Discovery Learning Berbantuan Schoology: Upaya Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis

Zelin Norma Resty, Muhardjito Muhardjito, Nandang Mufti


Abstract: This research was aimed to explain the effect learning model and gender on the critical thinking capabilities in static fluid topic. The research design was used descriptive and quasi-experimental. The learning models was used discovery learning and schoology-assisted discovery learning. The research data was obtained from the posttest of critical thinking capabilities on senior high school students. The results of this study indicate a difference in critical thinking capabilities based on the learning model. Gender factors and interaction of learning models with gender do not give a difference to critical thinking capabilities. The result of this study indicates that only learning models which effect to critical thinking capabilities in static fluid topic.

Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan pengaruh model pembelajaran dan jenis kelamin terhadap kemampuan berpikir kritis pada fluida statis. Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah deskriptif dan eksperimen semu. Model pembelajaran yang digunakan adalah model pembelajaran discovery learning dan discovery learning berbantuan schoology. Data penelitian diperoleh dari posttest kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa SMA. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan adanya perbedaan pada kemampuan berpikir kritis berdasarkan model pembelajaran. Faktor jenis kelamin dan interaksi model pembelajaran dengan jenis kelamin tidak memberikan perbedaan terhadap kemampuan berpikir kritis. Hasil penelitian mengindikasikan bahwa hanya model pembelajaran yang berpengaruh terhadap kemampuan berpikir kritis pada fluida statis.


critical thinking skills; discovery learning; schoology; kemampuan berpikir kritis; discovery learning; schoology;

Full Text:



Arslan, S. (2015). Investigating Predictive Role of Critical Thinking on Metacognition with Structural Equation Modeling. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2), 1–10.

Astuti, S. R. D., Suyanta, Lfx, E. W., & Rohaeti, E. (2017). An integrated assessment instrument: Developing and validating instrument for facilitating critical thinking abilities and science process skills on electrolyte and nonelectrolyte solution matter. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1847.

Bailin, S., Battersby, M., & Clauss, P. (2011). Scholarship at UWindsor Reason in the balance: Teaching critical thinking as dialectical. Retrieved from

Balim, A. G. (2009). The Effects of Discovery Learning on Students’ Success and Inquiry Learning Skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 35(35), 1–20.

Carlgren, T. (2013). Communication, Critical Thinking, Problem Solving: A Suggested Course for All High School Students in the 21st Century. Interchange, 44(1–2), 63–81.

Cetin-Dindar, A. (2016). Student motivation in constructivist learning environment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(2), 233–247.

Cheung, D. (2014). The Combined Effects of Classroom Teaching and Learning Strategy Use on Students’ Chemistry Self-Efficacy. Research in Science Education, 45(1), 101–116.

Cochrane, T. D. (2014). Critical success factors for transforming pedagogy with mobile Web 2.0. British Journal of Educational Technology.

Comer, D. R., & Lenaghan, J. A. (2013). Enhancing Discussions in the Asynchronous Online Classroom: The Lack of Face-to-Face Interaction Does Not Lessen the Lesson. Journal of Management Education.

ÇORLU, M. A., & ÇORLU, M. S. (2012). Scientific Inquiry based professional development models in teacher education. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 514–521. Retrieved from

Driver, R., Squire, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making Sense of Secondary Science. Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE.

Duran, M., & Dökme, I. (2016). The effect of the inquiry-based learning approach on student’s critical-thinking skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(12), 2887–2908.

Duran, M., & Sendag, S. (2012). A Preliminary Investigation into Critical Thinking Skills of Urban High School Students: Role of an IT/STEM Program. Creative Education, 03(02), 241–250.

Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical Thinking Dispositions: Their Nature and Assessability. Informal Logic, 18(2), 165–182.

Erceg, N., Aviani, I., & Mešić, V. (2013). Probing stuDents’ critical thinking processes by presenting ill-Defined physics problems. Revista Mexicana de Fisica E, 59(1), 65–76.

Ganci, S. (2008). A Multipurpose Device for Some Hydrostatics Questions. The Physics Teacher, 46(7), 407–409.

Gollub, J. (2008). Teaching about fluids. Physics Today, 61(10), 8–9.

Gwee, S., & Damodaran, S. (2015). Use of web 2.0 and mobile technologies for developing argumentative skills. In Communications in Computer and Information Science.

Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement.

Heron, P. R. L., Loverude, M. E., Shaffer, P. S., & McDermott, L. C. (2003). Helping students develop an understanding of Archimedes’ principle. II. Development of research-based instructional materials. American Journal of Physics, 71(11), 1188–1195.

