iv
PREFACE
Give thanks to Almighty God for gives blessing, health, and wisdom to the author until the thesis entitled “The Difference of Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided - Inquiry Learning Model and Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015” was finish. This thesis was arranged to fulfill the requirement for Mathematics Education Bachelor’s Degree of Mathematics and Natural Science Faculty in State University of Medan.
In the completion of this thesis, the author was achieves so many helps and supports from various sides. For that, the author says thank you so much to Dr. W. Rajagukguk, M.Pd as thesis supervisor who patiently guides the author by giving advice, input, and remarks. Also the author says thank you so much to Prof. Dr. B. Sinaga, M.Pd, Dr. Edy Surya, M.Si, Drs. M. Panjaitan, M.Pd, and Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si as examiner lecturers for reviewing thesis by give input and great comments for this thesis perfection. Author says thank you so much to Prof. Dr. Asmin, M.Pd as academic supervisor who gives advices during lecturing process and also thank you so much for all FMIPA lecturers.
Big thanks are extended to Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd as rector of State University of Medan and his staffs, Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D as Dean Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si as coordinator of bilingual study program, Mr Dr. Edy Surya, M.Si as Leader of Mathematics Department, Drs. Zul Amry, M.Si as Chief of Mathematics Education Study Program, Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si as Secretary of Mathematics Education Department, and all staffs who have helped the author.
v
The author also says thank you so much to Sr. Sofiani Warasi, SCMM, S,Pd as principle of SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan, A. Manurung, S.Pd as mathematics teacher, all of teachers and staffs, and also X-3 and X-4 students who have helped the author during research.
Special thanks to my friends: Yerni, Samantha, Rony, Natalitha, Kristiani, Dewi, Vera, Lestari, Anna, and also my big family in Bilingual Mathematics 2011: Evan, Joe, Deby, Nelly, Widi, Asifa, Dwi, Tika, Acy, Sapta, Leni, Mawaddah, Ozy, Galang, Elvi, and PPLT Lintongnihuta 2014 personnel: Ka’Nancy, Nova, Yolanda, Ricky, Jonni, Togi, Jasmen, Donny, and specially Frederick.
The author already gave the big effort to write this thesis, and about the weakness of thesis the author need some suggestions to make it better. For the last, the author hopes the contents of this paper would be useful in improving the knowledge.
Medan, June 2015 Author,
iii
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT TAUGHT BY GUIDED - INQUIRY LEARNING MODEL AND COOPERATIVE
LEARNING TYPE JIGSAW IN SMA SWASTA SANTO YOSEPH MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015
Aprita Simbolon (ID 411 3111 006)
ABSTRACT
The type of this research was quasi-experiment study. The objective of this research was to know whether there is any difference of students mathematics achievement taught by guided - inquiry learning model and cooperative learning type jigsaw in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.
The population of this research was students in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan with total 12 classes. The sample taken consisted of 2 classes, namely, X-3 as experiment class 1 consisted of 41 students and X-4 as experiment class 2 consisted of 40 students. Experiment class 1 taught by Guided - Inquiry Learning Model and experiment class 2 taught by cooperative learning type jigsaw. The instrument used to measure the students mathematics achievement was a multiple-choice test.
Before doing hypothesis test, the normality and the homogeneity test should be done. The normality test used was Liliefors’ Test and the homogeneity test used was F-Test. The result of those tests, sample was taken from normal distributed and homogeneous population.
