Sie sind auf Seite 1von 29

Students’ Creativity Skills, Attitude, and Knowledge towards General Physics

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The role of physics was recognized in the society for over an extended period, but despite

the fact that it made a significant contribution to life in today's society, there is a decline in

enrolment and performance over the years (KNEC 2002; 2011). The primary goal of physics is to

discover and verify the law which governs specific phenomenon derived from theory.

Demonstration of the experiment is essential for understanding the principles of physics.

Performing tests by one's hand are far more important because it involves learning by doing.

Practical work brings the basis in behavior changes in the students such as the scientific

temperament, curiosity, interest, and creativity. The students play a vital role in their systematic

and scientific training as what educational psychologists said. However, many students considered

physics as one of the most prevailing and problematic subjects in the realm of science. They

perceived physics as a problematic subject during high school days and become more evasive

when they reach college (Rivard and Straw, 2000; Endemir 2009).

Studies showed that knowledge and attitude play an important role in learning. To facilitate

learning, one of the fundamental principles instructors employ is understanding students'

knowledge. And it is well known that students build on what they already know and have come to

realize through formal and informal experiences. People develop attitude and beliefs as they

progress through life. A knowledge-management model incorporating e-learning and product

creation as well as the scaffolding of a teacher can promote the creativity of the learners (Yu,

2012). It is also said knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs evaluation is important for students in the
early semester since students' knowledge may either promote or hinder their learning (Jim Gee,

2012; Yu et al., 2012). Thus, this study is proposed to investigate the knowledge and attitude of

students towards physics and aimed to find the important relationship of these variables

specifically in physics subject.

In education, academic success of students depends on their attitude towards a subject

(Popham 2005; Royster Harris and Schoeps 1999). Silverman and Subramonium suggest that the

pupils with positive or negative belief lead to favorable or unfavorable attitude respectively thus,

pupils having a positive attitude towards any situation achieve their goal easily. Therefore,

development or formation of positive attitude in one's life is helpful facing any challenge. Attitudes

are beliefs and emotions which comprise the affective domain of learners. While the positive

attitude serve a better comprehension of the nature of learning for the learners, it also makes the

students more open to learning, increases their expectations from the learning process and reduces

their anxiety levels. On the released works of the attitudes of elementary school students by

Weingurgh 1998 has shown that nearly 50% of students may lose interest in science at the primary

school. Contrary to the findings made by Olusola, Olasimbo O. Rotimi, C.O. 2012, it was

established that students have high favorable attitude towards physics oriented career courses.

Majority of the studies deal with the knowledge, creativity skills and attitude of the students

in physics as different and separate variables. Some studies focus only on the attitude of the

students and its effect in their achievement, others were just determined the level of creativity skills

of the students and its effect on their learning. This study is intended to determine the students'

knowledge, creativity skills and attitude in physics and to seek whether there is a significant

relationship between them; how do each variable affects each other?


STATEMENTS OF THE PROBLEM

This study aimed to determine the predictors of students' knowledge about general physics

at the Institute of Teacher Education, Isabela State University-Cauayan Campus.

Specifically this study answered the following research questions:

1. What is the level of creativity skills of the students?

2. What is the attitude of the respondents when dealing with physics subject?

3. What is the level of respondents' knowledge of physics?

4. What are the predictors of students’ knowledge of physics?

SCOPE AND DELIMITATIONS

This study focused on the creativity skills, attitude towards general physics and students’

knowledge about general physics. The study was conducted at the Institute of Teacher Education,

Isabela State University-Cauyan Campus. The respondents were delimited to the students of the

abovementioned Institute who had finished the subject general physics in their curriculum. The

sample of the study was randomly selected from the third year and fourth year BSE and BEED

students.

The collection of data and information was done through survey and by administering an

objective test to the selected students. The knowledge was measured through a set of test questions

taken from the different branches of general physics, and the creativity skills and attitude of the

respondents towards physics were assessed through an adopted questionnaire.


SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Determining the predictors of students’ knowledge about general physics are significant to

the following:

The teachers. This study will give them information on what is the level of knowledge

and creativity skills of the students and to determine whether they have a negative or positive

attitude towards physics subject.

The students. This research will serve as their reflection of their knowledge, creativity

skills and attitude towards the subject. And to help them know whether their knowledge affects

their creativity skills.

The parents. This research will help them to know and be informed about their children's

knowledge, creativity skills and attitude, to have an initiative on how they need to participate in

the knowledge improvement of the students.

The future researchers. This study will serve as a guide for further study on students'

knowledge, creativity skills and attitude towards physics.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Creativity skills. This refers to the unique and creative skills that a person possessed and apply in

different aspects such as in creating a product, solving problems and relating to such situation.

Attitudes. This refers to a settled way of thinking of the respondents towards the subject; whether

it is perceived positively or negatively.

