International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (IJHSS) ISSN(P): 2319-393X; ISSN(E): 2319-3948 Vol. 6, Issue 1, Dec - Jan 2017; 37-42 © IASET ROLE OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS IN ENHANCING ADOLESCENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING PRIYANKA BENIWAL1 & CHANDRA KALA SINGH2 1MSC Student, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, College of Home Science, CCSHAU Hisar 2Professor, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, College of Home Science, CCSHAU Hisar ABSTRACT The present study was conducted to provide information and relation between creativity and socio-economic status in Haryana, India. Data was collected through divergent production abilities test by K.N Sharma for creativity and Socio-Economic Status was measured by self prepared schedule of 120 students of Rewari District and 120 students of Hisar district in Haryana state, by random selection method. The result revealed that creativity is positively related with socio-economic status. Boys and girls students differ significantly in their creativity. Significant association was found between area, age, caste and annual family income of the adolescents and the levels of overall creativity of adolescents KEYWORDS: Socio-Economic Status INTRODUCTION Adolescence is a period of transition between playful childhood and responsible adulthood. Adolescence is a period of rapid development, when young people acquire new capacities and are faced with many new situations that create not only opportunities for progress, but also risk to health and well-being (WHO, 1998). Creativity is the capacity of a person to produce compositions, products or ideas which are essentially new or novel and previously unknown to the producer (Drevdahl, 1956). Shakespeare defined creativity as the divine spark which makes the man paragon of animals. It is a mental process resulting in the production of ideas. Mental processes involved in creativity include: insight, intuition, imagination and heuristic search (Gupta & Jan, 2013; Singh et al., 2011). Good teachers recognize the importance of creativity and inventiveness. Creative teachers see the development of creativity and originality as the distinctive mark of their teaching process According to Kundu (1983), “there are certain blockages of creativity like poverty, lack of adequate education, restrictions and social mobility”. He concluded that high socio-economic status helps in enhancing creativity whereas low socio-economic status blocks the creativity of the individual. This is simply because one who belongs to high socioeconomic status gets more facilities and advantages, which will help him in his creativity. Singh (1972) in the analysis of high and low creative boys and girls found that educational status of the parent of high creative students was higher than the parents of lower creative students. The Socio-Economic Status (SES) denotes the main standing in the society. This standing of individual depends on many factors like role, class, education, estate; caste and occupation etc. Social status is the position that is accorded to the individual in the context of the social values prevalent in society. Thus, it is clear that the two variables namely, www.iaset.us [email protected] 38 Priyanka Beniwal & Chandra Kala Singh Creativity and Socio-Economic Status are closely related to each other and they go hand in hand which further contribute to the development of creativity. Methodology A list of districts was prepared. Two districts Hisar and Rewari were selected at random. From each districts a list of blocks was prepared. From district Hisar, block Hisar-1 and Jatusana block from district Rewari were selected at random. From each block list of villages was prepared which were having more than two private high schools. Two villages from each block were selected randomly. So total four villages i.e. Mayyar, Kharar-Alipur from Hisar-1 block and