www.ijcrsee.com
19
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
Original scientific paper
Received: January 27, 2024.
Revised: March 18, 2024.
Accepted: April 03, 2024.
UDC:
37.091.321:159.954.072(574)
37.018.43(574)
10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-1-19-29
© 2024 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
*
Corresponding author: aiguliyaboo_ahmetsapanova@mail.ru
Aigul Akhmetsapa
1
, Huseyin Uzunboylu
2,3
, Gulnar Zholtayeva
1
,Ulzharkyn Abdigapbarova
3
The Effect of Primary School Teachers Using Online Education on
Their Professional Creativity
1
Zhetysu University, named after Ilyas Zhansugurov’ Department of Pedagogy and Psychology, Taldykorgan, Kazakhstan,
e-mail: aiguliyaboo_ahmetsapanova@mail.ru; gnzh1661@mail.ru
2
University of Kyrenia’ Department of Special Education, Kyrenia, North Cyprus, Turkey,
e-mail: huseyin.uzunboylu@neu.edu.tr
3
Department of Primary Education, The Institute of Pedagogy and Psychology, Abai KazNPU, Almaty, Kazakhstan,
e-mail: u.abdigapbarova@abaiuniversity.edu.kz
Abstract: This study aims to examine the effect of online education on the professional creativity of primary school
teachers. The research was carried out in a mixed method. The study group of the research consisted of 319 primary school
teachers who work in various primary schools in Zhetysu Region, Kazakhstan, and have online education experience. The
data collection tools of the research were the teacher creativity scale, whose Kazakh language validity was provided by the
researchers, and the semi-structured interview form. The analysis of the quantitative data of the research was carried out with
SPSS 25 statistical program. Content analysis was performed for the analysis of the qualitative data of the studies. As a result
of the research, it was determined that the creativity levels of primary school teachers were high. According to the seniority
variable among primary school teachers, it was determined that the creativity levels of those with medium seniority were higher
than the others. The vast majority of teachers stated that online education has a positive effect on professional creativity. The
study recommends increasing the creativity level of primary school teachers, by establishing in-service training programs for
all teachers, especially those who are in the first and last years of their professions.
Keywords: online education, primary school, professional creativity, teachers.
Introduction
Raising useful individuals for society is possible with a modern education perspective that starts in
the early period (Harangus, 2021). One of the most important duties of teachers in the process of adopting
this understanding is to make an effort to gain various skills and qualifications primarily for themselves
and their students, and then to the society and environment they live in (Domingo and Gargante, 2016). In
contemporary societies, teachers are not only mechanical officials responsible for education and training,
but also role models who shed light on the society they live in (Dandashly et al., 2019). One of the
most important learning goals is to encourage children to be creative. Effective participation of teachers
is very important for the realization of this goal. Creativity is the first factor in the development of a
society (Henriksen et al., 2017). Instructors must be attentively focused on creativity and have a thorough
understanding of its definition and development to do this.
Theoretical and conceptual framework
Creativity is the ability to purposefully imagine an original product, to do something in different
ways than anyone else, and to develop new ideas (Bereczki and Karpati, 2018). Creativity is also defined
as a quality that emerges with unconventional thinking, original behavior, and products (Rubenstein et
al., 2018). When creativity is perceived as a product of thought, it refers to the process of reconstructing
www.ijcrsee.com
20
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
ideas that have not been linked to meaning before. Considered an original behavior output, it is the
reinterpretation of old experiences according to original behavior patterns (Perry and Karpova, 2017).
Creativity is a process that includes features such as flexibility, multidimensional thinking, sensitivity,
alertness to the environment and people, fluency, comfort, quick and independent thinking, originality,
and reaching different and different results. Using data wisely, arranging it, solving problems with flexible
approaches, and putting forth an original product, fluency in expressions are the characteristics inherent in
creativity. The fact that all of these features can be developed through education increases the importance
of creativity in education (Perry and Karpova, 2017;Tran et al., 2017). Creative thinking includes both
intellectual, affective, and behavioral products. In the information age, it is of great importance to raise
individuals who think critically and produce and question information (Craft et al., 2014). Thus, expectations
from education have begun to differ. The aim of education is not only to acquire knowledge but also to
raise individuals who think differently, flexible, original, and creative (Mola and Dagnew, 2020). In this
context, education programs and teachers have been involved in efforts to improve creativity in children
(Mullet et al., 2016).
Teacher creativity is defined as teaching by trying originality in the teaching process and using
imagination and problem-solving abilities (Lapeniene and Bruneckiene, 2010). A creative teacher is
considered to be innovative, multi-faceted, open to change, not afraid to express his views, and open-
minded (Cheung, 2012). In creative teaching, teachers use creative approaches to make the lesson more
interesting, enjoyable, and effective. Teachers can be highly creative in developing materials and methods
to encourage students (Ozcinar et al., 2020; Newton, 2013). Creative teaching emerges when the teacher
transforms the existing knowledge into a new form for the student to understand. Raising individuals
who can think, apply knowledge, produce, and solve problems depends on the teacher’s application of
different teaching approaches rather than direct teaching in the classroom (Songkram, 2015). It can be
more effective for teachers to use creative thinking as a teaching tool in the teaching process. Methods
and techniques used in each lesson, tools and materials, resources, and activities, among other things,
make it easier to use creativity as a whole and usual teaching tool (Laisema and Wannapiroon, 2014).
Distance education, with its most general and simple definition, is the formal education process
where students and teachers are not physically in the same place (Uaidullakyzy, 2021). In the distance
education process, students and teachers physically connect by making use of teaching resources and
interactive communication technologies in different environments (Bhuyan, 2021; Selvaraj et al., 2021).
Distance education has conceptual aims such as creating new educational opportunities, combining
work and education, creating equal opportunities in education, providing lifelong learning, incorporating
educational technologies into the process, providing individual and mass education opportunities, and
making education effective, efficient, and cost-effective (Izmagambetova et al., 2022). The effect of
online education applications, which are known to have many advantages and disadvantages on teacher
creativity is an important research topic.
Related research
Edinger (2008), in his study on teacher behaviors nurturing creativity in secondary school classes,
evaluated teacher behaviors that are effective in the development of creative thinking. The results
revealed that the teachers participating in the research exhibit behaviors that foster creativity at a
moderate level. Pelfrey (2011) evaluated the classroom behaviors of primary school teachers defined as
creativity enhancers. The researcher concluded that teachers should encourage their students to explore
by creating creative products. Davies et al., (2014) conducted a study on teachers’ roles and development
needs to support creativity. As a result of the research, it was emphasized that teachers play a key role in
the development of creative thinking skills and that they should provide versatile support.
Aish (2014) studied teachers’ beliefs about creativity in primary education. As a result of the
research, it was determined that teachers emphasized originality in creativity, that creativity is related to
art and that, it forms the basis for academic learning. Colley (2015) evaluated the teaching practices for
creativity in primary schools in developing creativity and revealed that teachers aim to enrich the learning
process activities. Guiller et al., (2008) investigated the effects of online and classroom discussions on
students’ critical thinking skills.
Important research on creativity and online education can be listed as follows. Carter (2008)
www.ijcrsee.com
21
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
compared the creative thinking dispositions of the students before and after the online course and
revealed that the applied online courses did not cause any increase in the students’ creative thinking
dispositions. Maor et al. (2023) examined whether teachers integrate metacognition and creativity in their
online lessons more than in classroom instruction. Gu et al (2023) developed and examined an online
creativity training program, which employed a comprehensive training approach and consisted of twenty
self-instructional exercises delivered throughout five weeks. In her study, Wu (2022) conducted one of
the first studies that used an online interactive creativity task platform to explore a person’s creativity
performance in paired player mode.
It is very important for teachers to constantly improve their professional creativity. As it is known, it
has become of great importance for teachers to have online education skills during and after the COVID
2019 period. It can be argued that teachers’ ability to use their creativity in online teaching skills and
provide effective and efficient teaching makes it easier for students to learn. When we look at the studies
carried out in this direction in recent years, we see that the focus is on online learning and creativity.
However, when we look at the literature carefully, it is seen that there are research gaps regarding the
extent to which the professional creativity of primary school teachers is effective in the online education
they provide.
Purpose of the research
The purpose of this research was to examine the effect of online education on the professional
creativity of primary school teachers. The research seeks answers to the following research questions.
1. What are the teachers’ creativity scale mean scores?
2. Do teachers’ creativity levels differ according to the variable of professional seniority?
3. How do teachers evaluate the impact of online education on their professional creativity?
4. How do teachers evaluate the advantages of online education that enable the development of
professional creativity?
5. How do teachers evaluate the disadvantages of online education that prevent the development of
professional creativity?
