Museum-based learning for creativity: Indonesian and Malaysian teachers’ expectation vs reality
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Museum-based learning is considered as one of the creative pedagogy strategies that may have an impact on insight and inspiration input as a driving force for the emergence of new ideas and enrichment of the diversity of solutions that students can come up with when solving a problem. However, its implementation in Malaysia and Indonesia is still low in number and quality. Constraints that hinder the implementation of the concept of museum-based learning are still needed to be studied in order to find out the root of the problem and find ways to improve educational institutions, museum organisers, and educational policymakers. By doing a two-phase approach that employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to compare data from the two countries, this study examines the expectations of teachers in Indonesia and Malaysia about museum-based learning for creativity and the problems that they face in its implementation. From the data analysis, it is found that narratives and both external and internal dialogues have central roles in museum-based learning for creativity. These embodiment dialogues will ignite students’ and teachers’ imaginations and inspirations and will eventually produce new ideas. However, teachers in Malaysia and Indonesia still have to face several issues, which include some important considerations about the need to develop museum creative programmes that are interactive and experiential; integrate arts and technologies; creatively arrange the learning strategies that match the contents of both museum and schools’ curriculum targets; propose curriculum review that values learning beyond the classroom; provide enough and appropriate supporting infrastructures; empower teachers with the time management and partnership with other parties including museum educators.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
All rights reserved. Apart from citations for the purposes of research, private study, or criticism and review,no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any other form without prior written permission by the publisher.
References
Altintas, İ. N., & Yenigül, Ç. K. (2020). Active learning education in museum. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1): 120–128. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20380
Anderson, D., Kisiel, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2006). Understanding teachers’ perspectives on field trips: Discovering common ground in three countries. Curator: The Museum Journal, 49(3), 365–386.
Andre, L., Durksen, T., & Volman, M. L. (2017). Museums as avenues of learning for children: A decade of research. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 47–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9222-9
Astuti, E. P., Suardana, I. W., Ambarwati, D. R. S., Wulandari, D., & Isa, B. (2021). Teachers’ perceptions of museum-based learning and its effects on creativity: A preliminary study. In K. S. Astuti & N. K. Sari (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Arts and Arts Education (ICAAE 2020) (pp. 215–221). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210602.043
Burnard, P., Colucci-Gray, L., & Sinha, P. (2021). Transdisciplinarity: Letting arts and science teach together. Curriculum Perspectives, 41(1), 113–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-020-00128-y
Burnard, P., Craft, A., Cremin, T., Duffy, B., Hanson, R., Keene, J., Haynes, L., & Burns, D. (2006). Documenting ‘possibility thinking’: A journey of collaborative enquiry. International Journal of Early Years Education, 14(3), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760600880001
Chappell, K. A., Pender, T., Swinford, E., & Ford, K. (2016). Making and being made: Wise humanising creativity in interdisciplinary early years arts education. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24(3), 254–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2016.1162704
Chappell, K., & Craft, A. (2011). Creative learning conversations: Producing living dialogic spaces. Educational Research, 53(3), 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2011.598663
Chappell, K., & Jobbins, V. (2015). Partnerships for creativity: Expanding teaching possibilities. In C. S. Nielsen, S. K. Robinson, & S. Burridge (Eds.), Dance education around the world: Perspectives on dance, young people and change (pp. 1–13). Routledge.
Chappell, K., Craft, A., Burnard, P., & Cremin, T. (2008). Question‐posing and question‐responding: The heart of ‘possibility thinking’ in the early years. Early Years, 28(3), 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140802224477
Chappell, K., Hetherington, L., Keene, H. R., Wren, H., Alexopoulos, A., Ben-Horin, O., Nikolopoulos, K., Robberstad, J., Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2019). Dialogue and materiality/embodiment in science|arts creative pedagogy: Their role and manifestation. Thinking Skills and Creativity 31, 296–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.12.008
Craft, A., Cremin, T., Hay, P., & Clack, J. (2013a). Creative primary schools: Developing and maintaining pedagogy for creativity. Ethnography and Education, 9(1), 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2013.828474
Craft, A., Cremin, T., Burnard, P., Dragovic, T., & Chappell, K. (2013b). Possibility thinking: Culminative studies of an evidence-based concept driving creativity? Education 3–13, 41(5), 538–556 https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2012.656671
Cremin, T., Burnard, P., & Craft, A. (2006). Pedagogy and possibility thinking in the early years. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2006.07.001
Cremin, T., Chappell, K., & Craft, A. (2013). Reciprocity between narrative, questioning and imagination in the early and primary years: Examining the role of narrative in possibility thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 9, 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.11.003
Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education — A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004.
