Issues in Educational Research, 28(2), 2018 254

The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards

integrated problem based learning models
Suhaedir Bachtiar
Public Junior High School 2 Batang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia
Siti Zubaidah, Aloysius Duran Corebima and Sri Endah Indriwati
Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia

This research aimed to investigate the spiritual and social attitudes of students with
different academic abilities towards four educational models: problem based learning
(PBL); numbered heads together (NHT); integrated PBL and NHT; and multi-strategies
model. This quasi-experimental investigation employed a pretest-posttest non-equivalent
control group with the design of a 4 x 2 factorial pattern. The research subjects were
tenth grade students from four public senior high schools (SMAN) in Jeneponto, namely
SMAN 1 Binamu; SMAN 2 Binamu; SMAN 1 Batang; and SMAN 1 Tamalatea. Data on
the students' spiritual and social attitudes was taken by using observations, self-
assessment and peer assessment sheets before and after the learning. The data was
analysed with descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. The results of the research
indicated some differences in the spiritual and social attitudes of students with different
academic abilities towards different learning models. The integrated PBL and NHT
learning model was considered as the best combination to improve the spiritual and
social attitudes of students with upper academic ability.

Introduction

In general, learning at schools tends to focus on improving students’ cognitive

achievement, whilst students’ attitudes tend to be ignored. Thus the spiritual and social
attitudes of high school students in Jeneponto tend to be under-developed because most
teachers implement learning models that do not facilitate the development of students'
spiritual and social attitudes. Students’ attitudes towards learning may reflect some
deficiencies such as students being dishonest in doing worksheets, cheating by using
observations made by other groups, being undisciplined, lacking respect for their friends'
opinions, and a lack of activity in practical work.

A survey questionnaire and interviews with biology teachers teaching eleventh grade
students at senior high schools in Jeneponto has provided some information on this case.
The teachers admitted that they did not understand how to implement cooperative
learning models such as problem based learning (PBL) and numbered heads together
(NHT) in the classroom. In addition, the teachers reported their lack of knowledge of
how to assess students’ spiritual and social attitudes Learning in senior high schools in
Jeneponto, therefore, was dominated by teacher-centred learning which may not do
enough to promote students’ spiritual and social attitudes in the classroom (Bachtiar,
2015).

Learning processes in senior high schools in Jeneponto have not tapped into the potential
of students as is mandated by national education goals. Different academic abilities in the

Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 255

classroom have not been noticed by the teachers. The learning model that has been
applied has not accommodated all characteristics of students’ academic abilities so that
there can be large gaps between high and low academic ability students. If the students
having different levels of academic ability are given the same learning, outcomes will also
differ according to ability level (Anderson, 2001).

The teaching and learning model that is used by teachers in public senior high schools
classrooms in Jeneponto has not been able to overcome the existing problems. Therefore,
it is necessary to develop a cooperative learning model that can promote students’ spiritual
and social attitudes. Several cooperative learning models offer potential to better develop
students’ attitudes (Bialangi, et al., 2016). Problem based learning (PBL), for example, is a
cooperative learning model that uses real-world problems as a context for students to
learn about critical thinking and problem solving skills, as well as to acquire knowledge
and essential concepts of the subject matter, to train high-level thinking including learning
how to learn (metacognitive skills), and to train students to become independent and self-
regulated (Nurhadi & Senduk, 2003; Arends, 2008; Bachtiar, 2014).

Goodnough and Cashion (2003) stated that PBL can improve students’ skills in organising
themselves (self-regulating or metacognitive skills). Nugraheni (2007) stated that
improvements in students’ critical thinking skills can be attained through problem-based
learning (PBL). Bachtiar (2013) stated that PBL is effective in improving students’ critical
thinking skills, metacognitive awareness, and cognitive achievement. PBL is an approach
to curriculum development and instruction which develops students’ problem solving
skills and helps students to acquire knowledge (Akcay, 2009). The use of PBL has revealed
many advantages. However, this learning model also has weaknesses. Peterson and
Treagust (1998) pointed out that it is difficult to implement PBL in all classes. PBL is less
effective with students who cannot fully understand the value or the scope of the problem
with social content. PBL is difficult for teachers who have to change their teaching style.
PBL is not able to accommodate all topics in the curriculum, especially those related to
declarative knowledge or conceptual narratives, because in PBL the material depends on
problem being solved, which is related to procedural knowledge (the act of using the
concepts, principles in certain situations). As a result, problems solved by students are less
representative. Students with low academic ability probably will face greater difficulties
during the problem solving process.

Another relevant learning model is numbered heads together (NHT), which is a type of
cooperative learning designed to improve interactions between students and make them
more actively engaged. Students are gathered into small heterogeneous groups, then each
member of the group is numbered. Students are given questions that are related to topics
presented by the teacher. Each group discusses the best answer to a question given by the
teacher. The teacher asks one specifically numbered student to answer the question. This
causes their learning to become more active because it is student centred and more
conducive for classroom situation to become more lively. Each student will strive to
understand the material because each member of the group has a responsibility for their
group in answering the question. Students who are weak will be keen to ask other students
because they do not know who would be called by the teacher. In this way students’
256 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

potential can be developed optimally, having a direct impact on improving students’

learning outcomes (Pradnyani & Ardana, 2013).

Envisaging a need for another learning model with potential to overcome the deficiencies
of PBL and NHT, an integrated model of PBL and NHT has been developed and is
investigated in this article. The application of this integrated model may assist students to
be more independent in completing their learning tasks. Also, grouping students based on
differing academic ability makes students work together to solve the problems assigned by
the teacher, as if there were no differences among the students because they have a shared
responsibility. Thus an implementation of the integrated model of PBL and NHT may
enhance students’ spiritual and social attitudes.

Problem based learning (PBL)

Problem based learning (PBL) is a learning model designed based on ill-structured, open-
ended, and ambiguous real life problems (Fogarty, 1997). The problems are vague and
undefined. PBL promotes students’ interest and cognitive ability as well as providing them
with an opportunity to learn in a real life context. Additionally, PBL helps stimulate
students’ higher order thinking when facing a problem-oriented situation in which they are
required to exercise their metacognitive skills (Ibrahim & Nur, 2000). In PBL, the teacher
has a role to introduce problems to the pupils, ask them questions, and facilitate their
investigation as well as to give scaffolding or support so that they will be able to develop
their intellectual skills.

PBL assists students to improve their ability to think various strategies in learning new
topics and finding solutions to problems. PBL also provides a conducive learning
environment for students to promote their critical thinking, create meaningful discussions,
and support each other (Ahlam & Gaber, 2014). It also challenges students to solve
authentic problems effectively. Unlike traditional teaching techniques, PBL is considered
more effective (Birgili, 2015).

Numbered heads together (NHT)

NHT is an alternative learning model implemented to involve students actively in a

discussion related to learning materials. All students write their individual responses to
teacher’s queries and share them with peers in small, heterogeneous groups. One of the
members of the group will be selected randomly as the group representative to read the
responses in front of all groups. The application of NHT indicates that this learning
model is more effective than conventional learning models (Haydon, Maheady & Hunter,
2010) as it promotes students’ active engagement and interpersonal relationships in the
classroom (Kagan & Kagan, 2009).

NHT is a cooperative learning model designed specially to influence student-student

interaction and improve their academic ability. This learning model involves students in
analysing materials and evaluating their understanding afterwards (Ibrahim, 2000). NHT
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 257

consists of four learning stages in which students are engaged to review facts and basic
information whilst interacting with one another. This learning model can also be used to
help students solve problems at medium difficulty level.

The involvement of the students will certainly affect their motivation in a positive way.
Students will attempt to understand concepts or provide solutions to problems offered by
the teacher. Cooperative learning, as is mentioned by Ibrahim (2000), helps increase
students’ learning achievement as it makes the high achievers and low achievers work
together and help each other in doing their tasks.

The integrated model of PBL and NHT

The integrated model of PBL and NHT combines the two learning models so that they
complement each other. This learning model is expected to be able to promote
individuals’ responsibility in PBL groups. The integrated model of PBL and NHT can be
applied in the classroom where problem solving activities exist, including biology learning.

The implementation of this learning model may build a stronger social relationship
between pupils since they are given an opportunity to discuss and communicate their
problems with other students in the classroom. The combination of the characteristics of
each learning model eventually may bring a significant and distinctive effect on students’
metacognitive ability. Students become familiarised with an essay test which requires them
to express their ideas creatively and organise their thoughts in a piece of writing as a
thorough evaluation of their learning. Slavin (2009) explained that students’ interactions
will result in their being able to discuss and communicate their learning problems with
peers. It therefore implies that teacher should promote students’ metacognitive skills in
the classroom in order that students can achieve better in the future (Kusumaningtyas,
2013).

Multi-strategies

Multi-strategies refer to learning strategies, teaching techniques, and methods developed

by the teacher in the classroom. All learning tools used to assist learning are also
developed by the teacher based on Curriculum 2013. No intervention was given to the
process. In other words, the researchers only played a role as the observer.

The characteristics of the four learning models investigated in this research are
summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: The characteristics of PBL, NHT, PBL and NHT, and multi-strategies

Learning Learning Learning activities

models procedures Teacher Students
PBL Introduce students to Deliver learning objectives. Pay attention to and note
problems. down the learning
objectives.
258 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

Organise students to Organise and define learning Sit in groups.

learn. assignments related to
problems introduced
beforehand.
Facilitate individual or Encourage students to collect Collect relevant information
group investigation. relevant information as much related to the topics in order
as possible. to solve the problems.
Develop and present final Assist students to plan and Plan and prepare a project
projects. prepare reports, worksheets to be presented and
which are going to be discussed.
presented or displayed.
Analyse and evaluate the Assist students to do a Do a reflection or evaluation
problem solving process. reflection or evaluation on on the problem solving
strategies used to solve process.
problems.
NHT Numbering. Group students into teams of Pay attention to the
4 to 5. Every student in each numbering.
team will be numbered.
Questioning. Ask students questions. Interact with other members
in the same group, care for
each other.
Head together. Motivate students to discuss Each member of the group
and discover answers to their must express their ideas to
problems. Teacher also needs help solve the problems.
to make sure that all members
of the group know the
answer.
Answering Call a number. Students Student whose number is
coded with the number will called raises hand, explains
provide the answer. the answer in front of the
classroom.
PBL and Introduce students to Deliver information about the Carefully analyse
NHT problems, learning integrated model of PBL and information delivered by the
information, learning NHT. teacher.
objectives, and motivate
them to learn.
Organise, number, and Organise students into Organise themselves in their
divide students into groups of 4-5. groups and make sure each
groups. member of the group gets
different number.
Present information, Present information about Carefully analyse
queries, and organise learning materials in brief. information from the
learning. teacher.
Facilitate individual or Motivate students to discuss All the group members must
group investigation. and discover answers to their contribute their ideas in
problems. Teacher also needs solving the problems.
to make sure that all
members of the group know
the answer.
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 259

Answer, develop, and Call a number. Students Student whose number is

present final projects. coded with the number will called raises hand, explains
provide the answer. the answer in front of the
classroom.
Analyse, evaluate, and Assist students to write a Write a summary of the
summarise problem summary of the application of application of the concepts
solving process. the concepts in life. in life.
Multi- Learning procedures are Depends on the situation Depends on the situation
strategies developed by the teacher created by the teacher in a created by the teacher in a
in the classroom. In other particular classroom. particular classroom.
words, every classroom
will implement different
ways of learning.

Method

This research is a quasi-experimental design with pretest-posttest, non-equivalent control

group factorial 4 x 2 (Sugiyono, 2009; Palennari, 2012). The independent variables as
factor A are PBL, NHT, the integration of PBL and NHT, and multi-strategies, while
factor B is upper academic (UA) and lower academic (LA) ability. The dependent variables
are students’ spiritual and social attitudes.

The population was tenth grade students (15 to 16 years old) from 11 public senior high
schools (SMAN) located in Jeneponto regency of Indonesia. The students were registered
in the school year 2014/2015. The samples were obtained by a random sampling
technique from 4 schools coded as SMAN 1 Binamu (N = 36), SMAN 2 Binamu (N =
35), SMAN 1 Batang (N = 33), and SMAN 1 Tamalatea (N = 39). From each class, 24
students were selected for pretest-posttest administration, based on their academic ability,
upper (KA; n = 12) and lower (KB; n = 12) as determined by tests conducted by the
researchers. Then, they were engaged in a biology lesson which covered topics on
Kingdom Plantae, Kingdom Animalia, ecology, ecological/weather balance, and waste
recycling. Learning in the integrated PBL and NHT class used the learning design for
integrated PBL and NHT that developed by researcher. The equipment consisted of a
syllabus, lesson plans, and student worksheets. Learning was conducted in 12 meetings
with eight basic competencies in biology lessons.

The instrument that was used comprised the observation, self-assessment (Appendix) and
peer assessment sheets for assessing the spiritual and social attitudes of students. The
guidelines for observations were in a rating scale by rubric, and a check list was used to
observe whether there an attitude or behaviour change had occurred. The assessment
scale determined the position of the attitude or behaviour of students for a range of items.

Data collection was done by using descriptive statistics to show profiles of spiritual and
social attitude scores of students. The descriptive statistics included the average, standard
deviation, the highest average, the lowest average, and the percentage change between
pretest and posttest. Inferential statistics ANCOVA two paths with a significant level of
260 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

5% was used to test the hypothesis of a difference. Data were analysed using SPSS 18.0 for
Windows. If the result of ANCOVA showed significance, it was followed by a least
significance difference (LSD) test which was used to measure students’ average scores on
spiritual and social attitudes test. Before the data were analysed by ANCOVA, first it was
tested for the prerequisite, i.e. normality of the test and homogeneity of the test. A test for
normality was done using one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and a homogeneity test
was conducted using Levene's test of equality of error variances.

