STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance
Full Text (PDF)
More Detail
1 Department of Industrial Education, National Taiwan Normal University, TAIWAN2 Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, TAIWAN3 Department of Fashion Design, Tainan University of Technology, TAIWAN* Corresponding Author
Abstract
Integrated learning of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) has become a challenge in the field of technical education. To understand the effect of STEM learning, in this study, we first identified the components of STEM in relation to bag design, then asked students to learn STEM knowledge as they designed bags. In this context, we explored how learners’ creative self-efficacy (CSE) related to two types of epistemic curiosity (EC) (i.e., interest type and deprivation type) and reflected the STEM knowledge they acquired and their creative performance (i.e., novelty, utility, and aesthetics). The data were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis with structural equation modeling. The results revealed that CSE was positively related to two types of EC, and knowledge acquired was positively related to creative performance. The indirect correlates between CSE and knowledge acquired, EC and creative performance, and CSE and creative performance were positively mediated by other constructs. The implication of this research is that integrating STEM into the study of fashion design can improve students’ creative performance.
License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article Type: Research Article
EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, Volume 15, Issue 9, September 2019, Article No: em1742
https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
Publication date: 12 Apr 2019
Article Views: 3995
Article Downloads: 2986
Open Access References How to cite this articleReferences
- Aladé, F., Lauricella, A. R., Beaudoin-Ryan, L., & Wartella, E. (2016). Measuring with murray: Touchscreen technology and preschoolers’ STEM learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 433-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.080.
- Ashby, M., Shercliff, H., & Cebon, D. (2007). Materials engineering, science, processing and design. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
- Bakhshi, H., Hargreaves, I., & Mateos-Garcia, J. (2013). A manifesto for the creative economy: Resource document. London, UK: Nesta. https://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/manifesto-creative-economy.
- Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
- Beeftink, F., Van Eerde, W., Rutte, C. G., & Bertrand, J. W. M. (2012). Being successful in a creative profession: The role of innovative cognitive style, self-regulation, and self-efficacy. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9214-9.
- Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15, 6-23. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.6.
- Bell, D. (2016). The reality of STEM education, design and technology teachers’ perceptions: A phenomenographic study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9300-9.
- Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book. https://doi.org/10.1037/.
- 11164-000.
- Berlyne, D. E. (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153, 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.153.3731.25.
- Besemer, S. P., & O’Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor creative product analysis matrix model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 287-296. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1204_6.
- Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision, Technol. Teach, 70 (1), 30-35.
- Byrge, C., & Tang, C. (2015). Embodied creativity training: Effects on creative self-efficacy and creative production. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.01.002.
- Caprara, G. V., Giunta, L. D., Eisenberg, N., Gerbino, M., Pastorelli, C., & Tramontano, C. (2008). Assessing regulatory emotional self-efficacy in three countries. Psychological Assessment, 20, 227-237. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.20.3.227.
- Cheng, V. M.Y. (2016). Understanding and enhancing personal transfer of creative learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.001.
- Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
- Christiaans, H. C. M.(2002). Creativity as a design criterion. Creativity Research Journal, 14(1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1401_4.
- Claxton, G., Edwards, L., & Scale-Constantinou, V. (2006). Cultivating creative mentalities: A framework for education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 57–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.11.001.
- Clinton, G., & Hokanson, B. (2012). Creativity in the training and practice of instructional designers: The design/creativity loops model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(1), 111-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9216-3.
- Cor, M. K. (2016). Trust me, it is valid: Research validity in pharmacy education research. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(3), 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2016.02.014.
- Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing (Vol. 1). London, UK: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628- 301-9.
- Daly, S. R., Mosyjowski, E. A., & Seifert, C. M. (2014). Teaching creativity in engineering courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 103, 417-449. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20048.
- Duch, W. (2007). Creativity and the brain. In A. G. Tan (Ed.), A handbook of creativity for teachers (pp. 507–530). Singapore, SG: World Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812770868_0027.
- Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
- Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256.
- Fan, S. C., & Yu, K. C. (2017). How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9328-x.
- Finke, R., Ward, T., & Smith, S. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research and applications. Cambridge, UK: MIT Press.
- Fleischhauer, M., Enge, S., Brocke, B., Ullrich, J., Strobel, A., & Strobel, A. (2010). Same or different? Clarifying the relationship of need for cognition to personality and intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(1), 82-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209351886.
- Fornell, C. R., & Larcker, F. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-51.
- Gajda, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Exploring creative learning in the classroom: A multi-method approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.04.002.
- Goldberg, S., Gibbs, A., Caro-Aguado, B. M., & Munoz, M. (2015). Enhancement of memory through curiosity-driven learning. Eukaryon, 11. Retrieved from http://www.lakeforest.edu/live/files/2701-goldberggibbscaro-aguadomunozenhancementpdf.
- Gomez, A., & Albrecht, B. (2013). True STEM education. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 73(4), 8-16.
- Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. (2004). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
- Gulten, D. C., Yaman, Y., Deringol, Y., & Ozsari, I. (2011). Investigating the relationship between curiosity level and computer self-efficacy beliefs of elementary teachers candidates. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 10(4), 248-254.
- Hair, J. F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Anderson multivariate data analysis (7th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
- Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Henseler, J. (2012). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon. Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154-160.
- Hall, A., & Miro, D. (2016). A study of student engagement in project‐based learning across multiple approaches to STEM education programs. School Science and Mathematics, 116(6), 310-319. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12182.
- Han, S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project based learning affects high-need students in the U.S. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.045.
- Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (Eds.)(2006). Structural equation modeling: A second course. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1303_2.
- Hardy III, J. H., Ness, A. M., & Mecca, J. (2017). Outside the box: Epistemic curiosity as a predictor of creative problem solving and creative performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 230-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.004.
- Harrison, R. L., & Parks, B. (2017). How STEM can gain some STEAM: Crafting meaningful collaborations between STEM disciplines and inquiry-based writing programs. In A. J. Myatt, & L. L. Gaillet (Eds.), Writing program and writing center collaborations (pp. 117-139). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59932-2_6.
- Harrison, S. H., Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021647.
- Hartnett, E.J., Malzahn, N., & Goldsmith, R. (2014). Video performances juxtaposing STEM with creativity. In C. Rensing, S. de Freitas, T. Ley, & P. J. Munoz-Merino (Eds.), Open Learning and Teaching in Educational Communities (pp. 570-571). EC-TEL 2014. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8719). Cham, CH: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11200-8_74.
- Hathcock, S. J., Dickerson, D. L., Eckhoff, A., & Katsioloudis, P. (2015). Scaffolding for creative product possibilities in a design-based STEM activity. Research in Science Education, 45(5), 727-748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9437-7.
- Horzyk, A. (2014). How does generalization and creativity come into being in neural associative systems and how does it form human-like knowledge? Neurocomputing, 144, 238-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2014.04.046.
- Huang, Y., & Li, J. (2015). Comparing personal characteristic factors of imagination between expert and novice designers within different product design stages. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9276-x.
- Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J, & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
- Jeraj, M., & Marič, M. (2013). Relation between entrepreneurial curiosity and entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A multi-country empirical validation. Organizacija, 46, 264-273. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2013-0027.
- Johnson, E. A., & O’Brien, K. A. (2013). Self-compassion soothes the savage EGO-threat system: Effects on negative affect, shame, rumination, and depressive symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32(9), 939–963. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2013.32.9.939.
- Jovanović, V., & Brdaric, D. (2012). Did curiosity kill the cat? Evidence from subjective well-being in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 380-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.043.
- Kaldi, S., Filippatou, D., & Govaris, C. (2011). Project-based learning in primary schools: Effects on pupils’ learning and attitudes. Education 3–13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 39(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270903179538.
- Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Tao-yi Wang, J., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963-973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02402.x.
- Karwowski, M. (2011). Doesn’t hurt to ask . . . but sometimes it hurts to believe: Polish students’ creative self-efficacy and its predictors. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(2), 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021427.
- Karwowski, M. (2012). Relationship between trait curiosity, creative self-efficacy and creative personal identity. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 8(4), 547. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v8i4.513.
- Karwowski, M. (2017). Subordinated and rebellious creativity at school. In. R. A. Beghetto & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creative contradictions in education (pp. 89-115). Cham, CH: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21924-0_6.
- Khedhaouria, A., Montani, F., & Thurik, R. (2017). Time pressure and team member creativity within R&D projects: The role of learning orientation and knowledge sourcing. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 942-954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.04.002.
- Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? a review of the Torrance tests of creative thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18, 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2.
- Kulturel-Konak, S., D’Allegro, M. L., & Dickinson, S. (2011). Review of gender differences in learning styles: Suggestions for stem education. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(3), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v4i3.4116.
- Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). STEM: Good jobs now and for the future. Retrieved from http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf.
- Lauriola, M., Litman, J. A., Mussel, P., De Santis, R., Crowson, H. M., & Hoffman, R. R. (2015). Epistemic curiosity and self-regulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 202-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.017.
- León, J., Núñez, J. L., & Liew, J. (2015). Self-determination and STEM education: Effects of autonomy, motivation, and self-regulated learning on high school math achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.017.
- Li, C., & Wu, J. (2011). The structural relationships between optimism and innovative behavior: Understanding potential antecedents and mediating effects. Creativity Research Journal, 23(2), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.571184.
- Li, Y., Wang, J., & Li, X. (2007). Design creativity in product innovation. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 33(3), 213-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0457-y.
- Litman, J. A. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 793-814. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930541000101.
- Litman, J. A. (2008). Interest and deprivation factors of epistemic curiosity. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1585-1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.014.
- Litman, J. A. (2014). Cross cultural validity of the interest- and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity model: Findings from three German samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, S8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.172.
- Litman, J. A., & Jimerson, T. L. (2004). The measurement of curiosity as a feeling of deprivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8202_3.
- Litman, J. A., & Silvia, P. J. (2006). The latent structure of trait curiosity: Evidence for interest and deprivation curiosity dimensions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86, 318-328. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8603_07.
- Litman, J. A., & Spielberger, C. D. (2003). Measuring epistemic curiosity and its diversive and specific components. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80, 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_16.
- Lobato, J. (2012). The actor-oriented transfer perspective and its contributions to educational research and practice. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.693353.
- Lou, S.-J., Liu, Y.-H., Shih, R.-C., Chuang, S.-Y., & Tseng, K.-H. (2011). Effectiveness of on-line STEM project-based learning for female senior high school students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(2), 399–410.
- MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130.
- Markham, T. (2003). Project based learning handbook: A guide to standards-focused project based learning for middle and high school teachers. Novato, CA: Buck Institute for Education.
- Martin, A. J. (2015). Implicit theories about intelligence and growth (personal best) goals: Exploring reciprocal relationships. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12038.
- Mathisen, G. E., & Bronnick, K. S. (2009). Creative self-efficacy: An intervention study. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.009.
- Miller, B. G., & Roehrig, G. (2018). Indigenous cultural contexts for STEM experiences: Snow snakes’ impact on students and the community. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 31-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9738-4.
- Moye, J. J., Dugger, W. E., & Stark-Weather, K. N. (2014). Learning by doing: Research introduction. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 74(1), 24-27.
- Mussel, P. (2013). Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 453-472. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1809.
- Puente-Díaz, R., & Cavazos-Arroyo, J. (2017). The influence of creative mindsets on achievement goals, enjoyment, creative self-efficacy and performance among business students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.007.
- Robbins, T. L., & Kegley, K. (2010). Playing with thinker toys to build creative abilities through online instruction. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5, 40-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.07.001.
- Satchwell, R. E., & Loepp, F. L. (2002). Designing and implementing an integrated mathematics, science, and technology curriculum for the middle school. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 39(3), 1-15.
- Sawyer, R. K. (2015). A call to action: The challenges of creative teaching and learning. Teachers College Record, 117(100303), 1-34.
