Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

HOTS student worksheet to identification of scientific creativity skill,

critical thinking skill and creative thinking skill in physics learning
To cite this article: S Astutik et al 2020 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1465 012075

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 36.71.232.137 on 13/04/2020 at 22:28

ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

HOTS student worksheet to identification of scientific

creativity skill, critical thinking skill and creative thinking
skill in physics learning

S Astutik1, I K Mahardika1, Indrawati1, Sudarti1, Supeno1

1
Departement Physics Education, University of Jember, Jember, Indonesia

Email: tika.fkip@unej.ac.id
Abstract. In the learning context of 21st century, teachers encounter many challenges in
optimizing the process and the outcome of learning. Students who have higher order thinking
skills will be able to think of scientific creativity, critical thinking and creative thinking. In this
study, identification is done by measuring the ability of scientific creativity, critical thinking
and creative thinking skills by HOTS student worksheet. The result showed that student’s
scientific creativity with 6 indicators need to be develop esspecialy for physics problem solving
and technical production. For critical thinking skills students obtain moderate results but have
shown good results in answering physics problem. For creative thinking skills students get
good results on the indicator fluency, flexibility and elaboration but for the originality still
needs to be developed. Therefore, it is very important to develop a proper physics intructional
design that can develop scientific creativity, crtical thinking and creative thinking skills.

1. Introduction
The competence of high school graduates is desirable who can solve problems and apply in
everyday life of students. To succeed in the life, students need skills that support them such as
scientific creativity, critical thinking, creative thinking, collaborative problem solving, innovation,
literacy, communication and collaboration [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. The results of previous studies in
scientific creativity [6] [3] suggest that as scientific creativity in learning activities are important in
identifying problems, exploring different methods, and exploring alternative solutions. Scientific
creativity in science education consists of several aspects including: knowledge, intellectual ability,
personality and motivation, and environment [17], ability to learn scientific knowledge and scientific
problem solving [18]; [16], and social or personal value [6] as well as studying the essential nature and
superiority of scientific thought [19]. The result of previous studies in critical thinking [2] stated that
Critical thinking skills are one of the basic modalities or intellectual models that are essential to
everyone and are a fundamental part of one's maturity [7]. Meanwhile the result of previous studies in
creative thinking [8] [3] stated that creative thinking deals with how people approach problems and
rely on personalities and thinking styles [31].

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

The results of research gained related scientific creativity, critical thinking, and creative thinking in
education have been reported in many studies [3] [9] [1][10] [30]. Some previous research results
showed that many teachers and lecturers have limited pedagogical knowledge and skills, especially in
designing effective learning activities in training the students’ skills [2].
Based on interviews with senior high school physics teachers in Jember, the problems that are often
faced in the learning of physics is the low learning outcomes. Based on daily test results on Newton’s
law material in class XI of academic year 2017/2018 shows that the highest percentage of students
answered one correct item on Newton’s law material that is 44,1% and lowest percentage that is
13,22%. This shows that the result of physics learning of class XI students is low [11]. One of the
causes of low learning outcomes is that students have difficulty in understanding the concepts of
physics. This indicates that the level of mastery of the physics concept of students is low. The results
show that students' scientific creativity ability is still low [3] [26].
The importance of mastering the concept on the cognitive aspect, does not necessarily ignore the
balance of affective and psychomotor aspects. Because in the learning process in accordance with the
2013 curriculum, it is also necessary to pay attention to the soft skill aspects such as collaborative
ability, mutual respect, sense of belonging, and sense of responsibility [12]. Aspects of high-order
thinking in accordance with the 21st century in the aspects of soft skills are the ability of scientific
creativity, critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills. Aspects that are measured on learning
are aspects of scientific creativity, critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills [4]. The ability of
scientific creativity, critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills are essential in today's learning
because students are trained in higher order thinking skills in these aspects.
According to the 21st Century Learning framework, "Learning and Innovation" includes: creativity
and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving and communication and collaboration in the
context of higher-order thinking [13] in this research focused on scientific creativity, critical thinking
and creative thinking. Higher order thinking skills based on [20] are defined as the cognitive abilities
of students who, according to Bloom's unincorporated level of cognitive, evaluation, and creative
cognitive abilities [29]. High-level thinking is the embodiment of critical thinking, creative, and
problem solving. Based on the results of the exploration of creativity in the literature, scientific
creativity is defined as a kind of intellectual nature or ability to produce or potentially produce a
specific product that is original and has social or personal value, designed with a specific purpose in
mind, using certain information [8].
Torrance [6] considers fluency, flexibility and originality the main features of creativity: Fluency
means the number of original ideas produced. Flexibility is the ability to be unattached to a
predetermined approach after the approach can no longer be used efficiently. Originality is interpreted
statistically: an answer is interpreted as a rare answer, if the answer only appears or occurs
occasionally in a particular population and such answers are viewed as original [29].
Every human being can grow and develop into a critical thinker, because in reality human thinking
will relate to the pattern of self-management. Critical thinking skills are very important possessed by
students in Physics learning because at the time of learning Physics students are required to be able to
recognize, solve problems, interfere, analyze, summarize and evaluate. The benefit of critical thinking
skills for students is to enhance students' academic awards as lifelong learning [14].
Creative is a performance. Performance in realizing ideas and ideas through a series of intensive
activities to produce a work of creation. Creative works can be poured in an idea, activity, artwork, to
a performance that has a unique uniqueness that can attract many people. Creative children are
children who will always realize creative ideas in the form of ideas in creative activities to produce the
work. Creative children are children creators. Children who always struggle with activities create a
masterpiece of the idea they have. The work created embodies novelty and good value based on the
experience and knowledge of children in learning [15] [29].
HOT’S student worksheet is a student worksheet that contains questions about critical thinking skills,
creative thinking skills and students' scientific creativity abilities. This HOTS student worksheet was

2
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

created to explore students' abilities related to high order thinking skills. Each question is compiled
with regard to indicators and aspects of scientific creativity skills, critical thinking and creative
thinking.
The purpose of this study are to identify the ability of scientific creativity, critical thinking skills
and creative thinking ability about Newton's law on student high school in Jember by HOTS student
worksheet.

2. Method
This research was conducted on high school class XI students in Jember in academic year
2018/2019. The study was conducted in class XI. Score of scientific creativity, critical thinking and
creative thinking are derived from the questions given to the students. Score of scientific creativity is
determined based on indicators of unusual use, technical production, hypothesis, science problem
solving, science product and creative experimental. Score critical thinking skills are expressed in 5
indicators, namely: Elementary Classification (EC), Basic Support (BS), Inferency (I), Advanced
Clarification (AC), and Explanation (E). While the score of creative thinking skills expressed in
aspects of fluency (F), Flexibility (F), Originality (O) and Elaboration (E).
The type of this research is qualitative descriptive research conducted in high school in Jember in
the academic year semester 2018/2019. The selection of the sample is done by direct determination
using purposive sampling method that is in the students of class XI IPA consisting of 112 students
namely: group-A, group-B and group-C.
Techniques used to retrieve data in this study is the documentation of student identity and written
tests given to students. While the instrument used is a written test in the form of a description (essay)
about Newton's law which consists of 6 questions of scientific creativity, 5 questions of critical
thinking and 2 questions of creative thinking. The technique of data analysis to answer the first
problem formulation is the assessment using the scoring rubric of scientific creativity ability about
Newton's law which consist of 6 value indicator for quantitative data and using rubric scale of
scientific creativity ability about Newton's law which consist of four scale ability for qualitative data.
The technique of data analysis to answer the second problem formulation is the assessment using the
rubric of critical thinking ability assessment in solving problem about Newton's law which consists of
5 description of value for quantitative data and using rubric scale critical thinking ability about
Newton's law which consist of four scale ability for data qualitative. The technique of data analysis to
answer the third problem formulation is the assessment using the rubric of creative thinking ability
assessment in solving problem about Newton's law which consists of four description of value for
quantitative data and using rubric scale creative thinking ability about Newton's law which consist of
four scale ability for data qualitative .
Assessment on the ability of scientific creativity based on indicators of unusual use, technical
production, hypothesis, science problem solving, creative experimental and science product. Indicators
of scientific creativity ability can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1. Scientific creativity skills indicator [4]

Scientific Creativity Skills Sub Skills of Scientific Creativity
Unusual Use (UU) 1. Using objects for scientific purposes
2. Assessing fluency, flexibility and originality in
scientific purposes
Technical Production (TP) 1. Improving science technical production
2. Assessing fluency, flexibility and originality
Hypothesis (H) 1. Make formulation of the
problem and hypothesis
2. Assessing fluency, flexibility and originality

3
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

Science Problem Solving (SPS) 1. Make solving problems in science

2. Assessing fluency, flexibility and originality in
science
Creative Experimental (CE) 3. 1. Doing creative experiments
4. 2. Assessing fluency, flexibility
5. and originality in creative
6. experiments
Science Product (SP) 1. Designing science products
2. Assessing flexibility and originality in designing
science products

Assessment of critical thinking skills based on indicators elementary clarification (EC), basic
support (BS), inference (I), advanced clarification (AC), explanation (E) [25] [26]. Critical thinking
skills indicators can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2. Critical thinking skills indicator

Critical Thinking Skills Sub Skills of Critical Thinking
Providing a simple explanation 1. Focusing questions
(Elementary clarification) 2. Analyze the argument
3. Ask questions and answer challenging questions
and clarifications
Building basic skills (Basic support) 1. 1. Consider credibility (criteria of a source)
2. 2. Observing and considering observation results
Summing up (Inference) 1. 1. Make deductions and consider the results of
deduction
2. 2. Making inductions and taking into account
induction
3. 3. Make and consider the value of the decision
Make further explanation (Advanced 7. 1. Define terms, consider definitions
clarification) 8. 2. Identify assumptions
Strategy and Tactics (explanation) 1. Decide an action
2. Interacting with others

Assessment of creative thinking skills based on indicators is expressed in terms of fluency (F),
Flexibility (F), Originality (O) and Elaboration (E). Creative thinking skills indicators can be seen in
Table 3.

Table 3 Aspects and Indicators of Student Creative Thinking Skills

Aspect Description
Fluency - Students can offer more than one answer for a problem..
 - Students are fluent in their ideas.
Flexibility - Students can provide different ways to solve a problem.
Originality - Students can provide answers along with different solutions or new ideas
with other students in solving problems.
Elaboration - Students take steps systematically in solving problems- Students can
combine elements, principles, and concepts that exist so as to become a
unified whole

4
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

The identification of the scientific creativity skills, critical thinking skills and creative thinking
skills was analyzed based on the assessments that was determined using observation sheets.
The data obtained from scientific creativity skills there are 6 problem with 6 data that is unusual use,
technical production, hypothesis, science problem solving, creative experimental and science product.
Score of Scientific creativity category expressed in four categories, namely: VH (Verry High) is the
example of the value of 2.25-3.00, H (High) is high with a score of 1.50 -2.24, M (Moderate) is an
moderate with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and L (Low) is low with grades 0 -74. The ability of students'
scientific creativity is derived from the average score of scientific creativity indicator that is unusual
use, technical production, hypothesis, science problem solving, creative experimental and science
product with VC (Verry Creative) category is the example of the value of 2.25-3.00, C (Creative) with
a score of 1.50 -2.24, (LC) Least Creative with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and NC (Not Creative) is low
with grades 0 -74.
The data obtained from critical thinking skills there are 5 problem with 5 data that is indicators
elementary clarification (EC), basic support (BS), inference (I), advanced clarification (AC),
explanation (E). Score of critical thinking skill category expressed in four categories, namely: VH
(Verry High) is the example of the value of 2.25-3.00, H (High) is high with a score of 1.50 -2.24, M
(Moderate) is an moderate with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and L (Low) is low with grades 0 -74. The
ability of students' critical thinking is derived from the average score of critical thinking indicator that
is indicators elementary clarification (EC), basic support (BS), inference (I), advanced clarification
(AC), explanation (E) with VC (Verry Critical) category is the example of the value of 2.25-3.00, C
(Critical) with a score of 1.50 -2.24, (LC) Least Critical with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and NC (Not
Critical) is low with grades 0 -74.
The data obtained from creative thinking skills there are 2 problem with 4 creative thinking skill
aspect data that is fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration. Score of creative thinking category
expressed in four categories, namely: VH (Verry High) is the example of the value of 2.25-3.00, H
(High) is high with a score of 1.50 -2.24, M (Moderate) is an moderate with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and
L (Low) is low with grades 0 -74. The ability of students' creative thinking is derived from the average
score of creative thinking aspect that is fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration with VC (Verry
Creative) category is the example of the value of 2.25-3.00, C (Creative) with a score of 1.50 -2.24,
(LC) Least Creative with a value of 0.75 - 1.49, and NC (Not Creative) is low with grades 0 -74.

3. Result and Discussion

The first objective in this study was to identify students' ability in scientific creativity in solving
problems about Newton's law using a skill assessment rubric consisting of 4 description values. The
first assessment is to assess the answers of students based on each problem is a unusual use, technical
production, hypothesis, science problem solving, creative experimental and science product. Each
student answer is grouped based on the description of the achieved value consisting of six values as
shown in the Table 4. The ability of scientific creativity for all groups can be expressed as shown in
Figure 1.

Tabel 4. The average score of scientific creativity skills in all groups

Scientific Creativity
Indicators of Scientific Creativity
Score Group Score Group Score
C C C
-A -B Group- C
Unusual Use (UU) 2,4 VH 2,2 H 2,0 H
Technical Production (TP) 1,9 H 2,0 H 1,4 M
Hypothesizing (H) 2,3 VH 2,2 H 2,3 VH
Science Problem Solving (SPS) 1,1 M 1,3 M 1,4 M
Creative Experimental (CE) 2,3 VH 2,1 H 2,3 VH

5
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

Science Product (SP) 2,1 H 2,1 H 2,2 VH

Scientific Creativity 2,0 C 2,0 C 1.9 C
Note: C= Criterion, VH= Very High H= High M= Moderate L= Low
VC= Very Creative C=Creative LC= Less Creative NC= Not Creative

Table 4 shows the score of each indicator of creativity scientific in the range of 1.1 to 2.4. Highest
score on unusual use (UU) indicator and lowest score on science indicators problem solving (SPS).
Scientific Creativity Skills

2.5

2
Score

1.5

0.5

0
UU TP H SPS CE SP SC

Group-a Group-b Group-c

Figure 1. The average scores of scientific creativity skill, in all groups

The second objective in this study was to identify students' ability in critical thinking skill in
solving problems about Newton's law using a skill assessment rubric consisting of 4 description
values. The assessment is to assess the answers of students based on each problem is a Providing a
simple explanation (Elementary clarification), Building basic skills (Basic support), Summing up
(Inference), Make further explanation (Advanced clarification), Strategy and Tactics
(explanation)[[23][28]. Each student answer is grouped based on the description of the achieved value
consisting of five values as shown in the Table 5. The ability of critical thinking skills for all groups
can be expressed as shown in Figure 2.

Table 5. The average score of critical thinking skills in all groups

Critical Thinking
Indicators of Critical Thinking
Score Score Score
C C C
Group- A Group- B Group- C
Elementarry clarification (EC) 2,0 H 2,0 H 2,0 H
Basic support (BS) 2,0 H 1,8 H 1,4 M
Inference (I) 1,4 M 1,5 H 1,3 M
Advanced clarification (AC) 0,6 L 0,9 M 0,4 L
Eexplanations (E) 1,4 M 1,4 M 1,3 M
Critical Thinking 1.5 C 1.5 C 1.3 LC
Note: C= Criterion, VH= Very High H= High M= Moderate L= Low
VC= Very Critical C=Critical LC= Less Critical NC= Not Critical

6
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

Critical Thinking Skills

3

2,5

2
Score
1,5

0,5

0
EC BS I AC E CT

Group-a Group-b Group-c

Figure 2. The average scores of critical thinking skill in all groups

The third objective in this study was to identify students' ability in creative thinking skill in solving
problems about Newton's law using a skill assessment rubric consisting of four description values. The
assessment is to assess the answers of students based on each problem is fluency, flexibility,
originality and elaboration [25]. Each student answer is grouped based on the description of the
achieved value consisting of four values as shown in the Table 6. The ability of creative thinking skills
for all groups can be expressed as shown in Figure 3.

Table 6. The average score of creative thinking skill aspect in all groups
Aspect of Creative Thinking Creative Thinking
Score Group- A C Score Group- B C Score Group- C C
Fluency (F) 2,5 VH 2,4 VH 2,0 H
Flexibility (F) 2,3 VH 2,2 H 2,1 H
Originality (O) 1,1 M 1,1 M 1,3 M
Elaboration (E) 1,6 H 1,9 H 1,4 M
Creative Thinking 1.8 C 1.9 C 1.7 C
Note: C= Criterion, VH= Verry High H= High M= Moderate L= Low
VC= Very Creative C=Creative LC= Less Creative NC= Not Creative

7
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

Creative Thinking Skills

3
2,5
2

Score 1,5
1
0,5
0

Group-a Group-b Group-c

Figure 3: The average scores of creative thinking skill in all groups

The average value of each skill of scientific creativity, critical thinking skills and creative thinking
skills is shown by Table1, Table 2 and Table 3. Furthermore the results obtained on the skills of
scientific creativity, critical thinking as well as creative thinking can be expressed in the graph of
students' ability higher order thinking skill as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The average scores of scientific creativity skill, critical thinking skill and creative thinking
skill in all groups.

Figure 4 shows the average score of scientific creativity skills for group-a, group-b, and group-c,
are respectively 67; 67; and 63. The average score of scientific creativity skills for group-a, group-b
and group-c is in the creative category. The average score of critical thinking skills for group-a, group-
b, and group-c, are respectively 50; 50; and 43. The average score for group-a and group-b is in the
creative category and group-c is in the less creative category. The average score of creative thinking
skills for group-a and group-b and group-c are respectively .60; .63; and 57. The average score of
creative thinking skills for group-a and group-b and group-c is in the creative category [22][26].

8
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

3.1 Scientific Creativity Skills

The student’s ability of scientific creativity can be seen from the average score of scientific
creativity indicators including unusual use, technical production, hypothesis, science problem solving,
creative experimental and science product. The average score of unusual use in scientific creativity
skills for all groups are respectively 2.4; 2.2; and 2.0 is in very high, high and high category the
standard score (minimum score 1.00 in score range 1-3). The average score of technical production in
scientific creativity skills for all groups are respectively 1.9; 2.0; and 1.4 is in high, high and moderate
category. The average score of hypothesis in scientific creativity skills for all groups are respectively
2.3; 2.2; and 2.3 is in very high, high and very high category. The average score of science problem
solving in scientific creativity skills for all groups are respectively 1.1; 1.3; and 1.4 is in moderate
category. The average score of creative experimental in scientific creativity skills for all groups are
respectively 2.3; 2.1; and 2.3 is in very high, high and very high category. The average score of
science product in scientific creativity skills for all groups are respectively 2.1; 2.1; and 2.2 is in high
category. Based on the results of the analysis of the 6 indicators of scientific creativity there is a low
value of technical production and science problem solving in all groups. The technical production
result for Group-a gets 1.9, group-b gets 2.0 and group-c gets 1.4. Result for science problem solving
Group-a gets 1.1, group-b gets 1.3 and group-c gets 1.4. This is because the technical production for
students is a new thing and feel the difficulty in designing a science-based product. The result of the
assessment for science problem solving is the students' difficulties when solving problem-based
science problems. This is supported by a questionnaire that says it is difficult 78% for technical
production and 90% difficult for science problem solving. The unusual use indicator for all groups has
the highest value, this is because students easily understand the characteristics of the unusual use
question. If the questions given to the students in accordance with the stages of student development
then obtained a good value[4][21][27]. Hypothesis, creative experimental and science product
indicators get high and medium values. The value of scientific creativity ability for all groups can be
seen in Figure 1.

3.2 Critical Thinking Skills

The student’s ability of critical thinking can be seen from the average score of critical thinking
indicators including Elementarry clarification, Building basic skills (Basic support), Summing up
(Inference), Make further explanation (Advanced clarification), Strategy and Tactics (explanation).
The average score of Elementarry clarification in critical thinking skills for all groups are respectively
2.0; 2.0; and 2.0 is in high category the standard score (minimum score 1.00 in score range 1-3). The
average score of Basic support in critical thinking skills for all groups are respectively 2.0; 1.8; and 1.4
is in high, high and moderate category. The average score of Inference in critical thinking skills for all
groups are respectively 1.4; 1.5; and 1.3 is in moderate, high and moderate category. The average
score of Advanced clarification in critical thinking skills for all groups are respectively 0.6; 0.9; and
0.4 is in moderate category and low category. The average score of explanation in scientific creativity
skills for all groups are respectively 1.4; 1.4; and 1.3 is in moderate category. Based on the results of
the analysis of the 5 indicators of critical thinking there is a low value of Advanced clarification in all
groups. The Advanced clarification result for Group-a gets 0.6, group-b gets 0.9 and group-c gets 0.4.
The low student score on the Advanced clarification indicator is because students still have difficulty
when defining terms, consider definitions and Identify assumptions. The result of the assessment for
Advanced clarification is the students' difficulties when defining terms, consider definitions and
Identify assumptions. The result of assessment a Providing a simple explanation (Elementarry
clarification), Building basic skills (Basic support), Summing up (Inference), Strategy and Tactics
(explanation) is in high and moderate category. The results of the research that have been carried out
show that there is a moderate increase when students are given learning by using the learning model
(Jatmiko, et.al., 2017) because appropriate learning can improve critical thinking skills.. Critical
thinking skills are a cognitive process and a person's mental process to gain more knowledge than

9
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

others. With this critical thinking skill can help students to be more active and more critical in
exploring a new science that they will learn.

3.3 Creative Thinking Skills

The student’s ability of creative thinking can be seen from the average score of creative thinking
aspect including fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration. The average score of fluency in
creative thinking skills for all groups are respectively 2.5; 2.4; and 2.0 is in very high and high
category in the standard score (minimum score 1.00 in score range 1-3). The average score of
flexibility in creative thinking skills for all groups are respectively 2.3; 2.2; and 2.1 is in very high and
category. The average score of originality in creative thinking skills for all groups are respectively 1.1;
1.1; and 1.3 is in moderate category. The average score of elaboration in critical thinking skills for all
groups are respectively 1.6; 1.9; and 1.4 is in high and moderate category. Based on the results of the
analysis of the 4 indicators of creative thinking there is a low value of originality in all groups. The
originality result for Group-a gets 1.1, group-b gets 1.1 and group-c gets 1,3. The low student score on
the originality aspect is because students still have difficulty when determined the thing in originality.
The result of assessment in fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration is in high and moderate
category. The results of the research that have been carried out show that there is a moderate increase
when students are given learning by using the proper instructional design (Susantini, et.al., 2017).
The ability to think high-level can be obtained through the skills of scientific creativity, critical
thinking skills and creative thinking skills through the indicators provide an overview of students'
understanding of these three skills. Scientific creativity directs students to be able to master scientific
performance through scientific processes (Aktamis, et. Al., 2008). Critical thinking skills are a
cognitive process and a person's mental process to gain more knowledge than others. (Amabile, et.al.,
1983). Creative thinking skills lead students to have fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration
aspects in every learning activity. When these three skills are creativity skills, critical thinking skills
and creative thinking skills are already mastered by students, in essence the students already have
higher order thinking skills. The success in identifying scientific creativity skills, critical thinking
skills and creative thinking skills is strongly influenced by supporting instruments, namely adequate
questions. Problems that match the characteristics of scientific creativity, critical thinking and creative
thinking will be able to explore their higher order thinking skills.

4. Conclusion
The results of this research for all groups indicate that the ability’s scientific creativity is in high
category, moderate category and low category. High category for unusual use, hypothesis, creative
experimental and science product. While, the technical production and science problem solving in low
category. The results of the critical thinking is in moderate category and the results of the creative
thinking is in high and moderate category.
The implications of this research can be an alternative to overcome the problems of 21st century
education in the industrial revolution era 4.0 related to the problem of the low level scientific
creativity skills, critical thinking skill and creative thinking skill on the physics learning course.
Further research can be done to improve the results of this research, it is necessary to research at the
elementary, middle and upper level of education, it is also need to be proven in other countries.

10
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

Acknowledgment
The author’s gratitude goes to the University of Jember for funding the research (research group
funding). Likewise, the author's gratitude goes to the senior high school in Jember that have provided
collaborative research opportunities

References
[1] Griffin P and Care E 2015 Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and
approach (New York: Springer)
[2] Jatmiko B, Prahani, B K, Munasir, Supardi Z A I, Wicaksono I, Erlina N, Pandiangan P,
Althaf R and Zainuddin 2018 The comparison of OR-IPA teaching model and problem
based learning model effectiveness to improve critical thinking skills of pre-service
physics teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education 17 1-22
[3] Astutik S, Nur M, and Susantini E 2015 Development of the hypothetical model to teach
the skills of scientific creativity students in learning science AEC Conf. Proc.
[4] Astutik S, Sudarti, Bektiarso S, & Nuraini L 2017 Developing scientific creativity test to
improve scientific creativity skills for secondary school students. The International
Journal of Social Science and Humanities Invention. 4 3970-3974
[5] Wicaksono I, Wasis, and Madlazim 2017 The effectiveness of virtual science teaching
model (VSTM) to improve student’s scientific creativity and concept mastery on senior
high school physics subject Journal of Baltic Science Education 16 549-561
[6] Hu W and Adey P 2010 A Scientific Creativity Test For Secondary School Students,
College (London)
[7] Putri A R, and Jatmiko B 2016 Guided Discovery Learning to Improve Creative Thinking
Skill for Learning Elasticity in 10th Grade Wonoayu High School Physics Learning
Innovation Journal JIPF 5 26-33.
[8] Nur M 2014 Creative Thinking (Surabaya: UNESA)
[9] Huang M H, Dong H R, Chen D Z 2012 Globalization Of Collaborative Creativity
Through Cross-Border Patent Activities Journal Of Informetrics 6 226-236
[10] Hesse F, Care E, Buder J, Sassenberg K, and Griffin P A 2015 Framework for Teachable
Collaborative Problem Solving Skills (Dordrecht: Springer)
[11] Fithriani S L, Halim A, and Khaldun I 2016 Media Simulation by Phet based on Guided
Inquiry to Improve Student Creative Thinking Skill in Heat Energy at Banda Aceh 12
High School Science Education Journal Indonesia 4 45-52
[12] Suyidno N M, Yuanita L, Prahani B K, and Jatmiko B 2018 Effectiveness of creative
responsibility based teaching (CRBT) model on basic physics learning to increase
student’s scientific creativity and responsibility Journal of Baltic Science Education 17
136-151
[13] Trilling B and Fadel C 2009 21st Century skills: Learning for life in our times (John
Wiley & Sons)
[14] Conklin W 2012 Higher-Order Thinking Skills to Develop 21st Century
Learners.Higher-Order Thinking Skills to Develop 21st Century Learners (Shell
Education Publishing,Inc)
[15] Kurniawan H 2016 Creative School (Yogyakarta: Ar-Ruzz Media)
[16] Hu W, Wu B, Jia X, Yi X, Duan C, Meyer W and Kaufman J C 2013 Increasing Student’s
Scientific Creativity: The “ Learn to Think” intervention program. The Journal of Creative
Behavior 47 3-21.

11
ICOPAMBS 2019 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1465 (2020) 012075 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012075

[17] Liu S C and Lin H S 2013 Primary teachers’ beliefs about Scientific Creativity in the
Classroom Context International Journal of Science Education 36 1551-1567
[18] Wang J and Yu J 2011 Scientific creativity research based on generalizability theory and
BP_Adaboost RT Advanced in Control Engineering and Information Science Procedia
Engineering 15 4178 – 4182
[19] Zhang J, Liu G, and Lin C 2014 An action-oriented approach to gifted education: evidence
from the field of Scientific Creativity High Ability Studies 23 123-125.
[20] Krathwohl D R 2002 A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview (Ohio: Ohio State
University
[21] Aktamis H, Pekmez E S, Can B T and Ergin O 2008 Developing Scientific Creativity
Test (Turkey:University of Dokuz Eylul)
[22] Aktamis H and Ergin O 2008 The effect of scientific process skills education on
students’ scientific creativity, science attitudes and academic achievements Asia-Pacific
Forum on Science Learning and Teaching 9
[23] Amabile T M 1983 The Social Psychology of Creativity (New York: Springer‐ Verlag)
[24] Arends R I 2012 Learning to Teach Ninth Edition (New York: McGraw-Hill)
[25] Astutik S, Nur M, and Susantini E 2016 Validity of Collaborative Creativity (CC)
Models ICRIEMS Conf. Proc. 73-78.
[26] Astutik S 2017 Effectiveness of collaborative students worksheet to improve student’s
affective scientific collaborative and science process skills (SPS) International Journal of
Education and Research 5
[27] Astutik S and Prahani B K 2018 The Practicality and Effectiveness of Collaborative
Creativity Learning (CCL) Model by Using PhET Simulation to Increase Students’
Scientific Creativity International Journal of Instruction 11 409-424
[28] Beetlestone F 2012 Creative Learning: Imaginative Teaching (Philadelpia, Open
University Press)
[29] Jones A, Miels D, Littleton K, and Vass E 2008 The discourse of collaborative creativity
writing: peer collaboration as a context for mutual inspiration Thinking Skill and
creativity journal 3 92 – 202
[30] Lin C, Hu W, Adey P and Shen J 2003 The influence of CASE on scientific creativity.
Research in Science Education 33 143‐162
[31]Susantini E, Isnawati, and Lisdiana L 2016 Effectiveness of genetics student worksheet to
improve creative thinking skills of teacher candidate students Journal Of Science
Education 17 74-79

12