www.ijcrsee.com
51
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Original scientific paper
Received: February 19, 2025.
Revised: April 09, 2025.
Accepted: April 13, 2025.
UDC:
371.212(910)
159.955.2-057.874(910)
10.23947/2334-8496-2025-13-1-51-61
© 2025 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: adnan@unm.ac.id
Abstract: Critical and creative thinking skills are essential in 21st-century education, but conventional learning
approaches are still less effective in developing these skills. This study aims to analyze the influence of the Citizen Sci-
ence Project learning model on the critical and creative thinking skills of high school students in Indonesia. The research
method used experiments with post-test control groups, involving 70 students divided into experimental and control
groups (35 students each). Instruments in the form of essay questions were used to measure students’ critical and cre-
ative thinking skills, while data were analyzed using quantitative descriptive analysis and inferential statistics using the
MANOVA test. The results showed that the Citizen Science Project model significantly improved students’ critical and cre-
ative thinking skills compared to conventional learning (p < 0.05). This improvement demonstrates the effectiveness of the
model in facilitating high-level thinking skills. These findings indicate that the Citizen Science Project can be an innova-
tive strategy in learning to improve 21st-century skills. Therefore, this model is recommended to be applied in Education.
Keywords: citizen science project, critical thinking skills, creative thinking skills, student.
Adnan
1*
, Sitti Saenab
2
, Rahmatullah
3
, Rifka Almunawarah
1
, Sahla Sahira
1
1
Department of Biology Education, Makassar State University, Makassar, Indonesia,
e-mail: adnan@unm.ac.id; rifkaalmunawarah1@gmail.com; sahlasahira02@gmail.com
2
Department of Science Education, Makassar State University, Makassar, Indonesia, e-mail: sitti.saenab@unm.ac.id
3
Department of Economic Education, Makassar State University, Makassar, Indonesia, e-mail: rahmatullah@unm.ac.id
The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’
Critical and Creative Thinking Skills
Introduction
The quality of education in Indonesia still faces significant challenges at the international level.
Based on the UNESCO report, Indonesia ranks 64
th
out of 120 countries in terms of quality of education.
In addition, the education development index 2015 shows that Indonesia ranks 57
th
out of 115 countries.
The latest data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2022 reveals that
the quality of education in Indonesia is still relatively low, ranking 68
th
out of 81 countries. These findings
reflect the low ability of students to think critically, think creatively, interpret information, and solve prob-
lems in various aspects of life. This low ranking also indicates a decline in academic achievement globally
(learning loss), which requires serious attention from various parties.
One of the main causes of the low quality of education in Indonesia is the dominance of a learn-
ing system that is still teacher-centered, memorization-oriented, and evaluation that emphasizes low-
level cognitive aspects. This is in contrast to countries such as Finland, Singapore, and Japan that have
adopted inquiry-based, project-based, and collaborative learning approaches. The education system in
Indonesia still faces challenges in developing learning strategies that are oriented towards strengthening
higher-order thinking skills (HOTS).
The development of HOTS-oriented learning is one of the programs developed by the Ministry of
Education as an effort to improve the quality of learning and the quality of graduates (Adnan et al., 2014;
Maryani et al., 2021). In addition, the HOTS capability is also applied to catch up with Indonesia’s ranking
in PISA and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) compared to other countries
(Rindermann and Baumeister, 2015; Adnan and Bahri, 2018). Countries that excel in implementing HOTS
www.ijcrsee.com
52
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
learning have strategic approaches to overcoming education problems. For example, Finland relies on
personalized learning and a flexible curriculum by giving teachers broad autonomy; Singapore emphasizes
a competency-based curriculum focusing on problem-solving and logical reasoning; and Japan strengthens
a collaborative and reflective learning culture through lesson studies and classroom discussions. These ap-
proaches have proven to be effective in improving students’ quality of education and higher thinking skills.
HOTS abilities are closely related to critical and creative thinking competencies that are key needs
in 21st-century learning (Eskiyurt and Özkan, 2024; Hews et al., 2023; Ghanizadeh et al., 2024; Hikamah
et al., 2021). Critical thinking skills can be trained through systematic and specific analysis and identi-
fication of problems, as well as designing strategies as solutions to problems faced in the surrounding
environment (Almunawarah et al., 2023; Fabian et al., 2024; Mahanal et al., 2019). Meanwhile, creative
thinking skills can be developed through efforts to find innovative solutions, analyze problems from vari-
ous perspectives, and generate unique ideas (out of the box) that are integral parts of advanced thinking
skills (Rohman et al., 2024; Adnan et al., 2021; Nurjanah et al., 2024; Juniati and Budayasa, 2024).
The main problem faced by education in Indonesia is students’ low critical and creative thinking
skills. This lack of high-level thinking skills suggests that many students still have difficulty analyzing in-
formation, solving complex problems, and coming up with innovative ideas. Traditional learning systems
that focus on memorization and passive mastery of material are factors that slow down the development
of students’ thinking skills (Bremner et al., 2023; Woods and Copur-Gencturk, 2024). This condition is a
challenge for educators in providing learning by the demands of the 21st century. One approach that has
the potential to be an effective solution is the Citizen Science Project (CSP) learning model.
