The effect of creative problem solving with the intervention social skills on the performance of creative tasks
This research aims to determine the social skills intervention with the student’s ability to solve problems creatively towards understanding the concepts and procedures: the objectives of learning. A quasi-experimental research design was used to see the interaction between attitudes and treatments. The research sample was students who took computer courses in reality-based laboratories in vocational schools. Data analysis was performed using descriptive analysis techniques and inferential statistical multivariate analysis of variance two paths. Creative problem solving is intervened by a background in social skills to understand concepts and procedures. Social skills have a greater influence on the creative process. This can be seen when giving creative problem-solving tasks. The abilities they have, about; readiness to learn, the ability to understand one’s own needs, and the ability to understand one’s own learning style, greatly support the performance of their creative assignments. At the same time, external factors have less influence on the performance of creative tasks. These external factors are influenced by the class social environment, group formation, and class management. Students who have high social skills find it easier to complete creative tasks, and students who have low social skills have problems adapting and adjusting to the learning process.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0622.214.171.1240
An, Ch. (2019). The content and role of intrinsic motivation in creative work: the importance of seeking “Enjoyment”. Creativity Studies, 12(2), 280–290. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2019.6451
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 344–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2003.09.002
Basadur, M., Gelade, G., & Basadur, T. (2014). Creative problem-solving process styles, cognitive work demands, and organizational adaptability. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(1), 80–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886313508433
Buisine, S., Besacier, G., Aoussat, A., & Vernier, F. (2012). How do interactive tabletop systems influence collaboration? Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.010
Carver, Ch. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2005). On the structure of behavioral self-regulation. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 41–84). Academic Press.
Chowdhry, S. (2016). Student’s perception of effectiveness of a technology enhanced problem based learning environment in a mechanical engineering module. Journal of Today’s Ideas – Tomorrow’s Technologies, 4(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.15415/jotitt.2016.41002
Estrada, C. A., Isen, A. M., & Young, M. J. (1994). Positive affect improves creative problem solving and influences reported source of practice satisfaction in physicians. Motivation and Emotion, 18(4), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02856470
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Florida, R., Mellander, Ch., Stolarick, K., Silk, K., Matheson, Z., & Hopgood, M. (2011). Creativity and prosperity: The Global Creativity Index. Martin Prosperity Institute.
Foster, J., & Yaoyuneyong, G. (2016). Teaching innovation: equipping students to overcome real-world challenges. Higher Education Pedagogies, 1(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2015.1134195
Gillies, R. M. (2019). Promoting academically productive student dialogue during collaborative learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 97, 200–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.07.014
Huang, T.-Ch. (2019). Do different learning styles make a difference when it comes to creativity? An Empirical Study, Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 252–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.003
Isari, D., Pontiggia, A., & Virili, F. (2016). Working with tweets vs. working with chats: an experiment on collaborative problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.052
Khuziakhmetov, A. N., & Gorev, P. M. (2017). Introducing learning creative mathematical activity for students in extra mathematics teaching. Bolema: Boletim de Educação Matemática, 31(58), 642–658. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v31n58a06
Lin, Sz.-Y., & Chang, H.-I. (2020). Does open-plan office environment support creativity? The mediating role of activated positive mood. Creativity Studies, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2020.10332
Merrell, K. W. (2001). Assessment of children’s social skills: recent developments, best practices, and new directions. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 9(1–2), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327035EX091&2_2
Muis, K. R., Chevrier, M., & Singh, C. A. (2018). The role of epistemic emotions in personal epistemology and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 53(3), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1421465
Navickienė, V., Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, Ž., Valantinaitė, I., & Žilinskaitė-Vytienė, V. (2019). The relationship between communication and education through the creative personality of the teacher. Creativity Studies, 12(1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2019.6472
Paas, F., Camp, G., & Rikers, R. (2001). Instructional compensation for age-related cognitive declines: effects of goal specificity in maze learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 181–186. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-06126.96.36.199
Paas, F. G. W. C., & Merriënboer, van J. G. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-06188.8.131.52
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Merriënboer, van J. J. G., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504795
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Gerven, van P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8
Schmidt, H. G., Loyens, S. M. M., Gog, van T., & Paas, F. (2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263350
Schmitt, L., Buisine, S., Chaboissier, J., Aoussat, A., & Vernier, F. (2012). Dynamic tabletop interfaces for increasing creativity. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1892–1901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.007
Schult, J., Stadler, M., Becker, N., Greiff, S., & Sparfeldt, J. R. (2017). Home alone: complex problem solving performance benefits from individual online assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 513–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.054
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35184.108.40.2067
Sweller, J., Merriënboer, van J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Valqui Vidal, R. V. (2005). Creativity for operational researchers. Investigação Operacional, 25, 1–24.
Wang, H.-Ch., Chang, Ch.-Y., & Li, T.-Y. (2008). Assessing creative problem-solving with automated text grading. Computers and Education, 51(4), 1450–1466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.01.006