Hilyana, F. S., & Hakim, M. M. (2018). Integrating Character Education on Physics Courses with Schoology Based E-learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17, 577–593.

Irawan, V. T., Sutadji, E., & Widiyanti. (2017). Blended learning based on schoology: Effort of improvement learning outcome and practicum chance in vocational high school. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1–10.

Kistner, S., Vollmeyer, R., Burns, B. D., & Kortenkamp, U. (2016). Model development in scientific discovery learning with a computer-based physics task. Computers in Human Behavior.

Koes-H, S., Muhardjito, M., & Wijaya, C. P. (2018). Scaffolding for solving problem in static fluid: A case study. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1923.

Loverude, M. E., Heron, P. R. L., & Kautz, C. H. (2010). Identifying and addressing student difficulties with hydrostatic pressure. American Journal of Physics, 78(1), 75–85.

Madsen, A., McKagan, S. B., & Sayre, E. C. (2013). Gender gap on concept inventories in physics: What is consistent, what is inconsistent, and what factors influence the gap? Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 9(2), 1–15.

Manning, C., Brooks, W., Crotteau, V., & Diedrich, A. (2011). Tech Tools for Teachers , By Teachers : Bridging Teachers and Students. Wisconsin English Journal, 53(1), 24–28.

Mkpanang, J. T. (2016). Influence of Creative Style and Gender on Students’ Achievement in Physics. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(12), 42–46. Retrieved from

Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2014). a Survey of Psychological, Motivational, Family and Perceptions of Physics Education Factors That Explain 15-Year-Old Students’ Aspirations To Study Physics in Post-Compulsory English Schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 371–393.

Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., … Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61.

Robinson, C. (2017). Technology tools for a paperless classroom. Science Scope, 41(3).

Sanchez Garcia, L. F., Sebastiá-Amat, S., Molina Garcia, N., & Saiz Colomina, S. (2018). Schoology As an Alternative To Traditional Teaching Tools for University Students. EDULEARN18 Proceedings, 1(July), 7514–7520.

Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational Psychology Fifth Edition. (E. Grelak & S. Colwell, Eds.). Michael Sugarman.

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: an educational perspective 6th ed. Pearson Education.

Suana, W., Maharta, N., Nyeneng, I. D. P., & Wahyuni, S. (2017). Design And Implementation of Schoology-Based Blended Learning Media for Basic Physics I Courses. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(1), 170–178.

Thompson, C. (2011). Critical thinking across the curriculum: Process over output. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(9), 1–7.

Tigowati, T., Efendi, A., & Budiyanto, C. W. (2017). The Influence of E-learning Use to Student Cognitive Performance and Motivation in Digital Simulation Course. IJIE (Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education), 1(1), 127.

Tiruneh, D. T., Verburgh, A., & Elen, J. (2014). Effectiveness of Critical Thinking Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies. Higher Education Studies, 4(1).

Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Junior high school students’ Internet usage and self-efficacy: A re-examination of the gender gap. Computers and Education, 54(4), 1182–1192.

Wartono, W., Hudha, M. N., & Batlolona, J. R. (2018). How are the physics critical thinking skills of the students taught by using inquiry-discovery through empirical and theorethical overview? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(2), 691–697.

Wenning, C. J. (2010). Levels of inquiry: Using inquiry spectrum learning sequences to teach science (Shaded sections added January 2012). J. Phys. Tchr. Educ. Online, 5(3), 11–20.

Wenning, C. J. (2011). The Levels of Inquiry Model of Science Teaching Wenning (2010) for explications of real-world applications component of the Inquiry Spectrum.) A Levels of Inquiry Redux. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 6(2).

Wilson, K., Low, D., Verdon, M., & Verdon, A. (2016). Differences in gender performance on competitive physics selection tests. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 1–16.

Young, D. E., & Meredith, D. C. (2017). Using the resources framework to design, assess, and refine interventions on pressure in fluids. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 1–16.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Zelin Norma Resty, Muhardjito Muhardjito, Nandang Mufti

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

JPtpp is accredited “Rank 3” as a scientific journal under the decree of the Directorate General of Research Enhancement and Development, Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, dated December 7, 2022, No: 225/E/KPT/2022, effective for five years from Volume 7 Issue 8, 2022 until Volume 12 Issue 7, 2027. Link to download

Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, & Pengembangan

Journal of Education: Theory, Research, and Development

Graduate School Of Universitas Negeri Malang

Lisensi Creative Commons

JPtpp is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License