STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA
A C A D E M I C Y E A R 2 0 1 5 / 2 0 1 6
By:
Novianti Hutasoit ID. Number. 4123322010 Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE MEDAN STATE UNIVERSITY
BIOGRAPHY
Novianti Hutasoit was born in Lintongnihuta on November 12th 1994. Father’s name is
Manihar Hutasoit and Mother’s name is Ruspita Sianturi, and she is the eigth of eight
siblings. In 2000, the author entered SDN 176354 Lintongnihuta and graduated in 2006.
In 2006, the author continued hiseducation in SMPN 4 Lintongnihuta and graduated in
2009. In 2009, the author continued his education to SMAN 1 Pagaran and graduated
2012. In 2012, the author was accepted in Bilingual Physics Education Studies Program
in Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Science in Medan State
THE EFFECT OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL ON STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC
AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
Novianti Hutasoit (ID.4123322010)
ABSTRACT
This research is aimed to know and describe the student’s Achievement using problem based learning and conventional learning about static fluid topic . This research employed a quasi experimental pretest and posttest with control design. The populations were 60 students grade XI-science in SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta academic year 2015/2016. The samples consist of two classes, one class with 30 students as experiment class and one class as control class with 30 students, while the sampling technique used purposif sampling. Research instrument used essay test. The data obtained in the study were analyzed by the computer program Ms.Excel. From the research the pre-test average value of outcomes experiment class 26.66 and control class 27.83, after giving the treatment the post-test with the average value of outcomes experiment class 59.66 and control class 49.50. The result of t test tcount = 3.158 while ttable= 1.661. Because tcount>ttable(3.158>1.661) so Ho rejected. The
result showed that student’s achievement in experiment class had been treated with problem based learning model have significantly different from control class which had been treated with conventional learning. In addition, the improvement of PBL in experiment class was greater than in control class. This meant implementation problem based learning has a significant effect toward student achievement.
PREFACE
The author says the great praise and gratitude to God Almighty, for all the graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to the author that this study can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time. This thesis entitled "The Effect of problem Based Learning Model on Student’s achievement on Static Fluid Topic at Year XI SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta Academic Year 2015/2016". This thesis was prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics Education (Sarjana Pendidikan Fisika), Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in Medan State University.
The author has endeavored as much as possible in completing this thesis, but the author is aware there are many mistakes either in terms of content or grammar, then the author welcome for any suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for this thesis . The author hopes the contents of this paper would be useful in enriching the means of knowledge.
Medan, January 2017
Author,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LEGITIMATION SHEET i
BIOGRAPHY ii
ABSTRACT iii
PREFACE iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
FIGURES LIST viii
TABLES LIST ix
APPENDIXES LIST x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Problem Identification 4 1.3 Problem Limitation 5 1.4 Problem Formulation 5
1.5 Research Objective 6
1.6 Benefits of Research 6 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Theoretical Framework 7 2.1.1 Learning Defenition, Purposes, Achievment, and Ability 7 2.1.1.1 Learning Defenitions 7 2.1.1.2 Learning Purposes 8
2.1.1.3 Learning Achievement 9 2.1.1.4 Learning Activity 10 2.1.2 Learning Model 12 2.1.2.1 Problem based Learning 13 2.1.2.1.1 Defenition and Characteristic of PBL 13 2.1.2.1.2 Syntax for Problem Based Learning 15 2.1.2.2 Conventional Learning 16 2.1.3 Subject Matter 17
2.1.3.1 Static Fluid 17
2.1.3.1.1 Density and Specific Gravity 19
2.1.3.1.2 Pressure on Fluid 20
2.1.3.1.3 Atmospheric Pressure (Air Pressure) 21
2.1.3.1.4 Pascal Principle 24
2.1.3.1.5 Archimedes Principle 24
2.1.3.1.6 Surface Tension 27
2.1.3.1.7 Capillarity 29
2.1.3.1.8 Viscosity 30
2.5. Research Hypothesis 32
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS 3.1. Research Location and Research Time 33 3.1.1. Research Location 33 3.1.2. Research Time 33 3.2. Research Population and Research Sample 33 3.2.1. Research Population 33 3.2.2. Research Sample 33 3.3 Research Variables 34
