Hipotenusa : Journal of Mathematical Society

Volume 2 Issue 2 Year 2020

ISSN: 2716-3156
Website: https://hipotenusa.iainsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/hipotenusa/index

The Effect of Problem-based Learning Model Modified

by Cognitive Load Theory on Mathematical Problem Solving Skills

Maulida Nur Zahara1*, Aan Hendrayana1, Aan Subhan Pamungkas1

1
Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University, Serang, Indonesia.
*Corresponding Author, e-mail: [email protected]
DOI: 10.18326/hipotenusa.v2i2.41-55

Article submitted : July 1st, 2020

Article reviewed : September 17th, 2020
Article published : December 1st, 2020

Abstract
The background of the research is based on the fact that problem-solving skills
and its process is still low so that those create overload information. Another way to
overcome this problem is to use a problem-based learning model that concerns the
cognitive load theory. This study aims to determine how students' problem-solving
skills are modified using a problem-based learning model limited by cognitive load
theory. This research method uses a combination of research methods, namely
quantitative as primary data and qualitative as secondary data. This study's population
are all students of grade VII Junior High School accredited A in Tangerang Regency.
The sampling technique used is random cluster sampling, and the selected sample is
60 students of Grade VII SMP Negeri 3 Cikupa, which is divided into experimental
class and control class. This research's instruments are 5 short essay tests and non-
tests, a questionnaire, and an interview. Based on data analysis's result, it can be
concluded that the achievement and improvement of students' mathematical problem-
solving abilities which use problem-based learning model modified by cognitive load
theory, are better than for those using problem-based learning generally.
Keywords: problem-based learning, problem-solving, cognitive load theory

41

Hipotenusa is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

INTRODUCTION
The development of digital technology in the current Industry 4.0 era has brought
changes and impacts greatly. It affects various aspects of human life, including the
education sector (Buteau & Muller, 2017; Panero & Aldon, 2016; Putrawangsa &
Hasanah, 2018). One of the challenges that must be faced in changing life in this era of
revolution 4.0 is improving the quality of human resources that are capable of competing
in this global era. The quality of human resources can be gained from the quality of
education as well so that the education unit should be able to provide a set of plans and
arrangements regarding the objectives, content, and learning materials, as well as the
methods used as guidelines for implementing learning activities to achieve certain
educational goals (Marlina & Jayanti, 2019; Parwati, 2019; Pratiwi & Fasha, 2015;
Sujadi, 2018).

To answer the Industrial Revolution 4.0 era's challenges, the educational world
should adopt the 21st-century learning process. In fact, education is growing continuously
in line with human civilization development, which is supported by science and
technology rapidly. In this century, people are required to have: critical thinking and
problem solving, communication, collaboration and creativity, and innovation. (Marlina
& Jayanti, 2019; Parwati, 2019; Putrawangsa & Hasanah, 2018).

In the world of education, students' abilities are trained through problems so that
they are able to improve their various competencies (Sumartini, 2016). Problem-solving
is basically the main goal of learning mathematics. However, based on several previous
studies, problem-solving ability skills are still low. Students prefer to memorize formulas
instead of understanding concepts so that learning outcomes are more important than their
process, and they are problematic when facing problem-solving on mathematics
questions. Then, teachers take part in implementing learning methods, which make them
less interested in solving a mathematical problem (Hadi & Radiatul, 2014; Sumartini,
2016; Ulya, 2015).

A good learning model is needed to improve students' problem-solving. One of the

learning models that can be developed and projected to improve problem-solving skills
is the problem-based learning model. Problem-based learning is learning that started and
centered on a problem (Davita & Pujiastuti, 2020; Fatimah, 2012; Novikasari, 2020).

42
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

In problem-based learning, students must identify conscious and unconscious material

and learn to solve a problem; students answer the questions based on their information
memory.

Moreover, when someone is faced with non-routine problems (problem-solving),

it is found that his working memory is overloaded (Nurfatanah; Rusmono; Nurjannah,
2019; Solikah & Himmah, 2019; Sweller, 1988; Ulya, 2015). People have limited
managing information in their brains so that when they cannot manage it properly, there
will be an overload. The condition of overload information is called cognitive load
(Hendrayana, 2015). Factors that affect the cognitive load on people's condition are level
of complexity of the problem (intrinsic load), mediators' actions that help to solve the
problem (extraneous load), and involvement of sense are constructing informational
process, working memory, and long-term memory (germane load) (Hendrayana, 2015;
Mayer & Moreno, 2010; Panse et al., 2018).

To minimize overloading conditions caused by problem solving's process in the

problem-based learning model, several innovations are needed in this model. One of them
is to pay attention to students' cognitive conditions. Therefore, researchers will use a
problem-based learning model on the cognitive load theory.

This model's reason is that the learning process shall increase problem-solving too
and eliminate students' cognitive load. (Fitriadi et al., 2017; Mikrayanti, 2012; Sumartini,
2016). The researchers focus on reducing extraneous loud, namely improper teaching
methods, which cause cognitive load on students.

The research is located in Tangerang Regency, one of 8 cities/regencies in Banten

Province. Tangerang people mostly work in the industrial sector because the area is
surrounded by many factories. But, according to the Ministry of Education and Culture,
Tangerang Regency receives the fourth rank in the mathematics National Examination
(UN) results of Junior High School in Banten, 2019.

The first rank is South Tangerang, while the second is Tangerang City. Although it
is close to Tangerang City and South Tangerang, the quality of education is quite
different. Thus, low mathematics UN result means that the ability to solve mathematical
problems is low too. Researchers want to improve the mathematical problem-solving
abilities of Junior High School students in the Tangerang Regency.

43
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

Based on the background above, the research problems are: (1) How are the
students' problem-solving skills when using a problem-based learning model modified by
cognitive load theory? (2) Are its skills better than a general problem-solving model?

The purpose of this research is to find out how problem-solving works when using
a problem-based learning model modified by cognitive load theory.

The benefit of this research is that a problem-based learning model modified by

cognitive load theory to improve students' problem-solving abilities can be used as a
guide in implementing mathematics learning; can provide information and suggestion on
its implementation in order to improve schools' quality, especially in mathematics; and to
know its effectiveness so that it gives the positive impacts on mathematics subject and
also increase students' problem-solving skills.

METHOD
This type of research uses the research data combination method (mixed methods).
Cresswell (in Sugiyono, 2011) argues that a combination research method is an approach
in research that combines or links between quantitative and qualitative research methods.

The research method in this research is a concurrent embedded design. Quantitative

and qualitative are used simultaneously or together, but in different portions, there are
primary and secondary methods (Sugiyono, 2011). Researchers use quantitative as a
primary method and qualitative as a secondary method.

The use of this method combination optimizes researchers to reveal the research
targets, as well as to obtain complete, valid, reliable, and objective data information. By
using a combination method, the weaknesses in both quantitative and qualitative methods
can be minimized.

The X variable (free) in this research is a problem-based learning model modified

by cognitive load theory, while the Y (dependent) variable is the problem-solving skills.
Then, the researchers will use the mean test method. The test is used to test the truth of
the hypothesis.

Research Subject

The population in this research is all students of Grade VII accredited A Junior High
School in Tangerang Regency. The sampling method is cluster random sampling. Then,

44
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

the sample is SMP Negeri 3 Cikupa. SMP Negeri 3 Cikupa has a national mathematics
test score of 46.92 and higher than the other schools. Therefore, the researcher uses 1
control class and 1 experimental class.

Data Collection Procedure

The data collection procedure is divided into 3 parts. The first is the preparation
stage. The second is the implementation stage, and the third is the data analysis stage. The
preparation stage is making good instruments, validating the required instruments,
identifying data collection procedures, and determining hypotheses.

The implementation phase begins by giving a pretest to the experimental class and
control class, followed by the learning process, then giving a posttest. Furthermore, to
obtain more in-depth data, the researchers gave a questionnaire and conducted an
interview.

The last stage is the data analysis stage. Test and non-test analysis' results
instruments are used to determine the effect of the problem-based learning model
modified by cognitive load theory on students' problem-solving skills.

Instrument

The instruments are test and non-test. The test questions consist of 5 short essay
questions, while the non-test is questionnaires and interviews, which questioned about
the learning process, students' feelings, and students' results on the problem-solving skills'
indicator during the class. Moreover, the instrument of the research is a valid and reliable
instrument.

Data Analysis Technique

Data analysis simplifies data into a form that is easier to be read and interpreted.
(Singarimbun & Effendi, 2006). The analysis takes two stages, namely using quantitative
methods and qualitative methods.

