The Effects of Teaching Methods in Primary Science Education on Students’ Creative Thinking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53797/ujssh.v5i1.15.2026Keywords:
Teaching Methods, Primary Science Education, Creative Thinking, Inquiry-Based Learning, Project-Based Learning, Traditional InstructionAbstract
This study investigates the effects of different teaching methods in primary science education on students’ creative thinking in Guangdong Province, China. A quantitative survey design was employed, and data were collected from 480 students across twelve public primary schools using a structured questionnaire measuring three instructional approaches Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL), Project-Based Learning (PBL), and Traditional Instruction (TI) and students’ creative thinking, including fluency, flexibility, and originality. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the predictive effects of the teaching methods on creative thinking. The results indicate that both IBL and PBL significantly enhance students’ creative thinking, while TI does not show a significant impact. These findings suggest that active, student-centered pedagogies are more effective than traditional teacher-centered approaches in fostering creativity in primary science education. The study provides empirical evidence for educators and policymakers to design instructional strategies that promote higher-order cognitive skills among young learners.
References
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
Cole-Onaifo, K. (2022). Teachers’ transition from teacher-centered to learner-centered classrooms using the next generation science standards as a tool. Columbia University.
Dilekçi, A., & Karatay, H. (2023). The effects of the 21st century skills curriculum on the development of students’ creative thinking skills. Thinking skills and creativity, 47, 101229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101229
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
Hui, A. N., & Lau, S. (2010). Formulation of policy and strategy in developing creativity education in four Asian Chinese societies: A policy analysis. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 44(4), 215-235. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010.tb01334.x
Law, W. W. (2014). Understanding China’s curriculum reform for the 21st century. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(3), 332-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.883431
Liu, S. C., & Lin, H. S. (2014). Primary teachers' beliefs about scientific creativity in the classroom context. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1551-1567. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.868619
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
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Educational and psychological measurement. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/t05532-000
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
