Creativity Assessment

Test Number	24
Title	Creativity Tests for Children
Author	Guilford, J. P.
Category	Test
Copyright Date	1976
Availability	Out of print
Restrictions
Age/Grade Level	Elementary+
Cost	No current information available
Forms	Two forms: A and B
Source	Sheridan Psychological Services, Inc. (No longer available)
Address
Phone
Fax
web or e-mail
Definition	Deals with diversity and production, fluency in production of alternative ideas to meet somewhat open situations. Linked to the Divergent Production factors in Guilford’s Structure of Intellect Model.
Purposes	A battery of 10 tests that deal with visual-figural and semantic abilities.
Characteristics	Generating Ideas

Manual
Good	The manual is thorough, well-organized, and clearly-written. It includes a discussion of: definition and purposes, the theoretical rationale, directions for administration, and the history and development of the instrument. Some of the data could be more

Validity
Fair	Low correlations are reported with TTCT. One study is reported for Concurrent Validity with widely varied results grade to grade.

Reliability
Good	Split-half reliability ranged from .42 to .97. Most correlations clustered in the .70’s and 80’s.

Utility
Fair	The tests cover: adding decorations, different letter groups, hidden letters, kinds of people, make something out of it, making objects, names for stories, similar meanings, and writing sentences.

Interpretation
Fair	Norms were established in 1972 – 1700 lower to upper middle class children in California, Florida and Illinois school systems including 150 blacks, 100 of Mexican heritage, and 190 noted as having high IQ scores. (Would not be useful without extensive updating.)

Propriety
Fair	While an effort was made to place the data in a realistic context, much more information would be necessary for use today.

Reviews & Related Lit

MMY #9, 1978: French, J. W. “Good research data show these tests to be reliable and to be related to teachers’ ratings of creativity. However, this criterion is a doubtful one and the whole concept of creativity has been only poorly defined.” Yammamoto, K. “…the CTC may be described as a useful research instrument that awaits further exploration. For instance, various validation studies need to be continued to give support to both the technical and conceptual claims of these tests. The suspected influence of sociopsychological variables on test performance is likely to be another fertile ground for inquiry. Most critical, however, will be to establish clear relationships between children’s performance on the test and their actual creative accomplishments in life, both concurrently and longitudinally.