CE  Vol.2 No.4 , October 2011
Creative Education, Globalization and Social Imaginary
ABSTRACT
The concept of creativity in education is linked with a range of social factors. By examining the relationship among social, educational factors and creativity among students in Thailand, this study proposes that educators and policy makers must understand various global factors that affect contemporary education. They include changes in contemporary politics, culture and communication in the global education contexts. The study confirms that modern cultural factors and concept of gender are marked as key predictors of the development of creativity among young Thai students. It is reported in this study that various facets of globalization also promote creativity and imagination among young Thais. Young Thai students in this study are, in fact, willing to participate in many creative educational and social activities.

Cite this paper
nullRojanapanich, P. & Pimpa, N. (2011). Creative Education, Globalization and Social Imaginary. Creative Education, 2, 327-332. doi: 10.4236/ce.2011.24046.
References
[1]   Appadurai, A. (1999). Globalization and the research imagination. CA: Blackwell Publishers.

[2]   Carney-Strahler, B. (2011). Wikis: Promoting collaborative literacy through affordable technology in content-area classrooms. Creative Ed- ucation, 2, 76-82.

[3]   Chareonwongsak, K. (2002). Globalization and technology: How will they change society? Technology in Society, 24, 191-206. doi:10.1016/S0160-791X(02)00004-0

[4]   Dacey, J. (1999). Concepts of creativity: A history. In M. A. Runco and S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity. CA: Academic Press.

[5]   Deveney, B. (2005). An investigation into aspects of Thai culture and its impact on Thai students in an international school in Thailand. Journal of Research in International Education, 4, 153-171. doi:10.1177/1475240905054388

[6]   Eisenberg, E. M., & Goodall, H. L. (2001). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

[7]   Frese, M. (2000). The changing nature of work. In N. Chmiel (Ed.), Introduction to work and organizational psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.

[8]   Giddens, A. (2003). The globalizing of modernity. In D. Held and A. McGrew (Eds.), The global transformations reader (2nd ed.). London: Polity.

[9]   Held, D., & McGrew, A. (2003). The great globalization debate: An introduction. In D. Held and A. McGrew (Eds.), The global transformations reader (2nd ed.). London: Polity.

[10]   Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Madenhead: McGraw-Hill Books.

[11]   Kellner, D. (1992). Critical theory, Marxism and modernity. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

[12]   Keong, L. C., & Soon, L. G., (1996). Factors affecting managers and executives’ attitude towards creativity training. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 4, 67-88.

[13]   Kratzer, J., Leenders, R., & Van Engelen, J. (2006). Team polarity and creative performance in innovation teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15, 96-104. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2006.00372.x

[14]   Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.

[15]   Ministry of Education (MOE, Thailand). (2006). Education policy for academic year 2005. Bangkok: Guru Sapha Press.

[16]   Mostafa, M. (2005). Factors affecting organisational creativity and innovativeness in Egyptian business organizations: An empirical investigation. Journal of Management Development, 24, 7-33. doi:10.1108/02621710510572326

[17]   Mulder, N. (1996). Inside Thai society: Interpretation of everyday life. Bangkok: Pepin Press.

[18]   Phongvivat, C. (2002). Social work education in Thailand. International Social Work, 45, 293-303. doi:10.1177/0020872802045003356

[19]   Pimpa, N., & Rojanapanich, P. (2008). Globalization, social imaginary and education policy in Thailand. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Australia and New Zealand Comparative and International Education Society (pp. 45-52). Perth: Curtin University of Technology.

[20]   Premasiri, P. D. (1996). Humanization of development: A Theravada Buddhist perspective. In B. Saraswati (Ed.), Interface of culture identity development. URL (last checked 8 November 2010) http//ignca.nic.in/Is_03005.htm

[21]   Rank, J., Pace, V., & Frese, M. (2004). Three avenues for future research on creativity, innovation and initiative. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 518-528. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00185.x

[22]   Rizvi, F. (2006). Imagination and the globalization of educational policy research. Globalization, Societies and Education, 4, 193-205. doi:10.1080/14767720600752551

[23]   Rojanapanich, P. (2010). The social imaginary in Thai society. Ph.D. Thesis, Melbourne: RMIT University.

[24]   Rowlands, S. (2011). Disciplinary boundaries for creativity. Creative Education, 2, 47-55. doi:10.4236/ce.2011.21007

[25]   Sinlarat, P. (2005). Changing the culture of education in Thai universities. Higher Education Policy, 18, 265-269. doi:10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300088

[26]   Thanasankit, T. (2002). Requirements engineering exploring the influence of power and Thai values. European Journal of Information Systems, 11, 128-141. doi:10.1057/palgrave/ejis/3000423

[27]   West, A., & Farr, L. (1990). Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies. Chichester: John Wiley.

[28]   Xu, F., & Rickards, T. (2007). Creative management: A predicted development from research into creativity and management. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16, 216-28. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00445.x

[29]   Yamada, K., (1991). Creativity in Japan. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 12, 11-14. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000001160

[30]   Yukongdi, V. (2001).Teams and TQM: A comparison between Australia and Thailand. International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management, 18, 387-403. doi:10.1108/02656710110386789

 
 
Top