Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

A Study of Google Docs Learning Media on Creative Thinking Skills and Student Learning Outcomes in Social Studies in Junior High Schools

Siti Novitasari ORCID
Universitas PGRI Madiun ROR
Indonesia
siti_2401202071L@mhs.unipma.ac.id
Muhammad Hanif ORCID
Universitas PGRI Madiun ROR
Indonesia
Parji Parji ORCID
Universitas PGRI Madiun ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study investigates the effectiveness of Google Docs as an innovative learning medium in enhancing students’ creative thinking skills and learning outcomes in Social Studies learning at the junior high school level.

    Methodology: A quantitative approach was employed using a quasi-experimental posttest non-equivalent control group design. The participants consisted of 28 eighth-grade students from Junior High School Negeri 12 Madiun, divided into an experimental group (n = 14) that used Google Docs for learning activities and a control group (n = 14) that used traditional textbook-based learning media. Data were collected through a creative thinking questionnaire and a learning outcomes test, and then analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent-samples t-tests at a 0.05 significance level.

    Main Findings: The results indicate that students in the experimental group achieved significantly higher levels of creative thinking and learning outcomes than those in the control group. The independent-samples t-test results revealed significant differences in creative thinking skills (t = 6.957, p < 0.05) and learning outcomes (t = 5.924, p < 0.05). These findings demonstrate that Google Docs effectively promotes collaborative learning, active engagement, and higher-order thinking skills.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides empirical evidence that integrating collaborative digital tools, such as Google Docs, can improve both cognitive achievement and creative thinking in junior high school Social Studies.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “A Study of Google Docs Learning Media on Creative Thinking Skills and Student Learning Outcomes in Social Studies in Junior High Schools”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 532–540, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jee.v7i2.1549.

    More Citation Formats

  • 82
    Abstract views
    54
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. O. Tapalova, and N, Zhiyenbayeva, “Artificial intelligence in education: AIEd for personalised learning pathways,” Electronic Journal of e-Learning, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 639-653, 2022, doi: 10.34190/ejel.20.5.2597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.5.2597
    2. K. S. Uralovich, T. U. Toshmamatovich, K. F. Kubayevich, I. B. Sapaev, S. S. Saylaubaevna, Z. F. Beknazarova, and A. Khurramov, “A primary factor in sustainable development and environmental sustainability is environmental education,” Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 965-975, 2023, doi: 10.22124/CJES.2023.7155.
    3. T. Yuniarsih, A. Sobandi, R. I. Meilani, and R. Indriarti, “Microlearning media development for office management: A TPACK-Based analysis,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1365-1373, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i4.2237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i4.2237
    4. M. K. Chen, and Y. H. Shih, “The role of higher education in sustainable national development: Reflections from an international perspective,” Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1343-1351, 2025, doi: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6262
    5. B. Huang, H. Li, J. Liu, and J. Lei, “Digital technology innovation and the high-quality development of Chinese enterprises: Evidence from enterprise’s digital patents,” China Finance and Economic Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 28-49, 2025, doi: 10.1515/cfer-2025-0020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cfer-2025-0020
    6. X. Shu, and X. Gu, “An empirical study of A smart education model enabled by the edu-metaverse to enhance better learning outcomes for students,” Systems, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 75, 2023, doi: 10.3390/systems11020075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11020075
    7. T. Blyznyuk, and T. Kachak, “Benefits of interactive learning for students’ critical thinking skills improvement,” Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 94-102, 2024, doi: 10.15330/jpnu.11.1.94-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15330/jpnu.11.1.94-102
