Revisiting The Determinants Of Students' Success In Conducting Creativity Program

This study investigated the determinants of students' success in completing creativity programs. A survey design was used in this study. A total of 351 respondents completed a survey on the factors that theoretically were related to students' creativity. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was then conducted to explore the factors that emerge as the correlates of students self-efficacy in completing the creativity program. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to confirm the pattern proposed in the EFA. Finally, Structural Equation Modelling with Mplus was conducted to explore how the factors are related to students self-efficacy in completing the creativity program. The results showed that students' self-efficacy are strongly related to the role of their advisors, supports from their research community, and supports from the university. Comprehensive discussions on these factors are provided throughout this paper.


INTRODUCTION
In light of the disruptive era, it is becoming extremely difficult to ignore the existence of creativity as a central issue for success in both college and future career (Sternberg, Jarvin, & Grigorenko, 2009;Sternberg & Lubart, 1995). These include the roles of creativity as an intangible resource that leads to problem solving (Runco, 1994), inspirations (Thrash, Maruskin, Cassidy, Fryer, & Ryan, 2010), entrepreneurship (Ward, 2004), and innovation (Legrenzi, 2005). In other words, creativity can be said as one of the factors determining the success of university students.
In line with the importance of creativity, the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 12 Year 2012 Article 4 states that higher education has three main functions: 1) to develop the capability and to build the character and civilization of the nation for enhancing its intellectual capacity; 2) to develop academicians to be innovative, responsive, creative, skilful, competitive, and cooperative through the implementation of Tri dharma; and 3) to develop science and technology by taking into account and applying the value of humanities. In order to actualize those three functions, every university is required to equip its academicians and students with critical thinking skills which are manifested through research skills. These research skills are expected to help academicians and students conduct research to unearth, develop, and disseminate knowledge, technology, arts, and/or sports for the purposes of improving individual and social welfares supporting regional and national developments and answering global challenges.
One of the actualizations of the mission is through the establishment of VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLW ZKLFK KRXVHV students who want to gain and broaden their knowledge related to research. Through this community, students also learn to develop their research skills by conducting research VWXGLHV PDQLIHVWHG LQ WKH IRUP RI VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity programs. $ VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ program is a program from the Directorate of Research and Community Service of the Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia to facilitate students to research, develop, and implement the knowledge and technology they learn. Students can participate in this program by writing a research proposal and/or a scientific paper. The selected proposals and/or papers will later be funded by the Ministry.
There are several factors influencing VWXGHQWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW HVSHFLDOO\ in relation to the creativity programs. Preliminary study through interviews with creativity program teams showed that there were several factors that could presumably affect the ways of supervising the students and the VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV 7KH Iirst factor found in the preliminary research was related to the ways of supervision by the advisor. The supervision from the advisor was not fully optimal due to the fact that students were confused both in writing the proposal and conducting their study. Furthermore, the roles of task forces from lecturers in each department and the creativity program task forces from each faculty were found not fully effective. The next factor was related to the information and facilities supports from the university. Then, it was also found that the roles of VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK FRPPXQLW\ ZHUH immensely important in facilitating students during the process of creativity programs writing. In addition, a number of students in the initial study were found to be doubtful about their own ability in conducting the creativity programs.
Therefore, a study is needed that is aimed at identifying, verifying, and overcoming the problems specifically UHODWHG WR VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV which later could improve their achievement is needed. Considering the results of the preliminary study, this study sets out to identify the factors affecting VWXGHQWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ FUHDWLYLW\ programs and the efforts needed to improve their achievement. 2018). To attain the four skills, university students need to synergize their mind (cognitive), emotion (affective), and skills (psychomotor) in order to be creative graduates. The mind deals with imagination, perception and reason (Currie & Ravenscroft, 2002). Feelings are associated with emotions (Hershfield, Scheibe, Sims, & Carstensen, 2013), aesthetics, and harmonization. Meanwhile, the psychomotor factor includes physical coordination, movement, and the motorskill area uses (Simpson, 1971). To help students reach the creative level, the three factors are strived to be optimal in an activity called the Students Creativity Program or, as well-known, the PKM (Kemahasiswaan, 2018).
