Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia

Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52

p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia is licensed under

A Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL)

APPROACH VIEWED FROM THE STUDENTS’ MATHEMATICAL
CREATIVE THINKING ABILITY
Lisda Fitriana Masitoh1)
1)
Pamulang University, South Tengerang
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. Generally, mathematical competence equips students with logical thinking ability. On the other hand, the
mathematical competence is expected to equip students with creative thinking ability. Creative thinking ability is used
when a person faces a problem or challenge. Nowadays, there has been a lot of developing approaches that can be used
to create ideal learning condition to achieve the learning goals, including improving the mathematical creative thinking
ability. One of approaches that can be used is Problem Based Learning (PBL). The purpose of this research was to
describe the effectiveness of PBL approach in terms of mathematical creative thinking ability. This was a quasi-
experimental reseach. A control class used the conventional approach. The results showed that Problem Based Learning
(PBL) was an effective appoach viewed from the mathematical creative thinking ability. Meanwhile, the control class
was not effective.

Keywords: creative thinking, mathematics, problem based learning

the quality of problem solving, creativity as a mental

I. INTRODUCTION expression or self-actualization, and creativity as a result of
Learning mathematics in higher education is one of the thinking. Because creativity is closely related to the thinking
efforts to equip students to become a quality generation of process, creativity is often called creative thinking.
people who are able to deal with times. This is because Creative thinking is one type of thinking that is very
mathematics is a science that makes an extraordinary interesting which is related to cognitive skills and the ability
contribution to the development of science and technology. to find new solutions of problem (Arends & Kilcher, 2010:
Mathematical competence opens doors to productive futures 233). Characteristics of creative thinking are original results
and lack of competence keep those doors close (NCTM, 2000: and new ways that are not previously predicted (Crow &
5). Many abilities can be developed through mathematics, one Crow, 1977: 448). Creative thinking is closely related to ideas
of which is creative thinking ability. The creative thinking to find solutions of problem. Therefore creative thinking in
ability is very important because it is needed when someone mathematics is closely related to the process to solve
faces problem or challenge. problems. Guilford (Lefrancois, 2000: 301) stated that
Creativity is the process of taking new ideas and generating creativity involves fluency, flexibility, and originality.
the appropriate and high quality products (Wrigth, 2010: 3). Creative thinking that involves divergent thinking, is
Creativity involves divergent thinking which is the ability to explained by Schlichter (Eragamreddy, 2013: 140) who stated
get new and original ideas that become unusual (McGredor, that in general the meaning of divergent thinking includes
2007: 168). Two ways of looking at creativity, namely fluency (thinking about many ideas), flexibility (thinking from
creativity refers to specific types of thinking or certain mental a different point of view), originality (thinking about unusual
functions called divergent thinking, and creativity refers to ideas) and elaboration (adding detailed solutions to enhance
producing creative products (Haylock: 1997: 68). ideas). Creative thinking has originality, which is unusual
Creativity is closely related to divergent thinking, which is thinking, smart, new ideas. Flexibility means thinking about
thinking to get new and original ideas. Creativity is very new ideas and ways to overcome the situation, fluency comes
important for students especially in problem solving process. through how much the number of ideas, words and ways of
Seifert (1983: 205) defines creativity as a rational emphasis, expressing something. Meanwhile, elaboration is enriching
experience through details (Gorman, 1974: 275).

47
 Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia
Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52
p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

According to Ali (2010: 5) aspects of creative thinking in Another thing that must be done is to evaluate students'
mathematics are fluency, flexibility, novelty and elaboration. thinking ability. The evaluation of students' creative thinking
Fluency includes the ability to solve problems and provide ability is important to find out the level of students' creative
many answers to the problem or provide many examples or thinking ability. To evaluate the creative thinking ability,
statements related to certain mathematical concepts or students can use tasks that require them to do problem solving
situations. Flexibility includes the ability to use a variety of activities. The type of problem solving that can be used in
problem solving strategies or provide various examples or evaluating students' creative thinking ability is open-ended
statements related to certain mathematical concepts or problem. According to Ali (2010: 1), one way to evaluate the
situations. Novelty includes the ability to use strategies that creative thingking ability is with open-ended problem, namely
are new, unique, or unusual to solve problems or provide problems that have a variety of solutions or strategies. The
examples or statements that are new, unique, or unusual. result of problem solving is analyzed to determine the level of
Elaboration includes the ability to explain in detail and students' creative thinking ability.
coherence to mathematical procedures, answers, or certain Based on the statements above, it can be concluded that
mathematical situations. problem solving activities can be used to improve and
Based on the description above, it can be concluded that in evaluate the creative thinking ability. One of the problems that
general the mathematics creative thinking ability is the ability can be used is an open-ended problem, which is a problem
to obtain ideas to solve problems that include fluency, that has a variety of solutions or strategies.
flexibility, originality and elaboration. Fluency is shown The above description suggests that students should have
through the ability to solve problems and provide many high creative thinking ability and can use it in solving
answers. Flexibility is shown through the ability of students to problems, especially mathematical problems. However, the
use various ways or strategies to solve problems and produce facts that occurred at Pamulang University, especially in the
a variety of answers. The originality is shown through the Informatics Engineering Study Program, showed that students'
ability of students to solve problems in new ways or strategies creative thinking ability was still relatively low. Students’
or provide new (unusual) answers. Meanwhile elaboration is creativity in working on mathematicsl problems is still lack.
shown through the ability of students to solve problems with Mathematics was not a subject that most students like.
detailed and coherent steps. Based on the results of interview with several students in
Everyone has the ability to think creatively. It is just that the Informatics Engineering Study Program, it was known that
their abilities are not the same and these abilities can be students did not like Mathematics, especially applied graph. In
developed. The creative thinking level of each person is addition, they were also not confident with their mathematical
different from one to each other. There are five levels of abilities. They have assumed that Mathematics is difficult and
creative thinking skills from the lowest to the highest (Tatag, they cannot comprehend it. About creative thinking ability, in
2010: 17). Everyone has at least some creative potential. The particular the initial description of students' creative thinking
difference is the extent to which the person is able to realize ability in the Informatics Engineering Study Program was
this potential (Wrigth, 2010: 3). obtained based on the students' creative thinking ability test in
Students can improve mathematical creative thinking the subject of applied graph by giving tests to 60 students. The
ability by practicing math problems. In this case, the lecturer results showed that most students have not been able to
facilitates students to improve their mathematical creative provide many answers in solving a problem. This showed that
thinking ability. Efforts to improve students' creative thinking students' creative thinking ability was still low and absolutely
ability are carried out by increasing students' abilities in still needs to be improved.
creative thinking aspects, namely fluency, flexibility, The efforts to improve students' creative thinking ability
originality and elaboration. can be done by improving the process of learning
Creative thinking as previously explained is very closely Mathematics. A teacher, in this case the lecturer, must prepare
related to problem solving. Therefore, mathematical problems their best for mathematics learning activities, including using
become the base for developing students' mathematical various learning approaches. One of the goals is to realize an
creative thinking ability. Developing students' creative interactive and fun mathematics learning and can facilitate
thinking ability can be done using open-ended problems. students in improving their creative thinking ability.
Open-ended problem is questions that have various solutions Related to efforts to improve the creative thinking ability,
or strategies to solve (Ali, 2010: 1). the alternative learning approache that can be used is Problem
In general, improving the creative thinking ability can be Based Learning (PBL). PBL is a learning strategy designed to
done through problem solving, including the problem solving improve learning by requiring students to study subject matter
in open-ended problems. Through problem solving, fluency while solving problems (Jonassen, 2011: 154). Problem
can be trained with problems that produce answers. Flexibility solving activities that carried out by students in PBL will
is trained through problems that can be solved in several ways bring students to problem solving skills. PBL uses problems
or in various answers. Originality is trained through problems as a means for students to acquire problem solving skills and
that give students freedom to give correct answers, including gain knowledge (Uden & Beaumont, 2006: 25). PBL is a
flexibility in using methods or strategies. Meanwhile student-centered model, developing activeness and learning
elaboration is trained through solving problems in a detailed motivation, problem-solving skills and broad knowledge, the
and coherent manner.

