MJFAS template
15
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Improving the creative thinking and
collaborative skills of prospective biology
teachers using the EMKONTAN learning model
in environmental science courses
N. Nurwidodo a,b,1, I. Ibrohim a,2,*, S. Sueb a,2, Fadhlan Muchlas Abrori c,3,
Tubagus Ahmad Darojat d,4
a Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri
Malang, Jl. Semarang No. 5 Malang, East Java 65145, Indonesia
b Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas
Muhammadiyah Malang, Jl. Raya Tlogomas 246 Malang, East Java 65144, Indonesia
c STEM Education Department, Linz School of Education, Johannes Kepler University Linz,
Altenberger Str. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria
d International College of Rajamangala Univesity of Technology Krungthep, Thung Maha Mek,
Sathon, Bangkok 10120, Thailand
1nurwidodo@umm.ac.id; 2ibrohim.fmipa@um.ac.id; 3sueb.fmipa@um.ac.id;
4fadhlan1991@gmail.com;
5bagus2m@gmail.com
Abstract: The implementation of the Environmental Science learning process so far has shown a
lack of encouragement to improve students' 4C skills. The EMKONTAN learning model is one of the
models that is believed to improve students' creativity, collaboration skills, and environmental literacy.
This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the EMKONTAN learning model in improving critical
thinking and collaborative skills for prospective biology teacher students. EMKONTAN is a student-
centered learning model (students’ active learning), oriented to creative learning, problem-based
learning, collaborative learning, and provides opportunities for students to improve environmental
learning. This research was conducted in the event semester of the 2020/2021 academic year at IKIP
Budi Utomo Malang and FTTE Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang-Indonesia, involving 150 second-
semester students through total sampling. Data was obtained through observation, questionnaires, and
tests. The research used a pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group design. Data collection in this
study was carried out using Google Forms, Google Classroom, Google Meet, and WhatsApp. Data
analysis using statistical product and service solutions (SPSS) version 23 software. The analysis of
covariance (ANCOVA) analysis results showed that EMKONTAN, PBL affected students' creativity and
collaboration skills in biology teacher candidate students with a value of p<0.005. The least significant
difference (LSD) result was significantly different in improving students' creativities thinking, and
collaboration skills. The EMKONTAN class gained the highest post-test score. Therefore, EMKONTAN
could be applicable to improve students' creative thinking and collaborative skills outcomes in
environmental learning.
Keywords: collaboration; creativity; EMKONTAN; prospective biology teachers
Introduction
One of the important targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the quality of education,
which particularly needs to be addressed in Indonesia and requires sustainable development.
*For correspondence:
ibrohim.fmipa@um.ac.id
Article history:
Received: 12 January 2023
Revised: 26 January 2023
Accepted: 30 January 2023
Published: 5 February 2023
10.22219/jpbi.v9i1.24382
© Copyright Nurwidodo et al.
This article is distributed
under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License
p-ISSN: 2442-3750
e-ISSN: 2537-6204
How to cite:
Nurwidodo, N., Ibrohim, I.,
Sueb, S., Abrori, F. M. &
Darojat, T. A. (2023). Improving
the creative thinking and
collaborative skills of
prospective biology teachers
using the EMKONTAN learning
model in environmental science
courses. JPBI (Jurnal
Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia),
9(1), 15-25.
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v
9i1.24382
mailto:nurwidodo@umm.ac.id
mailto:ibrohim.fmipa@um.ac.id
mailto:sueb.fmipa@um.ac.id
mailto:fadhlan1991@gmail.com
mailto:bagus2m@gmail.com
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v9i1.24382
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v9i1.24382
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
http://u.lipi.go.id/1422867894
http://u.lipi.go.id/1460300524
16
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
Indonesia needs to improve the quality of education to become a developed country and create a
glorious "Golden Indonesia" according to the ideals of the Indonesian nation (Chhajer, 2022; Unilever,
2017). Indeed, progress in various sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, resources, technology,
economy, culture, defence, etc begins with the advancement of the quality of education (Nambiar et
al., 2019; Nyhus, 2016; OECD & ADB, 2015).
During the 21st century, there has been a fundamental change in the level of philosophy, direction, and
purpose in education (Kim et al., 2019; Malik, 2018). Indeed, knowledge is the main basis for all
aspects of life, influencing education, science, technology, and employment (Kereluik et al., 2013; van
Laar et al., 2020), so efforts are required to fulfill the need for knowledge-based education, economic
development, social empowerment and development and knowledge-based industry development
(Chauhan, 2020; Hudson, 2011; Rohimah, 2021).
The quality of higher education as part of the education system in Indonesia is required to produce
human resources (HR) to face challenges in the global era (Adam & Negara, 2015; Amalia, 2012).
Universities must prepare students competent in knowledge and skills, attitudes and work spirit,
communication skills, interpersonal, leadership, and teamwork known as Experimental 5Cs: critical
thinking, communication, collaboration, creativity, and compassion (Al-Kaabi, 2016; De Prada et al.,
2022).
Creative thinking involves finding ways of thinking to overcome existing problems in unusual or new
ways (Birgili, 2015; Gafour & Gafour, 2020), creating something new, producing many imaginative
skills, or making something that already exists into something new. Creative thinking is also the ability
to generate original ideas or answers and to understand new and unexpected relationships or
unrelated factors (Duff et al., 2013). Hence, creative thinking is very important for a person's success in
carrying out life activities because they are one of the determining factors of a nation's excellence
(Wijayati et al., 2019).
Students' creative thinking is dominated by the medium and low categories because, to date, lecturers
have not made much effort to explore students' understanding of creative thinking skills (Valli et al.,
2014). Creative thinking still receives less attention in the learning process at various levels of
education (Kairuddin et al., 2020) but in recent years, educational institutions' interest in creative
thinking has increased because it is considered important in the world of education (Mullet et al.,
2016). Therefore, lecturers as agents of change are expected to develop creative thinking skills (Valli
et al., 2014).
Besides creative thinking, solving environmental problems will be successful if it involves various
parties by conducting solid collaboration (Ardoin et al., 2020; Avoyan, 2022). Therefore, collaborative
skills are needed for policymakers and all components of society to prevent and overcome
environmental problems (Collins et al., 2019; Green & Johnson, 2015). Collaborative problem-solving
is one of the 21st-century skills or 4Cs essential for successful learning and increased productivity in
real work environments (Chiruguru, 2020; Erdoğan, 2019; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2015).
Collaboration as a partnership/relationship in problem-solving is key to achieving a very effective
learning process (Armstrong, 2015; Bryson, 2016; Schmitz & Winskel, 2008). Probe-solving
collaboration is one type of social interaction in a specific learning process whereby each group
member can be active and constructive in solving all existing problems (Gauvain, 2018; Soller, 2001).
The collaboration includes effective communication skills, mutual respect, trust, giving and receiving
feedback, decision-making, and conflict management (Grover, 2005; Little, 2007; Sibiya, 2018). One
study of biology students at the Islamic University of Riau stated that students' collaborative skills
generally showed a sufficient level, which meant they were not able to collaborate well (Hidayati,
2019). Solving environmental problems not only requires the ability to think creatively and collaboration
skills but needs the support of individual and community environmental literacy, especially students as
potential leaders (Coyle, 2005; McBride et al., 2013).
Environmental science courses are multidisciplinary subjects that are closely related to everyday life
(Nugraheni, 2014). Some environmentally unfriendly behaviors in the community are closely related to
the understanding and concepts of environmental science, for example, cleanliness ranging from the
household environment, schools, markets, and public facilities due to littering. The increase in
electronic waste due to the massive use of mobile phones and computers contributes to environmental
problems. For example, cleanliness starts in the household environment, schools, markets, and public
facilities due to littering (Ferronato & Torretta, 2019; Needhidasan et al., 2014).
The implementation of the environmental science course so far has shown a lack of encouragement to
improve students' creative thinking, and collaboration skills. Preliminary research conducted at seven
universities in Java and Sumatra of fourteen lecturers and fifty students supported this indication
(Nurwidodo et al., 2019). The students tend to memorize concepts because of the application of
lecturer-centred learning and the absence of learning models that encourage student creativity both in
providing opportunities and creating environmental science products that are beneficial to life (Farwati
et al., 2017). In addition, the absence of exploration activities for environmental problems in the field
and the opportunity to solve them causes students to lack mastery of environmental problems and
17
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
minimally contribute is to solving environmental problems (Torkar, 2014).
Several learning models have been applied to separately develop aspects of creative thinking and
collaboration skills of candidate teachers. The OIDDE learning model (Husamah et al., 2018), project-
based blended learning (Sumarni et al., 2021), RANDAI learning model (Arsih et al., 2023), and
‘Moving the Kaleidoscope’ model (Ayyildiz & Yilmaz, 2021) have been applied to develop aspects of
creative thinking. Of the four models, only the OIDDE learning model has been used for candidate
biology teachers. candidate, namely t (Husamah et al., 2018). Remap Jigsaw learning (Indriwati et al.,
2019), ASICC model learning (Santoso et al., 2021), inquiry and project-based learning (Hairida et al.,
2021), and Predict-Observe-Explain-based Project (POEP) learning (Ilma et al., 2022a) have been
applied to develop aspects of collaboration skills. However, it is still rare that learning models oriented
towards the development of creative thinking and collaboration skills, especially in environmental
science courses, are implemented for biology teacher candidates. Therefore, we developed the
EMKONTAN learning model to involve students in observing environmental problems, identifying, and
analyzing environmental problems, preparing action plans and possible integration into natural
resource conservation, implementing actions to solve environmental problems, monitoring and
evaluation, and follow-up plans. This learning model is used in Environmental Science courses to
improve students' creative thinking and collaboration skills, providing opportunities for students to
participate in learning through appropriate steps in solving environmental problems that can provide
unity of creative thinking skills, collaborative skills, and environmental literacy. The model syntax
includes socialisation and environmental observation, identification and analysis of environmental
problems, action planning and integration into natural resource conservation, actions to solve
environmental problems and integrate into natural resource conservation, monitoring and evaluation,
and follow-up plans. The syntax is structured considering the characteristics of creative thinking and
collaborative skills (Nurwidodo, Hadi, et al., 2021; Nurwidodo, Romdaniyah, et al., 2021). If the syntax
of the EMKONTAN model is applied properly, the opportunities for creative thinking and collaborative
skills of students will increase. According to Nurwidodo et al (2023), the EMKONTAN learning model
has a positive effect on students' environmental literacy and could be applied to improve environmental
literacy outcomes. The EMKONTAN learning model must be implemented to improve various student
abilities, in this case, creative thinking and collaborative skills.
