THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN DISCOVERY BASED LEARNING AND PROBLE M B ASED L EARNI NG MODEL TH AT US I NG
MACROMEDIA FLASH TO STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ANDMOTIVATIO N IN ELECT ROLYT E AND
NON ELECTROLYTE SOLUTION TOPIC
By :
Lady OfinaBoangmanalu NIM 4123332008
Bilingual Chemistry Education Program
SKRIPSI
Submitted in Fulfillment of The Requirements for The Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATIC AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
ii
THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN DISCOVERY BASED LEARNING AND PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL THAT USING
MACROMEDIA FLASH TO STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT AND MOTIVATION IN ELECTROLYTE AND NON
ELECTROLYTE SOLUTION TOPIC
Lady Ofina Boangmanalu (NIM 4123332008) ABSTRACT
The main objective in this research is to know the influence the collaboration model between problem based learning with discovery based learning to student’s achievement and to analyze the correlation between student’s achievement and student’s motivation. This research was conducted in SMAN 1 Sidikalang on the second semester. The samples are two classes student from X grade, one class as class experiment I and one class as class ecperiment II. The research instrument that used in thisn research consist of test instrument (evaluation test) and non test instrument (questionaire sheet). Based on validity, there are 22 questions are valid and rcount for reliability test is high 0,78. Pretest is given to both class experiment to know the prior knowledge of students. From the research result, the average posttest in experimental class I I is 79±6,747 with gain 0,655 (medium), while for the average of posttest in experimental class II is 74±9,135 with gain 0,562 (medium). The pretest and posttest data of this research are already normally distributed and homogen. Based on the hypothesis test gotten the tcount > ttable or 3,321 > 1,671, it means that Ha is accepted and Ho is rejected. So, it can be concluded that student learning achievement that taught by collaboration between discovery based learning and problem based learning using macromedia flash is higher than the student’s achievement that taught by problem based learning using macromedia flash in learning electrolyte and non electrolyte solution. The correlation between student’s and motivation in class experiement I rxy(count) = 0,443. It is higer than the rxy(table) for 30 sample 0,361. The coefficient correlation is categorized as enough correlation.
iv
PREFACE
First and foremost, all praise be to God, the Almighty for His blessing and
guidance for giving inspiration, health, knowledge, and the strength to see that
this skripsi becomes a reality.
This skripsi, “The Collaboration between Discovery based Learning and Problem based Learning Model that Using Macromedia Flash to Student’s Achievement and Motivation in Electrolyte and Non Electrolyte Solution Topic”
has been arranged to obtain the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in Department of
Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences (FMIPA), State
University of Medan (UNIMED).
Author would like to express gratitude to all who have helped in one way
or another in the planning, brainstorming, writing, and editing of this skripsi. In
this opportunity, the author would like to express the great appreciation to Dr. Iis
Siti Jahro, as the thesis supervisor and also as a coordinator of bilingual program,
Prof. Dr. Retno Dwi Suyanti, M.Si, Dr. Ajat Sudrajat, M.Si, and also Dr.Marham
Sitorus, M.Si as the thesis examiners and also to Prof. Drs. Manihar Situmorang,
M.Sc., Ph.D., as the author’s academic supervisor, for their valuable time spent in
giving guidances, advices, motivations, comments and suggestions during the
process of finishing this skripsi. The author also says thanks to Dr. Asrin Lubis,
M.Pd, as the dean Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, State University
of Medan, then Nora Susanty, S.Si, Apt., M.Sc, as the secretary of Bilingual
Program. Thanks to Sir Syamsuddin as bilingual staff for his helping in
administrative assistance and kindness. And also to the head master of SMAN 1
Sidikalang namely Drs. Alben Sianturi for helping.
The author’s gratitude also to all of students to my mini research students in SMAN 1 Matauli Pandan, the student in second year grade X of SMAN 1
Sidikalang who have rendered their time to be the subjects of the learning process
v
The deepest and special gratitude, appreciation and love to my wonderful
parents daddy S.Boangmanalu and mommy Ida Sherliani Purba for their countless
love, supports, prays, motivation and careness and also to my beloved siblings,
Febiola Boangmanalu and Rain Kihara Boangmanalu for supports.
