BAB V KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN
B. Saran
Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dan pembahasan yang telah dilakukan, peneliti menyarankan beberapa hal, diantaranya adalah:
1. Kesulitan siswa dalam menginterpretasi pada kemampuan menghitung besaran seperti menghitung kecepatan atau percepatan, dapat dilakukan penguatan lagi seperti pada pembelajaran konvensional dan penekanan konten pembelajaran dalam WISE.
2. Peningkatan kemampuan membuat grafik yang rendah dalam menentukan dan menuliskan nama sumbu grafik sebaiknya ditekankan berdasarkan hubungan besaran yang ditinjau seperti hubungan antara posisi dan waktu atau hubungan antara kecepatan dan waktu.
3. Dalam membuat grafik pada konsep gerak sebaiknya siswa melakukan langkah-langkah yang telah ditetapkan. Sehingga, siswa tidak memfokuskan perhatian pada hasil akhir yaitu bentuk kurvanya saja. Setiap tahapan ini penting ditempuh karena dapat melatihkan kemampuan proses dalam membuat grafik.
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Project
2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993).
Benchmark for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Aravind, Vasudeva Rao and Heard John W. (2010). Physics by Simulation: Teaching Circular Motion Using Applets. Lat. Am. J. Phys. Educ. 4, 1. P. 35-39.
Arikunto, Suharsimi (2008). Prosedur Penelitian; suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Atmadji, Chrisna dan Soeleman, M. Arief. (2010). Multimedia Pembelajaran Mata Kuliah Sistem Informasi Manajemen. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi, 6 (1),
Aunurrahman, (2009). Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Hal.146. Bandung: Alfabeta Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs.
American Journal of Physics, 62(8), 750-762.
Beichner, R. J. (1996). The impact of video motion analysis on kinematics graph interpretation skills. American Journal of Physics, 64(10), 1272-1277. Bell, A., & Janvier, C. (1981). The interpretation of graphs representing
situations. For the Learning of Mathematics, 2(1), 34-42.
Bell, P., Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (1995). The knowledge integration environment: Theory and design. In J. L. Schnase & E. L. Cunnius (Eds.), Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning
'95 (pp. 14-21). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.)
Boulton, Helen. (2008). Managing e-Learning: What are the Real Implications
for Schools? dalam Electronic Journal e-Learning Volume 6 Issue 1
2008 (11-18) Tersedia pada
Bowen, G.M., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation among preservice science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1063–1088.
Carlos Monteiro dan Janet Ainley (2007). Investigating The Interpretation Of Media Graphs Among Student Teachers. International Electronic
Journal of mathematics education.
Chiu L & Linn C, (2011), Knowledge Integration and Wise Engineering, Journal
of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 1:1. Available http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jpeer.
Coletta, V. P. and Phillips, J. A. (2005). Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain,
preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability. Am. J. Phys.,
73(12). P. 1172-1182.
Costigan-Eaves, P., & Macdonald-Ross, M. (1990). William Playfair (1759- 1823). Statistical Science, 5(3), 318-326.
Curcio, F. R. (1987). Comprehension of mathematical relationship expressed in graphs. Journal for Research in Mathematic Education, 18(5), 382- 393.
Demirci, Neset. (2010). The Effect of Web-Based Homework on University
Student’s Physics Achievement. The Turkish Online Journal Of Educational Techonology. Oktober. 9(4). P 156-161.
diSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Friel, S.N., Curcio, F.R., & Bright, G.W. (2001). Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 124–158. Gerard, et.al. (2012).Learning to Graph: A Comparison Study of Using Probe or
Glazer Nirit . (2011). Challenges with graph interpretation: a review of the
literature. Studies in Science Education. 47(2), P.183–210.
Hake R. (1998), “Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six- thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory
physics courses,” Am. J. Phys. 66, p.64–74.
Hartley E. (2001), Selling e-Learning, American Society for Training and
Development, New York (http://www.m-
edukasi.web.id/2012/11/pengertian-e-learning.html)
Hoadley, C. M. & Linn, M. C. (2000) Teaching science through online, peer discussions: SpeakEasy in the Knowledge Integration Environment.
