Jurnal 3
Jurnal 3
Jurnal 3
1
Professor, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia
Associate Professor, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia
2
3
Student, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia
DOI: 10.15294/jpii.v12i1.39713
Accepted: October 24th, 2022. Approved: March 30th, 2023. Published: March 31st, 2023
ABSTRACT
This research is experimental research with a 2 x 2 factorial design involving students in the critical and creative
categories. Data collection used a description test instrument. Data were analyzed inferentially by hypothesis
testing ANACOVA comparison. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) directs students to learn, directs individual and
group investigations, generates and performs work, and assesses the problem-solving process. While the syntaxes
for Project-Based Learning (PjBL) are starting learning with essential questions, designing a plan for the project,
creating the schedule, monitoring students and project progress, assessing the outcome, and evaluating. This
study concludes that there is no difference in chemistry learning outcomes between students who are taught using
PBL and PjBL, and students who are critical and creative. For syntax, there are similarities in the activities of
critical and creative students, at the PjBL stage, in designing a project and evaluating a product, and at the PBL
stage, in guiding individual investigations and developing and presenting results.
parting than applying skills. This possibility cau- vior, and attitudes (Barrett, 2013). At the planning
ses a gap between students in school and what stage, the teacher helps every group participant
they need for work (Holmes, 2012). choose a project theme, create a project schedu-
Based on the description above, the fol- le, and collect related theories. Students work
lowing problems can be formulated: (1) Is there in groups to complete design projects (Bender,
a difference in the results of chemistry learning 2012). During the implementation and presenta-
for students who are taught by PBL and PjBL? tion stages, students create three different types
If so, which learning model gives a higher che- of projects, such as slime, jelly, and ice cream. At
mistry learning result? (2) Is there an interaction the assessment stage, students present the results
between students’ thinking abilities and learning of their projects and evaluate their friends. The
models that can give different learning outcomes? teacher gives feedback, and then students reflect
(3) For students with critical thinking skills, which and improve their projects (Bender, 2012; Kean
learning model will provide higher learning out- & Kwe, 2014). Then, all stages of the learning
comes, the PjBL or PBL models? (4) For students process are done. After the learning process, stu-
with creative thinking skills, which learning mo- dents are divided into several groups and are al-
del will provide higher learning outcomes, the lowed to communicate with each other, exchange
PjBL or PBL models? views, and contribute their own opinions. In this
In the world of education, Indonesia is still working group, students can improve their creati-
left behind compared with other countries in the ve thinking skills (Ulger & Imer, 2013). Students
world, especially in ASEAN (Rahabav, 2016). collect relevant materials for explanation and
Based on the PISA (Program of International problem-solving strategies in self-inquiry.
Student Assessment), Indonesia occupies a ran- At this stage, they contribute their ideas in
king 62nd out of 70 countries in literacy. Indo- order to find a solution. The next stage is the pre-
nesian science gets a value of 402, far away from sentation of work results, where students learn
the PISA average value. Low-quality education about the plan and make reports to be presented
is often associated with a less creative learning to classmates. Through this practice, it is hoped
process involving students actively and applying that other students can develop the ideas propo-
student-centered learning to develop higher-order sed with their own. The final stage is the assess-
thinking skills (HOTS). Leow and Neo (2014) sta- ment of solutions to the problem. Susanto (2013)
te that teacher-centered learning eemphasizes the states that intelligence, readiness, or maturity to
ability to memorize the theory so students have engage in learning activities, enthusiasm, presen-
no capability for applying learning in daily life. In tation of the theory of learning models offered
overcoming these problems, a learning paradigm by teachers, and a fun learning environment can
is required to increase students’ interest, introdu- affect student learning outcomes. According to
ce them to chemistry, give them the opportunity Alder and Milne (1997) in Fatirul (2020), PBL is
to solve real-world problems, and develop their an approach that focuses on identifying problems
skills. PBL and PjBL are interesting methods to and building problem analysis frameworks (Silva,
achieve this goal. 2018).
PBL uses problems as the main focus and In PjBL, according to Sulaeman (2020),
has an active teaching strategy for students, as- students have the freedom to conceptualize the-
sisting them in developing skills for thinking and mes or learning points. This is a learning appro-
solving problems collaboratively (Kauchak & ach that involves students in creating meaning-
Eggen, 2012; Rusmono 2017; Silva, 2018). Prob- ful project products for daily life (Sawyer, 2005;
lems encourage students to share knowledge, ne- Brundiers & Wiek, 2013). Applying project-based
gotiate alternative ideas, search for information, learning (PjBL) increases students’ creativity, in-
and build arguments to support solutions that dependence, involvement, self-confidence, reaso-
have been established (Sawyer, 2014). PBL can ning, and critical and analytical thinking.
improve critical thinking skills (Marzuki & Basa- Krajcik and Shin (2014) confirm that supe-
riah, 2017; Silva et al., 2018). Students are more riority in PjBL is a significant problem, focusing
motivated to be involved in the learning process on the learning goal, engagement in activity, col-
using the PBL model, which improves their criti- laboration among students, and between students
cal thinking skills (Setyosari & Sumarmi, 2017). and instructors, and use of technology for crea-
The initial stage of PBL is to orient them- ting real results. There are some principles in the
selves to challenges. They are encouraged to do PjBL model: (1) students are the center of lear-
various drafts of the problem formulation. The ning; (2) this model increases students’ creativity,
problems used in the PBL model should be desig- (3) this model increases challenging and exciting
ned to improve students’ knowledge, skills, beha- atmosphere in class; (4) this model includes va-
A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
155
lues, aesthetics, ethics, healthy reasoning, and ki- mation acquired through observation, experien-
nesthetic; (5) this model needs longer duration to ce, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a
share experience in diverse learning. guide to beliefs and action. According to Chang-
According to Yusriani et al. (2020), chal- wong et al. (2018), critical thinking is a multi-
lenges faced by teachers with the PjBL model in- step process. This process involves identifying
clude time allocations outside class. With limited problems, considering goals, gathering ideas for
availability of tools or infrastructure and unfa- potential solutions, considering options, applying
miliarity with this model, the teacher still cannot solutions, and assessing.
choose appropriate projects with this learning In real life, critical thinking skill is very im-
model. High expenses, lack of training, no exis- portant (Ikhsan et al., 2017; I Putu Yogi et al.,
tence of LKPD-based projects, lack of students’ 2021). According to Yaldiz and Bailey (2019), cri-
freedom, and long assessment procedures are also tical thinking skills train students to solve prob-
obstacles. Through PjBL, students improve their lems related to real life. Students need critical
skills in problem-solving, critical and creative thinking skills to increase their mentality in facing
thinking, communication, collaboration, change real-life situations (Tuzlukova et al., 2017; Fat-
adaptation, and evaluation (Khoiri et al., 2013). hiara et al., 2019; Purnomo, 2022). These skills
The PBL model utilizes real-world situations to grow students’ curiosity through deep reflection
inspire students (Farhan & Retnawati, 2014). (Alfi et al., 2016; Angriani et al., 2016). Critical
PBL emphasizes problem-solving and considers thinking rejects measuring students’ intellectual
experience, meanwhile, PjBL directs students to growth (Luzyawati, 2017; Defiyanti & Sumarni,
obtain new skills. 2019). Students need critical thinking skills as a
Several related studies related to students’ tool to solve real-life problems.
perceptions of PjBL find that group work in PjBL Munandar (2016) formulates that creative
can increase students’ critical thinking, engage thinking has some indicators: flexibility, origina-
students, offer a good learning atmosphere, and lity, fluency, and elaboration. In line with Utami,
train students’ self-control (Hall et al., 2012; Yang creative thinking has elements of flexibility, origi-
et al., 2012; Poonpon, 2017; Assaf, 2018; Belag- nality, fast thinking, independence, and thorough-
ra & Draoui, 2018; Vogler et al., 2018). George ness (Dewi, 2015; Gilhooly et al., 2015; Liu et al.,
Lucas Educational Foundation (2014) explains 2015). Creative thinking combined with the new
that PjBL and PBL have 5 (five) equations: 1) design will create new products (Sukmadinata &
start learning by identifying problems or situa- Syaodih, 2012). Creative thinking can combine
tions that lead to context learning; 2) emphasize prior inventions and discoveries to create new
the application of the right content and skills; 3) products.
build 21st-century skills; 4) encourage students to Students’ critical and innovative thinking
be more independent, 5) need longer time compa- skills are key skills in 21st-century international
red to conventional learning. competition due to their levels. The complexity
Information and Communications of the problems in all perspectives of modern
Technology (ICT) develops rapidly, giving oppor- life is really high. Critical and creative thinking
tunities for innovations in various fields, inclu- is included in the realm of high-level cognition
ding education. As a result, competition is more as a continuation of the principal competencies
open and stricter globally to increase life skills in in the learning system (Piergiovanni, 2014; Liu
this era. Dwyer et al. (2014) expand 21st learning et al., 2015). At this time, it is highly preferred
frameworks consisting top three skills as results if students can obtain those skills after the lear-
of the learning process: (1) life and career skills, ning process with innovative learning examples
(2) learning and innovation skills, and (3) infor- that require the use. Based on studies by Halmai-
mation and technology skills. For learning and da et al. (2020), Dimmitt (2017), Susilawati et al.
innovation skills, the learning process at school (2017), PjBL is more effective in increasing criti-
must equip students with four skills, namely, cre- cal and creative thinking skills and learning out-
ativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and com- comes. Group work helps increase creative thin-
munication called 4C. In these 4C skills, bloom’s king, problem-solving, and collaboration skills
taxonomy is the center of higher-order thinking and look for problem solutions with fun learning
skills (HOTSs). by exploring students’ skills.
