REFACE
raise and gratitude to God Almighty Jesus Christ, 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 Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation to Student’s Learning Outcomes on Linear Motion Topic in 10th Grade SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 2014/2015", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of hysics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State University of Medan.
4
And Wulida and all of my friend NHKB Jetun who have helped and gave support during writting this thesis.
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, March 2015 Author,
HE EFFEC OF COOPERAIVE LEARNING MODEL YPE GROUP INVESIGAION (GI) O SUDENS’ LEARNING OUCOME
ON LINEAR MOION OPIC IN 10 H GRADE SMA SANO HOMAS 3 MEDAN A.Y. 2014/2015
Jovan F. D. Sitinjak (Reg. Number : 4103322014) ABSRAC
he objectives of this research is to know whether students’ learning outcome by using cooperative learning model type group investigation is better than conventional learning in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA SANO HOMAS 3 MEDAN A.Y. 2014/2015
he research method was quasi experimental. he populations were all X IPA grade students in first semester that consist of 3 classes SMA Santo homas 3 Medan. he samples of this research conduct two classes and consist of 62 students, 31 from experiment class and 31 from control class and define by random cluster sampling. he results that were obtained: pre-test mean value of experiment class was 42.26 and 41.45 for control class and then post-test mean value of the experiment class was 80.48 and 64.03 was the mean value for control class. Standard deviation in pre-test were 7.62 in experiment class and 7.55 in control class and standard deviation in post-test for two classes were 6.87 and 8.89. hen, based on observation that done by observers by using observation sheet of students’ affective and psychomotor. Students’ affective score on last meeting of experiment and control class are 91.83 and 87.10 and students’ psychomotor score on last meeting of experiment and control class are 85.01 and 80.78 .
From data, concluded that there was the Effect of Cooperative Learning Model ype Group Investigation on Students’ Learning Outcome on Linier Motion opic in 10th Grade SMA Santo homas 3 Medan. Its conclude that learning outcome by using Cooperative Learning Model ype Group Investigation is better than by using Conventional Learning on Linier Motion opic in 10th Grade SMA Santo homas 3 Medan A.Y. 2014/2015.
ONOENO
egimitation i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Preface iv
Content vi
Figure ist ix
Table ist x
Appendix ist xi
hapter I Intropuction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Identification 5
1.3 Problem imitation 5
1.4 Problem Formulation 5
1.5 Research Objectives 6
1.6 Research Benefit 6
hapter II Literature Review 7
2.1 Definition of earning and earning Outcome 7
2.1.1 Definition of earning 7
2.1.2 Definition of earning Outcome 8 2.2 Cooperative earning Model Type Group Investigation 10
2.2.1 Model of earning Definition 10
2.2.2 Definition Of Cooperative earning 10
2.2.3 Group Investigation (GI) 12
2.3 Conventional earning 14
2.4 Subject Matter 15
2.4.1 Motion is relative 15
7
2.4.3 Speed and Velocity 17
2.4.3.1 Average Speed and Average Velocity 17 2.4.3.2 Instantaneous Speed and Velocity 18
2.4.4 Acceleration and Deceleration 20
2.4.4.1 Acceleration 20
2.4.5 Uniform Motion With Constant Velocity and Acceleration 21 2.5.4.1 Uniform Motion With Constant Velocity 21 2.5.4.2 Uniform Motion With Constant Acceleration 23
2.5 Group Investigation Journal 31
2.6 The Difference with Another Research Before 34
2.7 Conceptual Framework 35
2.8 xypothesis of Research 36
hapter III Research Methopology 37
3.1 Research ocation 37
3.2 Population and Sample Research 37
3.2.1 Population of Research 37
3.2.2 Sample of Research 37
3.3 Research Variable 37
3.3.1 Independent Variable 37
3.3.2 Dependent Variable 37
3.4 Type and Research Design 37
3.4.1 Type of Research 37
3.4.2 Design of Research 37
3.5 Research Instrument 38
3.5.1 Instrument of Student earning Outcome at
Experiment Class 38
3.5.1.1 Instrument of Cognitive Domain 38 3.5.1.2 Instrument of Affective Domain 40 3.5.1.3 Instrument of Psychomotor Domain 42
8
3.6 Research Procedure 44