48
 Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia
Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52
p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

basis of deep understanding and problem solving (Ali, et al, The third step is investigation. In this step students conduct
2010: 68). an investigation, discuss looking for ideas to get a solution to
Learning activities through PBL emphasize the need of the problem. At this stage students try to find the most
students to investigate problems presented and construct appropriate solution. Therefore, after getting a solution
knowledge based on their experiences. Torp & Sage (2002: students need to looking back and correct the results of the
15) stated that PBL is focused learning, learning from problem solving, so that they are truly confident in the
organized experiences through investigation and is the solution they get. The next step is presentation. This activity
resolution of real world problems. The investigation process is facilitates students in delivering the results of the problem
carried out both individually and in groups (Arend & Kilcher, solving. The last stage is evaluation. In evaluation activities,
2010: 127). students reflect or evaluate their investigations and the
Investigation involves students actively in learning and processes they use in solving problems.
allows students to identify problems, understand problems and Based on the description above, the researcher intends to
solve problems, until finally students gain new knowledge. find out the effectiveness of the Problem Based Learning
The investigation process requires students to think critically, approach in terms of students' mathematical creative thinking
creatively and monitor their understanding (Sungur & ability, especially in the subjects of applied graph. The
Tekkaya, 2006: 308). This opinion shows that PBL places conventional class will be chosen as the control class.
students as the center of learning activities and provides
learning facilities for students to develop the ability to think II. METHOD
critically and creatively. This is consistent with the opinion of This is a quasi-experimental research. Quasi-experimental
Chakrabarty & Mohamed (2013: 40) that PBL is learning research is based on the assumption that the classes used as
about problem solving that gives students the opportunity to experiments are equivalent. In experimental research the
think critically and convey their creative ideas. PBL is hypothesis regarding casual relationships (causation) will be
learning that can help students improve their creative thinking tested correctly (Gay 1981: 85). In this case the Problem
ability (Uden & Beaumont, 2006: 41). Based Learning approach will be applied and will be
Therefore, one of the thinking abilities that can be compared with conventional approach to see the consequences
developed through PBL is the creative thingking ability. The that are caused, especially in the dependent variable to be
proposed problem is the problem that trains students to solve studied, namely the mathematical creative thinking ability.
problems and requires creative thinking (Bilgin, Senocak & The research was conducted from March to May 2018, in the
Sozbilir, 2009: 155). PBL illustrates something that has the even semester period 2017/2018 academic year. The place of
potential to increase creative thinking (Wu & Forrester, 2004: the research was at Pamulang University.
75). Learning with the PBL approach uses problems as the The data collection methods used in this research were
starting point of students in constructing their knowledge. The interviews, documentation and tests. In particular, data of
problem must be solved by students, so that through the mathematical creative thinking ability were carried out using
problem solving process students can improve their creative written tests. The test was carried out before treatment to
thinking ability. determine students' initial mathematical creative thinking
Some experts find their opinions regarding the learning ability before getting treatment. After that the test was carried
syntax with PBL. Arend & Kilcher (2010: 333) described that out again after the treatment was given to determine the
PBL starting from presenting problems and organizing students' mathematical thinking ability after getting treatment.
students to study in groups. The groups of student are then The data analysis used in this study is descriptive analysis and
asked to design and plan investigations to find possible inferential analysis with calculations using the SPSS program.
solutions. The development of students’ learning is monitored
by the lecturer and students. Finally, the groups presented A. Descriptive Analysis
their findings and participated in reflection and question and
answer. According to Arends (2008: 57) the steps of learning The data analysed in this research were pretest and posttest
with PBL were carried out by giving orientation of the on the aspects of creative thinking ability. The data presented
problem to students, organizing students to research, assisting are mean, standard deviations, the highest score achieved, the
independent and group investigations, developing and lowest score achieved, the maximum possible score, and the
presenting artifacts and exhibits and finally evaluating the minimum possible score. The data of creative thingking
problem solving process. ability was obtained through measurement with test
Generally, it can be concluded that important points from instruments. For learning achievement tests, the instrument
learning with the PBL approach with five main steps, namely used was essay test. Furthermore, data about creative
preparing students, orientation of the problem, investigation, thingking ability are interpreted into specified criteria. To
presentation and evaluation. In the first step of preparing determine criteria, classification is used based on ideal
students, the lecturer organizes students to learn. In the second averages and ideal standard deviations. The conversion score
step of orientation of the problem, the lecturer can propose a of creative thinking ability refers to the following table.
phenomenon or problem that is the basis for students to learn.
Next, students define the main problem they will solve, and
what is needed to solve the problem.