According to National Council for Ex- The PBL model influences the increase in
cellence in Critical Thinking (NCECT, 2017), learning outcomes (Jusmaya & Efyanto, 2018;
critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined Binti, 2020). With critical and creative thinking
process that conceptualizes, applies, analyzes, skills, the PBL model can optimize students’
synthesizes, and evaluates knowledge or infor- thinking skills through the group work process
156 A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
tal class A1 is carried out using the PjBL model This research used a descriptive test as a
with several syntaxes. In the syntax “start with data collection method. The instrument used was
the essential question”, students answer questi- the critical thinking skill test consisting of four in-
ons related to real life through deep investigati- dicators proposed by Ennis (1996) and aspects of
on. In the syntax “design a plan for the project”, creative thinking, including flexibility, originality,
students formulate the problems and decide the fast thinking, and independence (Gilhooly et al.,
time to start the project. In the syntax “create the 2015; Liu et al., 2015). Before conducting the re-
schedule”, students create the project timetable. search, the questions had to be verified to see the
In the syntax “monitor the students and project level of validity, namely excellent, fair, and poor
progress”, students are monitored and supervised (Arifin, 2009). Validation consisted of content va-
for the projects they are carrying out. In the syn- lidity and construct validity (Arikunto, 2015). Va-
tax “assess the outcome”, the project products lidity test results showed that 18 out of 20 questi-
are assessed to fulfill the standard. In the syntax ons were valid. A reliability test was also carried
“evaluate the experience”, students are asked to out for the description test. A test is categorized
present their experience and improve the project as having high reliability if the results of the first
performance. The treatment for the experimen- and second tests are the same or have a strong re-
tal class A2 was carried out by applying the PBL lation (Surapranata, 2020). Reliability test results
model syntaxes. In the orientation stage, students using Excel showed that rcount=0.91>0.6=rtable.
solve the problems given by investing deeply. In Based on these data, the test instrument showed
the ‘organizing students to learn’ stage, students high reliability. The test instrument used in this
learn to connect problems with the theory. In study was in the form of essay questions given in
the “guiding individual and group observation” the form of a pretest and posttest. This test instru-
stage, students collect information. In the “deve- ment served to measure students’ critical and cre-
loping and presenting the work” stage, students ative thinking skills after and before learning was
plan and prepare the work, analyze, evaluate, and carried out using the PBL and PJBL models, con-
present the work. tent as seen in Table 2 and 3.
9 Design an experiment re- Students present an example of col- Creation (C6) Observe and
garding the properties of loids and design a test. consider the
colloids and the manu- results of ob-
facture of colloids servations
Based on Table 2 and Table 3, the question tions, showing five criteria using the Likert scale
instrument consists of nine critical thinking essay (Sugiyono, 2020).
questions and nine creative thinking essay ques-
The following is the content outline of the samples were taken considering certain charac-
question instrument for evaluating critical and teristics (Campbell et al., 2020).
creative thinking skills. This instrument had 7
questions in the difficult category and 11 ques- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
tions in the medium category. This test was held
before and after learning, six meetings with the First, the syntaxes of PjBL and PBL mo-
PjBL model and four meetings with the PBL dels of critical and creative students are presented
model. Data were then evaluated with inferen- in Table 2. The first activity is giving introduction
tial statistical tests including normality, homoge- tests for students to categorize those who have
neity, and ANCOVA (Hidayatsyah, 2021). The critical and creative thinking based on the test re-
number of tenth-grade students was 60; 30 were sults. Then, students apply the PjBL model in the
in the class with the PjBL model and 30 were in experimental class A1, and the others apply the
the PBL model. The sample selection was carried PBL model in the experimental class A2.
out using a purposive sampling technique where
Table 4. Syntaxes of PjBL and PBL Models in Critical and Creative Students
PjBL Steps Syntax of Critical and Creative Student Activities PBL Steps
Create a Students make Critical stu- Investigating Critical students Guide individ-
Schedule deadlines at each dents consider i n d e p e n d e n t l y, consider ideas ual and group
stage and deter- the use of ap- students collect based on the con- investigations
mine the right way propriate pro- material to get sequences that
to do projects. cedures for problem-solving will be received
doing projects strategies by con- and think about
tributing ideas for alternatives in do-
the solution ing projects
Creative stu- Creative students
dents add design to create
ideas to pro- new ideas
duce interest-
ing products
Monitor the At this stage, the Critical stu- Project presenta- Critical students Develop and
students and teacher records all dents work on tion, where stu- make deductions present their
the progress of student activities the project dents plan and and consider oth- work
the project so that the project- make reports to be er groups’ deduc-
making is more presented to their tions
well-driven. Creative stu- classmates Creative students
dents work on produce different
the project thoughts in prob-
lem-solving.
