EJ1285436

www.ijcer.
net
The Effect of Student-Centered

Approaches on Students' Creative
Thinking Skills: A Meta-Analysis Study
Tufan Aytaç1, Sultan Selen Kula1

1
Kırşehir Ahi Evran University
To cite this article:
Aytaç, T., & Kula, S. S. (2020). The effect of student-centered approaches on students'
creative thinking skills: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Contemporary
Educational Research, 7(2), 62-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.723894
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,

systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the
copyright of the articles.
The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or
costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research
Volume 7, Number 2, December 2020, 62-80 ISSN: 2148-3868
The Effect of Student-Centered Approaches on Students' Creative

Thinking Skills: A Meta-Analysis Study
Tufan Aytaç1*, Sultan Selen Kula1
1
Kırşehir Ahi Evran University
Abstract
The aim of this study is to determine the effects of student-centered approaches (SCA) on students' creative
thinking skills (CTS). Meta-analysis method is used in the study. The scope of the study consists of Master and
PhD theses and research articles addressing this issue in Turkey. As a result of the screening, it is seen that there
are 104 studies between 1990 and 2020 in line with inclusion criteria. The total number of samples within the
scope of these studies is 6434 students. 3215 of these students are in the experimental group and 3219 are in the
control group. According to the results of the study and the random effects model, a moderate (d=0.73; [0.63;
0.82]) statistically significant, positive effect size is determined according to SCA in favor of the students' CTS.
In other words, it is seen that when student-centered approaches and methods are applied in the lessons, creative
thinking skills of students are positively affected. As a result of the moderator analysis, it is determined that the
effect sizes of the studies differed according to education stage (p=0.00) and lessons (p=0.00). In the study, it is
concluded that SCA is a meaningful variable that positively affects students' CTS.
Key words: Student centered, learner centered, creative thinking, meta-analysis.
Introduction
In the twenty-first century, it is expected to raise individuals with advanced thinking skills who can question,
produce and use knowledge in the solution of problems. Raising this globally valued human profile has taken its
place among the educational objectives of all countries. The question “How can we raise individuals with
advanced thinking skills?” has led to many new approaches in education. One of the best ways to use thinking
skills effectively is to make individuals active in their learning processes. In this context, student-centered
approaches (SCA) such as active learning, learning by living and learning to learn shape today’s education.
Instead of using a single teaching method or certain techniques, SCA transform the role of the teacher from the
person who conveys information to person who create learning environments that facilitate learning. It is not
possible for teachers who have adopted SCA to use a single teaching method in lessons (Darsih, 2018). Methods
that facilitate learning and activate students is within the scope of SCA (Blumberg, 2008). Student-centered
teaching is an approach that focuses on student learning rather than what the teacher does, respects student
learning needs, learning styles and strategies, and puts the student at the center of learning (Blumberg, 2008;
Brown, 2003). In student-centered classes, students work individually, in pairs or with small groups on different
tasks and projects. Successful control of such a classroom environment is possible with comprehensive planning
and effective classroom management (Brown, 2003). SCA allows the student to make sense of the content in
student-centered classroom settings and allows the teacher to help students in this regard. In addition, SCA,
which develops higher order thinking skills that are suitable for learning objectives and students' characteristics,
is frequently used in effective classroom settings (Weimer, 2002). Trilling and Fadel (2009) and Yalçın (2018)
state that using SCA in classroom improves students' thinking skills. In this context, it can be said that there is a
significant relationship between SCA and thinking skills.
*
Corresponding Author: Tufan Aytaç, [email protected]
IJCER (International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research) 63
Other than basic skills, twenty-first century skills consist of three main skill areas: a) learning and innovation
skills, b) knowledge, media and technology skills, and c) life and career skills. Learning and innovation skills
consist of four sub-skills: critical thinking and problem solving, communication, cooperation and creativity.
These skills are seen as the key to lifelong learning and creative thinking. Creativity means producing,
evaluating, explaining and implementing new ideas. Creative thinking is a higher order thinking skill that aims
to solve problems, present alternative ideas and solutions, synthesize or make sense through re-meaning, and use
imagination (Kylonen, 2012; Özçelik, 2019; Trilling & Fadel, 2009; Yalçın, 2018). In the document Turkey's
Education Vision 2023, emphasis is placed on an educational approach based on these four soft skills of 21st
Century which are to be acquired by students (MEB, 2018). On a global scale, it is stated in many countries
from Finland to Singapore that 9 of every 10 skills that will shape the future in 2020 and beyond are creativity
or other creativity related skills. Creative thinking skills are at the top of the skills students need to learn
(Trilling & Fadel, 2009; World Economic Forum, 2016).
SCA is expected to develop higher order thinking skills such as creative, critical and reflective thinking
(American Psychological Association [APA], 1997; Perry & Karpova, 2017). It is generally known that
creativity skills of students are not given importance in educational environments. Accordingly, it is seen that
teachers keep the level of creativity and general intelligence equal (Sternberg, 2003). However, there are studies
showing that the student's general intelligence or academic achievement and creativity are not directly related
(Gajda, Karwowski & Beghetto, 2017; Kim, 2005). Torrance (1966) defines creativity as “being sensitive to
problems, malfunctions, lack of information, lost items, incompatibility, seeking solutions to difficulties and
predicting”. So creative thinking can be defined as mental processes that lead to an invention, solution or
synthesis in any field (Vanderbos, 2006). In short, individuals with higher CTS can produce different or original
ideas in a wide variety of fields and make predictions based on existing situation. While creativity evokes both
mental and performance-based activities, creative thinking evokes mostly cognitive activities (Doğan, 2005).
Creative thinking individual produces new, original, unexpected, appropriate, useful and adaptable concrete
objects and ideas (Sternberg & Kaufman, 2010). The importance of knowledge and motivation is emphasized in
creativity (Runco & Chand, 1995). In order to talk about creativity in any subject, we encounter two important
factors; the level of knowledge on the subject and the desire to discover. The motivation mentioned in creativity
is mostly intrinsic motivation. When the student is free to choose the tasks in the teaching process, his
motivation increases because this makes the task meaningful to the student. Thus, in order to increase the
creativity of students, it is necessary to take advantage of SCA, which will make them active in the teaching
process.
The aim of pedagogy, which develops innovation and creative thinking skills, is to provide students with the
necessary equipment to be creative, be prepared for problems to be able to analyze and manage information and
work with it. Teachers who want to see the effects of using SCA to develop students' CTS, provide feedback
and guide their learning to help students think creatively about content in terms of achievement and content.
Students are encouraged to become independent active learners. Student centered approaches and methods are
used in this process (Drapeau, 2014; Özçelik, 2009).
Educational approaches that center the student include many different teaching strategies, methods and
techniques. It is seen that meta-analysis studies on the subject are concentrated on the effects of these student-
centered strategies, methods and techniques on students' academic success. There are many meta-analysis
studies examining the effect of inquiry-based learning (Aktamış, Hiğde & Özden, 2016; Furtak, Seidel, Iverson
& Briggs, 2012; Wang, Huang, Tsay, Lee, Lin & Kao, 2011), constructivist approach (Arık & Yılmaz, 2020;
Erdamar, Aytaç, Demir & Demir, 2015; Tutal, Kaçire & Atabey, 2016), project based learning (Ayaz, 2014;
Kaşarcı, 2013; Tutal, Kaçire & Atabey, 2016), multiple intelligence theory (Ayaz, 2014; Baş, 2016; Biçer, 2017;
Çelik, 2013; Kaplan, Duran & Baş, 2015; Tutal, Kaçire & Atabey, 2016), active learning (Batdı, 2014),
technology-based methods (Batdı, 2014b; Çelik, 2013; Çırak-Kurt, Yıldırım & Cücük, 2018; Demir & Başol,
2014; Kaya & Öçal, 2018; Li & Ma, 2010; Merchant, Goetz, Cifuents, Keeney-Kennicutt,& Davis, 2014),
STEM (Becker & Park, 2011; Belland, Walker, Kim & Lefler, 2017), creative drama (Biçer, 2017; Cantürk
Günhan, 2016; Çelik, 2013; Erden, Aytaç & Erden, 2016; Lee, Patall, Cawthon & Steingut, 2015; Tutal, Kaçire
& Atabey, 2016; Özbey & Sarıkaya, 2019) collaborative learning (Biçer, 2017; Camnalbur & Mutlu-Bayraktar,
2018; Capar & Tarim, 2015; Çelik, 2013; Johnson, Johnson & Stanne, 2000), game based learning (Biçer,
2017), problem based learning (Çelik, 2013; Dağyar, 2014; Dochy, Segers, Bossche, & Gijbels, 2003; Tutal,
Kaçire & Atabey, 2016), brain based learning (Gözüyeşil & Dikici, 2014), argumentation technique (Karakuş &
Yalçın, 2016; Tutal, Kaçire & Atabey, 2016), concept maps (Okursoy-Günhan, 2019) and student centered
64 Aytaç & Kula
approaches (Tutal, Kaçire & Atabey, 2016; Yeşilpınar Uyar & Doğanay, 2018) on students' academic
achievement.
It is seen that meta-analysis studies in the literature focus on different variables as well as the effects of SCA on
students' academic achievement. It is noteworthy that there are also meta-analysis studies investigating the
effect of research and inquiry-based teaching on students' scientific process skills (Akkaya, 2019); project-based
learning on science lesson attitude (Ayaz, 2014; Kaşarcı, 2013); 5E learning model (Ayaz, 2015) and
constructivist approach on lesson attitudes (Ayaz & Şekerci, 2016); cooperative learning on mathematics
attitude (Capar & Tarim, 2015); technology-based methods on learning mathematics (Özdemir, Aslaner &
Açıkgül, 2020) and foreign languages (Chiu, Kao & Reynolds, 2012; Peterson, 2010); web-based problem
solving (Kuo, Chen and Hwang, 2014); argumentation technique on scientific process skills (Karakuş & Yalçın,
2016); creative drama on motivation and social skills (Özbey & Sarıkaya, 2019) and skill development (Cruz,
Lian & Morreau, 1998; Ulubey, 2018). However, when the studies conducted in Turkey and other countries, no
meta-analysis study is found to examine the effects of SCA on students' CTS.
The question "is there a relationship between SCA applied in the class and the students' CTS?" has been asked
for a long time, but there is no clear answer yet. At the conceptual level, scientists claimed that creativity and
learning represent interrelated phenomena (Beghetto, 2016; Sawyer, 2012; Vygotsky, 2004). It is seen that there
are many studies in Turkey in recent years dealing with the effects of SCA on thinking skills of students. The
increasing number of studies dealing with the effect of various student-centered approaches, methods and
techniques on students' creative thinking skills (CTS) has revealed the need to compile these results and
synthesize them by taking into account the sample numbers. However, it is seen that there are no meta-analysis
studies that deals with the effects of SCA on students' CTS. In addition, it is seen that there are no holistic and
comparative studies that examine the effects of SCA on students' CTS. In this context, determining whether
SCA has an impact on the students' CTS is the problem of this study. The aim of this study is to determine the
effects of SCA on students' CTS.
Method
Research Design
Research model of the study is meta-analysis method, which is a method of systematically analyzing and
synthesizing the data of quantitative studies carried out independently on the same subject. In the analysis of the
data, one of the group comparison meta-analysis methods, Group Difference Method is used (Card, 2012;
Cumming, 2012, 205). In a meta-analysis study; single and independent quantitative studies related to the same
research question and subject are selected according to the inclusion criteria and the data obtained from these
studies are synthesized with advanced statistical methods and their effect sizes are determined and interpreted
(Dinçer, 2014; Ellis, 2012:5). The purpose of a meta-analysis is to reach a synthesis with the least error by
comparing the quantitative data obtained from empirical studies conducted in different places and times on the
same subject, combining them with appropriate methods, increasing the number of samples and thereby
reducing the confidence interval of the overall result (Cumming, 2012; Hartung, 2008). Meta-analysis process
steps are shown in Figure 1 (Dinçer, 2014, 11).
Figure1. Meta-analysis process steps

