Identifying Students’ Creativity in the Higher Education Classroom
Laksmi Dewi and M. Ridwan Sutisna
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Student Creativity, Tutorial Book Project, Teaching Graphic Media.
Abstract: Creativity is one of skills higher education institutions (HEIs) need to develop of the students to address
challenges of the 21st century. Through the development of creativity, it is expected that students can meet
the ever more complex demands of the workplaces. The identification of students’ creativity is necessary in
order for the HEIs to be able to design an effective instructional program to develop it. This creativity
identification is also needed to support the implementation of a product-oriented education. Based on the
results of identification, it was revealed that generally students’ creativity could be said as being at the level
“ordinary/routine”. The fluency aspect was at the highest level of creativity. It goes to say that students’
creativity could still be improved to the level of creative or very creative. It was also revealed that students
relatively were unable to recognize the importance of a deep knowledge base and continual work to learn
new things the strongest aspects were the openness to new ideas and the active search for new ideas. It can
be concluded that there should be attempts from the lecturers to develop students’ creativity.
1 INTRODUCTION
Creativity remains one of the main issues in efforts
to improve the instructional process in higher
education institutions (HEIs). Like at other levels of
education, students’ participation is necessary to
improve the quality of education at HEIs (Sanjaya,
2005; Uno, 2010; Rusman, 2010).
A well-designed instructional process will enable
students to explore their potentials (Fardah, 2012;
Plucker et al., 2010; Beghetto, 2010; The Centre for
Cultural Policy Research, 2005). It means that
creativity is crucial for the skill acquisition because
it is not merely responding to the feedbacks
provided by the lecturer during the lesson.
An initial identification of students’ creativity is
necessary to design a lecture program that can
improve it because the students will be assigned to
develop tutorial book on how to develop educational
graphic media.
This identification is aimed at figuring out
students’ initial creativity level needed to improve
the quality of learning. Once it is identified, the
lecturer could design a lesson suitable for them.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Creativity
It is generally acknowledged that creativity is one of
important skills to face the 21st century. The ability
to think creatively is one of skills needed to support
learning and innovative skills
(www.P21.org/Framework).
Creativity can be formed and influenced by
several factors. It is an interaction result between
talent, process, and environment that can be done
either individually or in groups to produce a product,
be it a new product or a modified one, that is useful
for the society (Plucker et al., 2010; Plucker et al.,
2004; Morgan and Forster, 1999).
Brookhart (2013) describes a creativity as a
simple concept that becomes complex once a
thought is focused on finding an original and high-
quality idea. Creativity is not only an innate ability,
but also is influenced by environment and a
repeatedly done process, so creativity is well-
established and becomes an individual habit
(Sternberg, 2012). Thus, a structured and continuous
effort is required to develop creativity so that
Dewi, L. and Sutisna, M.
Identifying Students’ Creativity in the Higher Education Classroom.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 2, pages 189-193
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
189

creativity continues to develop and eventually
becomes an individual character.
Creativity can basically be seen in someone who is
open to new experiences (Brookhart, 2013; Feist,
2010), confident in his own creativity (Beghetto,
2010), knowledgeable, motivated, aware of any
potential risk he is facing, be able to deal with
criticism well (Plucker et al., 2010).
2.2 Measuring Creativity
A creativity measurement is developed to establish
criteria of creativity level (Brookhart, 2013).
Although creativity tests vary in their content and
systematics, their categorization of the test responses
are relatively similar in that they measure fluency,
flexibility, originality, and elaboration. Brookhart’s
(2013) creativity measurement model determines
four levels of creativity: very creative, creative,
ordinary/routine, and imitative. This measurement
considers four different areas: variations in
conveying ideas, variations in finding the resources
needed, novelty in combining ideas, and novelty in
conducting the communication process.
Guilford developed another model that can be
used to measure a person’s divergent production.
This model measures the creativity in terms of task
completion pace. Fluency is measured based on the
numbers of responses provided by the students,
flexibility is measured based on how many types of
responses provided by the students. originality is
measured based on the unusualness in the students’
responses, and elaboration is measured based on
how detailed the students’ responses are.
The present study was aimed at measuring the
initial creativity level of students in their first year.
To this end, Guilford’s (1987) measurement criteria
were adopted with the addition of Brookhart’s
(2013) five measurement criteria.
3 METHODS
This study was the first phase of the three phases of
research that will be carried out. The aim was to
identify the initial level of students’ creativity. The
participants were 47 second semester students,
consisting of 27 females and 20 male students,
enrolled in a bachelor degree program. To achieve
the aforesaid purpose, a descriptive analysis method
was employed. This method describes and analyze
research data that should be correctly interpreted.
This study was conducted in three phases. The first
phase is creativity identification, the second phase is
data analysis, and the last one is conclusion drawing.
Students’ creativity was measured using
Guilford’s creativity test and a questionnaire that
was developed with reference to Brookhart’s (2013)
creativity criteria: ability to recognize the
importance of a deep knowledge base and
continually work to learn new things; openness to
new ideas and active search for them; ability to find
source material in a wide variety of media, people,
and events; ability to organize and reorganize ideas
into different categories and combinations and then
evaluate whether the results are interesting, new, or
helpful; and ability to use trial and error when they
are not sure of how to proceed, viewing failure as an
opportunity to learn.
4 RESULTS
The results of data analysis are divided into two
categories: students’ self-assessed creativity level
obtained through questionnaires and the creativity
level measured by Guilford’s test.
4.1 Basic Level Creativity Test
Students’ creativity is measured from graphics
developed by the students using Guilford’ test. The
test results are presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Identification of students’ creativity.
ASPECT
SCORE
Fluency
3.28
Flexibility
2.19
Originality
2.55
Elaboration
1.85
Ẋ
2.47
The measurement score was done in a scale of 1
to 5. The score of 1 indicates the lowest creativity
level, and 5 indicates the highest.
The average score of overall aspects was 2.47. It
means that the average students’ creativity is at the
“ordinary/routine” level. With a score of 3.28,
fluency was at the level of “creative,” the highest if
compared with other aspects. With a score of 1.85,
elaboration was at the level of “ordinary/routine.” It
was the lowest one if compared with other aspects.
However, no one of the participants was at the
level or “imitative.” As many as 30 students were at
the level of “ordinary/routine,” and 20 students were
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
190

at the level of “creative,” but no one was at the level
of “very creative.”
4.2 Students’ Self-Assessed Creativity
In addition to Guilford’s test, the measurement was
also done through a Likert scale questionnaire. This
questionnaire was developed with reference to
Brookhart’s (2010) creativity criteria: (1) ability to
recognize the importance of a deep knowledge base
and continually work to learn new things, (2)
openness to new ideas and active search for them,
(3) ability to find source material in a wide variety
of media, people, and events, (4) ability to organize
and reorganize ideas into different categories or
combinations and then evaluate whether the results
are interesting, new, or helpful, (5) ability to use trial
and error when they are unsure how to proceed,
viewing failure as an opportunity to learn. What
follows is the result.
Table 2: Students’ self-assessed creativity.
NO
ASPECT
AVERAGE
SCORE
1
Ability to recognize the
importance of a deep
knowledge base and
continually work to learn
new things
3.15
2
Openness to new ideas and
active search for them
3.63
3
Ability to find source
material in a wide variety of
media, people, and events
3.54
4
Ability to organize and
reorganize ideas into
different categories or
combinations and then
evaluate whether the results
are interesting, new, or
helpful
3.28
5
Ability to use trial and error
when they are unsure how to
proceed, viewing failure as
an opportunity to learn
3.20
The average score of each of these aspect is
obtained by computing the average of overall scores
of statement items of the respective aspect.
Table 3: Ability to recognize the importance of a deep
knowledge base and continually work to learn new things.
No
Statement
A
Ability to recognize the
importance of a deep knowledge
base and continually work to
learn new things
3.15
1
I like to read about how to create
something
3.82
2
I love to draw a certain object
3.33
3
I love to write information that
may be useful for others
3.73
4
I find it hard to express ideas in
writing
3.33
5
I always avoid drawing
2.61
6
Reading about how to create
something is just a waste of time
2.14
7
I can operate a lot of computer
software to create things
3.10
With an average score of 3.15, students’ ability
to recognize basic knowledge to write a tutorial
book could be said sufficient.
Table 4: Openness to new ideas and active search for
them.
No
Statement
B
Openness to new ideas and
active search for them
3.63
8
I love to see the works of
famous people
4.02
9
I will be glad if my works
receive constructive criticisms
4.10
10
I accept the criticisms, but I
ignore them when creating a
new work
2.78
11
I find new ideas from reading
or seeing the works of others
3.88
12
I find new ideas by
contemplating
3.35
With an average score of 3.63, the students could
be said open to new ideas and actively seek them
out.
Identifying Students’ Creativity in the Higher Education Classroom
191

Table 5: Ability to find source material in a wide variety
of media, people, and events.
No
Statement
C
Ability to find source material in a
wide variety of media, people, and
events
3.54
13
I love to befriend with many
people, so I can learn creative
ideas from them
3.92
14
I get informed and find creative
ideas from ...
a. Printed mass media
33.33%
b. Television
39.22%
c. Radio
5.88%
d. Internet
49.02%
15
I frequently attend an event to find
new creative ideas.
3.16
16
Events I frequently attend
a. Seminar
23.53%
b. Workshop
39.22%
c. Bazaar
33.33%
d. Other events. Specify: ...
5.88%
3.54 is an average score of this indicator. It
means that can find ideas from various sources such
as people they encounter, mass media, and events
they attend.
Table 6: Ability to organize and reorganize ideas into
different categories or combinations and then evaluate
whether the results are interesting, new, or helpful.
No
Statement
D
Ability to organize and reorganize
ideas into different categories or
combinations and then evaluate
whether the results are interesting,
new, or helpful
3.28
17
I can develop creative ideas to produce
a work that is different from that of
others / existing ones
3.43
18
I can develop a product by imitating
the works of others
3.12
19
I developed an interesting and useful
creative idea by combining ideas from
various sources
3.80
20
I like to write about how to create
something
3.04
21
I have many ideas to write/create a
product
3.00
With an average score of 3.28, students can be
said to have self-confidence to organize and
reorganize ideas into different categories or
combinations and then evaluate whether the results
are interesting, new, or helpful.
Table 7: Ability to use trial and error when they are
unsure how to proceed, viewing failure as an opportunity
to learn.
No
Statement
E
Ability to use trial and error when
they are unsure how to proceed,
viewing failure as an opportunity to
learn
3.20
22
I like to work by modifying
predetermined methods
3.55
23
I think trying out new and unproven
methods is just wasting time, power,
money
2.57
24
I write about a newly found method
and disseminate it
3.02
25
When creating something, I always
work in accordance with the
instruction available in the source I
use
3.49
26
I find it difficult to follow the
instructions available in the source I
use
2.88
27
I love making experiments even if the
result is below my expectation
3.67
The first four indicators were the main indicators
of an individual’s creativity, and the fifth shows how
students approach taken by students to solve
problems. With a score of 3.20, the students can be
said to be used to making trial and error. Put it
simply, students seemed to consider failures as parts
of learning.
5 DISCUSSION
The results of the study showed that generally
students’ initial creativity level varied. Referring to
Guilford’s four creativity criteria, students can be
said to have ability in generating new ideas.
Based on Brookhart’s test, students can draw all
spheres with different types of images. However,
they tend to be homogeneous and less varied. It goes
to say that basically students’ creativity level varied.
Their creativity level can be seen in different shapes.
Generally, Guilford’s testing showed that students’
creativity levels were not sufficient. Every aspect
tended to be varied. No one of the participants was
at the level or “imitative.” The majority of students
were at the level of “ordinary/routine,” and the rest
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
192

were at the level of “creative,” but no one was at the
level of “very creative.”
The results revealed that students were able to
recognize the importance of a deep knowledge base
and continually worked to learn new things, very
open to new ideas and actively sought them out, able
to find source material in a wide variety of media,
people, and events, and able to organize and
reorganize ideas into different categories or
combinations and then evaluate whether the results
are interesting, new, or helpful.
Their ability to conduct trial and error in
addressing a problem shows that students were able
to see failure as a part of learning process and that
they did not easily give up.
6 CONCLUSION
Based on the results of data analysis, it was
concluded that students could be said to be creative
enough to be assigned to create a tutorial book.
The identification process became a way of
analyzing students’ characters. It was done to
optimize their learning achievements.
Creativity measurement at the beginning of
lecture program could provide general information
about students’ creativity level.
Students with high creativity level could be
assigned to solve problems appropriate with their
level of creativity. The lecturer could freely
determine teaching and evaluation methods.
Students’ low creativity could be improved through
various efforts, one of which is by assigning them to
create a tutorial book.
REFERENCES
Beghetto, R. A., 2010. Classroom Creativity. In R. J.
Kaufman, J.C. Sternberg (Eds.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Creativity (pp. 447–463), Cambridge
University Press. New York.
Brookhart, S. M., 2013. How to create and use rubrics for
formative assessment and grading, Alexandria.
ASCD.
Fardah, D. K., 2012. Analisis Proses dan Kemampuan
Berpikir Kreatif Siswa dalam Matematika Melalui
Tugas Open-Ended. 3 (September).
Feist, G. J., 2010. The function of personality in creativity:
the nature and nurture of the creative personality. In J.
C Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). The Cambridge
handbook of creativity (pp. 113 – 1300, Cambridge
University Press. New York.
Morgan, S., Forster, J., 1999. Creativity in the classroom.
Gifted Education International, Vol 14, pp. 29-43.
1999 A B Academic Publishers.
Plucker, J. A., Kaufman, J. C., Beghetto, R. A., 2010.
What we know about creativity. Partnership For 21st
Century Learning.
Plucker, J., Beghetto, R. A., Dow, G., 2004. Why isn’t
creativity more important to educational
psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions
in creativity research, Educational Psychologist. 39,
83–96.
Rusman, R., 2010. Model-Model Pembelajaran, Raja
Grafindo Persada. Bandung.
Sanjaya, W., 2005. Pembelajaran dalam Implementasi
Kurikulum berbasis Kompetensi, Kencana Prenada
Media Group. Jakarta.
Sternberg, R. J., 2012. The Assessment of Creativity: An
Investment-Based Approach, Creativity Research
Journal, 24(1), 3–12.
The Centre for Cultural Policy Research, T. U. of H.,
2005. A Study on Creativity Index a Study On. Home
Affairs Bureau, The Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region Government.
Uno, H. B., 2010. Model Pembelajaran, Bumi Aksara.
Jakarta.
Identifying Students’ Creativity in the Higher Education Classroom
193