IMPLEMENTATION OF GROUP INVESTIGATION LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY IN CLASS VIII IN SMP NEGERI 11 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015.

(1)

i

IMPLEMENTATION OF GROUP INVESTIGATION LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY

IN CLASS VIII IN SMP NEGERI 11 MEDAN ACADE MI C YEAR 2014/ 2015

By:

Leni Anggraini ID 4113111045

Mathematics Education Study Program

THESIS

Submitted to Fulfill the Requirement for Getting the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

(2)

(3)

iv

PREFACE

Give thanks to Allah Subhanallahu Wata’ala give me more spirit to finish my thesis. The title of thesis is Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in Smp Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015. This thesis was arranged to satisfy the law to get the Sarjana Pendidikan of Mathematics and Science Faculty in State University of Medan.

For this chance I want to say thank you for the rector of State University of Medan, Mr. Prof. Dr.Syawal Gultom, M.Pd. and his staffs, Mr. Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D. for dean of FMIPA UNIMED and his college assistant of Dean I, II, III in Unimed, Mr. Dr. Edi Surya, M.Si. as Leader of Mathematics Department, Mr. Drs. Zul Amry, M.Si, Ph.D as Leader of Mathematics Education Study Program and then Mr. Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si. as secretary of Mathematics Department.

Big Thank’s for Mr. Dr. KMS. M. Amin Fauzi, M.Pd. as supervisor who gave his time for guide, gave instructions and motivations so I can finish this thesis. And the thanks a lot for Mr. Prof. Dr. Hasratuddin, M.Pd., Dr. Izwita Dewi, M.Pd, and Prof. Dr. Bornok Sinaga M.Pd who’re the persons responsible for my thesis from the beginning until end. Thanks to Prof. Dr. Mukhtar, M.Pd as my academic supervisor and then thank you so much for all my lecturers and staffs in FMIPA.

Special thanks to my lovely father Mr Legimin, and my lovely mother Mrs. Asni for giving motivation, pray and all I need in finishing this thesis. And then thanks to my lovely brother, M. Teguh Gunawan and Febi Alamsyah.

Then, thank you so much to Mrs. Khairani as headmaster of SMP Negeri 11 Medan, Mrs. Adelina Hartati S,Pd, for helping and supporting in doing my research.

(4)

v

Yerni for sadness and happiness in the class, thank you so much for your words. The writer should give a big effort to prepare this thesis, and the writer knows that this thesis has so many weaknesses. So that, the writer needs some suggestions to make it this be better. And big wishes, it can be improve our knowledge.

Medan, June 2015 Writer,

(5)

iii

IMPLEMENTATION OF GROUP INVESTIGATION LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY IN CLASS VIII IN SMP

NEGERI 11 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015

Leni Anggraini (4113111045)

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to: 1) To know the big of the improvement of students' problem solving ability using Group Investigation learning model on the matter cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan in Academic Year 2014/2015. 2) To know the process of students’ answer in improving the problem solving ability in topic cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015. Type of this research is the Classroom Action Research (CAR), which was implemented in SMP Negeri 11 Medan.

The subjects were students of class VIII-7 school year 2014/2015, consist of 48 people consisting of 20 boys and 28 girls. The object of this research is the ability of mathematical problem solving, the process of students’ answer, student activities and model of group Investigation (GI). This study consisted of two cycles, the first cycle consists of two meetings and the second cycle consists of two meetings. The results of this study could be seen: (1) The process of implementation problem based learning was running well because the observation of implementation based teacher side is good category and student side is active category. (2) The improvement of problem solving ability of students by the implementation of group investigation learning model belongs to high category with the normalized gain value is 0.83 where the average of problem solving ability of students in cycle I is 48.16 and in cycle II the average is improved become 91.02. (3) The process of students’ answer is improve from the cycle 1 to cycle II. There are 80% of students to meet the minimum completeness criteria after learning activities using group investigation learning model in small study groups. It is seen from the percentage of the first cycle is 41% of students that get category good enough or more while the percentage of the second test result is 92% that get category good enough or more.