Results

Data describing spiritual attitudes

Based on the combination of learning model and academic ability, the highest average
pretest value of spiritual attitudes was obtained on the combination of PBL learning
model and upper academic ability (2.51), while the lowest was on the combination of PBL
and NHT learning model and lower academic ability (2.28). The highest of posttest
average spiritual attitudes value was obtained from the combination of PBL and NHT
learning model and upper academic ability (3.56), while the lowest was from the
combination of multi-strategies learning model with lower academic ability (2.85) (Table
2).
Table 2: Average of pretest, posttest, and difference value: Spiritual attitudes
UA = upper academic ability; LA = lower academic ability

Learning Academic Average Difference

n
model ability Pretest Posttest (%)
PBL UA 12 2.51 3.44 37.1
LA 12 2.41 3.23 34.0
Total 24 2.46 3.33 35.5
NHT UA 12 2.41 3.50 45.2
LA 12 2.29 3.10 35.4
Total 24 2.35 3.30 40.3
PBL and NHT UA 12 2.34 3.56 52.1
LA 12 2.28 3.33 46.1
Total 24 2.31 3.44 49.1
Multi-strategies UA 12 2.46 3.21 30.5
LA 12 2.33 2.85 22.3
Total 24 2.39 3.03 26.4
Total average UA 12 2.43 3.43 41.1
LA 12 2.33 3.13 34.3
Total 24 2.38 3.28 37.8

Table 2 shows that spiritual attitudes scores increased for all four learning models. The
largest average pretest-posttest difference was found for PBL and NHT learning (52.1%),
while the lowest average difference was found for multi-strategies (34.9%). Specifically
related to academic ability, the average upgrading percentage on spiritual attitudes scores
for the lower academic ability students (34.3%) was smaller than the average upgrading
percentage for higher academic ability students (41.1%). Concerning the combination of
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 261

learning model and academic ability, the largest increase in spiritual attitudes scores was
shown by PBL and NHT with higher academic ability students (52.1%), while the lowest
was shown by multi-strategies with lower academic ability students (22.3%).

Table 3 shows that based on the ANCOVA test results on learning model, the
significance value obtained was p = 0.000 (p <0.01), indicating that the learning model is
significantly influential upon spiritual attitude scores. The hypothesis "there is a difference
between spiritual attitudes of students who were given the integration of PBL and NHT
and students who were given PBL, NHT and multi-strategies", therefore, is accepted.

Table 3: ANCOVA test results: Spiritual attitudes

Type III sum Mean

Source df F Sig.
of squares square
Model 4.587 8 0.573 12.147 0.000
Intercept 6.200 1 6.200 131.343 0.000
Pretest 0.012 1 0.012 0.246 0.621
Learning model 2.270 3 0.757 16.032 0.000
Academic ability 1.977 1 1.977 41.889 0.000
Learning model x Academic ability 0.149 3 0.050 1.054 0.373
Error 4.107 87 0.047
Total 1043.600 96
Total average score 8.693 95

The ANCOVA for academic ability and interaction of learning model and academic ability
found p = 0.000 (p <0.01) and p = 0.373 (p> 0.05) respectively. This indicates that
academic ability is significantly influential, whilst the interaction between the learning
model and academic ability is not significant. Thus, the hypothesis "there is no difference
in spiritual attitudes between the higher academic ability students on lower academic
ability" is rejected, and "there is no difference in spiritual attitudes as a result of the
interaction between the learning model and academic ability" is accepted. There are
differences in spiritual attitudes scores between the higher academic ability and lower
academic ability students, but there is no interaction between learning model and
academic ability with respect to spiritual attitude scores.

Data describing social attitudes

Based on the combination of learning model and academic ability, the highest average
value of social attitudes pretest scores was obtained from the combination of higher
academic ability and multi-strategies learning model (2.53), whilst the lowest (2.35) was
obtained from the combination of lower academic ability and PBL, the integrated PBL
and NHT, and multi-strategies. The highest average social attitudes posttest score was
obtained from the combination of upper academic ability and integrated PBL and NHT
(3.77), whilst the lowest was from the combination of lower academic ability and multi-
strategies (3.03).
262 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

Table 4: Average of pretest, posttest, and difference value: Social attitudes

UA = upper academic ability; LA= lower academic ability

Learning Academic Average Difference

n
model ability Pretest Posttest (%)
PBL UA 12 2.42 3.69 52.5
LA 12 2.35 3.31 40.9
Total 24 2.39 3.50 46.4
NHT UA 12 2.51 3.46 37.8
LA 12 2.36 3.31 40.3
Total 24 2.44 3.38 38.5
PBL and NHT UA 12 2.46 3.77 53.3
LA 12 2.35 3.60 53.2
Total 24 2.40 3.68 53.3
Multi-strategies UA 12 2.53 3.43 35.6
LA 12 2.35 3.03 29.0
Total 24 2.44 3.23 32.4
Total UA 12 2.48 3.59 44.8
LA 12 2.35 3.13 33.2
Total 24 2.42 3.45 42.6

Table 4 shows that social attitude scores increased for all four learning models. The largest
average pretest-posttest difference (53.3%) was obtained for the integrated model of PBL
and NHT, whilst the lowest average increase (32.4%) was obtained from multi-strategies.
Specifically related to academic ability, the average increase in social attitudes scores for
lower academic ability students (33.2%) was smaller than the average increase for upper
academic ability students (44.8%).

Concerning the combination of learning model and academic ability, the highest
percentage increase in social attitude scores was obtained from the combination of upper
academic ability students with integrated PBL and NHT (53.3%); whilst the lowest
increase was obtained from academic ability students and multi-strategies learning model
(29.0%).

Table 5 shows that ANCOVA test results on learning model obtained the significance
value p = 0.000 (p <0.01). This result indicates that the learning model is significantly
influential upon social attitude scores. The hypothesis that "there is a difference between
social attitude scores of students who were given the integration of PBL and NHT
compared with students given PBL, NHT and multi-strategies", is therefore accepted.

The result of the ANCOVA tests on academic ability and interaction of learning model is
significant at p = 0.000 (p <0.01) and p = 0.093 (p> 0.05) respectively. This indicates that
academic ability is significantly influential, whilst the interaction between the learning and
academic ability is not significant. Thus, the hypothesis "there is no difference in social
attitude scores between the lower academic ability students and the upper academic
ability" is rejected, and "there is no difference in social attitude scores due to interaction of
learning model with academic ability" is accepted.
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 263

Table 5: ANCOVA test results: Social attitude

Type III sum Mean

Source df F Sig.
of squares square
Model 4.819 8 0.602 11.908 0.000
Intercept 8.656 1 8.656 171.126 0.000
Pretest 0.014 1 0,014 0.276 0.600
Learning model 2.551 3 0.850 16.812 0.000
Academic ability 1.730 1 1.730 34.202 0.000
Learning model x Academic ability 0.334 3 0.111 2.203 0.093
Error 4.401 87 0.051
Total 1153.240 96
Total average score 9.220 95

Discussion

Learning model and spiritual attitudes of students with different academic

abilities

The four learning models (PBL, NHT, integrated PBL and NHT, and multi-strategies)
have been proven effective in improving the spiritual attitude of the high school students
with upper and lower academic ability. Each learning model provides students with a
personal experience as the social stimulus which will result in the establishment of
attitude. Those learning models help promote student interactions, which also contributes
to the development of the students’ attitudes, especially spiritual attitude.

The results of data analysis indicate that the four learning models have a significant effect
on the students’ spiritual attitudes. Students with high spiritual attitude were found to be
happier than those with lower spiritual attitude (Abdel-Khalek, 2006). Research conducted
by Davis, Kerr & Robinson (2003) showed that there was a consistent positive correlation
between spiritual attitudes and happiness. They found a consistent inverse relationship
between spiritual attitudes, well-being and the nature of anxiety, regardless of gender, age,
and marital status. Harris, Schoneman and Carrera (2002) found that the commitment of
approach associated with spiritual attitudes may be related to lower levels of general
anxiety. A principal component analysis showed that the constellation of variables which
involved religious aspects of an individual and his/her relationship with other people in a
religious group had a significant negative correlation with anxiety traits. Aghili and Kumar
(2008) concluded that someone with a lower level spiritual attitude had more tension and
anxiety, and a lower level of happiness.

Students’ academic ability may influence their academic achievement, as indicated by the
research conducted by Corebima (2007), who found that slow learners who used
cooperative strategies can achieve at least the same or better than fast learners. Based on
the results of this research, it may be concluded that implementation of the integrated
model of PBL and NHT has some potential for developing students’ spiritual attitudes.
264 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

This may occur because the integration of the two learning models encourages students to
interact or collaborate in a smaller group to solve learning problems. Interaction promotes
tolerance, cooperation, responsibility, democracy, and plurality among the students,.
According to Gerungan (2010), social interaction that occurs in a group can change or
form a new attitude.

Each learning model, however, has a different effect on students’ spiritual attitudes. The
results of covariance analysis showed that the average score of students learning with PBL
is higher than for students learning with NHT. Nevertheless, the average score of students
learning with the integrated model of PBL and NHT is higher than for students learning
with PBL.

The NHT learning model provides students with an opportunity to work independently
and in collaboration with others (Lie, 2002). This model helps students gain self-
confidence and thereby become more active in discussing the topics being studied. Thus,
based on the highest percentage of the students’ average score, the integrated model of
PBL and NHT is considered the most effective learning model for improving the spiritual
attitude of students with upper academic ability.

Learning model and social attitudes of students with different academic abilities

The results of the present study show that PBL, NHT, the integrated model of PBL and
NHT, and multi-strategies can improve students’ social attitudes. Loudon and Bitta (1993)
stated that attitude is formed by three factors including (1) personal experience, (2) group
associations, and (3) influential others. The results of data analysis have showed that each
learning model has a significant distinctive effect on the students’ social attitude. The
results of this research are consistent with the results of previous research conducted by
Maasawet (2009).

The integrated model of PBL and NHT better improves students’ social attitude
compared to PBL, NHT, and multi-strategies learning models. This may be due to the
integrated model of PBL and NHT being better at enabling to interact and collaborate in a
smaller group to solve their learning problems. Joyce and Emily (2009) stated that
cooperation within a group increases responsibility, self-esteem (feeling respected and
valued), reduces competition and establishes a positive outlook towards others. Slavin
(2010) stated that cooperative learning can enhance students’ social relationships and
cultivate tolerance and respect for other people. Jordan and Metais (2000) stated that that
cooperative learning has the potential to foster interpersonal relationships and the creation
of mutually beneficial relationships, as well as providing a variety of interesting
experiences that can be drawn together. Haydon et al (2010) also concluded that
cooperative learning model can be effectively and efficiently used to improve learning
outcomes, including for students with certain disorders of emotional intelligence, and
Akbar (2003) stated that cooperative learning model can be applied to develop students’
emotional quotient. Through cooperative students learn to better understand their own
emotions and others’ feelings.
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 265

Although all the four learning models are able to improve students’ social attitudes, the
results of covariance analysis show that PBL has more potential to help students improve
their knowledge and become reflective and flexible thinkers who are able to solve real-life
problems. PBL remains one learning design that students preferred (Mansori, et al., 2015).
Thus, based on students’ average scores, the best learning design to improve students’
social attitude is the integrated model of PBL and NHT.

Conclusion

From this research we conclude that (1) the learning model affects the spiritual and social
attitude scores of students in biology; (2) academic ability affects the spiritual and social
attitudes of students; and (3) the interaction of learning model with academic ability does
affect the spiritual and social attitude scores of students in biology. However, the best
learning model for improving the spiritual and social attitudes of students is an integrated
combination of PBL and NHT models, in the cases of students who have upper academic
ability.

Acknowledgment

An earlier version of this work was presented at the 8th International Conference on Science,
Mathematics and Technology Education (icSMTE), hosted by Universitas Negeri Jakarta, at the
Sari Pan Pacific Hotel, Jakarta, Indonesia, 21-24 November 2015.

References

Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2006). Happiness, health, and religiosity: Significant relations. Mental

Health, Religion and Culture, 9(1), 85-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13694670500040625
Aghili, M. & Kumar, G. V. (2008). Relationship between religious attitude and happiness
among professional employees. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 34, 66-
69. http://medind.nic.in/jak/t08/s1/jakt08s1p66.pdf
Ahlam & Gaber, H. (2014). Impact of problem-based learning on students’ critical
thinking dispositions, knowledge acquisition and retention. Journal of Education and
Practice, 5(4), 74-85. http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP
Akbar, S. (2003). Study of curriculum and learning model on Pancasila and citizenship in elementary
school. Malang: Wineka Media.
Akcay, B. (2009). Problem-based learning in science education. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 6(1), 26-36. https://www.pegem.net/dosyalar/dokuman/48116-
20090429114931-04problem-based-learning-in-science-education.pdf
Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, assessing
(Revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives). New York: Addison-Wesley
Longman.
Arends, R. I. (2008). Learning to teach. Translation by P. S. Helly & Sri Mulyantini.
Yogyakarta: Student Library.
266 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

