Abstract

Mastering creative thinking skills (CTS) is crucial for enhancing students’ science conceptual understanding. However, conventional teaching prioritizes linear thinking over the three sub-CTS essential to science learning: associative, visual, and divergent thinking. Weaknesses in these three sub-CTS cause students to have misconceptions, difficulty in creating mental images, and an inability to generate ideas on abstract scientific concepts. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Digital Storytelling Science Creative (DSSC) module in enhancing these three sub-CTS, based on the topic of acids and bases. The ASSURE instructional design model guided the DSSC module design and development process. This quasi-experimental design study involved 63 eighth-grade students. Analysis of two-way MANCOVA using the data collected through the administered Creative Thinking Skills Test revealed that the DSSC module group performed significantly better than the control group in divergent thinking. However, the DSSC module did not significantly affect students’ associative and visual thinking or gender.

Keywords

References

• Acar, S., & Runco, M. A. (2014). Assessing associative distance among ideas elicited by tests of divergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.901095
• Akpan, B., & Kennedy, T. J. (2020). Science education in theory and practice an introductory guide to learning theory. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9
• Akpur, U. (2020). Critical, reflective, creative thinking, and their reflections on academic achievement. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100683
• Anderson, J., Chung, Y. C., & Macleroy, V. (2018). Creative and critical approaches to language learning and digital technology: Findings from a multilingual digital storytelling project. Language and Education, 32(3), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2018.1430151
• Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01289.x
• Bart, W. M., Hokanson, B., Sahin, I., & Abdelsamea, M. A. (2015). An investigation of the gender differences in creative thinking abilities among 8th and 11th grade students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17(November 2017), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.03.003
• Beaty, R. E., Zeitlen, D. C., Baker, B. S., & Kenett, Y. N. (2021). Forward flow and creative thought: Assessing associative cognition and its role in divergent thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100859
• Benedek, M., Könen, T., & Neubauer, A. C. (2012). Associative abilities underlying creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(3), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027059
• Boccia, M., Piccardi, L., Palermo, L., Nori, R., & Palmiero, M. (2015). Where do bright ideas occur in ourbrain? Meta-analytic evidence from neuroimaging studies of domain-specific creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(AUG), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01195
• Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Cheng, M. M., & Chuang, H. H. (2019). Learning processes for digital storytelling scientific imagination. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/100636
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
• Coppi, A. E. (2016). Fostering creativity through games and digital story telling. Proceedings - 2015 International Conference on Interactive Technologies and Games, ITAG 2015, 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/iTAG.2015.12
• Coventry, M. (2008). Engaging gender student application of theory through digital storytelling. Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 7(2), 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022208088649
• Crǎciun, D., Crǎciun, P., & Bunoiu, M. (2016). Digital storytelling as a creative teaching method in romanian science education. 9th International Physics Conference of the Balkan Physical Union (BPU-9), (1-4). Turkey: AIP Conference Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4944311
• 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
• Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
• de Cássia Nakano, T., da Silva Oliveira, K., & Zaia, P. (2021). Gender differences in creativity: A systematic literature review. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 37, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102.3772e372116
• Dikici, A., Özdemir, G., & Clark, D. B. (2020). The relationship between demographic variables and scientific creativity: Mediating and moderating roles of scientific process skills. Research in Science Education, 50(5), 2055–2079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9763-2
• Duveskog, M., Tedre, M., Sedano, C. I., & Sutinen, E. (2012). Life planning by digital storytelling in a primary school in rural Tanzania. Educational Technology and Society, 15(4), 225–237.
• Ercan, O. (2014). The effects of multimedia learning material on students’ academic achievement and attitudes towards science courses. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(5), 608–621. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/14.13.608
• Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq
• Feng, Q., Luo, H., Li, W., Chen, T., & Song, N. (2023). Effects of gender diversity on college students’ collaborative learning: From individual gender to gender pairing. Heliyon, 9(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16237
• Forthmann, B., Gerwig, A., Holling, H., Çelik, P., Storme, M., & Lubart, T. (2016). The be-creative effect in divergent thinking: The interplay of instruction and object frequency. Intelligence, 57, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.03.005