Sincerely a sweet utterance give to my very lovable persons Esra
Sitanggang, Taruli Lumbantobing, Elisa Lumbantobing, and Febryanty Silitonga
for every time that spent, every warm hug, for everything.
Special thanks also goes to my friends Ernita, Fany, Evi, Novel, and all
CESP students Arif, Biuti, Descey, Elvi, Fridayuni, Haryati, Ivana, Lestari, Lisna,
Marianna, Meliana, Nova, Nursaadah, Rimbun, Rina, Rolina, Seruni, Suditro,
Wita, Taufik, that have accompany me during the research. Regards also sent to
my Boanerges SG, Eklesia SG, Sulung SG, UP FMIPA 2016 coordination, PPLT
Matauli Sibolga 2015, Kosopers member, and everyone who cannot be mentioned
his/her name for their support and friendship during my academic years.
Finally, the author hopes this skripsi would be useful for everyone who
like to explore more about the learning model and media to learn electrolyte and
non electrolyte solution topic notably and chemistry generally. May God bless us.
Medan, June 2016
The author,
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Legalization Page i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Preface iv
Table of Contents vi
List of Figures ix
List of Table x
List of Appendices xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Problem Identification 5
1.3. Problem Limitation 5
1.4. Problem Statement 5
1.5. Research Objective 6
1.6. Research Advantage 6
1.7. Operational Definition 6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Learning 8
2.2. Learning Model 9
2.2.1. Discovery based Learning Model 9
2.2.2. Problem based Learning Model 12
2.3. Learning Media 14
2.3.1. Using Media in Problem based Learning 15
2.4. Learning Achievement 16
2.4.1. Assessing The Achievements of Learning 16
2.5. Student Motivation 17
vii
2.7. Relevant Research 19
2.8. Conceptual Framework 20
2.9. Hypothesis 21 CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS 3.1. Place and Time of Research 22
3.2. Population and Sample of Research 22
3.3. Research Variable 22 3.4. Data Collecting Techniques 23
3.5. Research Instrument 23
3.5.1. Content Validity Test 24
3.5.2. Validity of Item Test 25
3.5.3. Reliability of Test 25
3.5.4. Difficulty Index 26 3.5.5. Discrimination Index 26
3.5.6. Destructor 27
3.6. Research Design 27
3.7. Research Procedure 28
3.8. Data Analysis Technique 30 3.8.1. Normality Test 30
3.8.2. Homogeneity Test 30
3.8.3. Normalized Gain 31
3.8.4. Hypothesis Test 31 3.8.5. Linearity Test 32 3.8.6. Correlation Test 32
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Analysis of Research Instrument 34
4.1.1. Analysis of Instrument Test 35
4.1.1.1. Content Validity Test 35
viii
4.1.1.3. Reliability Test 36
4.1.1.4. Difficulty Index 36
4.1.1.5. Discriminating Index 36
4.1.1.6. Destructor 37
4.1.2. Analysis of Instrument Non Test 37
4.2. Research Result of Pretest 37
4.2.1. Normality and Homogeneity Test of Pretest 39
4.3. Research Result and Discussion of Student’s Achievement 40
4.3.1. Research Result of Student’s Achievement 40
4.3.1.1. Normality and Homogeneity Test of Posttest 41
4.3.1.2. Normality and Homogeneity Test of Gain 42
4.3.1.3. Hypothesis Test 43
4.3.2. Research Discussion of Student’s Achievement 44
4.4. Research Result of Student Motivation 45 4.5. Correlation between Student’s Achievement and Motivation 46
4.5.1. Linearity Test 46
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion 48
5.2 Suggestion 49
x
LIST OF TABLE
Page
Table 3.1. Lattice of Instrument Test based on Bloom Taxonomy 24
Table 3.2. The Design of Research 28
Table 4.1. Student’s Achievement on Pretest 38 Table 4.2. Normality Test of Pretest 39
Tabel 4.3. Homogeneity Test of Pretest 39
Table 4.4. Student’s Achievement on Posttest 40 Tabel 4.5. Normalized Gain in Class Experiment I and II 41
Table 4.6. Normality Test of Posttest 41
Tabel 4.7. Homogeneity Test of Posttest 42
Table 4.8. Normality Test of Gain 42
Table 4.9. Homogeneity Test of Gain 43
Tabel 4.10. Hypothesis Test 43
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1. The Multimedia-oriented Problem based Learning
curriculum Model 15
Figure 3.1. Flow chart of reseach procedure through difeerent
Model using macromeddia flash 29
Figure 4.1. Diagram Result of Pretest 38
xi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix 1 Syllabus 55
Appendix 2 Lesson Plan 59
Appendix 3 Instrument Test (Not Validated Yet) 72
Appendix 4 Content Validity of Instrument Test 80
Appendix 5 Instrument Test (Had been Valid) 96
Appendix 6 Angket Motivasi Siswa terhadap Pelajaran Larutan
Elektrolit dan Non Elektrolit 101
Appendix 7 Lembar Kerja Siswa (Macromedia Flash) 105
Appendix 8 Lembar Kerja Siswa (Eksperimen) 107
Appendix 9 Key Answer 110
Appendix 10 Calculation of Validity Test 113
Appendic 11 Validity of Instrument Test 115
Appendix 12 Calculation of Reliability Test 116
Appendix 13 Reliability of Instrument Test 118
Appendix 14 Calculation of Difficulty Level Test 119
Appendix 15 Difficulty Level of Instrument Test 120
Appendix 16 Calculation of Discrimination Index 121
Appendix 17 Discrimination Index of Instrument Test 122
Appendix 18 Calculation of Destructor 123
Appendix 19 Destructor of Instrument Test 124
Appendix 20 Data Tabulation of Student’s Achievement and
Motivation 125
Appendix 21 Calculation of Sandard Deviation 128
xii
Appendix 23 Homogeneity Test 136
Appendix 24 Normalized Gain 139
Appendix 25 Hypothesis Test 142
Appendix 26 Linearity Test 144
Appendix 27 Correlation Test 146
Appendix 28 Table of Chi Squared Distribution Critical Value (X2) 148
Appendix 29 Values of F Distribution 149
Appendix 30 Values of t Distribution (Table t) 152
Appendix 31 Values of R-Product Moment 153
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
The learning process occurs throughout the ages. Starting from a child is
born, the learning process is always happens. The learning process done through
formal education and informal education. The informal education that we all
know, happen in the natural environment and social environment. The formal
education happen in school and the teacher get the main part. The role of teacher
is often formal and ongoing, carried out at a school or other place of formal
education. Since teachers can affect how students perceive the course materials, it
has been found that teachers who showed enthusiasm towards the course
materials and students can affect a positive learning experience towards the
course materials. On teacher/course evaluations, Daren Olson was found that
teachers who have a positive disposition towards the course content tend to
transfer their passion to receptive students. And Bob Sullo (2011) states that these
teachers do not teach by rote but attempt to find new invigoration for the course
materials on a daily basis. Teachers that exhibit enthusiasm can lead to students
who are more likely to be engaged, interested, energetic, and curious about
learning the subject matter. Recent research has found a correlation between
teacher enthusiasm and students' intrinsic motivation to learn and vitality in the
classroom (Patrick, et.al, 2000).
Currently, the concentration of this research is the high school students where
included in the group of teenagers who are experiencing puberty. Many of the
current graduates are found to be lacking in creativity, communications skills,
analytical and critical thinking, and problem-solving skills (Teo and Wong, 2000;
Tan, 2000). These problems affect to the lack achievement of learning outcomes
obtained.
During implementing the Integrated Field Experience Program (PPLT) in
2015 at Senior High School District 1 Plus Matauli Pandan, researchers found a
2
chemistry. Among them is the lack of student interest, lack of motivation, lack of
media used by teachers to support learning, teaching model that was not relevant
to the content being taught, the tight schedule of student activities outside
chemistry learning activities.
There are two issues related to chemicals that can not be separated, i.e
chemistry as the products (chemistry knowledge in the form of facts, concepts,
principles, laws, and theories) and chemistry as the process of scientific work
(E. Mulyasa, 2006: 132-133). One of the efort that used to improve learning and
student learning outcomes is through the model and instructional media. Since these traditional approaches “do not encourage students to question what they have learnt or to associate with previously acquired knowledge” (Teo & Wong,
2000), problem-based learning (PBL) is seen as an innovative measure to encourage students to “learn how to learn” via “real-life” problems (Boud & Feletti, 1999). Boud and Felleti claim that a PBL approach produces more
motivated students with a deeper subject understanding, encourages independent
and collaborative learning, develops higher order cognitive skills as well as a range
of transferable skills including problem solving, group working, critical analysis
and communication. We would like to extend this contention further by using
multimedia technologies to create a multimedia-oriented project. By doing so, we
hope to further develop the students' ability to become creative and critical
thinkers and analysers, as well as problem-solvers, within this multimedia-
mediated problem-based learning (PBL) environment. This learning mode is
constructivist in approach whereby the students participate actively in their own
learning process and construct their own knowledge (Jonassen, Peck & Wilson,
1999). Research approach is to use the principles of PBL to develop
problem-solving case studies. According to the reasearch of Frida, et al. (2014) that
conducted in SMA Al-Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung class X, the average value of
pretest in control class is 16.33 and the average value of pretest in experiment class
3
creative thinking skill is Nurmaulana (2011). It shows that the implementation of problem solving learning model proved effectively increase students’ creative thinking skill in soil pollution material.
Researcher intends to collaborate two models in this study to make an
innovative learning to achieve maximum value of students learning. By using
macromedia flash as the media, researchers will know the value of student's
achievement as the result between Learning based Problem (PBL) collaborated
with Discovery-based Learning model. Bruner argues that "Practice in
discovering for oneself teaches one to acquire information in a way that makes
that information more readily viable in problem solving" (Bruner, 1961).
According to a meta-analytic review conducted by Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich, and
Tenenbaum (2011), a discovery learning task can range from implicit pattern
detection, to the elicitation of explanations and working through manuals to
conducting simulations. Discovery learning can occur whenever the student is not
provided with an exact answer but rather the materials in order to find the answer
themselves. Research has been conducted over years to prove the unfavorable
effects of Discovery Learning, specifically with beginning learners. "Cognitive
load theory suggests that the free exploration of a highly complex environment
may generate a heavy working memory load that is detrimental to learning"
(Kirschner, Sweller, Clark, 2006). Beginning learners do not have the necessary
skills to integrate the new information with information they have learned in the
past. Sweller reported that a better alternative to Discovery Learning was Guided
Instruction. Guided Instruction produced more immediate recall of facts than
unguided approaches along with longer term transfer and problem-solving skills
(Kirschner, Sweller, Clark, 2006). According to the research of Bambang
Supriyanto (2014), that conducted in SDN Tanggul Wetan Kecamatan Tanggul Kabupaten Jember class VIB, students’ achievement raise 30,30% from cycle I to cycle II and the result is optimal. The result showed that Discovery Learning model was effective to improve student’s achievement. Furthermore, the research of Putrayasa, et al. (2014), that conducted in fifth grade elementary school students
4
students’ achievement in conventional class is 70,3 while in discovery learning class is 74,7. There was a difference science outcomes between groups of students
who follow their lesson using discovery learning with conventional learning. In
addition, found different effect in high motivated learning and low motivated
learning (Arinawati, E., et al., 2014). Arina conduct the research in SDN in all
Gugus Permadi Kutowinangun Kebumen that consists of 6 SDN. Anava result shows
that high motivated student has the marginal column average 84,56 while the low
motivated student has the marginal column 62,44. It means that high motivated
student has the higher concept comprehension level. Sadirman (2012: 84) stated
that learning activities is important to own the motivation.
The supporter for a learning is media. Media helps to increase students
curiosity. The more curoisity the more motivation they have. One study that has
examined the relationship between multimedia and student learning and attitudes
was conducted by Butler and Mautz (1996). Butler and Mautz did find an
interaction between the effects of the multimedia presentation and the student’s
preferred class representation style (i.e., whether the student was considered a “verbal” or “imaginal” learner). Butler and Mautz concluded, based on a one class period experiment, that students considered multimedia presentations
entertaining.