Knowledge. This refers to the cognitive skills of the students in the subject gained throughout the

learning process.
Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Creativity skills

Creativity skills refer to ‘the process of bringing into being something novel and useful’

(Sternberg & O’Hara, 1999). ‘‘Human imagination is the ultimate economic means. The ability to

cope up with new ideas and better ways of doing things is what raises efficiency and living

standards”, Richard Florida (2002). Creativity is an important skill for problem-solving and

generating new ideas. “Creative thinking counterparts critical thinking” (Weston and Stoyles,

2007) and “using creative approaches may foster critical thinking” (Pavill, 2011), make it clear

that creative and critical thinking are interrelated and should be evenly balanced. Moreover, ethical

decision making is correlated positively with creative thinking, which includes idea generation and

evaluation, and solution monitoring, Mumford (2010). Varied forms of creative thinking have

identified; these include divergent thinking (multiple ideas in response to a given proposition),

problem identification, and evaluative thinking (judging the value of an idea; Plucker and Renzulli

1999). Creativity entails a balance among synthetic, analytic, and practical abilities. The person

who is only artificial may come up with advanced ideas, but cannot recognize them. The person

who is merely analytic may be a brilliant critic of other people’s thoughts but is not likely to

generate creative ideas.

Critical thinking skills promote the use of inductive and deductive reasoning in solving

problems. Whereas, the nature of creativity has changed from the concepts of ingenuity as an

“artistic and complex trait of talented individuals toward a higher level of development to second

generation concepts of creativity as a purposeful, collaborative process” (Rampersad & Patel,

2014). Also, creativity fosters “creative thinking skills” that lead to “aesthetic experiences”
(Hadzigeorgiou, 2012). It is considered as an “everyday phenomenon of making the world” as a

result of “positive psychological processes” (Tanggaard, 2012; Silvia, 2014). This nature of

creative thought requires assessment of creativity whether in diverse domains or specific domains

(Baer, 2012; Simonton, 2012). Who decides what is creative and how is it measured are issues of

concern in the size of creativity. “In domains with clear-cut experts, the judges’ expertise should

be described or, if novices or quasi-experts are judges describe the evidence that such judges

demonstrate validity in this domain” (Kaufman & Baer, 2012).

Creativity can be measured using the new heuristic framework with reference to “level

(individual, team, organization, and culture), facet (trait, process, press, and product), and

measurement approach (Batey, 2012; Piffer, 2012; Palmon, 2012). Instructional designers should

take into considerations different strategies that will enhance the creative skills of every learner

(Chan, 2012). “The teacher’s skills and attitudes; preparedness to turn as a role model; awareness

of learners’ needs; flexible approaches to curriculum and lesson structure; particular types of

classroom interaction with learners, together with the use of ICT and assessment, are essential

components of teaching for creativity as well as in nurturing creativity in the classroom ” (Davies,

et. al., 2014; Beghetto & Kaufman, 2014). Additionally, a knowledge-management model

incorporating e-learning and product creation as well as the scaffolding of a teacher can promote

the creativity of the learners (Yu et al., 2012).

Attitude

Attitudes are summary judgments of an object or event which aid individuals in structuring

their complex social environments. Hence, attitudes cannot observe directly. These are influenced

by individual’s personality and group and also acquired through learning over the period (Fazio &

Williams, 1986). Additionally, studies recommend that attitudes are likes and dislikes, Bem
(1970). Furthermore, reactions may be positive, negative, or neutral Walley (2009). On the other

hand, several views within the full meaning, readiness of the psyche to turn or react in a certain

way and that attitudes very often come in pairs, one conscious and the other unconscious Jung

(1971). Similarly, study discusses that attitudes are held concerning some aspect of the individual’s

world, such as another person, a physical object, behavior, or policy (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977).

Therefore, the way a person reacts to his surroundings is called his attitude. Also, attitudes defined

as relatively lasting clusters of feelings, beliefs, and behavior tendencies directed towards specific

persons, ideas, objects or groups, Baron & Byrne (1984). Therefore, an attitude is not passive, but

instead, it exerts an active influence on behavior.

A view is a mental or neural state of readiness, organized through experience, using a

directive or changing influence on the individual’s reply to all objects and situations to which it is

related. It is a tendency to reply to some object or situation, Allport (1935). An attitude is a

summary assessment of an object or thought, Malhotra (2005). Attitude is the effect for or in

contradiction of a mental entity (Thurstone 1931). Attitude viewed as an emotional tendency that

is expresses by evaluating a particular unit with some mark of favor or disfavor (Eagly & Chaiken

1993).

Each has some attitude hence, being a psychological phenomenon, every other attitude is

invisible. Therefore, beliefs are subjective and personal attributes and challenging to measure.

However, there seems to be “no universally accepted definition of the term attitude” (Walsh,

1991). Since then, there have been many other meanings which focus on the causal nature of

attitude as evidenced by behavior. Although there is no average meaning of the term attitude, in

general, it refers to a learned predisposition or tendency on the part of an individual to respond

positively or negatively to some object, situation, concept, or another person, Aiken (1970)
Attitudes are typically measured using two main types of scales. Either Likert Scales,

where five response groups are reaching between two extreme positions and the space between the

opposites is graded from 0 expressing the least evaluation to 6 representing the highest evaluation,

e.g., how would you rate the role of your teacher? Difficult (6) – Easy (0); Irritable (6) – Calm (0);

Active (6) – Passive (0), Roger Jowell, (2005).

