Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T15:13:43.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Research on Creativity in Israel

A Chronicle of Theoretical and Empirical Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Roberta M. Milgram
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University
Nava L. Livne
Affiliation:
University of Utah
James C. Kaufman
Affiliation:
California State University, San Bernardino
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

Israel is a small country in which the academic and creative abilities of people are considered a major natural resource (Milgram, 2000). The identification and education of gifted and talented children and adolescents have been the focus of considerable interest in Israel for many years. The rationale underlying this interest is that a small country, bereft of natural resources, must place high priority on its human resources, that is, on the abilities and talents of its people. This chapter is divided into four sections. In the first section, we present a summary of research in Israel on topics of creativity. In the second section, we present a theoretical model of the structure of giftedness and creativity (Milgram, 1989, 1991) that has generated the bulk of theory-driven empirical research on creativity in Israel. In the third section we report on international research on learning style and creativity that included Israel, and in the fourth section we discuss new directions in research on creativity in Israel.

CREATIVITY RESEARCH IN ISRAEL

In an effort to include in this chapter as much of the research done in Israel on creativity as possible, we conducted a computerized search by using several electronic databases, including FirstSearch (ERIC and MEDLINE) and EBSCO (PsychINFO). We searched these databases for the years from 1970 to 2004, using creativity and Israel as the two leading keywords and combinations of creativity and Israel with other keywords. This search yielded fourteen studies that we considered appropriate to report in the current section.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, R. S., & Runco, M. A. (1986). The achievement eminence: A model of a longitudinal study of exceptionally gifted boys and their families. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 332–357). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Altshuller, G. (1986). To find an idea: Introduction to the theory of inventive problem solving.Novosibirsk, Russia: NaukaGoogle Scholar
Altshuller, G. (1996). The theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ), (2nd ed.). Worcester, MA: Technical Innovation CenterGoogle Scholar
Baer, J. (1993). Why you shouldn't trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 1, 80–83Google Scholar
Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity in creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 173–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, M. (2004a, June 22–26). Implications of computer-based projects in electronics on fostering independent learning, creativity, and teamwork. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Learning Sciences, Santa Monica, CA
Barak, M. (2004b). Systematic approaches for inventive thinking and problem solving: Implications for engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20, 612–618Google Scholar
Barak, M., & Goffer, N. (2002). Fostering systematic innovative thinking and problem solving: Lessons education can learn from industry. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 12, 227–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current practices of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monograph, 4(4), 1–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beer, J. (1991). Depression, general anxiety, test anxiety, and rigidity of junior high and high school children. Psychological Reports, 69, 1128–1130CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Clabby, J. F. (1980). The wit: A personality analysis. Journal of Assessment, 44, 307–310Google ScholarPubMed
Davidovich, N., & Milgram, R. M. (2004). Ariel Index of Teacher Effectiveness (AITE). [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar
Dunn, R., Dunn, K., and Price, G. E. (1975, 1979, 1981, 1984, 1989). Learning style inventory. Lawrence, KS: Price SystemsGoogle Scholar
Eberle, B. F. (1997). SCAMPER. Buffalo, New York: D.O.K. PublishersGoogle Scholar
Feldhusen, J. E. (1986). A conception of giftedness. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 112–127). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Professional development module: Talent identification and development. Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative LearningGoogle Scholar
Feldhusen, J. F. (Guest Ed.). (1995). Talent development [special issue]. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 18(2)Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (1995). From giftedness to talent: A developmental model and its impact on the language of the field. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 18, 103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligence.New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Gorodetzky, M., & Klavir, R. (2003). What can we learn from how gifted/average pupils describe their processes of problem-solving. Learning and Instruction, 13, 305–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldenberg, J., & Mazursky, D. (1999). The voice of the product: Templates of new product emergence. Creativity and Innovation Management 8(3), 157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldenberg, J., & Mazursky, D. (2002). Creativity in product innovation. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldenberg, J., Mazursky, D., & Solomon, S. (1999). Creative sparks. Science, 255(5433), 1495–1496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, H. (1982). Frames of mind. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267–293CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1991). Original thinking in preschool children: A validation of ideational fluency measures. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1996). The structure of giftedness: The domain of literature as an exemplar. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (1998). Homework Motivation and Preference Questionnaire. Las Vegas: University of Nevada, College of Education; Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2000). Homework: Motivation and learning preference. Westport, CT: Bergin and GarveyGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004a). Creative thinking as a predictor of real-life problem solving in children, adolescents, and adults: A meta-analysis designed to validate ideational fluency measures. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004b). Preventing talent loss: Theory into practice. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., Milgram, R. M., & Rowell, L. L. (2004). Homework motivation and preference: A learner-centered homework approach. In Cooper, H. C. & Valentine, J. C. (Guest Eds.), Theory into practice. A special issue: Homework (Vol. 43, pp. 197–204). Columbus: Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., Milgram, R. M., & Whiston, S. C. (1993). Leisure activities in adolescence as a predictor of occupational choice in young adults: A longitudinal study. Journal of Career Development, 19, 221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, E., Whiston, S. C., & Milgram, R. M. (1993). Leisure activities in career guidance for gifted and talented adolescents: A validation study of the Tel-Aviv Activities Inventory. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 65–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, (2001). Advanced Systematic Inventive Thinking (ASIT)'s five thinking tools with examples. TRIZ Journal. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from www.triz-journal.com/archives/2001/08/cl
Horowitz, R., & Miamon, O. (1997). Creative design methodology and the SIT method. In Proceedings of DETC97, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference (pp. 1–10). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science
Kaufman, J. C. (2002). Dissecting the golden goose: Components of studying creative writers. Creativity Research Journal, 14, 27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (Eds.). (2005). Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Kanter, R. M., Kao, J., & Wiersema, F. (1997). Innovation: Breakthrough thinking at 3M, DuPont, GE, Pfizer and Rubbermaid. New York: Harper Business PressGoogle Scholar
Klavir, R., & Gorodetzky, M. (2001). The processing of analogous problems in the verbal and visual-humorous (cartoons) modalities by gifted/average children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 205–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent boys. Roeper Review, 13, 184–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koichu, B., Berman, A., & Moore, M. (2003). The effect of heuristic training in a regular classroom on mathematical reasoning ability of middle school students. Manuscript submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar
Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1968). Dimensions of meaning and their measurement. Psychological Review, 23, 1307–1329Google Scholar
Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1971). Symbol and sign. In Arnold, W., Eysenck, H. J., & Meili, R. (Eds.), Lexikon der psychologie (Vol. 3). Freiburg:HerderGoogle Scholar
Kreitler, S., & Kreitler, H. (1972). Psychology of the arts. Durham, NC: Duke University PressGoogle Scholar
Landau, E. (1973). The creative approach to psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 27, 566–578CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landau, E. (1979). The young persons' institute for the promotion of art and science. In Gallagher, J. (Ed.), Gifted children: Reaching their potential (pp. 146–147). Jerusalem: KolleckGoogle Scholar
Landau, E. (1981). The profile of the gifted child. In Kramer, A. L. (Ed.), Gifted children: Challenging their potential, new perspectives, and alternatives (pp. 21–32). New York: Trillium PressGoogle Scholar
Landau, E. (1990). The courage to be gifted. New York: Trillium PressGoogle Scholar
Landau, E., & Maoz, B. (1978). Creativity and self-actualizing in the aging personality. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 32, 117–127CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landau, E., & Wiessler, K. (1993). Parental environment in families with gifted and nongifted children. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 127, 100–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, E., & Wiessler, K. (1998). The relationship between emotional maturity, intelligence, and creativity in gifted children. Gifted Education International, 13, 100–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, E., & Wiessler, K., & Golod, G. (2001). Impact on enrichment program on intelligence, by sex, among low SES population in Israel. Gifted Educational International, 15, 207–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L. (2002). Giftedness in mathematics as a bi-dimensional phenomenon: Theoretical definition and psychometric assessment of levels of academic ability and levels of creative ability in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International, ⅹ, Telavis Retrieved July 28 2005, from www.tau.ac.il/education/toar3/archive/etakzir2003-5.htm