Hence the advantages of learning using these models, the researchers intend
to compare stundent's achievement whom taught by the Model Problem-based
Learning that use Macromedia Flash collaborated with Discovery-based Learning
Model to the student's achievement whom taught only by using Model
Problem-based Learning and Macromedia Flash. Moreover, the study of
electrolyte and non electrolyte solution that related with daily life through those
model and media can help student to solve and improve their learning motivation. Student’s motivation in each experimental class will be measured to see how the effectiveness of the models that have collaborated. Thus the title of the research is
“The Collaboration between Discovery based Learning and Problem based
5
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the background described, problems can be identified as follows:
1.The lack of student motivation in learning chemistry.
2.The lack of applicating the instructional media to support the classroom
learning process.
3.Students assume that the chemistry is an abstrack lesson because only
taught theoretically.
4.The lack of students participation in learning process.
5.Learning models that are less varied as required by the subject matter.
1.3. Problem Limitation
Based on the scope of problems identification above, this research will be
limited as follows:
1.Arranging the teaching materials in the form of syllaby and lesson plan
systematically.
2.Preparing the discussion material that taught by Problem based Learning,
Discovery based Learning model, and the macromedia flash.
3.Instrument test will be reviewed and validated by the lecturer from the
Department of Chemistry Education.
4.Distributing questionnaires to measure students' motivation.
1.4. Problem Statement
Problem statement can be formulated as:
1.Does the collaboration model between problem based learning and
discovery based learning with macromedia flash gives higher result to the student’s achievement than the student’s achievement taught using problem based learning with macromedia flash?
2.How does the correlation between student’s motivation and student’s
6
1.5. Research Objective
Based on the problem statements above, the objectives of this research are:
1.Knowing whether the student’s achievement whom taught through the
collaboration model between problem based learning with discovery based
learning is higher than the student’s achievement whom taught through
problem based learning in learning electrolyte and non electrolyte solution.
2.To analyze the correlation between student’s motivation and student’s
learning achievement in experiment class I.
1.6. Research Advantage
The advantages of this reasearch are:
1.Provide the broad outlines of innovative learning to the science teachers,
especially in using the collaboration model between PBL with Discovery
Learning in learning process.
2.Provide the learning reference that can be used in high school on the
material electrolyte and non electrolyte solution.
3.Help students to learn through active learning to foster their interest and
motivation to learn.
4.Provide input to the next researcher to conduct the same experiment later.
1.7. Operational Definition
The operational definition in this research consist of:
1.Problem based learning
Barrows (1996) defines the Problem-Based Learning Model as student
centered learning done in small student groups, ideally 6-10 people.
Teachers guide the students rather than teach the problem forms as the
basis for the organized focus of the group, and stimulates learning. The
problem is a vehicle for the development of problem solving skills. It
stimulates the cognitive process. So new knowledge is obtained through
7
2.Discovery based learning
Discovery learning is a technique of inquiry-based learning and is
considered a constructivist based approach to education. In discovery
learning, participants learn to recognize a problem, characterize what a
solution would look like, search for relevant information, develop a
solution strategy, and execute the chosen strategy (Faye Borthick and
Donald Jones, 2000)
3.Motivation
Motivation has been classified as being intrinsic, extrinsic, or achievement
driven. According to Newstead and Hoskins (1999), intrinsically motivated
students enjoy a challenge, want to master the subject, are curious and want
to learn; whilst extrinsically motivated students are concerned with the
grades they get, external rewards and whether they will gain approval from
others.
4.Learning Achievement
Student learning achievement measures the amount of academic content a
student learns in a determined amount of time. Each grade level has
learning goals or instructional standards that educators are required to
teach.
5.Media
Media education in general, is a teaching and learning tool. Multimedia
application design offers new insights into the learning process of the
designer and forces him or her to represent information and knowledge in a
48
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the result of research that obtained from the result of data
analysis. It can be stated some conclusion as follows:
1. The collaboration between discovery based learning and problem based
learning using macromedia flash gives higher result to the student’s
achievement than the student’s achievement that taught through problem
based learning using macromedia flash.
2. There is medium correlation between student’s achievement and
motivation to the student that taught through the collaboration between
discovery based learning and problem based learning using macromedia
49
5.2 Suggestion
Based on the conclusion above, there are some suggestions that have to be
stated in order to make teaching and learning process in chemistry become
effective and efficient as follows:
1. It is suggested that the chemistry teacher to develop the model
collaboration between discovery based learning and problem based learning to increase student’s achievement.
2. It is suggested to next researcher could improve the better innovative
learning media to improve the student’s learning achievement.
50
REFERENCES
Agnew, P. W., Kellerman, A. S. & Meyer, J., (1996), Multimedia in the Classroom, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R., (2011), Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?, Journal Of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18.
Allen, D., (1998), Bringing Problem-Based Learning to the Introductory Biology
Classroom. In A. McNeal & C. D’Avanzo (Eds.), Student Active Science. (Ch. 15). Available:
http://www.saunderscollege.com/lifesci/studact/chapters/ch15.html
Aman Sharma. Learning: Meaning, Nature, Types and Theories of Learning Psychology Discussion
http://www.psychologydiscussion.net/learning/learning-meaning-nature-types-and-theories-of-learning/652 January 11, 2016 10:26
Arifin., (2003), The conditions of Learning, Third Edition,. Florida State University: Rinehart and Winston. Inc., Canada.
Arikunto, S., (2006), Dasar – Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Arinawati, E., et al., (2014), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Discovery Learning terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Ditinjau dari Motivasi Belajar, Jurnal, PGSD FKIP Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta
Barr, R.J., dan Tagg, J., 1995, “From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for
Undergraduate Education: Change, hlm.13-25.
Barrows, Howard S., (1996), "Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview". New Directions for Teaching and Learning (68):3–12.
Bicknell-Holmes, T. & Hoffman, P.S. (2000). "Elicit, Engage, Experience, and Explore: Discovery Learning in Library Instruction." Reference Services Review. 28(4), pp. 313-322.
51
Borthick, A. F. & Jones, D. R. (2000). "The Motivation for Collaborative Discovery Learning Online and its Application in an Information Systems Assurance Course." Issues in Accounting Education. 15 (2), p.2. Boud, D. & Feletti, G., (1999), The Challenge of Problem-Based Learning, (2nd
Ed.), London: Kogan Page.
Bruner, J. S., (1961), "The act of discovery". Harvard Educational Review 31(1): 21–32.
Butler, J. B., and R. D. Mautz, Jr. 1996. Multimedia Presentations and Learning: A Laboratory Experiment. Issues in Accounting Education 11(2) 259-280.
Castronova, J. (2002). "Discovery Learning for the 21st Century: What is it and How Does it Compare to Traditional Learning in Effectiveness in the 21st Century?" Action Research Exchange 1(1).
D.C. McClelland, (1970), The Achieving Society, Free Press, New York.
D.E. Lavin, (1967), The Prediction of Academic Performance, Wiley, New York.
Daniel L. Schacter, Daniel T. Gilbert, Daniel M. Wegner (2011) [2009]. Psychology, 2nd edition. Worth Publishers. p. 264. ISBN
978-1-4292-3719-2.
Delisle, R., (1997), How to Use Problem-Based Learning in the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
"Discovery Learning (Bruner)." Cited on January 18th 2016 from
Learning-Theories.com: Knowledge Base and Webliography. Website:
http://www.learning-theories.com/discovery-learning-bruner.html.
Donnelly, R. and Marian Fitzmaurice, Collaborative Project-based Learning and Problem-based Learning in Higher Education: A consideration of tutor and student role in learner-focused strategies, Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland
Duch, B. (Ed.) (1995, January) What is Problem-Based Learning? In ABOUT TEACHING: A Newsletter of the Center for Teaching Effectiveness, 47. Available:http://www.udel.edu/pbl/cte/jan95-what.html)
52
Frida, et al., (2014), Efektifitas Problem Solving pada Materi Larutan
Elektrolit-Nonelektrolit dalam Meningkatkan Keterampilan Berpikir Luwes,
Jurnal, Bandar Lampung: Universitas Lampung
Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E., (2004), "Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn?", Educational Psychology Review 16 (3): 235–266.
Hoffman, B., & Ritchie, D., (1997, March), Using Multimedia to Overcome the Problems with Problem Based Learning. Instructional Science, 25(2), 97-115.
Istiana, G. A. et al., (2015), Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Discovery Learning untuk Meningkatkan Aktivitas dan Prestasi Belajar Pokok Bahasan Larutan Penyangga pada Siswa Kelas XI IPA Semester II SMA Negeri 1 Ngemplak Tahun Pelajaran 2013/2014, Jurnal, FKIP Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Surakarta
J.E. Brophy and T.L. Good, (1970), J. Ed. Psych., 61, 365.
J. Hartley and F. Hogarth, (1971), Br. J. Ed. Psych., 41, 171.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., and Wilson, B. G., (1999), Learning With
Technology: A Constructivist Perspective, New Jersey: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E., (2006), "Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching". Educational Psychologist 41(2): 75–86.
Lloyd-Jones, G., Margeston, D., dan Bligh, J., 1998, “Problem based Learning: A Coat of many Colours: Medical Education, 32, hlm.492-494.
Neo, M & Neo, T. K., (2000), Multimedia Learning: Using multimedia as a platform for instruction and learning in higher education. Paper presented at the Multimedia University International Symposium on Information and Communication Technologies 2000 (M2USIC’2000),
October 5-6, 2000, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia.
Ng, K. H. & Komiya, R., (2000), Introduction of Intelligent Interface to Virtual Learning Environment. Paper presented at the Multimedia University International Symposium on Information and Communication Technologies 2000 (M2USIC’2000), October 5-6, 2000, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia.
53
N.J. Entwistle, J.B. Nisbet, D.M. Entwistle and M.D. Cowell, (1971), Br. J. Ed.Psych., 41, 258.
Patrick, B.C., Hisley, J. and Kempler, T., (2000), “What’s Everybody so Excited about?”. The Effects of Teacher Enthusiasm on Student Instrinsic Motivation and
Vitality”, The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol.68, No.3, pp.217-236
Putrayasa, et al., (2014), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Discovery Learning dan Minat Belajar terhadap Hasil Belajar IPA Siswa, Jurnal Mimbar PGSD Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha Jurusan PGSD, 2(1)
Saab, N., van Joolingen, W., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2005). "Communication in Collaborative Discovery Learning." British Journal of Educational Psychology. 75, pp. 604.
Sardiman. (2012). Interaksi & Motivasi Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT Raja ` Grafindo Persada.
S. E. Newstead and S. Hoskins, (1999), A Handbook for teaching and learning in higher education (H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, and S Marshall, eds.), Chapter 6, Kogan Page.
Silitonga, P. M., (2011), Metode Penelitian Pendidikan, FMIPA, Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Sudijono, Anas, 1998, Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta
Sudjana, Nana, 2005, Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Remaja Rosda Karya, Bandung.
Sugiyanto, (2008), Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Surakarta: Panitia Sertifikasi Guru Rayon 13
Sukardi, (2004), Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan, Kompetensi dan Prakteknya, Jakarta, Bumi Aksara
Supriyanto, B., (2014), Penerapan Discovery Learning untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa Kelas VIB Mata Pelajaran Matematika Pokok Bahasan Keliling dan Luas Lingkaran di SDN Tanggul Wetan 02 Kecamatan Tanggul Kabupaten Jember, Jurnal, Pancaran, 3 (2), hal 165-174
54
Based Learning: Education Across Disciplines, December 4-7, 2000, Singapore.
Teo, R. & Wong, A., (2000), Does Problem Based Learning Create A Better Student: A Refelection? Paper presented at the 2nd Asia Pacific Conference on Problem –Based Learning: Education Across Disciplines, December 4-7, 2000, Singapore.
Vaughan, T., (1998), Multimedia: Making it Work (4th Ed.), Berkeley, CA: Osborne/McGraw-Hill.
Wang, H., (1998, August 8), Research Associate, CCMB-USC. On AERA listserve on-line Discussion.
Yew, Elaine H. J.; Schmidt, Henk G., (2011), "What students learn in problem-based learning: A process analysis". Instructional Science
