Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Despite growing consensus among educators and scholars that creativity is essential to student achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, institutions of higher education rarely focus on developing key indicators of student creativity. This study assessed the relationships between student creativity indicators and STEM career interest in 446 undergraduates, controlling for traditional motivators like STEM self‐efficacy and outcome expectations, in order to identify those creativity indicators that are most relevant for fostering student motivation to pursue a STEM career. Using hierarchical regression, multiple creative indicators, especially prior engagement in creative math and science activities, emerged as significant predictors of STEM career interest. Interestingly, domain‐general creative abilities such as divergent and convergent thinking demonstrated no relationships with STEM career interest, and growth mindset was a statistically significant predictor in the negative direction, suggesting nuanced dynamics in the development of career interests. These findings advocate for the integration of field‐specific creative activities in STEM education, as opposed to field‐general creative approaches (e.g., divergent thinking training) or exposure to creative activities in non‐STEM domains (e.g., performance arts), and they highlight the potential for innovative pedagogical approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McLemore et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: