The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science

This case study was conducted qualitatively to explore and understand the processthrough Science Creative Teaching Design (SCTD) implementation. Seven informantsincluding two Science teachers and five form two students from selected boardingschool were involved in this research. Data were collected...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Nadira Ismail
Format:	thesis
Language:	eng
Published:	2019
Subjects:	Q Science
Online Access:	https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6366
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:6366
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
collection	UPSI Digital Repository
language	eng
topic	Q Science
spellingShingle	Q Science Nadira Ismail The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
description	This case study was conducted qualitatively to explore and understand the processthrough Science Creative Teaching Design (SCTD) implementation. Seven informantsincluding two Science teachers and five form two students from selected boardingschool were involved in this research. Data were collected through in-depth semistructuredinterviews, observations, document analysis and field notes. The data werefurther analyzed through coding, categorizing and sub- themes to develop the mainthemes. This research found that, SCTD tool was feasible for Science teachers,improves both teachers and students emotions against stressful and less innovativeteaching and learning. Informants have practiced almost all suggested creativestrategies, hence, demonstrated creative teaching and learning and active teaching.Thinking culture was found amongst students and teachers as they attained creativethinking characteristics such as cognitive flexibility, originality thinking, fluencythinking, elaboration thinking, evaluating own works and making decision. Thestudents displayed higher order thinking skills such as analyzing, evaluating andcreating and found to develop skill sets such as communication skills, self-confidenceand team work skills. Thus, a novel framework of SCTD is successfully designed toenhance teaching and learning in Science. In conclusion, this research promotes a betterunderstanding and exploration on creative teaching and learning through a systematicguide on design thinking and creative skills. This implies that, Science teachers mayuse SCTD tool to produce a high impact and interesting teaching and learning for thestudents.
format	thesis
qualification_name
qualification_level	Master's degree
author	Nadira Ismail
author_facet	Nadira Ismail
author_sort	Nadira Ismail
title	The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
title_short	The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
title_full	The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
title_fullStr	The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
title_full_unstemmed	The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
title_sort	implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science
granting_institution	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
granting_department	Fakulti Sains dan Matematik
publishDate	2019
url	https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6366
_version_	1747833259999363072
spelling	oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:63662021-10-26 The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science 2019 Nadira Ismail Q Science This case study was conducted qualitatively to explore and understand the processthrough Science Creative Teaching Design (SCTD) implementation. Seven informantsincluding two Science teachers and five form two students from selected boardingschool were involved in this research. Data were collected through in-depth semistructuredinterviews, observations, document analysis and field notes. The data werefurther analyzed through coding, categorizing and sub- themes to develop the mainthemes. This research found that, SCTD tool was feasible for Science teachers,improves both teachers and students emotions against stressful and less innovativeteaching and learning. Informants have practiced almost all suggested creativestrategies, hence, demonstrated creative teaching and learning and active teaching.Thinking culture was found amongst students and teachers as they attained creativethinking characteristics such as cognitive flexibility, originality thinking, fluencythinking, elaboration thinking, evaluating own works and making decision. Thestudents displayed higher order thinking skills such as analyzing, evaluating andcreating and found to develop skill sets such as communication skills, self-confidenceand team work skills. Thus, a novel framework of SCTD is successfully designed toenhance teaching and learning in Science. In conclusion, this research promotes a betterunderstanding and exploration on creative teaching and learning through a systematicguide on design thinking and creative skills. This implies that, Science teachers mayuse SCTD tool to produce a high impact and interesting teaching and learning for thestudents. 