Sociology Study, May 2019, Vol. 9, No. 5, 189-196 doi: 10.17265/2159-5526/2019.05.001

 

Creativity Assessment From Integration Between Chemistry and

Physics Disciplines Using a Project

Pisitpong Intarapong, Banyat Lekprasert, Ratana Rungsirisakun

King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (Ratchaburi Learning Park), Ratchaburi, Thailand

Sukanlaya Tantiwisawaruji

King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand

The aim of this study is to assess creativity of the students from a project of first year undergrad students of King

Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, a residential college (KMUTT-RC). A project is a part of academic

contents from Physics and Chemistry subjects. There were instructors from Chemistry, Physics, Engineering, and

Social Sciences Department for consulting and engineering students for building a prototype. Formative assessment

activity is explored from question, answer, and presentation. The characters, assessed on creativity, associated with

an analysis on the rubric of prototype design, knowledge, and selective materials. Most students understood the

perspective on creativity correlating with the observation from instructors. The instructor’s view represented that

most of creative scores gained from motivate design and materials selection while their knowledge was not

adequate. The accuracy of prototypes from the students did not relate to creativity in terms of design but error of

measurement could occur from confusing with refractive index scale and from preparing a standard solution in

chemical laboratory.

Keywords: creativity, integrated project, prototype design, innovation skill

Introduction

Currently, modern world drives teenagers to have important skills for employability. Educators researched

and categorized guidelines and educational policies for the 21st century competencies that helped the new

generation keep up with the light of requirements for professional and social skills (Department of Academic

and Educational Standards, Office of the Basic Education Commission, 2008). The Centre for Work-Based

Learning Skills Development Scotland (2018) reported that most essential abilities that students need are, for

example, self-management (integrity, adapting, etc.), social intelligence (collaborating, leadership, etc.), and

innovation (creativity, critical thinking, etc.). Innovation is defined as the ability to create significant positive

Acknowledgement: The authors would like to thank King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Ratchaburi and all staffs for supporting and providing information.

Pisitpong Intarapong, Ph.D., professor and researcher, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (Ratchaburi Learning Park), Ratchaburi, Thailand.

Banyat Lekprasert, Ph.D., professor and researcher, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (Ratchaburi Learning Park), Ratchaburi, Thailand.

Ratana Rungsirisakun, Ph.D., professor and researcher, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (Ratchaburi Learning Park), Ratchaburi, Thailand.

Sukanlaya Tantiwisawaruji, Ph.D., professor and researcher, Learning Institute, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand.

DAVID PUBLISHING

D

CREATIVITY ASSESSMENT FROM INTEGRATION

 

190

change. It is one of the most important skills for the technology students. A general definition of this term

comprises of creativity, critical thinking, curiosity, and sense making (The Centre for Work-Based Learning

Skills Development Scotland, 2018). Moreover, creativity is an ability associated with idea generation,

imagination, inspiration, intuition, and ingenuity that expresses new ways of addressing problems (Felder,

1987). Measurement of creativity observes from participants who engage in solving problems by creating a new

innovative or expressing opportunity to manipulate problematic situation (Sternberg, 2006). King Mongkut’s

University of Technology Thonburi, learning park, located in Ratchaburi Province is a division of a university

that is set for academic purpose of engineering students. Implementing outcome-based education (OBE) has

been introduced as an initial model in a class for student training using a project-based curriculum. An

integrated curriculum in different subjects helps the students fully understand the contents. Drake and Reid

(2018) proposed that integrated curriculum is an effective system to teach in the 21st century for education.

