See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/377022214

Creative Problem-Solving in K to 12 Physics Classroom

on STEM Strand

Article in The Normal Lights · December 2023

DOI: 10.56278/tnl.v17i2.2174

CITATIONS READS

0 48

2 authors:

Albert Andry Panergayo Alfons Jayson Orbase Pelgone

Laguna State Polytechnic University, San Pablo City Ca… Philippine Normal University
14 PUBLICATIONS 54 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Albert Andry Panergayo on 01 January 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Creative Problem-Solving
in K to 12 Physics Classroom
on STEM Strand
Albert Andry E. Panergayo
[email protected]

Alfons Jayson O. Pelgone

Laguna State Polytechnic University – San Pablo

Abstract Creativity is an important skill to be developed

in STEM education and is also needed for economic
development. Hence, this study identified and described
the instructional practices of Physics teachers that foster
creativity in problem-solving in Physics classrooms and
their students creativity as influenced by these practices.
Using a descriptive case study, classroom observation,
semi-structured interviews, and document analysis were
initiated from the purposive sample of six cases of Physics
teachers. Thematic analysis revealed that the teacher
participants foster creativity in problem-solving through
constructivist-oriented and student-directed learning
activities. The descriptive statistics further revealed that
Creative Problem-Solving v6.1TM stages were moderately
observed. Assessment of the students’ learning outputs
uncovered that relevance, effectiveness, problematization,
and elegance were the criteria that were highlighted in
all cases. In conclusion, the instructional practices and
their extent of alignment to CPS v6.1TM can influence the
level of creativity in problem-solving. Implications and
recommendations were also discussed.

Keywords: creativity, creative problem-solving, problem

solving, science curriculum

Panergayo, A.A.E. & Pelgone, A.J.O. (2023). Creative problem-solving in K to 12 physics classroom on
STEM strand. The Normal Lights, 17(2), pp. X–X
Corresponding Author: [email protected]
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Introduction

The unabated and accelerating adoption of technology

coupled with the emergence of a global pandemic in 2020
has restructured the way tasks, jobs, and skills are done in
daily life, in school, and in the workplace. This also shifted
the educational paradigm from conventional learning to a
flexible learning system (Andal et al., 2020). Moreover, the
current educational reforms highlighted the need to integrate
complex skills such as analytical, critical, and creative
thinking into the school curriculum to respond to the global
demand and rising standards of education (Daud et al., 2012;
Schwab & Saman, 2016).

Creativity is a valuable skill immune to technological

automation. It is acknowledged as one of the foundations of
social and economic success in every nation (Blessinger et
al., 2018). It drives economic productivity and fosters global
competitiveness. Furthermore, the constant inclusion of
creativity among the top abilities in past and present reports
highlighted this talent’s critical role in an information- and
technology-based society (Schwab, 2018). As a result,
educators and policymakers are prompted to support changes
to meet the global demand for these skills.

In the Philippine setting, the Department of Education

started offering the K-12 Enhanced Basic Education Act of
2013 (R. A. 10533) as a response to the growing demand for
industries and rising standards for education. Specifically,
the K-12 conceptual model for science education is directed
towards acquiring skills essential in the workplace and a
knowledge-based society. These skills include responsible
stewardship of nature, effective communication, informed
decision-making, innovative thinking, and creative and
critical problem-solving (K to 12 Curriculum Guide in
Science, 2016). Creativity and problem-solving received

153
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

common concern from international and local educators,

emphasizing their crucial role in success in an evolving
society.

Various pedagogical frameworks were proposed

locally and internationally to address this demand. The
Creative Problem Solving (CPS) model is one of the most
widely used models for fostering creativity and problem-
solving (Scrhoth, 2016; Sumners, 2016). This method
integrates critical and creative thinking skills to generate
imaginative and innovative solutions to complex problems
(Treffinger et al., 2006, 2008, 2013). The CPS model, as a
teaching method, incorporates active learning strategies
to engage students in working with complex situations. It
further allows students to go beyond conventional thinking
and develop creative and novel solutions (Reali, 2017).

The CPS model is a viable response to the need for

practical and creative science teachers and learning materials.
Thus, the role of teachers is crucial in promoting creativity
and problem-solving (Davies et al., 2014). The effectiveness
of science instruction in terms of creativity development
lies in the instructional practices employed by the teachers.
Teachers’ beliefs about creativity or students’ abilities may
affect the development of students’ creativity (Beghetto &
Kaufman, 2014). It is important to establish an empirical
basis for the effectiveness of a creative learning environment
and approaches to the student’s development of creativity and
problem-solving skills (Davies et al., 2014). Moreover, there
is a dearth of research on Filipino learners’ creativity and
problem-solving levels. Yet, creativity and problem-solving
are among the skills needed in the future society. Thus, this
study was undertaken to describe the creativity and problem-
solving of Filipino learners in a Physics classroom and the
teaching method through the lens of the CPS model.

154
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Scientific Creativity
The product viewpoint of scientific creativity as its focal
point outcomes are those that result from the creative process.
In defining creativity from the perspective of a product,
Sternberg, Kaufman & Pretz (2002) maintain that creativity
is the ability to produce outcomes that are both novel (i.e.,
original and unexpected) and appropriate (i.e., useful,
adaptive concerning task constraints). Cropley et al. (2017)
defined creativity as depicting novel products that serve some
useful social purpose, known as functional creativity. This
is similar to the standard definition proposed by Runco and
Leckelt (2012) and Amabile and Pillemer (2012). Cropley
et al. (2005; 2019) proposed an enriched hierarchical four-
criterion model of functional creativity and, later transformed
by Cropley et al. (2011) and Cropley & Kaufmann (2012)
to the five-criterion model, which includes relevance &
effectiveness, problematization, propulsion, elegance, and
genesis as dimensions.

In the study of scientific creativity at the senior

high school level, Panergayo (2023) revealed that Grade 12
STEM Filipino learners have average scientific creativity.
This suggests that scientific creativity is fairly evident in
senior high schools in the STEM field. Similar findings
were uncovered by Gupta and Kumar (2020), stating that
half of the senior high schools registered an average level
of scientific creativity. These results can be attributed to the
teachers’ perceptions and practices in enhancing scientific
creativity. Siew et al. (2014) contended that teachers’
decisions and instructional strategies are crucial in designing
a learning environment that supports scientific innovation.
Sidek et al. (2022) argued that teacher and learning activities
significantly influence scientific creativity in science learning.
The systematic review conducted by Sidek et al. (2020)
further revealed that the role of the teacher is central to the
cultivation of scientific creativity. As a result, it is further

155
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

recommended to explore the teachers’ beliefs and practices

and their effect in real settings in science learning.

Creative Problem-Solving
CPS as a skill is an ability that students must have to succeed
in future society (Hu et al., 2017). This skill pertains to the
ability of the students to solve problems through the generation
of function and creative ideas (Saeidah & Nooren, 2013). In
simple terms, it refers to problem-solving with creativity. It is
the relation between creativity and problem-solving (Osborn,
1963). CPS can be viewed as a creative and critical thinking
process of developing something new, requiring creative efforts
through its process. It helps people redefine the problems and
opportunities they encounter, generate innovative solutions,
and take action (Isaksen, 2023; Treffinger et al., 2008). The
CPS model is a proven method for approaching a problem
or a challenge imaginatively and innovatively. It has been
used for over 60 years by various organizations worldwide
and has been supported by numerous research studies, with
hundreds of published studies on its effectiveness and impact
(Isaksen, 2023; Treffinger & Isaksen, 2013). According to
Birgili (2015), critical and creative thinking skills should
be integrated critically into instructional design to produce
learners who might be possible young scientists of the future.
Moreover, CPS is also influenced by the pedagogical practices
of the teachers. David et al. (2013) revealed that instructional
materials and resources used by teachers can be utilized to
stimulate the learners’ creative thinking.

Teachers’ instructional practices can affect the

development of the scientific creativity. The delivery of
science education can impact students’ ability to think
creatively and critically. Science educators can encourage
students to think creatively and solve problems innovatively
by providing creative teaching strategies and a supportive

156
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

learning environment. Given these, it is imperative to explore

the various instructions that promote creativity in science.
Investigating how teachers can tailor their strategies to
promote creative thinking and problem-solving is essential.
The results from this study can provide inputs in designing
creativity-fostering instructional materials and learning
environments.

Framework of the Study

Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. It

features the salient steps of the CPS model used to map the
Physics teachers’ instructional practices and the components
of creativity in problem-solving used to assess students’
scientific creativity.

Figure 1

Grounded on CPS v6.1TM, the study aimed to

document the instructional practices of the six cases of
physics teachers and assess the alignment of the model to
evaluate the effectiveness of the teacher’s instructional
practices in enhancing scientific creativity in STEM classes.
Scientific creativity can be shaped by the Physics teachers’
beliefs, decisions, and actions in the science teaching and

157
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

learning process (Gupta & Kumar, 2020; Sidek et al., 2020;

Sidek et al., 2022). The CPS model emphasizes problem-
solving skills through systematically and logically arranged
stages using different thinking patterns (Hu et al., 2017). CPS
v6.1TM is a proven, portable, powerful, practical, and positive
problem-solving model. It has been used for more than 60
years by organizations worldwide (Fahrisa & Parmin, 2022).
It is portable because it links a person’s natural creativity and
problem-solving approaches. It can substantially improve the
creativity and problem-solving performance of the students.
It was also proven to foster engagement and motivation,
improve metacognition (Effendi, 2017) and boost the
mathematical problem-solving ability of the students.

The framework further shows the four crucial

steps of CPS v6.1TM to solve problems and manage change
creatively: (1) understanding the challenge - involves
investigating a broad goal, opportunity, or challenge, and
clarifying, formulating, or focusing your thinking on setting
the principal direction for your work; (2) generating ideas –
involves coming up with new possibilities and many varied,
unusual ideas for a clearly stated problem, and identify the
promising possibilities; (3) preparing for action – involves
exploring ways to make promising options into workable
solutions and preparing for successful implementation;
and 4) planning your approach – involves keeping track of
your thinking while it is happening, to ensure that you are
moving in the direction you want to go. It also guides you in
customizing your approach to applying CPS.

Figure 1 also shows that the alignment of the

instructional practices and the CPS model significantly
shapes the students’ scientific creativity as manifested in
their learning output. The framework further posits that
alignment can create a conducive learning environment
where teachers employ pedagogical strategies that reflect the

158
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

principles of the CPS model. In this study, the five-criterion

model of functional creativity, as shown in Table 1, was used
to evaluate the students’ scientific creativity in their learning
outputs.

Table 1
The Hierarchical Five-Criterion Model for Functional Creativity

Product Creativity
Problematization
Effectiveness
Relevance &

Propulsion

Elegance

Genesis
Performance Prescription Redefinition Pleasingness Vision
Appropriateness Prognosis Reinitiation Completeness Transferability
Correctness Diagnosis Generation Sustainability Seminality
Operability Redirection Gracefulness Pathfinding
Durability Reconstruction Convincingness Germinality
Safety Harmoniousness Foundationality
Recognition

Creativity and problem-solving can be taught in

children of any age in any subject. The teaching method
is critical in developing learners’ creativity and problem-
solving skills (Davies et al., 2014; Ramankulov et al., 2016).
There are various of methods for teaching creativity and
problem-solving available in the literature (Treffinger et
al., 2006). Hence, this study presupposes that creativity in
problem-solving of the students in a physics classroom can be
attributed to the methods used by the teachers. The teaching
methods play a vital role in developing creativity in students’
problem-solving. Likewise, mapping the alignment of these
methods with the CPS v6.1TM would help teachers effectively
promote creativity and problem-solving in their respective
Physics classrooms.

159
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Research Questions

This study aimed to describe the method of teaching creativity

in problem-solving in General Physics 1 on the STEM strand.
Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. How do teachers develop Physics students’

creativity in problem-solving?
2. How does teaching creativity in problem-
solving align with the CPS v6.1TM
in terms of
2.1. understanding the challenge;
2.2. generating ideas;
2.3. preparing for action; and
2.4. planning your approach?
3. How evident is creativity in problem-
solving of STEM students in physics
classrooms as manifested in their learning
outputs in terms of:
3.1. relevance and effectiveness;
3.2. problematization;
3.3. propulsion;
3.4. elegance; and
3.5. genesis?

Methodology

Research Design
This study utilized a descriptive case study incorporating
quantitative and qualitative evidence to answer the research
problems. This type of research design attempts to present
a rich and thick description of the phenomenon under study
within its context (Merriam, 1998). In this case study, the
phenomenon under investigation is the teacher’s method of
developing creativity in problem-solving among learners in
physics classrooms.

160
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Participants

The primary participants of this study were six purposively

selected physics teachers from the senior high school
program. These teachers have at least two years of teaching
experience, have previously handled physics courses, and
are currently teaching General Physics 1. The teacher also
fostered creativity as they gained at least 3.5 as the overall
mean value in the pre-survey, indicating the frequent practice
of creativity-fostering teaching methods.

Table 2
Basic Information about the Teacher Participants

Experience Average
Teacher Sex Institution Subject Specialization
(years) Rating

A F Public Physics 2 4.12

B F Public Chemistry and Physics 7 3.59

C M Private Physical Science 4 3.89

D M Private Physical Science 2 4.37
E M Public Physics/ General Science 14 3.79
F M Private Physics and Mathematics 14 4.57

Legend: 1.0-1.8 is almost never; 1.9-2.6 is once in a while; 2.7-3.4 is sometimes;

3.5-4.2 is often; 4.3-5.0 is almost always

Instruments
The following are the instruments used in the study. Purpose,
development, and validation details are presented below:

Creative Problem-Solving Observation Checklist (CPSOC)

The CPSOC is a researcher-developed instrument, composed

of two parts: (1) CPS teacher’s checklist developed based
on a review of related literature; and (2) actual observation
notes that capture the actual teaching-learning process. This
instrument was used to observe the implementation of the
CPS model in the physics classroom. The CPS teacher’s

161
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

checklist comprises 28 statements on a four-point Likert

scale ranging from excellent (4) to poor (1).

Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale (CSDS)

To determine the level of the students’ creativity and

problem-solving regarding artifacts, the researchers adopted
and utilized the CSDS developed by Cropley et al. (2011),
a 27-item scale based on five core criteria with Cronbach’s
alpha of .956. It uses a five-point Likert scale, ranging from
“very evident” to “not evident.”

Creative Teachers Checklist (CTC)

This checklist was adapted and used to determine the practices

of teachers who cultivate creativity and problem-solving. The
results from this survey provided the basis for selecting the
participants for the case study. The CTC was divided into
two parts: (1) a Demographic Profile of the respondents and
(2) a Creative Teacher Checklist where items were adopted
from the study of Hazam and Griffith (2006). It comprises
49 statements on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “almost
always” to “rarely.”

Data Collection
First, the researchers conducted a survey using the CTC
adopted from the study of Hazam and Griffith (2006). The
survey forms were distributed to science teachers in the
SHS program in the Division of San Pablo City. The survey
came with an informed consent form explaining the purpose
of the study, procedures, risks and benefits, confidentiality,
and voluntary participation. The survey was distributed to all
SHS science teachers in DepEd San Pablo City, from which
the six qualified participants were selected.

Second, the researcher conducted classroom

observations. Each of the physics teachers was observed on

162
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

a mutually agreed schedule. The observation lasted for 45

minutes per session. This observation focused on capturing
the teaching method for fostering creativity and problem-
solving in the General Physic course. The researcher utilized
the CPSOC as an observation form to rate the alignment of
the teaching method with the CPS v6.1TM stages. The teachers
were also asked to provide the learning outputs of their
students for document analysis. The learning outputs were
rated using the CSDS to evaluate the students’ creativity. The
results from the CPSOC and CSDS provided the quantitative
data needed to address the research questions.

Lastly, the researchers conducted a semi-structured

interview to elicit the views and opinions of the participants.
The interview lasted for a maximum of 45 minutes. The
semi-structured interview focused on gauging the strategies,
methods, techniques, or ways of teaching creativity and
problem-solving. The conversations were recorded using
a smartphone recorder and were transcribed verbatim. The
researchers also took notes to highlight the key points of the
participant’s response.

Data Analysis
Upon completing qualitative data collection, all of the field
observation notes, interview responses, and documents
were coded and analyzed to reveal common themes. These
themes were drawn based on the lenses of research questions.
Moreover, the themes were supported by specific examples
from the data gathered to provide detailed descriptions
of the themes. This study adopted the seven steps in the
qualitative data analysis suggested by Creswell (2013). On
the other hand, the results from evaluating students’ learning
outputs using CSDS and the observation employing CPSOC
served as the quantitative data for this study. These data
were treated using descriptive statistics like the mean and

163
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

standard deviation to determine the students’ creativity level

in problem-solving and the extent of alignment of teachers’
instructional practices to CPS v6.1TM

Ethical Consideration
This study ensured proper communication with key personnel
on the research site, explaining the purpose of the study,
methodology, confidentiality, and potential ethical issues.
The data were collected following appropriate research
ethics and protocols, including validation of instruments,
confidentiality, and objectivity. The study results accorded
the participant’s right to privacy and anonymity by assigning
respondents codes. The results were shared with key school
officials, parents, and students to inform them of the findings
and give their comments.

Results and Discussion

On the Instructional Practices Used in Fostering

Creativity in Problem Solving
This study revealed that the teacher participants used various
ways to promote problem-solving in their respective physics
classrooms.

Implementing Collaborative Work

All of the teacher participants agreed that collaborative

activity is indeed an effective way to promote creativity
in problem-solving among the students. In collaborative
activity, the students could think and share ideas with their
peers, which led to the formulation of solutions. This process
is termed brainstorming, an effective tool to generate ideas.
It promotes communication, thinking, and decision-making
that fosters viewpoints and opinions (AlMutairi, 2015). In the

164
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

collaborative process, teacher participants emphasized the

importance of individual work where students can process
the inputs in collaborative work. In this manner, students
could refine ideas and select the most probable solutions to
the problem independently.

