Top

Journal of Computers in Education

Published in:

12-09-2020

Effects of an interest-driven creation approach on students’ mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science in a science museum

Authors: Lanqin Zheng, Renxue Liu, Xuan Zhang

Published in: Journal of Computers in Education | Issue 2/2021

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Creativity is a crucial skill for twenty-first century success. However, the examination-oriented educational system in China can stifle learners’ creativity. Therefore, nurturing students’ creativity has become a central concern in the field of education. To this end, this study designed four interest-driven creation activities for pupils in a science museum. The present study examined the effects of an interest-driven creation approach on mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science. In total, 52 pupils participated in this study for 2 months. Half of them were randomly assigned into the experimental group and half of them were in the control group. The students in the experimental group experienced the interest-driven creation approach, while the students in the control group learned through a conventional lecture approach. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used to collect and analyze data. The results indicated that the interest-driven creation approach significantly improved mobile learning performance and creativity. The findings added to our understanding of creativity and provide insight into how to nurture creativity through the design of learning activities.

next article Incorporating feedback in online cognitive diagnostic assessment for enhancing grade five students’ achievement in ‘time’

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Adams, P. (2006). Exploring social constructivism: Theories and practicalities. Education, 34(3), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270600898893.CrossRef

Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545.CrossRef

Arikpo, O. U., & Domike, G. (2015). Pupils learning preferences and interest development in learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(21), 31–38.

Atwater, M. M. (1996). Social constructivism: Infusion into the multicultural science education research agenda. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 821–837.CrossRef

Ayas, M. B., & Sak, U. (2014). Objective measure of scientific creativity: Psychometric validity of the creative scientific ability test. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.06.001.CrossRef

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Chan, T. W., Looi, C. K., Chen, W., Wong, L. H., Chang, B., Liao, C. C., et al. (2018). Interest-driven creator theory: Towards a theory of learning design for Asia in the twenty-first century. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(4), 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0122-0.CrossRef

Chen, B., & Bryer, T. (2012). Investigating instructional strategies for using social media in formal and informal learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1027.CrossRef

Cheng, L., & Beal, C. R. (2020). Effects of student-generated drawing and imagination on science text reading in a computer-based learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09684-1.CrossRef

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Collard, P., & Looney, J. (2014). Nurturing creativity in education. European Journal of Education, 49(3), 348–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12090.CrossRef

Conradty, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2019). From STEM to STEAM: Cracking the code? How creativity & motivation interacts with inquiry-based learning. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 284–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641678.CrossRef

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.

Fergusson, J., Oliver, C., & Walter, M. R. (2012). Astrobiology outreach and the nature of science: The role of creativity. Astrobiology, 12(12), 1143–1153. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2012.0873.CrossRef

Fraser, B. (2002). Learning environments research: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In G. S. Chiew & K. M. Swe (Eds.), Studies in educational learning environments: An international Perspective (pp. 1–26). Singapore: World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812777133_0001.CrossRef

García, P. C., & Fernandez, T. G. (2018). Makerspaces and scientific creativity level of middle school students. Global Journal of Arts Education, 8(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjae.v8i2.CrossRef

Georgiev, G. V., & Casakin, H. (2019). Semantic measures for enhancing creativity in design education. In M. Goudswaard, H. Forbes, L. Kent, C. Snider, & B. Hicks (Eds.), Proceedings of the design society: International conference on engineering design (Vol. 1(1), pp. 369–378). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.40.CrossRef

Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M., & Marek, E. A. (2001). Relationships among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535–549.CrossRef

Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (2012). The changing role of education and schools. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 1–16). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_1.CrossRef

Guo, J., & Woulfin, S. (2016). Twenty-first century creativity: An investigation of how the partnership for 21st century instructional framework reflects the principles of creativity. Roeper Review, 38(3), 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2016.1183741.CrossRef

Hernández-Torrano, D., & Ibrayeva, L. (2020). Creativity and education: A bibliometric mapping of the research literature (1975–2019). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, 100625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100625.CrossRef

Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.CrossRef

Hollanders, H., & Van Cruysen, A. (2009). Design, creativity and innovation: A scoreboard approach. Retrieved 3 May, 2020, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488.8970&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