Materials and Methods
In this section, information on the method of the research, the study group, the data collection tools,
the stages of data collection and processing, and the ethical principles of the research are presented.
Research method
This research was carried out in a mixed method. In the field of health, social, and behavioral
sciences, where the researcher collects both quantitative data (closed-ended) and qualitative data (open-
ended) to understand research problems, integrates two datasets, and then draws conclusions using the
advantages of integrating these two datasets. The basic assumption of this approach is that combining
statistical trends (quantitative data) with stories and personal experiences (qualitative data) will be more
advantageous than using either of these methods alone to better understand the research problem
(Doyle et al., 2009). Accordingly, in this study, while the creativity levels of teachers were obtained by the
quantitative method, the effect of online education on their professional creativity was evaluated by the
qualitative method.
Participants
The quantitative study group of the research consists of 319 primary school teachers working in
various primary schools in the city of Zhetysu Region, Kazakhstan, in the 2022-2023 academic years and
having online education experience. The qualitative part of the research was carried out by selecting 25
teachers by random sampling method among 319 teachers participating in the research. The demographic
characteristics of the teachers participating in the research are given in Table 1.
www.ijcrsee.com
22
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of primary school teachers
Gender F %
Woman 319 100
Professional Seniority
1–5 years
88 27.6
6–10 years
95 29.8
11–15 years
76 23.8
16 years and above
60 18.8
Demographic characteristics of primary school teachers participating in the research are given
in Table 1. All (100%) of the primary school teachers participati ng in the research are women. 88.2 of
the primary school teachers participating in the research have professional seniority between 1 and 5
years (27.6%), 95 of them have professional seniority between 6 and 10 years (29.8%), 76 of them
have professional seniority between 11 and 15 years (% 23.8), and 60 of them have 16 years or more
professional seniority (18.8%).
Data collection tools
Teacher Creativity Scale
“Teacher Creativity Scale,” one of the data collection tools of the research, was developed by Uçar
(2015). The following steps were followed while establishing the language validity of the scale.
• Translation: At this stage, the “Teacher Creativity Scale” (Uçar, 2015) was translated into Kazakh using
a 5-stage technique. This process consists of the steps of first translation, first translation evaluation,
back translation, back translation evaluation, and expert opinion. The first translation of the Teacher
Creativity Scale was carried out by 2 experts who were familiar with the cultural, psychological, and
grammatical differences in both languages. Afterward, the translation was evaluated and the scale was
translated back into its original language. After the back translation was carried out, the final translation
was evaluated and it was decided that the scale was ready for pilot application.
• Establishment of the Pilot Practice Sample Group: At this stage, 307 primary school teachers
experienced in the field of online education formed the pilot implementation sample group to pilot the
scale. Primary school teachers included in the pilot study sample group were excluded from the main
sample group of the study.
• Exploratory Factor Analysis: The SPSS 25.0 statistical program was used in exploratory factor analysis.
In the exploratory factor analysis, the suitability of the data set for the analysis was evaluated. Kaiser-
Meyer - Olkin (KMO) and Barlett Sphericity tests were used. In Kaiser-Meyer tests, the Olkin (KMO)
coefficient should be between 0.80-0.90 for the sample size, and in Barlett tests, the Sphericity test
should be significant at the .05 level (Hadi et al., 2016). In the Kaiser Meyer analysis, since the Olkin
(KMO) coefficient was 0.84 and the Barlett sphericity test was p<0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected
and it was accepted that the correlation matrix was not a unit matrix. Finding statistically significant
data shows that it is suitable for factor analysis. As a result of the exploratory factor analysis, it was
determined that the scale items were grouped under 3 factors with an eigenvalue greater than 1. The
factor loadings of the first factor of the scale, which includes 10 items and is called “Expertise,” ranged
from 0.65 to 0.77. The factor loads of the second factor of the scale, which includes 10 items and is
called “Creative Thinking Skill,” vary between 0.59 and 0.79. It was determined that the third factor,
which consists of 8 items and is called “Motivation,” had factor loads ranging from 0.73 to 0.86.
