The Impact of Mind Mapping Method to Student Learning Outcomes of Natural Science Class Grade X on Invertebrate Material
Lin Istiqomah1, Ira Nurmawati2, Umi Farihah3
1 Departement of Tadris Biologi, FTIK, UIN KHAS Jember, Indonesia, [email protected]
2 Departement of Tadris Biologi, FTIK, UIN KHAS Jember, Indonesia, iranurmawati@iain- jember.ac.id
3 Departement of Tadris Biologi, FTIK, UIN KHAS Jember, Indonesia, umifarihah@iain- jember.ac.id
Abstract. The purpose of this study is to determine the influence of the mind mapping approach on student learning outcomes when it comes to invertebrate topic matter. For the 2019/2020 academic year, this study was performed on students in class X IPA MAN 3 Jember, East Java, Indonesia. The study is a quantitative study and employs a non-equivalent group pre-test post- test design. To gather samples, a method known as purposeful sampling was performed. Data gathered throughout the test. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the data. According to the Mann-Whitney U test findings, there was no significant difference in learning outcomes between the experimental and control courses during the pre-test (sig.0,286), indicating that all groups started with the same set of skills. While there is a substantial difference between the experimental and control classes' learning outcomes at the post-test (sig. 0.000), the experimental class's average value is 84.91, while the control class's average value is 60.19. According to the studies completed, the mind mapping approach has an effect on student learning results.
1. Introduction
Learning is a process of change that is carried out consciously and deliberately which refers to the existence of a systematic activity in order to create a change in an individual towards a better thing.
Learning that is carried out has two possibilities, namely successful and failed learning. Learning that fails occurs when the predetermined goals are not achieved properly, while successful learning is when it achieves the expected results [1].
The creation of successful and quality learning cannot be separated from the implementation of the learning component system which includes objectives, learning media, learning strategies, learning methods, learning stages, and others. Optimal implementation of the components will support the success of the learning process that involves teachers and students.
Learning outcomes are usually used as a benchmark to determine how far a student has mastered the material that has been taught. Comprehension learning outcomes requires an understanding of the two terms that comprise it, namely "results" and "learning." The term "outcome" (product) refers to an acquisition that occurs as a consequence of an action or process that alters functional input [2]. Student learning outcomes refer to the talents that students develop as a result of participating in educational activities [3]. In general, learning outcomes may be classified as cognitive, emotional, or psychomotor [4].
Low student learning outcomes are caused by student factors and teacher factors themselves. Various causes can be described as follows: 1) Problems caused by students include: students only learn
CGANT e-Proceeding
http://www.proceedingcgantunej.or.id The Proceeding of the Fifth ICCGANT 2021 DOI: xx.xxxx/cgantjma.v2i2.64
e-ISSN xxxx-xxxx CGANT e-Proceeding
UNIVERSITAS JEMBER
individually, students lack confidence in expressing their opinions, or students only make ordinary notes that are monotonous. The method of receiving information will be less effective because the memory strengthening process is only in the form of monotonous notes. Students are not accustomed to think or find ideas critically; 2) Problems caused by teachers include: teachers are less varied in determining learning methods, teachers only provide regular notes, teachers do not teach students in groups [5].
The learning process that takes place in school requires the ability to design and implement fun strategies. The strategy chosen by the teacher should be more creative and innovative. The method of delivering material should also involve students directly, not only relying on the lecture method (one- way learning). Chapter 3 Article 4, paragraph 5, of the National Educational System Law No. 20 of 2003 says that: Education is carried out through fostering a culture of reading, writing and arithmetic for all members of the community. This is also governed by Government Regulation 19 of 2005 on National Education Standards Chapter IV, Article 21(2), which stipulates that: a reading and writing culture is being developed in the context of the learning process.
The culture of reading and writing can be created by choosing the right method and in accordance with the learning objectives. The mind mapping learning method is one of the right methods to improve student learning outcomes. This method involves students directly, students not only listen to the teacher's explanation but also read, write, and make notes in the form of mind maps. This method makes it easier for students to remember because it is presented in the form of key words that are arranged to express all the ideas that exist in the mind, besides that mind mapping is also presented in an attractive visual writing.
A technique is a way or methods by which a person accomplishes an objective. In a learning environment, learning is a process of interaction between students, instructors, and learning materials.
The learning technique is the way in which the instructor delivers learning information in order to accomplish learning goals [6]. The mind mapping method (mind map) is a technique for assisting pupils in their learning process, store information in the form of subject matter received by students during learning, and help students compile important points of subject matter into maps, graphics and the use of symbols so that students can easily remember the lesson [5].
The mind mapping technique is regarded as a technique capable of optimizing the human brain's entire potential and ability. Mind mapping was stimulated the student to be able to capture, store, and process information based on their creativity so that complete knowledge of the material they learn is obtained. Melvin L. Silberman made a similar point [7]. Mind mapping is one of the appropriate methods to be used in learning activities. Through the mind mapping method, students can make notes with full color and various shapes or models according to their imagination and creativity. This method is also widely used in various research fields. Parikh [8].
Figure 1. Example of Mind Mapping.
The following are the uses of mind mapping in learning: 1) Collecting data to be used for various purposes systematically, 2) Developing and analyzing ideas / knowledge as is usually done during the teaching and learning process, workshop meetings, or meetings, 3) Creating an easy way to reviewing and repeating ideas and ideas at the same time, 4) Producing many choices from various possible decision routes, 5) Facilitating the brainstroming process because ideas and ideas that have not been easily recorded so far become easy to pour out on a sheet of paper, 6) Providing a big picture of an idea,
thereby helping the brain work on the idea, 7) Simplifying the structure of ideas and ideas that were originally complicated, long and not easily seen to be easier, 8) Selecting information based on something that is considered important and in accordance with the goal, 9) Providing various choices from various possible decision routes, 10) Speeding up and maximizing an understanding at the time of learning because you can see the relationship between one topic and another, 11) Sharpen the brain's workability because mapping is full of creativity [9].
The advantages of mind mapping in learning: 1) Improve the performance of knowledge management, 2) Maximize the work system of the brain, 3) Connect with each other so that more ideas and information are presented, 4) Pump creativity, simple and easy to do, 5) Recall existing data anytime and easily, 6) Attractive and easy to be catched (eye catching), 7) Look up for number of data easily [9].
Numerous prior research have shown that the usage of the mind mapping approach in education may have an effect on student learning results. Silvia Oksa's research demonstrates that using the mind mapping approach effectively improves learning results in photography classes [10]. According to Rizki Sanjaya's study, the average learning outcomes in the experimental class are significantly greater than the average learning outcomes in the controlled class when the Islamic Cultural History lecture style is used [11]. Meanwhile, Anastasia Marxy's study revealed that the average mathematics learning outcomes of students treated with mind mapping learning techniques were much greater than the average mathematics learning outcomes of students treated with STAD type cooperative learning techniques [12].
The distinction between current study and earlier study is in the subject and method of investigation.
The topic of this study is biology, namely invertebrates. The researchers attempted to use this method because it is believed to be capable of increasing student activity, fostering student creativity, and activating students in recording learning material in a way that makes it easier for students to remember the material delivered and can improve student learning outcomes in cognitive areas.
The goal of this research, as stated before, was to investigate the influence of the mind mapping approach on student learning outcomes for invertebrate content in Natural Science Class Grade X of MAN 3 Jember, East Java, Indonesia.
2. Method
This research included a quantitative methodology and a quasi-experimental methodology, as well as a non-equivalent group pre-post-test design. Purposive sampling was utilized to collect data. The population for this research was comprised of all students enrolled in Natural Science class Grade X at Islamic State Senior High School 3 Jember, Indonesia. The sample consisted of two courses selected on the basis of almost identical academic performance as demonstrated by midterm and odd semester exam results. The experimental class and the controlled class are the two classes. The experimental class is Natural Science class 3, which is taught using the mind mapping approach, while the controlled class is Natural Science class 4, which is not taught using the mind mapping approach. Each class has 31 pupils.
The research was place from January 20, 2020 to February 14, 2020.
This study collected data via the use of tests. The research used a multiple-choice written examination. There are two tests administered, the pretest and the posttest. Pretest is a test used to determine a student's first proficiency with invertebrate material before to receiving therapy. While the posttest is a test administered to pupils after they have received therapy. The gathered study data were then evaluated using the Mann-Whitney U test to assess whether or not there were variations in learning outcomes between the controlled and experimental classes. Prior to this, normalcy and homogeneity were determined.
The pretest - posttest questions served as the study instrument. The exam questions consist of sixteen items that have been confirmed by a professor from Jember's State Islamic University and a teacher from Islamic State Senior High School 3 in Jember, Indonesia. Additionally, instrument validation was conducted in class X Natural Science Class 1 and Natural Science Class 2 Islamic State Senior High School 3 Jember, Indonesia to determine the instrument's degree of validity and reliability. The pretest and posttest items were all genuine and dependable.
3. Research Results
The data that used in this study are in the form of pretest and posttest scores. The scores that have been obtained are analyzed to ascertain whether or whether there are changes in student learning outcomes between both the control and experimental classes.
3.1 Normality Test
The normality test findings for both pre- and post-test, as well as for the experiment and the control class, are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Normality test results in experiment and controlled classes.
Data Class Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic Df Sig.
Pretest Experiment ,810 31 ,000
Control ,848 31 ,000
Post-test Experiment ,860 31 ,001
Control ,847 31 ,000
Based on the output in table 1 above, it can be seen that the significance value of learning outcomes is 0.00 <0.05. So, it can be concluded that the data is not normally distributed.
3.2 Homogeneity Test
After the normality of the data is known, a homogeneity test is carried out. The homogeneity test is used to measure the amount of variance similarity in the leven statistics to accept or reject the hypothesis between the two groups, namely the control group and the experimentary group (see Sig.>0.05). The results of the homogeneity test may be seen in Table 2 below.
Table 2. Homogeneity Test Results
Data Fcount Sig Description
Pretest 4,758 0,031 Not Homogeneous
Posttest 20,66 0,003 Not Homogeneous
Based on Table 2 above, it can be seen that the results of the research homogenity test showed that the pretest Fcount was 4.758 with a significance of 0.031 while the posttest Fcountreached 20.66 with a significance of 0.003. From the results of the calculation of the significant value of the pretest and post- test data is smaller than 0.05 (sig < 0.05), it can be concluded that the data in this study has a variance that is not homogeneous.
3.3 Hypothesis Testing
Based on the results of the data normality test, it is known that the data in this study were not normally distributed, so that the hypothesis testing in this study used the Mann-Whitney U Test non-parametric statistical test.
3.3.1 Pretest Results. Before the treatment, students were given a pretest with the aim of knowing the students' initial abilities. The pretest results obtained from the experimental class and controlled class students which available as follows.
Table 3. Pretest Data
Class Lowest
Score
Highest Score
Average Standard Deviation
Experiment Class 53,3 73,3 60,19 7,79
Controlled Class 53,3 80 62,55 8,89
Table 3 above shows the average learning outcomes of the test classroom students at 60.19 and 7.79, whereas the average student achievement of the controlled classroom students were 62.55 and the standard difference was 8.89, so that the average score of the learning outcomes in a test school is 2.36 less than the controversy in the experimental class.
Figure 2. Pre Tes Data.
The first mean score was evaluated using the Mann-Whitney U Test to show that the initial skills of the students did not vary substantially. The Asympvalue was derived from the results of a Mann- Whitney U test. Sig. (2-tailed) 0.286, meaning 0.286>0.05, and H0 will be accepted. This demonstrates that there was no significant difference between the experimental and the controlled class in the pre-test learning results. It may be concluded from these results that the beginning skills of the experiment group and the control group are not considerably different.
3.3.2 Posttest Result. After being taught using the mind mapping method on invertebrate material, the experimental class and controlled class students were given a posttest. The posttest results are used to measure learning outcomes on invertebrate material after being given treatment. The posttest for the experimental class and the controlled class was held on February 14, 2020. The posttest time allocation was 45 minutes.
Table 4. Posttest Data.
Class Lowest
Score
Highest Score
Average Standard Deviation
Experiment Class 73,3 100 84,91 9,26
Controlled Class 66,6 86,6 74,37 6,48
The average study results in the experimental class are 84.91, and the average learning outcomes in the control class are 74.37, which is why the average learning outcomes in the experimental class are 10.54 less than the controlled class.
Figure 3. Posttest Data 0
20 40 60 80 100
Lowest
Score Highest
Score Average Standard Deviation
Experiment Class Control Class
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Lowest
Score Highest
Score Average Standard Deviation
Experiment Class Control Class
The mean of post-test scores wereanalysed using the Mann-Whitney U test to test the hypothesis.
From the results of the Mann-Whitney U test, the Asymp value was obtained. Sig. (2-tailed) of 0.000 which means 0.000 <0.05, then H0 is rejected. It can be concluded that there was a significant difference in student learning outcomes between the experimental class and the controlled class. The existence of a significant difference in post-test learning outcomes between the experimental class and the controlled class shows that there was an effect of the mind mapping method on student learning outcomes on invertebrate material in Natural Science class Grade X of MAN 3 Jember.
4. Discussion
On the basis of the data analysis results, it was found that the average post-test results of the experimental students were higher than the controlled class. The average pre-test value of the controlled class students was the same as the average score of the experimental class. This shows that the initial capabilities of both classes are the same, but after the experimental class is treated using the mind mapping method, the mean after test score of the experimental class is higher than that of the control class. In examining the pre- and post-test findings, it can be concluded that the mind mapping method has an impact on the results of learning for students. With the existence of various learning methods that affect students, the increase in post-test students' results prove that there is a process called the learning process. Where the mean value of the experimental class is above the mean value of the controlled class used for conventional learning. In the experimental class, this increase was achieved using mind mapping methods.
Mind mapping or mind maps are a way to record topics that make it easier for students to learn. In addition, mind mapping can be classified as a creative note-taking technique. It is categorized as creative techniques because it requires the imagination of the maker for this mapping of mind. Creative students will find this mapping easier. The more students create mind mapping, the more creative students [13]
are. Mind mapping helps to create processes like writing [14]. The techniques of mental mapping are more effective than the traditional one. Mind mapping is intended to memorize text more effectively than regularly [15].
Overall, the results of this study support previous Hairani research, which has found that learning with the mind-mapping method enables one to activate and explore the ability to think [16]. This is seen from the student learning results that were achieved between the experimental and the controlled class, the student learning results using the mental mapping method were superior to those using the lecture method.
The results of this study also support the research conducted by Marxi which found that the mind mapping method has an important role in students' understanding and mastery of concepts, students easily remember the material taught not by memorizing, students also solve problems and can think actively without having to always coherently. Just like the methods or steps for completion given by the teacher, mind mapping is a method that uses concept maps as a tool in the delivery of learning material that aims to encourage students to learn to think critically by solving problems, mind mapping can help in critical thinking. Students are directed to identify problems, look for alternative problem solving, and find the most effective way of solving problems, and follow up [12].
5. Conclusion and Suggestion
Based on the issue formulation and the suggested study hypothesis, and the findings On the basis of the problem formula and proposed investigative hypothesis, as well as research results based on data analysis and testing of the hypotheses, it could be concluded that at the time of the test the learning results of students who were taught using the mind maping method were not significantly different from those who were not taught using mind maps. This demonstrates that each class has the same start capacity. In the posttest the results of students who were taught using the mind mapping approach differed greatly from those who were not taught using the mind mapping approach. The average learning results in the experimental class were greater than the average learning results of controls students. This reveals that the mind mapping approach has a considerable impact on the learning results of students in X-grade natural science classes in invertebrates at Islamic State Senior High School 3 July.
For future study it is advisable to employ various ways that may increase learning activities for students, promote student creativity and enable students to record subjects. This study is included only on invertebrates or the mind mapping approach. The various strategies should make it simpler for students to recall the content provided and may enhance student learning results not just from a cognitive perspective but also from an afective and psychomotor point of view.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful for the excellent insights and helpful ideas from the anonymous referee.
References
[1] Setiawan M. A, Teaching and Learning, Ponorogo, Uwais Inspirasi Indonesia, 2017 [2] Purwanto, Learning Outcomes Evaluation, Yogyakarta, Pustaka Pelajar, 2016
[3] Susanto A., Learning Theory and Elementary School Learning, Jakarta, Kencana, 2016
[4] Haryati M., Evaluation Model and Technique for All Educational Levels, Jakarta, Gaung Persada Press, 2008
[5] Syam N., “Implementation of Mind Mapping Learning Model to Improve Students Learning Outcomes on Social Science Course atau sixth State Elementary School 54 Pare pare Grade”.
Journal of Education Publication. 5 (3) 184-197, 2015
[6] Darmadai H., Development of Learning Method Model of Students Learning Dynamic, Yogyakarta, Deepublish, 2017
[7] Saputro A R et.al., “The Application of Mind Mapping Learning Model to Improve the Students’
Learning Outcomes and Liveliness”, Journal Atlantis Press, 158 44-53, 2017
[8] Parikh N. D., “Effectiveness of Teaching through Mind Mapping Technique”. The International Journal of Indian Psychology. 3 (3) 1-9, 2016
[9] Swadarma D., Implementation of Mind Mapping of Learning Curriculum, Jakarta, PT Elex Media Komputindo, 2013
[10] Oksa S., “The Effectiveness of Mind Mapping Method to increase Students learning Outcomes of Photografy Course at grade X Multimedia Class State Vocational School 2 Sewon”, A Thesis, State University of Yogyakarta, 2016
[11] Sanjaya R. “The influence of the Mind Mapping Method Implementation to Students learning Outcomes of Islamic Culture, A thesis, State University of Syarif Hidayatullah, 2018
[12] Marxy A., “The Influence of Mind Mapping to Students learning Outcomes on mathematic course”, Journal of Mathematic Literature, 02 (02) 173-182, 2017
[13] Budiyanto M. A. K., “Sintaks 45 Learning Methods of Student Centerd Learning (SCL)”, Malang, UMM Press. 2016
[14] Yunus M. & Chien C. H., “The Use of Mind Mapping Strategy in Malaysian University English Test ( MUET ) Writing”, Creative Education. 7 (04), 619-626, 2016
[15] Kalyanasundaram M., Abraham S. B., Ramachandran D., Jayaseelan V., Bazroy J., Singh Z., &
Purty A. J., “Effectiveness of Mind Mapping Technique in Information Retrieval Asmong Medical College Students in Puducherry-A Pilot Study”. Indian Journal of Community Medicine : Official Publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine. 42 (01) 19– 23, 2017
[16] Hairani et.al. “The Influence of supervised inquiry Learning Model to Science Process Skill and Students natural science achievement of grade seventh junior high School at initial knowlegde, Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2 (23)154-165. 2016
