PROS Desi FW, Nuryani YR Implementation of ask fulltext
Proceedings of the IConSSE FSM SWCU (2015), pp. SC.141–148
SC.141
ISBN: 978-602-1047-21-7
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies
to improve critical thinking skill
Desi Fitria Wulandaria and Nuryani Y Rustamanb
a
Education Univercity of Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
b
Education Univercity of Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
Abstract
The aim of this research to examine physic learning strategies base of asking activities
and group Competition (PLSAC) in order to improve Senior High School student’s critical
thinking skills. This research was carried out by using quasi experimental method. Senior
High School students at XII grade in Tasikmalaya West Java chosen as the subject of this
research and two classes were taken sample at physics subject topic. This research
revealed that the student which used physics learning strategy base of asking activities
and group competition(PLSAC) significantly had more critical thinking skills than those
that used conventional method. The average of N-gain of critical thinking skills for
experiment class was 0,38 while for control class was 0,27. Teachers and students gave
good comments on the implemented learning strategies. We conclude that Physic
Learning Strategy base of Asking activities and group Competition (PLSAC) is better than
conventional learning strategies in improving the student’s critical thinking skill.
Keywords learning strategies, asking and group competition, critical thinking skill
1. Introduction
Commitment to promote critical thinking skills has become one of the main agenda of
education program in Indonesia. Secondary School Competency Standards mention that
secondary school students are expected to: (1) establish and apply information or knowledge
in a logical, critical, creative, and innovative, (2) demonstrate the ability to think logically,
critical, creative, and innovative in decision-making; (3) demonstrate the ability to analyze
and solve complex problems (Permendiknas, 2006).
Based on preliminary studies in the form of observational toward physic learning
process, teachers tought in lecture method, which the teacher gave examples of physic
questions, then students were asked to do it individually. In the end, students who had
already completed answering the questions then asked to write it on the board in front of
the class. It was observed that less than half of the students in the class were involved in
learning process. Question and Answer as well as argumentation activities in physic learning
process were difficult to find. On the other hand, physics is still the unpopular subject for
most of then students. In accordance with a study done by (Shook & Mee, 2002; Orneck,
Robinson & Haugan, 2008) which found many students considers studying physic as a
daunting task.
Based on a literature review, in order to improve students' critical thinking skills, Fitria
(2014) proposed a physics learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition
(PLSAC). It is necessary to do a study on the use of a physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and group competition to enhance high school students critical thinking skills on
the topic of sound waves. Formulation of the research problem was "How is the comparison
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.142
of students' critical thinking skills improvement between the student who gain a physic
learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition and student who received
conventional learning strategy?"
2.
Materials and methods
2.1 The Physics Learning Strategy Base of Asking Activities and Group Competition
(PLSAC)
The physics learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition (PLSAC),
contains cooperative learning, reading, questioning and looking for possible answers, group
‘tournament’ (competition) and ends with reflections. Stages of learning undertaken by this
strategy were as follows:
1). Reading phase. In the early stages before the learning process, students were given
homework to find out various phenomena in everyday life that relate to the material that
will be discussed in class, then they have to make one questions related to the material.
He also must strive to provide possible answers of the questions made. Students were
assigned to communicate the questions maximum shortly before the learning process
begins.
2). The meeting begins with a preliminary class teaching, teachers collect students’
assignment.
3). Questioning (Asking) phase. Students in groups read the materials of MMI program
provided by the teacher. Students task here were that everyone should make one
question and possible answers to these questions based on existing learning resources
MMI with material specification set by the teacher. This specification was intended to
make the discussion not too broad and more focused.
4). ‘Tournament’ phase (Competition). After the group discussion session, the class
continued with tournament, quiz competitions between groups. Every person in every
group will get their turn to ask questions as well as a jury of their own questions. Teacher
serves as a facilitator as well as an expert source of concepts and revise the content
constructs of question and answer made by the students.
5). After all the students had a turn, then the tournament was completed, and the class
tournament scores were calculated. Teachers gave awards for student performances.
6). Reflection stage: teachers guided students to make summary. Then, the teacher asks the
students to write the conclusion of the topics which has been discussed as well as
reconsidering the questions and issues raised on the preliminary task. The task was made
as students’ homework.
2.2 Critical thinking skill
Critical thinking is part of the complex patterns of thinking / high-level convergen way
of thinking. Critical thinking used the basic process of thinking to analyze arguments and bring
the idea of each meaning and interpretation, to develop a cohesive pattern and logical
reasoning, to understand the underlying assumptions and biases of each position, as well as
providing a model presentation that is reliable, succinct and convince (Ennis, 1995). Facione
(2002) stated that the core of critical thinking is the detailed description of a number of
related characteristics, which include analysis, inference, explanation, evaluation, selfregulation, and interpretation.
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.143
Indicators of critical thinking skills studied used Ennis critical thinking indicators.
Critical thinking skills are translated into 5 indicator, namely: (1) elementary clarification; (2)
the basics support; (3) inference; (4) advanced clarification; and (5) strategies and tactics.
Each stage of thinking further elaborated in more specific indicators. Indicators of critical
thinking in Ennis are presented in Table 1.
Critical Thinking
Elementary
clarification
Table 1. Critical thinking skills indicators according to Ennis.
Sub Critical Thinking
Explanation
Focusing questions
Analyze arguments
The basics
support
Inference
Advanced
clarification
Strategies and
tactics
Ask and / or answer questions of
clarification and / or challenge
Consider the credibility of
sources
Investigating and / or
considering the observation
report.
Create and / or consider
deduction
Create and / or consider
induction
Create and / or consider the
opinions of value.
Defining the term and / or
consider definitions
Identifying assumptions.
Determining a course of action
Interact with others.
Identifying / formulate questions, formulate
answers criteria
Identifying conclusion, the reason, the relevance,
the similarities and differences
Looking for structure arguments, and ask
questions
Experts, there is no conflict of interest,
reputation, know the risks
Group logical, logical conditions, interpretation of
the statement
Make generalizations, conclusions and
hypothesis, investigation
Background facts, applying the principles,
consequences, think of alternatives
Shape, strategy definition and content
The reasons stated and not stated
Identifying problems, selecting criteria, formulate
alternatives, decide, reviewing and monitoring
Label, a logical strategy, rhetoric and
presentation strategies
2.3 Methods and research design
This study used a quasi-experimental method. Quasi experiments used to compare the
increase in critical thinking skills of students using a physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and competition group. The study design used nonequivalent control group design
(Sugiyono, 2008). The instruments used were (1) a test of critical thinking skills in the form of
multiple choice questions, (2) a questionnaire to determine students’ and teachers’
responses. Data processing done by calculating the normalized gain scores and the two mean
difference test using SPSS, while the questionnaire data in qualitative scale was converted
into a quantitative scale.
3. Results and discussion
3.1 The increase of critical thinking skill
The increase critical thinking skill were judge from preliminary and final tests score in
the form of percentages. Percentage of critical thinking skills average score achieved in
preliminary tests, final test and N-gain between the experimental class and control class can
be seen in Figure 1.
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.144
Figure 1. Comparison of Critical thinking skills percentage average score of initial tests,
final test and N-gain between experimental class and control class.
Based on data collected on the average score of preliminary tests, final test and N-gain
had showed that the average score in preliminary test in experimental class was 33.2% from
the ideal score, while the average score in control class was 36.7 % of the ideal score.
Furthermore, based on data collected the average score of the final test showed that the
average score of the final test in experimental class was 77.8% of the ideal score, while in
control class was 71.2% of the ideal score. N-gain Average for the experimental class was
0.38 and control class was 0.27. The average N-gain for the experimental class was in medium
category while the average N-gain in control class was in lower category. Thus the average
N-gain of experiment class was higher than the average N-gain in control class.
The results showed that the acquisition of N-gain in the experimental class was highest
in basic clarification indicator that was 0.53 in the medium category and the lowest occurred
in inference indicators that was 0.20 catagorized in lower category, while in the control class
the highest N- gain in basic clarification indicator was 0.50 in the medium category and the
lowest occurred in inference indicators that was 0.09 catagorized in the low category. From
the analysis showed an increase of N-gain students’ critical thinking average in experiment
class was higher than the control class. Comparison of N-gain critical thinking skills of each
indicator can be seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Comparison of N-gain critical thinking skills of each indicator
experimental class and control class.
in the
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.145
Normality test of critical thinking data distribution in students' experiment class and
control class conducted using One-Sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test. The results obtained
indicated that the distribution of data were normally on the significance of 0.128 for the
experimental class and 0.194 for control class. Homogeneity test for variant critical thinking
data of students' in experiment class and control class used the Levene test (Test of
Homogeneity of Variances), which showed that the variant of data homogeneous at 0.469
significance. After an increase in critical thinking skills data showed normally distributed and
homogeneous then the next step was to do parametric statistical test (t test with α = 0.005).
Independent Samples Test result showed that there were significant differences between the
increase in critical thinking skills in experimental class and control class based on the value of
t = 5,738; and the significance of 0.000. Based on the analysis of t test can be concluded that
the increase in critical thinking skills in experiment class was better than the increase in
critical thinking skills in control class.
