See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/380360705

Design and Development Research (DDR) Approach in Designing Design

Thinking Chemistry Module to Empower Students' Innovation Competencies

Article in Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology · April 2024
DOI: 10.37934/araset.44.1.5568

CITATIONS READS

2 402

3 authors, including:

Norliyana Md. Aris

University of Technology Malaysia
6 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Norliyana Md. Aris on 06 May 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

Journal of Advanced Research in Applied

Sciences and Engineering Technology
Journal homepage:
[Link]
ISSN: 2462-1943

Design and Development Research (DDR) Approach in Designing Design

Thinking Chemistry Module to Empower Students' Innovation
Competencies
Norliyana Md. Aris1,*, Nor Hasniza Ibrahim1, Noor Dayana Abd Halim1
1 School of Education, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history: Design and evaluation processes to provide an empirical basis for producing
Received 23 June 2023 instructional and non-instructional products, tools, and new or improved development
Received in revised form 23 September 2023 models. This method uses various methods, including qualitative and quantitative
Accepted 15 February 2024 techniques, and thoroughly examines the literature. The design and development of
Available online 25 April 2024
this chemistry module using design thinking to empower students' innovation
competencies are described in this article. The main challenge for the teaching
implementation process that is capable of mastering the skills of generating new ideas
and solving problems in the real world is preparing teaching materials, consuming time,
and putting pressure on the teacher. Teachers need more support resources to
translate the expected teaching practices. This effort aims to generate a new
perspective in education, especially chemistry education, in developing student
innovation competence in secondary schools in Malaysia. Therefore, this study aims to
discuss the design and development research (DDR) approach used to develop a design
thinking chemistry module using a DDR approach. The researcher will go through three
study phases and use several different research approaches in each phase. In the first
phase, the researcher investigated the teachers' needs in their pedagogy used in
teaching and students' innovation competencies. The second phase is the design and
development phase, involving the consensus of twelve experts in various fields, such as
chemistry/science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), curriculum
development, module construction experts, and research and innovation planning
experts. Consequently, the final phase is implementation and evaluation, focusing on
determining the module's effectiveness in teaching and learning. Expert consensus is
Keywords: the primary input in developing modules in Malaysian chemistry education. Malaysian
Design thinking; Design and education needs to bring a different educational paradigm and teaching strategy, which
development research (DDR); includes the impact of teacher pedagogy through design thinking in the future. The
Innovation competencies; Teachers' conclusion of this article proposes a conceptual framework for the research to
pedagogy; Chemistry education contribute to the advancement of design thinking and chemistry education.

*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: liyanaaris23@[Link]

[Link]

55
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

1. Introduction

Fostering students' innovation competencies and equipping them with the skills necessary to
navigate real-world challenges are paramount [1,2]. This study, guided by a design and development
research (DDR) approach, sets out to address this need by designing and developing a
groundbreaking Design thinking chemistry module. The objective is to empower students' innovation
competencies through an immersive and experiential learning experience. By integrating design
thinking principles into the chemistry curriculum, this module aims to transform traditional
pedagogical practices. It provides teachers with valuable support resources, enabling students to
master the art of generating new ideas and problem-solving. Furthermore, the main contribution of
this study lies in its comprehensive exploration of teachers' needs, the design and development of
the module through expert consensus, and its subsequent implementation and evaluation to assess
its effectiveness in enhancing students' innovation competencies. Hence, by bridging the gap
between theory and practice, this research endeavors to advance the fields of design thinking and
chemistry education, paving the way for a new paradigm in teaching and learning.
Innovation competence emphasizes the demand for education that enables the renewal of
initiatives, focusing on changes in teaching and learning with technology integration [3,4]. In line with
that, scholars have recommended integrating the teaching and training of innovation competence
and its various aspects into the curriculum to foster innovation competence through education [5,6].
According to the literature consensus, education can significantly improve students' innovation
competencies [7,8]. However, the existing learning environment is still not optimal for supporting
the improvement of student innovation competence [9]. In addition, although the importance of
developing students' innovation skills is emphasized, developing teaching strategies and
specifications on how teachers should plan curricula for innovation competence are not provided
[10,11]. Studies have also revealed little discussion of innovation competence, a learning activity
teachers must organize [12].