Dahina, Nagalmundi from Jatusana block were selected. From each village two schools were selected randomly. Total eight schools were selected at random i.e. Holy Faith Convent School, Morning Star Sr. Secondary School, Bharat Sr. Secondary School, Holy Child Public School and Shiva Public School, Vivekanand Sr. Secondary School, Balaji International School, Bhartiya Sr. Secondary School were selected from Hisar and Rewari districts respectively. Separate lists of boys and girls in the age group of 14 to 16 years studying in 9th and 10th classes were prepared from all the eight schools. From each school 15 boys and 15 girls were selected at random, thus, a total of thirty adolescents from each school. Total sample constituted 240 adolescents, 120 from district Hisar and 120 from district Rewari RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Level of Creativity among Adolescents Table 1, presents data on distribution of respondents for their creativity and their sub aspects on the basis of districts Rewari and Hisar. As the table reveals that majority of Rewari students (54.16%) had medium level of scores in word fluency while 34.16 per cent were low achievers and only 11.66 percent were having high level of word fluency. Similar results were observed among Hisar students where 61.66 per cent had medium level of word fluency followed by 19.16 per cent had low and high level of word fluency. In ideational fluency similar trends were observed as word fluency. The table reveals that majority of Rewari students (53.33%) had medium level of scores in ideational fluency while 35 per cent were low achievers and 11.66 per cent had high scores of ideational fluency. Among Hisar students where 61.66 per cent had medium level of ideational fluency followed by 19.16 per cent had low and high level of ideational fluency. Majority of respondents from both districts had low scores in spontaneous flexibility. The major percentof Rewari 54.16% and Hisar 67.50% students had low levels of spontaneous flexibility. 30 per cent students from both the districts had medium level of spontaneous flexibility. In associational fluency, table shows that 58.30 per cent of the Rewari students had low level of associational fluency while majority (60.80%) of the Hisar students were having medium level of associational fluency. District wise comparison shows that only 0.8 per cent of Rewari students had high level of associational fluency as compared toHisar students (5%). Table 1 further reveals that majority of the students (98.33) per cent from Rewari and (94.16) per cent students from Hisar district were low in expressional fluency. In terms of adaptive flexibility majority of total students from both districts had high scores of adaptive flexibility. In district wise comparison majority of Rewari students (50.8%) had high level of adaptive flexibility, while 40 per cent of Impact Factor (JCC): 3.1936 NAAS Rating 3.19 Role of Socio-Economic Status in Enhancing Adolescents’ Creative Thinking 39 Hisar students had high level of adaptive flexibility. In case ofHisar district students (40.8%) had medium level of adaptive flexibility, while 31.70 per cent of Rewari students were moderate in adaptive flexibility. With regard to originality and elaboration same trends were observed. As 78.33 per cent of Rewari students and 90 per cent of Hisar students were low in originality. Similarly 95 per cent of Rewari students and 93.30 per cent of Hisar students performed low in elaboration. Finally, in overall creativity 48.33 per cent of the total respondents had medium levels. Among respondents from Rewari majority of students (51.66%) had medium level of overall creativity while majority of Hisar students 54.16 per cent had high level of overall creativity. Table 1: Level of Creativity among Adolescents District Rewari (N=120) Hisar (N=120) Total (N=240) Variables Word fluency 41(34.16) 24(20.00) 65(27.08) Low (2-12) 65(54.16) 73(60.83) 138(57.50) Medium(12.1-21) 14(11.66) 