本研究旨在根據DISCOVER課程架構編擬一個適合資優生的主題課程，並經由教學實驗後，探討此三個單元的教學對增進國小資優生問題解決能力及創造力之成效。
本研究設計採用「不等組前-後測實驗設計」，以臺北縣兩所國小五年級一般智能資優班學生為研究對象。針對實驗組進行26次的實驗教學。研究工具包括：自編DISCOVER課程、多元智能量表乙式、新編問題解決測驗、陶倫斯創造思考測驗語文版甲式、教學評量單、個別課程記錄單、作品評量單以及教學回饋問卷。所得資料以相依樣本t考驗、共變數分析及次數百分比加以探討。本研究之研究結果分述如下：

一、實驗組在多元智能量表乙式的表現，以個別學生來看，具有一種優勢智能的有5位；兩種優勢智能的5位；三種優勢智能的2位；四種優勢智能的1位；五種優勢智能的2位；六種以上優勢智能的2位；沒有展現出優勢智能的10位。

二、實驗組在DISCOVER課程中展現的優勢智能，以個別學生來看，自評具有一種優勢智能的有5位；兩種優勢智能的有5位；三種優勢智能的有9位；四種優勢智能的有7位；六種以上優勢智能的有1位。

三、在DISCOVER課程中，實驗組學生在問題類型II、III、IV、V、VI前後測的表現上有顯著的差異。

四、經過DISCOVER課程教學後，實驗組學生在新編問題解決測驗的表現，變通性及全量表之後測成績顯著優於前測；以共變數分析之結果，實驗組學生在解決方法、界定原因、預防問題以及有效性的表現顯著優於對照組。

五、經過DISCOVER課程教學後，實驗組學生在陶倫斯創造思考測驗語文版甲式的表現，流暢、獨創與全量表之後測成績顯著優於前測；以共變數分析之結果，實驗組學生在變通的表現顯著優於對照組。

六、實驗組學生在創造力作品中的新奇、問題解決、精進與統合、總分四個向度與陶倫斯創造思考測驗語文版甲式中的流暢、獨創、變通、全量表四個向度之間的相關皆未達顯著水準。

七、實驗組在DISCOVER課程中選擇各問題類型活動的情形，從學生整體選擇的情形來看，以問題類型I至IV為主，占總選擇次數的92%，而問題類型V和VI則占總選擇次數的8%。

八、藉由教學回饋問卷可知，大部分學生對DISCOVER課程持肯定的態度。學生認為透過該課程可以提高自己在問題解決與創造力的能力。此外他們的收穫還包括資訊利用的能力、運用優勢能力進行學習、團隊合作、表達能力、動手操作的體驗。

The main purposes of this study were to design a three-units topic course in the science domain based on the DISCOVER Model for elementary gifted students, and to investigate the learning effects on problem solving ability.
A nonequivalent pretest-posttest experimental design was employed. The subjects of this study involved fifth grade gifted students from two elementary schools in Taipei County. The experiment group attended twenty-six classes, each class took 40 minutes. The instruments used were: (1)self-designed DISCOVER Curriculum；(2)“Scales of multiple intelligence”；(3)“Reorganization Problem Solving Test”；(4)“Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking”；(5)assessment work sheet；(6)learning records；(7)product assessment；and(8) feedback questionnaire. The data were analyzed by t-test , ANCOVA and frequency ratio analyses. The major results were as follows:

