Anatolian Journal of Education April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.

1
e-ISSN: 2547-9652 www.e-aje.net
pp. 215-230

Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on Learning Performance in The

Social Sciences Subject of Disaster Mitigation

Sukma Perdana Prasetya

Dr., Departement of Social Sciences Education, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Indonesia,
[email protected]
Fahmi Fahrudin Fadirubun
Dr., Departement of Geopraphy Education, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Indonesia,
[email protected]
Lidya Lestari Sitohang
Dr., Departement of Geopraphy Education, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Indonesia,
[email protected]
Armawati Hidayati
Departement of Social Sciences Tadris, Institut Agama Islam Al-Fatimah Bojonegoro, Indonesia,
[email protected]

This research aimed to investigate the impact of learning strategies with learning styles on
learning performance in disaster mitigation. Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Direct
Instruction (DI) are the strategies used. The learning styles used as moderator variables are
kinaesthetic, visual and auditory. The research subjects included two junior high schools, SMPN
1 Sidoarjo and SMPN 1 Maospati, with a total of 122 students. The two-way ANOVA analysis
technique was used to process the data obtained statistically. This research indicates that PBL
strategy with visual learning style is superior to DI strategy with other learning styles in terms of
learning achievement in disaster mitigation. This research has shown that considering the
specific learning strategy and learning style of students contributes to positive learning outcomes
in disaster mitigation.
Keywords: learning strategies, learning styles, disaster mitigation, learning performance, learning
INTRODUCTION
In learning the teacher needs to design the implementation of learning strategies that involve more
active student involvement (Settles, 2012). However, the important role played by students in terms of
their ability, which has received less attention, is their ability to solve problems. Yet, problem solving
requires clear direct instruction from the teacher in terms of task learning.
Problem-solving skills in disaster mitigation are especially important for school children, because
children are the most vulnerable group during a disaster, especially those who were in school at the
time the incident took place (Agustiana et al., 2013). During a disaster, school buildings are destroyed,
reducing the life span of school students and teachers who are very valuable and disrupting the right
to education as a result of the disaster (Paton, 2003).
In addition to problem-based learning strategies, direct instruction (DI) strategies can be used as
alternative strategies in learning disaster mitigation materials. Kim & Axelrod (2005), argue that the
DI strategy requires teachers to regulate and control the content and knowledge procedures to be

Citation: Prasetya, S. P., Fadirubun, F. F., Sitohang, L. L., & Hidayati, A. (2024). Effects of learning strategies and
learning styles on learning performance in the social sciences subject of disaster mitigation. anatolian journal of
education, 9(1), 215-230. https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2024.9115a
216 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

acquired by students so as to increase focus on what students must learn and achieve. It requires very
careful planning and execution on the part of the teacher to be effective (Stockard & Wood, 2018). DI
entails that every detail of skill or content is carefully defined, and demonstrations and training
schedules are carefully planned and implemented.
Another factor that needs to be considered in optimizing the learning achievement of disaster
mitigation in social science subjects is student characteristics in the form of learning styles. This was
also conveyed by Taconis et al., (2001); Slavin, (2020), revealed that learning conditions affect the
efficiency and effectiveness of learning strategies, meaning that the efficiency and effectiveness of
implementing learning strategies is influenced by student characteristics. One characteristic that
cannot be manipulated is the student's learning style.
In Indonesia, disaster mitigation education is designed, developed and implemented especially in
areas that are prone to disasters (Hasanah et al., 2016). The disaster mitigation must be learned in
social science material (Maryani, 2010). When linked to the Merdeka Curriculum in Junior High
Schools, disaster mitigation is one of the learning achievement that must be mastered by students. The
learning achievement in this disaster mitigation material are "able to analyze the relationship between
the geographical conditions of the area and the characteristics of the community and understand the
potential of natural resources and their relation to disaster mitigation" (Kemenbdikbud, 2022).
In 2021, 2.384 disaster events were recorded in the country, 386 of which occurred in the East Java
region (Sudarmawan, 2021). Following these records, the province is implementing disaster
mitigation in its school’s curriculum. It is implemented in order to minimize the risk due to disaster.
Some disaster mitigation learning includes, among others, introduction to the types and locations of
disaster risks, efforts to prevent or anticipate disasters, how to handle disasters, how to save yourself,
and how to survive in disaster situations (Smit & Wandel, 2006; Puspitawati et al., 2017).
Although schools in East Java have been pursuing learning about disaster preparedness as a subject to
the present day, the level of learning remains low. This is the case in two junior schools in the
province, namely SMPN 1 Sidoarjo and SMPN 1 Maospati, Madiun. Reports from an observation and
discussion in the two schools suggested that the low learning achievement is caused by the fact that
the students are not activated in the learning activities. In the learning process, the students are only
asked to listen to and remember a series of disaster preparedness materials from the teacher. The
reports describes that these results happen because teachers still use learning strategies that are teacher
centered. Besides that, the ability of students in analyzing disaster mitigation is very weak, students
tend to memorize so they quickly forget. Prasetya (2014) explained that learning that makes students
passive and only teacher-centred will result in low learning outcomes. Thus, such a result, therefore,
calls for re-examining.
With this in mind, the main aims of this research are 1) to explain differences in learning achievement
between students using PBL strategies and DI strategies, 2) to explain differences in learning
achievement between groups with auditory, kinaesthetic and visual learning styles, and 3) to analyse
the interaction between learning strategies and learning styles.
Literature Review
The importance of students' active involvement in learning was put forward by Gleason et al., (2011)
which states that students must have their learning abilities raised by mastering and being able to
implement their knowledge to be directed to be able to find problems, analyze problems to make
solutions to problems according to their own ideas. The task of learning is not to pour information into
students' heads, but to involve students' minds actively by connecting correct and useful concepts to
solve problems (Mizokami, 2017); (Setiawan & Supiyandi, 2018).
Student-centered learning that explores students' ability to solve problems actually allows it to be
applied to disaster mitigation material (Maryani, 2010). Disaster mitigation preparedness education in

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 217

schools is defined as practical thoughts and efforts in solving problems to reduce or eliminate all
forms of disaster risk (Salsabila & Dinda, 2016). Solving problems in learning is done by prioritizing
and/or prioritizing other educational processes so that students can actively develop a culture of
preparedness in facing the threat of danger from a disaster (Setyowati, 2019).
The implementation of teaching methods that are lectures from the teacher alone makes students'
activeness in learning relatively low (Nurhaliza. et al., 2021). Most students tend to only be able to
imitate what the teacher does (Savira et al., 2018). Students are not able to use textbooks effectively.
They tend to re-record concepts in textbooks, so they spend a lot of time and learning becomes
inefficient.
Applied learning must pay attention to several important components, namely strategies and student
characteristics (Reigeluth & Alison, 2009). Thus it is necessary to consider what strategies and student
characteristics are so that they can optimize disaster mitigation learning achievement. Research
chooses to use the learning strategies that are applied are PBL and DI designed by Arends (2012).
Stages of problem-based learning strategies, namely: 1) student orientation to problems, 2) organizing
students to learn, 3) guiding individual and group investigations, 4) developing and presenting results,
5) analyzing and evaluating the problem-solving process. The stages of the direct instruction strategy
are: (1) convey objectives and prepare students, (2) demonstrate knowledge and skills, (3) Guide
training, (4) check understanding and provide feedback, (5) provide opportunities for further training
and application (Arends, 2012).
Paying attention to the characteristics of disaster mitigation material as part of social science subjects
that require a strong material understanding relationship regarding disaster mitigation through
problem solving efforts, a problem-based learning strategy is needed that can encourage a learning
process with optimal learning achievement for the development of all potential students. According to
Uliyandari et al. (2021) in PBL, learning is carried out by oriented problems in a concrete form.
Problems can be in the form of events on objects on the earth's surface that are associated with
understanding the concepts of disaster mitigation that will be learned; Learning begins after students
are faced with real problem conditions. Through the PBL learning method, students understand how
they construct meaningful knowledge. All the knowledge gained will be analyzed both individually
and in joint discussions or practicing the results of solving problems that have been developed
together (Ulger, 2018).
DI (Direct Instruction) strategies can be applied to any subject, but this strategy is best suited for
performance-oriented subjects (Stockard, 2011). Disaster mitigation requires understanding
orientation in learning. To gain a comprehensive understanding of the concept of disaster mitigation,
students must go through a series of concepts that must be mastered step by step. In disaster
mitigation, there are three concepts of important stages, namely pre-disaster, when a disaster occurs,
and post-disaster.Vitale & Kaniuka (2012), assume that these declarative and procedural concepts
must be understood comprehensively by students. Strategies that emphasize procedural and
declarative knowledge are direct instruction; Farchatun & Indrayati (2015), argues, in implementing
DI strategies, teachers teach according to disaster mitigation measures, starting from defining disaster
mitigation and its components, analyzing the disaster mitigation cycle, classifying types of disasters in
Indonesia, disaster mitigation strategies (mapping, dissemination of information/socialization,
monitoring, early warning).
In addition to learning strategies, many other factors influence learning achievement. Slavin (2020),
states that the need to provide teachers involve student characteristic factors to accommodate their
learning modalities. Almost the same thing was conveyed by Marton & Pang (2006), who argued that
diversifying learning strategies in various kinds of lessons according to the objectives and topics of
the lesson taking into account a variety of different learning styles would be able to optimize student

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

218 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

learning achievement; (Awla, 2014), to be able to implement an effective learning strategy, it takes
the involvement of the conditions or characteristics of students. student characteristics that are
expected to influence learning achievement are student learning styles.
Learning innovations carried out in disaster mitigation learning through problem-based learning
strategies and direct instruction, where learning is focused on problems with up-to-date themes in the
areas where students live. According to (Mortimore, 2003; Suryani et al., 2014), through the
application of appropriate learning strategies taking into account different learning styles, learning
social sciences in disaster mitigation material is expected to achieve optimal learning achievement.
Consideration of the determination of variables on the cognitive aspect as a variable based on the
study of cognitive learning achievement as a learning orientation in solving and understanding
disaster mitigation (objects of social science subject disaster mitigation) and easy to measure.
Assessment of learning achievement in the cognitive aspect used refers to the opinion of Reigeluth
(1999), includes four levels, namely memorized information, Understand relationships, apply skills,
apply generic skills. The learning achievement in this study are the cognitive domain at the level of
Understand relationships and applying/solving skills). This is in line with the objectives of disaster
mitigation material in Social Sciences subjects, that students have the competence to understand and
solve problems in Social Sciences subjects, especially in disaster mitigation materials (Sugiharyanto
et al., 2014).
Through appropriate learning strategies by facilitating learning modalities, namely students' learning
methods or learning styles, learning achievement regarding understanding disaster mitigation will be
optimized. Learning styles that match the instructional strategy are very important (Malacapay, 2019).
Jacobsen et al. (2009) argues that learning styles have important implications that remind teachers of
the need to diversify learning strategies according to student learning styles because there is no
learning strategy that is liked by all students. Effective teachers use a variety of learning strategies to
achieve different goals.
Learning Characteristics Characteristics of
Learning conditions (Objectives and obstacles) Students
(Material of disaster mitigation in Learning Style
social science courses) (Visual, Auditory,
Kinesthetic)

Delivery Strategy Management

Organizing strategy
Learning methods strategy (Problem Based Learning
and Dirrect Instruction)

