AN EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ON 10TH CLASS AT SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL SUBDISTRICT 3 OF MEDAN WITH KIRK PATRICK APPROACH.

(1)

ABSTRACT

Rabukit, An Evaluation Of Mathematics Instructional Program On 10 Th Class At Senior High School Subdistrict 3 Of Medan With Kirk Patrick Approach. Thesis: Post graduate, State University ofMedan. 2010.

The purpose of this research is to detennine: ( 1) the higher mastery level of the teacher's pedagogy competence will make the leaner's; reaction, learning, behavior, and results be higher too, (2) the higher mastery level of the teacher's professional competence will make the leaner's; reaction, learning, behavior, and results be higher too, (3) the higher mastery level of pedagogy competence and professional competence of the teachers will make the learner's; reaction, learning, behavior, and results joinly be higher too.

This research population are teachers of the Senior High school at Subdistrict 3 of Medan, as many as 14 teachers in mathematics subjects and the leaners are utilized as population in this research are 258 learners. The instruments are used to collect data by using the Likert scale questionnaire.

The result of this research shows that professional competence is the only one that gives significant influence on reaction with canonical load 0.95 and behavior 0.59.

As the implication, in the process of learning or learning development is not solely dependent on the teacher and the learning process in schools, but also depends on the learners. Humans are not driven by forces within, and also not "beaten" by environmental stimuli, but it is a continuous interaction and feedback from persona] determination and involvement of parents to educate their children.

(2)

AN EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICS

INSTRUCTIONAL PROGR.At"l ON 10

111

CLASS

AT SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL SUBDISTRICT 3 OF

MEDAN WITH KIRK PATRICKAPPROACH

TESIS

Oleh:

RABUKIT

NIM: 0811 8813 0065

Diajukan Guna Memenuhi Salah Satu Syarat

Untuk Memperoleh Gelar Magister Pendidlkan

Program Studi Administrasi Pendidikan

PRO GRAl\'1 STUDI ADMINISTRASI PENDIDIKAN

PROGRAM PASCA SARJANA

UNIVERSJTAS NEGERI MEDAN

MEDAN

(3)

THESIS

AN EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICS

INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ON 10

To

CLASS

AT SENIOR IDGH SCHOOL SUBDISTRICT 3 OF

MEDAN WITH KIRK PATRICK APPROACH

P repared and submitted by: RABUKIT

SRN: 0811 8813 0065

Has been maintained

in

Front of Thesis Examination Committee On September,

20Th 2010

And Expressed Past Meet

One of Terms For Getting Master Of Education Educational Administration Study Program

Medan, September, 20111 2010 Approve:

Advisory Team

First Advisor

~

>

Prof. Dr. H.fyaiful Sagala. M.Pd

NIP : 1958 0509 198611 1 001

The Chief of Educational Administration Study Program

~--

-Know:

Prof. Dr. H.Syaiful Sagala. M.Pd

NIP: 1958 050919861 1 1 001

Second advisor

Dr. Sumarno, M.Pd

(4)

Approval Of Examiner Council

Educational Master Thesis Examination

No Name Signature

1. Prof. Dr. H. Syaiful Sagala. M.Pd

NIP: 195805Q9 198611 1001

~

---First Advisor

2. Dr. Sumamo, M.Pd

NIP: 19630320 199102 1 001 Second advisor

3. Prof. Dr. Belferik Manullang NIP: 19471015 1974121 001 Examiner

4.

Dr.

Sukarman Purba. M.Pd

NIP:

19620523 198703 1 002 Examiner

5. Dr. Zulkifli Matondang, M.Si NIP: 19680713 199303 1 003 Examiner

Student

Nam~ : Rabukit

Student Register Number : 081188130065

(5)

PREFACE

Alhamdulillah writer gratefully turning to Allah SWT, which has

to place science and bestow mercy and guidance so that writer can complete

the course in the Program Administrative Studies Graduate School of

Education, State University of Medan to the completion of this thesis.

This thesis entitled: " An Evaluation Of Mathematics fustructional

Program On 10 Th C lass At Senior High School Subdistrict 3 Of Medan With Kirk Patrick Approach. On this occasion, the writer expresses gratitude to Prof. Dr. H. Syaiful Sagala, M.Pd and Dr. Sumarno, M. Pd. as

advisors who have given guidance and suggestions to the writer since the

beginning of the research until the completion of this thesis. Thanks are also

extended to the staffs of Educational Administration Postgraduate State

University of Medan which also have given some suggestions for this thesis

development.

Especially thankgivings to my beloved wife and children: Aifa Attaillah, Chairun Arrasyid and Fadli Alghani. Thanks advance to my dear

brother Safrijal kind, honest and intelligent who has a lot of help and give

input and suggestions as well, so the writer continue to be motivated to complete the writing of this thesis.

Thanks goes to the Chief of the Senior High School at Subdistrict 3

of Medan and members who have helped and given pennission to the writer

to make a research in their respective schools.

The writer has been working as closely as possible in the completion of this thesis, but the writer realizes there are still many

weaknesses in terms of both content and grammar, the writer needs some

(6)

suggestions and constructive criticism from the readers for the sake of the

thesis perfection. Presumably the contents of this thesis is useful to enrich

educational science.

