Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thinking Skills and Creativity

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tsc

Creative learning in final year students in computer engineering: A

case study of the University of Matanzas
Walfredo González Hernández a, *, Maritza Petersson Roldán b, Marcelina Moreno
García c
a
Facultad de Educación Media, Universidad Central Marta Abreu de las Villas, Carretera Maleza y Circunvalación, CP 50100, Villa Clara, Cuba
b
Universidad de Ciencias Médicas, Carretera Central, CP, 40100 Matanzas, Cuba
c
Departamento de Formación del profesional. Universidad de Matanzas. Carretera a Canímar, km 3 ½, CP, 40100 Matanzas, Cuba

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The training of creative computer professionals is considered a strategic process in different
Creative learning countries because it is essential for the computerization of society. This paper proposes an
Creative learning in computing approach to the study of creative computer science learning for the digital transformation of
Training of computer professionals
modern society. The aim of the research was to evaluate the creative learning of computer science
University training
during the training of computer science professionals. An instrument derived from previous
research and metrics was applied to evaluate creative learning in the two groups of terminal years
of the computer engineering course at the University of Matanzas with a mixed paradigm. The
quantitative analysis diagnosed that more than sixty-five percent of the students are evaluated as
poor and fair in both years. The qualitative analysis revealed the inadequacies of the teaching
staff in the use of computer science teaching approaches, and the four stages of formation of
creative learning in computer science in the degree course: pre-university stage, basic stage,
professional stage and research stage. They also revealed three key factors in the formation of
creative learning in computer science: the integration of subjects, the solution of real projects, and
the mainly emotional support provided by teachers and other professionals to students during
their integration into the computerization of organizations.

1. Introduction

Creativity is one of the most studied topics by different scientific disciplines, and several studies consider it as a multidimensional
phenomenon. The development of creativity in human beings is closely related to creative learning, and many authors (Díaz Gómez &
Martínez, 2013) consider this type of learning as the basis of creativity. Therefore, in order to develop creativity in an individual, it is
important to develop creative learning. Didactics, as a science that studies educational processes in schools, should be concerned with
the development of creativity.
Many researchers (Orsolya Bereczkia & Kárpátib, 2018) have studied creativity and technologies, however, not many studies are
detected on the creative training of the IT professional. The research by González-Hernández (2013a) addresses the development of
creativity in these professionals and describes the ways to achieve that purpose but does not describe what it is to achieve creative
learning of computer technologies. In order to achieve this learning in a professional training process, and to develop creativity, it is

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wghernandez@uclv.cu (W. González Hernández).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101479
Received 31 October 2023; Received in revised form 10 February 2024; Accepted 17 February 2024
Available online 18 February 2024
1871-1871/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

important to determine the creative learning of information technology (CLI).

The fundamental theoretical references of this research are found in the Theory of Subjectivity enunciated by Fernando González
Rey and his followers (González Rey, 2019; Goulart et al., 2019). This theory is underpinned by three basic concepts: subjective
meaning, subjective configuration and subjective production. Subjective meaning is “... the integration of symbolic and emotional
processes that emerge during the individual’s performance” (González Rey, 2007, p. 170) while subjective configuration is the
integration of these subjective meanings into more complex structures.
Derived from this theory (Mitjáns Martínez, 2013) explains creative learning as a subjective configuration of three dominant
subjective senses: transgression of the given, personalization of information and generation of new and novel ideas. For their part, the
authors (González Hernández et al., 2022a) define creative learning in computer science as this subjective configuration in this science.
Derived from the concept of creative learning, ACI is defined as the subjective, social or individual configuration characterized by
the personalization of IT processes, the confrontation with already given IT processes that enable the emergence of subjective
meanings and the production, generation of own and “new” ideas during the execution of an IT project and has a total of 81 mea­
surement criteria (González Hernández et al., 2022a).
This definition summarizes the characteristics of ICA and places it in the fundamental context of IT creation: the project. At the
same time, it establishes the conditions for creative learning of computer technologies to take place. It provides researchers with a
definition and a system of dimensions and indicators to evaluate its development.
To assess the development of IT creativity is complex, and it is desirable to have quantitative measures depending on the
importance of each dimension for the organization. The Torrance test (Said-Metwaly et al., 2021) does not meet the conditions for its
application for two reasons. First, this test is developed to assess creativity and not the creative learning of a science. The second is that
the Torrance test assumes creativity as a type of thinking and does not take into account the complex character of subjective con­
figurations such as the integration of symbolic and emotional units (Oliveira-dos-Santos & Mitjans-Martinez, 2020).
∑
The metric for determining creative learning (CL) is shown in the expression AC = 1h 3i=1 Pi Di (1.1) (González Hernández et al.,
2022b), where h is the number of dimensions, Di is the assessment of the i th dimension and Pi is the weight. The following expression
∑ i ∑nij
calculates the value of the dimensions: Di = m1i m 1
j=1 Pij nij k=1 Iijk (1.2) where: mi: total number of indicators of dimension i, nij: total
number of aspects to be evaluated for indicator j of dimension i, Iijk: evaluation given to aspect k of indicator j in dimension i, Pij : is the
weight of each indicator assigned by the researcher.
To determine the weight of each dimension, it is recommended to use the paired comparisons’ method. This method, although
classified as a subjective weighting method (Martínez et al., 2018), allows for the quantification of the intensity of preference using the
rating scale proposed by Saaty (1987). The AHP Online System, a computer tool for the hierarchical analytical process (HAP), will be
used to determine these weights. Firstly, specialists with experience as computer science teachers and competence in educational
research will be identified to make judgments on the relative importance of each dimension.
Table 1 displays the consultation that each expert was requested to complete, following the order presented in the first row of the
table and considering the provided scale. If the criterion in the row is more important than the one in the column, the more important it
is according to the scale. If it is less important, the reciprocal of the value of the scale is used.
After evaluation of each dimension is determinate importance values gives by each expert about a dimension as is showing in
Table 2.
These results are aggregated using the geometric mean to arrive at a new consensus priority vector (Table 3).
In order to determine an evaluation scale for creative learning, the formula of Medina et al. (2021) is applied to determine the
equivalence of the resulting value with the evaluation scale of the educational system of any country, in this case, that of Cuban higher
education. However, the formulas of these authors need to correct the maximum and minimum of the interval because the way the
intervals are calculated includes the maximum of the previous interval as the minimum in the subsequent interval. This error is
corrected by adding o = 101r+1 (1.3) so that the minimum value of the new interval is greater than the maximum of the previous upper
limit. The r is the number of decimal places that the maximum value of the previous interval has.
The selection of the sample is related to the Cuban university curriculum context. In Cuba, a curricular transformation began in
2016 in which the number of years required to graduate as a professional was reduced to four from the previously established five. The
5-year curriculum was called Plan D and the new curriculum was called Plan E. The degree programme started this process of
curricular renewal in 2018 and by the end of 2022 will have two terminal years. A fourth-year group corresponding to Plan E

Table 1
Expert consultation.
Customization of IT Confrontation with already existing IT Production, generation of own and "new"
processes processes that enable the emergence of ideas during the implementation of an IT
subjective meanings. project

Customization of IT processes 1
Confrontation with already existing IT 1
processes that enable the emergence of
subjective meanings.
Production, generation of own and "new" 1
ideas during the implementation of an IT
project

2
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Table 2
Saaty Scale. Source: Penades Pla (2017).
Value Definition Comments

1 Equal Importance Criterion A is equally important as criterion B.

3 Moderate Importance
5 High Importance
7 Very High Importance
9 Extreme Importance
2,4,6,8 Intermediate values between the above when there
Experience and judgement slightly favour criterion A over B
Experience and judgement strongly favour criterion A over B
Criterion A is much more important than criterion B
The greater importance of criterion A over B is beyond doubt
is a need for nuancing

Table 3
Weighting of dimensions.
Criterion Comment Weights

1 Dimension 1 Personalization of information 16.3 %

2 Dimension 2 Confrontation with the given 29.7 %
3 Dimension 3 Idea generation 54.0 %

(2018–2022) and a fifth-year group corresponding to Plan D (2017–2022). These two years have different curricula and graduate in the
same year, fulfilling the same professional training objectives.
The research goes through the following phases:

• The questionnaire is applied in the two terminal groups to collect information on the 81 measurement criteria that characterize the
APCI.
• The ACI is calculated for each student in the two groups and expressed qualitatively using the Cuban evaluation scale known to the
teachers.
• The results obtained in the two groups are compared in order to test the following working hypotheses:
ü ACI is developed with evaluations of excellent and good in 80 % of the students in the two terminal years.
ü The difference in curriculum design between the two groups would lead to the Plan D group having better results than the Plan E
group because they studied the course for more years.
ü The qualitative interview with the students is carried out to corroborate the validity of the third hypothesis: the non-existence of
stages in the formation of the ICA.

2. Methodology

The typology of the article is research with a mixed approach, in which an exploratory cross-sectional design with descriptive
elements (Hernández Sampieri et al., 2014) is used to examine the APCI and describe its stages. A semi-structured questionnaire was
applied (González Hernández et al., 2022a) that includes a question to narrate the history of their career as a student. Additionally, a
qualitative interview was applied to the students that complements the story to explore the APCI formation process. All students agreed
to participate in the research.
The sample used was a non-probabilistic purposive sample, as all the students of the two final years of the Computer Engineering
course at the University of Matanzas were selected, distributed in two groups of 19 and 18 students respectively. This selection is due to
the fact that these are the years that should have the highest level of APCI since they have completed their training process as computer
engineers.
The questionnaire applied has a quantitative evaluation obtained through the metric proposed by González Hernández et al.
(2022b) and its result is expressed as a number in the interval from 0 to 0.3 The formulas established by Medina et al. (2021) varied
with the expression 1.3 allow equivalences to be established between the values of the interval and the evaluative system in Cuba for
Higher Education as reflected in Table 2:
Once the instruments have been applied and the results tabulated, the methodological triangulation method of the inter-method
type is applied (Musa & Isha, 2021). As explained by Velosa-Porras and Rodríguez-Malagon (2020), it lies in the composition of
qualitative or quantitative research methods in the verification of the same unit of analysis. In the following, the quantitative results
will first be presented in contrast with the qualitative results, and then vice versa.

3. Results and discussion

Question one of the questionnaires is related to placing the level of importance of self-development of IT content on a scale of 1 to
10. On this scale, four students marked 10, two students eight and the rest below six. This assessment of the students shows that it is not
their own production of IT content that is important to them, but rather the reproduction of the content taught by the teachers. This
suggests that students are more concerned with saying what teachers consider to be the correct answer than with producing computer
content. The assumption was compared to the students’ accounts and the interview. According to the students’ experiences, the

3
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

introduction of new ideas could be penalized if they did not lead to the expected answers by most teachers. Mistakes or divergent
answers resulted in poor evaluations, which led to low grades at the end of the semester. This way of conceiving learning is typical of
compressive learning (Mitjáns Martínez, 2013).
In sentence completion, only three students express the elaboration of new ideas and two of them identify contradictions as a way
for the development of learning, which expresses the poor development of these subjective senses in the students. During the interview,
students with poor and fair results expressed that contradictions in the content generated confusion for them. They needed to learn the
contents in order to pass and answer correctly for their teachers. Their priority was to graduate and start working.
In relation to the search, they mostly refer to information needed to solve the problems, and only one of them proposes the search
for problems to be computerized in reality. During the interview, students with poor and good results expressed that the contradictions
created confusion in them, as they needed the content to be learned in order to pass and answer correctly to the teachers. Their priority
was to graduate and get a job.
The quantitative assessment of creative learning takes place on the basis of the question to mark and argue the reasons for their
decisions. Table 5 shows the results of the ACI in the fourth year of the course.
It is evident that the worst performing assessments are found in dimension three, because if the resulting values are divided by the
weight of the dimension, they are much lower than in the first two dimensions. This implies that the students fail mainly in the
dimension considered as the main dimension for creative learning by the experts consulted. Out of the 19 students, only three students
have indicators of the third dimension which allow us to say that they generate their own new ideas taking into account the computer
results.
The indicators of less development are "Selects the most efficient and effective route during the execution of the project devel­
opment processes based on the concepts, procedures, models, systems and/or computer algorithms obtained in the different learning
spaces where they are involved" (González Hernández et al., 2022a, p. 5) and “Develops new projects that provoke satisfaction with
what has been done and the generation of new ideas linked to their training as computer engineers” (González Hernández et al., 2022a,
p. 5), being those in which the creativity of the students is most strongly expressed.
Further questioning of the students was necessary to determine why these indicators produced the worst results. According to the
students, the most efficient routes and the content to be studied were those provided by the teachers in class. Learning only occurred in
spaces where teachers provided study materials and focused on topics that allowed them to progress in their studies. This is an attitude
that settles for what can be approved. The described situation contradicts creativity studies (Ciriello et al., 2024).
The best evaluation indicators in this third dimension was “Collaborates with the people involved during the execution of the
project development processes based on the concepts, procedures, models, systems and/or computer algorithms obtained in the
different learning spaces where they are involved” (González Hernández et al., 2022a, p. 6), precisely the indicators with the least
weight in the subjective sense of production and generation of new ideas.
The students state in the applied qualitative methods that they already know each other, as they have been studying together for 4
years and are allowed to form teams based on affinity. The students suggest in their application of qualitative methods that they are
already familiar with each other as they have been studying together for four years and are allowed to form teams based on affinity. In
this sense, they express that this allows some to work on those parts of the project that are easier for them, without taking into account
the roles for which they are being trained. This team organization does not promote role-based work, which means that team members
are not trained in responsibility, diligence, or the necessary idea generation processes for the other indicators of idea generation.
Therefore, the methods for teaching how to solve problems related to computer projects do not correspond to the ways in which they
are solved in organizations that carry out computerization processes (Rice et al., 2022; Wiedemann et al., 2023). Therefore, based on
the triangulation of methods, it can be asserted that assuming the solution strategies used in employing organizations is important for
developing creative learning in computer science.
Table 6 expresses the results taking into account the number of students in each evaluation category:
As can be seen in the table, only one student has a creative learning of excellent while five students have an evaluation of good,
showing that more than 50 % of the students are in the category of poor and average. This implies that the majority of students with
excellent and good categories are not reached, which allows us to affirm that the course is not forming the creative learning
configuration in the students at the desired level.
It is therefore necessary to analyse the results in the fifth year.
In question one, an improvement is observed when seven students scored the number 10 as the maximum, three students the eight
and the rest below six. Even though there is a number close to half of the group selecting the maximum score and three students the
eight, this contrasts with the sentence completion in which only three students express the development of new computer content.
Only one student identifies contradictions as a source of new computer content.
In the fifth year, the situation is very similar to the fourth year, as the same teachers teach the repeating subjects. For the subjects
that were only taught to this cohort, the situation is also very similar. The predominant teaching style is traditional, where teachers
impart content and students demonstrate their application as taught to achieve high grades. Students can search for information on
these topics and delve deeper into the problem-solving methods that were taught. This approach does not promote cognitive inde­
pendence or the generation of novel ideas as proposed in studies of creativity (Marzban et al., 2023; Mohamed Taha & Abbas, 2023).
Studies continue to support the need for a shift in teaching style towards one that promotes discussion, idea generation, and
problem-solving during the teaching process (González Hernández, 2022).
Only four complete the item on seeking information to solve problems, while the rest answer ambiguously, the recurring phrase
being seeking information to increase their culture in eight students. Upon further exploration of the interviewee’s understanding of
culture, it was discovered that their search was focused on learning about music preferences, current TV shows, and other forms of

4
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

entertainment. These subjects are essential to learn and apply after graduation. This limited perspective demonstrates a narrow view of
culture, which is not inclusive of subjects such as computer science and other academic disciplines that contribute to the broader
understanding of human culture. The rest left it blank. This way of conceiving learning is typical of compressive learning (Mitjáns
Martínez, 2013).
The application of expression 1.1 and 1.2 allows the calculation of the ACI to determine the number of students in each category.
The results are shown in Table 7:
In the case of this group, the situation is similar to the previous group, although the behaviour of the third dimension is slightly
lower than in the previous group. Only three students out of 19 are found on the good and excellent scales of creative learning, which
tells of the low number of students who possess creative learning in a terminal year group.
In the indicator “Collaborates with the people involved during the execution of the project development processes based on the
concepts, procedures, models, systems and/or computer algorithms obtained in the different learning spaces where they are involved”
(González Hernández et al., 2022a, p. 6) only one student achieves a rating above 0.65 which indicates a high level of assessment. The
interview yielded similar results regarding teamwork and how roles are organized to solve problems proposed by teachers. This
emphasizes the conclusion about the insufficient methodological preparation of teachers to face the teaching of computer science that
promotes creative learning. The number of students and the percentages they represent are shown in Table 8:
As can be seen, there is a higher concentration of students evaluated between poor and fair for 83.33 % while only 16.67 % in the
good and excellent evaluations.
Although the two groups gave different assessments of question 1, it is important to note that the production of ideas is widely
recognized as an indicator of creativity in several studies (König et al., 2023; Van-Hooijdonk et al., 2022), and in the learning process
even more so (Meier et al., 2021; Tisoglu et al., 2022). The cause of poor idea generation was obtained from a qualitative interview and
was compared with the narrative of their trajectory in the two groups. According to the students, evaluations favour answers that
expand on class material, while ideas that introduce new perspectives or criteria are poorly evaluated. This has been the case since
their first year, particularly in the subject areas. They have learned that generating ideas that deviate from teacher-directed textbooks
and expressing opinions in class does not lead to favourable evaluations.
The aforementioned implies that students prioritize providing answers that align with their teachers’ expectations over generating
original computer content. The hindrance of creativity is reinforced by the rejection of novel concepts (Ciriello et al., 2024).
Based on the interview and trajectory analysis, it appears that problem finding is not given as much importance as the generation of
new ideas in the course, despite the literature indicating that it is a fundamental aspect of creative learning (Zielínska et al., 2023;
Zielinski-Nicolson et al., 2023). Teachers tend to avoid proposing open-ended problems with multiple solution paths, and independent
study is not focused on problem finding. Exercises that require students to find an algorithm or model are preferred over those that
reverse traditional problem-solving methods. For instance, two examples of problem-solving exercises are:
One way to find the largest number in a list when the number of elements is not known is to iterate through the list and keep track of
the largest number seen so far. Here is an algorithm to find the largest number in a list. Identify three scenarios where this can be
applied and provide a rationale for each.
Initialize a variable largest to store the largest number seen so far. Set it to negative infinity or any other value that is guaranteed to

Fig. 1. Use case model of the system.

5
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

be smaller than any element in the list.

Iterate through each element in the list.
For each element, compare it with the current value of the largest. If the element is larger than the largest, update the largest to be
equal to that element.
After iterating through all elements in the list, largest will contain the largest number in the list.

• If you have the following use case model of the system in Fig. 1, determine two scenarios that give rise to it.

The result showed in Tables 5 and 7 contradicts studies that give equal weight to all dimensions of creative learning and do not give
sufficient weight to the generation of original and innovative ideas (Blomberg & Kallio, 2022; Maimone & Sinclair, 2022). The results
indicate that personalizing information and confronting it with computer processes alone is insufficient for achieving the development
of creative learning in computer science. The study shows that students with high values in the first two dimensions (fourth year: 12, 13
and 17, fifth year: 1, 9, 11, 13 and 16) receive fair or poor evaluations in creative computer learning. The most important dimension for
the development of creative learning in computer science is generating new and original ideas, as supported by the experts consulted.
The previous paragraph suggests that developing creative learning in computer science requires the production of new and
innovative ideas during the teaching-learning process. To achieve this, it is essential to use problems with multiple solutions, including
those analysed in this article, in the classroom. Work practice provides a space for generating problems where the most efficient and
effective solution is not always known. The classroom should incorporate best practice workshops, exhibition fairs, and other learning
spaces (Gerver et al., 2023; Ruiz-del-Pino et al., 2022) where students can present their solutions. It is important to note that this
didactic treatment is not commonly found in studies that conduct meta-analyses on creativity (Gerver et al., 2023; Ruiz-del-Pino et al.,
2022). but it can be a valuable addition to the classroom environment. For technology students, science and technology parks are
excellent learning spaces for the development of creative learning due to the complexity of the problems, the potential for generating
new and innovative ideas, the solutions that are implemented, and the forms of teamwork that are structured.
Surveys of students indicate that they are unaware of project-based learning because projects are typically placed at the end of the
term, rather than at the beginning of the course as recommended in the literature (Ssemugenyi, 2022). The software engineering and
programming projects are not based on real-world scenarios, but are instead created by teachers who may not have recent experience
in software production within companies. The literature on project-based learning, as confirmed by Weng et al. (2022) highlights the
significance of incorporating authentic projects at the outset of the course.
To determine the status of the variable in the career, it would be interesting to compare the difference between the samples taken.
To determine the difference between the measurements taken in the fifth and fourth year, the correlation between them is determined.
The result obtained is 0.010408982, which shows that there is a very small difference between them and, therefore, the result of the
ACI assessment in these years is poor.
Another way to contrast the results would be to place the creative learning outcomes of the groups in a table expressing the number
of students with Poor, Fair, Good and Excellent in each group. Table 7 shows the comparison between them:
As can be seen in Table 7, the deviation from the mean is not significant in the group of students assessed as fair and poor. The
correlation between the two groups is 0.812, which shows that the results are very similar. When applying non-parametric statistical
elements, very similar results to the previous ones are obtained as shown in Tables 8 and 9:
The differences between the averages for each year are not significant in the rating of poor, which makes it possible to affirm that
the ICA in the two groups of the computer engineering degree course can be assessed as poor. More than 70 % of the two groups are in
the category of fair and poor. It is evident that there is no significant difference in the evaluation of creative learning in the third and
fourth year. It is possible to infer that an increase in the number of years and, consequently, in the amount of computer science content
does not guarantee the formation of ACI.
The comparison between the two groups indicates that a curriculum design that focuses on a large amount of content is not essential
for the development of creative learning in computer science, despite studies to the contrary (Brandon et al., 2022; Vuk, 2023). It is
crucial to determine the essential career cores that respond to the model of the professional and the roles they will play in the software
industry for creative learning to occur. Teachers should use problematic situations in the context of an organizational computerization
project to teach general concepts that express the career cores and constitute the basic conceptual cores of the computer engineering
profession (González Hernández, 2016) The organization of subjects and disciplines in the Computer Engineering degree course should
be based on their respective roles in the stages of computerization processes and the corresponding roles for students. The curriculum
design of this degree programme has not sufficiently addressed professional problems related to information technology, as noted by
several studies (Quezada et al., 2015; Taherdoost & Madanchian, 2022).
The degree course should adopt a systematic approach that consolidates all projects related to the essential cores of the course into a
single research project. The software engineering and database engineering projects provide the necessary modelling for the pro­
gramming and database management systems subjects. These processes must be validated using the test management content. The
organization of subjects within the degree programme at each university depends on the interplay between the social context of the
programme, student aspirations, and current trends in computer science. It is important to consider these factors when designing the
programme’s structure and specific contents. The resolution of these tensions would necessitate a complex process that is presently not
addressed in the theory of curriculum design in computer engineering (Casas Delgadillo, 2020) and requires in-depth study.
Based on the preceding paragraphs, the curriculum would include subjects that provide opportunities for discussing practical
problems. This aspect has not been addressed in the literature on computer engineering training (Anaya Hernández et al., 2019;
Barrera Jimenez et al., 2015). Solving new problems, unlike teaching problems, requires the generation of new ideas. This is because

6
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

the tools, methodologies, and technologies for their efficient and effective solution are not always known a priori. Additionally, these
problems respond to the characteristics of the organizations, so the ideas generated are specific to each one of them. Work from the
early years would facilitate the development of the third dimension, which is crucial for fostering creative learning in computer
science.
The results obtained lead to the rejection of the two hypotheses. The first hypothesis is not fulfilled due to the fact that the
evaluations of creative learning in computer science in the two years do not exceed 25 %. The values obtained correspond to previous
studies carried out at the university itself and with terminal years (González-Hernández, 2013b). These results contradict research that
proposes project-based learning as a way to develop creativity (Weng et al., 2022).
Surveys of students show that they are unaware of project-based learning because the projects are placed at the end of the term and
not at the beginning of the course as stated in the literature (Ssemugenyi, 2022). The software engineering and programming projects
do not correspond to real projects, but are thought up by teachers who have not been confronted with software production in com­
panies for years. In particular, the literature on project-based learning (Weng et al., 2022) confirms the importance of introducing real
projects from the beginning of the course.
The hypothesis about the determining role of the curricular design in the levels of ACI is also rejected, since given the curricular
change, the levels are maintained with minimal differences. This implies that the causes must be sought in the type of learning that
predominates in the degree course and in the methodological work of the management structures for conducting creative learning. To
begin this analysis, it is important to determine the regularities obtained from the results obtained:

• Comprehensive learning predominates (they learn to know what they are given, understand it and apply it: few ask themselves if
there is more to it than the content they are taught).
• There is no evidence of forms of learning that are characteristic of creativity (generation of ideas, confronting what is given and
searching for new solutions), nor is there any evidence of working with the potential of the students, in contrast to the recom­
mendations of the work reported in the current literature (Agnoli et al., 2023).
• Project and role-based work is not appreciated (mistakes are generally not accepted as part of learning, they do not communicate
easily with others, few create their own projects). Current literature on technology education recognizes the important role of
project-based learning in developing students’ potential (Hurtado Soler et al., 2022).

From the students’ trajectories, it can be detected that work practice and other learning spaces are not playing the role of dyna­
mizing creative learning in the students in order for them to be incorporated into research integrated into serious research projects.
This is corroborated in the questions related to the projects, where the majority of students did not identify spaces or moments in their
degree where they have been inserted into real full-time projects. The question regarding learning spaces in the survey revealed that all
students evaluated as poor or fair in dimension 3 referred to two spaces: the classroom and the virtual platform. The evaluated students
who received excellent and good grades mentioned other learning spaces, such as communities of programmers for specific tech­
nologies and professional websites like IEEE Computer Society (www.computer.org), Association for Computing Machinery (www.
acm.org), and Software Engineering Institute (www.sei.cmu.edu), among others. These sites are often referenced in classic software
engineering literature. Pressman’s (2011) book, ’A Practitioner’s Approach’, is often overlooked by students who fail to look beyond
what they are taught by their professors.
There is weak work on the part of the methodological structures of the career in the improvement of the teacher to achieve the
development of the ACI. It can also be asserted that the teaching of the discipline of software engineering and management does not
play an important role, given that it is mainly responsible for the academic training of computer engineers, as stated in the study by
Anaya Hernández et al. (2019). This statement contrasts with the completion of survey responses from students. Only three fourth-year
students and one fifth-year student identified software engineering-related subjects as the most important in the degree. As previously
stated, roles are not assigned within teams for work assignments. The subjects related to this discipline play an essential role as they
teach the content related to the roles of software analyst, designer, and architect. The responses to the life course question in the survey
were analysed and supplemented with a qualitative interview of the students who were assessed as good and excellent in the two
groups. An additional 50 % of the students who were rated poor and fair were split evenly between the two groups to contrast the
results.
The students’ accounts were confirmed by the interview, in which they all stated that they were interested in the course because
they liked computers at previous levels. In the survey, 37 out of 38 students answered affirmatively to the question about their interest
in computer science in their previous educational level. They stated that they were successful in all the tasks given to them by the
teachers, and they felt confident operating with the knowledge. In addition, they liked to look for other problems that could be solved
with this knowledge and that allowed them to look for information about it in order to go deeper.
This supposes a first stage in which the emergence of subjective senses favourable to computer science knowledge allows the
emergence of other subjective senses of a future life dedicated to working with this knowledge. However, the situation presented by the
students during their entry to the degree course coincides with several works (Casas Delgadillo, 2020; Garita-González et al., 2021)
that appreciate that the subjective senses about being a computer science professional are related to being a user of technologies. This
is a first stage in the formation of creative learning of computer science, an issue that does not appear in the literature on subjective
configurations (Bonvillani, 2023; Toledo Méndez et al., 2021). It can be inferred from the survey that 37 students were in this initial
stage.
In the first years of the degree course, they learn basic subjects that are being integrated into the teachers’ experiences of the
profession. In these first years, subjective meanings emerge and are integrated into the meanings that emerged in the previous stage. At