Learning achievement The effectiveness of disaster mitigation learning achievement

Figure 1
Conceptual framework adapted from Reigeluth & Alison (2009).
METHOD
Research Design
Quasi-experimental method with 3 x 2 patterned factorials was used to carry out this research. The 3 x
2 factorial designed in this research is the learning style which consists of three types, namely visual,

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 219

auditory and kinesthetic, learning strategies which consist of two, namely PBL and DI. The two
variables were analyzed for their interactional influence on disaster mitigation learning achievement.
The independent variable is the learning strategy, which includes the PBL strategy and the DI
strategy. Then the attribute independent variable (moderator) is the student's learning style. While the
dependent variable in the research is the learning achievement of disaster mitigation which is
measured at the level of relationship understanding and problem solving ability (apply skills) which
are classified in the learning taxonomy of Reigeluth (1999). The determination of the two levels of
disaster mitigation learning achievement is adjusted to the Merdeka curriculum that applies to junior
high schools, namely the learning objectives of disaster mitigation in junior high schools with learning
achievement having the ability to understand and solve disaster mitigation problems.
Table 1
Research data analysis design
Treatment variable (A) Strategy
Dirrect Instruction (A1) Problem Based Learning (A2)
Attribute variable (B)
Auditory (B1) B1A1 (19 student) B1A2 (18 student)
Learning Style Visual (B2) B2 A1 (21 student) B2A2 (21 student)
Kinesthetic (B3) B3A1 (20 student) B3A2 (21 student)
Information:
A1 B1 = direct instruction with auditory learning style
A2 B1 = problem based learning with auditory learning style
A1 B2 = direct instruction with a visual learning style
A2 B2 = problem-based learning with a visual learning style
A1 B3 = direct instruction with kinesthetic learning styles
A2 B3 = problem-based learning with kinesthetic learning style
The researcher is concerned with the independent variables, and wants to assess both the effects
separately and together (Arikunto, 2019). Both independent variables are manipulated, this design
allows analysis of main effects to be carried out for both experimental variables as well as analysis
between treatments. For both experimental variables and analysis between treatments. The factorial
design grouped subjects according to several treatments and groups to be observed (Tuckman, 1999).
The design of the research procedure table 2 is as follows:
Table 2
Research design
Group Pretest Group treatment post test
1 O1 X1Y1 O2
2 O1 X1Y2 O2
3 O1 X1Y3 O2
4 O1 X2Y1 O2
5 O1 X2Y2 O2
6 O1 X2Y3 O2
dapted from Tuckman, (1999).
Information:
X1 = implementation of PBL
X2 = implementation of DI
Y1 = auditory learning style
Y2 = visual learning style
Y3 = kinesthetic learning style
O1 = pretest
O2 = = postes

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

220 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

Research Subject
The research subjects were students of SMPN 1 Sidoarjo and SMPN 1 Maospati, Madiun, 2022-2023
academic year. Subjects were determined in this research through two stages, namely: (1) assigning
schools to groups of problem-based learning strategies (experimental class) and direct instruction
strategies (control class), (2) assigning classes where all students will receive treatment of problem-
based learning strategies (experimental class) and direct instruction strategies (control class).
Table 3
Research subjects
Group Academic year Schools Class Student Gender
male female
Control (DI) 2022-2023 SMPN 1 Sidoarjo VIIA 32 16 16
2022-2023 SMPN 1 Sidoarjo VIIB 30 17 23
Experiment 2022-2023 SMPN 1 Maospati VIIA 29 16 13
(PBL) 2022-2023 SMPN 1 Maospati VIIB 31 15 16
Research Procedure
In carrying out the experiment the following steps were applied: (1) giving a learning style
questionnaire. Students are given instruments regarding learning styles with the aim of identifying
their learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), (2) carrying out a pre-test using disaster mitigation
learning achievement instruments in the form of essays to test students' initial abilities regarding
disaster mitigation material to be studied, (3) carry out learning treatments (experiments), (4) carry out
post-tests.
The learning treatment that has been carried out eight times by applying the PBL and DI strategies, is
then carried out posttest. The test is used to determine the outcome of the applied treatment. This test
is given to each student after the subject of discussion in carrying out the disaster mitigation learning
process has been completed. This posttest activity tested the differences between the PBL group with
the DI group on the learning achievement of disaster mitigation. Next, analyze the interaction with
learning styles on the cognitive aspects of disaster mitigation learning achievement.
Research Instruments
The research instruments consist of: (1) learning achievement test consisting of pre-test and post-test,
(2) learning style questionnaire (DePorter & Hernacki, 2001).
This test instrument was given before and after treatment. The test was developed in an open
description format consisting of 10 questions with a value for each question from 0 to 5 so that the
maximum score achieved is 50. The value of learning achievement is obtained by dividing the total
number of scores obtained by 5 then multiplied by 10. Thus, if a student gets a score perfect then the
learning achievement will get a score of 100. The final score refers to the school's assessment
standard, which is between 0-100. Post-test data from the cognitive aspect is used to analyze the
influence between research variables. The level of ability measured includes the realm of
understanding and problem-solving abilities.
The learning style instrument is a questionnaire adapted from DePorter et al., (2014). The developed
questionnaire is a checklist containing statements that must be answered using a score between 1 to 4
which contains 12 statements from each learning style. The questionnaire contains statements
containing indicators of visual, kinesthetic and auditory learning styles.
In the three instruments each student will fill it out. The score obtained from each instrument
represents the learning style. Scores are then compared. The highest score of the instrument shows the

