Online scientific creativity learning (OSCL) in science education to ımprove students’ scientific creativity in Covid-19 pandemic

Binar Kurnia  Prahanı; Nadi  Suprapto; Fida  Rachmadıartı; Arıf  Sholahuddın; Saiyidah  Mahtarı; Suyıdno; Joko  Sıswanto

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Binar Kurnia Prahanı
Nadi Suprapto
Fida Rachmadıartı
Arıf Sholahuddın
Saiyidah Mahtarı
Suyıdno
Joko Sıswanto

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Covid-19 pandemic, higher education, learning innovation, OSCL, scientific creativity

Abstract

The Wademen Model was chosen to develop the Online Scientific Creativity Learning (OSCL). The quality of OSCL is measured using an expert validation sheet. Students' scientific creativity is assessed using the Scientific Creativity Test Instrument (SCTI) and then analyzed through N-gain and parametric inferential statistical tests. The OSCL has been proven effective in increasing students' scientific creativity during the Covid-19 pandemic. There is no significant difference (N-gain at a moderate level) between OSCL and Creativity Responsibility Based Learning (CRBL), except with Conventional Learning (N-gain at low level). The results of students' scientific creativity are at a high level after using OSCL and CRBL, while conventional learning is low. The OSCL can be an alternative for the scientific creativity of students in science education. Besides, OSCL facilitates the responsibility and science process skills which are characteristic of being emphasized in the learning phases. The OSCL can be a learning innovation in science education to improve students’ scientific creativity in the Covid-19 pandemic.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abidah, A., Hidaayatullaah, H. N., Simamora, R. M., Fehabutar, D., & Mutakinati, L. (2020). The Impact of Covid-19 to Indonesian education and ıts relation to the philosophy of “Merdeka Belajar”. Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 1(1), 38-49. https://doi.org/10.46627/sipose.v1i1.9

Al-khatib, B.A. (2012). The effect of using brainstorming strategy in developing creative problem solving skills among female students in princess alia university college. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(10), 29-38. Available from:https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1059.1348&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Arends, R.I. (2012). Learning to teach. New York: Mc.Graw-Hill.

Astutik, S., Susantini, E., Madlazim, Mohamad, N., & Supeno. (2020). The effectiveness of collaborative creativity learning models (CCL) on secondary schools scientific creativity skills. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 525-538. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13336a

Ayas, M. B. & Sak, U. (2014). Objective measure of scientific creativity: Psychometric validity of the creative scientific ability test. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 195–205.https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.06.001

Blascova, M. (2014). Influencing academic motivation, responsibility and creativity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 415-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.399

Chin, M. K. & Siew, N. M. (2015). The development and validation of a figural scientific creativity test for preschool pupils. Creative Education, 6(1), 1391-1402. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.612139

Cocu, A., Pecheanu, E., & Susnea, I. (2015). Stimulating creativity through collaboration in an innovation laboratory. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 173 - 178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.753

Daud, A. M., Omar, J., Turiman, P., & Osman, K. (2012). Creativity in science education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 467- 474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.302

Dhir, T. (2014). Problem solving ability and science process skills as the influential factors of scientific creativity. International Journal of Research Pedagogy and Technology in Education Movement Sciences, 2(4), 11-17.

Didin, W. & Wiji, L.Z. (2020). The implementation of project-based learning approach in students’ creativity programs in Indonesia. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 8(3), 702-708. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2020.8375

Dwikoranto, Munasir, Setiani, R., Suyidno, Surasmi, Tresnaningsih, S., & Pramono, A. (2020). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1569(4), 042066. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1569/4/042066

Eggen, P. D. & Kauchak, D. P. (2013). Educational psychology: Windows on clasrooms (9th edition). New Jersey: Pearson.

Famularsih, S. (2020). Students’ experiences in using online learning applications due to Covıd-19 in english classroom. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 112-121. https://doi.org/10.46627/silet.v1i2.40

Florence, K. W., Mark, O. O., & Wachanga, M. P. (2015). A correlation study of secondary students' academic achievement in chemistry and their scientific creativity in chemistry. International Journal of Scientific Research and Innovative Technology, 2(5), 1408–1415. Available from: https://www.ijsrit.com/uploaded_all_files/3373912118_f10.pdf

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: Mc Graw-Hill, Higher Education.

