The Impact of Problem Solving Method to Improve the Critical

Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics

Nana Mardiana

, Nani Mardiani

, Sheila Fitriana

, Miftahul Husna

, Rachmat Rizaldi

Departement of Physics Education, Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara, Jl. SM Raja, Medan, Indonesia

Department of Physics Education, Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Problem Solving Method, Critical Thinking Skills, Science Process Skills.

Abstract: This research was to know the level of students' critical thinking and science process skill after applyingthe

problems solving method. Themethod used in thisresearch was pre-test and post-testnon-equivalent control

group design. Sample of this research is the students of Junior High School in Medan.Class VII 1 was as the

experimental group and class VII 2 was as the control group. Test instruments and statistical analysis

collected the data. The tests of this research areanalysis of variance test, normality test and homogeneity

test.The result of the research showed that (1) there are difference of critical thinking and science process

skills among learners who learn to use problem solving method with learners who learn by using

conventional learning method in experiment class (62%) and in control class (38%) (2) There is an increase

of approximately 24% in the experimental class.

1 INTRODUCTION

Education has become a very influential aspect in

promoting generationswho are capable of dealing

with problems in this global era. However, the

quality of education in Indonesia is still in the low

category, including in science especially in Physics

Higher Order Thinking Skills (Phy-HOTS).

This was revealed through the results of a survey

of the Program for International Student Assessment

(PISA) organized by the Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Trent in

Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), which

showed that a reading ability was of 396, amounted

to 496.

The obtained scores of scienceswere 386. It was

below the average score of 501.Similarly, TIMSS

results obtained by Indonesian students were of 397.

It was below the average value of 500. The low

quality of education in Indonesia can be seen from

the results of research conducted by Trent in

Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) designed

to examine the trends in knowledge and math and

science skills of children aged 14 years along with

other information coming from students, teachers,

and principal. The result of TIMSS 1999showed that

Indonesia occupied the 32nd position of 38 TIMSS

participating countries in IPA (Martin MO, 2000). In

TIMSS 2003, Indonesia was at 37th out of 46

countries TIMSS participants in IPA (Martin MO,

2004). In TIMSS 2007, Indonesia occupied the

position of 35 out of 48 countries participating in

TIMSS IPA (Provasniket al. 2009). This fact

identifies that the demand of science, especially

Physics in the form of mastery of concepts and even

the application concept cannot be reached optimally.

Lasmawan (Lasmawan,2004) identifies several

educational problems as: (1) education emphasizes

the development of cognitive aspect with the

orientation of mastery of science as much as

possible and ignores the development of affection

and connectivity aspects. (2) It lacks of education to

develop process skill, critical thinking skills ability,

and creative. (3) Less education provides real

experience through integrated curriculum and

learning approaches. Sagala (Sagala,2009) also

argues that learning taking place in schools tends to

show (1) teachingis more than lecturing, (2) learning

management tends to be classical and learning

activities are less varied, and (3) teachers and books

are as learning resources.

In addition, a review of the counselling revealed

that only a fewstudies have explicitly attended to the

problem-solving process (Heppner, 1978). In short,

it has not developed a technology for helping clients

512

Mardiana, N., Mardiani, N., Fitriana, S., Husna, M. and Rizaldi, R.

The Impact of Problem Solving Method to Improve the Critical Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics.

DOI: 10.5220/0008889805120518

In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research (ICMR 2018) - , pages 512-518

ISBN: 978-989-758-437-4

with problem solving and decision making (Horan,

1979).

Most of schools do not encourage learners to

expand their thinking by creating new ideas and

rethinking existing conclusions.In the learning

process, learners are also less stimulated to be able

to expend their ideas in science, especially Physics.

Jacqueline and Brooks show that many successful

students complete their assignments, do good exams,

and get good grades, but they do not learn to think

critically and creatively. They both believe that

school only produces students who only think very

superficially. They just study the surface of a

problem. They do not extend thinking and do deep

thinking.

Sagala(Sagala,2009) said that most learners do

not get the overall learning because they still get

their education conventionally. Consequently, they

are not trained to solve problems, so that their

critical thinking cannot improve properly. It is also

explained by Aryana (Aryana,2006) that one of the

causes of low ability of thinking of learners is the

use of lesson model or method of giving the

opportunity to learners to empower their thinking

ability and to actively involve them in the learning

process.

