THE DIFFERENCES OF STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT AND CRITICAL THINKING BY IMPLEMENTING PROBLEM BASEDLEARNING
(PB L) AND GUI DED INQU IR Y LEA RN ING ON STOICH IOM E TRY TO P IC
Fany Rotua Yohana Sihite Reg. Number 4123131031
Bilingual Chemistry Education Program
Submitted to Fulfill The Requirement for Getting the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATIC AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
THE DIFFERENCES OF STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT AND CRITICAL THINKING BY IMPLEMENTING PROBLEM BASED LEARNING
(PBL) AND GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING ON STOICHIOMETRY TOPIC
Fany Rotua Yohana Sihite (4123131031)
The objective of this research is to know the difference of problem based learning model and guided inquiry learning model toward student’s achievement and critical thinking. This research was conducted in SMA N 1 Sidikalang on the even semester. The sample of this research are the students in grade X which consist two classes, one class as experimental class I taught by PBL model and the other as experimental class II taught by guided inquiry learning model. The research instrument in this research are 20 multiple choice questions from 40 questions that have validated. Before hypothesis test, the data of research had been analyzed by using normality test and homogeneity test, which is shown that data gain are normal distributed and homogenous. Based on hypothesis test of
hypothesis I using t-test was gotten value of significancecount (0,015) < significant
level (0.05), so the Ha1 is accepted and Ho1 is rejected. It means that student’s achievement that taught by implementing Guided Inquiry Learning is higher than student’s achievement that is taught by implementing PBL on stoichiometry topic.
In hypothesis test of hypothesis II using t-test was gotten value of significancecount
(0,030) < significant level (0.05), so the Ha2 is accepted and Ho2 is rejected. It means that there is differences in student’s critical thinking that taught by implementing PBL model with student’s critical thinking that is taught by implementing Guided Inquiry learning model on stoichiometry topic.
The writer say the praise and gratitude to Jesus Christ, for all His graces
and blessing who always provide health, strength, spirit and everything to writer
in finishing this thesis well.
Thesis entitled “ The Difference of Student’s Achievement and Problem
Based Learning By Implementing Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Guided
Inqury Learning on Stoichiometry Topic ” has been arraged to obtain the degree
of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, State
University of Medan.
In this opportunity, the writer would like to axpress thank you so much to
Mrs. Dra. Ani Sutiani, M.Si as thesis supervisor, for big support, advice,
guidance, suggestion and constructive comments from beginning until end of
completing this research and also to Mr. Prof. Dr. Albinus, M.S, Mr. Dr.
Zainuddin Muchtar, M.Si, Mr. Drs. Jamalum Purba, M.Si, as examiner lecturer
who had given advice and suggestion to completing this thesis. Thanks also goes
to Dr. Iis Siti Jahro, M.Si, as academic supervisor who had motivated and
guidance the writer during lecturing, Prof. Dr. Retno Dwi Suyani, M.Si as
instrument and observation sheet validator, Dr. Asrin Lubis, M.Pd, as a dean of
FMIPA UNIMED, Agus Kembaren, S.Si,M.Si as Head of Chemistry Department,
Dr. Iis Siti Jahro, M.Si, as Coordinator of Bilingual Program, Nora Susanti,S.Si,
Apt., M.Sc, as Secretary of Bilingual Program, Sir Syamsudin as Bilingual staff
for helping in administrative assistance and kindness and all lecturer and staff in
The writer also like to say thanks to Drs. Alben Sianturi as a headmaster of
SMAN 1 Sidikalang, Silas Sihombing, S.Pd as chemistry teacher, staff
administration, and all students grade X, Holan Sasada and Suidgolent class in
SMAN 1 Sidikalang for help when do the research. For students in SMAN 5
Medan who had given oportunity and helpful when do validation instrument test.
The special deepest gratitude and appreciation to my beloved family, my
support, and educated me and thank you for my brothers Fernando Sihite and all
my family who have prayed and gave me encouragement to complete my study.
The writer also thanks to my friends, Ernita, Evi, Lady, Novel for crazy
time we have during finishing thesis, and all my friends in family of CESP’12,
Lestari, Elviana, Meliana, Seruni, Rina, Lisna, Hariati, Frida, Saadah, Nova,
Rimbun, Suditro, Arif, Wita, Mariana, Ivana, Rolina, Descey, Biuti, Taufik.
Thanks to my friends at my second home, Sis Vivien, Sis Fitri, Sis Tika, Yossi for
laugh, happiness, sadness and support me. And thanks for all people, whom I
can’t tell one by one, who helped and gave support during my study.
The writer has done the maximal effort in the completion of this thesis, but
the writer is aware there are many weakness in terms of both content and
grammar. The writer welcome any suggestion and constructive criticism from
reader for this thesis perfectly. The writer hope the content of this thesis would be
useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan, June 2016
184.108.40.206. Charactheristics of Guided Inquiry Learning 16
220.127.116.11. The Syntax of Guided Inquiry Learning Model 18
18.104.22.168. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Guided Inquiry Learning Model 19
22.214.171.124. Reliability Test 39
126.96.36.199. Validity Test 40
188.8.131.52. Difficulty Level 40
184.108.40.206. Discrimination Index 40
4.1.2. Data Description of Result 40
220.127.116.11. Student’s Achievement 41
18.104.22.168. Observation Sheet Data of Student’s Critical Thinking 42
4.1.3. Data Analysis of Research Result 43
22.214.171.124. Normality Test of Student’s Achievement 43
126.96.36.199. Normality Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 44
188.8.131.52. Homogeneity Test of Student’s Achievement 44
184.108.40.206. Homogeneity Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 45
220.127.116.11. Normalized Gain of Student’s Achievement 45
18.104.22.168. Hypothesis Test 46
22.214.171.124.1. Hypothesis Test of Hypothesis 1 46
126.96.36.199.2. Hypothesis Test of Hypothesis 2 47
4.2. Research Discussion 48
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 52
5.1. Conclusion 52
5.2. Suggestion 52
Table 2.1 Steps of Problem Based Learning Model 14
Table 2.2 The Syntax of Guided Inquiry Learning Model 18
Table 2.3 Indicators of Critical Thinking Skills 21 Table 3.1 Lattice of Test Instrument 26 Table 3.2 Criteria of Validation Analysis 28
Tabel 3.3 Lattice Sheet of Observations 31 Tabel 3.4 The Design of Research 32
Tabel 3.5 The Percentage of the value of students attitude 38
Table 4.1 Student’s Achievement Data 41
Table 4.2 Observation Sheet Data of Student’s Critical Thinking 43
Table 4.3 Normality Test of Student’s Achievement 43
Tabel 4.4 Normality Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 44
Tabel 4.5 Homogeneity Test of Student’s Achievement 45
Tabel 4.6 Homogeneity Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 45
Tabel 4.7 Normalized Gain of Student’s Achievement 46
Tabel 4.8 Hypothesis Test of Hypothesis 1 47
Figure 3.1 The scheme of Research Stage 35
Figure 4.1 Result of student’s achievement in experimental class I 42
Formula 3.1 Reliability Test 27
Formula 3.2 Validity Test 28
Formula 3.3 Difficulty Level 29
Formula 3.4 Discrimination Index 29
Formula 3.5 Normalized Gain 36
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1. Research Background
Education is a basic requirement indispensable and can not be separated
from human life. Education according to UU SISDIKNAS no. 20 tahun 2003, is a
conscious and deliberate effort to create an atmosphere of learning and the
learning process in such a way so that students can develop their own potentials
actively in order to have self control, intelligence, social skills, spiritual power of
religion, personality and noble character. Education serves to develop the ability
and character development and a dignified civilization in the context of the
intellectual life of the nation.