Theoretically, CSP is rooted in constructivist (Vygotsky, 1978) and experiential learning (Kolb, 1984)
approaches that emphasize that knowledge is built through direct experience, social interaction, and reflec-
tion. In CSP, students are actively involved in real scientific processes such as data collection, field obser-
vation, and results analysis. These activities encourage the development of high-level thinking skills such
as analysis, evaluation, critical thinking, and creation (Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy). A number of studies
also support the effectiveness of CSP in increasing HOTS. Bonney et al. (2009) show that participation in
citizen science projects can improve scientific literacy and critical thinking skills. Ballard et al. (2017) and
Stein et al. (2023) found that involvement in CSP helps students develop analytical and evidence-based
problem-solving skills. Zoellick et al. (2012), Sanabria et al. (2022), Gray et al. (2012), and Edson et al.
(2024) affirm that CSP facilitates reflective and systemic thinking because students are directly involved in
real issues. In addition, Mitchell et al. (2017) and Jadallah and Wise (2023) also show that CSP supports
scientific inquiry, data analysis, and argumentation skills. Thus, in theory and practice, CSP has proven to
be effective in developing HOTS through authentic, contextual, and socially meaningful learning.
When compared to other learning models, CSP has its own uniqueness. Problem-based Based
Learning (PBL) focuses on solving hypothetical problems in the classroom, and inquiry-based Based
Learning (IBL) emphasizes the process of scientific inquiry, while CSP combines both approaches in a
real-world context. Similarly, compared to Project Based Learning (PJBL), which focuses on the design
and implementation of projects by students, CSP has additional depth in involvement in authentic scien-
tific processes and real contributions to producing knowledge or solutions used by scientific communities
or institutions. If PJBL student projects tend to be simulative or internal in the school environment, then
in CSP, the students’ work results are real, documented, and can be used by the public or stakeholders.
Therefore, CSP is relevant in strengthening HOTS and plays a strategic role in shaping students’ civic
awareness and social responsibility. Integrating scientific learning, social engagement, and tangible con-
tributions makes CSP a transformative learning model in the 21st-century education era.
Although previous research has shown that CSP is able to improve scientific literacy and critical
thinking skills, most of the studies still focus on overseas contexts, especially in countries with well-es-
tablished education systems. In addition, most of the research emphasizes the participatory aspects and
general impacts on science literacy but has not specifically examined how CSP contributes to the measur-
able development of HOTS in formal education, particularly in Indonesia. These limitations create a gap
in understanding the effectiveness of CSP as an innovative learning strategy in the local environment that
is still dominated by memorization approaches and teacher-centered learning. Therefore, this study aims
to fill this gap by empirically examining the influence of the implementation of CSP on the development
of student HOTS in Indonesia and adapting it to the characteristics of the national curriculum and the
dynamics of learning in the classroom.
www.ijcrsee.com
53
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
The Citizen Science Project learning model consists of seven stages: project problem orientation,
project planning, timeline creation, project implementation, project monitoring, project assessment, and
project evaluation. These stages were developed by adapting project-based learning models but have im-
portant differences. In CSP, there is community involvement in data collection, expert involvement in the
mentoring process, and integration of web-based learning technology equipped with learning resources
and practical guidance for project implementation. Through these stages, researchers will observe their
impact on improving students’ critical and creative thinking skills. The results of this research are expected
to be a foundation for policy makers, educators, and other stakeholders in designing more effective learn-
ing strategies to improve the quality of education in Indonesia.
Materials and Methods
Population and Sample
The population in this study is all students of class X of SMAN 9 Makassar for the 2024/2025 school
year. The research sample consisted of two classes that were selected using the intact group sampling
technique, which is the selection of groups that have formed naturally without changes in composition.
The sample totaled 70 students, with details of 35 students as the experimental group and 35 students
as the control group.
Both classes have similar initial characteristics based on the previous semester’s report card scores
and come from relatively homogeneous socioeconomic backgrounds. There was no pre-test because this
study used a post-test only control group design, but the class selection considered the equivalence of
the initial academic level to minimize bias.
Research Design and Procedure
This study uses a post-test-only control group design. The experimental group was given the Citi-
zen Science Project (CSP) learning model, while the control group used the Student Team Achievement
Division (STAD) model.
The implementation of the intervention lasted for three months, with 12 meetings in each class for
two hours of lessons (2 × 45 minutes) per meeting. In the experimental class, the CSP model is imple-
mented through seven main stages: (1) Project problem orientation, students recognize environmental
problems around, especially those related to biodiversity. (2) Creation of a project plan, collaborating with
group members to formulate project objectives and methods. (3) making a timeline, adjusting the activity
schedule to suit the time and existing resource limitations. (4) Project implementation is done through
field observation, recording, and visual documentation. Students analyze the data obtained, draw conclu-
sions, and discuss collaboratively. (5) Monitor the project, report progress and obstacles faced, discuss
in groups to find solutions, and reflect on the process that has been passed. (6) Project assessment,
presenting project results. (7) evaluate the project, write personal and group reflections on the project
experience, discuss the learnings gained, and provide project input for future improvement
The researcher served directly as the teacher in both classes: the experimental class, which imple-
mented the Citizen Science Project (CSP) model, and the control class, which used the Student Teams
Achievement Division (STAD) model. This ensured consistent and procedural implementation of both
learning models as designed.