- Shapira, L. B., & Mongrain, M. (2010). The benefits of self-compassion and optimism exercises for individuals vulnerable to depression. The Journal of Positive Psychology 5(5), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2010.516763.
- Stolarova, M., Wolf, C., Rinker, T., & Brielmann, A. (2014). How to assess and compare inter-rater reliability, agreement and correlation of ratings: An exemplary analysis of mother-father and parent-teacher expressive vocabulary rating pairs. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 509. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00509.
- Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3-20.
- Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-Efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148.
- Tierney, P., &Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277-293. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020952.
- Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual (research edition). Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.
- US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Occupational outlook handbook. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ooh/arts-and-design/fashion-designers.htm.
- van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., & Walma van der Molen, J. H. (2018). Modeling the relation between students’ implicit beliefs about their abilities and their educational STEM choices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9387-7.
- Vogt, W. P. (2007). Quantitative research methods for professionals. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
- Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 1–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2401_1.
- Wagner, J. F. (2010). A transfer-in-pieces consideration of the perception of structure in the transfer of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 443–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2010.505138.
- Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817-835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127.
- Wang, S., Zhang, X., & Martocchio, J. (2011). Thinking outside of the box when the box is missing: Role ambiguity and its linkage to creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23(3), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.595661.
- Ward, J. R., Clarke, H. D., & Horton, J. L. (2014). Effects of a research-infused botanical curriculum on undergraduates’ content knowledge, STEM competencies, and attitudes toward plant sciences. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 387-396. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0231.
- Warr, A., & O’Neill, E. (2005). Understanding design as a social creative process. In E. Edmonds (Ed.), Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 118-127). London, UK: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1056224.1056242.
- White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040934.
- Williams, J., Jones, A., & Bunting, C. (2015). The future of technology education. Singapore, SG: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-170-1.
- Workosky, C., & Willard, T. (2015). Answers to teachers’ questions about the next generation science standards. Science Teacher, 82(6), 29-31. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst15_082_06_29.
- World Economic Forum. (2015). New vision for education: Unlocking the potential of technology: Resource document. Geneva, CH: World Economic Forum. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEFUSA_NewVisionforEducation_Report2015.pdf.
- Worsham, E. K., Clevenger, A., & Whealan-George, K. A.(2016). STEM education discrepancy in the united states and Singapore. Beyond, 1, 20-26.
- Wright, N., & Wrigley, C. (2019). Broadening design-led education horizons: Conceptual insights and future research directions. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798- 017-9429-9.
- Wu, C.-C. (2002). Chinese students to explore and cultivate creativity. The Application of Psychological Research, 15, 17–22.
- Wu, Q. (2015). Computational curiosity (a book draft). Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1502/1502.04780.pdf.
- Wu, Q., & Miao, C. (2013). Curiosity: From psychology to computation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(2), 18:1-18:26.
- Yang, H. L., & Cheng, H. H. (2009). Creative self-efficacy and its factors: An empirical study of information system analysts and programmers. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 429-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.005.
- Zeisel, J. (2006). Inquiry by design: Environment/Behavior/Neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape and planning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Norton.
- Zhang, L. (2019). “Hands-on” plus “inquiry”? Effects of withholding answers coupled with physical manipulations on students' learning of energy-related science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 60, 199-205. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475217305455?via%3Dihub.
- Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x.
How to cite this article
APA
Hong, J.-C., Ye, J.-H., & Fan, J.-Y. (2019). STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
Vancouver
Hong JC, Ye JH, Fan JY. STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(9):em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
AMA
Hong JC, Ye JH, Fan JY. STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
Chicago
Hong, Jon-Chao, Jian-Hong Ye, and Jing-Yun Fan. "STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2019 15 no. 9 (2019): em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
Harvard
Hong, J.-C., Ye, J.-H., and Fan, J.-Y. (2019). STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9), em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455
MLA
Hong, Jon-Chao et al. "STEM in Fashion Design: The Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Epistemic Curiosity in Creative Performance". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 15, no. 9, 2019, em1742. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108455