Realising that, the study has a curriculum program, which will be updated
to improve the quality of human resources. Renewal of the current from education
unit level curriculum (KTSP) into the curriculum in 2013, which requires changes
in the model of learning that focuses on teachers become focused on student
Curriculum 2013 is a curriculum based character that promotes the
understanding, skill, and character education, in which students are required to
understand the above materials, active in the process of discussions and
presentations as well as having good manners and discipline is high. Curriculum
in 2013 there were scientific approach that imparts scientific attitude on students
which has three aspects: knowledge, skills aspects, and aspects of attitudes and
Chemistry is one of the subjects of natural sciences study the phenomena
of nature, but specializes in studying the structure, composition, properties and
changes of matter and energy that accompany changes in the material. Chemical
subjects having the following characteristics: (1) most of the chemicals are
abstract, abstract concepts of chemistry can be solved by using an analogy, (2)
chemistry is a simplification of the truth, (3) chemical materials character
the chemistry is not only to solve problems, (5) the material must be studied very
much (Kean and Middlecamp, 1985: 5-9). According to Jahro (2009), chemistry is
an experimental science, can not be learned only through reading, writing or
listening only. Studied chemistry not only master the body of knowledge in the
form of facts, concepts, principles, but Also a process of discovery and mastery of
procedures or the scientific method. Nekhleh (1992, in Sudria 2006) states that the
misconceptions commonly found in the chemistry of atoms, molecules, and ions.
Based on the author's experience when field experience program (PPL) in
SMA N 2 Lintongnihuta, many students who scored below the KKM. The lowest
value was 46.67, while the value of completeness is 70. For each class there are
20 students and 8 of them have a value below the KKM. During an interview with
the students, many say that the chemistry is complex, monotonous and not real. It
was submitted in accordance with Sanjaya (2008) that learning process especially
chemistry that is monotonous and less interest had Become one of the problems
that causes low of learning result on students. Besides it is monotonous, mostly
According to students, the materials in chemistry are Also cognitive and abstract.
During an interview with the subjects chemistry teacher at the school, said that
students have first afraid receive materials especially those of class X, so many
students who are not active. This led to low yields of learning and critical thinking
skills of students.
Related to the above, we need a treatment to improve learning outcomes
and students' critical thinking. The right way is to use a model of student-centered
learning with the teacher as a facilitator who encourages students to be more
active in developing its own potential. The learning model that can be used is a
model of PBL and guided inquiry learning model.
Model of problem-based learning makes students are required to learn
through direct experience based problems. PBL is an innovation in teaching
because of the students' thinking skills PBL truly optimized through the process of
work group or team that is systematic, so that students can empower, honing,
testing, and develop the capacity to think an on going basis. Syntax in the PBL
guiding the experience of individual / group, 4) develop and present work, 5)
analyze and evaluate the problem-solving process. Through the application of
PBL in the learning process can improve student interest in learning interest both
inside and outside the classroom and be able to increase the students'
understanding. PBL also can improve students' motivation, where students can
build their own understanding and knowledge.
Guided inquiry learning model provides the opportunity for students to
learn how to find the facts, concepts and principles through direct experience. So
the students not only learn to read and then memorize the lesson material, but also
get a chance to practice developing thinking skills and scientific attitude so as to
enable the construction process with a good knowledge so that students will be
able to improve the understanding of the material being studied (Ibrahim, 2010).
According to Hanafi (2009) inquiry learning model has several
advantages, namely: (1) helping learners to develop, readiness, and mastery of
skills in cognitive processes. (2) learners acquire knowledge individually so that it
is understandable and settle in his mind. (3) can generate motivation and passion
learners to study harder. (4) provide opportunities for developing and developed
according to the abilities and interests of each. (5) strengthen and increase the
confidence in yourself to find yourself because the learning process is centered on
the learner with the teacher's role is very limited.
Several studies have submitted the effectiveness of problem-based
learning model and guided inquiry learning model to improve learning outcomes.
According to research Yussi, Tri and Masykuri (2014), concluded that the
effective use of PBL seen from the achievement of learning targets, namely;
76.25% of students have high learning activity; 81.25% of students achieving
KKM material redox reactions; and 90.63% of learners have a very good attitude
through the assessment questionnaire as well as 82.29% of learners have a good
attitude through observation assessment.
