Analyzing The Impact of Project-Based Learning STEAM Flipped Classroom on Computer Architecture and Organization Courses in Higher Education

Abstract

This study examines the differences in students' creative thinking skills between the project-based learning STEAM Flipped Classroom and the direct learning STEAM Flipped Classroom model by paying attention to the role of academic self-efficacy as a moderator variable. The research population consists of students in informatics engineering study programs in the Denpasar area of Bali. The study used a quasi-experimental 2 x 2 factorial design. Data collection is carried out through questionnaires and test instruments. Data analysis used descriptive and inferential statistics, as well as analysis of covariance. The results showed a significant difference in students' creative thinking skills between those who learned with the STEAM Flipped Classroom project learning model and the STEAM Flipped Classroom direct learning model. In addition, there are differences in students' creative thinking skills based on the level of academic self-efficacy. The empirical application of the STEAM Flipped Classroom project model is proven to help students generate new ideas, develop ideas, and improve their thinking skills. However, the findings suggest that flexible thinking skills must be further enhanced. Students with high self-efficacy tend to be more proactive in providing constructive ideas in project-based learning activities. This research implies that it is necessary to actively motivate and share experiential stories with students who have low self-efficacy. In the future, I suggest that universities adopt the innovative learning model of project-based learning STEAM flipped Classroom to improve the creative thinking skills of informatics engineering students at the college level.

Full text

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
ON INFORMATICS VISUALIZATION
journal homepage : www.joiv.org/index.php/joiv
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL ON
INFORMATICS
VISUALIZATION
Analyzing The Impact of Project-Based Learning STEAM Flipped
Classroom on Computer Architecture and Organization Courses
in Higher Education
Anak Agung Gde Ekayana a,*, Ni Nyoman Parwati a, Ketut Agustini a, I Gede Ratnaya a
a Postgraduate, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Jl. Udayana No 11, Singaraja, Indonesia
Corresponding author: *anak.agung.gde.4@undiksha.ac.id
Abstract—This study examines the differences in students' creative thinking skills between the project-based learning STEAM Flipped
Classroom and the direct learning STEAM Flipped Classroom model by paying attention to the role of academic self-efficacy as a
moderator variable. The research population consists of students in informatics engineering study programs in the Denpasar area of
Bali. The study used a quasi-experimental 2 x 2 factorial design. Data collection is carried out through questionnaires and test
instruments. Data analysis used descriptive and inferential statistics, as well as analysis of covariance. The results showed a significant
difference in students' creative thinking skills between those who learned with the STEAM Flipped Classroom project learning model
and the STEAM Flipped Classroom direct learning model. In addition, there are differences in students' creative thinking skills based
on the level of academic self-efficacy. The empirical application of the STEAM Flipped Classroom project model is proven to help
students generate new ideas, develop ideas, and improve their thinking skills. However, the findings suggest that flexible thinking skills
must be further enhanced. Students with high self-efficacy tend to be more proactive in providing constructive ideas in project-based
learning activities. This research implies that it is necessary to actively motivate and share experiential stories with students who have
low self-efficacy. In the future, I suggest that universities adopt the innovative learning model of project-based learning STEAM flipped
Classroom to improve the creative thinking skills of informatics engineering students at the college level.
Keywords—Project-based learning STEAM flipped classroom; creative thinking skills; computer architecture and organization.
Manuscript received 7 Feb. 2024; revised 1 Mar. 2024; accepted 2 Apr. 2024. Date of publication 30 Sep. 2024.
International Journal on Informatics Visualization is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
I. INTRODUCTION
In the 21st century, students must develop competencies
relevant to technological developments and globalization [1].
The ability to adapt quickly to technological changes and a
deep understanding of information technology, artificial
intelligence, and the Internet of Things becomes very
important [2]. In addition, skills in complex problem-solving,
the ability to think creatively and innovatively, and effective
leadership and communication are also in-demand
competencies [3]. In addition, students also need to
understand aspects of globalization, such as cross-cultural
cooperation, global competition, and sustainability [4].
Prospective students who want to enter the engineering
department constantly record the highest number compared to
other majors [5]. This indicates that engineering graduates are
in high demand in various job sectors. This phenomenon is
due to the popularity of technology, the emphasis on
innovation, and the indispensable technical skills in today's
job market [6]. The ever-changing job market requires the
presence of engineering graduates who can adapt quickly and
face complex technical challenges.
The role of engineering graduates in filling job
opportunities is increasingly important. They are expected to
be prime movers in harnessing new technologies and
developing innovative solutions to complex problems [7]. In
addition, engineering graduates are also likely to have the
ability to work in cross-cultural teams, collaborate with
professionals from various backgrounds, and understand the
importance of sustainability in a global context.
In an ever-evolving world, creative thinking skills are
becoming increasingly important for students to explore ideas
and create new and practical solutions in the face of
increasingly complex technical challenges. Creative thinking
skills have become a significant need for students majoring in
engineering [8], [9]. These skills assist students in finding
innovative ideas and creative solutions to problems [10].
1436
JOIV : Int. J. Inform. Visualization, 8(3) - September 2024 1436-1444

Computer architecture and organization is one of the core
courses at the beginning of the semester for engineering
students whose learning objective is to develop creative
thinking skills. The learning outcomes of this course include
the ability to analyze and design features contained in
computer architecture [11]. This course provides a solid
foundation for students to understand the basic principles of
information and computing technology [12]. In addition, this
course offers a solid foundation for analytical, logical, and
systematic thinking skills, which are essential for facing
advanced courses that demand creative and innovative
thinking [13].
Based on data from the academic department for the last
three years shows that the average learning achievement in
computer architecture and organization courses is at a score
of 60.00-68.00. This indicates that the average score of
student learning achievement in architecture and computer
organization courses is still far from the minimum
completeness standard. The suspicion of low student learning
achievement was revealed from initial observations, which
showed that students' creative thinking skills were still down;
specifically, the creative thinking skills of engineering
students in the first year were still not optimal. The results of
interviews with heads of study programs and academic
departments explain that lecturers still have difficulty
transforming learning material for students and still rely on
conventional learning methods.
