The Effect of STEM-ESciT-based Mobile Learning in Improving the Creativity Thinking Ability of Preservice Teachers


  • Triman Juniarso Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya
  • Bramianto Setiawan Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya
  • Dinda Prameswari Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya
  • Dhea Natasya Putri Aprillia Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya
  • Reza Rachmadtullah Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya
  • Vina Iasha SD Negeri Pondok Bambu 06 Jakarta


Creativity Thinking, Mobile Learning, Preservice Teachers, STEM-ESciT


Creative thinking is one of the abilities a person must have in the 21st century. Unfortunately, the data shows Indonesian student graduates have low creative thinking ability. Higher Education as graduate producers is required to produce graduates with 21st-century abilities, one of which is the ability to think creatively. Therefore, this research aims to determine the effect of STEM-ESciT-based Mobile Learning on improving pre-service teachers’ creative thinking ability. This research used a quasi-experimental method with a pre-test, post-test control group design approach. In this research, the samples were divided into two groups: the experimental group using the STEM-ESciT-based learning model and the control group using the conventional learning model. Sixty-four samples were used in this research, with equal distribution between the two groups. Data were collected through essay tests, and data analysis was conducted using a t-test. The results showed that the use of STEM-ESciT-based learning media had a significant effect on student creativity. In addition, the pre-test and post-test results showed a more significant improvement compared to the conventional learning model.


Adlim, A., Saminan, S., & Ariestia, S. (2015). Pengembangan modul STEM terintegrasi kewirausahaan untuk meningkatkan keterampilan proses sains di SMA Negeri 4 Banda Aceh. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Science Education), 3(2), 112–130.

Aini, A., Mukhlis, M., Annizar, A., Jakaria, M., & Septiadi, D. (2020). Creative thinking level of visual-spatial students on geometry HOTS problems. 1465(1), 012054.

Ainulluluah, A., Boeriswati, E., Rahmawati, Y., & Setiawan, B. (2022). Systematic Literature Review: Improving Self Regulated Learning Through The Flipped Classroom Model Based on Interactive E-Books. Jurnal Basicedu; Vol 6, No 3 (2022): June Pages 3200-5500.

Bao, L., & Koenig, K. (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1–12.

Bujor, A., & Avasilcai, S. (2016). The creative entrepreneur: A framework of analysis. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221, 21–28.

Eltanahy, M., Forawi, S., & Mansour, N. (2020). Incorporating entrepreneurial practices into STEM education: Development of interdisciplinary E-STEM model in high school in the United Arab Emirates. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100697.

Emre, D. (2019). Prospective teachers’ perceptions of barriers to technology integration in education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(4), 381–398.

Fujiawati, F. S., & Raharja, R. M. (2019). Analisis Kesiapan Mahasiswa Pendidikan Seni Mengaplikasikan Pembelajaran Berbasis Online (E-Learning & Mobile Learning). Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kajian Seni, 4(2), 150–164.

Jia, X., Li, W., & Cao, L. (2019). The role of metacognitive components in creative thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2404.

Kim, H. J., Yi, P., & Hong, J. I. (2020). Students’ academic use of mobile technology and higher-order thinking skills: The role of active engagement. Education Sciences, 10(3), 47.

Lynch, M., Kamovich, U., Longva, K. K., & Steinert, M. (2021). Combining technology and entrepreneurial education through design thinking: Students’ reflections on the learning process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164, 119689.

Permanasari, A. (2016). STEM education: Inovasi dalam pembelajaran sains. 3, 23–34.

Rasulova, Z. (2020). Conditions and opportunities of organizing independent creative works of students of the direction Technology in Higher Education. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(3), 2552–2155.

Sagala, R., Rofiqul, U., Thahir, A., Saregar, A., & Wardani, I. (2019). The effectiveness of stem-based on gender differences: The impact of physics concept understanding. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 753–761.

Setiawan, B., Winarno, A., & Iasha, V. (2023). Immersive Virtual Reality: Unlocking Students’ Elementary School Science Literacy. Science and Education, 4(9), 281–288.

Siew, N. M. (2023). Socioscientific Issues Approach on Entrepreneurial Science Thinking among Fifth Graders: Socioscientific Issues Approach on Entrepreneurial Science Thinking. 18(2), 812–821.

Simeon, M. I., Samsudin, M. A., & Yakob, N. (2020). Effect of design thinking approach on students’ achievement in some selected physics concepts in the context of STEM learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1–28.

Sirajudin, N., & Suratno, J. (2021). Developing creativity through STEM education. 1806(1), 012211.

Sumarni, W., & Kadarwati, S. (2020). Ethno-stem project-based learning: Its impact to critical and creative thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(1), 11–21.

Winda, Z., Suhery, T., & Desi, D. (2019). Hasil Belajar Mahasiswa dalam Pembelajaran Modul Larutan Elektrolit dan Sifat Koligatif Larutan Berbasis STEM-Problem Based Learning Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Kimia: Kajian Hasil Penelitian Pendidikan Kimia, 6(1), 12–17.

Wongta, J., Grosseau, C., Yachulawetkunakorn, C., Watthana, C., & Wongwatkit, C. (2021). Effects of a collaborative STEM-based orientation approach on senior high-school students’ creativity and operacy. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 15(1), 71–106.




How to Cite

Triman Juniarso, Bramianto Setiawan, Dinda Prameswari, Dhea Natasya Putri Aprillia, Reza Rachmadtullah, & Vina Iasha. (2024). The Effect of STEM-ESciT-based Mobile Learning in Improving the Creativity Thinking Ability of Preservice Teachers. Science and Education, 5(1), 179–187. Retrieved from



Pedagogical Sciences