2. Innovation Competencies and Their Relevance to Chemistry Education

Chemistry education has the potential to provide students with critical skills and knowledge that
will allow them to contribute to innovation in a variety of fields, including materials science,
biotechnology, energy, and environmental sustainability [13-15]. To meet this need, we developed a
chemistry module incorporating design thinking principles to strengthen students' innovation
competencies. Empathy, experimentation, and collaboration are critical components of design
thinking, a problem-solving approach. By combining design thinking into the chemistry classroom
environment, we aim to engage students in a more interactive and exploratory learning experience
in which they can apply their knowledge to real-world challenges and develop their innovation
competencies.
Traditionally, chemistry education has focused on memorizing and applying established concepts
and procedures [16]. This method has successfully taught fundamental principles and prepared
students for standardized tests. However, it may not fully equip students with the skills required to
succeed in today's rapidly changing world. As the demand for innovation grows across all industries,
it is becoming increasingly important for chemistry students to develop creative problem-solving,
critical thinking, and design thinking competencies [17].
Innovation competence is also needed to solve many global problems, especially in chemistry
[18]. Chemistry is vital in achieving some of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) of the United
Nations to ensure a brighter and more sustainable future by 2030, such as nanotechnology,

56
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

sustainable energy transition, smart cities, innovative industries, and other social and environmental
issues [19]. Furthermore, the thought process that goes into it will help students develop creativity,
develop new ideas, solve problems, and discover new opportunities in solving problems [20].
Therefore, whether it is the view among scholars or educational policymakers, developing students'
innovation competence is necessary to remain relevant in both parties [21,22].
Undeniably, the need for students to empower their innovation competence is critical in
producing effective problem solvers, critical thinkers, and creative researchers [3]. The importance
of developing innovation competence is demonstrated by innovation being one of the national STEM
action plan 2017-2025's focus areas. Aside from research culture and improving the quality of
teaching and learning, the federal ministry of science, technology, and innovation (MOSTI)
collaborates with the Malaysian ministry of education (KPM) and higher education (KPT) on
innovation [23]. According to studies, many educators focus on developing innovation competence
through real-world problem-solving in STEM education [24,25]. This chemistry module's
development has far-reaching implications for chemistry education and beyond. Thus, we need to
prepare students for the challenges and opportunities of a rapidly changing world where creativity,
critical thinking, and collaboration are increasingly valued by enhancing innovation competencies.

3. The Potential of Design Thinking in Stimulating Innovation Competencies

The key to developing this innovation competency is creating a quality learning environment that
allows students to solve real-world problems and be curious and open-minded [26]. The question
here is how the development of innovation competence and maximizing digital technology through
one method can impact the development of students' innovation competence. Scholars, among
them, have proposed several solutions to apply the design thinking approach as a modern learning
paradigm in the classroom. For example [27-29] support this viewpoint, stating that when teachers
use a design thinking approach to create learning materials and lectures for students, they improve
student learning. Note that the quality of the classroom improves. Hence, design thinking should be
one of the solution methods to provide students with the ability to solve problems innovatively
[30,31].
Ultimately, design thinking can effectively develop students' innovation competencies [32,33].
Design thinking provides students a structured framework for developing innovation skills [34,35].
Empathy, defining, ideating, prototype, and testing are the five stages of design thinking [36].
Furthermore, this structured framework enables students to develop the systematic problem-solving
approach required for innovation. Consequently, students learn to approach problems in a structured
and systematic manner, which aids in developing their innovation skills. However, in the context of
Malaysia, elements of the design approach are still not disclosed to science and mathematics
teachers in particular [37]. Besides, teachers are still unclear about the design approach and how it
can be applied in the classroom [38,39] to encourage the development of students' innovation
competencies.

4. Design and Development of Design Thinking Chemistry Module

The idea of the entire study is described in the conceptual framework [40]. It also forms the basis
of research that clarifies how a concept developed will guide the design and execution of this study.
This module development is based on Richey and Klein's DDR, a systematic method for developing
teaching modules [41]. Other than that, it involves a process that includes needs analysis,

57
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

determining gaps to be filled, creating educational goals, designing materials to achieve the
objectives, and implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of instructional materials.
This DDR research comprises four comprehensive phases [41]. However, Noh and Karim [38] and
Saedah et al., [42] divided DDR research into three stages that have been used in the implementation
procedure of this study: (1) needs analysis, (2) design and development, and (3) implementation and
evaluation of module results that are developed. The illustration Figure 1 below displays the study
design used for each stage of the study implementation process.

Fig. 1. Research flow chart

4.1 Phase 1- Need Analysis

A needs analysis was the first phase in DDR. A needs analysis was a critical stage in developing a
product, in which information could be obtained through the user directly or indirectly [41]. It was
intended to look at the problems that arose to predict solutions to future customer needs.
Environmental information among the selected population was collected and analyzed to identify
the matter's needs. Moreover, this phase focused on what should be done compared to what had
been done in a study that identified the need to develop design thinking modules to empower
innovation competence in chemistry class [42].
The discrepancy model by McKillip will be used as the model in the needs analysis phase [43] used
in the field of educational research. This model emphasized several expectations, namely the process
of setting goals, the method of measuring performance that involved identifying what should be done
and identifying discrepancies (discrepancy identification) that should have happened (what ought to
be), and what exactly a problem was (what was). In the context of this study, needs analysis helped
to obtain information about the need to develop design thinking chemistry modules from the
perspective of chemistry expert teachers to empower the innovation competencies of high school
chemistry students. It is based on the following research questions: 1. Explore the need for applying
design thinking for chemistry subjects based on the expert teacher's perspective. 2. Explore teachers'
views on the need for chemistry modules to apply design thinking among chemistry students.
A qualitative approach is used in this study, using interview methods and document analysis. The
semi-structured interview method is selected as this method allows to obtain information about the
participants' perspectives, conduct the study, and better understand a phenomenon [44,45].
Moreover, it provides an advantage in controlling the discussion [46]. Information on opinions,
beliefs, attitudes, and experiences could be learned effectively through interviews.
This study also focuses on the needs and applications of technology in teaching and learning in
the chemistry classroom. Consequently, this process can identify an initial review of complex
information, technical requirements, criteria, appropriate teaching strategies, resource materials,
and applications. This explains why semi-structured interviews are considered one of the most