Integrated project can draw an attention for student engagement and experience to use their knowledge for

solving a problem in reality. According to this learning model, groups of students have a chance to connect

different knowledge, explore meaningful brainstorm, and work together in order to gather necessary

information. Competences, such as communication, creativity, and critical thinking relate with technological

developments and associate a student’s future career (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013; Rotherham &

Willingham, 2009). Therefore, integrate-based teaching must be designed together with a curriculum and an

activity to afford student learning in the future. The objective of research is to cultivate students’ creative

thinking from integrating two or more existing concepts (Physics and Chemistry) and to create a model for

measuring sugar concentration. A prototype was assessed on creativity to come up with the framework of an

innovative design (prototype design, materials use, and knowledge) and the analytical ability to demonstrate the

problem-solving process of their work, represented in their logbook and report. Creative facet between students

and lecturers was observed.

Method

The schedule, frame activities, and tools provided to the students via an integrated project were listed (see

Appendix). Information was announced in public media, such as Google classroom, handout, and Facebook.

The fundamental knowledge was taught in the Physics and Chemistry classes. Finally, a prototype of students

was tested on efficiency for using in reality.

Conceptual Framework

Creativity is a key competence to fulfill capabilities which are required for the 21st century occupation.

This competency helps people to be familiar with adaptation of many real-world innovations (Bell, 2010). The

objective of project-based education is to cultivate students’ creative thinking among all attributes that

university provides (Partnership for the 21st Century Skills, 2009). The research process approached to measure

creativity in a team. Many researches focused on a framework of creativity in which it was recognized from

multi-level perspective, for example, individual, group, and organization (Jeffrey & Craft, 2004). Normally,

outcome of creativity is evaluated on creating new products (Borghini, 2005) or new function responding social

environment. Researchers and educators published on group of creativity by focusing on the scope of context,

synergy, and strategy for developing group (Robinson & Stern, 1997; Leonard-Barton & Swap, 1999; Miell &

Littleton, 2004). The activity kicked out from role of contexts or tasks that students had to perform in a group.

CREATIVITY ASSESSMENT FROM INTEGRATION

 

191

After that, strategy was considered to research because it extended students’ abilities (creativity, individual

knowledge, and skills). They proposed that a group had more potential to generate creativity together than individual

members. Finally, effective strategies enhanced creativity in the group which revealed the problem-solving

skills. According to above literatures, the creative group could link to social perspective on human learning. In

the present research, there are five research questions that are assessed on whether and how creativity of their

model works from subjects of prototype design, knowledge of measurement, and selective materials (see Figure

1). There are 36 prototypes from a group of students (three or four people in a group). The 23 full-time lecturers

are in charge of instruction, laboratory, and workshop as well as evaluate performance of students.

Figure 1. Framework of creativity measurement in this work.

Prototype Design

The creative thinking, subconscious, and rational analytical process are collected from drawing ideas until

fabrication of Brix meter as a prototype. Collecting data from questionnaire (breaking out of old patterns),

interview (breaking out of scripts and fresh idea), and function of the prototype (functioning in reality) disclose

their thinking method and reflect critically on ideas and problem analysis for the users. However, Weisberg

(1999) discussed on relationships between group creativity and knowledge observed in students that creative

skills in human cannot occur without fundamental knowledge.

Knowledge Creation

Knowledge in the subject of Physics and Chemistry is the result of the process of cognition which interacts

among knowledge and activities (Paavola, Lipponen, & Hakkarainen, 2004). Part of Physics involved with the

theory of wave (light refraction and reflection under the difference of media), while Chemistry evaluated the

preparation solution as a standard solution for calibration of their prototypes. Thus, knowledge has an effect on

varying degrees of accuracy, reflecting the dialectics of error from the absolute truth. Accuracy of the prototype

and student’s presentation reveal the pathways of knowledge, ideas, and why learn creativity exists in a prototype.

Selective Materials

Innovative design means the imaginative exploitation of the properties offered by new or improved

materials, reasonable cost, and sustainable materials. Making an environmental product through renewable

materials must be considered a creative skill that represents understanding for material selection from

perspective of students (Prendeville, Connor, Rafferty, & Palmer, 2013). Varity of materials (such as paper,

cupboard, plastic, wood, glass, etc.) was chosen to make the prototype by students.