3.4. Research Type and Research Design 34
3.4.1 Research Type 34
3.4.2. Research Design 34
3.5. Research Procedure 35
3.6. Research Instrument 37
3.6.1.Instrument of Student’s Learning Activity 37
3.6.2. Validity Test 39
3.7. Data Analysis Techniques 39
3.7.1. Determine Average Value 39
3.7.2. Determine The Deviation Standard 40
3.7.3. Determine The Homogenity Test 40
3.7.4. Normality Test 41
3.7.5. Hypothesis Test 42
3.7.5.1. Pre-test ability (two tail test) 42
3.7.5.2. Post-Test Ability Test 43
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result of Research 45
4.1.2 Student Outcomes on Experiment Class 46
4.1.3 Student Outcomes on Control Class 47
4.1.4 Data Analysis 47
4.1.5 Hypothesis Test Result 48
4.2 Discussion 50
4.2.1 Outcomes of Experiment Class 50
4.2.2 Outcomes of Control Class 50
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion 51
5.2 Suggestion 51
FIGURES LIST
Figure 2.1. Bloom’s Taxonomy 9
Figure 2.2. Hydrostatic Pressure 20
Figure 2.3. Pressure Measurement 22
Figure 2.4. Forces on an object in water 25 Figure 2.5. Objects Floating, Flying and Sinking in Liquids 26 Figure 2.6. This Insect Can Walk on Water 27
Figure 2.7. Contact Angle 29
TABLES LIST
Table 2.1. Syntax for Problem Based Learning according to Arends. 16
Table 2.2. Density of Substance 18
Tabel 3.1. The design of the research 35 Table 3.2. The Specipication learning outcomes test in static fluid topic 37 Table 3.3. Student’s learning activity assessment 38 Table 3.4 Criteria Assesment of student’s Learning Activity 39 Table 4.1. Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard 46 Deviation and Variance on Experiment Class
Table 4.2. Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard 47 Deviation and Variance on Control Class
Table 4.3. The Result of Normality Test in Experiment Class and Control 47 Class
APPENDIX LIST
Appendix 1 Lesson Plan 1 53
Appendix 2 Lesson Plan 2 68
Appendix 3 Lesson Plan 3 81
Appendix 4 Students Worksheet I 91
Appendix 5 Students Worksheet II 94
Appendix 6 Students Worksheet IIA 100
Appendix 7 Students Worksheet III 103
Appendix 8 Grating Test Results of Learning 105 Appendix 9 Pretest Data of Experiment and Control Class 110 Appendix 10 Posttest Data of Experiment and Control Class 114 Appendix 11 Calculation of Average, Varians, and Standard Deviation 117
Appendix 12 Normality Test 120
Appendix 13 Homogenity Test 125
Appendix 14 Hypothesis Test 128
Appendix 15 Documentation 132
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Education holds the important role to produce Indonesian human resources, like as individu or as society because education can improve and develop the quality of human resources. Improving the quality of education deserve serious attention and careful. Therefore, various attempts have been made to improve the quality of education. One is the developmentof research in the field of education, especially in the teaching-learning process (Sanjaya, 2006). Learning exposes one to a range of possibilities and choices that life has to offer.The learning process is both a mirror of one’s life in relation to others and to the wider environment, as well as a compass to help us
to map our way in our life’s journey (Ramphele, 2015). Education is expected to
produce human resources highly skilled, including critical thinking, logical, creative, and willingness to work together effective that can be developed through education of physics.
National education according to law No. 20, 2003, serves to develop the ability and character development and civilization of the nation's dignity in the minds of the people. To that end, education aims to develop students' potentials to become a man of faith, and fear of God Almighty, the noble character, healthy, knowledgeable, skilled, creative, independent, and become citizens of a democratic and responsible (Mulyasa, 2013).
cannot be understood just by knowing factual data (Fauziah, 2016). The science and its applications are part of daily life to make our life better and therefore the development of an individual’s understanding of science and its applications is one of the objectives of science instruction. Learning physics in schools is still dominated by the activities of teachers. In the sense of active teachers to teach and learners passive in learning (Prayoga, 2013). Therefore, not all types of Learning strategis necessarily improve the acquisition of conceptual understanding. Research also suggests that higher level strategies are expected to promote conceptual understanding. Various studies exist in the physics education literature investigating the effectiveness of Learning strategi on student learning.Until now most schools will have to clean that purpose. However, the learning outcomes of students in studying physics has not shown success and satisfaction.
