This aim of this research to find out how much the effectiveness of using problem based learning (PBL) model on temperature and heat material to improve students’ critical thinking, Student’s critical thinking ability is still low. The low fact of students ’critical thinking ability is seen from the average score of students’ learning outcomes at the learning level of 47.82 with the completeness level of 29.4%. To improve the critical thinking ability, then applied problem based learning model when the learning process. Improvement of learning is conducted through 4 cycles from 12 September to 12 October 2017. The Result of research performance indicator of the research is the increasing critical thinking ability of students who scores above the KKM score of 70 and the completeness of learning by 70% of the number of students. The students’ critical thinking ability of, cycle I up to cycle III has increased, it is proved through the result of the test that the students get with the average student at 55%, on the first cycle average of students is 57%, cycle II is 67 % and in the third cycle of 83%. From the analysis result of each critical thinking indicator from the cycle I to III, the ability to give a simple explanation increase 32%, building basic skills, increase 50%, making inference increase 45%, making further explanation increase 30% and ability strategy and tactics increase 30%. The PBL steps in this research are: orientate the students to the problem, organize the students to learn, guide investigate independently or group, develop and present the work, and analyze and evaluate the results of problem solving. This improvement is accomplished by carrying out a classroom action research intended to improve classroom learning and improve the critical thinking skills of students of class XI MIPA 3 on temperature and heat matter. The conclusion PBL improving critical thinking aspect is measured in this study include: providing a simple explanation elementary clarification, building basic skills, making inferences, and making further clarification advanced clarification, strategies and tactics.

1.
A.
Samsudin
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1204
012027
, pp.
1
6
(
2019
).
2.
A.
Samsudin
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1013
012040
, pp.
1
6
(
2018
).
3.
T.
Barret
and
D.
Cashman
,
Practitiones “guided to enquiry and Problem based learning
,
Dublin, UCD Teaching and Learning
(
2015
).
4.
Creswell
and
John
W
,
Education Research Planing, Conducting and Evaluating Quatitative and Qualitative Research
Fourth Edition,
Pearson
,
New York
(
2016
).
5.
D. R.
Darman
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1188
012092
, pp.
1
5
(
2019
).
6.
F. C.
Wibowo
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1188
012085
, pp
1.6
(
2019
).
7.
F. C.
Wibowo
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
877
012009
, pp.
1
6
(
2017
).
8.
N.
Hermita
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1013
012060
, pp
1
8
(
2018
).
9.
Supriyatman
,
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1204
012058
, pp.
1
7
(
2019
).
10.
F. C.
Wibowo
,
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching
18
(
12
), pp.
1
32
(
2017
).
11.
F.
Bakri
and
D.
Muliyati
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
1013
012037
, pp.
1
6
(
2018
).
12.
S.
Bahri
and
F.
Bakri
,
JPPPF (Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika)
4
(
1
), pp. (
2018
).