By:
Boby Pratiwi Azimuth 081244210005
Physics Bilingual Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to fulfill the requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
IMPLEMENTATION ANALYZING OF PHYSICS TEACHER’S LESSON PLAN PROGRAM EVALUATION AT SEVERAL SENIOR HIGH
SCHOOL IN MEDAN
BobyPratiwi Azimuth (Reg. Number.081244210005)
The aims of this research are (1) Knowing the implementation of Educational Evaluation Standard of Senior High School at Medan especiallyInternational School whether it implemented properly and correctly, (2) Elaborating the abandoning factors of teachers in implementing Evaluation standard, (3) Knowing the lesson plan that was conducted by physics teacher whether it was evaluated continuously or not, and (4) Knowing the application of the Standard of Educational Evaluation in several Senior High School at Medan.
The method in this research was qualitative method. In this research the data resources were Principal, Principal Assistant (Curriculum), Physics Teacher, and students in several Senior High School at Medan. Data resources were obtained by using purposive sampling. This research used a stratified purposive sampling with particular consideration. There are 9 Senior High School in Medan with four different accreditations. In this research, researcher took three for school accreditation A and B, one for school accreditation C, and two for school non-accreditation.
iv
ANALISIS IMPLEMENTASI EVALUASI PROGRAM PERENCANAAN DAN PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN GURU FISIKA PADA
BEBERAPA SMA DI MEDAN Boby Pratiwi Azimuth (Nim.081244210005)
Tujuan Penelitian ini adalah (1) Mengetahui pelaksanaan Standar Evaluasi Pendidikan di SMA Medan khususnya SMA Internasional, apakah sudah melaksanakan Standar Evaluasi Pendidikan dengan baik dan benar, (2) Mendiskusikan faktor penghambat bagi guru dalam melaksanakan Standar Evaluasi Pendidikan, (3) Mengetahui apakah Perencanaan Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran yang dirancang oleh guru fisika dievaluasi secara berkelanjutan, dan (4) Mengetahui aplikasi dari Standar Evaluasi Pendidikan di beberapa SMA Medan.
Metode pada Penelitian ini adalah Metode Kualitatif. Sumber data pada penelitian ini adalah Kepala SMA, Wakil Kepala Sekolah, Guru Fisika SMA, dan beberapa siswa SMA Medan. Sumber data diambil dengan menggunakan purposive sampling. Penelitian ini menggunakan stratified purposive sampling dengan beberapa pertimbangan, yaitu ada 9 SMA Medan dengan empat perbedaan akreditasi. Pada penelitian ini, peneliti mengambil tiga untuk akreditasi sekolah A dan B, satu untuk akreditasi sekolah C, dan dua untuk sekolah yang belum terakreditasi.
CONTENT
Page
Ratification i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Preface iv
Content vi
List of Figure x
List of Table xi
List of Appendix xii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Identification of Problem 6
1.3. Limitation of Problem 6
1.4. Formulation of Problem 7
1.5. Objective of Research 7
1.6. Benefit of Research 7
1.7. Definition of Operational 10
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 12
2.1. Theoretical Framework 12
2.1.1. The Important of Educational 12
2.1.2. Profile of National Education 14
2.2. National Standard of Education 15
2.2.1. Educational Curriculum 19
2.3. Evaluation in the School Program 21
2.3.1. Annual Program 21
vii
2.3.3. ModuleProgram 22
2.3.4. DailyandWeeklyPrograms 22
2.3.5. RemedialandEnrichment Program 22
2.4. Authentic Assessment 24
2.5. Standard of Educational Evaluation 25
2.5.1. Philosophical and Juridical Foundation Standards Evaluation 28
2.5.1.1. Philosophical Foundation 29
2.5.1.2. Juridical Foundation 29
2.6. Evaluation 31
2.6.1. Types of Evaluation 34
2.6.1.1. Student Evaluation 34
2.6.1.2. Curriculum Evaluation 35
2.6.1.3. School Evaluation 36
2.6.1.4. Evaluation of Large Populations 37
2.6.1.5. Evaluation of Special Projects and Programs 37
2.6.1.6. Evaluation of Personnel 37
2.7. Educational Evaluation 38
2.7.1. Scope of Educational Evaluation in School 38
2.7.2. The Aims and Nature of Educational Evaluation 40
2.7.2.1. To Learn 40
2.7.2.2. To Motivate 41
2.7.2.3. To Participate 41
2.7.2.4. To Change and Improve 42
2.8. Educational Evaluation and Quality 42
2.9. Assessment 43
2.9.1 Purpose Assessment 44
2.9.2. Principal of Assessment 45
2.9.3. Techniques of Assessment 45
2.9.4.1. Principals of Lesson Plan Development 49
2.10. Mindset 50
2.11. Qualitative Research 52
2.11.1. Characteristics of Qualitative Research 52
2.12. Survey 53