• Groshans, G., Mikhailova, E., Post, C., Schlautman, M., Carbajales-Dale, P., & Payne, K. (2019). Digital story map learning for STEM disciplines. Education Sciences, 9(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020075
• Guilford, J. P. (1956). The Structure of Intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 267–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040755
• He, K. (2017). A theory of creative thinking construction and verification of the dual circulation model. Springer Nature.
• Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., & Smaldino, S. E. (2002). Instructional media and technologies for learning (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
• Hetley, R., Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z. L. (2014). Generating a taxonomy of spatially cued attention for visual discrimination: effects of judgment precision and set size on attention. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 76(8), 2286–2304. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0705-4
• Hirnstein, M., Stuebs, J., Moè, A., & Hausmann, M. (2023). Sex/gender differences in verbal fluency and verbal-episodic memory: A meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221082116
• Hsu, Y., Peng, L.-P., Wang, J.-H., & Liang, C. (2014). Revising the imaginative capability and creative capability scales : Testing the relationship between imagination and creativity among agriculture students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 6(1), 57–70.
• Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912
• Hwang, W. Y., Shadiev, R., Hsu, J. L., Huang, Y. M., Hsu, G. L., & Lin, Y. C. (2014). Effects of storytelling to facilitate EFL speaking using web-based multimedia system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.927367
• Igbojinwaekwu, P. C. (2016). Comparative effects of guided and unguided multiple choice objective questions tests on students’ mathematics academic achievement according to gender. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 6(2), 193–204. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2016.v6n2p193
• Ivanoska, K., & Stojanovska, M. (2021). Addressing and eliminating the misconceptions about acid and bases concepts in primary school chemistry teaching. Macedonian Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, 40(2), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.20450/MJCCE.2021.2413
• Jankowska, D. M., & Karwowski, M. (2015). Measuring creative imagery abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1591. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01591
• Kim, J., & Michael, W. B. (1995). The relationship of creativity measures to school achievement and to preferred learning and thinking style in a sample of Korean high school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164495055001006
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
• Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2015). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
• Koopman, O. (2017). Investigating how science teachers in south africa engage with all three levels of representation in selected chemistry topics. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2016.1261546
• Kosslyn, S. M. (2005). Mental images and the brain. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290442000130
• Larraz-Rábanos, N. (2021). Development of creative thinking skills in the teaching-learning process. In U. Kapayinar (Ed.), Teacher education (pp. 1–22). IntechOpen.
• Lashari, T. A., Sajid, U., & Lashari, S. A. (2022). The effective use of digital storytelling and flipped classroom instructional approach to improve science subjects. International Journal of Instruction, 15(4), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15413a
• Liang, C., & Chang, C. C. (2014). Predicting scientific imagination from the joint influences of intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, agreeableness, and extraversion. Learning and Individual Differences, 31, 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.013
• Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850
• Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024
• Mohtar, L. E. (2019). Contribution model of creativity, attitude, self-efficacy and motivation to physics achievement of form fourth students. Doctoral thesis, National University of Malaysia.
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358
• Mubarak, S., & Yahdi. (2020). Identifying undergraduate students’ misconceptions in understanding acid base materials. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(2), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i2.23193
• Nunvarova, J., Poulova, P., Prazak, P., & Klimova, B. (2023). Effectiveness of digital storytelling in teaching economics. Education Sciences, 13(5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050504
• OECD. (2022). Thinking outside the box the PISA 2022 creative thinking assessment. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/471ae22e-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/471ae22e-en
• Palmiero, M., Di Giacomo, D., & Passafiume, D. (2012). Creativity and dementia: A review. Cognitive Processing, 13(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-012-0439-y
• Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. International Universities Press, Inc.
• Piaw, C. Y. (2014). Effects of gender and thinking style on student’s creative thinking ability. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 5135–5139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1087
