THE DIFFERENCES OF MATHEMATICAL COMMUNICATION ABILITY OF STUDENTS THROUGH REMEDIAL TEACHING
OF PEER TUTORING USING MIND MAPPING AND CONVENTIONAL REMEDIAL TEACHING
IN SMP NEGERI 1 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR
2011/ 2012
By: Emil Hani 408111046
Bilingual Mathematics Education
THESIS
Submitted to Fulfill Requirements to Get The Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Alhamdulillah for The Almighty Allah SWT for blessing hence writer can finish this research in the price time.
The title of this thesis is “The Differences of Mathematical
Communication Ability of Students through Remedial Teaching of Peer Tutoring Using Mind Mapping and Conventional Remedial Teaching in SMP Negeri 1 Medan Learning Year 2011/ 2012”. This thesis is arranged to get Sarjana Pendidikan of Mathematics and Natural Science Faculty in State University of
Medan. In this opportunity, writer say thank you for Drs. Parapat Gultom, MMIE., Ph.D. as supervisor lecturer of this thesis. He has given much suggestion for writer from the start until the end of writing of this thesis. And thank you for Prof. Dr. Sahat Saragih, M.Pd., Dr. E. Elvis Napitupulu, M.S., and Faiz Ahyaningsih, S.Si., M.Si. that have given much suggestion for this thesis from planning of research until arranging of this thesis. And also thank you for Prof. Drs. Dian Armanto, M.Pd., M.A., M.Sc., Ph.D as academic supervisor, Prof. Dr. Mukhtar, M.Pd. as header of mathematics department, Prof. Dr. Herbert Sipahutar, M.Sc. as a coordinator of bilingual program, Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D. as header of Mathematics and Natural Science Faculty in State University of Medan, and Prof. Dr. Ibnu Hajar Damanik, S.Pd., M.Si as rector of State University of Medan.
Thank you for lecturer and lecturers in mathematics department especially for Mr. Mangaratua Simanjorang and Madame Ida Karnasih that always give motivation along of study in Unimed. And then thank you for Drs. H. Ahmad Siregar, M.M. as headmaster in SMP Negeri 1 Medan and Mam Anitah as teacher of mathematics subject, all teachers, and administration office that have helped and guided writer along research hold.
Mardiah and also all family as Mr. Sugiman, Mrs. Paikem, Mr. Bejo, Mrs. Maimunah, Mr. Suaib, Mrs. Ijah, Mr. Masri, and Mrs. Ani.
Writer also says thank you for my lovely friends Siti Rafiah Rangkuti, Misna Fitriyani Siregar, Hot Tiarma Sianipar and the other friends Angelica Pardede, Efrida Fitri, Eva Puspita Sari, Siti Rahmadani, Yanti Rambe, Farah Diba, and Veronika Syahniarini Panjaitan, and then for my so sweat friends in Kandang Bangau, Tuti Hardianti, Isma Ramadhani Lubis, Albarra Harahap, and Ali
Imransyah Ritonga. And the last thank you for all students of bilingual mathematics in 2008 that alwayss give spirit and motivation.
Writer realyzes that still much has insuffiency in arranging this thesis, and for that one writer hopes suggestion and critic for making better this thesis. Writer hopes this thesis will give benefit for reader and world of education.
Medan, September, 2012 Writer
iii
THE DIFFERENCES OF MATHEMATICAL COMMUNICATION ABILITY OF STUDENTS THROUGH REMEDIAL TEACHING
OF PEER TUTORING USING MIND MAPPING AND CONVENTIONAL REMEDIAL TEACHING IN
SMP NEGERI 1 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR
2011/ 2012 Emil Hani (408111046)
ABSTRACT
This research is aimed to find out if there is the difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping with student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching. This research is an experimental research which was conducted in SMP Negeri 1 Medan. The sample was chosen randomly in eight grade.
This research was started by validating the research instruments by validators. From the result of conditional test of data, all data from pre test and post test is normal distributed and homogeneous. Data collected from the experiment was analyzed using descriptive statistics analysis and inferential analysis. The descriptive analysis is aimed to describe the difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching. The inferential analysis used is the analysis using t-test.