(6)

vi

CONTENTS

Page

Sheet of Agreement i

Biography ii

Abstract iii

Preface iv

Contents vi

List of Figure ix

List of Table xi

List of Appendix xiv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background 1

1.2. Problem Identification 8

1.3. Problem Limitation 8

1.4. Problem Formulation 8

1.5. Research Objectives 9

1.6. Research Benefits 9

1.7. Operational Definitions 10

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 11

2.1. Theoretical Framework 11

2.1.1. Mathematical Problem Solving Ability 11

2.1.2. Cooperative Learning Model 14

2.1.3. Group Investigation Learning Model 17 2.1.4. Syntax of Group Investigation Learning 19

in Problem Solving Ability

2.1.5. The Advantages and The Disadvantages of GI 23

2.1.6. Supportive Learning Theory 24

2.1.7. Content Materials 26

2.1.7.1. The Element of Build Space Flat Side 26 2.1.7.2. The net Build Space Flat Side 30 2.1.7.3. Surface Area of Cubes and Beams 30

2.1.7.4. Volume Cube and Beam 32

2.2. Relevant Research 32

2.3. Conceptual Framework 33

(7)

vii

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 36

3.1. Location and Time of Research 36

3.1.1 Location of Research 36

3.1.2 Time of Research 36

3.2. Subject and Object of Research 36

3.2.1. Subject of Research 36

3.2.2. Object of Research 36

3.3. Type of Research 37

3.4. Procedure and Research Design 37

Cycle I 38

a. Problem I 38

b. Action Planning I 39

c. Action Implementation I 39

d. Observation I 41

e. Evaluation I 42

f. Reflection I 42

Cycle II 43

a. Action Planning II 43

b. Action Implementation II 43

c. Observation II 43

d. Evaluation II 43

e. Reflection II 44

3.5. Instrument of Research 45

3.5.1 Mathematics Problem Solving Ability Test 46

3.5.2 The Process of student’s answer 47

3.5.3 Observation 49

3.5.4 Interview 49

3.5.5 Documentation 49

3.5.6 Field Note 50

3.6. Data Analysis Technique 50

Step 1: Data Reduction 50

Step 2: Data Analysis 50

Step 3: Get Conclusion 56 3.7. Indicator of Succeed 56

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 57

4.1 Description of Research Results 57

4.1.1 Research Cycle I 57

4.1.1.1 Problems Cycle I 57

(8)

viii

4.1.1.3 Action Implementation Stage I 58

4.1.1.4 Data Analysis Cycle I 59

4.1.1.5 Evaluation cycle I 78

4.1.1.6 Reflection Cycle I 78

4.2.2 Research Cycle II 81

4.2.2.1 Problems Cycle II 81

4.2.2.2 Action Planning Stage II 81

4.2.2.3 Action Implementation Stage II 82

4.2.2.4 Data Analysis Cycle II 83

4.2.2.5 Evaluation cycle II 98

4.2.2.6 Reflection Cycle II 98

4.2.3 The Increasing of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability 103 4.2.4 The Increasing of The Process of student’s Answer 105

4.3 Description of Observation Result 107

4.4 The Result of Interview 108

4.5 Research Results 109

4.6 Discussion of Research Results 110

4.6.1 Mathematical Problem Solving Ability of Students 110

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 112

5.5 Conclusion 112

5.2 Suggestion 113

REFERENCE 115

APPENDIX 118

(9)

ix

LIST OF FIGURE

Page Figure 1.1 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 1

Figure 1.2 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 2 Figure 1.3 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 3 Figure 1.4 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 4 Figure 2.1 Cube

3 4 4 5 26 Figure 2.2 Beam

Figure 2.3 The net of Cube Figure 2.4 The net of Beam Figure 3.1 Step in CAR

28 30 30 38 Figure 4.1 Result of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test I

of Each Indicator

61

Figure 4.2 Result of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test I in Cycle I

Figure 4.3 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Good Category

Figure 4.4 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Good Enough Category Figure 4.5 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Not Good Category Figure 4.6 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Not Very Good Category Figure 4.7 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Good Enough Category Figure 4.8 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Not Good Category Figure 4.9 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Very Not Good Category Figure 4.10Result of Students Activity in Cycle 1

Figure 4.11 Result of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test II of Each Indicator

Figure 4.12Result of Process of Students Answer in Cycle II of Each Indicator

Figure 4.13 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Good Category

Figure 4.14 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Good Enough Category Figure 4.15 Students’ Answer Question no 1 in Not Good Category Figure 4.16 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Good Category