-

z

?

m

Medan, September 201 0

Writer

Rabukit

Jl:::

SRl<: 081 188!30065

(7)

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION 74

A. Overview of Research Subject______________________ _________ 74

B. Description of Research Result__________________ ___________ 74

1. Pedagogy Competence_______________________________________ 74

2. Professional Competence___________________________________ 76

3. Reaction ____ ---_________________ --- 7 8 4. Learning___________ ______________________________ ______ __ ___________ 80

5. Behavior____ _______________ ___________________________________ ____ __ 83 86

C. Assumption Test_________________ ____________________________________ 87

1. Normality Test___ ___________________________________________ ___ __ 88

(10)

2. Linearity Relation... 89

3. MuJticolinearity_________________________________________________ 90 D. Hypothesis Testing... 91

I. The First to the Fourth Hypothesis... 91

2. Hypothesis Testing by Manova... 93

3. The Fifth to Eighth Hypothesis... 96

4. Hypothesis Testing by Manova ... 97

5. The Ninth Hypothesis ... tOO E. Discussion ... 113

F. Limitation ... l17 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION ... 118

A. CONCLUSION ... l18 B. IMPLICATION ... l19 C. SUGGESTION ... ll9 REFERENCES ... 121

(11)

LIST OF TABLES

[image:11.543.40.472.129.580.2]

Page

TABLE 1.1. The Average Score of The National Examination on

The High School ofNorth Sumatera Province_________________ 6

TABLE 2. 1. The Grid Instruments ofProfessional Competence ... 63

TABEL 3. 1. The Grid Instruments of.Lem:ter's Response ···----·- --- 64

TABLE 4.1. The Frequency Distribution of Pedagogy Competence Score ... ···---·-·-···-·-·---... . 75

TABLE 4.2. The Frequency Distribution of Professional Competence Score... 77

TABLE 4.3. TheFrequency Distribution of Reaction Score... 79

TABLE 4.4. The Frequency Distribution of Learning Score... 81

TABLE 4.5. The Frequency Distribution of Behavior Score... 84

TABLE 4.6. The Frequency Distribution of Scores Result... 86

TABLE 4. 7. The Normality Result Test... 88

TABLE 4.8. The Summary of Linearity Result Test... 90

TABLE 4.9. The Multicolinearity Result Test... 91

TABLE 4.10. The Levene Equal ofVariance Result Test... 92

TABLE 4.11. 1lle Multivariate Result Test of Pedagogy Competence... 94

TABLE 4.12. The Tests of Between-Subjects Effects... 95

T ABEL 4.13. The Result of Levene's Test ofEquality··-·---·-·---·--··--· 97

TABLE 4.14. The Result of Multivariate Test of Professional Competence... 98

TABEL 4.15. The Test of Between-Subject Effects... 99

TABLE 4.16. The Normality Test Result ... 102

(12)

[image:12.543.36.471.47.595.2]

TABLE 4.17. The Multicolinearity Test Result ... 107

TABLE 4.18. The Significance Test Result of Multivariate

cannonical correlation analysis ... 108

TABEL 4.19. The Measurement Of Overall Fit Model On Canonical

Correlation Analysis ... 109

TABLE 4.20. The Eigenvalues and cannonical correlation ... 109

TABLE 4.21. The Cannonical Weight oflndependent Variable ... llO

TABEL 4.22. The Cannonical Weight of Dependent Variable ... lll

-

z

?

m

(13)

LIST OF FIGURES

[image:13.550.39.472.110.615.2]

Page

Figure 3.1. The Model analyzed by Manova analysis... 68

Figure 3 .2. The research analyzed by Cannonical Correlation... 69

Figure 4.1. The Frequency Distribution of Pedagogy Competence Score... 75

Figure 4.2. The Frequency Distribution of Professional Competence Score __ ... __ . ______ . __ .... ____ .. __ .. _._ ... __ . ______ ... _ ... _ ... ________ . ____ . 7 8 Figure 4 .3. The Frequency Distribution of Reaction Score .... _ ... ____ ... _ ... ______ ... _ 80 F igure 4.4. The Frequency D istribution of Learning Score_. ______ ... __ ... __ .. _ .. _____ ._. ____ ._. ___ ._ ... _._._ ... _______ .. ____ ... _. 82 Figure 4.5. The Frequency Distribution ·ofBehavior Score ______ . _ ... __ .. __ .. ___ .. __ ... _______ . _ .. _____ ... _ ... _. ___ ________ .. _. _. _.. 85

Figure 4.6. The Frequency Distribution of Result Score... 87

Figure 4.7. The Test result of Reaction Heteroscadasticity ... 103

Figure 4.8. The Test result of Learning Heteroscadasticity ... 104

Figure 4.9. The Test result of Behavior Heteroscadasticity ... 105

Figure 4.10. The Test result of Result Heteroscadasticity ... 105

Figure 4.11. The Cannonical Correlation Model ... 112

(14)

LIST OF APPENDIXES

Page

Appendix 1. Angket Penelitian... 129

Appendix 2. Instruments Data of Each Variables... 155

Appendix 3

Appendix 4.

Appendix 5.

Appendix 6.

Appendix 7.

Appendix 8.

Appendix 9.

R e~ch Data 200

Normality Test That is Processed by SPSS Output

Nonnality on Reaction, Learning, Behavior and Result 204

SPSS Output of Normality Tesy ... 205

SPSS Output Through Heteroscadasticity... ... 208

SPSS Output ofMulticolinearity Test... 212

SPSS Output of the Independent Variable Test

Through Man ova ... ... ... ... 2 13

SPSS Output of Cannonical Analysis... 216

(15)

A. Problem Background

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCfiON

The education problems in Indonesia are still around the low quality

in; relevance, efficiency, productivity and effectiveness. The reason is; (1) the educator availability and educational staffs who are not yet sufficient in

quantity and quality, (2) educator walfare that is not adequate yet, (3) laking

infrastructure and has not been optimally utilized, (4) education cost is not

yet sufficient to support learning quality. The one of problem root is the

educational staffs in low quality (Renstra Depdiknas 2005 dalam Gultom.

2007).

The Indonesia education quality is so poor. It is evidenced among others by UNESCO data (2000) in Human Development Index ranking

(Human Development Index), which is the composition of the ranking

educational attainme n~ health, and income per head is shown that Indonesia

human development index decline. Among 174 countries around the world

Indonesia ranks number is 102 tb (1996), 99th ( 1997), to-105 tb (1998) and 109 tb ( 1999). The Survey of Political and Economic Risk Consultants (PERC) the quality of education in Indonesia is in ranked 12 tb of 12 countries in Asia. Indonesia's position is under Vietnamese. The data which is reported by the World Economic Forum in Sweden (2000), Indonesia has

a low competitiveness, which ranked is only 37th of 57 countries surveyed

in the world. And still According to a survey in the same institution in

Indonesia only as a predicate as the follower rather than technology leaders

(16)

from 53 countries worldwide http: //www.idonbiu.com /2009 /10 /latar-belakang-masalab-pendidikan.btml.

The Indonesia low education quality is also shown by the research and Development Center data (2003) that is out of 146.052 elementary schools in Indonesia turned out to be only eight schools that are received by world recognition in the category of The Primary Years Programme (PYP). From 20.918 high schools in Indonesia are a lso only eight schools that are received by world recognition in the category of The Middle Years Programme (MYP) and the 8.036 High School are turned out to be only seven schools that are received by world recognition in the category of the Diploma Programme (DP).

The education quality in Indonesia is considered by many opinions are stilllow.lt can be seen from the several indicators as follows:

Schools graduates or universities that are not ready to enter the working world cause lacking of competence. According to economic analysts Berry Priyono skills that is supplied and obtained from education institutions is not sufficient to be used independently, because what is taught in educational institutions is often j ust focused on theory therefore learners are less innovative and creative;

Indonesia Human Development Index (HDI) is still low and it's rankin! is the position 111 th of 117 lh countries in 2004 and 111 th of 117

countries in 2005 but Vietnam's ranking is 1101h.

The report of International Educational Achievement (lEA) that the Indonesia's leaners reading ability of elementary school is in the ranking position of 38th out of 39 countries surveyed;

Academic quality among countries through the Programme for International Leaner Assessment (PW ASA) in 2003 shows that 41 countries surveyed for the field of Natural Sciences, Indonesia is ranked 38fjJ. While for the field of mathematics and reading ability is ranked 39th when compared with South Korea, the ranked is so far, to the field of Natural Science the ranked is 87th; , reading rating and Mathematics is the ranked 7!h;

(17)

5. World Competitiveness Year book Report 2000, Indonesia's competitiveness in the Human Resources is located at the position 46

tb of 4 7lh countries surveyed;

6. Indonesia Higher Education position which are considered as favorite, such as the University of Indonesia and Gadjah Mada University are in the position 61 tb and 68 lh of 77th Higher Education in Asia (Asia

Week, 2000); and

7. Indonesia is lagging in the field of Science and Technology compared to countries like Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand http://arisonOO l.wordpress.com I 2009/0 111 2/guru-dan-tantangan-globalisasi.

The poor quality indicators in Indonesia's education are over more concerned with the data of Youth Ministry and Sport which states that as many as 37.06 percent of the Indonesia youth just graduated of elementary school. From 217 million Indonesia population are estimated to total 97 million young people. It is assumed to be young people aged 15-35 years. Under these conditions is difficult to expect them to become social change agents, as expected by widely society (Media Indonesia, October 4, 2009).

Regarding to teacher's condition as curriculum implementers, Fatah (Harlan Umum Pikiran Rakyat, edisi 15 Desember 2005) gives the following p icture: most teachers in Indonesia are not worth teaching. For elementary school teachers who are not eligible to teach as many as 605.217 people (49.3%), Junior High School 167.643 people (35.94'/o), High School 75 684

people (32.911/o), Vocational High School 63.961 people (43,3%). With regard to the teachers suitability to teach, 15% of teachers do not t ~h in accordance to their expertise. Consequently there is no compatibility between expertise with the material taught The impact of this fact is impacted on the education quality.

The serious problem improves the Indonesia education quality is the low education quality at various education levels both fonnal and informal

(18)

education. The low education quality may hinder the human resources

provision who has the expertise and skills to meet the nation development in

various fields. The cause of Indonesia education low quality among others is

a matter of effectiveness, efficiency and standardization of teaching. It is

still education general problem in Indonesia The special problems in

education are: (1) low physical facilities, (2) the low quality of teachers (3)

the low welfare of teachers, (4) the low leaner achievement, (5) The low distribution of educational opportunities, ( 6) The low educational relevance

needs, and (7) the high cost of education http: //uses. wordpress.com

lkualitas-pendidikan-di-indonesia.

One indicator that makes the education quality poor especially in

mathematics is the reports result of Third International Mathematics and Science Research {TIMSS) which explains that the average score in eight

levels of mathematics leaners {level II Junior High School in Indonesia) is

far below the average of mathematics learner for International $COres and mathematics learners ranking is 34lh of 38 lh countries (Suharta, 2004:2). This occurs as the mathematics lesson is often considered difficult to

understand and most hated.

Mathematics has a characteristic and an abstract object The abstract nature causes many leaners have difficulties in mathematics. Those

difficulties are evident from the average of mathematics score that are much lower than other subjects. As national and International mathematics

achievement has not been encouraging yet.

As disclosed by Sujono (1988:81) in his book:" ... apparently a lot

of people are afraid of mathematics and as far as possible try to avoid the

numbers. " In line with that Ruseffendi (200 1: 15) also fmds that: "The lesson mathematics and science for children is general an unwelcome lesson if it is

(19)

not the most hated." They consider mathematics is a difficult lesson, unpleasant and frightening.

In this case, Andi Hakim also syas "there is a mathematics teacher who used it to punish the naughty pupil. More woe again, Part of people do not give mathematics as a positive appreciation. " The assumption and this condition has not changed up to this time. (Http: I I www.JS.Brinkster.com /Smun21 /mainshowfull.asp?id:83).

Even the notion of mathematics subject is difficult seems to be reinforced increasingly by the emergence of a new regulation from the government in recent years which is established that the mathematics is one determinant of whether or not graduate leaners in a graduate education level that is decided by the government through the Minister of Education (Permendiknas Nomor. 22 Talmo 2006).

Despite of effort from all aspects pertaining to mathematics education has been carried 9Ut continuously, but here and there, there are still barriers and the lack or failure. The most alarming thing that could instantly see the quaJity of education in mathematics who has not achieved the expected result. The average value of mathematics leaners at school is ve.ry low and still far lower than the other subjects value (Kamasih in Sianipar, 200 l :2).

According to Subennan and Winatapura (1993:120) state that mathematics is not knowledge that could be perfect solitude for himself, but mathematics is primarily to assist people in understanding and mastering the social issues, economy and nature. Then Hutauruk. (2000: 1) states that mathematics is the one of the top intellectual glory. Besides, as science, mathematics also provides the language, process and mathematics calculation theory that fonn the basis for engineering design. Even the rise

(20)

and fall of a country depends on the mathematics field progress. Besides,

mathematics also has a very dominant role in educating leaners by the way

to develop the ability to think logically, critically, analytically and

systematically as proposed by several mathematics (Soedjadi, 1999:7).

Table 1.1. The Average Score of 1be National Examination on The High School ofNorth Sumatera Province.

A _ _ _ , _ _

lila

...

-

y-

,...,

=-~

..._

' - ~

-

~

.._

..,..

...

~

--

...

Sodolov

I _~

-

--

'.6' 6.'111

"'

1JIO .

,,

...,

4..11 I.Z9 U6 6.16 . . ~CJ 5.12

- --

'·"

7,34 7,11 7,96 1,al

,,

J

-

--~ 1,11 I,IJ 7 . ~ l,)t I, 'Ill .

-

6.'J4 6,93

....

"·"

. f/if

..,,

J

-..

-

"'

,_.,.

w

,

..

. ~)li 6,10

Soun:e:Education Service of North Sumatc:ra Provmce

The low mathematics learning result is caused of two factors: ( 1) leaner's internal factors that include failure or psycho-physical inability such

as: intellectual I leaner low intelligence, emotional instability and attitude also means vision and disorders hearing, (2) External factors such as leaner

self: situation and environmental conditions that do not support, low family

economy, teacher's conditions and learning tools are in low quality, the

naughty friends and the bad building location ( Sh~ 2003 : 183).

According to Muljani in Pasaribu (2005:5) suggests that based on

the research in various countries show the factors that affect the educational

result quality significantly include teachers, books, laboratories and

management.

While Rezeki (2004:2) argues, cause of the gradute being low

quality or does not meet expectations viz: (1) lack of good-quality inputs, (2)

teachers' personal and Jess precise, (3) material is not or less suitable, ( 4)

[image:20.537.36.473.124.602.2]

(21)

teaching method and evaluation system are inadequate, (5) lack of

supporting infrastructure and (6) lack of appropriate administrative systems.

Hamalik (2001 :57) there are five major components that play a role of learning process on human elements (leaners' consisting, teachers and

other staff such as laboratory personnel), materials (including: books,

blackboard and chalk. photography, slides and films, audio and audio tapes),

facilities and equipment (consisting of classrooms, audio-visual equipment is

also a computer) and procedures (included: scheduling and informat ion

delivery method, practices, research, exams and so on) that influence each

other in achievement learning goals. Of all these factors the teachers play in

role.

There are three functions that could be played by teachers in teaching those are as a designer, manager, as an education evaluator,

teachers' ability in understanding the function of the curriculum, principles

o f teaching and learning (Suyanto, 1999: 15). There are still many teachers

who have not mastered in learning process (Wardiman, 1996:23).