To upsurge the level of attitude and success in science specifically in physics education,

new teaching methods and technology need to implement and attitude changes with the contact to

science, but the direction of modification may be related to the quality of that exposure and the

learning environment (Altun, Reid and Skryabina, 2002; Adesoji, Gonen, Basaran, Gok and Silay

2008). Learner’s motivation in learning is affected by their attitudes towards learning the subject.

The relationship between motivation and attitudes has been considered a primary concern in

knowledge (Erdemir, 2009). For motivation to learn is thought to be resolute in his attitudes

towards the other group in specific and by his positioning towards the learning task itself, Gardner

and Lambert (1972).

Only when paired up with motivation, proper attitudinal tendencies relate to the levels of

student engagement in learning, and to accomplish. It was observed that the students who have a

negative attitude towards physics have an absence of motivation for a class assignation, and also

the students who have positive attitudes towards physics have motivation for class engagement

(Newble, 1998 and Cracker, 2006).

Many researchers believed that if students were allowed to demonstrate higher cognitive

abilities through problem-solving, either through a teacher-centered approach or a student-centered

approach, their attitudes towards physics might be positively affected (Endemir 2009). Festingel’s

cognitive theory states that persons seek some degree of consonance between their feeling and
action. The kind of attitude builds up by students influence their learning abilities in a particular

theme. Furthermore, it was is found in the study that the low student attitudes towards physics in

the control group was due to the lack of data, problem-solving skills, self-confidence, lack of acting

like experts while solving physics problems and incorrect usage of formula.

Study specified that while students’ negative attitudes toward science are associated with

a traditional approach in science instruction, their positive feelings are related with constructivist

science classrooms, Oh and Yager (2004). The authors also remarked that if students are provided

with too much scientific data, they will have a more undesirable attitude. Thus, the authors

recommended that the learning environment should be planned in such a way to allow students

attain a scientific knowledge and increase a more positive attitude toward science.

Several studies have indicated that the classroom learning environment is a strong factor

in defining and forecasting students’ attitudes toward science (Lawrenz, 1976; Simpson & Oliver,

1990; Riah & Fraser, 1997; Aldolphe, Fraser & Aldridge, 2003). The measure of students’ attitudes

towards physics should take into justification to their attitudes towards the learning environment

(Crawley & Black, 1992).

Knowledge

Knowledge, as a technical term, is better regarded as an analytic concept. Like energy,

knowledge is not a constituent that can be in hand (Newell, 1982). Sometimes it is useful to view

knowledge metaphorically as being a thing; describing it and measuring it as a "body of

knowledge." Knowledge viewed as a belief that is true and justified that a person knew (Dvořák,

2004). More specifically, knowledge described as comprehension, understanding, and experiences

of an environment or the framework of a problem which administers our behavior in such a way

to get a necessary response (McQueen, 1999).


Similarly, knowledge defined as a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual

information, and expert insights that provides a framework for evaluating, incorporating new

experiences and information, and knowledge is context specific and relational (Davenport and

Prusak 1998 as cited in Ipe, 2003). Authors connect the definition of knowledge with information,

e.g., knowledge is an understanding of information and their associated patterns (Bierly 2000 as

cited in Singh, 2008).

Knowledge is hypothesized as codified information including insight, interpretation,

context, experience, wisdom, and (Davenport and Volpel, 2001 as cited in Fong, Ooi, Tan, Lee, &

Chong, 2011). Knowledge can be thought as information that is “contextual, relevant and

actionable” (Bose, 2004). It highlights that knowledge links to a specific context (Krogh 2000).

Knowledge is context-specific because it has a basis for experiences and its formation and molding

are influenced by one’s personality, understanding of an environment and regulation of behavior.

Human knowledge dynamically forms an adaptation of prior coordination (Edelman,

1992). Therefore we cannot account what someone knows, in the sense that we can list the textual

contents of a descriptive cognitive model or expert system. From a psychologist’s perspective, the

theory of situated action (Mills, 1940; Suchman, 1987) claims that knowledge is constructed

dynamically as we conceive of what is happening to us (Thelen and Smith, 1994).

Correspondingly, the nature of knowledge is declined to "truths about the world," and facts

for solving problems is considered regarding mathematical or naturally-occurring objects and

properties (Schön 1987). Consequently, the "social construction of knowledge" (Berger and

Luckman, 1966) is equated with the development of theories about nature, when its force should

be focused at understanding the social origin and resolve the problems in everyday work. As a

result of this confusion, claims about knowledge construction in design and policy interpretation
are viewed as forms of "relativism" and hence "anti-scientific." In psychology, a distinction

between declarative and procedural knowledge is made (Hartl & Hartlová, 2010; Sternberg, 2002).

Declarative knowledge knows something that can state as a true statement. Procedural

knowledge is an ability to do something; it means “to know how.” In knowledge management, this

kind of knowledge is often labeled as tacit knowledge. Knowledge can be measured by a set of

test questions. The presently used multiple-choice test or any other epistemic method may consider

as a set of rubrics by which the numbers (scores) or measurements are formed - and thus,

knowledge may be operationally defined. Most tests used today for measuring a person’s

knowledge on a topic aimed at constituting test items that represent the topic; and are fair and

balanced, i.e. not influenced by the test takers’ features other than knowledge, such as gender or

ethnicity, which might influence the measurement [“The idea of knowledge and how to measure

it” Darwin P. Hunt, 2003].