3.7 Data Analysis Techniques 46
3.7.1 Determine Average Value 46
3.7.2 Determine the Standard Deviation 46
3.7.3 Normality Test 46
3.7.4 xomogenity Test 47
3.7.5 xypothesis Test 47
hapter IV Research Result anp Discussion 49
4.1. Research Result 49
4.1.1. Pretest Score of Student in Experiment and Control Class 46
4.1.2. Data Analysis of Pretest 51
4.1.2.1 Normality Test of Pretest Data 51 4.1.2.2 xomogeneity Test of Pretest 51 4.1.2.3 xypothesis Test of Pretest 52 4.1.3. Post test Score of Student in Experiment and Control Class 53
4.1.4 Data Analysis of Post Test 54
4.1.4.1 Normality Test of Post Test 54 4.1.4.2 xomogeneity test of Post Test 54 4.1.4.3 xypothesis test of Post Test 55
4.1.5 Observation 55
4.2. Discussion 58
hapter V onclusion anp Suggestion 60
5.1. Conclusion 60
5.2. Suggestion 60
0
ABLE LIS
able 2.1 Group Investigation Phases 12
able 2.2 Free fall from rest 26
able 2.3 Distance fallen in free fall 28
able 2.4 Group Investigation Journal 31
able 3.1 he Design of the Research 38
able 3.2 he Specification learning outcomes test 39 able 3.3 Assessment Criteria of Affective and Psychomotor domain 40 able 3.4 Guidelines for Scoring Observation of Students’ affective
in Experiment and Control Class 41
able 3.5 Guidelines for Scoring Observation of Students’
Psychomotor in Experiment Class 42
able 3.6 Guidelines for Scoring Observation of Students’
Psychomotor in Control Class 43
able 4.1 Pre-test and Post test Score 49
able 4.2 Pre-test Score in Experiment and Control Class 50 able 4.3 Normality est of Pre-test data in
Experiment and Control Class 51
able 4.4 Homogeneity est of Pre-est Data 52
able 4.5 Hypothesis est of Pre-est Data 52
able 4.6 Post est Data in Experiment and Control Class 53 able 4.7 Normality est of Pre-test data in
Experiment and Control Class 54
able 4.8 Homogeneity est of Post est Data 54
able 4.9 Hypothesis est of Post est Data 55
able 4.10 Score of Students’ Affective 56
IGURE LIST
igure 2.1 When sitting on a chair, your speed is zero relative to
Earth but 30 km/s relative to the Sun 15
igure 2.2 Children moves east 50m then 30m west 15
igure 2.3 Ali moves from A to B, but Rudi moves from D to C 16 igure 2.4 Graph the position (x) towards to (t) of any linear motion 18 igure 2.5 Graph the position (x) towards to (t) of any linear motion 19
igure 2.6 Graph velocity toward to time 20
igure 2.7 Graph v-t 22
igure 2.8 Graph s-t 22
igure 2.9 Moving objects with irregular straight position so,
distance Δs and position of the end s 23
igure 2.10 Graph velocity toward to time 24
igure 2.11 (a) Graph s-t on uniform motion with constant acceleration
(b) Graph a-t on uniform motion with
constant acceleration 25
igure 2.12 (a) Pretend that falling rock is equipped with a speedometer.
(b) The rate at which the velocity changes
Each second is the same 27
igure 2.13 (a) Graph v-t, (b) Graph s-t 29
igure 2.14 Upward vertical motion 30
igure 3.1 The overview of research planning 45
igure 4.1 Column Diagram Pre-Test Value 50
igure 4.2 Column Diagram Post Test Value 53
igure 4.3 Developing of Students’ Affective 57
PPENDEX LEST
ppendex 1 Lesson Plan 1 64
ppendex 2 Lesson Plan 2 73
ppendex 3 Lesson Plan 3 82
ppendex 4 Worksheet 1 90
ppendex 5 Worksheet 2 93
ppendex 6 Worksheet 3 96
ppendex 7 Lattece of Pre-Test 99
ppendex 8 Pre-Test 111
ppendex 9 Key nswer of Pre-Test 118 ppendex 10 Lattece of Post Test 119
ppendex 11 Post Test 130
ppendex 12 Key nswer of Post Test 136 ppendex 13 Pre-Test and Post Test Data of Experement Class 137 ppendex 14 Pre-Test and Post Test Data of Control Class 138 ppendex 15 Calculateon of verage Score and Deveateon Standard
of Pre-Test and Post-Test 139
ppendex 16 Normalety Test 141
ppendex 17 Homogeneety Test Data 145
ppendex 18 Hypotheses Test 147
[image:10.595.80.531.117.747.2]
HAPTER I Introduction
1.1 Background
Based on UU No. 20 of 2003 about National Education System says that
“endidikan adalah usaha sadar dan terencana untuk mewujudkan suasana
belajar dan proses pembelajaran agar peserta didik secara aktif mengembangkan potensi dirinya untuk memiliki kekuatan spiritual keagamaan, pengendalian diri, kepribadian, kecerdasan, akhlak mulia, serta keterampilan yang diperlukan dirinya, masyarakat, bangsa dan negara”. The importance of education as the capital of the younger generation, to achieve a successful and capable citizens.
