A Critique of Six Measures for Assessing Creativity

ABSTRACT Tests and measures of creativity are critical instruments guiding educators in identifying highly productive individuals capable of contributing insightful and far reaching solutionsto ourproblem ridden civilization. This paperanalyzesand critiques six popularlyused measures ofcreativity: 1) The Torrance Test of Creative Thinking by E. Paul Torrance (1966); 2) The Creativity Assessment Packet by frank Williams (1980); three subtests of divergent production of the 3) Structure ofthe Intellect Learning Abilities Test by Mary Meeker; 4) Thinking Creatively With Sounds and Words by E. Paul Torrance, Joe Khatena and Bert F. Cunnington (1973); 5) Thinking Creatively In Action and Movement by E. Paul Torrance (1981); 6) Khatena‐Torrance Creative Perception Inventory by Joe Khatena & E. Paul Torrance (1976). Reviewed through personal observation and published literature, these tests reveal a capacity as partial measures of divergent and productive thinking. Findings indicate that updating and upgrading of several tests with thought toward key constituent factors of the creative process would be qualitatively beneficial to test design. Harnessing creative potential is a main concern of educators hoping to prepare America's youth for a fast paced and rapidly changing existence. The questions at the heart of this concern: what creativity is, what constitutes creative thinking, and what the creative individual is like, have given birth to many tests and biographical checklists. Understanding the dimensions ofcreativity is difficult at best, and assessing it through tests or biographical checklists is even more problematic. Through direct examination and a review ofthe literature, this paper critiques six such measures for validity, reliability and utility. Those measures included: the Creativity Assessment Packet (CAP), the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TICT), Thinking Creatively in Action and Movement, Thinking Creatively with Sound and Words, Khatena‐Torrance Creative Perception Inventory, and three divergent thinking subtests ofthe Structure of Intellect Learning Abilities Test (SOl‐LA).