Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Natural Science Education Page 683
Although convergent thinking is needed in this stage, it is very important the teacher told other students that do not pass any judgment good-bad or right-wrong to the idea.
This hypothetical model adapts the IBL, PBL and CPS learning models. All four models in their implementation require teachers role in providing scaffolding, focusing attention on the
creation of ideas, and involving divergent-convergent thinking. Models develop mainly from IBL models, with an emphasis on the presentation of the peculiar problems phase 2 similar
to the stages of concept idea deconstruction by using humor-provocation phase 3 in the CDR humor-based learning.
3. Result and Discussion 3.1. Inquiry-Based Learning IBL
The strength of IBL strength in improving students creative thinking especially lies in phases 2 and 3. In the second phase the students are being exposed to problem that they are curious
about and making them ready to participate in the learning process. It is important to get the attention and motivate students to engage in the planned learning activities. In the model of
inquiry, learning motivation easily obtained through the provision of provocative problem situations or events that deviate from the usual circumstances Arends, 2012. In the third
phase, the students conduct the data collection based on the presented problem for verification or formulating problems and hypotheses. During this phase, students are encouraged to ask
questions and formulate hypotheses that could help explain what happened. It is very important in this phase to accept all ideas Arends, 2012. IBL is a model of excellence to
encourage students to think scientifically, creatively, and intuitively, and works on the basis of their own initiative. Additionally, IBT can foster an attitude of objective, honest, and open.
Some studies indicate that inquiry model can improve students ability to think creatively Risnanosanti, 2009; Idrisah, 2014. IBL weaknesses are that the model requires a long time,
not all course materials containing the problem, require regular planning and well-though plans, and ineffective if there are some students who are passive. This model will develop in a
classroom environment that is characterized by open communication and conversation in which the students show respect to one another and feel involved Arends, 2012. Therefore,
if the classroom environment is not supportive, the implementation of the model becomes inefficient.
3.2. Problem-Based Learning PBL
PBL supports in improving students creative thinking are especially in phase 1 and 3. In the first phase, the teacher motivates students to engage in problem solving activities of their own
choosing. Students are given the widest opportunity to produce corresponding verbal issues that exist in their belief that moment. Phase 3 teachers encourage students to collect
appropriate information, carry out experiments, looking for explanations and solutions. In this phase, students can generate a lot of ideas to resolve the issue. PBL models have advantages
in terms of can develop students thinking skills, including critical thinking skills and creative thinking. Starko 2010 states that PBL is one of the strategies which organize the science
content which supports the creativity and the process of science. Bredderman Arends, 2012 conducted a meta-analysis of 57 studies and found that PBL is very good in terms of
creativity and students understanding of the scientific method. Several studies show a significant relationship with the PBL model of creative thinking abilities of students. Quasi-
experimental research on 60 students of Civil Engineering Polytechnic in Malaysia showed that the model PBL better in improving the skills of creative thinking than using conventional
learning Awang Ramly, 2008. Eldy Solomon 2013 found that PBL role in improving
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Natural Science Education Page 684
the ability of creative thinking in physics learning in students, and can generate a lot of ideas. Measurements using this TTCT showed that there is an improvement for fluency and
flexibility aspects, but there is no increase in aspects of originality. In addition to physics, the model PBL can improve the ability to think creatively in learning Mathematics Noer, 2011
and Biology Puspitasari, 2012. The weaknesses of PBL model are that this model is less appropriate when implemented for the purpose of increasing the ability of creative thinking in
students in the low education level. Many studies about creative thinking of students using PBL in high school students and the lower level showed that the improvement is different
from the improvement gain no gain in the college level. Teaching by using the PBL at a lower level of education generally involves the cooperation of students in groups. This is often done
in the teaching of Science because of the limitations of school facilities, for example, lack of laboratory facilities. Hillman Gomez, 2007 states that an emphasis on cooperative learning
can contribute to lowering the creation, imagination and individual production. Learning group also can weaken intrinsic motivation, hinder the development of problem-solving and
decision-making capabilities, as well as inhibit personal freedom to be creative. Although PBL can generate a lot of ideas, but it is less able to generate new or unique ideas Eldy
Solomon, 2013. In the Bredderman study above, PBL does not show the achievement of science content better than other traditional approaches Arends, 2012: 402. PBL will not be
effective if the teacher does not create a classroom environment in which there is an exchange of ideas openly and sincerely Arends, 2012: 396, which is part of a prerequisite to trigger
creative thinking of students.
3.3. Creative Problem Solving CPS