Knowledge makes the vital distinction between the behavioral potential, which cannot be

directly experiential, and the observable performance or behavior (Sveiby, 1997). Although there

are some who do not differentiate between knowledge and action, the failure to do so stops the

formulation of detailed questions about the full method by which individuals and organizations

obtain, retain and manage knowledge to perform tasks safely, efficiently and at a high-quality

level.

Traditionally, learning is defined as the relatively permanent modification of the behavioral

potential which accompanies the practice. The behavioral possibility that is modified is the

knowledge of a person (or group or any living system, see Miller, 1978). “To know is to have the

power to give a successful performance, not actually to be giving one” Ayer (1958). A person can

own substantial knowledge as a result of learning, but such knowledge remains an unseen power
until the person uses the knowledge to do something – to make some task, understand something,

make a conclusion or solve a problem. In spite of its being inaccessible for direct measurement,

its power of influence over performance can be overwhelming [“The concept of knowledge and

how to measure it” Darwin P. Hunt, 2003].


Chapter 3

Research Methodology

This chapter describes and discusses how the researcher gather the needed data and

information that is used in determining the knowledge and attitudes of the respondents towards

physics subject. It describes who the respondents are and the focus of the study. It also shows the

type of instrument used in gathering data, the sources of the data, data collection, and data analysis.

Research Design

Considering the goal of the study, to determine the predictors of students’ knowledge about

general physics, the cross-sectional-predictive non-experimental quantitative by Burke Johnson

was used as the framework of the study. The cross-sectional design was used because the data

were gathered across the population of the study and did not involve data from the past. On the

other hand, predictive design was utilized to predict or determine the predictors of students’

knowledge about general physics.

Conceptual framework

General Physics is one of the subjects in college that is considered in the curriculum.

Students’ knowledge about the subject is very important in order to apply the principles, theories
and laws in real life situation. It cannot be denied that the knowledge of the students to this very

important subject is affected by many factors. Many studies had been conducted to identify the

predictors of students’ knowledge about general physics. In this study, factors such as creativity

skills of the students and attitude of the students towards the subject were considered as the

predictors of students’ knowledge about general physics. Creativity skills is one of the 21st century

skills that students should developed. The importance of this 21st century skill cannot be

discounted, hence creativity can possibly predict the students’ knowledge about general physics.

Similarly, attitude had been established by many research works conducted as a very

important aspect in the students’ acceptance of a particular field and it certainly affect their

understanding. Having considered this aspect, attitude of the students towards general physics can

probably predict the students’ knowledge of the subject. In other words, creativity skills and

attitude towards the subjects were the predictors considered in this study

Sample and sampling technique

The respondents of the study are from the Institute of Teacher Education who had finished

physics subject during the previous semesters. The minimum sample size was computed using the

rule of thumb for multiple regression and was composed of one hundred twenty eight (128) BSE

and BEED. The 128 samples had met the minimum number of samples required for the use of

AMOS software. The BSE students include the third year comprising 18 males and 12 females,

and the fourth year students of 13 males and 17 females were randomly selected from the class

using a fishbowl or lottery technique. Similarly, the third year BEED consists of 6 males and 27

females, and the fourth year BEED has 7 males and 29 females were chosen using the same

method.
Data collection

In collecting the data, a request letter was addressed to the registrar to get a copy of enrolled

students in general physics for the previous semesters. Upon receiving the copy of students who

have enrolled in general physics, the researchers started to float the questionnaires to the selected

respondents. A consent letter was also given to the respondents requesting them to participate in

answering the questionnaires. The test for assessing their knowledge was administered during their

vacant time and collected right after the 20 minutes allotted time for answering the twenty (20)

multiple choice test questions. The researchers collected the respondents’ attitude and creativity

skills by giving the questionnaires consecutively to that of the knowledge assessment tool.

Data gathering instruments

The instrument used in gathering the data for students’ knowledge is a questionnaire

adopted from Praxis (The Praxis Study Companion). The Physics: Content Knowledge Test is

designed to measure the knowledge and competencies necessary for a beginning Physics teacher

secondary school the development of the test questions and the construction of the test reflect the

National Science Education Standards (NSES) and the National Science Teachers Association

(NSTA) standards and recognize that there are conceptual and procedural schemes that unify the

various scientific disciplines. The test questions will have the primary objective of evaluating the

content areas by using questions that focus on conceptual understanding, critical thinking, and

problem solving in Science. The test content is developed and reviewed in collaboration with

practicing high school Physics teachers, teacher-educators, and higher education content

specialists to keep the test updated and representative of current standards.

In measuring the attitude of the respondents, a questionnaire from Bambry et al, 2005 was

adopted. The questionnaire is consist of 20 items in total, the 12 items are about the students’
attitude towards physics lessons and 8 items about the students’ attitude towards physical

experiments. The respondents in the survey were asked to mark their level of agreement for the

given statement which have five degrees. The questionnaire was developed to question attitudes

towards physics lessons and physical experiments of the students was used. Data collection tool

was made end of this study was to pre-trial form, and then expert opinion was taken to ensure the

validity of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was applied to a group of students to determin its

clarity and understandability, and necessary revisions were made. Pilot study of the questionnaire

was made on 25 students. Reliability of the questionnaire was checked at this stage. Reliability

factor of the applied scale regarding the sampling area came out to be as Cronbach’s Alpha =0.73.

