Development Creativity Students through Problem Based Learning
Model in Physical Education in Reviewed of Adversity Quotient
Edi Setiawan, Tite Juliantine and Komarudin Komarudin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jln. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229 Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Problem Based Learning, Adversity Quotient, Creativity.
Abstract: The purpose of this research is to develop students' creativity through problem based learning model in
physical education in review of adversity quotient. The research method used is experimental method with
2x2 factorial designs. The population in this study are the students of 10th grade in SMK 1 Cipanas Cianjur
Regency consists of 10th grade as many as 8 classes with a total of 375 students. The sample in this research
is as many as 60 students, consists of 30 students with high adversity quotient skills and 30 students with low
adversity quotient skills. The sampling using cluster random sampling technique. The instrument used is a
questionnaire to measure the level of adversity quotient and the creativity. The result of data analysis Two
Way Anova showed that there are interactions between the learning model and the adversity quotient on
students' creativity. Discussion and Conclusion of the study showed that problem based learning model has
more effective impact and can be applied by physical education teachers in an effort to develop student
creativity.
1 INTRODUCTION
In today's world of globalization, creativity is an
important element in development and it is a basic
capital in building a better quality of human resources
in a country (Bereczki, 2016; Cheung, 2016). The
term creativity is very difficult to define because
creativity is a multidimensional concept so that many
experts are advocating the meaning of creativity
(Turpin, Matthee, and Kruger, 2015). The difference
in the definition of creativity put forward by experts
is a complementary definition, but the term that is
often used in the world of education that creativity
can be interpreted as a person's ability to create
something new both in concepts or real work
(Cheung, 2016; Rasmussen and Østergaard, 2016).
Creativity is the result of the process of interaction
between individuals and their environment. A person
can be influenced by the environment in which he is
located. It means, the creativity that is owned by a
person can develop depending on the environment he
is in. Student creativity can grow and develop well, if
family environment, society, especially school
environment also support them in expressing their
creativity (Zimmerman, 2009). Related to the
explanation, then one of the efforts to bridge the
development of student creativity is through learning
physical education in the school environment
(Cheung, 2010). But unfortunately, research on
creativity is still rarely done in the world of education,
especially physical education (Konstantinidou,
Michalopoulou, Agelousis, and Kourtesis, 2013).
There is a learning model that is expected to be
able to increase the creativity that is owned by
students is by applying problem based learning
model. Because problem based learning is a learning
model, where physical education teachers provide a
problem and give students the freedom to learn to
solve problems and find solutions to the problem
independently (Bethell and Morgan, 2011). Thus, it
can be concluded that in addition to external factors
that is by applying the model of problem based
learning into learning physical education is able to
facilitate students to improve their creativity (Awang
and Ramly, 2008; Folly Eldy and Sulaiman, 2013).
Nevertheless it cannot be denied that the quality of
adversity quotient students themselves in the face of
a problem is an internal factor is crucial to the
development of a creativity. The role of adversity
quotient in physical education is to help students not
to give up easily and not easily despair of the learning
problems they face. Adversity quotient can be
interpreted as the intelligence of a person in the face
92
Setiawan, E., Juliantine, T. and Komarudin, K.
Development Creativity Students through Problem Based Learning Model in Physical Education in Reviewed of Adversity Quotient.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 2, pages 92-94
ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

of difficulties or problems and help students to
increase the potential within him that includes various
components such as performance, motivation,
empowerment, creativity, productivity (Parvathy and
Praseeda, 2014). The better the adversity quotient the
student has, the higher the creativity or the better the
student is able to give a good response and able to
survive in overcoming a difficulty, the higher the
spirit of creation (Zhi-hsien, 2014).
According to the problems that have been
described above, the purpose of this research is to
develop students' creativity through the application of
problem based learning model in physical education
in review of adversity quotient. Some of the questions
to be answered through this research are:
 Is there a difference of creativity between
students given learning of problem-based
learning model and group of students who are
given direct instruction model?
 Is there any difference of creativity between
students who are given problem-based learning
model and direct instruction model in groups of
students who have high adversity quotient
ability?
 Is there any difference of creativity between
students who are given problem-based learning
model and direct instruction model in groups of
students who have low adversity quotient
ability?
 Is there an interaction of the model of learning
and adversity quotient on student creativity?
Based on the analysis of previous research
showed no one ever to study and try to apply problem
based learning model and adversity quotient in an
effort to develop students' creativity in physical
education.
2 METHODS
2.1 Participants
This research will be conducted at SMK 1 Cipanas
Cianjur. The population used was 10th grade student
at SMK 1 Cipanas, Cianjur Regency in the academic
year of 2016-2017 consisting of 10th grade of 8
classes with details: X agri business processing of
agricultural products 1 and 2, X online business and
marketing 1 and 2, X computer network engineering
1 and 2, X light vehicle engineering 1 and 2, the total
totals are 375 students. Sampling using cluster
random sampling technique. The sample in this study
were 60 students, consisting of 30 students who have
high AQ and 30 students who have low AQ.