23(19.16) 37(15.41) High(21.1-31) Ideational fluency 42(35.00) 23(19.16) 65(27.08) Low (3-8) 64(53.33) 74(61.66) 138(57.5) Medium (9-14) 14(11.66) 23(19.16) 37(15.41) High (15-20) Spontaneous flexibility 65(54.2) 81(67.50) 146(60.83) Low (0-1) 36(30.00) 35(29.20) 71(29.58) Medium (1.1-2) 19(15.80) 04(3.33) 23(9.58) High (2.1-3) Associational fluency 70(58.30) 41(34.16) 111(46.25) Low (2-10) 49(40.80) 73(60.83) 122(50.83) Medium (11-19) 01(0.80) 06(5.00) 07(2.91) High (20-28) Expressional fluency 118(98.33) 113(94.16) 231(96.25) Low (0-5) 02(1.60) 04(3.33) 06(2.50) Medium (5.1-9) 0 03(2.50) 03(1.25) High (9.1-13) Adaptive flexibility 21(17.50) 23(19.20) 44(18.33) Low (0-1) 38(31.70) 49(40.80) 87(36.25) Medium (1.1-2) 61(50.80) 48(40.00) 109(45.41) High (2.1-3) Originality 94(78.33) 108(90) 202(84.16) Low(0-1) 23(19.16) 10(8.33) 33(13.75) Medium (1.1-2) 03(2.50) 02(1.60) 05(2.08) High (2.1-3) Elaboration 114(95) 112(93.30) 226(94.16) Low (2-3) 03(2.50) 04(3.33) 07(2.91) Medium (3.1-4) 03(2.50) 04(3.33) 07(2.91) High (4.1-5) Overall creativity 40(33.33) 65(54.16) 105(43.75) Low (22-43) 62(51.66) 54(45.00) 116(48.33) Medium (44-65) 18(15.00) 01(0.80) 19(7.91) High (66-87) *Figures in parentheses indicate percentage www.iaset.us [email protected] 40 Priyanka Beniwal & Chandra Kala Singh Association between socio-personal factors and creativity of adolescents Chi squares were run between socio personal factors and different dimensions of creativity and overall creativity. Various socio-personal factors included were area of residence, gender of adolescents, family type, family size, caste, family income, academic achievement of adolescents, parental education and parental occupation. Three levels of creativity were computed as per scale- low, medium and high. As shown in table 2, there was significant association between area of residence and creativity (χ²= 21.71*). Creativity was also significantly associated with gender (χ²=34.26*), age (χ²= 9.74*), caste (χ²=20.12*), and family income (χ²= 18.41*) of adolescents. There was no significant association between creativity and ordinal position, number of siblings, educational achievement, family type, family size, maternal education, paternal education, maternal occupation, paternal occupation and income of family. Table 2: Association between Socio-Personal Factors and Creativity of Adolescents Levels of Creativity Chi-Square Value Variables Low (N=105) Moderate (N=116) High (N=19) (Χ²) Area Rewari 40 (38.09) 62 (53.44) 18 (94.73) 21.71* Hisar 65 (61.90) 54 (46.55) 01 (5.26) Gender Male 74 (70.47) 43 (37.06) 03 (15.78) 34.26* Female 31 (63.26 ) 73 (62.93) 16 (84.21) Age 14+ 76 (72.38) 61 (52.58) 10 (52.63) 9.74* 15 + 29 (27.61) 55 (47.41) 09 (47.36) Ordinal position 1st born 40 (38.04) 44 (37.93) 08 (42.10) 2nd born 52 (49.52) 56 (48.27) 09 (47.36) 1.34 3rd born 12 (11.42) 13 (11.20) 02 (10.52) 4th or above born 01 (0.95) 03 (2.58) 0 No. of siblings One 03 (2.85) 03 (2.58) 12 (63.15) Two 63 (60.00) 66 (56.89) 07 (36.84) 1.84 Three 34 (32.38) 42 (36.20) 0 Four or more 05 (4.76) 05 (4.31) 0 Educational achievement 80% and above 64 (60.95) 69 (59.48) 13 (68.42) Between 60% and 79.9 % 33 (31.42) 38 (32.75) 05 (26.31) 0.57 Below 60% 08 (7.61) 09 (7.75) 01 (5.26) Family type Nuclear 74 (70.47) 73 (62.93) 12 (63.15) 1.49 Extended 31 (29.52) 43 (37.06) 07 (36.84) Family size Small 35 (33.33) 27 (23.27) 04 (21.05) Medium 66 (62.85) 76 (65.51) 12 (63.15) 7.40 Large 04 (3.80) 13 (11.20) 03 (15.78) Caste General 44 (41.90) 45 (38.79) 01 (5.26) BC 35 (33.33) 55 (47.41) 16 (84.21) 20.12* SC 26 (24.76) 16 (13.79) 02 (10.52) Maternal education Impact Factor (JCC): 3.1936 NAAS Rating 3.19 Role of Socio-Economic Status in Enhancing Adolescents’ Creative Thinking 41 Illiterate 10 (9.52) 9 (7.75) 1 (5.26) Metric 74 (70.47) 74 (63.79) 13 (68.42) 3.64 Senior secondary 19 (18.09) 26 (22.41) 04 (21.05) Graduate or post graduate 02 (1.90) 07 (6.03) 01 (5.26) Paternal education Metric 42 (40.00) 40 (34.48) 05 (26.31) Senior secondary 49 (46.66) 46 (39.65) 12 (63.15) 8.55 Graduate or post graduate 14 (13.33) 30 (25.86) 02 (10.52) Maternal occupation Service 06 (5.71) 15 (12.93) 0 5.57 Home maker 99 (94.28) 101 (87.06) 19 (100) Paternal occupation Service 21 (20.00) 40 (34.48) 04 (21.05) Business 18 (17.14) 19 (16.37) 01 (5.26) 9.96 Farming 56 (53.33) 47 (40.51) 13 (68.42) Labor 10 (9.52) 10 (8.62) 01 (5.26) Income <Rs 50,000 02 (1.90) 03 (2.58) 0 Rs.50,001-10,0000 48 (45.71) 43 (37.06) 07 (36.84) 18.41* Rs. 100001-150000 32 (30.47) 18 (15.51) 02 (10.52) >Rs. 150000 23 (21.93) 52 (44.82) 10 (52.63) Significant at *5% level of significance Factors Contributing to Creativity of Adolescents Regarding factors affecting creativity of adolescents’ chi-square test was run. It was discovered that significant association was obtained between creativity and area, gender, age, caste and annual family income of the adolescents. Reason may be that families having better socio-economic status provide better facilities and opportunities to their children to enhance their creativity level. The results of the present study get support from the previous studies. Reddy et al. (2015) revealed that there is significant impact of gender, locality of residence and class of study on non-verbal creativity among high school students. Further, the study concluded that boys are higher in their non-verbal creativity than girls and also students belonged to urban areas secured higher as compared to students from rural areas. Mankar et al. (2011) examined creativity in children as a function of parent occupation and socio-economic status. Baquar Mahendi‘s creative thinking test and Bharadwaj‘s socio-economic status scale was used. Results indicated that socio-economic status and occupation of parent are showing insignificant correlation with the creativity of children (r=.03833). There is no impact of parent occupation on their children‘s creativity (r= 0.05158). CONCLUSIONS Significant association was found between area, gender, age, caste and annual family income of the adolescents and the levels of overall creativity of adolescents which means that these factors contribute in the development of creativity. Rewari students were more creative as compared to Hisar district students. Girls performed better than boys. It can be concluded that students with high socio-economic status were having better creativity as compared to students with low socio-economic status. As the students from high SES gets better facilities and enhanced environment to develop their creativity. www.iaset.us [email protected] 42 Priyanka Beniwal & Chandra Kala Singh REFERENCES 1. Mankar, J. P., Ugale, S. U. and Ro the, S.P. 2011. Creativity in children as function of parent occupation and socio-economic status. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 1(4): 17-18. 2. Reddy, K. J., V is wanath, K. and Reddy, S.V. 2015. Impact of demographical variables on non verbal creativity among high school students. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 2(4):105-115. 3. Sharma, K. N. 2011. Divergent Production Abilities. National Psychological Laboratory, Agra. 4. Gupta, S. & Jan, A. (2013). Attitude of B.Ed. Pupil-Teachers of Science and Arts Streams towards Creative Teaching: A Study. International Journal of Advancement in Education and Social Sciences, 1 (1): 36-41. 5. Singh, A., Ali, A. & Saxena, A.K. (2011). Blocks to creativity of indian industry executives. Journal of Community Guidance & Research, 28 (2):313-325. 6. Drevdahl, J.E. (1956). Factors of importance for creativity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 12: 22-26. 7. Kundu, D. (1983) A Study of Creativity, Ego-strength and Extraversion –A Theoretical frame work. An unpublished M. Phil. Dissertation, Delhi: University of Delhi, Department of Education. 8. World Health Organization. (1998). Life Skills Education in Schools. Geneva: World Health Organization. Impact Factor (JCC): 3.1936 NAAS Rating 3.19