Research Instruments
The instruments used to measure students’ critical thinking abilities are essay tests that refer to
the FRISCO model developed by Ennis et al. (2005), Ennis and Millman (2008), and Ennis (2011), with
indicators of focus, reason, conclusion, situation, clarity, and review. Meanwhile, creative thinking ability
was measured using an essay test based on indicators developed by Guilford (1950, 1967, 1968), with
indicators of fluency, flexibility, originality, and detail.
All questions are adjusted to the context of biology learning, especially the biodiversity material. The
instrument has gone through an expert validation process using Aiken’s V, with an average V value of
≥ 0.87, indicating high content validity. The reliability of the instrument was tested using Cronbach’s Alpha,
with α = 0.81 for the critical thinking test and α = 0.85 for the creative thinking test, indicating high reliability.
www.ijcrsee.com
54
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Data Analysis
The data from the post-test results was analyzed through several stages. First, prerequisite tests
are carried out as normality and homogeneity tests to ensure the data meets inferential statistical as-
sumptions. Furthermore, to test the research hypothesis, an analysis was carried out using Multivariate
Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) by looking at the values of Pillai’s Trace, Wilks’ Lambda, Hotelling’s
Trace, and Roy’s Largest Root. The Pillai’s Trace value is a positive value with an increased value statistic
indicating an effect that contributes more to the model, and Wilks’ Lambda is a positive statistical value
that ranges from 0 to 1, with a smaller value indicating a more contributing effect to the model. Hotelling’s
Trace with an increased positive value shows a more contribution effect to the model, and Roy’s Largest
Root gives the same value as Hotelling’s Trace; there is a strong correlation between dependent variables
(Sarwono, 2017). In addition to MANOVA, an independent sample t-test was also carried out to compare
the average scores between the experimental and control groups. Hypothesis testing was carried out
using SPSS 24 software for Windows, with the basis for decision-making that if the significance value
(2-tailed) < 0.05, then H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, which means that there is a significant difference
between the experimental group and the control group in improving critical and creative thinking skills, and
if the significance value (2-tailed) > 0.05, then H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected. which means there is
no significant difference between the two groups (Herzog et al., 2019). With this method, the study aims
to prove that the Citizen Science Project learning model has a more significant influence than the STAD
model in improving high school students’ critical and creative thinking skills.
Results
Critical and Creative
Based on Table 1, it can be observed that the average value of the critical thinking and crea-
tive ability class of the experimental class was higher than that of the control class. The average critical
thinking ability of the experimental class was 69.89, while the control class was 56.86. Therefore, the
difference between the two is 13.03. The average creative thinking ability of the experimental class was
70.80, while the control class was 54.00, so the difference between the two was 16.8. The highest score
of critical thinking in the experimental class was 98.00, and the highest score of creative thinking was
91.00, while in the control class, the highest score of critical thinking was 78.00, and the highest score of
creative thinking was 72.00. Furthermore, for the standard deviation of the experimental class, 12.98 is
critical thinking, and 10.38 is creative thinking. The standard deviation of the control class was 11.19 for
critical thinking and 8.39 for creative thinking.
Table 1. Critical and creative descriptive statistics of students in experimental and control classes
No. Statistics
Critical Thinking Creative Thinking
Experiment Class Control Class Experiment Class Control Class
1 Sample Quantity 35 35 35 35
2 Average 69.89 56.86 70.80 54.00
3 Highest Score 98.00 78.00 91.00 72.00
4 Lowest Score 48.00 40.00 44.00 41.00
5 Standard deviation 12.98 11.19 10.38 8.39
This quite striking difference in average scores shows statistical significance and has practical
implications in the context of learning. According to Cohen (1988), a difference of more than 0.8 standard
deviations can be categorized as a significant effect in education. With a score difference of more than
13 points (for critical thinking) and 16 points (for creative thinking), these results show that the use of
the Citizen Science Project (CSP) learning model provides a significant and substantial improvement in
students’ cognitive achievement.
The value of critical and creative thinking skills is then grouped by category based on the students’
post-test results. Table 2 shows the frequency distribution and percentage of critical and creative thinking
skills in both the control class and the experimental class.
www.ijcrsee.com
55
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Table 2. Distribution of frequency and percentage of students’ critical and creative thinking skills in the classroom
Experimental and controls
No. Category
Critical Thinking Creative Thinking
Experiment Class Control Class Experiment Class Control Class
F % F % F % F %
1 Very High 81 ≤ x ≤ 100 9 25.71 0 0 7 20.00 0 0
2 Good 61 ≤ X < 80 17 48.57 11 31.43 22 62.86 9 25.71
3 Simply 41 ≤ X < 60 9 25.71 23 65.71 6 17.14 26 74.29
4 Less 21 ≤ X < 40 0 0 1 2.86 0 0 0 0
5 Very low X < 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
The results of critical and creative thinking skills obtained by students in Table 2 interpret that the
critical thinking skills in the experimental class were 9 (25.71%) students who obtained very high results,
there were 17 (48.57%) classified as good, and there were 9 (25.71%) classified as adequate. Meanwhile,
11 (31.43%) were classified as good, 23 (65.71%) were classified as adequate, and 1 (2.86%) was classi-
fied as lacking. The interpretation of creative thinking skills in the experimental class was 7 (20.00%) clas-
sified as very high, there were 22 (62.86%) classified as good, and there were 6 (17.14%) classified as
sufficient. While 9 (62.86%) of the control class were classified as good and 26 (74.29%) were classified
as adequate, From the data, it can be seen that students in the experimental class tend to have a higher
distribution in the “Very High” and “Good” categories than the control class. This reflects that the Citizen
Science Project’s learning model is more successful in improving students’ high-level thinking skills.