    8. Y. W. Utaya, K. Khofiyati, L. M. Warner, and K. Hallam, “Learning pancasila values in citizenship education subjects in junior high school,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1-9, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jee.v5i1.852. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v5i1.852
    9. J. Wasim, M. H. Youssef, I. Christodoulou, and R. Reinhardt, “The path to entrepreneurship: The role of social networks in driving entrepreneurial learning and education,” Journal of Management Education, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 459-493, 2024, doi: 10.1177/10525629231219235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10525629231219235
    10. X. Weng, Z. Cui, O. L. Ng, M. S. Jong, and T. K. Chiu, “Characterizing students’ 4C skills development during problem-based digital making,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 372-385, 2022, doi: 0.1007/s10956-022-09961-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09961-4
    11. M. A. Adeoye, and H. A. Jimoh, “Problem-solving skills among 21st-century learners toward creativity and innovation ideas,” Thinking Skills and Creativity Journal, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 52-58, 2023, doi: 10.23887/tscj.v6i1.62708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/tscj.v6i1.62708
    12. I. Revenko, K. Hlianenko, M. Sosnova, R. Vlasenko, and L. Kolodina, “The exploration of pedagogical approaches and methods that are designed to stimulate the creative thinking of students,” Cadernos de Educação Tecnologia e Sociedade, vol. 17, no. se1, pp. 137-146, 2024, doi: 10.14571/brajets.v17.nse1.137-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14571/brajets.v17.nse1.137-146
    13. K. H. D. Tang, “Student-centered approach in teaching and learning: What does it really mean?,” Acta Pedagogia Asiana, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 72-83, 2023, doi: 10.53623/apga.v2i2.218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v2i2.218
    14. E. Balla, “Teacher centered method vs student centered method of teaching in teaching english: Critical study,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research and Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 60-60, 2023, doi: 10.56345/ijrdv10n309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56345/ijrdv10n309
    15. N. Nisar, and M. S. Hussain, “Learner vs teacher centered classes: critical discourse analysis of stakeholders' stance from socio-cognitive perspective,” Global Social Sciences Review, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 191-200, 2023, doi: 10.31703/gssr.2023(VIII-II).18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2023(VIII-II).18
    16. J. Busa, and S. J. Chung, “The effects of teacher-centered and student-centered approaches in TOEIC reading instruction,” Education Sciences, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 181, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14020181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020181
    17. S. Akhtar, Z. Zahid, and A. Munir, “Analysis of learner’s motivation level in teacher centered class: A study at bs level. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 538-548, 2024, doi: 10.47205/plhr.2024(8-IV)48.
    18. A. Firdhaus, M. L. Hakim, T. Tuswan, and O. Mursid, “The role of cooperative learning in undergraduate engineering education: A better alternative to teacher-centered learning,” PESHUM: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sosial dan Humaniora, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 5135-5144, 2025, doi: 10.56799/peshum.v4i4.9362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56799/peshum.v4i4.9362
    19. B. Quadir, J. C. Yang, and N. S. Chen, “The effects of interaction types on learning outcomes in a blog-based interactive learning environment,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 293-306, 2022, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1652835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1652835
    20. A. Kusmawan, R. Rahman, N. Anis, and O. Arifudin, “The relationship between teacher involvement in curriculum development and student learning outcomes,” International Journal of Educatio Elementaria and Psychologia, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2025, doi: 10.70177/ijeep.v2i1.1890.
    21. R. Mursid, A. H. Saragih, and R. Hartono, “The effect of the blended project-based learning model and creative thinking ability on engineering students’ learning outcomes,” International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 218-235, 2022, doi: 10.46328/ijemst.2244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2244
    22. J. Li, and E. Xue, “Dynamic interaction between student learning behaviour and learning environment: Meta-analysis of student engagement and its influencing factors,” Behavioral Sciences, vol. 13, no.1, pp. 59, 2023, doi: 10.3390/bs13010059. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13010059
    23. J. Cao, G. Bhuvaneswari, T. Arumugam, and B. R. Aravind, “The digital edge: examining the relationship between digital competency and language learning outcomes,” Frontiers in psychology, vol. 14, no. 1187909, 2023, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909
    24. M. Lukitasari, W. Murtafiah, S. Ramdiah, R. Hasan, and A. Sukri, “Constructing digital literacy instrument and its effect on college students' learning outcomes,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 171-188, 2022, doi: 10.29333/iji.2022.15210a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15210a
    25. S. Afifah, A. Mudzakir, and A. B. D. Nandiyanto, “How to calculate paired sample t-test using SPSS software: From step-by-step processing for users to the practical examples in the analysis of the effect of application anti-fire bamboo teaching materials on student learning outcomes,” Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science, vol. 2, nol. 1, pp. 81-92, 2022, doi: 10.17509/ijotis.v2i1.45895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/ijotis.v2i1.45895
    26. Y. A. U. Ansya, A. Alfianita, and H. P. Syahkira, “Optimizing mathematics learning in fifth grades: the critical role of evaluation in improving student achievement and character,” Progres Pendidikan, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 302-311, 2024, doi: 10.29303/prospek.v5i3.1120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/prospek.v5i3.1120
    27. H. Sari, M. Çevik, and Ö. Çevik, “The impact of STEAM (STEM+ arts) activities on learning outcomes in students with specific learning disabilities. Support for Learning, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 3-21, 2024, doi: 10.1111/1467-9604.12462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12462
    28. A. C. E. Ding, and C. H. Yu, “Serious game-based learning and learning by making games: Types of game-based pedagogies and student gaming hours impact students' science learning outcomes,” Computers & Education, vol. 218, pp. 105075, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105075
    29. C. M. Burke, L. P. Montross, and V. G. Dianova, “Beyond the classroom: An analysis of internal and external factors related to students’ love of learning and educational outcomes,” Data, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 81, 2024, doi: 10.3390/data9060081. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/data9060081
    30. H. M. Alwahoub, N. J. Jomaa, and M. N. L. Azmi, “The impact of synchronous collaborative writing and Google Docs collaborative features on enhancing students’ individual writing performance,” Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 113-125, 2022, doi: 10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46541. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46541
    31. N. F. Nasri, A. Habali, and M. Adam, “Google Docs: students’ perceptions as online collaborative tool in learning writing skills,” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 690-705, 2022, doi: 10.6007/ijarped/v11-i3/14611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v11-i3/14611
    32. D. T. N. Hoang, and T. Hoang, “Enhancing EFL students’ academic writing skills in online learning via Google Docs-based collaboration: A mixed-methods study,” Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 1504-1526, 2024, doi: 10.1080/09588221.2022.2083176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2083176
    33. L. I. Ruiz-Rojas, L. Salvador-Ullauri, and P. Acosta-Vargas, “Collaborative working and critical thinking: Adoption of generative artificial intelligence tools in higher education,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 13, pp. 5367, 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16135367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135367
    34. D. F. Hasniati, R. Raharjo, E. Sudibyo, and M. Satriawan, “The potential of creative thinking in STEAM based science learning: Supporting factors and implementation challenges,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 256-269, 2026, doi: 10.37251/jee.v7i1.2711. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v7i1.2711
    35. A. MacLeod, S. Burm, and K. Mann, “Constructivism: Learning theories and approaches to research,” Researching medical education, pp. 25-40, 2022, doi: 10.1002/9781119839446.ch3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119839446.ch3
    36. N. R. Mishra, “Constructivist approach to learning: An analysis of pedagogical models of social constructivist learning theory,” Journal of research and development, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 22-29, 2023, doi: 10.3126/jrdn.v6i01.55227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/jrdn.v6i01.55227
    37. M. A. Almulla, “Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for students’ critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving to affect academic performance in higher education,” Cogent Education, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 2172929, 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2172929. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2172929