(10)

x

Figure 4.17 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Good Enough Category Figure 4.18 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Not Good Category Figure 4.19 Students’ Answer Question no 2 in Very Not Good Category Figure 4.20 Result of Students Activities in Group Discussion Cycle II Figure 4.21 The Improvement of Mathematical Problem solving Ability Figure 4.22 The Improvement of Process Students Answer

Figure 4.23 The Improvement of The Teacher's Observation Result Figure 4.24 The Improvement of The Student's Observation Result

(11)

xiv

LIST OF APPENDIX

Page

Appendix 1 Lesson Plan I 118

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan II 123

Appendix 3 Lesson Plan III 129

Appendix 4 Lesson Plan IV 134

Appendix 5 Student Worksheet I 139

Appendix 6 Student Worksheet II 144

Appendix 7 Student Worksheet III 149

Appendix 8 Student Worksheet IV 154

Appendix 9 Alternative Solution of Student Worksheet I 161 Appendix 10 Alternative Solution of Student Worksheet II 165 Appendix 11 Alternative Solution of Student Worksheet III 169 Appendix 12 Alternative Solution of Student Worksheet IV 172 Appendix 13 Lattice of Initial Capability Test 177 Appendix 14 Lattice of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test I 178 Appendix 15 Lattice of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test II 179

Appendix 16 Initial Capability Test 180

Appendix 17 Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test I 181 Appendix 18 Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Test II 182 Appendix 19 Alternative Solution of Initial Capability Test 184 Appendix 20 Alternative Solution of Mathematical Problem Solving

Ability Test I 190

Appendix 21 Alternative Solution of Mathematical Problem Solving

Ability Test II 193

Appendix 22 Scoring Guidelines of Initial Capability Test 196 Appendix 23 Scoring Guidelines of Mathematical Problem Solving

Ability Test 197

Appendix 24 Observation Sheet of Student Activity 198 Appendix 25 Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity 200

(12)

xv

Appendix 27 Validation Sheet of Initial Capability Test 204 Appendix 28 Validation Sheet of Mathematical Problem Solving

Ability Test I 205

Appendix 29 Validation Sheet of Mathematical Problem Solving

Ability Test II 206

Appendix 30 Result Description of Initial Capability Test 207 Appendix 31 Result Description of Mathematical Problem Solving

Test I 209

Appendix 32 Result Description of Mathematical Problem Solving

Test II 211

(13)

1 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Mathematics is a study that be the basic of science and technology that is very important in every aspect of human life. Therefore, mathematics is very important to teach in every level of education such as SD, SMP, SMA and university. Beside of that mathematics is mother of all science, so mathematics is very important to teach. Cokrof (in Abdurrahman in Nasution, 2014:1) said that:

Matematika perlu di ajarkan kepada siswa karena (1) selalu digunakan dalam segi kehidupan; (2) semua bidang studi memerlukan keterampilan matematika yang sesuai; (3) merupakan sarana komunikasi yang kuat, singkat dan jelas; (4) dapat digunakan untuk menyajikan informasi dalam berbagai cara; (5) meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir logis, ketelitian, dan kesadaran keuangan; dan (6) memberikan kepuasan terhadap usaha memcahkan masalah yang menantang.

Beside that statement above, Cornelius (in Abdurrahman in Nasution, 2014:1) also said that:

Lima alasan perlunya belajar matematika karena matematika merupakan (1) sarana berpikir yang jelas dan logis; (2) sarana untuk memcahkan masalah kehidupan sehari-hari; (3) sarana mengenal pola-pola hubungan dan generalisasi pengalaman; (4) sarana untuk mengembangkan kreativitas; dan (5) sarana untuk meningkatkan kesadaran terhadap perkembangan budaya.

Because mathematics is very important to learn, so mathematics is considered as the main lesson in education, so time lesson for mathematics is much than the other lesson. Even though mathematics lesson is very important to teach in school but many students have many problems in study mathematics in school. This problem is because of student assumed that mathematics is a lesson that very difficult to be studied and mathematics is not interested to be studied.

(14)

2

be able to reach by students in study mathematics in every level of education such as SD, SMP until SMA. Depdiknas (in Wahyuni, 2013: 3), he said that the competence that be hoped can be reached by students are:

1. Showed the understanding mathematical concept that be studied, explained the relation between concept widely, accurately, efficiency, and right in problem solving.

2. Have the ability to communicate the idea using symbols, tables, graphs or diagrams in explaining the problem.

3. Using reasoning in pattern, characteristics or do manipulate mathematics in make generalization, arranging the fact or explaining idea and mathematics statement.