58
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

valuable techniques for gathering qualitative scientific data. Note that document analysis is utilized
in this step to triangulate the study.

4.2 Phase 2- Design and Development

The second phase is the design and development phase of the design thinking module for
chemistry subjects in secondary schools based on expert consensus. This design and development
phase is crucial for module development in this research. Consequently, McKenny and Reeves [47]
argued that this phase is essential and must be emphasized since the product produced, a module,
model, or curriculum, is relevant and requires scrutiny to ensure that it benefits users, whether
teacher or student. The results obtained in the requirements analysis are used in this phase.
Additionally, essential elements in the module, including learning objectives, content modules,
activities, and assessment methods, will be designed and evaluated according to an expert consensus
before developing the module prototype [48,49]. This phase will determine the appropriate module
design and identify important decisions and rational alternatives [42]. This is to meet the needs of
the high school chemistry teaching and learning process in improving student innovation
competence. Note that the module prototype produced in this phase is based on the inputs obtained
[50]. This study developed modules using the IDEO design thinking model [36], and the Sidek module
development model as studied by Sidek and Ahmad [56]. The IDEO model contains five phases that
are suitable to be used in this development module to increase the efficiency of student innovation
as shown in Figure 2.

Fig. 2. The five phases of design thinking [36]

IDEO model in Figure 2 is an instructional design model applied to develop student knowledge
through experience. Students define problems, identify, and develop potential solutions, and
determine how to evaluate real-world work. There are five main phases in the implementation of
teaching: exploration, interpretation, idea generation, experimentation, and evolution in the group
problem-solving process. A flexible approach through exploring ideas until producing prototypes in
solving problems can help students face and solve current challenges.
The theoretical basis of this study is derived from Dewey's experiential learning theory [51]. The
roots of pedagogy involving the application of innovation competence can be used in the
constructivist approach through collaborative learning and learning from experience [52]. This theory
examines reality as constructed, and experience will determine the outcome [53]. Moreover,
students develop intuitive thinking skills by engaging in cooperative learning activities that require

59
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

critical thinking in solving problems by considering various actions [54,55] for a more effective
learning process.
Therefore, the selection model in this study is suitable and in line with the primary objective of
developing innovation competencies and improving students' mastery of chemical concepts through
design thinking in chemistry subjects. Table 1 illustrates the design adaptation of the Sidek module
development model in the DDR approach utilized in this study.

Table 1
Applying the Sidek module development model in the design and development of design thinking chemistry
module
Phase Design and Sidek module construction model Description
development [56]
research (DDR)
1 Need analysis Goal setting, identifying the Issues and module design on learning based on
theory, rationale, philosophy, design thinking to improve innovation
concept, target, and period, and efficiency, based on the opinion of the expert
needs study chemistry teacher.
2 Design and Objective setting, content, Development of module
development strategy, logistics, media selection, prototype based on expert consensus through
and combining draft the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM).
3 Evaluation Pilot study, validity test, and Conduct the experimental to evaluate the
module evaluation effectiveness

The fuzzy Delphi method (FDM) technique was used in this study to design and develop a design
thinking teaching module for high school chemistry students as depicted in Figure 3. FDM is a
measurement tool developed or modified from the Delphi method. As a result, FDM is not a new
method since it is based on the classic Delphi method, which has been widely employed and accepted
in many studies [57-59]. Hence, the researcher chose this FDM approach as this improved FDM can
be a more effective measurement tool in placing the strength of element selection in the module
based on expert consensus. Studies also prove that this method can solve problems with inaccuracy
and uncertainty [60-62]. Furthermore, researchers use the FDM method, which involves a process of
agreement or agreement from a group of experts selected to confirm, evaluate, reject, or add
elements to the module to be developed [63]. Thus, selecting experts is critical to meet the context
of expert consensus in this FDM method.

Fig. 3. Fuzzy Delphi method (FDM) approach [64]

60
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

To ensure the empirical nature of this study, the researcher followed several steps to implement
the fuzzy Delphi method, as illustrated in Figure 3.

Step 1: Determination and selection of experts.

Berliner [65] highlights the importance of selecting experts with a minimum of five years of
consistent experience to ensure comprehensive insights into the studied issues. In this study, we
purposively sampled 12 experts to form a diverse panel encompassing expertise in Chemistry
Education, Curriculum, Module Development, Research, and Innovation. This panel size aligns with
the recommendation by Adler and Ziglio [66], who suggest involving 10 to 15 experts in the Delphi
technique to achieve a high level of agreement.

Step 2: The construction of the experts' questionnaire.

In this study, a researcher developed a questionnaire based on a literature review and expert
discussions, following recommended guidelines [67]. The questionnaire utilized a 7-point Likert scale,
chosen for its ability to reduce ambiguity and promote higher expert agreement. Moreover, previous
research findings [58,64] supported the superior accuracy achieved with a 7-point Likert scale
compared to a 5-point Likert scale. Experts requested to indicate their level of agreement with the
provided statements, facilitating content validation.

Step 3: Dissemination and data collection.

In this step, we distributed the developed questionnaires to the identified experts through two
methods: (i) conducting face-to-face meetings with each expert or (ii) disseminating the
questionnaires online, such as via email.

Step 4: Conversion of Likert scale to fuzzy scale.

All linguistic variables are converted into fuzzy triangular numbers, assigning a fuzzy rij number
to each criterion representing the K expert.

𝐼 = 1 … 𝑚, 𝑗 = 1, … 𝑛, 𝐾 = 1 … . , 𝑘 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑖𝑗 = 1/𝐾 (𝑟¹𝑖𝑗 ± 𝑟²𝑖𝑗 ± 𝑟ᴷ𝑖𝑗)I= 1 (1)

The average data value was calculated using a Delphi Fuzzy Analysis template developed in
Microsoft Excel.

Step 5(a): Determining threshold value (d).

Subsequently, experts' agreement for each item was indicated by the threshold value d, which
must be less than or equal to 0.2—an undeniable consensus achieved [68]. The distances between
two fuzzy numbers, m = (m1, m2, m3), and n = (n1, n2, n3), were computed using the following
formula.

𝑑 (𝑚, 𝑛) = √1/3 [(𝑚1 − 𝑛2)2 + (𝑚2 − 𝑛2)2 + (𝑚3 − 𝑛3)2] (2)

Step 5(b): Percentage expert consensus

The percentage of expert consensus must be more than 75%, indicating that the experts have
reached an agreement. Correspondingly, any questionnaire item not reaching an agreement was
dropped [69].

61
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

Steps 5(c): Defuzzification process

If the group consensus percentage exceeded 75%, the researcher proceeded with the
Defuzzification Process to determine the fuzzy score value (A). The fuzzy score (A) had to be equal to
or greater than the median value (α-cut value) of 0.5 [70], indicating agreement among the experts
and acceptance of the item. The formula used is as follows:

𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1/3 ∗ (𝑚1 + 𝑚2 + 𝑚3) (3)

Based on the consensus obtained from the experts, we developed prototypes of the chemistry
design thinking module. This phase involved restructuring the content program, organizational chart,
storyboard, flowchart program, screen design, evaluation process, and repetition. Before the
module's actual implementation by the group, we conducted a pilot study with a student group to
identify any issues that arose during module development.

4.3 Phase 3- Evaluation

The module's impact on enhancing innovation competence and mastery of concepts is thoroughly
evaluated in the final phase of this innovative design research. Sidek and Ahmad [56] emphasize that
the evaluation module encompasses various activities and questions. To comprehensively assess the
module, three types of assessments, formative, summative, and confirmatory [71], are conducted
throughout the teaching process and after completion. This study also evaluates the module's
effectiveness in improving students' innovation competence, encompassing individual,
interpersonal, and network dimensions. The assessment process involves administering a pre-test
(O1) to gauge students' baseline abilities, followed by implementing the design thinking module (X)
as a treatment, and finally conducting a post-test (O2) as depicted in Figure 4. To evaluate creative
problem-solving and thinking skills development, structured problem-based learning questions and
pre-post multiple-choice questions are utilized. Meanwhile, increased scores on both tests indicate
progress.
Furthermore, dimensions such as goal orientation, group work, and networking are evaluated
through assigned design projects. Throughout the group intervention, an observation list of
innovation competencies, encompassing 25 items across five primary domains, offers a
comprehensive snapshot of student innovation competence during each classroom session. This
meticulous evaluation process enables a thorough understanding of students' growth and
development in innovation competence.
Controlling all types of threats related to procedures and participants' experiences is essential to
guard against threats to internal validity [67,72]. Therefore, during the implementation of the
experimental study, we will ensure the control of threats to internal and external validity. According
to Creswell [72], a study involving one group may face a significant threat from history and maturity
when extending the study period. To mitigate this threat, the researcher conducted a four-week
interval study. Other than that, previous studies by Omar [73] support the appropriateness of a four-
week interval, as it effectively addresses the threat and achieves the study's objectives. The
researcher utilized the same rubric and scoring scheme for pre- and post-tests to maintain
consistency in testing and measurement.
This impactful study collects quantitative data through pre-test and post-test scores while
gathering qualitative data through clinical interviews with teachers and students. The data collection
is seamlessly integrated into the student's learning environment to ensure validity and
trustworthiness [72,73]. Moreover, the study explores improvements in innovation competence and

62
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

student conceptual changes by evaluating intervention effects and classroom observations. This
comprehensive approach provides valuable insights to enhance students' development.

Fig. 4. Evaluation phase procedures

5. Research Conceptual Framework

DDR's systematic and evidence-based nature enables a comprehensive understanding of design

and development processes [42,59]. DDR's iterative and evaluative nature allows for the refinement
and improvement of instructional interventions [41]. Furthermore, the involvement of expert
consensus enhances the quality and relevance of the design thinking chemistry module. By aligning
with previous research on the benefits of DDR in educational design and development, this study
contributes to advancing the field. It ensures a robust and practical approach to instructional design
in chemistry education. The study aims to create a comprehensive reference tool for enhancing
student innovation competence by incorporating STEM teaching strategies. Figure 5 illustrates the
conceptual framework employed in this study. To initiate the teaching process, the teacher will
catalyze organizing knowledge by integrating students' existing knowledge.
Consequently, the experience phase, where the implementation of teaching based on the design
thinking model of IDEO [36], is conducted. The IDEO design thinking model application allows
students to solve creative problems in group work systematically according to the five phases in this
model. Next, evaluate the impact of learning strategies on the dimension of innovation competence
while looking at the impact on students' mastery of concepts.

63
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

Fig. 5. Research conceptual framework

6. Conclusion and Recommendation

This research provides an empirical basis for producing instructional materials that empower
students' innovation competencies by systematically studying the design, development, and
evaluation processes. Through the DDR approach, which incorporates qualitative and quantitative
techniques and thorough literature examination, the study phases and research approaches
contribute to the comprehensive development of the module. The expert consensus from diverse
fields ensures the quality and relevance of the module in Malaysian chemistry education. This study
contributes valuable insights into design thinking and chemistry education. Hence, it is crucial to
consider certain limitations. The study's findings may have limited generalizability due to its exclusive
focus on Malaysian secondary schools. It would be beneficial to conduct the study in various
educational contexts to acquire a thorough knowledge of the effectiveness of the design thinking
chemistry module.
In conclusion, this study has significantly contributed to the field of design thinking and chemistry
education. The design thinking chemistry module has successfully addressed the challenge of
creating effective teaching materials and has provided teachers with invaluable support resources.
Moreover, the module has bridged the gap between theoretical understanding and practical
problem-solving abilities by strengthening students' innovation competencies. The proposed

64
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

conceptual framework advances design thinking principles in the context of chemistry education and
ensures the module's quality and relevance through expert consensus. Furthermore, the
implementation and evaluation phases can prove the module's effectiveness in teaching and
learning. This research offers a new perspective on education and emphasizes the significance of
teacher pedagogy and the necessity for a different educational paradigm. This study highlights the
potential to transform chemistry education practices and promote student innovation by integrating
design thinking principles. Therefore, the findings of this study can guide the development of
instructional materials and strategies that foster innovation competencies and advance the field of
design thinking and chemistry education, informing future research and educational initiatives in
Malaysia and beyond.

References
[1] Ovbiagbonhia, A. R., Bas Kollöffel, and Perry den Brok. "Educating for innovation: Students’ perceptions of the
learning environment and of their own innovation competence." Learning environments research 22 (2019): 387-
407. [Link]
[2] Hero, Laura-Maija, Marianne Pitkäjärvi, and Kaija Matinheikki-Kokko. "Validating an individual innovation
competence assessment tool for university–industry collaboration." Industry and Higher Education 35, no. 4
(2021): 485-496. [Link]
[3] Hero, Laura-Maija, Eila Lindfors, and Vesa Taatila. "Individual Innovation Competence: A Systematic Review and
Future Research Agenda." International Journal of Higher Education 6, no. 5 (2017): 103-121.
[Link]
[4] Falloon, Garry. "From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC)
framework." Educational Technology Research and Development 68 (2020): 2449-2472.
[Link]
[5] Bascopé, Martín, Paolo Perasso, and Kristina Reiss. "Systematic review of education for sustainable development
at an early stage: Cornerstones and pedagogical approaches for teacher professional
development." Sustainability 11, no. 3 (2019): 719. [Link]
[6] Durall, Eva, Claudia Carter, and Kathryn Burns. "Transdisciplinary education and innovation through STEAM."
In Proceedings of the Mini-Conference on Transdisciplinary Research and Design (TRaD 2022): 14th February 2022,
University of Oulu (online). Oulun yliopisto, 2022.
[7] Hu, Meng‐Lei I‐Chen Monica, Jeou‐Shyan Horng, and Chih‐Ching Teng. "Developing A model for an innovative
culinary competency curriculum and examining its effects on students' performance." The Journal of Creative
Behavior 50, no. 3 (2016): 193-202. [Link]
[8] Ovbiagbonhia, A. R., Bas Kollöffel, and Perry Den Brok. "Teaching for innovation competence in higher education
Built Environment engineering classrooms: teachers’ beliefs and perceptions of the learning
environment." European Journal of Engineering Education 45, no. 6 (2020): 917-936.
[Link]
[9] Keinänen, Meiju Marika, and Liisa Kairisto-Mertanen. "Researching learning environments and students’ innovation
competences." Education+ Training 61, no. 1 (2019): 17-30. [Link]
[10] Herodotou, Christothea, Mike Sharples, Mark Gaved, Agnes Kukulska-Hulme, Bart Rienties, Eileen Scanlon, and
Denise Whitelock. "Innovative pedagogies of the future: An evidence-based selection." In Frontiers in Education,
vol. 4, p. 113. Frontiers Media SA, 2019. [Link]
[11] Franco, Isabel, Osamu Saito, Philip Vaughter, Josh Whereat, Norichika Kanie, and Kazuhiko Takemoto. "Higher
education for sustainable development: Actioning the global goals in policy, curriculum and practice." Sustainability
Science 14 (2019): 1621-1642. [Link]
[12] Redman, Aaron, Arnim Wiek, and Matthias Barth. "Current practice of assessing students’ sustainability
competencies: A review of tools." Sustainability Science 16 (2021): 117-135. [Link]
00855-1
[13] Droescher, Michael. "Chemistry: The driving force for emerging technologies." Chemistry International 40, no. 4
(2018): 14-17. [Link]
[14] Gomollón-Bel, Fernando. "Ten Chemical innovations that will change our world: The developing science that will
fight the pandemic and reshape the chemical landscape." Chemistry International 42, no. 4 (2020): 3-9.
[Link]
[15] Ferreras-Garcia, Raquel, Jordi Sales-Zaguirre, and Enric Serradell-López. "Sustainable innovation in higher

65
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

education: the impact of gender on innovation competences." Sustainability 13, no. 9 (2021): 5004.
[Link]
[16] Dood, Amber J., and Field M. Watts. "Students’ strategies, struggles, and successes with mechanism problem
solving in organic chemistry: a scoping review of the research literature." Journal of Chemical Education 100, no. 1
(2022): 53-68. [Link]
[17] Mahaffy, Peter G., Stephen A. Matlin, Thomas A. Holme, and Jennifer MacKellar. "Systems thinking for education
about the molecular basis of sustainability." Nature Sustainability 2, no. 5 (2019): 362-370.
[Link]
[18] Garcia‐Martinez, Javier. "Chemistry 2030: a roadmap for a new decade." Angewandte Chemie 133, no. 10 (2021):
5008-5012. [Link]
[19] Anastas, Paul T., and Julie B. Zimmerman. "The United Nations sustainability goals: How can sustainable chemistry
contribute?." Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry 13 (2018): 150-153.
[Link]
[20] Chen, Li, Koichi Inoue, Yoshiko Goda, Fumiya Okubo, Yuta Taniguchi, Misato Oi, Shin’ichi Konomi, Hiroaki Ogata,
and Masanori Yamada. "Exploring factors that influence collaborative problem solving awareness in science
education." Technology, Knowledge and Learning 25 (2020): 337-366. [Link]
8
[21] International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. "Standards for technological and engineering
literacy: The role of technology and engineering in STEM education." (No Title) (2020).
[22] Diez-Ojeda, María, Miguel Ángel Queiruga-Dios, Noelia Velasco-Pérez, Emilia López-Iñesta, and José Benito
Vázquez-Dorrío. "Inquiry through industrial chemistry in compulsory Secondary Education for the achievement of
the development of the 21st Century skills." Education Sciences 11, no. 9 (2021): 475.
[Link]
[23] DSTIN (2021-2030), "Pengenalan kepada Dasar Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi Negara (DSTIN)." Portal Rasmi
Kementerian Sains, Teknologi Dan Inovasi (2024).
[24] Nguyen, Thi Phuoc Lai, Thi Huy Nguyen, and Thanh Khiet Tran. "STEM education in secondary schools: Teachers’
perspective towards sustainable development." Sustainability 12, no. 21 (2020): 8865.
[Link]
[25] Chalkiadaki, Areti. "A systematic literature review of 21st century skills and competencies in primary
education." International Journal of Instruction 11, no. 3 (2018): 1-16. [Link]
[26] Keinänen, Meiju, Jani Ursin, and Kari Nissinen. "How to measure students’ innovation competences in higher
education: Evaluation of an assessment tool in authentic learning environments." Studies in Educational
Evaluation 58 (2018): 30-36. [Link]
[27] J. H. L. Koh, C. S. Chai, B. Wong, and H.-Y. Hong, Design thinking for education: Conceptions and applications in
teaching and learning. Springer Singapore, 2015.
[28] Zupan, Blaž, Anja Svetina Nabergoj, and Franc Cankar. "Design thinking as a methodology for teaching
entrepreneurial mindset in primary education." In International Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship,
pp. 893-XXII. Academic Conferences International Limited, 2018.
[29] Hsiao, Hsien-Sheng, Kuang-Chao Yu, Yu-Shan Chang, Yu-Hung Chien, Kuen-Yi Lin, Chien-Yu Lin, Jyun-Chen Chen,
Jheng-Han Chen, and Yi-Wei Lin. "The study on integrating the design thinking model and STEM activity unit for
senior high school living technology course." In 2017 7th World Engineering Education Forum (WEEF), pp. 383-390.
IEEE, 2017. [Link]
[30] Pruneau, Diane, Viktor Freiman, Michel T. Léger, Liliane Dionne, Vincent Richard, and Anne-Marie Laroche. "Design
Thinking and Collaborative Digital Platforms: Innovative Tools for Co-creating Sustainability Solutions." Innovations
and Traditions for Sustainable Development (2021): 207-226. [Link]
[31] Scott, Julia A., Evangelia Bouzos, Matthew Philip Hendricks, and Prashanth Asuri. "Cultivating Student Adoption of
Design Thinking and Entrepreneurial Skills by Addressing Complex Challenges in Healthcare Through Industry
Partnerships." In 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access. 2021.
[32] Androutsos, Athanassios, and Vasiliki Brinia. "Developing and piloting a pedagogy for teaching innovation,
collaboration, and co-creation in secondary education based on design thinking, digital transformation, and
entrepreneurship." Education Sciences 9, no. 2 (2019): 113. [Link]
[33] Raber, Mary, Mary Fraley, and Amber Kemppainen. "Incorporating design thinking into the first-year engineering
curriculum." In 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. 2018.
[34] Lynch, Matthew, Uladzimir Kamovich, Kjersti K. Longva, and Martin Steinert. "Combining technology and
entrepreneurial education through design thinking: Students' reflections on the learning process." Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 164 (2021): 119689. [Link]
[35] Garcia-Vaquero, Marco. "Design thinking online: approaching constructive learning in food science." COGNITION

66
Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

AND EXPLORATORY LEARNING IN THE DIGITAL AGE (CELDA 2021) (2021): 339.
[36] IDEO. Design thinking for educators. 2012.
[37] Adam, Nur Amelia, and Lilia bt Halim. "Cabaran pengintegrasian pendidikan STEM dalam kurikulum
Malaysia." Seuntai Kata (2019): 252.
[38] Noh, Suhaila Che, and Abdul Malek Abdul Karim. "Design thinking mindset to enhance education 4.0
competitiveness in Malaysia." International journal of evaluation and research in education 10, no. 2 (2021): 494-
501. [Link]
[39] Nurulrabihah, Mat Noh. "Pembangunan model pengajaran pemikiran reka bentuk sekolah rendah/Nurulrabihah
Mat Noh." PhD diss., Universiti Malaya, 2020.
[40] Nieveen, Nienke, Susan McKenney, and Jan van den Akker. "Educational design research: the value of variety."
In Educational design research, pp. 163-170. Routledge, 2006. [Link]
[41] Richey, Rita C., and James D. Klein. "Design and development research." Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology (2014): 141-150. [Link]
[42] Saedah, S., T. L. A. Muhammad Ridhuan, and M. R. Rozaini. "Pendekatan Penyelidikan Rekabentuk dan
Pembangunan (PRP): Aplikasi kepada Penyelidikan Pendidikan." Tanjong Malim, Perak: Universiti Pendidikan Sultan
Idris (UPSI) (2020).
[43] Jack McKillip, Identifying Needs In: Nedd Analysis. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2011.
[Link]
[44] Creswell, John W., and Cheryl N. Poth. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.
Sage publications, 2016.
[45] Merriam, Sharan B., and Robin S. Grenier, eds. Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and
analysis. John Wiley & Sons, 2019.
[46] Choak, Clare. "Asking questions: Interviews and evaluations." In Research and research methods for youth
practitioners, pp. 90-112. Routledge, 2013.
[47] McKenney, Susan, and Thomas C. Reeves. "Educational design research." Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology (2014): 131-140. [Link]
[48] Ahmad, Zanariah. "Pembangunan modul pedagogi kelas berbalik berasaskan pembelajaran reflektif untuk
politeknik premier." PhD diss., University of Malaya (Malaysia), 2017.
[49] Dahaman, Amani. "Pembangunan modul m-pembelajaran bahasa Arab di institut pendidikan guru." PhD diss.,
University of Malaya, 2014.
[50] Padzil, Mohd Ridzuan, Aidah Abd Karim, and Hazrati Husnin. "Employing DDR to design and develop a flipped
classroom and project based learning module to applying design thinking in design and technology." International
Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 12, no. 9 (2021).
[Link]
[51] Roberts, T. Grady. "An Interpretation of Dewey's Experiential Learning Theory." (2003).
[52] Scheer, Andrea, Christine Noweski, and Christoph Meinel. "Transforming constructivist learning into action: Design
thinking in education." Design and Technology Education 17, no. 3 (2012): 8-19.
[53] Norlidah, Alias. "Pembangunan modul pedagogi berasaskan teknologi dan gaya pembelajaran Felder-Silverman
Kurikulum Fizik Sekolah Menengah/Norlidah Alias." PhD diss., University of Malaya, 2010.
[54] Cho, Youngwoo, and Renee M. Clary. "Challenges and opportunities for virtual learning in college geology." Active
Learning in College Science: The Case for Evidence-Based Practice (2020): 713-728. [Link]
030-33600-4_44
[55] Spitzman, Emily, and Alexandra Balconi. "Social justice in action: A document analysis of the integration of social
justice principles into teaching." Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 19, no. 5 (2019).
[Link]
[56] Mohd, Sidek, and Jamaludin Ahmad. Pembinaan modul: Bagaimana membina modul latihan dan modul akademik.
Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia, 2005.
[57] Cone, Catherine, and Elizabeth Unni. "Achieving consensus using a modified Delphi Technique embedded in Lewin's
change management model designed to improve faculty satisfaction in a pharmacy school." Research in Social and
Administrative Pharmacy 16, no. 12 (2020): 1711-1717. [Link]
[58] Yaakob, Muhammad Nidzam. "Pembangunan model kurikulum m-pembelajaran kursus teknologi dalam
pengajaran dan pembelajaran di institut pendidikan guru." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universiti Utara
Malaysia (2017).
[59] Jamil, Mohd Ridhuan Mohd, and Nurulrabihah Mat Noh. "Kepelbagaian metodologi dalam penyelidikan reka
bentuk dan pembangunan." Shah Alam: Qaisar Prestige Resources (2020).
[60] Zhu, Min, Wenbo Zhou, Min Hu, Juan Du, and Tengfei Yuan. "Evaluating the Renewal Degree for Expressway
Regeneration Projects Based on a Model Integrating the Fuzzy Delphi Method, the Fuzzy AHP Method, and the

67
 Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology
Volume 44, Issue 1 (2025) 55-68

TOPSIS Method." Sustainability 15, no. 4 (2023): 3769. [Link]

[61] Bui, Tat Dat, Feng Ming Tsai, Ming-Lang Tseng, and MohD Helmi Ali. "Identifying sustainable solid waste
management barriers in practice using the fuzzy Delphi method." Resources, conservation and recycling 154 (2020):
104625. [Link]
[62] Lim, You Rang, Aini Suzana Ariffin, Mazlan Ali, and Kuei-Lun Chang. "A hybrid MCDM model for live-streamer
selection via the fuzzy delphi method, AHP, and TOPSIS." Applied Sciences 11, no. 19 (2021): 9322.
[Link]
[63] Siraj, Saedah, Muhammad Ridhuan, and Rozami Muhamad Rozkee. "Pendekatan penyelidikan rekabentuk dan
pembangunan. Aplikasi kepada pendidikan." Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (2021).
[64] Jamil, Mohd Ridhuan Mohd. "Pembangunan model kurikulum latihan SkiVes bagi program pengajian kejuruteraan
pembelajaran berasaskan kerja." PhD diss., University of Malaya (Malaysia), 2016.
[65] Berliner, David C. "Describing the behavior and documenting the accomplishments of expert teachers." Bulletin of
Science, Technology & Society 24, no. 3 (2004): 200-212. [Link]
[66] Adler, Michael, and Erio Ziglio. Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and
public health. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 1996.
[67] Sekaran, Uma, and Roger Bougie. Research methods for business: A skill building approach. john wiley & sons, 2016.
[68] Cheng, Ching-Hsue, and Yin Lin. "Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic
criteria evaluation." European journal of operational research 142, no. 1 (2002): 174-186.
[Link]
[69] Mohd Ridhuan, M. J., S. Saedah, H. Zaharah, M. N. Nurulrabihah, and S. Arifin. "Pengenalan asas kaedah Fuzzy
Delphi dalam penyelidikan rekabentuk pembangunan." Minda Intelek Agency (2014).
[70] Tang, Chia-Wei, and Cheng-Ta Wu. "Obtaining a picture of undergraduate education quality: a voice from inside
the university." Higher Education 60 (2010): 269-286. [Link]
[71] Richey, Rita C., and James D. Klein. Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Routledge,
2014. [Link]
[72] Creswell, John W. "Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches." (2014).
[73] Omar, Siti Salbiah. "Model Kreativiti Terarah, Kemahiran Proses Sains Dan Soalan Terbuka Bagi Menggalakkan
Kreativiti Dalam Pembelajaran Kimia." Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (2019).

68

View publication stats