• Confirmatory Factor Analysis: SPSS Amos in Confirmatory Factor Analysis 25.0 statistics program
was used. To accept the confirmatory factor analysis results as valid, the goodness of fit indices of the
model must be sufficient. The goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Relative Fit Index
(RFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Incremental Fit Index (IFI) values greater than 0.90 indicate
that there is sufficient fit, and the values decrease to 0. Approximate bad, approaching 1 perfectly fit
root mean square Residuals (SRMR) and Root mean square. If the Error of Approximation (RMSEA)
is less than 0.05, it is stated that it has a good fit, if it is below 0.10, it is an acceptable goodness of fit,
and the ratio of the Chi-square value to the degree of freedom is less than 5 (Schermelleh-Engel et
www.ijcrsee.com
23
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
al., 2003). As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis, it was determined that the ratio of the Chi-
square value to the degrees of freedom had a sufficient level below 5. The fit index values were found
to be RMSEA=0.04, SRMR= 0.03, GFI=0.97, NFI=0.93, RFI=0.91, CFI=0.93, and IFI=0.98. When the
goodness of fit indices obtained as a result of confirmatory factor analysis was examined, the model
was determined to be compatible.
• Reliability Study: The consistency of the scale was checked with the Cronbach alpha internal
consistency coefficient. The Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient of the “Expertise” factor
was 0.82, the Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient of the “Creative Thinking Skill” factor
was 0.85, and the Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient of the “Motivation” factor was
0.88. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient for the Teacher Creativity Scale was found
to be 0.84 in general. When calculating the score of the 5-point Likert-type scale, “strongly agree” was
determined as 5, “strongly agree” 4, “moderately agree” 3, “little agree” 2, and “strongly disagree” 1
point. Item score ranges were accepted as equal, between 1.00-1.79 “I strongly disagree,” 1.80–2.59
“I agree little,” 2.60–3.39 “moderately agree,” 3.40–4.19 “strongly agree,” and 4.20- Between 5.00 and
5.00 was formed as “totally agree”.
The Effect of Online Education on Teacher Creativity Semi-Structured Interview Form
“The Effect of Online Education on Teacher Creativity Semi-Structured Interview Form” was
developed by the researchers to collect the qualitative data for the study. Opinions of 3 experts were
taken to determine the content validity of the three semi-structured interview questions created during
the development of the semi-structured interview form. Interview questions organized in line with expert
opinions were applied to 4 primary school teachers and the clarity of the questions was evaluated. The
semi-structured interview form was given its final form with the opinions of the teachers. The semi-
structured interview form prepared to be used in the research is given in Table 2.
Table 2. The effect of online education on teacher creativity semi-structured interview form
1. How do you evaluate the impact of online education on teachers’ professional creativity? Give your opinion by
choosing one of the options below.
Very effective in a positive way () Positively effective ()
Ineffective () Negatively effective () Very effective in the negative direction ()
Teacher’s opinion:
2. How do you evaluate the advantages of online education that enable the development of professional creativity?
Teacher’s opinion
3. How do you evaluate the disadvantages of online education that prevent the development of professional creativity?
Teacher’s opinion:
The Effect of Online Education on Teacher Creativity in semi-structured interview form is given in
Table 2. The form includes 1 closed and open-ended question and 2 open-ended questions.
Data collection process
Research data were collected in two stages. The first of these is the pilot implementation phase
of the Teacher Creativity Scale, which was adapted into language for use in the research. In the second
stage, primary school teachers who constituted the sample group of the research were studied. Data
collection tools were delivered to the teachers through Google Forms. It took approximately 3 months for
all data to be collected and delivered to the researchers.
Compliance with Ethics
At every stage of the research, an understanding of research by ethical principles was displayed.
Necessary permissions were obtained for the language adaptation study of the Teacher Creativity Scale,
whose language validity was established to collect the research data. A consent form was obtained
from all primary school teachers who participated in the study, stating that they voluntarily participated
in the study. In addition, a statement was made to the participants that the research data and personal
information would be kept confidential and not used for any other purpose or anywhere.
www.ijcrsee.com
24
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
Data analysis
The analysis of the quantitative data of the research was carried out with the SPSS 25.0 statistical
program. In addition to percentage, frequency and mean calculations, one-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) were applied. Content analysis was performed for the analysis of the qualitative data of the
studies. The process of content analysis is to bring together similar data within the framework of certain
concepts and themes and to present them in a way that the reader can comprehend (Stemler, 2000).
In this direction, the effect of online education on teacher creativity was presented by transforming the
data obtained from the semi-structured interview form into frequency and percentage tables with content
analysis.
Results
In this section, the findings obtained with the Teacher Creativity Scale and the Effect of Online
Education on Teacher Creativity Semi-Structured Interview Form are given.
Findings Regarding the Teacher Creativity Scale
In Table 3, the weighted average and standard deviations of the primary school teachers participating
in the research regarding the overall teacher proficiency scale and its sub-dimensions are given.
Table 3. Weighted mean and standard deviations of the teacher creativity scale
M SS
Expertise 3.68 0.773
Creative Thinking Skill 3.77 0.791
Motivation 3.59 0.834
Teacher creativity scale 3.69 0.698
In Table 3, the sub-dimension of expertise (M=3.68, SS=0.773), the sub-dimension of creative
thinking skills (M=3.77, SS=0.791), the sub-dimension of motivation (M=3.59, SS=0.834) and the overall
scale of teacher creativity (M=3.69, SS=0.698) weighted average and standard deviations are given.
From this point of view, it has been determined that primary school teachers have a high degree of
creativity in the teacher creativity scale sub-dimensions and overall.
According to the professional seniority variable of primary school teachers participating in the
research in Table 4, a one-way analysis of variance, ANOVA results is given.
Table 4. One-way analysis of variance ANOVA results
Class N M SS F P
1–5 years 88 3.29 0.839 16.552 0.000
6–10 years 95 4.08 0.677
11–15 years 76 4.01 0.682
16 years and above 60 3.26 0.848
In Table 4, the creativity of primary school teachers participating in the research was evaluated
according to the variable of professional seniority. As a result of one-way analysis of variance ANOVA, it
was determined that the creativity of primary school teachers showed a significant difference according to
the variable of professional seniority (F=16.552, P<0.5). It was determined that the significant difference
was in favor of primary school teachers with 6–10 years and 11–15 years of professional seniority.
www.ijcrsee.com
25
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
The Effect of Online Education on Teacher Creativity Findings Regarding the
Semi-Structured Interview Form
In Table 5, the evaluations of the primary school teachers participating in the research regarding the
effect of online education on professional creativity are given.
Table 5. Evaluations of primary school teachers on the effect of online education on professional creativity
Category F %
Very effective in a positive way 4 16
Positively effective 14 56
Ineffective 5 20
Negatively effective 2 8
Negatively very effective - -
Total 25 100
In Table 5, the views of primary school teachers participating in the research on the effect of online
education on professional creativity are categorized. 16% of primary school teachers answered very
effectively in a positive way, 56% in a positive way, 20% ineffective and 8% in a negative way. Among the
teachers participating in the research, no teacher stated that online education hurts professional creativity.
In Table 6, the evaluations of the primary school teachers participating in the research regarding the
advantages of online education that enable the development of professional creativity are given.
Table 6. Primary school teachers’ evaluations of the advantages of online education that enable the development
of professional creativity.
Category F %
Offers the opportunity to combine technology with professional knowledge 19 76
Allows the use of abilities 13 52
Encourages the development of different methods 10 40
Allows multidimensional thinking 7 28
Provides a review of habits 6 24
Improves the ability to find solutions 4 16
Improves the ability to think flexibly 2 8
In Table 6, the evaluations of the primary school teachers participating in the research regarding
the advantages of online education that enable the development of professional creativity are categorized.
About 76% of the teachers answered that it offers the opportunity to combine technology with professional
knowledge, 52% allows the use of talents, 40% encourages the development of different methods, and 28%
provides multidimensional thinking. About 24% of the teachers provided the review of habits, 16% answered
that it develops the ability to produce solutions, and 8% answered that it develops the ability to think flexibly.
In Table 7, primary school teachers’ evaluations of the disadvantages of online education that
prevent the development of professional creativity are given.
Table 7. Evaluations of primary school teachers about the disadvantages of online education that prevent the
development of professional creativity.
Category F %
Blocks interaction 16 64
Restricts the learning environment 15 60
Makes classroom management difficult 11th 44
Makes material development difficult 9 36
Deprives the opportunities and opportunities of the classroom environment 8 32
limits the imagination 5 20
Limits the student assessment process 2 8
Does not create an environment of cooperation and trust 1 4
www.ijcrsee.com
26
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
In Table 7, the evaluations of the primary school teachers participating in the research regarding the
disadvantages of online education that prevent the development of professional creativity are categorized.
About 64% of the teachers answered that it prevents interaction, 60% limits the learning environment, 44%
makes classroom management difficult, 36% makes it difficult to develop materials, and 32% deprives
the classroom environment of opportunities and opportunities. About 20% of the teachers answered that
they limit their imagination, 8% limit the evaluation process of the student, and 4% do not create an
environment of cooperation and trust.
