THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) TYPE USING MACROMEDIA FLASH
TOWARD PHYSICS OUTCOMES OF STUDENTS SMAN 1 SIDIKALANG A.Y. 2015/2016
By :
Reni Setian Br Karo ID.Number 4121121023
Bilingual Physics Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN MEDAN
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Reni Setian Br Karo was born in Binjai on September 19th 1994. Mother’s name is Miah, S.Pd.SD and Father ‘s name is Tambah Karo-Karo. The writer is the third of three children in family. In 2000, the writer entered SDN 024767
Binjai and graduated in 2006. In 2006 the writer continue her education in SMPN
8 Binjai and graduated in 2009. In 2009, the writer continue her education to
SMAN 3 Binjai and graduated 2012. In 2012, the writer was accepted in
Bilingual Physics Education Study Program in Department of Physics, Faculty of
iii
THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF GROUP
INVESTIGATION (GI) TYPE USING MACROMEDIA FLASH was taught using Cooperative Learning Model Of Group Investigation (GI) Type Using Macromedia Flash SMAN 1 Sidikalang in subject matter of dynamic electricity class X Academic Year 2015/2016, to know the physics outcomes of the students was taught using conventional learning model, and to know the effect in physics outcomes of the students was taught using cooperative learning model of group investigation (GI) Type using macromedia flash.
The type of research is quasi experimental research. The population were all the student of class X, consist of 11 classes. Two class is selected random cluster sampling as sample. One class as experimental class was tretment by Cooperative Learning Model Through Group Investigation type using macromedia flash and another class as control class was treatment by conventional learning. Instrument that used as learning result test, in the form of multiple choice questions as the amount is twenty items that contains of five options and already valid.
The result of quantitative analysis of pretest mean experimental class and control class homogeneous and the posttest mean is experimental class is higher than in control class. Data of result research is taken from normally distribution and homogeneous. To test the hypothesis, used the t-test with significant level α 0.05. If tcount > ttable that means Ha is accepted and Ho is rejected thus the are significant difference between the physics outcomes of student in experimental classs and in the control class. Because of the difference it means there are significant effect of Cooperative Learning Model through Group Investigation type using macromedia flash toward physics outcomes of students in higher outcomes than conventional learning.
iv
PREFACE
The writer say the praise and gratitude to God almighty, for all the grace and blessing that provide health and wisdom to the writer that this study can be
completed properly in accordance with the planned time. This thesis entitled “The Effect Of Cooperative Learning Model Of Group Investigation (GI) Type Using
Macromedia Flash toward Physics Outcomes Of Students SMAN 1 Sidikalang” is arranged to acquire the scholar degree of Physics Education, Faculty of
Mathematics and Natural Sciences, State University of Medan.
In this occasion, the researcher would like to Mr. Dr. Eidi Sihombing, M.S.
as thesis supervisor who has guide and give suggestion to researcher from
beginning until complete this research. Thanks a lot for Mr. Prof. Dr. Nurdin
Bukit, M.Si, Mrs Dr. Mariati P. Simanjuntak, M.Si and Mr. Dr. Makmur Sirait,
M.Si who give critics and suggestion to the researcher from the planning of
research until the finish of thesis writing. Thanks a lot also for Mr. Dr.
Rahmatsyah M.Si as academic supervisor and thanks to Mr. Muhammad Kadri,
M.Sc and Mr. Drs. Junhut Hutahaean, M.Si as the content validator in this
research. Appreciation was also presented to the Headmaster of SMAN 1
Sidikalang Mr. Drs. Alben Sianturi, thanks to Mrs Melfa Mariyati, S.Pd as the
physics teacher also to the entire staff in SMAN 1 Sidikalang who also helped the
researcher during did the research.
The researcher would like to say thanks especially to my beloved parents
Tambah Karo-Karo and Miah, S.Pd for all pray, love, support sincerely for the
researcher. Thanks to all the researcher friends in physics bilingual 2012.