PKM was held for the first time in 2001, namely after the implementation of the program restructuring in the Ditlitabmas Directorate General of Higher Education. PKM was developed to deliver students to reach the level of enlightenment of creativity and innovation based on the mastery of science and technology and high faith. In order to prepare themselves to be intellectual leaders, independent entrepreneurs and wise persons, students are given the opportunity to implement their abilities, expertise, attitude, responsibility, building teamwork, and developing independence through creative activities in their field of study.
Initially, there were five types of activities offered in PKM, namely research, entrepreneurship, community service, application of technology, and scientific writing. However, since January 2009, Ditlitabmas has managed 6 (six) PKMs. Student Writing Competition (KKTM), originally one function of the Academic Directorate in Management, has been delegated to Ditlitabmas. Because its nature is identical to PKM-I, KKTM is then managed together with PKM-I in the Scientific Writing PKM (Kemahasiswaan, 2018).
These include intellectual abilities, knowledge, styles of thinking, personality, motivation, and environment. In addition, Ginting (2013) state that both motivation to self-actualization and motivation to share knowledge have significant LQIOXHQFH RQ VWXGHQWV ¶ LQWHUHVWV in writing and publishing their project. On the other hand, motivation factors to gain reward and to show their existence do not KDYH DQ\ VLJQLILFDQW LQIOXHQFH RQ VWXGHQWV ¶ interests in writing and publishing projects.
Other psychological factors believed WR EH LQIOXHQFLQJ SHRSOH ¶V LQWHQWLRQ WR GR something creative have been explored in several studies. One of these psychological factors is self-efficacy. Early definition of self-efficacy is provided by Bandura (1997) DV ³SHUVRQDO MXGJPHQWV RI RQH ¶V capabilities to organize and execute courses of action to attain designated goals, and he sought to assess its level, generality, and VWUHQJWK DFURVV DFWLYLWLHV DQG FRQWH[WV´ ,WV measurement generally focuses on performance capabilities rather than on personal qualities through either psychological or physical characteristics. This psychological construct has been long believed as a vital condition for creative productivity and the acquisition of new knowledge (Tierney & Farmer, 2002) since LW LQIOXHQFHV LQGLYLGXDOV ¶ LQWHQWLRQ WR engage in specific behavior (Bandura & Wessels, 1994) and to search of certain tasks (Bandura & Schunk, 1981). In addition, self-efficacy is also claimed to be a key component in individual creative actions (Ford, 1996). Tierney and Farmer (2002) LQYHVWLJDWHV KRZ ZRUNHUV ¶ VHOIefficacy is related to their belief that they can be creative in completing their works. The findings show that the supervisor is one key role who interferes wLWK WKH ZRUNHUV ¶ self-efficacy in work roles. These propositions are in line with a study conducted by Oldham and Cummings (1996) that positive supervision is related to HPSOR\HUV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ DW ZRUN 2WKHU VWXGLHV by Liu, Liao, and Loi (2012); Fenge (2012) also reveal the roles of supervisors in HPSOR\HHV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ 7KHVH VWXGLHV PD\ indicate that supervising lecturers or DGYLVRUV DOVR LQWHUIHUH ZLWK VWXGHQWV ¶ intention in conducting creativity programs.
Another factor that has been claimed to interfere ZLWK LQGLYLGXDOV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ LV LQ the form of supports from the community or the environment where the individuals live (Rigolizzo & Amabile, 2015). It is believed WKDW ³Dn environment that supports the process of creativity, rather than the outcome, allows people to practice and learn both from and for the FUHDWLYH SURFHVV´ (Rigolizzo & Amabile, 2015, p. 62). Further, Solomon (2018) suggests five factors that influence LQGLYLGXDOV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ QDPHO\ IDFLOLWDWLRQ controlling information, prioritization, back-channel network, and shortcuts. This PD\ LQGLFDWH WKDW VXSSRUWV IURP VWXGHQWV ¶ research community or union, facilitation from the university, and the availability of LQIRUPDWLRQ DUH WKH FRUUHODWHV RI VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ LQ FRQGXFWLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDtivity programs.
To sum up, although extensive research has been carried out on factors affecting creativity, no single study exists which examines the factors contributing to VWXGHQWV ¶ VXFFHVV LQ FRQGXFWLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity program (PKM) in Indonesian setting. The present study is aimed at revisiting the potential factors which may LQWHUIHUH ZLWK VWXGHQWV ¶ VXFFHVV LQ conducting creativity programs.

Research Sample
This study was a survey research of the quantitative approach. The population of the study included all students conducting creativity programs in a public university in Yogyakarta Special Province, Indonesia, as described in the introduction above. Every student in the population had an equal chance of being selected in the sample in the study. The participants were drawn from the population since they were homogeneous and relatively small in number. A total of 351 university students participated in the study.

Instrument
The present study was conducted from July to December 2017. The data were collected using a questionnaire of 46 items.

The items represented several factors
LGHQWLILHG WR EH WKH FRUUHODWHV RI VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ QDPHO\ VWXGHQWV ¶ VHOI-efficacy (7 items), supports from the advisors (7 items), supporting facilities from the university (7 items), supports from the VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLRQ LWHPV VXSSRUWV from the student affairs staff (7 items), and the availability of information supports from the university (7 items). Respondents were to rate on a five-point rating scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

Data Analysis Technique
The data gathered from the data collection were analysed using an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) as the main data analysis techniques in the study. In addition, the structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to investigate the relationships among the aforementioned factors. Several criteria were used for analyzing and interpreting the results of EFA. First, items were retained in the study if the factor loading for each item was higher than .30; second, items were retained if they were significantly loaded in one factor (Field, 2009). Additionally, the criteria for being used in the CFA and SEM included:

Pilot Testing
Prior to the actual data collection, a pilot study was conducted to assess the usability and readability of the questionnaire. Fifteen students took part in the pilot study to give judgements whether each item in the questionnaire was readable and unambiguous. The results of the pilot test showed that the overall questionnaire was readable and no item was ambiguous.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This section describes the findings of the study and discussion of the findings. This includes results from the factor analyses investigating factors supporting VWXGHQWV ¶ VFLHQFH DQG FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV and the relationships among those factors.

Results of the Exploratory Factor Analysis
Results of the exploratory factor analysis on the Version-22 SPSS software showed that loadings from some factors differed and were ready to be interpreted. All the factor loadings from all variables were substantial in size. The exploratory factor analysis showed that 18 items were retained from the initial set of 46 items with factor loadings ranging from .395 to .992. In other words, from the initial set of 46 items, 18 items empirically represented the factors influencing students ¶ creativity programs. Table 1 shows the summary of the exploratory factor analysis results including the factors and their loadings.

Factor Interpretations from the Results of EFA
As mentioned earlier, items with factor loadings higher than .30 were consLGHUHG VLJQLILFDQW ZLWK .
)LHOG 2009). Therefore, only those with factor loadings higher than .30 were retained. As can be seen in Table 1, the 18 items converged into five different factors with three or four items in each factor. The interpretation of each factor is discussed as follows.
Based on the aforementioned criteria, all the factor loadings in Table 1 were considered as significant as they were greater than .30. Factor one consists of four items ranging from .766 to .922. Then, among the four items, item 1 shows the highest factor loading of all, i.e., .922. Likewise, factor two consists of four items ranging from .582 to .939. Item 5 was the highest with a factor loading of .939. Factor three, on the other hand, only consists of three items. The loadings for this factor range from .627 to .874 with the highest factor on item 9. Similarly, factor four consists of three items ranging from .600 to .992. Item 12 was the one with the highest factor loading from factor one to factor five. Finally, factor five has four significant items for which the factor loadings range from .395 to .841.

Factor or Construct Labelling
After the five factors, which contain several variables or items, were formed, they were labelled based on the characteristics of each item represented in each factor. The items in the first factor included a number of questions asking DERXW VWXGHQWV ¶ NQRZOHGJH DQG FDSDELOLW\ in conducting science or creativity programs. The key term for this factor was WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ EHOLHI DERXW their capability. Therefore, after generalizing the four items in this factor, the researchers labelled it as 6WXGHQWV ¶ 6HOI-efficacy.
The second factor contains four items related to the communication between the students and the advisors of creativity programs in the departments and faculties and also the supervision given by the advisors. Therefore, this factor was labelled Support from the Creativity Program Advisor. Factor three contains items related to WKH VXSSRUW IRU WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ programs, approval process, and administration from the campus. This factor, then, was labelled Approval and Administration Support from the University.
The three items grouped in factor five were those related to the support from the VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLW RU VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK community. The supports specifically consisted of communication and consultation supports from the community in relation to conducting creativity programs. Therefore, this factor was labelled Support from the Research Community.
The last factor contained four items related to the ease of accessing information about creativity programs by the university. Therefore, the researchers labelled this factor Information Support from the University.
Subsequent to the interpretation and labeling of the five factors, the researchers assessed the construct validity of the five factors by conducting confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). This was conducted to confirm whether the results from the exploratory factor analysis came out as hypothesized.

Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis
The final assessment on the five factors resulted in the exploratory factor analysis was conducted using MPlus Version-7 (Muthen & Muthen, 1998-2012. The results from the data analyses showed that the constructs assessed in the confirmatory factor analysis showed an excellent fit data (x 2 = 146.635; df = 125; x 2 /df = 1.3; RMSEA = .047; SRMR= .064; CFI = .963; and TLI = .954). The criteria for good fit indices used to confirm whether the factorial structures fit the model include: Based on these criteria, the 5-factor model was considered to be the best. The summary of the CFA results including the factor labels, items, factor loadings, and reliability of each factor is presented in in Table 2. This table shows that after being assessed by the confirmatory factor analysis, the five factors are fit for the model of the present study. Most of the factor loadings from each factor are relatively high. Factor loadings from the first factor range from .623 to .925. Similarly, the items in the second factor show relatively high factor loadings ranging from .792 to .889.
Then, factor three consists of items with factor loading ranging from .659 to .987. Next, high factor loadings are also found in factor four which range from .724 to .906. Likewise, all the items in factor five range in high factor loadings from .633 to .786. Therefore, all the factor loadings in the CFA are substantial in size. The high factor loadings contribute to the reliability coefficient from each factor as well. As can be seen from the table, the CroQEDFK ¶V Alpha from the five factors range from .753 to .899 which show a reasonably high value of reliability coefficient.

Results of Structural Equation Modelling
After the five factors were confirmed by the confirmatory factor analysis, the next analysis was to investigate whether the factors were correlated with each other. To identify the relationships among those factors, an analysis of structural equation modelling using MPlus Version-7 was conducted. The criteria for good fit indices used to confirm whether the factorial structures fit the model include: • DQG x 7/, • :DQJ :DQJ These criteria were the same criteria used in the confirmatory factor analysis. The model tested in the structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis investigated whether the five factors resulted in the confirmatory factor analysis including: Self-efficacy (F1); Supports from the Advisors, Departments and Faculties (F2); Approval and Administration Spports from the University (F3); Supports from the Research Community (F4); and Information Supports from the University (F5) were correlated with each other. The results of the SEM analyses for the five factors are displayed in Figure 1.  Figure 1 shows that the five factors that have been identified by THE exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses ARE correlated each other. The relationships among those factors are explained as follows: a. 6WXGHQWV ¶ VHOI-efficacy in completing creativity programs or their selfconfidence to be able to complete the creativity programs (F1)

DISCUSSION
This study aims to identify the factors DIIHFWLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ creativity programs and the efforts needed to improve their achievement. The results of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) have demonstrated that there are five factors VXSSRUWLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ creativity programs. Those five factors are: self-efficacy; supports from the advisors, departments, and faculties; approval and administration support from the university; supports from the research community; and information supports from the university. These results are in line with several studies FODLPLQJ WKDW VWXGHQWV ¶ VXFFHVV LQ WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV DUH influenced by both internal and external factors, e.g., (Sternberg, 2006). They include intellectual abilities, knowledge, styles of thinking, personality, motivation, and environment.
The following sub-section provides further discussion for each factor supporting studenWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ WKH creativity program.

Self-efficacy
6WXGHQWV ¶ VHOI-efficacy in conducting the creativity programs is immensely important. Self-efficacy is a result of a cognitive process in the forms of decision, belief, or reward on how far someone can predict his or her capability in accomplishing a certain task with satisfactory results (Bandura & Wessels, 1994). Self-efficacy does not directly FRUUHODWH ZLWK SHRSOH ¶V DELOLWLHV \HW LW correlates with their belief about what they can do with the abilities they have, no matter how small it is (Pajares & Johnson, 1994). Self-efficacy emphasizes on the SHRSOH ¶V VHOI-belief to face unpredictable conditions in the near future. Students with self-efficacy believe that they will be able to conduct research and creativity programs more readily than those who do not. On the other hand, those with low self-efficacy tend to judge themselves incapable of doing any job assigned to them. This is in line with Saeid and Eslaminejad (2016) study which reveals that self-efficacy and academic motivation have a strong impact RQ LQFUHDVLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYH SURJUDPV This indicates that to create students with good knowledge and skills in research, it is suggested that they be given supports or motivation to conduct the creativity programs so that they will have outlets through which their creative and innovative ideas can be expressed (Saeid & Eslaminejad, 2016).
,Q RUGHU WR LPSURYH VWXGHQWV ¶ VHOIefficacy, the university should provide training about the urgency of creativity programs to the freshmen so that they can SRVVLEO\ GHYHORS WKHLU LQWHUHVW LQ VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity programs from the beginning. Furthermore, a substantial and considerable reward is also needed for those with outstanding achievement in the studeQWV ¶ creativity programs; for instance, the programs which are selected to compete in the National Student Science Week and win gold medals in which later can be acknowledged as equal to an undergraduate thesis.

Roles of advisors
The present study has also demonstrated that the roles of the advisors are in the moderate category ( .286, p < .01). The roles of the advisors in the creativity programs are important. This is in line with the results of studies by Oldham and Cummings (1996);Liu et al. (2012);Fenge (2012);Suwarna (2005). Advisors roles are not only to guide the students so that the programs will go as planned, but also to help them to access the facilities from campus, give solution or justification for the problems they face, motivate the students, and monitor the programs periodically.
Considering the importance of the roles of advisors, an effort is needed to improve their understanding on the creativity programs and reviewing techniques on potential problem analyses by proposing creative ideas and using various strategic choices. Therefore, to LPSURYH VWXGHQWV ¶ achievement, lecturers should understand and carry out their duties as the advisors such as: a. reading and comprehending the guide books IRU WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ program and national student science week; b. JXLGLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ RI WKH SURJUDPV ZLWK high creativity and innovation values; c. supervising, making suggestions, and evaluating the students during the process of creativity programs completion; d. guiding the students in both the monitoring and evaluation process, and in the national student science week; e. correcting and making suggestions on VWXGHQWV ¶ SURJUHVV UHSRUWV ILQDO UHSRUWV posters, and journals.
With the intention of improving the DGYLVRUV ¶ UROHV VHYHUDO DFWLRQV FDQ EH GRQH by the university such as providing training of trainers (ToT) for the lecturers. In this activity, the university requires that every lecturer supervise at least one program in one year. Another action can be providing incentives for the lecturers whose students produce a notable achievement.

5ROHV RI VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK unit
To improve their effectiveness in completing creativity programs, students should possess the passion and motivation to gain knowledge and skills for conducting research and creativity programs by joining WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK FRPPXQLW\ in campus. Students normally find it easier to communicate with their peers, including in completing their creativity project. This is in line with findings from Liu, Lu, Wu, and Tsai (2016) in the sense that supports from peer review processes may help students to build a sophisticated level of reflection upon their creativity. Furthermore, another study by Hughes, Gillespie, and Kail (2010) supports the findings from this study in the sense that peers provide significant VXSSRUWV LQ WKH LPSURYHQW RI VWXGHQWV ¶ project achievement.
This indicates that universities need WR IDFLOLWDWH VWXGHQWV ZLWK D VWXGHQWV ¶ research unit which aims to facilitate students to gain information, knowledge, and skills to conduct research. However, the results of the present study show that the UROHV RI VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLW KDYH QRW been fully effective in facilitating students to write research proposals in the form of VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDP .286, p < .01). Therefore, universities should conduct strategic planning to optimise the roles of VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLW RU UHVHDUFK community; for example, by conducting 6WXGHQW 6FLHQFH :HHN SULRU WR VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity program proposals so that the TXDOLW\ DQG TXDQWLW\ RI VWXGHQWV ¶ SURJUDPV can improve.

Roles of the university
The results obtained in the present study show that information and facilities supports from university, specifically from the Reasoning Division of the Department of Student Affairs, can be improved ( .370, p < .01) and ( .505, p < .01). This suggests that university strategic planning should aim to improve the roles of the university to provide information and supporting IDFLOLWLHV IRU VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ programs. This is in line with the findings from Small (2014) which suggests that educational institutions must make many opportunities available to students so that they can create, innovate, and explore their knowledge. The roles of the university are undeniably crucial since any information from the Directorate General of Learning and Student Affairs, Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, LQFOXGLQJ WKH RQH UHODWHG WR VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity program, is directly given to the university. Consequently, the university has the alternatives to: a. give a comprehensive training for VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDP FHQWUHV DV the front line that provide information and services for university students; b. provide training of trainer (ToT) for the advisors and task forces from each department so that they can provide university students with detailed information in relation to the creativity programs; c. SURYLGH WUDLQLQJ RQ VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ programs from the beginning; i.e. for freshmen.

CONCLUSION
This survey research set out to investigate faFWRUV LQIOXHQFLQJ VWXGHQWV ¶ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ WKH VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ programs. This five-month study has provided additional evidence with respect to the key factors that have affected VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV 7KHVH include: (a) self-efficacy or studeQWV ¶ VHOIbelief that they are able to conduct a good creativity program; (b) supports from the advisors, departments, and faculties; (c) approval and administration support from the university; (d) supports from the VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK FRPPXQLW\ DQG (e) information supports from the university.
As a result of investigations of these factors, suggestions are proposed for the university to improve the quality and TXDQWLW\ RI VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV These include the following. a. In order to improve stuGHQWV ¶ VHOIefficacy, universities should provide training about the urgency of creativity programs to the freshmen so that they can possibly develop their interest in VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDPV IURP WKH beginning. Furthermore, a substantial reward is also offered to those with RXWVWDQGLQJ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity programs; for example, the programs that are selected to compete in the National Student Science Week and win gold medals which later can be acknowledged as equal to an undergraduate thesis. b. With the intention of improving the DGYLVRUV ¶ UROHV VHYHUDO DFWLRQV FDQ EH done by the university. Such actions can be providing training of trainers (ToT) for the lecturers, requiring every lecturer to supervise at least one program in one year, and providing incentives for the lecturers whose students attain a notable achievement.
c. Student Science Week for universities students can be conducted prior to VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ SURJUDP SURSRVDO writing. This is expected to be able to improve the quality and quantity of the students and to optimise the roles of the VWXGHQWV ¶ UHVHDUFK XQLW d. The university provides FRPSUHKHQVLYH WUDLQLQJ IRU VWXGHQWV ¶ creativity program centres. This is due to the importance of the centres as the front line that provide information and services for universities students. e. Each department is providing with training of trainer (ToT) for advisors and task forces. This will enable the department and advisors to provide detailed information for universities students in relation to the creativity programs; f. 7UDLQLQJ RQ VWXGHQWV ¶ FUHDWLYLW\ programs can be given from the beginning, i.e. for freshmen.