Creative Pedagogy and Innovation Skills among Higher Education Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63345/Keywords:
Creative pedagogy, Innovation skills, Higher education, Learning analytics, Generative artificial intelligence, Creative problem solvingAbstract
Creative and innovation capabilities have become increasingly important graduate attributes as higher education responds to technological change, artificial intelligence, and rapidly evolving professional environments. This study examines how structured creative pedagogy can strengthen innovation skills by moving beyond conventional assessments based primarily on student perceptions or final academic performance.
A central research gap is identified in the limited understanding of how observable learning processes—such as problem reframing, divergent ideation, collaborative critique, prototyping, and iterative refinement—translate into measurable innovation competence. The study therefore develops a process-oriented framework connecting creative pedagogical practices with idea originality, solution diversity, collaborative innovation, adaptability, and implementation-oriented problem solving.
The framework further integrates AI-enabled learning analytics to examine temporal patterns within students’ creative activities rather than treating creativity as a single post-course outcome. Particular attention is given to the emerging influence of generative artificial intelligence, which can expand ideation opportunities while potentially encouraging cognitive dependence or convergence when pedagogical guidance is weak.
References
1. Cremin, T., & Chappell, K. (2019). Creative pedagogies: A systematic review. Research Papers in Education, 36(3), 299–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1677757
2. OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework: Creative thinking, mathematics, reading, science and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
3. World Economic Forum. (2025). The Future of Jobs Report 2025. World Economic Forum.
4. UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.
5. Setiamurti, A., & Kurniawati, A. (2023). Creative pedagogy in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 4, 100249.
6. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
7. Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018). How school context and personal factors relate to teachers' attitudes toward teaching STEM. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 826–846. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1450355
8. Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019). Design and design thinking in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2, 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z
9. Retna, K. S. (2016). Thinking about design thinking: A study of teacher experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2015.1005049
10. Davies, M., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education—A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004
11. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2014.905247
12. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.
13. Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
14. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416
15. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
16. Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1380–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851
17. Viberg, O., Hatakka, M., Balter, O., & Mavroudi, A. (2018). The current landscape of learning analytics in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.027
18. Ochoa, X., & Worsley, M. (2016). Augmenting learning analytics with multimodal sensory data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), 213–219. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.32.10
19. Xu, B., Chen, N.-S., & Chen, G. (2024). A systematic review of multimodal learning analytics in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100169.
20. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeiffer, F., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Stadler, M., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
21. Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
22. Zhai, X. (2022). ChatGPT user experience: Implications for education. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4312418
23. UNESCO. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO.
24. Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001
25. Dyer, J., Gregersen, H., & Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator's DNA: Mastering the five skills of disruptive innovators. Harvard Business Review Press.