According to research Eka, Ratu and Tasviri (2014), concluded that the
guided inquiry learning model is effective in improving students' mastery of
model effectiveness is measured by the difference n-Gain students' mastery of the
concept of significant between experimental class and control class. The results
showed an average n-Gain mastery of a concept for an experimental class and
control class is 0.62 and 0.28. Based on hypothesis testing using t-test.
Application of learning models such as the above, which emphasizes the
involvement of students in full process both physically and mentally to be able to
find the material studied and connect with real-life situations that encourage
students to be able to apply it in their lives are guided inquiry models. Guided
inquiry is an inquiry approach where teachers have a more active role in defining
the issues and the stages of completion. And a learning requires students are
expected to actively think, communicate, and manage the data and ultimately
make their own conclusions and the knowledge that the desired PBL model. PBL
is an approach that is used to stimulate students' critical thinking in situations
oriented to real world problems.
Based on this background, the authors are interested in making the study
titled “The Differences of Student’s Achievement and Critical Thinking by
Implementing Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Guided Inquiry Learning On Stoichiometry Topic”.
Based on the background of the study, the problems identification in the study
a. Reaction of student in the learning process.
b. Characteristic of chemistry for students.
c. Student’s achievement in learning chemistry.
1.3. Problem Limitation
The Problems Limitation of this research are:
1. The learning model used in this research is PBL for the experimental class
I and Guided Inquiry Learning for the experimental class II.
2. The material that discuss in this research is limited to the subject of
3. Student’s achievement in this research can be divided into two, namely the
cognitive and affective. Cognitive domains measured by the Bloom's
taxonomy C1 (Knowledge), C2 (Comprehension), C3 (Application), C4
(Analysis) and affective domains in this research of student’s critical
thinking skills in learning groups.
1.4. Problem Formulation
Based on the background of research and the scope of research above, the
Problems Formulation of this Research are:
1. Is there a difference between student’s achievement that is taught by using
PBL and Guided Inquiry Learning on stoichiometry topic?
2. Is there a difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught
by using PBL and Guided Inquiry Learning on stoichiometry topic?
1.5. Research Objective
The Researches Objective of this research are:
1. To know there is a difference between student’s achievement that is taught
by using PBL and Guided Inquiry Learning on stoichiometry topic.
2. To know there is a difference between student’s critical thinking skills that
is taught by using PBL and Guided Inquiry Learning on stoichiometry
1.6. Research Benefit
The Benefits expected from the result of this Research are:
1. For Researchers/Students, the results of the research will add knowledge,
ability and experience to improve their competence as a teacher candidate.
2. For Chemistry Teacher, the results of research will provide input on the use
of PBL model and Guided Inquiry Learning model in the teaching of
chemistry, especially on the subject of stoichiometry.
3. For Students, this Research is expected to increase the knowledge and
experience of student learning.
4. For Schools, this Research is expected to contribute to improving student
achievement in schools so as to improve the quality of teaching chemistry at
SMA N 1 Sidikalang.
5. For the Next Researcher, this Research can be used as a reference in
conducting further research.
1.7. Operational Definition
In order to avoid different interpretations in understanding any existing
variable in this study, it was necessary given the operational definition to clarify
it. The operational definitions of research are:
1. Nana Sudjana (1992: 2) states that student learning outcomes is essentially
a change in behavior as a result of the process of learning activities and the
ability of the formulation containing the desired behavior as covered in the
learning objectives. Benjamin S. Bloom (1979) classifies learning
outcomes in three domains, namely: cognitive, affective domain, and
psychomotoric domain. Cognitive domain includes the ability
development of intellectual skills (knowledge) with the levels which
Knowledge (C1), Comprehension (C2), Application (C3), Analysis (C4),
Syntesis (C5), and Evaluation (C6). In this study, the observed learning
outcome includes two aspects: cognitive domains consist of C1 through
C4 and affective domain includes aspects of critical thinking skills and
2. According to Richard Paul (Fisher, 2001 : 7), critical thinking is that mode
of thinking about any subject, content, or problem in which the thinker
improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully analysing,
assessing, and reconstructing it. Critical thinking is self directed, self
disciplined, self monitored and self corrective thinking.
3. A learning method of PBL is one of the alternatives from the many
innovative methods are applied in the process of teaching and learning
activities to help students in processing the information that has been so in
her mind and put together their own knowledge about the social world and
beyond (Kusnadi, et.all, 2013)
4. A Guided Inquiry learning activity engages students, promotes
restructuring of information and knowledge, and helps students develop
understanding by employing the learning cycle in guided inquiry activities.
The learning cycle consists of three stages or phases: exploration, concept
invention or formation, and application (Hanson, 2006).
5. The matter of stoichiometry is one of the lesson in senior high school
chemistry class X. Topic stoichiometry includes basic chemical’s law,
mole concept, the application of mole concept in defining chemical
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Based on the research that have been done, can be concluded that:
1. Student’s achievement that is taught by using Guided Inquiry Learning
with increasing average 82.08 is higher than Student’s achievement that is
taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) with increasing average
78.50 on Stoichiometry topic.
2. There is difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught
by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) where average is 50.99% and
Guided Inquiry Learning where average is 46.05% on stoichiometry topic.
1. For chemistry teacher, they should make innovation in teaching of
chemistry, one of the ways is by apply Guided Inquiry Learning model
and Problem Based Learning model because this models can improve
student’s achievement and critical thinking in chemistry.
2. There is innovation to do Guided Inquiry Learning model and Problem
Abraham, M. R., (1989), Inquiry and the Learning Cycle Approach, International,
Journal Of Chemists Guide to EffectiveTeaching, 1, Upper Saddle River,
Ahmad, A., (2007), Memahami Berpikir Kritis, Bandung:
article/2611 access on January 2016.
Akcay, Behiye. (2009). Belajar Soal Berbasis Pendidikan Sains. Journal of
Turkish Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(1): 1-7.
Arends, R.I.,(1997), Classroom Instructional and Management, New York, Mc
Graw Hill Book companies, Inc.
Atan, H., Sulaiman, F., Idrus, R. M., (2005), The effectiveness of Problem-Based
Learning in the web-based environment for the delivery of an
undergraduate physics course, International Education Journal, 6(4):
430-437, ISSN 1443-1475.
Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I., Fallon, H., (2005), Handbook of Enquiry and
Problem-Based Learning. AISHE and CELT, NUI Galway, Galway.
Barrows, H. and Tamblyn, R. (1980), Problem-based Learning: An Approach to
Medical Education. Springer, New York.
Bilgin, I., Senocak, E., Sozbilir, M., (2009), The effects of Problem-Based
Learning Instruction on University Students’ Performance of Conceptual
and Quantitative Problems in Gas Concepts, Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(2): 153-164.
Bloom, B. S., (1979), Taxonomy of Education Objectivities, The Classification of
Education Goal, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, Longman Inc, USA.
Carol, C., Ross, J., (2010), Guided Inquiry : Learning in 21st Century, Aalborg
Creswell, J.W., (2012), Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Qualitative and quantitative Research, Pearson Education.
Dike, D., (2010), Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa dengan Model
TASC (Thinking Actively in a Social Context) pada Pembelajaran IPS,
Jurnal Penelitian1(1): 15-29.
Dimyanti and Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Jakarta: PT. Rineka
Eka, Y., Ratu, B., Tasviri, E., (2014), Efektivitas Pembelajaran Inkuiri
Terbimbing dalam Meningkatkan Penguasaan Konsep Hukum-Hukum
Dasar Kimia Siswa, Skripsi, FMIPA, Universitas Lampung.
Ennis, R.H., (1985), Goal Critical Thinking Curriculum. Dalam Costa, A.L. (Ed):
Developing of Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking, Virginia:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Developing (ASCD).
Fisher, A., (2001), Critical Thinking An Introduction, UK: Cambridge University
Fogarty, R., (1997), Problem-based learning and other curriculum models for the
multiple intelligences classroom, Arlington Heights, Illionis: Sky Light.
Graaff, E. D., Kolmos, A.,(2003), Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning, Int.
J. Enggng Ed., 19(5): 657-662.
Hanson, D., (2006), Instructors Guide to Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry
Learning, Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.
Isjoni, H., (2010), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan
Komunikasi Antar Peserta Didik, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Belajar.
Jack, G.U., (2013), Concept Mapping and Guided Inquiry as Effective Techniques
for Teaching Difficult Concepts in Chemistry: Effect on Students’
Academic Achievement, Journal of Education and Practice, 4(5): 9-15.
Jahro, I.S., (2009), Analisis Penerapan Metode Praktikum pada Pembelajaran
Ilmu Kimia di Sekolah Menengah Atas, FMIPA Unimed, Medan, Jurnal
Justiana, S., Muchtaridi, (2009), Bilingual Chemistry 1 for Senior high School
year X, Bandung: Yudhistira.
Kothari, C.R., (1990), Research Methodology: Methods and Technique, New Age
International (P) Ltd., New Delhi.
Kusnadi, Masykuri, M., and Mulyani, S., (2013), Pembelajaran Kimia Dengan
Problem Based Learning (PBL) Menggunakan Laboratorium Real dan
Virtual Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Matematik Dan Kemampuan Berpikir
Abstrak Siswa, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Jurnal Inkuri, ISSN:
2252-7893, 2(2): 163-172
Middlecamp, C. dan Kean, E. (1984). Panduan Belajar Kimia Dasar. Jakarta. PT
Pandey, A., Nanda, G. K., Ranja, V., (2011), Effectiveness of Inquiry Training
Model over Conventional Teaching Method on Academic Achievement of
Science Students in India, Journal of Innovative Research in Education,
Purwanto, M. N., (2009), Prinsip-Prinsip Dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran,
Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Roestyah, N., K., (2008), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Rooney, C., (2009), How am I Using Inquiry-Based Learning to Improve My
Practice and to Encourage Higher Order Thinking among My Students of
Mathematics?, Educational Journal of Living Theories, 5(2): 99-127.
Rusman. (2012). Model–model Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Sanjaya, W., (2006), Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses
Pendidikan, Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Sanjaya, W., (2008), Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran, Jakarta: Kencana Prenada
Savery, J. R, (2006), Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and
Sharif, A., Hasan, A., (2012), The Effects of Guided Inquiry Instruction on
Students’ Achievement and Understanding of the Nature of Science in
Environmental Biology Course, Skripsi, Faculty of Education of British,
University in Dubai.
Silitonga, P.M., (2013), Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan, Medan: FMIPA
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi, Jakarta: PT.
Sofiani, E., (2011), Pengaruh Model Inkuiri Terbimbing (Guided Inquiry)
Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa pada Konsep Listrik Dinamis, Skripsi,
Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, Jurusan Pendidikan Ilmi
Pengetahuan Alam, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.
Sudria, IBN. (2006). Peningkatan Kualitas Konsepsi Mahasiswa Tentang Konsep
Dasar Kimia Melalui Optimalisasi Pengaitan Kajian Aspek Makroskopis,
Mikroskopis, dan Simbolik Pada Perkuliahan Kimia Dasar. Hasil
Penelitian, Singaraja: Fakultas Pendidikan MIPA Universitas Pendidikan
Suyanti, R.D., (2010), Strategi Pembelajaran Kimia, Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Sunardi, (2010), Kimia Bilingual untuk SMA/MA kelas XI, Bandung: Yrama
Surya, H., (2013), Cara Belajar Orang Genius, PT Elex Medis Komputindo,
Sumiati dan Asra, (2013), Metode Pembelajaran, Bandung: CV Wacana Prima.
Trianto, (2010), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Jakarta:
Yussi, P., (2014), Pelaksanaan Model Pembelajaran Problem Based Learning
(PBL) pada Materi Redoks kelas X SMA Negeri 5 Surakarta Tahun