|M.Sc Student||Weisman Anat|
|Subject||Location-Based Learninhg as a Mean for Expressing|
Creativity among Preservice Science Teachers
|Department||Department of Education in Science and Technology||Supervisor||Professor Miriam Barak|
|Full Thesis text|
Facilitating creativity in schools has been set as one of the primary goals of education in the 21st century. Nevertheless, developing and integrating learning assignments that facilitate creativity is very complicated and many teachers feel that school curricula do not sufficiently encourage it. There are several support mechanisms that can facilitate creative learning, one of which is the use of advanced technologies. Today, web-based technologies play a crucial role in learners’ lives and can act as a platform to foster creative learning. However, technologies are far from being fully exploited inside and out of the classroom. For example, the potential of location-based social technologies for creative learning is still untapped .
In light of the aforesaid, the goal of this study was to examine whether and how the creation of location-based interactive learning objects (LILO) facilitates creativity. The study was conducted among preservice STEM teachers (N = 95), divided into two groups: a) Defined subject (N = 38) - participants who received a defined scientific topic (e.g. water or energy), b) Free subject (N = 57) - participants who were free to choose any scientific topic from the school science curriculum. The research participants were asked to construct a LILO - a modular digital resource consisting of two main sections: ‘Info’ - relevant information about the scientific subject and its connection to a relevant context and location via a virtual map; and DO - an interactive learning activity related to the scientific subject and the location in which it occurs. Data analysis compared the contents of Info and Do sections within and between research groups. The analysis focused on thinking levels according to the revised Bloom's taxonomy and Torrance Test of Creative Thinking.
Results showed that the scientific content constructed by the ‘Free subject’ participants was characterized by higher-order thinking levels compared to the ‘Defined subject’ group. In addition, the ‘Do’ activities were characterized by higher-order thinking levels compared to the content presented in the ‘Info’ section. We did not find a significant difference in creativity levels between the research groups. However, we did find that the ‘Do’ activities were characterized by a higher level of creativity than the ‘Info’ section.