In measuring the students’ creativity skills, a questionnaire from Foronda 2017 was used.

LIKERT scaled questionnaire was administered to the respondents to measure their creative

thinking, good communication, open mindedness, flexibility and being risk takers when dealing

with physics subject. The questionnaire is consisting of 93 items in total and respondents were

asked to marked the level of agreement for the given statement which have five degrees. The

questionnaire was developed and expert opinion was taken to ensure its validity.

Data analysis

The data that were being collected through the questionnaire were classified, organized and

tallied, and were used to answer the research question. The scores of the respondents regarding

their knowledge towards physics were tallied, and to determine its mean and standard deviation,

SPSS was used. The collected data for attitude was classified into Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral,

Disagree and Strongly Disagree respectively allocate each value point of as 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 for

negative and reverse sort for positive responses. After that, the tallied data was loaded into a

computer via SPSS to determine the mean and standard deviation of respondents and used to
interpret their attitude towards physics. The level of creativity skills of the respondents were

specified as 1-never, 2-rarely, 3-sometimes, 4-usally, and 5-always. After that, the mean and

standard deviation of the data were computed via SSPS. The data for the predictors of students’

knowledge was analyzed through AMOS.


CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS

This chapter discusses the presentation, interpretation and analysis of the data gathered from the

respondents who already took up their physics subject.

CREATIVITY SKILLS

Table 1. Creativity Skills description of students.