The quantitative data is analyzed using the N-Gain test and the mean test (T-test).
Before taking its result, the prerequisite test is carried out earlier, namely the normality
test and the homogeneity test. The T-test formula is:

45
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

𝑋1 − 𝑋2
𝑡𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 =
(𝑛1 − 1)𝑠𝑖 2 + (𝑛2 − 1)𝑠𝑖 2 1 1
√ ( + )
𝑛1 + 𝑛2 − 2 𝑛1 𝑛2
Based on this formula, there are 3 types of scores that we must prepare first, namely:

Xi = the average score/group i’s score

ni = Total respondents of group i

𝑠𝑖2 = group i's variants

The qualitative data of a questionnaire are analyzed using the average percentage
of student answers, by the formula:

∑ 𝑓𝑖 𝑃𝑖
𝑃̅𝑖 = ∗ 100%
𝑛
Explanation:

𝑃̅𝑖 = The average of students' answers on 'i' statement

𝑓𝑖 = The frequency of students' answers on 'i' statement

𝑃𝑖 = The percentage of students' answer on 'i' statement

𝑛 = The total of respondents

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Students in the experimental class and the control class conduct a pretest to examine
whether both classes have a similar basic understanding of the delivered materials. The
average score, standard deviation, variance, and maximum score of experimental class
and control class students' pretest data are presented in Table 1 as follows.

Table 1. Pretest result

Experiment Control
Average 12,97 12,9
Standard Deviation 5,59 4,89
Variance 31,34 23,96
Maximum Score 25 23

46
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

After obtaining data of students' pretest from both classes, then it will be conducted
hypothesis testing using the T-test with alpha 0.05. The result of tcount is 0.48, because
tcount> alpha, so H0 is accepted, which means that there is no significant difference in the
ability of the previous knowledge between the experimental class and the control class.
So those classes have similar previous knowledge.

After the learning process for approximately 4 weeks, the next step is to see the
difference from the classes' implemented learning model. In order to know the difference,
the researchers give a final test or posttest. The average score, standard deviation,
variance, and maximum score of post-test data are presented in Table 2.

The researcher analyzes it based on each indicator of students' mathematical

problem-solving skills first, which included the ability to identify known and asked
information, compile mathematical models, solve mathematical models, and check the
correct conclusion.

Table 2. Posttest Results Data

Experiment Control
Average 75,8 65
Standard Deviation 15,51 14,95
Variance 240,51 223,38
Maximum Score 98 95

Figure 1. The ability to identify elements that are known and asked
by the experimental class students in question number 1

47
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

Figure 2. The ability to identify control class students in question no.1

Figure 1 and Figure 2 below show the difference in the ability to identify the
elements that are known and asked among students in the experimental class and students
in the control class.

Based on Figure 1 and Figure 2, it can be concluded that the ability to identify
known and asked elements of the experimental class is better than the control class. The
experimental class writes it briefly and clearly, but the control class is contrasted to it.
Furthermore, on the indicators of compiling a mathematical model, the different answers
of two classes are presented in Figure 3 and Figure 4 as follows.

Figure 3. The ability to compile a mathematical model

for the experimental class students on the question no 2

Figure 4. The ability to compile a mathematical model

on the control class in question no 2
Based on Figure 3 and Figure 4, it can be concluded that the ability to compile
mathematical models in the experimental class is better than the control class. The
experimental class writes a mathematical model on the questions correctly, while the
control is missed. Furthermore, on the indicators of completing the mathematical model,

48
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

the experimental class and control class's differences answers are presented in Figure 5
and Figure 6 as follows.

Figure 5. The ability to solve the mathematical model in experimental

on question number 4

Figure 6. Students' ability to solve the mathematical model in the control class
on question no 4
Based on Figure 5 and Figure 6, it can be said that the ability to solve the
mathematical model of the experimental class is better than the control class. The
experimental class writes the mathematical model's answer correctly and in detail, while
the control class could not solve the answers. Moreover, on the indicators of checking the
correctness of the conclusion, both classes' differences are presented in Figure 7 and
Figure 8 as follows.

49
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

Figure 7. The ability to check the correctness of the conclusion

in the experimental class on question no.5

Figure 8. The ability to check students' correctness of the conclusion

in the control class on question no.5
Based on Figure 7 and Figure 8, it can be seen that the ability to check the
correctness of the experimental class conclusion is better than the control class. The
experimental class re-checks and writes arguments to the questions, while the control
class does not re-check the answer.

Statistical calculations are needed to test the hypothesis' truth so that the results will
be are accurate. The test is the achievement hypothesis test and the increase of hypothesis
tests. The achievement hypothesis test uses the T-test formula with an alpha of 0.05. The
result of tcount is 0.004, because tcount <alpha, then H0 is rejected, so H1 is accepted, which
means that the achievement of mathematical problem-solving ability in the experimental
class is better than the control class.

To test the increase in the hypothesis, the researcher used the T-test formula with
an alpha of 0.05. The result of tcount is 0.003, because tcount <alpha then H0 is rejected
and it results in H1 being accepted, which means that the increase in mathematical
problem-solving ability in the experimental class is better than the control class.

Learning on lines and angles are in 4 weeks. Researchers give worksheets and also
practice or projects. Experimental class worksheets always refer to extraneous load
deduction factors. This helps decrease students' cognitive load in the experimental class.

50
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

This is in line with Hendrayana's research; he states that minimized extraneous early is
important so that students are able to have a long-term memory (Hendrayana, 2015).

During the learning process, the experimental class students seem to be more
enthusiastic and active, asking questions than the control class students. Control class
students tend to be quiet and rarely ask many questions, even when practising the
condition of the control class is still conducive and silent. In the learning process, the
experimental class students can solve mathematical problems and finish the given
assignments better and faster than the control class. This is in line with the research
conducted by Sumartini, who has concluded that the experimental class, which uses a
problem-based learning model, is better at solving problems than the control class
(Sumartini, 2016).

Based on inferential statistical analysis results, the experimental class has a better
final achievement than the control class. The results can be seen from the differentiation
between experimental class' students and control class' students on their problem-solving
ability's average. Therefore, the problem-based learning model modified by cognitive
theory is better than the general problem-based learning model on students' mathematical
problem-solving skills.

The control class gets a higher cognitive load than the experimental class.
According to Sweller, excessive cognitive load arises from given irregular problems
(problem-solving) (Sweller, 1988). In other words, if the learning model focuses on
students' cognitive load, students will have the opportunity to improve their mathematical
problem-solving skills.

The analysis results of this research indicate that the problem-based learning model
modified by cognitive load theory has a positive impact on students' mathematical
problem-solving skills. Researchers give the appropriate teaching methods to reduce
students' extraneous cognitive load. This illustrates that the more perfect of problem-
based learning model concerned to the cognitive load theory (extraneous load's
deduction) used by the teachers, the ideal student's problem-solving skills achievement.
This is similar to Mayer & Moreno's statements that the effective learning process in
improving problem-solving skills happens if its learning reduces extraneous cognitive
load (Mayer & Moreno, 2010). Indeed, the problem-based learning model is proven to

51
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

enhance students' problem-solving skills (Gunantara et al., 2014; Jailani et al., 2017;
Maqfiroh, 2016).

However, by focusing on the students' cognitive load because of teachers'

misconception in the teaching-learning process, the problem-based learning models will
effectively increase problem-solving skills. This is similar to the previous research's
results found that problem-based learning which focused on students' cognitive load, has
proven to give good results (Fitriadi et al., 2017; Hendrayana, 2015; Mayer & Moreno,
2010).

CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis and discussion's results, the researchers conclude that the
problem-based learning model modified by cognitive load theory can improve
mathematical problem-solving skills. It can be seen from its high N-Gain score. It means
that there is a significant increase in mathematical problem-solving skills. Therefore,
mathematical problem-solving skills on the problem-based learning model modified by
cognitive load theory are better than the general problem-based model only.

REFERENCES
Buteau, C., & Muller, E. (2017). Assessment in Undergraduate Programming-Based
Mathematics Courses. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3(2), 97–
114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0026-4

Davita, P. W. C., & Pujiastuti, H. (2020). Anallisis Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah

Matematika Ditinjau Dari Gender. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif,
11(1), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.15294/kreano.v11i1.23601

Fatimah, F. (2012). Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Dalam Pembelajaran Statistika

Elementer Melalui Problem Based-Learning. Cakrawala Pendidikan,
TH.XXXIV(2), 267–277.

Fitriadi, S., Suharto., & Trapsilasiwi, D. (2017). Pengembangan Perangkat

Pembelajaran Matematika Model Problem Based Learning pada Materi Barisan
dan Deret Aritmetika Kelas X SMA dengan Memperhatikan Beban Kognitif.
Jurnal Edukasi, IV(1).

52
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

Gunantara, G., Suarjana, M., & Riastini, N. (2014). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran
Problem Based Learning untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan. Jurnal
Mimbar PGSD Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 2(1).

Hadi, S., & Radiatul. (2014). Metode Pemecahan Masalah Menurut Polya untuk
Mengembangkan Kemampuan Siswa dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematis di
Sekolah Menengah Pertama. EDU-MAT Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 53–
61.

Hendrayana, A. (2015). Mengatasi Cognitive Load Pada Anak. FKIP Untirta Publisher.

Jailani, J., Sugiman, S., & Apino, E. (2017). Implementing the problem-based learning
in order to improve the students’ HOTS and characters. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan
Matematika, 4(2), 247. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v4i2.17674

Maqfiroh, F. (2016). MENINGKATKAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIKA MELALUI

MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PBL (PROBLEM BASED LEARNING) BERBASIS
CIRC (COOPERATIVE INTEGRATED READING AND COMPOSITION.
Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.

Marlina, W., & Jayanti, D. (2019). 4C dalam Pembelajaran Matematika untuk

Menghadapi Era Revolusi Industri 4.0. SENDIKA Vol. 5 No. 1, 392–396.

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Reduce Extraneous Cognitive Load and Manage
Intrinsic Cognitive Load during Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University
Press.

Mikrayanti. (2012). MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN DAN

KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIS SISWA SEKOLAH MENENGAH ATAS MELALUI
PEMBELAJARAN BERBASIS MASALAH :Studi Kuasi Eksperimen pada Siswa
SMA di Kabupaten Bima. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Novikasari, I. (2020). Pre-service teacher’s mathematical knowledge for teaching in

problem-based learning. JRAMathEdu (Journal of Research and Advances in
Mathematics Education), 5(2), 160–174.
https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v5i2.10556

Nurfatanah; Rusmono; Nurjannah. (2019). Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis

Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Prosiding Seminar Dan Diskusi Nasional Pendidikan Dasar,

53
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

546–551. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/a5qyh

Panero, M., & Aldon, G. (2016). How Teachers Evolve Their Formative Assessment
Practices When Digital Tools Are Involved in the Classroom. Digital Experiences
in Mathematics Education, 2(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0012-
x

Panse, A., Alcock, L., & Inglis, M. (2018). Reading Proofs for Validation and
Comprehension: an Expert-Novice Eye-Movement Study. International Journal of
Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 4(3), 357–375.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-018-0077-6

Parwati, N. N. (2019). Adaptasi Pembelajaran Matematika di era Revolusi Industri 4.0.

SENAMA PGRI, 1–11.

Pratiwi, U., & Fasha, E. F. (2015). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Hots Berbasis
Kurikulum 2013 Terhadap Sikap Disiplin. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pembelajaran
IPA, 1(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.30870/jppi.v1i1.330

Putrawangsa, S., & Hasanah, U. (2018). Integrasi Teknologi Digital dalam

Pembelajaran di Era Industri 4.0 Kajian dari Perspektif Pembelajaran Matematika.
Jurnal Tatsqif, 16(1), 42–54.

Singarimbun, M., & Effendi, S. (2006). Metode Penelitian Survei. LP3ES.

Solikah, A., & Himmah, W. I. (2019). Keefektifan Model Pembelajaran Means Ends
Analysis Dengan Strategi Heuristik Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah
Matematika. Hipotenusa : Journal of Mathematical Society, 1(1).
https://doi.org/10.18326/hipotenusa.v1i1.3278

Sugiyono. (2016). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Sujadi, I. (2018). Peran Pembelajaran Matematika pada Penguatan Nilai Karakter

Bangsa di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0. Silogisme, 1–13.

Sumartini, T. . (2016). Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Siswa

melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2),
148–158.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Load During Problem Solving. Cognitive Science, 12(2),

54
 Jurnal Hipotenusa, 2 (2), December 2020
Maulida Nur Zahara, Aan Hendrayana, and Aan Subhan Pamungkas

257–285.

Ulya, H. (2015). Hubungan Gaya Kognitif dengan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah

Matematika Siswa. Jurnal Konseling GUSJIGANG, 1(2).

55