Several factors that can cause students' creative thinking
skills to be less than optimal are thought to be due to the
application of learning methods that do not provide
opportunities for students to practice exploration abilities and
thinking skills. The different educational backgrounds of each
student also affect the learning process if the methods used do
not provide the challenges and skills that students need. The
basic skills that students need to be able to take part in
engineering studies, such as understanding creative thinking
skills, new ideas, and innovation, are often not met equally
[8], [9]. Additionally, incorporating technology into the
learning process provides additional challenges for students.
However, the learning methods that are still dominant in
institutions are conventional learning methods, which do not
provide direct student involvement and do not train thinking
skills [14], [15].
Conventional learning models, especially lecture-centered
ones dominated by the teacher's role, have several significant
drawbacks. This learning model tends to place students as passive
recipients of information [16]. Students listen and take notes
more than actively participate in the learning process. As a
result, a lack of adequate interaction between students and
learning materials can cause a low level of understanding and
reasoning [17]. Furthermore, students' critical, analytical, and
creative skills are often not well-honed due to the lack of
space to question, explain, or discuss in conventional learning
[18]. In the long run, this can lead to students' less-than-
optimal ability to solve problems, develop ideas, and think
critically because they are in the habit of "receiving"
information without actively utilizing their potential.
The solution that can be applied to overcome these
problems is using learning models that support the active role
of students in the learning process. One of the learning models
that encourages active student involvement and direct
experience in knowledge construction is the Project-Based
Learning model with a STEAM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Arts, Math) approach. This model allows
students to engage in projects that are multidisciplinary and
reality-based so they can connect theory with practice, as well
as encourage the application of concepts in real-world
situations. In engineering, this learning model can also train
creative thinking skills, collaboration among students, and
problem-solving abilities because students work on projects
that require various skills and technical knowledge.
Previous research in the USA, Texas, reported that
integrating STEM in project-based learning models can
significantly increase student self-efficacy and participation
and support student interest in learning more optimally [19].
Previous research in the Arequipa area of Perú explored the
application of project-based learning to 74 students divided
into four groups. Research shows this approach improves
students' thinking skills, learning competence, and
comprehension. By involving students in relevant projects,
they acquire theoretical knowledge and develop practical
skills and problem-solving abilities [20].
Previous research in the Taichung area, Taiwan, detailed
the application of a project-based learning model with a
STEAM approach. Empirical findings highlight that project-
based learning integrates the STEAM approach positively and
significantly affects the development of students' creative
thinking skills. Although this study was limited by a short
timeframe in the STEAM context, learning with a focus on
the arts still provides ongoing benefits to STEAM education
and increases the effectiveness of student learning [21].
Previous research in Jakarta, Indonesia, highlighted
learning weaknesses related to students' mastery of concepts.
This finding shows that efforts are still needed to improve
students' understanding of the material. As a solution, the
PjBeL STEAM learning model has been implemented and has
increased students' mastery of concepts. The project-based
STEAM learning model is increasingly popular and is
believed to facilitate deeper student understanding to develop
relevant 21st-century skills [15].
It has been shown that using the Project-Based Learning
(PjBL) model to help students improve their skills, abilities,
and understanding is positive. However, some limitations
need to be noted. One is the limited time allocated by the
academic department [17], [22]. This limited time is a
significant obstacle because project activities require
sufficient duration to be completed properly. Sometimes,
classrooms cannot devote adequate time to involving students
in the entire project cycle, from planning to implementation
and evaluation. Therefore, it is necessary to make adjustments
and implement effective strategies so that this learning model
can still be implemented optimally despite time constraints.
One strategy that can be used to overcome this time
limitation is to apply the Flipped Classroom method. This
method optimizes the time before, during, and after classroom
learning [23]. Before entering the classroom, students can
prepare themselves by independently understanding the
primary material through the material provided. In the
Classroom, time can be focused on project activities and in-
depth discussions, so students are more actively involved in
problem-solving and concept application [24]. After class,
students can continue exploring and completing projects
1437

independently or collaboratively. This optimal out-of-class
timing is one of the effective strategies for achieving project
activities while providing space for students to try more,
explore their abilities, and discover their knowledge through
project activities outside the Classroom [25].
The results of previous research related to the Flipped
Classroom strategy in the learning process show that applying
this strategy has a significant influence. Students become
more active in preparing material before learning in class by
utilizing the resources provided. The learning atmosphere
becomes more interactive during classroom time, with
students engaging in in-depth discussions and reporting
material and project deliverables. The Flipped Classroom
strategy offers an opportunity for students to focus more on
concept application and collaboration, creating a more
dynamic and participatory learning environment [14], [26]–
[29]. Based on previous research diagnoses, there has not
been much application of the STEAM Project-Based
Learning model using the Flipped Classroom strategy in
various classroom conditions. Therefore, this study aims to
analyze the differences in students' creative thinking skills
between classes using Project STEAM-FC and classes
applying the Direct STEAM-FC model. This research is
expected to make a significant theoretical contribution in
combining the advantages of Project-Based Learning
STEAM and Flipped Classroom in facilitating knowledge
construction, particularly in learning architecture and
computer organization. This research is expected to guide
lecturers in designing learning in the informatics engineering
department effectively and efficiently, primarily through
applying the Project-based learning model with the STEAM
approach using the Flipped Classroom Strategy.
II. MATERIALS AND METHOD
This study used quasi-experimental research methods to
examine differences in creative thinking skills between two
groups that applied two learning approaches, namely the
Project STEAM-FC and Direct STEAM-FC models. The
study population consisted of 300 Informatics Engineering
students taking architecture and computer organization
courses in the odd academic year 2023/2024 in Denpasar,
Bali. The group random sampling technique is used because
the sample has been formed in predetermined classes. Six
different courses served as samples, split in half to create an
experimental and control group. Table 1 displays the study
design.
Table 1 describes the research conducted during ten
meetings, each aiming to improve creative thinking skills. In
the first meeting, all groups of students were given directions
on the learning model. A pretest was also conducted at the
first meeting to measure initial creative thinking skills.
Furthermore, from the second to the ninth meeting, students
get special treatment according to the syntax of the
established learning model. The learning process is carried
out gradually and systematically to ensure that each group
receives adequate intervention. In the tenth week, the study
ended with providing a posttest to all groups of students.