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 221

tendency of students' learning styles. With this instrument students can be grouped into three
categories, namely kinaesthetic, auditory, and visual learning styles.
Data Analysis Technique
This research compares the treatment of PBL and DI strategies based on learning style modalities on
learning achievement. Then carry out an analysis of the influence between learning strategies with
learning styles on disaster mitigation learning achievement. Two-way ANOVA analysis was
performed to test the established variables; This study involves independent, moderator and dependent
variables, so it uses a factorial design for its analysis (Sugiyono, 2015). To test the data in this study,
it was applied through two stages, in the form of prerequisite test and hypothesis test.
FINDINGS
Description of Learning Outcome Data
The description of the pretest data in the PBL class was reviewed in several ways, such as a mean of
46.86, a minimum score of 25.65, a maximum score of 63.86. The pre-test data for the DI class is the
mean 47.05, the minimum score is 24.12, the maximum score is 62.23. The pre-test data for both
classes were then subjected to a different test with a P-value of 0.870, which means that it is greater
than the significant value of 0.05. It can be concluded that the two pretest data (initial knowledge) of
the two classes are not significantly different.
Completed pretest analysis, then the implementation of learning with PBL and DI strategies was
carried out on disaster mitigation material for eight meetings. To find out the extent of its
effectiveness, after learning, posttest activities are carried out. Posttest is the result of learning disaster
mitigation material.
Data regarding the learning achievement of disaster mitigation materials by applying problem-based
learning strategies (PBL) can be divided into three categories, namely: (1). PBL on visual learning
style (PBL-V) number of students (N) 22, mean score 81.22, standard deviation (SD) 7.90378; (2).
PBL on auditory learning style (PBL-A) number of students (N) 20, mean score 71.5, standard
deviation (SD) 6.52525; (3) PBL on kinesthetic learning style (PBL-K) number of students (N) 18,
mean score 79.44, standard deviation 7.90549.
Data regarding the learning achievement of disaster mitigation materials by applying the direct
instruction (DI) strategy can be divided into three categories, namely: (1). DI on visual learning style
(DI-V) number of students (N) 22, mean score 78.14, standard deviation (SD) 9.01478; (2). DI on
auditory learning style (DI-A) number of students (N) 18, mean score 74.44, standard deviation (SD)
7.93520; (3) DI on kinesthetic learning style (DI-K) number of students (N) 22, mean score 70.23,
standard deviation 7.93984. A description of the learning achievement of disaster mitigation can be
explained in the table 4.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

222 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

Table 4
Summary of learning achievement data on disaster mitigation materials
Strategy Learning_style Mean Std. Deviation N
Visual 81.2273 7.90378 22
Auditoriy 71.5000 6.52525 20
PBL
Kinestetik 79.4444 7.90549 18
Total 77.4500 8.51405 60
Visual 78.1364 9.01478 22
Auditoriy 74.4444 7.93520 18
DI
Kinestetik 70.2273 7.93984 22
Total 74.2581 8.86129 62
Visual 79.6818 8.52295 44
Auditoriy 72.8947 7.28118 38
Total
Kinestetik 74.3750 9.09688 40
Total 75.8279 8.80335 122
Assumption/Prerequisite Testing
Before the hypothesis is carried out, it is necessary to test the assumptions/requirements first.
Assumption testing is carried out through normality and homogeneity tests of data. Data normality
testing uses Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov-Smirnov. Below is table 5 of the results of the data
normality test.
Tabel 5
Tests of normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Strategi Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
learning_outcames PBL .082 60 .200* .984 60 .596
DI .115 62 .060 .973 62 .184
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 5 shows the significant value in the Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests for both the
PBL and DI strategies, all of which have a value greater than 0.05, means that the data presented is
normally distributed.
Furthermore, testing the homogeneity of the data was carried out. The calculation of the homogeneity
test was carried out by the Levene test. The following is table 6 regarding the results of the data
homogeneity test.
Tabel 6
Test of homogeneity of variances
learning_outcames
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
.135 1 120 .714
Table 6 shows a significant value on the Levene test of 0.714 or greater than 0.05, which means that
the learning outcome data is homogeneous. Because all the data has met the homogeneous and normal
criteria so that it can be continued to test the hypothesis.
Hypothesis Test
Below is presented table 7 of the results of hypothesis testing implementing the two-way ANOVA
technique.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 223

Table 7
Summary of calculation results of the two-way variance analysis technique at the significance level α
= 0.05
Dependent Variable: Learning achievement of disaster mitigation
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Corrected Model 2093.178a 5 418.636 6.667 .000
Intercept 695879.628 1 695879.628 11081.788 .000
strategy 294.740 1 294.740 4.694 .032
learning style 997.508 2 498.754 7.943 .001
strategy * learning style 716.244 2 358.122 5.703 .004
Error 7284.207 116 62.795
Total 710861.000 122
Corrected Total 9377.385 121
a. R Squared = .223 (Adjusted R Squared = .190)

Table 7 above summarizes the two-way ANOVA test. There are two ways of taking conclusions,
namely: comparing the P-value with significance. the desired level of confidence is 95%, the
significance level is 100-95 = 5% or 0.05. The P-value of the learning strategy is 0.032; The P-value
of the learning style is 0.01; The P-value of the influence between strategies with learning styles is
0.04. Because all P-values <0.05, the treatment has a significant effect on the parameters.
There are significant differences in the learning achievement of disaster mitigation between groups
implementing PBL and DI strategies. There are significant differences in the learning achievement of
disaster mitigation between groups with visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning style modalities.
There is an influence between strategies with learning styles on learning achievement of disaster
mitigation.
Referring to table 7, it can be concluded that each influence between learning strategies with learning
styles, namely the interaction of PBL with visual learning styles (PBL-V), PBL with auditory learning
styles (PBL-A), PBL with kinesthetic learning styles (PBL-K ), DI with a visual learning style (DI-V),
DI with an auditory learning style (DI -A), DI with a kinesthetic learning style (DI -K) have varied
impacts on disaster mitigation learning achievement. Referring to the average value, it can be
concluded that the best interaction in improving learning achievement in disaster mitigation is the
interaction of PBL strategies with visual learning styles (PBL -V) with a score of 80.59 and then
followed by successive interactions of PBL -K (79.44), DI- V (75.6364), DI-A (72.83), and PBL-A
(71.50), DI -K (70.22).
Because the treatment has a significant effect on the parameters, it is necessary to carry out further
tests to compare the individual effects of each treatment. The next test is a post hoc test using the
Bonferroni test to see which groups are different (learning style group). The following is table 8 post
hoc results of the Benferroni test.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

224 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

Table 8
Post hoc test
Bonferroni
(J) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval
(I) Learning_style Std. Error Sig.
Learning_style (I-J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
Auditoriy 6.7871* 1.75489 .001 2.5241 11.0501
Visual
kinesthetic 5.3068 1.73119 .068 1.1014 9.5122
Visual -6.7871* 1.75489 .001 -11.0501 -2.5241
Auditoriy
kinesthetic -1.4803 1.79510 1.000 -5.8409 2.8804
Visual -5.3068 1.73119 .068 -9.5122 -1.1014
kinesthetic
Auditoriy 1.4803 1.79510 1.000 -2.8804 5.8409
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 62.795.
*. The mean difference is significant at the ,05 level.

From table 8 the Post Hoc Test above shows that the groups that show differences in learning
achievement of mitigation (marked with an asterisk "*") are the "visual" and "auditory" groups, this is
also evidenced by the p value of 0.001 which means it is smaller than at a significant value of 0.005.
DISCUSSION
Effect of Learning Strategies on Learning achievement of Disaster Mitigation
The results of hypothesis testing with two-way ANOVA show evidence that there is a significant
difference between the group that carries out learning with the PBL strategy and the group of students
who learn with the DI strategy. Based on the calculation of the average value, overall the
implementation of the PBL strategy has a better effect than the implementation of DI on disaster
mitigation learning achievement.
Factors that can make the learning achievement of disaster mitigation on the PBL strategy superior to
the DI strategy are:
First, the advantages of problem-based learning strategies compared to direct instruction because
problem-based learning strategies are in accordance with the character of disaster mitigation material.
According to Maryani (2010) and Lestari (2008), problem-based learning strategies provide
opportunities for students to analyze existing problems through discussion activities and group work
regarding disaster mitigation. As stated by Qurrotaini & Nuryanto (2020), disaster mitigation is
essentially a problem-solving activity in the form of analysis that uses all the capabilities of mastering
the concept of disaster mitigation in the form of pre-disaster analysis, disaster events, and post-
disaster. All three are used to analyze disaster mitigation to produce the desired disaster spatial
information, for example for mapping information on disaster-prone areas.
According to Surjati & Wiwoho (2014); Silviariza et al. (2023), Problem-based learning is the right
strategy to improve competence with geospatial references (spatial space on the earth's surface).
Disaster mitigation is part of the real problems that exist in geospatial; Geospatial-related problems
need to be solved by students themselves through a comprehensive study of disaster mitigation
problem solving, including involving social factors (Woa et al., 2018).
Second, problem solving makes students active in the student learning process (Slavin, 2018);
(Choden & Kijkuakul, 2020). Problem solving in disaster mitigation plays a major role in learning
activities and their resolution. Through problem solving activities in aspects of disaster mitigation
capabilities are important such as implementing rules on problems that are rarely encountered, finding
patterns, generalizing, communicating, etc. can be developed in a more positive way; It is possible for
students to gain experience to use the knowledge and abilities they already have by forming cognitive
structures through assimilation and accommodation processes (Degeng, 1997). Meaningful learning

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 225

is very important because students try to relate new phenomena to their knowledge structures. That is,
the learning strategy must match the abilities (characteristics) of students and must be relevant to the
cognitive structure of students (Joyce et al., 2009).
In contrast to the direct instruction strategy which emphasizes the importance of achieving learning
goals that must be achieved by students according to standards in the curriculum (Rosmi, 2017). In the
direct instruction strategy the teacher must monitor step by step until the learning objectives are
achieved. The teacher's dominance in learning activities makes it difficult for students to develop
understanding, which so far has been more often taught using the lecture method (Zahrian, 2014).
This learning causes the teacher to become the center or main source of knowledge, so that students
cannot develop their thinking patterns. Students tend to accept what the teacher gives. The teacher
does not give flexibility to students to construct their knowledge, even though students themselves
have basic knowledge to be developed (Lardika & Tulyakul, 2020).
Third, PBL triggers an increase in students' new understanding through cognitive conflict. The
findings of Puspasari (2017); (Mustofa & Hidayah, 2020), concluded that in the process of meaningful
learning it is very important to provide cognitive conflict so that students can assimilate and
accommodate to form new knowledge in strengthening intellectuality and problem solving abilities.
Woolfolk (2010), suggests that cognitive conflict is developed to explain when a student is faced with
an anomalous situation that does not suit him or his preconceptions in learning. Anomalous data have
had a significant impact on science learning by being used extensively in teaching to promote
conceptual change; Stimulating problems into cognitive conflicts in learning can help students
reconstruct their knowledge. With this reconstruction students will more easily connect the knowledge
that is being studied with the knowledge that has been studied before. Such learning activities will
provide meaningfulness to students through the process of critical thinking that occurs (Limo´n,
2001). The problems presented in learning to students will lead to conflict situations or
disequilibrium. Students will try to find a new balance through various processes such as discussing
with friends, seeking new information or trying various experiences through assimilation. If students
are able to solve their problems, they will experience a new balance (Verawati & Afifah, 2018).
Effect of Learning Styles on Learning achievement of Disaster Mitigation
The two-way ANOVA analysis also revealed that there were significant differences between groups
of each learning style on disaster mitigation learning achievement. The group with the visual learning
style obtained better learning results than the group with the kinesthetic and auditory learning styles.
Based on the average score of the disaster mitigation learning achievement test, it can be explained
that the visual learning style gets the best score compared to the kinesthetic and auditory learning
styles. Almost the same conditions from Irawati's et al. (2021) research, that 45% of children who
have a visual learning style have better learning achievement than kinesthetic and auditory learning
styles; Visual modality helps students to remember subject matter that is directly seen so that it affects
the learning achievement obtained (Chania et al., 2016). In disaster mitigation learning, many
materials are presented in visual media such as pictures, diagrams, animations, demonstrations, or
videos. Providing information through videos, pictures, infographics or diagrams regarding disaster
mitigation material is a positive stimulus to be responded to well by students who have this visual
modality.
The importance of visual style in learning disaster mitigation was also raised by Prasetyo, (2022), who
revealed that disaster mitigation uses visual media that exist on earth that communicates geographical
phenomena (disaster phenomena) to students. Material visualization of natural disasters is an
important component for analyzing the relationships between factors that influence disasters on the
earth's surface.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

