Creative Thinking Skills of Biology Education Students in a Gender Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70211/wesw.v2i1.297Keywords:
Biology Education, Creative Thinking, Gender Perspective, Higher Education, Inclusive PedagogyAbstract
Creative thinking represents a crucial twenty-first-century skill that enables learners to generate original ideas, explore diverse perspectives, and develop innovative solutions to problems. This study aims to analyze the creative thinking skills of biology education students at UIN Raden Intan Lampung through a gender perspective. Using a descriptive qualitative design, the research involved a population of 87 students, with a purposive sample of male and female students from the 2021 cohort. Data were collected through an essay-based creative-thinking test adapted from validated instruments covering four indicators: fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration. The findings show that female students demonstrated higher mean scores in fluency (58%) and elaboration (49%), while male students scored higher in flexibility (52%) and originality (46%). Overall, students’ creative thinking skills fell into the “moderately creative” category across all indicators. The results highlight the importance of gender-responsive strategies in science education that nurture creativity, inclusivity, and equal opportunity in academic settings. The implication of this study suggests that biology educators should design learning environments that provide balanced opportunities for both genders to express, explore, and refine their creative potential in the context of higher education.
References
A. Dilekçi and H. Karatay, “The effects of the 21st century skills curriculum on the development of students’ creative thinking skills,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 47, p. 101229, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101229.
H. Herlinawati, M. Marwa, N. Ismail, Junaidi, L. O. Liza, and D. D. B. Situmorang, “The integration of 21st century skills in the curriculum of education,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 15, p. e35148, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35148.
R. R. Saikia and S. Gogoi, “Nurturing Creativity And Critical Thinking In Students : The 21 st Century Skills,” no. May, 2025.
S. Alainati and S. Al-Ainati, “The Role of Educational Systems in Developing the Twenty-First Century Skills: Perspectives and Initiatives of Gulf Cooperation Council Countries,” Issue 1. Ser, vol. 26, no. January, pp. 44–57, 2024, doi: 10.9790/487X-2601034457.
B. Thornhill-Miller et al., “Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education,” J. Intell., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 54, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.3390/jintelligence11030054.
B. A. Saeed and T. Ramdane, “The effect of implementation of a creative thinking model on the development of creative thinking skills in high school students: A systematic review,” Rev. Educ., vol. 10, no. 3, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1002/rev3.3379.
S. Pontis and G. L. Salerno, “Understanding scientific creativity criteria: Biologists’ assessments of PhD students’ creative products using the CAT,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 57, p. 101861, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101861.
R. N. A. Komalasari, I. Ibrohim, and D. Listyorini, “Creativity in biology: The impact of Problem-Oriented Project Based Learning on high school students,” JPBI (Jurnal Pendidik. Biol. Indones., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 555–562, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.22219/jpbi.v10i2.32497.
D. Schizas, D. Psillos, and S. Asimopoulos, “Advancing scientific literacy: Integrating nature of science and nature of scientific inquiry in teaching Griffith’s and Avery-MacLeod-McCarty experiments,” Interdiscip. J. Environ. Sci. Educ., vol. 20, no. 4, p. e2421, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.29333/ijese/15522.
C. Leaper, T. Farkas, and C. S. Brown, “Adolescent Girls’ Experiences and Gender-Related Beliefs in Relation to Their Motivation in Math/Science and English,” J. Youth Adolesc., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 268–282, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z.
M. S. Jony, “Investigating the role of gender in teacher-student communication and classroom dynamics,” J. Educ. Sustain. Innov., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 87–99, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.56916/jesi.v3i1.1250.
J. Fleissner-Martin, J. Paul, and F. X. Bogner, “Creativity as Key Trigger to Cognitive Achievement: Effects of Digital and Analog Learning Interventions,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 669–686, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1007/s11165-024-10211-3.
E. G. Bailey et al., “Female In-Class Participation and Performance Increase with More Female Peers and/or a Female Instructor in Life Sciences Courses,” CBE—Life Sci. Educ., vol. 19, no. 3, p. ar30, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-12-0266.
J. M. Nissen and J. T. Shemwell, “Gender, experience, and self-efficacy in introductory physics,” Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res., vol. 12, no. 2, p. 020105, Aug. 2016, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020105.
B. Goecke, M. Benedek, J. G. Diedrich, B. Forthmann, S. Patzl, and S. Weiss, “Being female and being well-situated implies higher performance on creative thinking tests: Evidence across 62 countries from PISA 2022,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 59, p. 101963, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101963.
D. G. Campos and R. Scherer, “Digital gender gaps in Students’ knowledge, attitudes and skills: an integrative data analysis across 32 Countries,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 655–693, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12272-9.
S. Bania, “Integrating Inclusive and Constructivist Pedagogy in Inclusive Education,” no. May, 2025, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15379810.
R. Hanson, “How Gender-friendly Constructivist Approaches Facilitate the Development of STEM Skills,” Int. J. Cross-Disciplinary Subj. Educ., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 4281–4285, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2020.0523.
C.-A. Tsai, M.-Y. W. Song, Y.-F. Lo, and C.-C. Lo, “Design thinking with constructivist learning increases the learning motivation and wicked problem-solving capability—An empirical research in Taiwan,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 50, p. 101385, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101385.
Y. Y. Ho and W. Y. R. Lim, Educating Adult Learners: Bridging Learners’ Characteristics and the Learning Sciences. 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_4.
C. S. Sanger, “Inclusive Pedagogy and Universal Design Approaches for Diverse Learning Environments,” in Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education, Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2020, pp. 31–71. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_2.
A. Kasirer and S. Shnitzer-Meirovich, “The perception of creativity and creative abilities among general education and special education teachers,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 40, p. 100820, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100820.
S. Lin, W. Duan, Y. Wang, and H. Duan, “Thinking Style Moderates the Impact of the Classroom Environment on Language Creativity,” J. Intell., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 5, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.3390/jintelligence12010005.
X. Yang, J. Shen, D. H. Cropley, and Y. Zheng, “A systematic review of factors influencing K-12 teachers’ creative teaching across different forms: An ecological perspective,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 57, p. 101869, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101869.
A. A. Potur and mr Barkul, “Gender and creative thinking in education: A theoretical and experimental overview.,” A|Z ITU J. Fac. Archit., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 44–57, 2009.
J. BAER and J. C. KAUFMAN, “Gender Differences in Creativity,” J. Creat. Behav., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 75–105, Jun. 2008, doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01289.x.
C. L. Taylor, S. Said-Metwaly, A. Camarda, and B. Barbot, “Gender differences and variability in creative ability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the greater male variability hypothesis in creativity.,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 126, no. 6, pp. 1161–1179, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1037/pspp0000484.
W. M. Lim, “What Is Qualitative Research? An Overview and Guidelines,” Australas. Mark. J., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 199–229, May 2024, doi: 10.1177/14413582241264619.
W. M. Bart, B. Hokanson, I. Sahin, and M. A. Abdelsamea, “An investigation of the gender differences in creative thinking abilities among 8th and 11th grade students,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 17, pp. 17–24, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.03.003.
A. M. Abdulla Alabbasi, T. L. Thompson, M. A. Runco, L. A. Alansari, and A. E. A. Ayoub, “Gender differences in creative potential: A meta-analysis of mean differences and variability.,” Psychol. Aesthetics, Creat. Arts, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 87–100, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1037/aca0000506.
A. Abraham, “Gender and creativity: an overview of psychological and neuroscientific literature,” Brain Imaging Behav., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 609–618, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s11682-015-9410-8.
B. Kilby, “Gender and communication in children and school: aligning theory and evidence,” SN Soc. Sci., vol. 3, no. 2, p. 36, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s43545-023-00622-w.
D. T. Alamanda, A. Ahmed, D. A. Kurniady, A. Rahayu, I. Ahmad, and N. A. A. N. Hashim, “Linking Gender To Creativity: Role of Risk Taking and Support For Creativity Towards Creative Potential of Employees,” J. Intercult. Commun., pp. 1–17, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.36923/jicc.v24i1.219.
Y.-L. Ting, “Tapping into students’ digital literacy and designing negotiated learning to promote learner autonomy,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 26, pp. 25–32, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.004.
T. Kaewmanee, A. Srisenpila, and W. Worapun, “Integrating 5E inquiry-based learning and STEM education to enhance grade 5 students’ science process skills and achievement in friction,” Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 207–214, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.21833/ijaas.2024.12.023.
A. Novitasari, B. Widiasari, N. B. Haka, N. Hidayah, and A. Handoko, “The effect of Google Classroom assisted STEM approach on students’ creative thinking skills,” Assim. Indones. J. Biol. Educ., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 81–88, 2022, doi: 10.17509/aijbe.v5i2.43832.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Anita Rosiyanti, Nur Endah Susilowati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.