Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Numerasi Berdasarkan Gaya Belajar
Dwi Wulandari1 , Irwani Zawawi2 , Sri Suryanti 3
1, 2, 3 Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Muhammadiyah Gresik
E-mail: dwiiwulan1234@gmail.com1, irwanizawawi@umg.ac.id2, srisuryanti@umg.ac.id3 Abstrak
Kemampuan berpikir kritis sangat angat penting, hal tersebut dikarenakan kemampuan berpikir kritis melibatkan kemampuan untuk merenungkan masalah secara mendalam. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mendeskripsikan kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal numerasi berdasarkan gaya belajar. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif yang berjenis deskriptif.
Pelaksanaan penelitian pada kelas VIII MTs. Taswirul Afkar semester ganjil tahun ajaran 2023/2024.
Subjek penelitian ini terdiri dari 2 siswa gaya belajar Visual, 2 siswa gaya belajar Auditori, dan 2 siswa gaya belajar Kinestetik. Instrumen dalam penelitian ini adalah angket gaya belajar, tes kemampuan berpikir kritis dalam menyelesaikan soal numerasi dan pedoman wawancara. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan (1) siswa dengan gaya belajar Visual memiliki tingkat kemampuan berpikir kritis sedang dan mampu memenuhi 2 aspek kemampuan berpikir kritis yakni aspek evaluasi dan kesimoulan dengan lengkap dan tepat; (2) siswa dengan gaya belajar Auditori memiliki tingkat kemampuan berpikir kritis tinggi dan mampu memenuhi 4 aspek kemampuan berpikir kritis, yakni analisis, evaluasi, kesimpulan dan penjelasan dengan lengkap; (3) siswa dengan gaya belajar kinestetik memiliki tingkat kemampuan berpikit kritis rendah dan mampu memenuhi 2 aspek kemampuan berpikir kritis yakni evaluasi dan kesimpulan, namun kurang lengkap dan tepat.
Keywords: gaya belajar, kemampuan berpikir kritis, numerasi
Analysis of Students' Critical Thinking Skills in Solving Numeracy Problems Based on Learning Styles
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to describe students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems based on learning styles. This research uses a qualitative approach that is descriptive type.
Implementation of research in class VIII MTs. Taswirul Afkar odd semester of the 2023/2024 academic year. The subjects of this study consisted of 2 Visual learning style students, 2 Auditory learning style students, and 2 Kinesthetic learning style students. The instruments in this study were learning style questionnaires, tests of critical thinking skills in solving numeracy questions and interview guidelines.
Questionnaire data was analyzed to determine the type of student learning style, while test result data was analyzed based on aspects of critical thinking skills, namely interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation and self-regulation. The results showed (1) students with Visual learning styles have a moderate level of critical thinking skills and are able to fulfill 2 aspects of critical thinking skills, namely aspects of evaluation and simulation completely and precisely; (2) students with Auditory learning styles have a high level of critical thinking skills and are able to meet 4 aspects of critical thinking skills, namely analysis, evaluation, conclusion and explanation completely; (3) Students with kinesthetic learning styles have a low level of critical thinking ability and are able to meet 2 aspects of critical thinking skills, namely evaluation and conclusion, but are less complete and precise.
Keywords: critical thinking skills; learning style; numeracy
INTRODUCTION
Education is all knowledge learned throughout life anywhere and in any situation that contributes positively to the growth of each individual being (Pristiwanti et al., 2022). Also explained in the 1945 Law of the Republic of Indonesia Article 31 paragraph (1) concerning Education and Culture, what is meant by education is a series of processes to increase the potential and competence of an individual to become a human being with superior quality and the process takes as long as life. According to Pristiwanti et al. (2022) education while still alive is education that takes place throughout life (long life education). Education plays an important role in shaping individual character and skills. One of the skills that is highly emphasized in education is the ability to think critically. ( Siamy et al. 2018; Khairunisa
& Diah Utami, 2023). This ability includes not only concept understanding, but also skills of analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information.
Critical thinking is defined by Ennis (1996) as an activity that involves reflection, consideration and practice that focuses on making decisions about beliefs and appropriate actions So that everyone must have the ability to evaluate their own ideas that meet the criteria of thinking, solving problems, as well as making appropriate evaluations within a reasonable framework (Cansoy & Turkoglu, 2018).
Critical thinking is needed by everyone, to be able to successfully solve problems in difficult situations and have critical and effective communication (Atabaki et al., 2019). Rawung et al. (2021) stated that currently, the transition to the 21st century depends on the ability to think critically, solve problems, and work together. To improve the quality of education and prepare students for the challenges of 21st century skills, teaching should integrate 21st century skills such as critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and metacognition (Widodo & Rizky Kusuma Wardani, 2020). On the other hand, someone who has high critical thinking skills and good communication skills will more easily adjust to changes and will be valued both in the academic context and the world of work (Cahyono et al., 2019).
