Unlocking students’ creative potential in designing technological-enriched design solutions

References

• Acar, S., Runco, M. A., & Park, H. (2020). What should people be told when they take a divergent thinking test? A meta-analytic review of explicit instructions for divergent thinking. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Afzal, A., & Hussain, N. (2020). Impact of community service learning on the social skills of students. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 7(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.22555/joeed.v7i1.2988
   Google Scholar
• Aguilera, D., & Ortiz-Revilla, J. (2021). STEM vs. STEAM education and student creativity: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 11(7), 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (2012). Componential theory of creativity. Harvard Business School.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaty, R. E., Johnson, D. R., Zeitlen, D. C., & Forthmann, B. (2022). Semantic distance and the alternate uses task: Recommendations for reliable automated assessment of originality. Creativity Research Journal, 34(3), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2025720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning teaching and assessing to course objectives. Proceedings of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: New Trends and Innovations, 2, 13–17.
   Google Scholar
• Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1996). Implementing service learning in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780257
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, L., Zhang, X., Lin, J., Dong, Y., Zhang, J., & Tong, Z. (2022). Social-emotional classroom climate and academic achievement for Chinese elementary students: The roles of convergent and divergent thinking. School Psychology International, 44(3), 301–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343221128825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chermahini, S. A., Hickendorff, M., & Hommel, B. (2012). Development and validity of a Dutch version of the remote associates task: An item-response theory approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7(3), 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chittleborough, G. D., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Why models are advantageous to learning science. Educación Química, 20(1), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(18)30003-X
   Google Scholar
• Chiu, T. K., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
   Google Scholar
• Cui, Z., Ng, O., & Jong, M. S. Y. (2023). Integration of computational thinking with mathematical problem-based learning: Insights on affordances for learning. Educational Technology & Society, 26(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202304_26(2).0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Crippen, K. J., Ellis, S., Dunckel, B. A., Hendy, A. J., & MacFadden, B. J. (2016). Seeking shared practice: A juxtaposition of the attributes and activities of organized fossil groups with those of professional paleontology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(5), 731–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9627-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. HarperCollins Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1111294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumas, D., Organisciak, P., & Doherty, M. (2021). Measuring divergent thinking originality with human raters and text-mining models: A psychometric comparison of methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(4), 645–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• English, L. D. (2019). Learning while designing in a fourth-grade integrated STEM problem. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(5), 1011–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9482-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster, N., & Schleicher, A. (2022). Assessing creative skills. Creative Education, 13(01), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2022.131001
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. K. (2004). Models and modelling: Routes to more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-3186-4
   Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1967). Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1967.tb00002.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1968). Intelligence has three facets. Science (New York, N.Y.), 160(3828), 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.160.3828.615
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1971). Some misconceptions regarding measurement of creative talents. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 5(2), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1971.tb00877.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasso Plattner Institute of Design (2010). An introduction to design thinking process guide. https://web.stanford.edu/$/sim$mshanks/MichaelShanks/files/509554.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61(1), 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herro, D., Quigley, C., & Cian, H. (2019). The challenges of STEAM instruction: Lessons from the field. Action in Teacher Education, 41(2), 172–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2018.1551159
   Google Scholar
• Hervani, A., & Helms, M. M. (2004). Increasing creativity in economics: The service learning project. Journal of Education for Business, 79(5), 267–274. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.79.5.267-274
   Google Scholar
• Huang, B., Jong, M. S. Y., King, R. B., Chai, C. S., & Jiang, M. Y. C. (2022). Promoting secondary students’ twenty-first century skills and STEM career interests through a crossover program of STEM and community service education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.903252
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson, A. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 840–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.875117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kampylis, P., & Berki, E. (2014). Nurturing creative thinking. UNESCO International Bureau of Education (IBE-UNESCO) in Collaboration with the International Academy of Education (IAE). https://www.iaoed.org/downloads/edu-practices_25_eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kuo, H. C., Tseng, Y. C., & Yang, Y. T. C. (2019). Promoting college student’s learning motivation and creativity through a STEM interdisciplinary PBL human-computer interaction system design and development course. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazonder, A. W., Willemsen, R. H., de Vink, I. C., Roseboom-Folmer, J., Arends, O., Jongen, A. P., van Keulen, Y. Q., Oudenhoven, L. J. G., & Kroesbergen, E. H. (2022). Development and validation of RATje: A remote associates test for Dutch children. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44, 101042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, L., Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., & Shen, S. (2020). From knowledge and skills to digital works: An application of design thinking in the information technology course. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36, 100646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100646