Data Collection
Master’s and PhD theses, and research articles (conference paper, book chapter etc.) which discuss the subject
of this study in Turkey constitute the main data sources and scope of this study. In order to have access to the
relevant studies, the keywords "creativity", "creative thinking", "learner/student centered", "student centered
strategies", "teaching strategies and methods" are searched both in Turkish and English on Web of Science,
ERIC, ULAKBİM, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar and YOK National Thesis Center databases. After the search,
it is determined that there are 104 studies in accordance with the inclusion criteria from 187 studies conducted
on the subject of the study. In this study, studies focusing on experimental and quasi-experimental studies are
selected which especially have pretest-posttest, and comparisons between groups. The inclusion criteria used in
the selection of the studies included in the research are given in Table 1.
Table 1. Inclusion Criteria of the Studies

Inclusion Criteria
1. Published or unpublished study sources: Master's and PhD theses and research articles published in the
literature are covered.
2. Appropriateness of the dependent and independent variables in the studies to the meta-analysis study: In
order to reach the effect size in the meta-analysis studies it is taken into account that the included studies are
empirical studies and that SCA is used as an independent variable and CTS is used as a dependent variable.
3. Sample group: Studies involving students who are studying in the formal education institutions from
preschool education up to postgraduate education in Turkey are included.
4. Containing the quantitative data required for meta-analysis: It is taken into account that studies contain
quantitative data (mean, standard deviation, number of samples, p value, etc.) in order to calculate the effect
sizes required for the meta-analysis study.
5. Studies carried out in Turkey between 1990 and 2020 are taken into account.
6. Studies in both Turkish and English languages with a sampling from Turkey are included in scope.
The process of determining the studies included in the meta-analysis according to the inclusion criteria
mentioned above is given in Table 2.
Table 2. The Process of Determining the Studies Included in the Scope of Meta-analysis
1. Number of studies reached within 2. Number of studies not 3. Number of studies in
the context of determined keywords included in the scope according accordance with inclusion criteria
to exclusion criteria
187 studies 83 studies 104 studies
(34 PhD thesis, 98 Master thesis, 55 (11 PhD thesis, 51 Master (23 PhD thesis, 47 Master thesis,
Articles) thesis, 21 Articles) 34 Articles)
Reliability of the Research. In a meta-analysis study, reliability between coders is important in the coding phase
of the studies related to the reliability of the results. For this purpose, a coding protocol and form containing the
identity, content and data of the study are created. In order to ensure the reliability of coding, the studies that
will be included in the meta-analysis must be coded by at least two coders (Cooper, 2009; Wilson, 2009). The
reliability of the codings was calculated using the formula "Reliability=Consensus/(Consensus + Disagreement)
x 100" (Miles and Huberman, 1994) and was 96%. Values of 70% and above obtained from this formula are
sufficient for reliability (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). It can be said that the codings performed in this framework
are reliable.
Validity of the research. All studies that meet the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis are searched on all
available databases and their inclusion is an indication of the validity of the research (Petticrew, & Roberts,
2006). In this context, each of the 104 studies included in the meta-analysis are examined in detail, and it is
confirmed that the validity and reliability of the data collection tools used in studies are provided. Therefore, it
can be said that this meta-analysis study is also valid.
Reporting. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA)" writing guide,
which is a protocol used for systematic review and meta analysis, is used in the reporting of this study (Moher,
Liberati, Tetzlaff & Altman, 2009). Turkish translation of the PRISMA checklist is made by Aşık & Özen
(2019); Turkish version published on the official website of PRISMA is used (Aşık & Özen, 2019; Prisma
Checklist, 2019: Figure 2).
66 Aytaç & Kula
Records identified through database Additional records identified through other

searching (n= 187) sources
Identification
Records after duplicates removed (n= 12)

Screening
Records screened (n= 175 ) Records excluded (n= 5)
Full-text articles and PhD/master Full-text articles excluded,

thesis assessed for eligibility (n= 170) with reasons (n= 66 )
Eligibility
Studies included in qualitative synthesis