226 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

The results of these findings provide information especially for Social Sciences teachers that in
implementing the learning process, teachers must identify and provide more support for learning
styles (Rahman & Yanti, 2016). After knowing the student's learning style and the most prominent
intelligence tendencies it has, the teacher adjusts it to the student's learning style (Isnanto, 2022). How
to adapt to student learning styles, among others:
First, for visual students, where they absorb more information through their eyes, things that can be
done to maximize their learning abilities are: (1) by letting them sit on the front bench so they can
immediately see what the teacher has written or drawn on the board. write, (2) besides writing make
more charts, diagrams, flow-charts, maps explaining something, (3) provide visual media in the form
of disaster mitigation images and aerial photographs, ask them to interpret several objects on the
earth's surface, (4 ) rewrite what is on the blackboard, (5) use different colors on the writing.
Second, for auditory students, where they absorb more information through hearing, things that can be
done to maximize their learning abilities are: (1) when studying, let them read aloud and loudly, (2)
often ask questions to them, making class discussions, using recordings, (3) letting them explain in
words, (4) letting them write down what they understand about one subject and study in groups.
Third, for kinesthetic students, where they absorb more information through physical movement,
things that can be done to maximize their learning abilities are: (1) practice more, simulations and role
playing, (2) allow students to stand up when explaining something, (3) perform demonstrations or live
performances of a process, (4) make models or examples, (5) learning does not have to be formally
seated, it can be done by sitting in a comfortable position, although it is not usually done by other
students, (6) allowing students to memorize something while moving, walking or pacing for example,
(7) allowing students to stand when explaining something.
Interaction of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on Learning achievement
The two-way ANOVA analysis also indicates that there is an intercept in the strategies and learning
styles used which are statistically significant to the learning achievement of disaster mitigation. That
is, the achievement of student learning achievement is not just due to the implementation of learning
strategies, but also due to the impact of the characteristics or conditions of students in the form of
learning styles.
The findings of this research support several experts, among others: Reigeluth (1983), argues that
learning principles place characteristic variables (student conditions) and learning methods as givens,
and provide learning achievement as observed variables. According to Woolfolk (2010), the
suitability of strategies and learning styles will make students motivated and improve their learning
achievement more quickly; Student steps that students consciously use to increase proficiency, store,
remember, recall, and use new information if it is in accordance with student activities or behavior
that can accommodate receiving and entering information will help students feel happy and motivated
in their learning activities (Nurellah et al., 2016).
The learning achievement of disaster mitigation with PBL are not always better, depending on the
learning styles possessed by students (Noer, 2016). PBL interaction with visual learning styles is the
best interaction in improving disaster mitigation learning achievement. It can also be concluded, as
discussed above, that PBL with a visual learning style separately can improve student learning
achievement.
The combination of PBL strategies and visual learning styles mutually reinforce one another
(Sulistyawati et al., 2018). PBL strategies and visual learning styles achieve better learning
achievement because: (1) PBL is viewed as an integration of various visual-associated learning
media. The integration of various visual-associated media in disaster mitigation has increased the
relationship between understanding and application, (2) PBL provide actual, open-ended problems

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 227

that challenge students to identify them with the integration of visual analysis, (3) PBL strategies
provide groups that have responsibility responsibility to solve problems in order to achieve common
goals.
CONCLUSION
Referring to data processing and discussion of what has been concluded about several main points
related to the impact of strategies and learning styles on disaster mitigation learning achievement in
social science subjects for junior high school students in class VII the results of this study can explain:
1) learning achievement disaster mitigation between the study groups with PBL and DI strategies was
significantly different. Overall the learning achievement of disaster mitigation students who
implement treatment with the PBL strategy are higher than the learning achievement of disaster
mitigation students who implement the treatment with the DI strategy. This proves that the PBL
strategy has a better impact on disaster mitigation learning achievement than the DI strategy, 2) there
are significant differences in disaster mitigation learning achievement between students that have
visual, kinesthetic, and auditory learning style modalities. The tendency of the visual learning style to
be better on disaster mitigation learning achievement than the group that has kinesthetic and auditory
learning style modalities. Visual learning styles get better scores than kinesthetic and auditory in the
two learning strategies applied (PBL and DI), and 3) there is an influence between learning strategies
and learning style modalities on disaster mitigation learning achievement. The best learning
achievement for disaster mitigation are groups who have a tendency towards a visual learning style
and are taught using PBL strategies. this This research has shown positive learning outcome in terms
of PBL learning strategy for the visual student’s learning style with regard to the disaster mitigation.
Nevertheless, further research is needed to refine subject delivery, research techniques and methods to
assess and measure improvement in learners' learning and application of factual information.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors thank the dean of FISH, Universitas Negeri Surabaya and the dean of the Tarbiyah
Faculty of IAI Al-Fatimah Bojonegoro who have agreed to facilitate this research collaboration.
REFERENCES
Agustiana, I. . A. T., Wibawa, I. M. C., & Tika, I. N. (2013). The Influence of Disaster Mitigation
Learning Models on Students’ Understanding and Resilience of Disasters. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan
Pengajaran, 46(2), 97–105.
Arends, R. (2012). Learning to Teach, Ninth Edition. McGraw-Hil.
Arikunto, S. (2019). Research Procedure. Rieneka Cipta.
Awla, H. A. (2014). Learning styles and their relation to teaching styles. International Journal of
Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 241–245.
Chania, Y., Haviz, M., & Sasmita, D. (2016). The Relationship between Learning Styles and Student
Learning Outcomes in Biology Class X of SMAN 2 Sungai Tarab, Tanah Datar Regency. Journal of
Sainstek, 8(1), 77–84.
Choden, T., & Kijkuakul, K. (2020). Blending Problem Based Learning with Scientific
Argumentation to Enhance Students’ Understanding of Basic Genetics. International Journal of
Instruction, 13(1), 445–462.
Degeng, I. N. S. (1997). Learning Strategies, Organizing Content with Elaboration Model. In
Cooperation with the Publishing Bureau of Professional Educational Technology Association.
DePorter, B., & Hernacki, M. (2001). Quantum Learning. Membiasakan Belajar Nyaman dan

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

228 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

Menyenangkan. Penerbit Kaifa.

Deporter, B., Mark, R., & Sarah, S. N. (2014). Quantum Teaching. PT Mizan Pustak.
Farchatun, & Indrayati, A. (2015). Implementation of the Direct Instruction Learning Model (Direct
Teaching) Material Scouting Techniques for Flood Disaster Preparedness at Madrasa Aliyah
Nahdlatul Muslimin Undaan Kudus. Edu Geography, 3(5), 5–10.
Hasanah, I., Wahyuni, S., & Bachtiar, R. W. (2016). Development of an Integrated Local Potential-
Based Disaster Mitigation Module in Science Lessons in Junior High Schools. Jurnal Pembelajaran
Fisika, 5(3), 226–234.
Irawati, I., Nasruddin., & Ilhamdi, M. L. (2021). Influence of Learning Style on the Students Science
Learning Achievement. J. Pijar MIPA, 16(1), 44–48.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v16i1.2202
Isnanto. (2022). Student Learning Outcomes Viewed From Learning Styles. AKSARA: Jurnal Ilmu
Pendidikan Nonformal, 8(1), 547–562.
Jacobsen, D. A., Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (2009). Methods for Teaching. Pearson Education. Inc,
Publishings Allyn& Bacon.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of Teaching (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Kemenbdikbud. (2022). Capaian Pembelajaran dalam Panduan Kurikulum Merdeka. Kementerian
Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.
Lardika, R. . A., & Tulyakul, S. (2020). The Effect of Direct Instruction Model in Physical Education
Towards Students’ Adversity Quotient (AQ). Journal Sport Area, 5(1), 1–12.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.25299/sportarea.2020.vol5(1).4460
Lestari, T. R. (2008). Prolem Based Learning Model on Problem Solving Ability. . . Jurnal Geografi
Gea, 5(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/DOI 10.17509/gea.v15i1.4181
Limo´n, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: a
critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 1, 357–380.
Malacapay, M. C. (2019). Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning Style.
International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 625–638.
Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On Some Necessary Conditions of Learning. The Journal Of The
Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.
Maryani, E. (2010). Learning Model of Disaster Mitigation in Social Science in Junior High School.
Jurnal Geografi GEA, 10(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17509/gea.v10i1.1664.g1123
Mortimore, T. (2003). Dyslexia and Learning Style. A Practitioner’s Handbook. Whurr Publishers
Ltd.
Mustofa, R. F., & Hidayah, Y. R. (2020). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on Lateral Thinking
Skills. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 463–474.
Noer, U. (2016). Analysis of Student Learning Styles Against Lecturer Learning Models and
Strategies. AL-ISHLAH, 14(2), 110–124. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35905/alishlah.v14i2.391
Nurellah, A., Panjaitan, & Lichteria, R. M. (2016). Application of Visual, Auditorial, and Learning
Models Kinesthetic to Improve School Student Learning Outcomes Base. Jurnal Pena Ilmiah, 1(1),
431–440.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

Prasetya, Fadirubun, Sitohang & Hidayati 229

Nurhaliza., Lestari, E. T., & Irawani, V. (2021). Analysis of Lecture Methods in Integrated IPS
Learning in Class VII of SMP Negeri 1 Selimbau Kapuas Hulu District. Historica Didaktika: Jurnal
Pendidikan Sejarah, Budaya Sosial, 1(2), 11–19.
Paton, D. (2003). Disaster preparedness: a social-cognitive perspective. Disaster Prevention and
Management: An International Journal, 13(3), 210–216.
Prasetya, S. P. (2014). Facilitating Student-Centered Learning. Geografi Geografi Dan
Pengajarannya), 12(1), 1–12. http://geo.fish.unesa.ac.id/web/index.php/publikasi/jurnal/category/3-
2014-juni-vol-12-no-1
Prasetyo, K. (2022). Flash Flood Disaster Mitigation Through Environmental Education. Geomatics
And Environmental Engineering, 16(4), 119–134.
Puspasari, R. (2017). Strategies for Cognitive Conflicts in Overcoming Student Misconceptions.
Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Matematika (JP2M), 3(1), 1–14.
Puspitawati, P. D., Pantjastuti, S. R., Kurniawan, L., Praptono., & Yusra, T. (2017). Pendidikan
tangguh Bencana (mewujudkan Satuan Pendidikan Aman Bencana Indonesia). Dirjendikdasmen,
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Qurrotaini, L., & Nuryanto, N. (2020). Implementation of Natural Disaster Mitigation Education
Earthquakes in Elementary Social Studies Learning. Trapsila: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar, 2(1), 37–44.
Rahman, A. A., & Yanti, S. (2016). The Influence of Learning Styles on Student Learning Outcomes
in Integrated Social Studies Subjects in Class VII of SMP Negeri 1 Peudada. Jurnal Pendidikan
Almuslim, 4(1), 1–6.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional-Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current
Status. Vol. I. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). Instructional-Design Theories and Models; A New Paradigm of Instructional
Theory. Vol. II. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Alison, A. (2009). Instuctional-Design Theories and Models. Vol. III. Publishing
Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group.
Rosmi, N. (2017). Application of the Direct Learning Model to Improve Mathematics Learning
Outcomes for Class III Students of SD Negeri 003 Pulau Jambu. Jurnal PAJAR (Pendidikan Dan
Pengajaran), 1(2), 161–167.
Savira, A. N., Fatmawati, R., Z., R. M., & Eko, M. S. (2018). Increased Learning Interest Students
Using the Method Interactive Lectures. Jurnal Factor M, 1(1), 43–56.
Setiawan, B., & Supiyandi, M. I. (2018). The Contribution of Metacognitive Skills and Reasoning
Skills on Problem Solving Ability Based on Problem Based Learning (PBL) Model. Anatolian
Journal of Education, 3(2), 76–86.
Settles, B. (2012). Active Learning. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine (Vol. 6,
Issue 1). Morgan & Claypool.
Silviariza, W. Y., Sumarmi., Utaya, S., Bachri, S., & Handoyo, B. (2023). Development of Evaluation
Instruments to Measure the Quality of Spatial Problem Based Learning (SPBL): CIPP Framework.
International Journal of Instruction, 16(2), 413–436.
Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12th Edition). Pearson Education.
Slavin, R. E. (2020). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice, 13th edition. Pearson Education.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1

230 Effects of Learning Strategies and Learning Styles on …

Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, Adaptive Capacity and Vulnerability. Journal Global
Environmental Change, 16(2), 282–292.
Stockard, J. (2011). Direct Instruction and First Grade Reading Achievement: The Role of Technical
Support and Time of Implementation. Journal of Direct Instruction, 11(1), 31–50.
Sudarmawan. (2021). Gambaran Umum Resiko Bencana di Provinsi Jawa Timur Dan Upaya
Penanggulangannya. Pelaksana BPBD Provinsi Jawa Timur.
Sugiharyanto, Wulandari, T., & Wibowo, S. (2014). Perceptions of Social Science Education Students
on Earthquake Disaster Mitigation. JIPSINDO, 2(1), 161–182.
https://doi.org/10.21831/jipsindo.v2i1.2887
Sugiyono. (2015). Research and Development Methods Qualitative, Quantitative, and R&D
Approaches. In Metode Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan R&D.
Sulistyawati, A. H., Parubak, A. S., & Suparman, A. . (2018). Comparative of Learning Models and
Learning Styles to Students’ Cognitive Learning Outcomes on Hydrocarbons Subjec. QUANTUM:
Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Sains, 9(2), 100–106.
Surjati, E., & Wiwoho, S. (2014). Differences in Learning Problem Based Learning and Direct
Instruction to Improve Learning Outcomes and Ability to Solve Geospatial Problems. Seminar
Nasional Dan PIT IGI XIV, 105–117.
Suryani, I., Sari, S. A., & Milfayetty, S. (2014). The Quantum Teaching Model in Increasing
Earthquake Disaster Preparedness Knowledge in Elementary School 19 Banda Aceh (Model Quantum
Teaching dalam Meningkatkan Pengetahuan Kesiapsiagaan Bencana Gempa Bumi di Sekolah Dasar
19 Banda Aceh). Jurnal Biotik, 2(2), 77–137.
Tuckman, B. W. (1999). Conducting Educational Research (5th ed.). Harcourt Brace College
Publishers.
Ulger, K. (2018). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on the Creative Thinking and Critical
Thinking Disposition of Students in Visual Arts Education. Nterdisciplinary Journal of Problem-
Based Learning, 12(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1649
Uliyandari, M., Candrawati, E., Herawati, A. A., & Latipah, N. (2021). Problem-Based Learning to
Improve Concept Understanding and Critical Thinking Ability of Science Education Undergraduate
Students. International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 2(1), 65–72.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v2i1.56
Verawati, N. N. S. P. N., & Afifah, G. (2018). The Effect of Using Cognitive Conflict Strategies on
Learning Outcomes Student Cognitive. Prisma Sains: Jurnal Pengkajian Ilmu Dan Pembelajaran
Matematika Dan IPA IKIP Mataram, 6(2), 113–119.
Vitale, M. R., & Kaniuka, T. S. (2012). Adapting a multiple-baseline design rationale for evaluating
instructional interventions: Implications for the adoption of Direct Instruction reading curricula for
evidence-based reform. Journal of Direct Instruction, 12(1), 25–36.
Woa, K. M., Utaya, S., & Susilo, S. (2018). Effect of Problem Based Learning Learning Model on the
Ability to Solve Geographic Problems in High School Students. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian,
Dan Pengembangan, 3(3), 406—411.
Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational Psychology. Merrill.
Zahrian. (2014). Direct Instruction Contextualization in Science Learning. Lantanida Journal, 1(1),
95–106.

Anatolian Journal of Education, April 2024 ● Vol.9, No.1