The data analysis of experimental class by using t-test with significance level α = 0.05, it was obtained that tcalculation > ttable, where tcalculation = 2.352 and ttable = 1.990, then H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted. Because H0 is rejected, then can be concluded that students mathematics achievement taught by guided - inquiry learning model is higher than students mathematics achievement taught by cooperative learning type jigsaw.
vi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1. Backgroud
1.2. Problem Identification 1.3. Problem Limitation 1.4. Problem Formulation 1.5. Objective of Research 1.6. Benefit of Research 1.7. Operational Definition
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Theoretical Backgroud
2.1.1.Learning
2.1.2.Learning Achievement 2.1.3.Learning Model 2.1.4.Summary of Subject Matter 2.2. Relevant Research
2.3. Conceptual Framework 2.4. Research Hypothesis
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1. Type of Research
vii
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Descriptive Statistics Analysis
4.1.1.Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided-Inquiry Learning Model
4.1.2.Students Mathematics Achievement Taught By Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw
4.2. Analysis of Research Data 4.2.1 Normality Test
4.2.2 Homogeneity Test 4.3. Hypothesis Test 4.4. Discussion
4.5. Weakness of Study
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1. Conclusion
5.2. Suggestion
REFERENCES APPENDICES
37 38
39
40 40 41 41 43 44
45 45
ix
What Guided Inquiry Is Not and Is
Comparison of Four Type of Cooperative Learning Blue-Print of Mathematics Achievement Test
Summary of Descriptive Statistics Each Experiment Classes Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided -Inquiry Learning Model
Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw
Normality Test of Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided-Inquiry Learning Model
Normality Test of Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw
F-Test for Guided-Inquiry Learning Model and Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4 Figure 2.5 Figure 2.6 Figure 2.7 Figure 3.1 Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Students Answer of Initial Test
The Relationship between Home and Expert Team The Distance Between Two Points
The Distance of Point To Line Distance of Point to the Plane
The Distance Between Two Parallel Lines The Distance Between Two Crossing Lines The Distance From Line To Plane That Parallel Experimental Design Figure
Bar Chart of Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided-Inquiry Learning Model
Bar Chart of Students Mathematics Achievement Taught by Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw
Pages 3 19 21 22 23 23 23 24 29 38
x
Lesson Plan Experiment Class 1 (1st Meeting) Lesson Plan Experiment Class 1 (2nd Meeting) Lesson Plan Experiment Class 2 (1st Meeting) Lesson Plan Experiment Class 2 (2nd Meeting) Worksheet A (Experiment Class 1)
Worksheet B (Experiment Class 1) Worksheet C (Experiment Class 2) Worksheet D (Experiment Class 2)
Blue Print of Mathematics Achievement Test Mathematics Achievement Test
Alternative Solution of Mathematics Achievement Test Mathematics Test
Data of Students in Trial Class
Validity of Students Mathematics Achievement in Trial Class
Reliability of Students Mathematics Achievement in Trial Class
Difficulty Level Index and Distinguishing Power Index of Each Item in Trial Class
Code Name and Attendance of Students in Experiment Class 1
Code Name and Attendance of Students in Experiment Class 2
xi
Appendix 23 Appendix 24 Appendix 25 Appendix 26 Appendix 27 Appendix 28
Table of r-Product Moment Table of Z Distribution Table of F Distribution Table of t Distribution Documentations Requirement Letters
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Mathematics is one of branch of science that has a very important role in the development of science and technology. Not only that, the mathematics is often described as the Queen of Knowledge. Like a queen in a chess game that has a very important role in the game, so did the math in science. Almost all branches of science both natural and social science requires the application of mathematics.
Mathematics is one of the subjects taught in every level of sudents education, start from elementary school, junior high school, senior high school until college level. Mathematics is a subject which provides students with a logical, analytical, systematic, critical, and creative thinking that can be their provision to solve daily life problems. Every day students always face mathematics problem, that’s why mathematics is one of the compulsive subjects taught in school.
2
But unfortunately, until now, it is not easy to make students, especially senior high school, to be actively takes place in teaching and learning activities, becaused some of teachers still apply the traditional learning models. That’s why students still find difficulties in understanding mathematics. They still write, read, and memorize the formula that their teacher write without knowing the process. As a result, students generally learn mathematics without being able to use their knowledge to solve problems in diverse or non-familiar situations (de Lange in Thompson. 2008: 96). That’s why when they’re faced with some different problem, they’re unable to solve it.
Mastery of mathematics by students becomes a necessity that is not negotiable in the arrangement of reasoning and decision-making at this moment in the era of competitive rivalry. Unfortunately, the learning achievement of students in math is not so satisfy. Based on the report Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 2011, Indonesia was ranked 38th out of 42 countries in math contest at the international level. This is an indicator that shows that the mathematics learning achievement in Indonesia has not achieved satisfactory results.
The subject matter of geometry is one of the subjects of mathematics which is quite difficult for students. The concept of geometry consists of three parts: 1) Geometry is part of the investigation, 2) Geometry viewed as experimental invention, 3) Geometry as part of the produce general conclusions. It therefore requires a model of learning which make students active during learning so that students' understanding of the geometry of the material increases. The problems of the geometry are also experienced by students in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan.
3
to a friend or tend to be silent if given problems by the teacher. This indicates that the learning process still not interactive yet.
Besides that, researcher also gives some questions for class X-3 as initial test where the participant is 41 students. Then obtained that the average score is 41.4 Where 23 students get low scores (56.1 %), 14 students get medium scores (34.1%), and only 4 students get higher scores (9.8%).
i ii
iii iv
v
4
Figure 1.1 shows answers of some students from initial test. From figure above, shown that there are students that able to answer the question (i,ii,iv), some students able to write down the information and draw the cubes and connecting the points but still cannot answer the question (v), but there also students that only able to draw the cubes (iii). It showed that students still difficult answer questions about geometry. From information above, researcher conclude that this school needs another learning model that can make the students more active and also increase the mathematics achievement of students. Some learning model that can make students active during learning are guided-inquiry learning model and cooperative learning.
According to Seif (Ngalimun. 2014: 33), inquiry means to know how to find out things and to know how to solve problems. To inquire about something means to see out information, to be curious, to ask questions, to investigate and to know the skills that will help lead to a resolution of a problem. Inquiry is a way of learning new skills and knowledge for understanding and creating in the midst of rapid technological change. Kuhlthau (2010: 18) states that inquiry that is guided by an instructional team to enable students to gain a depth of understanding and a personal perspective through a wide range of sources of information is called Guided Inquiry. Guided Inquiry equips students with abilities and competencies to meet the challenges of an uncertain, changing world. Besides that, Schwarz and Gwekwerere (Özdilek and Bulunuz. 2009: 26) stated that inquiry practices are very important in terms of forming scientific knowledge.
5
results, and generalization to the drawing of conclusion. It places student’s ability first in all instructional processes. In other words it is student centered.
With the application of guided inquiry learning model, it is expected to increase the enthusiasm of students in the implementation of learning activities and the students become focus in the leaning process. According to Rokhmatika (2012: 2) guided inquiry is very suitable to be applied in accordance with the characteristics of high school for high school students who tend to be less independent and still need advice, and cues from the teacher. It means that, this model has a positive influence on students’ academic success and develops a scientific process skills as well as their scientific attitude.
According to Johnson and Johnson (Aziz. 2010: 2), cooperative leaning is the instructional use of small groups through which students work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning. They also found that cooperative leaning helped to improve relationship between high-ability and low-ability students, increasing self-esteem and development of positive attitudes toward mathematics. The same thing also expressed by Abdulhalak (Rusman. 2012: 203) that cooperative learning is carried out through the sharing process among learners, so as to realize the mutual understanding between the learners themselves. So that the cooperative learning is not only a one-way interaction and communication, but will create interaction and communication broader conducted between students and teachers, and students with students. Tom V. Savage (Rusman. 2012: 203) suggests that cooperative learning is an approach that emphasizes cooperation in groups.
6
Based on the general description above, then the researcher is interested to do research with the title “The Difference of Students’ Mathematics Achievement Taught by Guided - Inquiry Learning Model And Cooperative Learning Type Jigsaw in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015”.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the background above, problem identification in this research are: 1. Student’s participation during mathematics learning process is still low, 2. Student’s still not give enough attentions during learning process, 3. Student’s still difficult in understanding mathematics,
4. Student’s mathematics achievement is still low,
5. Learning process tends to teacher-centered.
1.3. Problem Limitation
This research needs boundaries in order to get the precise target of expectation. The limitations of this reseach are:
1. The model that researcher uses are guided–inquiry learning model and
cooperative learning model type jigsaw.
2. The students’ mathematics achievement in this research is bounded in
students’ mathematics achievement at geometry in class X SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan academic year 2014/2015.
1.4. Problem Formulation
Based on the background above, the writer formulates the problems of the study as follows:
7
1.5. Objective of Research
The objectives in this research are:
To know whether there is any difference in students' mathematics learning achievement taught by guided-inquiry learning model and cooperative learning type jigsaw in class X SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.
1.6. Benefits of Research
1. For the candidates of teacher, this can be one of the considerations in dealing
with problems that occur in the school as the candidate of professional teachers.
2. For the teacher, especially mathematics teacher, this can be considered as one
of the models or alternative methods in the process of learning mathematics in school.
3. For the student, this can makes students be more active in class in order to
improve the student’s mathematics learning achievement.
4. For the research, this can be one of the sources of knowledge in dealing with
problems that occur in schools.
1.7. Operational Definition
An operational definition is a procedure or measuring and defining a construct. An operational definition specifies a measurement procedure (a set of operations) for measuring an external, observable behavior, and uses the resulting measurements as a definition and a measurement of the hypothetical construct (Gravetter. 2012:75).
Here are some terms that need to be defined operationally in order to avoid misunderstanding of some of the terms used in this study to be more focused. So, operational definition in this research are:
8
opportunities for them to construct their own meaning and develop deep understanding. The syntaxes of Guided – Inquiry are like the following:
a. Phase 1: Orientation
b. Phase 2: Formulate the problem
c. Phase 3: Formulate a hypothesis
d. Phase 4: Collecting Data
e. Phase 5: Testing the hypothesis
f. Phase 6: Formulate conclusions
2. Cooperative Leaning type Jigsaw, students were assigned expert topics to read from a regular text or curriculum materials, met in expert groups to master the material, and then returned to their teams to report on their topic. Finally, all students took a quiz on all the material.
The syntaxes type jigsaw are like the following:
a. Phase 1: Divide students into 5 or 6 person jigsaw groups. The groups
should be diverse in terms of gender, ethnicity, race, and ability. b. Phase 2: Divide the day’s lesson into 5-6 segments. Assign each
student to learn one segment.
c. Phase 3: Give students time to read over their segment at least twice
and become familiar with it.
d. Phase 4: Form temporary “expert groups” by having one student from
each jigsaw group join other students assigned to the same segment. e. Phase 5: Bring the students back into their jigsaw groups.
f. Phase 6: Ask each student to present her or his segment to the group.
45
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the result and discussion in the previous chapter, can be concluded that there is significant difference of students learning achievement taught by guided-inquiry learning model and cooperative learning type jigsaw in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015. Students learning achievement taught by guided-inquiry learning model is better than cooperative learning type jigsaw in SMA Swasta Santo Yoseph Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.
5.2. Suggestion
Based on the research result and conclusion above, there’re some suggestions offered, they are:
1. For teacher, teacher can use guided-inquiry learning model as a alternative teaching to increase the students mathematics achievement.
2. In this study, researchers did not conduct the initial test to determine the normality and homogeneity both classes. For the next researcher are expected to perform initial tests to determine the normality and homogeneity of classes that will be studied.
3. Guided-inquiry learning model and cooperative learning type jigsaw are applied to mathematics learning of geometry in cognitive level for senior high school. For other researchers are suggested to take study in another subject or level.
46
REFERENCES
Arends, R. I., (2012), Learning to Teach 9th Ed, McGraw-Hill, New York. Arikunto, S., (2010), Prosedur Penelitian, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Asmin, Mansyur. A., (2012), Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar Dengan Analisis Klasik dan Modern, Larispa, Medan.
Aziz, Z., Hossain, M. A., (2010), A Comparison of Cooperative Learning and Conventional Teaching on Student’ Achievement In Secondary Mathematics, Journal of Procedia ‒ Social and Behavioral Sciences9: 53-62.
Davis, B. G., (2009), Tools for Teaching, Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco. Gulo, W., (2011), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Grasindo, Jakarta.
Gultom, J., (2013), Perbedaan Kemampuan Koneksi dan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Antara Siswa Yang Diberi Pembelajara Kooperatif Tipe Jigsaw dan Pangajaran Langsung., Thesis, PPs, Unimed, Medan
Gravetter, F. J., Forzano, L. A. B., (2012), Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences, Cengage Learning, USA.
FMIPA Unimed, 2012, Buku Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi dan Proposal Penelitian
Kependidikan, Medan, FMIPA Unimed.
Kagan, S., Kagan, M., (2009), Cooperative Learning, Kagan Publishing, San Clemente.
Krathwohl, D. R., (2002), A Revision of Bloom‘s Taxonomy: An Overview,
Journal of Theory into Practice41: 212-264.
Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K., Caspari, A. K., (2007), Guided Inquiry – Learning in The 21st Century, Libraries Unlimited, Westport.
Kuhlthau, C. C., (2010). Guided Inquiry: School Libraries in the 21st Century,
Journal of School Libraries Worldwide16: 17-28.
Matthew, B. M., Kenneth, I. O., (2013), A Study on the Effects of Guided Inquiry
Teaching Method on Students Achievement In Logic. Journal of
International Researcher2: 135-140.
Ngalimun, (2014), Strategi dan Model Pembelajaran, Aswaja Pressindo,
47
Özdilek, Z., Bulunuz, N., (2009), The Effect of A Guided Inquiry Method On Pre-Service Teachers’ Science Teaching Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Journal of Turkish Science Education6: 24-39.
Rokhmatika, S., (2012), Pengaruh Model Inkuiri Terbimbing Dipadu Kooperatif
Jigsaw Terhadap Keterampilan Proses Sains Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Akademik., Skripsi, FKIP, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta. Accessed via:http://biologi.fkip.uns.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Halaman-Depan-BAB-I-dan-V_Siti-Rokhmatika.pdf accessed on Thursday, December 4th 2015.
Rokhayati, N., (2010), Peningkatan Penguasaan Konsep Matematika Melalui Model Pembelajaran Guided Discovery-Inquiry Pada Siswa Kelas VII SMP N 1 Sleman., Skripsi, FMIPA, UNY, Yogyakarta. Accessed via: http://eprints.uny.ac.id/2102/1/skripsi_Nuri_Rokhayati.pdf accessed on Friday, January 16th 2015
Rusman, (2012), Model-Model Pembelajaran, Rajagrafindo Persada, Depok.
Sinaga, D. P., (2012), Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa Yang Diajarkan
Menggunakan Model Kooperatif Tipe Jigsaw Dengan Tipe Grup Investigasi Di SMP Swasta Josua Medan T.A. 2012/2013., Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
Sudjana, 2005, Metoda Statistika, Tarsito, Bandung.
Thompson, T., (2008), Mathematics Teachers’ Interpretation of Higher-Order Thinking in Bloom’s Taxonomy, Journal of International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education3: 96-108.
Vlassi, M., Karoliota, A., (2013), The Comparison between Guided Inquiry and Traditional Teaching Method. A Case Study for the Teaching of the Structure of Matter to 8th Grade Greek Students, Journal of Procedia ‒ Social and Behavioral Sciences 93: 494 – 497.
Wong, L, (2015), Essential Study Skills 8th Ed, Cengage Learning, Stamford. Yusri, (2012), Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Jigsaw Untuk