1. In terms of individual student’s performance in experiment group in “Multiple Intelligence Scale Type 2”, there are five students who are equipped with one priority intelligence, five students with two types of priority intelligence, two students with three types of priority intelligence, one student with four types of priority intelligence, two students with five types of priority intelligence, and two students with six types of priority intelligence. However, there are still ten students who don’t show any special intelligence.
2. In terms of individual student’s performance of self-evaluation in experiment group in DISCOVER curriculum, there are five students who are equipped with one priority intelligence, five students with two types of priority intelligence, nine students with three types of priority intelligence, seven students with four types of priority intelligence, and one student with six types of priority intelligence.
3. After DISCOVER learning, there were significant difference between the pretest and posttest on Type II, TypeIII, TypeIV, TypeV, and TypeVI problem solving abilities in the experiment group.
4. In terms of the posttest of “Reorganization Problem Solving Test” , “Flexibility”, and the full scale , the scores of the experiment group on the posttest are significantly better than on the pretest after the DISCOVER curriculum. The result of ANCOVA also indicates that the performances of experiment group on “Finding Solutions”, “Finding Causes”, “Avoiding Problems” and “Effectiveness” are significantly better than the performances of control group.
5. After implementing the DISCOVER curriculum, the scores of the students who took “Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking” in the experiment group in the posttest are better than those in the pretest. According to the result of ANCOVA, students in experiment group perform better on “Flexibility” than those of the students in control group.
6. There were no significant difference between the four dimensions regarding “Novelty”, “Resolution”, “Elaboration and Synthesis”, scores and the four dimensions regarding “Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking” regarding “fluency”, “originality”, “flexibility”, full scale.
7. The different types of problem solving activity chosen by experiment group showed that Type I to Type IV are 92% out of the total times. However, Type V and Type VI are 8% out of the total times.
8. Seeing from the feedback questionnaire, most students hold a positive attitude toward DISCOVER curriculum. Students believe that they can enhance their problem-solving ability and creativity through DISCOVER curriculum. Furthermore, they are more capable of handling information, learning with their gifted ability, team work, expressing themselves, experiencing hands-on activities.