3.2 Students’ responses against implementation of Physics Learning Strategy Base of
Asking Activities and Group competition (PLSAC)
Based on student responses obtained can be concluded that the students gave positive
responses to the implementation of physics learning strategy base of asking activities and
competition group, as can be seen in Table 2.
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Table 2. Summary of student responses to the implementation of Physics Learning
Strategy Base Of Asking Activities and Group Competition (PLSAC).
Percentage
of Answers
Statement
Yes
No
I am pleased to learn physics with PLSAC
97
Learning activities with PLSAC stimulate my desire to ask a lot of questions
82
in addition to those already assigned.
Learning with PLSAC is easy to follow.
73,5
Learning with PLSAC encouraged me to think more critically.
76
Learning with PLSAC encouraged me to think more creatively.
76
Learning with PLSAC add my motivation to learn physic
76
According to my opinion studying in a group is very pleasant
94
I feel the task of reading, making questions and its possible answers in physic
73.5
learning process burden me.
I feel "tournament" session in physic learning encouraged me to prepare
76
myself more in order to be the best at that session.
I feel "tournament" session in physic learning burden me.
94
94
I feel studying in a group preventing me to better understand the physics
topics because I need to interact with friends which takes a bit of my
learning time in class.
Learning activities with PLSAC did not encourage me to better understand
82
the material to be studied.
83
Learning activities with PLSAC burden me with making other questions /
change the question when my initial question has been picked earlier by
someone else.
Learning with PLSAC prevent me to develop myselves in learning because we
94
have to argue with another student.
Learning with PLSAC is difficult to follow.
73.5
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.146
3.3 Teacher’s responses against implementation of Physics Learning Strategy Base of
Asking Activities and Group Competition (PLSAC)
Based on teachers’ responses obtained in the study, it can be concluded that the
teacher gave a positive response to the implementation of PLSAC. The teacher said that this
learning strategy has the potential to improve the quality of physics learning process. The
weakness of this strategy was, in order to be more effective, it first needed habituation to
make students familiar with this learning strategy because it was different from the usual
one before and for materials that require the application of mathematical, learning in the
classroom will require more time in the phase of reflection where teachers check students
comprehension and will reduce the time of class tournament. Advantages of this strategy
were; it could increased the students’ motivation to read lessons before coming to class
because there was a pre learning session and they wanted to be the best in the tournament
session. This strategy can also improve students’ participation / activity in the classroom.
3.4 Discussion
The positive result of this learning strategy in accordance with the objectives when the
learning strategy was proposed. As Golding (2011) has taught critical thinking skills by using
Socratic questioning techniques in a inquiry community. Toledo (2006), used the approach
of asking by online. Macknight (2000) reported the use of web-based communications base
on Socrates Question to improve students' critical thinking abilities. From some of these
studies there is a similarity of methods used to teach critical thinking skills. The similarities
described in asking activity and discussion that occurs in the forum discussion group to
facilitate student’s interaction.
Craig et al. (2008) reported the use of questions on narrative in multimedia learning
environments. The use of questions to support comprehension, problem solving and
reasoning. This method forces students to answer questions during the process of reading
that can improve text learning. From the above it can be concluded that the use of methods
of asking can improve critical thinking skills.
The use of group define as cooperative learning can also be used to improve critical
thinking skills. Qin et (1995) reported a sal.tudy to find positive effects of cooperative
learning in improving critical thinking skills. Cooperative learning is a popular model that is
often used in almost all subjects. The use of cooperative learning in physics, among others,
research conducted by Heller et al. (1992) aimed to discover the effects of cooperative
learning in physics problem solving performance. In a cooperative group that functions well,
students can share concepts and procedural knowledge as well as the role of the argument,
asking for clarification, justification, and the elaboration of each other, so that the resulting
solution is better than working individually. Benckert & Pettersson (2008) investigated the
use of discussion groups in the physics learning problem solving process. Ho & Boo (2007)
investigated the use of cooperative learning in teaching physics. The results showed that the
use of cooperative learning can improve academic achievement, helping students to
understand the concepts of physics and increase students' motivation to learn.
Although reading has long been regarded as an activity of thinking, only in the last few
years, learning to read comprehensively included in the activities of high-level thinking
(Shook & Mee, 2002). In the same book Tan & Cheah proposed the use of critical questions
to help students think more profound reading of the text. Furthermore Netto-Shek (Shook &
Mee, 2002) also showed that thinking skills can be put at some stages of the deconstruction
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.147
of the text, which were reading, understanding or responding to the readings.