Through group activities kase nagbe-

brainstorming sila. Nagshe-share sila
ng different ideas and they come up
with a presentation. Small group muna
then big group. Minsan kapag maunti lang sila
‘yung Think-Pair-Share, by diad. [Through
group activities, they are brainstorming.
They share their different ideas and come
up with a presentation. We start with small
groups and move to big groups. Sometimes
when they are just few, we use Think-Pair-
Share, by diad] -Teacher B

Conducting Hands-on Activities

Experiments, particularly hands-on experiments, have been a

crucial element of physics learning. It has an important role in
teaching creativity inside a physics classroom since it allows
the creation of new and alternative inventions. In this study,
all of the teacher participants revealed that they conduct
hands-on tasks to enhance student’s creativity in problem-
solving. Shieh and Chang (2014) established facts about using
hands-on tasks to foster creativity and problem-solving in
conducting scientific projects. In the conduct of conventional
science hands-on tasks, the students are expected to submit
a laboratory report following a distinct format given by the
teacher. However, it was found that teacher participants only
provided learning goals, wherein they needed to design their
laboratory procedures to meet these goals. As Chen and Chan
(2021) contended in their study, freedom of exploration and

165
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

self-directed elements to inquiry, discovery, and problem-

solving processes must be considered in designing activities.
Teacher A shared:

In the catapult making, there are suggested

materials like rubber bands, tape, glue,
ruler, wood. But they are free to choose
what materials are they going to do, as
long as ma-meet nila ‘yung objective [they
meet the objectives], which is to apply the
law of physics to design a catapult that can
accurately launch a ping pong ball and hit a
designated target. -Teacher A

Using Project-based Learning

In using project-based learning, five out of six teacher

participants approved that this method can improve creativity
and problem-solving. This type of learning enhanced creativity
by requiring students to produce tangible and innovative
products actively. In this study, most of the teachers required
their students to develop a product that would encapsulate
the learning competencies in General Physics 1. The project-
based learning environment creates an environment that
fosters creativity and problem-solving. It also promotes life-
long learning since the students are involved in the decision-
making process that affects their learning. They are given
opportunities to choose how to solve problems, to select the
tool that would help them the best, and to use technology that
enables them to succeed. In addition, it caters to the different
learning styles of the students and involves them in the
whole learning development. Putri et al. (2019) contended
that project-based learning effectively improves creativity in
science classrooms. For instance, Teacher F elaborated on the
project that he conducted with his previous class that focused
on innovation of existing materials or products in the market

166
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

An example is a trash bin or trash can,

wherein they integrated an aroma type
compartment because the problem with
rubbish or garbage is that it is stinky or
smelly. To eliminate the bad smell, they
put something – aroma of leaves calamine
I think and rose. That is one. The concept
behind that is diffusion. –Teacher F

Encouraging Students to Think Critically

Critical and creative thinking skills are crucial to the

scientific process. Thus, it must be placed at the center of
science education. Integrating these two thinking skills into
instructional design is essential for cultivating learners who
have the potential to become scientists (Gupta & Sharma,
2019). This is to cope in the 21st century and information-
based society in the global trends emphasizing the
importance of nurturing higher-order thinking skills. In this
study, the teacher participants suggested asking questions or
implementing activities that let the students think outside
the box. This is evident in classroom observation, where
teachers encourage students to think differently about how
to solve problems.

Kailangan mo muna silang i-motivate.

Ano ba ‘yung meron sa creativity?
Baket siya kailangan? So, minsan pinapasok
ko ‘yung scientists kung paano nila nagamit
yung creativity nila, isa ito sa nagmo-
motivate. I also ask them the same questions
that scientists ask to themselves.

[You have to motivate them first. What is

with creativity? Why do you need it? So,
sometimes I tell stories about scientists
and how they used their creativity; this
is one of the motivating factors. I also ask

167
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

them the same questions that scientists ask

themselves.] – Teacher E

Providing idea and Reflection Time

Reflective habits involve processing information and

experiences before acting. The teachers can do this during
observation, evaluation, and decision-making. Kolb’s
Experiential Learning Theory (2012) identified reflection as
an essential stage of its learning model as a way of sensing
information and experiences. Throughout the study, five
teacher participants expressed their support for the importance
of reflection and feedback in the current educational system.
To impose reflection on the students, the teacher participants
implement various activities such as idea generation through
collaborative activity, group presentation and critique, and
reviewing and feedback. Literature recognized reflective
practice as a tool for developing creative abilities by supporting
students as they develop awareness of their creativity.

I help them, nagco-correct ako tapos inaayos

ko yung project nila, then I give them time to
implement it and reflect from it. I want them
to identify ‘yung strengths and weaknesses
ng work nila.

[I help them, I correct and then I fix their

project, then I give them time to implement
it and reflect from it. I want them to identify
the strengths and weaknesses of their work.]
- Teacher A

On the Alignment of Instructional Practices

to CPS v6.1TM
This study revealed that CPS v6.1TM is generally observed
to a moderate extent by the participants. Understanding the
challenge and generating ideas were observed to a moderate

168
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

extent and a great extent, respectively. On the other hand,

the observation registered both preparing for action and
planning your approach to some extent. The alignment of the
participants’ teaching methods with the CPS v6.1TM model
promotes the enhancement of creativity and problem-solving
in the students in synergistically. Table 3 shows the extent of
alignment of instructional practices employed by the teacher
participants to foster creativity to CPS v6.1TM.