TABLE I
RESEARCH DESIGN
Group Week
1 2-9 10
Experiment
Provide instructions to
students for the learning
process of Project
STEAM-FC.
(Pretest)
Treat
using the
STEAM-
FC project
model
syntax
Posttest
Creative
thinking
skills
Control
Provide instructions for
the Direct STEAM-FC
learning process to
students
(Pretest)
Treat
using
STEAM-
FC direct
model
syntax
Posttest
Creative
thinking
skills
In this study, the arrangement of learning activities in both
learning models modified the research results of Yun Lu [21]
and Kuang [24]. Flipped classroom learning activities are
divided into three sessions: before, during, and after. In the
pre-class session, students make preliminary preparations that
include gathering information, reading materials, and other
introductory activities relevant to the topic to be studied.
Furthermore, in the classroom session, activities focused on
the core activities of each learning model. Finally, in the after-
class session, each group of students is given activities
tailored to the learning model. Details of the activities of both
learning models are shown in Table 2.
In applying these two learning models, the equality
between groups of students becomes a significant factor to
pay attention to. Both in the STEAM-FC project model and in
the STEAM-FC direct model, equality in the provision of
materials and learning opportunities must be maintained.
Although these two models have different approaches, both
give student worksheets, the primary material in the learning
process. However, the content of these worksheets is
differentiated according to the characteristics of each learning
model. In the STEAM-FC project model, student worksheets
adopt a project-based learning approach. It involves activities
encouraging students to engage in actual or simulated
projects, allowing them to practically apply STEAM
(Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics)
concepts. Students are allowed to collaborate, explore, and
develop creative solutions to problems.
Meanwhile, in the Direct STEAM-FC model, students are
given worksheets containing practice questions and
assignments to be done independently or in groups during the
learning process. The questions provided are adapted to the
material used in this research. The role of the lecturer is still
relatively high as a determinant of whether the answers made
by students are in the right or wrong category.
The project-based learning model learning design using the
STEAM approach with the Flipped Classroom strategy is
designed carefully and pays attention to students' cognitive
load in learning. Activities before, during, and after learning
are arranged so students can practice creative thinking skills
through each learning stage adapted to the learning model. This
learning design is adapted from several research results, namely
Lu. [21], Chiang. [24], Begman [30], and Laboy-Rush [31].
1438

TABLE II
LEARNING ACTIVITIES
Group Pre-Class In-Class After-Class
Project
STEAM-
FC
Teachers study the curriculum
and learn the objectives of
architecture and computer
organization.
Teachers prepare learning
materials and resources.
Teachers prepare project
assessment methods.
1. Reflection: In this early
stage, students reflect on their
experience and knowledge
related to the topic to be
studied
3. Discovery: students begin to explore and experiment with
the concepts and ideas they have gathered. This discovery is
at the heart of STEAM learning, where students apply
scientific, technological, engineering, artistic, and
mathematical knowledge in real-world contexts.
5. Communication: presentation of their work to others, be it
classmates, teachers, or a wider audience. Students explain
the process and results of their work, receive feedback, and
participate in critical discussions. This communication is
essential for developing public speaking skills and conveying
ideas clearly and persuasively.
2. Research: in-depth
information search.
Students use a variety of
sources, such as books,
journals, the internet, and
interviews with experts, to
gather project-related data
and information
4. Application: students
apply the knowledge and
skills acquired in actual or
simulated projects. They
design, build, and test
solutions to their problems
using STEAM principles.
Direct
STEAM-
FC
Teachers study the curriculum
and learn the objectives of
architecture and computer
organization.
Teachers prepare learning
materials and resources.
Teachers prepare methods for
assessing activities and tasks.
Students prepare materials
and assignments given at
previous meetings.
1. Introductory Activities: This stage begins the learning
session, where the educator introduces the topic or concept to
be discussed.
2. Discussing Homework: Next, educators and students
jointly discuss homework done the night before.
3. Teaching New Content/Material: Educators introduce new
materials or concepts to students at this stage. The material
taught covers aspects of STEAM that are relevant to the
learning topic
5. Closing Activities: Conclusion and Assessment: Learning
ends with a closing session where educators and students
together make conclusions from what has been learned
4. Working on Tasks and
Activities in the
Laboratory: Students are
then allowed to apply the
concepts that have been
learned through working
on assignments
In the Direct STEAM-FC model, student worksheets focus
more on tasks and practice questions that students must do.
This model prioritizes a direct learning method where the
teacher provides instructions and explanations, then followed
by exercises to deepen students' understanding of the material
provided. The topic of BUS interconnection on computer
architecture was chosen as the STEAM learning material.
Each group learned to analyze various communication lines
in computers, evaluate the types of interconnection paths, and
design efficient bus lines for computer components. This
activity enhances theoretical understanding and trains
practical skills in designing and analyzing computer systems,
combining science, technology, engineering, art, and
mathematics concepts. The description of each STEAM
component is shown in Table 3.
TABLE III
STEAM ACTIVITY CONTENT ANALYSIS
Subtopic Science Technology Engineering Art Mathematics
Bus
Interconnect
Computer
architecture
S1 Basic Computer
S2 Computer
hardware
S3 Basic Electronics
T1 Material selection
T2 Tool determination
T3 Data communication
T4 Technology Integration
E1 Design
E2 Design
Structure
E3
Troubleshooting
A1 Think creatively
A2 Design
Capabilities
A3 Drawing and
Assembly
M1 Basic
measurements
M2 Timeline
M3 think logic
Creative thinking skills that emphasize the ability to
generate new ideas that are unique but also of quality and
appropriate to the context. In its dimensionality, Torrance
highlights four main aspects of creative thinking skills:
Fluency, that is, the ability to generate many ideas; Flexibility,
namely the ability to produce diverse ideas; Originality,
which is the ability to make unique ideas; and Elaboration,
which is the ability to develop and expand these ideas [32],
[33], [9]. The dimensions and indicators of creative thinking
skills in this study are shown in Table 4. In this study, in
addition to paying attention to learning aspects, students'
psychological factors are also a concern. One of the
psychological factors that students observed was self-
efficacy. Self-efficacy is thought to influence the learning
process significantly [34].
