Full Length Research Paper
Tatag Yuli Eko Siswono
Department of Mathematics, Surabaya State University, Kampus Ketintang Surabaya, Jawa Timur 60231, Indonesia.
It is reasonable to assume that people are creative, but the degree of creativity is different. The Idea of the level of student’s creative thinking has been expressed by experts, such as Gotoh (2004), and Krulik and Rudnick (1999). The perspective of the mathematics creative thinking refers to a combination of logical and divergent thinking which is based on intuition but has a conscious aim. The divergent thinking is focused on flexibility, fluency, and novelty in the mathematical problem solving and problem posing (Silver, 1997). Students have various backgrounds and different abilities. They possess different potential in thinking pattern, imagination, fantasy and performance. Therefore, students have a different level of creative thinking. This research used qualitative approach which aims to describe the characteristic of the level of student’s creative thinking in mathematics. The task-based interview was conducted to collect data from the 8thgrade students of junior secondary school. Snowball method was used to determine subject research. Finally, there were nine students from junior secondary school of “SMP Negeri 6 Sidoarjo” and one student from “SMP Al Hikmah” Surabaya. The result of this research pointed out the five levels of creative thinking that are of level 0 to level 4 which has a different characteristic. This difference is based on fluency, flexibility, and novelty in mathematical problem solving and problem posing.
Key words: Student’s creative thinking, problem posing, flexibility, fluency, novelty.
|APA||(2011). Level of student’s creative thinking in classroom mathematics. Educational Research and Reviews, 6(7), 548-553.|
|Chicago||Tatag Yuli Eko Siswono. "Level of student’s creative thinking in classroom mathematics." Educational Research and Reviews 6, no. 7 (2011): 548-553.|
|MLA||Tatag Yuli Eko Siswono. "Level of student’s creative thinking in classroom mathematics." Educational Research and Reviews 6.7 (2011): 548-553.|