Foley, C. M. (2014). Why creativity? Articulating and championing a museum’s social mission. Journal of Museum Education, 39(2), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2014.11510805
Godfrey, J. R., & Mcleod, H. S. (2017). Creativity and standardization: The Ability of museum-based programming to inform 21st century education. Canadian Review of Art Education, 44(1), 20–35.
Gregoriou, M. (2019). Creative thinking features and museum interactivity: Examining the narrative and possibility thinking features in primary classrooms using learning resources associated with museum visits. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 32, 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.03.003
Hapidin, Gunarti, W., Pujianti, Y., & Syarah, E. S. (2020). STEAM to R-SLAMET modification: An integrative thematic play based learning with R-SLAMETS content in early child-hood education. Jurnal Pendidikan Usia Dini, 14(2), 262–274. https://doi.org/10.21009/jpud.142.05
Hendri, Z., & Wulandari, D. (2022). Seni rupa anak & pembinaannya perspektif wacana kreativitas dan pedagogi kreatif. Cantrik Pustaka.
Hyatt, K. S. (1992). Creativity through intrapersonal communication dialog. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 26(1), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1992.tb01158.x
Ibrus, I., & Ojamaa, M. (2019). The creativity of digital (audiovisual) archives: A dialogue between media archaeology and cultural semiotics. Theory, Culture and Society, 37(3), 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276419871646
Isa, B. (2017). Museum pedagogy and learning experiences: An investigation into museum education from institutional perspectives [Doctoral dissertation, RMIT University]. RMIT University Library. https://researchrepository.rmit.edu.au/esploro/outputs/doctoral/Museum-pedagogy-and-learning-experiences-an-investigation-into-museum-education-from-institutional-perspectives/9921863944001341#file-0
Isa, B., & Zakaria, Z. (2007). Museums and education: Theoretical approaches and implications for Asian universities. Asian Journal of University Education, 3(1), 93–109.
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569032000159750
Kusumaningsih, A., Angkoso, C. V., & Anggraeny, N. (2018). Virtual reality museum Sunan Drajat Lamongan Berbasis Rulebased System untuk Pembelajaran Sejarah. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi Dan Ilmu Komputer, 5(4), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.25126/jtiik.201854818
Liao, C. (2016). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Education, 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873
Perignat, E., & Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2018). STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002
Pinasti, V. I. S. (2010). Penggunaan Museum Sebagai Model Pembelajaran Out-Class. ISTORIA: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Sejarah, 8(1), 60–74.
Piscitelli, B., & Penfold, L. (2015). Child-centered practice in museums: Experiential learning through creative play at the Ipswich art gallery. Curator: The Museum Journal, 58(3), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12113
Rahm, J. (2016). Project-based museum-school partnerships in support of meaningful student interest- and equity-driven learning across settings. Canadian Review of Art Education, 43(1), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.26443/crae.v43i1.25
Rolfe, L. (2011). The development of partnership-based pedagogies. In K. Chappell, L. Rolfe, A. Craft, & V. Jobbins (Eds.), Close encounters: Dance partners for creativity (pp. 101–112). Trentham Books.
Roughley, M., Smith, K., & Wilkinson, C. (2019). Investigating new areas of art-science practice-based research with the MA art in science programme at Liverpool School of Art and Design. Higher Education Pedagogies, 4(1), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2019.1583072
Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2011). Structure and improvisation in creative teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Selkrig, M. (2017). Teachers adopting artists’ pedagogies: Is it really that simple? International Journal of Education Through Art, 13(3), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1386/eta.13.3.333_1
Selkrig, M. (2018). Connections teachers make between creativity and arts learning. Educational Research, 60(4), 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2018.1524715
Selkrig, M., & Keamy, R. K. (2017). Creative pedagogy: A case for teachers’ creative learning being at the centre. Teaching Education, 28(3), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2017.1296829
Surface, M. H., & Ryan, N. (2018). Developing close looking, creativity, and community through writing and art. Journal of Museum Education, 43(4), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2018.1524652
Wulandari, D. (2017). A Cross-curricular investigation into learning about art through science and science through art [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Exeter.
Wulandari, D. (2019). Advantages and challenges of the open-ended approach in nurturing creativity. In K. Astuti, G. McPherson, B. Sugeng, N. Kurniasari, T. Herawan, C. Drake, Ashadi, E. Retnowati, & A. C. Pierewan (Eds.), Proceedings of 21st Century Innovation in Music Education (INTERCOME 2018) (pp. 468–474). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429024931
Wulandari, D. (2020). Primary school students’ perception of art and science integration in classroom. Imaji, 18(1), 1–9.