Creativity statements
Mean Std. Deviation Description
1. Capturing my feelings in a letter or
3.805 .8330 Usually
verse
2. Writing a poem
3.391 .9658 Sometimes
3. Making up jingles
2.922 .9850 Sometimes
4. Keeping an motivating journal or blog
3.008 1.1047 Sometimes
5. Making up an unique story
3.117 1.0395 Sometimes
6. Writing a factual article for a
2.492 1.1224 Rarely
newspaper, newsletter, or magazine
7. Making up lyrics to an amusing song
2.844 1.1934 Rarely
8. Writing witty e-mails
2.328 .9810 Rarely
9. Writing fan-fiction about pre-existing
2.875 1.1224 Sometimes
characters
10. Writing a letter to the editor
2.063 .9781 Rarely
11. Creating a crossword puzzle
2.586 1.1874 Rarely
12. Thinking of a good metaphor, simile, or
3.039 1.1529 Sometimes
analogy
13. Creating a tasty meal out of scattered
2.805 1.2041 Sometimes
leftovers
14. Figuring out a new way home to avoid
2.813 1.1277 Sometimes
traffic
15. Finding something fun to do when I
3.672 1.0126 Usually
have no money
16. Figuring out new ways to save money
3.625 1.1083 Usually
each month
17. Thinking up new rules or a new strategy
3.391 .9900 Sometimes
to play a game
18. Developing a new and efficient filing
2.688 1.0555 Sometimes
system for my CDs or clothing
19. Tinkering with a recipe
2.789 1.0843 Sometimes
20. Cutting out some foods and eating new
2.836 1.1348 Sometimes
ones in order to lose (or gain) weight
21. Finding new ways to motivate myself to
2.977 1.2325 Sometimes
do something unpleasant
22. Making a witty remark
2.969 .9386 Sometimes
23. Cracking a joke
3.664 .9743 Usually
24. Fixing something with duct tape (or
3.086 1.0576 Sometimes
something similar)
25. Composing an original song
2.586 1.1807 Rarely
26. Making up dance moves
2.703 1.1995 Sometimes
27. Learning how to play a musical
3.000 1.2102 Sometimes
instrument
28. Singing a popular song by myself
3.922 1.1337 Usually
29. Shooting a fun video to air on YouTube
2.297 1.3478 Rarely
30. Singing in harmony
2.867 1.2635 Sometimes
31. Giving a presentation in class or at work
3.406 .9756 Usually
32. Delivering a toast or a speech in front of
2.734 .9679 Sometimes
other people
33. Spontaneously creating lyrics to a rap
2.234 1.0684 Rarely
song
34. Playing music in public
2.602 1.2633 Sometimes
35. Acting in a play
2.797 1.0299 Sometimes
36. Delivering a punch line of a joke
3.547 1.1354 Usually
37. Entertaining a small child
3.773 1.0590 Usually
38. Communicating with people from
3.398 .9419 Usually
different cultures
39. Helping other people cope with a
3.523 .8321 Usually
difficult situation
40. Persuading someone to buy something
3.125 .9557 Sometimes
41. Wooing and flirting with someone I am
2.273 1.2213 Rarely
attracted to
42. Leading a group project
3.070 1.0438 Sometimes
43. Teaching someone how to do something
3.398 .8356 Usually
44. Thinking of a polite way to tell someone
3.484 .9390 Usually
about a flaw or bad habit
45. Planning a trip or event with friends that
3.438 .9537 Usually
meets everyone’s needs
46. Mediating a dispute or argument
3.195 .9227 Sometimes
between two friends
47. Delegating other work to people and
3.203 .8905 Sometimes
inspiring them to complete it
48. Getting people to feel relaxed and at
3.383 .9146 Sometimes
ease
49. Drawing a picture of something I’ve
2.836 1.2722 Sometimes
never actually seen (like an alien)
50. Creating or modifying my own clothing
2.906 1.1734 Sometimes
51. Decorating a room
3.148 1.1439 Sometimes
52. Sketching a person or object
2.703 1.2382 Sometimes
53. Making interesting PowerPoint
3.328 .9890 Sometimes
presentations
54. Doodling/drawing random or geometric
2.797 1.1995 Sometimes
designs
55. Designing a personal website (not
2.063 1.1277 Rarely
programming, but rather the aesthetics)
56. Carving something out of wood or
2.320 1.2098 Rarely
similar material
57. Making a scrapbook page out of my
2.922 1.1879 Sometimes
photographs
58. Constructing something out of metal,
2.461 1.1698 Rarely
stone, or similar material
59. Taking a well-composed photograph
2.977 1.2452 Sometimes
using an interesting angle or approach
60. Making a sculpture or piece of pottery
2.031 1.1007 Rarely
61. Thinking of a new invention
2.695 1.1675 Sometimes
62. Figuring out how to fix a frozen or
2.305 1.1263 Rarely
buggy computer
63. Writing a computer program
1.773 .9325 Never
64. Solving math puzzles
2.758 1.1276 Sometimes
65. Taking apart machines and figuring out
2.375 1.1433 Rarely
how they work
66. Building something mechanical (like a
1.914 1.1226 Rarely
robot)
67. Helping to carry out or design a
2.219 1.1149 Rarely
scientific experiment
68. Figuring out what illness a person might
2.703 1.0223 Sometimes
have based on their symptoms
69. Designing a way to test a hypothesis
2.445 .9705 Rarely
70. Solving an algebraic or geometric proof
2.539 1.0264 Rarely
71. Analyzing an argument
3.078 1.0009 Sometimes
72. Researching a topic using many
2.875 1.0722 Sometimes
different types of sources that may not
be readily apparent
73. Comparing two different points of view
3.367 1.1145 Sometimes
74. Debating a controversial topic from my
3.172 1.0048 Sometimes
own perspective
75. Gathering the best possible assortment
3.133 1.0527 Sometimes
of articles or papers to support a specific
point of view
76. Arguing a side in a debate that I do not
2.727 1.0403 Sometimes
personally agree with
77. Figuring out how to integrate critiques
2.898 1.0783 Sometimes
and suggestions while revising a work
78. Being able to offer constructive
3.031 1.1220 Sometimes
feedback based on my own reading of a
paper
79. Thinking of many different solutions to
3.461 .9713 Usually
a problem
80. Coming up with a new way to think
2.828 .9648 Sometimes
about an old debate
81. Thinking of new ways to help people
3.523 .8415 Usually
82. Choosing the best solution to a problem
3.703 .9668 Usually
83. Responding to an issue in a context-
3.227 .8804 Sometimes
appropriate way
84. Maintaining a good balance between my
3.695 .8377 Usually
work and my personal life
85. Understanding how to make myself
4.031 .9469 Usually
happy
86. Being able to work through my personal
3.773 .9154 Usually
problems in a healthy way
87. Appreciating a beautiful painting
4.094 1.0151 Usually
88. Analyzing the themes in a good book
3.563 1.0850 Usually
89. Coming up with my own interpretation
3.523 1.0115 Usually
of a classic work of art
90. Enjoying an art museum
3.469 1.1290 Usually
91. Thinking about how a movie or
3.680 1.1078 Usually
television show could be improved
92. Discovering new music
3.492 1.2859 Usually
93. Burning a mix CD to introduce a friend
2.242 1.1688 Rarely
to new songs
Grand mean
3.00 .539 Sometimes

The table for creativity skills shows the individual mean with its corresponding description

(always, usually, sometimes, rarely and never). There are different characteristics of creative

thinkers cited by CREATIVE THINKING-An essential skill for the 21st century (2016), first is

that they are good communicators in the sense that their creativity is expressed in many ways

through both listening and communicating. Collaboration is also important for this kind of

thinking, and good communication is essential for work performance as a part of a team. It can be

seen that the communication related questions (34- playing music in public, 35- acting in a play,

74-debating a controversial topic from my own perspective, 76- arguing a side in a debate that I

do not personally agree with, 80-coming up with a new way to think about an old debate) are

answered “sometimes”. Another characteristic of creative thinkers is open-mindedness and

flexibility. An open mind is a mind that appreciates criticism, is ready for new solutions and ideas,

and isn’t afraid of evaluating ideas. Abilities to adapt to changes and think outside the usual

patterns are parts of creative thinking, which is why being flexible is a characteristic trait of

creative thinkers. Questions that are related to open mindedness and flexibility are also answered

“sometimes”. It can be shown by the questions (46- mediating a dispute or argument between two

friends, 47-delegating other work to people and inspiring them to complete it, 71-analyzing an
argument, 73-comparing two different point of view, 75-gathering the best possible assortment of

articles or papers to support a specific point of view, 77-figuring out how to integrate critics and

suggestions while revising a work, 78-being able to offer constructive feedback based on my own

reading of paper). Creative thinkers are risk-takers. Exploring new ideas and strategies is

impossible without risk-taking, as a willingness to face challenges and accept change. Statements

showing risk-taking skills are shown in questions (17-thinking up new rules or new strategy to

play a game, 18-developing a new and efficient filing system for CDs or clothing, thinking of new

invention, 66- building something mechanical like robots) were answered rarely and sometimes.

