IMPROVED CREATIVE THINKING ABILITY WITH

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING LEARNING GROUP

INVESTIGATION TECHNIQUES IN RESTAURANT BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT
*Lina Mufidah, Eka Rachmawati, Titik Sulistyani

Akademi Kesejahteraan Sosial Yogyakarta, Jl. Nitikan Baru No.69, Sorosutan, Kec. Umbulharjo, Kota
Yogyakarta, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55162, Indonesia.
e-mail: *lina_mufidah@yahoo.co.id

Abstract
This study aims to improve the ability to think creatively with the Group Investigation Learning
Collaborative Learning Techniques in Restaurant Business Management courses. The research design
used in this study was Classroom Action Research (CAR) or Classroom Action Research (CAR). Sampling
using the total sampling method. The number of samples is 30 respondents. This research uses
observation and questionnaire methods. The analytical method used is a statistical test using descriptive
analysis. The results of this study indicate that (1) the application of Collaborative learning in the Group
Investigation technique in the category of not achieving learning indicators because only 2 indicators are
implemented. In cycle II, there were 7 indicators that were carried out in learning; (2) The results of the first
cycle questionnaire creative thinking ability owned by students has a total score of 106 with an average
of
3.5 most of the students in the first cycle have the ability to think creatively in the creative enough category
as many as 10 (33.3%); (3) The results of the second cycle questionnaire creative thinking abilities
possessed by students have a total score of 172 with an average of 5.7 most of the students in the first
cycle have the ability to think creatively in the creative category of 14 (46.7%)

Keywords: Collaborative learning, Group investigation, the ability to think critically

I. INTRODUCTION
The quality of education must always improve through the optimal teaching and
learning process so that learning outcomes are obtained in accordance with the
expected goals. The purpose of education is to assist humans in developing
themselves, so they are able to deal with every change in life. This is in accordance
with the objectives of national education listed in Chapter II article 3 of Law no. 20 of
2003 concerning the national education system concerning the national education
system, education in Indonesia has 3 main channels namely formal, non-formal, and
informal.
In this millennial era, it is very much needed a learning process that is able to
equip students to develop knowledge to the maximum. Educators are now required to
be able to apply appropriate learning methods so they can channel their creativity,
activeness, and interest in science to the maximum. In this case educators are required
to have an important role in the learning process, to realize this it is in accordance with
the focus of the 2013 curriculum (the latest revision) that it is necessary to integrate
HOTS (higher order thinking skills). HOTS includes analytical skills, evaluating abilities
and creative abilities. (Istiyono, Mardapi, & Suparno, 2014)
*

*Lina Mufidah, M.Pd, Akademi Kesejahteraan Sosial “AKK” Yogyakarta Indonesia, Jl Nitikan Baru No. 69
Umbulharjo, Yogyakarta e-mail: lina_mufidah@yahoo.co.id
** Eka Rachmawati, M.Pd, Lina Mufidah, M.Pd, Akademi Kesejahteraan Sosial “AKK” Yogyakarta
Indonesia, Jl Nitikan Baru No. 69 Umbulharjo, Yogyakarta e-mail: eckha.rachma@gmail.com
***Titik Sulisyani, S.Pd, M.Pd. Akademi Kesejahteraan Sosial “AKK” Yogyakarta Indonesia, Jl Nitikan Baru
No. 69 Umbulharjo, Yogyakarta
 2

The 2013 curriculum aims to prepare human resources who are able to live as
individuals who are faithful, productive, creative, innovative, and affective and able to
contribute to the life of society, nation and state as well as the world. The statement
illustrates the necessity of students to be able to think logically, systematically, critically
and creatively and be able to work together with the world of education. The ability to
think creatively in Indonesia is still relatively low can be seen in the journal Richard et al
(2015) in the global Creativity index which states that creative thinking in Indonesia is
ranked 115 out of 139 countries. (Richard, 2015)
Creative thinking in learning is not always used by educators even though
educators have a large role in developing the creativity of their students. Creative
thinking will not be separated from the meaning of referring to the ability of individuals
who rely on uniqueness and expertise and generate new ideas and fresh insights that
are valuable to the individual. Education has a contribution in preparing students to
think creatively with collaborative learning to create innovations that do not yet exist.
Creativity according to Ali and Asrori (2011) that the characteristics possessed by
individuals that indicate the ability to create something completely new or a
combination of existing works into a new work that is done with environmental
interaction to deal with problems and find alternative solutions through divergent ways
of thinking. (Ali & Asrori, 2011).
Creativity is a product of creative thinking while creative activities are activities in
learning that are directed to encourage and bring out creativity. Creative thinking
learning activities can be seen from students who have a future orientation, have
motivation so that they can solve problems well. Creative thinking will help in finding
new ideas, solving problems helping to get, exchange, and combine new knowledge in
the form of analytical thinking. The ability to combine, interpret information and will to
get ideas is called creative thinking. (Hero, Lindfors, & Taatila, 2017). Learning
activities that will produce creative thinking skills, one of which uses collaborative
learning learning methods.
The "AKK" Social welfare academy is one of the vocational tertiary institutions
located in the Yogyakarta City of Indonesia. The Academy of Social Welfare "AKK" has
a mission to play an active role in the development of cultural resources based on
national culture and local wisdom. AKS AKK has three study programs namely the
Catering Study Program, the Dress Design Study Program, and the Makeup Study
Program.
The mission of the culinary study program is to prepare an independent, expert
and skilled human resources in the culinary field in accordance with the conditions of
the labor market, so managerial skills in design, creative, productive and adaptive
production in the field of catering are highly needed. One of the Catering courses that
requires students to think creatively is restaurant business management.
This course equips students with knowledge and skills in applying management
functions to establish a restaurant business. Students are expected to be able to
develop restaurant concepts, plan, implement and evaluate restaurant management,
be able to make appropriate decisions based on material analysis and do it responsibly
according to theoretical concepts that have been mastered through exploration,
discussion, literature study, and lecturer assignments in order to develop fields
restaurant food and beverage service.
The purpose of restaurant business management courses is much needed
learning that is able to make students have the ability to think creatively. Think
creatively to find innovation in order to benefit in business. One such method is
collaborative learning. The method of collaborative learning in learning places more
emphasis on the construction of meaning by students from social processes that rely
on learning contests. (Silberman & Melvin, 2009)
 3

The collaborative learning method emphasizes the construction of meaning by

students of social processes that rely on the context of learning, the basis of this
method uses interactional theory which views learning as a process of building
meaning through social interaction. This learning becomes a means of achieving
successful learning practices and involves the active participation of students and
minimizes differences between individuals. (Suyatno, 2009). The above understanding
can be concluded as group learning where the learning process is carried out together
where students will contribute ideas, opinions and problems to each other.
Collaborative learning in the journal La Rocca et al states that it has a positive
influence in maintaining motivation and care that will make students motivated to do
learning well to support cognitive knowledge. This method requires students to be
involved in developing learning to help increase knowledge. This method uses
analysis, synthesis, evaluation. (La Rocca, Margottini, & Capobianco, 2014)
Collaborative learning method of learning is an appropriate effort to improve cognitive
and affective high thinking skills especially in learning restaurant management.
Collaborative learning in the context of education is widely used as a practice that is
able to develop and improve the quality of teaching and learning processes, especially
practice. (Nordentofl & Wistoft, 2013)
This collaborative learning requires that educators together with students
create small groups to achieve the same goal. Students have the responsibility to learn
together with other students, so students can help other students to achieve mutual
success. In this method there will be an exchange of ideas in small groups to increase
interest in critical thinking. Collaborative learning will have an impact on the opportunity
for students to engage and take responsibility for the learning of students to foster the
quality of student collaboration. (Janssen & Wubbels, 2017)
In the restaurant business management course there is a need for learning
methods that encourage creative thinking in creating food menus in restaurants and
creative thinking to capture market segments. One of the techniques in the
collaborative learning model is the mass resolution technique that encourages students
to analyze and be able to solve real-world issues, especially the culinary world using
the Group investigation technique.
Group investigation technique is a group learning technique where students
work into small groups using group investigations, discussions, planning and group
projects and then expose to all students about the findings or creative ideas of the
restaurant business. In the results of the Khasanah research, group learning-based
learning has a function to solve problems such as being able to understand, being able
to design a settlement plan, and being able to carry out a plan. (Khasanah, 2016)
Another benefit of the Group Investigation technique is that one of them
enhances analytical skills, in Untoro's research, the effect of learning using the Group
Investigation technique shows that there is a significant influence between students
taught through group investigations and students taught conventionally, there are
significant differences between stylish students learn audio with students learning
visual style. Visual students tend to be better at writing than audio students. However,
in terms of both learning styles, students in the experimental class were able to write
better than students in the control group. The results of this study conclude that the
group investigation learning model is suitable for teaching analytical exposition writing.
(Untoro, 2016)
This learning technique trains collaboration and direct responsibility because it
can plan a business, conduct an investigation of market segments, present and then
evaluate the results of the group's work. This technique integrates a kind of mastery,
analysis, and synthesizing information in connection with solving a complex problem.
This technique is proven to be superior in improving creative thinking skills compared
to conventional learning techniques. (Barkley, Cross, & Major, 2014).
 4

In Reniningsih's research, the results were obtained, that the implementation of

learning with the Group Investigation method in Class X Catering 1 SMK Sahid
Surakarta can increase student collaboration. (Reniningsih) Group investigation
technique is able to help students know the conceptual skills between students above
average and below average. The results of Almeda and Shayar's (2017) research show
that they can improve students' conceptual knowledge using Group investigation
techniques. (Almeda & Sahyar, 2017). Based on the description above, researchers
are interested in seeing the effect of collaborative learning group investigation
techniques on the ability to think creatively.

II. RESEARCH METHOD

2.1 The Research design
The research design used in this study is Classroom Action Research (CAR) or
Classroom Action Research (CAR). The classroom action research method in
this study uses the Kemmis and Mc Taggart models. The flow of this method is
planning, acting, observing and reflecting.
1. Planning is the act of planning to be carried out in this study using the
Collaborative learning method of group investigation techniques in restaurant
business management learning.
2. Action is the process of conducting research using Collaborative learning group
investigation techniques to improve students' creative thinking skills related to
restaurant business management
3. Observation is the process of observing the activities of students and
educators in the ongoing learning process carried out by the observer.
4. Reflection is the stage of reviewing, seeing, considering the process and the
results of the impact of the use of Collaborative learning group investigation
techniques in improving creative thinking, based on the results of this reflection
an improvement is made to the initial plan

Planning
 5

Refleksi I observation Implementation

Planning Implementation

Refleksi II observation Implementation

Figure 1 Research Design of Kemmis and Mc Tanggart Models

2.2 Sampling techniques

Sampling using the total sampling method. The number of samples is 30
respondents. Samples were taken from students who were taking restaurant
business management courses. This research uses observation and
questionnaire methods. The analytical method used is a statistical test using
descriptive statistical analysis.
2.3 Research Procedures
a) The planning stage in which plans students / students are going through
restaurant business management which is then estimated the number of
groups that will be respondents and Observing the research site
b) The implementation phase adjusts the changes to be achieved, namely the
ability to think creatively. The planning stage consists of making lesson
plans, forming small groups based on the theme of the type of restaurant,
making observation sheets of restaurant business management learning
activities. The implementation phase consists of initial, core and final
activities.
c) Observation Phase is to assess students and the observer to observe the
activities of students and educators from the beginning of learning to the
end of learning with the observation sheet format of educators and students
d) The reflection phase, which is the result of observations collected and
analyzed, is evaluated by the researcher, then the researcher reflects on
the success or failure of the increase in creative thinking. The results of the
first cycle are used as improvements in the second cycle.

2.4 Research Instruments

1. Group activity sheets in the form of restaurant business proposals whose
details contain the organizational structure, types of businesses, and
business plans and activity sheets in groups.
2. Observation sheet to measure the activities of educators and students who
record the activities of educators and students until the end of learning.

Table 1. Steps and Action of Group Investigation Learning

Step Implementation
Gro 1. RPS p
up c)
2.
Looki
inve Reference ng
stig material for
atio relev
1. Open ant
n
the lesson infor
lear matio
ning 2. n
Apperceptio about
tool
n food
Ste
3. Identify menu
ps the problem s
to 4. Forming suita
the ble
groups into
for
met five group the
hod 5. type
of Implementa of
grou tion of resta
group urant
p d)
investigatio
inve Stude
n
stig nts
methods prese
atio a) The nt
n lect the
urer result
distr s of
ibut the
es invest
sub igatio
topi n
cs e)
nam Students
ely and
type educators
s of reflect on
rest learning
aura
nts
b)
Stud
ents
mak
e a
plan
of
lear
ning
activ
ities
with
the
grou
 The advantages 1) Competence between groups is more visible
Group 2) Work between groups
Investigation 3) Demands to be active

Weaknesses in 1) Cannot work together with groups

Group 2) Weak students will depend on smart friends
Investigation
learning

2.5 Data Processing

Observation sheet data processing is done on learning to write
reports on the results of monitoring the stages of the implementation of actions
using observation. Data processing is carried out using aspects of the
assessment of activeness, attention and cooperation of all students in learning.
The explanation is as follows:

Table 2. Observational grating Observation of group investigation learning assessment

Indicator Sub indicator

liveliness • Students ask questions
• Students answer questions
• Students submit suggestions or opinions
Attention • Students do not engage in learning activities
• Do not disturb other students
• Students do not engage in learning activities
Cooperation • Students provide assistance to group friends
• Students show cohesiveness when working in
groups
• Students accept and give input from group friends

assessment criteria if the indicator is implemented then a value of 1 point is given.

Then all points are added up and interpreted in the following categories:
a. 7-9: good
b. 4-6 is enough
c. <3 less

Tabel 3. The questionnaire grille for the ability to think creatively

NO Indicator Sub indicator
1 Formulate ways to  Thinking smoothly: generating ideas that are
determine the theme characterized by the ability to determine various
of an interesting kinds of problem solving and choose one
millennial restaurant  Think flexibly produces new ideas that are the same
as solving different problems
 Original thinking, namely giving different and
unusual answers marked by solving problems
themselves
 Thinking in detail that is broadening ideas is marked
by detailing in solving problems
 2 • Think smoothly: produce planning with a range of
Make a plan for a finance, human resources, equipment, licensing, and
type of restaurant other components by choosing accordingly
along with the mix • Flexible thinking, that is, generating new ideas about
method used menus to be sold in restaurants, about human
resources, equipment management, etc. with a
variety of diverse
• Original thinking is having a restaurant theme that is
unusual from others. The menu or system in the
restaurant is unusual and rare for most people with
ideas from pure groups by solving sneiri ways
• Thinking in detail: expanding ideas by detailing each
section in the establishment of restaurants from
menu details to shopping, HR selection, calculation
of equipment efficiency to licensing done in an
unusual way
Processing of observational data is processed using Microsoft Excel media. The results
of the observations were analyzed using quantitative descriptive techniques which are
described by kamlinat and separated according to the categories of conclusions
descriptive analysis for the test analyzed descriptively using percentage techniques:

Percentage of score = Score x 100%

Then to describe research in learning activities. The percentage results are

categorized in the following classification

Table 4 Questionnaire Value Table Creative Thinking Ability

Kategori Prosentase
Very crative 81%-100%
Creative 61%-80%
Quite Creative 41%-60%
Less Creative 21%-40%
Very less creative 0%-20%

2.6 Indicators of success

Indicators of success in this study were seen from improving the ability to
think creatively in creating restaurant menus through group investigation through
observation of the questionnaire the average score reached more than 70%.

III. RESULTS

3.1 Data Observation Result of cycle I

Data from observations of collaborative learning techniques of
group investigation can be seen in table 5 below:

Tabel 5
Descriptive Observation Results of collaborative learning Technique Group
Investigation Cycle I
Indicator Sub Indicator Observasi
liveliness • Students ask questions Yes
• Students answer questions No
• Students submit suggestions or opinions No
Attention • Students do not engage in learning No
activities
• Do not disturb other students No
 • Students do not engage in learning No
activities
Cooperation • Students provide assistance to group Yes
friends
• Students show cohesiveness when No
working in groups
• Students accept and give input from No
group friends

Based on table 5 above, it can be seen that the observations in the first
cycle observations are included in the less category. There are only 2 indicators
implemented in the implementation of collaborative learning techniques of group
investigation cycle I seen that there are still many who do not all answer the
questions. Most of the students are still many who can not provide advice and
opinions. Most of the observations were still not focused on receiving the
material, there were still busy and active activities during the study, and there
were still some who disturbed other friends.
In the cooperation indicator, it can be observed that there are still some
groups that are not compact in their work, meaning that there is still a conflict
about choosing the type of restaurant, including choosing the menu so that the
absence of cohesiveness will make students unable to accept input from other
friends.

3.2 Data Result of cycle Questionnaire cycle I

The results of the questionnaire about the ability to think creatively in the first
cycle can be seen in the following descriptive table results:
Tabel 6.
Percentage of Questionnaire the ability to think creatively Cycle I
Keterangan Siklus I
Total score 106
Average skor 3,5
Minimum 1
Maximum 6

Based on table 6 above, it can be seen in the first cycle that the creative
thinking ability possessed by students has a total score of 106 with an average of 3.5.
The minimum value owned by students is 1, and the maximum value is 6. The values
obtained are then categorized with the results can be seen in table 7 below
 Tabel 7
The results of the first cycle creative thinking ability questionnaire (N = 30)
Kategori Frekuensi (f) Prosentase (%)
Very crative 0 0
Creative 7 23.3
Quite Creative 10 33.3
Less Creative 9 30.0
Very less creative 4 13.3
Total 30 100.0

Based on table 7, it was found that most students in the first cycle had the
ability to think creatively in the quite creative category as many as 10 (33.3%) and a
small portion had the ability to think creatively in the very less creative category as
much as 4 (13.3%)

3.4 Data Observation Result of cycle I

Data from observations of collaborative learning techniques of
group investigation can be seen in table 8 below:

Tabel 8
Descriptive Observation Results of collaborative learning Technique Group
Investigation Cycle II
Indikator Sub Indikator Observasi
liveliness • Students ask questions Yes
• Students answer questions Yes
• Students submit suggestions or opinions Yes
Attention • Students do not engage in learning Yes
activities
• Do not disturb other students Yes
 • Students do not engage in learning Yes
activities
Cooperation • Students provide assistance to group Yes
friends
• Students show cohesiveness when No
working in groups
• Students accept and give input from No
group friends

Based on table 8 above, it can be seen that the observations in the first cycle
observations are included in the less category. There are only 2 indicators
implemented in the implementation of collaborative learning techniques of group
investigation cycle I seen that there are still many who do not all answer the
questions. Most of the students are still many who can not provide advice and
opinions. Most of the observations were still not focused on receiving the
material, there were still busy and active activities during the study, and there
were still some who disturbed other friends.
In the cooperation indicator, it can be observed that there are still some groups
that are not compact in their work, meaning that there is still a conflict about
 choosing the type of restaurant, including choosing the menu so that the
absence of cohesiveness will make students unable to accept input from other
friends.

3.5 Data Result of cycle Questionnaire cycle II

The results of the questionnaire about the ability to think creatively in the first
cycle can be seen in the following descriptive table results:
Tabel 9
Percentage of Questionnaire the ability to think creatively Cycle II
Keterangan Siklus I
Total score 172
Average skor 5,7
Minimum 3
Maximum 8

Based on table 9 above, it can be seen in the second cycle that the creative
thinking ability possessed by students has a total score of 172 with an average of 5.7.
The minimum value possessed by students is 3, and the maximum value is 8. The
values obtained are then categorized whose results can be seen in table 10 below

Tabel 10
The results of the first cycle creative thinking ability questionnaire (N = 30)
Kategori Frekuensi (f) Prosentase (%)
Very crative 10 33.3
Creative 14 46.7
Quite Creative 3 10.0
Less Creative 3 10.0
Very less creative 0 0
Total 30 100.0
Based on table 10, it was found that most students in the first cycle had the
ability to think creatively in the creative category by 14 (46.7%) and a small portion had
the ability to think creatively in the enough and less creative categories each by 3
(10%).

DISCUSSION

In the observation results of the observation cycle I included in the category

of lacking, only two indicators were implemented in the implementation of
collaborative learning techniques group cycle investigation I. Observations seen
there are still many that do not all answer the question. Most of the students are
still many who can not provide advice and opinions. Most of the observations were
still not focused on receiving the material, there were still busy and active activities
while learning, and there were still others who bothered other friends. In the
cooperation indicator, it can be observed that there are still some groups that are
not compact in their work, meaning that there is still a conflict over the selection of
the type of restaurant, including the selection of menus so that the absence of
cohesiveness will make students unable to accept input from other friends.
 In the observations of the second cycle observations included in both
categories. The observation found 7 indicator scores have been made. In the
application of collaborative learning technique group cycle investigation II seen
many students all answered questions. Most of the students can give many
suggestions and opinions. The observations stated that most of the focus was on
receiving material, was no longer busy and active while learning, and no one was
disturbing other friends. On the indicator of cooperation, but there are still some
groups that are not compact in their work, meaning there are conflicts but they are
not very visible. The conflict is only shown by students with not optimal
performance. When students do not have maximum performance, other members
in one group provide input, but not all input suggestions from group peers are
listened to.
The results of this study are in line with the research of Laal and Ghodsi
states that collaborative learning can improve creative competitive abilities.
Produce high achievements and high productivity, have a high concern for mutual
support, social commitment and increase self-esteem. (Laal & Ghodsi, 2012). The
results of this study are also corroborated by research that collaborative learning
will increase the contribution of the role of students in learning. In this learning
students feel they have the ability to cooperate with other students, but there are
factors that become their obstacles, when meeting other students have a lack of
communication. (Hernandez, 2012)
The results of the questionnaire about the ability to think creatively obtained
creative thinking ability possessed by students has a total score of 106 with an
average of 3.5 most of the students in the first cycle have the ability to think
creatively in the creative enough category as many as 10 (33.3%). In cycle II the
creative thinking ability possessed by students had a total score of 172 with an
average of 5.7 and most of the students in the first cycle had creative thinking
abilities in the creative category of 14 (46.7%)
The results of these observations suggest an increase in the application of
collaborative learning in Group Investigation Techniques. In cycle I, only 2
indicators can be carried out by educators and students. The results of the
questionnaire were obtained to improve the ability to think creatively with the
Group Investigation Technique.
The ability to think creatively obtained from practical learning is in
accordance with the learning in research Khoiri et al. That is conducting
experiments in a laboratory space. This practice in learning serves to improve the
ability to think creatively. The method applied to be efficient is one of them using a
laboratory where in the laboratory there is collaboration between groups to
understand the concepts being taught. (Khoiri, Riyadi, Kaltsum, Hindarto, &
Rusilawati, 2017) This is also in line with research that the application of HOT in
research will improve the ability to think creatively. Data about the ability to think
creatively using creative thinking tests in the form of essays. Learning by the HOT
method (Malik, Setiawan, Suhandi, & Permanasari, 2017)
Investigation Technique showed 80.01% of work skills in either category with
the learning of Group Investigation Techniques. (Arinda, Wilujeng, & Kuswanto,
2019). The results of the study belonging to Sari et al (2018) stated that there were
significant differences in critical thinking between the experimental class and the
control class significantly. The experimental class with the Group Investigation
Technique method showed a positive effect on critical thinking skills. (Sari, Bundu,
Suradi, & Muh. Jufri, 2018).
3. CONCLUSION
a. The results of observations The results of this study are in line with the research of
Arinda et al (2019) the results of the implementation of the Group show that the
application of learning in the category lacks the indicator of learning because only
2 indicators are implemented. In cycle II, there were 7 indicators that were carried
out in learning
b. The results of the first cycle questionnaire creative thinking abilities possessed by
students have a total score of 106 with an average of 3.5 most of the students in
the first cycle have the ability to think creatively in the creative enough category as
many as 10 (33.3%)
c. The results of the second cycle questionnaire creative thinking ability owned by
students has a total score of 172 with an average of 5.7 most of the students in the
first cycle have the ability to think creatively in the creative category of 14 (46.7%)

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Thanks To Yogyakarta's Successful AKK Social Academy For Providing The

Opportunity To Be A Place Of Research. Thanks To Students Who Are Taking
Restaurant Business Management Courses

5 REFERENCES

Ali, M., & Asrori. (2011). Psikologi remaja perkembangan peserta didik . Jakarta: PT.
Bumi Aksara.

Almeda, R., & Sahyar. (2017). Effect of Cooperative Learning Model type Group
Investigation Assisted PhET to Students’ Conceptual Knowledge. IOSR Journal
of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME) , 75-80.

Arinda, Y., Wilujeng, I., & Kuswanto, H. (2019). The Application Group Investigation
(GI) Learning Model assisted Phet to Facilitate Student Scientific Work Skills.
International Journal of Educational Research Review, 254-261.

Barkley, E. E., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). colaborative learning techniques.
Bandung: Nusa Media.

Hernandez, R. (2012). Collaborative Learning: Increasing Students’ Engagement

Outside the Classroom. Journal US-China Education Review , 804-812.

Hero, L.-M., Lindfors, E., & Taatila, V. (2017). Individual Innovation Competence: A
Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda. International Journal of
Higher Education, 6(5),103-121.
Istiyono, E., Mardapi, D., & Suparno. (2014). Pengembangan tes kemampuan berpikir
tingkat tinggi fisika peserta didik SMA. Jurnal pendidikan dan evaluasi
pendidikan, 1-12.

Janssen, J., & Wubbels, T. (2017). Collaborative learning practices: teacher and
student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration . Cambridge
Journal of Education , 103-122.

Khasanah, N. U. (2016). Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika

Melalui Strategi Realistic Mathematics Education Berbasis Group Investigation.
Surakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan Dan Ilmu
Pendidikan.

Khoiri, N., Riyadi, S., Kaltsum, U., Hindarto, N., & Rusilawati, A. (2017). Teaching
Creative Thinking Skills with Laboratory Work. International Journal Of Science
And Applied Science: Conference Series, 25-33.

La Rocca, C., Margottini, M., & Capobianco, R. (2014). Collaborative Learning in

Higher Education. Journal of Social Science, 61-66.

Laal, M., & Ghodsi, S. M. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. sciverse

sciencedirect, 486-490.

Malik, A., Setiawan, A., Suhandi, A., & Permanasari, A. (2017). Enhancing pre-service
physics teachers’ creative thinking skills through HOT lab creative thinking skills
through HOT lab. AIP Conference Proceedings 1868,
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995177.

Nordentofl, H. M., & Wistoft, K. (2013). Collaborative learning and competence

development ini school health nursing. Health Education, 112(5), 448–468.

Reniningsih, E. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2019, 10 , from Peningkatan Kemampuan

Kerjsama siswa melalui GROUP INVESTIGATION Pada mata pelajaran
pengolahan makanan kontinental di SMK Sahid Surakarta:
https://eprints.uny.ac.id/27379/1/Erida%20Reniningsih%2008511242008.pdf

Richard, F. (2015). The Global Creativity Index 2015. Toronto: Martin Prosperity
Institute.

Sari, W. K., Bundu, P., Suradi, & Muh. Jufri. (2018). Application of Group Investigation
(GI) Learning Model in Pendidikan IPS SD Course, To Improve Students’
Critical Thinking Skills At Pgsd Universitas Negeri Makassar. IOSR Journal of
Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME) , 41-46.

Silberman, & Melvin, L. (2009). Active Learning Strategi Pembelajaran Aktif. .

Yogyakarta: Pustaka Insan Madani.

Suyatno. (2009). Menjelajah Pembelajaran Inovatif. Surabaya: Masmedia Buana

Pustaka.
Untoro, B. (2016). The Effect of Group Investigation and Learning Style on Students’
Writing of Analytical Exposition. Indonesian Journal of English
Education, 3(1), 29-45. doi:10.15408/ijee.v3i1.3445.