THE COMPARISON OF LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT AND ACTIVITIES BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT WITH GROUP AND INDIVIDUAL WORK OF PBLGRADE XI IA SMAN 1 MATAULI ACADEMIC YEAR 2012/2013.

17 

Teks penuh

(1)

THE COMPARISON OF LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT AND ACTIVITIES BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT WITH

GROUP AND INDIVIDUAL WORK OF PBL IN GRADE XI IA SMAN 1MATAULI

ACADEMIC YEAR 2012/2013

By:

Triana Puspasari Gultom 409342033

Biology Bilingual Education Study Programe

THESIS

Submitted to fulfill the requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATEUNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

(2)
(3)

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the writer would like to praise God for His Love and grace that has given health and wisdom, so this thesis can be completed properly in accordance with planned time.

Thesis with the title “The Comparison of Learning Achievement and Activities between Students Taught with Group and Individual Work of PBL Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013” is aimed in fulfilling a requirement to get the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan at Biology department, faculty Mathematics and natural science, State University of Medan.

Firstly the writer would like to express her great gratitude to Prof. Dr Herbert Sipahutar,M.S,M.Sc as her consultant for her generous assistance, guidance, advices and valuable time to read and discuss the thesis until it is completed. The author also would like thank profusely to Prof. Drs. Motlan,

M.Sc, Ph.D., as dean of the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, State University of Medan. Thank Dr. Fauziah Harahap, M.Si., Dra. Meida Nugrahalia, M.Sc., Dr. Hasruddin, M.Pd., as the lecturer team of examiners, for their suggestions and constructive criticisms for the revision of this thesis and Drs. H. Ashar Hasairin, M.Si. as her academic supervisor who has guided the author during academic program. The writer also thanks to Drs. H. Tri Harsono, M.Si as the head of Biology department, Prof. Dr Herbert Sipahutar,M.S,M.Sc as the coordinator of bilingual study program and also all officers in Biology department who had help the writer in arranging this thesis. Thank the headmaster of SMA Negeri 1 Matauli, Murdianto,S.Pd, M.M and Biology teacher, Mrs. Suhrotul widyah,S.Pd, Mrs. Irmayanti, S.Si, and all the teachers also students especially XI IA 2 and XI IA 3 in SMA Negeri 1 Matauli who received the presence of the

writer during research in the classes.

Writer thanks fully her beloved father Ombis Gultom and mother Lukeria

(4)

v

Martogap, Virnando, Dedearta and Ona Gultom who always give support and pray to the writer.

The writer thanks her small family in UKMKP (B’Doyar, Rina, and Ivo) and also family in El-Senyor Choir (B’Lambok, and all the members) and also for all her friends in Biology Bilingual ’09 and especially 7 sun (Ivo, Rina, Remli, Tresia, Nella, Wiwik) who always give spirit and motivation to the writer as the struggling friends. Writer also thanks B’Risya, B’Jhon, Mona and team PPLT MTN, and also for all the students Ank 17 MTN who always support the writer and thanks Ozora Choir (Mami ve, K’Maya, K’Ina and all the members). And

special thanks to Gregorius Tinambunan who always supports, motivates and prays for the writer.

The writer had tried as much as possible in the completion of this thesis, but the writer is aware there are still many weaknesses in terms of content and

grammar therefore the writer is pleased to receive some suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for thesis perfectly. Presumably the contents of this thesis are useful in enriching science and education.

Medan, July 2013 Author,

(5)

iii

THE COMPARISON OF LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT AND

ACTIVITIES BETWEEN STUDENTS TAUGHT WITH

GROUP AND INDIVIDUAL WORK OF PBL

GRADE XI IA SMAN 1 MATAULI

learning achievement and students activities between students taught with group and individual work of problem based learning model on human excretory topic in SMAN 1 Matauli Academic year 2012/2013. The population of this research was all students in SMAN 1 Matauli totaling 202 students. The sample was taken by using cluster random sampling and was obtained the sample for 30 students of PBL with group work and 30 students of PBL with individual. The instrument of research was student’s cognitive learning achievement test in multiple choise with 30 questions which had been validated by expert lecturer. The result of data analysis showed that pretest has nearly value, in free PBL with group work class (61.27±4.18) and pretest in PBL with individual work class (61.05±3.97) which statistically have no significant difference. Post-test in PBL with individual work class (89.69±3.84) is higher than PBL with group work class (81.70±4.53). Prerequisite test of analysis consisted of normality test and homogeneity test. The result was showed that all groups were in normal distribution and the sample has same of variant value (homogeneous data). After t-test was carried out by using significance degree ά = 0.05, it was obtained that tcount = 0.17> ttable= 1.683, so based on the criteria that Ho accepted if tcount < ttable, so this research rejected Ho and accepted Ha. The conclusion of this research is there is significant difference of student’s cognitive learning achievement between PBL with group work and PBL with individual work on human excretory system in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli academic year 2012/2013. Then, result of students activities in PBL with group work has average 69.70 and in PBL with individual work has average 76.42. Based on the result of data, students activities in both classes also shown the different percentage of classroom activities.

(6)

vi

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

Ratification Sheet i

Curriculum vitae ii

Abstract iii

Acknowledgment iv

Table of Content vi

List of Figure viii

List of Table ix

List of Appendices x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background 1

1.2 Problem Identification 3

1.3 The Scope of Study 4

1.4 Research Question 4

1.5 Research Objectives 4

1.6 Significance of Research 5

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2.1 Understanding of Learning 6

2.2 Learning Achievement 7

2.3 Learning Plans 7

2.4Students Activities 8

2.5Problem Based Learning 10

2.6 The Advantages and Weaknesses of Group and Individual Work 15 2.7The Description Materials of Excretory System 15

2.8Research Hypothesis 22

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 The Location and Time of the Research 23

(7)

vii

3.3 Research Variable 25

3.4 Research Design 25

3.5Research Instrument 26

3.6Research Procedure 32

3.7 Data Analysis 35

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Result 37

4.2. Discussion 42

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclussion 46

5.2Recommendation 46

(8)

ix

LIST OF TABLE

Page

Table 2.1 Syntax of FBL 14

Table 3.1 Number of Grade X1 science student 23 SMAN 1 Matuli Pandan Academic Year 2012/2013

Table 3.2 The design of study two groups (pre-test and post-test) 26 Table 3.3Thecognitive levels of questions of instrument 27

divided from indicators of syllabus

Table 3.4 TeachingLearning Activities 33

Table 4.1 Normality Test Data 37

Table 4.2 Homogeneity Test Data 37

Table 4.3 Data of t-test for post-test between PBL with 38

(9)

x

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix 1 Syllabus 49

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan PBL with Group Work 51 Appendix 3 Lesson Plan PBL with Individual Work 63 Appendix 4 Student’s Activity Sheet with Group work 75 Appendix 5 Student’s Activity Sheet with Individual work 87

Appendix 6 Student’s Achievement test 99

Appendix 7 Answer key 106

Appendix8 Observation Sheet of Student’s activity 107 Appendix 9 Validation Sheet of Instrument Test 109

Appendix 10 Validity Instrument 110

Appendix 11 Calculation of Validity Instrument 111

Appendix 12 Reliability Instrument 113

Appendix 13 Calculation of Reliability Instrument 114

Appendix 14 Difficulty Index 115

Appendix 15 Calculation of Difficulty index 116

Appendix 16 Discrimination Index 117

Appendix 17 Calculation of Discrimination Index 118

Appendix 18 Normality Test 120

Appendix 19 Calculation of Normality Test 122

Appendix 20 Homogeneity Test 126

Appendix 21 Calculation of Homogeneity Test 129

Appendix 22 Hypothesis Test 132

Appendix 23 Calculation of Hypothesis Test 133

Appendix 24 Normalized Gain 137

Appendix 25 Calculation Hypothesis Testing of Normalized Gain 139

(10)

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Bacground

Natural science is related to how to search and how to find natural problem sistematically. Thus natural science is not only a way to master knowledges in the form of facts, concepts or principles, but also a process of discovery. One of the problem in education is the weakness of learning process, especially in natural science subject (Mathematics, Physics, Biology, and Chemistry). Learning

process in class is focus on the students ability to memorize and to remember all the information without be expected to understand that information.

Macarandang (2009) said that many schools in Batangas city (Philippines) are producing non qualify graduates.Many students are good in memorizing the

information, facts and conceptsbut pour in understanding, so students did not know how to connect and applicate it in daily life. For natural science, concepts understanding and application is very important for students in order to be able to solve any problem in their daily life. A major challenge in the teaching and learning of biology isthe development of students’ abilities to gather, analyze,apply, and synthesize information. These skills are importantfor students to understand the basic biological concepts and the scientific process (Gehring et al, 2008).

Some factors that influence the quality of learning, as indicated by the

student’s learning achievement, are students themselves, teachers, strategy or

methods of learning, learning models, learning tools and evaluation (Fana, et al, 2011). So to increase the learning quality, it needs to plan and design the learning

process by developing learning tools (Hamzah, 2008:2). One of the important component of learning tools that influence learning outcomes is the learning methods.

In the process of teaching and learning in classroom, teacher is one of the

(11)

2

chance for students to develop their discovery and problem solving skills (Trianto, 2009:5).

The role of teachers in education can not be separated from their ability to deliver material to students. Therefore, teachers need to enhance the ability to disign, develop and implement teaching tools and processes in order to improve

the students’ potential (Tirtarahardja & Sulo, 2008:1). In the tools, teacher should

be ableto determine the best strategy, materials, time allocation, relevancy, feasibilty and the goals of study before doing teaching process (Harjanto, 2010:4).All that planning is arranged in learning tools, such as syllabus, lesson

plan, worksheet, evaluation instrument, test, learning media and students’ text book (Trianto, 2009:201).

Nowadays, learning models that expected can change the learning environment are available. Therefore, to increase student outcomes, teachers

should able to select and use the suitable learning models, mainly student-centered models, that motivate students to be more active in learning process. One of the models is Problem Based Learning(PBL).Preliminary research on the development of learning tools based on Problem Based Learning model(Paidi, 2009), indicatesthat student’s achievement in biology is increased if thought with any student-centered models. Biology learning tools based on PBL model was able to improve the student’s ability to solve any problem and to enhance their critical thinking. Furthermore, Oguz - Unver and Sertac (2011) reviewed that there is no any study reporting significant negative findings on the students outcomes and skill related to PBL.

Fana (2011), reported that PBL is effective to increase student’s learning achievement and problem solving skill in SMA IPA students. In this study, PBL

was effectively increase student minimum criteria of mastery from 60 % to 93 %. From many lerning models that mostly developed in education tend to cooperative learning which implemented by student’s group working. Cumming (2010) said that group work can encourage the development of key professional

(12)

3

can be a complex problem. Heller and Hollabaugh (1992) reported that group work is not always effective to improve the learning outcomes. The data of questinare indicates that not all the students were statisfy with cooperative- group problem solving. There were 72% of students agreed that group discussion helped them understand the course material while 28% of them was not agree. Then when doing test, there were 68% students agreed that group discussion could improve the students result while 325 of them were not agree for that.

Biology is a knowledge that has an important role in the development science and technology. So students are not only need to memorize the concept of

biology butthey need to understand and even to know how to apply it. Excretory system is one of the biology topic which is categorized as difficult lesson to be understood because of its complicated characteristics of physical and chemical process. Students must have already been on the stage of formal conceptual

thinking while learning Excretory system topic (Lazarowits, 1992:12)

Based on the background, the writer interested to conduct research with the title “ The Comparisonof Learning Achievement and Activities betweenStudents Taught with Group and Individual Work of PBL in grade

XI SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013”.

1.2 Problem Identification

From the background above, the following problems areidentified:

1. Learning process tends to focus on teacher domination and students are dependent on teacher information.

2. Teachers are lacking of use learning tools with variance model in teaching and learning activities.

3. Students are good in memorizing the information, facts and concepts but poor in understanding.

4. Apart of students can not work in group so it causes the different of constributing in discussion.

(13)

4

6. The student’s mastery learning in biology are generally below the school

standard.

1.3 The Scope of Study

Based on the identification on the problem above, the scope of study are:

1. Learning biology which can improve the students’ learning achievement by

using Problem Based Learning.

2. The comparison of both grouping strategy using PBL is seen by the result of student’s learning achievement. Student’s learning achievement that intended in this study is cognitive test and problem solving skill.

3. Subject matter is limited to the Human Excretory System topic in grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013.

1.4 Research Question

In accordance with the issues that have been stated, then the problem can be formulated:

1. Is there any difference in learning achievement between students taught with group and individual work of Problem Based Learning on HumanExcretory System in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013?

2. Is there any difference of activities between students taught by group and individual work of Problem Based Learning on HumanExcretory System in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013?

1.5 Reseach Objectives

The objectives of this research are:

1. To Know the difference of learning achievement between students taught by group and individual work of Problem Based Learning on Human Excretory System in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013.

2. To know thedifference of activities between students taught by group and

(14)

5

1.6 Significances of Research

The significances that expected from the results of this research are:

1. For teachers, they can enhance the innovative learning model by using Problem Based Learning in Learning tools on teaching and learning process in the classroom.

2. For students, they can mastery the concepts in the Human Excretory System topic easier and also can solve any problem about Human Excretory System in their daily life.

(15)

46 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1. Conclussion

The conclussion of this research are:

1. Learning achievement of students taught by PBL with individual work is higher than PBL with group work and based on t-test, Ho is rejected and Ha is received, means that there is a significant differenceof learning achievement between students taught with group and individual work of

Problem Based Learning on Human Excretory System in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013.

2. Students activitiesof PBL class with individual work is higher than PBL class with group work and based on t-test, Ho is rejected and Ha is received,

means that there is a significant difference of students activitiesbetween group and individual work of Problem Based Learning on Human Excretory System in Grade XI IA SMAN 1 Matauli Academic Year 2012/2013.

5.2.Recommendation

Having considered the findings of this research, the suggestions are:

1. Biologyteacherscan enhance the innovative learning model by using Problem Based Learning which expected to increase students’ learning achievements and students’ problem solving skill and better to use Problem Based Learning Model with individual work for more focus on

the student’s ability in solving the problem.

2. In practice, teachers also need to choose the material according to the

(16)

47

REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsimi, (2009), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Edisi Revisi, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.

Awang, Halizah & Ramly, Ishak, (2008), Creative Thinking Skill Approach Through Problem-Based Learning: Pedagogy and Practice in the Engineering Classroom, International Journal of Human and Social Sciences3:1

Curming, Jennifer, (2010), Student-initiated Group Management Strategies for More Effective and Enjoyable Group Work Experiences, Journal of Hospitally, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 9: 2

Diana, Rachmy, (2006), Setiap Anak Cerdas, Setiap Anak Kreatif. Menghidupkan Keberbakatan dan Kreativitas Anak, Jurnal Psikologi Universitas Diponegoro 3:2

Dimyati, Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.

Gehring, Kathleen et al, (2007), Information Fluency for Undergraduate Biology Majors: Applications of Inquiry-based Learning in a Developmental Biology Course, CBE- Life Sciences Education, 7: 54-63

Kunandar, 2007, Guru Profesional Implementasi Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP) dan Sukses dalam Sertifikasi Guru. Jakarta: PT. Rajagrafindo Persada.

Lestari, Endang, (2006), Biologi SMA/MA, Departemen pendidikan Nasional, Jakarta.

Macarandang, Marcedes, (2009), Evaluation of Proposed Set of Modules in

Principles and Method of Teaching, E-International Scientific Research Journal, 1

Paidi, (2009), Pengembangan Perangkat Pembelajaran dan Pengaruhnya terhadap Kemmpuan Metakognitif, Pemecahan Masalah, dan Penguasaan Konsep

(17)

48

Patricia, Heller and Hollabaugh, Mark, (1992), Teaching Problem Solving Through Cooperative Grouping. Part 2: Designing Problems and Structuring Groups, Am.Journal Physics, 60: 7

Pratiwi,D.A, (2005), Bilogi SMA untuk kelas XI, Erlangga, Jakarta

Priadi, A., (2009), Biology 2 for senior High School Year XI.Bandung: Yudhistira Purwanto, (2009), Evaluasi Hasil Belajar, Pustaka Belajar: Yogyakarta

Rusman, (2011), Model-model Pembelajaran, PT Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta Scanlon, Valenrie C and Sanders, Tina, (2007), Essential of Anatomy and

physiology. Davis Inc, New York

Sudijono, Anas., (2011), Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan, PT Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta

Sudjana, N., (2005), Penilaian Hasil Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit PT. Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung

Sugiyono, (2010), Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D, Penerbit Alfabeta Bandung, Bandung.

Sungur, Semra and Tekkaya, Ceren, (2011), Effects of Problem-Based Learning and Traditional Instruction on Self-Regulated Learning, Journal of Research Education, 99: 5

Suwarno, (2009), Biologi XI, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, Jakarta

Tate Philip, (2012), Principles of Anatomy and Phsiology Second Edition, Mc. Graw Hill, New York

Tirtarahardja, Umar, (2008), Pengantar Pendidikan, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model Pembeleajaran Inovatif Progresif, Penerbit Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.

Walsh, Allyn, (2005), The Tutor in Problem Based Learning, McMaster

University, Canada

Wieman, C, (2008), Student Group Work in Educational Setting, CWSEI and CU-SEI associates Journal, 1

Yadav, Aman et al, (2011), Problem-based Learning: Influence on Students’

Figur

Table 2.1 Syntax of FBL
Table 2 1 Syntax of FBL . View in document p.8

Referensi

Memperbarui...