Included
Studies included in quantitative synthesis

(meta-analysis) (n= 104 )
Figure 2. Prizma Flow Diagram for Meta-analysis
Data Analysis
For statistical calculations of this study, CMA [Comprehensive Meta Analysis] Ver. 2 software is used. In this
meta-analysis study, random effects model is used to calculate the overall effect size. In the random effects
model, universe effect sizes are assumed to vary from study to study, and studies included in the meta-analysis
are considered to be part of a distribution. When studies are obtained from published literature, it is appropriate
to use random effects model. When the samples of the studies within the scope of meta-analysis show a
heterogeneous structure, random effects model can be used. Furthermore, if the researcher wants to generalize
the universe and has a representative sample of the universe, it is appropriate to select the random effects model
(Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2013; Başol, 2016; Başol, Doğuyurt & Demir, 2016; Ellis, 2012).
Thus, it is predicted that it would be more appropriate to use the random effects model since the studies vary
both in patterns and variables, that is, they are heterogeneous. In the study, students in the classes where SCA
are applied are taken as experimental group and students in the classes where SCA are not applied are taken as
control group. Therefore, the positive effect size is interpreted in favor of the students in the classes where SCA
are applied, and the negative effect size is interpreted in favor of the students in the classes where SCA are not
applied.
Publication Bias
In this study, publication bias is calculated by using Funnel plot, Orwin’s Fail-Safe N., Duval and Tweedie’s
Trim and Fill method, Egger’s test, and Kendall’s Tau coefficient (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein,
2009; Cooper, 2009). As seen in Figure 2, the majority of 104 studies included in the study are located towards
the top of the figure and highly close to the combined effect size. In this sense, the funnel plot shows that there
is no publication bias for the studies included in the study (Borenstein et. al., 2009). It can be said that there is
no publication bias in this study according to the evidence that pointers of effect sizes and sample sizes take the
form of a funnel, the peak point is at the same level as the actual effect size, and the effect sizes are gathered
symmetrically at the top (Bakioğlu & Özcan, 2016; Borenstein et al., 2013). When the funnel plot is examined,
it is seen that the studies are mostly within the boundaries of the graph and the number of studies showing
asymmetric distribution is low. In other words, the majority of the studies in the distribution are not
concentrated on only one side. When the funnel plot is examined, it is seen that the studies are mostly within the
boundaries of the graph and the number of studies showing asymmetric distribution is low. In other words, the
majority of the studies in the distribution are not concentrated on only one side.
Figure 3. Funnel Plot
Publication bias test results of the studies included in the meta-analysis are given in Table 3. Orwin’s Fail-Safe
N calculation is also made to test publication bias. Orwin’s Fail-Safe N calculates the number of studies that
may be missing in a meta-analysis (Borenstein et al., 2009). As a result of this analysis, Orwin’s Fail-Safe N is
calculated as 6991. The number of studies required for the average effect size of 0.88 found in meta-analysis to
reach 0.01 level (trivial), that is almost zero effect level, is 6991. 104 studies that are determined according to
inclusion criteria are all of the studies conducted for this research question in Turkey. Apart from these, since
6991 studies are unlikely to be reached, this result is accepted as another indication that there is no publication
bias in this meta-analysis.
The fact that the result of the Egger's test (p=0.08) was not significant is accepted as another indication that
there is no publication bias in this meta-analysis. Another method, Kendall's Tau Coefficient is found to be 6.28
and p=0.41, so it is statistically revealed that there is no publication bias since the expectation that the p-value
does not make a significant difference, i.e., greater than 0.05 is met. According to the results of Duval and
Tweedie's Trim and Fill Method, when 29 precedent studies are included, the 0.88 average effect size found in
the meta-analysis has changed to 0.49. This change can’t be ignored, but it can be accepted that the reported
effect size is reliable According to other tests, it may say that there is no publication bias, but a change from .88
to .49 should also be taken into consideration.
Results
Findings acquired from researches within the scope of meta-analysis study (random effects model, and
moderator analysis) are given in this chapter.
Findings of Effect Sizes Combined by Fixed and Random Effects Model and Homogeneity Test Results
The mean of effect sizes regarding the effects of SCA on students' CTS which is combined according to the
fixed and random effects model, standard error, and lower and upper limits in accordance with 95% confidence
interval are given in Table 4.
Table 3. Combined Findings of the Effect Size Meta-Analysis of Studies by Fixed and
Random Effects Model and Homogeneity Test
Model/Sub-
dimension Homogeneity
Random Effect Standart Lower Upper P- Q-
effects k Size Error Limit Limit Value Value I2
RBL 1 0.09 0.21 -0.32 0.50 0.66
AL 4 1.53 0.43 0.69 2.36 0.00
AR 2 0.37 0.47 -0.56 1.30 0.44
68 Aytaç & Kula
STH 1 1.37 0.36 0.66 2.07 0.00

BBL 2 1.28 0.27 0.74 1.81 0.00
TE 20 0.85 0.16 0.54 1.16 0.00
DI 8 1.18 0.32 0.55 1.82 0.00
CL 3 0.42 0.18 0.06 0.77 0.02
GBL 3 1.25 0.65 -0.03 2.53 0.06
CS 2 0.81 0.22 0.37 1.25 0.00
ST 9 1.62 0.40 0.82 2.41 0.00
PBL 13 0.53 0.13 0.28 0.78 0.00
PJTL 8 0.82 0.21 0.41 1.23 0.00
STEM 7 0.67 0.15 0.37 0.97 0.00
TBL 7 0.70 0.10 0.51 0.88 0.00
CD 9 1.19 0.37 0.46 1.91 0.00
CWR 5 1.03 0.21 0.61 1.45 0.00
DIMENSIONS 104 0.73 0.04 0.63 0.82 0.01 37.88 86.17
SCA: Thinking education (TE), Problem based learning (PBL), Creative drama (CD), Story telling (ST), Differentiated
instruction (DI), Project Based Learning (PJTL), Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), Technology-
based learning (TBL), Creative writing-reading (CWR), Cooperative learning (CL), Game based learning (GBL),
Argumentation (AR), Research-inquiry based learning (RBL), Active learning (AL), Brain-based learning (BBL), Case
study (CS), Six thinking hats (STH).
As seen in Table 3, the average effect size value of the effect size values of the studies included in the study
according to the random effects model according to the SCA variable is calculated as ES=0.73. According to the
random effects model, the students in the SCA applied classes show that CTS is higher than the classes in which
traditional teacher-centered approaches are used. In the interpretation of the effects size, Cohen (1988, 1992)
proposed the standards for interpreting OR, SMD, and r shown in Table 4 (Bakioğlu & Özcan, 2016: Littell,
Corcoran & Pillai, 2008). The effect size value of this study, ES = 0.73, can be evaluated as a medium effect
size according to Cohen's classification.
Table 4. Cohen’s (1988) Standards for Interpreting Effect Size (ES)
ES Metric Small Effect Medium Effect Large Effect

OR 1.5 2.5 4.3
SMD 0.2 0 0.50 0,80
R 0.1 0.25 0.4
OR: odds ratio; SMD: standardized mean difference; R: correlation coefficient.
It is seen that, among SCA used in the teaching-learning process, approaches and methods that have the greatest
impact on students' CTS are; story telling (d=1.62), active learning (d=1.53), six thinking hats (d=1.37), brain-
based learning (d=1.28), game-based learning (d=1.25) and creative drama (d=1.19). On the other hand, it is
seen that research-inquiry based learning (d=0.09), argumentation (d=0.37) and cooperative learning (d=0.42)
have a lower level of effect on students' CTS.
Homogeneity Test and Q and I2 Statistics

For homogeneity test, Q is calculated as 37.88 (Q=37.88). From the chi-square table, 16 degrees of freedom is
found to be 7.96 at 95% significance level. Since the Q-statistic value (Q = 37.88) exceeds the critical value of
the chi-square distribution with 16 degrees of freedom ( χ2 0.95=7.96), the absence hypothesis of the distribution
of effect sizes was rejected in the fixed effects model.
Recently, the I2 index has been proposed to quantify the degree of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis (Huedo,
Sanchez, Julio, Fulgencio and Botella (2006). I2 shows the the ratio of the total variance of the effect size. I2
reveals the percent variability of effect size estimates due to heterogeneity (Bakioğlu ve Özcan, 2016: 197). In
addition, the 86.17 % value obtained as a result of calculating the I2 value indicates high level of heterogeneity.
The I2 statistic describes the percentage of total variation across studies that is attributable to heterogeneity
rather than chance (Higgins et al., 2003). A value greater than 25% is considered to reflect low heterogeneity,
50% moderate, and 75% high heterogeneity. In the interpretation of I2, 25% indicates low level of heterogeneity;
50% indicates medium level of heterogeneity; and 75% indicates high level of heterogeneity (Cooper et. al.,
2009, 263; Higgins et al., 2003). As a result of homogeneity tests (Q and I2) for SCA variable, since there is a
level of heterogeneity which is close to high level between studies, moderator analyzes are carried out to
determine the possible causes of this heterogeneity.
Results of the Moderator Analysis According to SCA Variable

Results of the moderator analysis which was carried out in order to reveal the reasons of heterogeneity occurring
as a result of SCA variable are given in Table 5.
Table 5. Categorical Moderator Results Related to the Effects of SCA on students’ CTS
Moderator k d SE %95 CI Q p
Publication Type 3.77 0.15
MA 47 0.88 0.10 [0.67; 1.09]
PhD 23 1.13 0.17 [0.78; 1.48]
Article 34 0.74 0.09 [0.55; 0.93]
Education Stage 22.10 0.00
Preschool 19 1.59 0.23 [1.14; 2.04]
Primary 55 0.88 0.09 [0.70; 1.05]
Secondary 9 0.31 0.20 [-0.08; 0.70]
Higher 21 0.60 0.10 [0.40; 0.80]
Lessons 130.5 0.00
Information Technologies 11 0.50 0.10 [0.31;0.70]
Biology 1 0.54 0.15 [0.25;0.84]
Geography 2 -0.79 0.23 [-1.25;-0.33]
Thinking Education 2 1.22 0.25 [0.73;1.71]
Philosophy 2 1.03 0.34 [0.35;1.70]
Science 18 0.52 0.11 [0.32;0.73]
Physics 1 0.62 0.20 [0.23;1.01]
Visual Arts 3 0.92 0.20 [0.52;1.30]
Life Science 2 0.49 0.42 [-0.33;1.30]
English 1 0.19 0.41 [-0.61;0.99]
Mathematics 10 0.95 0.21 [0.54;1.36]
Preschool 19 1.60 0.23 [1.15;2.04]
Assessment and Evaluation 1 2.64 0.33 [2.00;3.28]
Free Activity 3 0.55 0.13 [0.29;0.80]
Social Studies 9 1.69 0.46 [0.80;2.58]
All Lessons 1 0.33 0.16 [0.01;0.64]
Turkish 12 0.99 0.18 [0.65;1.34]
Creative Drama 5 0.48 0.19 [0.10;0.86]
Intelligence Games 1 1.41 0.27 [0.88;1.92]
Region of the Study 5.22
Mediterranean 9 0.88 0.13 [0.61; 1.14]
Eastern Anatolia 12 0.91 0.20 [0.52; 1.30]
Aegean 7 0.91 0.48 [-0.04; 1.87]
Southeast 2 0.30 0.57 [-0.82; 1.44]
Central Anatolia 31 1.12 0.14 [0.84; 1.39]
Black Sea 13 0.74 0.14 [0.45; 1.03]
Marmara 30 0.80 0.10 [0.59; 1.01]
School Type 2.52
State 86 0.88 0.07 [0.73; 1.02]
Private 17 0.87 0.16 [0.55; 1.19]
Science and Arts Center 1 1.69 0.50 [0.69; 2.69]
P.S.: k=number of studies, d= Cohen’s d
70 Aytaç & Kula
(SOF), SE=Standard Error CI=Confidence

