UJME 7 (1) 2018: 910-918

Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education

https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/ujme/
ISSN: 2252-6927 (print); 2460-5840 (online)

Mathematical Critical Thinking Skills Viewed from Curiosity

of 7th Grade Students in Creative Based Learning Using Smart
Card
Farah Zulfa Si’adillaa,*, Rochmada, Arief Agoestantoa
a
Universitas Negeri Semarang, Kampus Sekaran Gunungpati, Semarang, 50229, Indonesia

* E-mail address: farahzulfa056@students.unnes.ac.id

ARTICLE INFO Abstract

Article history:
Received 8 January 2019
Received 2018
Accepted 1 January 2018
Keywords:
Mathematical Critical
Thinking Skills; Curiosity;
Creative Based Learning;
Smart Card.
The objectives of this study are to examine the effectiveness of Creative Based
Learning model using smart card on mathematical critical thinking skills of 7th grade
students and to describe mathematical critical thinking skills viewed from the curiosity
of 7th grade students in Creative Based Learning using Smart Card. This study was a
mixed-methods study with sequential explanatory design. The study population was
7th grade students at SMP Negeri 2 Demak academic year 2017/2018. By using simple
random sampling, the sample of students in 7C class were selected as an experiment
class. The results showed that Creative Based Learning using Smart Card was effective
on mathematical critical thinking skills of 7th grade students. The description of
mathematical critical thinking skills viewed from students’ curiosity in Creative Based
Learning using Smart Card was students in the high curiosity category were able to to
meet sub-indicators at all stages of critical mathematical thinking, students in the
medium and low curiosity category were only able to meet the sub-indicators at
clarification stage.
© 2018 Published by Mathematics Department, Universitas Negeri Semarang

which involves mathematical knowledge,

1. Introduction
Mathematics is one of the main subjects at
schools, from elementary school, secondary school,
to higher education. As stated in mathematics
curriculum at schools, the purpose of giving
mathematics is to enable students to face condition
changes in the developing words through practices
of actions based on thinking logically, rationally,
critically, thoroughly, honestly, and effectively.
Critical thinking as a form of thinking skills
must be developed by everyone including student
(Setyaningsih, Agoestanto, & Kurniasih, 2014). It
shows that one of the thinking skills that become the
focus of mathematics teaching is critical thinking.
Sumarni, Sugiarto & Sunarmi (2016) said that
teaching and developing critical thinking skills are
considered vital to develop at schools so that the
students are able and get accustomed to facing
many problems around. Therefore, mathematical
critical thinking is a process of thinking critically
mathematical reasoning and mathematical proof.
To think critically, the stages of critical thinking
explained by Jacob & Sam (2008) are used:
clarification, assessment, inference, and strategies.
The indicators used in this study are analyzing and
discussing the scope of problems at clarification
stage, gathering and assessing the relevant
information at assessment stage, and framing
relationship among different parts of problems at
inference stage, and evaluating solving steps that
have been done at strategies stage. From each
indicator, there are sub-indicators used in this study
(1) writing down information of the problem and
stating questions of the problem, (2) using facts to
be applied in the concept or formula appropriately,
(3) drawing initial inference in each solving step
correctly, (4) writing down process steps based on
facts coherently and continuously and finding the
final solution appropriately.

To cite this article:

