THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015.

(1)

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE

AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM T O P I C G R A D E X S M A N 1 1 M E D A N

A C A D E M I C Y E A R 2 0 1 4 / 2 0 1 5 By:

Siti Fatimah Siregar 4113342014

Biology Bilingual Education

SKRIPSI

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

(2)

(3)

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND

STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN

ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015

Siti Fatimah Siregar/ 4113342014

ABSTRACT

The objectives of this study are to know the differences of students learning outcome and memory retention between mind maps and notes write and stacking (NWS) techniques at ecosystem topic grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic year 2014/2015. The type of this research is quasai experimental research. The population was all students grade X of SMAN 11 Medan, consist of eight classes. The technique of sampling was random sampling. Thus the research samples were class X-7 and X-8 consists of 38 students and 37 students. The result of hypothesis testing using t-test on post-test data about the differences of students learning outcome between mind maps and notes write and stacking (NWS) showed that tcount (2.1) > ttable (1.991) , it means that Ho1 was rejected and Ha1 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant difference of student learning outcomes in using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at topic ecosystem in academic year 2014/2015, and the results of hypothesis testing using t-test on retention data showed that tcount (3.62) > ttable (1.991) , it means that Ho2 was rejected and Ha2 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant difference of students’ retention using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at topic ecosystem academic year 2014/2015.

(4)

BIOGRAPHY

Siti Fatimah Siregar was born on November 10, 1993 in Medan, Sumatera Utara. Her father’s name is Ismail Siregar S.Ag and her mother is Siti Aminah Ritonga. In 2005, she graduated from SD Al-Hidayah, Medan. Then, she continued her study in SMP

Swasta Budi Satrya Medan in 2008, and in 2011, she finished her study in MAN 1

Medan.

She continued her undergraduate degree at State University of Medan in 2011

after she has passed from national selection and then, she continued her TOEFL test as a

requirement to be a student in Bilingual Program, especially Biology Bilingual Education

Program. During her university years, she attended several activities, regional and

(5)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillah, foremost writer would like to thank and all praises to

Almighty Good, Allah SWT for blessing hence writer is able to finish my thesis

entitled “The difference of Students Learning Outcome and Memory Retention

Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques at

Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015 to fulfill

one of the requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in Biology

Department, FMIPA, State University of Medan.

The writer would like to thank gratefully for the thesis supervisor

Prof.Dr.rer.nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si. who has generously precious time to

guide, encourage, motivate, support, help, and give all the valuable suggestions

for the writer until this thesis ready to be presented. The enormous appreciation is

addressed to all examiners, Dr.H. Syahmi Edi, M.Si., Dra. Martina Restuati, and

Dr. Melva Silitonga, M.Si. for their valuable advices. The writer would also like

to thank Dr.Hasruddin, M.Pd as the chaiman of Biology Departement, Mrs. Riche

and Mr. Syamsudin for their administrative assistant, and for all lectures of

Biology Bilingual Education Program, and especially for Prof. Dr. Herbert

Sipahutar, M.Si, M.Sc..The special thanks are extended to the headmaster of SMA

Negeri 11 Medan, Drs.K.Lumbantoruan, M.Pd. Pd who helping the writer during

the process of research.

The writer also would like to thank so much for beloved parent, Siti

Aminah Ritonga for their caring, motivation, support, love, and all the best for my

life, thanks for my younger sister Mega Wati Siregar, for their inspiration, love

and sacrifice to support my study in State University of Medan and for my boy

friend Syukran Jamil Tanjung, as my motivator when I tired and less my mood.

Thanks a lot for my best friends, Rahmadyah Kusuma Putri, Atikah Julia

Handayani, Farrahnaz Apriliandini Lubis, and for all my friend who always loved

me, supported me, and made my time more colorful, thanks for unforgettable

(6)

My Allah reward all those who have contributed for this thesis.

Hopefully, this thesis will give benefit to contribute ideas in education

development and to innovate the learning process in the class to be more fun.

Medan,15Desember 2015

Writer,

Siti Fatimah Siregar

(7)

LIST OF FIGURE

The figure 2.1 Example of mind mapping 14

The figure 2.2 Example of notes write and stacking technique 17

The figure 2.3 Conceptual Framework 18

(10)

LIST OF TABEL

The tabel 3.1 Research Design 21

The tabel 3.2 Distribution Questions Topic Ecosystem 24

The tabel 3.3 Validity Coefficient 25

The tabel 3.4 Validity Test Category 25

The tabel 3.5 Reliability Coefficient 26

The tabel 3.6 Difficulty Index 27

The tabel 3.7 Coefficient of Discrimination Power 27

The tabel 4.1 Normality Test Data of Learning Outcome 31

The tabel 4.2 Homogeneity Test Data of Learning Outcome 31

The tabel 4.3 t- Test Data of Learning Outcome 32

The tabel 4.4 Normality Test Data of Retention 33

The tabel 4.5 Homogeneity Test Data of Retention 33

(11)

LIST OF APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Syllabus of Learning Process 43

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan 45

Appendix 3 Instrument 62

Appendix 4 Validity 73

Appendix 5 Reliability 76

Appendix 6 Index Difficulty 78

Appendix 7 Discrimination Power 81

Appendix 8 Values of Pretes, Postest and Retention 83

Appendix 9 Normality Test 85

Appendix 10 Average, Deviation Standard , and Variance 92

Appendix 11 Homogeneity Test 96

Appendix 12 Hypothesis Test 100

(12)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Learning is a complex thing that happens to everyone and lasts a lifetime.

Signs a learned their complex behavioral changes including changes in the

cognitive, psychomotor and affective. Basically, the concepts in biology are

abstract concepts, therefore need a high imagination power including structure,

function, growth, taxonomy, distribution, and evolution which sometimes have a

lot of foreign terms that are not easy to pronunciation even harder to remember

the students, one of them is ecosystem. In fact many student not interested to learn

which ultimately can only be stored in short term memory only. While the

purpose of the learning process not only to the short term memory to long term

memory but students (Amaliah, 2011).

Meanwhile writing is a process of delivering ideas, thoughts, and feelings

through a letter system.Writing also encourage students to communicate thoughts,

feelings and make his thoughts reflected in written form, so that students will be

remembered in long time period. Therefore things done by creating an interesting

note creative learning students pour the material he had heard from a teacher on

an interesting note will make a repeating back to the memory of his brain so that

the material presented teachers can survive long in the brain. For that we need the

involvement of the various organs of the body from the ear (Audio), eyes (visual),

and hand (kinetic) the make information Easier to understand (Arsyad, 2011).

Proverb of Cofemicus I hear I forget, I see I remember, I do I Understand. This

Strengthens the assumption that the rate of retention of the material will be higher

when students are conditioned to learning more real. Research Magnessen (de

Potter, 2002) Explains that we remember 1% of the read, 20% of that in the

hearing, 30% of the visits, 50% of the Heard and seen, 70% of what is said, and

(13)

Based on preliminary observation in SMAN 11 Medan based on data

research , the mean values obtained pretest score of students in the experimental

class before it is treated by using mind mapping techniques is 40.92 with a

standard deviation of 11.61 and the value of pretest students in the experimental

class before it was treated by using notes write and and stacking technique is

39.09 with a standard deviation of 11.89, the result is showed that Lcount < Ltabel thus concluded that the data from the both pretest distribution were normal. It is

indicated that learning outcomes of students in this ecosystem topic is low. While

the low learning outcome caused of students easy to forget the learning material

that has been taught, so that student is difficult to answer the post test question.

The other result after homogeneity test Fcount < Ftabel or (1.05 < 1.73 ) can be

concluded that learning outcomes for the two classes have similar varience (

homogeny) can represent the entire population.

The researcher observation retention too students are low, due to when

teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has been explained the

least student answered and ask students very low frequency, very few students

were asked because the other students did not remember the material which is

repeated by the teacher. Student memory retention is the ability store abstraction

concepts in cognitive structure which is still owned by the student after the lapse

of time from the provision material (Dwi, 2011). The low student retention is one

of the problems that often faced by teacher because the learning process will run

slow so the determined target failure to achieve. After investigeted deeply it found

that student have messy note about this topic, and based on the interview to two

students , they said that teachers do not give students the opportunity to write,

techniques note students who are less attractive and less creative, make lazy

students re-read his notes, so that the absence of reinforcement retention process,

and mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for teachers.

Therefore, teachers have choosed a model and appropriate learning

techniques in order to better engage students optimally in cognitive, affective, and

(14)

long-term memory. The difficulty in studying biology, especially in memorizing can be

overcome by making the shape of a unique and creative notes. When compared

with the form of notes that only the form of writings, which are equipped with

color notes and drawings will be helping students understand the material being

taught by the teacher.

Thus, it can be assumed that in fact most students do not apply

techniques that suitable to their learning styles by which effectively and more

quickly to understand the material being taught teachers. To overcome this, it can

be done by applying methods and techniques such as learning proper technique

mind mapping and notes write and stacking.

Mind mapping media based on Buzan (1994) present information that

connect with central topic, in form of keyword, image, and symbol and picture so

the information can quickly and efficiently learned and remember. Mind mapping

can make students more active and creative and only students who are actively

involved as disvantage of mind mapping technique. Other research result conducted by Yulika ( 2012 ) stated that mind mapping can increase student’s learning outcome until 36.18% in the first cycle and 47.29% in the second cycle.

The research conducted by Arisdea, T (2008) , the use of mind mapping have the

influence to the improvement of learning outcomes was 33.89%, learning

retention for one week was 44.95% and learning retention for two weeks was

40.15%. Posttest mean value in the control class and each class experiment at

72.49 and 84.78. While about notes write and stacking technique can make

students easier to remember a problem when students read what he was thinking

at the time and emotionally satisfying students and help students get into the

emotional memory of students, but in the notes write and stacking technique

students only using one colour to make notes.

Mind mapping and notes write and stacking will help students understand

the material and ideas on paper with clear, complete and interesting so that

students can understand most of the information in a shorter time and will store it

(15)

minimized and the amount of detail information could not be included as

disvantage of notes write and stacking technique. Based on the above students

problem , the research with the title "The difference of Students Learning

Outcome and Memory Retention Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and

Stacking (NWS) Techniques at Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015” has been done.

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background,the problems are identified as follows :

1. Mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for

teachers.

2. Students make notes are less attractive and less creative, make lazy

students re-read his notes.

3. When teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has

been explained only two students answered.

4. Students learning outcome in two class very low, The ability test of

early ( pre-test) both classes given at the beginning of the study which

aims to determine whether the basic understanding are of students in the

same

1.3. Problem Limitation

Due to large of problem identification,the researcher limit the problems

only about learning outcome, retention, mind map, and notes write and

stacking (NWS) on topic ecosystem.

1.4. Research Question

Based on the problem identification, the problems that will be discussed are:

1. Is there any difference of learning outcome between students taught by

using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem

(16)

2. Is there any difference of retention between students taught by using

mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic

in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning?

1.5. Research Objectives

The research objectives is to know :

1. To know the difference of learning outcome between students taught by

using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem

topic in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning

2. To know the difference of retention between students taught by using

mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic

in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning

1.6. Research Significance

The research results are expected can be beneficial, both theoritically and

practically as follows :

1. Inform the biology teacher in selecting effective recording techniques to

improve the quality of student learning of the material taught.

2. Adding the experience for researchers as prospective teachers about the

use of appropriate methods and techniques to be applied so that the

students can understand more information related to the material being

taught and can survive in the long term.

3. As a guideline for other researchers in creating an effective learning

model biology so as to create an active learning environment and

conducive.

1.7. Operational Definition

(17)

2. Retention is students’ score on a test similar to the post-test but the

students were tested 7 days after post-test. The score range between

0-100.

3. Mind mapping is one way to organize and present concepts, ideas, tasks

or other information in form of radial-hierarchic non linear diagram and

present information that connects with central topic, in form keyword,

image, and symbol and picture and color.

4. Write notes and stacking techniques is derived from the word written is

writing a note which means listening to what the teacher or other person

as he wrote points - the main point, namely the preparation of records

while stacking means write down the thoughts and impressions that

(18)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the result of research, there are some conclusions:

1. There was significant difference of students learning outcome between

Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The

students learning outcome by the mind map technique 71.7 ± 10.2 ( ±

SD) was higher than notes write and stacking technique 66.48 ± 11.5 ( ±

SD) at ecosystem topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year

2014/2015.

2. There was significant difference of students retention between Mind Maps

and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The students retention

by the mind map technique 69.47 ± 10.38 ( ± SD) was higher than notes

write and stacking technique 62.7 ± 10.6 ( ± SD) at ecosystem topic

Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.

3. When compared to Mind Mapping and Notes Write and Stacking

Techniques, Mind Mapping was found to produce highest students

learning outcome and retention than Notes Write and Stacking. Because

because mind mapping technique, the teacher acts as facilitator and

students were required to understand the topic personally and It is possible

to remove the student or his ideas are good ideas and systematically. In

Notes Write and Stacking Technique emotionally satisfying students and

(19)

5.2 Recommendation

Based on the conclusion above, it’s recommended to:

1. Teacher should apply Mind Map in biological learning process especially

at ecosystem topic.

2. Mind Map has positive effect for development of students in ecosystem

topic learning, even there are many preparation to be prepared before

research, especially for timing affectivity.

3. As prospective teacher more creating an effective learning model biology

in ecosystem topic so as to create an active learning environment and

(20)

REFERENCES

Alsa, A. dan Hardjito, P. (2002). Pengarung Interferensi dan Rehearsal Terhadap Retensi Belajar Indonesia, 4 (1):83-86

Amaliah, S. (2011), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Take and Give Terhadap Retensi Siswa dalam Tatanama Ilmiah pada Konsep Jamur, Skripsi FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta:http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id./dspace/bitstream/123456789/4968/1 /101317-SITI%AMALIAH-FITK.PDF accessed on March 2nd ,2015.

Arikunto.S. (2008) . Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Arsyad, A. (2007), Media Pembelajaran, PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.

Buzan, T. (1994), The Mind Map Book, Penguin Group, New York.

DePotter, B.(2002), Quantum Teaching, Kaifa, Bandung

Dimyati dan Mudjiono (1999), Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.

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

Dwi, Y. (2011), Pengaruh Pembelajaran Berorientasi Retensi Terhadap Kemampuan Koneksi Matematika Siswa, FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta.

Gagne, R.M.(1975). Essentials of Learning for Instructions. Illinois: The Dryden Press.

Ika, S. (2011), Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD menggunakan Media Animasi dan Gambar Diam terhadap Aktivitas Belajar dan Retensi Memori Biologi Siswa Kelas XI SMA Negeri 11 Medan, Tesis, PPs. Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.

Istarani. 2011. 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Medan: Media Persada

Kimball, J. (1983), Biology Fifth Edition, Addison-Wesley Publisher,United State.

Kurniawati, A. (2013), Penerapan Mind Mapping dan Catatan Tulis dan Susun Terhadap Kreativitas dan Ketuntasan Belajar , Semarang : Sekaran Gunung Pati

(21)

Millar, A. (1959), The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two, some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information, Psychological Review, 101(2),343-355.

Pelson, K. (2004) Mind mapping in learning and teaching: Pupil and teacher perspective. Galashiels Academy Scottish Borders.

Peterson, L., and Peterson, M. (1959), Short-term Retention of Individual Verbal Items, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58 (3), 193-198.

Purwanto. (2010). Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Pustaka Pelajar : Yogyakarta, http://eprints.uny.ac.id/9238/2/bab%202.pdf (accessed on March 2nd, 2015).

Ridhayani, L. dan Binari, M. (2010), Pengaruh Model dan Media Pembelajaran Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Siswa Pada Pelajaran Biologi di SMP Swasta Muhammadyah Serbelawan. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi PPs. Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.

Sagala, S. (2003), Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, CV. Alfabeta, Bandung.

Santrock, J, (2003), Psycology: Essential Updated Second Edition, Mc Graw Hill, New York.

Schacter, D. (1987), Implicit Memory: History and Current Status, Journal of

Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition , 23,533- 568.http://www.unt.edu/rss/class/mike/5640/articles/Schacterimplicitme m87.pdf

Sprenger, M., (2011), Cara Mengajar Agar Siswa Tetap Ingat, Erlangga, Jakarta.

Sudjana, N. Dan Rivai, A (2003). Teknologi Pengajaran. Sinar Baru Algesindo.

Suroyo. (2002). Penyampaian Sekuen Pembelajaran Berbantuan Komputer Terhadap Retensi Belajar Ipa. Jurusan Matematika FMIPA Universitas Terbuka.

Jogjakarta

Tri, A, Hairida, Ira, L. (2008), Pengaruh Multimedia Berbasis Mind Mapping Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Belajar Siswa pada Materi Hidrokarbon, Universitas Tanjung Pura, Pontianak.

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015.