    38. F. M. Jumaah, “Exploring constructivist learning theory and its applications in teaching English,” The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations, vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 7-19, 2024, doi: 10.37547/tajssei/Volume06Issue08-02. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume06Issue08-02
    39. H. A. Aimang, and B. O. Gallardo, “Teacher emotional intelligence and classroom leadership dynamics in differentiated learning,” Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 900-907, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i3.1658. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i3.1658
    40. S. Y. Chen, C. F. Lai, Y. H. Lai, and Y. S. Su, “Effect of project-based learning on development of students’ creative thinking,” The International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 232-250, 2022, doi: 10.1177/0020720919846808. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720919846808
    41. M. M. Li, and C. C. Tu, “Developing a project-based learning course model combined with the think–pair–share strategy to enhance creative thinking skills in education students,” Education Sciences, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 233, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14030233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030233
    42. W. A. Nursiwan, C. Hanri, and N. H. Ibrahim, “Scientific problem-based creativity learning model for enhancing students’ creative traits and developing scientific creative process,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 89-110, 2025, doi: 10.29333/iji.2025.1846a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2025.1846a
    43. N. E. Nurjanah, E. Yetti, and M. S. Sumantri, “Fostering creative thinking in early childhood: An analysis of developmental stimulation,” Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini Undiksha, vol. 12, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.23887/paud.v12i2.75177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/paud.v12i2.75177
    44. X. Hu, Y. Liu, J. Huang, and S. Mu, “The effects of different patterns of group collaborative learning on Fourth-Grade students’ creative thinking in a digital artificial intelligence course,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 19, pp. 12674, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141912674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912674
    45. M. Selfa-Sastre, M. Pifarre, A. Cujba, L. Cutillas, and E. Falguera, “The role of digital technologies to promote collaborative creativity in language education,” Frontiers in psychology, vol. 13, pp. 828981, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.828981. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.828981
    46. C. Tang, S. Mao, S. E. Naumann, and Z. Xing, “Improving student creativity through digital technology products: A literature review,” Thinking Skills and Creativity, vol. 44, pp. 101032, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101032. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101032
    47. D. Zou, H. Xie, and F. L. Wang, “Effects of technology enhanced peer, teacher and self-feedback on students’ collaborative writing, critical thinking tendency and engagement in learning,” Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 166-185, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s12528-022-09337-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09337-y
    48. M. Noetel, S. Griffith, O. Delaney, N. R. Harris, T. Sanders, P. Parker, ... and C. Lonsdale, “Multimedia design for learning: An overview of reviews with meta-meta-analysis,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 413-454, 2022, doi: 10.3102/00346543211052329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211052329
    49. T. M. Cavanagh, and C. Kiersch, “Using commonly-available technologies to create online multimedia lessons through the application of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning,” Educational technology research and development, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 1033-1053, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11423-022-10181-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10181-1
    50. A. De Brún, L. Rogers, A. Drury, and B. Gilmore, “Evaluation of a formative peer assessment in research methods teaching using an online platform: A mixed methods pre-post study,” Nurse Education Today, vol. 108, pp. 105166, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105166
    51. S. Winarno, and H. Al Azies, “The effectiveness of continuous formative assessment in hybrid learning models: An empirical analysis in higher education institutions,” International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1-11, 2024, doi: 10.20961/ijpte.v8i1.89693. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/ijpte.v8i1.89693
    52. L. K. Nhan, “Enhancing teaching and learning through formative assessment,” International Journal of Science and Management Studies, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 356-365, 2024, doi: 10.51386/25815946/ijsms-v7i3p128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51386/25815946/ijsms-v7i3p128
    53. Z. Q. Ma, L. Y. Kong, Y. F. Tu, G. J. Hwang, and Z. Y. Lyu, “Strengthening collaborative argumentation with interactive guidance: a dialogic peer feedback approach based on the six thinking hats strategy,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 296-320, 2025, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2024.2344051. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2344051
    54. Y. Kim, and A. Kumi-Yeboah, “Strategies to promote self-regulated learning for online diverse students,” Distance Education, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 272-300, 2025, doi: 10.1080/01587919.2024.2358855. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2024.2358855