The Teaching for Creativity through an AI-Assisted C-R-E-A-T-E Model in Chemistry Project-Based Learning: A TCOF-Based Feasibility Evaluation
Abstract
Creativity-oriented chemistry learning requires instructional designs that enable students to generate, refine, transform, and evaluate ideas through meaningful scientific inquiry. However, the success of such learning depends not only on the availability of innovative models and digital tools but also on teachers’ ability to facilitate creativity-supportive classroom practices. This study aimed to evaluate the pedagogical feasibility of an Artificial Intelligence-assisted C-R-E-A-T-E learning model in a chemistry project-based learning activity on natural paint production. The study employed a descriptive-evaluative design with a design-based research orientation. Participants included 16 Grade XI students, three trained observers, three chemistry teachers as validators, and two expert lecturers. Data were collected using the Teaching for Creativity Observation Form (TCOF), which evaluates four dimensions of creativity-supportive teaching: questioning techniques, teacher responses to students’ ideas, classroom activities that foster creativity, and whole-lesson methods that support creative learning. The data were analyzed using descriptive percentages and interpretive categories. The results showed that questioning techniques and creativity-oriented classroom activities reached full implementation, each scoring 100%. Teacher responses to students’ ideas reached a high level of implementation at 82%, whereas whole-lesson implementation of the creative learning model remained moderate at 50%. These findings indicate that the AI-assisted C-R-E-A-T-E model is pedagogically feasible for supporting creativity-oriented chemistry instruction, particularly in strengthening questioning strategies and project-based creative activities. However, deeper scaffolding is still required in imagination-building, reflective evaluation, and metacognitive guidance. The study contributes to chemistry education by demonstrating how AI can be positioned as a cognitive support tool within a structured creative learning model, while emphasizing that teacher mediation remains central to meaningful and responsible AI integration.
Downloads
References
Aisyah, S., & Novita, D. (2025). Teachers’ perception of the implementation of project-based learning in early childhood education in Indonesia. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2458663
Al-Abdali, N. S., & Al-Balushi, S. M. (2016). Teaching for creativity by science teachers in grades 5–10. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(S2), 251–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9612-3
Al-Idrus, S. W., Hakim, A., Supriadi, & Ningsyih, S. (2019). Colloid, blood, and kidney: Chemistry topics to support meaningful learning for biology students. Creative Education, 10(04), 650–654. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.104047
Awaliyah, S., & Rusmini. (2023). Profile of students’ creative thinking skill on colloid materials through chemistry flipbooks. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 10750–10757. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.4675
Azumi, B. M., Aisyah, S., & Rohaeti, E. (2024). Trend of creative thinking researches in chemistry education from research design to data analysis: A literature review. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(12), 944–952. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i12.9504
Barata, M. F., Epandi, D., & Aisyah, S. N. (2024). The relationship between mother’s education level and family welfare: A case study in Bandar Lampung City. Women, Education, and Social Welfare, 1(2), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.70211/wesw.v1i2.242
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2014.905247
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2021). Creative learning in education. In The Palgrave handbook of positive education (pp. 473–491). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64537-3_19
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
BFK. (2015). Partnership for 21st century skills-core content integration. Ohio Department of Education. www.P21.org
Brod, G. (2021). Toward an understanding of when prior knowledge helps or hinders learning. npj Science of Learning, 6(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00103-w
Bryce, T. G. K., & Blown, E. J. (2024). Ausubel’s meaningful learning re-visited. Current Psychology, 43(5), 4579–4598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04440-4
Byusa, E., Kampire, E., & Mwesigye, A. R. (2022). Game-based learning approach on students’ motivation and understanding of chemistry concepts: A systematic review of literature. Heliyon, 8(5), e09541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09541
Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20171
Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y
Desiana, G. A., Sulastri, S., & Syahrial, S. (2022). Application of project-based learning (PjBL) to improve critical thinking skills and students’ learning independence on the making of colloids in dispersion. JTK (Jurnal Tadris Kimiya), 7(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.15575/jtk.v7i1.13395
Dharmayana, I. W., & Herawati, A. A. (2021). Descriptive evaluative study on the implementation of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in the courses of guidance and counseling profession. Proceedings of the International Conference on Educational Sciences and Teacher Profession (ICETeP 2020), 532, 495–501. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210227.085
Dumont, R., & Willis, J. O. (2008). Torrance tests of creative thinking. In Encyclopedia of special education (pp. 2022–2023). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470373699.speced2110
Ginting, F., Angelica, N., Sutikno, A., & Jayadi, R. (2023). Analysis of title influence on popularity of forum postings using text mining: Case study on Kaskus.com. AIP Conference Proceedings, 020024. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0117404
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
Guo, Y., Ma, C., Du, L., Xu, Y., & Yang, X. (2025). Research progress on the application of food colloids in precise targeted delivery of drugs and bioactive compounds. Gels, 11(9), 746. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels11090746
Han, S., Liu, D., & Lv, Y. (2022). The influence of psychological safety on students’ creativity in project-based learning: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.865123
Hansen, S., Chen, J., Lyngdorf, N. E. R., Bertel, L. B., & Du, X. (2025). Supporting psychological safety in teamwork: In which ways do engineering students feel safe doing creativity-focused interventions in a PBL environment? European Journal of Engineering Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2025.2522278
Heard, J., Krstic, S., & Richardson, S. (2023). Evidencing creativity in educational settings. Journal of Creativity, 33(1), 100046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2023.100046
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2023). Artificial intelligence in education. In Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems (Vol. 478). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2940-3_16
Jacob, J., Grelier, S., Grau, M., & Chorein, B. (2022). Effect of dispersing agents on the stability of recycled paints. Coatings, 12(11), 1722. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12111722
Jamal, S. N., Ibrahim, N. H., Abd Halim, N. D., Surif, J., Saputra, A., Tania, L., & Sunyono, S. (2025). Problem-based learning integrated with the direct creative thinking process (PBL-DCT) module in enhancing creativity in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 102(10), 4289–4304. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c01237
Johnstone, A. H. (2010). You can’t get there from here. Journal of Chemical Education, 87(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed800026d
Kapici, H. O. (2023). From symbolic representation to submicroscopic one: Preservice science teachers’ struggle with chemical representation levels in chemistry. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 9(1), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.3122
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
Kawalkar, A., & Vijapurkar, J. (2013). Scaffolding science talk: The role of teachers’ questions in the inquiry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2004–2027. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.604684
Lloyd-Cox, J., Pickering, A., & Bhattacharya, J. (2022). Evaluating creativity: How idea context and rater personality affect considerations of novelty and usefulness. Creativity Research Journal, 34(4), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2125721
Markula, A., & Aksela, M. (2022). The key characteristics of project-based learning: How teachers implement projects in K–12 science education. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 4(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00042-x
Matchett, A. J. (2020). Exponential stress in silos: An example from literature. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 161, 125–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2020.06.030
Moju, M., Taylor, L., & Iweuno, B. (2025). Tackling the challenge of chemical representations through sensemaking practices in chemistry education. Discover Education, 4(1), 352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00703-3
Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041
OECD. (2013). OECD future of education and skills 2030: Transformative competencies for 2030. Comparative Education, 15(2), 1–15.
OECD. (2019). Conceptual learning framework: Skills for 2030. OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/skills/Skills_for_2030_concept_note.pdf
OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 results (Volume III). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/765ee8c2-en
Pahrudin, A., Irwandani, Aridan, M., & Barata, M. F. (2025). Teacher readiness for deep learning in Islamic education: A Rasch model analysis of challenges and opportunities. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v19i4.9573
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Pinar, F. I. L., Panergayo, A. A. E., Sagcal, R. R., Acut, D. P., Roleda, L. S., & Prudente, M. S. (2025). Fostering scientific creativity in science education through scientific problem-solving approaches and STEM contexts: A meta-analysis. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 7(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-025-00137-9
Qian, Y., Wang, Y., Wen, J., Wu, S., & Zhang, J. (2023). One hundred core concepts in chemistry and upper-secondary school teachers’ and students’ chemistry conceptual structures. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(3), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/23.22.493
Rahmawan, S., Nur Fadhilah, S., & Fackhurohman, E. (2025). Improving students’ understanding of chemistry concepts through project-based learning (PJBL): A systematic literature review. Reforma: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 15(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.30736/reforma.v15i2.1281
Rios-Atehortua, L. D., Torres-Valois, T., Solaz-Portolés, J. J., & Sanjosé, V. (2024). Pre-service science teachers’ beliefs about creativity at school: A study in the Hispanic context. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1194. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111194
Ripsam, M., & Nerdel, C. (2024). Augmented reality for chemistry education to promote the use of chemical terminology in teacher training. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1392529
Rodger Bybee. (2018). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Personal reflections and contemporary implications. Science and Children, 15–18. https://www.ksta.org/resources/Documents/Resources/The%20BSCS%205E%20Instructional%20Model_Bybee%20article.pdf
Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Scott-Barrett, J., Johnston, S.-K., Denton-Calabrese, T., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2023). Nurturing curiosity and creativity in primary school classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 135, 104356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104356
Sim, J. H., & Daniel, E. G. S. (2014). Representational competence in chemistry: A comparison between students with different levels of understanding of basic chemical concepts and chemical representations. Cogent Education, 1(1), 991180. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2014.991180
Sowden, P. T., Warren, F., Seymour, M., Martin, C., Kauer, A., Spencer, E., Mansfield, S., & Waite, J. (2025). A creativity navigator to guide teaching for creativity: Implementation and teacher impacts in a creativity collaborative of schools. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 59(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.70005
Strat, T. T. S., Henriksen, E. K., & Jegstad, K. M. (2024). Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 60(2), 191–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2207148
Su, J., & Yang, W. (2023). Unlocking the power of ChatGPT: A framework for applying generative AI in education. ECNU Review of Education, 6(3), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311231168423
Tadros, T. (2013). Paints and coatings. In Encyclopedia of colloid and interface science (pp. 821–868). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20665-8_29
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet.” International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
Thornhill-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J.-M., Morisseau, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Vinchon, F., El Hayek, S., Augereau-Landais, M., Mourey, F., Feybesse, C., Sundquist, D., & Lubart, T. (2023). Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: Assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence, 11(3), 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11030054
Torrance, E. P. (1987). Teaching for creativity (pp. 189–215).
Treagust, D., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353–1368. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070306
UNESCO. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Education Working Papers, 23. http://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
Valle-Muñoz, V. M., Mendoza-Muñoz, M., & Villa-González, E. (2025). Physical literacy as a pedagogical model in physical education. Children, 12(8), 1008. https://doi.org/10.3390/children12081008
van Broekhoven, K. (2025). The evaluation and selection of creative ideas in educational settings: Current knowledge and future directions. Creativity Research Journal, 37(2), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2253403
Volosa, E., Wahyu, W., & Fatimah, S. S. (2025). Analysis of students’ creative thinking skill achievement through the implementation of the C-R-E-A-T-E learning model on the natural acid-base lesson. Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(6), 6209–6218.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society (M. Cole, V. Jolm-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Wahyu, W., & Kusrijadi, A. (2022). Analysis of the creativity of senior high school students through the C-R-E-A-T-E learning model. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 23(4), 1673–1682. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v23i4.pp1673-1682
Wahyu, W., & Kusrijadi, A. (2024). The effectiveness of C-R-E-A-T-E model through TCOF in making natural voltaic cell to build high school students’ creativity (pp. 339–346). https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-283-5_32
Wang, B., LvYe, J., Yang, S., Shi, Y., & Chen, Q. (2024). Critical review of food colloidal delivery system for bioactive compounds: Physical characterization and application. Foods, 13(16), 2596. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13162596
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Wang, L., Hodges, G., & Lee, J. (2022). Connecting macroscopic, molecular, and symbolic representations with immersive technologies in high school chemistry: The case of redox reactions. Education Sciences, 12(7), 428. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070428
Yuan, R. (2023). The other side of the coin: A socio-cultural analysis of pre-service language teachers’ learning to teach critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 48, 101265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101265
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Copyright (c) 2026 Wawan Wahyu, Rosi Oktiani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
_(3).png)
