3D yazıcı destekli proje uygulamalarının öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel yaratıcılık düzeyleri ile materyal geliştirmeye yönelik öz-yeterlik inançları üzerindeki etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmada fen öğretimi ve laboratuvar uygulamaları 2 dersinde 3D yazıcı destekli proje uygulamalarının fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel yaratıcılık düzeyleri ile materyal geliştirme öz-yeterlik inanç düzeyleri üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Bu bağlamda çalışma, üçüncü sınıf fen öğretimi ve laboratuvar uygulamaları 2 dersinde öğrenim gören katılımcılar ile deney öncesi modellerden tek grup ön test son test desen kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir (n=14). Uygulama bir dönem ve on dört hafta boyunca sürdürülmüştür. Çalışmada Hu ve Adey (2002) tarafından geliştirilen bilimsel yaratıcılık ölçeği kullanılmış ve materyal geliştirmeye yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç ölçeği araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilmiştir. Söz konusu ölçme araçları çalışma grubuna ön test ve son test olarak uygulanmıştır. Araştırmadan elde edilen sonuçlar doğrultusunda öğretmen adaylarının, bilimsel yaratıcılık (z=2.63; p=0.08<.05) ve materyal geliştirmeye yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç ölçeğinden (z=3.24; p=.001<.05) almış oldukları son test puanlarının ön teste göre anlamlı düzeyde farklılaştığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca bilimsel yaratıcılık ölçeğinden alınan puanlar ölçeğin alt boyutlarına göre değerlendirildiğinde öğretmen adaylarının orijinallik (z=2,26; p=.024<.05), esneklik (z=2,15; p=.032<.05) ve akıcılık (z=2,81; p=.005<.05) alt boyutlarında son test puanlarının ön test puanlarına göre anlamlı düzeyde arttığı, bununla birlikte işlevsellik alt boyutuna yönelik ön test son test puanları arasında anlamlı bir farklılık olmadığı belirlenmiştir (z=1,31; p=.190>.05).

Anahtar Kelimeler

• 3D yazıcı
• proje
• bilimsel yaratıcılık ve materyal geliştirmeye yönelik öz yeterlilik

The effect of 3D printer-supported project applications on the scientific creativity levels and material development self-efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers

Öz

The current study the effect of 3D printer-supported project applications in the course of Science Teaching and Laboratory Practices 2 on the scientific creativity levels and material development self-efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers were investigated. The study used a one-group pre-test/post-test design from pre-experimental models (n=14). The implementation lasted for one semester, spanning fourteen weeks. The scientific creativity scale developed by Hu and Adey (2002) and a self-efficacy belief scale for material development developed by the researchers were utilized in the study. These measurement instruments were administered to the study group as pre-tests and post-tests. According to the results obtained from the research, it was observed that the post-test scores of pre-service teachers in scientific creativity (z=2.63; p=0.08<.05) and self-efficacy belief scale for material development (z=3.24; p=.001<.05) were significantly different from the pre-test scores. When the scores from the scientific creativity scale were evaluated according to its sub-dimensions, it was determined that the post-test scores of science teachers significantly increased compared to the pre-test scores in the sub-dimensions of originality (z=2.26; p=.024<.05), flexibility (z=2.15; p=.032<.05), and fluency (z=2.81; p=.005<.05), while there was no significant difference between pre-test and post-test scores for the functionality sub-dimension (z=1.31; p=.190>.05).

Anahtar Kelimeler

• 3D printer
• scientific creativity
• self-efficacy belief of material development

Kaynakça

1. Arslan A., & Edoğan, İ. (2021). Use of 3D printers for teacher training and sample activities International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(3), 343-360. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.346.22
2. Asal Özkan, R., & Sarıkaya, R. (2023). Mühendislik tasarım temelli fen etkinliklerinin dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılıklarına etkisi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (55), 154-167. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1208412
3. Aslan A., Durukan Ü. G., & Batman, D. (2021). Fizik, kimya ve biyoloji öğretmenlerinin 3-boyutlu katı model tasarım ve kullanım ihtiyaçlarına genel bir bakış. International Journal of 3D Printing Technologies and Digital Industry, 5(3), 515-534. https://doi.org/10.46519/ij3dptdi.991955
4. Assante, D., Cennamo, G. M., & Placidi, L. (2020, Nisan). 3D Printing in education: an European perspective. A. Cardoso, G. R. Alves, & T. Restivo (Editörler), Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference içinde (1133-1138. ss.). Piscataway, New Jersey, https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON45650.2020
5. Avinal M., & Aydın, A. (2022). The effects of activities designed with three-dimensional printing technology on science education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(3), 887-910. http://doi:10.36681/tused.2022.155
6. Bakaç, E., & Özen, R. (2017). Öğretmen adaylarının materyal tasarımı öz-yeterlik inanç düzeylerinin teknolojik pedagojik alan yeterlikleri bağlamında incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(2), 613-632. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1486973
7. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
8. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs

9. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, Freeman.
10. Bediroğlu, R. (2021). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının dijital öğretim materyali geliştirme öz- yeterlikleri [Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi]. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi
11. Bi, H., Mi, S., Lu, S., & Hu, X. (2020). Meta-analysis of interventions and their effectiveness in students’ scientific creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity 38(100750), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100750
12. Bicer, A., Nite, S. B., Capraro, R. M., Barroso, L. R., Capraro, M. M., & Lee, Y. (2017, Ekim). Moving from STEM to STEAM: the effects of informal STEM learning on students' creativity and problem-solving skills with 3D printing. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Indianapolis, United States. https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2017.8190545
13. Birişçi, S., Kul, Ü., Aksu, Z., Akaslan, D. & Çelik, S. (2018). Web 2.0 hızlı içerik geliştirme öz-yeterlik inancı belirlemeye yönelik ölçek (W2ÖYİÖ) geliştirme çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 8(1), 187-208. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.335164
14. Blonder, R., Jonatan, M., Bar-Dov, Z., Benny, N., Rap, S., & Sakhnini, S. (2013). Can you tube it? Providing chemistry teachers with technological tools and enhanching their self-efficacy beliefs. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 269-285. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255772920
15. Budinski, N., Lavicza, Z. & Houghton, T. (2022). Opportunities for 3D printing in hybrid education. Open Education Studies, 4(1), 339-344. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0175
16. Bursal, M., & Yigit, N. (2012). Pre-service science and technology teachers' efficacy beliefs about information and communication technologies (ict) usage and material design. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(2), 1084-1088. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ981831.pdf
17. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Pegem Akademi
18. Chen, J., & Cheng, L. (2021). The influence of 3D printing on the education of primary and secondary school students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1976(1), 012072. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/ 1976/1/012072
19. Chin, M. K., & Siew, N. M. (2015). The development and validation of a figural scientific creativity test for preschool pupils. Creative Education, 6(12), 1391-1402. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.612139
20. Chun, H. (2021). A study on the impact of 3D printing and artificial intelligence on education and learning process. Scientific Programming, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2247346
21. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Reserach methods in education. New York, NY, USA:Routledge
22. Cremin, T., & Chappell, K. (2021). Creative pedagogies: A systemic review. Research Papers in Education, 36(3), 299-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1677757
23. Çaydere, O., & Akgün, N. (2023). Eğitimde yenilikçi teknolojilerin kullanımı ve çağdaş içerik tasarlama. Stratejik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(2), 439-451. https://doi.org/10.30692/sisad.1254245
24. Çuhadar, C., & Yücel, M. (2010). Yabancı dil öğretmeni adaylarının bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin öğretim amaçlı kullanımına yönelik özyeterlik algıları. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(27), 199-210. http://pauegitimdergi.pau.edu.tr/Makaleler/288588672_ss.199-210.pdf
25. Daud, A., M., Omar, J., Turiman, P., & Osman, K. (2012). Creativity in science education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 467-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.302
26. Deniş Çeliker, H. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji dersi “güneş sistemi ve ötesi: uzay bilmecesi” ünitesinde proje tabanlı öğrenme uygulamalarının öğrenci başarılarına, yaratıcı düşünmelerine, fen ve teknolojiye yönelik tutumlarına etkisi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi.
27. Deniş, H., & Balım, A. G. (2012). Bilimsel yaratıcılık ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama süreci ve değerlendirme ölçütleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(2), 1-21. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/usaksosbil/issue/21646/232705
28. Diakidoy, I. A. N., & Constantinou, C. P. (2001). Creativity in physics: Response fluency and task specificity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3-4), 401-410. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_17
29. Eroğlu, S., & Bektaş, O. (2022). The effect of 5E-based STEM education on academic achievement, scientific creativity, and views on the nature of science. Learning and Individual Differences, 98, 102781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102181
30. Flores, J. E. (2019). LNU Pre-service Secondary Science Teachers’ Scientific Literacy and Science Teaching Self-Efficacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1254. https://doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1254/1/012043
31. Guenther, C., Hayes, M., Davis, A., & Stern, M. (2021). Building confidence: Engaging students through 3D printing in biology courses. Bioscene: Journal of College Biology Teaching, 47(1), 40-58. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1304735.pdf
32. Ha, H., & Ha, M. (2022). Exploring Korean scientists’ perceptions of scientific creativity and education for scientific creativity. International Journal of Science Education, 44(11), 1767-1791. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2095680
33. Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Fokialis, P., & Kabouropoulou, M. (2012). Thinking about creativity in science education. Creative Education, 3(5), 603-611. https://doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.35089.
34. Henson, R. K. (2001). The effects of participation in teacher research on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 819-836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00033-6
35. Hoffmann, J. D., Ivcevic, Z., & Maliakkal, N. (2021). Emotions, creativity, and the arts: Evaluating a course for children. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 39(2), 123-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237420907
36. Hsiao, H-S., Chen, J-C., Lin, C-Y., Zhuo, P-W., & Lin, K-Y. (2018). Using 3D printing technology with experiential learning strategies to improve preengineering students’ comprehension of abstract scientific concepts and hands-on ability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(2), 178-187. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12319
37. Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
38. 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
39. Huang, P. S., Peng, S. L., Chen, H. C., Tseng, L. C., & Hsu, L. C. (2017). The relative influences of domain knowledge and domain-general divergent thinking on scientific creativity and mathematical creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 25, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.001
40. Huleihil, M. (2017). 3D printing technology as innovative tool for math and geometry teaching applications. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 164(1), 012023. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/164/1/012023
41. Karaduman, H. (2018). Soyuttan somuta, sanaldan gerçeğe: öğretmen adaylarının bakış açısıyla üç boyutlu yazıcılar. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 273-303. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-358818
42. Karagöz. B. & Şahin Çakır, Ç. (2020). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının 3 boyutlu yazılar hakkında görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(2), 303-317. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kebd/issue/67544/1051092#article_cite
43. Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using lisrel for structural equation modeling: a researcher’s guide, Sage Publications.
44. Kim, N., Im, S., & Slater, S. F. (2013). Impact of knowledge type and strategic orientation on new product creativity and advantage in high‐technology firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 136-153. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00992.x
45. Kiras, B., & Bezir Akçay, B. (2016). Yedinci sınıf vücudumuzda sistemler ünitesinin öğretiminde aktif öğrenme yöntemi uygulamalarının öğrencilerin bilimsel yaratıcılığına etkisi. International Journal of Active Learning, 1(2), 1-20.
46. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principal and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.
47. Korkmaz, Ö., Arıkaya, C., & Altıntaş, Y. (2019). Öğretmenlerin dijital öğretim materyali geliştirme öz-yeterlik ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi çalışması. Turkish Journal of Primary Education, 4(2), 40-56. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/880832
48. Kurbanoğlu, S. S. (2004). Öz yeterlik inancı ve bilgi profesyonelleri için önemi. Bilgi Dünyası, 5(2), 137-152. https://doi.org/10.15612/BD.2004.484
49. Kwon, H. (2017). Effects of 3D printing and design software on students overall performance. Journal of STEM Education, 18(4), 37-42. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1163773
50. LeBow, V., Bernhardt-Barry, M. L., & Datta, J. (2018). Improving spatial visualization abilities using 3D printed blocks. Proceedings of 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Konferansında. Salt Lake City, UT. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--30634
51. Lee, D., & Kwon, H. (2023). Meta analysis on effects of using 3D printing in South Korea K-12 classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 11733-11758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11644-5
52. Lee, Y. C., & Kim, H. P. (2015). The effects of an invention education program using 3D design and 3D printers on elementary school students' creativity. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 21(3), 39-54. https://doi.org/10.17055/jpaer.2015.21.3.39
53. Levitt, K. E. (2002). An analysis of elementary teachers' beliefs regarding the teaching and learning of science. Science Education, 86(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1042
54. Lim, C., Kim, J., Hong, M., Seo, S., Lee, C., Yoo, S., ..., & Bak, J. (2016). A study on the application and effects of smart support system for creativity in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education Research, 19(2), 34-44. https://doi.org/10.18108/jeer.2016.19.2.34
55. Lin, K-Y., Lu, S-C., Hsiao, H-H., Kao, C-P., & Williams, P. J. (2021). Developing student imagination and career interest through a STEM project using 3D printing with repetitive modeling. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5), 2884- 2898. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1913607
56. 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
57. McGregor, D., & Frodsham, S. (2019). Epistemic insights: Contemplating tensions between policy influences and creativity in school science. British Educational Research Journal, 45(4), 770-790. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3525
58. Manochehri, N., & Sharif, K. (2010). A Model-Based Investigation of Learner Attitude towards Recently Introduced Classroom Technology. J. Inf. Technol. Educ., 9, 31-52. https://doi.org/10.28945/1107.
59. Novak, E., & Wisdom, S. (2018). Effects of 3D printing project-based learning on preservice elementary teachers' science attitudes, science content knowledge, and anxiety about teaching science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(2), 412-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9733-5
60. Novak, E., & Wisdom, S. (2020). Using 3D printing in science for elementary teachers. J. J. Mintzes, E. ve M. Walter (Ed.), Active Learning in College Science içinde (s. 729-739). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-030-33600-4_45
61. Ocak, G., & Karakuş, G. (2018). Öğretmen adaylarının dijital okuryazarlık öz-yeterliliği ölçek geliştirme çalışması. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 26(5), 1427-1436. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1931
62. OECD (2014). PISA 2012 results: creative problem solving. Students' skills in tackling real-life problems. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264208070-en.
63. Pearson, H. A., & Dubé, A. K. (2021). 3D printing as an educational technology: Theoretical perspectives, learning outcomes, and recommendations for practice. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 3037-3064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10733-7
64. Peters-Burton, E. E., & Martin-Hansen, L. M. (2016). Implications of gifted student selection techniques for scientific creativity. In Interplay of Creativity and Giftedness in Science (pp. 45-69). Brill.
65. Say, S., & Yıldırım, F. S. (2020). Investigation of pre-service teachers' web 2.0 rapid content development self-efficacy belief levels and their views on web 2.0 tools. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(2), 345-354. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.2.345
66. Scalfani, F. V., & Vaid, T. P. (2014). 3D printed molecules and extended solid models for teaching symmetry and point groups. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 1174-1180. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed400887t
67. Schunk, D.H., & Zimmerman, B.J. (2003). Self-regulation and learning. In Reynolds, W.M.& Miller, G.E. (Ed.), Handbook of psychology Volume 7 Educational Psychology içinde (s. 59-78). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
68. Shi, B., Cao, X., Chen, Q., Zhuang, K., & Qiu, J. (2017). Different brain structures associated with artistic and scientific creativity: a voxel-based morphometry study. Scientific reports, 7(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep42911
69. Song, J. (2018). Learning to teach 3D printing in schools: how do teachers in Korea prepare to integrate 3D printing technology into classrooms?, Educational Media International, 55(3), 183-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1512448
70. Sönmez, V. (2005). Bilimsel araştırmalarda yapılan yanlışlıklar. Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18, 150-170. https://openurl.ebsco.com/EPDB%3Agcd%3A6%3A1942/detailv2?sid=ebsco%3Aplink%3Ascholar&id=ebsco%3Agcd%3A17085923&crl=f
71. Sun, M., Wang, M., & Wegerif, R. (2020). Effects of divergent thinking training on students’ scientific creativity: The impact of individual creative potential and domain knowledge. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100682
72. Sypros, P., Georgios, S., Konstantinos, K. T., & Konstantinos, G. (2021). The effect of 3D printing technology on primary school students’ content knowledge, anxiety and interest toward science. International Journal of Educational Innovation, 3(1), 38-50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349810239
73. Şahin Pekmez, E., Aktamış, H., & Can, B. (2010). Fen laboratuarı dersinin öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel süreç becerileri ve bilimsel yaratıcılıklarına etkisi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 93-112. http://hdl.handle.net/11616/4352
74. Şimşek, C. L., Demirhan, E., & Köklükaya, A. N. (2018). Projeye dayalı öğrenmenin öğretmen adaylarının eleştirel düşünme eğilimleri, problem çözme becerileri ve bilimsel yaratıcılıklarına etkisi. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 6(2), 197-212. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2581372
75. Tran, N-H., Huang, C-F., Hsiao, K-H., Lin, K-L., & Hung, J-F. (2021). Investigation on the influences of steam-based curriculum on scientific creativity of elementary school students. Frontiers in Education. 6(694516), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.694516
76. Trust, T., & Maloy, R. W. (2017). Why 3D print? The 21st-century skills students develop while engaging in 3D printing projects. Computers in the Schools, 34(4), 253-266, https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2017.1384684
77. Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 89-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.09.002
78. Uzunöz, A., Aktepe, V., & Gündüz. M. (2017). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı dersinin mesleki açıdan kazandırdıklarına ilişkin öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri: nitel bir çalışma. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(3), 317-339. https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.5c3s14m
79. Üçgül, M., & Altıok, S. (2023). The perceptions of prospective ICT teachers towards the integration of 3D printing into education and their views on the 3D modeling and printing cours. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 10151-10181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11593-z
80. Ünsal, Y. (2011). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı derslerinde üretilen üç boyutlu nesnelerin değerlendirilmesinde kullanılabilecek bir ölçek önerisi. 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications (ss.817-822). Antalya.
81. Üredi I., & Üredi, L. (2006). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının cinsiyetlerine, bulundukları sınıflara ve başarı düzeylerine göre fen öğretimine ilişkin öz yeterlik inançlarının karşılaştırılması. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 98110. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/yayin/detay/75097/
82. Vries, H. B., & Lubart, T. I. (2017). Scientific creativity: divergent and convergent thinking and the impact of culture. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(2), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.184
83. Walia, C. (2019). A dynamic definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 237-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641787
84. Willerson, A., & Mullet, D. R. (2017). Creativity research in education from 2005-2015: a systematic review and synthesis. The International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 27(2), 5-22.https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A533556208/AONE?u=anon~a6f11cae&sid=googleScholar&xid=1b57ce43
85. Wilson, M., Ritzhaupt, A., & Cheng, L. (2020). The impact of teacher education courses for technology integration on pre-service teacher knowledge: A meta-analysis study. Comput. Educ., 156, 103941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103941.
86. World Economic Forum. (2016). Future of jobs report. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf
87. Yang, K., Lee, L., Hong, Z., & Lin, H. (2016). Investigation of effective strategies for developing creative science thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 38(13), 2133-2151. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1230685