The Effect of Problem Based Learning Model on Problem Solving Ability Student

Abstract

This study aims to determine the effect of the Problem Based Learning model on students' mathematical problem solving abilities. In addition, this study also looked at the interaction between learning and gender on students' mathematical problem solving abilities. This research was a quasi-experimental study. The population in this study consisted of all students in junior high school (SMP) 7 Padangsidimpuan totaling 423 students. The study sample consisted of 46 students, namely 23 students in grade VIII-3 and 23 students in grade VIII-6. Data analysis was performed with two-way ANOVA using SPSS version 21.0. The results of this study indicate that there is the effect of the Problem-Based Learning model on mathematical problem solving ability of students. In addition the result also show that there is no interaction between learning and gender on students' mathematical problem solving abilities.

La formación de la capacidad matemática de los estudiantes a través de tareas orientadas a la competencia.

“…They can solve one-step applied problems and identify simple algebraic relationships, a common system of notation. They can recognize and transform applied problem data, which can be written in tables, or represented graphically in the form of graphs, maps, and various scales (Hasibuan & Fauzi, 2020;Siregar, Asmin, & Fauzi, 2018).…”

Enhancing Mathematical Problem-Solving Skills of Indonesian Junior High School Students through Problem-Based Learning: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…The overall effect size of the implementation of PBL in enhancing the MPSS of Indonesian JHS students from each study is presented in Table 5. (Saragih et al, 2018) 1,008 0,241 0,058 0,535 1,481 4,177 0,000 (Siregar et al, 2018) 1,399 0,324 0,105 0,763 2,035 4,313 0,000 (Hobri et al, 2020) 0,023 0,240 0,057 -0,447 0,493 0,096 0,924 (Astriani et al, 2017) 0,941 0,327 0,107 0,299 1,582 2,874 0,004 (Karatas & Baki, 2013) 0,816 0,282 0,080 0,263 1,368 2,892 0,004 (Yanti, 2017) 1,486 0,252 0,064 0,992 1,980 5,891 0,000 (Miranti et al, 2015) 0,597 0,261 0,068 0,086 1,108 2,292 0,022 (Lestari et al, 2016) 0,087 0,251 0,063 -0,404 0,579 0,349 0,727 (Supratinah et al, 2015) 0,606 0,145 0,021 0,322 0,891 4,176 0,000 (Supratinah et al, 2015) 1,013 0,150 0,023 0,718 1,308 6,735 0,000 (Setiawan et al, 2014) 0,692 0,272 0,074 0,160 1,224 2,548 0,011 (Nadhifah & Afriansyah, 2016) -0,298 0,232 0,054 -0,753 0,157 -1,283 0,199 (Amperawan et al, 2018) 0,450 0,260 0,068 -0,060 0,960 1,730 0,084 (Putri et al, 2018) 0,411 0,246 0,060 -0,071 0,893 1,670 0,095 (Minarni, 2012) 0,885 0,173 0,030 0,545 1,225 5,109 0,000 (Khayroiyah & Ramadhani, 2018) 0,644 0,262 0,068 0,132 1,157 2,464 0,014 (Ayu et al, 2016) 0,996 0,347 0,120 0,316 1,676 2,872 0,004 (Afrilia et al, 2014) 0,831 0,266 0,071 0,310 1,352 3,124 0,002 (Elita et al, 2019) 0,863 0,351 0,123 0,176 1,551 2,461 0,014 (Sa'bani, 2017) 0,482 0,283 0,080 -0,073 1,036 1,703 0,089 (Rizka, 2018) 0,138 0,247 0,061 -0,347 0,623 0,559 0,576 (Aprianti et al, 2018) 0,700 0,282 0,079 0,148 1,252 2,485 0,013 (Laili, 2019) 0,546 0,220 0,049 0,114 0,978 2,479 0,013 (Zulaiha et al, 2016) 1,333 0,258 0,067 0,827 1,839 5,161 0,000 (Mulyani et al, 2018) 1,383 0,244 0,060 0,904 1,862 5,658 0,000 (Ferdianto et al, 2018) 0,464 0,282 0,080 -0,089 1,017 1,643 0,100 (Yenni et al, 2017) 0,812 0,250 0,062 0,322 1,301 3,251 0,001 (Rahmawati et al, 2019) 1,325 0,297 0,088 0,742 1,907 4,458 0,000 (Sutrisno et al, 2020) 1,274 0,290 0,084 0,706 1,842 4,...…”

“…The results of these studies are various. Some said that PBL had a positive effect (Ferdianto et al, 2018;Karatas & Baki, 2013;Mulyani et al, 2018;Rahmawati et al, 2019;Saragih et al, 2018;Siregar et al, 2018;Sutrisno et al, 2020;Yenni et al, 2017), while others claimed that it had no difference from conventional learning (Amperawan et al, 2018;Hobri et al, 2020;Lestari et al, 2016;Nadhifah & Afriansyah, 2016;Putri et al, 2018;Rizka, 2018;Sa'bani, 2017). Of course, the heterogeneity of the results creates a new problem, especially as the reference for one that believes PBL affected MPSS.…”

Pengembangan Soal Matemika Model Pisa Pada Konten Change and Relationship Untuk Mengukur Kemampuanpemecahan Masalah Matematis Siswa SMP Negeri 6 Padangsidimpuan

“…Adapun karakteristik soal PISA terdiri dari tiga komponen (OECD, 2013) Menurut Wati (Simalango, Darmawijoyo, dan Aisyah, 2018) [9] mengungkapkan faktor penyebab kesalahan siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal PISA konten change and relationship yaitu kemampuan penalaran dan kreativitas siswa yang rendah dalam memecahkan masalah pada konteks nyata dan memanipulasi dalam bentuk aljabar.Soal model PISA dengan konten change and relatinship sangat penting karena dengan adanya tipe soal seperti ini dapat mendorong minat siswa untuk termotivasi lagi dalam menyelesaikan masalah pada soal.Dengan adanya konten ini dapat menjadi acuan guru untuk membuat ataupun mendesain soal secara khusus dan sesuai dengan potensi siswa dengan menggunakan solusi dalam pemecahan masalah dalam setiap soal.Keterampilan dan pembelajaran pemecahan masalah matematika kemandirian siswa dapat dilatih dan dikembangkan ketika guru dapat memilih pendekatan, model, metode, atau pembelajaran strategi yang sesuai dan sesuai dengan materi, situasi dan kondisi siswa dalam belajar (Siregar, Asmin, dan fauzi, 2018) [10].…”