Government always pay attention to the education of Indonesia. All government’s effort is characterized by an increase in Revenue and Expenditure National Budget of education, curriculum changing, foster educators, cooperating with other countries to better the quality of education etc. But, The government can not fend for themselves, which is required for the participation of all education stakeholders include: the Department of Education, superintendent, principal, teacher, parent, school committee, school board, community, business and industries world, as well as all parents agency concerned directly or indirectly to the educational activities in schools (Wau : 203). The cooperation is performed to achieve national education goals are written in UU RI No. 20 Chapter II Subsection 3 Of 2003 is to develop the potential of student to become a man of faith and fear of God Almighty, noble, healthy, knowledgeable, skilled, creative, indep endent, and become citizens of a democratic and responsible.
2
educated by teacher at school every day. The ability of teacher to educate is very influential to success or failure the learning activities at school. For the teacher must be able to present learning activities more active, creative, and fun to produce better in the future. So, it can be conclude the education is very important and key to the success of nation.
One of the subject 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 is 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 student who doesn’t like physics because 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 at SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan. Researcher use questioner instrument to observe student interest in physics subject. From the observation result, At the class there was ±73% student said rare learn physics in group, ±6% student said always and just ±% said never learn physics in group discussion. Before learn physics, just ±6% student prepare them self before learn physics, then ±79% student sometimes do the preparation, and there was ±5% student don’t do anything. And then there was ±24% student interest to solve physics problem by them self, then ±76% student interest to solve physics problem with discussion. From the observation result above, researcher conclude that student in SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan wasn’t interest to learn physics and rarely learn physics. And this will be influenced the student outcome in learning physics.
3
good mark, some student have not good enough mark in physics. She said that student didn’t want to review the lesson at home.
Researchers also observe three physics teacher when they teach at SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan. From the observation, researcher finds that most of physics teacher, use conventional learning to explain physics phenomenon in front of the class. And this will be influenced the student outcome in learning physics.
There are many things that cause low result of this study, one of which is the use of learning methods that teacher is less variable and the model is still used conventional teaching models. Djamarah ( 2009:26 ) states "When teacher teach when only using one of the methods it will be boring, uninterested student attention on the lesson " . The use of model made by teacher in the teaching of physics, still using conventional learning model and method used approach is the method of lecture and discussion. Meanwhile, in the subject of physics, which requires not only how student solves problem by memorized formula, but students must be able to understand the concepts of physics. And understanding of concepts by student, can’t be done with the lecture method and the conventional learning, because the model and the method will only create an atmosphere of teacher-centered learning . And learning environment like this, it will only make student passive but also makes the student doesn’t have the opportunity to develop their understanding of physics concepts.
4
2008). All component, help student to understand physics clearly, because the student will learn by them self and find the answer with their team. And it will make student have a good teamwork and can memorize the lesson for a long time.
Cooperative learning model group investigation had been examined by previous student by (Adolf: 202) the result of research conducted by Adolf at SMAN Kec. Binjai, states that there is difference in physics learning outcomes using cooperative learning model group investigation of the average pretest score 30.88 after learning the type of cooperative group investigation model of the average value increased to 7.50. (Mery:200) result of research conducted by Mery at SMAN Percut Sei Tuan, stating that during the student learning outcomes using the model of cooperative group investigation the learning outcome get increased. At the first meeting of the average value of 33.55, and at the second meeting of the average value of 70.84.
From the research that has been done, the researcher argued that there are some weaknesses, namely, (Adolf:202) failed to give more attention and guidance to student who is less active and in the use of instructional media is still less, (Mery:200) is less efficient in the use of time, and student need more motivation to explore their statement. The advantages of the current research, will motivate students who less active and more attention to the details of the allocation and the use of instructional media, researchers use lab tools that are already available in the laboratory of SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan, to raise the interest of student in participating teaching and learning activities .
Based on explanation above the writer wants to do the research with title
“The Effect of ooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation (GI)
To Students’ Learning Outcome On Linear Motion in 10th Grade SMA Santo
5
1.2 Problem Identification
Based on the background that already consider, so the problem identification in this research are:
. Student learn in group rarely
2. Students’ learning outcome of physics is low 3. Student don’t do a preparation before physics class 4. The physics teacher still use the conventional learning
1.3 Problem Limitation
Based on the problem identification, writer limits this problem, namely: . Learning model is cooperative learning model type group investigation 2. Subject matter that will be learn is linear motion
3. Subject of this research is 0th grade student in SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan
1.4 Problem Formulation
Based on the limitation problem, so the problem formulation are:
. How is students’ learning outcome (cognitive, affective and psychomotor) using cooperative learning model type group investigation in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 204/205?
2. How is students’ learning outcome (cognitive, affective and psychomotor) using and conventional learning in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 204/205?
6
1.5 Research Objectives
There are some research objective, namely:
. To know students’ learning outcome by using conventional learning in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 204/205
2. To know students’ learning outcome by using cooperative learning model type group investigation in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 204/205
3. To know whether students’ learning outcome by using cooperative learning model type group investigation is better than conventional learning in the subject matter linear motion in class X SMA Santo Thomas 3 Medan A.Y. 204/205
1.6 Research Benefit
Once this study is completed then the expected benefits of this research are:
. For physics teacher: As input to improve students’ learning outcome by using better learning model like cooperative learning model type group investigation
0
HAPTER V
ONLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 onclusion
Based on research result and data collection, can be concluded that:
1. Students’ learning outcohe in experihent class after taught by using Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation was cognitive average score is 80.48, affective score is 91.83 in very good criteria and psychohotor score is 85.01 in good criteria.
2. Students’ learning outcohe in control class after taught by using Conventional learning was cognitive average score is 4.03, affective score is 87.10 in good criteria and psychohotor score is 80.78 in good criteria.
3. Students’ learning outcohe in experihent class after taught by using Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation was better than students’ learning outcohe in control class that’s using Conventional Learning. So, Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation has the effect on students’ learning outcohes.
5.2 Suggestion
According to the data of students’ learning outcohe and the experience of author when applying the Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation in class, so the author gives suggestion as below:
1. Needed further research to deterhine the effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation on student achievehent in other haterials concepts, so that it can heasure the extent to which wider this hodel is effective in learning physics.
1
students to be hore active so that good cohhunication between students and students and between teachers and students.
3. For the next researcher who wants to do research using Cooperative Learning Model Type Group Investigation expected to allocate the tihe as efficient as possible in the learning process so that each stage of learning can be done well.
2
EFEENCES
Akcay, Nilufer Okur & Kemal Doymus. 2012. he Effects of Group Investigation and Cooperative Learning echniques Applied in eaching Force and Motion Subjects on Students’ Academic Achievements Journol Of Educotionol Science Reseorch, Turkey Vol 2 No 1, June 2012
Arends, I Richard. 2008. earning to Teach 7thEdition. New York, McGraw Hill
Companies, Inc
Dimyati dan Mudjiono, 2009, Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta Doymus, Kemal and friends.2009.Effects Of Two Cooperative earning
Strategies On Teaching And earning Topics Of Thermochemistry. World Applied Science Journal, Turkey 7(1): 34-42, 2009
Hewitt, G Paul, 200, Conceptual Physics (Tenth Edition), Newyork, Addison Wesley. Inc.
Joyce, Bruce & Marsha Weil. 1980. Models of Teaching 2th edition. New Jersey,
Prentice Hall, inc
Udo, M. E., (2010). Effect of Guided-Discovery, Student- Centered Demonstration and the Expository Instructional Strategies on Students’ Performance in Chemistry. An International Multi-Disciplinary Journal, Ethiopia Vol. 4 (4), Serial No. 1, October, 2010
Kanginan, Marthen, 200, Fisika Untuk SMA Kelas X, Jakarta, Erlangga
Koc, Yasemin and friends.2010. The Effects of Two Cooperative earning Strategies on the Teaching and earning of the Topics of Chemical Kinetics.Journal of Turkish Science Education, Turkey Vol. 7 No. 2, June 2010
Nurachmandani, Setya, 2009, Fisika Untuk SMA X, Jakarta, Pusat Perbukuan, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional
Sardiman, A. M., (2010), Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta
Simbolon, Adolf, 2012, Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa Menggunakan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Group Investigation dengan Pembelajaran Konvensiona pada Materi Pokokl , Skripsi, Medan, FMIPA Unimed.
3
On New Trends In Education And Their Implication, Vol. 4 No. 3, Turkey July 2013
Slavin, R. E., 2005, Cooperative earning: Theory, Research, and Practice, Prentice Hill, London
Sudijono, A., (2009), Pengantar Evaluasi Pendikan, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta.
Sudjana, 2005, Metoda Statistika, Bandung, PT. Tarsito
Suryadana, Brian Aziz, dkk. 2012. Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Group Investigation (GI) Disertai Media Kartu Masalah Pada Pembelajaran Fisika Di SMA. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika (JPF), Vol. 1 No 3, Indonesia Desember 2010
Trianto, (2010), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progesif, Prenada Media, Jakarta.
Wau, Yasaratodo, 2013, Profesi Kependidikan, Medan, Unimed Press
