A Counterbalanced Quasi-Experiment Comparing Problem-Based Learning with Zep Quiz, Zep Quiz Alone, and Traditional Lecture on Critical Thinking in High School Mechanics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21831/jpip.v19i1.97460Keywords:
Critical Thinking, Problem-Based Learning, Zep Quiz, counterbalanced design, physics education, mechanicsAbstract
Developing critical thinking in physics is a priority in 21st-century education, yet evidence comparing the effectiveness of different instructional approaches—particularly those integrating problem-based learning (PBL) with digital quiz platforms—remains limited. This study compared the effects of three learning models—PBL assisted by Zep Quiz, Zep Quiz alone, and traditional lecture—on 11th-grade students' critical thinking skills in mechanics. A counterbalanced within-subject quasi-experimental design was employed with 102 students from SMAN 4 Tangerang Selatan. Each student experienced all three models across three topics (Newton's Laws, Momentum & Impulse, Rotational Motion) in a rotated order. Critical thinking was measured using a validated 18-item test based on Facione's six indicators (reliability: 0.78–0.79 for two topics, 0.45 for Rotational Motion). Data were analyzed using N-gain, repeated-measures ANOVA, and ANCOVA with pretest scores as covariate. All models improved critical thinking with moderate-to-high N-gain (0.73–0.78). Repeated-measures ANOVA showed significant differences between models (F(2,202)=4.920, p=.008, η²=.046). However, after controlling for pretest scores, ANCOVA revealed no statistically significant differences between models (F(2,202)=2.229, p=.109, η²=.015, small effect). Topic characteristics explained substantially more variance (η²=.642) than model variations (η²=.015). The largest gains occurred in Momentum & Impulse (N-gain=0.89), the lowest in Rotational Motion (N-gain=0.55). The three learning models are comparably effective in improving critical thinking in mechanics. Topic characteristics—particularly conceptual complexity—outweigh model variations in determining learning gains. Physics educators should prioritize alignment between instructional design and topic demands rather than focusing solely on model selection. Future research should extend to other physics topics and investigate longer-term retention.
References
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
Adhelacahya, K., Sukarmin, S., & Sarwanto, S. (2023). Impact of Problem-Based Learning Electronics Module Integrated with STEM on Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(7), 4869–4878. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i7.3931
Ahsan, F. A., Nasution, N. A., Dermawan, T. D., & Alda, M. (2026). Pengaruh Penggunaan Aplikasi Quizizz Mobile terhadap Motivasi Belajar Siswa di Era Pembelajaran Digital. Jurnal Publikasi Teknik Informatika, 5(1), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.55606/jupti.v5i1.6413
AlKandari, A. M., & AlQattan, M. M. (2020). E-Task-Based Learning Approach to Enhancing 21st-Century Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 551–566. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13136a
Aulia, H., Rafi, M. A., Permatasari, R. P., Jaufillaili, J., & Apandi, A. (2025). How Does Digital Quiz Motivate Students in EFL Setting? International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies, 6(3), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlts.v6i3.604
Cresswell, C., & Speelman, C. P. (2020). Does mathematics training lead to better logical thinking and reasoning? A cross-sectional assessment from students to professors. PLOS ONE, 15(7), e0236153. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236153
Dewi, S., Dwikoranto, & Setiani, R. (2024). Analisis Efektivitas dan Respon Peserta Didik terhadap Penerapan Model Problem Based Learning (PBL) pada Materi Usaha dan Energi. IPF: Inovasi Pendidikan Fisika, 13(2), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.26740/ipf.v13n2.p143-151
Docktor, J. L., Dornfeld, J., Frodermann, E., Heller, K., Hsu, L., Jackson, K. A., Mason, A., Ryan, Q. X., & Yang, J. (2016). Assessing student written problem solutions: A problem-solving rubric with application to introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 10130. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010130
Goodwin, J. R. (2024). What’s the Difference? A Comparison of Student-Centered Teaching Methods. Education Sciences, 14(7), 736. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070736
Jannah, M., Nasir, M., Siahaan, D. S., & Soewarno, S. (2022). Analysis of Students’ Difficulties in Solving Physics Problems with Multiple Representation Using What’s Another Way Method. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(2), 2479–2488. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i2.1008
Kotsis, K. T. (2025). From Theory to Practice: Exploring Students’ Everyday Use of Physics Knowledge. European Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning, 3(5), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejceel.2025.3(5).05
Moeis, M. R., & Maulana, M. F. (2021). Improving plastic degradation by increasing the thermostability of a whole cell biocatalyst with LC-cutinase activity. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1764(1), 12029. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1764/1/012029
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do. In PISA. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
Rencher, A. C. (2002). Methods of Multivariate Analysis (2nd Edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Rizki, I. A., Suprapto, N., Saphira, H. V, Alfarizy, Y., Ramadani, R., Saputri, A. D., & Suryani, D. (2024). Cooperative model, digital game, and augmented reality-based learning to enhance students critical thinking skills and learning motivation. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 1. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202423825
Rutherford, A. (2001). Introducing ANOVA and ANCOVA: A GLM Approach (1st Edition). SAGE Publications.
Susanto, F. S., & Airlanda, G. S. (2023). Efektivitas Model Problem Based Learning dan Problem Solving untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa dalam Pembelajaran IPAS. Jurnal Basicedu, 7(6), 3646–3653. https://doi.org/10.31004/basicedu.v7i6.6353
Takaoğlu, Z. B. (2024). High School Students’ Multiple Representation Translation Skills on One-Dimensional Motion: A Cross-Grade Study. Journal of Science Learning, 7(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v7i1.61099
Tiruneh, D. T., De Cock, M., Weldeslassie, A. G., Elen, J., & Janssen, R. (2017). Measuring Critical Thinking in Physics: Development and Validation of a Critical Thinking Test in Electricity and Magnetism. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(4), 663–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9723-0
Valentine, K. D., Kopcha, T. J., & Vagle, M. D. (2018). Phenomenological Methodologies in the Field of Educational Communications and Technology. TechTrends, 62(5), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0317-2
Yaumie, S. N., Jatmiko, B., Satriawan, M., Supardi, Z. A. I., & Arivi, M. A. (2025). The Role of Guided Inquiry to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Physics Education: A Systematic Review of Indonesian Studies. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 26(3), 1893–1908. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa.v26i3.pp1893-1908
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Fikriyah Luthfiyani, Iwan Permana Suwarna

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




