Berdasarkan data tes, portofolio, dan wawancara maka dapat dideskripsikan daya pikir kritis mahasiswa dalam perancangan alat penilaian matematika sebagaimana yang dijelaskan berikut ini:
a. Elementary clarification (memberikan penjelasan dasar)
Pada awal perkuliahan, dosen menyampaikan permasalahan pembelajaran matematika terkini yang sedang menjadi perhatian utama dalam bidang pendidikan. Permasalahan disampaikan dalam bentuk kasus-kasus yang disajikan melalui demon-strasi, pemutaran video, maupun pengguna-an model dari suatu permasalahpengguna-an. Maha-siswa diharuskan menuliskan sebanyak-banyaknya berbagai istilah maupun konsep dalam penilaian matematika dan menjelaskannya melalui kajian berbagai pustaka dan belajar mandiri. Portofolio mahasiswa menunjukkan mahasiswa mampu mendaftar banyak istilah maupun konsep dan memberikan penjelasannya seperti yang dikutip dari pustaka yang dirujuk. Perbedaan pendapat kemudian muncul, pada saat dosen mengklarifikasi apa yang telah diperoleh mahasiswa. Hal ini dikarenakan, banyak istilah maupun konsep yang dirumuskan dan
didefinisikan menggunakan bahasa pen-didikan tingkat tinggi, sehingga menim-bulkan banyak persepsi dan perbedaan dalam memahami dan memberi makna terhadap istilah maupun konsep tersebut.
Perbedaan pandangan banyak terjadi pada saat diskusi mengenai : apa itu konsep matematika? Apa saja yang merupakan konsep dan bukan konsep dalam materi matematika? Bagaimana cara membedakan suatu objek pembicaraan dalam matematika merupakan konsep atau bukan? Bagaimana cara mengetahui siswa telah memahami konsep atau tidak? Bagaimana kriteria suatu soal yang dapat mengukur pemahaman konsep atau tidak? Bagaimana cara membedakan antara pemahaman konsep dengan pengetahuan prosedural? Bukankah pada saat siswa melakukan matematika secara prosedural, maka ia juga harus memiliki pemahaman konsep? Bagaimana cara melihat perbedaan diantara keduanya secara jelas? Hal ini juga menjadi tidak begitu jelas apabila kita ingin menilai problem solving karena pada saat siswa melakukan problem solving, maka ia harus memahami konsep, mampu melakukan matematika secara prosedural dan kemampuan matematika lainnya? Bagai-mana cara kita menilai semua hal itu? Apakah harus menilai setiap aspek tersebut satu persatu secara terpisah atau menilai semua aspek dalam satu alat penilaian? b. The basis for the decision (menentukan
dasar pengambilan keputusan)
Melakukan kajian pustaka baik melalui belajar mandiri maupun bimbingan dosen, mahasiswa melakukan klarifikasi kembali apakah mereka telah benar-benar memahami apa yang telah mereka pelajari.
Mahasiswa harus mampu menjustifikasi dengan membandingkan antara pustaka yang satu dengan yang lainnya agar mendapatkan pemahaman mendalam mengenai berbagai istilah dan konsep yang berkaitan dengan penilaian matematika. Portofolio mahasiswa menunjukkan mereka mampu mengkritisi berbagai sumber pustaka dan pada akhirnya membuat kesimpulan yang nantinya akan menjadi dasar dalam merancang suatu indikator dari aspek penilaian matematika. c. Inference (menarik kesimpulan)
Portofolio mahasiswa menunjukkan mahasiswa mampu mendefisinikan istilah atau konsep dalam penilaian matematika dan mampu merancang indikator penilaiannya secara operasional.
d. Advanced clarification (memberikan penjelasan lanjut)
Portofolio mahasiswa menunjukkan mahasiswa mampu memberikan penjelasan lebih lanjut mengenai : jenis alat penilaian apa yang sesuai dengan aspek yang akan diukur? Bagaimana cara membuat rubrik penilaiannya? Pada saat kapan penilaian tersebut sebaiknya dilakukan? Bagaimana melibatkan siswa dalam penilaian matematika? Bagaimana cara melakukan penilaian dalam kelas besar?