According to John W Santrock (John W

Santrock,2010, p. 359) that critical thinking is

reflective and productive thinking. Itinvolves

evaluation of evidence.Another opinion is put

forward by Halpen. According to Halpen in Achmad

(Halpen in Achmad,2007, p. 1), critical thinking is

empowering skills or cognitive strategies in setting

goals. So, in order to be able to increase critical

thinking of learners, we can use the appropriate

learning method.

Problem solving method is right example method

to improve the critical thinking skills for learners.

There are three main characteristics of problem

solving (Suwito, 2010): 1) problem solving ina

series of learning activities. Itmeans that in its

.application problem solving, there are a number of

activities to be done by the learners. Learners not

only listen, record, and memorize the material but

also actively think, seek, process data, and conclude

the task, 2) learning activities directed to solve

problems, 3) problem solving is done by using

thinking approach scientifically.

However, problem solving not only develop the

critical thinking ability of learners but also develop

science skillsprocess of the learners. Skills process is

a set of skills that scientists use in conducting

investigations (Qomariyah et al. 2014). Skills

process is a set of skills used in conducting an

inquiry to find a concept/ principle/ theory. IPA

process skills are divided into 2 groups: basic skills

and integrated skills. Basic process skills consist of

observing, classifying, measuring, communicating,

interpreting data, predicting, using tools,

experimenting, and concluding.

Integrated process skills include formulating

problems, identifying variables, describing

relationships among variables, controlling variables,

defining operational variables, obtaining and

presenting data, analyzing data, formulating

hypotheses, designing research, and conducting

investigations (Kemdikbud, 2013, p. 6). KPS

(Toharudin, 2011, p. 35) states that, Scientific

process skills are all scientific skills used to discover

concepts or theories in order to develop existing

concepts or deny previous findings. Process skills

are required to acquire, develop, and apply the

concepts of legal principles and theoretical science.

One can perform the process as experienced and

done by scientists as they attempt to solve the

mysteries of nature through the skill of the process

of science.

Hamalik (2005) also points out that the

understanding of process skills in the field of natural

science is the knowledge of concepts in principles

that learners can gain when they have certain basic

skills that are the scientific process skills required to

use science. Scientific attitudes are aspects of

behavior that cannot be taught through particular

learning, but are behaviors captured through positive

examples that must be continuously supported,

nurtured, and developed so as to have students

(Bundu, 2006).

Based on the background that has been described

above, the authors want to examine “The Impact of

Problems Solving Method to Improve the Critical

Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics”.

2 RESEARCH METHODS

This is an experimental research. Sugiyono

(Sugiyono,2015, p. 107) states that the experiment

researchmethod is to find the effect of certain

treatment against controlled conditions. Joseph

(Joseph, 2014, p. 77) states that the researcher can

control the condition of the experimental group and

the control group.

The object of this research is the influence of

problem solving method (X) on the critical thinking

ability (Y) and the science process skill of learners

(Y). This research uses non-equivalent control group

design.

The Impact of Problem Solving Method to Improve the Critical Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics

513

This design uses 2 groups, namely experimental

group and control group. Experimental group is the

group that received treatment in the form of

application of problems solving method while the

control group is the group that is not treated class. In

this design, the experimental group or control group

is not selected randomly. Sugiyono (Sugiyono,2015,

p. 116) states that non-equivalent control group

design is described as follows

Table 1: Nonequivalent control group design.

Group Pretest

Independent

Variable

posttest

Experiment O1 X O2

Control O1 - O2

Annotation:

O1: pretest value

O2: the value of posttest

×: treatment given

2.1 Variable Observed

Each of the resulting products will be applied to one

classroom and the results are compared with one

control class. Field test using experimental method

with one-way is ANOVA design. In this study the

variables are:

1. Variable in this research is learning method

using problem solving and conventional media.

2. Dependent variable is critical thinking and it is

also tested separately.

3. ControlVariables in this study are educators,

teaching materials, number of hours Lesson, and

learning time.

2.2 Sampling, Data Collection and

Data Collecting Instruments

2.2.1 Sampling

Sampling technique in this research is probability

sampling technique. Thus, the strategy is that there

is no classroom discrimination. The determination of

experimental group classes is done randomly by

drawing technique.

2.2.2 Data Collection Techniques

Data processing techniques are the means used to

collect data. The techniques used in this study are as

follows:

1) Acquire preliminary data of students' critical

thinking skills by providing critical thinking

skills tests before improving the first and

second experimental classes. The same is done

for process skills.

2) Apply different activities in the two groups of

students in which one group used problem-

solving methods and experimental groups both

with conventional learning

3) test critical thinking skills of students by

providing critical thinking skills tests in the

first and second experimental classes. The

same is done for process skills.

This is done naturally, because students are

taught directly by their own educators to get the

intended learning objectives.

2.2.3 Data Collection

1) Test critical thinking skills

The technique of collecting data is done

through the written test to measure student's

critical thinking skill. The test is given at the

beginning and at the end of the session to see

students' critical thinking skills. The

questionnaire indicator refers to the student's

skill indicator.

2) Test the science process skills

The technique of data collecting is done

through the written test to measure skill of

science process of student. The test is given at

the beginning and end to see students' science

process skills. The questionnaire indicator

refers to the student's skill indicator.

2.3 Instrument Validity

Testing the validity of the content by expert

judgment, with the aim to know whether the

compiled instrument has measured accurately.

Experts are asked to provide feedback on the

instruments that have been prepared.

The validity test was done empirically (through

trials) in groups of students who had parallel class

with the experimental class. They are not the

students who were as the subjects of the study.

Validation is to test every item that has been

created. The scores on the item are correlated with

the total score. The grain score is viewed as the X

value and the total score is viewed as the Y value.

To test the correlation between the grain row scores

with the total score, the product moment correlation

of Pearson is used.

The result of product moment correlation is then

consulted with table (r

) at 5% significance level.

The item is said to be valid if r

count

table

, or the

questionnaire is said to be valid if its significance is

ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research

514

less than 0.05. Grain validity test is done with the

help of SPSS 20.0 for windows software.

2.4 Instrument Reliability

The reliability measurement uses a critical thinking

test and a science process skill. Reliability is used to

indicate the extent to which the measurement can

give relatively no different results when re-measured

against the same subject. The high reliability of the

instrument is illustrated by the reliability coefficient

in a number.

Testing instrument reliability is done internally

consistency, then the data obtained is analyzed using

a certain technique to test its consistency to various

items in the group.

The procedure used to measure the reliability

level of a scale test can be done by a retest or alpha

coefficient (Alpha Cronbach). Unqualified tests in

terms of reliability will be discarded or revised. This

reliability measurement is reliable if the r value

obtained is greater than 0.5. Instrument reliability

test is done with the help of SPSS 20.0 for windows

software. As a benchmark high low reliability

coefficient used interpretation scores as follows:

Category Reliability Test(Arikunto, 2010).

Table 2: Interpretation of reliabilities degree test.

Range category

0,800  



1,00

Very high

0,600  



 0,800

High

0,400  



 0,600

Enough

0,200  



 0,400

Low

0,00  



 0,200

Very low

2.5 Data Analysis Technique

Description of data is done through descriptive

analysis. The data described is the data obtained

from measurement on research variables that is

critical thinking ability and science process skill.

The data that has been obtained is calculated using

the help of SPSS program.

2.5.1 Inferential Analysis

Test Assumption Analysis

a) Multivariate Normality Test

The normality data test aims to test whether data

from each research variable is normally

distributed or not. Normality testing was

performed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov

technique with the help of SPSS version 20.0 for

Windows.

If the significance is below 0.05 means the data

to be tested has a significant difference with the

normal raw data, it means that the data is not

normal. If the significance is above 0.05 then

there is no significant difference between the

data to be tested with normal raw data, so the

data can be said to be normally distributed.

b) Homogeneity Test of Variance

The homogeneity test was conducted to find out

whether the data in the two experimental groups

had homogeneous variants or not.

1. Test the Equation of Variance

Homogeneity test of variant is done for

dependent variable that is mastering the

concept and ability of digital literacy. By

using Levene's test with SPSS version 20.0

for Windows.

If the significance is below 0.05, it means

that the population variant is not identical or

different. If significance above 0.05, then Ho

is accepted the mean identical population

variance.

2. Test of Variant-Covariance Matrix

Equations

To know the homogeneity of two-group

variant-covariant matrix with each

dependent variable and independent

variable, the homogeneity test of Box-M

was done. In order to know the homogeneity

of two groups variance, Levene's

homogeneity test was done by using SPSS

20.0 for windows.

The decision criterion for homogeneity test

is if the significance value <0,05 then the

data come from population with

nonhomogeneous variant, if significance>

0,05 then the data come from population

having homogeneous variant.

c) Correlational Test

Correlation test is used to know the relationship

between each independent variable with

dependent variable and to know the relation

between each of independent variable. If the

requirement to perform the test,Manova has to be

fulfilled

d) Regression Slope ((Homogeneity of Regression

Slopes)

Regression test is used to test the similarity of

slope between treatments, It uses SPSS 20.0 for

windows. The decision criterion for the

regression test is if the significance value <0.05

then Ho is rejected; if the significance is > 0.05

or in other words there is a similarity of slope to

the treatment.

The Impact of Problem Solving Method to Improve the Critical Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics

515

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Table 3: Data description of pretest critical thinking Skills.

Data Score

Deviation Standart 12.07341

Variance 145.7672

Average 55.71429

Minimum Scores 30

Maximum Scores 75

The data above can be seen that the standard

deviation value is 12.07341, the value of variance

still shows 145.7672, the average value of pre-test is

55.71429, the minimum value of the learners is also

very low with a value of 30, and the maximum value

of learners only reach the basic score only. For that,

it is still very necessary to be given appropriate

learning methods to be able to improve the value and

critical thinking skills of learners.

a) Description posttest of critical thinking skills

Table 4: Data of posttest critical thinking skills.

Data Score

Deviation Standart 9.251055

Varians 85.58201

Average 71.78571

Minimum Score 50

Maximum Score 90

From the data given in the table above, it shows

that there is a significant increase in the post test

(test done after given the method of learning with

problem solving) compared with the tests conducted

before the problems solving learning method was

given.

It can be seen that the average score of the

learners who originally only 55.71429 to 71.78571,

when viewed from the minimum score of learners at

the time of pre-test is 30 after post-test to 50,

although the minimum score of the students after the

post test is still low because not yet reached the

value of basic score but already 50% improvement,

and if we see the maximum value of learners at pre-

test only 75 rose to 90.

This shows that the method used is very suitable

to improve the critical thinking skills of learners.

b) Description pretest of science process skills

Table 5: Data of pretest science process skills.

Data Score

Deviation Standart 8.749177616

Varians 76.54810896

Average 47

Minimum Score 33

Maximum Score 67

The data above shows that the science process

skills of learners is still very low. This can be seen

from the average score of learners at the time of pre-

test performed. The average score of learners did not

reach the KKM or basic score that was very low at

47, the minimum score of the learner was still very

low at 33, and the maximum score of the learner

only reached 67 under the basic or KKM score.

From the data, it can be concluded that we must

find the right solution to be able to improve the skill

of science process of learners, that is by designing

the model or method suitable and appropriate for the

learners so that skill of science process learners

increase.

c) Description post-test of science process skills

Table 6: Data post-test of science process skills.

Data Score

Deviation Standart 10.28084

Varians

105.6957

Average 78

Minimum score 61

Maximum score 94

From the post test data in the table above that

there is an excellent or significant improvement in

the time before the learning with problem solving

and learning stages with problem solving.

Attended by the average learner whose previous

score is only 47 now becomes 78. The minimum

value at the time of pre-test is only 33 to 61 and the

maximum score of learners previously only 67 to 94.

This indicates that the methods provided are well

suited to improve the performance of the student.

1) Data pre-test and post-test process skills

Students.

Skills of the students' scientific process are

assessed from the test answers. Skill of science

process which form of essay matter as many as 6

problem. The instruments used have been validated

and tested before they are used to retrieve data.

Science process skill tests are performed.

The action is done before and after following the

learning by applying problem solving learning

method on material and followed by X-1 class

ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research

516

(experiment class) consisting of 44 students and X-3

class (control class) which amounted to 43 students.

Scientific process skills used are basic science

process skills consisting of six skills: observation,

classification, communicating, measuring,

forecasting (predicting) and inferences. The pre-test

and post-test values of the students' learning process

skills are presented in the following pie chart.

From the results shown on the diagram shows

that there is an increase in the ability of the learners

about 12%. This can be seen on the pie chart, is at

the time of pre-test or test performed before the

treatment is done with the problems solving method,

the average of the average participants only reached

44%, but after the settlement of the problem occurs

about 12% in the value of learners in the post test, is

56%.

Pretest loop diagrams and posttest science

process skills.

Figure 1: Percentage pre-test and post-test of critical

thinking skills.

2) Data pre-test and post-test process skills

Students.

Pre-test loop diagrams and post-test critical

thinking skills

Figure 2: Percentage pre-test and post-test of critical

thinking skills.

The pie chart shows that there is a good

improvement of test results before being treated with

problem solving method(pre-test) with tests

performed after the treatment of problems solving

method (post-test).

There is an increase of about 24% in the diagram

above, it can be seen that the percentage depicted in

the circle diagram at the time of pre-test only

reached 38%, but after being treated with problem

solving method (post-test) then increased to 62%.

The conclusion that we can draw from the diagram

above is that the method of problem solving is very

good in use to improve the critical thinking ability of

learners and improve the ability of science process

learners.

3.1 Homogeneity Test

Homogeneity Levene’s Test (Test of Homogeneity

of Variances) is a test used to determine the

homogeneity of experimental class science process

skills and control classes in this study, with the

criteria of testing if the value significance> 0.05 then

the homogeneous data whereas if significance <0.05

then the data is not homogeneous.

The result of homogeneity test of science process

skill data and critical thinking of experiment class

and control class show that sig difference by using

Microsoft Excel it can be concluded that Ho is

acceptable or there is a significant difference

between the learning result used using problem

solving method with conventional method, because

P = 1.0725>α = 0,05.

3.2 Normality Test

Test of normality of science process skill data is

used to know the distribution of data of critical

thinking ability of experimental class and control

class. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov is One-Sample

normality test with test criteria if significance> 0.05

then the data is normally distributed, whereas if the

significance <0.05 then the data is not normally

distributed.

Test data of normality of critical thinking and

ability of science process using SPSS.

From the Figure 3, it can be concluded that post-

test data critical thinking and process style between

control class and experiment class is normal data,

because the distribution of data shown the data in the

form of bells. Similarly, the data is normal data.

pretest

44%

post test

56%

Pretest

38%

Posttest

62%

The Impact of Problem Solving Method to Improve the Critical Thinking and Science Process Skills in Physics

517

Figure 3: Normality test of critical thinking and science

process skills.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the data analysis and

discussion obtained, then the following conclusions

can be taken that Improving the science process

skills of experimental class learners is very

significant, seen from the average score of learners

who previously only 47 to 78.

Improvement of critical thinking ability of

experimental class learners also significant, seen

from the average value of learners from pre-test and

post test results that only 55.71429 to 71.78571.

There is a significant difference in the science

process skills of learners who are taught by problem

solving method compared to students taught by

conventional method, with P = 1.0725>alfa = 0,05

so, Ho is acceptable.

For the best future, teachers are expected to use

learning methods that involve activeness and can

develop students' thinking skills in the learning

process, one of which is problem solving.

For teachers and others who will apply problem

solving method in learning activities, should arrange

the time precisely because this method takes a

longer time.

REFERENCES

Achmad, Arief. 2007. Memahami berpikir kritis.

http://researchengines.com/1007arief3.html.

(Accessed at April, 10, 2018).

Hamalik, Oemar, 2005. Proses Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta:

Bumi Aksara.

Kementrian pendidikan dan kebudayaan 2012.

Pengembangan kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Lasmawan, Wawan. 2008.” Tujuan pembelajaran IPS di

Sekolah. Dasar” Artikel.,

http://www.blogspot.com/2008/10/tujuan-

pembelajaran-ips-di sekolah.html diakses pada 10

April 2018.

Martin, M. O., .Mullis, V.S.I., Foy, P., Stanco, G. M.

2012. TIMSS 2011 International Results in Science.

United States: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study

Center.

P . Paul Heppner. 1982. The Development and

Implications of a Personal Problem-Solving Inventory.

http://jurnalinternasional.com/.html. (Accessed at

April, 10, 2018).

Santrock, W John. 2010. Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta:

Kencana.

Syaiful sagala.2009. konsep dan makna pembelajaran.

Bandung: CV. ALFABETA.

Suwito, 2010. Perbandingan Hasil Belajar Menggunakan

Model Pembelajaran Problem Solving dan Problem

Based Learning Pada Mata Pelajaran Geografi

Semester Gasal Kelas XI di MAN 1 Jember. Skripsi.

Malang: Jurusan Geografi FIS. Universitas Negeri

Malang.

Sugiyono, 2015. Metode penelitian kombinasi (mix

methods). Bandung: Alfabeta.

Toharudin, Uus, dkk. 2011. Membangun Literasi Sains

Peserta Didik. Bandung : Humaniora.

ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research

518