Both competition and cooperation learning have great opportunity to influence the
performance of students in the class. After all, humans are basically like working together,
debating, discussing, and always try to compete with the opponent in debate or discussion
competency (Sharan, 1990). Lam et al. (2004) found that competition has positive effect on
student performance results and motivation to learn in the classroom. While Parrenas &
Parrenas (1993) stated that cooperative learning can facilitate students to acquire higher
academic achievement. Therefore, both individual and team reward should exist in
cooperative learning environment, or reward for participation in the productivity of the team
proved to be very useful (Johnson et al., 1998). For that, then Wynne (1995) recommended
a synthesis of cooperation-competition teaching strategy that combines the positive aspects
of cooperative learning and motivation competition between groups using competition
among team collaboration. If placed correctly in the competitive environment, cooperative
learning can strengthens the contribution of each individual in achieving collective goals and
can provide a very positive influence on student learning (Dyson & Grineski, 2001).
Cooperation and competition are teaching strategy that combines components of
cooperative learning with positive motivation aspects of competition through inter-group
competition between collaborative team, as has been reported the effectiveness of its use
by Attle & Baker (2007) in sports management students. As has also been reported by Tauer
& Harackiewicz (2004), that in combination with group learning, cooperative inter-group
competition can increase intrinsic motivation of participants consistently. The findings
concluded that the combination of cooperation and competition are able to facilitate
motivation, enjoyment and performance of the participants. In the proposed learning
strategy, these structures are in the tournament session.
4.
Conclusion and remarks
Improvement of students’ critical thinking skills using physics learning strategy base of
asking activities and group competition were significantly higher than students who received
conventional learning startegy. The average N-gain students’ critical thinking skills in
experiment class was 0.38 (medium category) and the control class was 0.27 (low category),
this showed that the use of PLSAC learning strategy was more effective than conventional
learning strategy. Teachers and students respond well to this learning strategy. Based on the
results of this study, it is recommended that the physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and group competition to used in physics learning process.
References
Attle, S., & Baker, B. (2007). Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: Classroom
applications. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 77–83.
Benckert, S., & Pettersson, S. (2008). Learning physics in small-group discussions – Three Examples.
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(2), 121–134.
Chang, A.S.C., & Cheah, Y.M. (Eds) (2002). Teacher’ Handbook On Teaching Thinking Skills Across
Disciplines. Singapura: Prentice Hall.
Craig, S.D., VanLehn, K., & Chi, M.T.H. (2008). Promoting learning by observing deep-level reasoning
questions on quantitative physics problem solving with Andes. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R.
Weber, R. Carlsen, & D.A. Willis (Eds.). The proceedings of the 19th International conference for
the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Chesapeake, 1065–1068.
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.148
Dyson, B., & Grineski, S. (2001). Using cooperative learning structures in physical education. Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 72(2), 28–31.
Ennis, R. (1995). Critical thinking. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Facione, P.A., Facione, N.C., Blohm, S.W., & Giancarlo, C.A.F. (2002). The california critical thinking skill
test: Test manual 2002 update edition. Milbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Fitria, D. (2014). Physics of learning strategy to train critical and creative thinking skills. International
Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 3(11).
Golding, C. (2011). Educating for critical thinking: Thought-encouraging question in a community of
inquiry. The Journal Of Higher Education Research & Development.
Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping.
Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627–636.
Ho, F.F., & Boo, H.K. (2007). Cooperative learning: Exploring its effectiveness in the physics classroom.
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 1.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change, 30(4).
26–35.
Lam, S.F., Yim, P.S., Law, J.S., & Cheung, R.W. (2004). The effects of competition on achievement
motivation in Chinese classrooms. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 281–296.
MacKnight, C.B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. Educause Quarterly, 4.
Ornek, F., Robinson, W., & Haugan, M. (2008). What makes physics difficult? International Journal of
Environmental & Science Education, 2008, 3(1), 30–34.
Parrenas, C.S., & Parrenas, F.Y. (1993). Cooperative learning, multicultural functioning, and student
achievement. In L. M. Malave (Ed.), Proceedings of the National Association for Bilingual
Education Conferences, Washington, 181–189.
Peraturan Mendiknas No. 23 (2006). Standar kompetensi lulusan untuk satuan pendidikan dasar dan
menengah. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Qin, Z, Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem
solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129–143.
Sharan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory and Research. New York: Praeger.
Sugiyono (2008). Metode penelitian pendidikan (pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R&D).
Bandung: Alfabeta.
Tauer, J.M., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2004). The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic
motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 849–861.
Toledo, C.A. (2006). Does your dog bite? Creating good questions for online discussions. International
Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 18(2), 150–154.
Wynne, E.A. (1995). Cooperation-competition: An instructional strategy. Phi Delta Kappan Fastbacks,
387, 7–27.