Asses the out- Students present Critical stu- Study and assess- Critical students Analyze and
come their products dents make ment of solutions define problems evaluate the
d e d u c t i o n s to these problems and select criteria problem-solv-
and consider to make solutions ing process
the results of to problems
the deduc-
tions from the
assessments
of other
Creative stu- Creative students
dents pro- look for deeper
duce different meanings for
thoughts in answers or prob-
problem-solv- lems so that they
ing enrich an idea or
Evaluate the Students reflect on Critical stu- product
experiences the project-mak- dents criticize
ing process the resulting
project.
Creative stu-
dents add
project details
Second, data description, test analysis sta- learning outcome evaluation instrument that has
tement, review, and hypothesis testing used AN- been validated. The results of the description
COVA statistical test. The use of ANACOVA was data analysis are in Table 5.
due to the presence of accompanying variables Table 5 presents the learning outcomes
that are difficult to control but can be measured of students who have taught using the PBL and
with the dependent variable (Silaen et al, 2021). PjBL models separately, including the highest, lo-
PjBL and PBL were applied to chemistry ma- west, average, and median scores, and standard
terial about colloids. The test was given using a deviation.
A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
161
The homogeneity test of normality and test and the homogeneity test of the Kolmogorov-
variance is a prerequisite for assessing this study Smirnov SPSS are shown in Table 6, Table 7, and
(slope homogeneity). The results of the normality Table 8.
Based on Tables 6 and 7, the normality test the next stage. Homogeneity is a presumption
results of the PBL and PjBL classes obtain more condition that must be fulfilled when conducting
p-value of 0,05. Thus, it can be interpreted that an analysis of variance and covariance.
data are normally distributed and can be used for
From Table 8, it is obtained that the statis- tical thinking skills using the PjBL model is the
tical p-value is higher than the significance value same as the variance of students using the PBL
of 0.05 so it can be concluded that the variance model. Based on the normality test, it is normally
of class scores of students with creative and cri- distributed.
162 A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
These values are obtained based on the ferences in chemistry learning outcomes between
tests conducted at SMK Kesehatan in South Tan- students taught using Project-based learning (A1)
gerang. This study seeks to determine the effect and students taught using Problem-based Lear-
of learning models and cognitive skills on student ning (A2). The results of the covariate analysis in
learning outcomes to show the following: 1. Dif- groups A1 and A2 are summarized in Table 9.
Table 9. Hypothesis 1
Source Amount of square df Mean square F Sig
Corrector models 90233 2 45,116 1,160 ,321
Intercept 2120848 1 2120848 54,550 ,000
Size 21,966 1 21,966 ,565 ,455
Group * Measure 44,869 1 44,869 1,154 ,287
2216.100 57 38,879
Error
Total 404108,000 60
Total corrected 2306333 59
2. The interaction effect between the lear- Interaction test results between learning
ning model and thinking skills on chemistry lear- models and students’ characteristics (critical and
ning outcomes creative) are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Interaction
4. Differences in chemistry learning out- in creative thinking skills. The results of covariate
comes between students taught using the PjBL analysis among groups A1B2 and A2B2 are in Tab-
model and students taught using the PBL model le 11.
Based on the findings syntax in Table 2, that are appropriate to the learning topic and
there is a similarity between the PjBL “design a the different backgrounds of the students. This
project” and the PBL “guide individual and group reason makes the teachers unable to observe the
investigation”. Critical students consider the idea students as a whole. Another difficulty in imple-
based on consequences and think of alternatives menting the PBL model is that there are quiet stu-
in a project. In comparison, creative students de- dents, so they are not active in discussions. Lear-
sign and create new ideas or products. The PjBL ning happens through a reflective activity process
stage assesses a product, while PBL develops and to build cognitive that can develop ideas, obtain
presents results. Critical students make deduc- information critically, and be more ready to sol-
tions and consider the results from the assess- ve problems based on learning (Black & Allen,
ment of other groups, meanwhile, creative stu- 2018; Pertel et al., 2020).
dents give opinions, bring up flexible and original The hypothesis testing with ANCOVA
thinking, and produce different thoughts in sol- shows several results. First, chemistry learning
ving problems. The difference is, in this case, that outcomes in colloid materials of students taught
PjBL produces a product whereas PBL delivers a using PjBL have an average of 82.9, while stu-
solution to a problem. PBL solves problems whe- dents taught using PBL have an average of 80.7.
re the ice cream is a liquid emulsion colloid and This number shows that the chemistry learning
liquid foam because in making ice cream, gelatin outcomes in colloid materials of students taught
is used (colloid crystals ice by mixing dragon fruit PjBL are almost the same, or there is no signifi-
juice as natural coloring and flavoring) CMC in cant difference with students taught with the PBL
making homemade ice cream. In PjBL, students after controlling initial skills. Figure 2 illustrates
make various products, such as slime, ice cream, the results. However, based on ANCOVA test
and jelly, using natural ingredients, dragon fruit. results, the p-value exceeds the significant level
The challenges faced by teachers with 0.05, namely 0.287 > 0.05; it fails to reject Ho,
PjBL include time allocation outside class hours, which means that there is no significant differen-
limited facilities or infrastructure, and unfamilia- ce between the learning outcomes.
rity with this learning model. Teachers are still Second, assessing the effect of the inter-
unable to choose projects that are appropriate to action of learning models and thinking skills on
the learning model. The inhibiting factors include chemistry learning outcomes. Based on Figure
the high cost, lack of PjBL training, the absence 3, students with critical thinking skills have lo-
of project-based worksheets, the lack of student wer test scores than students who have creative
independence, and the long evaluation process. thinking skills. In addition, students taught with
Most of the obstacles faced by teachers in imple- PjBL have higher test scores than those taught
menting PBL are caused by the initial skills, thin- with PBL. The groove does not cut the line bet-
king skills, level of self-confidence, and several ot- ween one another or show alignment so that the-
her heterogeneous student variables. In addition re is no interaction between thinking skills and
to the lack of learning tools and the disparity in learning models influencing students’ test scores.
the number of students and teachers in the class, Based on descriptive analysis of chemistry lear-
teachers also face additional challenges in imple- ning outcomes in colloid materials, students with
menting the PBL model and choosing problems critical thinking skills taught using PjBL have an
164 A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
average of 79.3, meanwhile students with critical dicators, observing, and considering the results
thinking skills taught with PBL have an average of observations obtains the lowest average score
of 76.9. The results show that the chemistry lear- in the PjBL and PBL models, where students are
ning outcomes in colloid materials of students asked to classify colloidal systems based on ob-
with critical thinking skills taught using PjBL are servations.
almost the same, or there is no significant diffe- Based on the creative thinking indicator
rence with those taught using PBL after control- analysis, the indicator of flexibility obtains the
ling the initial skills. Figure 4 illustrates the re- highest score of 92 for the PjBL and 88 for the
sults. Based on the ANCOVA test obtained, the PBL. The increased flexibility occurs because
p-value exceeds the significant level 0.05, namely students can apply colloid properties and make
0.354 > 0.05, so it fails to reject Ho which means colloids based on logical arguments in daily life.
that there is no difference in chemistry learning The PjBL class obtains an average score of 90 for
outcomes between students with critical thinking the indicator of originality, while the PBL obtains
skills taught using PjBL and PBL. 85. Because the experimental designs made by
Third, based on descriptive analysis of students during the learning process can increase
chemistry learning outcomes in colloid materi- their confidence in the results of their thinking,
als, students with creative thinking skills taught students usually do not look for similar answers
using PjBL have an average of 86.5, while stu- from other groups or books to increase their con-
dents with creative thinking skills taught using fidence. The indicator of fluency obtains a sco-
PBL have an average of 84.3. The results show re of 82 in PjBL and PBL classes. Students with
that the chemistry learning outcomes in colloid fluent thinking skills will provide comprehensive
materials of students with creative thinking skills responses. The more answers given, the more flu-
taught using PjBL are almost the same, or there is ent students think. However, some students are
no significant difference with those taught using less thorough and still make mistakes when ans-
PBL after controlling the initial skills. It can be wering questions. This indicator obtains the lo-
seen in Figure 5. Based on the ANCOVA test, west score, indicating that students cannot think
the p-value exceeds the significance level of 0.05, divergently to produce several ideas.
namely 0.220 > 0.05. It fails to reject Ho, which When taught using PBL and PjBL, it is ex-
means that there is no difference in chemistry pected to accommodate fluency where students
learning outcomes between students with creati- are very enthusiastic about finding problems
ve thinking skills taught using PjBL and PBL. from problem articles, pictures, and videos and
From the results of the ANCOVA test on trying to find solutions to these problems from
hypotheses 2 and 3, there is no significant effect other supporting books and discussing them with
on the interaction between learning models and their peers. However, sometimes students do not
thinking skills on students’ learning outcomes af- focus on the problem they are looking for. In ad-
ter initial control of students’ skills in each class. dition, in almost every application of the PBL
This is also due to the Covid-19 situation which and PjBL, students are directed to developing
made the government stop school activity (As- more fluent thinking skills, the obstacles teachers
muni, 2020; Maulana & Hamidi, 2020). Due to face to determine the skills of students without
the pandemic, face-to-face learning was shifted a high level of critical thinking. Some students
to online learning (Fadlilah, 2020; Wahyono et have not been able to articulate their thoughts,
al., 2020), and then it was limited. Based on the so they still struggle to articulate the challenges
analysis of questions on PjBL and PBL, the cri- they face during the learning process. Students’
tical thinking indicator of analyzing arguments low learning awareness is seen from the lack of
obtains the highest average score of 92 in the enthusiasm when the learning process begins.
PJBL and the highest average of 83 in the PBL, Students are still adapting from online to offline
where students were asked to conclude colloid learning, whereas they only study online and fa-
properties and make colloids based on research ce-to-face learning transitions during junior high
observations. Then, the critical thinking question school. It only allows them to attend school for 2
indicator of concluding → inducing and conside- hours, making it less effective. Students’ lack of
ring the results of induction with an average score creativity and involvement in learning is a chal-
of 90 in the PjBL and the highest average score of lenge in this problem. As a result, students are
83 in the PBL, where students are asked to make not ready to understand, assimilate, and react to
a definition of colloid properties based on logical the material and problems. The dynamic nature
arguments and thinking indicators. The critical of asking and answering questions, expressing
thinking indicator of making definitions and in- ideas, and solving problems creatively can help
A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
165
students develop their critical thinking skills. The versity (AIU). Theory and Practice in Language
absence of differences in the implementation of Studies, 8(12), 1649-1657.
the learning process between PjBL and PBL is a Barrett, T. (2013). Learning about the problem in
factor that must be emphasized to stimulate lear- problem-based learning (PBL) by listening to
students’ talk in tutorials: a critical discourse
ning outcomes with critical and creative thinking
analysis study. Journal of Further and Higher
skills. However, based on the data, the PjBL class Education, 37(4), 519-535.
is superior in learning outcomes in critical and Belagra, M., & Draoui, B. (2018). Project-based learn-
creative thinking compared to the PBL class. ing and information and communication tech-
nology’s integration: Impacts on motivation.
CONCLUSION International Journal of Electrical Engineering
Education, 55(4), 293-312.
Based on the results and discussion that Bender, W. N. (2012). Project-based learning: Differentiat-
have been described, it can be concluded that ing instruction for the 21st century. Corwin Press.
Binti, A. (2020). Analisa Kemampuan Berfikir Kritis
there is no difference in testing PjBL and PBL
Dan Penalaran Peserta Didik Dalam Pem-
models in critical and creative students in colloid ecahan Masalah Matematis Dengan Model
materials, and there is no interaction between Problem-Based Learning. In Social, Humanities,
thinking skills and learning models in chemistry and Educational Studies (SHES): Conference Series
learning outcomes, there is no difference in lear- (Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 633-639).
ning outcomes of students with critical thinking Black, S., & Allen, J. D. (2018). Part 5: Learning is a
skills both in PjBL and PBL models. In the PBL social act. The Reference Librarian, 59(2), 76-91.
model syntax, namely guiding individual and Brundiers, K., & Wiek, A. (2013). Do we teach what
group investigations, critical students take action we preach? An international comparison of
problem-and project-based learning courses in
and consider ideas based on the consequences to
sustainability. Sustainability, 5(4), 1725-1746.
be received and think of alternatives in making Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T.,
a project. Meanwhile, creative students design Walkem, K., Young, S. ... & Walker, K. (2020).
and create new ideas or products. At the “assess Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Re-
the product” stage in the PjBL model and at the search case examples. Journal of Research in
“develop and present the result” stage in the PBL Nursing, 25(8), 652-661.
model, critical students make deductions and Changwong, K., Sukkamart, A., & Sisan, B. (2018).
consider the results of the deductions from the Critical thinking skill development: Analysis
assessments of other groups, while creative stu- of a new learning management model for Thai
high schools. Journal of International Studies,
dents give opinions by thinking flexibly and ori-
11(2).
ginally and produce different thoughts in solving Defiyanti, & Sumarni, W. (2019). Analisis Kemam-
problems. puan Berpikir Kritis Peserta Didik Pada Pener-
REFERENCES apan Problem-Based Learning Berbantuan
Lembar Kerja Peserta Didik Bermuatan Etno-
Alfi, C., Sumarmi, S., & Amirudin, A. (2016). Penga- sains. Phenomenon, 09(2), 206–218.
ruh pembelajaran geografi berbasis masalah Dewi, H. I. (2015). Pengembangan Strategi Pembelaja-
dengan blended learning terhadap kemampuan ran Berlandaskan Cara Berpikir Kreatif untuk
berpikir kritis Peserta didik SMA. Jurnal Pendi- Membuat Karya Arsitektur. JTP-Jurnal Teknolo-
dikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 1(4), gi Pendidikan, 17(2), 107-118.
597-602. Dimmitt, N. (2017, September). The power of proj-
Angriani, A. D., Bernard, B., Nur, R., & Nurjawahi- ect-based learning: Experiential education to
rah, N. (2016). Meningkatkan Kemampuan develop critical thinking skills for university
Pemecahan Masalah Melalui Pembelajaran students. In CBU International Conference Pro-
Kooperatif Think-Talk-Write Pada Peserta ceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 575-579).
Didik Kelas Viii1 Mtsn Model Makassar. Ma- Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An
Pan: Jurnal Matematika Dan Pembelajaran, 4(1), integrated critical thinking framework for the
11-28. 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12,
Arifin, Z. (2009). Evaluasi Pembelajaran, Bandung: 43-52.
PT. Remaja Rosda Karya. Ennis R (1996) Critical thinking. Prentice-Hall, Upper
Arikunto, S. (2015). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan Saddle River
jilid 2. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara. Fadlilah, A. N. (2020). Strategi menghidupkan mo-
Asmuni, A. (2020). Problematika pembelajaran daring tivasi belajar anak usia dini selama pandemi
di masa pandemi covid-19 dan solusi pemecah- covid-19 melalui publikasi. Jurnal Obsesi: Jurnal
annya. Jurnal paedagogy, 7(4), 281-288. Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 5(1), 373-384.
Assaf, D. (2018). Motivating language learners during Farhan, M., & Retnawati, H. (2014). Keefektifan PBL
times of crisis through project-based learning: dan IBL ditinjau dari prestasi belajar, kemam-
Filming activities at the Arab international uni- puan representasi matematis, dan motivasi be-
166 A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
lajar. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), dia dalam pembelajaran matematika untuk me-
227-240. ningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kreatif. Unnes
Fathiara, A., Badarudin, B., & Muslim, A. H. (2019). Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(1).
Meningkatkan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning.
gemar membaca peserta didik melalui model In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook
predict observe explain berbasis literasi. Mualli- of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297).
muna: Jurnal Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 4(2), 92-101. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fatirul, A. N. (2020). Strategi Pembelajaran Problem Le Pertel, N., Fisher, J., & van Dam, N. (2020). Neu-
Based Learning Berbantuan Internet dan Gaya roscience of embodied reflection:somatic/
Kognitif terhadap Prestasi Belajar. Jakad Media mindbody/contemplative practices, health,
Publishing. and transformative learning. Reflective Practice,
George Lucas Educational Foundation. (2014). What 21(6), 803-818.
is Project-Based Learning (PBL). https://www. Leow, F. T., & Neo, M. (2014). Interactive multimedia
edutopia.org/project-based-learning. learning: Innovating classroom education in a
Gilhooly, K. J., Ball, L. J., & Macchi, L. (2015). Insight Malaysian university. Turkish Online Journal of
and creative thinking processes: Routine and Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(2), 99-110.
special. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 1-4. Liu, Z. K., He, J., & Li, B. (2015). Critical and creative
Hall, W., Palmer, S., & Bennett, M. (2012). A longi- thinking as learning processes at top-ranking
tudinal evaluation of a project-based learning Chinese middle schools: possibilities and re-
initiative in an engineering undergraduate pro- quired improvements. High Ability Studies,
gramme. European Journal of Engineering Educa- 26(1), 139-152.
tion, 37(2), 155-165. Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2017). An A–Z of applied
Halmaida, H., Mahzum, E., & Susanna, S. (2020). The linguistics research methods. Bloomsbury Publish-
Effort To Improve Critical Thinking SKILLS ing.
In Physics Learning Through Project Based Luzyawati, L. (2017). Analisis kemampuan berpikir
Learning Model. Asian Journal of Science Educa- kritis Peserta didik SMA materi alat indera
tion, 2(2), 93-98. melalui model pembelajaran inquiry pictorial
Hidayatsyah, H. (2021). Kemampuan pemecahan riddle. Edu Sains: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan
masalah Peserta didik menggunakan model Matematika, 5(2), 9-21.
Problem-Based learning berbantuan Geogebra. Marzuki, M., & Basariah, B. (2017). The influence
Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, of problem-based learning and project citizen
5(1), 458-470. model in the civic education learning on stu-
Holmes, L. M. (2012). The effects of Project-based learn- dent’s critical thinking ability and self-disci-
ing on 21st-century skills and no child left behind pline. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 36(3).
accountability standards (Doctoral dissertation). Maulana, H. A., & Hamidi, M. (2020). Persepsi Ma-
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and hapeserta didik terhadap Pembelajaran Daring
Theses database pada Mata Kuliah Praktik di Pendidikan Voka-
I Putu Yogi, Y. S. P., Nyeneng, I., & Distrik, I. W. si. Equilibrium: Jurnal Pendidikan, 8(2), 224–231.
(2021). The Effect of Science, Technology, Munandar, U. (2016). Pengembangan kreativitas anak ber-
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Ap- bakat. Rineka cipta.
proaches on Critical Thinking Skills Using National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking.
PBL Learning Models. Berkala Ilmiah Pendidi- (NCECT) 2017. A draft statement of principles
kan Fisika, 9(1), 1-15. Retrieved.
Ikhsan, M., Munzir, S., & Fitria, L. (2017). Kemam- OECD. (2019). PISA 2018. PISA 2018 Result Com-
puan berpikir kritis dan metakognisi Peserta di- bined Executive Summaries. PISA-OECD
dik dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematika Publishing.
melalui pendekatan problem solving. AKSIO- Piergiovanni, P. R. (2014). Creating a critical thinker.
MA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matema- College Teaching, 62(3), 86-93.
tika, 6(2), 234. Poonpon, K. (2017). Enhancing English skills through
Jusmaya, A., & Efyanto, W. (2018). Meningkatkan project-based learning. The English Teacher, 10.
Kemampuan Critical Thinking MahaPeserta Purnomo, D. S. (2022). Efektivitas Problem-Based
didik dengan MenerapkanProject Based Learn- learning dan project based learning terhadap
ing. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Seni, prestasi belajar matematika ditinjau dari digital
19(2), 116-127. literacy pada peserta didik kelas viii smp negeri
Kauchak, D., & Eggen, P. (2012). Learning and Teach- 3 klaten tahun ajaran 2021/2022 (Doctoral dis-
ing. sertation, Universitas Widya
Kean, A. C., & Kwe, N. M. (2014). Meaningful learn- Rahabav, P. (2016). The Effectiveness of Academic Su-
ing in the teaching of culture: The project- pervision for Teachers. Journal of Education and
based learning approach. Journal of Education Practice, 7(9), 47-55.
and Training Studies, 2(2), 189-197 Reigeluth, C. M. (2013). Instructional-design theories and
Khoiri, W., Rochmad, R., & Cahyono, A. N. (2013). models: A new paradigm of instructional theory,
Problem-Based learning berbantuan multime- Volume II. Routledge.
A. Suradika, H. I. Dewi, M. I. Nasution / JPII 12 (1) (2023) 153-167
167
Rusmono. (2017). Problem-Based Learning itu perlu. Mind Maps to Improve Students’Environmental
Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia. Attitudes Towards Waste Management in Ju-
Sawyer, R. K. (2014). The future of learning: Ground- nior High Schools. International Journal of Edu-
ing educational innovation in the learning sci- cation, 9(2), 120-125.
ences. The Cambridge Handbook of the learning Tuzlukova, V., Al Busaidi, S., & Burns, S. L. (2017).
sciences, 726-746. Critical thinking in the Language Classroom:
Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge Handbook Teacher Beliefs and Methods. Pertanika Journal
of the learning sciences. Cambridge University of Social Sciences & Humanities, 25(2).
Press. Ülger, K. A. N. İ., & Imer, Z. (2013). The effect of
Setyosari, P., & Sumarmi, S. (2017). Penerapan model Problem-Based learning (PBL) approach on
Problem-Based learning meningkatkan motiva- students’ creative thinking ability. Hacettepe Üni-
si dan hasil belajar IPS. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, versitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(1), 382-392.
Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 2(9), 1188-1195. Vogler, J. S., Thompson, P., Davis, D. W., Mayfield,
Silaen, I. A. V., Adriana, M., & Rahayu, R. (2021). B. E., Finley, P. M., & Yasseri, D. (2018). The
Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Contextual hard work of soft skills: augmenting the proj-
Teaching Learning Dan Realistic Mathematics ect-based learning experience with interdisci-
Education Terhadap Kemampuan Pemahaman plinary teamwork. Instructional Science, 46(3),
Konsep Matematika Dan Kemampuan Komu- 457-488.
nikasi Matematis Di Kelas VIII SMP IT Ibnu Wahyono, P., Husamah, H., & Budi, A. S. (2020).
Halim Medan Tahun Pelajaran 2020/2021. Guru profesional di masa pandemi COVID-19:
ALACRITY: Journal Of Education, 12-20. Review implementasi, tantangan, dan solusi
Silva, A. B. D., Bispo, A. C. K. D. A., Rodriguez, D. pembelajaran daring. Jurnal pendidikan profesi
G., & Vasquez, F. I. F. (2018). Problem-based guru, 1(1), 51-65.
learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and Yaldız, N., & Bailey, M. (2019). The Effect of Criti-
its implications for learning among students cal Thinking on Making the Right Decisions in
in an undergraduate management degree pro- the New Venture Process. Procedia Computer Sci-
gram. Revista de Gestão, 25(2), 160-177. ence, 158, 281-286.
Sulaeman, M. (2020). Aplikasi Project-Based Learn- Yang, K., Woomer, G. R., & Matthews, J. T. (2012).
ing. Jawa Barat: Bioma Publishing. Collaborative learning among undergraduate
Sugiyono, S. (2020). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. students in community health nursing. Nurse
Bandung: Alfabeta. Education in Practice, 12(2), 72-76.
Sukmadinata, N. S., & Syaodih, E. (2012). Kurikulum Yusriani, Y., Arsyad, M., & Arafah, K. (2020). Kesuli-
dan Pembelajaran Kompetensi, Bandung: PT. tan Guru dalam Mengimplementasikan Model
Refika Aditama. Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek pada Mata Pela-
Surapranata, S. (2020). Analisis, validitas, reliabilitas, jaran Fisika di SMA Negeri Kota Makassar. In
dan interpretasi hasil tes. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Fisika PPs Universitas
Susanto, A. (2013). Teori Belajar dan Pembelajaran di Negeri Makassar (Vol. 2, pp. 138-141).
Seklah Dasar. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Zalbidea, J. (2017). ‘One task fits all’? The roles of task
Group. complexity, modality, and working memory ca-
Susilawati, A., Hernani, H., & Sinaga, P. (2017). The pacity in L2 performance. The Modern Language
Application of Project-Based Learning Using Journal, 101(2), 335-352.