Keywords:
Computational Thiking Skills
Creative Thinking Skills
Hybrid Learning
Project STEAMER
Science Learning

  • Abstract

    This research aims to describe the application of the STEAMER hybrid learning project in training computational and creative thinking skills of prospective elementary school teacher students. The research used was classroom action research. The research subjects were 176 students at PGRI Kanjuruhan University, Malang. The instruments used consisted of observation sheets, test sheets, and interview guidelines. Analysis of the research data was carried out quantitative and descriptive qualitative analysis. The research results show that the application of the STEAMER hybrid learning project consists of the learning syntax Reflection, Research, Discovery, Application, Communication and Reflection. The results of the learning implementation show an increase in computational thinking abilities and creative thinking abilities in cycle I and cycle II through the application of the Hybrid Learning Project STEAMER learning model. Presenting problems and determining solutions in learning can develop computational thinking and creative thinking skills.

  • References

    1. Angeli, C., & Giannakos, M. (2020). Computational thinking education: Issues and challenges. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, 106185.
    2. Anzari, P. P., Shiddiq, I. H. Al, Pratiwi, S. S., Fatanti, M. N., & Silvallana, D. F. V. (2021). Teachers Technological Capability as Digital Immigrants in Learning from Home Activities. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(7), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i07.21229
    3. Arnelia, S., & Hardiyanti, W. (2023). Bond Ratings In Manufacturing Companies Listed On The Indonesia Stock Exchange Pengaruh Manajemen Laba , Rasio Keuangan ( Leverange Dan Profitabilitas ) Terhadap Peringkat Obligasi Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Yang Terdaftar Dibursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 201. Management Studies and Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(5), 5542–5553.
    4. Azizah, N., Baptista, Y., & Aprinastuti, C. (2023). Penerapan Pembelajaran Ipa Berbasis Computational Thinking Materi Siklus Air Kelas V Sekolah Dasar. Prima Magistra: Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 4(3), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.37478/jpm.v4i3.2655
    5. Azmi, R. D., & Ummah, S. K. (2021). Implementasi Project Based Learning Untuk Mengeksplorasi Kemampuan Computational Thinking Mahasiswa. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika Al Qalasadi, 5(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.32505/qalasadi.v5i1.2761
    6. Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.
    7. Bedar, R. A. H., & Al-Shboul, M. (2020). The effect of using STEAM approach on developing computational thinking skills among high school students in Jordan. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 14(14), 80–94. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/217814/
    8. Berland, M., & Lee, V. R. (2011). Collaborative strategic board games as a site for distributed computational thinking. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 1(2), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2011040105
    9. Caniëls, M. C. J., De Stobbeleir, K., & De Clippeleer, I. (2014). The antecedents of creativity revisited: A process perspective. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(2), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12051
    10. Çelik, H. C., Ertaş, H., & İlhan, A. (2018). The Impact of Project-Based Learning on Achievement and Student Views: The Case of AutoCAD Programming Course. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(6), 67. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v7n6p67
    11. Chen, S. Y., Lai, C. F., Lai, Y. H., & Su, Y. S. (2022). Effect of project-based learning on development of students’ creative thinking. International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Education, 59(3), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720919846808
    12. Chumsukon, M. (2021). Developing Geography Curriculum Framework for Promoting Pre-Service Teachers’ Creative Thinking Through Instructional Media Production. Journal of Education and Learning, 10(5), 197. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v10n5p197
    13. Çiftçi, A., & Topçu, M. S. (2022). Improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ computational thinking teaching self-efficacy beliefs in a STEM course. Research in Science and Technological Education, 00(00), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2036117
    14. Conde, M. Á., Fernández, C., Alves, J., Ramos, M.-J., Celis-Tena, S., Gonçalves, J., Lima, J., Reimann, D., Jormanainen, I., Peñalvo, & José, G. F. (2019). RoboSTEAM-A Challenge based learning approach for integrating STEAM and develop computational thinking. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, 24–30.
    15. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2014). New Conceptions and Research Approaches to Creativity: Implications of a Systems Perspective for Creativity in Education. The Systems Model of Creativity, 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_10
    16. Damayanti, H. T., & Sumardi. (2018). Mathematical Creative Thinking Ability of Junior High School Students in Solving Open-Ended Problem. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 3(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012069
    17. Dierbach, C., Hochheiser, H., Collins, S., Jerome, G., Ariza, C., Kelleher, T., Kleinsasser, W., Dehlinger, J., & Kaza, S. (2011). A model for piloting pathways for computational thinking in a general education curriculum. SIGCSE’11 - Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953243
    18. Dilekci, A. K., & Halit. (2023). The effects of the 21st century skills curriculum on the development of students’ creative thinking skills. J Thinking Skillscreativity.
    19. Domenici, V. (2022). STEAM Project-Based Learning Activities at the Science Museum as an Effective Training for Future Chemistry Teachers. Education Sciences, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12010030
    20. Donald, A. S. (1983). Reflective Practitioner. Basic Book.
    21. Durak, H. Y., & Saritepeci, M. (2017). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers and Education, 116, 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.004
    22. El-Gayar, O. (2005). Effectiveness of Hybrid Learning Environments. Issues In Information Systems, VI(1). https://doi.org/10.48009/1_iis_2005_176-182
    23. Eragamreddy, D. N. (2015). Teaching Creative Thinking Skills. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 1(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302x15569010
    24. Fauziah, M., Marmoah, S., Murwaningsih, T., & Saddhono, K. (2020). The effect of thinking actively in a social context and creative problem-solving learning models on divergent-thinking skills viewed from adversity quotient. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 537–568. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.537
    25. Fitriyana, N., Wiyarsi, A., Sugiyarto, K. H., & Ikhsan, J. (2021). The Influences of Hybrid Learning with Video Conference and “Chemondro-Game” on Students’ Self-Efficacy, Self-Regulated Learning, and Achievement toward Chemistry. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(2), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.62
    26. Habibi, Mundilarto, Jumadi, J., Gummah, S., Ahzan, S., & Prasetya, D. S. B. (2020). Project brief effects on creative thinking skills among low-ability pre-service physics teachers. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(2), 415–420. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i2.20531
    27. Henriksen, D. (2016). The seven transdisciplinary habits of mind of creative teachers: An exploratory study of award winning teachers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 212–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.10.007
    28. Hoffmann, J. D., & Russ, S. W. (2016). Fostering pretend play skills and creativity in elementary school girls: A group play intervention. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(1), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000039
    29. Hudiananingsih, D., Sitawati, R., Widanta, M. R. J., Ardika, D., Gede, S., & Sadiyani, W. (2019). Effectiveness of Project-Based Learning (PjBL). 354(iCASTSS), 378–382. https://doi.org/10.2991/icastss-19.2019.80
    30. Islam, S., Baharun, H., Muali, C., Ghufron, M. I., Bali, M. E. I., Wijaya, M., & Marzuki, I. (2018). To Boost Students’ Motivation and Achievement through Blended Learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1114(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1114/1/012046
    31. ISTE, CSTA, & NSF. (2011). Operational Definition of Computational Thinking.
    32. Jeffrey, L., Milne, J., Suddaby, G., & Higgins, A. (2014). Blended Learning: How Teachers Balance the Blend of Online and Classroom Components. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13(February 2020), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.28945/1968
    33. Juškevičienė, A., Stupurienė, G., & Jevsikova, T. (2021). Computational thinking development through physical computing activities in STEAM education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(1), 175–190. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22365
    34. Kartikasari, I. A., Usodo, B., & Riyadi. (2022). The Effectiveness Open-Ended learning and Creative Problem Solving Models to Teach Creative Thinking Skills. Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi, 12(4), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.12.04.04
    35. Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2018). Gathering STE(A)M: Policy, curricular, and programmatic developments in arts-based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education Introduction to the special issue of Arts Education Policy Review: STEAM Focus. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1407979
    36. Kintu, M. J., Zhu, C., & Kagambe, E. (2017). Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4
    37. Kumala, F. ., Yasa, A. ., Wibawa, A. ., & Hidayah, L. (2023). Model Pembelajaran Hybrid Learning Microsite Project STEAMER. Kanjuruhan Press.
    38. Latifah, S., Diani, R., & Malik, S. L. M. (2022). ICARE Model (Introduction, Connection, Application, Reflection, Extension) in Physics Learning: Analysis of its Effect on Students’ Computational Thinking Skills based on Gender. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 8(2), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.21009/1.08205
    39. Leasa, M., Batlolona, J. R., & Talakua, M. (2021). Elementary students’ creative thinking skills in science in the Maluku islands, Indonesia. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.11244
    40. Lemay, D. J., Basnet, R. B., Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., & Saxena, A. (2021). Instructional interventions for computational thinking: Examining the link between computational thinking and academic performance. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100056
    41. Mariana, E. P., & Kristanto, Y. D. (2023). Integrating STEAM Education and Computational Thinking: Analysis of Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills in an Innovative Teaching and Learning. Southeast Asian Mathematics Education Journal, 13(1), 1–18.
    42. Matraeva, A. D., Rybakova, M. V., Vinichenko, M. V., Oseev, A. A., & Ljapunova, N. V. (2020). Development of creativity of students in higher educational institutions: Assessment of students and experts. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080102
    43. McGregor, D. (2007). Developing thinking, developing learning : A guide to thinking skills in education.
    44. Miles, M. B., Huberman, M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods Sourcebook (3rd Edition). In SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/239700221402800402
    45. Miller, A. I., Wilson, B., & Hawkins, B. (2019). Featuring Art and Science in a Transdisciplinary Curriculum Circe Magazine: STEAM Edition. Circe Magazine: STEAM Edition, January, 0–167.
    46. Moeller, B. M., Cutler, K., Fiedler, D., & Weier, L. (2013). Visual Thinking Strategies Creative and Critical Thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(3), 56–60.
    47. Molita, A., & Masriyah, M. (2023). Junior High School Students Creative Thinking Ability In Solving Open Ended Problems On Straight-Line Equations From Gender. Edumaspul: Jurnal Pendidikan, 7(1), 822–832. https://doi.org/10.33487/edumaspul.v7i1.5660
    48. Muhdhar, M. H. I. Al, Faruq, M. K., Sari, M. S., Sumberartha, I. W., & Mardiyanti, L. (2021). The effectiveness of the project-based learning-based ethnobotany module of Karang Kitri towards critical thinking skills. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2330(March). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0043107
    49. Mulyanto, A., Rusyida, Y., & Niwanputri, G. S. (2020). Computational Thinking Learning and Teaching Guide for Primary and Secondary Schools in Indonesia. In Book (Issue December, pp. 1–68). Institut Teknologi Bandung.
    50. Napitupulu, F. (2021). The Improving Of Students Ability In Writing Research Background Of Classroom Action Research Proposal By Using Scientific Approach. , 2(1), 1-16. Visi Sosial Humaniora, 2(1), 1–16.
    51. Nashir, M., & Laili, R. N. (2021). Blended Learning as an Effective Learning Solution on Intensive English Program in the New Normal Era. IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 9(2), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.35914/jad.v5i2.1303
    52. Nguyen, H., Garcia, L., Jacob, S., Richardson, D., & Warschauer, M. (2020). Reflection as formative assessment of computational thinking in elementary grades. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL, 1(July), 525–528.
    53. Noraini, L., & Hazrati, H. (2016). The Effect of Computational Thinking Module on Achievement. Science Education International, 31(2), 164–171.
    54. Nurbavliyev, O., Kaymak, S., Almas, A., & Abedi, M. O. (2020). the Effect of Project-Based Learning on Students’ Achievement in Mathematics. Proceedings of International Young Scholars Workshop, 9, 235–248. https://doi.org/10.47344/iysw.v9i0.173
    55. Nurkhin, A., & Pramusinto, H. (2020). Problem-Based Learning Strategy: Its Impact on Students’ Critical and Creative Thinking Skills. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 1141–1150. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1262473
    56. Pandey, P., & Pandey, M. M. (2021). Research methodology tools and techniques. Bridge Center. http://dspace.vnbrims.org:13000/jspui/bitstream/123456789/4666/1/RESEARCH METHODOLOGY TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES.pdf
    57. Patricio, R., Moreira, A., Zurlo, F., & Melazzini, M. (2020). Co-creation of new solutions through gamification: A collaborative innovation practice. Creativity and Innovation Management, 29(1), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12356
    58. Perković, L., Settle, A., Hwang, S., & Jones, J. (2010). A framework for computational thinking across the curriculum. In ITiCSE’10 - Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGCSE Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 123–127). https://doi.org/10.1145/1822090.1822126
    59. Phadung, M., Yokkhun, A., & Persoh, S. (2021). A Study of Enhancing Computational Thinking Skills through STEAM Robotics Activities. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1), 012004.
    60. Poonsin, T., & Jansoon, N. (2021). Integrated STEM with Project-Based Learning Implementation to Enhance Students’ Creativity. In 2021 2nd SEA-STEM International Conference (SEA-STEM), 112–115. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEA-STEM53614.2021.9668085
    61. Psycharis, S., & Kotzampasaki, E. (2019). The impact of a STEM inquiry game learning scenario on computational thinking and computer self-confidence. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(4), em1689. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103071
    62. Putra, B. P. (2022). Development of SSCS-Based E-Modules (Search, Solve, Create, Share) to Practice Creative Thinking Skills of Students on Wave Materials in High School. IJOEM : Indonesian Journal of E-Learning and Multimedia, 1(1), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.58723/ijoem.v1i1.3
    63. Putri, N., Rusdiana, D., & Suwarma, I. R. (2019). The Comparison of Student Creative Thinking Skill using CBL Implemented in STEM Education and Combined with PSL Worksheet in Indonesian School. Journal of Science Learning, 3(1), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v3i1.17557
    64. Rahmawati, Y., Ridwan, A., Hadinugrahaningsih, T., & Soeprijanto. (2019). Developing critical and creative thinking skills through STEAM integration in chemistry learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1156, 012033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1156/1/012033
    65. Razdorskaya, O. (2015). Reflection and Creativity: The Need for Symbiosis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 209(July), 433–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.241
    66. Saad, A. (2020). Students’ computational thinking skill through cooperative learning based on hands-on, inquiry-based, and student-centric learning approaches. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 290–296. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080135
    67. Saleh, N., & Khader, K. (2016). The Effectiveness of Blended Learning in Improving Students’ Achievement in Third Grade’s Science in Bani Kenana. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(35), 109–116.
    68. Samura, A. ode. (2019). Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Kreatif Matematis Melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah. Journal of Mathematics and Science, 5(1), 20–28.
    69. Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational Psychology. Mc.Graw Hill Education.
    70. Selby, C. (2013). Computational Thinking : The Developing Definition. ITiCSE Conference 2013, 5–8.
    71. Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Kiray, S. A. (2021). Computational thinking skills of gifted and talented students in integrated STEM activities based on the engineering design process: The case of robotics and 3D robot modeling. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42(August), 100931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100931
    72. Sigit, D. V., Ristanto, R. H., & Mufida, S. N. (2022). Integration of Project-Based E-Learning with STEAM: An Innovative Solution to Learn Ecological Concept. International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.1532a
    73. Sitorus, J., & Masrayati. (2016). Students’ creative thinking process stages: Implementation of realistic mathematics education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.007
    74. Sondakh, D. E. (2019). Reflecting on Computational Thinking Studies for High School Education. CogITo Smart Journal, 4(2), 243–256. https://doi.org/10.31154/cogito.v4i2.136.243-256
    75. Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 47(3), 325–338. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830308595.
    76. Sulistiyo, M. A. S., & Wijaya, A. (2020). The effectiveness of inquiry-based learning on computational thinking skills and self-efficacy of high school students. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1581(1), 012046. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1581/1/012046
    77. Susiani, T. S., Salimi, M., Hidayah, R., Fauziah, M., & Astuti, D. (2021). Utilization of Free Platforms in Online Learning. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Learning Innovation and Quality Education, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3516875.3516997
    78. Susiani, T. S., Salimi, M., Ngatman, Hidayah, R., & Suhartono. (2020). STEAM in Art Education Course: Students Perception. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Learning Innovation and Quality Education, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3452144.3452266
    79. Tabiin, A. (2020). Implementation of STEAM Method (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts And Mathematics) for Early Childhood Developing in Kindergarten Mutiara Paradise Pekalongan. Early Childhood Research Journal (ECRJ), 2(2), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.23917/ecrj.v2i2.9903
    80. Tran, N. H., Huang, C. F., & Hung, J. F. (2021). Exploring the effectiveness of STEAM-based courses on junior high school students’ Scientific Creativity. In Frontiers in Education, 6, 666792. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.666792
    81. Vourletsis, I., & Politis, P. (2022). Exploring the effect of remixing stories and games on the development of students’ computational thinking. Computers and Education Open, 3(June 2021), 100069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100069
    82. Wijayati, N., Sumarni, W., & Supanti, S. (2019). Improving Student Creative Thinking Skills Through Project Based Learning. KnE Social Sciences, 2019, 408–421. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i18.4732
    83. Wing, J. M. (2010). Computational Thinking: What and Why? In thelink - The Magaizne of the Varnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science (Issue March 2006, pp. 1–6).
    84. Wing, J. M. (2017). Anatomical, radiographic, and clinical evaluation of temporomandibular articular eminence reduction as a treatment for recurrent dislocation and chronic subluxation. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/922
    85. Yadav, A., Zhou, N., Mayfield, C., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2011). Introducing computational thinking in education courses. SIGCSE’11 - Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2, 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953297
    86. Yang, D., Baek, Y., & Swanson, S. (2020). Developing Computational Thinking through Project-Based Airplane Design Activities. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2020-October, 16–19. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274021
    87. Yasin, M. (2020). Computational thinking untuk pembelajaran dasar - dasar pemrograman komputer. Researchgate, April, 0–11.
    88. Yustina, Mahadi, I., Ariska, D., Arnentis, & Darmadi. (2022). The Effect of E-Learning Based on the Problem-Based Learning Model on Students’ Creative Thinking Skills During the Covid-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Instruction, 15(2), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15219a
    89. Zayyinah, Z., Erman, E., Supardi, Z. A. I., Hariyono, E., & Prahani, B. K. (2022). STEAM-Integrated Project Based Learning Models: Alternative to Improve 21st Century Skills. Proceedings of the Eighth Southeast Asia Design Research (SEA-DR) & the Second Science, Technology, Education, Arts, Culture, and Humanity (STEACH) International Conference (SEADR-STEACH 2021), 627, 251–258. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211229.039
    90. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2023 Multidisciplinary Science Journal

How to cite

Kumala, F. N., Yasa, A. D., Wibawa, A. P., & Hidayah, L. (2023). Application of the hybrid learning project STEAMER in science courses for prospective elementary school teachers: Computational thinking and creative thinking. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 6(6), 2024113. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024113
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
  • Article viewed - 1094
  • PDF downloaded - 723