Medan, June 2016
Author
v
Table of Contents
Page
Legalization Sheet i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Prepace iv
Table of Content v
Figures List ix
Tables List x
Appendix List xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Problem Identification 6
1.3. Problem Limitation 7
1.4. Problem Formulation 7
1.5. Research Objective 7
1.6. Research Benefits 8
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1. Theoretical Framework 9
2.1.1. Learning Definition 9
2.1.2. Learning Outcomes 9
vi
2.1.4. Cooperative Learning Model 12
2.1.4.1. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning 13
2.1.4.2. Goals of Cooperative Learning Model 14
2.1.4.3. Syntax For Cooperative Learning Model 14
2.1.4.4. Theoretical and Empirical Support Cooperative Learning 15
2.1.4.4.1. The Concept of Democratic Classrooms 15
2.1.4.4.2. Intergroup Relations 16
2.1.4.4.3. Experiential Learning 16
2.1.4.5. Advantages And Disadvantages of Cooperative Learning 16
2.1.4.6. Various Cooperative Learning Model 19
2.1.4.7. Cooperative Learning Group Investigation (GI) 21
2.1.5. Conventional Learning 22
2.1.6. Learning Media 23
2.1.6.1. Objectives of Media 24
2.1.6.2. Macromedia Flash 24
2.1.6.3. Function of Media 25
2.2.Literature of Subject Matter 26
2.2.1. Dynamics Electricity 26
2.2.1.1.Electric Current 26
2.2.1.1.1. Measuring the Electric Current 28
2.2.1.1.2. Switch and Fuse 29
2.2.1.2. Potential Difference 30
2.2.1.3. Ohm’s Law 32
2.2.1.4. Resistance and Resistancity 34
2.2.1.4.1. Resistor Types 34
2.2.1.4.1.1. Fixed resistor 34
2.2.1.4.1.2. Variable Resistor 35
2.2.1.5. Series Circuit 38
2.2.1.6. Paralel Circuit 39
vii
2.2.1.8. Kirchhoff’s Second Law 42
2.2.1.9. Electrical Power and Energy 44
2.3. Preceding Research 47
2.4. Conceptual Framework 49
2.5. Research Hypothesis 51
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 52
3.1. Place and Time of Research 52
3.2. Population and Sample of Research 52
3.2.1. Population of Research 52
3.2.2. Sample of Research 52
3.3. Variable of Research 52
3.4. Type and Research Design 53
3.4.1. Type of Research 53
3.4.2. Design of Research 53
3.5. Instrument of Research 54
3.5.1. Cognitive Instrument 54
3.5.2. Content Validity 54
3.5.3. Prediction Validity 55
3.5.4. Reliability of Test 56
3.5.5. Level of Difficulty Test 56
3.5.6. Test Distinguishing Features 57
3.6. Techniques of Collecting Data (Procedure of Research) 57
3.7. Techniques Of Data Analysis 60
3.7.1. Determine Data 60
3.7.2. Determine Deviation Standard 60
3.7.3. Data Conditional Test 61
3.7.3.1. Normality Test 61
3.7.3.2. Homogeneity Test 61
viii
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 64
4.1 Research Result 64
4.1.1. Description of Research Data 64
4.1.1.1. Research Data of Pretest and Posttest 64
4.1.1.1.1. Pretest Data 64
4.1.1.1.2. Posttest Data 66
4.1.2 Testing Analysis of Data 67
4.1.2.1 Normality Test 67
4.1.2.2 Homogeneity Test of Data 67
4.1.3 Hypothesis Test of Research 68
4.2. Discussion 69
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 74
5.1. Conclusion 74
5.2. Suggestion 74
ix
FIGURES LIST
Page
Figure 2.1. Goals of Cooperative Learning 14
Figure 2.2. Electric Circuit 26
Figure 2.3. The flow of positive electric charge 26
Figure 2.4 Charges in motion through an area A 27
Figure 2.5. Ammeter in series circuit 29
Figure 2.6. Ammeters 29
Figure 2.7. Switch type 30
Figure 2.8. Electric charge in some objects 30
Figure 2.9. The potential difference 31
Figure 2.10. the way of string up voltmeter 32
Figure 2.11. Voltmeter scale 32
Figure 2.12. Graph of the relationship between I with V 33
Figure 2.13. Using the multimeter 35
Figure 2.14. Installing voltmeter and ammeter in the circuit 35
Figure 2.15. Series circuit 39
Figure 2.16. Parallel Circuit 40
Figure 2.17. Kirchooff’s first law 41
Figure 2.18. A generalised circuit the application of Kirchhoff ’ s laws 43
Figure 3.1. Scheme of research procedure 59
Figure 4.1. diagram of pretest data 65
x
TABLES LIST
Page
Table 2.1. Syntax of cooperative learning model 15
Table 2.2. Categories of Cooperative Learning Models 19
Table 2.3. Comparison of Four Approaches to Cooperative Learning 20
Table 2.4. Phase of Group Investigation Type 22
Table 2.5. Color coding for resistor 34
Table 2.6. The factors that impact resistance 36
Table 2.7. Resistivity and Temperature coefficient of resistivity 38
Table 2.8. Preceding Relevant Research 47
Table 3.1. Design of research of two group 53
Table 3.2. Spesification of Instrument Test 54
Table 4.1. Data of Pretest in Experiment Class and Control Class 64
Table 4.2 Summary of The Calculation of The T – Test 65
Table 4.3. Data of posttest in Experiment Class and Control Class 66
Table 4.4. Result of research the pretest and postest data 67
Tabel 4.5. Normality Test of Experiment Class and Control Class 67
Tabel 4.6. Summary Results of Homogeneity test 68
v
APPENDIX LIST
Appendix 1. Lesson Plan 1 78
Appendix 2. Lesson Plan 2 88
Appendix 3. Lesson Plan 3 98
Appendix 4. Student Worksheet 1 110
Appendix 5. Student Worksheet 2 117
Appendix 6. Student Worksheet 3 124
Appendix 7. Specification Table Of Instrument 131
Appendix 8. Instrument Assessment 141
Appendix 9. Instrument Of Content Validation 146
Appendix 10. Calculation of Test Validity and Test Reliability 147
Appendix 11. Calculation of Difficulty Level Result Physics Learning 150
Appendix 12. Calculation of Distinguishing Test 151
Appendix 13. Pretest and Posttest Data 153
Appendix 14. The Calculation Of Data 155
Appendix 15. Normality-Test 158
Appendix 16. Homogenity Test 162
Appendix 17. Hypothesis Test 165
Appendix 18. List of critical value for liliefors 170
Appendix 19. Table of Normality-test 171
Appendix 20. Table of F-distribution 172
Appendix 21. List of percentil value of t-distribution 174
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1.Background
According to Hasan (2011) education is an effort in prepare human resource
have expertise and skill appropriate the demand of nation building, in which the
quality of nation is strongly influenced by educational factor. Embodiment of
quality people become one of responsibility in education, especially in prepare
students to be subject of act showing the superiority, creative, independent, and
profesional in each area. Effort increasing educational quality can be achieved
optimally, if done development and improvement to the educational component
itself.
Education basically is one of effort to provide knowledge, insight, skill, and
specific expertise to individuals in order to explore and develop their talent and
personality, through education human try to develop itself face every change
occur caused advancement of science and technology. Therefore, the issue of
education need receive attention and serious treatment relate to the quantity,
quality, and relevance.
Increasing the quality of education has been done by the government among
others by complementary facilities and infrastructure, increasing quality of
teachers, and improvement of curiculum that emphasize developing aspects that
lead to improvement and development of life skills are realized through
competence achievement of student to adaptable, and succeed in the future.
The aims of education program for in the field of Mathematics and Sciences
to prepare professionals of education who have knowledge foundation, technical
skills, and professional values and attitudes in planning, conducting, managing
instructional activities, developing learning resources, evaluating learning
achievements, and solving problems pertaining to the profession in the field in the
context of subject teaching, 1) this perspective views teacher not as a storeroom of facts and ideas, but as “a source and creator of knowledge and skills needed for
2
focused on the substance, which is what should be learned by the pre-service
teachers and the best way to encourage them to learn it (Sinaga , 2014).
According to Mondolang (2013) learning physics education secondary
school (SMP), often get notes as the learning that has value learning outcomes are
low compared to the value of the results of the other study subjects.
Presently, the teaching approach in the physics lessons in secondary school
classrooms seems boring and uninteresting. This is particularly true when one
considers that the conventional method of chalk, board and talk are predominantly
in vogue. Notwithstanding the call for the use of modern approach in the form of
constructivist view, many teachers still use the conventional approach (Akanwa,
2014). Physics teacher still apply conventional learning characterised with relying
on the use of the expository method is explaining, giving examples, asking
questions, and giving assignments classically. Learning model like this shows that
teacher still be central in learning, while students are less empowered ability to
optimally so that the activity and participation of students is less meaning. At least
varied learning methods are used and using media has not been optimal become a
problem that can be ignored. Using media less attractive cause students get bored
and not interested to follow learning activities in earnest.
Speaking about the study results, it can not be separated from the process of
learning that occurs in self-learners. The learning process is less according to the
student characteristics and the characteristics of the matter will result in less than
the maximum outcomes that can even result in understanding the wrong concepts
(misconception). According to Slameto (2010 : 1) suggests that the overall
process of education in schools, learning is the most basic activity, which means
that the success or failure of many educational achievement depends on how the
learning process experienced by students as learners.
