The Effectiveness of Problem Based Learning (PBL) in Increasing

Student Creative Thinking and Self-efﬁcacy

Risnawati

, Zubaidah Amir

, Mana Samin Lubis

, Muhammad Syafri

, Dedek Andrian

Department of Mathematics Education, State Islamic University of Sultan Syarif kasim, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Department of Mathematics Education, State Islamic University of Sumatera Utara, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia

Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Islam Riau, Pekanbaru, Indonesia

Keywords:

Problem Based Learning, Self-Efﬁcacy, Creative Thinking Ability

Abstract:

Creative Thinking and Self-Efﬁcacy are needed in mathematics because these factors are the determining

factors in the mathematical success. The purpose of this study was to see the inﬂuence of Problem Based

Learning (PBL) in increasing the ability of student’s Creative Thinking and Self-Efﬁcacy on Junior High

School at Pekanbaru Riau Province. This research was quantitative with Quasi-Experimental approach. The

design of this study is the Randomized Control-Group Post-test Only Design. The population of this research

was junior high school student at Pekanbaru Riau Province. The data collection technique is used in this

research was a mathematical creative thinking test. The data analysis technique is used in this research

were descriptive statistics and ANOVA. The results showed that the Problem Based Leaning gave signiﬁcant

inﬂuences in increasing the students and self-efﬁcacy. These results were proven from the signiﬁcant value of

ANOVA analysis less 0.05 for creative thinking and self-efﬁcacy.

1 INTRODUCTION

One of science which is very important in the

development of education and technology is

Mathematics. Mathematics is a science that explains

abstract concepts to those that can be clearly deﬁned

(Himmah et al., 2014). This is because mathematics

is not an observation activity, but from ideas,

processes, and deductive evidence. to translate this

abstract thing, we need an active learning process

in teaching and learning mathematics. In learning

mathematics, students are brought to observe, guess,

do, try, be able to answer the question of why

even argue. These principles are expected to be

able to realize the goals of creative and critical

mathematics learning (Suherman, 2001). According

to (Sukmadinata, 2012) creative thinking is a habit

of thinking that is embodied in the principles of

exploring, reviving imagination, intuition, fostering

new potential, opening views that create admiration,

stimulating unexpected thinking.

Several national and international studies have

found that students’ creative thinking skills are still

low. This fact is proven by research conducted by

the International Student Assessment Program (PISA)

team in 2015 which found that Indonesia ranked 69th

out of 76 countries. The PISA results are strengthened

by the average 2016/2017 National Exam results in

each province in Indonesia are still not as expected.

These results indicate that mathematics is still a

difﬁcult subject for students. for in Riau Province,

the value of the National Mathematics Student

Examination in particular in Pekanbaru, the National

Exam results are still relatively low.

Based on the problems have found above. The

Mathematics Education Experts seek strategy and

have found several strategy or models that can make

student actively involved in building creative thinking

skills. The model can increase creative thinking

and self-efﬁcacy student have created by experts is

problem-based learning (PBL) model. PBL is a

problem-based learning model that enables student

can develop the thinking skills. PBL makes student

can learn through various real problems in student

daily life. PBL goals are how to make students

can get and shape their knowledge in various way

of learning. (Sungur and Tekkaya, 2006) state that,

with the PBL model, students can interact with the

environment, classmates which the PBL will guide

students in improving their skills.

In addition to creative thinking, self-efﬁcacy is an

important variable in learning mathematics because

152

Risnawati, ., Amir, Z., Lubis, M., Syafri, M. and Andrian, D.

The Effectiveness of Problem Based Learning (PBL) in Increasing Student Creative Thinking and Self-efﬁcacy.

DOI: 10.5220/0009096701520156

In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Social, Economy, Education and Humanity (ICoSEEH 2019) - Sustainable Development in Developing Country for Facing Industrial

Revolution 4.0, pages 152-156

ISBN: 978-989-758-464-0

of students’ attitude like self-efﬁcacy one aspect

that makes student success in learning mathematics.

(Bandura, 1997) says Self-efﬁcacy is an individual

believes that student can do something like other

friends in the classroom in a certain condition. in

other words, self-efﬁcacy is students’ conﬁdence in

teaching and learning process that makes it get the

best result in learning mathematics. Self-efﬁcacy

is a concept of the cognitive personal which is

had by students and formed from main components,

namely students’ experience, through observation

of other people’s experiences, social or verbal

media, physical and students’ emotional conditions.

Students’ experience is the source most inﬂuential

because students’ experience about success or failure

of students can increase or decrease self-efﬁcacy

The self-efﬁcacy is trust in one’s abilities,

speciﬁcally in the belief in a particular ﬁeld or

concept. Conﬁdence is needed to be able to compete

in the globalization era and the work world, as well

as in the education world. In teaching and learning

process, the teachers are often found that students

lack conﬁdence and unsure of their abilities. If

this condition doesn’t improve, it will give a bad

impact on the students quality on future. In the

learning activities, they can not answer the teacher

question and they usually turned left and right as if

looking for support to a friend next to them. The

students are seemed to be unsure that he/she could

answer the questions given by teachers. Because of

the teacher have accountabilities on all problem the

student found, the teachers need to always look for a

solution to ﬁx education quality.

Mathematics is a subject that could give a

solution about how to develop students’ conﬁdence.

Various studies have been conducted related to

the students’ self-efﬁcacy. (Pajares and Miller,

1994), (Pajares, 1996) have found that self-efﬁcacy

inﬂuences student success in mathematics. (Kabiri

and Zohuriaan-Mehr, 2003) found that self-efﬁcacy

affects mathematical anxiety and mathematical

success, namely mathematics anxiety is an inﬂuence

of mathematical self-efﬁcacy or mathematical

performance. (Bandura, 1997) state that self-efﬁcacy

is not something that is acquired from birth or

permanent from an individual but as a result of

cognitive processes through teaching and learning

that experienced by students in a certain period. This

means that students’ self-efﬁcacy can be developed

through various strategy because cognitive processes

someone occur when teaching and learning process

in the classroom. the self-efﬁcacy can be formed and

driven through daily activities have done by teachers

and students in the classroom.

The PBL model is begun by giving authentic

problems to students. According to (Choridah,

2013) PBL model can ﬁx students’ mathematical

thinking skills on a high level. In the learning

process, PBL involves groups of students who are

supported to communicate with their friends. when

presenting group results, students have understood the

materials are asked for communicating with friends

and teachers. In PBL, the student is demanded to use

the all experience and knowledge have acquired from

the various strategy.

PBL will guide individuals and group to

investigate students to exchange answers and produce

various solutions to existing problems. the

ideas conveyed by student come from themselves

(original). This strategy can improve students’

creative thinking skills. Group discussions have

created making students have many experiences

through interaction between students and others.

Students are also trained to give a suggestion,

comment or express opinions in their groups, this

activity can increase their verbal abilities. Then, some

students present the discussion results in detail to their

friend in the classroom. In addition, the experience

that acquired from discussing will make students feel

satisﬁed with the achievement of their performance.

2 RESEARCH METHOD

This research was quantitative research with a

quasi-experimental approach. The design is used in

this research was the Nonequivalent Control Group

Design where is there are two groups were studied,

namely; the treated group (X) and the untreated

group. the treated group is called the experimental

group and the untreated group is called the control

group. The population in this research were students

of Junior High School in Pekanbaru consisted of 36

schools.. The samples in these study were Public

Junior High School 4 for high level, Public Junior

High School 20 for middle level, Public Junior High

School 21 for low level. The instruments used in

this research were tests of creative thinking skills

and students’ self-efﬁcacy questionnaires. The data

analysis technique that will be used in this study was

Descriptive Statistics and Two Way ANOVA.

The Effectiveness of Problem Based Learning (PBL) in Increasing Student Creative Thinking and Self-efﬁcacy

153

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Creative Thinking

The scores of students’ creative thinking were

analyzed through post-test data. The score from the

post-test results were presented in the table below.

The scores of average and standard deviation were

obtained after processing data from the results of the

test of students’ creative thinking tests based on PBL

model.

Table 1: Student Creative Thinking Scores

Score of Model of Learning

School PBL Conventional

Level Mean SD N Mean SD N

High 88,6 8,5 31 77,8 6,3 30

Middle 83,4 9,7 41 75.5 6,9 41

Low 79,9 8 39 74,2 3,4 39

Total 83,9 8,7 111 75,9 5,9 110

Based on the table above, students at high level

schools have a higher average score of creative

thinking of the PBL class, compared to students at

the middle school level and low school level students,

namely 88.6. In Conventional classes, high school

level students get a higher average value of creative

thinking compared to middle school level students

and low school level students which are 77.83. Then

it can be seen whether there are signiﬁcant differences

between the three levels of the school based on

learning that uses PBL with conventional. This result

can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2: Summary of ANOVA analysis of Creative

Thinking

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Source Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 1,028,952 19,063 ,000

Intercept 1326446,40 24574,85 ,000

Model 31,403 ,582 ,000

School Level 1,000,635 18,539 ,000

Model * School Level 1,700,026 31,496 ,003

Error 53,976

From the results of the calculation, obtained a

signiﬁcant value based on the difference in the model

used in the learning of 0.00. This value indicates

that there is a signiﬁcant difference between the

experimental class using the PBL Model and control

class using the conventional model. Based on the

analysis result was obtained a signiﬁcant value at

school levels have used as treatment. From analysis

was obtained the signiﬁcant value of 0.00. This result

shows that there is a signiﬁcant difference between

experiment class and control class based on school

level, that is; high, middle, and low. Result analysis

shows have happened an interaction between the

learning models used with school level used in this

research. This result indicates that The PBL learning

model can increase the outcome result based on the

school level. The next step can be checked which one

of the best level for used in the PBL learning model.

the result can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3: Scheffe Multiple Comparisons

(I) IQ (J) IQ Mean

Difference

(I-J)

Std. Error Sig.

Scheffe

High

Middle 26,104 13,071 ,139

Low 6,8391* 12,956 ,000

Middle

High -26,104 13,071 ,139

Low 4,2286* 11,272 ,001

Low

High -6,8391* 12,956 ,000

Middle -4,2286* 11,272 ,001

Based on Table 3 obtained the multiple

comparisons between school levels that is; high,

middle, and low. From analysis result can be seen

that there is signiﬁcant difference between high level

schools with low level. This result is proven from

the signiﬁcant value has obtained is 0.00. There is

no signiﬁcant difference of high level school with

middle level school. This result can be checked from

the signiﬁcant value is 0.139. There is the signiﬁcant

difference between middle level schools with low

level schools. This result can be seen clearly at Figure

Figure 1: Difference between Experiment and Control

Class

Figure 1 shows that the experimental class has a

higher average of creative thinking ability than the

control class. This result can be generalized as a

whole that the group of exponents using the PBL

model is better than conventional classes, both from

high, middle, and low levels.

3.2 Self-efﬁcacy

Self-efﬁcacy scores are acquired from data analysis

uses questionnaire instruments. The score of average,

standard deviation, and number of students obtained

ICoSEEH 2019 - The Second International Conference on Social, Economy, Education, and Humanity

154

after processing data from the instrument in the form

of the student self-efﬁcacy questionnaire.

Table 4: Student’s Mathematical Self-Efﬁcacy Score Based

on Model of learning and level of schools.

Self-Efﬁcacy

Learning Model

PBL Convensional

Mean SD N Mean SD N

High 121 10,6 31 119 9,4 30

Middle 113 11,8 41 111 12,0 41

Low 122 10,4 39 104 9 39

Total 117,7 10,9 111 110,67 10,1 110

Based on the table above, in the class of PBL

model with low-level students having a higher score

of students’ mathematics self-efﬁcacy than the two

school levels others, namely 121. In the conventional

class students with high-level schools have higher

average scores of self-efﬁcacy from the two school

levels others that is 118. Then it can be seen

whether the comparison between the experimental

class self-efﬁcacy is better than the control class.

these results can be seen in Table 5.

Table 5: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Source Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 1,791,604 16,013 ,000

Intercept 2,674,375,337 23903,38 ,000

Model 1,914,772 17,114 ,000

School Level 646,666 5,780 ,004

Model * School Level 2,236,776 19,992 ,000

Error 111,883

Based on the analysis above has acquired the

signiﬁcant difference between experiment class with

control class. This result was proven from the analysis

result with a signiﬁcant of 0.00. When viewed

from the school level aspect, obtained the signiﬁcant

difference between school levels from experiment

class with control class. This result can be seen from

signiﬁcant value was 0.004. From the analysis, the

result can be seen the interaction between Model and

School levels (Model*Level Schools). This result

shows that there is signiﬁcant interaction between

Model and Level School so that can be concluded

that Model and Level School can give different

result when Model and School Levels were used

simultaneously. For check the difference result

of interaction between Model and School Levels,

multiple comparisons can describe it as in Table 6.

Table 6: Multiple Comparisons of Self-Efﬁcacy

Dependent Variable: Self-Efﬁcacy

(I) IQ (J) IQ Mean

Difference

(I-J)

Std. Error Sig.

Scheffe

High

Middle 5,28* 1,89 ,02

Low 7,74* 1,87 ,00

Middle

High -5,28* 1,88 ,02

Low 2,46 1,63 ,32

Low

High -7,74* 1,87 ,00

Middle -2,46 1,63 ,32

Based on Multiple Comparisons table, it can be

seen that there is a signiﬁcant difference between high

levels school with middle school level in self-efﬁcacy.

This conclusion can be seen from signiﬁcant value

was 0.021. From the Mean Difference result that

viewed from multiple comparisons, the high-level

school was higher from middle-level school. The

result analysis shows that there is a signiﬁcant

difference between the high-level school with the

low-level school, this result can be seen form

signiﬁcant value was 0.021. From the result of

Mean Difference, it can be made a conclusion that

the high-level school was higher from the low-level

school. Based on the result analysis, obtained a

comparison between the middle-level school with the

low-level school. The result analysis shows that

there is no signiﬁcant difference between the middle

school level with the low-level school because of the

signiﬁcant value more 0.05 that is; 0.319. Although

no signiﬁcant difference but Mean Difference shows

that the middle-level school is better from the

low-level school. For describe clearly comparison

of school levels of self-efﬁcacy, ﬁgure 2 will show

self-efﬁcacy comparison based on the levels school

as follow: Figure 2 shows that the experimental class

Figure 2: Line diagram between school levels of

self-efﬁcacy.

uses PBL model has a higher average than the control

class use conventional model. For the high-level

school the experimental class is 120 and for the

control class is 118, the middle-level school in the

experimental class is 112 and for the control class is

111, while for the low-level group the experimental

class is 120 and the control class is 103. From this

result, it can be concluded that the PBL Model was

carried out at the experiment class effectively increase

the student’s self-efﬁcacy.

The learning model is very important for

increasing learning outcome in teaching and learning

process because learning model can give a solution

about weakness and deﬁciency of teaching and

learning in the classroom (Risnawati, Andrian, Azmi,

The Effectiveness of Problem Based Learning (PBL) in Increasing Student Creative Thinking and Self-efﬁcacy

155

Amir & Nurdin, 2019). Model and strategy of

learning actively can increase learning outcome in the

classroom (Moravec et al., 2010). Learning model

can give a broad direction to the student for solving

the problem about bad of learning outcome (Oxford,

2003). The learning will provide a solution about low

student motivation, low student outcome, low ability

of student during teaching and learning process, and

low interest in following the learning process.

PBL is one of learning model can increase

learning outcome. From this study, the conclusions

have made that problem-based learning can increase

the mathematics learning outcome and self-efﬁcacy

of mathematics student at junior high school of

Pekanbaru, Riau Province. These results show that

PBL gives a good effect in giving knowledge to the

student to solve a problem in real life. PBL one a

model that describes a learning environment with a

problem and give a solution to solve it (Roh K H,

2003). PBL gives a positive effect in teaching and

learning process, improve student understanding in

mathematics subject, this model can increase student

ability to use the concept in real life (Padmavathy

and Mareesh, 2013). PBL is an effective and

efﬁcient model in increasing mathematics student’s

performance. PBL is a model can give a good

solution in solving problems have found with good

and effective procedures (Abdullah et al., 2010).

4 CONCLUSION

Based on the results of the research, it was concluded

that there were differences in learning outcomes

between the Problem Based Learning model applied

to the experimental class and the conventional

strategy applied in the control class. The results

show that PBL can improve learning outcomes in the

form skills of the creative thinking and self-efﬁcacy of

public junior high school Pekanbaru, Riau province.

REFERENCES

Abdullah, N. I., Tarmizi, R. A., and Abu, R. (2010).

The effects of problem based learning on

mathematics performance and affective attributes

in learning statistics at form four secondary level.

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8:370–376.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efﬁcacy: The Exercise of Control.

W.H. Freman and Company, New York.

Choridah, D. T. (2013). Peran pembelajaran berbasis

masalah untuk meningkatkan kemampuan

komunikasi dan berpikir kreatif serta disposisi

matematis siswa sma. Inﬁnity Journal, 2(2):194–202.

Himmah, N., Noer, S. H., and Gunowibowo, P. (2014).

Penerapan pbm untuk meningkatkan kemampuan

berpikir kreatif matematis dan self-efﬁcacy. Jurnal

Pendidikan Matematika Unila, 2(2).

Kabiri, K. and Zohuriaan-Mehr, M. (2003). Superabsorbent

hydrogel composites. Polymers for Advanced

Technologies, 14(6):438–444.

Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., and

O’Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: a

strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large

introductory biology class. CBE—Life Sciences

Education, 9(4):473–481.

Padmavathy, R. and Mareesh, K. (2013). Effectiveness of

problem based learning in mathematics. International

Multidisciplinary e-Journal, 2(1):45–51.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efﬁcacy beliefs and mathematical

problem-solving of gifted students. Contemporary

educational psychology, 21(4):325–344.

Pajares, F. and Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efﬁcacy

and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem

solving: A path analysis. Journal of educational

psychology, 86(2):193.

Roh K H, . (2003). Problem-based Learning in

Mathematics. ERIC. Ohio.

Suherman, E. . d. (2001). Strategi Pembelajaran

Matematika Kontemporer. JICA-Universitas

Pendidikan Indonesia (UPI), Bandung.

Sukmadinata, N. S. (2012). Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran

Kompetensi. PT Reﬁka Aditama, Bandung.

Sungur, S. and Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effects of

problem-based learning and traditional instruction on

self-regulated learning. The journal of educational

research, 99(5):307–320.

ICoSEEH 2019 - The Second International Conference on Social, Economy, Education, and Humanity

156