Regionalization and Harmonization in TVET – Abdullah et al.

(Eds)
© 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-05419-6

Upgrading student creativity in computing subjects by synectics

application

S.C. Wibawa, R. Harimurti & B. Sujatmiko

Informatics Engineering, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia

F.I. Sari
Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia

S. Dwiyanti
Cosmetology Education, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia

ABSTRACT: Creativity is a process that produces something new. The student needs to produce a port-
folio of work creativity by integrating their enjoyment of the lecture subject, which compels the student to
practice the computer. The synectics learning model leads to learning that can develop the creativity of
students. Synectics learning management consists of a six-phase study: (1) a phase of real conditions at
the time, (2) a phase of direct analogy, (3) a stage of direct analogy, (4) a stage of compressed conflict, (5)
direct analogy to the stage, (6) stage trials of the original task. Classroom action research deals with
several stages that are interrelated and continuous, namely: (1) planning, (2) the implementation (of act-
ing), (3) observation (observing), and (4) reflection (reflecting), carried out in two cycles. In our study, the
average data yield of Cycle 1 was 77.08%, which included good progress to 79.16% in Cycle 2. Synectics
learning can enrich the creativity of students. The average percentage of a cycle starts at around 67.9% in
Cycle 1 and increases to 70.6% in Cycle 2. In Cycle 1, practice photography techniques scored 78.1%, and
the technique of pre-wedding photography with the concept of beauty increased to 89.6% in Cycle
2. The percentage of completeness of cognitive learning outcomes increased from Cycle 1 to Cycle 2. In
cycle one, the completeness is 82.45% while in cycle 2 it is 88.3%. In terms of classroom action research, it can
be concluded that synectics learning can enhance student creativity and improve a student’s learning
outcomes (both cognitive and psychomotor).

1 INTRODUCTION referred to by Gordon (1961) as an ‘excursion’, is a

Creativity is the ability to produce original work
and ideas. Creativity can be defined as the ability
to produce original ideas and new items. It also
includes the combining of existing work, objects,
and ideas in different ways for new purposes (Barry
& Kanematsu, 2006). The creative process is the
emergence of a new product in action which grew
out of the uniqueness of the individual, from expe-
rience that emphasizes the new product, and the
interaction of individuals with their environment
or culture (Johnson & Johnson, 2002).
A model of the teaching and learning process
characterized by an increase in critical and creative
thinking skills and generated through education
or training, proves to be conducive and effective
to improve both creative and critical thinking
of students. Good teaching traditionally makes
ingenious use of analogies and metaphors to help
students visualize content. A synectics session,
group problem-solving activity wherein a person is
stimulated to think creatively under a loosely struc-
tured system. The process, in brief, begins with a
problem introduced by a leader who conducts an
‘excursion’ of the group through a series of steps
which attempt to determine a solution to the prob-
lem. This procedure deliberately stimulates creative
thinking rather than leaving it to chance (Gordon,
1961).
The synectics approach relies on bringing
the three keys of Climate, Thinking and Action
together (see Figure 1). Foremost is a supportive
climate, which is made up of the behaviors we
use to work with others, to give and receive ideas
and to build the trust environment for speculative
ideas to be offered. Thinking requires pushing out
our idea boundaries using the spectrum of ‘Think-
ing and Developmental Thinking’, which takes
promising but speculative ideas, and builds feasibil-
ity into them. Synectics’ emphasis on developmental

1
Downloaded by [TVET UPI] at 00:02 27 September 2017
Figure 1. Synectics process: climate, thinking and action (adapted by Nolan & Williams, 2010).
thinking is a key differentiating feature compared
to brainstorming and other creative problem-
solving techniques. Finally, there is a set of action
steps which move the process along with an empha-
sis on creative problem-solving to get to actionable
execution.
Unfortunately, sometimes the ideas are not
interesting. It takes a learning model to generate a
portfolio of creative works of students to combine
their enjoyment with the lecture material, so that
they practice applied computer task subjects with
pleasure and attempt to generate good work.
It can be concluded that a characteristic of the
learning acquired under the synectics teaching
model is student creativity.
As one learning model, synectics has several
advantages, such as, 1) increasing the ability to live
in an atmosphere which appreciates differences,
2) to be able to stimulate creative thinking abili-
ties, 3) to be able to activate both hemispheres, and
4) to be able to create new ideas. The basis of the
synectics model is to enrich the creativity of learn-
ing outcomes.
2 METHOD
2.1 Procedures
Data was obtained from the observation of 32 stu-
dents studying the bachelor degree Educational
Makeup in 2013. A synectics strategy was applied
in this study. The first strategy is that teachers cre-
ate something new. The experiment is conducted in
two cycles. The actions in the procedure for Cycle
1 are planning, implementing action, observation
2
and evaluation, and reflection within each Cycle 1
as follows:
1. Planning—this step is done through an obser-
vation sheet discussing all the learning activities
to carry out.
2. Phase action and observation—implementation
of teaching and learning activities carried out by
researchers who created the teaching plan (RPP).
At this stage the application is similar to learning
synectics. Observations were carried out simul-
taneously with the implementation of teaching
and learning activities. In this case, the observer
used guidelines to fill out the observation sheet
in accordance with established practice.
3. Phase reflection—based on observation of the
learning process. Students’ learning outcomes
are the necessary information that relates the
advantages and disadvantages for the imple-
mentation of learning in one week.
2.2 Data collection technique
This study uses data collection methods as follows:
1. Observation method—the student uses obser-
vation to measure creativity and learning out-
comes of the students on the computer subject.
2. Achievement test—the test carried out after
the teaching and learning activities to deter-
mine student mastery and understanding of
the material, and the extent of creative think-
ing of students after receiving a referral from a
teacher/lecturer as to the purpose of the synec-
tics learning model.
3. Rating for work—rating for psychomotor
assessment work. It performs students’ learning
 Figure 2. The cycle of classroom action (source: Kemmis & McTaggart, 1982).
outcomes in the forms of their creativity and
class participation. Assessment is carried out by
observing the students in expressing the results
of their creative thinking, in order to improve
the quality of the photos that are expected
by doing something different like laboratory
processing or outdoor shooting.
Downloaded by [TVET UPI] at 00:02 27 September 2017
2.3 Data analysis technique
This study uses data analysis techniques as follows:
1. Learning observation data analysis—teachers
manage data analysis of lecturers/the classroom
on the application of this learning model. Syn-
ectics are analyzed by calculating the average
category of learning undertaken.
2. Analysis observation on student creativity—
data analysis of student creativity is measured
by using a Likert scale and percentages. Formu-
las and tables combine to make the analysis of
observational data of learning.
3. Test data analysis of student results—at this
stage, analysis of the achievement test aims to
identify students’ learning outcomes in terms of
completeness of student learning. The analysis
is performed by calculating the evaluation value
and converting into a percentage.
4. Analysis of student work—the analysis of the
performance of students or lab aims to find out
the results of the evaluation of creative thinking
that have been previously theorized in groups.
The analysis is performed by calculating the
value of the performance which is then modi-
fied in a percentage calculation.
2.4 Indicators of success
The measure of the success of this class action
research process is as follows:
1. Student creativity—indication of success is if
80% or more of the students were categorized
with a creative performance score above 65%,
and also whether the students have increased
their creativity from Cycle 1 to Cycle 2, as meas-
ured by the change in the average score of the
3
students from the observation sheets in terms of
creative attitude and creative thinking.
2. Learning outcomes—student results will be
measured by tests. Tests will be performed on
the final results of each action. There is an
indication of success if 85% or more of the stu-
dents are categorized by an evaluation value of
78 or more in the first and second cycles, when
referring to the Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan
(SMK) secondary school.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The data used in this study are an assessment of
the creativity of the students, and the results
obtained by the students. Based on the actions
that took place in Cycle 1, observations of man-
agement learning, creativity of students and
student results were obtained. KKM (Kriteria
Ketuntasan Minimal) is a minimum score for stu-
dents to reach.
3.1 Cycle 1
Data obtained in Cycle 1 were as follows:
1. Data observation of synthetic learning man-
agement shows that both teacher and students
perform the learning management well at every
stage in Cycle 1. This can be seen from the
percentages, as follows: Stage 1 describes the
real situation at that time was 62.5% in either
category; Stage 2 by 75% direct analogy with
excellent category; Stage 3 direct analogy of
62.5% with good category; Stage 4 conflicts
compressed by 100% with a very good category;
Stage 5 direct analogy by 75% with excellent
category; Stage 6 tests on the original task of
87.5% with very good category.
2. Observations of student creativity at Cycle 1
(theory) – the observation of the creativity of
students in Cycle 1. On average, the creativity
of students in the Cycle 1 observation is 67.9%.
This indicates that the success of the action in
Cycle 1 has been reached as the percentage of
student creativity is more than 65%. The highest
 percentage of student creativity is the indicator
of curiosity. It is shown by the high percentage
of the indicator (63.% and 74.3%).
3. Data on student results in Cycle 1 – 28 students
completed Cycle 1 with the remaining six stu-
dents not finishing. The percentage mastery
of learning outcomes in Cycle 1 was 82.45%,
which shows that the minimum score require-
ment was reached because it is greater than that
of the KKM secondary school at 78%.
4. Observations of student creativity at Cycle
1 (practice) – the average of student creativ-
ity obtained through observation is shown in
cycle 1. This indicates that the success of the first
cycle action on a given theory has been achieved
because the percentage of student creativity is
more than 65%. The highest percentage of
student creativity (87.5%) was the indicator of
Downloaded by [TVET UPI] at 00:02 27 September 2017
flicts was 87.5% (very good category); Stage 5
direct analogy with 75% (great category); Stage
6 tests on the original task of 87.5% (highest
category). It was concluded that the learning
process that was carried out already reflects the
learning activities with synectics models.
2. Data observations of student creativity in Cycle
2 (theory) – the development of student creativ-
ity is reflected in cycle 1 and 2. In Cycle 1, the
average percentage of creativity was 67.9%, and
in Cycle 2 it rose to 70.6%. This indicates that
success of the action has been achieved because
the percentage of Cycles 1 and 2 ≥ 65%.
3. Data student results Cycle 2 – 30 students com-
pleted Cycle 2 while two students did not. The
percentage of completeness is 88.3%, which
indicates that classical completeness has been
reached for more than 78%.

curiosity about the teaching method, followed 4. Observations of student creativity in Cycle 2
by having original ideas and problem-solving, (practice) – the average of student creativity
and asking good questions. in cycle 2 was 79.7% for both categories. The
5. Data learning outcomes practice Cycle 1 – successful teaching is in two cycles that provide
81.25% of students practiced thoroughly. The
data shows that the minimum requirement
standard is reached (KKM 78). Table 2. Percentage of student creativity Cycle 2
(practice).
3.2 Cycle 2 No. Creativity indicators Percentage
Data obtained in Cycle 2 were as follows:
1. Curiosity about the theme being 75.7
1. Data observations of synectics learning man- taught
agement in Cycle 2 – in the results of the obser- 2. Often ask good questions 75.7
vation of the learning management synectics, 3. Offer plenty of ideas to a problem 72.1
two cycles can be seen that the teacher has man- 4. Freedom of opinion 68.4
aged the teaching and learning processes well in 5. Look at the problem from different 69.1
every stage in cycle 2. This can be seen from the angles
percentages of each stage as follows. Stage 1: 6. Power of imagination 68.4
62.5 % (good), stage 2: 87.5% (very good), stage 7. Having original ideas & problem- 68.4
3: 75% (very good), stage 4 compression con- solving
8. Having a sense of “beauty” to 66.9
appreciate things around them
Average 70.6
Table 1. Percentage of student creativity Cycle 2
(theory).

No. Creativity indicators Percentage

1. Curiosity about the theme being 62.5
taught
2. Asking good questions 75
3. Offering good ideas to solve 87.5
problem
4. Freedom of opinion 75
5. Looking at the problem from 87.5
different angles
6. Power of imagination 87.5
7. Having original ideas & problem- 87.5
solving
8. Having an idea to solve problem 75
Average 79.7
Figure 3. Product result in Cycle 1.

4

Figure 4. Product result in Cycle 2.
Downloaded by [TVET UPI] at 00:02 27 September 2017
theory. Student creativity of more than 65% is
achieved.
5. Data for Cycle 2 learning outcomes practice
– all students have completed the practice of
learning outcomes. This shows that the classi-
cal completeness is reached because KKM has
exceeded 78%.
4 CONCLUSION
On implementation of action Cycles 1 and 2, the
stages which were dominant in eliciting student
creativity were Stages 3, 5, 6 and 7. At these stages,
the students worked in small groups, discussions,
and mutual digs, and they bounced ideas and
expressed their creativity, and, combined with the
theory and practicals, it proved that students show
creativity in modifying the basic techniques of
photography and beauty of pre-wedding photog-
raphy, in applied computing subjects.
The conclusion of the research is that the imple-
mentation of learning management increased.
Synectics learning can enhance the creativity of
students and improve learning outcomes of both
cognitive and psychomotor students. Students can
use their creativity by using synectics learning.
The first step in synthetic learning is that students
need to learn the subject well to earn good results.
The synectics teaching model requires a lot of
time, effort and well-organized planning. There-
fore, the implementation should focus on the time
and the stages of learning.
5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Muhammad Arsyad,
PhD (Hasanuddin University) his suggestions to
find more research findings on synthetic learn- ing
to enrich the discussion of the current study. The
authors would also like to thank Dr Yuni Sri
Rahayu, Deputy Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Universitas Negeri Surabaya for supporting the
research grant.
REFERENCES
Barry, D.M. & Kanematsu, H. (2006). International pro-
gram to promote creative thinking in chemistry and
science. The Chemist, 83(2), 10–14.
Cruse, E. (2006). Using educational video in the classroom:
Theory, research and practice. West Conshohocken,
PA: Library Video Company. Retrieved from http://
www.libraryvideo.com/articles/article26.asp
Gordon, William J.J. (1961). Synectics: The Development
of Creative Capasity. Harper Publisher.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (2002). Meaningful
assessment: A manageable and cooperative process.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Joyce, B.R. & Weill, M. (2003). Models of teaching
(7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1982). The action
research reader (3rd ed.). Victoria, Australia: Deakin
University.
Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R.A. & Runco, M.A. (2010).
Theories of creativity. In Kaufman, J.C. & Sternberg,
R.J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp.
20–47). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Nolan,
V. & Williams, C. (Eds.) (2010). A visual overview of the
synectics invention model (From a contribu- tion by
Heinz Prekel). In Imagine that! Celebrating
50 years of synectics (pp. 32–41). Waltham, MA:
Synecticsworld.
Seligmann, E.R. (2007). Reaching students through synec-
tics: A creative solution. University of Northern Colo-
rado. Retrieved from http://ellieseligmann.com/essays/
SYNECTICS_Seligmann.pdf
Silverman, F. (2006). Learning styles. District Adminis-
tration, 42(9), 70–71.
Wibawa, S.C. (2014). Students’ creative e-portfolio:
Using Android cellphone cameras for inventive beauty
photography. In Proceedings International Conference
on Advances in Education Technology (ICAET 2014)
(pp. 121–124).
Wibawa, S.C. & Schulte, S. (2015). Beauty media learn-
ing using Android mobile phone. International Jour-
nal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering
(IJIRAE), 2(11), 20–26.
Downloaded by [TVET UPI] at 00:02 27 September 2017