Teaching experience taught in SMAN 1 Sidikalang there are some problems
in the process of student learning: 1) physics outcomes of student in class X
SMAN 1 Sidikalang on physics still low, 2) learning implementation still use the
conventional model, 3) using media is not optimal, 4) the learning process is still
3
learning process in the class, 6) students assumed physics is passive lesson and
difficult to leaned, 7) students are less socialize in learning process, 8) teachers
explain the matter to students in one way, 9) students are not interested with
physics lesson, 10) physics tend to solved with mathematical approach.
Besides, based on the result of interview with one of physics teacher at
SMAN 1 Sidikalang, she revealed that difficulty in learning is difficult to motivate and encourage the students’ interest to do the physics exercises. Then, the students less motivated and less active in asking questions during the physics learning process. The students aren’t motivated to learn in group, they felt difficult to solve the physics problem and the students often memorize
mathematical formula of physics than try to understand the concepts and
principles of physics.
Based on the problems above, some students SMAN 1 Sidikalang is passive
in learning process and other is quite, although not understand yet subject learned
by teacher, cause learning environment is not interesting and communicative,its
cause grade of some students is low. The physics average mare obtained by
students didn’t reach the minimum completeness criteria (MCC) known as KKM.
It is necessary to use a learning model so that students outcome can be
improved, especially in the teaching of dynamic electricity. There is a possibility
of less precise application of learning model as a factor in the lack of ability of
students to solve problem of dynamic electricity.
According to Hayat (2008) that the assessment should be an integral part of
the learning process (a part of instruction) and must be understood as an activity
to streamline the learning process. Therefore models of learning and assessment
techniques regarded as the components are very important in improving student
learning outcomes.
The Application of learning is teacher-centered, hampering efforts students
to optimize the outcomes in physics. Resolve the problems, need media or
visuallization method that is easy to understand students such as using a computer
with a projector, posters and other media. The application of conventional
4
particularly physics, so the variety and creativity is required in learning model,
especially active learning.
According to Yasemin (2013) active learning is the leading one among new
education strategies. Problem based learning, inquiry based learning, project
based learning and cooperative learning models rank as part of active learning.
One of active learning strategies is cooperative learning model. Cooperative
learning is one of widely encountered models in the areas of theory, research and
education applications besides it calls much attention to teachers and researchers.
During the past decade, a new approach called “Cooperative Learning” seemed to attract a lot of attention and became popular. Even though most college
courses are taught in a competitive or individualistic manner, more is understood
about the effectiveness of cooperative learning than almost any other facet of
education. Cooperative Learning strategies demand a facilitator that transfers
greater responsibility for knowledge acquisition, organization and application
from the teacher to the student (Marzban and Fatemeh, 2014).
Cooperative learning has been defined as" small groups of learners working
together as a team to solve a problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common
goal". The cooperative learning model requires student cooperation and
interdependence in its task, goal, and reward structures. The idea is that lessons
are created in such a way that students must cooperate in order to achieve their
learning objectives.
Cooperative learning activities also offer the opportunity to develop and
practice strategies for learning and using language. Especially social-affective
strategies such as asking for help and cooperation. Cooperative learning can
provide a very pleasant learning atmosphere (Marzban and Fatemeh, 2014).
In recent years, studies involving cooperative learning, one kind of
student-centered approach have emerged as an internationally important area of social
science research among researchers. Many studies have been conducted in
different settings of education, using different kinds of cooperative learning
techniques, such as Learning Together (LT), Jigsaw Grouping,
5
Division (STAD), and Team Accelerated Instruction (TAI).
Cooperative learning can be defined as a learning model in which students
help each other’s learning on academic topics by forming small groups, self
-confidence of individuals grow, their skills for communication develop, power of
solving problem and critical thinking rises and they actively attend the education
period.
Cooperative learning model has many type, among them group investigation
(GI). In group investigation, students are actively engaged in planning and
carrying out investigations and presenting their findings to peers and others. Then,
the classroom should be organized to reflect the larger social order and students
should be required to work in democratic problem-solving groups to study
academic and real life problems using democratic processes and scientific
methods of inquiry. Selection of the group investigation type in physics learning
is good and has great potential in the success because it is easy in practice. This
prompted the researchers choose group investigation type cooperative learning. In
addition, by applying the group investigation type in physics lessons in class will
create an atmosphere of active learning, communicating, sharing, giving and
receiving, this situation can increase understanding of the matter and increase the
interaction among the students, it will increase student learning outcomes,
particularly physics.
