The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers

Esra Kızılay; Aslı Saylan Kırmızıgül; Mustafa Çevik

doi:10.17275/per.23.54.10.3

EN

The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers

Abstract

In the present study it is aimed to investigate the pre-service science and mathematics teachers’ opinions on the effect of technology-supported interdisciplinary activities on critical thinking and creativity. This study was designed as a case study, a qualitative research method. A total of 17 pre-service teachers were selected for the current study. Four questions were included in the survey to gauge pre-service teachers' opinions on the impact of technology-supported interdisciplinary integration on critical thinking and creativity. Research was undertaken to gather information from the relevant literature while formulating the questions. Due to the pandemic, the technology-supported interdisciplinary science and mathematics integration course was delivered via remote education. This research was carried out throughout the academic year 2020-2021. The data collection method was used as an online form for the participants. The online technology-supported interdisciplinary course application was completed during 25 hours of instruction. TUBITAK financed this course in the 2021/1 term under the project code 1129B372100437 as part of the 2237-A program. Content analysis was used to examine the data gathered from the open-ended question form. It was concluded that the pre-service teachers participating in the study generally had positive views about technology-supported interdisciplinary activities. Participants stated that in the student context, the activities increased students’ interest in the lesson, enabled a holistic perspective, provided solutions to real-life problems, and improved their thinking skills. The responses received from the participants indicate that these activities have a positive effect on critical thinking skills in the context of both the student and the teacher

Keywords

technology education, interdisciplinary integration, critical thinking, creativity, pre-service teachers

Supporting Institution

Tübitak

Project Number

1129B372100437

References

Adams, D., & Baker, R. (1986). Science, technology, and human values: An Interdisciplinary approach to science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 15(4), 254-258.
Alkan, C. (2005). Educational technology. (8th ed.). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
American Academy of Arts and Sciences. (2013). Arise 2: Unleashing America’s research & innovation enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Amercian Academy of Arts and Sciences. Retrieved from https://www.amacad.org/multimedia/pdfs/publications/researchpapersmonographs/arise2.pdf
Asunda, P. A., & Mativo, J. (2017). Integrated STEM: A new primer for teaching technology education. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 76(5), 14-19.
Avsec, S., & Ferk Savec, V. (2019). Creativity and critical thinking in engineering design: the role of interdisciplinary augmentation. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 30-36.
Bardak, S. & Karamustafaoglu, O. (2016a). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Eleştirel Düşünme ve Düşünmeyi Engelleyen Faktörlere İlişkin Görüşlerinin Belirlenmesi. 4. International Conference on Quality in Higher Education (ICQH2016), Sakarya-Turkey, 2016, 24-25, November, Proceeding Book, pp.: 328-334.
Bardak, S., & Karamustafaoglu, O. (2016b). Yaratıcı düşünme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi ile ilgili pedagojik alan bilgisinin tespiti [Determination of creative thinking about the development of pedagogical content knowledge skills]. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5, 227-237.
Bardak, S. & Karamustafaoglu, O. (2016c). Yaratıcılık Yönüyle Üst Bilişsel Farkındalığa Dayalı Sınıf İçi Etkinliklerinin İncelenmesi”. 4. International Conference on Quality in Higher Education (ICQH2016), Sakarya-Turkey, 2016, 24-25, November, Proceeding Book, pp.:1026-1040.
Birchinall, L. (2013). Case study of trainee teachers’ responses to the impact on engagement and motivation in learning through a model of cross-curricular context-based learning: ‘Keeping fit and healthy.’ Curriculum Journal, 24(1), 27-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2012.731014
Bolden, D. S., Harries, T. V., & Newton, D. P. (2010). Pre-service primary teachers’ conceptions of creativity in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(2), 143-157.

Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369- 387.
Budak Coskun, S. (2009). An investigation of the effect of interdisciplinary approach used at 8th grade math lessons on students' math achievement levels and critical thinking disposition inventory (Unpublished master thesis). Yıldız Technical University.
Budak Coskun, S., & Altun, S. (2012). The effect of the implementation of interdisciplinary approach in 8th grade lessons of mathematics on mathematical achievement of students. Kalem International Journal of Education and Human Sciences, 2(2), 91-122.
Cai, W. W., & Sankaran, G. (2015). Promoting critical thinking through an interdisciplinary study abroad program. Journal of International Students, 5(1), 38-49.
Canbazoglu Bilici, S., Kupeli, M. A., & Guzey, S. S. (2021). Inspired by nature: An engineering design-based biomimicry activity. Science Activities, 58(2), 77-88.
Chun, M. S., Kang, K. I., Kim, Y. H., & Kim, Y. M. (2015). Theme-based project learning: Design and application of convergent science experiments. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(11), 937-942.
Compton, A. (2007). What does creativity mean in English education? Education 3-13, 35(2), 109-116.
Courtney, T. M., (2006). Interdisciplinary instruction and student engagement: A case study of Midwestern Suburban High School. Unpublished master thesis, DeKalb: Northern Illinois University.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. California: Sage Publications.
Cuervo, L. (2018). Study of an interdisciplinary didactic model in a secondary education music class. Music Education Research, 20(4), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2018.1433148.
Cura, G., & Ercan Yalman, F. (2019). Investigating science teacher candidates’ use of interdisciplinary instructional approach. Online Science Education Journal, 4(2), 131-153.
Darbellay, F. (2014). Rethinking inter- and transdisciplinarity: Undisciplined knowledge and the emergence of a new thought style. Futures, 65, 163-174.
Darbellay, F., Moody, Z., & Lubart, T. (Eds.). (2017). Creativity, design thinking and interdisciplinarity. Springer Singapore.
Dezure, D., (2000). Interdisciplinary teaching and learning. Class Action, 2, 3.
DiCamillo, L., & Bailey, N. M. (2016). Two teacher educators go to the source: Teaching an interdisciplinary class in an urban charter high school. Social Studies, 107(6), 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2016.1214904
Eckhoff, A. (2011). Creativity in the early childhood classroom: Perspectives of preservice teachers. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 32, 240-255.
Erdogan, İ., & Ciftci A. (2017). Investigating the views of pre-service science teachers on STEM education practices. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 12(5), 1055-1065.
Gardiner, P. (2020). Learning to think together: Creativity, interdisciplinary collaboration and epistemic control. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100749.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Ectj, 30(4), 233-252.
Fartushenko, L. (2011). An interdisciplinary approach to promote creativity. Retrieved from https://www.designedasia.com/2011/final/AN%20INTERDISCIPLINARY%20APPROACH%20.pdf
Fillis, I., & Rentschler, R. (2010). The role of creativity in entrepreneurship. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 18(1), 49-81.
Gardnier, P. (2020). Learning to think together: Creativity, collaboration and epistemic control. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 1-10.
Giraldo-Garcia, R., Roy, M., & Alotebi, H. (2015). The interplay of technology and critical thinking skills in the 21st century blended classroom. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education Technology, 2(3), 32-35.
Greef, L. d., Post, G., Vink, C., & Wenting, L. (2017). Designing interdisciplinary education: A practical handbook for university teachers. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048535552
Gürsan, S., Tapan-Broutin, M. S., & İpek, J. (2021). Opinions of preservice teachers on technology-assisted teaching practices designed to develop critical thinking skills. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 34(2), 703-744.
Haladyna, T. M. (1997). Writing test items to evaluate higher order thinking. Allyn & Bacon.
Hamalaosmanoğlu, M. (2022). Eğitimde disiplinlerarası yaklaşım [Interdisciplinary approach in education]. In Disiplinler arası fen öğretimi [interdisciplinary science teaching] (Ed: Kızılay, E & Çevik, M.) Eğiten Yayınevi.
Haring, D., & Kelner, T. (2015). Why we got serious about interdisciplinary teaching. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 68-72.
Heong, Y. M, Othman, W. B., Yunos, J. B. M., Kiong, T. T., Hassan, R. B. & Mohamad, M. M. B. (2011). The level of Marzano Higher Order Thinking Skills among technical education students. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(2), 121-125.
Hubert, J. (2021). Interdisciplinary learning and the effects on students (Master thesis). Northwestern College, Iowa.
Işık, K. D. (2007). The effects of cooperative learning method supported by multiple intelligence theory on elementary school fourth grade students’ academic achievement and retention toward mathematics course. (Unpublished master thesis). Cukurova University, Adana.
Jones, C. (2010). Interdisciplinary Approach - Advantages, Disadvantages, and the Future Benefits of Interdisciplinary Studies, ESSAI: 7, 76-81.
Kanematsu, H., & Barry, D. M. (2016). Creativity and its importance for education. In STEM and ICT Education in Intelligent Environments (pp. 3-7). Springer, Cham.
Karakuş, M. ve Aslan, S. (2016). Examination of the current situation regarding interdisciplinary teaching in primary schools. Elementary Education Online, 15(4), 1325-1344.
Kim, M.K., Roh, I.S. & Cho, M.K. (2016). Creativity of gifted students in an integrated math science instruction. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, 38-48.
Lyall, C., Bruce, A., Tait, J., & Meagher, L. (2011). Departure point: Our approach to interdisciplinarity. In C. Lyall, A. Bruce, J. Tait, & L. Meagher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary research journeys: Practical strategies for capturing creativity (pp. 7-24). Bloomsbury Academic.
Mialaret, G. (2010). Eğitim bilimlerinin gelişimi [Development of educational sciences] (H. Izgar & M. Gürsel, Translators) Ankara: Publishing.
Michelsen, C. (2015). Mathematical modeling is also physics-Interdisciplinary teaching between mathematics and physics in Danish upper secondary education. Physics Education, 50(4), 489-494.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2011). MoNE 21st century student profile. Ankara, Milli Egitim Basimevi.
MoNE (2015). Düşünme eğitimi dersi öğretim program [Thinking education course curriculum]. From retrived https://www.memurlar.net/common/news/documents/534274/31021142_dnmeeitimitaslak.pdf
Montana-Hoyos, C., & Lemiatre, F. (2011). Systems thinking, disciplinarity and critical thinking in relation to creativity within contemporary arts and design Education. Studies in Learning, Evaluation Innovation and Development, 8(2), 12–25.
Morrison, J.S. (2006). Attributes of STEM education, the students, the academy, the classroom. TIES STEM Education Monograph Series.
National Research Council. 2013. The Mathematical Sciences in 2025. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Nikitina, S. (2005). Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 389-425. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3568096.
NSTA, (2006). Professional Development Using an Interdisciplinary Learning Circle. From retrived https://www.nsta.org/professional-development-using-interdisciplinary-learning-circle-linking-pedagogical-theory.
Özaydınlı, B. & Kılıç, C. (2019). Secondary school teachers’ opinions and course practices on interdisciplinary teaching approach. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 52(2), 301-330 . DOI: 10.30964/auebfd.446969
Patton M, Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st Century Learning. Retrieved from http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_Brief.pdf.
Reilly, E. T. (2010). The four C’s: Executives say the 21st century requires more skilled workers. MWorld, 9(2), 47.
Repko, A. F., Szostak, R., & Buchberger, M. P. (2016). Introduction to interdisciplinary studies (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Saldana, J. (2019). Nitel araştırmacılar için kodlama el kitabı [Coding handbook for qualitative researchers] (A. Tüfekçi Akcan and S. N. Şad, Translate. Ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Savard, A. & Samson, G. (2014). Questioning elementary students in an interdisciplinary lesson in science and mathematics. In M. J. Mohr-Schroeder & S. S. Harkness (Eds), Proceedings of the 113th Annual Convention of the School Science and Mathematics Association (Vol. 1). Jacksonville: FL: SSMA
Scanlon E, Anastopoulou S, Conole G., & Twiner A (2019) Interdisciplinary Working Methods: Reflections Based on Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL). Front. Educ. 4, 134.
Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Critical thinking. In The 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform, CA (Vol. 7, No. 9).
Song, A. A. (2017). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of interdisciplinary pedagogy: the case of elementary mathematics–science integrated lessons. ZDM Mathematics Education, 49, 237–248.
Suraco, T.L. (2006). An interdisciplinary approach in the art education curriculum. (Master thesis, Georgia State University, Atlanta).
Suligoj, V., Zavbi, R., Avsec, S. (2020). Interdisciplinary Critical and Design Thinking. International Journal of Engineering Education. 36(1), 84-95.
Sullivan, J.M. (2000). A study of the effect of an interdisciplinary study improvement program on the academic achievement and classroom behavior among tenth grade students. (Doctoral thesis, Universty of Massachusetts, Lowell).
Tyler-Wood, T., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2010). Instruments for assessing interest in STEM content and careers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2), 345-368.
Šuligoj, V., Žavb, R., & Avsec, S. (2020). Interdisciplinary Critical and Design Thinking. International Journal of Engineering Education, 36(1)(A), 84–95.
Vasquez, J. A., Comer, M. & Sneider, C. (2013). STEM Lesson Essentials, Grades 3-8: Integrating Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (1st ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
World Economic Forum. (2020, October). The future of jobs report 2020. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020/in-full.
Yarimca, Ö. (2011). A case study in interdisciplinary approach. Akademik Bakış Dergisi [Journal of Academic View], 25, 1-22.
Ye, P., & Xu, X. (2023). A case study of interdisciplinary thematic learning curriculum to cultivate “4C skills”. Frontiers in Psychology, 14.
You, H. S. (2017). Why teach science with an interdisciplinary approach: History, trends, and conceptual frameworks. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 66-77.
Zhang, C. (2017, March). Interdisciplinary teaching and research: Challenges and solutions. In 2017 7th International Conference on Education, Management, Computer and Society (EMCS 2017) (pp. 160-163). Atlantis Press.Zimmerman, S. D., Lester Short, G. F., Hendrix, E. M., & Timson, B. F. (2011). Impact of interdisciplinary learning on critical thinking using case study method in allied health care graduate students. Journal of Allied Health, 40(1), 15-18.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Studies on Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Esra Kızılay ^*
0000-0001-8329-0186
Türkiye

Aslı Saylan Kırmızıgül
0000-0001-5678-8050
Türkiye

Mustafa Çevik
0000-0001-5064-6983
Türkiye

Early Pub Date

May 14, 2023

Publication Date

May 1, 2023

Submission Date

February 22, 2023

Acceptance Date

April 13, 2023

Published in Issue

Year 2023 Volume: 10 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.54.10.3

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA82PH96PD

APA

Kızılay, E., Saylan Kırmızıgül, A., & Çevik, M. (2023). The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers. Participatory Educational Research, 10(3), 247-265. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.54.10.3

AMA

1.Kızılay E, Saylan Kırmızıgül A, Çevik M. The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers. PER. 2023;10(3):247-265. doi:10.17275/per.23.54.10.3

Chicago

Kızılay, Esra, Aslı Saylan Kırmızıgül, and Mustafa Çevik. 2023. “The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers”. Participatory Educational Research 10 (3): 247-65. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.54.10.3.

EndNote

Kızılay E, Saylan Kırmızıgül A, Çevik M (May 1, 2023) The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers. Participatory Educational Research 10 3 247–265.

IEEE

[1]E. Kızılay, A. Saylan Kırmızıgül, and M. Çevik, “The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers”, PER, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 247–265, May 2023, doi: 10.17275/per.23.54.10.3.

ISNAD

Kızılay, Esra - Saylan Kırmızıgül, Aslı - Çevik, Mustafa. “The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers”. Participatory Educational Research 10/3 (May 1, 2023): 247-265. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.54.10.3.

JAMA

1.Kızılay E, Saylan Kırmızıgül A, Çevik M. The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers. PER. 2023;10:247–265.

MLA

Kızılay, Esra, et al. “The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers”. Participatory Educational Research, vol. 10, no. 3, May 2023, pp. 247-65, doi:10.17275/per.23.54.10.3.

Vancouver

1.Esra Kızılay, Aslı Saylan Kırmızıgül, Mustafa Çevik. The Impact of Technology-Supported Interdisciplinary Integration on Critical Thinking and Creativity: The Perspective of Pre-Service Teachers. PER. 2023 May 1;10(3):247-65. doi:10.17275/per.23.54.10.3