Abstract

The paper presents a Lesson Study comprising a cycle of planning, conducting a lesson, and analyzing its outcomes. The research question is: "How can the FILA table (Focus, Information, Learn, Action plan) improve students' creative thinking skills in STEAM lessons on the subject of art?" The authors aimed to explore how the FILA table could be utilized to enhance students' creative thinking in STEAM classrooms. This study provided an opportunity to examine the process of implementing the FILA table and its impact on fostering creative thinking during STEAM lessons.

The research builds on the theoretical work of Johnson and J. Guilford, which defines creative thinking as the ability to generate a variety of ideas, exhibit originality, and demonstrate flexibility in thought. The findings of this study can benefit teachers aiming to cultivate not only subject-specific knowledge and skills but also creative thinking—an essential competency for success in the modern world.

The study revealed that incorporating the FILA table in STEAM lessons significantly enhanced originality and flexibility in students' thinking. Students who used the table exhibited a high level of creative thinking, demonstrated by their ability to generate diverse and unconventional ideas and to develop innovative solutions to creative challenges.

Introduction:

In today’s ever-changing world, individuals must constantly adapt to unpredictable situations, solve complex problems, and introduce innovations [1]. . Creative thinking, a cognitive process, is defined as the ability to generate ideas or solutions that are both original and useful within a given context. An original idea is distinguished by its high level of novelty or uniqueness, while a useful idea is characterized by its efficiency or practicality. Some researchers emphasize that creativity in the classroom should incorporate topics and questions that transcend the boundaries of specific disciplines . Numerous studies highlight the positive impact of STEAM education on fostering creative thinking among students. This approach is particularly valued for its ability to establish connections between diverse subjects, making it an effective method for cultivating creative thinking skills. STEAM also supports the development of higher-order thinking skills, such as critical and creative thinking, in students [2]. 

The purpose of the Lesson Study is to explore and evaluate how the FILA table in STEAM lessons can support the development of students' creative thinking.

Bernard Marr, a writer, futurist, and business technology advisor, makes an argument in favor of STEAM education: "... necessary to prepare our children for the fourth industrial revolution."[3].

Research Design or Methodology

The object of the study is creative thinking and its key components: flexibility, fluency, and originality. The study involved 32 seventh-grade students from Almaty. At the preliminary stage, the level of creativity was assessed using Johnson’s creativity questionnaire [4]. Focus group teachers participated in two cycles of a Lesson Study, observing students of different achievement levels (A, B, and C) as they analyzed information using the FILA chart within the CLIL approach. The teachers recorded their observations and drew conclusions based on the collected data.

The following tools and methods were identified for the study:

• Analysis of students' responses: In the experimental group, responses recorded in the FILA chart using the CLIL approach were analyzed, while in the control group, student responses were studied independently.

• Observation of students’ social interactions: A graphic interaction map was used to document and analyze students’ collaborative behavior.

• Analysis of students’ creative works: A total of 54 creative works produced during the two Lesson Study cycles were assessed [6].

Method: The study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis techniques [5].. An experiment was conducted with two groups of seventh-grade students: the experimental group, where the FILA table was implemented in the STEAM lessons, and the control group, where no FILA table was used, and lessons were conducted in the traditional format. [6-7]. To gather the data, the following tools were utilized: • Pretests and post-tests: These were administered to assess the students' creativity levels using the Johnson and J. Guilford test. • Monitoring student work: The work of students using the FILA table was observed and analyzed. • Student survey: A survey was conducted to gather student feedback on their experiences and perceptions of the lessons. Results: The study's findings highlight the positive impact of the FILA table on the development of creative thinking and the ability to generate new ideas. These results contribute to both the theory and practical application of STEAM lesson implementation and offer teachers an effective tool for fostering creative thinking in art lessons [8-9]. We believe the research holds practical significance for developing new teaching materials designed to enhance students' creative abilities. Research Lesson 1 (RL1) Forecasts were made for each student at two or three points during the lesson: in the middle and at the end. Two cycles of the Lesson Study were conducted. The first stage of the lesson aimed to assess and develop various aspects of creative thinking, which were evaluated using a modified version of the test by J. Guilford [10-14]. . To complete the task, students were divided into groups and engaged in a brainstorming session. Their task was to generate as many ideas as possible for using a specific object in a STEAM lesson. They were given 5 minutes to complete the task. • Thinking fluency: The number of ideas generated was evaluated; the more ideas produced within the 5 minutes, the higher the level of thinking fluency. • Originality of thinking: The number of unique ideas that went beyond conventional uses of the object was assessed. • Flexibility of thinking: The ability to switch between different categories and propose various uses for the same object was evaluated.