7
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

this stage, it is important for teachers to raise issues of the profession in which the contents of the basic subjects are involved. From this
process, favourable subjective meanings towards these subjects emerged.
It was interesting for the students to integrate the contents of the mathematics subjects with their speciality until they reached
Discrete Mathematics, a subject that plays an essential role in programming subjects. This made it possible to solve the difficulties with
this subject, which is considered difficult and complex for students (Faura-Martínez et al., 2022; Gamarra Astuhuaman, 2021),
especially in computer engineering (Bueno Hernández et al., 2020).
The students’ actions were directed towards the search for new information linked to these subjects, which led to the emergence of
subjective meanings associated with the transgression of the given. At the same time, they introduce these mathematical contents into
the programming subjects. This integration makes it possible for them to make the mathematical content their own from a subject in
which the willingness to learn it is high due to the subjective senses favourable towards it.
The integration of subjects from which unfavourable subjective meanings emerge with others where the emergence of subjective
meanings is favourable raises a new factor that proved to be conducive to learning in the rejected subjects. This result differs from other
research on subjective configurations of learning, where only subjective meanings in a subject are analysed (Martins-do-Carmo-­
de-Oliveira & Massot-Madeira-Coelho, 2020). It enables the personalization of information differently to that proposed by Mitjáns
Martínez (2013) as this author proposes it from the transformation of the background content and not from the integration of content
with a subject where students feel involved.
These statements were confirmed by 5 students who were evaluated as regular, 7 students who were evaluated as good, and 2
students who were evaluated as excellent. This was obtained when they completed sentences about examples of interdisciplinary and
the most important moments of the course where they integrated subjects according to their speciality. In this case, the students argue
that they personalize the information and go beyond what is taught in Mathematics by integrating it with Discrete Mathematics.
However, the rest of the students do not generate any subjective meanings favourable to this integration.
The introduction of the subjects of the profession brings students into contact with the contents that show the modes of action
expected of them in the employing organizations. They recognize that this is a third turning point in their training as professionals that
leads them to solve professional problems in the organizations where they carry out their work practice. In this process, the dominant
subjective meanings of the subjective configuration of learning a profession emerge in the life trajectories and in the interviews, which
differ substantially from other subjective configurations of learning (Maceo Vargas & Tamayo, 2017; Toledo Méndez et al., 2021).
One of the emerging subjective senses is the future projection of computer engineers as part of the personalization of information. It
arises when the solution of professional problems is gratifying for them and this, in turn, occurs when student error is seen as a natural
process of learning (González Hernández, 2022). This implies a tension between the efficiency and effectiveness needs of the orga­
nizations where students are inserted and the learning processes. The students evaluated as excellent and good say that the accom­
paniment by the professionals of the organizations and the teachers provides them with the necessary security to reduce the number of
errors (Table 4).
The help of others in dealing with mistakes and their emotional impact avoids a high burden of responsibility on students and
increases their affective stability, as Subero and Esteban-Guitart (2020) argue. It also reduces the tension between the dynamics of
employing organizations and universities, as well as bringing training objectives closer together, which avoids the disparity between
what organizations expect and what the university provides, as revealed by several studies (Accenture, 2007; Kusters et al., 2023). This
implies that student support is another essential element for the development of creative learning in computer science.
The continuous solution of professional problems with the appropriate support brings out subjective senses favourable to the
production of new ideas. Students report that the selection of technologies, methodologies or development models is rewarding for
them and brings new elements to the processes of computerization in organizations. In the case of computer engineers in this article,
the production of models that guide computerization processes is added as a novelty, an issue that is not taken into account in the
current literature on computer science education (Claro et al., 2018; Garita-González et al., 2021).
The absence of modelling in the literature on training computer professional’s contrasts with trends in model-driven software
development (Cortellessa et al., 2020; Kay et al., 2022). This presupposes a contradiction between the transcendental importance given
to modelling of computerization processes (López et al., 2022; Ngadiman et al., 2023) and its absence in theoretical analyses of the
training process of these professionals (Syafril et al., 2022; Wang, 2022).
Modelling during the computerization of organizations is a subjective production in which various models are constructed that
represent the reality to be computerized and the systems to be developed for their introduction into the processes of organizations
subject to digital transformation (Zhao et al., 2023). The integration of symbols and signs developed in the development of informatics
as a science is configured differently to solve each of the problems of computerization of organizations.
By assuming modelling as a novel subjective production, it is recognized that it is unique and unrepeatable for each computeri­
zation process, an issue that is not addressed in the literature on creativity and computer science (Ciriello et al., 2024; Zielínska et al.,

Table 4
ICA assessment scales.
Qualitative scale Quantitative scale

Excellent 0.239991–0.3
Well 0.179981–0.23999
Regular 0.119881–0.17998
Bad 1 - 0.11988

8
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Table 5
Assessment of the ICA.
Student Dimension 1 Dimension 2 Dimension 3 APCI Qualitative Scale

Est 1 0.163 0.297 0 0.204595238 Well

Est 2 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.145452381 Regular
Est 3 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.127341272 Regular
Est 4 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.027166667 Bad
Est 5 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.199507937 Well
Est 6 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.105539683 Bad
Est 7 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.077253968 Bad
Est 8 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.159595238 Regular
Est 9 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.231761905 Well
Est 10 0.163 0.297 0.54 0.027166667 Bad
Est 11 0.5 0.571428571 1 0.263738095 Excellent
Est 12 0.666666667 0.428571429 0.5 0.168650794 Regular
Est 13 0.833333333 0.428571429 0.5 0.177706349 Regular
Est 14 0.5 0.714285714 0.75 0.232880952 Well
Est 15 0.666666667 0.142857143 0.75 0.185365079 Well
Est 16 0.333333333 0 0.5 0.108111111 Bad
Est 17 0.666666667 0.428571429 0.5 0.168650794 Regular
Est 18 0.333333333 0 0 0.018111111 Bad
Est 19 0 0 0 0 Bad

Table 6
Student classification.
Group ICA ACI%

M R B E M R B E
Fourth 7 6 5 1 36.84211 31.57895 26.31579 5.263158

Table 7
Assessment of ICA in Year 5.
Student Dimension 1 Dimension 2 Dimension 3 APCI Qualitative scale

Est 1 0.833333333 0.297 0 0.177706349 Regular

Est 2 0.5 0.297 0.54 0.145452381 Regular
Est 3 0.166666667 0.297 0.54 0.127341273 Regular
Est 4 0 0 0 0 Bad
Est 5 0.333333333 0.297 0.54 0.091396825 Bad
Est 6 0.5 0.297 0.54 0.159595238 Regular
Est 7 0.333333333 0.297 0.54 0.181396825 Well
Est 8 0 0 0 0 Bad
Est 9 0.5 0.297 0.54 0.159595238 Regular
Est 10 1 0.297 0.54 0.305047619 Excellent
Est 11 0.5 0.28571428 0.5 0.145452381 Regular
Est 12 0 0 0 0 Bad
Est 13 0.5 0.28571428 0.5 0.145452381 Regular
Est 14 0.666666667 0.42857142 0.75 0.213650794 Well
Est 15 0.333333333 0.14285714 0.25 0.077253968 Bad
Est 16 0.5 0 0 0.027166667 Bad
Est 17 0.333333333 0.28571428 0.5 0.136396825 Regular
Est 18 0.333333333 0.29285714 0.25 0.092103968 Bad

Table 8
Classification of students.
ICA ACI%

M R B E M R B E
Fifth 7 8 2 1 38.88888889 44.44444444 11.11111111 5.555555556

2023). Students assessed as fair and poor state that modelling is poor or non-existent in the organizations where they carry out their
work practice, while students assessed as excellent and good do model in their work practice. What has been analysed in these two
paragraphs allows us to affirm that modelling in software processes is one of the factors that influence creative learning in computer
science.