2019 thesis https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6366 https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=6366 text eng closedAccess Masters Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris Fakulti Sains dan Matematik Abdulla, A. M., & Cramond, B. (2017). After six decades of systematic study ofcreativity: what do teachers need to know about what it is and how it is measured?.Roeper Review, 39(1), 9-23.Ahmad, S., Ch, A. H., Batool, A., Sittar, K., & Malik, M. (2016). Play and Cognitive Development:Formal Operational Perspective of Piaget's Theory. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(28),72-79.Akinoglu, O. (2008). Assessment of the Inquiry-Based Project Application in Science Education upon Turkish Science teachers Perspectives. Education, 129.2 (Winter 2008), 202215.Alt, D. (2018). Science teachers' conceptions of teaching and learning, ICT efficacy, ICTprofessional development and ICT practices enacted in their classrooms. Teaching andTeacher Education, 73, 141-150.Aliakbari, F., Parvin, N., Heidari, M., & Haghani, F. (2015). Learning theoriesapplication in nursing education. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 4.Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componentialconceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357.Amir, N. (2017). Developing a measurement tool of the effectiveness of the physical educationteachers' teaching and learning process. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 17, 127.Anderman, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Gray, D. L. (2012). The challenges of teaching and learningabout science in the twenty-first century: Exploring the abilities and constraints ofadolescent learners. Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 89-117.Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P.R., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision ofBlooms taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition. White Plains, NY: Longman.Angrosino, M. V., & Mays de Prez, K. A. (2000). Rethinking observation: From method tocontext. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2, 673-702.Anwar, M. N., Aness, M., Khizar, A., Naseer, M., & Muhammad, G. (2012). Relationship ofcreative thinking with the academic achievements of secondary school students. InternationalInterdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1(3), 44- 47.Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity: The magic synthesis.Ball, A. L., & Garton, B. L. (2005). Modeling higher order thinking: The alignmentbetween objectives, classroom discourse, and assessments. Journal ofAgricultural Education, 46(2), 58-69.Bakhtin, M. M. (2010). Speech genres and other late essays. University of Texas Press.Barnes, C. W. (1961). A definition of science education: Curriculum research. Science Education,45(5), 394-396.Becker-Weidman, E. G., Jacobs, R. H., Reinecke, M. A., Silva, S. G., & March, J. S. (2010). Social problem-solving among adolescents treated for depression. Behaviour Research andTherapy, 48(1), 1118.Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High AbilityStudies, 25(1), 53-69.Berland, E. (2013). Barriers to Creativity in Education: educators and parents grade the system(Adobe Systems, Inc).Boden, M. (2001). Creativity and knowledge. Creativity in Education, 95-102.Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Foundations of qualitative research in education.Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods, 1-48.Books, B., & Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic.Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research inPsychology, 3 (2). pp. 77-101. ISSN 1478-0887.Brinkman, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative researchinterviewing. Aalborg, 24, 2017.Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding. The case forconstructivist classrooms, 101-118.Broussard, K., Murphy, L., & Fu, K. K. S. (2017). A descriptive study of the effect of K-12 designeducation on changes in self-esteem. In DS 87-9 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference onEngineering Design (ICED 17) Vol 9: Design Education, Vancouver, Canada, 21-25.08. 2017 (pp.069-078).Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for thought: A science of learning in the classroom. MIT press.Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning (Vol. 3). Harvard University Press.Buchanan, B. G. (2001). Creativity at the metalevel: AAAI-2000 presidential address.AI magazine, 22(3), 13.Bullough Jr, R. V. (2012). Against best practice: Uncertainty, outliers and local studiesin educational research. Journal of Education for Teaching, 38(3), 343-357.Burdick, A., & Willis, H. (2011). Digital learning, digital scholarship and designthinking. Design Studies, 32(6), 546-556.Bunyamin, M. A. H., & Finley, F. (2016, January). STEM education in Malaysia: reviewingthe current physics curriculum. In International Conference of Association forScience Teacher Education.Canas, J. J., Fajardo, I., & Salmeron, L. (2006). Cognitive flexibility. InternationalEncyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors, 1, 297-301.Canas, J., Quesada, J., Antol, A., & Fajardo, I. (2003). Cognitive flexibility andadaptability to environmental changes in dynamic complex problem-solving tasks. Ergonomics,46(5), 482-501.Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in informationvisualization: Using vision to think. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010).Destination, imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom.International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37-53.Chalmers, A. F. (2013). What is this thing called science?. Hackett Publishing.Chang, S.-N., Yeung, Y.-Y. & Hung Cheng, M. (2009). Ninth graders learning interests,life experiences and attitude towards science & technology. Journal of Science Education andTechnology, 18(5), 447457.Chiam, C. L., Hong, H., Ning, F., & Tay, W. Y. (2014). Creative and critical thinking in Singaporeschools.Chua, Y. P. (2012). Mastering research methods. Mcgraw-Hill Education.Coe, R., Aloisi, C., Higgins, S., & Major, L. E. (2014). What makes great teaching?Review of the underpinning research.Corebima, A. D., Susilo, H., & Zubaidah, S. (2017). Creative Thinking of Low Academic Student Undergoing Search Solve Create and Share Learning Integrated with Metacognitive Strategy. International Journal of Instruction, 10(2).Co?kun, E., & Alkan, M. (2017). Evaluation of learning and teaching process in Turkish courses.International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(3), 387- 407.Creswell, J. W. (2007). Five qualitative approaches to inquiry. Qualitative inquiry andresearch design: Choosing among five approaches, 2, 53-80.Creswell, J. W. (2012). Collecting qualitative data. Educational Research: Planning,Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Fourth ed. Boston: Pearson,204-35.Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rded). Thousand.Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixedmethods approaches. Sage publications.Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Berg.Croxford, L. (2002). Participation in science, engineering and technology at school and in highereducation. Edinburgh: Centre for Educational Sociology, University of Edinburgh.Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity.In The Systems Model of Creativity (pp. 47-61). Springer Netherlands.Das, A. K., Nguyen, Q. T., Nguyen, A., & Thomas, S. (2018). Flipping BusinessComputing Class: An Integration of Design Thinking and BlendedImplementation in the Vietnamese Educational Culture. In InSITE 2018: Our Next Leap Forward(pp. 1-11). Informing Science Institute.Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). The challenge of staffing our schools. Educational Leadership,58(8), 12-17.Davies, M. B., & Hughes, N. (2014). Doing a successful research project: Usingqualitative or quantitative methods. Palgrave Macmillan.Day, M. C. (1981). Thinking at Piaget's stage of formal operations. EducationalLeadership, 39(1), 44-45.Danielson, C., & McNeal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professionalpractice.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.DeMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience.Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences, 1(1),51-68.Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guide. Berkshire. England: McGraw-Hill Education.Donnelly, J. F. (2004). Humanizing science education. Science Education, 88(5), 762 784.Drner, D. (1999). Approaching design thinking research. Design Studies, 20(5), 407-415.Dorst, K. (2011). The core of design thinkingand its application. Design studies,32(6), 521-532.Dweck, C., & Molden, D. C. (2000). Self theories. Handbook of competence andmotivation, 122-140.Fabil, N. & Ismail, Z. (2005) Visualisasi maklumat dalam pendidikan masa kini.Masalah Pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur : Universiti of Malaya.Feynman, R. P. (1969). What Is Science. The Physics Teacher, 7(6), 313 320.doi:10.1119/1.2351388Fisher, R. (2004). What is creativity. Unlocking creativity: Teaching across thecurriculum, 6-20.Fisher, R. (2006). Expanding minds: Developing creative thinking in young learners.CATS: The IATEFL Young Learners SIG Journal, 5-9.Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory oflearning. Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, 2, 8-33.Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). The nature of qualitative research. How to design andevaluate research in education, seventh edition. Boston: McGraw- Hill, 420.Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, andmathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415.Gaya, H. J., & Smith, E. E. (2016). Developing a qualitative single case study in the strategicmanagement realm: An appropriate research design. International Journal of BusinessManagement & Economic Research, 7(2), 529-538.Georgiev, G. V. (2012). Design Thinking: An Overview ( Design Thinking).Special issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, 20(1), 70- 77.Ghani, M. Z., Yaacob, N. R. N., Ahmad, A. C., Aman, R. C., and Isa, Z. M. (2010). Perbezaanpersonaliti kestabilan emosi dalam kalangan pelajar Pintar Cerdas Akademik (PCA)berdasarkan jantina dan jenis sekolah (Differences in the emotional stability amongacademically talented students base on gender and different type of schools). Asia PacificJournal of Educators and Education.25, 153167.Ghani, M.A F., Siraj, S., Mohd, N., and Elham, F. (2011). School effectiveness and improvementpractices in excellent schools in Malaysia and Brunei. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences.15, 17051712.Ghofur, A. (2017). Creative Teaching. Okara: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 6(2).Glaze, A. L. (2018). Teaching and Learning Science in the 21st Century: Challenging CriticalAssumptions in Post-Secondary Science. Education Sciences, 8(1), 12.Glense, G., & Peshkin, A. (1991). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction.White Plains, New York. Longman.Gonzlez, M. ., Gonzlez, M. ., Martn, M. E., Llamas, C., Martnez, ., Vegas, J.,... & Hernndez, C. (2017). Teaching and learning physics with smartphones. In Blended Learning:Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 866- 885). IGI Global.Goodson, I. F., & Sikes, P. J. (2001). Life history research in educational settings: Learningfrom lives. Open University Press.Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: A comparative study.Griffiths, S. (2008). The experience of creative activity as a treatment medium. Journal of MentalHealth, 17(1), 49-63.Hadi, A. Z. S. A., Ramlee, M. R., & Amin, N. M. (2018). Enhancing Teaching and LearningMethodology with Computing Visualization in Studies of Qiraat (Malaysia).Haenen, J. (2001). Outlining the teachinglearning process: Piotr Gal'perin'scontribution. Learning and Instruction, 11(2), 157-170.Halverson, R., Kelley, C., & Kimball, S. (2004). How principals make sense of complex artifacts toshape local instructional practice. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration,policy, and reform: Research and measurement (pp. 153 188).Greenwich, CT: George F. Johnson.Hannafin, M.J. and Peck, K.L. (1988) The design development and evaluation ofinstructional software. Macmillan. Publishing Company, New York.Haq, R., Shamim-ur-Rasool, S., & Anwar, M. N. (2012). A comparison of creative thinking abilities of high and low achievers secondary school students.International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1(1), 23-28.Haring-Smith, T. (2006). Creativity research review: Some lessons for highereducation. Peer Review, 8(2), 23.Harpaz, Y. Teaching and learning: Analysis of the relationships.Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2009). CK design theory: An advanced formulation.Research in Engineering Design, 19(4), 181.Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: A creativeapproach to educational problems of practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 140-153.Hidayat, T., Susilaningsih, E., & dan Cepi, K. (2018). The Effectiveness of Enrichment TestInstruments Design to Measure Students Creative Thinking Skills and Problem-Solving.Thinking Skills and Creativity.Ho, M. K., MacGlashan, J., Littman, M. L., & Cushman, F. (2017). Social is special: A normativeframework for teaching with and learning from evaluative feedback. Cognition, 167, 91-106.Hoadley, C., & Cox, C. (2009). What is design knowledge and how do we teach it. Educatinglearning technology designers: Guiding and inspiring creators of innovative educationaltools, 19-35.Hooda, m., & devi, r. (2017). Relationship of creative thinking abilities with family environment and intelligence among senior secondary school students. Internationaleducation and research journal, 3(7).Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or method? A critical review ofqualitative case study reports. International journal of Qualitative Studies on Health andWell-being, 9(1), 23606.Ilias, K. (2012). Kesejahteraan Sekolah dan Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar Sekolah BerasramaPenuh (SBP) dan Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM) di Malaysia. Ijazah Doktor Falsafah, UniversitiPendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjung Malim.Isman, A., aglar, M., Dabaj, F., & Erszl, H. (2005). A New Model for the World of InstructionalDesign: A New Model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 4(3), 33-39.Jacobs, C. L., Martin, S. N., & Otieno, T. C. (2008). A science lesson plan analysis instrumentfor formative and summative program evaluation of a teacher education program. ScienceEducation, 92(6), 1096-1126.Jenkins, E. W. (2006). The student voice and school science education. Studies inScience Education, 42(1), 4988.Jenkins, E., & Nelson, N. W. (2005). Important but not for me: Students attitudestowards secondary school science in England. Research in Science & TechnologicalEducation, 23 (1), 4157.Jidesj, A., & Danielsson, . (2016). Student experience and interest in science:Connections and relations with further education. Nordic Studies in ScienceEducation, 12(1), 36-55.Johansson?Skldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & etinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: past, present andpossible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121- 146.Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75-83.Johari Surif, Nor Hasniza Ibrahim & Yusof Arshad. (2007). Visualisasi Dalam PendidikanSains : Ke Arah Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Yang Berkesan. Jurnal Pendidikan. 