Interval, Q= Heterogeneity between studies,
Comparison analyzes are made for studies with
sub-dimension numbers of 2 or more. *p<.05
As a result of the moderator analysis, it is determined that the effect sizes of the studies differ according to the
education stage (p=0.00) and lessons (p=0.00). The results of the studies dealing with the preschools in terms of
education stage show that the students' CTS are higher (d=1.59) in favor of SCA variable. In terms of lessons,
especially in preschool education stage (d=1,60), it is seen that when SCA are applied in Social Studies
(d=1,69), Assessment and Evaluation (d=2,64), Turkish (d=0,99) and Mathematics (d=0, 95) lessons, students'
CTS increased more compared to other lessons. As an interesting result, it is observed that the implementation
of SCA in geography lessons does not have any effect on students' CTS (d=-0.79).
It is determined that the effect sizes of studies according to the publication type (p=0.15), school type (p=0.28),
region of the study (p=0.51) does not differ significantly.
Conclusion and Discussion

In this study, 104 effect sizes are calculated from 104 studies constituting a sample of 6434. According to the
results of the study, a statistically significant moderate effect size is determined according to the random effects
model (d=0.73; [0.63; 0.82]) in favor of the students in the experimental group according to the SCA variable.
This result is a medium level according to the classifications of Cohen (1988). The results of this meta-analysis
study show that SCA practices are a significant variable that positively affects students' CTS.
According to the random effects model in the context of SCA variable, the result of a moderate positive
difference in favor of the students' CTS is in parallel with the results of the researches conducted by Akar &
Şengil Akar (2013), Akkılıç (2018), Akran & Aşıroğlu (2018), Aksoy (2018), Aktamış, Hiğde & Özden (2016),
Altındağ et. al., (2012), Arkan Sezgin & Baysal (2019), Atalay (2014), Avcu (2014), Aydın (2011), Bacak
(2008), Batdal Karaduman (2012), Birişçi & Karal (2011), Bulut (2015), Chung & Ro (2004), Çetinkaya (2014),
Çolakoğlu (2018), Dere & Ömeroğlu (2018), Engin (2019), Kaya (2018), Terzi (2019), Tezci (2002), Tut
(2018), Ülger & İmer (2013), Üret (2019), Yıldırım (2018), Yıldırım & Akman (2020), Yıldız (2012), Yiğit &
Erdoğan (2008). The view that the use of SCA in lessons is effective in the development of higher order
thinking skills of students, which also include CTS (Brown & Freeman, 2000; Galton, et. al., 2009; Pascarella,
et al., 2013) supports this meta-analysis study. In the national and international literature, a meta-analysis study
examining the effect of SCA on students' CTS is not found. In this context, it is not possible to compare the
results of this study with the findings of other meta-analysis studies. No meta-analysis study dealing with the
effect of various SCA on the CTS or a study on the holistic effect is not found in the literature.
It is seen in both individual studies and in this meta-analysis study that students' CTS increase in a classroom
where SCA are used. However, in the moderator analysis conducted to reveal which approaches and methods
are more effective, it is seen that approaches and methods that have the most effect among SCA on students'
CTS are respectively; storyline, active learning, six thinking hats, brain-based learning, game-based learning and
creative drama. The common point of these approaches are that they provide individual and group work
environment, develop multiple learning skills, and bring in skills such as collaboration, discussion and empathy.
In the meta-analysis study conducted by Hsen-Hsing Ma (2009), it is seen that problem solving and
communication skills stand out among the important variables that affect creativity. In this context, especially
active learning, brain-based learning, creative drama and game/storyline methods can be considered meaningful
in the context of having more of these two skills. On the other hand, the effects of research-inquiry based
learning, argumentation, and cooperative learning approaches on students' CTS are slightly lower than other
methods. In the meta-analysis study conducted by Ören and Sarı (2019), the effect of research-inquiry based
learning on students' higher order thinking skills is moderate and positive (ES=0.66), while in this meta-analysis
study, the effect on CTS which is among higher order thinking skills is insignificant and low. This may be due
to the fact that there is the only one study included in the scope of meta-analysis (Şensoy & Yıldırım, 2017).
Generally, it is seen that research, interaction and activity-based learning positively affect students' higher order
thinking skills, especially CTS (Aktamış, Hiğde & Özden, 2016). The findings of this meta-analysis study also
support this view. In the context of this meta-analysis study, it can be said that learning environments where
approaches and methods such as constructivist approach, storyline, educational games, active learning and
drama are applied, the opportunities offered to students have a positive effect students' CTS. In these learning
environments, students actively work (Aydın, 2011) make inquiries, scientific method process is applied, and in
this way, many higher order thinking skills, especially scientific process skills (Karakuş & Yalçın, 2016), are
developed (Perry & Karpova, 2017).
Another result obtained in the study is that in terms of education stage, students' CTS is higher in favor of SCA
in preschool education stage. Theorists (Hertzog, 2008; Özçelik, 2019; Vygotsky, 2004) that deal with the
developmental processes of CTS state that the creativity of younger children is more developable and they use
these skills more to make sense of the world around them. In the study conducted by Yaşar and Aral (2010), the
finding that preschool education stage has a high impact on students' CTS also supports the results of this meta-
analysis study. In the study conducted by Krauksta, Rozenvalde and Ciekurs (2016); It is revealed that active
learning approaches involving activities carried out in extra-curricular environments and storyline and game
activities contributed to the development of CTS in the preschool education stage. In the study conducted by
Atay (2009), it is stated that students in preschool education stage have higher level of CTS than students at
other stages, and that other than the use of SCA, imagination, flexible thinking and learning speed/agility are
also effective as a feature of their cognitive development period. These meta-analysis results reveal that students
contribute more to the development of CTS compared to other education stages, especially in this stage where
the activity-intensive learning-teaching process is carried out. As we move from preschool education to higher
education, it is seen that students' CTS decrease. This situation can be explained by the increase in the effect of a
teacher-centered and exam-oriented education approach in primary and secondary education stages and the less
use of SCA. However, the developmental process does not follow a linear rise in the context of creativity, it is
stated that there is a collapse in CTS after the 4th grade (Hong & Milgram, 2010; Raina, 1980; Torrance, 1968).
In addition, it is known that the students in the upper classes get higher scores in creative thinking than the
students in the lower grades among classes 1 to 5 (Hong & Milgram, 2010; Sak & Maker, 2006). Due to this
developmental difference in creativity skills, it is thought that in this meta-analysis stud, results are in favor of
preschool students. In addition, the finding that preschool teachers have high creative thinking tendencies in the
study conducted by Eskidemir and Tezel (2019) supports the results of this meta-analysis study. In a sense, this
can be evaluated as that the attitudes of the teachers are important in the development of the students.
In terms of scale type, Whetton and Cameron (2002) Creative Thinking Skill Scale "How Creative Are You?"
which is used in 19 studies and The Torrance (1966) Creative Thinking Test scale “Test of Creative Thinking”
used in 65 studies produced similar results. In the literature, it is seen that these two scales are often used to
measure CTS in the world and in Turkey and that the validity/reliability is higher (Çetin, Üstündağ, Kerimoğlu
and Beyazıt, 2015, Kim, 2011). It is seen that the effect size of the studies using these two scales (ES=0.70-
0.79) is very close to the effect size found in this meta-analysis study (ES=0.73). However, there are significant
differences between other scales in terms of effect sizes. In addition to the valid/reliable scales that measure
students' CTS in a way that matches the results of the study, it is also seen that different measurement tools give
results that are not close to each other (Carson, Peterson & Higgins, 2005; Dollinger, Urban & James, 2004;
Haasse et al., 2018).
When the gender of the researcher is female, it is seen that the students' CTS are higher in favor of SCA. This
can be explained by the fact that only 26 of the 104 studies included in the meta-analysis study are done by male
researchers and that female researchers have more interest and motivation for learning and studying on this
subject. In addition, the fact that studies in the preschool education stage and studies where the students have
higher CTS are carried out by female researchers can be effective in this.
In terms of the moderator variable, it is observed that the students are more likely to increase their CTS when
SCA are applied in lessons in preschool education stage and Social Studies, Philosophy, Assesment and
Evaluation, Turkish, Mathematics and Visual Arts lessons in different education stages. Since teacher centered
approaches and methods are generally used in these lessons, it is clear that when SCA are applied, it will
contribute more to the development of higher order thinking skills of students (Perry & Karpova, 2017; Weimer,
2002). As an interesting result, it is observed that the application of SCA does not have any effect on students'
CTS in geography lessons. Geography lessons in Turkey are carried out with many concepts taught with a
complex structure (Akbulut, 2004). Although student centered approaches are tried to be used, it is difficult to
increase creativity in schools without geography laboratories (Gardner et al., 1997; as cited in Akbulut, 2004).
This interesting result of the study is thought to have originated from the conditions in which Geography lessons
are carried out in Turkey.
It is determined that the effect size of the studies does not differ according to publication type, student group
(normal-gifted), school type (state, foundation, science and arts center) and region of the study. Since no meta-
72 Aytaç & Kula
analysis studies that reveal the effect of SCA on students' CTS carried out in Turkey and abroad are found, it is
impossible to compare results.
Furthermore, it is seen that the positive effect of SCA used in lessons on students' CTS continues within years of
which meta-analysis studies are carried out (1990-2020). The adoption of the constructivist approach in the
education programs in Turkey since 2005 has increased interest in the higher order thinking skills such as CTS.
Therefore, the research carried out in Turkey dealing with CTS is known to increase in numbers after 2005
(Saracaloğlu et. al., 2014).
Recommendations
Recommendations for Researchers
- In the context of the results of this meta-analysis study, meta-analysis studies can be conducted by using
variables that have effect on students' CTS other than SCA applications such as teacher quality, school culture,
out-of-school activities, family and social environment.
- In the context of the results of this meta-analysis study, it can be suggested to make qualitative and quantitative
studies on the factors that may have effect on students' CTS. Studies can be conducted to determine the effects
of SCA on higher order thinking skills other than CTS (problem solving, meta-cognitive thinking etc.).
- It can be suggested to make meta-synthesis studies on the factors that may have effect on students' CTS.
- It can be suggested to make research conducted outside the Turkey in order to compare and to generalize the
findings of the meta-analysis.
Recommendations for Implementers
- As a result of the meta-analysis study, it is observed that the learning-teaching approaches such as storyline,
active learning, six thinking hats, brain-based learning, game-based learning and creative drama are more
effective on students' CTS than other approaches. In this context, it can be suggested that teachers use these
approaches more in the lessons for the development of students' CTS. In addition, it can be suggested to use
more of SCA and activities that develop students' CTS in primary and secondary education.
- It can be suggested to use teaching methods and techniques based on social interaction in cognitive sense in
order to develop students' creative thinking skills.
References
(The symbol of * refers to the studies included in the meta-analysis).
*Akar, İ., & Şengil Akar, Ş. (2013). The effectiveness of the creative reversal act (creact) on students’ creative
thinking: further evidence from Turkey. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(4),
183-191.
Akbulut, G. (2004). Geography teaching and creative thinking. C.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 28(2), 215-223.
Akkaya, M. (2019). The effects of research inquiry-based teaching on scientific process skills: A national meta
analysıs study. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Science, Ağrı.
*Akkılıç, G. (2018). Investigation of the effect of activities based on six thinking hats technique in a philosophy
class on creativity, critical thinking and academic self-efficacy. Atatürk University. Master
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
*Akran, K. S., & Aşıroğlu, S. (2018). The effect of writing circle technique on prospective teachers’ creative
thinking skills. Inonu University Journal of the Graduate School of Education, 5(10). *Aksoy, M.
(2018). Investigation of the effects of block play on children’s creativity. Gazi University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Aktamış, H., Hiğde, E., & Özden, B. (2016). Effects of the ınquiry-based learning method on students’
achievement, science process skills and attitudes towards science: a meta-analysis science. Journal of
Turkish Science Education, 13(4), 248-261.
*Akyürek Tay, B. (2019). The effect of patterned case method with band caricatures on success, permanence
and creative thinkıng skills in social studies course. Gazi University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of
Educational Sciences, Ankara.
*Altındağ, C., Göksel, Ç., Koray, Ö., & Koray, A. (2012). The effect of science and technology laboratory
applications based on critical and creative thinking on problem solving and creativity. X.Ulusal Fen
Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi. Niğde: Türkiye (27-30 Haziran 2012)
*Aras, R. (2018). Secondary school 6. grade social studies in problem based learning approach the effect of
higher-order thinkıng skills and creativity level. Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Erzincan.
*Arkan Sezgin, K. & Baysal, Z. N. (2019). Examining the effects of thinking skills program developed for the
primary school 3rd-grade students on their creativity levels. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 16(1); 19-
47.APA (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school redesign and
reform. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ed/ governance/bea/learner-centered.pdf.
Arık, S. & Yılmaz, M. (2020). The effect of constructivist learning approach and active learning on
environmental education: A meta-analysis study. International Electronic. Journal of Environmental
Education, 10(2), 44-84.
Aşık, Z., & Özen, M. (2019). Meta-Analysis Steps and Reporting. Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and
Primary Care, 13(2), 232-240.
Atay, Z. (2009). Okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarına devam eden 5-6 yaş öğrencilerinin yaratıcılık düzeylerinin yaş,
cinsiyet ve ebeveyn eğitim durumlarına göre incelenmesi [Investigation of the creativity levels of 5-6
year old students attending preschool education ınstitutions according to age, gender and parental
education status], Master Dissertation, Selçuk University, Konya
*Atalay, Z. Ö. (2014). The effect of differentiated social studies instruction on gifted students' academic
achievement, attitudes, critical thinking and creativity. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute
of Educational Sciences, Istanbul.
*Avcu, Y. E. (2014). The effect of creative thinking activities on students' creative thinking and academic
achievement “Geography Lesson Example”. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University. Master Dissertation,
Institute of Educational Sciences, Çanakkale.
Ayaz, M. F. (2014). The effect of the project-based learning approach on the academic achievements of the
students in science lesson and their attitudes towards science lesson: A meta-analysis study. Dicle
University. PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Diyarbakır.
Ayaz, M. F. (2015). The effect of 5E learning model on the attitudes towards lessons of the students: A meta-
analysis study. Electronic Journal of Education Sciences. 4(7), 29-50.
Ayaz, M. F. & Şekerci, H. (2016). The effect of constructivist learning approach to attitudes of the students
towards lessons: A meta-analysis study. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 47, 46-63.
Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/dpusbe/issue/26801/286166
*Aydın, Z. (2011). The effects of active learning activities on the 6th graders’ attitude towards mathematics
classes and their creative thinking abilities. Gaziantep University, Master Dissertation, Institute of
Social Sciences, Gaziantep.
*Bacak, S. (2008). The effect of story-based learning approach on academic success and creativity of 5th grade
social sciences course. Celal Bayar University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences,
Manisa.
Bakioğlu, A. & Özcan, Ş. (2016). Meta Analysis. Ankara: Nobel Academy Publishing.
Baş, G. (2016). The effect of multiple intelligences theory-based education on academic achievement: A meta-
analytic review. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1833–1864.
*Başkök, B. (2012). Investigation of the effect of creative writing studies on the seven grade students on the
creativities and attitude of Turkish courses. Akdeniz University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social
Sciences, Antalya.
Başol, G., Doğuyurt, M. F., & Demir, S. (2016). A content analysis and methodological evaluation of meta-
analyses on Turkish samples. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 714-745.
*Batdal Karaduman, G. (2012). The effect of differentiation geometry teaching on creative thinking, spatial
ability level and access for primary school 5th grade gifted students. Istanbul University, PhD
Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Istanbul.
Batdı, V. (2014). The effect of activity-based learning approach on academic achievement (A meta-analytic and
thematic study). e-International Journal of Educational Research, 5(3), 39-55.
Batdı, V. (2014b). The effect of blended learning environments on students’ academic achievement: a meta-
analysis study. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(1), 287-302.
*Baylav Korkmaz, H. (2002). The effect of project based learning on creative thinking, problem solving and
academic risk taking levels in science education. Hacettepe University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of
Social Sciences, Ankara.
*Baz, B. (2019). The effect of the program based on the children's literature texts on the creative thinking skills
of primary school students. Yıldız Teknik University, Master Dissertation. Institute of Social Sciences,
İstanbul.
Becker, K & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) subjects on students’ learning: A preliminary meta-analysis. Journal of STEM
Education, 12(5/6), 23-37.
Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Creative learning: A fresh look. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 15, 6–
23.
74 Aytaç & Kula
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on
computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational
Research, 87(2), 309-344.
*Biber, M. (2006). The effect of the discovering learning method on the creativity of elementary school students
of 2nd stage mathematics course. Dokuz Eylül University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, İzmir.
Biçer, N. (2017). The influence of student-centered methods in Turkish language instruction on academic
success: A meta-analysis study. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(4), 687-69.
*Birinci, E. (2008). The effect of using project-based learning in adaptation and development of materials on
teacher candidates’ critical thinking, creative thinking and scientific-process skills. Zonguldak
Karaelmas University, Master Dissertation. Institute of Social Sciences, Zonguldak.
*Birişçi, S. & Karal, H. (2011). Effect of collaborative studies on prospective teachers’ creative thinking skills
while designing computer based material. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,
12(2/Haziran), 203-219.
Blumberg, P. (2008). A guide to learner-centered teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West
Sussex-UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2013). Meta-Analize Giriş. Çev. Serkan
Dinçer, Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Brown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving learning in diverse
classrooms. Education, 124(1), 49-54.
Brown, M. N. & Freeman, K. (2000). Distinguishing features of critical thinking classrooms. Teach. Higher
Educ. 5(3), 301-309.
*Bulut, D. (2015). The effect of educational game design process on student’s creativity. Bahcesehir University,
Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
*Camcı Erdoğan, S. (2014). The effect of differentiated science and technology instruction based on scientific
creativity on gifted and talented students’ achievement, attitude and creativity. Istanbul University,
PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul.
Camnalbur, M. & Mutlu Bayraktar, D. (2018). The effect of collaborative learning on academic achievement: A
meta-analysis study. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches, 7(2), 1149-1172.
Cantürk Günhan, B. (2016). The effect of drama based learning applied in turkey on success of mathematics: a
meta-analysis study. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(2), 145-162.
Capar, G. & Tarim, K. (2015). Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics achievement and
attitude: A meta-analysis research. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(2), 553-559.
Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York: The Guilford Press, 7, 9.
Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the creative
achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37-50. DOI:10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4
Chung, N. & Ro, G. (2004). The Effect of problem-solving instruction on children’s creativity and self-efficacy
in the teaching of the practical arts subject. The Journal of Technology Studies. 30(2), 116-122.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1 (3), 98-101.
Cooper, H. M. (2009). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cruz, R. E., Lian, M. J. & Morreau, L. E. (1998) The effects of creative drama on social and oral language skills
of children with learning disabilities. Youth Theatre Journal, 12(1), 89-95. DOI:
10.1080/08929092.1998.10012498
Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Çelik, S. (2013). The effect of alternative teaching methods used in elementary mathematics classes on
academic success: A meta analysis study. Eskişehir Osmangazi University. Master Dissertation,
Institute of Educational Sciences, Eskişehir.
Çetin, Z., Üstündağ, A., Kerimoğlu, G. & Beyazıt, U. (2015). Examining the assessment tools used for
creativity of children in Turkey and worldwıde. H.Ü. Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 30-49.
*Çetinkaya, Ç. (2014). The effect of gifted students’ creative problem solving program on creative thinking.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(2014), 3722–3726.
Chiu, Y. H., Kao, C. W., & Reynolds, B. L. (2012). The relative effectiveness of digital game‐based learning
types in English as a foreign language setting: A meta‐analysis. British journal of educational
technology, 43(4), E104-E107.
Çırak-Kurt, S., Yıldırım, İ. & Cücük, E. (2018). The effects of blended learning on student achievement: a meta-
analysis study. H. U. Journal of Education, 33(3), 776-802.
*Çoban, B. (2014). The effects of problem based learning to success, creativity and transfer skills of the
students. Gazi University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
*Çolakoğlu, S. (2018). The effect of the teaching of the circle topic on the creative thinking skills of 7th grade
students with the geogebra software. Bayburt University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social
Sciences, Bayburt.
Dağyar, M. (2014). The effects of problem based learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study.
Hacettepe University. PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Darsih, E. (2018). Learner-centered learning: What makes it effective. Indonesian EFL Journal, 4(1), 33-42.
DOI: 10.25134/ieflj.v4i1.796.
Demir, S. & Başol, G. (2014). Effectiveness of computer-assisted mathematics education (came) over academic
achievement: A meta-analysis study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(5), 2026-2035.
*Dere, Z. & Ömeroğlu, E. (2018). A study on the effects of creativity training program on creative behaviors of
children. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 7(1), 1-15. Doi:10.30703/cije.333901.
Dinçer, S. (2014). Eğitim bilimlerinde uygulamalı meta-analiz. Ankara: PEGEM Akademi Yayıncılık.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Bossche, P. & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: a meta-analysis.
Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 533-568.
Doğan, N. (2005). Creative thinking. Demirel Ö. (Ed.), New Trends in Education (2. Edition). Ankara: Pegem
A.
Dollinger, S. J., Urban, K. K., & James, T. A. (2004). Creativity and openness: Further validation of two
creative product measures. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 35-47.
Drapeau, P. (2014). Sparking Student Creativity: Practical Ways to Promote Innovative Thinking and Problem
Solving. ASCD Learn Teaching.
*Düzen, Ü. (2019). The effect of mathematical centered stem activities on the creative thinking skills of students
and ınvestigation of student opinions. Bayburt University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social
Sciences, Bayburt.
*Ekinci Işık, D. (2007). The effect of project based learning on academic success, creative thinking, permanance
attitude levels towards life study course in knowledge of life teaching. Dokuz Eylül University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İzmir.
Ellis, P. D. (2012). The essential guide to effect sizes (5th edition). Cambridge-UK: Cambridge University Press.
*Engin, G. A. (2019). The effect of integrated creative drama-art activities applied to 4-5 years old pre-school
children on creative thinking skills. Ankara University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, Ankara.
Erdamar, G., Ayataç, T., Demir, E. & Demir, F. (2015). The Effects of Constructivist Learning Approach on
Academic Success of Students: A Meta-Analysis. Education in the 21st Century: Theory and Practice,
St. Kliment Ohridski University Pres.
Erden, H., Aytaç, T. & Erden, A. (2016). Effect of Creative Drama on Students’ Academic Achievement: A
Meta-Analysis Study. 2nd International Conference on Lifelong Education and Leadership for All,
ICLEL 2016, July 21-23, 2016, Sakarya University&Liepaja University, Liepaja-LATVIA.
*Ersoy, E. & Başer, N. (2014). The effects of problem-based learning method in higher education on creative
thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(2014) 3494-3498.
Eskidemir, M. S. & Tezel, Ş. F. (2019). Creative thinking dispositions of the preschool teachers. OPUS
Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13 (19) , 311-331.
*Eşsizoğlu, G. (2013). The effect of project based learning in social sciences on gifted students' achievement,
critical thinking and creativity. Istanbul University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, İstanbul.
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of
inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 82(3), 300-329.
Gajda, A., Karwowski, M., & Beghetto, R. A. (2017). Creativity and academic achievement: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(2), 269–299.
Galton, M., Hargreaves, L. & Pell, T. (2009). Group work and whole-class teaching with 11 to14 year olds
compared. Cambridge J. Educ. 39(1), 119-140.
*Gizir Ergen, Z. (2013). A study on the effects of the project approach on the creativity of children attending
preschool. Ankara University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Science, Ankara.
*Gölcük, A. (2017). The effect of science education that is supported by scıentıfıc storıes on students’ creatıvıty
and affectıve properties. Hacettepe University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences,
Ankara.
Gözüyeşil, E. & Dikici, A. (2014). The effect of brain based learning on academic achievement: A meta-
analytical study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(2), 642-648.
*Güldemir, S. (2019). The effect of stem activities on creativity in pre-school education. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Science, Rize.
76 Aytaç & Kula
*Günbatar, M. S. (2009). The effect of web-assisted problem-based learning on students 'creative thinking skills
and attitudes. Yüzüncü Yıl University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Van.
* Gündoğan, A., Arı, M. & Gönen, M. (2013). The effect of drama on the creative ımagination of children in
different age groups. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 28(2), 206-220.
*Güner Yüksel, S. (2019). The effect of problem based learning method on students 'creative thinking and
problem solving skills and academic achievements in social studies. Gaziantep University. Master
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Gaziantep.
Haase, J., Hoff, E. V., Hanel, P. H. P. & Innes-Ker, A. (2018) A meta- analysis of the relation between creative
self-efficacy and different creativity measurements. Creativity Research Journal, 30(1), 1-16.
*Hacıoğlu, Y. (2017). The effect of science, techology, engineering and mathematics (stem) education based
activities on prospective science teachers’ critical and creative thinking skills. Gazi University, PhD
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Hartung, J., Knapp, G., & Sinha, B. K. (2008). Statistical meta-analysis with applications. New Jersey: Wiley
Publishing Inc.
Hertzog, N. B. (2008). Ready for preschool. Prufrock Press, Waco: TX.
*Hızır, B. (2014). The effect of creative reading to creative thinking skill in primary and secondary school.
Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Muğla.
Higgins, J. P., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.
Bmj. 327(7414), 557-60.
Hong, E. & Milgram, R. M. (2010) Creative thinking ability: Domain generality and specificity, Creativity
Research Journal, 22(3), 272-287. DOI: 10.1080/10400419.2010.503535
Hsen-Hsing Ma (2009). The Effect Size of Variables Associated with Creativity: A Meta-Analysis. Creativity
Research Journal, 21:1, 30-42.
Huedo-Medina, Tania; Sanchez-Meca, Julio; Marin-Martinez, Fulgencio; and Botella, Juan (2006). Assessing
heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?". CHIP Documents. 19.
Internet: Prisma Checklist Turkish Version. WEB: Retrieved from
http://www.prismastatement.org/documents/PRISMA%20Turkish%20checklist.pdf
*Işık, A. D. & Saygılı, G. (2015). The effect of learning creative development techniques on the skills of
creative thinking. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, Special Issue on XIV.
International Participation Symposium of Primary School Teacher Education (21-23 May, 2015), 133 –
139.
*İkikat, U. (2019). The effect of enriched science course on the creative thoughts of primary school students.
İstanbul Aydın University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
*İşeri, Ş. (2010). Effect of class activities based on newspapers used in science and technology lessons on the
attitude and creativity of students. Kocaeli University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Science,
Kocaeli.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. & Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis.
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
*Kanlı, E. & Emir, S. (2013). The Effect of problem based learning on gifted and normal students’ achievement
and creativity levels. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 7(2, December), 18-45.
Kaplan, A., Duran, M. & Baş, G. (2015). The effects of ınstruction based on multiple ıntelligence theory in
mathematics course on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Mersin University Journal of the
Faculty of Education, 11(3): 814-831.
*Kaplan Sayı, A. (2013). The effect of differentiated foreign language instructıon on gifted students'
achievement, critical thinking and creativity. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Social
Sciences, Istanbul.
*Kar, T. (2010). The effects of problem-based learning in linear algebra on the academic achievement,
problem-solving skills and creativity of students. Atatürk University, Master Dissertation, Institute of
Science, Erzurum.
*Karaca, T. & Koray, Ö. (2017). The Effect of using the creative reversal act in science education on middle
school students’ creativity levels. Euraisan Journal of Educational Research. 67, 199-214.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2017.67.12
*Karadayı, Ş. İ. (2018). The effect of creative education on preschool period on creative performance,
administrative mental functions and emotional regulatory skills. Ege University. Master Dissertation,
Institute of Social Sciences, İzmir.
*Karakuş, M. (2000). The effects of creative problem solving curriculum on the creativity levels of creativity in
the second grade students who are from low socio-economic status. Cukurova University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Adana.
Karakuş, M. & Yalçın, O. (2016). The effect of the argümantation-based learning in science education to the
academic achievement and scientific process skills: A meta analysis study. Anadolu University Journal
of Social Sciences, 16(4), 1-20.
*Karataş, S. & Özcan, S. (2010). The effects of creative thinking activities on learners’ creative thinking and
project development skills. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 225-243.
*Karataş Öztürk, S. (2007). The effect of the learning approach based on creative thinking upon the creative
thinking and problem solving skills of students. Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Master Dissertation,
Institute of Science, Eskişehir.
Kaşarcı, İ. (2013). The effectiveness of project based learning on students’ academic achievements and attıtude:
A meta-analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, Eskişehir.
Kaya, A. & Öçal, M. F. (2018). A meta-analysis for the effect of geogebra on students’ academic achievements
in mathematics. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 12(2), 31-59.
*Kaya, H. İ. (2010). Effects of the practices based on constructivist learning in teacher education on teacher
candidates’ tendencies of problem solving, critical thinking and creative thinking. Atatürk University,
PhD Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Erzurum.
*Kaya, M. E. (2018). Effects of stem applications on scientific arrangement and creativity of science teachers of
science. Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Science, Erzincan.
*Kıncal, R. Y., Avcu, Y. E. & Kartal, O. Y. (2016). The effects of creative thinking activities on learners’
creative thinking skills and academic achievement. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 9(1),
15-37.
Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis. Journal of Secondary Gifted
Education. 16(2-3), 57-66.
Kim, K. H. (2011). (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the torrance tests of
creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 4, 285-295.
*Koray, Ö. (2004). The influence of science education based on creative thinking on creativity of preservice
teachers. Educational Administration in Theory & Practice, Fall (40), 580-599.
* Koray, Ö. & Köksal, M. S. (2009). The effect of creative and critical thinking based laboratory applications on
creative and logical thinking abilities of prospective teachers. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning
and Teaching, 10(1), 3-13.
*Kök, B. (2012). The effect of differentiated geometry teaching on gifted and talented students in view of
creativity, spatial ability and success. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Social
Sciences, Istanbul.
*Köse Biber, S. (2014). The effect of web-based learning supported by creativity improving activities on
students’ achievement and creativity. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Science,
Istanbul.
Krauksta D., Rozenvalde, P. & Ciekurs, K. (2016). Outdoor Activities to Promote Creative Thinking in
Preschool Children. Society, Integration, Education Proceedings of the International Scientific
Conference. Volume II, May 27th - 28th, 2016. 396-403.
Kuo, F.R., Chen, N. S. and Hwang, G. J. (2014). A creative thinking approach to enhancing the web-based
problem solving performance of university students. Computers & Education. Vol. 72, 220-230.
*Kuytan, Ş. (2019). The effect of individual or group educational game development on pre ‐service teachers’
creative thinking. Mersin University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Mersin.
Kylonen, P. C. (2012). Measurement of 21st century skills within the common core state standards. Paper
presented at the Invitational Research Symposium on Technology Enhanced Assessments, May 7-8.
Lee, B. K., Patall, E. A., Cawthon, S. W., & Steingut, R. R. (2015). The effect of drama-based pedagogy on
preK–16 outcomes: A meta-analysis of research from 1985 to 2012. Review of Educational
Research, 85(1), 3-49.
Li, Q. & Ma, X. (2010). A meta analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics
learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 215-243.
Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J. and Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. UK: Oxford University
Press.
MEB. (2018). 2023 Eğitim Vizyonu Belgesi. Retrieved from http://2023vizyonu.meb.gov.tr/ 11.01.2019.
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuents, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W. & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual
reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis.
Computers & Education, 70, 29-40.
*Metin, Ö. (2019). The effect of music story and tales on the creativity levels of children in pre-school
education. Marmara University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
78 Aytaç & Kula
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D. G., The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine, 6 (7): e1000097.
Okursoy-Günhan, F. (2009). The effect of concept mapping on learner success: A meta-analytic study. Marmara
University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
*Orçan, A. (2013). The effect of science-fiction stories developed by comics technique, on creative thinking
skills and physics attitudes of students. Gazi University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, Ankara.
*Öç, U. (2019). Scientific process skills of science lab applications based on argumentation, their effects on the
attitude for laboratory and the creativity. Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Master Dissertation, Institute
of Educational Sciences, Sivas.
*Ömeroğlu, E. (1990). The effect of creative drama education on the development of verbal creativity of 5-6
year old children who attend kindergarten. Hacettepe University, PhD Dissertation, Health Sciences
Institute, Ankara.
Özbey, Ö. F. & Sarıkaya, R. (2019). Investigation of effectiveness on drama method studies in Turkey: A meta-
analysis study. Gazi Journal of Education Sciences (GJES), 5, Özel Sayı, 231-253.
*Özcan, E. (2019). Investigation of the effects of argumentation based science learning approach on the
conceptual understanding of the students, their creative thought and the epistemological beliefs.
Marmara University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
Özçelik, A. D. Ö. (2019). Eğitimde ve Endüstride 21. Yüzyıl Becerileri. Editörler: Prof. Dr. Ayşe Dilek Öğretir
Özçelik ve Dr. Öğr. Üyesi Mehmet Nur Tuğluk, 2. Baskı, Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Özdemir, F., Aslaner, R. & Açıkgül, K. (2020). The effect of the computer-aided mathematics teaching on the
students’ attitudes towards mathematics: A meta - analysis study. Inonu University Journal of the
Graduate School of Education, 7(13), DOI: 10.29129/inujgse.543534.
*Özdemir, S. M. & Çakmak, A. (2008). The effect of drama education on prospective teachers’ creativity.
International Journal of Instruction, 1(1), 13-30.
*Özgenel, M., Canpolat, Ö., Yağan, E. & Canlı, Ö. (2019). The effects of enriched workshop training given to
pre-school students on creative thinking skills of students. Problems of Education in the 21st Century,
77(5), 616-635.
*Özyaprak, M. (2012). The effect of different mathematics teaching on his, attitude and creativity for the gifted
and talented students. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Istanbul.
*Palamut, İ. (2008). Effects of reading story on primary students creativity and academical success. Dokuz
Eylül University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İzmir.
Pascarella, E. T., Wang, J. S., Trolian, T.L. & Blaich, C. (2013). How the instructional and learning
environments of liberal arts colleges enhance cognitive development. Higher Educ. 66, 569-583.
Perry, A. & Karpova, E. (2017). Efficacy of teaching creative thinking skills: A comparison of multiple
creativity assessments. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 24(2017), 118–126.
Peterson, M. (2010). Computerized games and simulations in computer-assisted language learning: A meta-
analysis of research. Simulating & Gaming, 41(1), 72-93.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences. MA- USA: Blackwell Publishers
Ltd.
Runco, M. A. & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7(1), 243-26.
*Sak, U & Öz, Ö. (2010). The effectiveness of the creative reversal act (CREACT) on students’ creative
thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(2010), 33–39.