Normality Test
Based on the Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test results in Table 3, the significance value (Sig.) is
greater than 0.05, meaning the data is usually distributed. In addition, the homogeneity test was carried
out using the Levene test and the Kovarian Box matrix equivalence test. The results of the Levene test
showed that the Sig. value for critical thinking skills was 0.351 and for creative thinking skills was 0.312,
both of which were greater than 0.05, so the data were declared homogeneous. The use of the Box covar-
iance matrix equivalence test yielded a Sig. value of 0.263 also showed that the data were homogeneous
Table 3. Normality Results
Learning Model
Kolmogorov-Smirnov
a
Statistic df Sig. > 0.05
Critical Thinking
Model Citizen Science Project .096 35 .200
STAD model .145 35 .060
Creative Thinking
Model Citizen Science Project .074 35 .200
STAD model .134 35 .113
Hypothesis Test
The prerequisite test for the MANOVA analysis has been completed, so the results of the MANOVA
test can be used for hypothesis testing. Based on the results of Table 4, it shows four significance tests for
each of the model’s effects of the Pillar Trace value of 0.453, which means that it has a more contribution
effect on the model, Wilks’ Lambda value of 0.547, which gives a more contribution effect to the Hotelling’s
Trace value model of 0.830 equal to the value of Roy’s Largest Root which means that there is a strong
correlation between the dependent variables and for the F coefficient is 27.792 with a Sig. 0.00, and the
Partial Eta Squared is 0.453, which shows that the treatment explains 45.3% of the variance in students’
critical and creative thinking abilities. This shows a difference in the ability to think critically and creatively
between students who are taught with the Citizen Science Project and STAD learning models.
www.ijcrsee.com
56
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Table 4. MANOVA test analysis results
Effect Value F Hypothesis df Error df Sig. Partial Eta Squared
Intercept
Pillai’s Trace .981 1691.644 2.000 67.000 .000 .981
Wilks’ Lambda .019 1691.644 2.000 67.000 .000 .981
Hotelling’s Trace 50.497 1691.644 2.000 67.000 .000 .981
Roy’s Largest Root 50.497 1691.644 2.000 67.000 .000 .981
Treatment
Pillai’s Trace .453 27.792 2.000 67.000 .000 .453
Wilks’ Lambda .547 27.792 2.000 67.000 .000 .453
Hotelling’s Trace .830 27.792 2.000 67.000 .000 .453
Roy’s Largest Root .830 27.792 2.000 67.000 .000 .453
Based on the findings of the analysis in Table 5. The results of the ability to think critically and
creatively have a partially significant impact. The results of the Tests of Between-Subject Effects study
showed in detail that the value of F was 20.184 with a Sig. of 0.00, which was less than 0.05. This shows
that the learning model given influences critical thinking skills. In addition, an F value of 55.336 with a Sig.
of 0.00, less than 0.05, and Partial Eta Squared of 0.229 (22.9%) and creative thinking of 0.449 (44.9%).
Thus, it was revealed by the analysis of Tests of Between-Subject Effects that the learning model provided
influenced the ability to think creatively. The influence of the CSP model on creative thinking skills is more
significant than on critical thinking skills. This is most likely related to the natural characteristics of the Citi-
zen Science Project, which is 1. to encourage open exploration and diverse problem-solving approaches,
2. Involve students in real projects that do not have one definitive answer, 3. provides ample space for
students to innovate and express ideas in an original way.
The nature of community-based scientific projects that demand creativity and originality in develop-
ing solutions allows students to show divergent thinking, i.e., the ability to think creatively in various direc-
tions. In contrast, more structured critical thinking is still improving, but not as high as creative thinking
skills because it may require additional instructional reinforcement
Table 5. Results of test analysis of between-subjects effects
Source
Dependent Vari-
able
Type III Sum
of Squares
df Mean Square F Sig.
Partial Eta
Squared
Corrected Model
Berpikir_kritis 2970.514a 1 2970.514 20.184 .000 .229
Berpikir_kreatif 4939.200b 1 4939.200 55.336 .000 .449
Intercept Berpikir_kritis 281115.657 1 281115.657 1910.091 .000 .966
Berpikir_kreatif 272563.200 1 272563.200 3053.628 .000 .978
Treatment
Berpikir_kritis 2970.514 1 2970.514 20.184 .000 .229
Berpikir_kreatif 4939.200 1 4939.200 55.336 .000 .449
Error Berpikir_kritis 10007.829 68 147.174
Berpikir_kreatif 6069.600 68 89.259
Total Berpikir_kritis 294094.000 70
Berpikir_kreatif 283572.000 70
Corrected Total Berpikir_kritis 12978.343 69
Berpikir_kreatif 11008.800 69
The analysis results in Table 6 show that the CSP model significantly increases critical thinking
scores by 13,029 points and creative thinking by 16,800 points (Sig. = 0.000). This difference is not only
statistically significant but also practical in the context of education, as an increase above 10 points on
a scale of 100 can have a tangible impact on students’ achievement and high-level thinking readiness.
Overall, these results confirm that using the Citizen Science Project learning model is significantly more
effective in improving creative thinking skills while still making a meaningful contribution to improving
students’ critical thinking skills.
www.ijcrsee.com
57
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Tablel 6. Parameter estimates
Dependent Variable Parameter B
Std.
Error
t Sig.
95% Confidence Interval
Partial Eta
Squared
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Berpikir Kritis
Intercept 56.857 2.051 27.727 .000 52.765 60.949 .919
CSP 13.029 2.900 4.493 .000 7.242 18.815 .229
STAD 0
a
. . . . . .
Berpikir Kreatif
Intercept 54.000 1.597 33.814 .000 50.813 57.187 .944
CSP 16.800 2.258 7.439 .000 12.293 21.307 .449
STAD 0
a
. . . . . .
Discussions
The study results show that the Citizen Science Project (CSP) model can improve students’ critical
and creative thinking skills. Students involved in this project are more active in collecting data, analyzing
information, and solving problems. This is in line with Adnan et al. (2024), Adnan et al. (2025) who stated
that CSP divides the learning process into seven main steps: (1) project problem orientation, (2) project
plan creation, (3) timeline creation, (4) project implementation, (5) project monitoring, (6) project assess-
ment, and (7) project evaluation. Following these steps makes the learning environment more engaging,
and students are more motivated to solve problems. They learn theory and apply fundamental skills that
will be useful in the future, improving their critical and creative thinking abilities.
Critical thinking skills are the primary foundation that supports the development of high-level think-
ing skills, which include analytical and evaluation skills (Gavronskaya et al., 2022; Malik and Ubaidillah,
2020; Molokhina et al., 2021). These results are reflected in the CSP syntax, particularly at the stage of
problem orientation, project planning, and timeline development. Learning strategies such as problem-
based and project-based learning are effective in developing students’ critical thinking (Sahira et al., 2023;
Na et al., 2022; Sahira, 2023). This strategy encourages students to become critical thinkers (Eskiyurt and
Özkan, 2024; Ma, 2023), which is seen as students drawing up project plans based on real problems. Stu-
dents are given the role of researching, evaluating, and processing information from various sources to
activate critical thinking skills (Angelelli et al., 2023; Jiang, 2022; Belousova, 2020). The syntax of project
implementation, project monitoring, project assessment, and evaluation in CSP reflects these activities in
real terms. Therefore, CSP is relevant and appropriately used to improve students’ critical thinking skills
because it makes critical thinking skills the core of the overall project process.
Creative thinking skills involve the merging of divergent and logical thinking. Divergent thinking
is used to explore various ideas and solutions, while logical thinking is needed to evaluate and develop
such solutions concretely (Lee et al., 2020; Ristic et al., 2023; Akhmetsapa et al., 2024; Waskito et al.,
2024). This can be seen in the CSP syntax, especially at problem orientation, project planning, timeline
creation, and project implementation. Students are encouraged to generate original ideas, formulate crea-
tive questions, and develop innovative solutions (Yildiz and Guler, 2021; Hews et al., 2023; Zdanevych
et al., 2020). During project monitoring, assessment, and evaluation, students are trained to refine their
solutions, reinforce originality, and creatively evaluate results. CSP facilitates exploration, innovation, and
adaptation in the face of challenges, making it an effective model for developing creative thinking skills.
Table 1 shows that CSP significantly impacts critical and creative thinking skills more than the STAD
learning model. This is due to the active and contextual learning approach that CSP offers. Each stage
in the CSP syntax systematically encourages the development of students’ thinking skills, from problem
orientation that builds connections to real issues to in-depth project reflection. Table 2 corroborates these
findings by showing that most students in the experimental class were in the good and excellent catego-
ries, which is inversely proportional to the distribution in the control class. This suggests that statistically
significant differences in scores also reflect a practically meaningful effect in the context of learning. For
example, the average critical thinking score of the experimental group was 69.89 compared to 56.86 in
the control group, indicating that CSP was not only statistically superior but also had a real impact in en-
couraging the improvement of the quality of students’ thinking in the classroom.
www.ijcrsee.com
58
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Nonetheless, it is necessary to explain further how the CSP mechanism is specifically superior
to STAD. STADs rely more on cooperative learning in fixed groups and merit-based task sharing, while
CSPs provide greater exploratory freedom and genuine engagement with communities and authentic
issues. The involvement of experts and digital platforms adds value to CSPs, which is not found in the
STAD approach. However, the effectiveness of CSP can also be influenced by several external factors,
such as teacher support, student motivation, and the availability of digital resources. Therefore, CSP’s
advantage in improving HOTS comes from the model itself and its supporting ecosystem.
The MANOVA analysis and the Test of Between-Subjects Effects test showed that CSP significantly
influenced both thinking skills. However, the Partial Eta Squared value for creative thinking (0.449) is
higher than critical thinking (0.229), which means that CSP has a more significant influence on the crea-
tive aspect. This can be explained through the characteristics of CSP, which are based on exploration,
idea submission, open collaboration, and interaction with real contexts that further challenge students’
creativity. A flexible approach to problem-solving and community involvement in projects enriches stu-
dents’ perspectives, encouraging them to develop new and original solutions.
