The Digital Cognitive Partner: A 4P Framework Analysis of Prospective Teacher Creativity in the Age of AI
), Robert Harry Soesanto(2), Dylmoon Hidayat(3), Wilfridus Beda Nuba Dosinaeng(4), Helti Lygia Mampouw(5)
| 
Country:
(1) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Indonesia
(2) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Pelita Harapan, Indonesia
(3) Master Program of Educational Technology, Universitas Pelita Harapan, Indonesia
(4) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira. Doctor of Philosophy, School of Education, University of Queensland, Australia
(5) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Indonesia
Corresponding Author
Prospective teachers must be equipped with creative thinking skills to be able to design innovative mathematics learning media. However, studies on the creativity of prospective teachers are often not comprehensive and tend to focus on only one dimension of creativity. Although the 4P creativity model (Person, Process, Press, Product) provides a comprehensive analytical lens, research that integrates all four dimensions simultaneously in the context of mathematics teacher education is still rare. This study is a qualitative descriptive study that aims to describe and analyze the creativity of prospective mathematics teacher students in developing mathematics learning media. The subjects were eight students of the Mathematics Education study program who were taking the Mathematics Learning Media course and had completed a mathematics learning media development project. Data sources came from students' reflective journals when creating learning media, interview transcripts, and the learning media products that had been created. The collected data were analyzed based on Rhodes' 4P creativity framework: Person, Process, Press, and Product. The product dimension was analyzed descriptively and quantitatively using the Torrance rubric, consisting of four creativity indicators: fluency, flexibility, originality, and development. The Process dimension was analyzed based on Wallas' creative thinking framework: Preparation, Incubation, Illumination, and Verification. The person and press dimensions were then analyzed qualitatively using a thematic analysis approach. The results showed that students with high intrinsic motivation, active involvement in exploring ideas, and the ability to manage technical and time constraints tended to produce more creative and meaningful learning media. The key findings of this study significantly expand and challenge the traditional understanding of the Press dimension. The use of technology, particularly generative AI such as ChatGPT, serves not only as an external tool but also as a digital cognitive environment. AI acts as an interactive, dialogical partner, assisting in brainstorming, developing flowcharts, and solving technical problems, thereby blurring the boundaries between environmental factors (Press) and students' internal thinking processes (Process). This deep integration demonstrates that AI has become an integral part of students' cognitive workflows, implying that the 4P framework in the digital era needs to be viewed as an interconnected and flexible system, rather than as four rigidly separate pillars.
Keywords: creativity, mathematics learning media, creative thinking process, case study, pre-service teachers, artificial intelligence.
Adinugraha, F. (2020). Students’ creativity in producing biology learning media. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Conference on Blended Learning, Educational Technology and Innovation (ACBLETI), 560, 228–233. Atlantis Press.
Agustinaningsih, W. (2020). Profil kreativitas calon guru fisika dengan manajemen pembelajaran berbasis gaya belajar [Creativity profile of prospective physics teachers with learning style-based learning management]. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika, 8(1), 112. https://doi.org/10.24127/jpf.v8i1.2601
Anggraeni, R., Abdulkarim, A., & Jupri. (2019). Improvement of digital literation in aspects of creativity thinking participant education through project-based learning in social studies. International Journal Pedagogy of Social Studies, 4(1), 17–22.
Antonenko, P. D., & Thompson, A. D. (2011). Preservice teachers’ perspectives on the definition and assessment of creativity and the role of web design in developing creative potential. Education and Information Technologies, 16(2), 203–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-009-9112-1
Ashcraft, M. H. (2002). Math anxiety: Personal, educational, and cognitive consequences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00196
Ashkinaze, J., Mendelsohn, J., Qiwei, L., Budak, C., & Gilbert, E. (2025, August 4). How AI Ideas affect the creativity, diversity, and evolution of human ideas: evidence from a large, dynamic experiment. 198–213. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). https://doi.org/10.1145/3715928.3737481
Aziz, R. (2023). Creativity in higher education: the effect of personality on students’ creative thinking skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity Journal, 6(1), 44–51. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.23887/tscj.v6i1.54916
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.73
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25, 53–69.
Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets- unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. San Francisco, CA 94104-4594: Jossey-Bass.
Boden, M. A. (1998). Artificial intelligence creativity and artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 103, 347–356. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00055-1
Botella, M., Zenasni, F., & Lubart, T. (2018). What are the stages of the creative process? What visual art students are saying. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(NOV). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02266
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Camelia, I. A., Ratyaningrum, F., Marsudi, M., & Subagio, A. (2023). Developing pre-service teachers’ critical thinking through multimedia learning. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities 2022 (IJCAH 2022), 1864–1874. Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-008-4_202
Carson, D. K. (1999). Counseling. Encyclopedia of Creativity, 1.
Chen, L., Song, Y., Guo, J., Sun, L., Childs, P., & Yin, Y. (2025). How generative AI supports human in conceptual design. Design Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2025.2
Cheng, C., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2005). Cognitive processes underlying coping flexibility: Differentiation and integration. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 859–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00331.x
Choi, D. E., Hong, S., Park, J., Chung, J. J. Y., & Kim, J. (2024). Creative connect: Supporting reference recombination for graphic design ideation with generative AI. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642794
Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. In Creativity in Schools: Tensions and Dilemmas. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203357965
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399
De Alencar, E. M. L. S., De Souza Fleith, D., & Pereira, N. (2017). Creativity in higher education: Challenges and facilitating factors. Temas Em Psicologia, 25(2), 553–561. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2017.2-09
Diani, R., Susanti, A., Widiawati, N., & Velina, Y. (2025). Enhancing creative thinking skills and technological literacy through project-based microteaching: a study on prospective physics teachers at UIN Raden Intan Lampung. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia, 13(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.24815/jpsi.v13i1.41950
Dilling, F., Schneider, R., Weigand, H. G., & Witzke, I. (2024). Describing the digital competencies of mathematics teachers: theoretical and empirical considerations on the importance of experience and reflection. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 56(4), 639–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01560-4
Drijvers, P., Doorman, M., Boon, P., Reed, H., & Gravemeijer, K. (2010). The teacher and the tool: Instrumental orchestrations in the technology-rich mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(2), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9254-5
Glăveanu, V. P. (2014). The psychology of creativity: a critical reading. Creativity: Theories – Research – Applications, 1(1), 10–32. https://doi.org/10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02
Goos, M., & Bennison, A. (2008). Surveying the technology landscape: Teachers’ use of technology in secondary mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 102–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217532
Guilford, J. P., & York StLouis San Francisco Toronto London Sydney, N. (1967). Human Intelligence.
Haidemariam, T., & Gran, A. B. (2025). On the problems of training generative AI: towards a hybrid approach combining technical and non-technical alignment strategies. AI and Society. Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02445-0
Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, Teresa. (1987). Creativity and learning (National Education Association, Ed.). Washington, D.C: NEA Professional Library, National Education Association.
Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Fisser, P. (2016). Infusing creativity and technology in 21st-century education: A systemic view for change. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 27–37. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311670214
Hidayana, R., & Lianingsih, N. (2025). Contextual learning as a means to improve elementary school students’ mathematical literacy skills. International Journal of Ethno-Sciences and Education Research, 5(2), 46–50.
Hidayati, W. S., & Tristanti, L. B. (2023). Creativity profile of students in constructing mathematics learning media. JTAM (Jurnal Teori Dan Aplikasi Matematika), 7(3), 836. https://doi.org/10.31764/jtam.v7i3.15223
Kadyirov, T., Oo, T. Z., Kadyjrova, L., & Józsa, K. (2024). Effects of motivation on creativity in the art and design education. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2350322
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: the four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
Larraz-Rábanos, N. (2021). Chapter development of creative thinking skills in the teaching-learning process. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97780
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology-diana laurillard 4I9GF1LNOU. Routledge. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/teachingasdesignOO0OOlaur
Lee, H. P. (Hank), Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The impact of generative ai on critical thinking: self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778
Lemmetty, S., Collin, K., Glăveanu, V. P., & Forsman, P. (2021). Correction to: Creativity and learning (Palgrave Macmillan, 10.1007/978-3-030-77066-2). In Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77066-2_12
Lestari, I., & Zakiah, L. (2019). Kreativitas dalam konteks pembelajaran [Creativity in the context of learning]. Jakarta: Erzatama Karya Abadi. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335320470
Liu, V., & Chilton, L. B. (2022). Design guidelines for prompt engineering text-to-image generative models. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501825
Marlina, R., Suwono, H., Yuenyong, C., Ibrohim, I., & Hamdani, H. (2023). Reflection practice in microteaching: evidence from prospective science teachers. Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah, 8(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v8i1.15846
Mawarsari, V. D., Astuti, A. P., Purnomo, H. D., Sediyono, E., & Purnomo, E. A. (2022). The creativity of pre-service mathematics teachers in digital learning. Indonesian Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(2), 45–52. https://doi.org/10.31002/ijome.v4i2.5638
Meincke, L., Mollick, E., & Terwiesch, C. (2024). Working paper prompting diverse ideas: increasing ai idea variance. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=4708466
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge punya mishra. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Mosene, K. (2024). One step forward, two steps back: Why Artificial Intelligence is currently mainly predicting the past. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13934923
Moyer-Packenham, P. S., & Suh, J. M. (2012). Learning mathematics with technology: the influence of virtual manipulatives on different achievement groups. In Jl. of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching.
Muñoz-Salinas, Y., Caro-Zúñiga, D., & Jeria, I. (2025, March 1). Creativity and Preservice Teachers: A literature review of an underexplored field (2014–2024). Education Sciences, Vol. 15. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030395
Muslimah, R. H., & Witanto, Y. (2025). A study of students’ mathematical concept understanding ability: learning anxiety and independence in learning mathematics. Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE), 6(2), 417–427. https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1482
Najmi, M., Sinaga, A., Kuswandi, D., & Fadhli, M. (2024). The role of mobile learning in improving 21st-century teacher competencies: A systematic literature review. Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 11(2), 219. https://doi.org/10.21831/jitp.v11i2.69214
Nolasco, D. (2025). Unearthing mathematics anxiety: a qualitative exploration of student experiences. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 15(2), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2950
Nurhayati, N., & Rahardi, R. (2021). Kemampuan berpikir kreatif mahasiswa dalam mengembangkan media pembelajaran matematika saat pandemi covid-19 [Students’ creative thinking abilities in developing mathematics learning media during the covid-19 pandemic]. Maret, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.22460/jpmi.v4i2.331-342
Ostermaier, A., & Uhl, M. (2020). Performance evaluation and creativity: Balancing originality and usefulness. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2020.101552
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
Rahman, G., Almutairi, E. A. A., Mudhsh, B. A., & Al-Yafaei, Y. (2025). Harnessing generative AI for collaborative creativity: A study of university students’ engagement and innovation. International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(3), 3284–3296. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i3.7227
Rhodes, M. (1961). An Analysis of Creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305–310. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/20342603
Rosen, Y., Stoeffler, K., & Simmering, V. (2020). Imagine: Design for creative thinking, learning, and assessment in schools. Journal of Intelligence, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence8020016
Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice (2nd ed.). Elsevier Academic Press.
Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012, January). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Sawyer, R. K. (2021). The iterative and improvisational nature of the creative process. Journal of Creativity, 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2021.100002
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review.
Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014212
Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 18, pp. 87–98. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_10
Suresh, K. (2022). Design thinking as an innovative teaching method for media and communication courses. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 3(2), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v3.i2.2022.123
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Wu, Y., & Koutstaal, W. (2020). Charting the contributions of cognitive flexibility to creativity: Self-guided transitions as a process-based index of creativity-related adaptivity. PLoS ONE, 15(6 June). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234473
Xu, C., & Wang, Q. (2022). The relationships of creative coping and college students’ achievement emotions and academic stress: the mediating role of psychological capital. Journal of Intelligence, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10040126
Zamzam, K. F. (2017). Model berpikir kreatif guru dalam mengembangkan media pembelajaran matematika berbasis teknologi dan non teknologi [Teachers’ creative thinking model in developing technology-based and non-technology mathematics learning media]. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Matematika), 8(2), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.29100/jp2m.v7i2.2139
Zeng, J., Yan, H., & Zhang, H. (2025). How classroom curiosity affects college students’ creativity? Education Sciences, 15(9), 1101. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091101
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.