Analysis of J. Guilford's test: A: Completed the task in 3 minutes, demonstrating high fluency. Showed a balanced level of originality (4) and flexibility (4) in thinking. B: Achieved average results, generating 2 original ideas in 4 minutes. Conclusion: Can generate ideas quickly, but needs further development in unconventionality and flexibility of thinking. C: Completed the task in 2 minutes, displaying low speed. Conclusion: Struggles to come up with ideas and tends not to pursue them; the ideas generated lack originality. Focus is needed on developing creativity and flexibility. The second stage of the lesson focused on tracking the progress of students at levels A, B, and C in developing creative thinking. Using the FILA table, students were required to break down their ideas into smaller, clearer steps for problem-solving. Forecasts were made for each student at different levels to assess their development. A: Will demonstrate a deep understanding of the idea’s implementation. B: Will show a superficial understanding of the lesson topic, generating ideas based on known solutions. C: Will require more time to grasp new material and may struggle to generate ideas. Brainstorming in RL1 served as the starting point for the STEAM lesson. Students broke down the information into smaller, more manageable steps, which helped them generate unconventional ideas. A: This student generated not only a large number of ideas but also developed them by working out the details and justifying each decision. Some of the ideas were innovative. B: He generated ideas based on familiar solutions, but through working with the FILA table, he was able to express these ideas more clearly and justify his choices. C: It took him more time to understand the new material, but the table helped him break down complex information into smaller, more manageable parts.

[1] Halpern D. Psychology of critical thinking. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000 - 512 p. – p. 41]. [2] Anisimova T. I. STEAM education as an innovative technology for Industry 4.0, (2018) [3] Ivanova S.V., Ivanov O.B., Prospects for the development of education in the context of the fourth industrial revolution //Voprosy ekonomiki obrazovaniya, 2019, pp.7-29. [4] E. E. Tunik. The creativity questionnaire. Johnson. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University PM, 1997г [5] Alekseev NG, Leontovich AV, Obuhov AS, Fomina LF. The concept of the development of research activities of students. Issledovatel’skaja Rabota Shkol’nikov. 2002;(1): 24–33. (In Russ.). [6] Barron F. «The Psychology of Imagination.» Scientific American, 1958, 199,151-166 [7] Gordon W. J. J. Synectics: The Development of Creative Capacity. New York: Harper and Row, 1961. [8] Taylor C. W. (Ed.) Creativity: Progress and Potential. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964. [9] Torrance E. P. Education and the Creative Potential. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1963. [10] Torrance E. P. Mental Health and Constructive Behavior. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1965. [11] Torrance E. P. «Predictive Validity o f 'Bonus' Scoring fo r Combinations on Repeated Figures Tests o f Creative Thinking.» Journal of Psychology, 1972, 81,167-171. [12] Torrance E. P. «Predictive Validity of the Torrance Tests o f CreativeThinking.» Journal of Creative Behavior, 1972, 6(4), 236-252. [13] Torrance E. P. and Gupta R.«Programmed Experiences in Creative Thinking.» Minneapolis: Bureau of Educational Research, University of Minnesota, 1964. (Mimeographed) [14] Torrance E. P. and Hansen E. «The Question-Asking Behavior of HighlyCreative and Less Creative Basic Business Teachers Identified by a Paper-and-Pendl Test» Psychological reports, 1965,17,815-818.