SWUP
SC.141
ISBN: 978-602-1047-21-7
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies
to improve critical thinking skill
Desi Fitria Wulandaria and Nuryani Y Rustamanb
a
Education Univercity of Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
b
Education Univercity of Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
Abstract
The aim of this research to examine physic learning strategies base of asking activities
and group Competition (PLSAC) in order to improve Senior High School student’s critical
thinking skills. This research was carried out by using quasi experimental method. Senior
High School students at XII grade in Tasikmalaya West Java chosen as the subject of this
research and two classes were taken sample at physics subject topic. This research
revealed that the student which used physics learning strategy base of asking activities
and group competition(PLSAC) significantly had more critical thinking skills than those
that used conventional method. The average of N-gain of critical thinking skills for
experiment class was 0,38 while for control class was 0,27. Teachers and students gave
good comments on the implemented learning strategies. We conclude that Physic
Learning Strategy base of Asking activities and group Competition (PLSAC) is better than
conventional learning strategies in improving the student’s critical thinking skill.
Keywords learning strategies, asking and group competition, critical thinking skill
1. Introduction
Commitment to promote critical thinking skills has become one of the main agenda of
education program in Indonesia. Secondary School Competency Standards mention that
secondary school students are expected to: (1) establish and apply information or knowledge
in a logical, critical, creative, and innovative, (2) demonstrate the ability to think logically,
critical, creative, and innovative in decision-making; (3) demonstrate the ability to analyze
and solve complex problems (Permendiknas, 2006).
Based on preliminary studies in the form of observational toward physic learning
process, teachers tought in lecture method, which the teacher gave examples of physic
questions, then students were asked to do it individually. In the end, students who had
already completed answering the questions then asked to write it on the board in front of
the class. It was observed that less than half of the students in the class were involved in
learning process. Question and Answer as well as argumentation activities in physic learning
process were difficult to find. On the other hand, physics is still the unpopular subject for
most of then students. In accordance with a study done by (Shook & Mee, 2002; Orneck,
Robinson & Haugan, 2008) which found many students considers studying physic as a
daunting task.
Based on a literature review, in order to improve students' critical thinking skills, Fitria
(2014) proposed a physics learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition
(PLSAC). It is necessary to do a study on the use of a physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and group competition to enhance high school students critical thinking skills on
the topic of sound waves. Formulation of the research problem was "How is the comparison
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.142
of students' critical thinking skills improvement between the student who gain a physic
learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition and student who received
conventional learning strategy?"
2.
Materials and methods
2.1 The Physics Learning Strategy Base of Asking Activities and Group Competition
(PLSAC)
The physics learning strategy base of asking activities and group competition (PLSAC),
contains cooperative learning, reading, questioning and looking for possible answers, group
‘tournament’ (competition) and ends with reflections. Stages of learning undertaken by this
strategy were as follows:
1). Reading phase. In the early stages before the learning process, students were given
homework to find out various phenomena in everyday life that relate to the material that
will be discussed in class, then they have to make one questions related to the material.
He also must strive to provide possible answers of the questions made. Students were
assigned to communicate the questions maximum shortly before the learning process
begins.
2). The meeting begins with a preliminary class teaching, teachers collect students’
assignment.
3). Questioning (Asking) phase. Students in groups read the materials of MMI program
provided by the teacher. Students task here were that everyone should make one
question and possible answers to these questions based on existing learning resources
MMI with material specification set by the teacher. This specification was intended to
make the discussion not too broad and more focused.
4). ‘Tournament’ phase (Competition). After the group discussion session, the class
continued with tournament, quiz competitions between groups. Every person in every
group will get their turn to ask questions as well as a jury of their own questions. Teacher
serves as a facilitator as well as an expert source of concepts and revise the content
constructs of question and answer made by the students.
5). After all the students had a turn, then the tournament was completed, and the class
tournament scores were calculated. Teachers gave awards for student performances.
6). Reflection stage: teachers guided students to make summary. Then, the teacher asks the
students to write the conclusion of the topics which has been discussed as well as
reconsidering the questions and issues raised on the preliminary task. The task was made
as students’ homework.
2.2 Critical thinking skill
Critical thinking is part of the complex patterns of thinking / high-level convergen way
of thinking. Critical thinking used the basic process of thinking to analyze arguments and bring
the idea of each meaning and interpretation, to develop a cohesive pattern and logical
reasoning, to understand the underlying assumptions and biases of each position, as well as
providing a model presentation that is reliable, succinct and convince (Ennis, 1995). Facione
(2002) stated that the core of critical thinking is the detailed description of a number of
related characteristics, which include analysis, inference, explanation, evaluation, selfregulation, and interpretation.
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.143
Indicators of critical thinking skills studied used Ennis critical thinking indicators.
Critical thinking skills are translated into 5 indicator, namely: (1) elementary clarification; (2)
the basics support; (3) inference; (4) advanced clarification; and (5) strategies and tactics.
Each stage of thinking further elaborated in more specific indicators. Indicators of critical
thinking in Ennis are presented in Table 1.
Critical Thinking
Elementary
clarification
Table 1. Critical thinking skills indicators according to Ennis.
Sub Critical Thinking
Explanation
Focusing questions
Analyze arguments
The basics
support
Inference
Advanced
clarification
Strategies and
tactics
Ask and / or answer questions of
clarification and / or challenge
Consider the credibility of
sources
Investigating and / or
considering the observation
report.
Create and / or consider
deduction
Create and / or consider
induction
Create and / or consider the
opinions of value.
Defining the term and / or
consider definitions
Identifying assumptions.
Determining a course of action
Interact with others.
Identifying / formulate questions, formulate
answers criteria
Identifying conclusion, the reason, the relevance,
the similarities and differences
Looking for structure arguments, and ask
questions
Experts, there is no conflict of interest,
reputation, know the risks
Group logical, logical conditions, interpretation of
the statement
Make generalizations, conclusions and
hypothesis, investigation
Background facts, applying the principles,
consequences, think of alternatives
Shape, strategy definition and content
The reasons stated and not stated
Identifying problems, selecting criteria, formulate
alternatives, decide, reviewing and monitoring
Label, a logical strategy, rhetoric and
presentation strategies
2.3 Methods and research design
This study used a quasi-experimental method. Quasi experiments used to compare the
increase in critical thinking skills of students using a physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and competition group. The study design used nonequivalent control group design
(Sugiyono, 2008). The instruments used were (1) a test of critical thinking skills in the form of
multiple choice questions, (2) a questionnaire to determine students’ and teachers’
responses. Data processing done by calculating the normalized gain scores and the two mean
difference test using SPSS, while the questionnaire data in qualitative scale was converted
into a quantitative scale.
3. Results and discussion
3.1 The increase of critical thinking skill
The increase critical thinking skill were judge from preliminary and final tests score in
the form of percentages. Percentage of critical thinking skills average score achieved in
preliminary tests, final test and N-gain between the experimental class and control class can
be seen in Figure 1.
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.144
Figure 1. Comparison of Critical thinking skills percentage average score of initial tests,
final test and N-gain between experimental class and control class.
Based on data collected on the average score of preliminary tests, final test and N-gain
had showed that the average score in preliminary test in experimental class was 33.2% from
the ideal score, while the average score in control class was 36.7 % of the ideal score.
Furthermore, based on data collected the average score of the final test showed that the
average score of the final test in experimental class was 77.8% of the ideal score, while in
control class was 71.2% of the ideal score. N-gain Average for the experimental class was
0.38 and control class was 0.27. The average N-gain for the experimental class was in medium
category while the average N-gain in control class was in lower category. Thus the average
N-gain of experiment class was higher than the average N-gain in control class.
The results showed that the acquisition of N-gain in the experimental class was highest
in basic clarification indicator that was 0.53 in the medium category and the lowest occurred
in inference indicators that was 0.20 catagorized in lower category, while in the control class
the highest N- gain in basic clarification indicator was 0.50 in the medium category and the
lowest occurred in inference indicators that was 0.09 catagorized in the low category. From
the analysis showed an increase of N-gain students’ critical thinking average in experiment
class was higher than the control class. Comparison of N-gain critical thinking skills of each
indicator can be seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Comparison of N-gain critical thinking skills of each indicator
experimental class and control class.
in the
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.145
Normality test of critical thinking data distribution in students' experiment class and
control class conducted using One-Sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test. The results obtained
indicated that the distribution of data were normally on the significance of 0.128 for the
experimental class and 0.194 for control class. Homogeneity test for variant critical thinking
data of students' in experiment class and control class used the Levene test (Test of
Homogeneity of Variances), which showed that the variant of data homogeneous at 0.469
significance. After an increase in critical thinking skills data showed normally distributed and
homogeneous then the next step was to do parametric statistical test (t test with α = 0.005).
Independent Samples Test result showed that there were significant differences between the
increase in critical thinking skills in experimental class and control class based on the value of
t = 5,738; and the significance of 0.000. Based on the analysis of t test can be concluded that
the increase in critical thinking skills in experiment class was better than the increase in
critical thinking skills in control class.
3.2 Students’ responses against implementation of Physics Learning Strategy Base of
Asking Activities and Group competition (PLSAC)
Based on student responses obtained can be concluded that the students gave positive
responses to the implementation of physics learning strategy base of asking activities and
competition group, as can be seen in Table 2.
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Table 2. Summary of student responses to the implementation of Physics Learning
Strategy Base Of Asking Activities and Group Competition (PLSAC).
Percentage
of Answers
Statement
Yes
No
I am pleased to learn physics with PLSAC
97
Learning activities with PLSAC stimulate my desire to ask a lot of questions
82
in addition to those already assigned.
Learning with PLSAC is easy to follow.
73,5
Learning with PLSAC encouraged me to think more critically.
76
Learning with PLSAC encouraged me to think more creatively.
76
Learning with PLSAC add my motivation to learn physic
76
According to my opinion studying in a group is very pleasant
94
I feel the task of reading, making questions and its possible answers in physic
73.5
learning process burden me.
I feel "tournament" session in physic learning encouraged me to prepare
76
myself more in order to be the best at that session.
I feel "tournament" session in physic learning burden me.
94
94
I feel studying in a group preventing me to better understand the physics
topics because I need to interact with friends which takes a bit of my
learning time in class.
Learning activities with PLSAC did not encourage me to better understand
82
the material to be studied.
83
Learning activities with PLSAC burden me with making other questions /
change the question when my initial question has been picked earlier by
someone else.
Learning with PLSAC prevent me to develop myselves in learning because we
94
have to argue with another student.
Learning with PLSAC is difficult to follow.
73.5
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.146
3.3 Teacher’s responses against implementation of Physics Learning Strategy Base of
Asking Activities and Group Competition (PLSAC)
Based on teachers’ responses obtained in the study, it can be concluded that the
teacher gave a positive response to the implementation of PLSAC. The teacher said that this
learning strategy has the potential to improve the quality of physics learning process. The
weakness of this strategy was, in order to be more effective, it first needed habituation to
make students familiar with this learning strategy because it was different from the usual
one before and for materials that require the application of mathematical, learning in the
classroom will require more time in the phase of reflection where teachers check students
comprehension and will reduce the time of class tournament. Advantages of this strategy
were; it could increased the students’ motivation to read lessons before coming to class
because there was a pre learning session and they wanted to be the best in the tournament
session. This strategy can also improve students’ participation / activity in the classroom.
3.4 Discussion
The positive result of this learning strategy in accordance with the objectives when the
learning strategy was proposed. As Golding (2011) has taught critical thinking skills by using
Socratic questioning techniques in a inquiry community. Toledo (2006), used the approach
of asking by online. Macknight (2000) reported the use of web-based communications base
on Socrates Question to improve students' critical thinking abilities. From some of these
studies there is a similarity of methods used to teach critical thinking skills. The similarities
described in asking activity and discussion that occurs in the forum discussion group to
facilitate student’s interaction.
Craig et al. (2008) reported the use of questions on narrative in multimedia learning
environments. The use of questions to support comprehension, problem solving and
reasoning. This method forces students to answer questions during the process of reading
that can improve text learning. From the above it can be concluded that the use of methods
of asking can improve critical thinking skills.
The use of group define as cooperative learning can also be used to improve critical
thinking skills. Qin et (1995) reported a sal.tudy to find positive effects of cooperative
learning in improving critical thinking skills. Cooperative learning is a popular model that is
often used in almost all subjects. The use of cooperative learning in physics, among others,
research conducted by Heller et al. (1992) aimed to discover the effects of cooperative
learning in physics problem solving performance. In a cooperative group that functions well,
students can share concepts and procedural knowledge as well as the role of the argument,
asking for clarification, justification, and the elaboration of each other, so that the resulting
solution is better than working individually. Benckert & Pettersson (2008) investigated the
use of discussion groups in the physics learning problem solving process. Ho & Boo (2007)
investigated the use of cooperative learning in teaching physics. The results showed that the
use of cooperative learning can improve academic achievement, helping students to
understand the concepts of physics and increase students' motivation to learn.
Although reading has long been regarded as an activity of thinking, only in the last few
years, learning to read comprehensively included in the activities of high-level thinking
(Shook & Mee, 2002). In the same book Tan & Cheah proposed the use of critical questions
to help students think more profound reading of the text. Furthermore Netto-Shek (Shook &
Mee, 2002) also showed that thinking skills can be put at some stages of the deconstruction
SWUP
D.F. Wulandari, N.Y. Rustaman
SC.147
of the text, which were reading, understanding or responding to the readings.
Both competition and cooperation learning have great opportunity to influence the
performance of students in the class. After all, humans are basically like working together,
debating, discussing, and always try to compete with the opponent in debate or discussion
competency (Sharan, 1990). Lam et al. (2004) found that competition has positive effect on
student performance results and motivation to learn in the classroom. While Parrenas &
Parrenas (1993) stated that cooperative learning can facilitate students to acquire higher
academic achievement. Therefore, both individual and team reward should exist in
cooperative learning environment, or reward for participation in the productivity of the team
proved to be very useful (Johnson et al., 1998). For that, then Wynne (1995) recommended
a synthesis of cooperation-competition teaching strategy that combines the positive aspects
of cooperative learning and motivation competition between groups using competition
among team collaboration. If placed correctly in the competitive environment, cooperative
learning can strengthens the contribution of each individual in achieving collective goals and
can provide a very positive influence on student learning (Dyson & Grineski, 2001).
Cooperation and competition are teaching strategy that combines components of
cooperative learning with positive motivation aspects of competition through inter-group
competition between collaborative team, as has been reported the effectiveness of its use
by Attle & Baker (2007) in sports management students. As has also been reported by Tauer
& Harackiewicz (2004), that in combination with group learning, cooperative inter-group
competition can increase intrinsic motivation of participants consistently. The findings
concluded that the combination of cooperation and competition are able to facilitate
motivation, enjoyment and performance of the participants. In the proposed learning
strategy, these structures are in the tournament session.
4.
Conclusion and remarks
Improvement of students’ critical thinking skills using physics learning strategy base of
asking activities and group competition were significantly higher than students who received
conventional learning startegy. The average N-gain students’ critical thinking skills in
experiment class was 0.38 (medium category) and the control class was 0.27 (low category),
this showed that the use of PLSAC learning strategy was more effective than conventional
learning strategy. Teachers and students respond well to this learning strategy. Based on the
results of this study, it is recommended that the physics learning strategy base of asking
activities and group competition to used in physics learning process.
References
Attle, S., & Baker, B. (2007). Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: Classroom
applications. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 77–83.
Benckert, S., & Pettersson, S. (2008). Learning physics in small-group discussions – Three Examples.
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(2), 121–134.
Chang, A.S.C., & Cheah, Y.M. (Eds) (2002). Teacher’ Handbook On Teaching Thinking Skills Across
Disciplines. Singapura: Prentice Hall.
Craig, S.D., VanLehn, K., & Chi, M.T.H. (2008). Promoting learning by observing deep-level reasoning
questions on quantitative physics problem solving with Andes. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R.
Weber, R. Carlsen, & D.A. Willis (Eds.). The proceedings of the 19th International conference for
the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Chesapeake, 1065–1068.
SWUP
Implementation of asking and group competition learning strategies to improve critical thinking skill
SC.148
Dyson, B., & Grineski, S. (2001). Using cooperative learning structures in physical education. Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 72(2), 28–31.
Ennis, R. (1995). Critical thinking. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Facione, P.A., Facione, N.C., Blohm, S.W., & Giancarlo, C.A.F. (2002). The california critical thinking skill
test: Test manual 2002 update edition. Milbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Fitria, D. (2014). Physics of learning strategy to train critical and creative thinking skills. International
Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 3(11).
Golding, C. (2011). Educating for critical thinking: Thought-encouraging question in a community of
inquiry. The Journal Of Higher Education Research & Development.
Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping.
Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627–636.
Ho, F.F., & Boo, H.K. (2007). Cooperative learning: Exploring its effectiveness in the physics classroom.
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 1.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change, 30(4).
26–35.
Lam, S.F., Yim, P.S., Law, J.S., & Cheung, R.W. (2004). The effects of competition on achievement
motivation in Chinese classrooms. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 281–296.
MacKnight, C.B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. Educause Quarterly, 4.
Ornek, F., Robinson, W., & Haugan, M. (2008). What makes physics difficult? International Journal of
Environmental & Science Education, 2008, 3(1), 30–34.
Parrenas, C.S., & Parrenas, F.Y. (1993). Cooperative learning, multicultural functioning, and student
achievement. In L. M. Malave (Ed.), Proceedings of the National Association for Bilingual
Education Conferences, Washington, 181–189.
Peraturan Mendiknas No. 23 (2006). Standar kompetensi lulusan untuk satuan pendidikan dasar dan
menengah. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Qin, Z, Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem
solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129–143.
Sharan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory and Research. New York: Praeger.
Sugiyono (2008). Metode penelitian pendidikan (pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R&D).
Bandung: Alfabeta.
Tauer, J.M., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2004). The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic
motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 849–861.
Toledo, C.A. (2006). Does your dog bite? Creating good questions for online discussions. International
Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 18(2), 150–154.
Wynne, E.A. (1995). Cooperation-competition: An instructional strategy. Phi Delta Kappan Fastbacks,
387, 7–27.
SWUP