Supporting data for: Bridging Ideas to Innovation in Physics Learning: The Role of Dynamic Formative Feedback in Cultivating Creative Thinking through Product-Based Assessment
Description
DATASET INFORMATION =================== Title: Quantitative data from study on dynamic formative feedback in physics PjBL Study: Bridging Ideas to Innovation in Physics Learning Corresponding Author: [Nama Anda, Email] FILE DESCRIPTION ================ 1. CreativeThinking_Physics_Data.xlsx - Sheet1 Expert validation - Sheet2 "RawScores" Questionnaire - Sheet3 "RawScores" Graphs - Sheet4 "RawScores" Creativity - Sheet5 "RawScores" Posttest indicator (CSV) - Sheet6 "RawScores" Independent t-test (presentation) - Sheet7 "RawScores" Independent t-test (product) - Sheet8 "RawScores" Paired-sample t-test (experimental group) - Sheet9 "RawScores" Paired-sample t-test (control group) - Sheet10 "RawScores" Independent t-test (posttest) Note: The calculations were conducted using the JASP application by entering the raw data into JASP. VARIABLE DESCRIPTION ==================== 1. Student_ID: Kode anonim peserta (Experimen 1-25, Control 1-30) 2. Group: Experimental (n=25) / Control (n=30) 3. Pretest_Posttest, Produk and presentatation = (Fluency, Flexibility, Originality, Elaboration) MEASUREMENT SCALE ================= All creativity scores: 1-4 Likert scale N-Gain: Normalized gain scores calculated per Hake (1998) ETHICAL NOTE ============ - All participant identifiers have been removed - School name and location anonymized - Qualitative data (interviews, observations) not included to protect privacy CONTACT ======= For questions: 25031635007@mhs.unesa.ac.id
Files
Steps to reproduce
Data Collection Procedure This study employed a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design, consisting of a quantitative experimental phase followed by a qualitative phase to deepen the interpretation of the results. The participants were 55 eighth-grade junior high school students, selected using cluster random sampling. The experimental group (25 students) received Project-Based Learning (PjBL) integrated with dynamic formative feedback, while the control group (30 students) experienced conventional PjBL. Data collection began with instrument preparation and validation including essay-based pretest–posttest items, product and presentation assessment rubrics, observation sheets, and semi-structured interview guidelines. Instrument validity was established through expert judgment and empirical testing, and reliability analysis indicated excellent internal consistency. The intervention was conducted over four weeks. In the first week, students completed a creativity pretest and engaged in project ideation. During weeks two and three, students developed and revised physics products related to simple machines through iterative cycles of teacher feedback (directive, elaborative, reflective, and metacognitive), peer feedback, and self-reflection. In the final week, students finalized their products, delivered presentations, and completed the posttest. Quantitative data consisted of pretest–posttest creativity scores, product creativity scores, and presentation scores. These data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, normalized gain (N-gain), and effect size analysis. Qualitative data were obtained through classroom observations, documentation of product revisions, and semi-structured interviews with selected students, and were analyzed thematically to explain how and why dynamic formative feedback influenced creative thinking. Ethical considerations included informed consent, anonymity, and data confidentiality. All procedures were systematically documented to ensure transparency and reproducibility.
Institutions
- Universitas Negeri Surabaya