THE COMPARING ACHIEVEMENTS BY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL STAD (STUDENTS TEAMS ACHIEVEMENTS DIVISIONS) WITH TGT (TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENS) ON THE
STATIC FLUID TOPIC SEMESTER II CLASS XI SMA N ADIANKOTING A.Y. 2015/2016
By:
Dewi Sari Situmorang Reg.Number: 409322002
Physics Bilingual Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
BIOGRAPHY
iii
THE COMPARING OF LEARNING ACHIEVEMENTS BY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL STAD (STUDENTS TEAMS ACHIEVEMENTS DIVISION)
WITH TGT (TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENTS) ON THE STATIC FLUID TOPICS SEMESTER II CLASS XI SMA N 1
ADIAKONTING A.Y. 2015/2016
Dewi Sari Situmorang (NIM. 409322002)
ABSTRACT
This research aims to known the results of students learning by using cooperative learning model of the type of students teams achievements divisions (STAD)models in the control Class and Teams Games Tournaments ( TGT) models in the control Class ,and also to know Comparing of learning Achievements By Using Cooperative Learning Model STAD (Students Division Teams Achievements) With TGT (Teams Games Tournaments) On The Static Fluid Topics Semester II Class XI SMA N 1 Adiakonting A.Y. 2015/2016
Type of this research is quasi experimental .The population of this research is all the students class XI even semester SMAN 1 Adiankoting A.Y.2015/2016 which consisted of 61 students and consisting of two class regular and 2 classes excellent .A sample of this research was taken two classes are determined by means of cluster random sampling, namely class XIIA1 As a experiment class and a class XIIA2 As a control class that each class number 30 students 31 and 30 students
From the data analysis the results obtained averaged value of experimental class pretest was 5,067 with a standard deviation of 2,114 and the averang value of the control class pretest 5,600 with a standard deviation of 1,886 . Thus obtained Fcount of 0,79 and Ftable of 1,87 Because Fcount<Ftale = (0,795 <1,872),so that the results for these two classes have pretest homogenous.Then obtained t count > t table (2,089 > 2,002,It conclude there was no significant difference between the result of learning students experiments class with control class.After study completion given obtained average value of experimental class posttest is 5,90 with standard deviation 1,87 and average value of control class is 4,96 posttest with standard deviation 1,60.Both of these data have a normal distributions. Result of hypothesis testing obtained obtained t count > t table (2,089 > 2,0 so the conclusion is there is the comparing of cooperative learning model types Students Teams Achievements Divisions( STAD) with Teams Games Tournaments(TGT) of Learning Achievements
PREFACE
Titled :” The Comparing Of Learning Achievements By Using
Cooperative Learning Model STAD (Students Division Teams Achievements) With TGT (Teams Games Tournaments) On The Static FluidTopics Semester II Class XI SMA N 1 Adiakonting A.Y. 2015/2016. Prepared to obtain a Bachelors degree Physical Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State University of Medan .