TABLE IV
DIMENSIONS AND INDICATORS OF CREATIVE TH INKING SKILLS
Dimensions of
Creative
Thinking Skills
Indicator
Fluency
Memory and storage concept problem-
answering skills use knowledge and
experience to generate new ideas.
Elaboration
Skills in finding relevant information for
troubleshooting problems related to bus
interconnection types
Flexibility Skills to produce varied answers related to
memory hierarchy in computer architecture
Originality
Skills to choose another way of thinking in
analogizing bus lines in computer
architecture
1439

According to previous research, self-efficacy determines
how students evaluate their ability to handle academic tasks
[35], [36]. Therefore, self-efficacy is used as a moderator
variable or a sorting variable for groups of students with high
and low levels of self-efficacy.
TABLE V
SELF-EFFICACY DIMENSIONS AND INDICATO RS
Dimension Indicator
Difficulty Level Self-efficacy in overcoming obstacles in
learning
Confidence Level Self-efficacy refers to confidence in
accomplishing a task or overcoming a
given scenario.
Breadth Level
Generalizable ability beliefs
This research involves various variables that are analyzed
in depth. Here, the learning model serves as the independent
variable. The ability of the student to think creatively is the
dependent variable. Meanwhile, the moderator variable is
student self-efficacy, which moderates the relationship between
learning models and creative thinking skills. In addition, there
are covariate variables, namely initial creative thinking skills
(pretest). When randomization of covariate variables cannot be
done thoroughly, the analysis technique Analysis of Covariance
is used. ANCOVA utilizes covariate variables as controllers to
reduce variance errors, thus allowing control of outside factors
affecting the dependent variable, thus obtaining a pure
influence from the independent variable under study on
students' creative thinking skills [37], [38].
TABLE VI
RESEARCH DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
Analysis Formula
Test validity
Korelasi Pearson
Test Reliability
Cronbach Alpha
Descriptive Data
Percentage
Data normality Kolmogorov-
Smirnov
Data
homogeneity
Levene Test
Linearity
Anova Table
Hypothesis 1 Learning Model on Creative
Thinking Skills
Ancova Tabel
Hypothesis 2 Self-efficacy on Creative
Thinking Skills
Ancova Tabel
Hypothesis 3 Learning Model *Self-
efficacy on Creative
Thinking Skills
Ancova Tabel
In Table 6, the data analysis technique is carried out
through several stages: validity test, test reliability, and
descriptive data analysis. Furthermore, prerequisite tests are
data normality, data homogeneity, and data linearity, which
aim to evaluate the necessary assumptions before proceeding
to the hypothesis test. After all prerequisites are met, a
hypothesis test is carried out to test the relationship between
variables.
In this study, the validity test results produced an
instrument to measure self-efficacy consisting of 44 statement
items designed to evaluate students' confidence level in their
ability to cope with various academic tasks, adapted from
[39]. In addition, the creative thinking skills essay test is also
given with five questions used at the pretest and posttest
stages, adapted from [40]. This test aims to measure students'
creative thinking skills before and after the learning process.
In addition to these two instruments, student worksheets are
used in each learning model.
The self-efficacy instrument reliability test results received
a Cronbach Alpha score of 0.948 and a creative thinking skills
test instrument of 0.707. Next, before conducting the
hypothesis test, the first step that needs to be done is to
perform a prerequisite test to ensure that the data to be tested
meets the necessary assumptions. This includes data
normality tests, tests, and linearity tests. Decision-making on
prerequisite tests compared to a significant level of 5%. The
results of these prerequisite tests are shown in Table 7.
TABLE VII
PREREQUISITE TEST RESULTS
Prerequisite
Test
Result Decision
Data Normality [D(100) = 0.055, p =
0
,
200]
Normal Distributed
Data
Data
homogeneity
[F(3,96) = 0,642, p =
0,590]
Data is
Homogeneous
Data Linearity [F(23) = 0,828, p =
0,687]
Pretest and Posttest
variables of
creative thinking
skills have a linear
relationship
.
III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
After ensuring that the data collected follows the provisions
set, the next step is to test the hypothesis using predetermined
analysis techniques.
A. Result
The results of descriptive analysis based on the mean of the
data set of Project STEAM-FC and Direct STEAM FC
learning models that have been disaggregated based on Self-
efficacy show different scores. The average score of the
Project STEAM-FC learning model is higher than that of the
Direct STEAM-FC model. In addition, sorting by the level of
self-efficacy showed a consistent pattern, wherein in each
learning model, the group of students with high self-efficacy
had a higher average than those with low self-efficacy. See
Table 8.
TABLE VIII
AVERAGE RESULT OF DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF LEA RNING MODEL ON SELF-
EFFICACY SORTER
Learning Model Self-efficacy M SD
Project STEAM-FC
High Self-efficacy 31.84 2.982
Low self-efficacy 26.80 3.926
Total 29.32 4.288
Direct STEAM-FC
High Self-efficacy 26.16 3.955
Low self-efficacy 20.24 3.099
Total 23.20 4.616
Total
High Self-efficacy 29.00 4.499
Low self-efficacy 23.52 4.820
Total 26.26 5.395
Hypothesis testing was performed using the two-track
ANCOVA test to evaluate group differences mean by
considering covariate variables. The results of the hypothesis
test are shown in Table 9.
1440

TABLE IX
SUMMARY OF HYPOTHESIS TEST USING TWO-WAY ANCOVA
Source Mean Square df F Sig.
Corrected Model 423.846 4 33.955 0.000
Intercept 3750.923 1 300.489 0.000
Pretest Creative 3.422 1 0.274 0.602
Learning Model 789.643 1 63.259 0.000
Self-efficacy 740.450 1 59.318 0.000
Learn Model * Self-
efficacy
6.858 1 0.549 0.460
Error 1185.858 95
Total 71840.000 100
Corrected Total 2881.240 99
a. R Squared = .588 (Adjusted R Squared = .571)
Information: Pretest Creative = Early Creative Thinking Skills
The summary of the ANCOVA test in Table 9 revealed that
the results of the first hypothesis test showed a significant
difference in creative thinking skills between the Project
STEAM-FC and Direct STEAM-FC learning models with a
p-value = 0.000 smaller than 0.05. In addition, the results of
the second hypothesis test reported significant differences in
students' creative thinking skills between groups with high
and low self-efficacy in both learning models, with p values =
0.000 < 0.05. Furthermore, the third hypothesis test results
revealed no interaction between the learning model and self-
efficacy with creative thinking skills. See Figure 1. The results
of the ANCOVA test also take into account the covariate
variable, namely early creative thinking skills, where the p-
value = 0.602 is more significant than 0.05, where the pretest
value of creative thinking skills does not affect the creative
thinking skills posttest, in another sense that the significant
difference in students' creative thinking skills is indeed caused
by being given treatment according to the learning syntax, not
because of differences in students' initial abilities.