Livne, N. L., & Livne, O. E. (1999a). Multiscale Academic and Creative Abilities in Mathematics (MACAM) [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L., & Livne, O. E. (1999b). A scoring guide for the Multiscale Academic and Creative Abilities in Mathematics (MACAM) [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Milgram, R. M. (1999). Assessing academic and creative abilities in mathematics at four levels of understanding. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 30, 227–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Milgram, R. M. (2004). Assessing cognitive complexity within levels of academic and creative abilities in mathematics using open-ended problems. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L., & Milgram, R. M. (1998). Tel-Aviv Activities and Accomplishments Inventory: Mathematics [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar
Livne, N. L., & Milgram, R. M. (2000). Assessing four levels of creative mathematical ability in Israeli adolescents utilizing out-of-school activities: A circular three-stage technique. Roeper Review, 22, 111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovecky, D. V. (1992). Exploring social and emotional aspects of giftedness in children. Roeper Review, 15, 18–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: HarperGoogle Scholar
McGhee, P. E. (1979). Humor: Its origins and development. San Francisco: FreemanGoogle Scholar
McGuffog, C., Feiring, C., & Lewis, M. (1987). The diverse profile of the extremely gifted child. Roeper Review, 10, 82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milgram, R. M. (1983, 1987, 1990, 1998). Tel-Aviv Activities and Accomplishments Inventory (TAAI): Adolescent form [in Hebrew]. Ramat Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, School of EducationGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (1983). A validation of ideational fluency measures of original thinking in children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 619–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (1989). (Ed.). Teaching gifted and talented learners in regular classrooms. Springfield, IL: ThomasGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (1990). Creativity: An idea whose time has come and gone? In Runco, M. A. & Albert, R. S. (Eds.), Theories of creativity (pp. 215–233). Newbury Park, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (1991). (Ed.). Counseling gifted and talented children: A guide for teachers, counselors, and parents.Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (2000). Identifying and enhancing talent in Israel: A high national priority. Roeper Review, 22, 108–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (2003). Challenging out-of-school activities as predictor of creative accomplishments in art, drama, dance, and social leadership. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47, 305–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M. (2004). Real-Life Problem-Solving [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral Sciences. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Arad, R. (1981). Ideational fluency as a predictor of original problem-solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 568–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Davidovich, N. (2004a). Activities & Accomplishments in Teaching Inventory (AATI) [in Hebrew]. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Davidovich, N. (2004b). Real-Life Problem-Solving in Teaching. Ariel, Israel: College of Judea & Samaria, Department of Behavioral SciencesGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Davidovich, N., Livne, N. L., Livne, O. E., & Lieberman, N. (2004). Using individualized computerized units to advance the achievement of high school students in mathematics (Final technical research report). Jerusalem: Israel Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (1993). (Eds.). Teaching and counseling gifted and talented adolescents: An international learning style perspective. New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (1994). Creative thinking and creative performance in adolescents as predictors of creative attainments in adults: A follow-up study after 18 years. In Subotnik, R. F. & Arnold, K. D. (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 212–228). Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Hong, E. (1999). Creative out-of-school activities in intellectually gifted adolescents as predictors of their life accomplishments as young adults: A longitudinal study. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Hong, E., Shavit, Y. W., & Peled, R. (1997). Out-of-school activities in gifted adolescents as a predictor of vocational choice and work accomplishment in young adults. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 8, 111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Livne, N. L. (2005). Creativity as a general and a domain-specific ability: The domain of mathematics as an exemplar. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J.. (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse. Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976). Group versus individual administration in the measurement of creative thinking in gifted and non-gifted children. Child Development, 47, 563–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Milgram, N. A., Rosenbloom, G., & Rabkin, L. (1978). Quantity and quality of creative thinking in children and adolescents. Child Development, 49, 385–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., Moran, J. D. III, Sawyers, J. K., & Fu, V. (1987). Original thinking in Israeli preschool children. School Psychology International, 8, 54–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Price, G. E. (1993). The learning styles of gifted adolescents in Israel. In Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (Eds.), Teaching gifted and talented learners for learning style: An international perspective (pp. 137–148). New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar
Milgram, R. M., & Rabkin, L. (1980). A developmental test of Mednick's associative hierarchies of original thinking. Developmental Psychology, 16, 157–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, M., & Applegate, B. (1993). Middle school students' mathematical problem solving: An analysis of think-aloud protocols. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16(1), 19–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Multifamilypro. (2001). Bringing creativity to your company. Palm Harbar, FL: The Sales & Marketing Magic Companies. Retrieved September, 2005, from http://www.smmonline.com/
Ohayon, Y. (1999). Preferred and actual homework motivation and preference in high and low creative thinking children. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel Aviv University, IsraelGoogle Scholar
Ortar, G. (1973). Milta Intelligence Scale. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University School of Education and Israel Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
Pearson, M., & Beer, J. (1990). Self consciousness, self esteem, and depression of gifted school children. Psychological Reports, 66, 960–962CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, G. E., & Milgram, R. M. (1993). The learning styles of gifted adolescents around the world: Differences and similarities. In Milgram, R. M., Dunn, R., & Price, G. E. (Eds.), Teaching gifted and talented learners for learning style: An international perspective (pp. 229–247). New York: PraegerGoogle Scholar
Raven, J. (1947). Progressive matrices. New York: Psychological CorporationGoogle Scholar
Raviv, D. (2002, June, 18–21). Eight-dimension methodology for innovative thinking. Paper presented at the Annual National Conference and Exposition of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). Montreal, Canada
Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools are places for talent development. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning PressGoogle Scholar
Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–92). Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of Learning Science, 3(2), 115–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, M. J. (2000). Live arts experiences: Their impact on health and wellness (3rd ed.). New York: Hospital Audiences. Retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.hospitalaudiences.org/hai/pubs/monograph.pdfGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The nature of creativity.New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge, U. K.:Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Tannenbaum, A. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives.New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treffinger, D. J., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1996). Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual research edition – Verbal tests, forms A and B – Figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel PressGoogle Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1972). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Figural Test. Lexington, MA: Personnel PressGoogle Scholar
Verschaffel, L. (1999). Realistic mathematical modeling and problem solving. In Hamers, J., Luit, J., & Csapo, B. (Eds.), Teaching and learning thinking skills (215–239). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger
Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction.New York: Holt, Rinehart & WinstonGoogle Scholar
Whitmore, J. R. (1986). Preventing severe underachievement and developing achievement motivation. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 18, 119–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1976a). Guidance for the gifted. Journal: School Guidance Worker, 32(1), 45–47Google Scholar
Ziv, A. (1976b). Facilitating effects of humor on creativity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 318–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1977). Counseling the intellectually gifted child. Toronto: Toronto University PressGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1979). Sociometry of humor: Objectifying the subjective. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 97–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1981). The psychology of humor [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: YahdavGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1983). The influence of humorous atmosphere on divergent thinking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1984). Humor and personality [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: PapyrusGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1988). Using humor to develop creative thinking. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 20, 99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1990). Giftedness [in Hebrew]. Jerusalem: KeterGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1994). Personality and sense of humor.New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A. (1998). Gifted and talented [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: The Open UniversityGoogle Scholar
Ziv, A., & Gadish, O. (1990). Humor and giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13(4), 332–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×