2.2 Procedures
The research method used is experimental method
with 2x2 factorial designs. The study was conducted
for 5 weeks, while the learning was done 14 times as
a whole, With details for the treatment of 12 meetings
and 2 times that is one to perform the pretest and one
to perform the posttest, with frequency 3 times a
week, the treatment was given to the experimental
group using problem based learning model, while in
the control group using direct instruction model.
The instrument used is a questionnaire to measure
the level of adversity quotient theory proposed by
Stolz (2000) and the theoretical creativity put forward
by Guilford (1950). This instrument is not known
with certainty to have the validity and reliability of
how much, therefore the authors will re-examine this
instrument to find validity and reliability upon high
school students of class X computer network
engineering and X light vehicle engineering in SMK
1 Cipanas Cianjur. Data analysis using SPSS version
17.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The main purpose of this research is to find out
whether learning model and lean model based
learning model can be used to facilitate the
development of students' creativity in physical
education. Overall the results of this study show that
there is a difference between PBL and DI model, and
PBL model is more suitable applied to high AQ
students, whereas DI model is more suitable applied
to low AQ students. Further data show there is
interaction of learning model and AQ to creativity.
In relation to the results of previous research
conducted by Temel (2014) showed that the design of
pre-test-post-test control group, PBL has no
significant effect. PBL and DI do not have a different
effect on the disposition of critical thinking of
teachers and have different effects on perceptions in
problem-solving abilities. Based on the results of
research Temel above is different from the results of
research that the authors do, where the results show
that the PBL model is better than DI to improve
student creativity (Chen, 2013).
4 CONCLUSIONS
The implication is that when a teacher wants to
increase the creativity possessed by students, then one
Development Creativity Students through Problem Based Learning Model in Physical Education in Reviewed of Adversity Quotient
93

solution is to apply problem based learning model in
the process of physical education. This is in
accordance with the results of the study showed that
problem based learning model has more effective
impact and can be applied by physical education
teachers in an effort to develop student creativity.
Based on these conclusions the authors suggest to
further researchers to complement the existing
limitations in this study that is when the PBL model
applied to low AQ group data results showed the
creativity of students experienced a significant
reduction.
REFERENCES
Awang, H., Ramly, I. 2008. Through Problem-Based
Learning : Pedagogy and Practice in the Engineering
Classroom. International Journal of Human and Social
Sciences, 2(4), 18–23.
Bereczki, E. O. 2016. Mapping creativity in the Hungarian
National Core Curriculum: a content analysis of the
overall statements of intent, curricular areas and
education levels. The Curriculum Journal, 27(3), 330–
367.
Bethell, S., Morgan, K. 2011. Problem-based and
experiential learning: Engaging students in an
undergraduate physical education module. The Journal
of Hospitality Leisure Sport and Tourism, 10(1), 128–
134.
Chen, W. 2013. Applying Problem-Based Learning Model
and Creative Design to Conic-Sections Teaching, 7(3),
73–80.
Cheung, R. H. P. 2010. Designing movement activities to
develop children’s creativity in early childhood
education. Early Child Development and Care, 180(3),
377–385.
Cheung, R. H. P. 2016. The challenge of developing
creativity in a Chinese context: the effectiveness of
adapting Western creative pedagogy to inform creative
practice. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 24(1), 141–
160.
Folly Eldy, E., Sulaiman, F. 2013. The Role of PBL in
Improving Physics Students’ Creative Thinking and Its
Imprint on Gender. International Journal of Education
and Research, 1(6).
Guilford, J. P. 1950. Creativity Research. New York:
University Press.
Konstantinidou, E., Michalopoulou, M., Agelousis, N.,
Kourtesis, T. 2013. Primary Physical Education
Perspective on Creativity: The Characteristics of the
Creative Student and Their Creative Outcomes.
International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science, 3(3), 2015.
Parvathy, U., Praseeda, M. 2014. Relationship between
Adversity Quotient and Academic Problems among
Student Teachers, 19(11), 23–26.
Rasmussen, L. J. T., Østergaard, L. D. 2016. The Creative
Soccer Platform: New Strategies for Stimulating
Creativity in Organized Youth Soccer Practice. Journal
of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 87(7),
9–19.
Stoltz. 2000. Adversity Quotient Mengubah Hambatan
Menjadi Peluang. Grasindo: Jakarta.
Temel, S. 2014. The effects of problem-based learning on
pre-service teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and
perceptions of problem-solving ability. South African
Journal of Education; 2014; 34(1).
Turpin, M., Matthee, M., Kruger, A. 2015. The Teaching of
Creativity in Information Systems Programmes at
South African Higher Education Institutions. African
Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and
Technology Education, 19(3), 278–288.
Zhi-hsien, C. V. 2014. A Study Investigating the Influence
of Demographic Variables on Adversity Quotient.
Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning,
10(June), 22–32.
Zimmerman, E. 2009. Reconceptualizing the Role of
Creativity in Art Education Theory and Practice -
ProQuest. Studies in Art Education, 50(4), 382–399.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
94