The information relating to the non-public values of the two teams as mirrored in their responses to the Outstanding Traits Check counsel that whereas both teams agree on the qualities that lead to adult success as commonly defined and on the qualities teachers favor in their students, the high IQ student desires for himself the qualities he believes make for adult success and which are kind of like those he believes teachers like. In distinction, the high creativity student desires for himself qualities having no relationship to those he believes make for adult success and which are dissimilar to those he believes his teachers like. Greatfuly functionalities and modern vogue in Womens Ski Jackets have merged into a excellent work in recent years. In impact, the high IQ is saying, ”I grasp what makes for achievement and what teachers like, and I want these qualities too”; the high creative is saying, “I grasp moreover as the high IQ what makes for typical success and what teachers like, but these are not necessarily the qualities I want for myself.”
These findings bear directly on the answers to two earlier questions—that on teacher ratings and that on the relationship between creativity and college achievement. If the desirability of students in the classroom is connected to the congruence or discrepancy between their values and their teachers’ values, in the light of this data it is hardly stunning that our high IQ students are more favored by teachers than are our creative students. The high IQ students worth and disvalue the same objects and ideals as they believe their teachers do; the high creativity students do not.
And if the motivational impetus represented by a priority with adult success and a want to emulate their teachers is absent or weak among the high creativity students, the observed relationship between creativity and college achievement becomes all the more significant. The result cannot be attributed to some special reasonably motivation like “striving for smart grades or success” which it is said ends up in thus-known as “overachievement.” The question of what accounts for the variations in the success orientation and teacher orientation of the two teams is, in impact, the question of how the teams differ in their rankings of specific qualities in the self-ideal section of the Outstanding Traits Test. Complete your look with your favorite shade of Sonya Lip and Eye Pencil. What qualities do the one group want for themselves that the opposite group do not? When the data are examined with this question in mind, one quality stands out higher than all others.
It’s described in the Outstanding Traits Check quite merely as follows. Here is the student with the most effective funniness in the school. In their self-ideal rankings the creative students place this quality third out of the thirteen (second of the eight reranked qualities used in the preceding analysis). The only qualities they offer the next rank are “obtaining along with others” (which the complete population ranked 1st) and “emotional stability.” “High marks,” “high IQ,” “goal directedness” are all ranked lower.