Academic Summary Assignment due in 13 hours

350

ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION

Nilay Şener, Erol Taş

Introduction

A person uses science, which is a part of everyday life, in order to un- derstand and adopt to the environment in which he/she lives no matter how old he/she is. Tendency towards science starts at very early age. The age at which children ask questions constantly and inquire about everything is between 6 and 14 and they mostly inquire about science at these ages. As these students at this age learn a new subject, they keep asking questions about that subject and this creates a desire to learn more about it (Gürdal, 1992). Through science education, the children ask questions in order to understand the events that occur around their environment and their curi- osity increases by facing a new problem with every question. They develop themselves using the scientific process skills to solve the problems they have faced. They use the solutions they produce and the information they learn in order to solve the new problems they confront in their real life. Consequently, the child will have gained the skills that make his daily life easier. Thus, sci- ence education will enable the child to produce solutions by applying the information they acquire to new situations and allow them to develop their creative thinking skills.

Creative Thinking

The first scientific research on creativity was initiated in the 1950s by the American Psychological Association, headed by Guilford. Different definitions have been made in the literature related to the concept of creativity, which is tried to be explained by different approaches, and each author emphasizes a different direction of creativity (Demirci, 2007). Creative things are both original and in some way effective and indeed this is the standard definition of creativity (Runco & Jaeger, 2012). According to Bélanger, Akre, Berchtold, and Michaud (2011) identified creativity as the process to surpass existing ex- periences, take a step forward through the restriction of habits, and form new concepts in problematic situations at the same time not to be restricted to practice and the abilities to solve problems flexibly. Torrance (1974) describes creativity as being sensitive to the problems, inadequacies, lack of knowledge,

Nilay Şener The Ministry of National Education

Secondary School Özcan Duran Karagöl, Turkey

Erol Taş Ordu University, Turkey

Abstract. The aim of this research is to develop a guide material prepared accord- ing to Purdue Model for the ‘The Let’s Solve

the Puzzle of Our Body’ unit in the 5th grade Science class at secondary school and to

research the effects of this guide material on students’ creative thinking. For this pur- pose, the research was carried out by using

the quasi experimental model, with pre-test and post-test control groups. Experimen-

tal application was carried out with 43 experimental group and 44 control group

students, in total 87 students in Turkey. While in the experimental group applica-

tions were carried out based on the Purdue Model, in the control group the course was taught according to the activities stated in

2013 Ministry of National Education Sci- ence Curriculum in Turkey. The data of the

research were collected using Torrance Test of Creative Thinking Verbal Form A-B and

Figural Form A-B. As a result of the research, it was determined that verbal and formal creative thinking levels of the experimen- tal group and the control group students

were significantly different in favour of the experimental group students. On the basis

of the results obtained from this research, some suggestions have been made to the

educators and future researchers.

Keywords: creative thinking, problem solving, science project, Purdue model.

351

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

inconsistencies and determining the difficulties, searching for solutions, estimation and hypothesising about in- adequacies, changing the hypotheses, identifying a solution and testing and revealing the results after retesting.

There are three features of creativity defined by Torrance (1974); fluency, flexibility and originality. Fluency, which refers to the amount of answers given by the student about a problem. Flexibility can be thought as the student’s potential to change from one type of thinking to another one when creating solutions. Lastly, according to Kuo (2016) originality is described as the ability of an individual being able to come out with unique ideas, like to do unexpected things or showing abilities different from others.

Purdue Three-Stage Enrichment Model

It is one of the basic aims of science education to educate creative and productive individuals who can es- tablish relations between their daily life and science to meet the requirements of the times we live in. It is needed to educate individuals who analyse and interpret the information through their own mental process after reach- ing the scientific knowledge thus, who realize meaningful learning. In this respect, science programs need to be organized in a way that individuals know how to achieve creative scientific knowledge that can produce original products and in a way that they can actively solve problems. For the education of gifted students who have these qualities in their education systems, developed countries have developed various researches and models, some of which are the autonomous learning model, the Learning Enrichment Service (LES) model, the Integrative Education Model and the Purdue Three-Stage Enrichment Model (Feldhusen & Kollof, 1978).

The Purdue Three-Stage Enrichment Model (Purdue Model) is a program that has been developed and pre- pared for the development of gifted students (Moon, Feldhusen, Powley, Nidiffer & Whitman, 1993). The Purdue Model was first introduced by Feldhusen, Linden and Awes in a course that they teach college students in 1973. Afterwards, Feldhusen and Kollof experimented in 1977 applying the model to gifted students at elementary school level. The model of regular enrichment which is one of students’ simple thinking experiences has gradually evolved from simple thinking experiences to complex independent activities (Feldhusen & Kolloff, 1986).

According to Feldhusen and Kollof (1978), the model includes three types of educational activity. These in- clude research activities that will allow (I) students to discover and develop their own interests and thinking skills, (II) group activities to help students use the knowledge they learn, and (III) individual and small group projects in which students can conduct real, life-related research. Every step of the Purdue Model and the contents of these steps are shown in Table 1 (Feldhusen & Kolloff, 1986).

Table 1. The content of Purdue three stage enrichment model (Feldhusen & Kolloff, 1986).

Stages of Model General Content Detailed Content

Stage 1. Separator and Connec- tive Thinking Skills

Integrated scientific process skills, basic scientific process skills

The teacher allows short-term activities. He/she makes the students practice so that they can develop in the subject area There is a balance between mental and visual activities.

Stage 2. Problem Solving and Creative Problem Solving Techniques

Group work on a problem selected by the teacher

The practises are made in control of the teacher. Many research and investigation techniques are applied (such as brainstorming).

Stage 3. Independent Project Study

Researching in depth It is in the control of the student. The teacher is the guide. The subjects are chosen individually or in small groups. The research methods are applied. The product obtained at the end of the study is prepared for presentation.

The Purdue Model used in the training of gifted students is a three-fold learning model of scientific process skills, problem solving and project production. The first two stages bringing the model to the fair constitute the basis and preparation for the third stage. These three stages are related to each other and they sport the develop- ment of each other. For this reason, students are expected to use scientific process skills to reach scientific knowl- edge, conduct research, use creative thinking skills by questioning knowledge, and solve the problems they face. Individuals who have these knowledge and skills will become science literate individuals.

Although the researches on Purdue Model used in this research are limited (Altıntaş, 2009; Çepni, Gökdere, & Küçük, 2002; Kutlu & Gökdere, 2013; Moon, 2004; Ünlü, 2008), many studies have been carried out separately in science teaching in the three stages of the model, scientific process skills, problem solving and project matters

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

352

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

(Aktamış, 2007; Bahadır, 2007; Batı, 2010; Çıbık, 2009; Doppelt, 2003; Garrett, 1987; Kanlı & Emir, 2013; Korkmaz, 2002; Lewis, 2006; Yaman & Yalçın, 2005). However, since the research on the three-stage Purdue Model used in the training of gifted students is very limited, scientific research is needed to determine the effectiveness of the model on normal students. The research is significant to ensure that the Purdue Model used for gifted students is available for the normal students in public schools as well. Thus, with the examples of activities developed for the applicability of the model, its dissemination in science education will be ensured.

It is one the main aims of science education to raise creative and productive individuals who can meet the necessities of the times we live in and relate science with everyday life. There is a need for individuals who are capable of achieving scientific knowledge, analysing and interpreting information through their own mental pro- cesses, and thus achieving meaningful learning. It is important to raise creative and productive individuals who can solve problems in different ways.

In learning environments that allow creative thinking, thinking is highly valued in comparison to knowledge. In science education, it is expected that the students should try to attain knowledge rather than to memorize the information and to assimilate the knowledge. Memorizing is one of the biggest obstacles to creativity. A child’s mind is full of creativity especially in primary school. Over time, creativity starts to decline (Üstündağ, 2011). For this reason, the establishment of educational environment that will develop creativity for the 5th grade students who are in transition period from elementary school to middle school is significant in terms of not creating memorization and developing creativity. In addition, according to Piaget, this period is included in the students’ transition period from concrete operational stage to formal operational stage. In this period, students should be taught how to deal with a problem, how to reach the solution, how to create a research plan and how to apply it. In this process, the basic requirements they will often use in science teaching are the scientific process skills. Scientific process skills are, as well as the skills that scientists use during their work, the abilities exhibited in the solution of any scientific problem (Monhardt & Monhardt, 2006). By using these skills, students try to perceive the environment in science teaching and learn about events that occur in nature. At this point, Purdue Model meets basic requirements such as the planning of research process in science education and the problem solving and scientific process skills that the student should have in this process. It allows students to develop their potential that exists beyond their academic success.

This research was designed to develop students’ creative thinking in science teaching. When looked at the three stages, Purdue Model is considered as a model that can be effective in realizing meaningful learning in sci- ence teaching and developing students’ creative thinking. For this reason, in this research, it has been tried to put forward the effects of the Purdue Model on the students’ verbal and figural creative thinking skills, used in the teaching of the unit ‘The Let’s Solve the Puzzle of Our Body’ in the 5th grade Science course of the 2013 Science Cur- riculum. In particular, the problem of the research seeks to answer the following two questions:

1. Are there any statistically significant differences in the levels of Torrance verbal creative thinking pre- test and post-test results between experimental group (using Purdue Model) and control group (using 2013 Science Curriculum)?

2. Are there any statistically significant differences in the levels of Torrance figural creative thinking pre- test and post-test results between experimental group (using Purdue Model) and control group (using 2013 Science Curriculum)?

Methodology of Research

In this research, experimental research design was used. In experimental research, it may not be possible to assign the participants, who are always the nature of real experimental designs, to the groups. In cases where the controls required by experimental designs are not provided or sufficient, quasi experimental research designs that contain all the features of the experimental investigations are used (Karasar, 2006; Mertler & Charles, 2011). In quasi experimental researches, the choice of subjects is not random (Cohen, Monion, & Morrison, 2000; Creswell, 1994). In this research, since the 5th grade students who are the samples of this research are not assigned to the experimental and control groups randomly, quasi experimental research with matched control group is used.

The research was conducted with totally 87 students (43 in experimental group and 44 in the control group) from Samsun city in Turkey, during the first semester of the school year of 2014-2015. While ‘Let’s Solve the Puzzle of Our Body’ unit was taught to experimental group using Purdue Three Stage Enrichment Model, the control group was instructed to do the activities in 2013 Science Curriculum.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

353

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Sample of Research

In this research, experimental and control groups were determined by using simple random sampling method. Before research was executed, all necessary permissions about research were granted by Turkish Ministry of Na- tional Education. Before research was conducted, the classes were established by the school administration, in accordance with the registration list without considering the students’ academic level. The experimental and control group classes among the fifth grade were determined via lot. The research was conducted with 87 students, 43 of which in the experimental group and 44 of which in the control group in Turkey. Besides, all the students were volunteers in research.

Instrument and Procedures

‘Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) Verbal A-B Forms’ and ‘Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) Figural A-B Forms’ tests were used as data collection tools in the research. TTCT Verbal Form A-B and TTCT Figural Form A-B has been used with the aim of demonstrating how the teaching of the experimental and control groups in the experimental application process leads to a change in the verbal and formal creativity of the students to- wards science.

Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) developed by E. P. Torrance, was published for the first time in 1966 in the United States to determine the creative thinking levels of students. The scale has a wide range of uses from kindergarten to the university. Statistical analyses of the scale on its linguistic equivalence, reliability and validity were made by Aslan (2001) and it was adapted to Turkish. The test consists of two parts: ‘TTCT Verbal A-B form’ and ‘TTCT Figural A-B form’. While the A forms of verbal and figural tests were used as pre-tests before the application, the B forms were used as post-tests after the application.

Verbal test forms consist of seven subtests called ‘asking questions’, ‘guessing causes’, ‘guessing consequences’, ‘product improvement’, ‘unusual uses’, ‘unusual questions’ and ‘just suppose’. The answers of the students for each test were scored in three aspects as ‘fluency’, ‘abstractness’ and ‘originality’, they were added up and creative think- ing score was formed. Sample question for ‘TTCT verbal B’ is given Table 2.

Table 2. Sample question for TTCT verbal B.

Just suppose… Now you will be given an improbable event. An event that will perhaps never come true. You will just suppose that this happens. This will give you the opportunity to think about other exciting things and use your imagination. Of course, if this improbable event comes true… just imagine that it happens. Then think about the other things that might happen with the occurrence of this event. In other words, what might the consequences of this event be? Make as many guesses as you can. That is the impossible event: Just suppose that a big fog came to the Earth and only people’s feet can be seen. How is this going to change the world? List your thoughts and guesses.

In the figural part, there are three subtests respectively; ‘image creation’, ‘image completion’ and ‘parallel lines and circles’ Table 3. For the application of the TTCTs, the approximate time was 75-80 minutes. For each of the verbal and figural tests, one lesson hour was given and they were applied separately.

Table 3. Sample question for TTCT figural A.

You can make interesting pictures or objects by adding lines to this and the unfinished figures on the back page. And try not to think about the figures and objects that others cannot think of. Try to make your picture interesting and tell a whole story by adding your first ideas. Think of an interest- ing title for each figure and write on the line next to the number under each picture.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

354

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Aslan (2001) has conducted Turkish linguistic equivalence, reliability and validity studies of TTCT. The Pearson Moment Product Correlation Coefficient between the scores obtained with the application of the Turkish and English forms of the same group was found to be significant at p<.01 level for all subtests. For the internal validity of the test, an analysis of substance total, substance exclusion and substance discrimination was performed for all age groups. Significant results were obtained for all age groups and all scores of verbal creativity test at p< .01 level in item-total and item-remaining analyses for seven subtests of verbal creativity test belonging to primary, high school and university age groups. In the figural creative test, significant results at p< .01 level were obtained in the item-total, item-remaining analyses; fluency, originality, abstraction of the titles, enrichment, resistance to early closure scores for all age groups including the pre-school age group (Aslan, 2001).

Data Analysis

In the analysis of qualitative data, two types of analysis methods are used: descriptive and content analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). While the data obtained in the descriptive analysis are summarized and interpreted accord- ing to the previously determined theme, in the content analysis, the resulting data are analysed in depth to allow for the generation of previously unfamiliar themes and dimensions (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). In this research, content analysis method was used in the analysis of qualitative data obtained from TTCT Verbal and TTCT Figural forms.

In TTCT verbal form, the answers given by the students in each test were scored in three dimensions as (1) fluency, (2) flexibility and (3) originality, and a creative thinking verbal test score was generated. In TTCT figural form, two separate scoring criteria; norm-based and criterion-based were created by Torrance and Ball (1984). In the norm-based scoring criteria, the answers were scored according to (1) fluency, (2) originality, (3) abstraction of titles, (4) enrichment, and (5) early closure resistance. In criterion-based scoring criteria, the power of creating a creative product was evaluated according to 13 different criteria under the title of ‘the list of creative forces’ depending on the figural stimulus in the answers of the students. These 13 criteria are (1) emotional expressions, (2) storytelling, (3) movement or activity, (4) explanations of the titles, (5) uncompleted figures, (6) synthesis of the incomplete lines, (7) unusual visualization, (8) internal visualization, (9) stretching or crossing boundaries, (10) humour, (11) richness of imagination, (12) colourfulness of imagination (13) fantasy. The total creativity figural test score evaluates the thought product according to 18 different measures including the list of creative forces.

In the analysis of the scores obtained from the TTCT verbal and formal A-B forms, the answers given by the students were taken into account according to the above-mentioned evaluation criteria for the verbal and figural forms. The criteria to be followed in the scoring of the data obtained from TTCT verbal and figural A-B forms were made according to the Turkish scoring guide prepared by Aslan (2001) considering the revision made by Torronce in 1984. For each criterion in the scoring guide, categories were given and the student answers were scored ac- cording to these categories and the data were converted into quantitative.

Before deciding on the method to be used in the analysis of the data, it was checked whether the scores ob- tained from each measurement tool provided normality assumptions. In the analysis of the data that show normal distribution, the two-way ANOVA for mixed measures was used.

Reliability and Validity of Data Collection Instruments

The TTCT Verbal and Figural Forms were pre-applied to a group of five students chosen from the 5th grade students before the experimental practice. In preliminary practice, the students were assessed from the point of view of whether there were points that were not understood in the questions or in the drawings and the duration of the application, and necessary precautions were taken against the problems that may be encountered in the actual application.

After the experimental treatment (detailed information is available in the following experimental implemen- tation section), the reliability analysis between the raters was used for the reliability analysis of the data obtained from the TTCT verbal and the figural forms. Interrater reliability is expressed as the consistency between scores of two or more raters on the characteristics of different individuals or substances (Aiken, 2000; Anastasi & Urbina, 1997; Güler, 2008). There are many methods that can be used for this purpose such as Pearson correlation coefficient, comparison of averages, percentage of numbness and generalizability. Inter- raters reliability is most commonly calculated by the correlation coefficient (Güler & Gelbal, 2010; Güler & Taşdelen Teker, 2015). The Pearson correla- tion coefficient shows the linear relationship of the scores of the two raters and their variation together (Baykul,

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

355

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

2010). If the correlation coefficient is less than 0.30 the relation is low, if it is between 0.30 and 0.70 the relation is medium and if it is more than 0.70 the relation is high (Büyüköztürk, Çokluk & Köklü, 2010).

For the scoring of the tests, the researcher was trained according to the ‘Torrance Creative Thinking Tests Scoring Training’ under the supervision of a specialist. For this purpose, TTCT Verbal Test A (20) and Figural Test (20) forms of 20 students ten of whom were randomly selected for the control group and ten of whom were randomly selected for the experimental group were recoded and rescored by two other specialists. The tests were re-planned. The reliability of the research was evaluated by the researcher and a researcher who explained the scoring guide by the researcher, and another researcher who was trained in scoring training. In the correlation analysis, since the group number was N≤30, the Spearman-Brown correlation coefficient which is one of the non-parametric methods was used (Table 4).

Table 4. Correlation coefficients between the scores of the three raters to the TTCT verbal and figure A forms.

Researcher 1th Rater 2nd Rater

Verbal Form A

Researcher - .934* .909*

1th Rater .934* - .858**

2nd Rater .909* .858* -

Figural Form A

Researcher - .907* .914**

1th Rater .907* - .915**

2nd Rater .914* .915* - *p< .05

The Spearman-Brown correlation coefficient was used firstly in the reliability analysis between the raters for the TTCT – Verbal A Form. Correlation coefficients for the TTCT - Verbal form were calculated as values ranging from 0.858 to 0.934. The same procedure was performed for the TTCT – Figurer A Form and the Spearman-Brown correlation coefficients were calculated as the values ranging from 0.907 to 0.915. This correlation coefficient value supports the interpretation that the raters are compatible.

It may be wrong to evaluate reliability only by looking at the correlation. The correlation coefficient is insuf- ficient to calculate the reliability between the raters, since the correlation value between points is independent from the average (Goodwin, 2001). For this reason, the difference between the points average of the raters must also be tested. The results of the Friedman test which was used to test the differences between the rankings of the priorities for TTCT Verbal and Figural Form scores of the raters in the research, are given in Table 5.

Table 5. Friedman test results of TTCT verbal /figural form scores by inter-raters.

Mean Rank N χ2 df p

TTCT Verbal Form A

Researcher 132.60 20 3.90 2 .142

1th Rater 125.60

2nd Rater 122.40

TTCT Figural Form A

Researcher 91.55 20 3.60 2 .165

1th Rater 89.00

2nd Rater 93.65

According to the Friedman test results shown in Table 5, the difference between the raters score of TTCT Verbal and Figural Form papers was not found significant statistically (p< .05). As a result, it was observed that there was a significant positive correlation between the scores of the different raters and there was no significant difference between the scores. These results show that the scores obtained from TTCT Verbal and Figural Forms are consistent results in data analysis.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

356

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Experimental Implementation

In experimental treatment ‘The Let’s Solve the Puzzle of Our Body’ unit was processed with activities based on Purdue Model in experimental group for 9 weeks while in the control group, teaching was done by using the book of 2013 Science Curriculum (MoNE, 2015). In the control group, the science teacher used the methods of lecture, question-answer and experiment.

In the experimental group during the experimental treatment process, firstly the experimental group was informed about the project activities and the project groups were formed at the beginning of the semester. The experimental group was divided into heterogeneous groups of 4-5 persons by taking the pre-test scores and the opinions of the Science teachers into consideration in order to carry out pre-implementation group studies. Students were asked to form a research problem by concentrating on the topics they were curious about ‘The Let’s Solve the Puzzle of Our Body’ unit. On this subject, the students have been asked for brainstorming in order to make a list on what they know and what they want to know. First of all, project groups have prepared their proposal form and have submitted to the teacher. After the subjects of project which are examined by the teacher have been accepted, every group has started working on their subject. Afterwards, the students have been asked for making a project planning based on the problem of research that they have determined and practicing it. For this purpose, groups have created a project calendar. They have noted the things they need to do on this calendar week by week until the presentation of the project. At the end of the unit, they have been asked for doing presentations about the projects they prepared in the classroom.

Scientific process skills exercises which are the first stage of the model, problem solving exercises as the second and presenting the students projects as the last have been carried out. The exercises used in the practice and the distribution of the exercises according to the subjects are given in the Table 6.

Table 6. Distribution of the activities used in the practices, duration and related steps.

Subject Week Activities Period (min) Stage

Nutrients and Properties 3

Let’s Test the Nutrients 40

Stage 1

Explore our nutrients and let’s find out score of our friends 20

Determine the nutrient groups of our characters 10

Let’s compare the nutrients according to protein amounts 10

Let’s determine vitamins the characters are holding 10

Find the missing vitamins 10

What should we avoid for a healthy life? 20

Let’s answer the speech bubbles 20

Stage 2

Who is healthier? 20

Let’s evaluate Demet’s shopping bag 20

Let’s solve the Sinan’s family problems 30

Alcohol addict 20

Let’s prepare a nutrient poster 40 Stage 3

Let’s prepare a journal ‘Fight Against Alcohol and Smoking ‘ 40

Nutrients Digestion 3

Let’s sort the organs of digestion system 30

Stage 1 Digestion system 10

Let’s do crossword puzzle I 40

Let’s colour the teeth 20

The story of digestion 20

Stage 2Who will win the digestion bet? 20

Murat is dental check-up 20

How much does my peer know the digestion system? 40 Stage 3

Let’s make teeth model 40

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

357

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Subject Week Activities Period (min) Stage

Excretory in Our Body 3

Our excretory system 15

Stage 1Let’s do crossword puzzle II 20

Let’s investigate our kidneys 40

Do we know our excretory organs? 15

Stage 2 The specialists explain excretory organs 20

Let’s solve the problem 20

What should we do for our kidneys health? 20

Let’s make a excretory model 40

Stage 3Let’s compose our scenario 40

Project presentations 80

In the first stage of the model, students have performed activities based on scientific process skills. In the second stage, problem solving activities have been used. In this stage, mainly group discussions, brain storms and problem scenarios related to topics have been used in the problem-solving process. In the first two stages, the students have been made ready for the project phase, which is the third stage of the model, with the scientific process skills and problem solving activity implementation. Since, in order for the student to be able to create a project, he should be able to create a problem, to be able to research the problem and to use scientific process skills during this research process.

Results of Research

The Findings Related to TTCT Verbal A-B Forms

The correctness of the hypothesis of ‘There is a significant difference between Verbal scores of the Torrance Cre- ative Thinking Test of experimental and control group students when compared before and after teaching process’ has been researched. The TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test averages of the students in the experimental and control groups are given in Table 7.

Table 7. Descriptive data related to TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test scores.

Group N Mean Median Mode Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis Variance

Pre Experimental 43 65.12 64.00 65 11.94 1.099 -1.410 142.581

Control 44 60.50 61.00 61 11.35 0.448 -0.175 128.767

Post Experimental 43 169.51 171.00 171 44.72 0.285 -0.811 1999.542

Control 44 94.45 95.00 95 32.89 0.507 -0.979 1082.114

Table 7 shows that the arithmetic average values of the TTCT verbal pre-test (X

E =65.12; X

C =60.50) are close

to each other in the experimental and control groups. After experimental practice, the arithmetic average of the students in the experimental group (X

E =169.51) is higher than the arithmetic average of the students in the control

group (X C =94.45).

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

358

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Figure 1: The difference between TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test average scores of experimental and control groups.

The change in mean scores of the TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test scores of the students in the experimental and control groups is shown by a line chart (Figure 1). As seen above, TTCT verbal test scores of the both control and experimental group students have increased during the programme. However, the higher increase in the scores of the experimental group is obvious. Two-way ANOVA for mixed measures has been performed in order to test whether the differences in scores are statistically significant and the results are presented below.

In order to use parametric methods in data analysis, the quantitative data obtained from the applied tests should show normal distribution (Seçer, 2015). For this reason, it has been examined whether the scores obtained from TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test treatment applied to the students have showed normal distribution. When Table 7 is examined, arithmetic average and mode median values belonging to the pre-test scores of the experimental and control group are pretty close to each other. If the skewness and kurtosis values of the TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test scores are less than 1.96 for α = .05, it can be interpreted that the distribution does not normally deviate excessively (Büyüköztürk, 2010).

After that scores of TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test have displayed a normal distribution is controlled, analysis through the two-factor ANOVA statistical model for mixed measures has been continued. On 2x2 split-plot factorial design; the first factor indicates independent treatment groups, and the other factor indicates the pre-test and post-test measurements of the dependent variable. Before passing on to the analysis, it has been examined whether the two-factor ANOVA model for mixed measures over a single factor has met the following assumptions. (1) The scores (measures) of the dependent variable are in the minimum range scale, (2) the scores of the dependent variable display a normal distribution in every subgroup. (3) variances of the groups’ scores obtained in the same breath are equal, (4) the covariance of the groups is equal for the binary combinations of the measurement sets, (5) the difference score calculated for any subject is independent of the difference score calculated for the other subjects (Büyüköztürk, 2010).

Since TTCT verbal test is an equal interval scale, the first assumption has been met. For the second assumption; in order to examine whether the scores of the dependent variable display normal distributions in the subgroups, arithmetic mean, mod, median, skewness and kurtosis values of the groups have been examined (Table 7). As a result, scores of the dependent variable with the TTCT Verbal test have been found to display normal distribution at each level. For the third assumption that the scores of the groups are equal to the variances; The Levene’s Test has been applied to the homogeneity of variances on the TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test scores of the par- ticipants in the experimental and control groups. In accordance with the results obtained, it has been seen that there is not any significant difference between variances of the participants’ scores of pre-test [F

(1,85) =0.102, p> .05]

and post-test [F (1,85)

=2.799, p> .05]. For the fourth assumption, the covariance equality of groups was tested and the covariance has been found to be homogeneous, in order to determine the appropriateness of the variance analysis to find the significance of the change in TTCT verbal test scores [F

(3, 1323463.652) =1.391, p> .05]. Since the dif-

ference score calculated for any subject is independent of the difference score calculated for the other subjects, it has been met in the fifth assumption.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

359

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Table 8. Independent samples t-test results of TTCT verbal pre-test scores in accordance with experimental and control groups.

Group N X SD df t p

Experimental 43 65.12 11.94075 85 -1.849 0.68

Control 44 60.50 11.34757 *p< .05

When Table 8 is examined, it is clear that TTCT verbal pre-test scores of the students do not differ significantly from group variable [t(85)= -1.849, p> .05]. According to the Purdue Model, the two-factor ANOVA for mixed mea- sures results concerning whether there is a significant difference in the changes observed after the experiment compared to the pre-experiment for verbal creative thinking of the participants in the experimental group of science teaching are given in Table 9.

Table 9. Two-Factor ANOVA for mixed measures results related to comparison of TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test scores.

Source SS df MS F p η2

Between Groups 149574.667 86

Group 69023.689 1 69023.689 72.836 0.00* .461

Error 80550.978 85 947.659

Within Groups 323567.239 87

Measurement (Pre-test/Post-test) 208127.538 1 208127.538 287.721 0.00* .772

Group*Measurement 53953.607 1 53953.607 74.587 0.00* .467

Error 61486.094 85 723.366

Total 473141.906 173 *p< .05

When two-factor ANOVA for mixed measures analysis results are examined (Table 9) for mixed patterns to test the change in verbal creativity of students participating in experimental practice; if the TTCT verbal scores of the students belonging to the experimental and control group are compared regardless of the differentiation between pre-test and post-test, there is a significant difference between the total scores obtained from TTCT verbal pre-test and post-test [F(1,85)=72.836, p< .05].

Regardless of grouping the students participating in the teaching process (measurement baseline effect) activi- ties included in 2013 Science Curriculum with Purdue Model, there is a significant difference between the averages of the TTCT verbal scores of the students before and after the experimental treatment [F(1,85)=287.721, p< .05].

When the common effect test of group and measurement factors is examined; it has been found that the TTCT verbal scores of the experimental and control group students participating in the experimental practice differ from after the experimental treatment, that is, being in the different treatment groups and the common effects of the repeated measures factors on verbal creativity have been statistically significant in favour of the experimental group [F(1,85)=74.587, p< .05]. The significance of the common effect suggests that Purdue Model-based science teaching and science teaching according to 2013 Science Curriculum have different effects on students’ verbal creativity.

The Findings Related to TTCT Figural A-B Forms

The correctness of the hypothesis of ‘There is a significant difference between Figural scores of the Torrance Creative Thinking Test of experimental and control group students when compared before and after teaching process’ has been researched. The TTCT figural pre-test and post-test averages of the students in the experimental and control groups are given in Table 10.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

360

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Table 10. Descriptive data related to TTCT figural pre-test and post-test scores.

Group N Mean Median Mode Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis Variance

Pre Experimental 43 69.67 68.00 64 19.853 1.000 0.5035 394.130

Control 44 72.16 72.50 84 19.927 -0.13165 -0.6837 397.067

Post Experimental 43 112.67 112.00 112 24.286 -0.0277 -1.3878 589.796

Control 44 72.93 74.00 82 18.246 -0.12605 -0.8533 332.902

When Table 10 is examined, it can be that TTCT formal pre-test arithmetic average values of experimental and control groups (X

E =69.674; X

C =72.159) are pretty close to each other. After experimental practice, the arithmetic

average of the students in the experimental group (X E =112.674) is higher than the arithmetic average of the stu-

dents in the control group (X C =72.932).

Figure 2: The difference between TTCT figural pre-test and post-test average scores of experimental and control groups.

The line chart shows the change in TTCT pre-test and post-test mean scores of the students in the experimental and control groups (Figure 2). As seen above, the TTCT formal test scores of both control and experimental group students have increased during the program. However, the higher increase in the scores of the experimental group is clearly visible. Two-factor ANOVA for mixed measures has been performed to test whether the point differences have been statistically significant and the results are presented below.

Before the analysis of two-factor ANOVA for mixed measures, it has been examined whether the scores obtained from TTCT figural pre-test-post-test applications applied to the students have showed normal distribution. When Table 10 is examined, arithmetic average and mode median values belonging to the pre-test scores of the experi- mental and control group are pretty close to each other. After that scores of TTCT figural pre-test and post-test have displayed a normal distribution is controlled, analysis through the two-factor ANOVA statistical model for mixed measures has been continued. On 2x2 split-plot factorial design; the first factor indicates independent treatment groups, and the other factor indicates the pre-test and post-test measurements of the dependent variable. Before passing on to the analysis, it has been examined whether the two-factor ANOVA model for mixed measures over a single factor has met the following assumptions. (1) The scores (measures) of the dependent variable are in the minimum range scale, (2) the scores of the dependent variable display a normal distribution in every subgroup. (3) variances of the groups’ scores obtained in the same breath are equal, (4) the covariance of the groups is equal for the binary combinations of the measurement sets, (5) the difference score calculated for any subject is independent of the difference score calculated for the other subjects (Büyüköztürk, 2010).

Since TTCT figural test is an equal interval scale, the first assumption has been met. For the second assumption; in order to examine whether the scores of the dependent variable display normal distributions in the subgroups, arithmetic mean, mod, median, skewness and kurtosis values of the groups have been examined (Table 10). As

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

361

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

a result, scores of the dependent variable with the TTCT figural test have been found to display normal distribu- tion at each level. For the third assumption that the scores of the groups are equal to the variances; The Levene’s Test has been applied to the homogeneity of variances on the TTCT figural pre-test and post-test scores of the participants in the experimental and control groups. In accordance with the results obtained, it has been seen that there is not any significant difference between variances of the participants’ scores of pre-test [F

(1,85) =0.223; p>.05]

and post-test [F (1,85)

=3.797, p> .05]. For the fourth assumption, the covariance equality of groups was tested and the covariance has been found to be homogeneous, in order to determine the appropriateness of the variance analysis to find the significance of the change in TTCT figural test scores [F

(3, 1323463.652) =1.143, p> .05]. Since the dif-

ference score calculated for any subject is independent of the difference score calculated for the other subjects, it has been met in the fifth assumption.

Table 11. Independent samples t-test results of TTCT figural pre-test scores in accordance with experimental and control groups.

Group N X SD df t p

Experimental 43 69.6744 19.85270 85 0.583 0.562

Control 44 72.1591 19.92654 *p< .05

When Table 11 is examined, it is clear that TTCT figural pre-test scores of the students do not differ significantly from group variable [t(85)=0.583, p> .05]. According to the Purdue Model, the two-factor ANOVA for mixed mea- sures results concerning whether there is a significant difference in the changes observed after the experimental compared to the pre-experimental for figural creative thinking of the participants in the experimental group of science teaching are given in Table 12.

Table 12. Two-factor ANOVA for mixed measures results related to comparison of TTCT figural pre-test / post- test scores.

Source SS df MS F p η2

Between Groups 64761.874 86

Group 15094.172 1 15094.172 25.832 0.00* 0.233

Error 49667.702 85 584.326

Within Groups 63269.286 87

Measurement (Pre-test-Post-test) 20834.309 1 20834.309 76.843 0.00* 0.475

Group*Measurement 19389.113 1 19389.113 71.513 0.00* 0.457

Error 23045.864 85 271.128

Total 128031.16 173 *p< .05

When two-factor ANOVA for mixed measures analysis results are examined (Table 12) for mixed patterns to test the change in figural creativity of students participating in experimental practice; if the TTCT figural scores of the students belonging to the experimental and control group are compared regardless of the differentiation between pre-test and post-test, there is a significant difference between the total scores obtained from TTCT figural pre-test and post-test [F(1,85)=25.832, p< .05].

Regardless of grouping the students participating in the teaching process (the main effect of the measure) activities included in 2013 Science Curriculum with Purdue Model, there is a significant difference between the aver- ages of the TTCT figural scores of the students before and after the experimental treatment [F(1,85)=76.843, p< .05].

When the common effect test of group and measurement factors is examined; it has been found that the TTCT figural scores of the experimental and control group students participating in the experimental practice differ from after the experimental treatment, that is, being in the different treatment groups and the common effects of the repeated measures factors on figural creativity have been statistically significant in favour of the experimental group

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

362

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

[F(1,85)=71.513. p< .05]. The significance of the common effect suggests that Purdue Model-based science teaching and science teaching according to 2013 Science Curriculum have different effects on students’ figural creativity.

Discussion

In an attempt to test the change in verbal and formal creative thinking levels of students participating in the research, the average of TTCT verbal and TTCT figural pre-test and post-test scores of the experimental and control group students have been examined. It has been proved that TTCT verbal and figural test scores of both control and experimental group students have increased during the program [F(1,85)=74.587, p< .05]. The significance of the common effect indicates that the Purdue Model-based science teaching and the science teaching according to 2013 Science Curriculum have different effects on students’ verbal creativity. It has been also found that the TTCT figure scores of students participating in the experimental treatment in the same way also have differed after the experimental treatment, in the different treatment groups, and the common effects of repetitive measurement factors on formal creativity were statistically significant in favour of the experimental group [F(1,85)=71.513, p< .05]. As a result, the level of creative thinking of TTCT verbal form A-B and TTCT figural form A-B of the fifth-grade students in the research is higher than the control group in the experimental group where Purdue Model has been applied, but the difference between them has been found to be statistically significant. This suggests that the Purdue Model increases the verbal and formal creative thinking levels of the students more than the control group according to the 2013 Science Curriculum.

According to Kolloff and Feldhusen (1984), the three-stage Purdue Model is highly influential on gifted stu- dents’ ability to acquire creative thinking skills. Besides, according to Moon (2004), the use of the Purdue Model in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses enriches the creativity of students. Likewise, Altıntaş, Özdemir and Kerpiç (2013) presented in parallel with the results of this research that Purdue Model is more effective in teaching the 7th classes of ‘Conscious Consumption Arithmetic’ than the current program on students’ creativity.

There are many studies that examine the effects of the scientific process skills, problem solving and project steps that make up the Purdue Model on students’ creative thinking levels. Karahan (2006) determined that appli- cations based on scientific process skills in the research conducted by fourth grade students and physical events for learning area positively affected the students’ creative thinking. Acquiring scientific process skills in science allows students to develop their creative skills (Kaptan & Korkmaz, 2001). Similarly, there are many studies in the literature showing that the creative thinking skills of students have improved positively in learning environments where problem solving methods are used (Kanlı & Emir, 2013; Yaman & Yalçın, 2005). Kanlı (2008) has implemented various applications for gifted students with probing based learning method in 6th grade science class ‘Electricity in our Life’ unit. As a result of the research, it was determined that probation based learning practices increased the students’ motivation and creative thinking levels for success, science learning. It is considered that the project implementations realized in the stage of product creation, which is the last stage of the model, have positive effects on students’ creative thinking skills. There are many researches showing that students’ creative thinking skills are evolving especially in the teaching environment where the project method is applied in science education (Birinci, 2008; Koray, 2003; Korkmaz, 2002). Since, the interest of the students in the class can be increased by creating a creative class supported with project works in the science classes, and the ability to relate between the reality and the science subjects can be provided (Dede & Yaman, 2003). According to Shearer and Quinn (1996), a creative class environment can be created by using science project works and the interest of students in the class can be increased.

In this research, it is shown that the Purdue model used in science teaching is an exemplary teaching model for increasing creative thinking in students. Because each stage of the model contains effective teaching methods used in science teaching and each stage supports each other.

Conclusions

For the development of creative thinking in students, it is significant for the students to produce different solutions for solving the problems in the teaching environment and to carry out researches on these solutions. In this research, positive interaction is provided on verbal and creative thinking of the students by means of various methods and application process as the Purdue Model is in practice.

The Purdue Model enriches the teaching process by dividing it into three phases, and prepares each stage for the next stage in terms of implementation process. Thus, the student is able to apply the knowledge he learned

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

363

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

in the previous phase in the next stage to achieve more effective results. The methods used in the model provide students active exploration, problem solving, solving, researching and creating a product in the science learning process. In this respect, teaching of other topics in science teaching needs to be made widespread by using the model. 

The model not only includes the use of active methods, but it also provides these methods to support the weaknesses of each other and it eases teaching. For as student who has taken scientific process skills and problem solving steps consecutively, it is easier for him to plan the research process and to present a solution –oriented product. Moreover, it is important to apply the model developed for gifted students on normal students to ob- tain positive results in order to popularize the model in science education. It is believed that the model not only has creative thinking but also positive effects on different variables such as academic success, attitude, scientific process skills, motivation. For this reason, it is considered that in future researches, the research of the different topics and the effect of the model on different variables will be significant in terms of increasing the efficiency in teaching environments.

Acknowledgements

This research was produced from first author’s PhD thesis and supported by Scientific Research Project Number PYO.EGF.1904.13.011 within the University Project of Supporting Program for Master Theses in Ondokuz Mayıs University.

References

Aiken, L. R. (2000). Psychological testing and assessment. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Aktamış, H. (2007). The effects of scientific process skills on scientific creativity: Te example of primary school seventh grade physics

unit. PhD Thesis, Educational Sciences Institute, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir. Altıntaş, E. (2009). The effect of teaching with the mathematics activity based on Purdue model on the achievement and critical think-

ing skills of gifted students. Master Thesis, Marmara University, Educational Sciences Institute, İstanbul. Altıntaş, E., Özdemir, A. Ş., & Kerpiç, A. (2013). The effect of teaching based on the Purdue model on creative thinking skills of

students. International Journal of Education and Human Sciences, 3 (1), 187-214. Anastasi, A. & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Aslan, A. E. (2001). Torrance yaratıcı düşünce testinin türkçe versiyonu [Turkish version of the torrence creative thinking test]. M.Ü.

Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14, 19-40. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/2120 Bahadır, H. (2007). The effect of elementary science education based on scientific method process on science process skills, attitude,

academic achievement and retention. Master Thesis, Social Sciences Institute, Hacettepe University, Ankara. Batı, K. (2010). The effect of the science education based on science process skills of scientific problem solving. Master Thesis, Social

Sciences Institute, Hacettepe University, Ankara. Baykul, Y. (2010). Eğitimde ve psikolojide ölçme: Klasik test teorisi ve uygulaması [Evaluation in education and psychology: Classical

testing theory and application] (2nd Edition). Ankara: PegemA Publishing. Bélanger, R. E., Akre, C., Berchtold, A., & Michaud, P. A. (2011). A U-shaped association between intensity of Internet use and

adolescent health. Pediatrics, 127 (2), 330-335. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-1235 Birinci, E. (2008). The effect of using project-based learning in adaptation and development of materials on teacher candidates?

Critical thinking, creative thinking and scientific-process skills. Master Thesis, Social Sciences Institute, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Zonguldak.

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [A handbook of data analysis for social sciences] (12th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.

Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk, O. & Köklü, N. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik [Statistics for social sciences] (6th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Cohen, L., Monion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London: Routledge / Falmer, Taylor and Francis Group. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design qualitative & quantitative approaches. London: Sage Publications. Çepni, S., Gökdere, M., & Küçük, M. (2002). Zihinsel alanda üstün yetenekli öğrencilere yönelik Purdue modeline dayalı fen alanında

örnek etkinlik geliştirme [Based on Purdue Model, developing sample activities in Science Field intended for mentally gifted students], V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 16-18 September, Middle East Technical, Ankara.

Çıbık, A. S. (2009). The effect of the project based learning approach to the attitudes of students towards science lesson. Elemen- tary Education Online, 8 (1), 36-47.

Dede, Y. & Yaman, S. (2003). The status, importance and evaluation of teaching with projects in the science and mathematics instruction. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 23 (1), 117-132. Retrieved from http://gefad.gazi.edu.tr/ article/view/5000078861.

Demirci, C. (2007). The effects of the creative approach in the science teaching on achievement and attitude. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 32, 65–75. Retrieved from http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/makale_goster.php?id=579.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

364

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Doppelt, Y. (2003). Implementation and assessment of project-based learning in a flexible environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 255–272. doi: 10.1023/A:1026125427344.

Feldhusen, J. F. & Kolloff, M. B. (1978). A three-stage model for gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 1 (4), 53-57. doi: 10.1177/107621757800100403.

Feldhusen, J. F. & Kolloff, M. B. (1986). The Purdue three-stage enrichment model at the elementary level. Joseph S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented, (pp. 126-152). Freeman, Mansfield Center CT: Creative Learning Press.

Garrett, R. M. (1987). Issues in science education: Problem–solving, creativity and originality. International Journal of Science Education, 9 (2), 125-137. doi:10.1080/0950069870090201.

Goodwin, L. D. (2001). Interrater agreement and reliability. Measurement in Psychical Education and Exercises Science, 5 (1), 13-14. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327841MPEE0501_2.

Güler, N. (2008). A research on classical test theory generalizability theory and rasch model. PhD Thesis, Hacettepe University, Social Sciences Institute, Ankara.

Güler, N. & Gelbal, S. (2010). Studying reliability of open ended mathematics items according to the classical test theory and generalizability theory. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 10 (2), 989-1019. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ889199.pdf.

Güler, N. & Taşdelen Teker, G. (2015). The evaluation of rater reliability of open ended items obtained from different approaches. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 6 (1), 12-24.

Gürdal, A. (1992). İlköğretim okullarında fen bilgisinin önemi [The importance of science in elementary schools]. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 8 (8), 185-188. Retrieved from http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/hunefd/article/ view/5000049238/5000046559.

Kanlı, E. (2008). The effect of problem based learning in science and technology instruction on gifted and normal students’ achieve- ment, creative thinking and motivation levels. Master Thesis, İstanbul University, Social Sciences Institute, İstanbul.

Kanlı, E., & Emir, S. (2013). The effect of problem based learning on gifted and normal students’ achievement and creativity levels. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7 (2), 18-45. doi: 10.12973/nefmed201.

Kaptan, F. & Korkmaz, H. (2001). Mevcut fen bilgisi programı ile 2001-2002 öğretim yılında uygulanacak olan yeni fen bilgisi programlarının karşılaştırılması [Comparing the current science curriculum to the new science curriculum which will be applied in 2001-2002 academic year]. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 273, 33-38.

Karahan, Z. (2006). With in the science and technology lesson, the effects of scientific process skills based learning on learning products. Master Thesis, Social Sciences Institute, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Zonguldak.

Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (16th Edition). Ankara: Nobel Publishing. Kolloff, M. B. & Feldhusen, J. F. (1984). The effects of enrichment on self-concept and creative thinking. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28,

53-57. doi: 10.1177/001698628402800202. Koray, Ö.C. (2003). The Influence of science education based on creative thinking on learning products. PhD Thesis, Educational

Sciences Institute, Gazi University, Ankara. Korkmaz, H. (2002). The effects of project based learning on creative thinking ability, problem solving ability and level of academic

risk taking in science education. PhD Thesis, Social Science Institute, Hacettepe University, Ankara. Kuo, P. (2016). Effects of synchronous web-based instruction on students’ thinking styles and creativity. EURASIA Journal of

Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12 (3), 609-619. doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2016.1234a. Kutlu, N. & Gökdere, M. (2013). Enrichment project based learning in primary education: The three stage Purdue model. Journal

of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 20, 293-311. Retrieved from http://www.zgefdergi.com/Makaleler/2146439686_20_19_ ID_347.pdf.

Lewis, T. (2006). Creativity: A framework for the design/problem solving discourse in technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 17 (1), 36. doi: 10.21061/jte.v17i1.a.3.

Mertler, C. A. & Charles, C. M. (2011). Introduction to educational research (7th Edition). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2015). İlköğretim kurumları (ilkokullar ve ortaokullar) fen bilimleri dersi (3,4,5,6,7 ve 8. sınıflar)

öğretim programı. Ankara: MEB Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. [Science curriculum of state primary Schools for 3,4,5,6,7 and 8 classes. Ankara: Ministery of National Education and Head Council of Turkish Education and Morality].

Monhardt, L. & Monhardt, R. (2006). Creating a context for the learning of science process skills through picture books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34, 67-71. doi:10.1007/s10643-006-0108-9

Moon, S. D., Feldhusen, J. F., Powley, S., Nidiffer, L., & Whitman, M. W. (1993). Secondary application of the Purdue three stage model. Gifted Child Today, 16 (3), 2-9. doi: 10.1177/107621759301600301

Moon, S. M. (2004). Using the Purdue three-stage model to develop talent in the science and technology. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 14 (3), 19-40. Retrieved from http://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/ArticleFullRecord.jsp?cn=OJHHBM_2004_ v14n3_19.

Runco M.A. & Jaeger G. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24, 92-96. doi: 10.1080/104004 19.2012.650092.

Seçer, İ. (2015). SPSS ve LISREL ile pratik veri analizi ve raporlaştırma [Practice data analysis and report using SPSS and LISREL] (Ex- panded 2nd Edition). Ankara: Anı Publishing.

Shearer, K. & Quinn, R. J. (1996). Using projects to implement mathematics standards. Clearing house: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70 (2), 73-76. doi:10.1080/00098655.1996.9959401.

Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

365

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2017

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Beaconville, IL: Scholastic Testing Services. Torrance, E. P. & Ball, O. E. (1984). Torrance test of creative thinking streamlined (revised) manual, figural A & B. Bensenville, IL: Scho-

lastic Testing Service, Inc. Ünlü, P. (2008). An application of the three stage-Purdue model in physics education in turkey. Journal of Applied Sciences, 8 (22),

4137-4144. doi: 10.3923/jas.2008.4137.4144. Üstündağ, T. (2011). Yaratıcılığa yolculuk [A journey to creativity] (5th Editon). Ankara: Pegem A Akademi Publising. Yaman, S. & Yalçın, N. (2005). Fen bilgisi öğretiminde problem dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının yaratıcı düşünme becerisi üzerine

etkisi [Effectiveness on creative thinking skills of problem based learning approach in science teaching]. İlköğretim-Online, 4 (1), 42-52. Retrived from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/91081.

Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences] (8th Edition). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

Received: March 11, 2017 Accepted: May 30, 2017

Nilay Şener PhD, Science Teacher, The Ministry of National Education, Muğla, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]

Erol Taş PhD., Associate Professor, Science Education, Ordu University, Ordu, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://akademi.odu.edu.tr/sayfalar/eroltas-zz5

IMPROVING OF STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING THROUGH PURDUE MODEL IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (P. 350-365)

Copyright of Journal of Baltic Science Education is the property of Scientific Methodical Center Scientia Educologica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.