It is hypothesised that the EMKONTAN learning model in Environmental Science courses will improve
creative, collaborative thinking skills and environmental literacy contributing to better and sustainable
environmental problem-solving. Therefore, the study objectives are as follows: (a) to analyse the
differences in the creative thinking of students taught by the EMKONTAN learning model, problem-
based learning, and conventional learning, and (b) to analyse differences in collaborative skills of
students taught by learning EMKONTAN, problem-based learning, and conventional. The study results
are expected to contribute alternative learning models that can be used by teachers and lecturers to
develop their prospective teachers’ creative thinking and collaborative skills.
Method
This research was conducted at IKIP Budi Utomo-Malang and Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang and
involved a saturated sample of 50 second-semester students. Hypothesis testing was conducted on
student learning outcomes in the form of description test scores on creative thinking and collaborative
skills. Meanwhile, environmental literacy scores on the aspects of knowledge and cognitive skills were
obtained through multiple-choice tests and the normality of the residual data was assessed using
Kolmogorov Smirnov (alpha = 5%) and the data homogeneity using the Levene Test (alpha = 5%).
The hypothesis was tested using ANACOVA with the test criteria stating that if the probability level of
significance (alpha = 5%) then H0 is rejected. The study design was a non-equivalent pre/post-test
control group design, with tests conducted at the beginning (pretest) and the end (posttest) of learning
in the control and experimental groups (Table 1).
Table 1. Research design
Group Pretest Treatment Posttest
EMKONTAN learning model (Experiment) O1 X1 O2
Positive control (Problem-based learning/PBL) O3 X2 O4
Negative control (conventional learning model) O5 X3 O6
Where O1, O3, and O5= pretest score; O2, O4, and O6= post-test score; X1= EMKONTAN learning
model; X2= PBL model; and X3= conventional learning model.
The independent variables were the EMKONTAN learning model, the PBL, and conventional (direct)
learning models. The dependent variable was creative thinking and collaborative skills. The creative
thinking was assessed in the form of an essay test sheet developed based on a rubric adapted from
Treffinger et al. (2002) regarding the following indicators: originality, fluency, flexibility, and elaboration.
18
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
The collaborative skills instrument is based on the formulation by Greenstein (2012) which states that
collaboration skills consist of working productively, showing respect, compromise, and responsibility.
The data collected were the test score data obtained through pre-test and post-tests. Before collecting
post-test data, learning was carried out as a class experimental activity using the EMKONTAN learning
model, the positive control class with the PBL learning model, and the negative control class with the
conventional learning model. Each meeting was observed to assess the dependent variable.
The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to determine the validity and implementation of
EMKONTAN and the effectiveness of the EMKONTAN model in improving students' creative thinking
and collaborative skills were analysed using inferential statistics. Hypothesis testing was performed
using one-way ANCOVA.
Results and Discussion
The effectiveness of the EMKONTAN model on students’ creative
thinking
The results of the variance of the effectiveness of the EMKONTAN, PBL, and conventional learning
models on student creativity are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. The average percentage of students' creativity pretest and posttest
No Creativity Aspect Category
Advanced
(%)
Proficient
(%)
Basic (%) Beginner (5)
Pre-test
1 Curiosity 20.00 20.00 26.70 33.00
2 Fluency 10.00 33.33 50.00 6.67
3 Originality 13.00 16.70 43.30 26.70
4 Elaboration 16.70 13.30 26.70 43.30
5 Flexibility 13.30 16.67 30.00 40.00
6 Divergent 3.33 30.00 30.00 36.67
Post-test
1 Curiosity 56.70 30.00 10.00 3.30
2 Fluency 20.00 46.67 30.00 6.67
3 Originality 23.00 23.30 33.30 20.00
4 Elaboration 63.30 13.30 10.00 13.30
5 Flexibility 40.00 23.33 23.30 13.33
6 Divergent 6.67 33.33 30.00 30.00
The results show that the average percentage of student creativity in the field trials increased after
being taught via the EMKONTAN learning model, with more students being advanced in all aspects of
creativity in the post-test compared to the pre-test.
The ANCOVA of creativity results is provided in Table 3 showing that there are differences in learning
model variance [F count = 146.83 with p-value = 0.00. P-value < (α = 0.05)], indicating that the learning
model affects student creativity.
Table 3. ANCOVA results of creativity
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 36435.09a 4 9108.77 122.69 0.00
Intercept 10747.61 1 10747.61 144.77 0.00
X creativity 33.04 1 33.04 0.44 0.50
Class 32701.78 3 10900.59 146.83 0.00
Error 10318.90 139 74.23
Total 169254.00 144
Corrected Total 46754.00 143
a. R Squared = 0.779 (Adjusted R Squared = 0.773)
The creativity LSD test results are presented in Table 4 showing that the learning models are
significantly different with the EMKONTAN model having the highest post-test mean value. The
detailed scores for each aspect are presented in Figure 1 showing that the EMKONTAN-taught class
19
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
has the highest creativity scores.
Table 4. Creativity LSD test results
Class Mean LSD Notation
Conventional 10.81 14.18 A
PBL 31.39 34.75 B
EMKONTAN 53.66 57.02 C
Figure 1. Average Student Creativity Score
These results indicate that the learning model affected student creativity, with the EMKONTAN learning
model contributing most to student creativity compared to the PBL and conventional learning models.
EMKONTAN involves students exploring curiosity, and fluency in thinking, generating new ideas,
providing detailed explanations, bringing up several possibilities, and adapting, combining, or modifying
ideas to solve a problem. This is following other studies which ‘state that creativity in all its aspects can
be increased through learning that challenges the problems that exist around students (Coman et al.,
2020; Craft, 2003; Häkkinen & Mäkelä, 1996; Lodge et al., 2018).
EMKONTAN is significantly different from PBL because it provides opportunities for students to directly
orientate towards environmental problems through the observation of environmental problems around
them, thereby developing their curiosity. Students' curiosity is empowered through observation,
identification, and analysis of environmental problems. Gulacar et al. explained that the activities of
observation, identification, and problem analysis increase students' curiosity before students identified
and analysed the problem (Gulacar et al., 2013). Likewise, Greenstein (2012) explains that curiosity is
the originator of creativity. Student curiosity will encourage students to elaborate in depth about the
material following the study by Pluck and Johnson (2011) which reported that students with high
curiosity were able to provide analysis. For example, for students to identify and analyse the impact of
environmental damage if no adjustments are made and the consequences, they must explore their
curiosity about the possible impacts of environmental damage, and compile an action plan to solve
environmental problems. In this case, students are directed to elaborate on the impact of
environmental damage and realise actions (behaviours) to solve environmental problems.
In addition, through the identification and analysis of environmental problems, students are directed to
think flexibly. Greenstein (2012) explains flexible thinking as thinking by suggesting possibilities that
will occur. For example, students make predictions about the decline in biodiversity in Indonesia such
as extinction, flooding, drought, landslides, and reduced oxygen supply, then find solutions to
environmental problems with the conservation of natural resources which need to be realised in action
20
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
plans to prevent the decline in biodiversity. Integration with natural resources is provided through
reforestation, selective logging, and in-situ and ex-situ conservation. Fluency in thinking in finding
solutions is achieved through group discussions, reading references, and good cooperation. Fleming et
al. (2019) explained that students' fluency in thinking is influenced by the learning environment, such
as the references and media used.
Students’ fluency in thinking can also be trained through the preparation of action plans to solve
environmental problems and integrate them into natural resource conservation, training students to
think systematically in solving problems (Dunlosky et al., 2013; Martinich et al., 2006). In practice, each
group reports on the project's progress and identifies obstacles, then the other groups give
suggestions to solve these problems. For example, a group that has difficulty designing posters using
an application, another group can give suggestions to make posters manually.
Conventional learning is significantly different from PBL and EMKONTAN in empowering student
creativity, as indicated by the low scores of all aspects of student creativity. In conventional classes,
learning relies on textbooks and student worksheets containing multiple-choice questions and
descriptions. Students are not taught contextually, so it is difficult for them to think creatively and apply
it in everyday life.
The effectiveness of the learning model on collaboration skills
The results of the variance of the effectiveness of the EMKONTAN, PBL, and conventional learning
models on collaboration skills are presented in Table 5, showing that the EMKONTAN learning model
improved all collaboration skills.
Table 5. The average percentage of pretest and posttest students' collaboration skills in field trials
No Collaboration
skills
Category
Very good (%) Good (%) Enough (%) Not enough (%)
Pre-test
1 Productive work 17.00 43.30 23.00 17.00
2 Show respect 23.30 20.00 50.00 6.67
3 Compromise 20.00 16.67 46.70 16.67
4 Responsibility 33.30 10.00 23.30 33.33
Post-test
1 Productive work 50.00 43.30 3.30% 3.30
2 Show respect 63.30 20.00 13.33% 3.33
3 Compromise 46.70 16.67 30.00 6.66
4 Responsibility 66.70 16.67 6.67 10.00
Table 6 shows the differences in learning models [Fcount = 254.00 with p-value = 0.00. P-value < (α =
0.05)], therefore, the hypothesis that the learning model affects students' collaboration skills are
accepted. The LSD test results in Table 7 show significant differences in the learning model, with the
highest average post-test scores in the EMKONTAN-taught class. The highest average score and the
average value per aspect are presented in Figure 2 showing that the students taught via the
EMKONTAN learning model had the highest collaboration skill scores.
Table 6. ANCOVA results of the collaboration skills
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 1772.85a 4 443.21 190.51 0.00
Intercept 508.65 1 508.65 218.64 0.00
X Collaboration 1.35 1 1.35 0.58 0.44
Class 1772.73 3 590.90 254.00 0.00
Error 323.36 139 2.32
Total 19170.00 144
Corrected Total 2096.22 143
R Squared = 0.84 (Adjusted R Squared = 0.84)
21
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
Table 7. LSD test results for collaboration skills
Class Mean LSD Notation
Conventional 6.72 7.31 A
PBL 13.08 13.67 B
EMKONTAN 15.40 16.00 C
Figure 2. Average score of collaboration skills for the classes taught via the conventional, PBL, and
EMKONTAN learning models
These results indicate that the learning model affected students' collaboration skills. The EMKONTAN
learning model contributes more to students' collaboration skills compared to PBL as this model
involves students in productive work, mutual respect, compromise, and responsibility in completing
group assignments. Students must express their respective opinions and discuss together to determine
an appropriate solution to prevent the Coronavirus through posters. Students who can express
opinions are those who already have prior knowledge of the material. This is in accordance with the
study results of Ilma et al. (2022) which stated that students who are active in a group have at least
some knowledge.
Collaborative skills in the aspect of productive work are evident when students identify and analyse
problems, take action planning steps and implement actions. The identification and analysis of
environmental problems are performed when students have succeeded in determining the factors that
influence the emergence of environmental problems. Productive work involves the students designing
action-planning activities regarding solving environmental problems. Each group has a leader who
helps the lecturer to divide the tasks into groups to prepare tools and materials, compile work
procedures, and make a schedule of activities. Cheruvelil et al. (2020) explain that productive work can
be achieved through the division of tasks into groups, thus training the students to be responsible.
Greenstein (2012) explains that responsibility is not only about punctuality in collecting assignments
but more about achieving the best work.
Collaborative skills in the aspect of mutual respect occur when students have discussions with fellow
group members and when presenting results outside the group. Students carefully listen to
suggestions or ideas given by other groups. This is in accordance with Greenstein (2012) who states
that mutual respect is achieved through group learning activities. In addition, O’Leary et al. (2012)
22
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
reported that mutual respect can give positive energy to others. Similarly, when students reported the
group's progress, they conveyed the obstacles they faced and then the other groups provided
solutions.
There was a significant difference between EMKONTAN and PBL in improving student collaboration
skills, with EMKONTAN's steps making a major contribution to the development of student
collaboration skills through the process of observation, identification and analysis, action plans,
implementation of monitoring and evaluation actions and follow-up plans. This is following previous
research which explains that student collaboration can be improved through making identification,
preparing an action plan, carrying out the action, analysing, and conducting monitoring and evaluation
(Le et al., 2018).
EMKONTAN and PBL significantly differ from conventional learning because conventional classroom
learning cannot facilitate the development of student collaboration skills. Learning in conventional
classrooms only involves knowledge transfer activities which are conducted individually without actively
involving students in learning. Learning in conventional classrooms only provides assignments in the
form of questions with lower levels of cognition. Hasan and Pardjono (2019) reported that student
collaboration skills are difficult to develop in learning that only emphasises memory, understanding,
and analysis.
Conclusion
The EMKONTAN learning model significantly improves students’ creativity and collaboration skills,
therefore this learning model can be applied to improve students' creative thinking and collaborative
skills outcomes in environmental learning.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their gratitude to the Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang and Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Teacher
Training and Education, Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang for the support in this research.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding of this paper.
Author Contributions
N. Nurwidodo: Data curation; Writing ─ original draft. I. Ibrohim: Writing an original draft; Writing ─
review and editing; Formal analysis. S. Sueb: Writing ─ review and editing. F. M. Abrori:
Conceptualization. T. A. Darojat: Writing ─ review and editing.
References
Adam, L., & Negara, S. D. (2015). Improving human capital through better education to support
indonesia’s economic development. Economics and Finance in Indonesia, 61(2), 92–106.
https://doi.org/10.7454/efi.v61i2.506
Al-kaabi, A. F. (2016). Effects of collaborative learning on the achievement of students with different
learning styles at Qatar University (QU) (Issue November). Brunel University London.
Amalia, L. (2012). Higher Education Reform Implementation Of Improving The Quality Of Human
Resources For Making Good Governance In Order National Development Of Indonesia. Forum
Ilmiah, 9(2), 105–110.
Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Gaillard, E. (2020). Environmental education outcomes for
conservation: A systematic review. Biological Conservation, 241(November 2019), 108224.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224
Armstrong, P. (2015). Partnerships and collaboration for school improvement : A review of the
evidence October 2015. In Research Report (Issue October).
Arsih, F., Zubaidah, S., Alberida, H., & Jamaluddin, A. Bin. (2023). Relationship of critical thinking
skills and creative thinking skills through the RANDAI learning model. AIP Conference
Proceedings, 2569(1), 20031. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112399
Avoyan, E. (2022). Collaborative governance for innovative environmental solutions: qualitative
https://doi.org/10.7454/efi.v61i2.506
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112399
23
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
comparative analysis of cases from around the world. Environmental Management, 2022(0), 1–
15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01642-7
Ayyildiz, P., & Yilmaz, A. (2021). ‘Moving the Kaleidoscope’ to see the effect of creative personality
traits on creative thinking dispositions of preservice teachers: The mediating effect of creative
learning environments and teachers’ creativity fostering behavior. Thinking Skills and Creativity,
41, 100879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100879
Birgili, B. (2015). Creative and critical thinking skills in problem-based learning environments. Journal
of Gifted Education and Creativity, 2(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.18200/JGEDC.2015214253
Bryson, C. (2016). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in
higher education. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1), 84–86.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2016.1124966
Chauhan, A. (2020). Knowledge-based economic development : A comparative study of selected.
Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(19), 6143–6169.
Cheruvelil, K. S., Palma-Dow, A. de, & Smith, K. A. (2020). Strategies to promote effective student
research teams in undergraduate biology labs. The American Biology Teacher, 82(1), 18–27.
https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2020.82.1.18
Chhajer, A. S. K. (2022). Asia for Earth 2022. 8th GoGreen Summit.
Chiruguru, S. (2020). The essential skills of 21 st century classroom (Issue March). ResearchGate.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36190.59201
Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Randall, N. (2019). Engaging environmental policy-makers with
systematic reviews: challenges, solutions and lessons learned. Environmental Evidence, 8(1), 2.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0144-0
Coman, C., Țîru, L. G., Meseșan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., & Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online teaching
and learning in higher education during the coronavirus pandemic: Students’ perspective.
Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(24), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410367
Coyle, K. (2005). Environmental literacy in America: What ten years of NEETF/roper research and
related studies say about environmental literacy in the U.S. The National Environmental
Education & Training Foundation.
Craft, A. (2003). The Limits to Creativity in Education: Dilemmas for the Educator. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 51(2), 113–127.
De Prada, E., Mareque, M., & Pino-Juste, M. (2022). Teamwork skills in higher education: is
university training contributing to their mastery? Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 35(1), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-022-00207-1
Duff, M. C., Kurczek, J., Rubin, R., Cohen, N. J., & Tranel, D. (2013). Hippocampal amnesia disturb
creative thinking. Hippocampus, 23(12), 1143–1149.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.22208.Hippocampal
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving
students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and
educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 14(1), 4–58.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
Erdoğan, V. (2019). Integrating 4C Skills of 21st Century into 4 Language Skills in EFL Classes.
International Journal of Education and Research, 7(11), 113–124.
Farwati, R., Permanasari, A., Firman, H., & Suhery, T. (2017). Integrasi problem based learning
dalam STEM education berorientasi pada aktualisasi literasi lingkungan dan kreativitas.
Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan IPA, 198–206.
Ferronato, N., & Torretta, V. (2019). Waste mismanagement in developing countries: A review of
global issues. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(6).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16061060
Fleming, D. J., Culclasure, B. T., & Zhang, D. (2019). The Montessori model and creativity. Journal of
Montessori Research, 5(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7695
Gafour, O. W. A., & Gafour, W. A. S. (2020). Creative thinking skills – A review article. Journal of
Education and E-Learning, 4(May), 44–58.
Gauvain, M. (2018). Collaborative problem solving: Social and developmental considerations.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(2), 53–58.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618813370
Green, B. N., & Johnson, C. D. (2015). Interprofessional collaboration in research, education, and
clinical practice: working together for a better future. Journal of Chiropractic Education, 29(1), 1–
10. https://doi.org/10.7899/jce-14-36
Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and authentic
learning. Corwin A SAGE Company.
Grover, S. M. (2005). Shaping effective communication skills and therapeutic relationship: The
Foundation of Collaboration. AAOHN Journal, 53(4), 177–182.
Gulacar, O., Bowman, C. R., & Feakes, D. a. (2013). Observational investigation of student problem
solving: The role and importance of habits. Science Education International, 24(2), 344–360.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01642-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100879
https://doi.org/10.18200/JGEDC.2015214253
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2016.1124966
https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2020.82.1.18
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36190.59201
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0144-0
https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410367
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-022-00207-1
https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.22208.Hippocampal
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16061060
https://doi.org/10.17161/jomr.v5i2.7695
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618813370
https://doi.org/10.7899/jce-14-36
24
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
Hairida, H., Marmawi, M., & Kartono, K. (2021). An analysis of students’ collaboration skills in science
learning through inquiry and project-based learning. Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah,
6(2), 219–228. https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v6i2.9320
Häkkinen, T., & Mäkelä, K. (1996). Environmental adaption of concrete. Environmental impact of
concrete and asphalt pavements. VTT Tiedotteita - Valtion Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus,
8(1752), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08
Hasan, A., & Pardjono, P. (2019). The Correlation of Higher Order Thinking Skills and Work
Readiness of Vocational High School Students. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Dan Kejuruan,
25(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.21831/jptk.v25i1.19118
Hidayati, N. (2019). Collaboration Skill Of Biology Students At Universitas Islam Riau, Indonesia.
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(11), 208–211.
Hudson, R. (2011). From knowledge-based economy to knowledge-based economy? Reflections on
changes in the economy and development policies in the North East of England. Regional
Studies, 45(7), 997–1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400802662633
Husamah, H., Fatmawati, D., & Setyawan, D. (2018). OIDDE learning model: Improving higher order
thinking skills of biology teacher candidates. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 249–264.
https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11217a
Ilma, S., Al-Muhdhar, M. H. I., Rohman, F., & Saptasari, M. (2022a). Promote collaboration skills
during the COVID-19 pandemic through Predict-Observe-Explain-based Project (POEP)
learning. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 8(1), 32–39.
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v8i1.17622
Ilma, S., Al-Muhdhar, M. H. I., Rohman, F., & Saptasari, M. (2022b). Students Collaboration Skills in
Science Learning. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Innovation in Education
and Pedagogy (ICIEP 2020), 619(Iciep 2020), 204–208.
https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211219.037
Indriwati, S. E., Susilo, H., & Hermawan, I. M. S. (2019). Improving students’ motivation and
collaborative skills through Remap Jigsaw learning combined with modelling activities. JPBI
(Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 5(2), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i2.7888
Kairuddin, K., Siregar, B. H., & Siregar, N. H. (2020). Improvement of students’ high order thinking
skills (HOTS) ability through the application of Van Hiele theory assisted by video animation.
Journal of Mathematical Pedagogy (JoMP), 2(1), 32–39.
https://doi.org/10.26740/jomp.v2n1.p%25p
Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What Knowledge Is of Most Worth. Journal of
Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 127–140.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716
Kim, S., Raza, M., & Seidman, E. (2019). Improving 21st-century teaching skills: The key to effective
21st-century learners. Research in Comparative and International Education, 14(1), 99–117.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214
Le, H., Janssen, J., & Wubbels, T. (2018). Collaborative learning practices: teacher and student
perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1),
103–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1259389
Little, J. W. (2007). Professional communication and collaboration. The Keys to Effective Schools:
Educational Reform as Continuous Improvement, Second Edition, 51–66.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329512.n4
Lodge, J. M., Kennedy, G., Lockyer, L., Arguel, A., & Pachman, M. (2018). Understanding difficulties
and resulting confusion in learning: An integrative review. Frontiers in Education, 3(49), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00049
Malik, R. S. (2018). Educational challenges in 21St century and sustainable development. Journal of
Sustainable Development Education and Research, 2(1), 10–20.
https://doi.org/10.17509/jsder.v2i1.12266
Martinich, J. A., Solarz, S. L., & Lyons, J. R. (2006). Preparing Students for Conservation Careers
through Project-Based Learning. Conservation Biology, 20(6), 1579–1583.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00569.x
McBride, B. B., Brewer, C. A., Berkowitz, A. R., & Borrie, W. T. (2013). Environmental literacy,
ecological literacy, ecoliteracy: What do we mean and how did we get here? Ecosphere, 4(5).
https://doi.org/10.1890/ES13-00075.1
Mullet, D. R., Willerson, A., N. Lamb, K., & Kettler, T. (2016). Examining teacher perceptions of
creativity: A systematic review of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 9–30.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.001
Nambiar, D., Karki, S., Rahardiani, D., Putri, M., & Singh, K. (2019). Study on skills for the future in
Indonesia. Oxford Policy Management, July, 1–117.
Needhidasan, S., Samuel, M., & Chidambaram, R. (2014). Electronic waste - An emerging threat to
the environment of urban India. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering,
12(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-336X-12-36
https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v6i2.9320
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08
https://doi.org/10.21831/jptk.v25i1.19118
https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400802662633
https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11217a
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v8i1.17622
https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211219.037
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i2.7888
https://doi.org/10.26740/jomp.v2n1.p%25p
https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1259389
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329512.n4
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00049
https://doi.org/10.17509/jsder.v2i1.12266
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00569.x
https://doi.org/10.1890/ES13-00075.1
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.001
https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-336X-12-36
25
Nurwidodo et al. | JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), Vol. 9 Issue 1, 2023, 15-25
Nugraheni, E. (2014). Pengantar Ilmu Lingkungan. In Pengetahuan Dasar Ilmu Lingkungan (pp. 1–
49). Universitas Terbuka.
Nurwidodo, N., Al Muhdar, M. H. I., Rohman, F., Iriani, D., Herlina, H., & Fausan, M. M. (2019).
Building pro-environmental behavior among school community of Adiwiyata green school. JPBI
(Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 5(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i1.7233
Nurwidodo, N., Hadi, S., Ibrohim, I., & Sueb, S. (2021). Validity and practicality of the EMKONTAN
learning model to improve creative thinking, collaborative and literacy environment of
prospective biology teacher students. The 12th International Conference on Lesson Study
(ICLS-XII), 221–232.
Nurwidodo, N., Romdaniyah, S. W., Sudarmanto, S., Rosanti, D., Kurniawati, K., & Abidin, Z. (2021).
Analisis profil berpikir kritis, kreatif, keterampilan kolaboratif, dan literasi lingkungan siswa kelas
8 SMP Muhammadiyah sebagai impak pembelajaran modern. Bioscientist: Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi,
9(2), 605–619. https://doi.org/10.33394/bioscientist.v9i2.4642
Nurwidodo, N., Wahyuni, S., & Hindun, I. (2023). Enhancing environmental literacy using
EMKONTAN learning for biology teacher candidates. Prisma Sains: Jurnal Pengkajian Ilmu Dan
Pembelajaran Matematika Dan IPA IKIP Mataram, 11(1), 175–189. https://doi.org/10.33394/j-
ps.v11i1.6976
Nyhus, P. J. (2016). Human-Wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annual Review of Environment and
Resources, 41, 143–171. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634
O’Leary, R., Choi, Y., & Gerard, C. M. (2012). The skill set of the successful collaborator. Public
Administration Review, 72(s1), S70–S83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02667.x
OECD, & ADB. (2015). Education in Indonesia: Rising to the Challenge. In Far Eastern Survey (Vol.
20, Issue 15).
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2015). P21 Framework Definitions. Partnership for 21st Century
Skills.
Pluck, G., & Johnson, H. L. (2011). Stimulating curiosity to enhance learning. GESJ: Education
Sciences and Psychology, 2(19), 24–31.
Rohimah. (2021). Knowledge-Based Economy As Human Capital Investment to Drive The Nation’s
Economic Growth. Tahdzib Al-Akhlaq: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 4(1), 29–46.
Santoso, A. M., Primandiri, P. R., Zubaidah, S., & Amin, M. (2021). Improving student collaboration
and critical thinking skills through ASICC model learning. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1806(1), 012174. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012174
Schmitz, M. J., & Winskel, H. (2008). Towards effective partnerships in a collaborative problem-
solving task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 581–596.
https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X281619
Sibiya, M. N. (2018). Effective Communication in Nursing. IntechOpen.
Soller, A. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system.
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(1), 1–24.
Sumarni, W., Sudarmin, S., & Kadarwati, S. (2021). Creative skill improvement of the teacher
candidates in designing learning programs through a project-based blended learning. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1918(3), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/3/032026
Torkar, G. (2014). Learning experiences that produce environmentally active and informed minds.
NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 69, 49–55.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002
Treffinger, D., Young, G., Selby, E., & Shepardson, C. (2002). Assessing creativity: A guide for
educators. National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Unilever, P. (2017). Annual Report PT Unilever Tahun 2017 (Vol. 12). PT Unilever.
Valli, P., Perkkilä, P., & Valli, R. (2014). Adult Pre-Service Teachers Applying 21st Century Skills in
the Practice. Athens Journal of Education, 1(2), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.1-2-2
van Laar, E., van Deursen, A. J. A. M., van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & de Haan, J. (2020). Determinants of
21st-century skills and 21st-century digital skills for workers: A systematic literature review.
SAGE Open, 10(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900176
Wijayati, N., Sumarni, W., & Supanti, S. (2019). Improving student creative thinking skills through
project based learning. KnE Social Sciences, 3(18 SE-Articles), 408–421.
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i18.4732
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i1.7233
https://doi.org/10.33394/bioscientist.v9i2.4642
https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v11i1.6976
https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v11i1.6976
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02667.x
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012174
https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X281619
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/3/032026
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002
https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.1-2-2
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900176
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i18.4732