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