Discussions
The primary school teachers participating in the research showed a high degree of creativity in the
teacher creativity scale sub-dimensions and in general. This finding corroborates the results of previous
studies. Kaufman (2006) and Aljughaiman (2002) aimed to reveal teachers’ creativity perceptions in their
research. As a result of the researches, it was revealed that teachers have positive perceptions and
tendencies about creativity. As a result of the research conducted by Mullet et al., (2016), it was revealed
that teachers attach importance to creative thinking and consider it valuable, but they do not know theories
and research related to creative thinking.
The findings obtained from the research reveal that, there is a significant difference in favor of
primary school teachers who have professional seniority of 6–10 years and 11–15 years according to
the variable of professional seniority. Polat (2017), in his study with classroom teachers, found that the
creativity levels of classroom teachers differ according to their professional seniority. As a result of the
research, the creativity score averages of teachers with 11–15 years and 16–20 years of seniority were
found to be higher than teachers with 1–5 years of seniority.
The majority of primary school teachers stated that online education had a positive effect on
professional creativity. Providing the opportunity to combine technology with professional knowledge,
enabling the use of talents, encouraging the development of different methods, providing multidimensional
thinking, reviewing habits, developing the ability to produce solutions, and thinking flexibly are the answers
given by primary school teachers to the advantages of online education that enable the development of
professional creativity. In similar studies conducted in the field, it is shown as an important advantage that
online education allows teachers to develop by contributing to their technology knowledge (Zuhairi et al.,
2006; De Paepe et al., 2018).
The primary school teachers participating in the research, on the disadvantages of online education
that prevent the development of professional creativity expressed it as preventing interaction, restricting
the learning environment, making classroom management difficult, making it difficult to develop materials,
depriving the opportunities and opportunities of the classroom environment, limiting the imagination,
limiting the evaluation process of the student, and not creating an environment of cooperation and trust. In
his study, Attr (2012) revealed that the communication between the student and the teacher and the need
to increase the in-class interaction in distance education activities, this situation negatively affects the
use of the teacher’s potential. In their research, De Alencar and Oliveira (2016) also stated that teacher
candidates and teachers realized the importance of creativity skills, but they encountered some problems
in developing this skill in the learning-teaching process.
Conclusion
In this study, the effect of online education on primary school teachers’ professional creativity was
examined. In the quantitative dimension of the research, the creativity levels of primary school teachers
were examined according to the professional seniority, while the effect of online education on creativity
was evaluated in the qualitative dimension. As a result of the research, it was determined that the creativity
levels of primary school teachers were high. According to the seniority variable among primary school
teachers, it was determined that the creativity levels of those with medium seniority were higher than the
others. The vast majority of teachers stated that online education has a positive effect on professional
creativity.
Providing the opportunity to combine technology with professional knowledge, enabling the use
www.ijcrsee.com
27
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
of talents, and encouraging the development of different methods are stated by the majority of teachers
as the advantages of online education that enable the development of professional creativity. Preventing
interaction, restricting the learning environment, making classroom management difficult, making material
development difficult, and depriving the classroom environment of opportunities and opportunities are the
answers given by the majority of primary school teachers to the disadvantages of online education that
prevent the development of professional creativity.
Higher education programs that train teachers should be developed according to the requirements
of the age so that primary school teachers, who are the most important step in shaping the society and
raising qualified manpower, have high-level thinking skills such as creativity following the requirements
of the information age. To increase the creativity level of primary school teachers, in-service training
programs should be established for all teachers, especially those who are in the first and last years of
their profession. In addition, the educational content to be created to eliminate the negative effects of
online education on the professional creativity of primary school teachers should be included in in-service
training programs.
Acknowledgements
This research was approved by the Zhetysu University Scientific Research Ethics Committee,
project number Zhetysu University/Higher School of Pedagogy and Psychology/2022/145, dated 22
November 2022.
The authors would like to extend their gratitude to all the participants in this study. Without their
participation, this study would not have been possible.
Conict of interests
The authors declare no conict of interest.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.K and G.Z; methodology, H.U.; software, H.U. and U.A.; formal analysis, H.U.
and U.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.K. and G.Z.; writing—review and editing, H.U. and U.A. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
References
Aish, D. (2014). Teachers’ Beliefs about Creativity in the Elementary School Classroom (Doctoral Thesis), Pepperdine University.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/71e635738b1b40a3e1ae53ea963b4384/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Aljughaiman, A. M. (2002). Teachers’ Perceptions of Creativity and Creative Students. (PhD Thesis), University of Idaho.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/ffc011213b8bbabb4f03f4dde4877477/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Attr, A. K. (2012). Distance education: Problems and solution. International Journal of Behavioral Social and Movement
Sciences, 1(4), 42-58. https://www.ijobsms.org/index.php/ijobsms/article/view/53
Bereczki, E. O., & Karpati, A. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs about creativity and its nurture: A systematic review of the recent
research literature. Educational Research Review, 23, 25-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.10.003
Bhuyan, M. H. (2021). Practices of online teaching, learning and assessment of the students of the BSc in EEE programme
during the COVID-2019 pandemic. Contemporary Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 14-28. https://doi.org/10.18844/
cerj.v11i2.5899
Carter, L. M. (2008). Critical thinking dispositions in online nursing education. Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 89-114.
https://www.eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ812567
Cheung, R. H. P. (2012). Teaching for creativity: Examining the beliefs of early childhood teachers and their inuence on teaching
practice. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37(3), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1836939111203700307
Colley, K. M. (2015). Cultivating Creativity: The Practice of Teaching for Creativity in the Elementary School Classroom
(Doctoral Thesis), University of Denver. https://www.proquest.com/openview/17c776c0303d6bc89f8fd71aa24f3686/1
?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Craft, A., Cremin, T., Hay, P., & Clack, J. (2014). Creative primary school: Developing and maintaining pedagogy for creativity.
www.ijcrsee.com
28
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
Ethnography and Education, 9(1), 16-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2013.828474
Dandashly, N. A., Barbar, A., & Antoun, M. (2019). The effects of using blogs and webquests in teaching education postgraduate
courses. Global Journal of Information Technology: Emerging Technologies, 9(1), 012-019. https://doi.org/10.18844/
gjit.v9i1.4018
Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Digby, R., Howe, A., Collier, C., & Hay, P. (2014). The roles and development needs of teachers
to promote creativity: A systematic review of literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 41, 34-41. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.03.003
De Alencar, E. M. L. S., & de Oliveira, Z. M. F. (2016). Creativity in higher education according to to graduate programs’
professors. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(3), 555-560. https://www.eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1092350
De Paepe, L., Zhu, C., & DePryck, K. (2018). Drop-out, retention, satisfaction and attainment of online learners of Dutch in
adults education. International Journal on E-Learning, 17(3), 303-323. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/174173
Domingo, M. G., & Garganté, A. B. (2016). Exploring the use of educational technology in primary education: Teachers’
perception of mobile technology learning impacts and applications’ use in the classroom. Computers in Human
Behavior, 56, 21-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.023
Doyle, L., Brady, A. M., & Byrne, G. (2009). An overview of mixed methods research. Journal of Research in Nursing, 14(2),
175-185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987108093962
Edinger, M. J. (2008). An Exploratory Study of Creativity-Fostering Teacher Behaviors in Secondary Classrooms. The
College of William and Mary. https://www.proquest.com/openview/ee8ac3746011be838a06c966a5290915/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Gu, X., Ritter, S.M. & Dijksterhuis, A. (2024). Online Creativity Training: Examining the Effectiveness of a Comprehensive
Training Approach. Int J Technol Des Educ 34, 403–426 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09820-2
Guiller, J., Durndell, A., & Ross, A. (2008). Peer interaction and critical thinking: face-to-face or online discussion? Learning and
Instruction, 18(2), 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.001
Hadi, N. U., Abdullah, N., & Sentosa, I. (2016). An easy approach to exploratory factor analysis: Marketing perspective. Journal
of Education and Social Research, 6(1), 215. https://www.mcser.org/journal/index.php/jesr/article/view/8799
Harangus, K. (2021). Assessing competence in teacher education: Development of university students’ problem solving
skills. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Advances in Pure and Applied Sciences, 8(2), 102-110. https://doi.
org/10.18844/ijire.v8i2.6806
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: A creative approach to educational problems of practice.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 140-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001
Izmagambetova, R., Roza, N., Kenzhekhan, M., Tursynay, B., & Raissa, K. (2022). The problem of evaluating primary
school students in the online education process. Cypriot Journal of Education Sciences, 17(1), 255-267. https://doi.
org/10.18844/cjes.v17i1.6704
Kaufman, J. C. (2006). Self-reported differences in creativity by ethnicity and gender. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Ofcial
Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 20(8), 1065-1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1255
Laisema, S., & Wannapiroon, P. (2014). Design of collaborative learning with creative problem-solving process learning
activities in a ubiquitous learning environment to develop creative thinking skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 116, 3921-3926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01,867
Lapeniene, D., & Bruneckiene, J. (2010). Teachers’ creativity in the domain of professional activity analysis of individual factors.
Economics and Management, 15, 642-649.
Maor, R., Levi, R., Mevarech, Z., Paz-Baruch, N., Grinshpan, N., Milman, A., Shlomo, S. & Zion, M. (2023). Difference between
zoom-based online versus classroom lesson plan performances in creativity and metacognition during COVID-19
pandemic. Learning Environ Res 26, 803–822, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-023-09455-z
Mola, S., & Dagnew, A. (2020). The status of teachers’ motivation and process of quality education: The case of primary school
teachers, Ethiopia. Global Journal of Guidance and Counselling in Schools: Current Perspectives, 10(1), 1-11. https://
doi.org/10.18844/gjgc.v10i1.4448
Mullet, D. R., Willerson, A., Lamb, K. N., & Kettler, T. (2016). Examining teacher perceptions of creativity: A systematic review
of the literature. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.001
Newton, D. P. (2013). Moods and creative thinking: A framework for teaching. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 34-44. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.05.006
Ozcinar, Z., Sakhieva, R. G., Pozharskaya, E. L., Popova, O. V., Melnik, M. V., & Matvienko, V. V. (2020). Student’s Perception
of Web 2.0 Tools and Educational Applications. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET),
15(23), pp. 220–233. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i23.19065
Pelfrey, R. (2011). Classroom Behaviors in Elementary School Teachers Identied as Fostering Creativity. (Doctoral Thesis),
Northern Kentucky University. https://www.proquest.com/openview/887d3680d368dccfa59a167985d4b221/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Perry, A., & Karpova, E. (2017). Efcacy of teaching creative thinking skills: A comparison of multiple creativity assessments.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 118-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.017
www.ijcrsee.com
29
Akhmetsapa A., et al. (2024). The effect of primary school teachers using online education on their professional creativity,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 19-29.
Polat, M. (2017). Examining the Critical Thinking Dispositions and Creativity Levels of Classroom Teachers According to
Some Variables (Doctoral dissertation), Adıyaman University. https://www.dspace.adiyaman.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/
handle/20.500.12414/1860
Rubenstein, L. D., Ridgley, L. M., Callan, G. L., Karami, S., & Ehlinger, J. (2018). How teachers perceive factors that inuence
creativity development: Applying a social cognitive theory perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 100-110.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.012
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the t of structural equation models: Tests of
signicance and descriptive goodness-of-t measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. https://
www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~snijders/mpr_Schermelleh.pdf
Selvaraj, A., Radhin, V., Nithin, K. A., Benson, N., & Mathew, A. J. (2021). Effect of pandemic based online education on
teaching and learning system. International Journal of Educational Development, 85, 102444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijedudev.2021.102444
Songkram, N. (2015). e-Learning system in virtual learning environment to develop creative thinking for learners in higher
education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 674-679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.600
Stemler, S. (2000). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(1), 17. https://doi.
org/10.7275/z6fm-2e34
Tran, T. B. L., Ho, T. N., Mackenzie, S. V., & Le, L. K. (2017). Developing assessment criteria of a lesson for creativity to
promote teaching for creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 25, 10-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.05.006
Uaidullakyzy, E. (2021). Formation of information and professional competence of primary school teachers with Online
Education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 13(4), 838-850. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.
v13i4.6269
Uçar, R. (2015). The Relationship between Primary School Principals’ Distributed Leadership behaviors and Teachers’
Motivation and Creativity Levels (Diyarbakır province example), (PhD Thesis), Diyarbakır, Turkey. https://www.tez.yok.
gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
Wu, C.-L. (2022). How is One Plus One More than Two? The Interaction between Two Players in Online Co-Creativity Tasks.
Educational Technology & Society, 25 (3), 60-70. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202207_25(3).0005
Zuhairi, A., Wahyono, E., & Suratinah, S. (2006). The historical context, current development, and future challenges of distance
education in Indonesia. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(1), 95-101. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/106683