2, 26-40. UniversitiTeknologi Malaysia. Skudai : Malaysia.John, E. B., & Meera, K. P. (2014). Effect of cooperative learning strategy on thecreative thinking skills of secondary school students of Kozhikode District. IOSR Journal ofHumanities and Social Science, 19(11), 70-74.Jung, E., Song, G., & Le, M. (2017, January). Role of Form-making Exercises in Design EducationFor Creative Thinking. Hice (Hawaii International Conference On Education).Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2010). The teacher as designer: Pedagogy in the new media age.E-learning and Digital Media, 7(3), 200-222.Kelley, D., & Kelley, T. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within usall. Crown Pub.Kember, D. (2001). Beliefs about knowledge and the process of teaching and learning as a factor in adjusting to study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2),205-221.Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth: Teacherknowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4),127-140.Khalidah, K. A., Rohani, S., and Mashitah, S. (2014). Ethical Values and Commitment TowardsAchieving Excellence : A Study on Public Boarding School Students In Malaysia. Pertanika J. Soc.Sci. & Hum. 22(S), 3350.Kirschner, P. A. (2015). Do we need teachers as designers of technology enhancedlearning? Instructional Science, 43(2), 309-322.Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? Thedevelopment of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational ComputingResearch, 32(2), 131-152.Kostaris, C., Sergis, S., Sampson, D. G., Giannakos, M. ., & Pelliccione, L. (2017). Investigatingthe potential of the flipped classroom model in K-12 ICT teaching and learning: An action researchstudy. Journal of Educational Technology &Society, 20(1), 261.Krajcik, J., & Delen, I. (2017). How to support learners in developing usable and lastingknowledge of STEM. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science andTechnology, 5(1), 21-28.Krulik, S., Rudnick, J. A., & Milou, E. (2003). Teaching mathematics in middle school: A practicalguide. Allyn and Bacon.Kyle, D. (1980). Curriculum decisions: Who decides what?. Elementary School Journal,81(2), 77 85.Laporan TIMSS 2015- Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study ISBN 978-983-3444-96-0.Laporan TIMSS 2015- Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study Laman sesawang :www.moe.gov.myLave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.Cambridge university press.Leverenz, C. S. (2014). Design thinking and the wicked problem of teaching writing.Computers and Composition, 33, 1-12.Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry, 75. Sage.Lindahl, B. (2003). Lust attlranaturvetenskapochteknik? Enlongitudinellstudieomvgen till gymnasiet. Dissertation (Gteborg studies in educationalsciences 196), Gteborg, Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Lubart, T. I. (2001). Models of the creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity ResearchJournal, 13(3-4), 295-308.Lugmayr, A. (2011, September). Applying design thinking as a method for teaching in mediaeducation. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: EnvisioningFuture Media Environments (pp. 332-334). ACM.Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: Students experiences of schoolscience in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (6), 591613.Mali, A., & Kumar, P. (2017). Creative Thinking of Secondary School Students in Relationto their School Type and Residential Background. Educational Quest, 8, 435.Mali, A., & Kumar, P. (2017a). Creative thinking and socio-Demographic variables of secondaryschool students. IJAR, 3(4), 824-828.Mantzicopoulos, P., Samarapungavan, A. & Patrick, H. (2009). We learn how to predictand be a scientist: Early science experiences and kindergarten childrenssocial meanings about science. Cognition and Instruction, 27(4), 312369.Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest inscience. International Journal of Science Education, 32(5), 669685.Mardiana, H., Dharma, U. B., & No, J. I. B. (2017). Forecasting Social Media AsPotential Tool For Teaching And Learning Process In The Classroom. Jurnal Sains Terapan DanTeknologi, 2(2).Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Data collection methods. Designing qualitative research,97-150.McCutcheon, G. (1980). How do elementary school teachers plan? The nature of planningand influences on it. The elementary school journal, 81(1), 4-23.Melles, G., Anderson, N., Barrett, T., & Thompson-Whiteside, S. (2015). Problem Findingthrough Design Thinking in Education. In Inquiry-Based Learning for Multidisciplinary Programs: AConceptual and Practical Resource for Educators (pp. 191-209). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Merriam, S. B. (1998). Case study research and case study applications in education.Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative case study research. Qualitative research: A guide to design andimplementation, 39-54.Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation(3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Designing your study and selecting a sample.Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation, 73-104.Meyer, C.B. (2001). A case in case study methodology. Field Methods, 13(4): 329 352.Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., Huberman, M. A., & Huberman, M. (1994).Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.Millar, R. (2006). Twenty first century science: Insights from the design andimplementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal ofScience Education, 28 (13), 14991521.Milne, I. (2010). A sense of wonder, arising from aesthetic experiences, should be the startingpoint for inquiry in primary science. Science Education International, 21(2), 102115.OECD/PISA (2006). PISA 2006 technical report. Publication 02/02/2009. OECD 2009. Oppenheim, A. N. (2000). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitudemeasurement. London: Continuum.Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: Aframework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017.Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Henriksen, D. (2011). The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind:Extending the TPACK framework towards 21st century learning. Educational Technology, 22-28.Mishra, P., & Mehta, R. (2017). What we educators get wrong about 21st-Centurylearning: Results of a survey. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(1), 6-19.Muhriz, T. Abidin, Abdullah, A., and Jan, W. S. W. (2011). Pilihan, persaingan dan peranan sektorswasta dalam sistem sekolah Malaysia.Nachiappan, S., Osman, Z., Hassan, N. M., Jamil, N., Hussein, H., Othman, M., & Suffian, S.(2018). An Analysis of the Criteria and Effectiveness of Using Teaching Aids in PreschoolScience and Technology Components in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research inProgressive Education and Development, 7(1), 6382.Najihah Mustaffa, Zaleha Ismail, Zaidatun Tasir & Mohd Nihra Haruzuan Mohamad Said (2017).Integrating Algebraic Thinking in Problem-Based Learning Among Secondary School Students. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Doctor of Philosophy.Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. HarvardUniversity Press.Norton, P., & Hathaway, D. (2015). In search of a teacher education curriculum:appropriating a design lens to solve problems of practice. EducationalTechnology, 3-14.Nurjaman, A., & Sari, I. P. (2017). The Effect Of Problem Posing Approach TowardsStudentsmathematical Disposition, Critical & Creative Thinking Ability Based On School Level.Infinity Journal, 6(1), 69-76.Nwachukwu, T. A., & Iordaah, T. A. (2016). Effect Of Training On Junior And Senior Secondary SchoolStudentscreative Thinking Performance. Sustainable Human Development Review, 1(4).Oaks, Ca: Sage.OECD. (2013). Pisa 2012 Assessment And Analytical Framework-Mathematics, Reading, Science,Problem Solving and Financial Literacy. Oecd.Owen, C. (2007). Design thinking: Notes on its nature and use. Design ResearchQuarterly, 2(1), 16-27.Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. SAGEPublications, inc.Payne, D., & Zimmerman, T. (2010). The Inclusion of Environmental Education inScience teacher Education. The Inclusion of Environmental Education in Science Teacher Education,8194.Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker.Cambridge University Press.Pendleton-Jullian, A. M., & Brown, J. S. (2015). Design unbound: Evolving design literacypathways of efficacy. CreateSpace (distributor).Peng, C. F., & Nadaraja, S. (2016). Pelaksanaan Kemahiran Berfikir Kreatif Dan Kritis DalamPengajaran Dan Pembelajaran Komsas Di Sekolah Menengah. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu,4(2), 10-24.Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. New York, NY: Basic Books.Pinnegar, S., & Daynes, J. G. (2007). Locating narrative inquiry historically. Handbook ofnarrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology, 3-34.PISA 2015- Programme For International Student Assessment ISBN 978-983-3444-97-7 PISA 2015- Programme For International Student Assessment. Laman sesawang :www.moe.gov.my/v/bppdpPlattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2012). Design thinking research. SpringerPreja, C. A., Grosu, E. F., & Grosu, V. T. (2017). The Development Of CreativeThinking In Children In Secondary Schools. Gymnasium, 15(1).Pugh, K. J. & Girod, M. (2007). Science, art, and Experience: Constructing science pedagogy fromDeweys aesthetics. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1), 927.Pukdeewut, S., Chantarasombat, C., & Satapornwong, P. (2013). Creative Thinking DevelopmentProgram for Learning Activity Management of Secondary School Teachers. International EducationStudies, 6(12), 82.Rahman, S., Surat, S., & Azmi, N. H. (2017). Creativity and Teaching Strategies in Institution ofHigher Learning. Advanced Science Letters, 23(2), 865-868.Razali, F. B., Talib, O. B., & Othman, A. B. (2017). Aplikasi Kemahiran Proses Sains DalamPembelajaran Berasaskan Masalah Untuk Mata Pelajaran Biologi. JuKu: Jurnal Kurikulum & PengajaranAsia Pasifik, 4(3), 38-46.Razik, T. (1966). Recent findings and developments in creativity studies. Theory into Practice,5(4), 160-165.Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important?.Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348.Reilly, E. M. (2018). Performance in Math and Science by English LanguageLearners. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1-5.Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305-310.Rizk, N. M. H., Attia, K. A. M., & Al-Jundi, A. A. H. (2017). The Impact ofMetacognition Strategies in Teaching Mathematics among Innovative ThinkingStudents in Primary School, Rafha, KSA. International Journal of EnglishLinguistics, 7(3), 103.Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. John Wiley & Sons.Robson, C. (2002). Real world research. 2nd. Edition. Blackwell Publishing. Malden.Root-Bernstein, R., & Root-Bernstein, M. (2017). People, passions, problems: The roleof creative exemplars in teaching for creativity. In Creative contradictions ineducation (pp. 143-164). Springer, Cham.Rotherham, A. J., & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st century. Educational leadership,67(1), 16-21.Sakes, M., Cabe Trundle, K., Bell, R. L. & OConnell, A. A. (2011). The influence ofearly science experience in kindergarten on childrens immediate and laterscience achievement: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 217235.Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Wallas four-stage model of the creative process: More thanmeets the eye?. Creativity Research Journal, 27(4), 342-352.Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals cognition: A dynamicinteractional view. Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educationalconsiderations, 111-138.Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional modeland its constructivist framework. Educational technology, 35(5), 31-38.Seale, C. (2002). Quality issues in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social Work, 1(1),97-110.Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers ineducation and the social sciences. Teachers college press.Sequeira, A. H. (2012). Introduction to concepts of teaching and learning.Shute, V. J., & Torres, R. (2012). Where streams converge: Using evidence-centereddesign to assess Quest to Learn. Technology-based assessments for 21st centuryskills: Theoretical and practical implications from modern research, 91124.Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. SAGEPublications Limited.Soper, J. C., Walstad, W. B., Abrams, L. M., Pedulla, J. J., Madaus, G. F., & Vanfossen,P. J. (2003). Views from the Classroom : Teachers . Theory & Research in SocialEducation, 28(3), 391410.Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. Guilford Press.Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Wisdom and its relations to intelligence and creativity. Wisdom:Its nature, origins, and development, 142-159.Taber, K. S., & Akpan, B. (Eds.). (2016). Science Education: An International CourseCompanion. Springer.Tan, L. S., Lee, S. S., Ponnusamy, L. D., Koh, E. R., & Tan, K. C. K. (2016). FosteringCreativity in the Classroom for High Ability Students: Context DoesMatter. Education Sciences, 6(4), 36.Teh, N. C., Isa, N. H., & Omar, A. (2018). Promoting Higher Order Thinking Skills inLiterature Class via Critical Thinking Module (CTM). ASIAN TEFL, 1(1).Thomas, G. (2011). A typology for the case study in social science following a reviewof definition, discourse, and structure. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(6): 511521Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. The nature ofcreativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives, 43.Trkmen, H., & Sertkahya, M. (2015). Creative Thinking Skills Analyzes OfVocational High School Students. Journal Of Educational & InstructionalStudies In The World, 5(1).Vani, K. S. (2016). A Study of Creative Thinking of Secondary School Teachers inWest Godawari District. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 2(8).Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychologicalprocesses. Harvard university press.Watson, A. D. (2015). Design thinking for life. Art Education, 68(3), 12-18.Wellington, J. (2001). What is science education for? Canadian Journal of Science,Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(1), 2338.Weisman, D. L. (2012). An essay on the art and science of teaching. The AmericanEconomist, 57(1), 111-125.Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.). (1986). Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskianperspectives. CUP Archive.Wilson, S. M., & Peterson, P. L. (2006). Theories of Learning and Teaching: What DoThey Mean for Educators? Working Paper. National Education AssociationResearch Department.Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. Sage.Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.Zhang, X., Wang, H., & Guo, D. (2018). Embodied Cognition From the Perspective ofVygotskys Socio-cultural Theory. Philosophy, 8(8), 362-367.Zhou, J. (1998). Feedback valence, feedback style, task autonomy, and achievementorientation: Interactive effects on creative performance. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 83(2), 261.Ziman, J. (2002). Real science: What it is and what it means. Cambridge UniversityPress.Zulkpli, Z., Mohamed, M., & Abdullah, A. H. (2017). Assessing MathematicsTeachers Knowledge in Teaching Thinking Skills. Sains Humanika, 9(1-4).

The implementation of science creative teaching design tool in teaching and learning science

Similar Items