Knowledge allows creative thinkers to see the full picture, which is why they know a lot about the

sector they work in. They are experts in what they do, and the concept of life-long learning is what

they base their expertise on, made them knowledgeable. Questions related to knowledge are mostly

answered by “sometimes”. These includes the questions (2-writing a poem, 3-making up jingle, 5-

making up an unique story, 6-writing a factual article for a newspaper, newsletter or magazine,

9-writing fun fiction about pre-existing characters, 52-sketching a person or object, 53-making

interesting Power point presentation, 64-solving math problems). As shown by the students’

attitude grand mean, 3.00, students are sometimes good communicator, open-minded, flexible,

knowledgeable, and risk-takers.


ATTITUDE

Table 2. Attitude description of respondents towards general physics.

Mean Std. Description


Attitude Statements
Deviation

1. We learn interesting things in physics


3.953 .7619 Agree
lessons
2. I look forward to physics lessons.
3.578 .7593 Agree
3. Physics lessons are exiting.
3.602 .8992 Agree
4. I would like to have more physics
3.328 .8704 Undecided
lessons at school.
5. I like physics lessons more than the
2.727 .7707 Undecided
others.
6. Physics lessons are boring.
2.516 .8034 Disagree
7. Physics lessons are difficult.
3.523 .9878 Agree
8. I only fail in physics lessons.
2.570 .8845 Disagree
9. I get good marks from physics
3.148 .7109 Undecided
lessons.
10. I easily learn physics topics.
3.000 .6758 Undecided
11. I feel helpless when doing physics
2.797 .7567 Undecided
homework’s.
12. I understand everything lectured in
2.914 .7320 Undecided
physics lessons.
13. Physics experiments are exiting.
3.742 .7961 Agree
14. I like physics experiments because I
3.641 .7910 Agree
don’t know what will happen.
15. Physics experiments are useful,
3.875 .7099 Agree
because I can work with my friends.
16. I like physics experiments, because I
3.453 .7619 Agree
can decide what to do myself.
17. I would like to have more
3.641 .8009 Agree
experiments in the physics lessons.
18. We learn physics lessons better when
3.625 .8694 Agree
we do physics experiments.
19. I look forward to doing experiments
3.609 .7013 Agree
in physics lessons.
20. Physics experiments in the physics
2.586 .8651 Disagree
lessons are boring.
Grand mean 3.29 .366 Positive
Table 2.1. Attitude mean range of respondents

Attitude Mean Range

Positive 2.60-5.00

Negative 1.00-2.50

As shown in the table 2 the computed mean of the students’ attitude in every questions in a scale

of 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-nuetral or undecided, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree. The table

shows the positive attitude of the students towards general physics subject as per of its grand mean,

3.29. The computed grand mean ranges from 2.60 to 5.00 showing a positive attitude of the

respondents. As seen from table 2, students who participated to the survey replied positively to the

questions (1-we learn interesting things in physics lesson, 2- I look forward to physics lesson, 3-

physics lessons are exciting, 13 physics experiments are exciting, 14-I like physics experiments

because I don’t know what will happen, 15- Physics experiments are useful, because I can work

with my friends, 16- I like physics experiments because I can decide what to do myself, 17-I would

like to have more experiments in the physics lessons, 18-we learn physics lessons better when we

do physics experiments, 19-I look forward to doing experiments in physics lessons). It also shown

in the table that the students are having a positive attitude towards physics experiments and are

interested in physics lessons. In the study of students’ attitude and motivation, the researchers

concluded that students who have high-level motivation for class engagement have also positive

attitudes towards physics laboratory, Eryilmaz, Yildiz & Akin (2011). Regarding the questions stating

that physics is boring, (questions 6- Physics lessons are boring, 20- Physics experiments in the

physics lessons are boring) the students answered negatively, in return showing a positive attitude.

Students improve their skills to better understand the concepts, and adapt them to daily life as well as

their personal skills, and it provides a positive attitude towards physics lessons (Algan 1999, Staeck
1995). According to Hendrickson, attitudes are the best predictor estimation of students’ success

(Hendrickson, 1997) Activities must be planned, organized and implemented so that students may

develop more positive attitudes (Pintrich, 1996)

KNOWLEDGE
Table 3. Knowledge description of respondents towards general physics.

Variable Mean SD Description


Level of Knowledge 5.39 1.94 Unsatisfactory

As shown in the table 3, the level of knowledge of the respondents is unsatisfactory. This is because

out of 20 items, the mean result is only 5.39. It shows that the level of their knowledge towards

general physics is very low considering the mean that did not even reach the half of the total item.

The knowledge of the students can somehow affect their learning considering that knowledge is

one of the predictor of learning because students who had a more integrated knowledge base were

able to operate on higher levels of procedural knowledge at the beginning of the course were more

likely to be successful. These results emphasize the importance of recognizing students,

knowledge base at the beginning of learning process. Therefore, the focus should not only be on

what students know but also on how well they know it. (Hailikari, Katajavuori, and Ylanne 2009).