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maiorca, C., Roberts, T., Jackson, C., Bush, S., Delaney, A., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., & Soledad, S. Y. (2021). Informal learning environments and impact on interest in STEM careers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10038-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mednick, S. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss, P. A. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: Implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 229–258. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430620032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nazzal, L. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2020). The relationship of the quality of creative problem solving stages to overall creativity in engineering students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100734
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuutila, K., Tapola, A., Tuominen, H., Kupiainen, S., Pásztor, A., & Niemivirta, M. (2020). Reciprocal predictions between interest, self-efficacy, and performance during a task. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00036
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2019). PISA 2021 creative thinking framework (third draft). https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2022). Thinking outside the box: The PISA 2022 creative thinking assessment. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/innovation/creative-thinking/rg
   Google Scholar
• Peppler, K. A., Sedas, R. M., & Thompson, N. (2023). Paper circuits vs. breadboards: Materializing learners’ powerful ideas around circuitry and layout design. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(4), 469–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10029-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahimi, S., & Shute, V. J. (2021). First inspire, then instruct to improve students’ creativity. Computers & Education, 174, 104312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiter-Palmon, R., Forthmann, B., & Barbot, B. (2019). Scoring divergent thinking tests: A review and systematic framework. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(2), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynders, G., Lantz, J., Ruder, S. M., Stanford, C. L., & Cole, R. S. (2020). Rubrics to assess critical thinking and information processing in undergraduate STEM courses. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00208-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, T., Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Cavalcanti, M., Schroeder, D. C., Delaney, A., Putnam, L., & Cremeans, C. (2018). Students’ perceptions of STEM learning after participating in a summer informal learning experience. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0133-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, M. J. (2020). The application of digital fabrication technologies to the art and design curriculum in a teacher preparation program: A case study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(4), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09524-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soomro, S. A., Casakin, H., Nanjappan, V., & Georgiev, G. V. (2023). Makerspaces fostering creativity: A systematic literature review. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(4), 530–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10041-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830308595
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The Nature of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun, M., Wang, M., & Wegerif, R. (2020). Effects of divergent thinking training on students’ scientific creativity: The impact of individual creative potential and domain knowledge. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.10068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tijsma, G., Hilverda, F., Scheffelaar, A., Alders, S., Schoonmade, L., Blignaut, N., & Zweekhorst, M. (2020). Becoming productive 21st century citizens: A systematic review uncovering design principles for integrating community service learning into higher education courses. Educational Research, 62(4), 390–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2020.1836987
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, E. P. (1953). Methods of conducting critiques of group problem-solving performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 37(5), 394–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ünlü, K. Z., & Dökme, I. (2020). Multivariate assessment of middle school students’ interest in STEM career: A profile from Turkey. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 1217–1231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9729-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J. (1997). Conceptual structures and processes in creative thought. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 1–27) American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Weng, X., Chiu, T. K., & Tsang, C. C. (2022). Promoting student creativity and entrepreneurship through real-world problem-based maker education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45, 101046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101046
   Google Scholar
• Wigert, B. G., Murugavel, V. R., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2022). The utility of divergent and convergent thinking in the problem construction processes during creative problem-solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiong, Z., Liu, Q., & Huang, X. (2022). The influence of digital educational games on preschool children’s creative thinking. Computers & Education, 189, 104578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yi, X., Plucker, J. A., & Guo, J. (2015). Modeling influences on divergent thinking and artistic creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng, L., Liu, R., & Zhang, X. (2021). Effects of an interest-driven creation approach on students’ mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science in a science museum. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(2), 159–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00175-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, N., Pereira, N. L., George, T. T., Alperovich, J., Booth, J., Chandrasegaran, S., Tew, J. D., Kulkarni, D. M., & Ramani, K. (2017). The influence of toy design activities on middle school students’ understanding of the engineering design processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(5), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9693-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar