Integrated Science Education Journal
Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

6.1

Impact

GScholar

18

H-Index

Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

Effectiveness of Reverse Engineering STEM-ESD on Students’ Creative Problem-Solving Ability: A Quasi-Experimental SDG-12 Topic Study

Syifa Nur Shadrina
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
syifanurs@upi.edu
Riandi Riandi
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Ari Widodo
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study examines the effectiveness of a Reverse Engineering-based STEM-Education for Sustainable Development (STEM-ESD) learning model in improving tenth-grade students’ Creative Problem Solving (CPS) Thinking ability on the SDG-12 topic, compared with an Engineering Design Process-based STEM-ESD (STEM-EDP) model and conventional instruction.

    Methodology: A mixed-methods explanatory sequential design combined a quasi-experimental non-equivalent control-group pretest–posttest design with 108 tenth-grade students in three intact classes (STEM-RE, STEM-EDP, and Control) at a public senior high school in Bandung, purposively selected at the class level, and semi-structured interviews with 9 purposively selected students. Quantitative data were analyzed using normalized gain (N-Gain), the Shapiro–Wilk normality test, the Kruskal–Wallis test, and the Mann–Whitney post hoc test with Bonferroni correction in SPSS; qualitative data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis.

    Main Findings: The STEM-RE group achieved the most consistent improvement in CPS Thinking across all four indicators (N-Gain = 0.255–0.301), with statistically significant differences among the three groups (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney, p < 0.05). Idea flexibility was the only indicator to reach the moderate category, while the STEM-EDP group showed fluctuating, low-category gains and the Control group showed negligible or negative change.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides indicator-level comparative evidence that a Reverse Engineering-based STEM-ESD sequence, contextually integrated with SDG-12, produces more consistent CPS Thinking gains than an Engineering Design Process-based alternative within the same sustainability context a comparison not previously reported thereby advancing both creative problem-solving pedagogy and sustainability-oriented science education.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Effectiveness of Reverse Engineering STEM-ESD on Students’ Creative Problem-Solving Ability: A Quasi-Experimental SDG-12 Topic Study”, In. Sci. Ed. J, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 629–638, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.37251/isej.v7i4.3461.

    More Citation Formats

  • 31
    Abstract views
    11
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. [1] UNEP, “Global Waste Management Outlook 2.0,” United Nations Environment Programme, 2021.
    2. [2] Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, “Laporan kinerja pengelolaan sampah nasional tahun 2023 [National waste management performance report 2023],” KLHK, 2023.
    3. [3] L. A. Guerrero, G. Maas, and W. Hogland, “Solid waste management challenges for cities in developing countries,” Waste Management, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 220–232, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.008
    4. [4] United Nations, “Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development,” UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/70/1, 2015.
    5. [5] D. Hoornweg and P. Bhada-Tata, “What a waste: A global review of solid waste management,” World Bank Urban Development Series Knowledge Papers, no. 15, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012.
    6. [6] J. R. Jambeck et al., “Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean,” Science, vol. 347, no. 6223, pp. 768–771, 2015, doi: 10.1126/science.1260352.
    7. [7] D. J. Treffinger, S. G. Isaksen, and K. B. Stead-Dorval, Creative Problem Solving: An Introduction, 4th ed. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2006.
    8. [8] K. A. Crowson, G. Callan, J. M. Craig, D. Hendry, and L. D. Rubenstein, “Secondary students’ use of creative problem-solving strategies prior to intervention,” Thinking Skills and Creativity, pp. 102259, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2026.102259.
    9. [9] A. Abraham, “Why the standard definition of creativity fails to capture the creative act,” Theory & Psychology, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 40-60, 2025, doi: 10.1177/09593543241290232.
    10. [10] E. P. Torrance, Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-Technical Manual. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service, 2008.
    11. [11] Partnership for 21st Century Skills, “Framework for 21st century learning definitions,” Battelle for Kids, 2019.
    12. [12] R. S. S. Aisyah, P. N. Jannah, and L. D. Assaat, “The effect of the creative problem solving (cps) learning model on students’ creative thinking skills in learning about the effects of hydrocarbon combustion,” Takuana: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains, dan Humaniora, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 175-184, 2026, doi: 10.56113/takuana.v5i1.468.
    13. [13] W. Wahyudi, S. B. Waluya, H. Suyitno, and I. Isnarto, “The impact of 3CM model within blended learning to enhance student's creative thinking ability,” Journal of Technology and Science Education, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 182–197, 2019, doi: 10.3926/jotse.435.
    14. [14] OECD, The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2018.
    15. [15] R. Rusman, Model-Model Pembelajaran: Mengembangkan Profesionalisme Guru edisi-2 [Learning Models: Developing Teacher Professionalism 2nd ed], Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2014.
    16. [16] R. Hidayat, H. Zulnaidi, and S. N. A. Syed Zamri, “Roles of metacognition and achievement goals in mathematical modeling competency: A structural equation modeling analysis,” PLOS ONE, vol. 13, no. 11, e0206211, 2018, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206211.
    17. [17] K. Rigopouli, D. Kotsifakos, and Y. Psaromiligkos, “Vygotsky’s creativity options and ideas in 21st-century technology-enhanced learning design,” Education Sciences, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 257, 2025, doi: 10.3390/educsci15020257.
    18. [18] UNESCO, Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Paris: UNESCO, 2017.
    19. [19] T. Martin-Paez, D. Aguilera, F. J. Perales-Palacios, and J. M. Vilchez-Gonzalez, “What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature,” Science Education, vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 799–822, 2019, doi: 10.1002/sce.21522.
    20. [20] M. Rieckmann, “Learning to transform the world: Key competencies in ESD,” in Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development, A. Leicht, J. Heiss, and W. J. Byun, Eds. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 2018, pp. 39–59.
    21. [21] N. N. Le and M. Z. Aye, “The effect of integrating green sustainable science and technology into STEM learning on students' environmental literacy,” Integrated Science Education Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 232–239, 2025, doi: 10.37251/isej.v6i3.2116.
    22. [22] S. E. Grapin, M. Ramos Borrego, and V. G. Navarro, “Translanguaging in US K–12 science and engineering education: A review of the literature through the lens of equity,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 15-48, 2025, doi: 10.1002/tea.22012.
    23. [23] K. Otto and K. Wood, Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001.
    24. [24] M. Lammi and K. Becker, “Engineering design thinking,” Journal of Technology Education, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 55–77, 2013, doi: 10.21061/jte.v24i2.a.4.
    25. [25] G. J. Strimel, S. R. Bartholomew, E. Kim, and L. Zhang, “Examining engineering design cognition and achievement in primary school,” Journal for STEM Education Research, vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 68–89, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s41979-018-0004-9.
    26. [26] F. Aziz, C. Li, and A. U. Khan, “Immersive learning in virtual worlds: A two-step analysis SEM and NCA for assessing the impact of Metaverse education on knowledge retention and student collaboration,” Technology in Society, vol. 81, pp. 102871, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102871.
    27. [27] S. Mayer, and M. Schwemmle, “The impact of design thinking and its underlying theoretical mechanisms: A review of the literature,” Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 78-110, 2025, doi: 10.1111/caim.12626.
    28. [28] C. C. Hsu, C. S. Su, and K. I. Su, “Project-based learning in ESP: exploring pedagogical strategies for engineering education,” Taiwan International ESP Journal, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 59-95, 2025, doi: 10.6706/TIESPJ.202506_16(1).0002.
    29. [29] J. Holbrook and M. Rannikmae, The Philosophy and Approach on Which the PROFILES Project is Based. Tartu: Center for Science Education, University of Tartu, 2014.
    30. [30] T. R. Kelley and J. G. Knowles, “A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