There are six questions for pre test and six questions too for post test. The questions are validated by validator from teachers and lecturer, and all the questions are valid. The results of the research shows that the average score of pret test of experimental class is 56.00 and the average score of pre test of control class is 57.95. After doing treathment in each classes it is gotten that the average score of post test of class of remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping is 88.60 and the average score of post test of class of conventional remedial teaching is 82.85. Therefore in hypothesis test it is gotten that tcalculation = 6.58 and ttable = 2.056, so tcalculation > ttable (6.58 > 2.056), consequently Ha is received then there is the difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping with student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching. Then, it is better if doing research of remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping is in more long time therefore student’s difficulties will be managed better.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Authentication Sheet i
Bibliography ii
Abstract iii
Acknowledgment iv
Table of Content vi
List of Figure ix
List of Table x
List of Appendix xii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. The Background 1 1.2. Problem Identification 7 1.3. Problem Limitation 8 1.4. Problem Formulation 8 1.5. Research Objectives 8 1.6. Research Benefit 8 1.7. Operational Definition 9
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.1. Theories of Speaking 11 2.1.1. Mathematical Communication 11 2.1.2. Remedial Teaching 13 2.1.2.1. Definition of Remedial Teaching 13 2.1.2.2. Purpose, Function, and the Principle of Remedial
Teaching 14
vii
2.1.2.3.2. Strategy and Approach of Remedial Teaching
That Is Preventive 19
2.1.2.3.3. Strategy and Approach of Remedial Teaching
That Is Developmental 25
2.1.2.4. Remedial Fused Procedure 25 2.1.2.4.1. Observation Return Case 25 2.1.2.4.2. Choosing of Action Fused 26 2.1.2.4.3. Giving Special Service 27 2.1.2.4.4. Fused of Remedial Teaching 27 2.1.2.4.5. Return Measurement 27 2.1.2.4.6. Re-evaluation and Re-diagnostic 27 2.1.2.5. Role of Head Master, Parents, and Society
in Remedial Education Program 28 2.1.2.5.1. Head Master 29
2.1.2.5.2. Parents 30
2.1.2.5.3. Administration office Staff of School 30 2.1.2.5.4. The Related Social Institutes 30 2.1.3. Peer Tutoring 31 2.1.3.1. Definition of Peer Tutoring 31 2.1.3.2. Type of Peer Tutoring 32 2.1.3.3. Step Guidelines for Execution of Peer Tutoring 34 2.1.3.4. Characteristics of Peer Tutoring 37 2.1.3.5. The Benefits of Peer Tutoring 37
2.1.4. Mind Mapping 39
2.1.4.1. Definition of Mind Mapping 39 2.1.4.2. Functions of Mind Mapping 40 2.1.4.3. The Benefits of Mind Mapping 40 2.1.4.3.1. The Benefits of Mind Mapping for Students 40 2.1.4.3.2. The Benefits of Mind Mapping for Teacher 41 2.1.4.4. The Fundamental Principles of Mind Mapping 42 2.1.4.5. The Flow of Creating Mind Mapping 42 2.2. Theories of Thinking 43 2.3. Research Hypothesis 44
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHOD 45
3.1. Kinds of Research 45
3.2. Location and Time of Research 45 3.3. Sample of Research
3.4. Variable and Instrument of Research 45 3.5. Research Instrumental 45 3.5.1. Test of Mathematical Communication Ability 45 3.6. Instrumental Test 48 3.6.1. Validation of Experts towards Fused Learning Peripheral 48 3.6.2. Validation of Experts towards Fused Research Instrument 48
3.7. Design 48
viii
3.7. 2 Research Procedure 49 3.8. Data Analysis Technique 50 3.8.1. Normality Test 51 3.8.1.1. Normality Test Manuallly 51 3.8.1.2. Normality Test with SPSS 51 3.8.2. Homogeneity Test 52 3.8.2.1. Homogeneity Test Manually 52 3.8.2.2. Homogeneity Test with SPSS 52 3.9. Hypothesis Test 52
3.9.1. Test of t 52
3.9.1.1. Test of t Manually 53
3.9.1.1. Test of t with SPSS 53
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND EXPLANATION 55
4.1. Result of Research 55
4.1.1 Result of Research of Student’s Mathematical
Communication Ability 55
4.1.1.1. Description of Mathematical Communication Ability 55 4.1.1.2. Normality Test of Data 60
4.1.1.3. Homogeneity Test 65
4.1.1.4. Test of Average Difference 66 4.2. Discussion of Research Result 69
4.3. Research Limitation 71
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 72
5.1. Conclusion 72
5.2. Suggestion 72
x
LIST OF TABLE
Page Table 3.1. Questionnaire grille of mathematical communication
ability 46
Table 3.2. Scoring criteria of test results of mathematical
communication 46
Table 3.3. Research design 48
Table 3.4. Weiner table about the relation between variables of
independent, dependent, and control 49 Table. 4.1. Data pre test of student’s mathematical communication
ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial
teaching 56
Table. 4.2. Data post test of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring
using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial
teaching 57
Table. 4.3. Average of gain of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring
using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial
teaching 60
Table. 4.4. Normality test of pre test and post test of student’s mathematical communication ability of classes of remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and conventional remedial teaching 62 Table. 4.5 The result of normality of pre test of student’s
mathematical communication ability through remedial
teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping 62 Table. 4.6. The result of normality of pre test of student’s
mathematical communication ability through
xi
Table. 4.7. The result of normality of post test of student’s
mathematical communication ability through remedial
teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping 63 Table. 4.8. The result of normality of post test of student’s
mathematical communication ability through
conventional remedial teaching 64 Table. 4.9. The test result homogeneity test of pre test of
student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability
through conventional remedial teaching 65 Table. 4.10. The test result homogeneity test of post test of
student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability
through conventional remedial teaching 66 Table. 4.11. The result of test of mean difference of post test of
student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and conventional remedial teaching 67 Table. 4.1.2. The result of mean difference test of post test of
ix
LIST OF FIGURE
Page Figure 2.1. Steps of service for learning group of homogeneous 22 Figure 2.2. Fused steps of individual teaching 23 Figure 2.3. Technique of teaching service by group complicated
special class of remedial and enrichment 24 Figure 2.4. Type of peer tutoring with student to student 33 Figure 2.5. Peer tutoring with tutor to group 33 Figure 2.6. Peer tutoring with tutor to student 34 Figure 3.1. Steps of research activity 50 Figure 4.1. Average score of pre test of student’s mathematical
communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s
mathematical communication ability through
conventional remedial teaching 58 Figure 4.2. Average score of post test of student’s
mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability
xii
LIST OF APPENDIX
Appendix 1 Lesson plan 1 (Class of Experiment) 77 Appendix 2 Lesson plan 2 (Class of Experiment) 82 Appendix 3 Lesson plan 1 (Class of Control) 87 Appendix 4 Lesson plan 2 (Class of Control) 91 Appendix 5 Student activity sheet (SAS) for experiment 1 95 Appendix 6 Student activity sheet (SAS) for experiment 1 98 Appendix 7 Student activity sheet (SAS) for control 1 102 Appendix 8 Student activity sheet (SAS) for control 2 104 Appendix 9 Questionnaire grille of research test instrument
(communication ability test) 107 Appendix 10 Pre test of mathematical communication ability 109 Appendix 11 Post test of mathematical communication ability 111 Appendix 12 Answer key and scoring
(Pre Test of Mathematical Communication Ability) 113 Appendix 13 Answer key and scoring
(Post Test of Mathematical Communication Ability) 118 Appendix 14 Validating sheet
(test of ability to communicate mathematics) 123 Appendix 15 Observation sheet for teacher’s activity 129 Appendix 16 Data distribution of pre test of class of control 133 Appendix 17 Data distribution of pre test of class of experiment 134 Appendix 18 Data distribution of post test of class of control 135 Appendix 19 Data distribution of post test of class of experiment 136 Appendix 20 Descrivtive statistics, histogram, normality test,
xiii
remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping by
using spss 15 137
Appendix 21 Normality test of pre test 143 Appendix 22 Homogeneity test of pre test 147 Appendix 23 Mean difference test of pre test 148 Appendix 24 Normality test of post test 150 Appendix 25 Homogeneity test of post test 154 Appendix 26 Mean difference test of post test 155
Appendix 27 t-test 157
Appendix 28 Research documentation 159
Appendix 29 F Table 165
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Background
Development of knowledge and technology and life demand of society has brought consequence for education to do some concord efforts to prepare students that are already for following competition and able to face some challenges of life that is complex enough.
To make students ready to follow competition and able to face some challenges of life that are complex enough, is made Level of Education Unity Curriculum (KTSP) based on Permendiknas No. 22, 23, and 24 in 2006 and Permendiknas No. 6 in 2007 that apply learning system with competence basic, totally learning system, and learning system that attends differences of individual of students (Sutedjo, 2009).
