STUDENTS’ LEARNING CREATIVITY PROFILE: A VIEW FROM SCHOOL ACCREDITATION STATUS

Creativity is a person's ability to create something new. Creativity of students need to be cultivated by all of their environment, such as school environment. Schools accreditations status is one of the determinants environment of student creativity. This article aimed to describe the students' learning creativity profile based on their school's accreditation status. To this end, a survey method was applied. A questionnaire of students' learning creativity was deployed through Google Form. Participants in this study were 2ndgrade students of public junior high schools with accreditation status of National Standard School (SSN), A, and B. The results of the study showed a significant average difference in students' ability in dealing with learning problems between SSNand A-accredited schools. The average ability to deal with learning problems is also significantly different between Aand B-accredited schools. A significant difference was also found in the students' interest in learning creations and ability to develop in learning between SSNand A-accredited junior high schools. The results of this study could be used as empirical data for research on guidance and counseling programs to develop students' creativity in schools.


INTRODUCTION
Creativity is a dynamic phenomenon, plays a pivotal role in human life, and is important in daily life and environment settings, as it describes a core aspect of human adaptability (Beghetto & Corazza, 2019;Martinsen, 2011;Runco, 2014). It serves as the key aspect that determines someone's learning and business success, and psychological well-being (Susanto et al., 2018). Creativity is seen as a capacity to develop a new and valuable argument, behavior, or product and complex capacity related to the interplay of individual, situational, and cultural variables (Runco, 2007).
Study on creativity is an interdisciplinary study that reflects on current researches about behavior, clinic, cognitive, development, economic, education, evolution, history, organization, personality, and social perspective (Runco, 2014). Other research shows creativity as an important aspect of educational performance, especially creativity design and development, as the goals of most design education programs (Chang et al., 2015).
In line with current developing research, students' creativity becomes one of the national education goals. As mentioned in Law no 20/2003 on National Education System, education aims to prepare students to be citizens who believe in God, have a noble character, are healthy, knowledgeable, competent, creative, independent, democratic, and responsible.
National education goals are the main reference for any education institution in Indonesia. Their educational activities are substantially based on national education goals (Noor, 2018). Therefore, teaching and learning practices at school, from planning to evaluation stages, are aimed to achieve national education goals, including students' creativity development.
The actualization of an individual's creativity may occur in either formal, informal, and non-formal education settings. This actualization process, may be affected by a range of factors. As these factors may support or inhibit the process, the role of guidance and counseling service is crucial (Supriadi, 1989). School counselors are responsible for developing any internal and external factors supporting the students' creativity while minimizing the inhibiting factors.
Although the literature has consistently reported the importance of creativity development, the learning activities in school still give a small portion for creativity development and focus more on students' cognitive development. Meanwhile, both creativity and cognitive aspects should be in balance to attain learning success. Learning process at school is more focused on students' knowledge and pays little attention to students' creativity development (Hasanah et al., 2018). In the same vein, the study conducted on 2nd-grade students of a public junior high school found that only half of the participants (52.17%) passed the creativity test, indicating that half of them is still lack creativity (Luntungan et al., 2013).
The observation and interviews in a public junior high school in Padang revealed that (a) students find it difficult to develop their creativity in both learning and extracurricular activities, (b) they exhibited low learning motivation and were reticent to ask questions during the learning process due to monotonous teaching methods, and because of this condition, (c)some students commit cheating by copying other students' work (Hasanah et al., 2018).
Based on the assumption that school quality can significantly affect the teaching and learning process, a low-quality school will hinder the teaching and learning process. The results of the research above, have not shown the quality of schools that can affect the creativity of students, it is very important to conduct research that shows that the quality of schools can affect the creativity of students, that it can become a standard for quality assurance of education.
Thus, education quality assurance, i.e., a systemic and integrated activity done by an educational institution, government, or the community in order to improve the nation's quality, is important (Safitri, 2015). Regarding quality assurance, accreditation is held according to article 2 paragraph (2) of the government regulation no. 19 of 2005 on National Education Standard. This accreditation process aims to ensure and control the quality of education (Karyanto et al., 2015). The accreditation process is done by assessing a school condition based on eight standards (Awaludin, 2017).
Considering the vital role of school accreditation as the means of national education quality control and the fact that students' creativity set as one of the national education goals is still far from the expected standard, the present study aimed to provide a comparative view of junior high school students' creativity in SSN-, A-, and B-accredited public junior high schools.
Creativity refers to one's ability to create new combinations based on data, information, and existing elements. It can also be described as an ability to create new things or a combination of existing elements (Munandar, 2009). Creativity is a process of expression of a free idea that leads to an ability to think widely and formulate various solutions for a problem (Page & Page, 2018).
Meanwhile, learning refers to one's effort to get obtain behavioral change as a result of his or her interaction experience with the cognitive and settled environment (Surya, 2004;Syah, 2011).
Based on learning and creativity definitions above, it can be concluded that learning creativity is someone's ability to achieve behavior change in the learning process creatively. Learning as a behavioral change process involves experience and interaction with problems to trigger one's creative problemsolving skills.

METHOD
This survey study involved 2nd-grade students of public junior high schools in the academic year of 2020-2021. The population of this study was 458 students from SSN-, A-and B-accredited public junior high schools. From this population, 194 students were recruited to participate in this study using the purposive sampling technique.
The data related to the students' creativity was collected using the learning creativity questionnaire), which has passed the validity and reliability tests. The questionnaire consisted of twenty-three items to depict the students' learning creativity level, involving ability to solve learning problems (items number 2,3,7,9,10, and 23); learning development ability (items number 8, 14, 18, and 22); depth of thinking in learning (items number 4, 15, and 20); ability to evaluate learning outcomes (items number 12, 16, 19, and 21); and learning creation interest (items number 1, 5, 6, 11, 13, and 17). Based on the validity test result, two invalid items (items number 10 and 16) were removed (Yoga, 2013).
The final version of the questionnaire was then distributed through google forms to the participants. Out of 194 participants, 120 students came from SSN-Accredited schools, 43 from A-accredited schools, and 31 from Baccredited schools.
The collected data were categorized using the ideal average score (Mi) and ideal standard deviation score (SDi) in order to obtain the depiction of the students' creativity level. The formula is presented as follow: Mi = ½ (highest scorelowest score) SDi = 1/6 (highest scorelowest score) Three levels of creativity were used, high, medium, and low (Mardhapi, 2008). ANOVA was also applied in order to describe the average difference of each learning creativity indicator.

Findings
The findings of this study are presented based on each indicator of students' learning creativity. The indicators include the students' ability to solve learning problems, learning development ability, learning creation interest, ability to evaluate learning outcomes and the depth of thinking in learning. The following are the descriptions of learning creativity profile in each indicator:

2nd-Grade Students' Learning Creativity of SSN-Accredited Public Junior High Schools
The students' learning creativity of SSN-accredited junior high school is described based on the learning creativity indicators, namely: A. ability to solve learning problems, B. learning development ability, C. learning creation interest, D. ability to evaluate learning outcomes, and E. the depth of thinking in learning. They are presented in the following figure 1.

Figure 1. SSN-Accredited School Students' Learning Creativity
As displayed in figure 1 above, no student was reported to have a high level of learning a problem-solving skills (0%). Most of them were categorized as medium (62.50%) and low (37.50%). Regarding the students' learning development ability, 5.83% of them were categorized as high, 67.50% of them a medium, and 26.67 of them as low.
No student was reported to have a high level of learning creation interest (0%). 59.17% was categorized as a medium, and 30.83% was categorized as low. No student was reporting a high level of ability to evaluate learning outcomes (0%). Most of them were categorized as medium (56.67%) and low (43.33%) categories. Meanwhile, the depth thinking learning indicator displays that 19.17% was in the high category, 53.33% in the medium category, and 27.50% in the low category.

2nd-Grade Students' Learning Creativity of A-Accredited Junior High Schools
The following figure 2 displays the level of each indicator of students' creativity, namely: A. ability to solve learning problems, B. learning development ability, C. learning creation interest, D. ability to evaluate learning outcomes, and E. the depth of thinking in learning. They are presented in the following figure 2.

Figure 2. A-Accredited School Students' Learning Creativity
As presented in figure 2 above, no student was reported to have a high level of learning a problem-solving skills (0%). Most of them were categorized as medium (76.74%) and low (23.26%). Meanwhile, regarding the learning development ability, no students were reported to be categorized as high (0%), some of them were categorized as medium (39.53%) and most of them were categorized as low (60.47%).
Regarding students' learning creation interest, all of them (100%) were categorized as low. No student was reported to have a high level of the ability to evaluate learning outcomes, most of them were categorized as medium (67.44%), and 32.56% of them were categorized as low. Lastly, 16.28% of students' depth thinking learning was categorized as high, while 41.86% of them were categorized as medium and another 41.86% was categorized as low.

2nd-Grade Students' Learning Creativity of B-Accredited Junior High School
The students' learning creativity of B-accredited junior high schools is presented in the following figure. It displays the percentage of each indicator of students learning creativity, including A. ability to solve learning problems, B. learning development ability, C. learning creation interest, D. ability to evaluate learning outcomes, and E. the depth of thinking in learning are shown in figure 3.
As displayed in figure 3 above, 12.90% of students' ability to solve learning problems was categorized as high, while 87.10% of them were categorized as medium. No students were categorized as low (0%). Meanwhile, no students were reported to have a high level of learning development ability (0%), most of them were categorized as medium (58.06%) and low (41.94%).

Figure 3. B-Accredited School Students' Learning Creativity
Regarding students' learning creating interest, 12.90% was categorized as high, 61.29% as a medium, and 25.81% as low. Meanwhile, 51.61% of the students' ability to evaluate learning outcomes was categorized as high, 41.94% of them were categorized as a medium, and 6.45% of them were categorized as low. Lastly, 16.13% of the students depth thinking learning was categorized as high, 58.06% of them were categorized as a medium, and 25.81% of them were categorized as low.

Comparison of Students' Learning Creativity in SSN-, A-, an B Accredited Public Junior High School
The comparison was done using Statistical Package for the Sosial Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Before comparing the result, a homogeneity test was conducted. As the result indicated that all research variables were homogeneous. Parametric statistics were applied to compare students' learning creation interest and learning development ability. The test result was portrayed in the table below.

Ability to Solve Learning Problems Indicator
Table 1 above indicates that there are a significant a comparison average of the ability to solve learning problems between SSN-and Aaccredited school students with comparison average of 1.189. Besides, there are significant a comparison average of the ability to solve learning problems between A-and B-accredited school students with comparison average of 1.375.

Learning Creation Interest Indicator
Comparison test result in table 2 above shows that there is a significant comparison average of the learning creation interest indicator between SSNand A-accredited schools with a comparison average of 1.301.  Table 3 above illustrates a significant comparison average of learning development indicator between SSN-and A-accredited school with a comparison average of 1.811 and there is also a significant comparison average between A-and B-accredited schools with a comparison average of 1.779.

Ability to Evaluate Learning Outcomes and the Depth of Thinking in Learning Indicators
According to the comparison test using Least Significance Different (LSD), there is no significant difference between SSN-, A, and -B accredited public junior high school in terms of students' learning creativity based on ability to evaluate learning outcomes and the depth of thinking and learning indicators. They are presented in the following table 4. Table 4 shows there was no significant difference between SSN-, A, and -B accredited public junior high school in terms of students' learning creativity based on ability to evaluate learning outcomes.  Table 5 shows there was no significant difference between SSN-, A, and -B accredited public junior high school in terms of students' learning creativity based on ability to evaluate learning outcomes.

Discussions
Based on learning creativity data analysis result on the ability to solve learning problems indicator in SSN-accredited public junior high school, it can be concluded that students' learning creativity belongs to the medium category. It is in line with research on the creative thinking skills of students of junior high school in Cimahi, finding that the majority of the students' (66.67%) creative thinking skills are categorized as medium (Putra, 2017).
Meanwhile, learning creativity indicators in A-accredited schools showed various results. Only the ability to solve learning problems indicator belongs to a medium category, and the learning development indicator mainly belongs to the low category (60.47%). A significant result is shown on the depth of thinking in the learning category, which 100% belongs to the low category. As the depth of thinking in learning refers to creative thinking skills. This is following research findings related to efforts to improve students' creative thinking skills through problem-posing which shows that students' creative thinking skills are still low (Siswono, 2005). Based on the survey results, 46% of respondents answered that the education system in Indonesia is not able to produce students who think critically (Welly Mentari, Arwin Achmad, 2019).
A-accredited junior high schools should implement a strategy to increase students' capability of self-actualization or creative thinking (Rahmah, 2016). This is in line with the assessment in Indonesia directed at the assessment of the Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) model. The policy refers to the need for life skills in the 21 st -century. Bernie Trilling (2005) formulates 21st century life skills in the form of The Seven C's 21 st -Century Lifelong Skills, including critical thinking skills.
On the other hand, B-Accredited schools showed their potential indicators (ability to solve learning problems, learning development, the depth of thinking in learning, and learning creation interest indicators) in the medium category. Meanwhile, the ability to evaluate learning outcomes indicator demonstrated a bigger percentage of high category.
According to the findings above, it can be concluded that, in general, students' learning creativity in B-accredited schools was categorized as medium. Therefore, they need to make improvements to be able to become Aaccredited schools, which refers to superior school development strategies as follow: emerging collective mindset to strive for the development of superior school quality; creating school innovation that highlights its superiority; utilizing information technology and involving parents in school activities could also become an effective strategy in developing high-quality learning system (Rahmah, 2016). Furthermore, a good and conducive school environment will create a comfortable learning atmosphere. It can be done by providing adequate learning facilities and infrastructures. A school environment that suits national education standard (NES) are more likely to create a learning atmosphere that increases students' creativity (Setyo, 2017).
The statement above is in line with the data analysis result using the Least Statistical Difference test, which indicated that environment (accreditation status) influences learning creativity comparison average in terms of the ability to solve learning problems indicator. The comparison average of SSN-and Aaccredited schools was 1.189, while the comparison average of A-and Baccredited schools was 1.375.
The finding of this study supports the study conducted on the creative culture in concept and development, which found that external aspects are 63% more dominant in determining individual' creativity encouragement. These external aspects may include environment, social, culture, politics, and belief (Susanto, 2017).
Regarding the learning creation interest indicator, the comparison average of SSN-and A-accredited schools was 1.301. It means that school quality influences students' learning creation interest which directly affects their learning achievement (Setyowati & Widana, 2016).
Moreover, in terms of learning development indicators, the comparison average of SSN-and A-accredited schools was 1.811. At the same time, the comparison average of A-and B-accredited schools was 1.779. This finding supports that school quality may influence students' learning creativity (Koharudin Jayadiningrat, 2021).
The comparison test using Least Statistical Difference (LSD), found no significant comparison average among SSN-, A-, and B-accredited junior high schools in terms of the ability to evaluate learning outcomes and the depth of thinking in learning indicators.
The ability to evaluate learning outcomes is defined as the ability achieved by students from test results that include cognitive abilities, namely memory, understanding, application, analysis, and synthesis. (Nuryadi & Rahmawati, 2018). In line with the results of research related to the effect of cooperative learning models on improving the quality of student learning outcomes, it shows that there is no difference in the ability of students' learning outcomes between the experimental class and the control class (Sudarsana, 2018).
Meanwhile, the depth of thinking in learning or called critical thinking skills focuses on systems, structures, principles, concepts, and the tight link between one element and another (Ariyanto et al., 2018). Critical thinking is the basis for understanding complex problems for purposeful self-awareness and self-adjustments (Chou et al., 2019;Heinrich et al., 2015). This finding may be accounted for by the fact that the ability to evaluate learning outcomes and the depth of thinking in learning indicators are not directly influenced by school environment and possibly influenced by other variables such as gender, social and economic status, family order, city and village environment, and intelligence.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
There is a significant comparison average on the ability to solve learning problems, learning creation interest, and learning development indicators between SSN-and A-accredited public junior high schools. There is also a significant comparison average between A-and B-accredited public junior high schools in terms of the ability to solve learning problems and learning development indicators. In general, all learning creativity indicators in SSN-, A, and B-Accredited public junior high schools are categorized as medium.
The findings of this study can be used as empirical data for research on guidance and counseling programs especially about developing students' learning creativity at school. Schools are expected to maintain and develop school accreditation based on national education standards to increase students' learning creativity.