technical education teacher educators. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(4), 64–81.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.607

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology [Editorial]. American Psychologist, 56(12), 1069–1079. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.12.1069

Stuchlíková, I. (2005). Od implicitních teorií k implicitním pedagogickým znalostem. In V. Švec (Ed.), Od implicitních teorií výuky k implicitním pedagogickým znalostem (pp. 9–15). Paido.

Šíp, R., & Švec, V. (2013). Pojetí tacitních znalostí v paradigmatu sjednoceného pole. Pedagogická orientace, 23(5), 664–690. https://doi.org/10.5817/PedOr2013-5-664

Švec, V. (2003). Implicitní pedagogické znalosti – východiska a možnosti jejich zkoumání. In Sociální a kulturní souvislosti výchovy a vzdělávání: Sborník příspěvků z 11. konference České asociace pedagogického výzkumu (pp. 1–9). Masarykova univerzita. https://www.ped.muni.cz/capv11/referaty/h_capv_svec.pdf

Švec, V. (Ed.). (2005). Od implicitních teorií výuky k implicitním pedagogickým znalostem. Paido.

Švec, V., Nehyba, J., & Svojanovský, P. (Eds.). (2017). Becoming a teacher: The dance between tacit and explicit knowledge. Masaryk University Press. https://doi.org/10.5817/CZ.MUNI.M210-8605-2017

Torff, B., & Sessions, D. N. (2005). Principals' perceptions of the causes of teacher ineffectiveness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 530–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.530

Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 12(4), 195–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698626801200401

UNESCO. (2006). World conference on arts education: Building creative capacities for the 21st century. Working document, Lisbon, Portugal, 6–9 March 2006. UNESCO.

VanPatten, B., & Rothman, J. (2015). What does current generative theory suggest about the explicit–implicit debate? In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 91–116). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.05van

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Whitty, G. (1996). Professional competence and professional characteristics: The Northern Ireland approach to the reform of teacher education. In D. Hustler & D. McIntyre (Eds.), Developing competent teachers: Approaches to professional competence in teacher education (pp. 86-97). David Fulton Publishers.

Yu, D., & Zhou, D. (2015). Tacit knowledge sharing modes of university teachers from the perspectives of psychological risk and value. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v4n2p214

Teachers' implicit pedagogical knowledge in the field of technical creativity

Authors

DOI:

Keywords:

Abstract

References

Downloads

Published

How to Cite

Issue

Section

License

Language

Make a Submission

Keywords

Current Issue