To make totally learning system and learning system that attends differences of individual of students, government of education spends new rule for every schools to apply remedial teaching for students whose learning difficulty.
According to Suen, (2007) children whose learning difficulty has psychology need that is same with other children. Several of these children may be less in organizing perception and understanding ideas that are abstract or concrete. This case happens because children have low recall, less motivation, less concern in doing something or it is caused by behavior problem. Besides self of children, learning difficulties also can be caused from out self of children for example background of family, condition of school and their friends.
According to Pramudji, (2008) is needed remedial teaching because in teaching-learning activity, every students have rights to get satisfying learning result, but in reality every students have different ability. Matter of lesson will be easier to be understood by students having high ability, but students have low ability will need more long time in understanding matter of lesson. This case is caused every students consist different ability, capacity, background, and experience.
According to Padakannaya, (2008) that children having learning difficulties if there is no handling from teacher, administration party, and headmaster, in a moment will be fail in getting higher education level. But if it is given remedial teaching will be possibility to be success.
Before doing procedure of remedial teaching, Supriyanto (2007), said that the steps that must be done namely are: 1) Analyzing case again; 2) Choosing execution alternative; 3) Giving specific service; 4) Remedial teaching execution; 5) Measuring again; 6) Re-evaluation and re-diagnostic. If teacher does the steps or procedures, then will be given various remedial teaching for every students having learning difficulties because it is accommodated with ability, capacity, background, and experience that are different from every students, consequently student’s learning difficulty will be managed and can accelerate mastering the next matter.
In addition, students who have difficulty learning, especially in math according to Sriyanto, (2007) states that mathematics is often seen as a frightening specter by most students and for mathematics is likely to be perceived as a difficult subject. This resulted in low student mathematics learning outcomes. So that students do not complete the study. Students cannot achieve the mathematics passing maximal efficacy criterion established schools.
Another thing that contributed to low math learning outcomes are still many students who think that mathematics is a subject that is difficult and tedious. Students also did not realize that the mathematical skills that were grown in the learning of mathematics as reasoning, communication, connections, and solving math problems were contributed to the achievement of much-needed life skills of students in the real world where he lives and society.
In addition, mathematics as a basic science has an important role in science and technology was revealed in the curriculum (2004: 6) that the purpose of learning mathematics are developing the ability to convey information or communicate ideas, among others, through verbal discussions, charts, diagrams to explain ideas.
Kohler et al (1993) confirms that the interaction of teachers and students is important to say:
Most would agree that could teaching and learning occur without texts, blackboards, or manipulative, but we maintain that the learning process would exist for only very few students or if classroom interactions with teachers and peers were eliminated. Teacher-student interactions are indeed the heart beat of the learning process.
The above explains that student interaction with teachers and peers is a very important role in teaching and learning. Thus, social interaction between teachers and students, pupils and students, individually or in small groups is a process that must be realized in communication learns and learning of mathematics.
accordance with the opinion Cai, Lane, and Jakabcsin (in Ester, 1996) which suggests that students are rarely asked to argue in learning mathematics, the result is very foreign to them to talk about mathematics.
In learning mathematics, mathematical communication indicators according to NCTM (1989: 214) can be seen from:
1. Ability to interpret mathematical ideas through oral, written, and demonstrate it and draw it visually.
2. Ability to understand, interprets, and evaluates mathematical ideas both in oral, written, and in other visual forms.
3. Ability in using these terms, mathematical notations and structures to present ideas, describe relationships with models of the situation.
Above facts show that the learning process is applied at this time has not shown satisfactory results. Most teachers tend to use traditional or conventional model of learning, i.e. learning model that is more focused on the teacher while students tend to be passive. This makes learning such a poor student response to learning mathematics. More students accept what is delivered by the teacher. Such learning enables students to become less active.
Learning models which are supposed to increasing communication skills and also be able to overcome the difficulties of student learning is cooperative learning. In cooperative learning, students will be more active due to a process of discussion or interaction among students in the group. Through discussions, conversations in expressing mathematical ideas can help students develop the mind, therefore students involved in the differences of opinion or a solution of a problem will understand mathematical concepts better and can improve communication skills and be able to overcome the mathematical difficulties of student learning. This is in line with the opinion of Ansari (2009) which says that one of alternative of innovative learning that is expected to develop communication skills and the process of interaction between students and students' learning difficulties can be overcome is learning model class discussions.
new way of involving students had increased their motivation, participation, real communication, in-depth understanding, their sense of responsibility for their own learning, and their commitment to the course, as well as their self confidence and respect for each other, the number of language skills and strategies they were able to practice and develop, and their language accuracy.