The development of these skills is included in life skills to find the truth and make the right decision by considering many questions (Cahyono et al., 2019). Critical thinking skills include the ability to reflect deeply on problems, accept a variety of different methods and perspectives, not fully assume information from many sources (oral or written), and think reflectively. It involves an attitude that does not simply accept outside ideas without understanding and in-depth judgment (Dewanti, 2018).
Chukwuyenum (2011) states that a person can use critical thinking is when solving problems in everyday life, because it involves interpretation, logical reasoning, analysis and evaluation of various information to make reliable and appropriate decisions. Referring to the opinions that have been described, it can be concluded that critical thinking skills are important and need to be developed for each individual with school education, especially in learning mathematics.
The importance of critical thinking skills makes the government always try to promote educational programs by following developments, which are currently in the development of the 21st century which is a technology-based era. The use of technology, information, and communication in all aspects of life, including education. But in reality, some students still have difficulty improving their critical thinking skills, especially in solving numerical problems. Indonesia's PISA 2022 results showed an increase of 5-6 ranks compared to 2018 in various aspects. However, Indonesian students still received average literacy and numeracy scores below the OECD (Organisation Economic Co-operation and Development) average, which shows that Indonesia's literacy and numeracy skills are still relatively low (Ayuningtyas & Sukriyah, 2022). Here the meaning of numeracy is not only the ability to solve math problems, but to use math in everyday life. This is referred to as literate which means math literacy (Noor & Abadi, 2022). A person's ability to use their math skills to explain events, solve problems, or make everyday decisions is known as numeracy (Aningsih, 2018). Taking into account both opinions, mathematical literacy or numeracy is defined as the ability to analyze, apply, communicate, and interpret basic mathematical symbols to solve common problems and reach conclusions in various forms (e.g.
stories, tables, graphs, diagrams, etc.) (Mahmud & Pratiwi, 2019). Therefore, this critical thinking ability is very important to develop students' ability to solve numeracy problems. According to research Salsabila et al. (2023) numeracy has a positive impact on students' critical and creative thinking skills.
Farkhatunnisa (2023) explained that the effect of critical thinking ability on numeracy was 0.649 or 64.9% and the remaining 35.1% was influenced by other variables outside the study.
Based on observations made by researchers, in grade 7 students of MTs. Taswirul Afkar Madumulyorejo in the 2023/2024 school year, it was found that not all students have the same critical thinking skills, some students have difficulty in thinking critically. This is influenced by the diversity of student learning styles. Understanding this learning method is very important to improve the effectiveness of learning. There are a number of studies that have examined students' critical thinking skills and their relationship with learning styles. Research from Binsar Waluyo & Heni Pujiastuti (2023) shows that due to differences in learning styles, students who are given the same numeracy problem will produce various types of errors. Research results Kirani et al. (2023) after analyzing students' learning styles in solving numeracy problems, changes in learning styles that educators apply to students can change how students are interested in literacy and numeracy.
Both of these studies have discussed how the influence of learning styles, such as auditory, visual, and kinesthetic can affect the way students examine information and understand numeracy problems.
However, previous studies have not investigated how students' learning styles and critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems relate to each other. Thus, this study was conducted to explore the relationship between students' critical thinking ability and their learning styles. It is expected that this analysis will provide in-depth insight into the components that influence students' ability to solve numeracy problems and provide a basis for the development of more appropriate and effective learning strategies.
By exploring the relationship between critical thinking skills and students' learning styles, we can make a positive contribution to the improvement of teaching methods in numeracy. The results of this analysis can serve as a basis for educators to customize learning methods that suit students' individual needs and ensure that each student can optimally develop his or her critical thinking ability. It is hoped that this research will build a solid foundation for creating a learning environment that encourages the development of students' intellectual and mathematical skills. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to describe students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems based on learning styles.
METHODS
This research uses a qualitative approach and is presented descriptively. Researchers use a theoretical basis in qualitative research to make the research more focused and relevant to the findings in the field. The data used in this study are sentences that will be analyzed thoroughly, not numerical data. This research describes how the differences in students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems based on their learning styles.
The research was conducted on July 25, 2023 at MTs. Taswirul Afkar Madumulyorejo which is located in Madumulyorejo village, Dukun sub-district, Gresik Regency, East Java. The subjects of this study were students of class VIII MTs. Tawirul Afkar in the 2023/2024 school year. The purposive technique was used to select the subject of analysis, namely two subjects from each type of learning style. The determination of subjects on a small scale is intended to enable more in-depth and focused information collection through tests and interviews.
The data collection instruments are the first instrument and the auxiliary instrument. The main instrument, namely the direct involvement of researchers in the research field. While the auxiliary instruments include (1) learning style tendency questionnaire; (2) critical thinking ability test sheet, which is used to measure students' critical thinking ability in solving numeracy problems; (3) interview guidelines used to interview subjects to find out students' critical thinking ability in solving numeracy problems; and (4) recording tools, which are used to record all interview activities of researchers with subjects.