International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 839-857.
Hsi, S. and Hoadley, C. M. (1997) Productive discussion in science: gender equity through electronic discourse. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 6(1), 23-36.
http://wise.berkeley.edu/webapp/index.html
http://www.m-edukasi.web.id/2012/11/pengertian-e-learning.html.
Keller, K. Stacy. (2008). Levels of Line Graph Question Interpretation with
Intermediate Elementary Students of Varying Scientific and Mathematical Knowledge and Ability: a Think Aloud Study. A
dissertation. College of Education. University of Central Florida Knorr-Cetina, K. (1983). The ethnographic study of scientific work: Towards a
constructivist interpretation of science. In K. Knorr-Cetina&M.
Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science. p. 115–140.
Koentjaraningrat. (1986). Manajemen Penelitian. Jakarta; Aksara Baru
Kwon, On Nam. (2002). Tools for the Acquisition of Graphing Ability: Real- Time Graphing Technology. Journal of the Korean Society of
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life The Social construction of
scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational
Research, 60(1), 1-64.
Linn C. , Slotta D., et.al. (2010), Designing Science Instruction using the Web- based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE). Asia-Pacific Forum on
Science Learning and Teaching, 11, (2), p.1-23
Linn, M. C. and S. Hsi (2000). Computers, Teachers, Peers: Science
LearningPartners. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lowrie, Tom & Diezmann C.M. (2007). Middle School Students’ Interpretation
of Graphing Task: Difficulties within a Graphical Language.
EARCOME4. LS061
Lynch, M. & Woolgar, S. (Eds.) (1990). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McKenzie, D. L., & Padilla, M. J. (1986). The construction and validation of the test of graphing in science (TOGS). Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 23(7), 571-579.
Mubarak, Lidia (2011). Model Pembelajaran Berbasis Web Pada Materi Fluida
Dinamis untuk Meningkatkan Penguasaan Konsep dan Keterampilan Generik Sain Siswa”. Tesis SPs UPI Bandung. Tidak diterbitkan. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards
for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). The National Science Education
Standards. Washington DC. National Academic Press.
Padilla, M.J., McKenzie, D.L., & Show, E.L. Jr. (1986). An examination of the
line graphing ability of students in grades seven through twelve. School Science and Mathematics, 86, 20–26.
Pelita, Pipin .(2011). Efektivitas Penggunaan Video Based Laboratory (VBL)
Pemahaman Konsep, Pemahaman Grafik, dan Berfikir Logis Siswa.
Tesis SPs UPI Bandung. Tidak diterbitkan.
R. W. Scheifler and J. Gettys. (1986). The X window system, ACM Trans Graph 5, 79_109.
Rogers L.T. (1998). Probing the Hidden Secrets of Graphs, Hands-on Experiments in Physics Education - Proceedings of the GIREP, Conference in Duisburg.
Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (2001). Professionals read graphs: A semiotic analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 159- 194.
Shah, P., & Hoeffner, J. (2002). Review of graph comprehension research: Implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 47– 69.
Soekartawi (2003). Prinsip Dasar E-Learning: Teori Dan Aplikasinya Di Indonesia, Jurnal Teknodik, Edisi No.12/VII.
Sugiyono (2011). Metode Penelitian Kombinasi. Bandung; Alfabeta.
Suyanto (2005). Merancang dan Menyelenggarakan E-learning. Magelang : Ardana Media
Taşdemir, Demirbaş, dan Bozdoğan (2005). The Effect of Cooperative Learning Method in Science Education on Improving Graphic Interpretation Skills of the Students. Gazi Üniversitesi Kirşehir Eğitim Fakültesi, ,
(2), p.81-91
Tebabal, Ambelu dan Kahssay, Gegregziabher. (2011). The effects of Student-
Centered Approach in Improving Students’ Graphical Interpretation Skills and Conceptual Understanding of Kinematical Motion.
Wahono Romi Satria (2003). Pengantar e-Learning dan pengembangannya. Ilmukomputer.com (IKC).
Waller, V. dan Wilson, J. (2001). A Definition for E-Learning. Newsletter of Open and Distance Learning Quality Control. (sumber: