The article examines how interactive teaching methods catalyze creative thinking in chemistry education at the tertiary level, with particular attention to the preparation of pre-service chemistry teachers. Drawing on constructivist learning theory and contemporary research in chemistry education, the study reframes creativity not as a solitary act of insight but as a learnable, social, and iterative competence that emerges through problem framing, representational fluency, and metacognitive regulation. The research aims to clarify conceptual pathways through which interactive approaches—problem-based learning, process-oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL), case-based debate, Socratic dialogue, and simulation-rich labs—scaffold divergent and convergent thinking within the macroscopic–submicroscopic–symbolic “triplet” of chemical knowledge. Methodologically, the paper conducts a narrative synthesis of empirical literature and reports a design-based pilot implemented in a methods course for prospective chemistry teachers, integrating two iterative cycles of interactive modules aligned to creativity indicators: originality, flexibility, elaboration, and problem sensitivity. The results converge on three claims. First, creativity in chemistry is best developed when learners are required to translate among representational registers, making their reasoning publicly inspectable in dialogic settings. Second, structured interactivity, rather than generic “activity,” is decisive; the presence of explicit roles, consensus-building protocols, and formative feedback doubles the likelihood that students generate novel yet chemically valid solutions. Third, creative gains depend on meta-level prompts that surface criteria of chemical plausibility and model limitations, which together prevent imaginative ideation from drifting into misconception. The paper concludes with a model of interactive–creative alignment for chemistry teacher education, a set of assessable indicators and rubrics, and implications for curriculum design and policy.  

Chemistry education, interactive methods, creative thinking, POGIL, problem-based learning

Freeman S., Eddy S. L., McDonough M., Smith M. K., Okoroafor N., Jordt H., Wenderoth M. P. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. — 2014. — Vol. 111, No. 23. — P. 8410–8415.

Prince M. Does active learning work? A review of the research // Journal of Engineering Education. — 2004. — Vol. 93, No. 3. — P. 223–231.

Hake R. R. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses // American Journal of Physics. — 1998. — Vol. 66, No. 1. — P. 64–74.

Moog R. S., Spencer J. N. Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). — New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. — 240 p.

Eberlein T., Kampmeier J., Minderhout V., Moog R. S., Platt T., Varma-Nelson P., White H. D. Pedagogies of engagement in science: A comparison of PBL, POGIL, and PLTL // Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. — 2008. — Vol. 36, No. 4. — P. 262–273.

Johnstone A. H. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem // Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. — 1991. — Vol. 7, No. 2. — P. 75–83.

Gilbert J. K., Treagust D. F. (eds.). Multiple Representations in Chemical Education. — Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. — 325 p.

Taber K. S. Chemical misconceptions—Prevention, diagnosis and cure. Vol. 1: Theoretical background. — London: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2002. — 256 p.

Nakhleh M. B. Why some students don’t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions // Journal of Chemical Education. — 1992. — Vol. 69, No. 3. — P. 191–196.

deHaan R. L. Teaching creativity and inventive problem solving in science // CBE—Life Sciences Education. — 2009. — Vol. 8, No. 3. — P. 172–181.

Sawyer R. K. Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. — 2nd ed. — New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. — 368 p.

Duit R., Treagust D. F. Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning // International Journal of Science Education. — 2003. — Vol. 25, No. 6. — P. 671–688.

National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. — Expanded ed. — Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000. — 374 p.

Bodner G. M. Constructivism: A theory of knowledge // Journal of Chemical Education. — 1986. — Vol. 63, No. 10. — P. 873–878.

Cooper M. M., Stowe R. L. Chemistry education research—From personal empiricism to evidence, theory, and informed practice // Chemical Reviews. — 2018. — Vol. 118, No. 12. — P. 6053–6087.

Cooper M. M., Underwood S. M., Hilley C. Z., Klymkowsky M. W. Development and assessment of a molecular structure and properties learning progression // Journal of Chemical Education. — 2012. — Vol. 89, No. 11. — P. 1351–1357.