From this statement can be said that peer tutoring can help students namely students having learning difficulties or do not success to get maximal efficacy criterion of mathematics subject (students must get remedial teaching) in mathematical communication. So it will make students be success to get maximal efficacy criterion that school has specified as a minimal value standard of mathematics subject. It is similar to Melissa’s opinion (2005) that peer tutoring will increase student engagement (15%-35% with teacher only to 46%-75% with peer tutoring).
Peer tutoring can be done by peers who are smarter, providing learning assistance to classmates in school. Aid learning by peers can eliminate the awkwardness. Language peers more easily understood, but it with peers no reluctance, inferiority, shame, and so on, so expect students who do not understand do not hesitate to express the difficulties it faces. Furthermore, Melissa (2005) says that students who struggle in specific content areas are paired with a higher performing peer to supplement teacher-led instruction. When pairs of student work together in a peer tutoring session, one student takes on the role of tutor while the other is the tutee. The flexibility of peer tutoring yields significant improvements for both tutor and tutee. For students with behavior problems, improvements have been found in academics, self esteem, attitude toward school, and peer relation.
as a tutor for their friends that have not been success in getting maximal efficacy criterion yet for mathematics subject with teacher’s guidance.
It is similar to Ischak and Warji in Siti (2012) said that peer tutors are students who have completed a bunch of material, provide assistance to students who have difficulty in understanding the lessons learned material. Then, Goodlad and Hirst in Melissa (2005), says that peer tutoring involves student helpers or tutors assisting in the learning process and helping other peers to learn by teaching.
From the experts say above, it can be concluded that peer tutoring can help students to increase mathematical communication to interpret mathematical ideas through oral, written, and demonstrate it and draw it visually.
But, not all students including the tutors can explain mathematical communication as draw the mathematical idea well. This is caused school especially teachers do not use media that can enhance students' mathematical communication skills, especially in mathematics learning namely in subject the surface area of the upright prism and the upright pyramid to manage students that have learning difficulties. For making students easier to communicate it, it can be helped by using mind mapping as a media in remedial teaching by peer tutoring technique. In addition, John (2003) said that some cooperative learning likes as peer tutoring for ensuring that all of the group members are actively engaged.
And based on interviewing with mathematics teacher in eighth grade of SMP Negeri 1 Medan that teacher did not use media namely mind mapping in teaching-learning process especially in subject the surface area of the upright prism and the upright pyramid. Then teacher just did conventional teaching in classroom where teacher as a centered of teaching-learning process without fully developing and applying various types of approaches and teaching methods in teaching and learning activities
classify ideas, and as an aid to studying and organizing information, solving problems, making decisions, and writing.
Then, in mind mapping, it can be seen the relationship between one idea with another idea. This is very brain makes it easy to understand and absorb the information. It works similar to how the connections in the brain. In addition, mind maps also allow us to develop the idea because we could start with a main idea and then use connections in our brains for ideas to break it down into more detail, (Susana, 2010).
From the explanation above, can be said that mind mapping is a media that is suitable for student’s mathematical communication by performing students as a tutor for the other students having learning difficulties or have not gotten maximal efficacy criterion yet that school has specified it.
Based on analysis above, then need to do research that the title is “ The Differences of Mathematical Communication Ability of Students through Remedial Teaching of Peer Tutoring Using Mind Mapping and Conventional Remedial Teaching in SMP Negeri 1 Medan Learning Year 2011/ 2012”.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on analyzing in the background, then problem identification in this research are:
1. Student’s mathematical communication ability is still low.
2. Student’s activities are more passive during the learning takes place. 3. Teachers have not fully developed and applied various types of
approaches and teaching methods in teaching and learning activities. 4. Less cooperative methods applied by teachers in the learning of
mathematics, especially in subject the surface area of the upright prism and the upright pyramid.
1.3. Problem Limitation
Because of some limitations namely for aspect of time, knowledge, ability, and fund had, so it needs to bound problems in this research to get precise target according to expectation, then limitation of the study is “The Differences of Mathematical Communication Ability of Students through Remedial Teaching of Peer Tutoring Using Mind Mapping and Conventional Remedial Teaching in SMP Negeri 1 Medan Learning Year 2011/ 2012”.
1.4. Problem Formulation
Problem formulation in this research is:
1. Is there the difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping with student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching?
1.5. Research Objective
Together with problems, then research objective of this research is:
1. To know the difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping with student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching.
1.6. Research Benefit 1. For Researcher
• Give information about student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching.
2. For Teachers
• Provide an alternative model of mathematics remedial teaching to be developed for the better so that it can be one of the efforts to improve student learning outcomes.
3. For Students
• Provide new experiences for students and encourage students to engage actively in the learning of mathematics in the classroom.
• To improve mathematical communication skills
• To make learning math become more meaningful and useful.
1.7. Operational Definition
Given terms limitation in the title “The Differences of Mathematical Communication Ability of Students through Remedial Teaching of Peer Tutoring Using Mind Mapping and Conventional Remedial Teaching in SMP Negeri 1 Medan Learning Year 2011/ 2012” to avoid wrong interpretation towards to this research title. The terms need to get clear meaning is:
• Mathematical communication ability is: (i) Able to understand, interpret, and determine mathematical ideas through writing. (ii) Able to express mathematical ideas through writing and draw it visually. (iii) Developing conjectures, developing arguments, formulating definitions, and generalizations.
• Peer tutoring is one model of cooperative learning where smarter students can help another students having learning difficulty. In this research, students are playing role as a tutor are students that have gotten maximal efficacy criterion, and students as a tutee are students that have not gotten maximal efficacy criterion yet.
1
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the gotten result of research from data analysis and test of hypothesis then it can be concluded that:
1. There is difference of student’s mathematical communication ability through remedial teaching of peer tutoring using mind mapping and student’s mathematical communication ability through conventional remedial teaching
5.2. Suggestion
Based on the result and conclusion in this research then researcher has some suggestions, namely:
73
REFERENCE
Ahmadi, A., (2004), Psikologi Belajar Edisi Revisi, Publisher PT Rineka Cipta, Jakarta
Ansari, I.B., (2009), Komunikasi Matematik; Konsep dan Aplikasi, Yayasan Pena, Banda Aceh
Anton, M., (2009), Manfaat Mind Map dalam Proses Belajar Mengajar di Kelas, availbe in http://antoniusmaryadi.blogspot.com/2009/11/manfaat-mind-map-dalam-proses-belajar.html (accessed May 10th, 2012)
Arikunto, S., (2006), Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta
Bagus, A., (2007), Pembelajaran dalam Kelompok Kecil dengan Teknik Probing dalam Upaya MeningkatkanKemampuan Pemahaman dan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa SMP,Thesis, UPI, Bandung
Brinkley, K., (2011), Peer Teaching, available in http://tenntlc.utk.edu/files/2010/12/HowToPeerTeachingFinal1.pdf
(accessed May 10th, 2012)
Buzan, T., (2004), Mind Map Untuk Meningkatkan Kreativitas, Gramedia, Jakarta (2007), Buku Pintar Mind Map Untuk Anak, Gramedia, Jakarta
Duran, D., (2010), Cooperative Interactions in Peer Tutoring; Patterns and
Sequences in Paired Writing, available in
http://ice2.uab.cat/grai/Documents%20i%20recursos/cooperativeinteracti ons.pdf (accessed May 15th, 2012)
Hamid, A., (2009), Buku Ajar Evaluasi Pembelajaran, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Syah Kuala, Aceh
Isjoni, H., (2009), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi Antar Peserta Didik, Publisher Pustaka Pelajar, Pekan Baru
John, W. B., (2003), Mind Maps as Classroom Exercise, available in
http://www.legacy-irc.csom.umn.edu/faculty/jbudd/mindmaps/mindmaps.pdf (accessed May 13th, 2012)
74
Classroom: Middle Grades Mathematics (m.s 280-298), Publisher Macmillan Publishing Company for NCTM, New York
Kurikulum 2004, (2004), Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Matematika Sekolah Menengah Pertama dan Madrasah Tsanawiyah, Publisher Depdiknas, Jakarta
Lestari, G.E., and Maliki, (2003), Komunikasi yang Efektif, Publisher Lembaga Administrasi Negara, Jakarta.