Bachtiar, S. (2013). Application of problem based learning model to enhance critical thinking ability,
metacognitive awareness and cognitive learning outcomes in class XI SMAN 1 Binamu. Thesis.
Makassar: Postgraduate Program, State University of Makassar.
Bachtiar, S. (2014). Upgrades critical thinking and cognitive learning outcomes through
problem based learning (PBL) model in material excretion systems IX grade students
in junior high school. Proceedings. National Conference: Empowering the 21st Century.
Educators Malang: SMK Negeri 13 Malang.
Bachtiar, S. (2015). Jeneponto SMAN teacher’s perception of the problem based learning,
numbered head together, motivation, critical thinking skills, and metacognitive.
Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference and Workshop Biology/Science and Learning. Malang:
Biology Department, State University of Malang, 17 October 2015.
Bialangi, S. M., Zubaidah, S., Amin, M. & Gofur, A. (2016). Development of students’
social attitudes in biology classroom through jigsaw and guided inquiry. International
Journal of Academic Research and Development, 1(10), 01-07.
http://www.academicsjournal.com/download/165/1-9-32-530.pdf
Birgili, B. (2015). Creative and critical thinking skills in problem-based learning
environments. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 2(2), 71-80.
http://globalimpactfactor.com/journal-of-gifted-education-and-creativity/
Corebima, A. D. (2007). Learning strategies having bigger potency to empower thinking
skill and concept gaining of lower academic students. Proceedings of Redesigning Pedagogy
Conference. Nanyang, May 28-30 2007.
Davis, L. T., Kerr, A. R. & Robinson, K. E. S. (2003). Meaning, purpose, and religiosity in
at-risk youth: The relationship between anxiety and spirituality. Journal of Psychology and
Theology, 31(4), 356-365.
http://journals.biola.edu/jpt/volumes/31/issues/4/articles/356
Fogarty, R. (1997). Problem-based learning and other curriculum models for the multiple intelligences
classroom. New York: IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing, Inc.
Gerungan (2004). Social psychology. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
Goodnough, K. & Cashion, M. (2003). Fostering inquiry through problem-based learning.
The Science Teacher, 70(9), 21-25.
http://www.nsta.org/publications/news/story.aspx?id=48825
Harris, J. I., Schoneman, S. W. & Carrera, S. R. (2002). Approaches to religiosity related to
anxiety among college students. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 5(3), 253-265.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674670110112730
Haydon, T., Maheady, L. & Hunter, L. (2010). Effects of numbered heads together on the
daily quiz scores and on-task behavior of students with disabilities. Journal of Behavior
Education, 19, 222-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-010-9108-3
Ibrahim, M. (2000). Pembelajaran kooperatif. Surabaya: Unesa University Press.
Ibrahim, M. & Nur, M. (2000). Pengajaran berdasarkan masalah. Surabaya: Unesa University
Press.
Jordan, D. & Le Metais, J. (2000). Developing emotional intelligence in the classroom. Issue 24.
NZCER and ACER.
https://www.wtc.ie/images/pdf/Emotional_Intelligence/eq4.pdf
Joyce, M. & Emily. (2009). Models of teaching (Teaching Models) 8th ed. Translation by A.
Fawaid & A. Mirza, 2011. Yogyakarta: Student Library.
Kagan, S. & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan’s cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan.
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 267

Kusumaningtias, A., Zubaidah, S. & Indriwati, E. S. (2013). Problem based learning

dipadu strategi numbered heads together terhadap kemampuan metakognitif, berpikir
kritis, dan kognitif biologi. Jurnal Penelitian Kependidikan, 23(1), 33-47.
http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/jurnal-penelitian-kependidikan
Lie, A. (2002). Cooperative learning: Practicing cooperative learning in space-classroom. Jakarta:
Grasindo.
Loudon, D. L. & Bitta, J. A. D. (1993). Consumer behavior, concepts, and applications. 4th ed.
New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.
Maasawet, E. T. (2009). Effect of cooperative learning strategies snowballing and numbered heads
together (NHT) at the school of multi-ethnic against critical thinking skills, cognitive science learning
outcomes biology and social Attitudes junior high school students Samarinda. Unpublished
dissertation. Malang: PPS State University of Malang.
Mansori, N. A., Abdullah, O. N., Wahab, A. J., Rasul, M. S., Yusoff, M, Norhayati, M. N.
& Raof, R. A. (2015). Managing problem-based learning: Challenges and solutions for
educational practice. Asian Social Science, 11(4), 259-268.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n4p259
Nugraheni, E. (2007). Student centered learning: Dan implikasinya terhadap proses
pembelajaran [Student centred learning and learning process implications]. Jurnal
Pendidikan, 8(1), 1-10.
http://simpen.lppm.ut.ac.id/jp/Volume%208.1%20maret%202007/01-nugraheni.pdf
Nurhadi, Y. B. & Senduk, A. G. (2003). Contextual learning (Contextual Teaching and Learning)
and application in the CBC. Malang: State University of Malang.
Palennari, M. (2012). Potensi integrasi problem based learning dengan pembelajaran
kooperatif jigsaw dalam meningkatkan keterampilan berpikir kritis mahasiswa
[Potential integration of problem based learning with cooperative learning jigsaw in
improving the critical thinking skills of students]. Jurnal Bionature, 13(1), 1-9.
http://ojs.unm.ac.id/index.php/bionature/article/view/1418/491
Peterson, R. F. & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning to teach primary science through
problem-based learning. Science Education, 82(2), 215-237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199804)82:2<215::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-H
Pradnyani, M. & Ardana (2013). Effect of learning model numbered head together against
judging from the mathematics learning achievement study habits in SD. e-Journal
Ganesha Education University Graduate Program Department of Basic Education. Vol. 3.
Slavin, R. E. (2009). Educational psychology theory and practice. Boston: Allyn Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (2010). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice. Translated by Narulta
Yusron. Bandung: Publisher Nusa Media.
Sugiyono (2009). Educational research methods: Quantitative approach, qualitative and R & D.
Bandung: Alfabeta.
268 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

Appendix: Assessment sheets

(translated from Indonesian)
1. Assessment sheet: Spiritual attitudes
Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I pray before starting the study and after the study is
completed
2 I express gratitude for the gift of God
3 I greet before and after the expression / presentation
4 I express admiration orally and in writing to the Lord when
he saw the greatness of God
5 I feel the greatness of God's existence and is currently
studying science
Total score

2. Assessment sheet: Social attitude

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I am actively involved in practical activities / discussion
2 I am willing to do tasks as agreed
3 I'm looking for a way to resolve differences of opinion /
thoughts between myself and others
4 I'm not putting personal interests first
5 I encourage others to work together to achieve a common
goal
Total score

3. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - discipline

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I did observations in accordance with established procedures
2 I am disciplined in doing observations in accordance with the
time allotted
3 I did part of the job that has been set in advance with the
focus regardless of what does not work
4 I put together a temporary observation sheet in accordance
with the specified time
5 I returned the equipment and materials in place after
observation activities
Total score
Bachtiar, Zubaidah, Corebima, & Indriwati 269

4. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - honesty

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I'm honest in doing LKS
2 I work according to his ability, cheating observations,
analysis of the problems of other groups
3 I express opinions in accordance with the feelings that are
owned and not-fetched
4 I reported observational data or information as it is
5 I am honest in making the link between the analysis of
observational data with the problems presented
Total score

5. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - confidence

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I dare to make a presentation in front of the class
2 I dare argue, question, or answer questions
3 I believe or do activities without hesitation
4 I was able to make quick decisions
5 I do not easily surrender
Total score

6. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - responsibility

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I did the division of tasks to each member of the group
2 I carry out individual tasks well in accordance with the
division of tasks well
3 I made the observation reports while in table form
4 I made the observation data obtained with the results of the
analysis
5 I am honest in making the analysis of observational data and
analysis presented in accordance with the division of tasks set
Total score

7. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - tolerance

Some- Frequ-
No. Statement Never Always
times ently
1 I respect the opinion of friends
2 I do not impose opinions or beliefs on others
3 I received a deal although they differ with his opinion
4 I am willing to learn from (open to) beliefs and ideas of
others and understand others better
5 I forgive mistakes by my friends groups and other groups
Total score
270 The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models

8. Assessment sheet: Social attitudes - good manners

Strongly Dis- Strongly
No. Statement Agree
disagree agree agree
1 I do not say dirty, rude, and arrogant words at the time
of learning activities in the classroom
2 I thank you after receiving help from others
3 I use polite language when expressing
4 I use polite language when criticising the opinion of
friends
5 I'm not interrupting the discussion time
Total score

Suhaedir Bachtiar is a postgraduate student at Universitas Negeri Malang. He is also

currently teaching natural sciences to junior high school students in Batang, South
Sulawesi, Indonesia.
Email: [email protected]

Siti Zubaidah is a professor in the Biology Department, Faculty of Mathematics and

Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. Her research interests include biology
education, critical thinking, metacognitive skills, and student attitudes.
Email: [email protected]

Aloysius Duran Corebima is a professor in the Faculty of Mathematics and Sciences,

Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. He specialises in genetics study and biology
education. In addition, he has developed the achievement test (essay test) to measure
students’ critical thinking and metacognitive skills.
Email: [email protected]

Sri Endah Indriwati is currently teaching in the S1 Biology Education Program and is a
postgraduate at Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. Her research traces various
educational problems in universities, schools, and in the community. She is particularly
interested in learning strategies implemented in the classroom.
Email: [email protected]

Please cite as: Bachtiar, S., Zubaidah, S., Corebima, A. D. & Indriwati, S. E. (2017). The
spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning
models. Issues in Educational Research, 28(2), 254-270.
http://www.iier.org.au/iier28/bachtiar.pdf