Learning outcomes are also associated with student life perspective (Ronfeldt, 2015). A fact that when the children were young, their world is full of questions. In various facets of life, they get the idea that being an adult means left the world questioning to enter the world know the answer. Schools tend to encourage the movement of question to answer because success by simply placing the correct answer blank or mark the correct response. Problem in school tend to have one correct answer and questions that no response is rare. Therefore, if we want to know how to learn is more important than knowing all the answers, then we must realize that a good question is more important than the right answer. Teaching students to ask questions of quality more important than the truth of the answers they could provide. The lesson will be interesting and successful, when linked with experiences in which they can see, feel, give, do, try, think, and so forth. In this case the learning approach used in schools are less precise.
scientists. Furthermore, the way of teaching physics teacher in the classroom tends to take notes and work on the problems. In addition, about 60% of students in each class XI science still has a value below KKM standards.
Monotonous teaching methods is the reason why the study of physics be learning less interesting for students. Moreover, when given a problem most students do not get to read about and determine what formula is used. Teachers do not always adopt new instructional strategies seamlessly. According Ravitz (2003) in (Tamim, 2013) posited that, even when teachers show enthusiasm about the constructivist teaching approach after participating in professional development workshops, they might not find it easy to implement it in their classrooms. Hence develop assumptions on students that physics is suitable only be learned by those who want to be a scientist or a physicist more details. At the time of teaching and learning activities take place, the activity of students in working on the problems of physics given by the teacher is still lacking, although still capitalized, see the notes and only some students were active. Another case when the teacher asked the students if the material presented is understandable, students only silence in other words no student is given a definite answer. Additionally, when a time the teacher gave a demonstration, students were also less active in its implementation. It shows students just received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative to find their own. Furthermore, from the results of tests conducted by teachers of physics, it is known that the results of student learning about the material of static Fluid has not reached the expected target. Information about the physics student learning outcomes obtained from interviews, the average value for 3 years in a row has not reached the minimum completeness criteria. From this it appears that student learning outcomes are still low in physics.
ability to work in a team, showing their coordinated abilities to access information and turn it into viable knowledge (Eldy, 2013). PBL will happen with meaningful learning. Because Learners who learn to solve a problem then they will apply the knowledge possessed or sought to know the necessary knowledge. Learning can be more meaningful and can be expanded when students are dealing with a situation in which the concept is applied. PBL can improve critical thinking skills, foster initiatives learners in work, internal motivation to learn, and can develop interpersonal relationships in the working group. One advantage of PBL is that discussion in a small group will empower students to be more independent in their study. Which means they will stimulate themselves to be more responsible and directly lead them to spend more time on their studies (Dolmans, 2016).In the fact shows students are less able to relate the information that has been obtained from the teacher with information that will be studied and related to everyday life. This relates to the lack of practice over theory learned and laboratory use are not effective in schools.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher want to do a research with
the title “ The Effect of Problem Based Learning Model on Student’s
Achievement on Static Fluid topic at year XI of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.2.Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problem, problem can be identified as follows:
1. Teaching and learning process is still teacher-centered.
2. Students assume the physics is a difficult subject and less attractive
3. Students only received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative to find her own
5. Low student learning outcomes.
1.3 Problem Limitation
In order to keep this research become more focused and directed, the researcher limit the problem as following:
1. The subjects studied are students of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong Nihuta grade XI Academic Year 2015/2016.
2. The learning model used is a problem based learning model on the experimental class and conventional learning on the control class.
3. The material that will be taught is static fluid topic.
1.4 Problem Formulation
The problem formulation of this research are:
1. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use conventional learning in static fluid topic class XI in SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
2. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use the teaching model of problem based learning in static fluid topic in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
1.5. Research Objectives
Based on the formulation of the problem, the objectives to be obtained in this study are:
1. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use problem based learning in static fluid topic in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
2. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use conventional learning in static fluid in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta the Academic Year 2015/2016.
3. To know the influence learning model of problem-based learning is better than conventional learning in static fluid in semester class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.6. Benefits of Research
This research is expected to be useful as follows:
1. For researcher, adding the in the future to improve student learning outcomes using problem based learning.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion, the conclusions of this research are as followings as below:
1. Conventional Learning before being given treatment average pretest 27.83and after giving the treatment the average post-test 49.50
2. Problem Based Learning model before being given treatment average pretest 26.66 and after giving the treatment the average post-test 59.66
3. From the result of hypothesis test tcount> ttable is3.158 > 1.661, so that H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted. It can be concluded that there is a difference of student learning achievement using problem based learning model with conventional, on the other word the learning achievement by using problem based learning better than conventional learning.
5.2. Suggestions
Based on the research results and conclusions of the above, then as a follow-up of this research suggested some of the following:
1. Should mastered all the syntax in Problem Based Learning and arrange a time to implement all the syntax in a timely manner and the students had no difficulty in following all the syntax.