The data collection technique consisted of two stages. In the first stage, student learning style data was collected before the test using a questionnaire instrument. In the second stage, the critical thinking skills test was conducted and followed by an interview, with a test instrument and interview guidelines.
The learning style questionnaire instrument was given to all students in one class. Then, based on the questionnaire analysis and consultation with the subject teacher, six students were selected in the category of easy cooperation and communication to be analyzed for test completion and further interviewed.
The learning style tendency questionnaire used was adopted from Hernacki (2013). The learning style questionnaire is used as a grouping of students based on their learning styles, namely Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic learning styles. The learning tendency questionnaire consists of 12 questions each for Auditory, Visual, and Kinesthetic learning styles. There are 3 answer options, namely often, sometimes, and rarely. The options are scored based on the level of fit, with each answer choice having a score of 0-2.
The test instrument consisted of five items in the form of multiple choice and open-ended. The questions used in this test are numeracy questions adopted from Suryanti et al. (2019). The test instrument is reviewed with a grid that shows the relationship between each indicator of critical thinking ability. Indicators of critical thinking skills refer to Facione (2000). The lattice of the test instrument is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Critical thinking skills test instrument lattice
Aspects Indicator Sub Indicators Description
Interpretation (Understanding the Problem)
Can write what is known about the problem correctly
Can write what the question is asking correctly
Identify and focus the elements contained in the problem
Identify the question contained in the problem
Write what is known and add up the score of the 9th archery based on the question.
Writing what is asked based on the question
Analyze (Planning for Completion)
Can write the relationship of the concepts used in solving the problem
Checking concepts related to simple explanations
Writing down concepts by modeling Sahrul and Tono's scores
Evaluation (Performing a Completion Plan)
Can write the solution to the problem correctly
Using strategies in proper calculation
Solve the problem with correct, precise, and coherent steps to assess the number of results of the 10th archery score.
Conclusion
Can provide conclusions based on what is asked logically
Draw and state conclusions
Summarizing the results of Sahrul and Tono's 10th archery score
Explanation Can provide reasons for the conclusions drawn
Gives reasons with simple explanations
Write down the reasons for the conclusions drawn
Self-regulation
Can review the answers that have been written down
Review and consider the answers that have been written
Correct and consider the answers that have been written Then, the scores from the student tests were calculated and the students' critical thinking skills were categorized. The score calculation is adjusted to the indicators that researchers have detailed in Table 2.
Table 2. Categorization of Critical Thinking Ability Criteria Score Range
80 ≤ 𝑠𝑘𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑠 ≤ 100 High 80≤ 𝑠𝑘𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑠 < 60 Medium 60 ≤ 𝑠𝑘𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑠 < 0 Low (adapted from Rosliani & Munandar, 2022)
Furthermore, the researcher conducted interviews with the research subjects one by one to find out in detail regarding the solution. After collecting data with all instruments, continued with the data analysis process. Based on Huberman’s (2014), qualitative data analysis consists of three stages, namely data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. In the data reduction stage, researchers started
from the results of the learning style questionnaire, the results of the critical thinking ability test in solving numeracy problems, and the results of the interviews. In the data presentation stage, the collection of information is organized with the conclusion of taking action and presented in the form of tables and graphs. The conclusion drawing stage is to draw conclusions from the results of the data presented about students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems that are adjusted based on learning styles.
RESULTS
The first data collection for the learning style questionnaire instrument was carried out by all VIII grade students totaling 13 students. Of these 13 students, there are 6 students who have a Visual learning style, only 4 students who have an Auditory learning style, and only 3 students who have a kinesthetic learning style. In detail, it is presented in table 3 below.
Table 3. The results of the learning style questionnaire for students in class VIII MTs. Tashwirul Afkar Learning style Number of
Students
Visual 6
Auditory 4
Kinesthetic 3
After grouping learning styles, the researcher took 6 samples of research subjects, where the sample was taken 2 students from each learning style group with the highest score, which was then consulted with the subject teacher with the criteria of students who were easy to work with and communicate. The results of the learning style questionnaire filled out by the subjects who have been selected based on learning styles can be seen in table 4 below.
Table 4. Scores of Learning style Questionnaires of Selected Research Subjects
Student Learning Style Subject Code Score
Visual S-V1
S-V2
20 18
Auditory S-A1
S-A2
22 20
Kinesthetic S-K1
S-K2
18 17
Furthermore, the six subjects were given a critical thinking ability test instrument in solving numerical problems. Thus, the results of the critical thinking ability of each subject based on the type of learning style were obtained.