Makmun, A., (2007), Psikologi Kependidikan Perangkat Sistem Pengajarn Modul, Publisher PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung
Marcus, I., (2010), The Power of Mind Mapping, available in http://www.mapyourmind.com/ebook.pdf (accessed May 16th, 2012) Mary, S., Benji, L., (2000), Peer Teaching and Peer Learning Revisited, available
in http://203.72.145.166/ELT/files/54-3-1.pdf (accessed: May, 11th 2012)
Melissa, A. M., (2005), Using Peer Tutoring in The Classroom:or Students With Applications for Students With Emotional/ Behavioral Disorders,
available in http://www.ccbd.net/sites/default/files/BEBE_Fall_2005_Vol15_No1_p2
5-30.pdf (accessed: May, 10th 2012)
Mulyadi, (2010), Diagnosis Kesulitan Belajar dan Bimbingan terhadap Kesulitan Belajar Khusus, Publisher Nuhalitera, Yogyakarta
NCTM, (1989), Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, Publisher VA: Arthur, Reston
Available in http://www.nctm.org/meetings/ (accessed: May, 10th 2012)
Padakannaya, P., Nishanimut, P., Karibasappa, C., (2008), A Remedial Teaching Programme to Help Children With Mathematics Disability, Asia Pacific Disablity Rehabilitation Journal Vol. 19-No. 2, available inhttp://www.aifo.it/english/resources/online/apdrj/apdrj208/mathematica l_disability.pdf (accessed February 13, 2012)
75
Rafika, S., (2012), Peer Tutoring, available in http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/direct/94382600?extension
=pdf&ft=1339090173<=1339093783&uahk=n73YX58FrU4cohx1iCZ H3o47l44 (accessed February 13rd, 2012)
Rotua, (2011), Komunikasi Matematis, available in http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/direct/94387458?extension
=pdf&ft=1339090126<=1339093736&uahk=QYpU+55lAwvNHH73O kWDR10XBpg, (accessed March 14th, 2012)
Saragih, S., (2007), Sikap Siswa Terhadap Pembelajaran Matematika, available in http://zainuri.files.wordpress.com/2007/11 (accessed February 13, 2012) Siregar, N., (2009), Studi Perbandingan Kemampuan Penalaran Matematik Siswa
Madrasah Tsanawiyah pada Kelas yang Belajar Geometri Berbantuan Geometers Sketchpad dengan Siswa yang Belajar Geometri tanpa Geometer’s Sketchpad, Thesis, UPI, Bandung
Sriyanto, H.J., (2007), Strategi Sukses Menguasai Matematika, Publisher Indonesia Cerdas, Yogyakarta
Sudjana, (2001), Metoda Statistika, Publisher Tarsito, Bandung
Sugiyono, (2008), Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D, Alfabeta, Bandung
Sue, O., et.al, (2009), Group Peer Review as an Active Learning Strategy in a
Research Course, available in http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE481.pdf (accessed: May, 10th
2012)
Suen, M., (2007), Special Education, Chapter III: Remedial Teaching Strategies, available inhttp://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=2607&langno=1 (accessed December 25, 2011)
Suen, M., (2007) Special Education, Chapter II: Aim of Remedial available inhttp://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_3993/unit_ii_aim_of _remedial_teaching.pdf (accessed January 23, 2012)
Sukardi, H., (20080, Evaluasi Pendidikan Prinsip dan Operasionalnya, Publisher Bumi Aksara, Jakarta
Sutedjo, (2009), Sistem Penilaian KTSP Panduan Penyelenggaraan
Pembelajaran Remedial, available
76
Sutirman, (2009), Komunikasi Efektif dalam Pembelajaran, available in http://tirman.wordpress.com/komunikasi-efektif-dalam-pembelajaran/ (accessed February 11th, 2012)
Suyitno, A., (2005), Dasar-Dasar dan Proses Pembelajaran Matematika 1, FMIPA UNNES, Semarang
Panjaitan, V., (2011), Persepsi Siswa terhadap Pelaksanaan Pengajaran Remedial IPA Terpadu dan Hubungannya dengan Hasil Belajar Siswa SMP Negeri 1 Air Joman Kabupaten Asahan T.P. 2010/ 2011, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan
Priyatno, Duwi., (2011), Buku Saku SPSS; Analisis Statistik Data Lebih Cepat, Efisien, dan Akurat, Mediakom, Yogyakarta
Wijaya, C., (2007), Pendidikan Remedial Sarana; Pengembangan Mutu Sumberdaya Maanusia, Publisher PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung
