Mapping elementary school students' creativity in science process skills of life aspects viewed from their divergent thinking patterns

Bambang Subali, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Paidi Paidi, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Siti Mariyam, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia


The purpose of this study was to map elementary school students’ creativity in science process skills (SPS) of life aspects in science subjects viewed from their divergent thinking patterns using written tests whose items were fitted with Partial Credit Model (PCM). The measurement used a test validated using the IRT approach published in JEE journal in 2015. The trials employed four sets of test, each comprising 20 items completed with anchor items which were fitted referring to PCM. The measurements were performed with larger scale on 14 regional technical implementation unit (RTIU) in Yogyakarta Special Province in five regencies/cities to students of grades IV, V, and VI. The findings showed that the higher the grade level, the higher of the testees’ scores would be. There were some testees who did not have divergent thinking ability and they obtained a score of 0 The divergent thinking ability of the students was not related to the regency/city where an RTIU was located.


creativity; divergent thinking; science process skills; partial credit models

Full Text:



Adams, R. J., & Khoo, S.-T. (1993). Acer Quest version 2.1. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.

Bryce, T. G. K., McCall, J., MacGregor, J., Robertson, I. J., & Weston, R. A. J. (1990). Techniques for assessing process skills in practical science: Teacher’s guide. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Books.

Burke-Adams, A. (2007). The benefits of equalizing standards and creativity: Discovering a balance in instruction. Gifted Child Today, 30(1), 58–63.

Carin, A. A., & Sund, R. B. (1989). Teaching science through discovery. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company. Retrieved from

Chiappetta, E. L. (1997). Inquiry-based science: Strategies and techniques for encouraging inquiry in the classroom. Science Teacher, 64(10), 22–26.

Cox, D. R. (1958). Planning of experiments. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Cramond, B. (1994). We can trust creativity tests. Educational Leadership, 52(2), 70. Retrieved from

Cromie, W. J. (2003). Creativity tied to mental illness: Irrelevance can make you mad. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved from

Croom, B., & Stair, K. (2005). Getting from Q to A: Effective questioning for effective learning. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 78(1), 12–14. Retrieved from

Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23(2), 72–79.

Dettmer, P. (2005). New blooms in established fields: Four domains of learning and doing. Roeper Review, 28(2), 70–78.

Ferrando, M., Prieto, M. D., Ferrandiz, C., & Sanchez, C. (2005). Intelligence and creativity. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 3(3), 21–50. Retrieved from

Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Fokialis, P., & Kabouropoulou, M. (2012). Thinking about creativity in science education. Creative Education, 3(5), 603–611.

Kelly, K. E. (2004). A brief measure of creativity among college students. College Student Journal, 38(4), 594–596.

Kind, P. M., & Kind, V. (2007). Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Studies in Science Education, 43(1), 1–37.

Mayer, W. V (Ed.). (1980). Biological science: An inquiry into life (4th ed.). Denver, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.

Meeker, M. N. (1969). The structure of intellect: Its interpretation and uses. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company.

Michalko, M. (2000). Four steps toward creative thinking. The Futurist, 18–21. Retrieved from

Miller, P. W. (2008). Measurement and teaching. Munster, IN: Patrick W. Miller & Associates.

Mitchell, W. J., Inouye, A. S., & Blumenthal, M. S. (Eds.). (2003). Beyond productivity: Information, technology, innovation, and creativity (Committee). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from

Olivant, K. F. (2009). An interview study of teachers’ perceptions of the role of creativity in a high-stakes testing environment. Fresno, CA: California State University.

Peppler, K. A., & Solomou, M. (2011). Building creativity: Collaborative learning and creativity in social media environments. On the Horizon, 19(1), 13–23.

Rawat, K. J., Qazi, W., & Hamid, S. (2012). Creativity and education. Academic Research International, 2(2), 264–275.

Rezba, R. J., Sparague, C. S., Fiel, R. L., Funk, H. J., Okey, J. R., & Jaus, H. H. (2007). Learning and assessing science process skills (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Rule, A. C., Schneider, J. S., Tallakson, D. A., & Highnam, D. (2012). Creativity and thinking skills integrated into a science enrichment unit on flooding. Creative Education, 3(8), 1371–1379.

Subali, B. (2009). Pengukuran keterampilan proses sains pola divergen dalam mata pelajaran biologi SMA di Provinsi DIY dan Jawa Tengah. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. Retrieved from

Subali, B. (2011). Pengukuran kreativitas keterampilan proses sains dalam konteks assessment for learning. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 30(1), 130–144.

Subali, B., & Mariyam, S. (2013). Pengembangan kreativitas keterampilan proses sains dalam aspek kehidupan organisme pada mata pelajaran IPA SD. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 32(3), 365–381.

Subali, B., & Mariyam, S. (2015). Measuring the Indonesian elementary schools student’s creativity in science processing skills of life aspects on natural sciences subject: In Yogyakarta Special Province (DIY). Journal of Elementary Education, 25(1), 91–105. Retrieved from

Subali, B., Paidi, P., & Mariyam, S. (2016). The divergent thinking of basic skills of sciences process skills of life aspects on natural sciences subject in Indonesian elementary school students. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 17(1). Retrieved from

Torrance, E. P. (1979). A three-stage model for teaching for creative thinking. In A. E. Lawson (Ed.), The psychology of teaching for thinking and creativity (pp. 226–253). Columbus, OH: Association for Education of Teachers of Science, Ohio State University.

Towle, A. (1989). Modern biology. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Wenning, C. J. (2005). Levels of inquiry: Hierarchies of pedagogical practices and inquiry processes. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 2(3), 3–12. Retrieved from

Wenning, C. J. (2010). Level of inquiry: Using inquiry spectrum learning sequences to teach science. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 5(3), 11–20. Retrieved from

Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

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

Find REID (Research and Evaluation in Education) on:


ISSN 2460-6995 (Online)

View REiD Visitor Statistics