Integrating 3C3R Design Problem and Four-Component Instructional Design (4C/ID) into Problem-Based Learning: Addressing Students' Cognitive Load in Biology Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31571/ijcmasted.v1i1.1149Keywords:
3C3R Design Problem, Biology Education, Cognitive Load, Four-Component Instructional Design (4C/ID)Abstract
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is widely adopted in biology education; however, its implementation frequently generates excessive cognitive load for students, particularly when instructional scenarios are poorly structured or when teachers lack expertise in designing contextually appropriate problems. This study presents the development and validation of a PBL model integrated with 3C3R Design Problem (Content, Context, Connection, Research, Reasoning, Reflection) and Four-Component Instructional Design (4C/ID) frameworks, specifically designed to reduce students' cognitive load in junior high school (SMP) biology classes in Sambas Regency, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. A Research and Development (R&D) approach was employed using the Hannafin & Peck model, encompassing three phases: needs analysis, design, and development. The effectiveness of the integrated model was tested using a quasi-experimental non-equivalent pretest-posttest control group design involving 612 SMP students (n₁ = 306 experimental; n₂ = 306 control) across 20 schools. Expert validation yielded an overall validity score of 4.52 (Highly Valid), and practicality ratings from teachers (M = 4.40) and students (M = 4.29) confirmed classroom feasibility. ANCOVA results demonstrated that the integrated model produced significantly lower intrinsic and extraneous cognitive load and significantly higher germane cognitive load than conventional PBL, with large effect sizes (η²p = 0.31–0.57). These findings underscore the importance of structured instructional design frameworks in mitigating cognitive overload in complex, problems-based science learning environments.
References
Burhanudin, R., Subarkah, C. Z., & Sari, S. (2018). Penerapan model pembelajaran Content Context Connection Researching Reasoning Reflecting (3C3R) untuk mengembangkan keterampilan generik sains siswa pada konsep koloid. Jurnal Tadris Kimiya, 3(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.15575/jtk.v3i1.2595
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342
Catatan: DOI ini tercatat untuk edisi ke-5 tahun 2000; jika naskah Bapak wajib mengikuti sumber fisik tahun 2002, tahun dapat disesuaikan kembali.
Funa, A. A., & Prudente, M. S. (2021). Effectiveness of problem-based learning on secondary students’ achievement in science: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1445a
Ghufron, M. A., & Ermawati, S. (2018). The strengths and weaknesses of cooperative learning and problem-based learning in EFL writing class: Teachers’ and students’ perspectives. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 657–672. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11441a
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Janssen, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2020). Applying collaborative cognitive load theory to computer-supported collaborative learning: Towards a research agenda. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09729-5
Jordan, J., Wagner, J., Manthey, D. E., Wolff, M., Santen, S., & Cico, S. J. (2020). Optimizing lectures from a cognitive load perspective. AEM Education and Training, 4(3), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10389
Junco, M. A., & Nabua, E. (2023). The academic performance of grade-11 biology on modular distance learning: Basis for instructional material development. International Journal of Science Education and Teaching, 2(2), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.14456/ijset.2023.7
Kardoyo, Nurkhin, A., Muhsin, & Pramusinto, H. (2020). Problem-based learning strategy: Its impact on students’ critical and creative thinking skills. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.3.1141
Magaji, A. (2021). Promoting problem-solving skills among secondary science students through problem-based learning. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14432a
Malik, A., Yuliani, Y., Rochman, C., Zakwandi, R., Ismail, A., & Ubaidillah, M. (2020). Optimizing students’ critical thinking skills related to heat topics through the model of content, context, connection, researching, reasoning, reflecting (3C3R). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521(2), Article 022001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1521/2/022001
Merritt, J., Lee, M. Y., Rillero, P., & Kinach, B. M. (2017). Problem-based learning in K–8 mathematics and science education: A literature review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1674
Nadila, N., & Sukma, E. (2020). Penggunaan model Problem Based Learning (PBL) pada pembelajaran tematik terpadu di kelas IV SDN 19 Koto Taratak Kabupaten Pesisir Selatan. Jurnal Pendidikan Tambusai, 4(3), 2508–2517. https://doi.org/10.31004/jptam.v4i3.737
Paas, F. G. W. C., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Adam, J. J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79(1), 419–430. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.419
Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2020). Cognitive-load theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420922183
Pratama, M. A., & Zilhakim, R. (2022). Pengaruh model pembelajaran Problem Based Learning berbasis blended learning terhadap literasi sains siswa di MTsN 1 Bengkulu Selatan. Jurnal Jendela Pendidikan, 2(1), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.57008/jjp.v2i01.128
Savery, J. R. (2019). Comparative pedagogical models of problem-based learning. In M. Moallem, W. Hung, & N. Dabbagh (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of problem-based learning (pp. 81–104). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119173243.ch4
Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021808.72598.4d
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Taylor, L. (2004). Educational theories and instructional design models: Their place in simulation. Nursing Education Research, Southern Health, 1–6.
Catatan: DOI tidak ditemukan pada metadata terbuka yang tersedia.
Trisianawati, E., Dafrita, I. E., & Darmawan, H. (2019). A development of biodiversity module based on socioscientific issues and local potential for department students of IKIP PGRI Pontianak. Indonesian Journal of Biology Education, 2(2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.31002/ijobe.v2i2.2005
Trisianawati, E., & Darmawan, H. (2016). Peranan dosen dalam pembelajaran berbasis masalah berorientasi pada peningkatan keterampilan proses sains mahasiswa. Jurnal Edukasi Matematika dan Sains, 4(2), 102–107.
Catatan: DOI tidak ditemukan pada laman Garuda/jurnal yang tersedia.
Trisianawati, E., & Manisa, T. (2023). The ability of critical thinking and problem solving prospective biology teacher to solve biological Olympiad questions. BIO-INOVED: Jurnal Biologi-Inovasi Pendidikan, 5(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.20527/bino.v5i1.15004
Trullàs, J. C., Blay, C., Sarri, E., & Pujol, R. (2022). Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: A scoping review. BMC Medical Education, 22, Article 104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03154-8
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504993
Downloads
Published
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Handi Darmawan, Eka Trisianawati, Mustika Sari (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
All articles published in the Proceeding of IJC-MaSTEd (International Joint Conference on Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Education) are published as open access and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).
This license permits anyone to read, download, copy, distribute, adapt, and reuse the published work in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that proper credit is given to the original author(s) and source, a link to the license is included, and any modifications are clearly indicated. Any derivative works must be distributed under the same license (CC BY-SA 4.0).
Author Rights
Authors retain full copyright of their work. By submitting and publishing in the Proceeding of IJC-MaSTEd, authors grant the publisher a non-exclusive right to publish, distribute, and archive the article as part of the conference proceedings.
Authors are allowed to share, deposit, and reuse their published articles for academic, educational, and research purposes, provided proper attribution is given.
User Rights
Users may freely access and reuse all published content without prior permission, as long as appropriate attribution is provided and the same license terms are maintained.
Third-Party Material
Any third-party material included in an article must be clearly identified and is not covered by the Creative Commons license unless explicitly stated.
By submitting a manuscript to the Proceeding of IJC-MaSTEd, authors confirm that they agree with the open access policy and the license terms stated above.
