Gender response in laboratory activity based on creative research project on biology creative thinking skills of high school students
DOI:
10.29303/jpm.v14i2.1901Published:
2021-11-11Issue:
Vol. 16 No. 5 (2021): November 2021Keywords:
kreativitas, berpikir kreatif, praktikum proyek penelitian, genderArticles
Downloads
Additional Files
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
The study of creative thinking skills has focused on creative research project-based laboratory activity for high school students' biology learning. The purpose of this study is to explore the differences in the creative thinking ability of male and female students. The participants of this study were students of X MIPA consisting of 22 males and 37 females students in a high school of Mataram, Lombok, NTB. Students completed a biological creative thinking skills test after completing a laboratory learning activity based on creative research project that was required to be encouraged by activities and creative thinking. The results showed that there was evidence of an improvement trend of creative thinking skills in all male and female students. However, statistical analysis using independent sample t-test showed no significant difference to the mean scores obtained by male and female students. The results of the study are discussed based on the existing literature on developmental trends and gender differences in creative thinking.
References
Wolfe, D., & Bramwell, A. (2016). Innovation, creativity and governance 8 years on: Social dynamics of economic performance in city-regions. Innovation. 18(4): 462-467.
Runco, M. A. (2012) Creative and Imaginative Thinking. 2 ed, Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition. 2 ed. Elsevier Inc.
Lamb, S., Doecke, E. dan Maire, Q. (2017) Key Skills for the 21st Century: An evidence-based review, NSW Government. State of New South Wales.
RodrÃÂguez, G. et al. (2019) ââ¬ÅDeveloping creative and research skills through an open and interprofessional inquiry-based learning course,ââ¬Â BMC Medical Education. BMC Medical Education, 19(1):1ââ¬â13.
Robinson, J. K. (2013) ââ¬ÅProject-based learning : improving student engagement and performance in the laboratory,ââ¬Â 7ââ¬â13.
Giroux, H. A. dan Schmidt, M. L.E (2004) ââ¬ÅClosing the achievement gap: a metaphor for children left behind,ââ¬Â Journal of Educational Change, 5: 213ââ¬â228.
Florida, R., Mellander, C. dan King, K. (2015) ââ¬ÅThe Global Creativity Index 2015,ââ¬Â Martin Prosperity Institute, hal. 68.
Widodo, A., Waldrip, B. dan Herawati, D. (2016) ââ¬ÅStudents argumentation in science lessons: A story of two research projects,ââ¬Â Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(2):199ââ¬â208.
Marwiyah, S., Kamid, K. dan Risnita, R. (2015) ââ¬ÅPengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Keterampilan Berpikir Kreatif Pada Mata Pelajaran IPA Terpadu Materi Atom, Ion, Dan Molekul SMP Islam Al Falah,ââ¬Â Edu-Sains: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, 4(1): 26ââ¬â31.
Gupta, S. (2015) ââ¬ÅDevelopment of Creativity : Interplay of Biological, Psychological and Social Factors,ââ¬Â International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 3(12); 195ââ¬â202.
Lee Chuo Hiong dan Kamisah Osman (2013) ââ¬ÅA conceptual framework for the integration of 21st century skills in biology education,ââ¬Â Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 6(16): 2976ââ¬â2983.
Chelang, C. (2014) ââ¬ÅEffects of practical investigation on scientific creativity amongst secondary schools biology students in Kericho district , Kenya .,ââ¬Â Journal of Education and Practice, 5(8): 43ââ¬â51.
Tran, L. T. B., Ho, N. T. dan Hurle, R. J. (2016) ââ¬ÅTeaching for Creativity Development: Lessons Learned from a Preliminary Study of Vietnamese and International Upper (High) Secondary School Teachersââ¬â¢ Perceptions and Lesson Plans,ââ¬Â Creative Education, 07(7): 1024ââ¬â1043.
Daskolia, M., Dimos, A. dan Kampylis, P. G. (2012) ââ¬ÅSecondary teachersââ¬â¢ conceptions of creative thinking within the context of environmental education,ââ¬Â International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(2): 269ââ¬â290.
Moeed, A. (2013) ââ¬ÅScience investigation that best supports student learning: Teachers understanding of science investigation,ââ¬Â International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 8(4): 537ââ¬â559.
Karademir, E. (2016) ââ¬ÅInvestigation the Scientific Creativity of Gifted Students Through Project-Based Activities,ââ¬Â International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 2(2): 416ââ¬â427.
Sukarso, A., A. Widodo, D. Rochintaniawati dan W. Purwianingsih. (2019) ââ¬ÅThe potential of studentsââ¬â¢ creative disposition as a perspective to develop creative teaching and learning for senior high school biological science,ââ¬Â Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(2). doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022092.
Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology. 15: 6ââ¬â23.
Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Gentile, C. A. (2004). Differences in gender and ethnicity as measured by ratings of three writing tasks. Journal of Creative Behavior. 39: 56ââ¬â69.
Torrance, E. P. (1977). Creativity in the Classroom. Washington: National Education Association.
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), 64ââ¬â74.
Meltzer, D. E. (2002). The relationship between mathematics preparation and conceptual learning gains in physics: A possible ââ¬Åhidden variableââ¬Â in diagnostic pretest scores. American Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1259ââ¬â1268.
Haigh, Mavis. 2007. Can Investigative Practical Work in High School Biology Foster Creativity? Res Sci Educ. 37: 123ââ¬â140.
Russ, S. (2002). Primary process thinking and creativity. In R. F. Bornstein & J. M. Masling (Eds.), The psychodynamics of gender and gender role. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Cross, S., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin. 122: 5ââ¬â37.
Klein, K. J. K.; Hodges, S. D. (2001). Gender Differences, Motivation, and Empathic Accuracy: When it Pays to Understand. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(6), 720ââ¬â730. doi:10.1177/0146167201276007
Lippa, R. A. (2010). Gender differences in personality and interests: When, where, andwhy? Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 4: 1098ââ¬â1110.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 81: 728ââ¬â741.
Kemmelmeier, M. dan Walton, A. P. (2016) ââ¬ÅCreativity in Men and Women: Threat, Other-Interest, and Self-Assessment,ââ¬Â Creativity Research Journal, 28(1): 78ââ¬â88.
De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., Bechtold, M. N., & Baas, M. (2011). Group creativity and innovation: A motivated information processing perspective. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts. 5: 81ââ¬â 89.
Reis, S. M. (1999). Women and creativity. In M. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity. 2: 699ââ¬â708. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior. 42: 75ââ¬â105.
Tegano, D. W., & Moran, J. D. (1989). Sex differences in the original thinking of preschool and elementary school children. Creativity Research Journal. 2:102ââ¬â110.
Kim, J., & Michael, W. B. (1995). The relationship of creativity mea- sures to school achievement and to preferred learning and thinking style in a sample of Korean high school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 55: 60ââ¬â74.
Onarheim, B. dan Friis-Olivarius, M. (2013) ââ¬ÅApplying the neuroscience of creativity to creativity training,ââ¬Â Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7(10): 1ââ¬â10.
Meyer, A. A. dan Lederman, N. G. (2013) ââ¬ÅInventing Creativity: An Exploration of the Pedagogy of Ingenuity in Science Classrooms,ââ¬Â School Science and Mathematics, 113(8): 400ââ¬â409.
Reisman, F. K. (2014) Creativity : Process , Product , Personality , Environment & Technology, Knowledge, Innovation and Enterprose Conference.
Martin, L. dan Wilson, N. (2017) ââ¬ÅDefining Creativity with Discovery,ââ¬Â Creativity Research Journal. Routledge, 29(4): 417ââ¬â425.
Scheffer, M., Baas, M. dan Bjordam, T. K. (2017) ââ¬ÅTeaching originality? Common habits behind creative production in science and arts,ââ¬Â 22(2):
Ferrándiz, C. et al. (2017) ââ¬ÅDivergent thinking and its dimensions: What we talk about and what we evaluate?,ââ¬Â Anales de Psicologia, 33(1): 40ââ¬â47.
Hu, W. dan Adey, P. (2002) ââ¬ÅA scientific creativity test for secondary school students,ââ¬Â International Journal of Science Education, 24(4): 389ââ¬â403.
Akkaà Ÿ, E. (2013) ââ¬ÅThe Effect of Orientation and Assistance Training in Science and Art Centers on Creativity in Gifted Ones,ââ¬Â Journal of Gifted Education Researches, 1(12): 108ââ¬â116.
Elsayed, A. M. (2015) ââ¬ÅEffectiveness of Using Elaboration Theory in Teaching Mathematics to Develop Academic Achievement and Critical Thinking For Primary Students in Oman,ââ¬Â International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2(3), hal. 851ââ¬â865.
Lemons, G. (2011) Diverse perspectives of creativity testing: Controversial issues when used for inclusion into gifted programs, Journal for the Education of the Gifted. doi: 10.1177/0162353211417221.
Prieto, M. D. et al. (2006) ââ¬ÅCreative abilities in early childhood,ââ¬Â Journal of Early Childhood Research, 4(3): 277ââ¬â290.
Runco, M. A. dan Acar, S. (2012) ââ¬ÅDivergent Thinking as an Indicator of Creative Potential,ââ¬Â Creativity Research Journal, 24(1): 66ââ¬â75.
Glassner, A. dan Schwarz, B. B. (2007) ââ¬ÅWhat stands and develops between creative and critical thinking?. Argumentation?,ââ¬Â Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2(1): 10ââ¬â18.
Alghafri, A. S. R. dan Ismail, H. N. Bin (2014) ââ¬ÅThe Effects of Integrating Creative and Critical Thinking on Schools Studentsââ¬â¢ Thinking,ââ¬Â International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 4(6): 518ââ¬â525.
Runco, M. R., Illies, J. J. dan Eisenman, R. (2005) ââ¬ÅCreativity, originality, and appropriateness: What do explicit instructions tell us about their relationships?,ââ¬Â Journal of Creative Behavior, 39(2): 137ââ¬â148.
Author Biographies
AA. Sukarso, University of Mataram
Ari Widodo, Indonesia University of Education
Diana Rochintaniawati, Indonesia University of Education
Widi Purwianingsih, Indonesia University of Education
License
The following terms apply to authors who publish in this journal:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal first publication rights, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY License) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and first publication in this journal.
2. Authors may enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
3. Before and during the submission process, authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as this can lead to productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