4. Showing the strategy ability in making (formulating) the model of mathematics in problem solving.

5. Having the respect in used mathematics in daily life.

Based on the competences that be hoped by Depdiknas, problem solving ability must be have by students in study mathematics in school. Because of problem solving ability was very important to have by students. The importance of mathematical problem solving also be said by Barca (in Sumarno in Wahyuni, 2013: 4) are: (1) problem solving ability is the main purpose in study mathematics; (2) problem solving consist of method, procedure, and strategy was a main process in curriculum of mathematics; and (3) problem solving is a basic ability in study mathematics.

Problem solving has the main function in the activity of teach and learn mathematics. By mathematical problem solving, students can try to interpret the concepts, theorems and skills that be studied (Hudojo in Wahyuni, 2014:3.

(15)

3

of the students still low. First question that given to the students is: “A solid beam ABCD.EFGH that have size 15 cm x 10 cm x 6 cm. The point P was in the side of AB, so AP=3 cm. A lizard wan be in the corner of G will catch a mosque that wan be in point P by creep in the surface of beam. If the velocity of lizard moved 2.5 cm/second, how many the fastest time that need by lizard to catch mosque”.

Figure 1.1 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 1

Based on picture 1.1, we can know that the students can’t understand what the asked in that question. Student doesn’t make the known and the asked from the problem above. Beside of that, in the process of solution the student doesn’t know the way to solve the problem, he also can’t make the graph of the beam correctly because he doesn’t know to put the point coordinate in that beam. Then, the student also doesn’t answer the question correctly because the student answer that the velocity of lizard to catch a mosquito is 13,500 second, and the true answer is 8 second.

In the next question, student also has the mistake in doing the problem solving process to answer the question. The second question that be given to the student in observation time is: “a tank that have a size like a beam have the size in based area is 60 cm x 25 cm was filled by water that high 14 cm. If 3,507 liter of water was added to the tank, so the increase of the water in the tank is?”

The students’ answer is still false. In the

picture, the students don’t graph

the beam correctly.

Students don’t make

(16)

4

Figure 1.2 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 2

Based on picture 1.2, the students still can’t understand what was asked in the problem above. The student still doesn’t make the known and the asked in the process of problem solving. And in the process of answering the question for the problem above, the process still not appropriate with the step of problem solving of mathematics.

In the third question, student also makes the mistake in process of problem solving in that question. The question in the third of observation is: “There are 11 beams that have the same sizes with the length 15 cm, wide 10 cm, and high 8 cm will be paint using the paint in tin that have the sized radius 7 cm and high 10 cm. If every 1 cm3 can be used to paint ½ cm2, how many tins that need to paint 11 beams?”

Figure 1.3 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 3 Students

don’t make the knowing and asked.

The step of solution

still uncomplete Students

(17)

5

Based on pictured 1.3, the student still can’t understand what that asked in the problem above, the student still not make the known and the asked from the problem above. And in the process of answering the question for the problem above, the process still not appropriate with the step of problem solving of mathematics.

In the fourth question in observation, the students still have many mistakes in process of problem solving to answer the question. The question of the fourth question is: “There is a beam that has the comparison size of length, wide, and high of a beam is 4:3:2. If the beam has the area of the base of beam is 192 cm2. How is the surface area of that beam?”

Figure 1.4 Sample of Student’s Sheet Answer Number 4

Based on picture 1.4, the students still not understand what is asked in the problem above. The student still doesn’t make the known and asked from the problem above. In the process of problem solving, the student doesn’t understand the way to solve that problem, student still has the mistake in calculating the problem solving. So, the result of solution still doesn’t have the right answer.

The student almost be understand the problem from the question above and the way to get the solution from the question above although they don’t use the right of mathematics model to solve the problem. However, the student can’t

Students don’t make the knowing

and asked.

The step of solution

(18)

6

be interpreted correctly to get the answer correctly because they don’t know the position of P, so they don’t use the Pythagorean theorem to find the distance of lizard and mosquito. So in the last problem, the student can’t know to find the correct comparison to solve the problem above because they don’t understand the problem or they don’t have many time to answering the problem above.