Si’adilla, F.Z., Rochmad, & Agoestanto, A. (2019). Mathematical Critical Thinking Skills Viewed from Curiosity of
7th Grade Students in Creative Based Learning Using Smart Card. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 7(1),
910-918. doi: 10.15294/ujme.v7i1.xxxxx
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
Marin & Halpern as cited by Isti, Agoestanto, &
Kurniasih (2017) said that developing critical
thinking skills is often listed as the most important
reason for formal education because critical
thinking skills are vital for the success in the
contemporary world. The explanation shows that
critical thinking skills are skills that every student
must have to solve mathematics problems,
including junior high school students. However,
facts on the ground are the opposite. The
improvement of critical thinking skills of junior
high school students is not as expected.
Based on the observation result conducted by
the researcher in 7th grade at SMP Negeri 2 Demak,
students’ mathematical critical thinking skills is
non-optimal. This can be seen from the test result of
a 7th grade at SMP Negeri 2 Demak in Figure 1 as
follows.
Figure 1. Test Question and Student’s Answer on
Question Number 1 and 2 in Observation
Test of Mathematical Critical Thinking
skills
Based on Figure 1, the student was unable to
write down the information about the problem and
unable to state questions of the problem. The
student only wrote down what was known, yet it
was incomplete because there were still parts that
the student should have written down in the known,
and the student did not write down what to look for
in the problem. Thus the students did not meet the
sub-indicator of writing down information about the
problem and stating question of the problem. In
addition, the students was also nonoptimal in
solving problem in question number 2, because the
student did not completely write down the concept
or formula that would be used to look for the
solution and write down process steps coherently
and continuously, so that the student did not meet
911
the indicator of using facts to be applied in the
concept or formula appropriately. Moreover, the
student did not meet the indicator of drawing the
initial inference in each solving step correctly,
because the student was unable to generalize the
initial inference based on the facts. In addition, the
student did not meet the sub-indicator of writing
down process steps based on the steps coherently
and continuously and was unable to find the final
solution appropriately, where students did not
generalize the inference based on the facts. From
the results, it has been proved that the student did
not meet the four sub-indicators of mathematical
critical thinking skills, so from the example, it can
be said that mathematical critical thinking skills of
7th-grade students are not optimal.
In addition to critical thinking, another thing
that can improve mathematical critical thinking
skills of the students is their curiosity about the
questions given by the teacher. According to
Permendikbud (2013), one of the mathematics
learning objectives is to have curiosity, confidence,
and interest in mathematics, shaped from the
learning experience. Furthermore, according to
Kemendiknas (2011) curiosity is an attitude or an
action which always attempts to know deeper and
broader about something learned, seen, and heard.
Based on the explanation above, mathematical
critical thinking skills and student curiosity are
important mathematics learning objectives. With
mathematical critical thinking skills, students can
solve problems regarding mathematics, in which
during the process students will build their own
knowledge. Meanwhile, with curiosity, students
will try to always learn deeper and broader of
something learned, seen, heard, felt, and
experienced.
Based on the statements above, the teacher as a
students’ guide needs to select an appropriate
learning model. One of the models that can be used
is Creative Based Learning. Creative Based
Learning is a learning model similar to Problem
Based Learning which begins by giving students a
problem, then students solve the problem to find
new knowledge, later, students are required to be
more active in the teaching and learning process.
The presented problem can train students to think
critically through problem-solving process.
This is in line with Hosnan (2014) which stated
that the main objective of PBL is to develop critical
thinking skills and problem-solving skill as well as
to develop students’ skills to build their own
knowledge actively. According to Fathiya,
Agoestanto, & Kurniasih (2014), this learning
model provides spaces for the students to find and
build their own concept and can develop students’
thinking skills. PBL gives students challenges to
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
cooperate in a group to solve the problem (Khoiri,
Rochmad, & Cahyono, 2013).
This is supported by the research results of
Akinoglu & Tandogan (2007) which explained that
PBL model implementation can develop students’
high-order thinking skills including critical thinking
skills and scientific thinking skills. Therefore, PBL
model is considered to have an important role in
developing mathematical critical thinking of the
students.
The syntax of this Creative Based Learning
model is (1) students’ orientation toward problems,
(2) organizing students to learn, (3) guiding the
individual or group inquiries, (4) developing and
presenting work products, and (5) analyzing and
evaluating problem-solving process (Trianto,
2007).
To support the implementation of Creative
Based Learning model, learning media are needed.
According to Widyaningrum, Pujiastuti, &
Wijayanti (2016), learning media are important in
the learning for helping students explore
knowledge, increase learning motivation, and make
learning more interesting. One of the media that can
be used in delivering problems to students in this
study is by using learning media in the form of
smart card. Smart card is a learning medium which