On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr. Dr.Eidi Sihombing ,M.S as Thesis advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis writing .Thanks to Prof. Dr. Nurdin Bukit ,M.S, Dr. Makmur Sirait ,M.S. ,and Alkhafi Maas Siregar , M.Si ,who have provided input and suggestion from the research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Thanks also presented to Drs. Sehat Simatupang ,M.S as the academic Supervisior .Thanks also for all Mr.and Mrs. Lecture and staff employes of Physics FMIPA State University of Medan who have encourage the writer during the lecture .Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster Drs Postman Sitorus and all teacher in SMA Negeri 1 Adiankoting who have helped during this researches Physics teacher
Gratefully and specially to Dear my lovely Father H.Situmorang and my lovely mother S.Manurung and also my younger brothers, and my younger sister Pebriani Situmorang ,and all family who have prayed and gave me encouragement and funding to complete the study in the State University of Medan
The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this thesis, but the author is a were there are many draw backs in terms of both content and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestion and constructive criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly The author hope the contents of this paper would be useful in enriching the repertoire
Medan, Juli 2016
v LIST OF CONTENT
Page
Legitimating Sheet i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Preface iv
List of Content vi
Table List ix
Figure List x
Appendix List xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Background 1
1.1.1. Identification of Problems 5
1.1.2. Limitation of the Problem 5
1.1.3.Formulation Of Problems 5
1.1.4. Research Purpose 6
1.1.5. Benefits of Reaserch 6
1.1.6. Definition Operational 6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.1.Learning 8
2.1.2.Essence of Teaching 10
2.1.3. The Nature of learning Physics 11
2.1.4. Cognitive ability 12
2.1.5. Definition of Cooperative Learning 18
2.1.6. STAD 21
2.1.6.a. Clssroom Presentation 21
2.1.6.b. Teams 21
2.1.6.c. Quiz 22
2.1.6.d.Individual Progress Score 24
2.1.6.e. Calculating the score group 25
2.1.6.f.Recognition Teams 25
2.1.7. TGT 24
2.2. Teaching Material 26
2.2.A. Pressure and Hydrostatic Pressure 26
2.2.1. Pressure 26
2.2.2. Hydrostatic Pressure 26
2.2.3. Absolute Pressure 27
2.2.B. Fundamental Law of Hydrostatic 28
2.2.2. Pascal Laws 29
2.2.3. Archimedes Principle 30
2.3. Conceptual Framework 32
2.4. Research Hypothesis 34
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
3.1.1. Research Location and Research Time 35
3.1.2. Population and Sample 35
3.2.1 Population 35
3.2.2 Sample 35
3.3. Research Variable 35
3.3.1 Independent Variable 35
3.3.2 Dependent Variable 35
3.4. Method and Reasearch Design 36
3.5. Research Procedure 36
vii
3.5.2. Implementation phase 37 3.6. Research Instrument 38 3.7. Content Validity 39
3.8. Data Analysis Techniques 40
3.8.1. Determine Average Value 40
3.8.2. Determine The Standard Deviation 40
3.9.Normality Test 40
3.10.Homogeneity Test 41
3.11.Hypothesis Test 41
CHAPTER IV REASEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSION
4.1.1. Result of Reasearch 44
4.1.1Description of Rasearch Data 44
41.1.1 Pre-test Data of Experimantal and Control Class 44
4.1.2. Testing Of Data Analysis 45
4.1.2.1 Normality Test of Pre-test data 45 4.1.2. 2. Pre-test Data Homogeneity Test
and Differences Test of Students Initial Ability 46 4.1.2.3 Post-test Data of Experimental and Control Class 45 4.1.2. 4. Pre-test Data Homogeneity Test
and Differences Test of Students Initial Ability 47 4.1.2.3 Hyphothesis T5est of Reasearch 49
4.1.2. 4. Observation 50
4.2. Discussion 51
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
4.1.1. Conclusion 54
4.2. Suggestion 56
TABLE LIST
Page Table 2.1 Syntax Cooperative Learning Model 19
Table 2.2 Counters Development Individual Score 22
Table 2.3 Counters Development Individual Score Progress 22
Table 2 .4 Calculation of Score Group Development 23
Table 2. 5 Schematic STAD Cooperative Learning 23
Table 2.6 Cooperative Learning TGT Schematic 25
Table 3.1. The Design of Experiment 36
Table 3.2. Specification of Learning Achievements 39
Table 3.3 Criteria For Assesment of Learning 40
Table 4.1 Pre-test Data Normality Test of Experimental
and Control Class 45
Table 4.2 Summary of Pre-test Calculation 47
Table 4.3 Post-Test Data Normality Test of Experimental
and Control Class 48
Table 4.4 Summary of Homogenity Test Result of Post-Test Data 48
Table 4.5 The result of Individual observation and result of students Learning
ix FIGURE LIST
Page Figure 2.1 A-U –Shaped Table Contents Oil And Water 28
Figure 2.4. a Sinking Body 31
Figure 2.4. b Suspending Body 32
Figure 2.4. c Float Body 32
Figure 3.1 Flow chart Research 38
Figure 4.1 Bar Chart of Pre-test data in Experiment and Control Class 45
Figure 4.2 Bar Chart of Post-test Data in Experiment and Control Class 46
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1.Background
The process of learning is an educational component. In the learning process there is an interaction between teachers and students as learners. Teachers have an important role during the lesson. The teacher's task is not only to transfer knowledge, does not make students as learning objects but as subjects of learning, so that students are not passive and can develop in accordance with the knowledge of the subject areas studied. Therefore, teachers must understand the material that will be delivered to students and can choose appropriate learning models to deliver the material.Physics Education is expected to provide experience directly. Physics Education should also be able to develop the power of reason in solving problems in everyday life to-day, because students need to be helped to develop a number of skills to enable them to explore and to understand the nature fully.
are factors that come from outside the student that includes the overall family situation, methods of teaching.
Various patterns approaches, models / methods and a variety of learning media eg discussions, experiments, demonstrations and others can increase the ability of affective and cognitive abilities of students. Learning is not only done by monotonous lecture in front of the class or learn individually and just sticking to the textbooks, since students will feel tired and forget. Using less interactive media learning, can also lead to boredom and forgetfulness to the students. Alternative learning models to reduce boredom is a cooperative learning model because it can stimulate cooperation and mutual help in learning so that student performance can be increased.Cooperative Learning is derived from the cooperative, which means doing something together to help each other as a group or a team. Learning Cooperative learning refers to a wide variety of teaching methods in which students work in small groups to help one another in learning the subject matter. Eggen defines that cooperative learning is a teaching strategy used by students to help one another in one group to learn something while Slavin explained that the cooperative learning are extensive, on the theory that students will more easily find and understand concepts that are difficult if they are able to discuss the concept with his friend. Of the various explanations of cooperative learning can be concluded that learning is a learning model for each group have a member heterogeneous groups. Cooperative learning is a model that group members have individual goal when the group has managed to achieve the goals of individuals in the group, strongly influenced the activity of the group members in doing anything for the group's success. In cooperative learning there are three learning objectives: academic achievement, acceptance of diverse opinion and social skills development.
influence learning cooperative model Teams Games Tournament (TGT) and Student Teams Achievement Division (STAD) in terms of student motivation on cognitive abilities of students in the subjects of physics, so the researchers propose research title: "The Comparing of Learning Outcomes by using Cooperative Learning Model STAD (Students Teams Achievements Divisions) with TGT (Teams Games Tournaments) on the Static Fluid Topics Semester II Class XI SMA N 1 Adiankotingi A.Y. 2015/2016
1.1.1. Identification of Problems
The identification of the problem is as follows:
1. Students assume that the physics is very difficult and monotonous 2. The process of learning physics that are centered on the teacher alone 3. Low student learning outcomes
1.1.2. Limitation of the Problem
The restrictions on the problem to the researcher pointed out
1. Learning physics research using cooperative learning model Teams Games Tournament (TGT) and Student Teams Achievement Division (STAD).
2. The learning model used STAD and TGT on the subject matter is taken from static Fluid sub subject for high school students of class X the second semester.
3. The learning result obtained by the students of class XI SMA Negeri 1Adiakonting
1.1.3. Formulation of the Problem
The formulation of the problem that the authors propose the following:
2. How can learning outcomes students by using Cooperative Learning Model TGT (Teams Groups Tournaments)
3. Learning Model STAD (Students Teams Achievements Division) greater than Learning Model TGT(Teams Groups Tournaments
1.1.4. Research purposes
The purpose of this study is as follows:
1. To know learning outcomes students by using Cooperative Learning Model STAD(Students Teams Achievements)
2. To know learning students by using Cooperative Learning Model TGT (Teams Groups Tournaments)
3. Comparing Learning outcomes Cooperative Learning Model STAD(Students Achievement Division)with Cooperative Learning Model TGT (Teams Groups Tournaments)
1.1.5. Benefits of research
The benefits of this research is useful for:
1. Giving feedback to teachers and prospective teachers to chooseappropriate approaches and methods in the delivery of material. 2. Giving feedback to teachers, prospective teachers and students to pay attention to internal factors of students, especially students' motivation to study harder as the ability to support so as to improve student achievement.
