Simulation of the CDR-Po Learning Model to Foster the Creative Thinking of Junior High School Students in Learning Natural Science

Fransiska Harahap; Leni Yuanita; Muslimin Ibrahim

Satya Wacana Conference & Seminar, Seminar Nasional Sains dan Pendidikan Sains XI Tahun 2018

Fransiska Harahap, Leni Yuanita, Muslimin Ibrahim

Last modified: 2018-09-25

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to know the practicality and effectiveness of instructional model of Construction Deconstruction Reconstruction-Provocation (CDR-Po) in science learning in Junior High School. The CDR-Po learning model was developed to develop students' creative thinking skills. Characteristics of the model are the use of humor and provocation techniques to generate ideas. Sampling method using purposive sampling (N = 25). The practicality of the model is obtained through the use of Observation Sheet of the implementation of the learning model and the learning constraints. Data collection on the effectiveness of the model is obtained through the Creative Thinking Sheet Assessment, Learning Outcome Test, and Students' Response Questionnaire. The research results show that the implementation of the learning model is very good, originality aspect of creative thinking ability is higher compared to fluency and flexibility, there is an increase of learning outcomes with medium criteria, and student's response to the implementation of learning model is very positive. This study conclude that the learning model of CDR-Po is quite efficient and effective enough to be used in science learning in junior high school students.

Keywords

CDR-Po learning model, creative thinking, junior high school, natural science

References

Trilling, B. & Fadel, C., 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. John Wiley & Sons, 2009.

Florida, R., Mellander, C., Stolarick, K., Silk, K., Matheson, Z.. & Hoprod, M., Creativity and prosperity: The Global Creativity Index, Martin Prosperity Institute, 2011.

Florida, R., Mellander, C., Stolarick, K., Silk, K., Matheson, Z.. & Hoprod, M. Creativity and prosperity: The Global Creativity Index. Martin Prosperity Institute, 2015.

Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch-Vincent, S., The Global Innovation Index 2017, Innovation Feeding the World, World Intellectual Property Organization, 2017.

Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., & Wunsch-Vincent, S., The Global Innovation Index 2016. Winning with Global Innovation, World Intellectual Property Organization, 2016.

Fisher, Robert, What is Creativity? In: Fisher, R. & William, M. (Eds), Unlocking Creativity. Teaching Across the Curriculum, London: David Fulto Publishers, pp. 1-20, 2004.

Barry, D.M. & Kanematsu, H., “International program to Promote Creative Thinking in Chemistry and Science”, The Chemist: American Institute of Chemist, Vol. 83, No. 2, pp. 1-7, 2006.

Ogunyemi A.O., “Provocation and Emotional Mastery Techniques as Strategies for Fostering Creative Thinking Competence among Nigerian Adoloscents”, J.Sec.Sci., vol.22, no.1, pp. 25-32, 2010.

Vidal, R.V.V., Creativity and Problem Solving, Lecture Notes, Informatics and Mathematical Modeling, Technical University of Denmark, 2003.
Gomez, J.G., “What Do We Know About Creativity?”, The Journal of Effective Teaching. Vol.7, No. 1, pp.31-43, 2007.

Baer, J., “Why Grand Theories of Creativity Distort, Distract, and Disappoint”. The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving. Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 73-100, 2011.

De Bono, E., “Serious Creativity”, The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 12-18, 1995.

Joice, B., Weil, M., and Calhoun, E., Models of Teaching. (Alih bahasa: A. Fawaid dan A. Mirza), Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2011.

Ratumanan, G. T. & Laurens, T., Evaluasi Hasil Belajar pada Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan, Surabaya: Unesa University Press, 2011.

DeHaan, R.L., Teaching Creative Science Thinking. Science Education, Science, Vol. 334, 2011. [Online] available: http://www.sciencemag.org (Dec. 6, 2011).

Hake, R.R., “Interaktive-engagement versus Traditional Methods; a Six-thousand-student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses”, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 66, No.1, pp. 64-74, 1998.

Makewa, L.N., Role, E. & Genga, J.A., “Teachers’ Use of Humor in Teaching and Students’ Rating of Their Effectiveness”, International Journal of Education. Vol.3, No. 2, pp. 1-17, 2011.

Gazit, A., “Pre Service Mathematics Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Integrating Humor in Math Lessons”, Israeli Journal of Humor Research. No. 3, pp. 27-44, 2013.

Garner, E., Thinking Skills. Using Your Brain in the Information Age, Eric Garner & Ventus Publishing ApS. 2012, eBook. [Online] Available: http://www.bookboon.com (March 4, 2014).

Vidal, R.V.V. (2006). Creative and Participative Problem Solving: The Art and The Science. eBook. Tersedia www.imm.dtu.dk. (March 4, 2014).
Runco, M.A., “Education for Creative Potential”, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 7,no.3, pp.317-324, 2003.

Wang, A.Y., ”Contexts of Creative Thinking: A Comparison on Creative Performance of Student Teachers in Taiwan and The United States”, Journal of International and Cross-Cultural Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 1-14, 2011.

Jabeen, S. and Khan, M.A., “A Study on Creative Thinking Abilities and Self-concept of High and Low Achievers”, Unique Journal of Education Research. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 110-011, 2013. 60231, Indonesia

Full Text: PDF