Table 3
Teacher’ Instructional Alignment to CPS v6.1TM and Level
of Creativity of Students

Alignment to CPS v6.1TM

Understanding

Planning Your
the Challenge

Preparing for

Description
Cases of
Generating

Approach

Overall
Action

Mean
Ideas

Teachers

A 3.57 3.43 3.00 3.00 3.25 ME

B 2.86 3.29 2.43 2.33 2.73 ME

C 3.29 3.14 2.43 2.33 2.80 ME

D 4.14 4.57 3.29 2.17 3.71 GE

E 3.00 3.29 2.43 2.17 2.72 ME

F 3.29 3.29 2.43 2.47 2.80 ME

Mean 3.36 3.50 2.67 2.41 3.00 ME

Legend: 1.0-1.8 is not at all (NA); 1.9-2.6 is to some extent (SE); 2.7-3.4 is to a moderate extent
(ME); 3.5-4.2 is to a great extent (GE); 4.3-5.0 is to a very great extent (VGE)

Table 3 shows that Teacher A and Teacher D gained

the highest overall mean value on the alignment to CPS
v6.1TM model and creativity of the students on their projects.
This suggests that the more aligned the instructional practices
to the model, the more creative learning outputs can be
produced by their respective students. Reali (2017) explained
that the CPS model is a teaching method that incorporates

169
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

active learning strategies to engage students in working with

complex situations. Samson (2015) further claimed that the
CPS model is a transformative teaching methodology that
converts a traditional classroom to experiential learning
through active learning.

On the Creativity in Problem-Solving of Students on

their Learning Outputs

Table 4
Creativity in Problem-Solving of Students
on their Learning Outputs

Level of Creativity
Problematization
Relevance and
Effectiveness

Cases of

Description
Propulsion

Elegance

Genesis

Overall
Mean
Teachers

A 3.40 3.63 3.33 3.27 2.56 3.24 FE

B 2.94 3.22 3.13 2.86 3.17 3.06 FE

C 3.14 2.14 2.26 3.47 2.29 2.66 SE

D 3.54 3.42 3.20 3.50 3.00 3.33 FE

E 3.78 3.50 2.83 3.07 2.97 3.23 FE

F 3.08 3.17 3.00 2.96 3.04 3.05 FE

Legend: 1.0-1.8 is Not Evident (NE); 1.9-2.6 is Somewhat Evident (SE);

2.7-3.4 is Fairly Evident (FE); 3.5-4.2 is Evident (E); 4.3-5.0 is Very Evident (VE)

The results from Table 4 regarding the evaluation of the

collected learning outputs were influenced by the teaching
and learning activities they went through under their physics
teachers. The most cultivated kind of creativity manifested
on the projects was the criteria problematization, which
was implemented through collaborative learning activities.
Teachers D and E’s students got the highest rating on the

170
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

relevance and effectiveness. At the same time, Teacher

C was able to foster an elegant type of creativity in the
students’ learning outputs. Ayob et al. (2013) highlighted
the importance of the teachers’ attitudes in shaping the
students’ creative attitudes. Teachers’ instructional practices
can enhance creativity in creative production, experiment
without restrictions, and investigate investigation outside the
classroom’s conformity. Figure 2 below shows examples of
students’ learning projects.

Figure 2
Sample Learning Outputs

171
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Conclusions and Recommendations

This study described the instructional practices that foster

creativity in problem-solving in K to 12 physics classrooms
and the creativity of Grade 12 STEM students in the light
of CPS v6.1TM and functional creativity models. This
investigation provides an understanding of evidence-based
instructional practices at the grassroots level viewed from the
lens of empirically valid models.

This study revealed that creativity in problem-solving

can be developed using constructivist-oriented teaching-
learning activities, which allow students to actively engage
in their own thinking process and knowledge construction.
Likewise, the teacher participants employed the CPS v6.1TM
model in their physics classroom to a moderate extent. Still,
it does not have logical connections to provide a structured
problem-solving process. The study further uncovered that
teachers who employ student-centered approaches and with
a higher extent of alignment to the CPS v6.1TM model are
likely to foster creativity in problem-solving. This result
implies that providing a structured learning process with
opportunities for self-directed learning, exploration of more
ideas, and thinking creatively results in creative products.

The physics curriculum can be reexamined to

highlight creativity to produce innovative students who can
become future scientists or inventors. The results of this
study may also serve as the basis for developing teachers’
training programs and in-service programs for physics
teaching. The teachers must attend various seminars and
workshops to improve their pedagogical knowledge. This
will help them select appropriate approaches to develop the
students’ creativity in problem-solving. This study further
recommends applying the CPS v6.1TM model in K-12 physics
classrooms. Utilizing this model to teach creativity in physics

172
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

will greatly help the teachers facilitate the students’ divergent

and convergent thinking activities.

There are certain limitations encountered in the

study’s conduct. This study only involved six cases of physics
teachers to address the research objectives. Hence, the
conclusion obtained is not generalizable to a larger population.
Students’ views and opinions were not also gauged since the
study only underscores their creative projects as elaborated by
their teachers. Similarly, the CPS v6.1TM was not empirically
tested to determine its effectiveness in enhancing creativity.

For future research directions, it is also

recommended to replicate a similar study with a larger
sample to provide a more detailed and thicker description of
the case eventually obtaining reliable results. Future lines
of research can also consider widening the context of the
study covering all physics subjects in grade levels in the K
to 12 Science education curriculum. Likewise, an empirical
investigation must be conducted in using the CPS v6.1TM
model as an instructional approach to provide experience-
based evidence on the effectiveness of the said model.

■■■

References

AlMutairi, A. N. M. (2015). The effect of using

brainstorming strategy in developing creative
problem solving skills among male students in
Kuwait: a field study on Saud Al-kharji School in
Kuwait City. Journal of Education and Practice,
6(3), 136–145.
Amabile, T. M., & Pillemer, J. (2012). Perspectives on
the social psychology of creativity. The Journal
of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 3 -15. https://doi.
org/10.1002/jocb.001

173
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Andal, E. Z., Panergayo, A. A. E., & Almanza, M. R. G.

(2020b). Exploring the online learning Self-efficacy
of teacher education students at the Laguna State
Polytechnic University: Basis for Transition to
Flexible Learning System. Universal Journal of
Educational Research, 8(12), 6598 -6608. https://doi.
org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081224
Ayob, A., Hussain, A. & Majid, R. A. (2013). A review of
research on creative teachers in higher education.
International Education Studies, 6(6), 8-14. http://
dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n6p8
Birgili, B. (2015). Creative and critical thinking skills in
problem-based learning environments. Journal of
Gifted Education and Creativity, 71-71. https://doi.
org/10.18200/JGEDC.2015214253
Blessinger, P., Sengupta, E., & Yamin, T. S. (2018). Human
creativity as a renewable resource. International
Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 6(1),
17-26. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1296855.
pdf
Chen, P., & Chan, Y. (2021). Enhancing creative problem
solving in postgraduate courses in education
management using project-based learning.
International Journal of Higher Education, 10(6), 11.
https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n6p11
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research designs: Quantitaive,
qualitaive and mixed-method approaches 4th Edition.
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Cropley, D. H. & Cropley, A. J. (2005). Engineering
creativity: A systems concept of functional creativity.
In J. C. Kaufman and J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across
domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 169-185). Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Cropley, D. H., & Cropley, A. J. (2008). Elements of a
universal aesthetic of creativity. Psychology of

174
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(3), 155-161.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.3.155
Cropley, D. H., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Measuring
functional creativity: Non-expert raters and the
creative solution diagnosis scale. Journal of Creative
Behavior, 46(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/
jocb.9
Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J. & Sandwith, B. L. (2017).
Creativity in the Engineering Domain. In J. Kaufman,
V. P. Glaveanu, and J. Baer (Eds.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Creativity Across Domains, Chapter 15,
(pp. 261-275), New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Cropley, D. H., Kaufman, J. C., & Cropley, A. J. (2011).
Measuring creativity for innovation management.
Journal of Technology Management & Innovation,
6(3), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-
27242011000300002
Cropley, D. H., Patston, T., Marrone, R. L., & Kaufman,
J. C. (2019). Essential, unexceptional and universal:
Teacher implicit beliefs of creativity. Thinking Skills
and Creativity, 34, 100604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tsc.2019.100604
David, P., Jamie, D. B., Kimberly, S. H. et al. (2013).
Teaching people to manage constraints: Effects
on creative problem solving. Creativity Research
Journal, 25, 335-347.
Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P.,
& Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments
in education—A systematic literature review.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80-91. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004
Department of Education. (2016, August). K to 12
Curriculum Guide for Science Kindergarten to Grade
10. (Pasig City: Department of Education, 2016).

175
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

Effendi, A. (2017). Implementation of creative

problemsolving model to improve the high school
student’s metacognitive. Journal of Physics. https://
doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/812/1/012065
Fahrisa, N., & Parmin, P. (2022). Creative Problem Solving
(CPS) learning to improve ability an strudent’s critical
and creative thinking on science materials. Journal of
Environmental and Science Education, 2(2), 98–105.
https://doi.org/10.15294/jese.v2i2.55641
Gupta, P., & Sharma, Y. (2019). Nurturing scientific
creativity in science classroom. Resonance, 24, 561–
574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12045-019-0810-8
Hu, R., Su, X., & Shieh, C. (2017). A study on the application
of creative problem solving teaching to statistics
teaching. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science
and Technology Education. https://doi.org/10.12973/
eurasia.2017.00708a
Isaksen, S. G. (2023). Developing creative potential:
The power of process, people, and place. Journal
of Advanced Academics, 0(0). https://doi.
org/10.1177/1932202X231156389
Isaksen, S., Dorval, B., & Treffinger, D. (2000). Creative
approaches to problem solving: A framework
forchange (2nd. Ed.). Williamsville, NY: Creative
Problem Solving Group-Buffalo.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. (2012). Experiential learning
theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to management
learning, education and development. In SAGE
Publications Ltd eBooks (pp. 42–68). https://doi.
org/10.4135/9780857021038.n3
Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and
Procedures of creative problem solving (3rd Revised
ed.). Scribners.
Panergayo, A. A. E. (2023). Students’ conceptual
understanding, self-efficacy and scientific creativity

176
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

in science learning: A multivariate analysis.

International Journal of Educational Management
and Development Studies, 4(4), 139–159. https://doi.
org/10.53378/353027
Putri, S. U., Sumiati, T., & Larasati, I. (2019). Improving
creative thinking skill through project-based-
learning in science for primary school. Journal of
Physics, 1157, 022052. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1157/2/022052
Ramankulov, S., Usembaeva, I., Berdi, D., Omarov, B.,
Baimukhanbetov, B., & Shektibayev, N. (2016).
Formation of the creativity of students in the context
of the education informatization. International
Journal of Environmental and Science Education,
11(16), 9598-9613.
Runco, M. A., & Leckelt, M. (2012). The standard definition
of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–
96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Saeidah, B., & Nooreen, N. (2013). Investigating relationship
between creativity and academic achievement of
Malaysia undergraduates. Jurnal Teknologi Malaysia,
65, 101-107.
Schroth, S. T. (2016). Teaching children creative
thinking and problem-solving skills: Strategies for
building creativity through classroom instruction
and interventions. Torrance Journal for Applied
Creativity, 1, 21-26. http://www.centerforgifted.org/
TorranceJournal_V1.pdf
Schwab, K. & Samans, R. (2016). The future of jobs:
Employment, skills and workforce strategy for fourth
industrial revolution. Geneva, Switzeland: World
Economic Forum.
Schwab, K. (2018, January 14). The fourth industrial
revolution: What it means and how to respond.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-

177
The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-
to-respond/
Shieh, R., & Chang, W. (2014). Fostering student’s creative
and problem-solving skills through a hands-on
activity. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(5),
650–661. http://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/14.13.650
Sidek, R., Halim, L. & Buang, N. (2022). Pedagogical
approaches to inculcate scientific creativity among
secondary students. Creative Education, 13, 1779-
1791. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2022.135112
Sidek, R., Halim, L., Buang, N. A., & Arsad, N. M. (2020).
Fostering scientific creativity in teaching and learning
science in Schools: A systematic review. Jurnal
Penelitian Dan Pembelajaran IPA, 6(1), 13. https://
doi.org/10.30870/jppi.v6i1.7149
Siew, N. M., Chong, C. L., & Chin, K. O. (2014). Developing
a scientific creativity test for fifth graders. Problems
of Education in the 21st Century, 62, 109-123. https://
doi.org/10.33225/pec/14.62.109
Sophonhiranrak, S., Suwannatthachote, P., & Ngudgratoke,
S. (2015). Factors affecting creative problem solving
in the blended learning environment: A review of
the literature. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 174, 2130-2136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2015.02.012
Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2002). The
creativity conundrum: A propulsion model of kinds of
creative contributions. New York: Psychology Press.
Sumners, S. (2016). Visions of the future: The work of
E. Paul Torrance. Torrance Journal for Applied
Creativity, 1, 11-15. http://www.centerforgifted.org/
TorranceJournal_V1.pdf
Tawil, M., & Dahlan, A. (2017). Developing students’
creativity through computer simulation based learning

178
 The Normal Lights
Volume 17, No. 2 (2023)

in Quantum Physics learning. International Journal

of Environmental and Science Education, 12(8),
1829-1845.
Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G. & Dorval, K. B. (2006).
Creative problem solving: An introduction. (4th Ed).
Prufrock Press.
Treffinger, D. J., Schoonover, P. F., & Selby, E. C. (2013).
Educating for creativity and innovation. Waco, TX:
Prufrock Press
Treffinger, D.J., & Isaken, S. G. (2013). Teaching and
applying creative problem solving: implications for
at-risk students. International Journal for Talent
Development and Creativity 1(1), 87-97.
Treffinger, D.J., Selby E. C., & Isaken, S. G., (2008).
Understanding individual problem solving styles: A
key to learning and applying creative problem solving.
Learning and Individual Differences, 18,349-401.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.007

179

View publication stats