consists of questions to help the teachers teach. The
variety of questions in the smart card is expected to
make the students interested and active in finding
the solution to train students’ critical thinking skills
and curiosity. Based on the research by Rahmawati
(2013), problem card can attract students’ attention,
and the students’ learning result with problem card
is higher, so the researcher is interested in using
smart card.
To support that Creative Based Learning Model
using Smart Card is an appropriate model for
developing mathematical critical thinking viewed
from students’ curiosity, it is needed to examine the
effectiveness of Creative Based Learning using
Smart Card to know whether the objective of
Creative Based Learning model can be achieved.
According to Akhmad & Masriyah (2014),
learning effectiveness is a measurement to
determine the extent to which learning objective is
achieved. Meanwhile, according to Rochmad
(2012), components to measure effectiveness can
be different among the researchers depending on
the definition (the term explanation) of what is
called effective in the study. In this study, Creative
Based Learning using Smart Card is considered
effective if: (1) students’ mathematical critical
thinking skills achieve actual mastery criteria 69,
(2) there is an improvement of students’
mathematical critical thinking skills before and
after getting Creative Based Learning model using
912
Smart Card, (3) the learning using Creative Based
Learning using Smart Card is better than the
learning using conventional model, and (4)
students’ response to Creative Based Learning
using Smart Card is good. If Creative Based
Learning using Smart Card is effective, it is
expected that the description of mathematical
critical thinking skills viewed from student
curiosity can be better.
This study aims to know that (1) Creative Based
Learning model using Smart Card is effective on
students’ mathematical critical thinking skills, and
(2) to describe mathematical critical thinking skills
viewed from student curiosity.
2. Methods
This study was a mixed-methods study with
sequential explanatory strategy. According to
Cresswell (2014), the characteristics of sequential
explanatory strategy are collecting and analyzing
quantitative data in the early stage of the study,
followed by collecting and analyzing qualitative
data built from quantitative analysis results. The
design used in the quantitative study was true
experimental design in the form of Pretest-Posttest
Control Group Design.
The population of this study was 7th-grade
students at SMP Negeri 2 Demak academic year
2017/2018. From the population, the sample was
selected using random sampling technique, that was
7C class as the experiment class obtaining Creative
Based Learning model using smart card and 7D
class as the control class obtaining conventional
learning which is usually done in the class, that is
Discovery Learning. To analyze mathematical
critical thinking skills viewed from student
curiosity, the research subject was selected by using
purposive sampling technique from experiment
class as many as 9 students, of which 3 students
were from each students’ curiosity category with
high category, medium category, and low category.
The data collection techniques used in this study
were (1) written test in the form of pre-test and post-
test of students’ mathematical critical thinking
skills, (2) questionnaire about students’ response
was used to know students’ response to Creative
Based Learning using smart card, (3) questionnaire
about students’ curiosity was used to categorize
students’ curiosity into high category, medium
category, and low category, and (4) interview was
used to obtain data directly on students’
mathematical critical thinking skills in solving
problem in post-test.
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
The data analysis or data processing included
analysis of test set and analysis of research data.
The questions of mathematical critical thinking
used for pre-test and post-test were the question that
had been tested. The testing data were then
analyzed. The analysis of test item of pre-test
included test item validity, test reliability, level of
difficulty, and the ability to differentiate. After
being analyzed, of 10 test items that were tested, 5
questions were properly used for pre-test and post-
test, this analysis result was then validated by the
experts, i.e. lecturer of mathematics department.
Questionnaire about curiosity used to know the
curiosity of experiment class was questionnaire
about curiosity that had been tested. The testing
results were analyzed using validity and reliability
tests. After being analyzed, of 20 questionnaire
items about curiosity which was tested, 18
questionnaire items were valid and reliable. The
analysis results were then validated by the expert,
i.e. mathematics lecturer.
Before the study was carried out, the researcher
conducted normality test and homogeneity test. The
data used were assessment data of the odd mid-
semester. After the students did pre-test and post
test, pre-test and post-test result data were tested
using normality test, homogeneity test, one-tailed
mean test, one-tailed proportion test, normalized
gain test, two means difference test, and two
proportion difference test. The results of curiosity
questionnaire completion by the students were then
analysed to classify students’ curiosity into high
category, medium category, and low category.
From the score obtained from the questionnaire
completion, students were then categorized
according to Arikunto (2009). Meanwhile, analysis
of qualitative data was done by reducing data,
presenting data, drawing conclusion, and verifying
data.
In data reduction, the data were summarized and
focused on important things based students’
mathematical critical thinking skills with high,
medium, and low curiosity. The data presented
were then analysis of students’ mathematical
critical thinking based on critical thinking sub-
