Article Sidebar

Published
Nov 28, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 49

Main Article Content

Abstract

Enhancing mathematical creativity requires more learning activities that foster creative thinking. However, teachers need more resources and activities to nurture students' creativity in mathematics effectively. Therefore, this study aimed to design STEAM-based geometry activities using the Engineering Design Process (EDP) to explore how such projects can enhance students' mathematical creativity. In this study, creativity focuses on how students use geometric principles to design Wingko Babat as an Indonesian cuisine, making culturally meaningful connections and solving design challenges. The study involved research and development using the analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) model, continuing with a descriptive qualitative approach. The activities designed for the STEAM-Geometry projects allow students to think creatively and elaborate on the engineering design process. Through expert reviews that involved multiple educators, the design activities on the STEAM-Geometry project are reliable and valid. The findings show that the EDP on Geometry project enables students to think creatively. The findings imply that teaching geometry can develop the students' mathematical creativity through the engineering design process in STEAM activities. Furthermore, it indicates that the design activities encompass more than just understanding geometry; they also nurture creativity by applying STEAM principles in the engineering design process. Integrating STEAM principles within culturally meaningful, geometry-based tasks enhances students' critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and real-world problem-solving skills, preparing them to tackle complex challenges beyond the scope of mathematics.

Keywords

Design activities Engineering design process Mathematical creativity STEAM STEAM-geometry

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

  1. 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

  2. Ariba, O., & Luneta, K. (2018). Nurturing creativity in early years’ mathematics via art-integrated mathematics lessons. The International Journal of Early Childhood Learning, 25(2), 31-48. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-7939/CGP/v25i02/31-48

  3. Astutik, I. D., Pramasdyahsari, A. S., & Setyawati, R. D. (2024). Development of PJBL-STEM based e-books assisted by geometry calculator to foster students' critical thinking ability. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif, 15(1), 69-82.

  4. Bahrum, S., Wahid, N., & Ibrahim, N. (2017). Integration of STEM education in Malaysia and why to STEAM. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(6), 645-654. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i6/3027

  5. Breda, A., Carvalho, P., & Hall, A. (2023). Interdisciplinary approaches: Exploring the fusion of mathematics, art, and culture in a professional development course for mathematics teachers. In 15th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Palma, Spain (pp. 1449-1457). https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2023.0452

  6. Brijlall, D., Maharaj, A., & Jojo, Z. M. M. (2006). The development of geometrical concepts through design activities during a Technology education class. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2006.10740592

  7. Cardellini, L. (2006). Fostering creative problem solving in chemistry through group work. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(2), 131-140. https://doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90019K

  8. Carpenter, T. P., & Peterson, P. L. (1988). Learning through instruction: The study of students' thinking during instruction in mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 79-85. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2302_1

  9. Chandler, L., & Ward, A. (2019). Immersed in design: Using an immersive teaching space to visualise design solutions. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(2), 314-327. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12191

  10. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613

  11. Conradty, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2020). STEAM teaching professional development works: effects on students’ creativity and motivation. Smart learning environments, 7(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00132-9

  12. Cooke, S. (2022). The impact of design thinking and STEAM learning on student engagement. He Rourou, 2(1), 109-125. https://doi.org/10.54474/herourou.v2i1.7153

  13. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

  14. Cunningham, C. M., & Hester, K. (2007). Engineering is elementary: An engineering and technology curriculum for children. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu.

  15. Dang Ut, P., Dinh Lan, A., Nguyen Thi Mai, T., & Le Thu, T. (2022). Access to process 6E, EDP in organization of STEAM ducational activities for preschoolers 5 to 6 years old. Journal of Science Educational Science, 67, 43-51.

  16. Diefes-dux, H. A., Hjalmarson, M. A., Miller, T. K., & Lesh, R. (2008). Model-Eliciting Activities for Engineering Education. In J. S. Zawojewski, H. A. Diefes-Dux, & K. J. Bowman (Eds.), Models and Modeling in Engineering Education (pp. 17-35). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087904043_003

  17. English, L., Hudson, P., & Dawes, L. (2013). Engineering-based problem solving in the middle school: Design and construction with simple machines. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 3(2), 5. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1081

  18. Ernest, J. B., & Nemirovsky, R. (2016). Arguments for integrating the arts: Artistic engagement in an undergraduate foundations of geometry course. PRIMUS, 26(4), 356-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2015.1123784

  19. Fenyvesi, K. (2015). Hidak a „STEM” és a művészet között: a világ legnagyobb matematikai-művészeti közössége, a bridges organization [Bridges between STEM and the arts: The world's largest math-arts community, the bridges organization]. Autonomy and Responsibility Journal of Educational Sciences, 1(3), 65-76.

  20. Freiman, V., & Tassell, J. L. (2018). Leveraging mathematics creativity by using technology: Questions, issues, solutions, and innovative paths. In V. Freiman & J. L. Tassell (Eds.), Creativity and Technology in Mathematics Education (pp. 3-29). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72381-5_1

  21. Goldsmith, L. T., Hetland, L., Hoyle, C., & Winner, E. (2016). Visual-spatial thinking in geometry and the visual arts. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(1), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000027

  22. Grégoire, J. (2016). Understanding creativity in mathematics for improving mathematical education. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15(1), 24-36. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.24

  23. Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational thinking and media & information literacy: An integrated approach to teaching twenty-first century skills. TechTrends, 60(5), 510-516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0098-4

  24. Handican, R., Nasution, E. Y. P., Ananda, A., Gistituati, N., & Rusdinal, R. (2023). Understanding the duality of mathematics education paradigms: A comparative review of learning methods in Indonesia and Japan. Mathline : Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 8(3), 921-936. https://doi.org/10.31943/mathline.v8i3.473

  25. Hanif, S., Wijaya, A. F. C., & Winarno, N. (2019). Enhancing students' creativity through STEM project-based learning. Journal of Science Learning, 2(2), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v2i2.13271

  26. Haylock, D. W. (1987). A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in school chilren. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00367914

  27. Hebebci, M. T., & Usta, E. (2022). The effects of integrated STEM education practices on problem solving skills, scientific creativity, and critical thinking dispositions. Participatory Educational Research, 9(6), 358-379. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.143.9.6

  28. Henriksen, D. (2017). Creating STEAM with design thinking: Beyond STEM and arts integration. The STEAM Journal, 3(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.5642/steam.20170301.11

  29. Hsiao, P.-W., & Su, C.-H. (2021). A study on the impact of STEAM education for sustainable development courses and its effects on student motivation and learning. Sustainability, 13(7), 3772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073772

  30. Ilyas, H. P. (2017). Historical perspective: The development of critical thinking in Indonesian ELT. Journal of ELT Research: The Academic Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.22236/JER_Vol2Issue2pp89-102

  31. Jacobson, C., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Teacher appropriation and student learning of geometry through design. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 71-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/749820

  32. Joglar Prieto, N., Sordo Juanena, J. M., & Star, J. R. (2014). Designing geometry 2.0 learning environments: A preliminary study with primary school students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(3), 396-416. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.837526

  33. Kang, N.-H. (2019). A review of the effect of integrated STEM or STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education in South Korea. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0034-y

  34. Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2013). Connecting mathematical creativity to mathematical ability. Zdm, 45(2), 167-181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0467-1

  35. Kim, Y., & Park, N. (2012). The effect of STEAM education on elementary school student’s creativity improvement. In Computer Applications for Security, Control and System Engineering, Communications in Computer and Information Science, Berlin, Heidelberg (Vol. 339, pp. 115-121). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35264-5_16

  36. Kozlowski, J. S., & Si, S. (2019). Mathematical creativity: A vehicle to foster equity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100579

  37. Lachapelle, C. P., & Cunningham, C. M. (2014). Engineering in elementary schools. In P. Şenay, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 61-88). Purdue University Press.

  38. Lage-Gómez, C., & Ros, G. (2023). How transdisciplinary integration, creativity and student motivation interact in three STEAM projects for gifted education? Gifted Education International, 39(2), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294231167744

  39. Leikin, R., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2013). Creativity and mathematics education: The state of the art. Zdm, 45(2), 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0459-1

  40. Liao, C. (2016). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Education, 69(6), 44-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873

  41. Lin, C.-L., & Tsai, C.-Y. (2021). The effect of a pedagogical STEAM model on students’ project competence and learning motivation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(1), 112-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09885-x

  42. Lochmiller, C. R. (2021). Conducting thematic analysis with qualitative data. The Qualitative Report, 26(6), 2029-2044. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5008

  43. Maynes, N. (2012). Examining a false dichotomy: The role of direct instruction and problem-solving approaches in today’s classrooms. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8), 40-46.

  44. Mbato, C. L. (2019). Indonesian EFL learners’ critical thinking in reading: Bridging the gap between declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge. Humaniora, 31(1), 92-101. https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.37295

  45. Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x

  46. Montero, C. S. (2018). Craft- and project-based making for STEAM learning Proceedings of the 18th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, Koli, Finland. https://doi.org/10.1145/3279720.3289237

  47. Moore, T. J., Glancy, A. W., Tank, K. M., Kersten, J. A., Smith, K. A., & Stohlmann, M. S. (2014). A framework for quality K-12 engineering education: Research and development. Journal of pre-college engineering education research (J-PEER), 4(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1069

  48. Munakata, M., & Vaidya, A. (2012). Encouraging creativity in mathematics and science through photography. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 31(3), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrr022

  49. Nadjafikhah, M., Yaftian, N., & Bakhshalizadeh, S. (2012). Mathematical creativity: some definitions and characteristics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 285-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.056

  50. Ng, A., Kewalramani, S., & Kidman, G. (2022). Integrating and navigating STEAM (inSTEAM) in early childhood education: An integrative review and inSTEAM conceptual framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(7), em2133. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12174

  51. Ng, O.-L. (2017). Exploring the use of 3D computer-aided design and 3D printing for STEAM learning in mathematics. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3(3), 257-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0036-x

  52. Nguyen, H. A., Guo, Y., Stamper, J., & McLaren, B. M. (2020). Improving students’ problem-solving flexibility in non-routine mathematics. In I. I. Bittencourt, M. Cukurova, K. Muldner, R. Luckin, & E. Millán, In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Cham (pp. 409-413). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_74

  53. Olkun, S. (2003). Making connections: Improving spatial abilities with engineering drawing activities. International journal of mathematics teaching and learning, 3(1), 1-10.

  54. Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Meneses-Villagrá, J.-Á. (2021). Effects of an integrated STEAM approach on the development of competence in primary education students (Efectos de una propuesta STEAM integrada en el desarrollo competencial del alumnado de Educación Primaria). Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 44(4), 838-870. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2021.1925473

  55. Ozkan, G., & Umdu Topsakal, U. (2021). Investigating the effectiveness of STEAM education on students’ conceptual understanding of force and energy topics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 39(4), 441-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1769586

  56. Parhusip, H. A., Purnomo, H. D., Nugroho, D. B., & Kawuryan, I. S. S. (2023). Integration of STEAM in teaching modern geometry through batik motifs creation with algebraic surfaces. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1564/tme_v30.1.3

  57. Pehkonen, E. (1997). The state-of-art in mathematical creativity. Zdm, 29(3), 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0001-z

  58. Perignat, E., & Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2019). STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002

  59. Pramasdyahsari, A. S., Setyawati, R. D., Aini, S. N., Nusuki, U., Arum, J. P., Astutik, I. D., Widodo, W., Zuliah, N., & Salmah, U. (2023). Fostering students’ mathematical critical thinking skills on number patterns through digital book STEM PjBL. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2297. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13342

  60. Purzer, Ş., Strobel, J., & Cardella, M. E. (2014). Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices. Purdue University Press.

  61. Riling, M. (2020). Recognizing mathematics students as creative: Mathematical creativity as community-based and possibility-expanding. Journal of Humanistic Mathematics, 10(2), 6-39. https://doi.org/10.5642/jhummath.202002.04

  62. Salmi, H. S., Thuneberg, H., & Bogner, F. X. (2023). Is there deep learning on Mars? STEAM education in an inquiry-based out-of-school setting. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 1173-1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1823856

  63. Seifert, E. H., & Simmons, D. (1997). Learning centered schools using a problem-based approach. NASSP Bulletin, 81(587), 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263659708158713

  64. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. Zdm, 29(3), 75-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0003-x

  65. Silver, E. A., Ghousseini, H., Gosen, D., Charalambous, C., & Strawhun, B. T. F. (2005). Moving from rhetoric to praxis: Issues faced by teachers in having students consider multiple solutions for problems in the mathematics classroom. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(3), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2005.09.009

  66. Smith, L. E. (2021). Making the conceptual tangible: The role of art in understanding mathematics and physics. In EGU General Assembly Conference, (pp. EGU21-960). https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-960

  67. Spikol, D., & Eliasson, J. (2010). Lessons from designing geometry learning activities that combine mobile and 3D tools. In 2010 6th IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile, and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (pp. 137-141). https://doi.org/10.1109/WMUTE.2010.44

  68. Sriraman, B. (2009). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. Zdm, 41(1), 13-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0114-z

  69. Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/1380361960020103

  70. Suherman, S., Vidákovich, T., & Komarudin, K. (2021). STEM-E: Fostering mathematical creative thinking ability in the 21st Century. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882(1), 012164. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012164

  71. Sutama, S., Prayitno, H. J., Ishartono, N., & Sari, D. P. (2020). Development of mathematics learning process by using flipped classroom integrated by STEAM Education in senior high school. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3690-3697. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080848

  72. Švecová, V., Rumanová, L., & Pavlovičová, G. (2014). Support of pupil's creative thinking in mathematical education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1715-1719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.461

  73. Szabo, Z. K., Körtesi, P., Guncaga, J., Szabo, D., & Neag, R. (2020). Examples of problem-solving strategies in mathematics education supporting the sustainability of 21st-century skills. Sustainability, 12(23), 10113. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310113

  74. Toheri, T., Winarso, W., & Haqq, A. A. (2019). Three parts of 21 century skills: Creative, critical, and communication mathematics through academic-constructive controversy. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(11), 2314-2329. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.071109

  75. Vistara, M. F., Rochmad, R., & Wijayanti, K. (2022). Systematic literature review: STEM approach through engineering design process with project based learning model to improve mathematical creative thinking skills. Mathematics Education Journal, 6(2), 140-156. https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v6i2.21150

  76. Voica, C., & Singer, F. M. (2012). Creative contexts as ways to strengthen mathematics learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 538-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.179

  77. Zakeri, N. N. b., Hidayat, R., Sabri, N. A. b. M., Yaakub, N. F. b., Balachandran, K. S., & Azizan, N. I. b. (2023). Creative methods in STEM for secondary school students: Systematic literature review. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(1), ep23003. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/12601