3. Giving feedback to teachers and prospective teachers who conduct further research related to this research within the scope of a broader and deeper discussion
1. TGT learning model STAD have similarities that students will sit together in groups of four or five people or including heterogeneous group members to master the material presented by the teacher.
2. Model TGT is to motivate the students in order to support each other and help each other in mastering the skills taught by the teacher while the TGT has a purpose different ideas with STAD namely: using academic and student tournaments compete as representatives of the team to win the tournament.
3. Learning result: Have equation in terms of learning the same scheme, namely: presentation classes, group activities, group recognition and awards groups to improve learning.
4. STAD and TGT namely in terms of a class presentation on Learning Model STAD Using Learning model Directly using discussions led by teachers So students will realize that they have to actually pay full attention during the presentation because it will greatly help them quiz and quiz score they determine their team scores while the percentage of audiovisual TGT learning model that focuses on the team, games, and tournaments only.
CHAPTERT V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Based on the analysis of the result obtained, the authors present conclusion and suggestion as follows:
5.1 Conclusion
After doing some research, calculating data and testing hypotheses, the researchers obtained the following conclusions:
1. Learning Achievements students experiment class given prefential treatment by using learning model Students Teams Achievements Divisions (STAD) with Teams Games Tournaments (TGT) to the learning outcomes of students in the subject matter physics Fluid Static Class XI SMAN Adiankoting 1 Semester II 2015/2016 with average value of 5,067 pretest and average value of posttest 5,900 include in the good category
2. Learning Achievements students control class are given preferential treatment by using learning model Students Teams Achievements Divisions (STAD) with Teams Games Tournaments (TGT) to the learning outcomes of students in the subject matter physics Fluid Static Class XI SMAN Adiankoting 1 Semester II 2015/2016 with an average value 5,600 pretest and average value of posttest 4,967 include in the good category
3. There is any effect of the model type of Cooperative Learning model Students Teams Achievements Divisions (STAD) with Teams Games Tournaments (TGT) to the learning outcomes of students in the subject matter physics Fluid Static Class XI SMAN Adiankoting 1 Semester II 2015/2016
5.2 Suggestion
1. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Students Teams Achievements(STAD) in order to better direct the students more actively in the discussion groups 2. The reasearcher want to further examine the cooperative learning
model of the type Teams Games Tournaments(TGT) in order to better guide students in discussion groups.
3. The researcher want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Students Teams Achievements Divisions (STAD)further more ,in order to use the time as effectively as possible but with use model Learning Teams Games Tournaments further more,in order to use the time as not effectively as possible. .
4. The researches want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Students Teams Achievements Divisions(STAD) in order to better the conceptual of physics in the group discussion and test individual but in the Teams Games Tournaments(TGT) sam with STAD but there are difference in the groups discussion .TGT make group discussion use Games and test individual with group
56 REFERENCE
Aldrich ,Clark .2005.Learning by Doing Plefier An Important of Willey,San Fransisco
Arends ,Richard I.2009.Learning to teach English Edition .Mc Graw-Hill .New York
Arikunto ,Suharsimi 2010.Procedure Research.Penerbit Rineka Cipta.Jakarta
Edminister,Joseph A & Mahmood Nahwi.2003.Theory and Problems of Electric Circuit Fourth Edition.Mc.Graw-Hill .New York..
Hergenhahn,B.R.,Olson ,M.H,(2008).Teori Belajar Edisi ke 7,Kencana Prenada Media Group ,Jakarta
Hewit ,Paul G .2006.Conceptual Physics Tenth Edition .Pearson Addission Wesley.San Fransisco
James,dkk.1970.Studying Teaching .Prentice Hall.USA
Klen ,Stephan B.1991.Learning Principles and Application Second Edition McGraw –Hill .Singapore
Novita .2009.Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD TerhadapHasil Belajar Siswa pada Materi Pokok Gerak Lurus di kelas
X SMAN 1 Hamparan Perak T.P
20019/2010.Skripsi.FMIPA,UNIMED.Medan
Slavin ,R.Cooperative Learning.Nusa Media:Bandung
Sudjana, N. 2002 .Metode Statistik.Penerbit Tarsito.Bandung