Integrating CSP with digital technology through the website platform also strengthens its effective-
ness. Students can upload data, discuss with experts and the community, and access online learning
resources. This supports a collaborative, open, and continuous learning process. The website also allows
the community to be actively involved, enriching the student learning experience and encouraging the
creation of a participatory learning ecosystem.
However, the implementation of CSP also has its challenges. This model is optimal for students with
good independent learning and collaboration skills. Students who are still familiar with passive learning or
have limitations in managing projects may have difficulty following the CSP syntax. In addition, the success
of the implementation is highly dependent on the competence of teachers as active facilitators, as well as
the readiness of the technological infrastructure. Technical obstacles such as limited devices, uneven inter-
net access, and limited time in the curriculum are obstacles in themselves. Resistance from teachers and
students can also arise if they are not familiar with the project-based approach and community involvement.
In addition, there are still limitations in the literature that reviews the failure or ineffectiveness of
CSP. Previous studies have tended to emphasize the success of CSP, while studies showing that CSP
does not have a significant impact on Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) are still very limited. Therefore,
the findings in this study can be an important contribution to strengthening the empirical evidence regard-
ing the effectiveness of CSP. However, it takes follow-up studies with different contexts, populations, and
subject areas to test the consistency of these findings.
The practical implications of this study are important to elaborate further. If CSP proves effective,
teachers can integrate this model into the curriculum through subjects such as science, social studies,
or Language, as long as the learning topic contains elements of real problems that can be researched
and solved collaboratively. This model can also be adapted to cross-subject learning through thematic
projects. For schools with large student numbers, CSP can be implemented as small group work to be
more effective. Teacher training, time flexibility, and technological support are the keys to its successful
implementation. Thus, CSP can be an adaptive, collaborative, and contextual learning approach in devel-
oping students’ HOTS at various levels and conditions of educational units.
Conclusions
The Citizen Science Project (CSP) model has proven effective in improving students’ critical and
creative thinking skills. The analysis results show that CSP’s influence is more substantial on creative
thinking skills, which can be seen from the higher Partial Eta Squared value compared to the critical think-
ing aspect. CSP’s syntax emphasizing exploration, collaboration, and real-world problem-solving provides
space for students to actively engage in meaningful learning processes. This model can be applied flex-
ibly across a range of subjects, not limited to science and STEM, as long as the learning topic is relevant
to the authentic issue for which the project can be used. Teachers play an important role as facilitators,
and technology support is the main factor in implementing CSP in the classroom.
For wider implementation, education policies that support the integration of CSP in the curriculum
are needed, including teacher training, flexible time allocation, and adequate digital infrastructure. Further
research is recommended to examine the long-term impact of CSP implementation and explore other
www.ijcrsee.com
59
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
variables such as gender differences, student learning styles, or school characteristics. Thus, the effec-
tiveness of CSP can be tested in various contexts and produce learning models that are more inclusive
and adaptive to the needs of learners in the 21st-century learning era.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to DRTPM (Directorate of Research, Technology and Community Service) for funding
research with Decree Number 0459/E5/PG.02.00/2024 and Contract Number 2870/UN36.11/LP2M/2024.
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author Contributions
Conceptualisation: Adnan, Sitti Saenab, and Rahmatullah; Data curation: Adnan, Rifka Almunawa-
rah, and Sahla Sahira; Formal analysis: Adnan, Rahmatullah, and Rifka Almunawarah; Funding acquisi-
tion: Adnan; Investigation: Adnan, Sitti Saenab, Rahmatullah, Rifka Almunawarah, and Sahla Sahira;
Methodology: Adnan, Sitti Saenab, and Rifka Almunawarah; Project administration: Adnan; Resources:
Adnan and Sitti Saenab; Software: Adnan; Supervision: Adnan; Validation: Adnan and Rahmatullah; Visu-
alization: Adnan and Rifka Almunawarah; Writing – original draft: Adnan and Sitti Saenab; Writing – review
and editing: Adnan, Rahmatullah, Sitti Saenab, and Rifka Almunawarah. All authors have read and ap-
proved the final version of the manuscript for submission.
References
Adnan, & Bahri, A. (2018). Beyond Effective Teaching: Enhancing Students’ Metacognitive Skill Through Guided Inquiry. Jour-
nal of Physics: Conference Series, 954(1), 012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/954/1/012022
Adnan, A., Saenab, S., Rahmatullah, R., Almunawarah, R., Sahira, S., Aulia, M. A., & Jannah, H. N. (2025). Citizen Science
Project (CSP) Learning Model as Innovation Learning in Improving 21st Century Skills. BIO-INOVED : Journal of
Biology-Educational Innovation, 7(1), 27–36. https://ppjp.ulm.ac.id/journal/index.php/bino/article/view/20799
Adnan, Abhimanyu, S., Patta, B., & Arsyad, N. (2014). The Improving of Junior High School Student in Learning Motivation
Through Implementation Constructivistic Biology Learning Model Based on Information and Communication Technol-
ogy. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(2), 63–71. http://eprints.unm.ac.id/id/eprint/24282
Adnan, Mulbar, U., Sugiarti, & Bahri, A. (2021). Biology Science Literacy of Junior High School Students in South Sulawesi,
Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1752(1), 012084. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1752/1/012084
Adnan, Saenab, S., Rahmatullah, Almunawarah, R., Sahira, S., & Aldi, S. (2024). Citizen Science Project Learning Model.
Nusa Tenggara Barat: P4I Publisher.
Akhmetsapa, A., Uzunboylu, H., Zholtayeva, G., & Abdigapbarova, U. (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), 10(2), 19-29. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-1-19-29
Almunawarah, R., Adnan, & Bahri, A. (2023). Analysis of Critical Thinking Ability on Senior High School Students in Biology
Classroom Based on Modied FRISCO Indicators. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 12(10),
876–882. https://doi.org/10.21275/SR231002095937
Angelelli, C. V., Ribeiro, G. M. de C., Severino, M. R., Johnstone, E., Borzenkova, G., & da Silva, D. C. O. (2023). Developing Critical
Thinking Skills Through Gamication. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101354
Ballard, H. L., Dixon, C. G. H., & Harris, E. M. (2017). Youth-focused citizen science: Examining the role of environmental science
learning and agency for conservation. Biological Conservation, 208, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.024
Belousova, A. (2020). I Functions of Participants in the Collaborative Solution of Thinking Problems. International Journal of
Cognitive Research in Science Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE). 10(2), 29-36. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-
8496-2020-8-SI-29-36
Bonney, R., Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K. V., & Shirk, J. (2009). Citizen Science: A
Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientic Literacy. BioScience, 59(11), 977–984. https://doi.
org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
Bremner, N., Sakata, N., & Cameron, L. (2023). Teacher Education as an Enabler or Constraint of Learner-Centred Peda-
gogy Implementation in Low-To Middle-Income Countries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 126, 104033. https://doi.
www.ijcrsee.com
60
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104033
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Edson, L. B., MacDonald, E., Cawood, A., & Fischer, H. (2024). Practical Applications of a Participatory Science Project
Evaluation Tool: Perspectives from Across Earth and Space Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 9(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.536
Ennis, R. H. (2011). Nationwide Testing of Critical Thinking for Higher Education. America: Teaching Philosophy.
Ennis, R. H., Millman, J., & Tomko, T. N. (2005). Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual. Pacic Grove, CA:
Midwest Publications.
Ennis, R., & Millman, J. (2008). Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Levels X and Z Answer Sheets. California: Critical Thinking Company.
Eskiyurt, R., & Özkan, B. (2024). Exploring the Impact of Collaborative Learning on the Development of Critical Thinking
and Clinical Decision-Making Skills in Nursing Students: A Quantitative Descriptive Design. Heliyon, 10(17), e37198.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37198
Fabian, M., Rabiichuk, S., Mykhalchenko, N., Pavlushchenko, N., Dzhurylo, A., & Soroka, T. (2024). Pedagogical Aspects of
Improving Communication Skills of University Students. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 4(1), e01594–e01594.
https://doi.org/10.37497/2965-730X.SDGsReview.v4.n00.pe01594
Gavronskaya, Y., Larchenkova, L., Berestova, A., Latysheva, V., & Smirnov, S. (2022). The Development of Critical Thinking Skills
in Mobile Learning: Fact Checking and Getting Rid of Cognitive Distortions. International Journal of Cognitive Research
in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 51-68. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-2-51-68
Ghanizadeh, A., Bajestani, G. S., Hosseinpour, F., Hosseini, A., Makhloughi, F., & Toosi, M. B. (2024). Mindfulness-Enhancing
Instruction (MEI): Contributions to Electroencephalogram (EEG) Dynamics, Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), and
Effective Learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53, 101611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101611
Gray, S., Nicosia, K., & Jordan, R. (2012). Lessons Learned from Citizen Science in the Classroom. Democracy Education, 20(2), 1–5.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book.
Guilford, J. P. (1968). Intelligence, Creativity, and Their Educational Implications. San Diego, Cal.: Robert R. Knapp.
Herzog, M. H., Francis, G., & Clarke, A. (2019). Understanding Statistics and Experimental Design: How to Not Lie with Statis-
tics. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03499-3
Hews, R., Beligatamulla, G., & McNamara, J. (2023). Creative Condence and Thinking Skills for Lawyers: Making Sense of Design
Thinking Pedagogy in Legal Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101352
Jadallah, C. C., & Wise, A. L. (2023). Enduring Tensions Between Scientic Outputs and Science Learning in Citizen Science.
Biological Conservation, 284, 110141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110141
Jiang, Y. (2022). Evaluation of Pedagogical Impact of Business English Textbooks on Teaching Critical Thinking Skills. Heliyon,
8(11), e11419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11419
Juniati, D., & Budayasa, I. K. (2024). How the Learning Style and Working Memory Capacity of Prospective Mathematics
Teachers Affects Their Ability to Solve Higher Order Thinking Problems. European Journal of Educational Research,
13(3), 1043–1056. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.3.1043
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall.
Lee, J., Ostwald, M., & Gu, N. (2020). Design Thinking: Creativity, Collaboration and Culture. Switzerland: Springer Nature
Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56558-9
Ma, Y. (2023). Exploration of Flipped Classroom Approach to Enhance Critical Thinking Skills. Heliyon, 9(11), e20895. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20895
Mahanal, S., Zubaidah, S., Sumiati, I. D., Sari, T. M., & Ismirawati, N. (2019). RICOSRE: A Learning Model to Develop Criti-
cal Thinking Skills for Students with Different Academic Abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 417–434.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12227a
Malik, A., & Ubaidillah, M. (2020). Students Critical-Creative Thinking Skill: A Multivariate Analysis of Experiments and Gender.
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 49-58. https://
doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2020-8-SI-49-58
Maryani, I., Prasetyo, Z. K., Wilujeng, I., Purwanti, S., & Fitrianawati, M. (2021). HOTS Multiple Choice and Essay Questions:
A Validated Instrument to Measure Higher-Order Thinking Skills of Prospective Teachers. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 18(4), 674–690. https://doi.org/10.36681/
Mitchell, R., Triska, M., Liberatore, A., Weatherill, R., & Longnecker, N. (2017). Benets and challenges of incorporating citizen
science into university education. PLoS ONE, 12(11), e0186285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186285
Molokhina, G. A., Pishchik, V., & Fomin, A. (2021). Features of Critical Thinking of Individual Entrepreneurs With Different Lev-
els of Self-Regulation. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering, and Education (IJCRSEE),
10(2), 253-264. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2021-9-2-253-264
Na, S.-H., Kim, J.-U., Ga, S.-H., Park, C., & Kim, C.-J. (2022). Using an Ecological Approach to Explore Teacher Agency dur-
ing the Implementation of a Citizen Science Education Program Using Arduino. Asia-Pacic Science Education, 8(1),
480–520. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10054
www.ijcrsee.com
61
Adnan, et al. (2025). The Effect of Citizen Science Project Learning Model on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 13(1), 51-61.
Nurjanah, N. E., Yetti, E., & Sumantri, M. S. (2024). Developing Creative Thinking in Preschool Children: A Comprehensive Review
of Innovative. European Journal of Educational Research, 13(3), 1303–1319. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.3.1303
Rindermann, H., & Baumeister, A. E. E. (2015). Validating the Interpretations of PISA and TIMSS Tasks: A Rating Study. Inter-
national Journal of Testing, 15(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2014.966911
Ristić, I., Runić-Ristić, M., Tot, T. S., Tot, V., & Bajac, M. (2023). The Effects and Effectiveness of an Adaptive E-Learning Sys-
tem on The Learning Process and Performance of Students. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science,
Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 77-92. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2023-11-1-77-92
Rohman, M. H., Marwoto, P., Nugroho, S. E., & Supriyadi, S. (2024). Effectiveness of Ethnoecological-STEM Project-Based
Learning Model to Improve Critical Thinking Skills, Creativity, and Science Concept Mastery. International Journal of
Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 521-534. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-
8496-2024-12-3-521-534
Sahira, S. (2023). Citizen Science Project (CS Project) Based Book Development in Biology Learning. Universitas Negeri Makassar.
Sahira, S., Muis, A., & Adnan. (2023). Analysis of the Needs for Developing Citizen Science Project (CSP) Based Books in
Biology Learning at Senior High Schools. Proceedings of the National Biology Seminar on Innovation in Science Learn-
ing, 15, 368–374.
Sanabria, J. C., Molina Espinosa, J. M., Alfaro Ponce, B., & Vycudilíková Outlá, M. (2022). A Threshold for Citizen Science Proj-
ects: Complex Thinking as a Driver of Holistic Development. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia,
25(2), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.25.2.33052
Sarwono, J. (2017). Get to know Popular Procedures in SPSS 23. Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo.
Stein, C., Wittmer, A., Fegert, J., & Weinhardt, C. (2023). Citizen Science as a Service? A Review Of Multi-Project Citizen Sci-
ence Platforms. Proceedings of the International Conferences on E-Society 2023 and Mobile Learning 2023, 36–44.
https://doi.org/10.33965/es_ml2023_202301l005
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Waskito, Wulansari, R. E., Rifelino, R., Fortuna, A., Nyamapfene, A., & Jalil, S. A. (2024). Constructivist Feedback-Based
Assessment Method as Key for Effective Teaching and Learning: The Development and Impact on Mechanical Engi-
neering Students’ Adaptive Capacity, Decision Making, Problem Solving and Creativity Skills. International Journal of
Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-
8496-2024-12-1-57-76
Woods, P. J., & Copur-Gencturk, Y. (2024). Examining the Role of Student-Centered Versus Teacher-Centered Pedagogical
Approaches to Self-Directed Learning Through Teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 138, 104415. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104415
Yildiz, C., & Guler Yildiz, T. (2021). Exploring the Relationship Between Creative Thinking and Scientic Process Skills of Pre-
school Children. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100795
Zdanevych, L. V., Buchkivska, G. V., Greskova, V. V., Аndriievskyi, B. M., & Perminova, L. A. (2020). Creativity Formation in the Con-
text of Social and Psychological Adaptation of Preschoolers Aged 5-6 Years. International Journal of Cognitive Research in
Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 10(2), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2020-8-SI-79-91
Zoellick, B., Nelson, S. J., & Schaufer, M. (2012). Participatory Science and Education: Bringing both views into focus. Fron-
tiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 310–313. https://doi.org/10.1890/110277