Based on the explanation above, that problem showed that the problem solving ability have some indicators, they are: (1) understanding the problem with written the known and the asked in that problem, (2) finding the plan by written the formula that used to solve the problem, (3) solving the problem based on the formula that has been planned, (4) correcting back the result that get from that solution. Based on that analyzed about the average of problem solving ability students’ are still low. No one of the student get score 80 in the test, but some student that get score of 60-75 is 6 students from 42 students, and they almost completed in process of problem solving, and the approximation of 6 students are 14.29% because 85.71% from the students uncompleted in answering the problem

Based on the result of observation and interview that be done by researcher to the one of the mathematics teacher in SMP Negeri 11 Medan, she is Mrs. Adelina Hartati S.Pd, known that the student still have many difficult in solving the problem in mathematical problem. That is caused of the student still have difficulties to understand the problem that was be asked in the problem especially to know what they asked and they known in that problem, so the students still were very difficult to solve the problem.

Based on the facts above, so one of the method that can be used to solve that problem is cooperative learning method type Group Investigation (GI). Group investigation is a cooperative learning method in which students from groups based on their interest in a particular topic for in-depth study and investigation (Ellis and Stuen 1998:84).

(19)

7

learning that had formulated (Yumisnaini, 2012:3). Beside of that Trianto (in Yumisnaini, 2012:4) also give the opinion about group investigation, group investigation is the method of learning that involved the student from the planning, finding the topic or ways to learn in investigation. This learning model uses the student to have the good ability in communication or in group process skills.

In implementing the Group Investigation learning model, the teacher divided the students be some groups that consists 5-6 students that heterogeneous in every group. The implementation of group investigation learning model, have four steps, they are: (1) identifying commonly the topics and organizing the student in group; (2) planning the learning tasks; (3) doing investigation; (4) preparing the last report; (5) presenting the last report; (6) evaluation (Rusman, 2010: 221-222).

Group Investigation learning model has some assumption as the reference in developed of learning, they are: (1) to improve the creativity ability of student based on developing creativity process to awareness and developing tools that support creativity; (2) emotional component more important that intellectual, that irrational more important than rational; (3) to improving the change of success in solving a problem must be understand the emotional component and irrational (Rusman, 2010:223)

(20)

8

Based on the explanation above, the researcher has the focus in group investigation learning model to improve the problem solving ability. So, this research have the title is: “Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in SMP Negeri 11

Medan Academic Year 2014/2015” can answer the problem above.

1.2 Problem Identification

Based on the background above, there are some problem that identified, they are:

1. Mathematical problem solving ability of students still low. 2. Students have difficult in solving the problem.

3. The learning process still teacher centered.

4. In learning process, teacher more emphasis on learning outcomes than in the learning process

5. Teacher often gives the example to the students about how the way to answer that question.

1.3 Problem Limitation

Based on identification problem above, so the researches make the limited the problem in: Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.

1.4 Problem Formulation

Based on problem limitation above, so the problem of this research be formulated such as:

(21)

9

2. How is the improvement of students' problem solving ability using Group Investigation learning model on the matter cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015?

3. How is the process of students’ answer in improving the problem solving ability in topic cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015?

1.5 Research Objectives

The purposes of this research are:

1. Repairing the learning process by using the group investigation learning model to improve the problem solving ability in topic cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015

2. Knowing the big of the improvement of students' problem solving ability using Group Investigation learning model on the matter cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan in Academic Year 2014/2015?

3. Knowing the process of students’ answer in improving the problem solving ability in topic cubes and beams in SMP Negeri 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.

1.6 Research Benefits

Benefit that hoped from this research is:

1. Improving the mathematics problem solving ability of students especially in topic cube and beam.

2. As consideration and input for the teacher to implementing group investigation learning model in learning activity.

3. Improving the interesting filling for the student to learn mathematics. 4. As grip for researcher in mathematics lesson that will be a teacher. 5. Be motivated for the school in improving quality of education.

(22)

10

1.7 Operational Definition

This research has the title, “Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in SMP Negeri 11 Medan A.Y 2014/2015”. Terms that require some explanations are as follows: - Problem solving ability is students' ability in solving mathematical problems

through several aspects: understanding the problem, making a plan completion, perform calculations and check back.

(23)

115

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. (2007), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Bumi Aksara ,Jakarta Arikunto, S. (2013), Prosedur Penelitian suatu Pendekatan Praktik, Rineka Cipta,

Jakarta

Brahier. J.D. (2010). Teaching Secondary and Middle School Mathematics: Fourth Edition. Pearson Education Inc. USA

Ellis, K.A and Stuen, J.C. (1998). The Interdisciplinary Curriculum. Eye On Education Inc. Larchmont.

Fitriani. (2014). Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah dan Komunikasi Matematik Siswa SMP Negeri Langkat yang Diajarakan Model Problem

Centered Learning. Tesis, PascasarjanaUNIMED. Medan

Ginting, R. (2012), Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Investigasi Dalam Kelompok Untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa

di Kelas IX SMP Negeri 1 Kotarih T.A.2011/2012, Skripsi, FMIPA

UNIMED, Medan

Husna, dkk. (2013). Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah dan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa Sekolah Menengah Pertama Melalui Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Think, Pair, Share. Volume 1. No 2. UNSYIAH

Kagan, S and Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan Cooperative Learning. Kagan Spencer, -. Lubis, N. (2014). Perbedaan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah dan Metakognisi Matematika Antara Sisw yang Diberi Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah

dengan Pembelajaran Ekspositori. Tesis, Pascasarjana UNIMED. Medan.

(24)

116

Teaching Quadrilaterals Topic in Seventh Grade of Mts. N 3 Medan in A.Y

2014/2015. Skripsi FMIPA UNIMED. Medan.

McNiff, J and Whitehead, J. (2002). Action Research: Principles and Practice. Routledge Falmer. London

Pederson, J.E and Digby, D.A. (2013). Secondary School and Cooperative Learning. Routledge. United Stated of America.

Posamentier, S.A, dkk. (2009). Problem Solving in Mathematics Grade 3-6. Corwin, USA.

Purba, A. (2012), Penerapan Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Investigasi Kelompok (IG) Untuk Meningkatkan Kreativitas Matematika Siswa Pada Pokok Bahasan Kubus dan Balok di Kelas VIII SMP N 16 Medan T.A.2011/2012, Skripsi, FMIPA UNIMED, Medan

Purba, L.N.U. (2014). The Inplementation of Group Investigation Learning Model TO Improve The Students’ Mathenatical Communication Ab. ility of Eight Grade SMP N 4 Pematang Siantar Academic Year 2014/1015. Skripsi. FMIPA UNIMED. Medan.

Rizki, Y. (2012). The Influence of Critical Thinking Development Through Chemistry Module To Increase Students Achievement Grade XI On The

Topic Solubility and Solubility Product. Skripsi FMIPA UNIMED. Medan

Rusman, (2010). Model-Model Pembelajaran, Mengembangkan Profesionalisme Guru. PT Rajagrafindo Persada. Depok.

Sipahutar, D.H. (2014). Penerapan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Investigasi Kelompok untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematika siswa pada pokok bahasan segi empat di kelas VII SMP Negeri

4 Medan tahun ajaran 2013/2014. skripsi FMIPA UNIMED. Medan

(25)

117

Tan, I.G.C , Sharan, S and Lee, C.K.E. (2006). Group Investigation and Student

Learning: An Experiment is Singapore School. Marshall Cavendish

Academic. Singapore

Trianto, 2009. Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif- Progresif. Kencana Prenada. Media Group. Jakarta

Wahyuni. (2013). Perbedaan Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah dan Komunikasi Matematis antara siswa kelas Homogen Gender melalui model Pembelajaran Bebasis masalah di Mts Kota Langsa, Tesis, Pascasarjana UNIMED, Medan

Wulandari, E. and Sukirno. (2012). Penerapan Model Cooperative Learning Tipe Student Teams Achievement Division (STAD) Berbantu Media Monopoli Dalam Peningkatan Aktivitas Belajar Akuntansi Siswa Kelas X Akuntansi 2 Smk Negeri 1 Godean Tahun Ajaran 2011/2012. Vol. X, No. 1,-.

Yanti, E.N. (2014). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Learning Tipe Number Head Together (NHT) untuk meningkatkan aktivitas dan hasil belajar system Persamaan Linear Dua Variabel (SPLDV) di Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 1 Sei Rampah Tahin Ajaran 2013/2014, Skripsi, FMIPA UNIMED, Medan.

Yumisnaini. (2012). Efektivitas Metode Investigasi Kelompok (Group Investigation)Terhadap Keterampilan Menulis Artikel Oleh Siswa Kelas

Xi Sma Negeri 1 Pancurbatu Tahun Pembelajaran 2012/2013. Volume 1,

(26)

ii