Cooperative learning model type group investigation had been examined by
Giawa (2014) the result of research focus on student’s learning outcomes of his research in SMA N 1 Sei Rampah on dynamic electricity topic of physics. That
were obtained: pre-test mean value of experiment class was 3,190 and 4,575 for
control class and then post-test mean value of the experiment class was 6,138 and
6
Based on previous thesis above used of group investigation method in
learning process. The success of cooperative learning offers a proven, it is one of
the great choices models of teaching to improving learning outcomes of students
in dynamic electricity matter. Besides, to increase the physics outcomes in
dynamic electricity matter, the research use the cooperative learning model type
group investigation using macromedia flash, because previously research lack of
using media.
Using the appropriate media can make more meaningful learning. Physics
matter tend to be filled with mathematical calculations if poured in a conventional
way will make the students easily bored. Learning use media such as macromedia
flash can facilitate teachers to demonstrate lessons. For example, animation,
experiments can be done as originally. Besides experiments that take a long time
can be shortened so learning activities more effective.
Therefore delivery of matter is not only in text form tent to abstract and
monotonous but more real and can be applicated. Based on the above background,
the author try to do research with the cooperative learning model group
investigation (GI) to improving student learning outcomes, and the author take the
title: The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model of Group Investigation Type
Using Macromedia Flash toward Physics Outcomes of Students SMAN 1 Sidikalang AY 2015/2016.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on background above, we can identify of problems to be studied :
1. Physics outcomes of student in class X SMAN 1 Sidikalang on physics
still low
2. Learning implementation still use the conventional model in physics
3. Using media is not optimal
4. The learning process is still teacher-centered
5. The students are less active in asking during learning process in the class
6. Students assumed physics is passive lesson and difficult to learned
7
8. Teachers explain the matter to students in one way
9. Students are not interested with physics lesson,
10.Physics tend to solved with mathematical approach
1.3. Problem Limitation
The extent of problems and lack of expertise, time and cost, the writer need
to make limitation of problems. Several limitation of problems are :
1. Learning model used is learning model group investigation type using
macromedia flash toward physics outcomes of students
2. Learning outcomes of students in class X SMAN 1 Sidikalang in even
semester academic year 2015/2016
3. This research will be conducted on students of class X SMAN 1
Sidikalang in even semester academic year 2015/2016
4. The subject matter is dynamic electricity of class X SMAN 1 Sidikalang in
even semester academic year 2015/2016
1.4. Problem Formulation
To explain the problems in study, formulation of problems are :
1. How the physics outcomes students taught using cooperative learning
model group investigation type using macromedia flash in dynamic
electricity ?
2. How the physics outcomes students taught using conventional learning
model in dynamic electricity ?
3. Is there the effect of physics outcomes of students taught using
cooperative learning model group investigation type using macromedia
flash in dynamic electricity
1.5. Research Objective
The objectives of the study are as follow:
1. To know the physics outcomes of the student was taught using cooperative
learning model group investigation type using macromedia flash in
8
2. To know the physics outcomes of student was taught using conventional
learning model in the material dynamic electricity
3. To know the effect in physics outcomes of the students was taught using
cooperative learning model type group investigation using macromedia
flash in dynamic electricity
1.6. Research Benefits
The expected benefits of this study are: 1. For students
Result of study is very benefit for students in order to create the positive
behaviors such as working together in solve the problems, active in physical
activities so increasing physics learning outcomes of students.
2. For physics teacher
Provide reference for teachers in choose learning model in order to
improving the quality of learning process in increasing student achievement
especially in physics.
3. For high school institution
Result of study can provide a valuable contribution to improving the
quality of education. Principal is expexted to facilitate teacher to be able to
implement cooperative learning model group investigation type, so teachers
are not only use conventional model continuously.
4. For university student
As information matter for university student who conduct study using
cooperative learning model in improving the quality of the learning process in
education.