Fig. 1 Interaction between Learning Models and Self-efficacy on creative
thinking skills
Based on the results of statistical analysis that has been
carried out, generalizations can be taken by controlling the
initial thinking skills of the students; the results of the two-
way ANCOVA test show that differences in treatment in the
learning model produce significant differences in students'
creative thinking skills [F(1.95) = 63.259 p = 0.000]. On the
other hand, students' levels of self-efficacy produced
significant differences [F(1.95) = 59.318, p = 0.000].
Furthermore, the learning model did not interact significantly
with students' levels of self-efficacy [F(1.95) = 0.549, p =
0.460].
B. Discussion
Based on Table 2, the learning model applied by both uses
the STEAM approach and involves the flipped classroom
strategy. These two models significantly differ in the learning
steps given to both groups. The experimental group applies
project activities as a learning focus, particularly in computer
architecture and organization. Students in the experimental
group engage in real-world project-based learning that
provides an in-depth understanding of the material. In
practice, students in the experimental group understand the
theory and are trained to apply the concepts of computer
architecture and organization material in real situations. They
are invited to load products through project activities relevant
to everyday life, allowing them to hone their creativity and
design skills to create innovative ideas in their projects.
On the other hand, the control group followed a more
conventional method of hands-on learning. Students in the
control group focused on receiving information about
computer architecture and organization materials through
assignments assigned by lecturers. They practice completing
predetermined tasks with an emphasis on understanding basic
concepts. The differences between the two groups provide an
opportunity to compare the effectiveness of the two learning
approaches in the context of STEAM and flipped classrooms.
The challenges lecturers face in implementing the Project
STEAM-FC model involve several aspects, including
difficulties in choosing projects suitable for their learning
materials, lack of student independence, and the evaluation
process that requires a relatively long time. In addition,
lecturers find it challenging to observe students as a whole
because some students are quiet and less active in discussions.
The effectiveness of learning will occur through the process
of reflective activity, which aims to build students' cognitive,
develop ideas, obtain information critically, and increase
readiness to solve problems based on the learning carried out
[14], [15], [41], [42].
Hypothesis testing with ANCOVA showed several results;
the first hypothesis showed a significant difference in
students' creative thinking skills between the group of
students who learned using the Project STEAM-FC model
with a corrected average of 29.25 and the group of students
who used the Direct STEAM-FC model with a fixed average
of 23.26. From the results of the ANCOVA test, a value of p
= 0.000 is obtained, which is smaller than the significance
level of 0.05, so the null hypothesis is rejected (Ho is
rejected). This demonstrates a substantial disparity in the
creative cognitive abilities of students in the two groups.
Furthermore, the findings indicate that the STEAM-FC
project model outperforms the Direct STEAM-FC model in
enhancing students' creative thinking abilities.
Second, the impact of self-efficacy on creative thinking
skills between the two learning models should be analyzed.
The descriptive statistics in Table 8 reveal differences in mean
scores between groups of students with high and low self-
efficacy in each learning model. The results showed that the
group of students who had high self-efficacy in both learning
models showed significantly higher average scores than the
group of students who had low self-efficacy. In detail, it
1441

revealed that creative thinking skills in the group of students
with high self-efficacy had a corrected average score of 28.98.
In contrast, the students with low self-efficacy had an updated
average score of 23.53. The ANCOVA test yielded a p-value
of 0.000, below the significant level of 0.05. Therefore,
rejection of the null hypothesis (Ho) indicates a substantial
difference in creative thinking skills between groups of
students with high and low self-efficacy. These findings
support the concept that differences in levels of self-efficacy
can affect students' creative thinking skills across both
learning models, providing an empirical foundation for
understanding the role of self-efficacy in improving creative
thinking skills.
Self-efficacy refers to a person's belief in their ability to
complete a task or achieve a specific goal [43]. Students with
high self-efficacy may be more likely to take the initiative to
explore the material independently, solve complex problems, and
try different approaches in STEAM projects [44], [45]. Their
belief in their abilities can encourage them to face challenges
generating new ideas confidently. Conversely, students with low
self-efficacy may tend to feel less confident in the face of
complex tasks. This can limit the exploration of new ideas,
creativity, and active participation in learning [1], [46].
Third, the interaction between learning models and self-
efficacy on creative thinking skills should be evaluated. In
Figure 1, the students with high self-efficacy using the Direct
STEAM-FC model had lower creative thinking skills than
those of high self-efficacy students in the Project STEAM-FC
model. The same was true for the students with low self-
efficacy in both models. Based on ANCOVA, it gives a p-
value result of 0.549, which is higher than the significant level
of 0.05, fails to reject H0, and is reinforced with the line flow
in Figure 1 that does not intersect each other. In conclusion,
no significant interaction existed between the learning model
and self-efficacy in students' creative thinking skills.
In the context of computer architecture and organization
materials, the influence of self-efficacy on each learning
model, namely Project-Based Learning STEAM flipped
Classroom and direct learning STEAM flipped Classroom,
significantly affects creative thinking skills. In the Project
STEAM-FC model, students are more actively involved in
complex projects, and self-efficacy is essential in fostering
self-confidence[47]. Students with high levels of self-efficacy
are more confident in tackling challenging tasks and can apply
knowledge of computer architecture and organization in their
projects. In contrast, students with low self-efficacy feel less
confident in dealing with such projects, which can limit active
participation and application of concepts.
On the other hand, in the Direct STEAM-FC model, the
focus is more on delivering material directly. Self-efficacy
can affect how students can independently understand and
master these concepts. Students with high levels of self-
efficacy are better able to cope with the material
independently and find solutions to learning difficulties. In
contrast, students with low self-efficacy require more support
and guidance [28], [35].
The Project STEAM-FC model has great potential to
improve students' creative thinking skills through several
aspects that are integrated holistically. First, in this model,
students engage in projects that reflect the context of
computer architecture and organization materials. The
projects allow students to face concrete challenges, solve
problems, and design innovative solutions [48], [49].
Research has revealed that students can hone their creative
thinking skills through project activities by responding
actively to specific problems [50]. Furthermore, the Project
STEAM-FC model encourages group work, where students
work together to achieve project goals. This collaboration
stimulates the exchange of ideas and views from different
perspectives, enriching the creative thinking process.
Discussion and interaction between group members can trigger
the emergence of new ideas and creative solutions [51], [52].
The flipped classroom strategy in this model allows
students to understand the material independently before and
after the class meeting [14], [24]. This provides space for
students to develop independence in learning and problem-
solving so they can focus more on the creative aspects of the
project, generating original ideas and innovative solutions
[53], [54]. In addition, this model creates opportunities to
grow soft skills such as communication, cooperation, and
leadership. These skills support the development of students'
creative dimension, enabling them to convey ideas and engage
in discussions [27] more effectively. Project STEAM-FC
involves a stage of reflection and evaluation after project
completion. This process allows students to look back on their
experiences, consider different approaches, and think of ways
to enhance their creativity in the future.
Based on the dimension of creative thinking skills, the
fluency dimension achieved the highest score, 71 for the
STEAM-FC project and 61 for direct STEAM-FC. Fluency
increases because students are specifically trained to develop
creative solutions to problems related to bus interconnection
paths in computer architecture. Then, in the Elaboration
dimension, the STEAM-FC project class scored 76, while the
direct STEAM-FC scored 61. Improvements to this
dimension can occur because project-based learning provides
space for students to develop new ideas. All students are
actively involved by giving their ideas on how to solve
learning problems.
Furthermore, the STEAM-FC project class scored 71 in the
Originality dimension, while the direct STEAM-FC only
scored 51. The increase in the dimension of originality shows
that students can think beyond expectations, especially in
solving problems related to the analogy of bus lines in
computer architecture. However, in the Flexibility dimension,
the STEAM-FC project gets a score of 68, while the direct
approach of STEAM-FC only reaches 56, the lowest score
among other dimensions. This is due to the lack of variety of
answers from students, who still tend to rely on friends who
are considered more capable, so they are less able to stand as
independent thinkers.
Thus, implementing the STEAM-FC project model in
learning contributes positively to students' creative thinking
skills. However, in carrying out project-based learning, it is
necessary to pay special attention to students' flexibility skills.
The combination of STEAM project learning with flipped
classroom strategies brings a new atmosphere to students,
allowing them to prepare material ahead of time, interact more
in class, and continue project activities outside the classroom.
STEAM's contribution to project learning creates an
overarching emphasis across disciplines (science, technology,
engineering, art, and mathematics) on the work produced
1442

through project learning. The STEAM approach also provides
a more planned focus and analysis of project learning
continuity.
In developing this model in the future, it is necessary to pay
attention to students' academic self-efficacy levels. This factor
has a significant impact on students' ability. Therefore,
lecturers must provide motivation and stories of constructive
experiences during the learning process, especially for
students with low self-efficacy. Thus, the data obtained shows
that the STEAM-FC project model is superior in creative
thinking skills compared to the STEAM-FC direct model.
IV. CONCLUSION
The findings of this study show that the model project-
based learning with the STEAM approach using flipped
classroom strategy and students' self-efficacy levels
positively affect students' creative thinking skills. This
research provides concrete evidence that the application of
project-based learning models consistently contributes
positively to improving creative thinking skills, especially in
students who take architecture and computer organization
courses. In the future, through the research results, the
learning process in architecture and computer organizations
can experience changes toward innovative learning.
Innovative learning provides space for students to dare to find
the meaning of knowledge from the material they learn,
involves them actively in learning, and stimulates their
creativity.
This study is subject to limitations as it solely examines
disparities in creative thinking abilities across various
instructional approaches. Hence, forthcoming investigations
are anticipated to explore the impact of variations in students'
creative thinking abilities on learning achievement. This will
provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between
creative thinking skills and learning achievement and can also
contribute to future curriculum development and learning
methods.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We sincerely thank the Institute Bisnis dan Teknologi
Indonesia for its cooperation and support as a research
location. We also thank the Doctoral Program of Universitas
Pendidikan Ganesha for valuable guidance and support
throughout the research process.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Yulastri, Ganefri, F. Ferdian, and Elfizon, “Analyzing the Impact
of Project-Based Learning on Student Entrepreneurship Readiness: A
Structural Equation Modeling and Statistical Analysis in Higher
Education,” Int. J. Informatics Vis., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 2427–2435, 2023,
doi: 10.30630/joiv.7.4.2457.
[2] S. Sukatiman, M. Akhyar, Siswandari, and Roemintoyo, “Enhancing
higher-order thinking skills in vocational education through
scaffolding-problem based learning,” Open Eng., vol. 10, no. 1, pp.
612–619, 2020, doi: 10.1515/eng-2020-0070.
[3] R. Pawar, S. Patil, and S. Kulkarni, “Enhancing Product Development
Skills of Engineering Students through Diversified Group Activities,”
J. Eng. Educ. Transform., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 20–30, 2023,
doi:10.16920/jeet/2023/v37i1/23128.
[4] M. Ali, “Vocational students’ perception and readiness in facing
globalization, industry revolution 4.0 and society 5.0,” J. Phys. Conf.
Ser., vol. 1833, no. 1, pp. 0–7, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-
6596/1833/1/012050.
[5] C. M. Annur, “Daftar Program Studi Terfavorit Calon Mahasiswa di
Indonesia,” Jakarta, 2021.
[6] M. B. Purwanto, R . Hartono, and S. Wahyuni, “Essential Skills
Challenges for the 21st Century Graduates: Creating A Generation of
High-Level Competence in The Industrial Revolution 4.0 Era,” Asian
J. Appl. Educ., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 279–292, 2023,
doi:10.55927/ajae.v2i3.3972.
[7] S. Kocdar, A. Bozkurt, and T. Goru Dogan, “Engineering through
distance education in the time of the fourth industrial revolution:
Reflections from three decades of peer reviewed studies,” Comput.
Appl. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 931–949, 2021,
doi:10.1002/cae.22367.
[8] A. S. Sulistianingsih and Z. C. A. Dalu, “Improving architecture
student creativity in project-based environmental knowledge
learning,” J. Eng. Educ. Transform., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 90–96, 2021,
doi: 10.16920/jeet/2021/v34i4/154891.
[9] S. Sendag, I. Yakin, and N. Gedik, “Fostering creative thinking skills
through computer programming: Explicit or integrated teaching?,”
Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 10819–10838, 2023,
doi:10.1007/s10639-023-11629-4.
[10] A. A. G. Ekayana, “Flipped Learning Berbasis Project Terhadap
Berpikir Kreatif Dan Prestasi Belajar Di Pendidikan Tinggi,”
Kwangsan: Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, vol. 10, no. 2. p. 164, 2022.
doi: 10.31800/jtp.kw.v10n2.p164--182.
[11] S. F. Sidek, M. H. M. Yatim, S. A. Ariffin, and A. Nurzid, “The
acceptance factors and effectiveness of mooc in the blended learning
of computer architecture and organization course,” Univers. J. Educ.
Res., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 909–915, 2020, doi:10.13189/ujer.2020.080323.
[12] A. S. Nayak, N. D. Hiremath, F. M. Umadevi, and V. G. Garagad, “A
hands-on approach in teaching computer organization & architecture
through project based learning,” J. Eng. Educ. Transform., vol. 34, no.
Special Issue, pp. 742–746, 2021,
doi:10.16920/jeet/2021/v34i0/157176.
[13] S. Suhaimi, A. N. Rosli, A. H. Ariffin, T. Muniandy, and M. H. A.
Wahab, “Education 4.0: The impact of computer architecture and
organization course on students’ computer anxiety and computer self-
efficacy,” Int. J. Adv. Trends Comput. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no. 6, pp.
3022–3025, 2019, doi: 10.30534/ijatcse/2019/57862019.
[14] F. Mayar, F. W. Putra, F. A. Monia, S. O. Kosassy, R. P. Fadli, and R.
Arinalhaq, “Project-Based Learning Model Development Using
Flipped Classroom for Drawing Learning in College,” Int. J.
Informatics Vis., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 2415–2420, 2023,
doi:10.30630/joiv.7.4.02227.
[15] D. V Sigit, R. H. Ristanto, and S. N. Mufida, “Integration of Project-
Based E-Learning with STEAM: An Innovative Solution to Learn
Ecological Concept,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 23–40, 2022, doi:
10.29333/iji.2022.1532a.
[16] I. W. Santyasa, G. S. Santyadiputra, and M. Juniantari, “Problem-
based learning model versus direct instruction in achieving critical
thinking ability viewed from students’ social attitude in learning
physics,” in Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities
Research, 2019, pp. 633–644. doi: 10.2991/icesshum-19.2019.101.
[17] N. W. E . Pratiwi and I. W. Santyasa, “Project-Based with Flipped
Learning : A Challenge to Enhance Students ’ Achievement on
Chemistry,” Adv. Soc. Sci. Educ. Humanit. Res., vol. 566, no. Aes
2020, pp. 186–190, 2021, doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.210715.040.
[18] J. A. López and F. J. P. Palacios, “Effects of a Project-Based Learning
Methodology on Environmental Awareness of Secondary School
Students,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2024.
[19] M. E. Beier, M. H. Kim, A. Saterbak, V. Leautaud, S. Bishnoi, and J.
M. Gi lberto, “The effect of authentic project-based learning on
attitudes and career aspirations in STEM,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 56,
no. 1, pp. 3–23, 2019, doi: 10.1002/tea.21465.
[20] C. Baluarte-Araya, “Project based learning application experience in
engineering courses: Database case in the professional career of
systems engineering,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl., vol. 11, no. 3,
pp. 131–140, 2020, doi: 10.14569/ijacsa.2020.0110316.
[21] S. Y. Lu, C. C. Lo, and J. Y. Syu, “Project-based learning oriented
STEAM: the case of micro–bit paper-cutting lamp,” Int. J. Technol.
Des. Educ., 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10798-021-09714-1.
[22] L. D. Lapitan, C. E. Tiangco, D. A. G. Sumalinog, N. S. Sabarillo, and
J. M. Diaz, “An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy
during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Educ. Chem. Eng., vol. 35, no. May
2020, pp. 116–131, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ece.2021.01.012.
[23] Y. J. Lee, R. Davis, and Y. Li, “Korean Pre-service Teachers’ Self-
efficacy with Online Micro-Teaching Activities in a Teacher
Education Program,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 71–86, 2023,
doi:10.29333/iji.2023.1645a.
1443

[24] F. K. Chiang and Z. Wu, “Flipping a classroom with a three-stage
collaborative instructional model (3-CI) for graduate students,”
Australas. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 51–67, 2021,
doi:10.14742/ajet.6330.
[25] N. S. Goedhart, N. Blignaut-van Westrhenen, C. Moser, and M. B. M.
Zweekhorst, “The flipped classroom: supporting a diverse group of
students in their learning,” Learn. Environ. Res., vol. 22, no. 2, pp.
297–310, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10984-019-09281-2.
[26] Y. Ma, “Exploration of flipped classroom approach to enhance critical
thinking skills,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 1–21, 2023,
doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20895.
[27] M. Priyaadharshini and M. Maiti, “Learning Analytics: Gamification
in Flipped Classroom for Higher Education,” J. Eng. Educ.
Transform., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 106–119, 2023,
doi:10.16920/jeet/2023/v37i1/23137.
[28] Diana, H. D. Surjono, and A. Mahmudi, “The Effect of Flipped
Classroom Learning Model on Students’ Understanding of
Mathematical Concepts and Higher-Order Thinking Skills,” Int. J. Inf.
Educ. Technol., vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 2014–2022, 2023,
doi:10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.12.2016.
[29] T. Tang, A. M. Abuhmaid, M. Olaimat, D. M. Oudat, M. Aldhaeebi,
and E. Bamanger, “Efficiency of flipped classroom with online-based
teaching under COVID-19,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 0, no. 0,
pp. 1–12, 2020, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2020.1817761.
[30] J. Bergman and A. Sams, “The Flipped Classroom,” CSE, vol. 17, no.
3, pp. 24–27, 2014.
[31] D. Laboy-Rush, Integrated STEM Education through Project-Based
Learning. learning.com, 2007.
[32] C. Yildiz and T. Guler Yildiz, “Exploring the relationship between
creative thinking and scientific process skills of preschool children,”
Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 39, no. January, p. 100795, 2021,
doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100795.
[33] G. Ozkan and U. Umdu Topsakal, “Exploring the effectiveness of
STEAM design processes on middle school students’ creativity,” Int.
J. Technol. Des. Educ., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 95–116, 2021,
doi:10.1007/s10798-019-09547-z.
[34] A. Yada, M. Leskinen, H. Savolainen, and S. Schwab, “Meta-analysis
of the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes toward
inclusive education,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 109, no. 103521, pp.
1–15, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103521.
[35] P. I. Capron and C. Audrin, “Improving self-efficacy and creative self-
efficacy to foster creativity and learning in schools,” Think. Ski. Creat.,
vol. 42, no. Desember, p. 100966, 2021,
doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100966.
[36] M. W. Setiyadi, “Implementation of the project-based learning model
to improve sefl efficacy and student learning outcomes,” J. Pijar Mipa,
vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 687–691, 2023, doi: 10.29303/jpm.v18i5.5479.
[37] I. M. Candiasa, Analisis Data Dengan Statistik Multivariat. Singaraja:
Undiksha Press, 2020.
[38] I. W. Santyasa, Metodologi penelitian pendidikan. Singaraja:
Singaraja Press, 2019.
[39] O. Saoula, A. Shamim, M. J. Ahmad, and M. F. Abid, “Do
entrepreneurial self-efficacy, entrepreneurial motivation, and family
support enhance entrepreneurial intention? The mediating role of
entrepreneurial education,” Asia Pacific J. Innov. Entrep., vol. 17, no.
1, pp. 20–45, 2023, doi: 10.1108/apjie-06-2022-0055.
[40] M. P. Simanjuntak, J. Hutahaean, N. Marpaung, and D. Ramadhani,
“Effectiveness of problem-based learning combined with computer
simulation on students’ problem-solving and creative thinking skills,”
Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 519–534, 2021,
doi:10.29333/iji.2021.14330a.
[41] I. R. W. Atmojo, R. Ardiansyah, and D. Y. Saputri, “Empowering
Science-Based Entrepreneurship (SciPreneur) Skills through CEL-
BaDiS Up Learning Model on Food Biotechnology Materials,” Int. J.
Instr., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 83–102, 2022, doi: 10.29333/iji.2022.1535a.
[42] K. Y. Lin, Y. T. Wu, Y. T. Hsu, and P. J. Williams, “Effects of infusing
the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to
develop preservice technology teachers’ engineering design thinking,”
Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40594-
020-00258-9.
[43] A. Bandura, “Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and
Functioning,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 117–148, 1993,
doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3.
[44] A. Bandura, W. H. Freeman, and R. Lightsey, “Self-Efficacy: The
Exercise of Control,” J. Cogn. Psychother., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 158–
166, 1999, doi: 10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158.
[45] A. Bandura, Cultivate Self-efficacy for Personal and Organizational
Effectiveness. 2009. doi: 10.1002/9781405164047.ch9.
[46] M. Randazzo, R. Priefer, and R. Khamis-Dakwar, “Project-Based
Learning and Traditional Online Teaching of Research Methods
During COVID-19: An Investigation of Research Self-Efficacy and
Student Satisfaction,” Front. Educ., vol. 6, no. May, pp. 1–16, 2021,
doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.662850.
[47] C. Nordlöf, J. Hallström, and G. E. Höst, “Self-efficacy or context
dependency?: Exploring teachers’ perceptions of and attitudes towards
technology education,” Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., vol. 29, no. 1, pp.
123–141, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10798-017-9431-2.
[48] A. A. Chistyakov, S. P. Zhdanov, E. L. Avdeeva, E. A. Dyadichenko,
M. L. Kunitsyna, and R . I . Yagudina, “Exploring the characteristics
and effectiveness of project-based learning for science and STEAM
education,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1–
7, 2023, doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/13128.
[49] V. Hlukhaniuk, V. Solovei, S. Tsvilyk, and I. Shymkova, “Steam
Education As a Benchmark for Innovative Training of Future Teachers
of Labour Training and Technology,” in Society. Integration.
Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference,
2020, p. 211. doi: 10.17770/sie2020vol1.5000.
[50] Nurhasnah, Festiyed, and Yerimadesi, “A Review Analysis:
Implementation of STEAM Project Based Learning in Science
Learning,” SEJ (Science Educ. Journal), vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2023,
doi: 10.21070/sej.v7i1.1623.
[51] V. Kusumasari, T. D. Chandra, M. Muksar, and R. Rahardi,
“Pengembangan E-Modul Berbasis Problem Based Learning untuk
Mendukung Pambelajaran Daring dengan Flipped Classroom,”
Prisma, vol. 5, pp. 195–201, 2022.
[52] T. A. Setyarini and M. M. Jannah, “The effect of project-based
learning assisted PANGTUS on creative thinking ability in higher
education,” Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn., vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 245–
251, 2020, doi: 10.3991/IJET.V15I11.12717.
[53] P. Abedi, M. H. Keshmirshekan, and E. Namaziandost, “The
Comparative Effect of Flipped Classroom Instruction versus
Traditional Instruction on Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ English
Composition Writing Task-based language teaching and speaking skill
View project Implementing the E-portfolio assessment p,” J. Apllied
Linguist. Lang. Res., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 43–56, 2019.
[54] D. Sudiarti, N. M. Ashilah, and U. Nurjanah, “Implementation of
flipped learning with flipbook media assistance on learning outcomes
and critical thinking abilities,” J. Inov. Teknol. Pendidik., vol. 10, no.
4, pp. 385–394, 2023, doi: 10.21831/jitp.v10i4.58191.
1444