49
 Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia
Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52
p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

Table I ability for PBL class increased from pretest with a score of
Conversion Score of Creative Thinking Ability 11.83 to 76.79 at posttest, this showed that there was an
(Quantitative to Qualitative with Five Scale) increase of 64.96. These results indicate that the mean score of
students after being treated has reached the specified
Score Interval Criteria minimum criteria of 70. For conventional class, the mean
X > 75 Very good score of students’ thinking ability from pretest with a score of
58.33 < X ≤ 75 Good
41.67 < X ≤ 58.33 Fair
11.28 to 69.24 at posttest means that it increases by 57.96.
25 < X ≤ 41.67 Bad While based on the percentage of student completed the test,
X ≤ 25 Very bad before being given treatment there were no students who
completed or reached a score of 70. Then after being given
B. Inferential analysis treatment, the percentage of student completed the test in the
PBL class reached 95.83%. Exactly, 23 of the 24 students did.
The techniques of data analysis that used was univariate While the conventional class reached 58.62% or 17 of 29
analysts with pre-trial tests, namely normality test and students. The frequency distribution of students' creative
homogeneity test. The analysis was carried out with the SPSS thinking ability can be seen in table below.
program. The learning approach is said to be effective if the
mean score of student is more than or equal to 70. The test Table III
used was one sample t-test to find out the effectiveness of Frequency Distribution of Students’ Creative Thinking
each approach. Test of one sample t-test can be done if the Ability
data comes from a normal distribution population. If both PBL
and conventional approaches are effective, then a comparative Problem Based Learning Conventional
test of the effectiveness of the learning approach is carried out Criteria Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest
F % f % f % f %
using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test. Very
If the results of the univariate test have different 0 0% 11 45.83% 0 0% 5 17.24%
Good
effectiveness between the two learning approaches, then Good 0 0% 13 54.17% 0 0% 19 65.51%
further testing (post hoc) is conducted to see which learning Fair 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 13.79%
Bad 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
approach is more effective. However, if the results of Very
multivariate tests show that there is no difference in 24 100% 0 0% 29 100% 0 0%
bad
effectiveness between the two learning approaches, further
testing is not carried out. Based on the table above, class of PBL showed that when
before being treated all students had very poor creative
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION thinking ability, as many as 24 students or 100% of the class.
Then after being given treatment using the PBL approach it
A. Data of Creative Thingking Ability can be seen that as many as 11 students or 45.83% had very
The data in this study were divided into two, namely data good creative thinking ability and the remaining 13 students
before treatment and data after being treated. The data or 54.17% were in good criteria.
includes pretest and posttest about creative thinking ability. While in the class with conventional methods, it can be
The following is a description of the results of the test of seen that when before being treated, all students had very poor
creative thinking ability, both those who received the PBL creative thinking skills. Then after being given a treatment
approach and the conventional approaches presented in Table using a conventional approach, it can be seen that as many as
below. 5 students or 17.24% had very good criteria of creative
Table II thinking ability, 19 students or 65.51% were in good criteria
Result of Creative Thingking Ability and the remaining 4 students or 13.79% were in fair criteria.
B. Result of Hypothesis Test
Problem Based Learning Conventional
Description
Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest The significance value of the posttest data of creative
Mean 11.83 76.79 11.28 69.24 thinking ability for PBL was 0.00 < α = 0.05, so it could be
Standard
6.38 5.60 4.90 9.65 concluded that PBL approach was effective in terms of
deviation
Maximum score 100 100 100 100 mathematical creative thinking ability. While the significance
Minimum score 0 0 0 0 value of the posttest data of creative thinking ability for
Highest score 25 90 25 85
conventional class was 0.679 < α = 0.05, so it could be
Lowest score 0 65 0 50
Complete the concluded that conventional approach was not effective in
0% 95.83% 0% 58.62% terms of mathematical creative thinking ability.
test (%)
The effectiveness of PBL approach has also been proven
Based on the table above, the mean of posttest score of by previous research,that was research by Fadrik (2017) that
students' creative thinking ability is more than the mean of PBL was effective in improving students' creative thinking
pretest score of the class that gets treatment using both PBL ability in the Mathematics Education Study Program of UIN
and conventional approaches. The mean of creative thinking Mataram. In addition, the results of research conducted by

50
 Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia
Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52
p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

Ima, et al (2015) showed that PBL was effectively used to American Book Company. (buku asli diterbitkan
improve the creative thinking ability of students of Biology tahun 1954).
Education study program of Sebelas Maret University.
Because the results of testing the effectiveness of Eragamreddy, N. (2013). Teaching creative thinking skills.
conventional approach showed that conventional approach International Journal of English Language &
was not effective in terms of creative thinking ability, the Translation Studies, 1 (2), 124-145.
analysis was not continued to determine the differences in the
effectiveness of PBL and conventional approaches in terms of Fadrik, A.,F. (2017). Efektivitas Problem Based Learning
students' mathematical creative thinking ability. Terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Mahasiswa
Program Studi Tadris Matematika UIM Mataram.
IV. CONCLUSION Jurnal Teori dan Aplikasi Matematika, 1 (1), 48-54.
Based on the results of data analysis and discussion that Gay, L.R. (1981). Education Research: Competencies for
have been described previously, it can be concluded that the
Analisis and Aplication. Columbus:Charles E.
Problem Based Leaning Approach (PBL) was effective
Merrill Publishing Company.
viewed form the students’ mathematical creative thinking
ability. While conventional approach was not effective. From
Gorman, R. M. (1974). The psychology of classroom learning:
these results it is recommended for teachers in higher an inductive approach. Columbus, OH: Meril
education to be able to apply the PBL approach in learning Publisjing Company.
mathematics in the classroom.
Haylock, D. (1997). Recognizing mathematical creativity in
school children. Zentralblattfur Didaktik der
REFERENCES Mathematics, 29 (3), 68-74.

Ali, Mahmudi. (2010). Mengukur kemampuan berpikir kreatif Ima, et al. (2015) Pengembangan Modul Problem Based
matematis. Dipresentasikan dalam Konferensi Learning (PBL) pada Materi Populasi Hewan untuk
Nasional Matematika XV. Manado: UNIMA. Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif
Mahasiswa Pendidikan Biologi Universitas Sebelas
Ali, R., et al. (2010). Effect of using problem solving method Maret. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Inkuiri, 4 (3), 1-6.
in teaching mathematics on the achievement of
mathematics students. Asian Social Science, 6 (2), Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problem: A
66-72. handbook for designing problem solving learning
environments. New York, NY: Routledge.
Arends, R. I. (2008). Learning to teach: belajar untuk
mengajar. (Terjemahan Helly Prajitno Soetjipto & Lefrancois, G. R. (2000). Psychology for teaching. London:
Sri mulyani Soetjipto). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Wadsworth Thamson Learning.
Companies. (Buku asli diterbitkan tahun 2007).
McGredor, D. (2007). Developing thinking; developing
Arends, R. I., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: A guide to thinking skills in education.
learning: Becoming an accomplished teacher. New New York, NY: Open University Press.
York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school
Bilgin, I., Senocak, E., &Sozbilir, M. (2009). The effect of mathematics. Reston, VA: The National.
problem based learning instruction on university
students performance of conceptual and quantitative Seifert, K. S. (1983). Educational psycology theory and
problem in gas concepts. Eurasia Journal of practice. Norfolk, MA: Pearson Education Company.
Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5
(2), 153-164. Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effect of problem based
learning and traditional instruction on self-regulated
Chakrabarty, S., & Muhamed, N. (2013). Problem based learning. The Journal of Educational Research, 99
learning: Cultural diverse students’ engagement, (5), 307-317.
learning and contextualized problem solving in a
mathematics class. Wcik E-Journal of Integration Tatag, Y. E. S. (2010). Leveling student creative thinking in
Knowledge, 38-49. solving and posing mathematical problem. Journal
on Mathematics Education, 1 (1), 17-40.
Crow, L. D., & Crow, A. (1977). Psikologi pendidikan.
(Terjemahan Drs. Z. Kasijan). New York, NY:

51
 Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Indonesia
Volum 4 Nomor 2 bulan September 2019 Page 47 - 52
p-ISSN: 2477-5967 e-ISSN: 2477-8443

Torp, L., & Sage, S.(2002). Problem as possibilities: Problem

based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed).
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Uden, L., & Beaumont, C.( 2006). Technology and problem

based learning. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

Wrigth, S. (2010). Understanding creativity in early

childhood. London: SAGE Publication Ltd.

Wu, W. Y., & Forrester, V. (2004). Exploring the cognitive

processes of problem-based learning and their
relationship to talent development. Dalam Tan, O. S
& Watson, G. Enhancing Thinking Through
Problem-Based Learning Approaches: International
Perspectives (pp. 64-77). Singapore: Cengage
Learning

52