Hsu, P. L., & Venegas, L. (2018). Activity features of high school students’ science learning in an open-inquiry-based internship programme. International Journal of Science Education, 40(12), 1391–1409. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1479801.CrossRef

Hu, B., & West, A. (2015). Exam-oriented education and implementation of education policy for migrant children in urban China. Educational Studies, 41(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2014.977780.CrossRef

Hwang, G. J., & Chang, H. F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.002.CrossRef

Kirkpatrick, R., & Zang, Y. (2011). The negative influences exam-oriented education on Chinese high school students: Backwash from classroom to child. Language Testing in Asia, 1(3), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-1-3-36.CrossRef

Knezek, G. A., & Christensen, R. (2019). Space science activities to enhance middle school students’ interest in STEM: Follow-up assessment of disposition retention. In S. Carliner (Ed.), Proceedings of e-learn: World conference on e-learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 971–980). New Orleans, Louisiana: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved May 3, 2020, from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/211179/.

Kong, X., Dabney, K. P., & Tai, R. H. (2014). The association between science summer camps and career interest in science and engineering. International Journal of Science Education, 4(1), 54–65.

Kong, S. C., & Li, P. (2016). The interest-driven creator theory and coding education. In Gao, D., Wu, Y.-T., Chan, T.-W., Kong, S. C., Lee, M.-H., Yang, J.-C., Shih, J.-L., Hong, J.-C., Shang, J., Cheng, K.-H., & Chen, S. Y. (Eds.), Workshop proceedings of the 20th global Chinese conference on computers in education (pp. 116–119). Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Institute of Education.

Lally, P., & Gardner, B. (2013). Promoting habit formation. Health Psychology Review, 7(sup1), S137–S158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2011.603640.CrossRef

Lille, B., & Romero, M. (2017). Creativity assessment in the context of maker-based projects. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 22(3), 32–47.

Lin, P. Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2016). The dimensions and impact of informal science learning experiences on middle schoolers’ attitudes and abilities in science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(17), 2551–2572.CrossRef

Liu, C. C., Chen, W. C., Lin, H. M., & Huang, Y. Y. (2017). A remix-oriented approach to promoting student engagement in a long-term participatory learning program. Computers & Education, 110, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.002.CrossRef

Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75.CrossRef

Malik, M. A. R., Choi, J. N., & Butt, A. N. (2019). Distinct effects of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic rewards on radical and incremental creativity: The moderating role of goal orientations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(9–10), 1013–1026. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2403.CrossRef

Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41, 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4.CrossRef

Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., & Vom Hofe, R. (2013). Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies. Child Development, 84(4), 1475–1490. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12036.CrossRef

Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed constructionism. International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved May 3, 2020, from https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1161135.1161173.

Rosli, R., Abdullah, M., Siregar, N. C., Hamid, N. S. A., Abdullah, S., Beng, G. K., et al. (2019). Exploring Space Science through the UKM-SIDn Outreach Program. IEEE. Retrieved May 3, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.1109/IconSpace.2019.8905957.

Runco, M. A., & McGarva, D. J. (2013). Creativity and motivation. In S. Kreitler (Ed.), Cognition and motivation: Forging and interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 468–482). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.CrossRef

Sandifer, C. (2003). Technological novelty and open-endedness: Two characteristics of interactive exhibits that contribute to the holding of visitor attention in a science museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10068.CrossRef

Sawyer, R. K., Csikszentmihalyi, M., John-Steiner, V., Moran, S., Feldman, D. H., Gardner, H., et al. (2003). Creativity and development. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 197–222). New York: Routledge.

Schulz, K. P., Geithner, S., Woelfel, C., & Krzywinski, J. (2015). Toolkit-based modelling and serious play as means to foster creativity in innovation processes. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(2), 323–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12113.CrossRef

Shaby, N., Assaraf, O. B. Z., & Tal, T. (2017). The particular aspects of science museum exhibits that encourage students’ engagement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(3), 253–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9676-7.CrossRef

Shaby, N., Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Tal, T. (2019). An examination of the interactions between museum educators and students on a school visit to science museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(2), 211–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21476.CrossRef

Shaby, N., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2020). Science identity trajectories throughout school visits to a science museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(5), 733–764. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21608.CrossRef

Sher, K. B. T., Levi-Keren, M., & Gordon, G. (2019). Priming, enabling and assessment of curiosity. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(4), 931–952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09665-4.CrossRef

Soh, K. (2017). Fostering student creativity through teacher behaviors. Thinking skills and creativity, 23, 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.11.002.CrossRef

Starko, A. J. (1995). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. New York: Longman Publishers USA.

Sternberg, R. J. (2006a). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87–98.CrossRef

Sternberg, R. J. (2006b). Creating a vision of creativity: The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S(1), 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.S.1.2.CrossRef

Tan, C. (2016). Tensions and challenges in China’s education policy borrowing. Educational Research, 58(2), 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2016.1165551.CrossRef

Tan, L., Lee, S., Ponnusamy, L., Koh, E., & Tan, K. (2016). Fostering creativity in the classroom for high ability students: Context does matter. Education Sciences, 6(4), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040036.CrossRef

Tarde, G., & Baldwin, J. M. (2019). Imitation and creativity. In V. P. Glaveanu (Ed.), The creativity reader (pp. 173–189). New York: Oxford University Press.

Tu, Y. F., & Hwang, G. J. (2018a). Trends of library-associated mobile learning based on a review of academic studies published from 2007 to 2016. The Electronic Library, 36(5), 875–891.CrossRef

Tu, Y. F., & Hwang, G. J. (2018b). The roles of sensing technologies and learning strategies in library-associated mobile learning: A review of 2007-2016 journal publications. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 12(1), 42–54.CrossRef

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In N. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 29–36). New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Wang, H. Y., Liu, G. Z., & Hwang, G. J. (2017). Integrating socio-cultural contexts and location-based systems for ubiquitous language learning in museums: A state of the art review of 2009–2014. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 653–671.CrossRef

Williams, F. E. (1979). Assessing creativity across Williams” cube” model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 23(4), 748–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698627902300406.CrossRef

Winston, A. S., & Baker, J. E. (1985). Behavior analytic studies of creativity: A critical review. The Behavior Analyst, 8(Fall (2)), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393151.CrossRef

Wong, L. H., Chan, T. W., Chen, Z. H., King, R. B., & Wong, S. L. (2015). The IDC theory: Interest and the interest loop. In T. Kojiri, T. Supnithi, Y. Wang, Y.-T. Wu, H. Ogata, W. Chen, S. C. Kong, & F. Qiu (Eds.). Workshop proceedings of the 23rd international conference on computers in education (pp. 804–813). Hangzhou: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.

Yeh, Y. C., Rega, E. M., & Chen, S. Y. (2019). Enhancing creativity through aesthetics-integrated computer-based training: The effectiveness of a FACE approach and exploration of moderators. Computers & Education, 139, 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.007.CrossRef

Yoon, H. J., Sung, S. Y., Choi, J. N., Lee, K., & Kim, S. (2015). Tangible and intangible rewards and employee creativity: The mediating role of situational extrinsic motivation. Creativity Research Journal, 27(4), 383–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.1088283.CrossRef

Zeng, L., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2011). Can traditional divergent thinking tests be trusted in measuring and predicting real-world creativity? Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.545713.CrossRef

Zhang, Y. (1999). The blind leading the blind? Using learner-authored texts to foster conceptual change in college EFL learners. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED474688.pdf.

Title: Effects of an interest-driven creation approach on students’ mobile learning performance and creativity in learning science in a science museum
Authors: Lanqin Zheng
Renxue Liu
Xuan Zhang
Publication date: 12-09-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Journal of Computers in Education / Issue 2/2021
Print ISSN: 2197-9987
Electronic ISSN: 2197-9995
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00175-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2021

The effect of basic robotic coding in-service training on teachers’ acceptance of technology, self-development, and computational thinking skills in technology use

Development and validation of online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for ‘Multiplication of Time’

Flipping an EFL classroom with the LINE application: students’ performance and perceptions

Assessing computational thinking abilities among Singapore secondary students: a Rasch model measurement analysis

Incorporating feedback in online cognitive diagnostic assessment for enhancing grade five students’ achievement in ‘time’

Premium Partner