    31. [31] L. D. English, “STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1.
    32. [32] S. M. Brookhart, How to Assess Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Your Classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2010.
    33. [33] F. Kiraga, “Literature review: efforts to improve creative thinking ability in science learning,” Integrated Science Education Journal, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 77–83, 2023, doi: 10.37251/isej.v4i2.330.
    34. [34] A. E. J. Wals, “Sustainability in higher education in the context of the UN DESD: A review of learning and institutionalization processes,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 62, pp. 8–15, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.007.
    35. [35] A. Leicht, J. Heiss, and W. J. Byun, Eds., Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 2018.
    36. [36] M. B. Tafese, and E. Kopp, “Education for sustainable development: Analyzing research trends in higher education for sustainable development goals through bibliometric analysis,” Discover Sustainability, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 51, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s43621-024-00711-7.
    37. [37] UNESCO, Education for Sustainable Development: A Roadmap. Paris: UNESCO, 2020.
    38. [38] A. Amprazis, and P. Papadopoulou, “Key competencies in education for sustainable development: A valuable framework for enhancing plant awareness,” Plants, People, Planet, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1195-1211, 2025, doi: 10.1002/ppp3.10625.
    39. [39] P. MacDowell, J. Jaunzems-Fernuk, J. Clifford, A. Ghani, and B. Hoy, “Virtual reality in history education: Instructional design considerations for designing authentic, deep, and meaningful learning,” The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 6-48, 2025, doi: 10.59668/2033.19032.
    40. [40] J. W. Creswell and V. L. Plano Clark, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2018.
    41. [41] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2014.
    42. [42] A. Field, Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications, 2018.
    43. [43] S. Siegel and N. J. Castellan, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988.
    44. [44] R. R. Hake, “Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses,” American Journal of Physics, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 64–74, 1998, doi: 10.1119/1.18809.
    45. [45] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77–101, 2006, doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
    46. [46] Y. S. Lincoln and E. G. Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications, 1985.
    47. [47] A. R. Damanik, and T. J. Siregar, “The influence of the creative problem-solving (cps) model on students’ learning motivation and mathematical problem-solving ability,” Journal of Mathematics Instruction, Social Research and Opinion, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 971-980, 2025, doi: 10.58421/misro.v4i3.731.
    48. [48] H. C. Kuo, “Transforming tomorrow: a practical synthesis of STEAM and PBL for empowering students’ creative thinking,” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 2061-2087, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10763-024-10511-0.
    49. [49] P. A. Facione, Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Millbrae, CA: Measured Reasons and The California Academic Press, 2011.
    50. [50] C. Hoßbach, and S. G. Isaksen, “AI‐Augmented approaches to creative problem‐solving: a metacognitive perspective,” Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 854-869, 2025, doi: 10.1111/caim.70003.
    51. [51] P. Santos, K. El Aadmi, M. Calvera-Isabal, and A. Rodríguez, “Fostering students’ motivation and self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, and design through design thinking and making in project-based learning: a gender-perspective study in primary education,” International Journal of Technology and Design Education, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 1293-1319, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10798-025-10001-6.
    52. [52] D. H. Jonassen, Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments. New York: Routledge, 2011.
    53. [53] A. O. Yüksel, “Design-based STEM activities in teacher education and its effect on pre-service science teachers’ design thinking skills,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 904-918, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10956-025-10215-2.
    54. [54] A. Susilawati, A. S. M. Al-Obaidi, A. Abduh, F. S. Irwansyah, and A. B. D. Nandiyanto, “How to do research methodology: From literature review, bibliometric, step-by-step research stages, to practical examples in science and engineering education,” Indonesian Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1-40, 2025, doi: 10.17509/ijost.v10i1.78637.
    55. [55] V. Rana, B. Verhoeven, and M. Sharma, “Generative AI in design thinking pedagogy: Enhancing creativity, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning in higher education,” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1-22, 2025, doi: 10.3316/informit.T2025090900004290816631094.
    56. [56] Y. Belghith, M. Riedl, R. Moore, M. Alemdar, and J. Roberts, “Exploring AI intervention points in high-school engineering education: a research through co-design approach,” Information and Learning Sciences, vol. 126, no. 7-8, pp. 472-490, 2025, doi: .
    57. [57] M. Yun, and K. J. Crippen, “Computational thinking integration into pre-service science teacher education: A systematic review,” Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 225-254, 2025, doi: 10.1080/1046560X.2024.2390758.
    58. [58] G. W. Corder and D. I. Foreman, Nonparametric Statistics: A Step-by-Step Approach, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2014.
    59. [59] J. D. Novak, Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2010.
    60. [60] T. Zhou, D. Cañabate, R. Bubnys, B. Staniküniené, and J. Colomer, “Collaborative learning, cooperative learning and reflective learning to foster sustainable development: A scoping review,” Review of Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 70065, 2025, doi: 10.1002/rev3.70065.
    61. [61] S. A. Cahayu, J. Siburian, and A. Hamidah, “The effect of problem based learning (pbl) model based on local wisdom to improve students’ critical thinking skills,” Integrated Science Education Journal, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2024, doi: 10.37251/isej.v5i2.985.

Categories