indicators in the form of essay and presented in the
form of tables. The data conclusion and verification
were gained from the reducing and presenting data
of mathematical critical thinking skills viewed from
students’ curiosity.
Besides using quantitative and qualitative
analysis, to analyse the effectiveness of Creative
Based Learning using smart card, there was an
analysis of questionnaire about students’ response
to Creative Based Learning using smart card.
Analysis of students’ response questionnaire aimed
to know the category to which students in the
experiment class responded to Creative Based
913
Learning using smart card. The scale used in the
students’ response was Likert scale with score 1, 2,
3, 4, or 5 for every statement item.
3. Results and Discussion
Analysis of Students’ Response Questionnaire
Based on the calculation of questionnaire result
about students’ response to Creative Based
Learning using smart card, it was obtained the
percentage as much as 82.857%, which means that
students’ response in the experiment class to
Creative Based Learning using smart card was
good.
Analysis of Quantitative Data
Based on normality test in SPPS using
Kolmogorov-Smirnov with significant level 5%, the
odd mid-semester assessment of the experiment
class and control class was normal distribution.
Based on the homogeneity test in SPSS using
Lavene’s Test with significant level 5%, the
experiment class variance was the same with the
control class.
Based on normality test in SPPS using
Kolmogorov-Smirnov with significant level 5%,
the post-test score of mathematical critical thinking
skills of the experiment class and post-test score of
the control class were normal distribution. Based on
the homogeneity test in SPSS using Lavene’s Test
with significant level 5%, the post-test score
variance of the experiment class was the same with
the post-test variance of the control class.
The first hypothesis testing in this study was
actual mastery test 69. The hypothesis test of
learning mastery used post-test result of students;
mathematical critical thinking skills in the
experiment class. The actual mastery test 69 was
conducted by two tests, i.e. right-tailed mean test
and right-tailed proportion test. Based on the right-
tailed mean test, it was obtained 𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 5 and
𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑒𝑙 = 1,7 so that 𝐻0 was rejected and 𝐻1 was
accepted. It means that the average post-test result
of students’ mathematical critical thinking skills in
Creative Based Learning using smart card was
above minimum mastery criteria. The minimum
mastery criteria which have been determined based
on the observation of students’ mathematical
critical thinking skills were 69. Meanwhile, based
on right-tailed proportion test, it was obtained
𝑧𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 2,041 and 𝑧𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 1,64 so that 𝐻0
was rejected dan 𝐻1 was accepted. It means that
students’ proportion that achieved minimum
mastery criteria was more than 75%. Based on
right-tailed mean test and right-tailed proportion
test, it can be concluded that students’ mathematical
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
critical thinking skills in Creative Based Learning
using smart card achieves actual mastery up to 69.
The result is obtained because Creative Based
Learning model using smart card gives students
opportunities to explore their existing knowledge
and relate it to contextual problems through their
thinking process so that students can develop their
critical thinking skills in solving contextual
problems. The study result by Akinoglu &
Tandogan (2007) showed that PBL can develop
students’ higher-order thinking skill, for example
critical thinking skill and scientific thinking skill.
Therefore, Creative Based Learning model has an
important role in developing students’
mathematical critical thinking skill.
The second hypothesis testing in this study was
learning result improvement. Test of learning result
improvement used three types of testing i.e.: (1)
normalized gain test of pre-test and post-test results
of students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in
the experiment class which obtained < 𝑔 > =
0,715. It means that the improvement of students’
mathematical critical thinking skill in the
experiment class between before and after getting
Creative Based Learning using smart card was in
the high category; (2) the paired difference test of
two means between pre-test and post-results of
students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in the
experiment class obtained 𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 19,490 and
𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 1,7 so that 𝐻0 was rejected dan 𝐻1 was
accepted. It means that there was a significant
improvement of students’ mathematical critical
thinking skill in the experiment class. (3) test of the
difference between two means as gain results of
pre-test and post-test of students’ mathematical
critical thinking skill in the experiment class
obtained 𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 3,645 and 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 1,67 so
that 𝐻0 was rejected and 𝐻1 was accepted. It means
that the improvement of students’ mathematical
critical skill in the experiment class was better than
the improvement in the control class.
Based on the three tests, it can be concluded that
there is high and significant improvement in
students’ mathematical critical thinking skill before
and after getting Creative Based Learning using
smart card, and the improvement is better than the
improvement in conventional learning.
The third hypothesis testing in this study was
hypothesis testing of the experiment class’ skill was
better than the control class’ skill. The hypothesis
testing used two tests i.e. difference test of two
means and difference test of two proportions. Based
on the difference test of two means from post-test