There are several factors that cause of teacher does not master in

learning process. Most teachers have difficulties in:

(1 )learning plan include: formulating a comprehensive Specific Learning Objectives, Speciftc Learning O bjectives formulated referring to the General Learning Objectives and Outlines of the Principal Learning, considering the time and provided by the Principal Lines of Learning with materials and so forth; (2) implementation of learning include: providing a tool/medium of learning, to encourage leaners to think differently, encouraging

multiditection and so PPIN-Batan Digital

Library.

(online),

(http://j iptumm/gdl/sl I 2009/trisnawat

The competencies are required by the teachers to implement learning (specific mathematics subjects) viz; pedagogy competence,

professional competence, personality competence, and social competence.

(22)

There is line with the Law of the Republic of Indonesia number 14 year 2005 about the teachers and lecturers, demanding the improvement of education quality in line with the increased of teacher's professionalism. Professional teachers must have academic qualification, competence, and educators' certification.

According to Alma (2008: 17) a professional teacher should have the capacity or a set of competence capibilities and so should professional performance. The ability must be owned by the teachers in fulfilling their primary duty are:

(l)pedagogy competence to manage learning. That includes concept of teaching and the readiness that is shown by knowledge mastery and teaching skills, (2) the competence of personality, namely the ability of stable, mature, dignified, role model and morality, (3) professional competence is the ability of mastering subject which matter is widely and depth, as well as teaching method, appropriate techniques and understood by leaners, easy to grasp, does not cause difficulties and doubts, (4) social competence is teachers' ability to communicate and interact effectively with in-out school environment.

According to Kamars (2005:25) management also consists of being meaning that there are a series of sequential events. If the tasks in organization could be done by the people in accordance with the order then it means that management has functioned.

Experts have different opinions and many kinds of management functions. Other experts include the functions such as ( 1) planning, (2) budgetting, (3) staffing, (4) organizing, (5), actuating, (6) superving, (7) controlling, (8), evaluating and (9) Communicating. But out of nine functions by several experts agree that the function of: ( 1) planning, (2) actuating I executing and (3) controlling /evaluating are the main functions that must not be left (Kamars, 2005:26).

(23)

Controlling is determination whether the plan has been completed

as the performance assessment result by applying the measure of inspection

therefore the performance is in accordance with the plan (in Kamars Terry,

2005:86). Furthermore, Robinson, 2000:443) traditional approach oversees

the actual result of the comparison with the standard. After doing the

activities the leader has to evaluate them to carried out as input for more

detailed monitorings and evaluations tailored to the atmosphere.

This research aims to detennine mathematics learning quality with

Kirkpatrick approach.

B. P roblem Identifiaation

From the result of various theories which are mentioned above

about learning there are many things which contribute to learning. Between

theory and other theories are different in terms of affecting leaner learning.

There is a number of factors that is contributed to learn. These differences

led to a number of questions of following variables: (I) how extent is the

school principal's role to motivate teachers to obtain learning quality?; (2)

how is the influence on teacher's competence on learning quality?; (3) how

are the influence on facilities and infrastructure on learning quality?; (4) how

is the climate role on learning quality?; (5) how is the school committee's

role to provide and support the teachers in implementing the learning? and

(6) how is the influence on self-control on learning quality?.

Evaluation is development of controlling and controlling is one

function of management. In implementation of controlling has to use instrument. Then it's data must be analyzed. Analysis activity is an

evaluation. Evaluation in administration conteld and educational

management is program evalution therefore learning must be evaluated.

(24)

One main activity at school is learning program to determine

whether it has been implemented correctly in accordance with the competencies possessed by the teachers and need to be evaluated. Teacher

competencies are (1 ) pedagogy competence, (2) professional competence, (3) personality competence and ( 4) social competence.

Because of competence field largemeot and researcher limitation,

this research is limited to pedagogy competence and professional

competence.

C. Problem Limitation

This evaluation research is focused on teacher's competence of mathematics teacher of class X with the Kirkpatrick model approach which

examine teacher's pedagogy competence and professional competence.

D. Problem Formulation

The problem will be investigated in this research. can be formulated

as follows:

1. How extensive does pedagogy competence influence reaction?

2. How extensive does pedagogy competence influence learning?

3. How extensive does pedagogy competence influence behavior?

4. How extensive does pedagogy competence influence result?

5. How extensive does professional competence influence reaction? 6. How extensive does professionalcompetence influence learning?

7. How extensive does professional competence influence behavior?

8. How extensive does professional competence influence result?

(25)

E. Research Objective

This research aim is going to detect:

I. The Influence of pedagogy competence on reaction, learning, behavior,

and result.

2. The Influence of professional competence on reaction, learning,

behavior, and result.

F. Research Benefit

5

1. Theoretical

a. With obtained the outcome will be described aspects the role of both teachers'components (pedagogy competence and professional

competence) in developing, reaction, learning, behavior and result.

Provided the relation between aspects of pedagogy competence and

professional competence on reaction, learning, behavior, and result

during learning.

b. Develop a repertoire of knowledge about the influence on pedagogy

competence and professional competence on reaction, learning, behavior

and result in accordance with development of the situation and demands

quality.

3. P ractical

a. Having in mind the relation between variables could be used for teacher

training related to pedagogy competence and professional competence.

b. For the information and comparative material; (a) Head of North

Sumatera Province Education Department in formulating policies

regarding to develop teachers' pedagogy competence and professional competence development therefore will have great influence on reaction,

(26)

learning, behavior and result, (b) For the school principal as an input to

improve teacher's learning, (c) for observer's repertoire of education

management add the infonnation for human resources development,

especially in tenns of improving the quality of teacher's pedagogy

competence and professional competence on learning in which impact on

competence quality.

z

?

m

(27)

CHAPTERV

CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion

Based on data and analysis result that have been described above could be concluded as follows:

I. Pedagogy competence and professional competence of teachers are simultaneous influence on mastery reaction and behavior, while for learning and result show that there are no significant quantities. Professional competence has cannonical loading 0.99 on it's canonical loading variable (reaction) and 0.59 cannonical loading for behavior variable, while the pedagogy competence has cannonical loading variable 0.19, which means it is not significant. These result indicates the higher mastery level of professional competence of the teachers makes reaction and behavior variables higher on High School at Subdistrict 3 ofMedan. The teachers's higher mastery of pedagogy competence and professiona l competence on High Schoolat Subdistrict 3 of Medan will make the mastery on reaction, learning, behavior and result be higher. Viewed from the significance multivariate tests of the cannonical correlation analysis shows that pedagogy competence and professional competence are correlated with the mastery level on reaction, learning, behavior and result together. Cannonical correlation on reaction is 0.99, learning is 0.09; behaviour is 0 .59 and result is 0 .19. it shows that reaction and behavior variable have significant cannonical loading.

3. By controlling pedagogy competence and professional competence shows that there is no difference between the required mastery level on

(28)

reaction with the learner's reaction for high school learners at Subdistrict

3 ofMedan.

B. Implication

Based on the conclusions that have been described above, the

following will put forward some implications that are considered relevant to

the research. The following implications are:

1. The learning ability skills that include knowledge and skills attitude or

behavior include in enough category. These components are required as

special attention from teachers and the school improvement.

2. The mastery level of reaction and behavior on the high school learners at Subdistrict 3 of Medan includes in master category. Reaction and

behavior are probability to give learning as addition task.

3. In the process of learning/learning development is not solely dependent

on the teacher and learning process in sch09ls, but also depends on the

.

learners. men are not driven by forces within, and also not "beaten" by

environmental stimuli, but it is a continuous interaction and feedback

determination throu gh the personal determination and involvement of

parents to educate their child.

C. Suggestion

The submitted suggestions according to the fmdings in this research

are as follows:

1. The educational service chief of Medan City Government and it' s

associated ranks of other mainly in terms of improving teacher

competence advised to give special attention in this regard: (a) to guide

the teacher's ability in carrying out the duties and responsibilities, (b) to provide rewards for teachers who are excel in perform the task, (c) the

(29)

opportunity for the teachers to continue their education at a higher level

and (d) to provide adequate budget for training activities related to the

upgrading of teacher's competence.

2. To Improve the teachers' ability to continue development through

effective training and upgrading so that it will be a positive motivation

factor for the improvement of teacher performance specifically in terms of teacher competence.

3. Other researchers, it is suggested following up this research with

different variables that also impact the performance of teachers,

particularly about the teacher's competence.

z

?

m

(30)

REFERENCES

Abdurrohman, Mulyono. 1999. Pendidikan Bagi Anak Berlcesulitan Be/ajar.

Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.

Ahmad. 2009. Kualitas Pendidikan di Indonesia. http: 1/uses.wordpress.com

lkua li tas-pendidikan~i-indonesia/. Diakses 4/11/2009.

Ambarita, J. 2004. Pembelajaran Matematika SMU deogan Pendekatan PMR. Makalah disajikan dalam seminar nasional dan Workshop Pendidikan Matematika, FPMIPA UNIMED, 29-30 Agustus 2004.

Anto, S. 2009. Evaluasi Program Pelatihan Model Kirkpatrick. StafSileksi Pemetaan dan Supervisi LPMP D.I. Yogyakarta. http://vibizconsulting.com/column/indexlmnagement/1671/hr. Diakses 2412/2010.

Anwar, Q & Sagala, S. 2006. Profesi Jabatan Kependidikan dan Guru

Arison.

Sebagai Upaya Menjamin Kualitas Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Uhamka Press.

2009. Guru dan //arisonOO 1. wordpress.com globalisasi/ Diakses 4112/2009.

Tantangan Globalisasi. http: /2009/0 I /07

/guru-dan-tantangan-A.R. 2000, Peningkatan mutu pendidikan Matematika. Makalah disajikan pada seminar nasional Peningkatan kualitas pendidikan Matematika pada Pendidikan Dasar, Malang: UM Malan g.

Danim, Sudarman. 1995. Pengantar Studi Penelitian Kebijakan. Jakarta; Bumi Aksara.

(31)

Daryanto. 2009. Panduan Proses Pembelajaran Kreatif& Inovatif. Teori dan Praktik dalam Pengembangan Profesionalme Guru. Jakarta: A V

Publisher.

Depdiknas. 2003. Kurikulum 2004 SMA. Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Matematika SMAIMA. Jakarta:Depdiknas.

Dimyati dan Mudjiono. 1999. Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Dunn. N, William. 1981 . Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction. Prentice-Hall. Inc., Englewood Clift, N.J. 07632.

Filsafat Matemaika http: 1/meetabied.wordpress.com /20 10/03/20/teori-

belajar-konstruktivisme-vygotsky-dalam-pembelajaran-matematika/diakses 29/4 /2010.

Franciscusti. 2009. Pengertian Pembelajaran .http: 1/franciscusti.b logspot.com /2008/06/pembelajaran-merupakan proses.html. Diakses 4/ll/2009.

Gultom, Syawal. 2007. "Sertifikasi Guru: Tantangan bagi Guru Profesional" . Makalah Disajikan dalam Seminar Strategi Pencapaian Kompetensi dalam Rangka Menghadapi Uji Sertifikasi Profesi Guru dan Dosen. Unimed, Medan, 14 Juli 2007.

Had i, Y 2009. Kajian Kompetensi Guru Dalam Peningkatan Mutu

Pendidikan.

http:/lyusufhadi.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/sinopsis-kompetensi-guru.pdf. 17/ll/2009.

Hamalik, Oemar. 2004. Psikologi Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algesindo.

---- - --- 200 I. Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

(32)

Hill, Michael. 1993. The Policy Process. Harvester Wheatsheaf. New York.

London. Toronto. Sydney. Tokyo. Singapore. Printed and bound

in Great Britain by BPC Wheatons Ltd. Exeter.

Hujodo, Hennan. 1988. Mengajar Be1ajar Matematika. Depdikbud, Jakarta.

Hutauruk, Rosidah. 2000 ... Analisis Kesulitan Guru Mengajar Matematika di

SD pada Kecamatan Sibolga Kabupaten Tapanuli Tengah". Skripsi

tidak. Diterbitkan. Medan. FMIP A Universitas Negeri Medan.

lnstrumen kompetensi pedagogik dikembangkan berdasarkan defenisi operasional dengan mengadopsi instrumen yang telah

dikembangkan. Format Peni1aian Kinetja Guru, 2009.

JR. Robinson. B. Richard. 2000. Strategic Management. Formulation,

Implementation, and Control. Seven Edition. Business Week

Irwin. McGraw-Hill.

Kamars, Dachnel. 2005. Administrasi Pendidikan. Teori dan Praktek. Edisi

Kedua. Padang: Universitas Putra Indonesia.

Kasim. Azbar. 1995. Teori Pembuatan Keputusan. Lembaga Penerbit

Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia.

Katmiati. 2009. Guru Dan Proses Mengajar-Belajar (Prnb) Http:

//Katmiati.Biogspot.Corn /2007/05/Guru-Dan-Proses- Mengajar.

Diakses 4/11/2009.

Kirkpatrick, L, Donald. 1994. Evaluating Training Programs. The Four Levels. Berret-Koebler Publisher. San Fransisco.

Mardapi, D. 2003. Kurilculum 2004 dan Optimalisasi Sistem Evaluasi

Pendidikan di Sekolah. Makalah disajikan dalam Seminar Nasional

Kurikulum 2004 Berbasis Kompetensi, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, y ogyakarta.

(33)

Mudyahardjo. Redja.2001. Pengantar Pendidikan. Sebuah Studi Awal Tentang dasar-Dasar Pendidikan pada Umumnya dan Pendidikan di Indonesia. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Muhidin, A, S. 2010. http: 1/sambasalim.com /pendidikan lkualitas-proses-pembelajaran.html. Diakses 19/03/2010.

Mulyasa, E. 2007. Kurikulum Tingkast Satuan Pendidikan. Sebuah Panduan Praktis. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

- - - - -. 2007. Standar Kompetensi Sertifikasi Guru. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

N anim, 2009. Pengertian Guru. http: //umnifkipunisma.blogspot.com /2009/06/Pengertian.guru.html. D iakses 3/9/2009.

Pasaribu, Delta. 2004. " Hasil Ujian akhir Nasional (UAN) Bidang Studi Matematika Siswa SMA se-Kota Medan Ditinjau dari Disiplin Kerja, Kepuasan Kerja dan Keterampilan Mengajar Guru". Tesis tidak diterbitkan. Medan: Program Pascasarjana. Universifa$ Negeri Medan.

Pemberdayaan Guru, T enaga Kependidikan dan Masyarakat dalam Manajemen Sekolah. B andung: Alfabeta Bandung.

Purwanto, NgaJim. 2007. Ilmu Pendidikan Teoritis dan Praktis. Band ung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Putupanji. 2009. Guru Agung Pendidikan Kejuruan. http: //blog.Uny.ac.id /putupanjilguru/. Diakses 5/12/2009.

Reynolds, D & Muijs, D . 2008. Effective Teaching. Tepri dan Aplikasi. Y ogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Rezeki, Robbi. 2004. "Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Kontekstual dan

Kreativitas terbadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Sekolah Lanjutan Pertama (SLTP) Negeri Kecamatan Stabat". Tesis tidak

(34)

Diterbitkan. Medan: Program Pascasarjana. Universitas Negeri

Medan.

Rink.

J. E. ( 1993). Teaching Physical Education f or Learning. Second

Edition. Toronto: Mosby. http: //blog.Uny.ac.id /putupanji/guru/.

Diakses

/06/2010.

Ruseffendi, E.T. 1989. Pengantar kepada Membantu Guru Mengembangkan Kompetensinya dalam Pengajaran untuk Meningkatkan CBSA.

Bandung: Tarsito.

Sagala, Syaiful. 2005. Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran. Untuk membantu

Ban dung:

Administrasi Pendidikan Komtemporer. Bandung.

·~- - -. 2009. Ke mam p~ Profesional Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan. Pemberdayaan Guru, Tenaga Kependidikan dan

Masyarakat dalam Manajemen Sekolah. Bandung: Alfabeta

Bandung.

Sanjaya, Wina. 2008. Strategi Pembel~am. Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Sardiman, A.M. 2001. Interaksi & Motivasi Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Siregar, L, S. 2010. Korelasi Kanonikal: Komputasi dengan menggunakan

SPSS dan lnterpretasi Hasil Analisis.

ssiregar@staff.gunadarma.ac.id. D iakses 25/4no 10.

Slamet, PH. 2007. "Kompetensi Guru dan Strategi Pencapaiannya" . Makalah Disajikan dalam Seminar NasionaJ Strategi Pencapaian

(35)

Kompetensi dalam Rangka Menghadapi Uji Sertiftkasi Profrsi Guru dan Dosen. Unimed, Medan, 14 Juli.

Sobur, Alex. 2003. Psikologi Umum dalam Lintasan Sejarah. Bandung: Pus taka

Setia. http: /lblog.Uny.ac.id /putupanji/guru/. Diakses 511212009. Soedjadi, R. 1999. Kiat Pendidikan M atematika di Indonesia. Konstatasi

Keadaan Masa Kini Menuju Harapan Masa Depan. Jakarta: Dirjend. Dlkti.

Soemannan. 2006. Graduate Profiles at Graduation for implementation of C ompetence Based-System. http: 1/elearning-for-professionals.com /mod /resource /view.php?id=8. Diakses 4/J l/2009.

Soetopo, H. 2007. Evaluasi Program Supervisi Peodidikan. Dalam Imron, A., Burhanuddin, dan Maisyarob (Eds.), Supervisi Pendidikan dan

Pengajaran: Konsep, Pendekatan, dan Penerapan Pembinaan

Profesiona/. Malang: Fakultas Umu Pendidi.kao Universitas Negeri

Malan g .

Sugiyono, 2008. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfa Beta Bandung.

Suharta, I Gusti, Putu & Anglingsari. 2004. Matematika Reatistik: Apa dan Bagaimana?. Editorial Jumal Peodidikan dan Kebudayaan, (online}, Edisi 38.

Suberman, Erman & Winataputra, Udin, S. 1993. Strategi Belajar Mengajar Matematika. Jakarta: Depdikbud Dirjend. Dikdasmen.

Sujono. 1988. Pengajaran Matematika untuk Sekolah Menengah. Jakarta: Depdikbud.

Sumarno. 2007. Disertasi. Evaluasi Program Pendidikan Sekolab Menengah Kejuruan Teknologi dan Ind ustri (SMKTI) Kota Bandar Lampung

(36)

Untuk Perencanaan Strategi Level Mikro. Program Pascasrujana Universitas Negeri Y ogyakarta.

Susanto, H. http //www. bpkpenabur.or.id /files /2010 /Hal. 6471 % 20 Mengembangkan % 20 Self % 20 regulation.pdf. Diakses

Susanto.

12/4/2010

2009. http:

ilmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/disertasi/article/view/973. 17/11/2009.

/lkarya-Diakses

Susilo, Joko, Muhammad. 2007. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Manajemen Pelaksanaan dan Kesiapan Sekolah Menyongsongnya. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Syah, Muhibbin. 2003. Psikologi Belajar. Rosdakarya, Bandung.

Syahputra.2009. Latar Belakang Masalah Pendidikan Indonesia. http:

//www.idonbiu.com/2009/10/latar-belakang-masalah-pendidikan.html. Diakses 4/11/2009.

Tim dosen. 2009. Pengantar Dasar-Dasar Pendidikan. Tim Dosen IKIP Malang. Malang: Pencetak Usaha Offset Printing Surabaya Indonesia.

2009. Peningkatan Kualitas Pendidikan Indonesia. http:/ /privace23 .blogspot.com/2009/08/peningkatan-kualitas-pendidikan-di.html. Diakses 17 /11/2009.

Trimahanani, Emy. (2009) . Mengukur Keberhasilan Program Pelatihan (2).

Editor Managementfile.com Bentuk EvaJuasi Training. http:

1/vibizconsulting.com /column/index/management /1671/hr. Diakses 24/2/2010.

Trisnawati. 2009. "Analisis Kesulitan Guru dalam Pembelajaran Matematika di SMK Kota Malang''. Tesis diterbitkan. PPJN-Batan Digital

(37)

Library, (online), (http://jiptumm/gdl/sl/2003/trisnawati, Diakses 20 /112010).

Tu' u. Tulus. 2004. Peran Disiplin Pada Perilaku dan Prestasi Siswa.

Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia

AN EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ON 10TH CLASS AT SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL SUBDISTRICT 3 OF MEDAN WITH KIRK PATRICK APPROACH.

ABSTRACT

AN EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICS

PROGRAM PASCA SARJANA

Approval Of Examiner Council

PREFACE

SRl<: 081 188!30065

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION 74

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF APPENDIXES

CHAPTER I

multiditection and so PPIN-Batan Digital

C. Problem Limitation

CHAPTERV

REFERENCES