Gregory, E., Hardiman, M., Yarmolinskaya, J., Rinne, L., & Limb, C. (2013). Building creative thinking in the classroom: From research to practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.06.003

Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Hammond, L., Barron, B., Pearson, P. D., Schoenfeld, A. H., Stage, E. K., Zimmerman, T. D., Tilson, J. L. (2015). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding: John Wiley & Sons.

Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2010). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912

Hu, W., Shi, Q. Z., Han, Q., Wang, X., & Adey, P. (2010). Creative scientific problem finding and its developmental trend. Creativity Research Journal, 22 (1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410903579551

Hu, W., Wu, B., Jia, X., Yi, X., Duan, C., & Meyer, W. (2013). Increasing student’s scientific creativity: The “learn to think” intervention program. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(1), 3-21. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jocb.20

Jatmiko, B., Widodo, W., Martini, Budiyanto, M., Wicaksono, I., & Pandiangan, P. (2016). Effectiveness of the INQF-based learning on a general physics for improving student’s learning outcomes.

Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(4), 441-451. Available from:http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol15/441-451.Jatmiko_JBSE_Vol.15_No.4.pdf.

Kadayifci, K. (2017). Barriers to students’ creative evaluation of unexpected experimental findings. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16 (3), 414-428. Available from: http://oaji.net/articles/2017/9871497964307.pdf

Kang, D., Park, J., & Hong, H. (2015). Changes in the number of ideas depending on time when conducting scientific creativity activities. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14(4), 448-459. Available from: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol14/448459.Kang_JBSE_Vol.14_No.4.pdf.

Kapoor, H., & Kaufman, J.C. (2020). Meaning-making through creativity during COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 18 December 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.595990

Khan, Z.F., & Alotaibi, S. R. (2020). Design and implementation of a computerized user authentication system for e-Learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(9), 4–18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i09.12387

Laisema, S., & Wannapiroon, P. (2014). Design of collaborative learning with creative problem-solving process learning activities in a ubiquitous learning environment to develop creative thinking skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3921-3926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.867

Mamun, A. Al, Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2020). Instructional design of scaffolded online learning modules for self- directed and inquiry-based learning environments. Computers & Education, 144, 103695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103695

Mukhopadhyay, R. (2013). Measurement of creativity in physics: A brief review on related tools. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 6(5), 45-50. 10.9790/0837-0654550

Novo-corti, I., Varela-candamio, L., & Ramil-díaz, M. (2013). E-learning and face to face mixed methodology : Evaluating effectiveness of e-learning and perceived satisfaction for a microeconomic course using the Moodle platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 410– 415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.006

OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Student’s skills in tackling real-life problems (Volume V), PISA. Publishing: OECD. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264208070-en

Ozdemir, G. & Dikici, A. (2017). Relationships between scientific process skills and scientific creativity: Mediating role of nature of science knowledge. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 3(1), 52-68. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.275696

Pandiangan, P., Sanjaya, M., Gusti, I., & Jatmiko, B. (2017). The validity and effectiveness of physics independent learning model to improve physics problem solving and self-directed learning skills of students in open and distance education systems. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(5), 651665. Available from: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/?q=node/601.

Pangastuti, R., & Fadhillah, N. (2020). Integrated Twin Tower (ITT) Based learning to think (LTT) model to enhance scientific creativity and spiritual of students in the early childhood ıslamic education department. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.46627/silet.v1i1.21

Park, J. (2012). Developing the format and samples of teaching materials for scientific creativity in the ordinary science curriculum-Including teachers’ practice and reflection. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 32(3), 446-466. http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.3.446

Plomp (2007). “Educational Design Research : An Introduction”, in An Introduction to Educational Research. Enschede, Netherland: National Institute for Curriculum Development.

Raj, H. & Saxena, D. R. (2016). Scientific creativity: A review of researches. European Academic Research, 4, 1122-1138. Available from: http://euacademic.org/UploadArticle/2494.pdf.

Ren, L.-L., Wang, Y.-M., Wu, Z.-Q., Xiang, Z.-C., Guo, L., Xu, T., et al. (2020). Identification of a novel coronavirus causing severe pneumonia in human. Chinese Medical Journal, 133, 1015–1024. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000000722.

Rizqi, Prabowo, & Kirana, T. (2020). Development of OCIPSE Learning Model to Increase Students’ Scientific Creativity in Natural Science Learning. IJORER : International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 1(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v1i1.10

Saliceti, F. (2015). Educate for creativity: New educational strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1174-1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.374

Serway, R. A., & Jewett, J.W. (2014). Physics, for scientists and enginer with modern physics, ninth edition. USA: Cengage Learning, Inc.

Saputro, B., Saerozi, M., & Ardhiansyah, F. (2020). Philosophical reflections: CRITICAL analysis of learning strategies for science practicum during the Covid-19 pandemic. IJORER: Internatıonal Journal of Recent Educational Research, 1(2), 78-89. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v1i2.26

Sevilla, C. G., Ochave, J. A., Punsalan, T. G., Regala, B. P., & Uriarte, G. G. (1984). An introduction to research methods. Quezon City: Rex Printing Company.

Siew, N.M., Chong, C.L., & Chin, K.O. (2014). Developing a scientific creativity test for fifth graders. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 62(1), 109-123. Available from: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/pec/node/937.

Siswanto, J, Susantini, E, & Jatmiko, B. (2018a). Practicality and effectiveness of the IBMR teaching model to improve physics problem solving skills. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(3), 381-394. Available from: http://oaji.net/articles/2017/987-1529508735.pdf

Siswanto, J., Susantini, E., & Jatmiko, B. (2018b) Multi-representation based on scientific investigation for enhancing students’ representation skills. Journal Physics: Conference Series, 983, 012034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012034

Solso, R. L., MacLin, O. H., & MacLin, M. K. (2008). Cognitive psychology, 8th edition. Boston: Pearson Education.

Suryaman, H., Kusnan, & Mubarok., H. (2020). Profile of online learning in building engineering education study program during the Covid-19 pandemic. IJORER: International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 1(2), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v1i2.42

Susantini, E., Isnawati, & Lisdiana, L. (2016). Effectiveness of genetics student worksheet to improve creative thinking skills of teacher candidate students. Journal of Science Education, 2(17), 74-79.

Susantini, E., Lisdiana, L., Isnawati, Al Haq, A. T., & Trimulyono, G. (2017). Designing easy DNA extraction: Teaching creativity through laboratory practice. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 45(3), 216-225. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21030

Suyidno, Dewantara, D., Nur, M., & Yuanita, L. (2017). Maximize student’s scientific process skill within creatively product designing: Creative responsibility based learning. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 100, 98-103. https://doi.org/10.2991/seadric-17.2017.21

Suyidno, Susilowati, E., Arifuddin, M., Misbah, M., Sunarti, T., & Dwikoranto, D. (2019). Increasing students’ responsibility and scientific creativity through creative responsibility based learning.

Jurnal Penelitian Fisika dan Aplikasinya, 9(2), 178-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v9n2.p147-157 Usta, E., & Akkanat, C. (2015). Investigating the scientific creativity level of seventhgrade students.

Walker, J., Halliday, D., & Resnick, R. (2014). Fundamentals of physics, tenth edition. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wicaksono, I., Wasis, and Madlazim. (2017). The effectiveness of virtual science teaching model (VSTM) to improve student’s scientific creativity and concept mastery on senior high school physics subject. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(4), 549-561. Available from: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/?q=node/588

Widodo, A., Maria, R.A., & Fitriani, A. (2016). Peran praktikum rill dan praktikum virtual dalam membangun kreatifitas siswa. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA, 21(1), 92-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v21i1.670.

Yigit, T., Koyun, A., Sinan, A., & Arda, I. (2014). Evaluation of blended learning approach in computer engineering education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 807–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.140

Yusnaeni, Corebima, A. D., Susilo, H., & Zubaidah, S. (2017). Creative thinking of low academic students undergoing search solve create and share learning integrated with metacognitive strategy. International Journal of Instruction, 10(2), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10216a

Zainuddin, Suyidno, Dewantara, D., Mahtari, S., Nur, M., Yuanita, L., & Sunarti, T. (2020). The correlation of scientific knowledge-science process skills and scientific creativity in creative responsibility based learning. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 307-316. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13321a

Zubaidah, S., Fuad, N. M., Mahanal, S., & Suarsini, E. (2017). Improving creative thinking skills of students through differentiated science inquiry integrated with mind map. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(4), 77–91. DOI: 10.12973/tused.10214a

Zulkarnaen, Supardi, I.Z.A., & Jatmiko, B. (2017). Feasibility of creative exploration, creative elaboration, creative modeling, practice scientific creativity, discussion, reflection (C3PDR) teaching model to improve students’ scientific creativity of junior high school. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(6), 1020-1034.