e. Supposition and integration (memper-kirakan dan menggabungkan)
Berdasarkan semua kajian dari berbagai permasalahan, mahasiswa meng-gabungkan berbagai informasi untuk membuat rancangan alat penilaian mate-matika. Portofolio mahasiswa menunjuk-kan mereka telah mampu merancang alat penilaian matematika baik tes maupun non-tes yang sesuai dengan indikator dan aspek
yang akan diukur. Mahasiswa juga mampu merancang bagaimana caranya untuk menganalisis data hasil penilaian tersebut untuk membuat keputusan mengenai kemampuan matematika siswa dan merumuskan tindakan tindak lanjut yang mungkin dilakukan dalam pembelajaran. Simpulan
Berdasarkan analisis statistik terhadap data hasil penelitian diperoleh bahwa thitung >
tabel
t (4,975525507 > 1,684) atau dengan kata lain Ha (rata-rata nilai kelas eksperimen lebih tinggi daripada kelas kontrol) diterima dan H0 (rata-rata nilai kelas eksperimen sama dengan kelas kontrol) ditolak. Oleh karena itu, dapat diambil suatu kesimpulan bahwa penerapan problem based learning dengan metode seven jumps memiliki pengaruh terhadap terhadap daya pikir kritis mahasiswa dalam perancangan alat penilaian matematika. Saran
Kemampuan mahasiswa dalam memahami sumber pustaka harus lebih ditingkatkan, karena hal ini sangat diperlukan untuk menyusun indikator yang jelas dan operasional yang akan menuntun mahasiswa dalam merancang alat penilaian matematika yang tepat. Oleh karena itu, perlu untuk dimaksimalkan pada tahap orientasi masalah untuk memastikan bahwa mahasiswa telah benar-benar memahami istilah atau konsep yang sedang dibicarakan.
Daftar Pustaka
Ennis, R. H. 2000. “An Outline of Goals for a Critical Thinking Curriculum and Its Assessment”. This is a revised version of a presentation at the Sixth International Conference on Thinking at MIT, Cambridge, MA, July,1994,
(online),(http://www.criticalthinking. net), diakses 10 November 2014. Herman, Tatang. 2001. Asesmen Portofolio
dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta 14 Juli 2001.
Roh, Kyeong Ha. 2003. Problem Based Learning in Mathematics. Educational Resources Information Center, (Online), (http://ericse.org), diakses 14 Oktober 2012
Rusman. 2012. Model-Model Pembelajaran. Jakarta: PT Rajagrafindo Persada Subana. 2005. Statistik Pendidikan.
The Identification of Students’ Learning Strategies in Reading Class Kamarudin
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, FPBS IKIP Mataram E-mail: kamarudin_din15@yahoo.com
Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui strategi belajar yang digunakan oleh mahasiswa mata kuliah Membaca. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan deskriptif kualitatif karena data yang dianalisa berbentuk deskripsi kata, klausa dan kalimat. Data diperoleh dari hasil observasi dan wawancara. Hasil temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat 20 mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi belajar pada mata kuliah Membaca. Terdapat 14 strategi kognitif yang digunakan oleh mahasiswa, yaitu 19 mahasiswa menggunakan strategi resourcing, 6 siswa menggunakan strategi summarizing, 4 siswa menggunakan strategi translation. 1 mahasiswa menggunakan strategi grouping, 1 mahasiswa menggunakan strategi imagery, 1 siswa menggunakan strategi auditory representation, dan sebagian mahasiswa tidak menggunakan strategi belajar pada mata kuliah Membaca. Strategi Metakognitif terdiri atas tujuh strategi, dimana terdapat 5 mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi self-evaluation, 4 mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi advanced organizer, dan 3 mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi self-monitoring, dan sebagian mahasiswa tidak menggunakan strategi belajar pada mata kuliah Membaca. Sementara itu, strategi sosial atau afektif terdiri atas dua maca strategi belajar yaitu strategi question for clarification dan cooperation. Terdapat 12 mahasiswa yang menggunakan strategi cooperation dan 2 mahasiswa yang menggunakan question for clarification pada mata kuliah Membaca.
Abstract: This study is aimed at recognizing learning strategies that the University students employ in their reading class. This study applies a descriptive qualitative method since the data analyzed are descriptive data. It is employed due to the description of the research phenomenon is in the form of words, clauses, and sentences. The data were obtained through observation and interview. As the result, it showed that there are twenty students employing the learning strategies in the reading class. There are fourteen strategies of cognitive strategies employed by university students; nineteen students employed resourcing, six students employed summarizing, four students employed translation. One student employed grouping, one student employed imagery, and one student employed auditory representation strategy in reading class, and the rest of students did not employ those strategies in their reading class. Meta-cognitive strategies consist of seven learning strategies; there were five students who employed self-evaluation, four students who employed advanced organizer, and three students who employed self-monitoring in their reading class, and the rest of students did not employ those strategies at all in their reading class. Meanwhile, Social or Affective or Mediation Strategies consist of two kinds of learning strategies namely question for clarification and cooperation. There were twelve students who employed cooperation and two students who employed question for clarification in their reading class.
Key Words: Learning Strategies, Cognitive, Metacognitive, Social or Affective strategies. Introduction
Reading is one of the English language skills which is considered important for students’ growth as an individual in many aspects of life. Nunan (2003: 68) states that reading is a fluent process of readers combining information from a text and their own background knowledge to build meaning. Everyday we cannot avoid of reading activity. We read newspaper, report,
message, book, notes, and many other writings. Hence, students are taught reading skill at school or university. The students will know how English is actually used in printed and written forms. According to Rivers (1981; 259) the most important activity in any language classes is reading. Reading is not only a source of information and a pleasurable activity, but also a means of consolidating ones’ knowledge of a
langauge. In other words, reading activity can bring many benefits for students such as to get information, pleasure and knowledge.
There are four skills that have been done in studying English such as; reading, listening, speaking and writing. These include receptive and productive skills that are based on speech as well as text. Reading is one of the receptive skills. Burn et al (1996: 5) state that the ability to read is vital functioning effectively in a literate society. However, students who do not understand the importance of learning to read will not be motivated to read.
According to Brurder and Henderson (1986: 27), the ability to read can be affected by some factors, such as linguistic aspects, prior knowledge and reading strategy. Another factor is prior knowledge that the student brings into reading. Meanwhile, the use of strategy in reading brings about some benefits for which the students their purpose for reading as well as become aware of what they are reading.
When dealing with a reading lesson, students often experience the lack of reading strategies which are essential for them to overcome the challenges in the classroom. Research into reading has found that effective readers are aware of the strategies they use and that they use strategies flexibly and efficiently (Garner, 1987: 80). The researcher believes that these strategies can be taught to ineffective language learners so that they can become more successful in learning the language. As Oxford (1990:1) states, language learning strategies "... are especially important for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed movement, which is essential for
developing communicative competence." Therefore, it is important for learners to be equipped with theseeffective reading strategies, especially showing them how to utilize the skills and knowledge that they bring from their first language in order to cope with reading in the second language.
In relation to the illustration above, it can be said that language learning strategy plays an important role in learning a second language (Chamot, 2005: 112-130). It is also axiomatic fact that language learning strategy is one of the most widely accepted means to enhance students’ learning efficiency since it can help students when mastering the forms and functions in second language acquisition and thus affect achievement. (O’Malley and Chamot, 1990:99; Rubin, 1981: 117-131), thus, especially in reading comprehension. Some findings of relevant strategy research outside of the L2 field have also shown the powerful role of learning strategies in improving students’ learning outcome. Investigations dealing with the use of learning strategies applied outside of the second language field have also shown the power of learning strategies in the process of gaining the knowledge.
O’Malley and Chamot (1990: 99) classify the learning strategies into metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and affective strategies. In other side, almost all learning strategies categorized by Oxford (1990: 109) either direct strategies-memory, cognitive, and affective, and social strategies are employed by successful learners. These strategies are important in language learning strategies.
Prior studies on language learning strategy focus on reading inESL/EFL context, among other things are as follows: Zhang (2002: 65-90) focused on the possible differences between high scores and low scores in metacognitive awareness of reading strategies employed by ESL learners in Singapore by using questionnaires. Ozek and Cievelek (2006: 112-134) examined 185 ELT student’s cognitive reading strategies by using Think-Aloud Protocol and self report questionnaire. Ghonsooly and Eghtesadee (2006: 119-150) investigated the role ogf cognitive style of field dependence/independence (FD/FI) in using metacognitive and cognitive reading strategies in novice and skilled readers by using think-aloud protocol as data collection technique. These and other studies are elaborated in chapter two.
Despite the presence of studies on the use of language learning strategies for reading skill, there are not many studies on it which have been done in an attempt to achieve some balance in perspective and link what strategies learners use in reading comprehension and the factors affecting the strategy use. Ghonsooly and Eghtesadee (2006: 119-150) investigated role of cognitive style of field-dependence/ independence in using metacognitive and cognitive reading strategies by group of skilled and novice Iranian students of English literature. The attempt to link language learning strategies with learners variables, especially cognitive or learning styles, is in accordance with what Cohen (1996: 72) asserts that learning strategies do not work by themselves, but rather are directly related to the learners’ underlying
learning styles. It means that the relation between learning strategies and reading strategies has a close interrelation and it also has a very crucial role in increasing learners achievement or ability in the goal of learning.
A teacher who teaches reading comprehension in private University in Mataram also told that some of his students sometimes find some difficulties in learning of reading. It means that those students do not apply minimally the three of learning strategies like; cognitive strategies, meta-cognitive strategies and social or affective or mediation mentioned above in developing their reading skill. And the way learners use those strategies will influence the way they can develop their reading skill, hence, these illustration brings the researcher to investigate the learning strategies used by fourth semester students of IKIP Mataram reading comprehension in developing their reading skill.
Research Method
This research applies descriptive qualitative. Subjects of the research are twenty university students of IKIP Mataram in the fourth semesters consisting of twelve male students and eight female students. Instruments of the research are obervation and interview. The techniques used to collect the data are classroom observation and interview to support the main data relating to the unobservable data. The observation is employed to know all the phenomena that happen in the classroom when students apply their learning strategies. The observation employed focus on the way students employ the three
learning strategies like metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and social/ affective strategies in the classrom (see tables: 2,3 and 4). And the interview will be done after classroom observation finished to support the observation data to validate the complement and the result of the research.
After the data obtained and transcribed into transcription sheets, the researcher analyzed them using language learning strategies proposed by O’Malley et al. The purpose of using O’Malley’s learning strategies was to find the types learning strategies employed by university students in their extensive reading class. After that, the writer determined which data were relevant to the research questions. Then, the researcher displayed the findings in the form of interview cheecklist and gave the conclusion after all data had been analyzed on the next chapter. The description were represented in the qualitative narrative passage. The narrative passage was to
convey the findings and conclusion of the study by describing the types of learning strategies employed by university students in extensive reading class.
Findings and Disccussions
The Use of Cognitive Strategies in Reading Class
Cognitive strategy is a learning strategy that involves mental manipulation or transformation of materials or tasks and is intended to enhance comprehension, acquisition, or retention. Cognitive strategies can also be stated the strategies which directly affect language kearning. In this case the strategies are: recourcing, repitition, grouping, deduction, imagery, auditory re-presentation, key word method, elaboration, transfer, infferencing, note taking, sum-marizing, recombination, and translation.
Here is the result of the use of cognitive strategies by university students of IKIP Mataram (see table.2)
Table. 2 The use of cognitive strategies
Lear n er Lear n er s R es our ci ng R epe ti ti on G roupi n g D educ ti on Im ager y A udi to ry R epr es ent at ion K ey word m et hod Ela bo rat ion Tra ns fe r Inf er en ci n g N ot e t aki ng Sum m ar iz ing R ec om b ina ti on Tra ns la ti on 1. √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 2. √ √ √ √ 3. 4. √ √ 5. √ √ √ 6. √ 7. √ √ √ √ 8. √ 9. √ √ 10. √ 11. √
12. √ √ √ 13. √ √ 14. √ √ √ 15. √ √ 16. √ 17. √ 18. √ 19. √ 20. √ √ √ √ Total 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 5 11
Learning Strategies Classification (O’ Malley and Chamot: 1990)
Note: The used of resourcing = 19 students The used of grouping = 1 student The used of Imagery = 1 student The used of Auditory representation = 1 student The used of Key word method = 1 student The used of Elaboration = 1 student The used of Inferencing = 1 student The used of Note taking = 6 students The used of Summarizing = 5 students The used of Translation = 11 students
From table 2 shown above that, the most dominant learning strategies emloyed by university students in their reading class is resourcing. This strategy is employed by nineteen students, then it is followed by
translation, which is employed by eleven students, then note taking as a part of cognitive strategies employed by six students, five students employed
summarizing in their learning process, furthermore, grouping, imagery, auditory
representation, key word method,
elaboration and inferencing each of them is employed by one student in their reading class, meanwhile no one from the number of students observed employed repetition, deduction, transfer, and recombination in their learning process especially in reading class. Here is further illustration about the
use of cognitive strategies by the university students of IKIP Mataram in their reading reading class based on table 2 above.
The Use of Meta-Cognitive in Reading Class
Metacognitive strategies is clauster learning stratgeies which involve thinking about the learning process, planning for learning, monitoring the learning task, and evaluating how well one has learned. This learning strategy is proposed by O’Malley and there are also some division of these strategies namely; advance organizers, directed attention, functional planing, selective attention, self management, self monitoring and self evaluation.
Dealing with the learning strategy illustrated above, in this case, the students
who study English especially in reading are expected to master the learning strategies in order to improve their knowledge in reading.
The researcher analyzed the types of learning strategies which are employed by
University students of IKIP Mataram in metacognitive strategies, and there were twenty students who were observed in this case. The result of observation and interview can be seen on table.3
Table 3: The use of metacognitive strategies in the classroom.
Lear n er s A dvanc e or gan ize r D ir ec ted at tent ion F unct iona l pl ann ing Sel ec ti ve at tent ion Sel f-m ana ge m en t Sel f-m on it o ri n g Sel f – eva lu at ion 1. √ √ 2. √ 3. 4. √ 5. √ √ 6. √ 7. √ 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. √ 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. √ √ 20. Total 3 2 6
Learning Strategies Classification (O’ Malley and Chamot: 1990)
Note: The used of Advance Organizer = 3 students The used of Self-monitoring = 2 students
The used of Self-evaluation = 6 students From table.3 shown above that, the
most dominant learning strategies which belong to meta-cognitive strategies employed by the sudents’ of IKIP Matram in reading class is Self- Evaluation. This strategy was employed by six students, then
it was followed by Advance Organizer, which was employed by three students in their reading class and the last is Self-Monitoring, which was employed by two students, finally the rest of the students did