Test and Interview Results Based on Visual Learning Style Subject S-V1
Figure 1. S-V1 Completion Sheet
Based on Figure 1, as well as the results of the interview by S-V1, it can be seen that S-V1 answered questions 1-5 in the order of correct, incorrect, correct, incorrect, correct. It can be concluded that S-V1 answered all of them correctly. Then, in the aspect of interpretation and analysis, S-V1 has not been able to write what is known, what is asked, and make a model in the given problem. The following is an excerpt from the interview with S-V1.
P : What do you know from the problem?
S-V1 : Ninth throw, shahrul's point total is 25 and Toni's point total is 26.
P : Next, what is asked in the question?
S-V1 : Assessment of the 10th comprehension result by Sahrul and Tono.
P : What are the variables that you generalized in the problem?
S-V1 : Syahrul and Tono
P : Why don't you write it down?
S-V1 : Sorry sis, I forgot and it's hard for me to organize the words to write down.
In the interview results, S-V1 seemed to have difficulty in stringing words, both in the interpretation and explanation aspects. In the evaluation and conclusion aspects, S-V1 was able to make complete and precise solutions and conclusions as shown in Figure 1. In the explanation aspect, S-V1 had difficulty in stringing words to write convincing reasons in the form of arguments, this was confirmed in the interview. As for the self-regulation aspect, S-V1 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Subject S-V2
Figure 2. S-V2 Completion Sheet Description:
1. Write down the solution correctly.
2. Write the conclusion appropriately.
Description:
1. Write down the solution correctly.
2. Write the conclusion appropriately.
Based on Figure 2, as well as the results of the interview by S-V2, it can be seen that S-V2 answered questions 1-5 in the order of correct, incorrect, correct, incorrect, correct. It can be concluded that S-V2 answered all of them correctly. Then, in the aspect of interpretation and analysis, S-V2 has not been able to mention and write down what is known and what is asked and make permissiveness in the given problem. The interview snippet of S-V2 is as follows.
P : Why don't you write what is known and asked in the problem?
S-V2 : Eum is confused about the words sis.
P : How did you come to that conclusion?
S-V2 : I forgot how, but that's what I wrote.
P : Then, why don't you justify your conclusion or answer?
S-V2 : It's hard to make the sentence.
The results of the interview showed that S-V2 had difficulty in stringing words and making the right sentences. In the evaluation and conclusion aspect, S-V2 was able to write the completion and conclusion of the problem completely and precisely as in Figure 2. The explanation aspect, S-V2 had difficulty in stringing words to provide convincing reasons in the form of arguments, this was confirmed in the interview. As for the self-regulation aspect, S-V2 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Based on the analysis of the completion of test questions and interviews on S-V1 and S-V2, it is found that S-V1 and S-V2 have fulfilled the aspects of critical thinking skills of evaluation and conclusions.
Test and Interview Results Based on Auditory Learning Style Subject S-A1
Figure 3. S-A1 Completion Sheet
Based on Figure 3, as well as the results of the interview by S-A1, it can be seen that S-A1 answered questions 1-5 in the order of correct, incorrect, correct, incorrect, correct. It can be concluded that S-A1 answered all of them correctly. Then, in the interpretation aspect S-A1 has not been able to write the known and the questioned in the given problem but after being confirmed in the interview it was found that S-A1 remembered the teacher's writing on the board. The following is an excerpt of the interview.
P : What do you know from the problem?
S-A1 : Sahrul and Tono's point results are 9 times archery. Syahrul 25 points and Tono 26 points.
P : Next, what is asked in the question?
S-A1 : The result of Syahrul and Toni's 10th archery.
P : Then why didn't you write it down?
S-A1 : I just remembered that the teacher in class wrote that and I haven't found the right sentence yet.
In the analysis aspect, S-A1 was able to provide a model of the given problem. In the evaluation aspect, S-A1 was able to write the solution completely and correctly. In the conclusion aspect, S-A1 was
Description:
1. Write down the
relationship of concepts by modeling.
2. Write the solution correctly
3. Write the conclusion appropriately.
4. Write down the reasons for the conclusions drawn.
able to determine the right conclusion from the given problem. The explanation aspect of S-A1 was able to write convincing reasons in the form of arguments. As for the self-regulation aspect, in this aspect S- A1 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Subject S-A2
Figure 4. S-A2 Completion Sheet
Based on Figure 4, it can be seen that S-A2 answered questions 1-5 in the order wrong, wrong, right, wrong, wrong.... It can be concluded that S-A2 answered 3 questions correctly and 2 questions incorrectly. Then, in the interpretation aspect, S-A2 has not been able to write down what is known and what is asked in the given problem. The analysis aspect of S-A2 was able to provide a model of the given problem. In the evaluation aspect, S-A1 was able to write a complete solution, but not yet correct.
This was traced through the interview as follows.
P : Do you think the steps you used are complete?
S-A2 : I have, but I'm confused why my result is not the same as the others.
P : Please look closely, what is this 1 times 2 result?