5. For researcher
Researcher will know more about problems that appear in learning and
teaching activities, especially in cooperative learning model and as
74
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusion
Based on the research with cooperative learning model grouo investigation
type using macromedia flash for classroom experiments and the conventional
model for the control class, then from the analysis data and hypothesis testing
concluded as follow :
First, the average value of the students outcomes was learned by the
cooperative learning model group investigation type using macromedia flash is
43.57 before given treatment and 76.65 after given treatment. It shows that there
is increase the outcomes students
Second, the average value of the students outcomes was learned by the
conventional learning model is 45.59 before given treatment and 70.40 after given
treatment. It shows that there is increase the outcomes students
Third, there are effect between the sudents physics outcomes that was
learned by cooperative learning model group investigation type using macromedia
flash. It showed based on the posttest data of cooperative learning model group
investigation type using macromedia flash higher than the conventional learning.
5.2. Suggestion
Based on the the research result and discussion before, researcher gives
suggestion that to the next researcher who want to do research using cooperative
learning model group investigation type sugggested to be more guide the sudents
to be more active while work in group by ask the students in group what students
already to do in group so the students will be motivated to be active in solving the
group students worksheet and investigation.
The next researcher suggested before start to learning process, first should
have explained to the students how the implement the cooperative learning model
group investigation type so when learning process the students already know what
75 Problems of College Physics, 9th Edition, Mc Graw Hills, United States of America.
Erlisnawati, (2014), Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Group Investigation untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar IPS Siswa Kelas IV SD Negeri 56 Pekanbaru, Skripsi, FKIP, Universitas Riau, Riau.
Fraenkel, J.R., Norman W., and Helen H., (2012), How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 8th edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Giawa, A.K., (2014), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD Berbasis Peta Konsep Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa Pada Materi Pokok Listrik Dinamis Kelas X Semester Ii Sma N 1 Sei Rampah T.P 2013/2014, Thesis, FMIPA, Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan
Gitonga, D., (2016), http://www.ehow.com/facts_5751850_definition macromedia flash.html (accessed April 2016).
Glenco, (2005), Physics Princples and Problems, The Mc Graw-Hill Companies, United States of America.
Hasan, E., (2011), Penggunaan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe (Student Teams Achievement Divisions) Berbantuan Animasi Flash Untuk Meningkatkan Keaktifan Dan Prestasi Belajar Fisika Pada Pokok Bahasan Kalor Siswa Kelas X6 Di Sma Al Islam 1 Surakarta Tahun Ajaran 2009/2010, Thesis, FKIP, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta.
Halliday, R., and Walker., (2008), Fundamental of Physics. 7th edition. Pdf, Http://www.fisica.net/ebooks/HallidayResnickWalker_Fundamentals_of_ Physics_7thed-solutions.pdf
76
SMP Negeri 19 Palembang, Skripsi, FMIPA, Universitas Sriwijaya, Palembang.
Hayat, B., (2008), Principles and Strategies Assessment in the Classroom, Central Educational Assessment, Research and Development, Department of
Kanginan, M., (2007), Fisika SMA Kelas X Jilid 1, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Krathwohl, David R., (2014), A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview. Http://www.unco.edu/cetl/sir/stating_outcome/document/lrathwohl.pdf
Li, M. P., and Lam, B. H., (2013). Cooperative Learning. The Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Mondolang, A.H., (2013), Effect of Cooperative Learning Model and Assessment Technique towards the Physics Learning Result by Controlling Student’s
Nurachmandani, S., (2009), Fisika Untuk SMA/MA Kelas X, Grahadi, Jakarta.
Perdani, R.P., (2015), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Group Investigation terhadap Kemampuan Analisis Siswa : Studi Eksperimen Mata Pelajaran Ekonomi pada Peserta Didik Kelas X Sma Negeri 7 Bandung, Skripsi, FE, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung.
Robertson, and Christopher R., (2008), Fundamental Electrical and Electronic Principles (3rdedition), Elseiver, USA.
77
Setiawan, D., et all., (2008), Komputer dan Media Pembelajaran, Universitas Terbuka, Jakarta.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Sudjana, (2005), Metode Statistik, Tarsito, Bandung.
Suryani, N., and Leo A., (2012), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Ombak, Yogyakarta.
Thobroni, (2015), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Ar-Ruzz Media, Yogyakarta.
Tran, Van Dat., (2014), The Effects of Cooperative Learning on the Academic Achievement and Knowledge Retention, International Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 3, No. 2.
Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif dan Progresif, Prenada Media, Jakarta.
Trianto, (2013), Model Pembelajarn Terpadu.: Konsep, Strategi, dan Implementasinya dalam KTSP, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Wahida, N., (2015), The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model of Group Investigation Type using Animation in Increasing Physics Learning Outcomes of Student MAN 3 Medan A.Y. 2014/2015, Thesis, Fmipa, Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