9
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Table 9
Comparison between fourth and fifth year.
ICA

M R B E

Fourth 7 6 5 1
Fifth 7 8 2 1
Media 7 7 3.5 1
Desv 0 1 1.5 0

The processes explained thus far are compared to the survey results, specifically the questions related to solving professional
problems and the role of modelling in their solution. Only the students who received excellent and good evaluations have integrated
subjective evaluations that favour these topics relevant to the computer science profession. The comparison between the qualitative
and quantitative results allows us to state that the students who exhibit favourable subjective perceptions are those whose creative
learning is evaluated positively.
In the research stage, which is transversal to the previous stages, students carry out research related to professional modes of action
in which they solve problems under the guidance of scientific methods. The linking of students to real projects from the previous stage
allows the emergence of subjective senses such as satisfaction for solving problems, satisfaction for the application of solutions in the
improvement of processes, joy for the recognition of their results, among others raised by students evaluated as excellent and good.
The solutions become more complex over time with the use of the base problem as a fundamental teaching approach in the basic
stage (Muñoz Pentón et al., 2018) at the same time as the subjects of the academic component are integrated into these solutions.
Students refer to their liking for subjects in the year that take into account the real problems of work practice for their evaluation
processes.
The periodicity in the use of the project in work practice during the professional stage leads them to obtain small novel results that
are integrated and hypothesize about the new results that must be achieved in order to obtain the final result, which characterizes the
production of new ideas (Willemsen et al., 2023). In the same way, configuring technologies, tools and development models in a
unique and unrepeatable way in each project to be solved is also a subjective production loaded with new ideas. It is thus argued that
solving real problems during their work practice that lead to research is another element that shapes creative learning in computer
science.
In this final stage, only the students who received an excellent evaluation answered affirmatively to the survey questions related to
solving real problems in connection with practice. These were the students who were able to solve complex and novel problems with
minimal help from teachers and colleagues. All of them are students involved in research projects related to computerization solutions
for processes related to technology in education or artificial intelligence.
In the detected research on the development of creative learning (de-Almeida & Mitjáns Martínez, 2020; González Hernández et al.,
2022c; Labarrere Sarduy, 2003; Mitjáns Martínez, 2013), the phases in which its development occurs have not been identified. No
phases have been detected in recent research on subjective configurations (Bonvillani, 2023; Rojas Vidaurreta & Vidaurreta Lim, 2020;
Toledo Méndez et al., 2021). This leaves possible paths for further research on the existence of phases in the development of creative
learning and subjective configurations.
This research highlights the importance of paying special attention to the stages of creative learning development in computer
science didactics in general, and in the training of computer engineers in particular. It is necessary to create curricular spaces that
include multiple learning environments related to the profession and the solution of real problems in organizations related to it.
Finally, it is important to integrate scientific research processes into these solutions, as this contributes to the development of creative
learning in computer science (Tables 10 and11).

4. Conclusions

The selected instrument was used to evaluate the creative learning of computer science in the fourth and fifth year groups of the
Computer Engineering course at the University of Matanzas. The first working hypothesis is rejected because over 70 % of the students
received a poor or fair evaluation. The first working hypothesis is rejected because over 70 % of the students received a poor or fair
evaluation. The second hypothesis is also rejected because both groups have similar results despite curricular differences. Weaknesses
have been identified in the faculty’s preparation for conducting creative computer learning at the University of Matanzas, specifically
in the use of problem-based approaches, projects, and their integration. The potential of practical work as a space for generating
problems with characteristics different from those addressed in class, which enhances the production of ideas, is not being fully
utilized.
The students’ life histories show the existence of 4 stages in the development of creative learning of computer science. The first
stage is related to the favourable subjective senses related to school computer science. In the second stage, subjective senses of learning
the basic subjects emerge that allow them to create in computer science. During the third stage, the dominant subjective senses of
creative learning of computer science emerge when learning the subjects of the speciality. In the last stage, creative learning in
computer science is structured when they do research in this profession. This leads to the rejection of a third hypothesis made after the
evaluation of the creative learning of computer science at the University of Matanzas.
The application of the qualitative interview made it possible to confirm the stories obtained in the questionnaire. The analysis of the

10
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Table 10
Application of group statistics.
Year N Media Standard deviation Standard error of the mean

ED1 4 19 .5000 .22906 .05255

5 18 .4074 .26948 .06352
ED2 4 19 .4105 .29419 .06749
5 18 .3783 .26476 .06240
ED3 4 19 .4605 .30349 .06963
5 18 .4028 .28619 .06746

Table 11
Independent samples test.
Leveneʼs test for T-test for equality of means
equality of
variances

F Sig. t gl Sig. Difference in Standard error of 95 % Confidence

(bilateral) averages the difference interval for the
difference
Inferior Top Inferior Top Inferior Top Inferior Top Inferior

ED1 Equal variances have .708 .406 1.128 35 .267 .09259 .08207 − 0.07402 .25920
been assumed
Equal variances have 1.123 33.440 .269 .09259 .08244 − 0.07505 .26023
not been assumed
ED2 Equal variances have .973 .331 .349 35 .729 .03219 .09219 − 0.15496 .21935
been assumed
Equal variances have .350 34.914 .728 .03219 .09192 − 0.15443 .21882
not been assumed
ED3 Equal variances have .022 .884 .595 35 .556 .05775 .09710 − 0.13938 .25487
been assumed
Equal variances have .596 35.000 .555 .05775 .09694 − 0.13906 .25455
not been assumed

questionnaire revealed three essential elements in the formation of creative learning of computer science: the integration of rejected
subjects with accepted ones, the solution of real projects and the mainly emotional accompaniment of teachers and other professionals
to students during their insertion in the computerization of organizations.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Walfredo González Hernández: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Valida­
tion, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Maritza Petersson Roldán: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Software, Supervision. Marcelina Moreno García: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Author contribution statement and acknowledgment of acknowledgments

Information available in the journal’s database is not included in this version to avoid potential conflicts of interest with reviewers.

Statement of ethics committee approval

The authors declare that the research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the responsible institution insofar as the research
involved human subjects.

11
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Authors statement

We the authors agree with all the points made.