S-A2 : Yes, 2 results. I'm the one who's not careful
Based on the interview results, S-A2 made mistakes in the calculation of the multiplication form, so S-A2 made mistakes when answering questions, making conclusions and drawing reasons that included aspects of evaluation, conclusions, and explanations. As for the aspect of self-regulation, S-A2 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Based on the analysis of the completion of test questions and interviews on S-A1 and S-A2, it is found that S-A1 and S-A2 have fulfilled the aspects of critical thinking skills of analysis, evaluation, conclusions, and explanations completely, but less precise.
Analysis of Test and Interview Results Based on Kinesthetic Learning Style Subject S-K1
Figure 5. S-K1 Completion Sheet Description:
1. Write down the relationship of concepts by modeling.
2. Writing the solution inaccurately 3. Write the conclusion inaccurately.
4. Write down the reasons for the conclusions drawn.
Description:
1. Write the solution inaccurately.
2. Write the conclusion inaccurately.
Based on Figure 5, it can be seen that S-K1 answered questions 1-5 in the order correct, correct, incorrect, incorrect, correct. It can be concluded that S-K1 answered 3 questions correctly and 2 questions incorrectly. Then, in the interpretation aspect, S-K1 was unable to write down what was known and what was asked in the given problem, this was confirmed in the interview. The following is an excerpt of the interview with S-K1.
P : What is known and asked in the question?
S-K1 : Sorry sis, I don't know which one is which P : Are you sure about your answer?
S-K1 : I was suddenly confused and unsure of my answer.
Based on the results of the interview, S-K1 did not seem to understand in rewriting what was known and what was asked in the problem. The analysis aspect of S-K1 was not able to provide a model of the problem given. In the evaluation and conclusion aspects, S-K1 seemed to be in a hurry in doing the work so that he was less careful and answered and gave conclusions. The explanation aspect of S- K1 was unable to write convincing reasons in the form of arguments. As for the self-regulation aspect, S-K1 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Subject S-K2
Figure 6. S-K2 Completion Sheet
Based on Figure 6, it can be seen that S-K2 answered questions 1-5 in the order of correct, incorrect, correct, incorrect, correct. It can be concluded that S-K2 answered all of them correctly. Then, in the interpretation aspect, S-K2 was unable to write down what was known and what was asked in the problem. The following is an excerpt of the interview.
P : What is known and asked from the problem?
S-K2 : I don't understand
The results of the interview, S-K2 did not seem to understand in determining what was known and what was asked in the problem. The analysis aspect of S-K2 was unable to provide a model of the problem given. In the evaluation and conclusion aspect, S-K2 was able to write the solution and conclusion of the problem correctly but incompletely as shown in Figure 6. The explanation aspect, S- K2 was unable to write convincing reasons in the form of arguments. As for the self-regulation aspect, S-K2 did not recheck the results of the work done.
Based on the analysis of the completion of test questions and interviews on S-K1 and S-K2, it is found that S-K1 and S-K2 fulfill the aspects of critical thinking skills of evaluation and conclusions, but are less complete and precise.
Description:
1. Wrote the correct solution, but did not complete it.
2. Write the conclusion appropriately.
Based on the results of the critical thinking ability test in solving numerical problems, S- V1 obtained a score of 74 which was classified as a medium critical thinking ability category;
S-V2 obtained a score of 74 which was classified as a medium critical thinking ability category;
S-A1 obtained a score of 88.5 which was classified as a high critical thinking ability category;
S-A2 obtained a score of 80.5 which was classified as a high critical thinking ability category;
S-K1 obtained a score of 40 which was classified as a low critical thinking ability category; S- K2 obtained a score of 58 which was classified as a low critical thinking ability category. As for the achievement of each aspect in total based on learning style, S-V1 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 33.33%; S-V2 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 33.33%; S-A1 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 66.67%; S-A2 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 61.67%; S-K1 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 23.33%; S-K2 fulfills the aspects of critical thinking ability by 28.33%. Clearly the results of the critical thinking ability test can be seen in Figure 7 below.
Figure 7. Score and Percentage of Critical Thinking Skills in Solving Numerical Problems Based on Learning Style
DISCUSSION
The discussion of the research results aims to find out how learning styles affect students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems.
Visual Learning Style Subject
Based on the results of research analysis of different student learning styles. It can be seen that subjects with visual learning styles can master 2 aspects of critical thinking, namely evaluation skills and drawing conclusions. In the evaluation and conclusion aspects, Visual subjects are able to write the solution correctly and precisely. However, subjects with visual learning styles are lacking in understanding and explaining the information in the problem needed to solve the problem, where this aspect covers the interpretation aspect. The same thing happens in the analysis aspect which is the indicator of writing the relationship of concepts by doing the memorization, where visual subjects have difficulty in writing the memorization as a solution planning. Setyawan et al. (2018) stated that students who tend to have a Visual learning style are more likely to favor symbols in the form of diagrams compared to presenting them in the form of words.
In addition, in the explanation aspect with the indicator of writing the reasons for the
conclusions drawn, the Visual subject does not write the reasons that support the conclusions
drawn. This is because the subject is unable to string words. The results of this study are in line
with the results of research conducted by Naufal Firdaus (2019) that students with visual
learning styles have difficulty when answering questions by choosing the right words. On the other hand, in self-regulation skills, Visual subjects also have difficulty in rechecking the results of the answers obtained.
In view of these several indicators, it can be concluded that the Visual learning style subject has not fully mastered the material/concept given. This is like the findings of (Zahroh
& Asyhar, 2018) which states that Visual learning style subjects at the stage of understanding concepts/problems tend to only be able to obtain information from reading. Therefore, subjects with Visual learning style preferences have not reached the level of full mastery of all indicators from various aspects of critical thinking skills, and it can be said that visual learning style subjects are at a moderate level. This is in line with what was said by Setiana & Purwoko (2020) that students with visual learning styles have moderate critical thinking skills.
Auditory Learning Style Subject
After conducting research on Auditory learning style subjects, the results state that auditory subjects can master 4 critical thinking skills, namely analysis, evaluation, conclusion and explanation skills. In the skill of writing the relationship between concepts by modeling (analysis), auditory subjects are able to write the modeling correctly and precisely. In evaluation skills, conclusions and explanations with indicators of writing solutions and conclusions correctly, and writing reasons for the conclusions drawn. S-A1 has been able to provide correct and complete solutions. However, S-A2 was said to be less capable because there were errors in the solution, during the interview S-A2 mentioned that he was not careful in solving the problem. Subjects with Auditory learning style have the capacity to assess each of their work accurately. As explained Karim (2018) critical thinking is an intellectual process that includes analysis and active assessment of information obtained through observation and experience.
On the other hand, in the interpretation skill with the indicator of writing what is known and what is asked about the problem correctly, the auditory subject is not yet said to be capable, because the auditory subject does not write anything he knows and is asked in the problem.
Likewise with self-regulation skills, auditory subjects have not been able to write and describe in detail the steps to solve the problem correctly. Auditory learning style subjects can make the right answer decisions in handling problems well and will generally experience writing problems, but are perfect in telling stories (Fitriana, 2023). Auditory subjects have not fulfilled all indicators of each critical thinking skill. However, Auditory learning style students can fulfill more critical thinking skills indicators than Visual and Kinesthetic learning style students, therefore students with auditory learning styles can be said to have a high level of critical thinking skills. This is in line with Purwanto et al. (2020); Rokhimah & Rejeki, (2018) who said that auditory learning style students have better critical thinking skills than kinesthetic and visual learning style students. However, this is refuted by other studies stating that visual learning styles are better than auditorial learning styles students (Fitriana, 2023).
Kinesthetic Learning Style Subject
Whereas in the Kinesthetic subject, the subject was only able to provide conclusions and had not fully fulfilled the evaluation aspect properly. Kinesthetic subjects are less able to understand and explain the information contained in the problem needed when solving the problem where this skill includes the interpretation aspect. In the analysis aspect with the indicator of writing down the relationship of concepts by doing memorization, Kinesthetic subjects have not been able to mention and write down the memorization as a solution plan.
People with Kinesthetic learning styles may have difficulty in mentioning and writing
approximations in critical thinking skills, which is caused by a lack of experience in visualizing abstract concepts (Tyas & Safitri, 2017).
In the evaluation aspect, S-K1 has not been able to carry out the problem solving correctly.
Meanwhile, S-K2 was able to carry out the problem solving correctly and precisely. In the conclusion aspect, S-K1 has not been able to provide conclusions correctly, due to lack of accuracy and confusion in solving the problem, while S-K2 is able to write conclusions correctly and accurately. The explanation aspect, in this aspect with the indicator of writing reasons about the conclusions drawn, Kinesthetic subjects did not write any reasons to support the conclusions drawn. During the interview, the kinesthetic subject mentioned that he was less able to make reasons why the conclusion was drawn. This means that in this case the subject is said to not be able to understand the concept taught. In the aspect of self-knowledge, kinesthetic subjects have not been able to specifically mention the stages when solving problems.
Based on this, kinesthetic subjects compared to visual and auditory learning style students are among the least critical students. This is also in line with research conducted by Rokhimah
& Rejeki (2018) that kinesthetic students' learning styles are grouped into students who think less critically when compared to students who use visual and auditory learning styles. People with a Kinesthetic learning style will tend to learn new knowledge more easily by moving, acting, and touching objects (Tyas & Safitri, 2017).
Impact in Education
Based on this discussion, it can be seen that students' critical thinking skills can be influenced by their learning style preferences. In line with the statement, every student who has an Auditory, Visual, or Kinesthetic learning style has different mathematical critical thinking skills (Hamidah et al., 2022; Purwanto et al., 2020). However, all students have positive potential in developing their ability to solve mathematical problems so that every student is able to think critically (Purwoko et al., 2019). However, students' critical thinking skills can be positively influenced by teachers' policies in facilitating students who have diverse characteristics, especially in terms of style (Setiana & Purwoko, 2020).
The findings of this study provide a more in-depth view of the relationship between students' learning styles and critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems. The first impact is seen in improving the quality of mathematics learning in the classroom. Mathematics teachers can utilize this information to design teaching strategies that are more responsive to students' individual needs, enabling more effective and enjoyable learning experiences. In terms of curriculum development, the findings of this study can make an important contribution.
Mathematics curriculum development can focus more on developing students' critical thinking skills, in line with their individual learning styles. This not only creates more diverse and inclusive learning, but can also increase students' interest and motivation in mathematics.
This research also has an impact on educational intervention strategies. By understanding
the different learning styles of students, schools can develop more targeted intervention
programs. Students with certain learning styles can receive specialized support designed to
improve their critical thinking skills in the context of numeracy. In addition, this research opens
up opportunities for further discussion and collaboration between teachers, researchers and
mathematics education experts. The exchange of ideas and best practices can enrich the
educational environment, creating an atmosphere that supports innovation in mathematics
teaching and learning. Because, engaging learning styles can develop high-quality critical
thinking skills (Mahmood & Othman, 2020).
Overall, the results of this study not only enrich the understanding of the relationship between learning styles and students' critical thinking skills in mathematics, but also make a significant contribution to improving the quality of mathematics education as a whole.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the analysis of students' critical thinking skills in solving numeracy problems based on learning styles, it can be concluded that students' learning styles, especially Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic, have a significant influence on their ability to solve
numeracy problems. Students with auditory learning styles tend to have a higher level of critical thinking skills, while visual and kinesthetic learning styles show a lower correlation. Students with Visual learning style have a moderate level of critical thinking ability and are able to complete 2 aspects of critical thinking namely evaluation and conclusion completely and correctly. Students with Auditory learning style have a high level of critical thinking ability and are able to complete 4 aspects of critical thinking namely analysis, evaluation, conclusion, and explanation completely. Students with Kinesthetic learning styles have a low level of critical thinking skills and are able to fulfill 2 aspects of critical thinking, namely evaluation and conclusions, but are less complete and precise.LITERATURE
Aningsih, A. (2018). Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi. Journal Reseapedia, 1(1), 5–24.
Atabaki, A. M. S., Keshtiaray, N., & Yarmohammadian, M. H. (2019). Scrutiny of critical thinking concept. International Education Studies, 8(3), 93–102.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n3p93
Ayuningtyas, N., & Sukriyah, D. (2022). Analisis pengetahuan numerasi mahasiswa matematika calon guru. Delta-Pi: Jurnal Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 9(2), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.33387/dpi.v9i2.2299
Binsar Waluyo, & Heni Pujiastuti. (2023). Analisis Kesalahan Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal AKM Numerasi ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar. GAUSS: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.30656/gauss.v6i1.6450
Cahyono, B., Kartono, Waluyo, B., & Mulyono. (2019). Analysis critical thinking skills in solving problems algebra in terms of cognitive style and gender. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1321(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1321/2/022115
Cansoy, R., & Turkoglu, M. E. (2018). Examining the Relationship between Pre-Service Teachers’ Critical Thinking Disposition, Problem Solving Skills and Teacher Self- Efficacy. International Education Studies, 10(6), 23. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v10n6p23 Chukwuyenum, A. N. (2011). From Distance to Online Education : Educational Management
in the 21st Century. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 3(5), 85–95.
Dewanti, S. S. (2018). Profil Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa PGMI dalam Memecahkan Masalah Matematika Dasar. Jurnal Matematika Dan Pembelajaran, 6(August), 128.
https://jurnal.iainambon.ac.id/index.php/INT/article/view/451 Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical Thinking. New Jersey: Printice-Hall Inc.
F Setyawan, R C I Prahmana, A istiandaru, and A. hendroanto. (2018). Visualizer ’ s
representation in functions. 0–6.
Facione, P. A. (2000). The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill. Informal Logic, 61–84.
https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v20i1.2254
Farkhatunnisa, S. A. (2023). Pengaruh Literasi Numerasi terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Peserta Didik Kelas 5 SDN Gandasuli 02 Tahun Pelajaran 2021/2022.
http://repository.upstegal.ac.id/6410/
Fitriana, E. (2023). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa Berdasarkan Gaya Belajar.
9(2), 176–188.
Hamidah, H., Kusuma, J. W., & Ilmadi, I. (2022). Learning Analysis with ARIAS Model on Students’ Critical Thinking Skills Reviewed from Learning Styles. AlphaMath : Journal of Mathematics Education, 8(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.30595/alphamath.v8i1.13550 Hernacki, B. D. P. & M. (2013). Quantum Learning. PT. Mizan Pustaka.
Huberman’s, M. &. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis A Methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Karim, A. (2018). Pengaruh Gaya Belajar dan Sikap Siswa pada Pelajaran Matematika Terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Matematika. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v4i3.154
Khairunisa, L., & Diah Utami, R. (2023). Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Sekolah Dasar Implementasi Proyek Penguatan Profil Pelajar Pancasila pada Tema Kearifan Lokal Bagi Siswa Sekolah Dasar How to cite. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran
Sekolah Dasar (JIPPSD), 7(2), 262–273.
http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jippsd/indexJournalDOI:https://doi.org/10.24036/jipp sd.v7i2
Kirani, D., Putri, R., Farmila, W., & Dalimunthe, D. A. (2023). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Numerasi Siswa/I Kelas X Mas Al Washliyah 12 Perbaungan Ditinjau Dari Gaya Belajar.
Pedagogi: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan, 9(1), 12–15.
https://doi.org/10.47662/pedagogi.v9i1.539
Mahmood, M. S., & Othman, M. K. (2020). Learning style practices and critical thinking of students in Malaysia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3570–3578.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080833
Mahmud, M. R., & Pratiwi, I. M. (2019). Literasi Numerasi Siswa Dalam Pemecahan Masalah Tidak Terstruktur. KALAMATIKA Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 69–88.
https://doi.org/10.22236/kalamatika.vol4no1.2019pp69-88
Naufal Firdaus, R. R. (2019). ANALISIS KEMAMPUAN BERPIKIR KRITIS MATEMATIS DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR. Jurnal Lebesgue : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika, Matematika Dan Statistika, 4(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.46306/lb.v4i1.157 Noor, P. P., & Abadi, A. P. (2022). Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi dalam Perkembangan Pembelajaran Matematika SMA. Jurnal Educatio FKIP UNMA, 8(2), 466–473.
https://doi.org/10.31949/educatio.v8i2.1986
Pristiwanti, D., Badariah, B., Hidayat, S., & Dewi, R. S. (2022). Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Konseling. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Konseling, 4(1980), 1349–1358.
Purwanto, W. R., Waluya, S. B., Rochmad, & Wardono. (2020). Analysis of mathematical critical thinking ability in student learning style. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1511(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1511/1/012057
Purwoko, R. Y., Nugraheni, P., & Instanti, D. (2019). Implementation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge Model in Mathematics Learning for High School. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1254(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1254/1/012079
Rawung, W. H., Katuuk, D. A., Rotty, V. N. J., & Lengkong, J. S. J. (2021). Kurikulum dan Tantangannya pada Abad 21. Jurnal Bahana Manajemen Pendidikan, 10(1), 29.
https://doi.org/10.24036/jbmp.v10i1.112127
Rokhimah, S., & Rejeki, S. (2018). Pembelajaran Dengan Model 4K. Jurnal Penelitian Didaktik Matematika, 2(1), 1–13.
Rosliani, V. D., & Munandar, D. R. (2022). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Matematis Siswa Kelas VII Pada Materi Pecahan. Jurnal Educatio FKIP UNMA, 8(2), 401–409.
https://doi.org/10.31949/educatio.v8i2.1968
Salsabila, Y., Fatah, A., & Jaenudin, J. (2023). Hubungan antara Literasi Numerasi terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Kreatif Siswa SMP di Kecamatan Curug. EQUALS:
Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 42–54.
https://doi.org/10.46918/equals.v6i1.1789
Setiana, D. S., & Purwoko, R. Y. (2020). Analisis kemampuan berpikir kritis ditinjau dari gaya belajar matematika siswa. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 163–177.
https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v7i2.34290
Siamy, L., Farida, F., & Syazali, M. (2018). Media Belajar Matematika Berbasis Multimedia Interaktif dengan Pendekatan Contextual Teaching and Learning. Desimal: Jurnal Matematika, 1(1), 113. https://doi.org/10.24042/djm.v1i1.1919
Suryanti, S., Arifani, Y., Zawawi, I., & Fauziyah, N. (2019). Student’s engagement behaviour and their success in abstract algebra: Structural equation modelling approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1188(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1188/1/012105 Tyas, P. A., & Safitri, M. (2017). Kinesthetic Learning Style Preferences: A Survey of
Indonesian EFL Learners by Gender. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 2(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v2i1.688
Widodo, S., & Rizky Kusuma Wardani. (2020). Mengajarkan Keterampilana Abad 21 4C (Communication, Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Creativity and Inovation) di Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Program Studi PGMI, 7(2), 185–197.
Zahroh, U., & Asyhar, B. (2018). Kecenderungan Gaya Belajar Mahasiswa dalam
Menyelesaikan Masalah Fungsi Bijektif. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Pengembangan
Pendidikan, 2(1), 72–81. http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/jmkpp/article/view/1738
