THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES ON STATIC
FLUIDS TOPIC AT CLASS XI SMA CERDAS MURNI A C A D E M I C Y E A R 2 0 1 3 / 2 0 1 4
By:
Nur Azizah Pulungan Reg. Number: 4103322016
Study Program: Physics Bilingual Education
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
iii
BIOGRAPHY
Nur Azizah pulungan was born in Medan at December 26th 1991. Father’s
name is Drs. Syarif S. Pulungan and Mother’s name is Faridah Nasution, and she
is the second of three children. In 1998, the author entered SD N 106814 and
graduate in 2004. In 2004, the author continues her education in SMP Amir
Hamzah Medan and graduate in 2007. In 2007, the author continues her education
to SMA Cerdas Murni and graduated 2010. In 2010, the author accepted in
Physical Education Studies Program in Department of Physics, Faculty of
PREFACE
The authors say the praise and gratitude to God Almighty, for all the
graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to the author that this study
can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time.
Thesis entitled "The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to
Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class XI SMA
Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree
Physical Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State
University of Medan.
On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr. Drs. Eidi Sihombing,
M.S, as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author
since the beginning of the study until the completed of this thesis writing. Thanks
also to Prof. Dr. Sahyar, M.S., MM, Drs. Pintor Simamora, M.Si, and Dr. Derlina,
M.Si, who have provided input and suggestions to complete this thesis. Thanks
also presented to Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D as the academic supervisor also
as Dean Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and to coordinator of
bilingual Prof. Dr. rer.nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si, and the entire lecturer and staff
in physics department of FMIPA UNIMED who have helped the
author. Appreciation were also presented to headmaster and all teachers in SMA
Cerdas Murni who have helped during this research. I would like to thank
especially to my father Drs. Syarif S. Pulungan, my mother Farida Nasution and
my grand parents also my brothers, Mara Halim Pulungan, S.P., and
Muhammad Iqbal Pulungan also all family who have prayed and gave me
encouragement and funding to complete my study in Unimed. Especially thanks
to all my friends in Bilingual Physics Class 2010, Fitri, Roffi, Rindy, Feggi, Tika,
Evi, Uli, Chritine, Jovan, James, Rikcy, Indra, Jeneva, and Riando who have
helped, prayed and gave supported me. I also would like to thank to my PPL
friends, Fitri, Mimi, Mila, Meilani, Fita, Fika, and Rully who have helped and
The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this
thesis, but the author is aware there are many drawbacks in terms of both content
and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive
criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of
this paper would be useful in enriching the reportoire of knowledge.
Medan, July 2014
Author,
iii
The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class
XI SMA Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014
Nur Azizah Pulungan (Reg. Number 4103322016) ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to find out the difference of students’ learning outcomes using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning on static fluids topic at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni. The research method was quasi experiment. The population was all students at class XI SMA semester II SMA Cerdas Murni consist of 4 classes. The sample of this research conduct two classes and consist of 20 students, class XI-1 as experimental class and class XI-2 as control class and define by cluster random sampling. The result that was obtained the average value in experimental class after given treatment is 74.99 and the average value in control class after given treatment is 65.33. Deviation standard in experimental class is 13.30 and in control class is 10.28. The average value of students’ psychomotor in experimental class is 77.96, and the average value of students’ affective in experimental class is 80.67. Normality test result of both samples are normally distributed. Homogeneity test result of both samples come from a homogeneous population. Hypothesis test result for posttest data using t-test one tail is tcount > ttabel = 2.571 > 1.68 with = 0.05. So it can be concluded that the students’ learning outcome using guided inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning in Static Fluids topic at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.
vi
1.2. Problem Identification 4
1.3. Problem Limitation 4
2.6.1. Conventional Learning 11
2.6.2. Steps in Conducting Conventional Learning 12 2.6.3. Advantages of Conventional Learning 12 2.6.4. Disadvantages of Conventional Learning 13
2.6.5. Inquiry Learning Model 13
2.6.5.1. Guided Inquiry Learning Model 17
vii
2.11.Fundamental Law of Hydrostatics 24
2.12.Archimedes’s Principle 25
2.13.Pascal’s Law 27
2.14. Conceptual Framework 28
2.15. Research Hypothesis 29
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 30
3.1. Location and Time of Research 30
3.1.1. Location of Research 30
3.1.2. Time of Research 30
3.2. Pupolation and Sample of Research 30
3.2.1. Population of Research 30
3.6.1. Instrument of Cognitive Domain 33
3.6.2. Instrument of Affective Domain 34
3.6.3. Instrument of Psychomotor Domain 36
3.6.4. Validity Test 38
3.7. Data Analysis Technique 38
3.7.1. Determine The Average Value 48
3.7.2. Determine The Deviation Standard 39
3.7.3. Determine The Normality Test 39
3.7.4. Determine The Homogeny Test 39
3.7.5. Determine The Hypothesis Test 39
viii
4.1.1.6. Hypothesis Testing 47
4.1.2. Students’ Learning Outcomes in Affective Domain 47 4.1.3. Students’ Learning Outcomes in Psychomotor Domain 49
4.2. Discussion 50
CHAPTER V 53
5.1. Conclusion 53
5.2. Suggestion 53
ix
LIST OF FIGURE
Page
Figure 2.1. Inquiry Model ………...………...………... 16
Figure 2.2. Four Different Shapes of Vessel ……….... 24
Figure 2.3. U-Shaped Tube Contains Oil and Water ………... 24
Figure 2.4. Sinking Body ………... 26
Figure 2.5. Floating Body ……… 26
Figure 2.6. Neither Sinking nor Floating Body ………... 26
Figure 2.7. Principle of Hydraulic Jack ………... 27
Figure 3.1. Overview of Research Planning ………...…... 33
Figure 4.1. Chart of Pretest Data in Experimental and Control Class ……. 44
Figure 4.2. Chart of Posttest Data in Experimental and Control Class …… 45
Figure 4.3. Chart of Students’ Affective in Experimental and Control Class ………....…………... 48
xi
Appendix 6. Experiment Worksheet III ………..…. 103
Appendix 7. Student’s Worksheet I ………...…….. 107
Appendix 8. Student’s Worksheet II ……….…………... 109
Appendix 9. Student’s Worksheet III ………..……. 115
Appendix 10. Pretest Questions ………. 117
Appendix 11. Lattice of Pretest Questions …...………...…………... 120
Appendix 12. Posttest Questions ………....… 128
Appendix 13. Lattice of Posttest Questions ………..…...………….. 131
Appendix 14. Pretest and Posttest Data in Experimental Class ………. 139
Appendix 15. Pretest and Posttest Data in Control Class ………... 140
Appendix 16. Calculation of Average Value and Deviation Standard ……... 141
Appendix 17. Calculation of Normality Test ………. 144
Appendix 18. Calculation of Homogeneity Test ……… 148
Appendix 19. Calculation of Hypothesis Test ……… 150
Appendix 20. Observation Table of Students’ Affective in Experimental Class ...….……….……….……..…... 153
Appendix 21. Observation Table of Students’ Affective in Control Class .... 154
xii
Appendix 23. Observation Table of Students’ Psychomotoric in Control
Class ………... 156
Appendix 24. List of Critical Value for Liliefors ………... 157
Appendix 25. List of Percentil Value for Distribution t ………. 158
Appendix 26. Table of Region Under Normal Curve 0 to z ……….. 159
Appendix 27. Table of Critical values for F-test for Alpha = 0.1 ………….. 160
1
main activities in teaching and learning are the emphasis on engaging students in
learning,
One of the subjects that is taught in school, especially in high school is
physics. Physics is the science that studies about natural phenomenon. Therefore,
physics is one of the lessons that quite interesting because it relates directly to
natural phenomena and knowledge can be applied in daily life.
But in fact physics is one lesson that has the lowest score. This is caused
by the large number of students who do not like physics and they think physics is
a difficult subject to understand, especially when faced with a complicated
formulas and calculations. This fact is in accordance with the results of
observations conducted by researchers in SMA Cerdas Murni. Researcher use
questioner instrument to observe student interest in physics subject. From the
observation result, there is 10 % student say that they don’t like physics, 58 % student say that physics isn’t interest to learn and 32 % says that they like physics, just 5 % student say that they really like physics. Before learn physics, just 13 %
student prepare themselves before learn physics, 25 % student sometimes do the
preparation, 57 % student just see the title without do the preparation, and there is
9 % student don’t do anything and there is 18 % student interest to solve physics
problem by themselves, 41 % student interest to solve physics problem with
discussion, 58 % student solve physics problem when the problem is easy and
there is 8 % student don’t want to solve physics problem. From the observation
result above, researcher conclude that student in SMA Cerdas Murni isn’t interest
to learn physics and this will be influenced the student outcome in learning
2
Researchers also interviewed three physics teachers in SMA Cerdas
Murni. The teachers have the same answer when researcher asking about the
student learning outcomes. They say that student learning outcomes that are
generally still low at an average of 60, so it can be said score the average student
does not achieve the expected criteria. The researchers observed that the physics
teachers, especially in class XI SMA generally apply lecturing method more than
the other methods in learning activities, in fact the method is not accordance with
the purpose of learning. This is due to the teachers are not fully apply the
appropriate methods for each materials. The teacher's role is more dominant,
material presented by the teacher is more likely to lecturing method, the student
learn or repeat the lesson only in exam time so the students do not understand the
material overall, when the teacher gives the test higher than the material that has
been written, the student can not answer it. This is caused by to students are not
beeing regularly to solve a problem. This learning activities becomes a problem
for students because some of them are not able to understand the material.
To improve student’s learning outcomes, teachers can perform a variety
method, for example using a method of effective teaching and learning in
accordance with the objectives set in the curriculum. Inquiry is a model used in
learning process, the main purpose of inquiry is to develop skill, intellectual,
critical thinking and able to solve problems scientifically. Students are expected to
investigate why an event took place then collect and process the scientific data to
solve a problem. The advantages of inquiry learning model is make the students
able to understand the ideas and basic concepts better than before, encourage them
to think and work initiatively, objectively and formulate their own hypothesis,
which makes the situation of the learning process become more interesting.
From previous research, Rumahorbo, (2014) in the research journal about
the learning quality improvement in class entitled “Effect of Inquiry-Based
Learning Model on Student’s learning Outcomes in Topic of Dinamic Electricity
in Grade X SMAN 2 Balige academic year 2013/2014” obtained that the pretest
3
83.57 while the pretest average value in control class was 48.8 and posttest
average value was 75.67.
Research by Ariska, (2012), entitled “Implementation of Guided Inquiry to
Improve Student’s Learning Motivation and Learning Outcomes of Human
Respiratory System for 2nd Grade Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi”, it was
found that the cycle IV of learning outcome increased by 32.3% to 94.94%. The
activity of students reached of 97.06%. Other research conducted by Zebua,
(2012), entitled “Strategi Pembelajaran Inquiry pada materi pokok Hukum
Newton di kelas X SMA Gajah Mada Medan T.P. 2010/2011”, obtained the pretest
average value in experimental class is 47.71 and the posttest average value in
experimental class is 73.29. While the pretest average value in control class is
43.29 and the the posttest average value in control class is 66.86. Based on these
data, there are some improvement in student’s learning outcome using inquiry
learning model in subject matter of Newton's Law. Research conducted by Yunus,
et al, (2013) obtained that the implementation of physics inquiry based learning
can improve student learning outcomes auditory.
Learning outcomes of students taught with inquiry learning model
significantly different from taught with conventional learning, with the average
value of the test in the experimental class is 70.68 while the control class with an
average value of 66.46. The analysis results the standard deviation between
inquiry and conventional significance level of 1% (0.01) is ttabel = 2.64 while tcount
= 3.80, so that Ho is rejected and Ha accepted. The students who learn in the
inquiry learning model is able to learn well, where students can express their own
opinion according to their experience with a percentage of 12.1%, whereas in the
conventional learning students can not express their opinion better, this can be
proven when the students are asked how to overcome the land, water, air and
sound pollution with a percentage of 12% (Kamal, et al, 2011). Based on some of
these research, it can be concluded that the use of guided inquiry learning model
can assist students in learning the scientific method and foster research skills such
as working in groups, writing, and verbal expression, experience in solving
4
Based on that problems, the author interested in applying guided inquiry
learning model to improve student’s learning achievement, especially in the static
fluids topic. Thus this study is formulated by the title “The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class XI SMA Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014”.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the background above, the problems identification of this
research are as follows:
1. Students have difficulty to understand the physics concept.
2. Students are not active in physics learning activities.
3. Teachers often use conventional method in learning activities.
4. Teachers use few model in learning physics
5. Teachers still dominate the class in teaching and learning activities.
1.3. Problem Limitation
Based on the problem identification, the authors limit the issues in this
research so that the study can be focused and achieve the goals. The limitation of
these problems are as follow:
1. Learning model used in this research are guided inquiry learning model
for the experimental class and conventional learning for the control
class.
2. The material taught is static fluids.
3. Subject of this research is the students at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni
academic year 2013/2014.
1.4. Problem Formulation
In accordance with the limitation problem, the problem formulation of this
5
1. How is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided
inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA
Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?
2. Is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided
inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning at class XI
SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?
1.5. Research Objectives
The research objectives are as follows:
1. To know the student learning result on static fluids topic using guided
inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA
Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.
2. To know whether the student’s learning result on static fluids topic
using guided inquiry learning model greater than conventional learning
at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.
1.6. Research Benefits
After doing this research, the significant benefits expected are:
1. For school : Gives good contribution in order to improve the learning
process and the quality of school by increasing student
achievement and teacher professionalism.
2. For teacher : As a consideration in selecting learning model in teaching
physics.
3. For student : The guided inquiry learning model can improve the student
learning outcomes in physics and help students to be more
active in the learning process.
4. For researcher : Adds the author’s knowledge in using guided inquiry
53
1. The average value of students’ learning outcomes using guided inquiry
learning model is greater than the students’ learning outcomes using
conventional learning.
2. Students’ activity as long as using guided inquiry learning model
increased, from the first meeting up to the third meeting. The category of students’ activity is good. And students’ affective as long as using guided inquiry learning model also increased, from the first meeting up
to the third meeting. The category of students’ affective is good.
3. Based on the results of data analysis, the processing of hypothesis test
using t-test get that tcount > ttable, so it can be stated that the students’
learning outcome in static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning
model is greater than conventional learning in class XI SMA Cerdas
Murni.
1.2. Suggestion
Based on the research result and discussion before, researcher give
suggestions as follows :
1. For the next researcher, should use the time effectively thus the syntax
in guided inquiry learning model can achieved and occurs well.
2. For the next researcher, should prepare observer for each group to get accurate data and to observe the students’ affective better if researcher take daily notes of students from class teacher.
3. For the next researcher, should give more attention and guidance to
54 Approach To Teaching Research methods in Information Studies Education for Information 29: 19–38.
Arends, R.I., (2009), Learning to Teach, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Arikunto, S., (2012), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Ariska, R. N., (2012), Implementation of Guided Inquiry to Improve Students’ Motivation and Learning Outcomes of Human Respiratory System for 2nd grade Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
Dimyati and Mudjiono, (2002), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Hamalik, O., (2006), Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Hewit, P.G., (2006), Conceptual Physics 10th edition, Addison Wesley, America.
Istarani, (2011), 58 Metode Pembelajaran Inovatif, Media Persada, Medan.
Joyce, B., (2004) Models of Teaching 2nd edition, Prentice/Hall International. Inc, New Jersey.
Joyce, B., and Weil, M., (1972), Models of Teaching, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall International, Inc.
Kamal, S., Jailani, and Rahmi, (2012), Efektivitas Pembelajaran Inquiry Terhadap Hasil dan Aktivitas Belajar Siswa MTsN Sakti Kota Bakti Kabupaten Pidie, Laporan Hasil Penelitian.
Kanginan, M., (2006), Fisika untuk SMA Kelas XI, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Kuhlthau, C. C., (2004), Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services, 2nd ed, Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Kuhlthau, C. C. Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari. A. K., (2007), Guided inquiry: Learning in the 21st century, Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
55
Rumahorbo, R.M., (2014), Effect of Inquiry Based learning Model on Student’s Learning Outcomes in Topic of Dinamic Electricity in Grade X SMA N 2 Balige Academic Year 2013/2014. Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
Sani, R.A., (2013), Inovasi Pembelajaran, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Sanjaya, W., (2006), Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran, Kencana, Jakarta.
Sanjaya, W., (2009), Strategi Pembelajaran, Kencana, Jakarta.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor – Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Slavin, R.E., (2006), Educational Psychology: theory and practice (Eight edition), USA, John Hapkins University.
Sudijono, A., (2009), Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta.
Sudjana, (2008), Metoda Statistika, Tarsito, Bandung.
Sudjana, (2009), Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung.
Sunardi, (2006), Fisika Bilingual untuk SMA Kelas XI, Yrama Widya, Bandung.
Suryabrata, S., (2002), Metologi Penelitian, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Trianto, (2010), Mendesain Model pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana, Jakarta.
Yunus, S. R., Sanjaya, I. G. M., Jatmiko, B., (2013), Implementasi pembelajaran fisika berbasis guided inquiry untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa auditorik, Laporan Hasil Penelitian, FMIPA UNNES Semarang.