Saracaloğlu, A. S., Gündoğgu, K., Altın, M., Aksu, N., Kozağaç, Z. B. & Koç, B. (2014). Analysis of articles
published in the field of creative thinking skills after the year of 2000. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi
Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2), 62-74.
*Sarmaşık Kaya, G. (2018). Research regarding the effects of “effective thinking training” program on the
ninth grade students‟ problem solving and creative thinking abilities. İstanbul University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
*Sevgen, M. (2016). The effect of social skills education given to children through creative drama on the social
development and creativity of kindergarten children. İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim University, Master
Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
*Siper Kabadayı, G. (2019). The effects of robotic activities on pre-school children's creative thinking skills.
Hacettepe University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
*Sönmez, B. (2016). The effect of thinking training lesson on 6th grade elemantary school students’ critical and
creative thinking skills. Anadolu Universty, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences,
Eskişehir.
*Sözer Çapan, A. (2014). Investigation of the effect of a 5-year children's creative skills of a training program
prepared by the brain based learning approach. Marmara Universty, PhD Dissertation, Institute of
Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
47(3), 325-338. DOI: 10.1080/00313830308595
*Şener, N., Türk, C. & Taş, E. (2015). Improving science attitude and creative thinking through science
education project: a design, implementation and assessment. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 3(4), 57-67.
*Şendağ, S. & Erol, O. (2015). Use of 3D drawing software in promoting creativity in preschool. Journal of
Theoretical Educational Science, 8(3), 316-336.
*Şensoy, Ö. & Yıldırım, H. İ. (2017). The Effect of research investigation based learning approach on creative
thinking and scientific process skills. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education-CIJE, 6(1), 34 –
46.
*Tedik, G. (2013). The effect of creative drama activities in the fourth grade of prımary school on creatıvıty
abilities of students. Atatürk University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences,
Erzurum.
*Terzi, H. (2019). The effects of intelligence games on the creative thinking skills of 6th grade students. Bayburt
University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Bayburt.
*Tezci, E. (2002). The effects of cunstructivist instructional design on the success and creativity of fifth-year
students in primary schools. Fırat University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, Elazığ.
Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance test of creative thinking. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service
Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
*Tut, E. (2018). Effect of game-based learning applications in 4th grade science class on students’ academic
achievement and creative thinking skills. Ondokuz Mayıs University. Master Dissertation, Institute of
Educational Sciences, Samsun.
Tutal, Ö., Kaçire, İ. & Atabey, E. (2016). Öğretmen eğitiminde kullanılan alternatif öğretim yöntemlerinin
akademik başarıya etkisi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. 4. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim
Kongresi, Antalya.
*Ulaş, A. H., Tedik, G. & Sevim, O. (2014). The effect of creative drama activities in the fourth grade of
prımary school in Turkey on creativity levels of students. A. Ü. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü
Dergisi, 52, 331-350.
Ulubey, Ö. (2018). The effect of creative drama as a method on skills: A meta-analysis study. Journal of
Education and Training Studies, 6(4), 63-78.
*Umar, Ç. N. (2014). The effects of differentiated curriculum with blended learning method on gifted students’
academic achiecevement, critical thinking abilities and creative. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation,
Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul.
*Uygun, D. (2017). The effectiveness of creative reversal act on 7th grade students’ creative thinking. Eskişehir
Anadolu University. Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Eskişehir.
*Uysal, M. E. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning on access, critical thought and creativity skills in
primary education Turkish course. Dokuz Eylul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, İzmir.
*Ülger, K. (2018). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on the Creative Thinking and Critical Thinking
Disposition of Students in Visual Arts Education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based
Learning, 12(1).
*Ülger, K. & İmer, Z. (2013). The effect of problem based learning (pbl) approach on students’ creative
thinking ability. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 28(1), 382-392.
*Üret, A. (2019). Effects of stem education on creativity levels of 5-year-old preschool children. Yıldız Teknik
University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
Vanderbos, G. R. (2006). APA Dictionary of Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European
Psychology, 42, 7–97.
Wang, J. R., Huang, B. Y., Tsay, R. F., Lee, K. P., Lin, S. W., & Kao, H. L. (2011). A Meta-analysis of inquiry-
based ınstruction on student learning outcomes in Taiwan. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (De La
Salle University Manila), 20(3).
Wilson, D. B. (2009). Systematic coding. H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges ve J. C. Valentine (Ed.), The handbook of
research synthesis and meta-analysis içinde (2. bs., s. 159-176). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
World Economic Forum (2016). The 10 skills you need to thrive in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Retrieved
from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-10-skills-you-need-to-thrive-in-the-fourth-
industrial-revolution/ 09.04.2020
80 Aytaç & Kula
Yalçın, S. (2018). 21. Yüzyıl becerileri ve bu becerilerin ölçülmesinde kullanılan araçlar ve yaklaşımlar. Ankara
Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(1), 183-201.
*Yaman, S. & Yalçın, N. (2005). Effectiveness on creative thinking skills of problem based learning approach
in science teaching. Elemantary-Online, 4(1), 42-52.
*Yaman, Y. (2014). Effects of brain based science teaching on gifted students’ achievement, critical thinking,
creativity and attitudes. Istanbul University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences,
Istanbul.
*Yaprakdal, A. B. (2013). The effect of teaching objects design on the critical, creative thinking and scientific
process skills of the teacher candidates. Marmara University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, Istanbul.
Yaşar, M. C. & Aral, N. (2010). The effects of early childhood education on creative thinking skills. Kuramsal
Eğitimbilim, 3 (2), 201-209.
*Yaşar, M. C. & Aral, N. (2012). Drama education on the creative thinking skills of 61-72 months old pre-
school children. US-China Education Review, 6(2012), 568-577.
*Yazıcı, E., Belen, H, B., Baydar, I. Y., Aksu, G. & Okutan, N. Ş. (2019). The effect of story based activities on
children's creativity skills. Adıyaman University Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(2), 226-249.
Yeşilpınar Uyar, M. & Doğanay, A. (2018). The effect of student-centered strategies, methods and techniques
on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of
Education. 14(1), 186-209.
*Yıldırım, A. & Akman, B. (2020). The effects of creative problem solving activities on creativity of
preschoolers. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 10(1), 399-431.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods
in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
*Yıldırım, M. (2018). The effect of context-based storyline method in science education on acadeiıc
achievement, creativity and attitudes towards science. Abant İzzet Baysal University, PhD Dissertation,
Institute of Educational Sciences, Bolu.
*Yıldız, Z. (2012). The effect of project based learning approach to high school students' level of creative
thinking, problem solving, taking academic risk. Gazi University, Master Dissertation, Institute of
Educational Sciences, Ankara.
*Yılmaz, O. (2006). Effects of project-based learning on students' academic achievement, creativity and
attitudes in 7th grade social science lesson. Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Master Dissertation,
Institute of Social Sciences, Zonguldak.
*Yılmaz, R. M. (2014). Effects of three dimensional storytelling developed with augmented reality technology
on narrative skill and creativity. Atatürk University, PhD Dissertation, Institute of Educational
Sciences, Erzurum.
*Yiğit, E. Ö. & Erdoğan, T. (2008). The effect of studying method applied in the social science course on the
creative thinking levels of primary school students. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(3), 399-
416.
*Yurdakal, İ. H. (2019). The effects of creative reading practices on the skills of creative thinking. PAU Journal
of Education, 47, 130-144.
*Yüksel, Y. B. (2018). The impact of creativity education program for preschoolers on kids’ creativity and
audio reasoning. Gazi University, Master Dissertation, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

EJ1285436

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EJ1285436

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EJ1285436

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.ijcer.

The Effect of Student-Centered

Tufan Aytaç1, Sultan Selen Kula1

To cite this article:

Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,

Volume 7, Number 2, December 2020, 62-80 ISSN: 2148-3868

The Effect of Student-Centered Approaches on Students' Creative

Key words: Student centered, learner centered, creative thinking, meta-analysis.

Figure1. Meta-analysis process steps

Table 1. Inclusion Criteria of the Studies

Records identified through database Additional records identified through other

Records after duplicates removed (n= 12)

Records screened (n= 175 ) Records excluded (n= 5)

Full-text articles and PhD/master Full-text articles excluded,

Studies included in qualitative synthesis

Studies included in quantitative synthesis

Figure 2. Prizma Flow Diagram for Meta-analysis

Figure 3. Funnel Plot

STH 1 1.37 0.36 0.66 2.07 0.00

Table 4. Cohen’s (1988) Standards for Interpreting Effect Size (ES)

ES Metric Small Effect Medium Effect Large Effect

Homogeneity Test and Q and I2 Statistics

Results of the Moderator Analysis According to SCA Variable

(SOF), SE=Standard Error CI=Confidence

Conclusion and Discussion

Recommendations for Implementers

You might also like