References

Accenture, Y. U. (2007). Las competencias profesionales en los titulados (pp. 1–16). Contraste y diálogo Universidad-Empresa. http://www.accenture.com/
SiteCollectionDocuments/Local_Spain/PDF/Accenture-Resumen-Competencias-profesionales-enlos-titulados.pdf.
Agnoli, S., Mastria, S., Mancini, G., Corazza, G. E., Franchin, L., & Pozzoli, T. (2023). The dynamic interplay of affective, cognitive and contextual resources on
children’s creative potential: The modulatory role of trait emotional intelligence. Journal of Intelligence, 11(11), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/
jintelligence11010011
Anaya Hernández, R., Tumino, M. C., Niño Manrique, J. F., Juan, B., & Mazo Arboleda, W. H. (2019). Motivation of informatics engineering students with emphasis on
software engineering: A study in latin-American universities. Revista Ingenierías Universidad de Medellín, 19(36), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.22395/rium.
v19n36a12
Barrera Jimenez, R., Jimenez, A. D. B., & Amaro, L. E. H. (2015). Algunas consideraciones en torno al desarrollo de habilidades profesionales del ingeniero informático
y el rol de la comprensión de texto en la modelación de algoritmos computacionales. Revista Mendive, 13(50), 1–5.
Blomberg, A. J., & Kallio, T. J. (2022). A review ofthe physical context ofcreativity: A three-dimensional framework for investigating the physical context of creativity.
International Journal of Managenment Review, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12286
Bonvillani, A. (2023). Hacia una comprensión psicosocial de la configuración de las subjetividades. Quaderns de Psicologia, 25(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/
qpsicologia.1873
Brandon, L. E., Reis, S. M., Renzulli, J. S., & Beghetto, R. A. (2022). Examining teachers’ perspectives of school-based opportunities and support for student creativity
with the ICI index. Creativity Research Journal, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2022.2110416
Bueno Hernández, R., Naveira Carreño, W., & González Hernández, W. (2020). Los conceptos matemáticos y sus definiciones para la formación de los ingenieros
informáticos para la sociedad. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 12(4), 147–155.
Casas Delgadillo, J.Y. (2020). Rediseño curricular en el área de tecnología e informática de la institución educativa técnica pio alberto ferro peña del municipio de chiquinquirá
universidad Santo Tomás Abierta y a Distancia]. Medellín-Colombia.
Ciriello, R. F., Richter, A., & Mathiassen, L. (2024). Emergence of creativity in IS development teams: A socio-technical systems perspective. International Journal of
Information Management, 74, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102698
Claro, M., Salinas, A., Cabello-Hutt, T., San-Martín, E., Preiss, D. D., Valenzuela, S., & Jara, I. (2018). Teaching in a digital environment (TIDE): Defining and
measuring teachers’ capacity to develop students’ digital information and communication skills. Computers & Education, 121, 162–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.compedu.2018.03.001
Cortellessa, V., Eramo, R., & Tucci, M. (2020). From software architecture to analysis models and back: Model-driven refactoring aimed at availability improvement.
Information and Software Technology, 127, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106362
de-Almeida, P., & Mitjáns Martínez, A. (2020). Emergencia del aprendizaje creativo. Alternativas cubanas en Psicología, 8(23), 95–111.
Díaz Gómez, Á., & Martínez, A. M. (2013). Creatividad y subjetividad: Su expresión en el contexto escolar. Diversitas: Perspectivas Psicológicas, 9(2), 427–434.
Faura-Martínez, Ú., Lafuente-Lechuga, M., & Cifuentes-Faura, J. (2022). ¿Desigualdad territorial en Selectividad? Analizando la asignatura de matemáticas en
Ciencias Sociales. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 40(1), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.424841
Gamarra Astuhuaman, G. P. C., & Eugenio, Oscar (2021). Resolución de problemas, habilidades y rendimiento académico en la enseñanza de la matemática. Revista
Educación, 45(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v45i1.41237
Garita-González, G., Villalobos-Murillo, J., Cordero-Esquivel, C., & Cabrera-Alzate, S. (2021). Referentes internacionales para el rediseño de un plan de estudios:
Competencias para una carrera en Informática. Uniciencia, 35(1), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.15359/ru.35-1.11
Gerver, C. R., Griffin, J. W., Dennis, N. A., & Beaty, R. E. (2023). Memory and creativity: A meta‑analytic examination of the relationship between memory systems
and creative cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02303-4
González Hernández, W., Petersson Roldán, M., & Moreno García, M. (2022a). El aprendizaje creativo de la informática: Conceptualización. Universidades 2022, Ciudad
de la Habana.
González Hernández, W. (2016). Propuesta metodológica para el tratamiento de conceptos y definiciones informáticos. Revista Electrónica Formación y Calidad
Educativa, 4(2), 45–62.
González Hernández, W. (2022). Los parques científicos tecnológicos como espacios de aprendizaje. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 14(S1), 322–333.
González Hernández, W., Petersson Roldán, M., & García Moreno, M. (2022b). El aprendizaje creativo de la informática: Definición de una variable XXIII Evento
Internacional de la Enseñanza de la Matemática. la Computación y la Estadística, Matanzas-Cuba.
González Hernández, W., Petersson Roldán, M., & García Moreno, M. (2022c). Métrica para evaluar el aprendizaje creativo de la informática XXIII Evento Internacional
de la Enseñanza de la Matemática. la Computación y la Estadística, Matanzas-Cuba.
González-Hernández, W. (2013a). Creativity development in informatics teaching using the project focus. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 3(1), 63–70.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v3i1.2342
González-Hernández, W. (2013b). Intuition as part of informatics creativity. International Journal of Engineering Education, 3(3), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.
v3i3.2521
Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, M.d. P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación. McGRAW-HILL /Interamericana Editores.
Hurtado Soler, A., Botella Nicolás, A. M., & Martínez Gallego, S. (2022). Virtual and augmented reality applied to the perception of the sound and visual garden.
Education Sciences, 12, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060377
Kay, J., Bartimote, K., Kitto, K., Kummerfeld, B., Liu, D., & Reimann, P. (2022). Enhancing learning by Open Learner Model (OLM) driven data design. Computers and
Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100069
König, K., Zeidler, S., Walter, R., Friedmann, M., Fleischer, J., & Vielhaber, M. (2023). Lightweight creativity methods for idea generation and evaluation in the
conceptual phase of lightweight and sustainable design. Procedia CIRP, 119, 1170–1175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2023.05.008
Kusters, M., van der Rijst, R., de Vetten, A., & Admiraal, W. (2023). University lecturers as change agents: How do they perceive their professional agency? Teaching
and Teacher Education, 127, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104097
Sarduy, L., & F, A. (2003). Creatividad, aprendizaje creativo y desarrollo del sujeto creador. Summa Psicológica UST, (2), 37–47.
López, L., Burgués, X., Martínez-Fernández, S., Vollmer, A. M., Behutiye, W., Karhapää, P., Franch, X., Rodríguez, P., & Oivo, M. (2022). Quality measurement in agile
and rapid software development: A systematic mapping. Journal of Systems and Software, 186, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2021.111187
Maceo Vargas, D., & Tamayo, D. R. M. (2017). Configuración subjetiva del ejercicio de la dirección en directivos. Universidad & Empresa, 19(33), 75–112.
Maimone, F., & Sinclair, M. (2022). Editorial: Cross-cultural and intercultural dimensions of creativity in the workplace. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 1–3. https://
doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.1062257
Martínez, R. E., Gómez, J. C. O., Ibarra, D. E., & Moncada, C. A. L. (2018). Selección de una infraestructura de medición inteligente de energía usando una técnica de
decisión multicriterio. Scientia et Technica, 23(2), 136–142.
Martins-do-Carmo-de-Oliveira, A., & Massot-Madeira-Coelho, C. (2020). Subjective development process as a path to school learning: The classroom as a dialogic
relational context. Studies in Psychology, 41(1), 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2019.1710803
Marzban, S., Candido, C., Avazpour, B., Mackey, M., Zhang, F., Engelen, L., & Tjondronegoro, D. (2023). The potential of high-performance workplaces for boosting
worker productivity, health, and creativity: A comparison between WELL and non-WELL certified environments. Building and Environment, 243, Article 110708.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110708

12
W. González Hernández et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 52 (2024) 101479

Medina, P., González, W., Robayo, D., López, G., & Freire, T. (2021). In Metric to evaluate virtual courses: Case Ecuador XI international conference on virtual campus
(JICV).
Meier, M. A., Burgstaller, J. A., Benedek, M., Vogel, S. E., & Grabner, R. H. (2021). Mathematical creativity in adults: Its measurement and its relation to intelligence,
mathematical competence and general creativity. Journal of Intelligence, 9(10), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9010010
Mitjáns Martínez, A. (2013). Aprendizaje creativo: Desafíos para la práctica pedagógica. CS, (11), 311–341.
Mohamed Taha, I., & Abbas, A. A. (2023). The role of environmental monitoring in promoting green creativity. Economics and Business, 17, 15–36. https://doi.org/
10.2478/eb-2023-0002
Muñoz Pentón, M. A., Díaz Tejera, K. I., & Fierro Martín, E. R. (2018). La formación en investigación educativa para profesores de informática. Una experiencia
cubana. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 26, 215–227.
Musa, M., & Isha, A. S. N. (2021). Holistic view of safety culture in aircraft ground handling: Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods with data triangulation.
Journal of Air Transport Management, 92, Article 102019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102019
Ngadiman, N., Sulaiman, S., Idris, N., Samingan, M. R., & Mohamed, H. (2023). Checklist approach for the development of educational applications by novice
software developers. IEEE Access : Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 11, 900–918. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3232947
Oliveira-dos-Santos, M., & Mitjans-Martinez, A. (2020). Discussions about the notion of competence: Contributions from the theory of subjectivity. Studies in
Psychology, 41(1), 138–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2019.1710801
Orsolya Bereczkia, E., & Kárpátib, 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
Pressman, R. (2011). Ingeniería del software: Un enfoque práctico. McGRAW-HILL Higher Education (Séptima Edición ed.).
Quezada, P., Garbajosa, J., Enciso, L., Solano, L., & Barba, L. (2015). Estructura, Componentes e Importancia de los Cuerpos de Conocimiento en el contexto de la
Ingeniería de Software y propuesta de dos nuevas áreas de conocimiento en la currícula de la Titulación de Sistemas Informáticos. Revista Tecnológica ESPOL –
RTE, 28(5), 133–146.
Rice, N., Pêgo, J. M., Collares, C. F., Kisielewska, J., & Gale, T. (2022). The development and implementation of a computer adaptive progress test across European
countries. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100083
Rojas Vidaurreta, L., & Vidaurreta Lim, L. (2020). Interpretando la acción como configuración subjetiva: Experiencia, subjetividad y práctica deportiva. Alternativas
Cubanas en Psicología, 8(23), 48–65.
Ruiz-del-Pino, B., Fernández-Martín, F. D., & Arco-Tirado, J. L. (2022). Creativity training programs in primary education: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101172
Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3–5), 161–176.
Said-Metwaly, S., Van-den-Noortgate, W., & Barbot, B. (2021). Torrance test of creative thinking-verbal, Arabic version: Measurement invariance and latent mean
differences across gender, year of study, and academic major. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100768
Ssemugenyi, F. (2022). Trapped at the crossroads: Does problem-based learning make a difference? The moderating role of traditional mode of instruction. Cogent
Education, 9(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2068398
Subero, D., & Esteban-Guitart, M. (2020). Más allá del aprendizaje escolar: El rol de la subjetividad en el enfoque de los fondos de identidad. Teoría de Educación, 32
(1), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.14201/teri.22955
Syafril, S., Rahayu, T., & Ganefri, G. (2022). Prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1),
119–128. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.33125
Taherdoost, H., & Madanchian, M. (2022). Employment of technological-based approaches for creative elearning. In Teaching management information systems 4th
international conference on innovative data communication technology and application.
Tisoglu, S., Piri, Z., Mericelli, M., & Inan, F. C. (2022). Targeting creativity through a learnergenerated digital storytelling project. International Journal of Technology in
Teaching and Learning, 18(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.37120/ijttl.2022.18.1.01
Toledo Méndez, M. A., Ruiz, I. I. C., & Fernández, A. P. (2021). Configuración subjetiva del afrontamiento psicológico a la COVID-19 de adolescentes convalecientes
del primer rebrote. Revista Cubana de Medicina Militar, 50(3), 1–15.
Van-Hooijdonk, M., Mainhard, T., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van-Tartwijk, J. (2022). Examining the assessment of creativity with generalizability theory: An analysis of
creative problem solving assessment tasks. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100994
Velosa-Porras, J., & Rodríguez-Malagon, N. (2020). Utilidad de la triangulación en salud. Memorias del Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud, 18(1),
108–112.
Vuk, S. (2023). Development of creativity in elementary school. Journal of Creativity, 33(2), Article 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2023.100055
Wang, L. (2022). Influence of teacher behaviors on student activities in information-based classroom teaching. iJET, 17(02), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.
v17i02.28271
Weng, X., Chiu, T. K. F., & Tsang, C. C. (2022). Promoting student creativity and entrepreneurship through real-world problem-based maker education. Thinking Skills
and Creativity, 45, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101046
Wiedemann, A., Wiesche, M., Gewald, H., & Krcmar, H. (2023). Integrating development and operations teams: A control approach for DevOps. Information and
Organization, 33(3), Article 100474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2023.100474
Willemsen, R. H., de Vink, I. C., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Lazonder, A. W. (2023). The role of creative thinking in children’s scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and
Creativity, 49, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101375
Zhao, H., Frese, L., Venzin, C., Kaszás, D., Weibel, R. P., Hölscher, C., et al. (2023). The time course of spatial knowledge acquisition for different digital navigation
aids. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 103, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2023.101992
Zielínska, A., Lebuda, I., & Karwowski, M. (2023). Dispositional self-regulation strengthens the links between creative activity and creative achievement. Personality
and Individual Differences, 200, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111894
Zielinski-Nicolson, K. L., Roberts, N., & Boag, S. (2023). Does ASMR propensity reflect a mentally flexible mindset? Exploring the relationship between ASMR
propensity, transliminality, emotional contagion, schizotypal traits, roleplaying ability, and creativity. Consciousness and Cognition, 113, Article 103546. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2023.103546

13