• Ping, R., Parrill, F., Church, R. B., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2022). Teaching stereoisomers through gesture, action, and mental imagery. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 698–713. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00313E
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 488–495. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
• Ramalingam, D., Anderson, P., Duckworth, D., Scoular, C., & Heard, J. (2020). Creative thinking: Definition and structure. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://research.acer.edu.au/ar_misc/43
• Reche, I., & Perfectti, F. (2020). Promoting individual and collective creativity in science students. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 35(9), 745–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.06.002
• Ritter, S. M., Gu, X., Crijns, M., & Biekens, P. (2020). Fostering students’ creative thinking skills by means of a one-year creativity training program. PLoS ONE, 15(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229773
• Robertson, J. (2012). Making games in the classroom: Benefits and gender concerns. Computers and Education, 59(2), 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.020
• Robin, B. R. (2016). The power of digital storytelling to support teaching and learning. Digital Education Review, 30, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2016.30.17-29
• Rosly, N. S., Rahim, N. A., & Halim, H. A. (2016). Children’s speech interaction through digitization elements in storytelling. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 16(1), 89–108.
• Schmoelz, A. (2018). Enabling co-creativity through digital storytelling in education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, 1–13. https://doi.org/https://doi-org.eresourcesptsl.ukm.remotexs.co/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.002
• Sesen, B. A., & Tarhan, L. (2011). Active-learning versus teacher-centered instruction for learning acids and bases. Research in Science and Technological Education, 29(2), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2011.581630
• Sheafer, V. (2017). Using digital storytelling to teach psychology: A preliminary investigation. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 16(1), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725716685537
• Silseth, K. (2013). Surviving the impossible: Studying students’ constructions of digital stories on World War II. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(3), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.04.004
• Smeda, N., Dakich, E., & Sharda, N. (2014). The effectiveness of digital storytelling in the classrooms: A comprehensive study. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0006-3
• Smyrnaiou, Z., Georgakopoulou, E., & Sotiriou, S. (2020). Promoting a mixed-design model of scientific creativity through digital storytelling—the CCQ model for creativity. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00223-6
• Sun, M., Wang, M., Wegerif, R., & Peng, J. (2022). How do students generate ideas together in scientific creativity tasks through computer-based mind mapping?. Computers & Education, 176, 104359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104359
• Susanti, S., & Ramdani, Z. (2022). Are boys more verbally creative? gender-based difference in verbal creativity in adolescents. Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Conference of Psychology, Health, and Social Science (ICPHS 2021), 639, 7–10. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220203.002
• Suyundikova, M. K., Zhumataeva, E. O., Suyundikov, M. M., & Snopkova, E. I. (2021). Prerequisites defining the trajectory of creative thinking. The Education and Science Journal, 23(3), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-3-75-100
• Torrance, E. P. (1979). Torrance framework for creative thinking. Creative Education Foundation.
• Trevisan, R., Serrano, A., Wolff, J., & Ramos, A. (2019). Peeking into students’ mental imagery: The report aloud technique in science education research. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 25(3), 647–664. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320190030004
• Ulger, K., & Morsunbul, U. (2016). The differences in creative thinking: The comparison of male and female students. The Online Journal of Counseling and Education, 5(4), 1–12.
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
• Yang, J., & Zhao, X. (2021). The effect of creative thinking on academic performance: Mechanisms, heterogeneity, and implication. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40(2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100831
• Yilmaz, R. M., & Goktas, Y. (2017). Using augmented reality technology in storytelling activities: Examining elementary students’ narrative skill and creativity. Virtual Reality, 21(2), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-016-0300-1
• Zarifsanaiey, N., Mehrabi, Z., Kashefian-Naeeini, S., & Mustapha, R. (2022). The effects of digital storytelling with group discussion on social and emotional intelligence among female elementary school students. Cogent Psychology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2021.2004872
• Zhan, Z., Yao, X., & Li, T. (2023). Effects of association interventions on students’ creative thinking, aptitude, empathy, and design scheme in a STEAM course: Considering remote and close association. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(5), 1773–1795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09801-x

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.