Alleviating Students’ Naive Theory on Newton’s Laws of Motion through Problem Optimization and Scaffolding Discussion

Table 3

Results of advanced hypothesis testing with t-test statistics posttest data.

Class	Average	Sig.	Conclusion
	Y1 = 75.3; Y3 = 50.0	0.000	There is a significant difference between students’ understanding of concepts taught by PBL with open problems equipped with scaffolding and understanding of students’ concepts taught by PBL with closed problems equipped with scaffolding. Based on the mean score, students’ conceptual understanding taught with PBL with open problems equipped with scaffolding was higher than the conceptual understanding of students taught with PBL with closed problems equipped with scaffolding.
	Y2 = 65.2; Y3 = 50.0	0.000	There is a significant difference between students’ understanding of concepts taught by PBL with open problems without scaffolding and understanding of students’ concepts taught by PBL with closed problems equipped with scaffolding. Based on the mean score, students’ conceptual understanding taught with PBL with open problems without scaffolding was higher than students taught with PBL with closed problems equipped with scaffolding.
	Y1 = 75.3; Y2 = 65.2	0.000	There is a significant difference between students’ understanding of concepts taught with PBL with open problems equipped with scaffolding and understanding of students’ concepts taught with PBL with open problems without scaffolding. Based on the mean score, students’ understanding of concepts taught with PBL with open problems equipped with scaffolding was higher than students taught with PBL with open problems without scaffolding.