However, with regard to improve of study conditions the identification of subject-specific

predictors is of particular interest. In this regard, knowledge, which has proven to be a good

predictor for learning (Shapiro, 2004), is likely to predict academic success, too. (Hailikari 2009)

is theoretically derived based on prior work of (Krathwohl 2002). It is empirically supported by

the fact that different types of knowledge predict academic success to a different extend in different

subjects.
Table 4. Predictors of students’ knowledge of general physics
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) 4.618 1.672 2.763 .007

Ave. Creativity .526 .327 .146 1.606 .111

Ave. Attitude -.244 .482 -.046 -.506 .614

As shown by the regression model, creativity skills (β=.526; p=.111>0.05) and attitude towards

general physics (β=-.244; p=.614>0.05) do not predict the students’ knowledge of general physics.

Behaviorism states that the mind does not help a person to acquire knowledge (Thomas H Leahey

2000), but instead it is the psychology of the environment which a person lives. It only proves that

environmental factors are the ones that predict the level of students’ knowledge. Another study

shows that students acquire knowledge through the interaction of two factors. (1) The ability to

process and store information, and (2) the number and frequency of academically oriented

experiences, called the fluid intelligence, Cattell (1987). Procedural and declarative knowledge

can influence creative thinking (Runco & Chand, 1995). This only proves that knowledge can

affect creativity but creativity in return cannot be a predictor of knowledge. Knowledge can be

developed through different methods and techniques; or they contribute to the development of

different methods and techniques (Drummond at all, 1998; Howe at all, 2000; Kamouri at all,

1986; Johnson & Star, 2007; Kırkhart, 2001; Andre & Ding, 1991).
CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of the findings, so conclusions drawn from the findings

and the corresponding recommendations.

SUMMARY

This is a quantitative study which was designed to determine the students’ creativity skills, attitude

and knowledge towards general physics subject. A five-page test questionnaire was administered

to the respondents who already took up their physics subject. In the knowledge variable, a test

questions were used adopted from Praxis (The Praxis Study Companion). In the attitude variable,

we adopted a 5 LIKERT scale questionnaire from Bambry et al 2005. While in measuring the

creativity of the respondents, we use also a 5 LIKERT scale formulated by Foronda 2017 and has

been validated.

Specifically, this study answered the following research questions:

1. What is the level of creativity skills of the students?

The result of the students’ creativity skills towards general physics subject is at the

moderate level as showed by the grand mean, 3.00. This means that the respondent’s

creativity skills are used only occasionally.

2. What is the attitude of the respondents when dealing with physics subject?

The respondents’ attitude towards the physics subject shows a positive result. That is

because, the grand mean (3.29) lies on the mean positive range from 2.60-5.00.

3. What is the level of respondents' knowledge of physics?


The level of the respondents’ knowledge towards physics shows an unsatisfactory result with

a mean of 5.39.

4. What are the predictors of students’ knowledge of physics?

Students acquire knowledge through the interaction of two factors. These are the ability to process

and store information, and the number and frequency of our academically oriented experiences.

The ability to process and store information is a component of what cognitive psychologists refer

to as fluid intelligence. One of its defining features is the ability to process information and store

it in permanent memory. High fluid intelligence is associated with enhanced ability to process and

store information. Low fluid intelligence is associated with diminished ability to process and store

information. Behaviorism states that the mind does not help a person to acquire knowledge, but

instead it is the psychology of the environment which a person lives.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings derived from this study, the researchers concluded that the creativity skills

of the students such as good communicators, open-minded, flexible, and risk-takers are sometimes

observed in such situations. The attitude of the students towards physics is considered to be

favorable since they almost answered positive questions with favor and negative questions with

disfavor. In contrast with the students’ attitude, their level of knowledge is perceived to be

unsatisfactory proving that they lack in knowledge in physics lessons. It was also concluded in

this study that positive attitude towards physics does not predict or affect the level of students’

knowledge. And also, creativity skills are determined to be a not significant factor of knowledge.

Therefore, positive or negative attitude towards physics does not predict the increase and decrease

of students’ level of knowledge. An improvement of students’ creativity skills does not also reflect

any progress in their knowledge.


RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are offered based on the findings and conclusion of the study:

1. Teachers must help students to develop creativity since it is one of the essential skills for

21st century, in align with the observed creativity skills of students in the study that they

tend to use their creativity occasionally. With this, teachers will somehow help the students

to be creative thinkers. It was also proven that the ability to apply innovative thinking in

both a digital and non-digital environment has become a characteristic of successful people

nowadays, CREATIVE THINKING-An essential skill for the 21st century (2016).

2. Teachers must provide activities that would enhance students’ creativity because it

important to develop creative thinking techniques as a skill, together with problem solving

and critical thinking to be successful in such career.

3. Students’ learning environment must be conducive for learning that could help them for

acquiring and constructing knowledge.

4. Teachers should use instructional methods (learning activities such as critical thinking and

reasoning) and instructional materials that will enhance the teaching and learning process,

and will increase the level of students’ knowledge in physics subject.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen