Creative Thinking Skills in Science Education: A Prisma-based Systematic Literature Review (2019-2022)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i2.822Keywords:
Creative Thinking Skills, Science Education, Systematic Literature ReviewAbstract
Creative thinking skills are widely discussed in science education research, yet their conceptualization, pedagogical treatment, and measurement still show methodological diversity. This study systematically synthesizes recent studies on creative thinking skills in science education, focusing on learning strategies, learning media, and assessment instruments. A systematic literature review (SLR) using the PRISMA framework was conducted on 23 Scopus-indexed publications from 2019–2022. The results indicate that most studies position creative thinking skills as a learning outcome embedded in instructional innovation rather than as an independent construct. STEM-oriented learning, technology-assisted learning, problem-based learning, and inquiry-based learning are the most frequently explored contexts. However, the literature is dominated by qualitative and descriptive research, with limited comparative or experimental evidence. Variation in definitions and measurements also persists, often overlapping with related constructs such as critical thinking. Overall, this review reveals rich pedagogical innovation but limited methodological consistency and analytical rigor. The findings highlight the need for clearer construct boundaries, more robust research designs, and better alignment between learning strategies and validated instruments. This review contributes to mapping research patterns and identifying gaps for future empirical studies in creative thinking skills in science education
References
Adawiyah, R. (2019). Interactive e-book of physics to increase students’ creative thinking skills on rotational dynamics concept. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1153(1), 012117. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1153/1/012117
Aguilar, D. (2019). Promoting social creativity in science education with digital technology to overcome inequalities: A scoping review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1474. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01474
Amponsah, S. (2019). Lin’s creative pedagogy framework as a strategy for fostering creative learning in Ghanaian schools. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.09.002
Athanassios, A., & Vasiliki, B. (2019). Developing and piloting a pedagogy for teaching innovation, collaboration, and co-creation in secondary education based on design thinking. Education Sciences, 9(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020088
Barrow, L. H. (2010). Encouraging creativity with scientific inquiry. Creative Education, 1(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2010.11001
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
Blatti, J. L. (2019). Systems thinking in science education and outreach toward a sustainable future. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(12), 2852–2862. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00318
Boom-Cárcamo, E., Buelvas-Gutiérrez, L., Acosta-Oñate, L., & Boom-Cárcamo, D. (2024). Gamification and problem-based learning (PBL): Development of creativity in the teaching-learning process of mathematics in university students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53, 101614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101614
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
Calavia, M. B. (2021). Fostering creativity as a problem-solving competence through design: Think-Create-Learn, a tool for teachers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100761
Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cooke, A., Smith, D. M., & Booth, A. (2012). The benefits of a systematic search strategy when conducting qualitative evidence synthesis; the SPIDER tool. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
Duit, R. H., & Treagust, D. F. (2012). Conceptual change: Still a powerful framework for improving the practice of science instruction. In Issues and challenges in science education research: Moving forward (pp. 43–54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3980-2_4
Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment, 1(1), 1–23.
Farida, F., Alamsyah, Y. A., & Suherman, S. (2023). Assessment in educational context: The case of environmental literacy, digital literacy, and its relation to mathematical thinking skill. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 23(76), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.6018/red.552231
Fatmawati, A. (2019). Critical thinking, creative thinking, and learning achievement: How they are related. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1417, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1417/1/012070
Großmann, N. (2019). Experimentation in biology lessons: Guided discovery through incremental scaffolds. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 759–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1579392
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
Haq, A. M., & Roesminingsih, E. (2023). Situational leadership skills of foundation heads in human resource development for early childhood education. Munaddhomah: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 5(1), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.31538/munaddhomah.v5i1.545
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
Hsia, L. H. (2021). A creative problem solving-based flipped learning strategy for promoting students’ performing creativity, skills and tendencies of creative thinking and collaboration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(4), 1771–1787. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13073
Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912
Huang, T. C. (2019). Seeing creativity in an augmented experiential learning environment. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(2), 301–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0592-2
Israel-Fishelson, R. (2021). The associations between computational thinking and creativity: The role of personal characteristics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(8), 1415–1447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120940954
Jawad, L. F. (2021). The impact of teaching by using STEM approach in the development of creative thinking and mathematical achievement among the students of the fourth scientific class. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(13), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i13.24185
Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Creativity, intelligence, and culture: Connections and possibilities. In P. Meusburger, J. Funke, & E. Wunder (Eds.), Milieus of Creativity (pp. 155–168). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9877-2_8
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
Kennedy, T. J., & Sundberg, C. W. (2020). 21st century skills. In Science education in theory and practice: An introductory guide to learning theory (pp. 479–496). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_32
Kim, K. H. (2006). Can we trust creativity tests? A review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2
Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. Visualization in Science Education, 1, 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3613-2_8
Kusumawati, R. (2019). Implementation of integrated inquiry collaborative learning based on the lesson study for learning community to improve students’ creative thinking skill. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1211, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1211/1/012097
Kwangmuang, P. (2021). The development of learning innovation to enhance higher order thinking skills for students in Thailand junior high schools. Heliyon, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07309
Latorre-Cosculluela, C. (2020). Design thinking: Creativity and critical thinking in college. Revista Electronica de Investigacion Educativa, 22, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.24320/REDIE.2020.22.E28.2917
Linnenluecke, M. K., Marrone, M., & Singh, A. K. (2020). Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678
Lu, X. (2025). Pedagogical approaches to training: Role of teacher ingenuity in students’ creative potential/Enfoques pedagógicos de la formación: El papel del ingenio docente en el potencial creativo de los estudiantes. Culture and Education, 37(2), 411–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/11356405251328175
Lucifora, C., Scorolli, C., & Gangemi, A. (2025). Empirical exploration of the 4P theory of creativity using virtual reality. Acta Psychologica, 258, 105243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105243
Marini, A., Safitri, D., Niladini, A., Zahari, M., Dewiyani, L., & Muawanah, U. (2025). Developing a website integrated with project-based learning: Evidence of stimulating creativity among elementary school students in Indonesia. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, 101402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101402
Mason, N. L. (2019). Sub-acute effects of psilocybin on empathy, creative thinking, and subjective well-being. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 51(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2019.1580804
Meyer, M. W. (2020). Changing design education for the 21st century. She Ji, 6(1), 13–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002
OECD. (2019). An OECD learning framework 2030. In The future of education and labor (pp. 23–35). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26068-2_3
Pacheco, C. S. (2021). A conceptual proposal and operational definitions of the cognitive processes of complex thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100794
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., & Brennan, S. E. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160
Parra-González, M. E. (2020). Analysis of creative thinking and levels of student activation after a gamification experience. Educar, 56(2), 475–489. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.1104
Puspita, L., Retno, P., Nur Hidayah, N., & Komarudin, K. (2025). Sets-based Vee diagram learning and its effect on students’ critical thinking and self-regulation: A case study in Indonesian high school. Biosfer: Jurnal Tadris Biologi, 16(1), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.24042/biosfer.v16i1.27922
Puspita, L., Solviana, M. D., Nafrilla, F., Kesumawardani, A. D., Oktafiani, R., Hayati, D. K., & Syahril, S. (2025). Fostering student creativity: Through project-based learning e-module with the ClassPoint.io gamification. Biosfer: Jurnal Tadris Biologi, 16(2), 28756. https://doi.org/10.24042/biosfer.v16i2.28756
Putranta, H. (2019). Synthesis of the cognitive aspects’ science literacy and higher order thinking skills (HOTS) in chapter momentum and impulse. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1397(1), 012014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1397/1/012014
Rahimi, S. (2021). First inspire, then instruct to improve students’ creativity. Computers and Education, 174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104312
Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Castillo-Martínez, I. M., Sanabria-Z, J., & Miranda, J. (2022). Complex thinking in the framework of education 4.0 and open innovation—A systematic literature review. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010004
Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond, B. (2010). Torrance tests of creative thinking as predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty-year follow-up. Creativity Research Journal, 22(4), 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.523393
Sirajudin, N., & Suratno, J. (2021). Developing creativity through STEM education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806(1), 012211. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012211
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Sternberg, R. J. (2018). A triangular theory of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000095
Sternberg, R. J. (2020). The relation of scientific creativity and evaluation of scientific impact to scientific reasoning and general intelligence. Journal of Intelligence, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence8020017
Suherman, S., & Vidákovich, T. (2022). Assessment of mathematical creative thinking: A systematic review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44, 101019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101019
Suherman, S., Vidákovich, T., Mujib, M., Hidayatulloh, H., Andari, T., & Susanti, V. D. (2025). The role of STEM teaching in education: An empirical study to enhance creativity and computational thinking. Journal of Intelligence, 13(7), 88. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13070088
Sumarni, W. (2020). Ethno-stem project-based learning: Its impact to critical and creative thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i1.21754
Sun, M. (2022). How do students generate ideas together in scientific creativity tasks through computer-based mind mapping? Computers and Education, 176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104359
Supriadi, N., Jamaluddin, W., Suherman, S., & Komarudin, K. (2025). The role of blended learning in improving students’ numerical ability and learning creativity. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 25(81). https://doi.org/10.6018/red.619061
Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspective.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.
Wahyu, R., Putra, Y., Haenilah, E. Y., Hariri, H., & Sutiarso, S. (2023). Systematic literature review on the recent three-year trend mathematical representation ability in Scopus database. Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(2), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v12i2.p243-260
Weng, X., Chiu, T. K., & Tsang, C. C. (2022). Promoting student creativity and entrepreneurship through real-world problem-based maker education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45, 101046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101046
Wicaksono, D., Rahmawati, D., & Fanisyah, E. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of technology trends in education: Analysis from 2018 to 2022. Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 6(3), 435–445. https://doi.org/10.23887/jlls.v6i3.59877
Wu, Y. J., Wu, C.-H., & Peng, K.-L. (2025). Effects of creativity styles on learning engagement and motivation in STEAM education. Sustainability, 17(6), 2755. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17062755
Xu, C., & Fan, D. (2025). Creative‐becoming holism: Reflections on and development of creative holism in the case of science education. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 42(1), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.3106
Yılmaz, A. (2021). The effect of technology integration in education on prospective teachers’ critical and creative thinking, multidimensional 21st century skills and academic achievements. Participatory Educational Research, 8(2), 163–199. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.35.8.2
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Laila Puspita, Abdurrahman Abdurrahman, Tri Jalmo, Dina Maulina, Komarudin Komarudin, Suherman Suherman, Nurrana Fitria Luthfi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Online Learning in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Online Learning in Educational Research agree to the following terms:
Copyright Retention: Authors retain the copyright of their work without any restrictions.
Publishing Rights: Authors retain the right to publish and distribute their work without any restrictions.
License Agreement: By publishing with Online Learning in Educational Research, authors agree that their work will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA). This license allows others to share and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given, any changes are indicated, and the new creations are licensed under the same terms.