2.12.1. Steps of Survey 54
2.12.2. Data Collection Survey 54
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 57
3.1. Method 57
3.2. Place of Research 57
3.3. The Research Instrument 57
3.4. Source of Data Samples 57
3.5. Data Collection Techniques 58
3.6. Data Analysis Techniques 58
3.6.1. Data Reduction 59
3.6.2. Data Display 59
3.6.3. Verification 60
3.7. Data Validity Testing Plan 61
3.7.1. Credibility Testing 61
3.7.2. Confirmability Testing 61
CHAPTER IV RESULT OF RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION 62
4.1. Result of Research 62
4.1.1. Setting of Research 62
4.1.2. Round-Down of Research 66
4.1.2.1. Questionnaires of Principal Assistant 68
4.1.2.2. Questionnaires of Physics Teacher in Several SMA at Medan 69
ix
4.1.2.4. School Accreditation and Teacher Qualification 72 4.1.2.5. Design of Physics Teacher’s Lesson Plan at Several Senior High 77
School in Medan
4.1.3. Confirmability Testing of Research 89
4.2. Discussion 90
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 107
5.1. Conclusion 107
5.2. Suggestion 108
List of Table
Page Table 4.1 General Data of school and high school physics teachers 63
Table 4.2 The Inhibiting Factors for physics teacher in implementation 93
of evaluation
Table 4.3 Design of lesson plan of physics teacher 96
Table 4.4 Implementation Analyzing of Physics Teacher’s Lesson Plan 97
Program Evaluation at Several Senior High School in Medan
Table 4.5 Application of Implementation of Evaluation and Lesson Plan 105
x
List of Figure
Page Figure 2.1 The relationships between Evaluation, Assessment, 33
Measurement, Test
Figure 2.2 Educational Evaluation and Quality 43
Figure 2.3 Scheme Mindset of Research 51
Figure 3.1 Data Collection Techniques 58
Figure 3.2 Components in Data Analysis (Flow Model) 58
Figure 3.3 Components in Data Analysis (Interactive Model) 59
Figure 3.4 Scheme Data Reduction, Data Display, and Verification 60
Figure 4.1 Map of Research Location 64
Figure 4.2 Bar Chart of indicators percentage of physics teachers 68
understanding about evaluation in several senior high
school at Medan according principal assistant
Figure 4.3 Bar-Chart of Indicators percentage of physics teachers 69
understanding about evaluation in several senior high
school at Medan
Figure 4.4 Bar-Chart of Indicators Percentage of Evaluation done by 71
Physics Teachers in several senior high school at Medan
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. CONCLUSIONS
1. Generally at several senior high school in Medan has not implemented of
educational evaluation standard that accordance with the standard
containing in Permendiknas No.20/2007 about Educational Evaluation
Standard. Teacher is difficulty to carrying out evaluation in the learning
process. It was50.72% of teacher at several senior high school in Medan
who had carried out the evaluation in learning process. Evaluation
standard is very important. Evaluation should be conducted ongoing,in
orderthe schools can know the real abilities of their students. It may be the
school has done it but because of the instrument that used was invalid,
sothe data or results were not valid.Furthermore, physics teacher do not
know and understand about the goal and function of evaluation. So,
teacher is difficult experience in planning and implementation of
evaluation.
2. There are four factors abandoning for teachers to implementation the
evaluation in learning process. One of the factors of the school
environment is less supportive, such as attention from the principal. The
school principal has not performedtheir function as supervision, which is
not only instruction but also guidance or assistance of teachers. So that to
create motivation of teachers in carrying out the evaluation. The lacking
of teacher understanding about good evaluation instrument is also
abandoning factor for teachers in implementing of evaluation asproperly
and correctly.
3. There are still many teachers who have not carried out the evaluation that
accordance with the standards. Teachers also do not know Permendiknas
No.41/2007 on Standards of process that related with planning,
implementation, evaluation, and oversight of learning. Few teachers who
108
guidance in teach, or just to fulfill obligations at any time if there is an
examination of the supervisors and many teachers are using the old pattern
that is only do what is already routinely done without careful planning and
less variable in evaluation technique. Only 3 of 11 physics teacher’s lesson
plan are different or develop it by their selves.
4. Application of evaluation standards in several high school at Medan can
be seen on the mechanisms and procedures for implementation. From the
research results obtained by the application of evaluation standards in
schools is not maximized. School accreditation A, B, C and
non-accreditation, long time of learning experience, and certification has not
suitable with standard in implementation of evaluation. Only one school
that the teacher is already knows and applies it in learning process suitable
with standard.
B. SUGGESTIONS
1. As a professional teacher should have a five competencies that one of
them is the preparation of the program is to prepare the implementation of
lesson plan in the learning process.
2. Make a diklat or up grading for teachers, especially for Physics Teacher at
senior high school in Medan as continuously about the important of
evaluation in learning process and also making of design of lesson plan
before teach in class.
3. For the next researcher that will examine the research on this topic, should
be wise, patient, and careful for data collection. So that the results that
REFERENCES
Arifin, Zainal. 2009. EvaluasiPembelajaran. Bandung: P.T RemajaRosdakarya.
Arikunto, S. 2007. Dasar-dasarEvaluasiPendidikan. Jakarta: BumiAksara.
Council of Europe and European Commission. 2007. T-kit on Educational Evaluation in Youth Work. StrasboughCedex: Council of Europe Publishing.
Daryanto. 2008. EvaluasiPendidikan. Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
EBPS (2010), http://dunia-fikri.blogspot.com/2010/01/ebps-evaluasi-berbasis-peserta-didik.html (accessed kamis-05 Januari 2012)
Fraenkel, Jack.R. 1932. How to Design and Evaluate research in Education 6th ed. McGraw-Hill.
Gronlund, N.E. 1985. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching, Fourth Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Hasan, H. 2009. EvaluasiKurikulum. Bandung: PT RemajaRosdakarya
Haryati, M. 2009. Model danTeknikPenilaianpada Tingkat SatuanPendidikan. Jakarta: GaungPersada Press
Infoskripsi (2008), http://www.infoskripsi.com/Theory/Metode-Penelitian-Pendidikan.html (accessed 26 Januari 2012)
KomponenEvaluasiPendidikan (2009), http://sarkomkar.blogspot.com/2009/12/komponen-evaluasi-pendidikan-makalah.html (accessed kamis-05 Januari2012)
Kunandar. 2007. Guru Profesional, ImplementasiKurikulum Tingkat SatuanPendidikan (KTPS) dansuksesdalamsertifikasi guru.
Linn, R.L, andGronlund, N.E. 1995. Measurement andAssessment in Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Majid, A. 2008.PerencanaanPembelajaran. Bandung: PT RemajaRosdakarya
110
Moleong, J. Lexy. 2009. MetodologiPenelitianKualitatif. Bandung: PT RemajaRosdakarya
Popham, W. James. 1995. Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know. USA: Simon & Schuster Company
Sanjaya, W. 2009.StrategiPembelajaranBerorientasiStandarPendidikan. Jakarta: Kencana.
Sudijono, A. 2009.PengantarEvaluasiPendidikan. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Sugiyono. 2009. MetodePenelitianPendidikan (PendekatanKuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D). Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sukardi. 2009. EvaluasiPendidikan: prinsipdanoperasionalnya. Jakarta: BumiAksara.
Sukardi. 2003. MetodologiPenelitianPendidikan. Jakarta: BumiAksara.
Sukmadinata, N. S. 2005. MetodePenelitianPendidikan. Bandung: P.T RemajaRosdakarya.
Susilawati, S. 2009.
PengaruhPenerapanStandarNasionalPendidikanTerhadapKesempatanK erjaLulusanSiswa SMK Negeri di Kota Medan. Tesis, USU, Medan
Tayibnapis, F. Y. 2008. Evaluasi Program danInstrumenEvaluasiuntuk program pendidikandanpenilaian. Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
Wardhani, S. 2008. StandarPenilaianPendidikan (ImplikasinyaTerhadapTugas Guru MatematikadanSekolah). Yogyakarta: PPPPTK Matematika
Regulations
DepartemenPendidikanNasional, Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2003
tentangSistemPendidikanNasional
---,Undang-UndangNomor 14 Tahun 2004 tentang Guru danDosen
---,PeraturanPemerintahNomor 19 Tahun 2005
---,PermendiknasNomor 16 Tahun 2007
tentangStandarKualifikasiAkademikdanKompetensi Guru.
---, PermendiknasNomor 19 Tahun 2007
tentangStandarPengelolaanPendidikanolehSatuanPendidika
nDasardanMenengah
---, PermendiknasNomor 20 Tahun 2007
tentangStandarPenilaianPendidikan
---, PermendiknasNomor 41 Tahun 2007 tentangStandar Proses