Analyses

The method is to collect data sources (questionnaire, testing, and report) and to convert into the quality

and quantity. Information is gathered and reported as a group appearance. Questionnaire affects the person’s

responses via a set of questions, which demonstrates the ability to respond creatively under standardized

Creativity

Prototype design Materials selection Knowledge

 

192

conditions.

which prov

the respon

technicians

generated a

-0.5 – -1 =

instructor a

measureme

The le

students. T

The attitud

same opin

between le

the excelle

students. T

(1999) pro

not. The di

experience

investigatin

that teache

class. Ther

. Testing und

vide creativity

nses to questi

s, who know

and rearrange

= under exp

and student i

ent, which wa

evel of creati

The facet of c

de between le

ion (yellow

ecturers and s

ence model (g

The different v

posed that te

ifferent attitu

e, and enviro

ng their activ

ers who were

refore, creativ

(

CREATI

der controlled

y characterist

ions, skills, a

the relation

ed from the se

ectation, -0.5

indices was e

as based on re

ivity is assess

creativity on

cturers and s

star) while 1

students. The

green sign).

value of the s

eachers had b

udes of creativ

onment. Lec

vity based on

more creativ

ve results on t

Figure 2. Ev

= Agreein

IVITY ASSE

d condition r

tics. Report a

abilities, acti

to those fram

et of framewo

5 – 0.5 = fa

examined wh

eality measur

Result

sed from abo

prototype de

tudents on cr

10 prototype

prototype fr

Moreover, th

score was cau

better underst

vity related t

cturers determ

certain fram

ve find studen

this work wer

valuation of crea

ng view, =

ESSMENT FR

reflects abou

and logbook c

vities, etc. A

meworks, as

ork and outco

air/normal, an

hether the as

rements.

ts and Disc

ve criteria (p

esigns betwee

reativity from

es have the d

om groups o

he scores from

used from kn

anding to cla

o aspects of p

mine what a

mework. Kettl

nts that had s

re based on th

ativity level bet

= Disagreeing v

ROM INTEG

ut a people’s

contain inform

All ratings ga

we call for r

ome based sk

nd 0.5 – 1 =

sociation of

cussion

prototypes, kn

en students a

m the prototyp

different view

f 5, 8, 11, 15

m instructors

nowledge, sty

assify high cr

personality, s

a creative id

er, Lamb, W

pecial charac

he criterion a

tween students

view, = E

GRATION

creativity th

mation about

ain from teac

ratings by pee

kills into the g

= beyond exp

creativity rel

nowledge, an

and instructor

pes found tha

wpoint (red s

5, 17, 23, and

s were somew

les of thinkin

reativity stude

such as cogn

dea is or w

Willerson, and

cteristics asso

and evaluation

and lecturers.

Excellence view

hrough their

people’s crea

chers, mento

ers. The qual

group of valu

pectation. Th

lated to the a

nd selective m

rs is shown i

at 21 prototyp

star) on a cr

d 32 was eval

what higher t

ng, motivation

ents from tho

itive ability,

what simply

Mullet (2018

ociated with c

n from all of

w)

instruments

ativity from

rs, or other

lity score is

e as follow:

he rating of

accuracy of

materials) of

in Figure 2.

pes have the

reative skill

luated to be

than that of

n, etc. Scott

ose who are

knowledge,

idea is by

8) proposed

creativity in

instructors.

 

The e

lecturer (se

of modern

do somethi

reference v

groups) of

Physics cou

reveal a sig

design corr

Jalong

The results

Chemistry

successfull

understand

describe an

prototypes

evaluation of

ee Figure 3).

design which

ing in a certa

value of each

f prototype de

urse without

gnificant unde

related with t

Fig

(a)

F

go (2003) dis

s of the know

(standard sol

ly. The majo

d deeply in b

nd give a rea

. Creativity

CREATI

f creativity fr

Fourteen per

h they can hi

ain way. For

h Brix in thei

esign showed

notable upgr

er average m

heir creative

gure 3. Evaluat

Figure 4. Exam

scussed that c

wledge skill fo

lution) as we

ority of stud

both physics

asonable exp

is linked to

IVITY ASSE

rom prototyp

rcent (five gro

ighlight that r

example, th

ir prototype (

d a common d

rade in scale

measurement b

though as we

tion of creativity

mple of scale con

creativity is co

ound that fou

ell as mapping

dents reveale

and chemic

lanation of th

a way of p

ESSMENT FR

pe design, kn

oups) of proto

reflection of

ey used grap

(see Figure 4

design by me

measurement

by lacking a s

ell as their kn

y from prototyp

(b

nstruction for re

onnected to r

ur groups exp

g standard cu

ed of miscon

cal theory as

heir measure

problem findi

ROM INTEG

nowledge, an

otype design

light required

ph paper or ru

4a) with a ma

eans of classi

t (see Figure

standardized s

nowledge in e

pe, knowledge,

b)

efraction of ligh

resourcefulne

plained the th

urve with mat

nceptions in

s well as cal

ement process

ing in measu

GRATION

d materials u

passed the cr

d conscious d

uler scale to

athematic equ

ical theory w

4b). Thirty-s

scale (see Fig

each group.

and materials u

ht from student

ss, invention

eory of Phys

thematic owi

n theory. Mo

libration proc

s because of

urement of a

use was mea

reative thinki

decisions in e

create custom

uation. Fifty

which they we

six percent of

gure 4c). The

use.

(c)

ts.

, imagination

ics (light refr

ing to using i

ost of studen

cedure. They

f ambiguous s

accuracy and

193

asured from

ing in terms

each step to

m grid as a

percent (18

ere tough in

f prototypes

problem of

n, and ethics.

raction) and

it easily and

nts did not

y could not

scale in the

d precision.

 

194

Therefore,

skill level c

The re

of students

There are

some stude

Creati

material us

challenged

calculated

percentage

have an err

in Physics

Physics and

that of ave

fabricated

representin

Table 1

Error of M

Error (%)

57.8

68.4

57.2

36.6

Average

The to

The frame

creative stud

corresponded

esults (see Fi

s understood

eight prototy

ents used a pl

ive model is

se is averaged

d to test the ac

the error of t

e. The creativ

ror over 30%

and Chemis

d Chemistry.

erage in the c

the good eq

ng their true c

Measurement a

P

2

2

2

1

15.2 2

opic of creati

ework (proto

CREATI

dents have ab

d with the vie

gure 3) found

how to use r

ypes that sho

lastic or a gla

not only ad

d and present

ccuracy of eq

the equipmen

ity of prototy

%. Table 1 sho

stry and prac

Misconcepti

lass as well a

quipment wit

creativity.

F

and Performa

Physics (5)

2.67

2.90

2.63

1.97

2.90

ivity is difficu

type design,

IVITY ASSE

ility to adapt

wpoint of Fe

d that materia

renewable ma

owed the exc

ss for their pr

daptive but al

ted in the val

quipment in r

nt as shown i

ypes does not

ows the relati

ctical part in

ion on the pat

as a problem

th error low

Figure 5. Creativ

ance of Stude

Report

C

ult to evaluat

knowledge,

ESSMENT FR

and achieve

ldhusen and G

als use for pro

aterials, such

cellence of m

rototype, they

lso useful in

lues (-1 to 1)

real life by us

in Figure 5. T

t relate directl

ion between k

Chemistry. H

th of light is a

in preparatio

wer than 10%

vity with accura

ent in Physics

t & logbook

Chemistry (

2.28

2.12

2.22

1.61

2.51

Conclusion

te as the resu

and selectiv

ROM INTEG

a goal which

Goh (1995).

ototype was s

as a waste c

materials sele

y gave an exc

reality. The

of creativity

sing three unk

The average

ly to the valu

knowledge pa

High value o

a major probl

on of sugar so

% and expres

acy measureme

s and Chemist

(5)

ns

ults of varying

ve materials)

GRATION

h is set beyon

satisfied to al

cupboard from

ection for the

cellent explan

score from

of the protot

known sampl

of error valu

ue of error. Th

art obtained f

of error is ca

lem of studen

olution. Thre

ssed a value

ent.

try Subjects

Laborat

Skill (3

2.3

2.0

1.0

2.0

2.2

g in age, kno

) illustrated

d an individu

ll lecturers be

m an instant n

eir prototypes

nation of usin

design, know

types. All pro

les of sugar s

ue of all proto

here are four

from report a

aused from m

nts with lowe

ee groups of t

e of outstand

tory Chemistry

)

owledge, expe

education ar

ual’s current

ecause most

noodle box.

s. Although

ng it clearly.

wledge, and

ototypes are

solution and

otypes is 15

groups that

and logbook

mistaking of

r score than

the students

ding design

erience, etc.

reas of the

CREATIVITY ASSESSMENT FROM INTEGRATION

 

195

research that help to explore students’ creativity. Creative perspective of instructors and students got along in

the same framework. We have found that proper activities and facilities could enhance a creativity skill in the

students. The average accuracy of the prototype for measuring sugar concentration was lower than 15% and

three groups could make the useful equipment in reality. Most of students understand how to define the

creativity as instructors do but principle of knowledge is ambiguous in some groups. Influence of creativity

drove through to their unique design while efficiency of their prototypes was based on a method that used for

calibrating their equipment. Students express their formative thinking, break down barriers between disciplines,

and learn activities which can be connected to real life.

References Borghini, S. (2005). Organizational creativity: Breaking equilibrium and order to innovate. Journal of Knowledge Management,

9(4), 19-33. Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational

Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39-43. Department of Academic and Educational Standards, Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2008). Index and learning

contents for the subjects about professions and technology. Bangkok: Thailand’s Agriculture Co-operative Printing Press. Drake, S. M., & Reid J. L. (2018). Integrated curriculum as an effective way to teach the 21st century capabilities. Asia Pacific

Journal of Educational Research, 1(1) 31-50. Felder, R. M. (1987). Creating creative engineers. Engineering Education, 77(4), 222-227. Feldhusen, J., & Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and

development. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231-247. Jalongo, M. R. (2003). The child’s right to creative thought and expression. Childhood Education, 79(4), 218-228. Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies,

30(1), 77-87. Kettler, T., Lamb, N. K., Willerson, A., & Mullet, R. D. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions of creativity in the classroom. Creativity

Research Journal, 30(2), 164-171. Leonard-Barton, D., & Swap, W. C. (1999). When sparks fly: Igniting creativity in groups. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Miell, D., & Littleton, K. (2004). Collaborative creativity, contemporary perspectives. London: Free Associate Books. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of

learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557-576. Partnership for the 21st Century Skills. (2009). Framework for the 21st century learning. Retrieved 1/23/2017 from

http://www.p21.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=254&Itemid=119 Prendeville, S., Connor, F., Rafferty, S., & Palmer, L. (2013). Material selection and design for sustainable material innovation:

Conference paper. The 10th European Academy of Design Conference―Crafting the Future, April 17-19, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Robinson, A. G., & Stern, S. (1997). Corporative creativity: How innovation and improvement actually happen. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Rotherham. A. J., & Willingham, D. (2009). The 21st century skills the challenges ahead. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 16-21. Scott, C. (1999). Teachers’ biases toward creative children. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 321-328. The Centre for Work-Based Learning Skills Development Scotland. (2018). Skills 4.0: A skill model to drive Scotland’s future.

Retrieved 6/6/2019 from https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/media/44684/skills-40_a-skills-model.pdf Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87-98. Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the

21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403-413. Weisberg, R. W. (1999). Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.

226-248). New York: Cambridge University Press.

 

196

CREATI

Appendix

IVITY ASSE

: Project Sched

ESSMENT FR

dule Planning

ROM INTEG

of the Integrat

GRATION

ted Project