中文部分
仇惟善（2004）：創造性問題解決教學對國中資優學生之應用研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系在職進修碩士班論文，未出版，臺北。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台（2000）：創造力研究。臺北：心理。
方朝生（1994）：激發智能培養創造力的教學。特教園丁，9（4），27-31。
王雅奇（2003）：六頂思考帽訓練課程對提高國小資優生問題解決能力成效之研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
王雅奇（2006）：學前資優幼兒自然領域課程設計。資優教育季刊，99，23-31。
王萬清（1987）：電腦輔助問題解決課程對兒童問題解決能力及程序思考能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
王琡棻（2005）：哲學思考教學方案對國小資優生創造力與批判性思考能力之影響。特殊教育與復健學報，13，1-25。
朱柏州（2002）：合作學習在網路教學上對問題解決能力影響之研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
江美惠（2005）：創造性問題解決教學方案對資優學生創造力及問題解決能力影響之研究。資優教育研究，5（2），83-106。
李乙明（2006）：陶倫斯創造思考測驗語文版指導手冊。臺北：心理。
李秀姿（2005）：創造性戲劇教學對國小資優生創造力與人際溝通影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系在職進修碩士班論文，未出版，臺北。
李震甌（2001）：高低學習成就學童科學問題解決能力之比較研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
呂金燮（2000）：資優兒童問題解決能力實作評量之建構研究。特殊教育研究學刊，19，279-308。
呂金燮（2003）：創造力教學的本質與陷阱。資優教育季刊，86，1-9。
吳武典（2007）：多元智能量表乙式指導手冊。臺北：心理。
吳淑敏（1992）：創造性問題解決之心像教學方案對國小資優班學生問題解決能力、創造力、自我概念及認知風格之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
吳淑敏（2005）：DISCOVER探索課程結合多元智能與問題解決能力。資優教育季刊，96，1-15。
吳雅萍（2008）：創造性問題解決教學對學生學習成效影響之後設分析。國立新竹教育大學人力資源發展研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹。
吳靜吉（1998）：新編創造思考測驗研究。教育部輔導工作六年計畫研究報告。
林怜秀（2005）：學前資優幼兒語文領域課程設計與教學心得。資優教育季刊，95，1-11。
林幸台、陳明終、黃美玉（1985）：創造力訓練對國小資優兒童創造力與高層次認知能力之影響。資優教育季刊，17，28-31。
林奕宏（2001a）：多元智能與問題解決整合型教學模式對國小學生數學學習表現之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
林奕宏（2001b）：未來教學之趨勢－結合多元智能理論與問題解決教學。教育資料與研究，42，76-84。
林傳能（2005）：問題本位學習課程對國小資優生問題解決歷程與表現之影響。臺北市立教育大學創造思考暨資賦優異教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
林慈薇（2007）：圖形遊戲對提升國小資優學生創造力成效之研究。國立彰化師範大學資賦優異研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
邱慧怡（2008）：國小資優生創造思考寫作教學方案成效研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育學系在職進修碩士班論文，未出版，臺北。
施建農（2006）：在科學課中發展問題解決和思維技能。資優教育季刊，101，10-21。
胡錦蕉（1995）：靜坐訓練對國小資優兒童創造力、注意力、自我概念及焦慮反應之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
張玉成（1983）：教師發問技巧及其對學生創造思考能力之影響。臺北：教育部教育計畫小組編印。
張玉佩（2002）：創造力可以教嗎？談影響創造力發展的相關因素。資優教育季刊，84，22-30。
張世彗（1988）：創造性問題解決方案對國小資優班與普通班學生創造性問題解決能力、創造力和問題解決能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
張世彗（2007）：創造力理論：技法與教學。臺北：五南。
張春興（1994）：教育心理學。臺北：東華。
張春興（1997）：現代心理學。臺北：東華。
張修維（1998）：CoRT廣度思考教材對國小資優班與普通班學生創造思考教學效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
梁仲容（2000）：自主學習者方案對特殊才能資優班學生學習效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所博士論文，未出版，彰化。
郭有遹（1977）：創造心理學。臺北：正中。
郭伯銓（2001）：應用全球資訊網培養國中學生問題解決能力之實驗研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
郭靜姿（2003a）：走在三十年後：一個學前資優教育方案的開始。資優教育季刊，88，7 -17。
郭靜姿（2003b）：藝術才能學生之發掘與培育研究－以烏來國民中小學為例（2/2）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC91-2514-S-003-009）。臺北：國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
郭靜姿（2006）：學前資優幼兒多元智能與問題解決能力之充實教學研究（3/3）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC94-2511-S-003-003）。臺北：國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
郭靜姿（2009）：聰明的孩子，資優的教學。臺北：心理。
教育部（2002）：創造力教育政策白皮書。臺北：編者。
教育部（2006）：身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。臺北：編者。
教育部（2008）：資優教育白皮書。臺北：編者。
曹志隆（2004）：以科學創意遊戲教學訓練方案激發國小資優班學生創造力之研究。國立嘉義大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
陳美芳（1997）：從「想」出發－思考能力訓練的內涵與方式概覽。載於中華民國特殊教育學會（編），資優教育的革新與展望－開發潛能培育人才（345-355頁）。臺北：編者。
陳淑絹（1990）：創造性問題解決訓練課程對高中學生創造能力、科學能力及科學相關態度的影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
陳龍安（1985）：創造思考教學對國小資優班與普通班學生創造思考能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
陳龍安（2006）：創造思考教學的理論與實際（第六版）。臺北：心理。
曾子瑛（2008）：繪本創造思考教學方案對國小資優生創造力之影響。臺北市立教育大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
曾俊鋒（2007）：創造性問題解決教學對國小學生自然與生活科技領域學習態度、創造力、後設認知與學習成就之影響―以普通班中的資優生為例。國立臺中教育大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
黃宜敏（2006）：從多元智能與問題解決類型分析實習保育員試教活動。康寧學報，8，55-75。
游健弘（2003）：CoRT創造思考教學對國小資優班學生語文創造能力學習成效之研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
游健弘（2005）：學前資優幼兒數學領域課程設計與教學心得。資優教育季刊，95，12-17。
彭瓊慧（2002）：我國資優教育研究之回顧與後設分析研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
葉玉珠（2007）：創造力教學。臺北：心理。　
詹秀美、吳武典（1991）：問題解決測驗指導手冊。臺北：心理。
詹秀美、吳武典（2007）：新編問題解決測驗指導手冊。臺北：心理。
楊坤原（2001）：創造力的意義及其影響因素簡介。科學教育月刊，239，3-12。
賈馥茗（1970）：創造能力發展之實驗研究。師大教育研究所集刊，12，149-240。
劉世南、郭誌光（2003）：創造力實踐的基礎建設：評量方法的發展。資優教育季刊，86，10-20。
廖偉雄（2009）：心智繪圖教學對提升國小資優生創造力成效之研究。國立彰化師範大學資賦優異研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
鄭月嬌（1993）：小組探究式合作學習法對國小資優生專題研究成果、問題解決能力及合作技巧的影響。臺北市立師範學院初等教育學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
鄭聖敏（1997）：兒童哲學方案對國小資優學生批判思考能力及創造思考能力之影響。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
賴美蓉（1990）：創造性英語教學策略對國小資優學生創造力和學業成績之影響。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
謝宗翰（2009）：單元觀念式創意問題解決策略課程之成效研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北。
鄺靜辰（2009）：探索台灣兒童的美術智能。載於中華資優教育學會（編），資優教育行動方案研討會論文集（109-118頁）。臺北：編者。
譚克平（1999）：創造力定義之探討和台灣與香港國中學生數學創造性解題之比較。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC88-2519-S-003-004-C）。臺北：國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
羅芝芸（1999）：兒童認知風格、情緒智力與問題解決能力之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
龔仁棉（2008）：運用問題解決教學策略於幼兒小書創作教學之合作行動研究。大仁科技大學教師研究計畫成果報告（仁研96193）。屏東：大仁科技大學幼兒保育科。

英文部分
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Besemer, S. (1998). Creative product analysis matrix: Testing the modelstructure and a comparison among products-three novel chairs. Creativity Research Journal, 11(4), 333-346.
Besemer, S., & O’Quin, K. (1986). Analyzing creative products: Refinement and test of a judging instrument. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20, 115-126.
Besemer, S., & O’Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three-factor Creative Product Analysis Model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 287-296.
Besemer, S., & Treffinger, D. H. (1981). Analysis of creative products: Review and synthesis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 15(3), 158-178.
Chi, M. T. H., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem-solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),　Human ability: An information-processing approach (pp. 169-186). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Clark, B. (1992). Growing up gifted (4th ed.). New York: Merril.
Cropley, A. J. (1999). Creativity and cognition: Producing effective novelty. Roeper Review, 21(4), 253-260.
Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1999)：創造力（杜明城譯）。臺北：時報。（原著出版年：1996）。
Csikzentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approach to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monk, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 81-94). New York: Elsevier.
Davis, G. A. (1997). Identifying creative students and measuring creativity. In N. Colangelo ＆ G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd ed., pp.269-281). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Davison, J. E. (1986). The role of insight in giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davison (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 201-222). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.
Esquivel, G. B. (1995). Teacher behavior that foster creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7(2), 185-202.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Creative thinking and problem solving in gifted education (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gallagher, J. J. (1985). Teaching the gifted child. Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gallagher, J. J. (2009). Gifted education in the 21st century. In D. Eyre (Ed.), Gifted and Talented Education: Vol. 1. (pp.122-134). New York: Routledge.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (2009). Reflections on multiple intelligences: Myths and messages. In D. Eyre (Ed.), Gifted and Talented Education: Vol. 1. (pp.444-455). New York: Routledge.
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1967). Scientific creativity. Science Journal, 3(9), 80-84.
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). From problem solving to problem finding. In I. A. Taylor & L. W. Gezels (Eds.), Perspective in creativity (pp. 90-116). Chicago: Aldine.
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: Wiley.
Gowan, J. C. (1972). Development of the creative individual. San Diego, CA: Robert R. Knapp.
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 267-293.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents: Their nature, uses and development. New York: Bearly.
Hocevar, D. (1981). Measurement of creativity: Review and critique. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 450-464.
Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 53-75). New York: Plenum Press.
Hoover, S. M. (1994). Scientific problem finding in gifted fifth-grade students. Roeper Review, 16(3), 156-159.
Hunt, E. (1994). Problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Teaching and problem solving (pp. 215-232). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Khatena, J. (1978). The creatively gifted child. New York: Vantage Press.
Kuo, C. C. (2007). Creativity in special education. In A.G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 193-208). Singapore: World Scientific.
Ma, H. H. (2006). A synthetic analysis of the effectiveness of single components and packages in creativity training programs. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 435-446.
Maker, C. J. (1993). Creativity, intelligence, and problem solving: A definition and design for cross-cultural research and measurement related to giftedness. Gifted Education International, 9(2), 68-77.
Maker, C. J. (1997). DISCOVER Problem-Solving Assessment. Quest, 8(1), 3, 5, 7, 9.
Maker, C. J. (2001). DISCOVER: Assessing and developing problem solving. Gifted Education International, 15(3), 232-251.
Maker, C. J. (2002)：問題解決能力與多元智能工作坊講議。臺灣師範大學特殊教育中心編印。
Maker, C. J. (2005). The DISCOVER project: Improving assessment and curriculum for diverse gifted learners. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Maker, C. J. (2009a). DISCOVER's components. 2009/5/5 Retrieved from http://discover.arizona.edu/
Maker, C. J. (2009b). The DISCOVER assessment and curriculum development model. In J. S. Renzulli, E. J. Gubbins, K. S. McMillen, R. D. Eckert, & C. A. Little (Eds.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 253-288). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (2005). The DISCOVER curriculum model. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Teaching models in education of the gifted (3rd ed.)(pp. 165-194). Austin, TX: PRO. ED.
Maker, C. J., Jo, S.,　& Muammar, O. M.　(2008). Development of creativity: The influence of varying levels of implementation of the DISCOVER curriculum model, a non-traditional pedagogical approach. Learning and individual differences, 18, 402-417.
Maker, C. J., Rogers, J. A., Nielson, A. B., & Bauerle, P. (1996). Multiple intelligences, problem solving, and diversity in the general classroom. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(4), 437- 460.
Maker, C. J., Muammar, O., Serino, L., Kuang, C. C., Mohamed, A., & Sak, U. (2006). The DISCOVER curriculum model: Nurturing and enhancing creativity in all children. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 3(2), 99-121.
Mayer, R. E. (1983). Thinking problem solving cognition. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 449-460). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (1996). Problem-solving Transfer. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47-62). New York: Macmillan.
Mednick, S. A., & Mednick, M. T. (1967). Remote Associates Test, College and Adult, Forms 1 and 2 and Examiner's Manual. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Moseley, D., Baumfield, V., Elliott, J., Gregson, M., Higgins, S., Miller, J., & Newton, D. P. (2005). Frameworks for thinking: A handbook for teaching and learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mumford, M. D., Decker, B. P., Connelle, M. S., Osborn, H. K., & Scott, G. (2002). Beliefs and creative performance: Relationships across three tasks. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(3), 153-181.
Nezu, A. M., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (1989). Social problem solving and negative affective conditions. In P. C. Kendall & D. Watson (Eds.), Anxiety and depression: Distinctive and overlapping features (pp. 285-315). New York: Academic Press.
Nielson, A. (1994). Traditional identification: Elitist, racist, sexist? New Evidence. CAG Communicator, 24(3), 18-19, 26-31.
Osborn, A. F. (1967). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Parnes, S. J. (1967). Creative behavior guidebook. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Perleth, C., & Wilde, A. (2007). Identification of talents. In A. G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 143-165). Singapore: World Scientific.
Polya, G. (1981). Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning, and teaching problem solving. New York: Wiley.
Pyryt, M. C. (1999). Effectiveness of traning children's divergent thinking: A meta-analytic review. In A. S. Fishkin, B. Cramond, ＆P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Eds.), Investigating creativity in youth: Research and methods (pp. 367-387). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Rathunde, K., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2006). The developing person: An experiential perspective. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed.) (pp.465-515). New York: Wiley.
Renzulli, J. S (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: New directions for developing high-end learning. In N. Colangenlo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.)(pp. 136-154). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In B. R. Gifford & M. C. O’Connor (Eds.), Changing assessments: Alternative views of aptitude, achievement and instruction (pp. 35-75). Boston: Kluwer.
Reuter, M. (2007). The biological basis of creativity. In A.　G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 79-99). Singapore: World Scientific.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 216-222). New York: Bearly Limited.
Riley, T. L., & Karnes, F. A. (2009). Problem-solving competitions. In D. Eyre (Ed.), Gifted and talented education: Vol.3. (pp.250-263). New York: Routledge.
Rowe, H. A. H. (1985). Problem solving and intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Runco, Ｍ. A. (2008)：創造力－當代理論與議題（邱皓政、丁興祥、林耀南、陳育瑜、林碧芳、王詩婷、賴靜儀、柯怡安、陳佳筠、何潤娥譯）。臺北：心理。（原著出版年：2007）。
Sak, U., & Maker, C. J. (2003, August). The long-term predictive validity of a performance-based assessment used to identify gifted CLD students. Paper presented at the 15th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children, Adelaide, Australia.
Sak, U., & Maker, C. J. (2004). DISCOVER assessment and curriculum model: Application of theories of multiple intelligences and successful intelligence in the education of gifted students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 15, 1-15.
Sarouphim, K. M. (1999a). Discovering multiple intelligences through a performance- based assessment: Consistency with independent ratings. Exceptional Children, 65(2), 151-161.
Sarouphim, K. M. (1999b). DISCOVER: A promising alternative assessment for the identification of gifted minorities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(4), 244-251.
Sarouphim, K. M. (2000). Internal structure of DISCOVER: A performance-based assessment. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 314-327.
Sarouphim, K. M. (2005). DISCOVER across the spectrum of grades: Identifying gifted minority students. Gifted and Talented International, 20, 70-77.
Sarouphim, K. M., & Maker, C. J. (2009, April). Ethnic and gender differences in the use of DISCOVER: A multiultural analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Schiever, S. W., & Maker, C. J. (1991). Enrichment and acceleration: An overview and new directions. In G. Davis & N. Colangelo (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 99‐110). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Schiever, S. W., & Maker, C. J. (1997). Enrichment & acceleration: An overview & new directions. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.)(pp. 113-125). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Schiever, S.W., & Maker, C. J. (2003). New directions in enrichment and acceleration. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.)(pp. 163-173). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., ＆ Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361-388.
Shahrin, M., Toh, K. A., Ho, B. T., & Wong, J. (2002). Performance assessment: Is creative thinking necessary? Journal of Creative Behavior, 36(2), 77-87.
Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Creativity as a habit. In A.G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 3-25). Singapore: World Scientific.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd. New York: The Free Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3-15). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Spear, S. L. (1996). Harcourt teaching creative problem-solving. New York: The Free Press.
Stone. R. (2001). How teachers can assess the thinking skill they are teaching. In L. A. Costa. (Ed.). Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (3rd ed.)(pp. 525-527). Alexandria,VI: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tan, A. G., & Wong, S. S. (2007). Constructive creativity in education. In A.G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp. 485-506). Singapore: World Scientific.
Thomas, N. G., ＆ Berk, L. E. (1981). Effects of school environments on the development of young children's creativity. Child Development, 52(4), 1153-1162.
Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. New York: William Morrow.
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1972). Can we teach children to think creatively? Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 114-143.
Torrance, E. P. (1984). The role of creativity in identification of the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28 (4), 153-156.
Torrance, E. P., & Goff, K. (1989). A quiet revolution. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 23, 136-145.
Treffinger, D. J. (1986). Fostering effective, independent learining through individualized programming. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 429-460). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Treffinger, D. J. (2004). Research on creativity. In D. J. Treffinger (Ed.), Creativity and giftedness (pp. 87-96). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Udall, A. J., & Daniels, J. E. (1991). Creating the thoughtful classroom: Strategies to promote student thinking. Tucson, Arizona: Zephyr Press.
Urban, K. K. (2007). Assessing creativity: A componential model. In A.　G. Tan (Ed.), Creativity: A handbook for teachers (pp.　167-184). Singapore: World Scientific.
Urban, K. K., & Jellen, H. G. (1996). Test for Creative Thinking-Drawing Production. Frankfurt, Germany: Swets Test Services.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. (2009). Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. In D. Eyre (Ed.), Gifted and Talented Education: Vol. 3. (pp.15-42). New York: Routledge.
Wallach, M., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (1980). Teaching for creative thinking in the intermediate grades. A Journal on Gifted Education, 3(1), 4-6.
Williams, F. E. (1980). Creativity Assessment Packet (CAP): Manual. Buffalo, NY: D.O.K..
Woolfolk, A. E. (1987). Educational psychology (3rd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.