The development of andro-webcomic media based on problem-based learning to improve analytical thinking ability and scientific attitude

Abstract

The research aimed to describe the validity, practicality, and effectiveness of Andro-Webcomic media based on problem-based learning as a learning media to improve students’ analytical thinking ability and scientific attitudes. The development design used was Research and Development (R&D) and used the ADDIE model, limited to the ADD (Analysis, Design, Development) stage. At the product development stage, small-scale trials are carried out, which this phrase was limited to 9 students of class XI MIPA at one of the high schools in Jepara. The instruments used were validation sheets, test sheets, observation sheets for students’ scientific attitudes, student and teacher questionnaire responses. The results of this study indicate that: (1) the validity of the Andro-Webcomic media is 95.58%; (2) effective in improving analytical thinking of 88.89% with an n-gain score of 67% and a scientific attitude of 87.19%; (3) practicality based on student responses of 98.39% and teacher responses of 97.36%; (4) media component that supports improving competencies is on the webcomic and investigation menu. Based on the research results, it can be concluded that the Andro-Webcomic media is valid, practical, and effective in improving students’ analytical thinking ability and scientific attitudes.

Enhancing HOTS using Problem-Based Learning and Digital Game in the Context of Malaysian Primary School

“…For years, problem-based learning was highlighted as an effective approach that suit the dynamic needs of 21 st century education. The literatures show the effect of problem-based learning on creative thinking [10], mathematical literacy [11], metacognition [12], analytical thinking [13], mathematical problem solving [14], and science problem solving skills [15]. However, what is the effect of problem-based learning in promoting HOTS?…”

A systematic review of analytical thinking skills in STEM education settings

“…The seven studies using this design were likely to be interested in exploring the extent to which changes in AT skills can be associated with changes in other learning outcomes or identify patterns or trends in AT skills. Finally, it has been observed that the seven studies under investigation have adopted a research and development (R&D) design (Chuumchuen and Surpare, 2022; Levin and Verner, 2020; Lu Atun Nisa’ et al , 2019; Nur’Azizah et al , 2018; Rodrangsee et al , 2022; Sujatmiko et al , 2021; Thabvithorn and Samat, 2022). In the context of the research study, R&D design may be used to explore potential solutions or develop new products to enhance AT skills.…”

“…Other research studies have used specific models to guide their investigations and among these frameworks are the guided inquiry model (Rodrangsee et al , 2022), the research-based learning (RBL) model (Chumsukon and Ruangsan, 2021; Suyatman et al , 2021) and the community learning resources (CLR) model (Chumsukon and Ruangsan, 2021), Focusing, exploring, analyzing, conceptual developing, and applying teaching model (Kocabaş and Yücel, 2022) and analytical thinking skills learning model (Phurikultong and Kantathanawat, 2022). However, the sixteen studies analysed did not specify the theoretical framework or model they used in conducting their research (Andriani and Supiah, 2021; Chuumchuen and Surpare, 2022; Karenina et al , 2020; Levin and Verner, 2020; Mayarni and Nopiyanti, 2021; Lu Atun Nisa’ et al , 2019; Perdana et al , 2019; Phuseengoen and Singhchainara, 2022; Sari et al , 2019; Sujatmiko et al , 2021; Sundari et al , 2020; Suyatman et al , 2021a, 2021b; Thabvithorn and Samat, 2022; Theabthueng et al , 2022; Wahyuningtyas et al , 2021; Yuenyong and Yuenyong, 2021).…”

“…The intervention that is commonly used is problem-based learning (Andriani and Supiah, 2021; Karenina et al , 2020; Perdana et al , 2019; Putranta and Supahar, 2019; Sari et al , 2019; Suyatman et al , 2021a, 2021b) and followed by the use of learning models such as RBL (Suyatman et al , 2021), CLR (Chumsukon and Ruangsan, 2021), online active learning (OAL) models (Rodrangsee et al , 2022) and the guided inquiry model (Cahyati and Subali, 2022). Other studies used a variety of intervention methods, including open learning (Anggoro et al , 2021), interactive modules based on intelligence theory (Azid and Md-Ali, 2020), think-pair-share techniques (Theabthueng et al , 2022), learning interactive multimedia (Nur’Azizah et al , 2018), flipped classroom (Khamsaengmat and Kanjug, 2022), digital storytelling, inquiry-based learning (IBL) (Phurikultong and Kantathanawat, 2022), concept map in AT-based module (Sundari et al , 2020), YouTube video (Wahyuningtyas et al , 2021), STEM-integrated movement activities (Phuseengoen and Singhchainara, 2022), predict–observe–explain (POE) strategy (Yuenyong and Yuenyong, 2021), andro-webcomic media based on problem-based learning (Sujatmiko et al , 2021), Web-based learning with augmented reality (AR) (Thabvithorn and Samat, 2022), simulation based interactive e-learning course (Chuumchuen and Surpare, 2022), emergency distance (Kocabaş and Yücel, 2022), blended learning, collaborative learning (Wongpratoom and Sranamkam, 2019), popup booklet development (Lu Atun Nisa’ et al , 2019), 3D design and printing (Levin and Verner, 2020) and multimedia learning interactive (Nur’Azizah et al , 2018). One research analysis did not determine the intervention used (Mayarni and Nopiyanti, 2021).…”