result of students’ mathematical critical thinking
skill in the experiment class and in the control class,
it was obtained 𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 3,414 and 𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 =
1,67 so that 𝐻0 was rejected and 𝐻1 was accepted.
It means that the post-result of students’
914
mathematical critical thinking skill in the
experiment class was better than post-test result of
students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in the
control class.
Meanwhile, based on the difference test of two
proportions between post-test result of students’
mathematical critical thinking skill in the
experiment class and control class, it was obtained
𝑧𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 3,336 and 𝑧𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 1,64 so that 𝐻0
was rejected and 𝐻1 was accepted. It means that
students’ proportion in the experiment class whose
post-test result of mathematical critical thinking
skill achieved the minimum mastery criteria was
better than students’ proportion in the control class
whose post-test result of mathematical critical
thinking skill achieved minimum mastery criteria.
Based on the two tests, it can be concluded that
students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in
Creative Based Learning using smart card is better
than students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in
conventional learning. The result is obtained
because smart card media have an important role in
helping students understand the problems presented
during the learning process. The study result by Elia
& George (2004) stated that the use of media in the
form of pictures can make it easier for students to
find an appropriate solution to a problem.
Based on the discussion of study result above, it
can be concluded that (1) students’ mathematical
critical thinking skill in Creative Based Learning
using smart card achieves learning mastery, (2) the
improvement of students’ mathematical critical
thinking skill in Creative Based Learning using
smart card is high and significant as well as better
than the improvement in the conventional learning,
(3) students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in
Creative Based Learning using smart card is better
than students’ mathematical critical thinking skill in
conventional learning, and (4) students’ response to
Creative Based Learning using smart card is good.
Therefore, Creative Based Learning using smart
card is effective in supporting students’
mathematical critical thinking skill.
Analysis of Qualitative Data
Qualitative analysis discussed the description of
mathematical critical thinking skill viewed from
students’ curiosity was conducted to nine research
subjects. The subjects were selected from
experiment group students based on the curiosity
questionnaire which had been obtained. The nine
subjects were T1, T2, T3 for high curiosity
category, S1, S2, S3 for medium curiosity category,
and R1, R2, R3 for low curiosity category. The
grouping of students into high, medium, and low
category according to Arikunto (2009) i.e. students
in high curiosity category are a group of students
obtaining questionnaire score more than the average
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
score plus standard deviation, students in medium
curiosity category are a group of students obtaining
questionnaire score more than or equal to the
average score minus standard deviation, students in
the low category are a group of students obtaining
questionnaire score less than the average score
minus standard deviation. Moreover, based on the
test result data of mathematical critical thinking
skill of each indicator and interview result with the
nine subjects, triangulation technique can be done.
The triangulation technique was an attempt by the
researcher to use different data collection
techniques to gain data from the same source.
According to Renner (2006), curiosity is the
desire for new information and knowledge.
Curiosity is also a child’s motivation in initiating
critical and creative thinking activities. Therefore, it
can be said that curiosity can affect students'
mathematical critical thinking skill.
Students’ Mathematical Critical Thinking Skill
Viewed from High Curiosity Category
At the clarification stage, students with high
curiosity category are able to write down the
information about the problem and state the
problem question. Then at the assessment stage, the
students are able to use facts to be applied in the
concepts or formulas appropriately although there
is still a lack on the subject T2 in question number
2 that is less able to use all available information to
solve the problem. At the inference stage, students
with high curiosity category are able to draw initial
inference in every solving step correctly even
though the T2 subject in question number 2 is less
able to determine the process steps. Then at the
strategies stage, students with high curiosity
category are able to write down process steps
coherently and continuously based on facts and find
the final solution appropriately.
During the classroom learning, students with
high curiosity category were able to work
independently during the learning and did not need
much teacher’s guide. Students were able to analyze
a problem and develop a strategy to solve it. They
tried to see if their strategy can be used or not, and
when that strategy did not work they will try again
until it worked. If any material is poorly understood,
students with high curiosity were not ashamed to
ask the teacher. They were always looking for
something new to increase their knowledge and
improve their skills.
This is in line with a research by Ardiyanto
(2013) that curiosity will make students become
active thinkers, active observers, then will motivate
students to learn deeper to bring satisfaction in
themselves and eliminate the boredom to continue
learning. This is also reinforced with what proposed
by Salirawati (2012) that the characteristic of
915
students with high curiosity is often asking
questions to teachers. Thus it can be said that
students in the high curiosity category meet all
stages of critical thinking.
Students’ Mathematical Critical Thinking Skill
Viewed from Medium Curiosity Category
At the clarification stage, students with medium
curiosity category were able to write down the
information of the problem and able to state the
problem question although there was still a lack on
doing question number 5 by subject S2 and question
number 2 by subject S3. Then at the assessment
stage, there was a problem what the students were
less able to meet the sub-indicator at this assessment
stage because they only focused on the formula to
be looked for. Thus they only used some of the
information that has been specified in the problem.
Therefore, at the assessment stage students with
medium curiosity category were less able to use
facts to be applied in concepts or formulas
appropriately. At the inference stage, there were 2
questions that the subject S2 and S3 were in a hurry
in determining the steps to be used, causing
something wrong in the algorithm solving.
However, when determining the formula used,
students with medium curiosity were already able
to determine it correctly. Thus students with
medium curiosity category were less able to draw
initial inference in every solving step correctly.
Then at the strategy stage, students with medium
curiosity were less careful in calculation. So the
students with medium curiosity were less able to
write down the process steps based on facts
coherently and continuously and less able to find
the final solution properly.
During the classroom learning, students with
medium curiosity category were ashamed to ask
questions and only keep their curiosity, as a result
students would find the information by themselves.
Though one indicator of curiosity is asking
questions. Students sometimes felt discouraged
when an answer to a question is not immediately
known, then write an answer as soon as possible to
solve, causing to be less careful in doing the
calculation.
Therefore, students with medium curiosity
category were only able to meet the sub-indicator at
the clarification stage, while the sub-indicators at
the assessment stage, the inference stage, and the
strategies stage were not met. This was because
although students with medium curiosity category
were able to understand the material taught by the
teacher well but students with medium curiosity
category were often less careful in doing the
calculation so that the solution was still wrong.
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
Students’ Mathematical Critical Thinking Skill
Viewed from Low Curiosity Category
At the clarification stage, students with low
curiosity category were able to write down the
information of the problem and to state the problem
questions although there was still a lack of question
number 2 by the subject R1 and R3. Then at the
assessment stage, there were some questions that
students were unable to use facts to be applied in
concepts or formulas appropriately. So students
with low curiosity categories have not met the sub-
indicators at this stage. At the inference stage, there
were some questions that the students were unable
to draw the initial inference in each step correctly
due to the confusion to determine the steps that
would be used to solve the problem. So students
with low curiosity category have not met the sub-
indicators at this stage. At the strategies stage,
students with low curiosity category were still
wrong in writing down the formula that should be
used and not yet able to apply it. Students were also
less careful in calculating and still did not write the
final inference in detail. So students with low
curiosity categories have not met the sub-indicators
at this stage.
During the classroom learning, students in the
low curiosity category received material presented
by the teacher with an absolute truth without
considering the origin of the material or theory.
Students did not want to try to go deeper and
develop the materials. Therefore, when students
were less familiar with the material which had been
presented by the teacher, they would not ask the
teacher or their friend. Students also did not seek to
find out the learning resources about the concepts
or problems being learned. These students had low
self-esteem. In the classroom, these students tend to
be quiet and passive. Whereas, the concept of
critical thinking is to identify questions, consider
whether the source is trustworthy or not and
consider the answers to questions, conclude,
provide further explanation, set the strategy, and
draw conclusions. This is in line with Mardhiyana
& Jailani (2015) Curiosity is the desire to learn
something to gain new information or knowledge.
Learning is not only to know, but also explores
knowledge to discover new knowledge in the
learning process. This is causing his curiosity is
low.
Hence, students in the low curiosity category
only met the sub-indicators at the clarification stage
while the sub-indicators at the assessment stage, the
inference stage, and the strategies stage had not
been met. Those were due to students in the low
curiosity category still required much guidance
from teachers to be able to follow the learning well.
In other words, students in the low curiosity
category were still unable to learn independently,
916
were dependent, and needed assistance from others
to be able to understand the material being
presented.
This is in line with the theory according to the
Ministry of National Education (2010) explains that
curiosity is the attitude and action that always try to
know deeper and extends from something he
learned, seen, and heard. It is showed in the high
curiosity category subject that are able to solve the
problem of mathematical critical thinking skills
because actively asked the teacher and actively
participate in the group discussion activities. In
addition to the above opinion supported the
influence of curiosity on mathematical critical
thinking skills supported by previous research. As
research conducted by Herayani, Kartono, &
Sukestiyarno (2016) which showed a significant
influence of students' curiosity to the ability of
mathematical creative thinking skills. In this case
critical thinking skills and creative thinking is a
high-order thinking skills (high order thinking
skill). The results of this study can be seen that the
attitude of curiosity on learning mathematics can
affect the results of students' mathematical critical
thinking skills.
4. Conclusion
Based on this research, the following
conclusions are drawn: (1) Creative Based Learning
using Smart Card is effective on mathematical
critical thinking skill of 7th grade students with
indicator: students' mathematical critical thinking
skill in Creative Based Learning learning using
smart card reaches actual mastery equals to 69;
there is a high and significant improvement in
students' mathematical critical thinking skills
between before and after obtaining Creative Based
Learning learning using smart cards, as well as
better improvement than conventional learning;
students 'mathematical critical thinking skills in
Creative Based Learning using smart card is better
than students' mathematical critical thinking skills
in the school learning, in this case, the Discovery
Learning; student's response to Creative Based
Learning using smart card is good; (2) description
of critical mathematical thinking skills viewed from
student's curiosity in Creative Based Learning
model of Smart Card-assisted learning: students in
high curiosity category are able to fulfill all critical
mathematical thinking stages namely clarification
stage, assessment stage, inference stage, and
strategies stage; the students in the medium
curiosity category are only able to meet the sub-
indicator at the clarification stage, while the sub-
indicators at the assessment stage, the inference
stage, and the strategies stage are not met, since the
sub-indicators at the assessment stage, the inference
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto
stage, and the strategies stage have not been fully
implemented; students in the low curiosity category
are able to meet the sub-indicators at the
clarification stage, while the sub-indicators at the
assessment stage, the inference stage, and the
strategies stage were not met. Suggestions that can
be recommended by researchers are as follows: (1)
Creative Based Learning learning Smart Card
Assisted can be used as an alternative learning
model for teachers to improve critical thinking
skills applied in mathematics class; (2) the use of
mathematical critical thinking skills in mathematics
learning needs to be cultivated, so it is expected to
encourage students' mathematical critical thinking.
References
Akhmad, G.P.A. & Masriyah. 2014. Efektifitas
Pembelajaran Matematika dengan
Pendekatan Model Elicting Activities
(MESa) pada Materi Persamaan dan
Pertidaksamaan Linear Satu Variabel di
Kelas VII-A SMP Negeri 1 Lamongan.
MATHEdunesa Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan
Matematika, 3(2), 97-102.
Akinoglu, O., & Tandogan, R. O. 2007. The Effect
of Problem-Based Active Learning in
Science Education on Students’s Academic
Achievement, Attitude and Concept
Learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,
Science & Technology Education, 3(1): 71-
81.
Ardiyanto, D. S. 2013. Pembelajaran Matematika
dengan Pendekatan Kontekstual
Berbantuan Hands On Problem Solving
untuk Meningkatkan Rasa Ingin Tahu dan
Prestasi Belajar Siswa. Dalam Prosiding
Universitas Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, 9
November 2013, ISBN : 978-979-16353-9-
4.
Arikunto, S. 2009. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi
Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Creswell, J. W. 2014. Research Design :
Pendekatan Metode Kualitatif, Kuantitatif,
dan Campuran. Translated by Fawaid, A.,
& Pancasari, R. K. 2016. Yogyakarta:
Pustaka Belajar.
Elia, I., & George, P. 2004. The Function of
Pictures in Problem Solving. In
Proceedings of the 28th Conference of
the International Group for the
917
Psychology of Mathematics Education.
University of Cyprus.
Fathiya, R. N., Agoestanto, A., & Kurniasih, A. W.
2014. Identifikasi Tahap Berpikir Kreatif
Menggunakan PBL Dengan Tugas
Pengajuan Masalah. Unnes Journal of
Mathematics Education, 3(1), 75-80.
Herayani, Kartono, & Sukestiyarno, YL. 2015.
Analisis Berpikir Kreatif Matematis Dan
Karakter Rasa Ingin Tahu Pada
Pembelajaran SSCS Berbantuan Media
Puzzle Materi Pecahan. Journal of Primary
Education, 4(2), 96-103.
Hosnan, M. 2014. Pendekatan Saintifik dan
Kontekstual dalam Pembelajaran Abad 21.
Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.
Isti, N. A., Agoestanto, A., & Kurniasih, A. W.
2017. Analisis Tahap Berpikir Kritis Siswa
Kelas VIII dalam Setting PBL dan
Scaffolding untuk Menyelesaikan Masalah
Matematika. Unnes Journal of
Mathematics Education, 6(1), 52-62.
Jacob, S. M., & Sam, H. K. 2008. Measuring
Critical Thinking in Problem Solving
through Online Discussion Forums in First
Year University Mathematics. In
Proceedings of the International
MultiConference of Engineers and
Computer Scientists (IMECS), Hong Kong,
19-21 Maret 2008, ISSN: 978-988-98671-
8-8.
Kemendiknas. 2010. Pengembangan Pendidikan
Budaya Dan Karakter Bangsa. Jakarta:
Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional.
Kemendiknas. 2011. Pendidikan Nilai-nilai Budaya
Dan Karakter Bangsa Dalam
Pembelajaran Matematika di SMP.
Jogjakarta: Pusat Pengembangan Dan
Pemberdayaan Pendidik Dan Tenaga
Kependidikan.
Khoiri, W., Rochmad, & Cahyono, A. N. 2013.
Problem Based Learning Berbantuan
Multimedia Dalam Pembelajaran
Matematika Untuk Meningkatkan
Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif. Unnes
Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(1),
114-121.
Mardhiyana, D., & Jailani. 2015. Developing
Instrument To Measure Religiosity And
Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918
 F.Z. Si’adilla, Rochmad, A. Agoestanto 918

Other Affective Domain In Teaching and VIII. Unnes Journal of Mathematics

Learning Mathematics. In Proceeding of Education, 5(3), 207-216.
International Conference On Research,
Implementation And Education Of
Mathematics And Sciences 2015,
Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta.
17-19 Mei 2015, ISBN: 978-979-96880-8-
8.

Novitasari. 2013. Studi Komparasi Metode

Pembelajaran Student Teams Achievement
Divisions (STAD) Dilengkapi Handout dan
Smart Card pada Materi Pokok Kelarutan
Kelas XI Semester Genap SMA Negeri 1
SIMO Tahun Pelajaran 2011/2012. Skripsi.
Surakarta: Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu
Pendidikan Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Permendikbud. 2013. Standar Isi Pendidikan Dasar

dan Menengah. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Renner, B. 2006. Curiosity About People: The

Development of a Social Curiosity Measure
in Adults. Journal of Personality
Assesment, 83(3), 305-316.

Rochmad. 2012. Desain Model Pengembangan

Perangkat Pembelajaran Matematika.
Kreano, 3(1), 59-72.

Salirawati, D. 2012. Percaya Diri, Keingintahuan,

dan Berjiwa Wirausaha: Tiga Karakter
Penting Bagi Peserta Didik. Jurnal
Pendidikan Karakter, II(2), 213-224.

Setyaningsih, T. D., Agoestanto, A., & Kurniasih,

A. W. 2014. Identifikasi Tahap Berpikir
Kritis Siswa Menggunakan PBL dalam
Tugas Pengajuan Masalah Matematika.
Kreano, 5(2), 180-187.

Sumarni, Sugiarto, & Sunarmi. 2016. Implementasi

Pembelajaran Auditory Intellectualy
Repetition (AIR) Terhadap Kemampuan
Berfikir Kritis Dan Disposisi Matematis
Peserta Didik Pada Materi Kubus Dan
Balok. Unnes Journal of Mathematics
Education, 5(2), 109-117.

Trianto. 2007. Model-Model Pembelajaran Inovatif

Berorientasi Konstruktivistik. Surabaya:
Prestasi Pustaka.

Widyaningrum, P. S., Pujiastuti, E., & Wijayanti,

K. 2016. Keefektifan Pembelajaran Model
POGIL Berbantuan Kartu Masalah
Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan
Masalah Dan Karakter Bangsa Siswa Kelas

Unnes J. Math. Educ. 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, 910-918