Irma Ayuwanti, Irma
Prodi Magister Pendidikan Matematika, Pascasarjana, FKIP – UNS

Published : 3 Documents
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DAN GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) PADA MATERI SEGITIGA DAN SEGIEMPAT DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT (AQ) SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN TULANG BAWANG BARAT

Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of the research  were to find out: (1) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT, GI or direct learning model, (2) which one having better mathematics learning achievement, students with climbers, campers or quitters AQ, (3) in each learning models (NHT, GI and direct) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, climbers, campers or quitters AQ, (4) in each student AQ (climbers, campers, and quitters) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT, GI or direct learning  model.This study was a quasi-experimental research. The research design used was a 3x3 factorial design. The population of research was all VII graders of Junior High Schools throughout West Tulang Bawang Regency in the school year of 2014/2015. Meanwhile the sample was taken using stratified cluster random sampling. The sample consisted of 281 students: 93 students for experiment I class, 93 for experiment II class and 95 for control class. The instruments used to collect the data were learning AQ questionnaire and  mathematics learning achievement test. From the result of research, it could be concluded as follows: (1) NHT learning model provided mathematics learning achievement better than GI learning model and direct learning model, GI learning model provided mathematics learning achievement better than direct learning model. (2) The learning achievement of the students with climbers AQ was better than that of those with campers and quitters AQ, and the learning achievement of the students with campers AQ was better than that of those with quitters AQ. (3) In NHT learning model, students with climbers and campers AQ had the same achievement, students with climbers  and campers AQ had better achievement than students with quitters AQ; qqqin GI learning model, students with climbers and campers AQ had the same achievement, students with climbers AQ categories had better achievement than students with quitters AQ, students with campers and quitters AQ had the same achievement; in direct learning model, students with climbers, campers and quitters AQ had the same achievement. (4) In climbers AQ, NHT learning modelqqq gave the same achievement as GI learning model, NHT learning model gave better achievement than in direct learning model, GI learning model gave the same achievement as direct learning model; in campers AQ, NHT learning model gave the same achievement as GI learning model, NHT learning model gave better achievement than in direct learning model, GI learning model gave the same achievement as direct learning model; in quitters AQ, NHT, GI and direct learning model gave the same achievement. Keywords: NHT, GI, Direct Learning, and Adversity Quotient (AQ).

EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DAN GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) PADA MATERI SEGITIGA DAN SEGIEMPAT DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT (AQ) SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN TULANG BAWANG BARAT

Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of the research  were to find out: (1) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT, GI or direct learning model, (2) which one having better mathematics learning achievement, students with climbers, campers or quitters AQ, (3) in each learning models (NHT, GI and direct) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, climbers, campers or quitters AQ, (4) in each student AQ (climbers, campers, and quitters) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT, GI or direct learning  model.This study was a quasi-experimental research. The research design used was a 3x3 factorial design. The population of research was all VII graders of Junior High Schools throughout West Tulang Bawang Regency in the school year of 2014/2015. Meanwhile the sample was taken using stratified cluster random sampling. The sample consisted of 281 students: 93 students for experiment I class, 93 for experiment II class and 95 for control class. The instruments used to collect the data were learning AQ questionnaire and  mathematics learning achievement test. From the result of research, it could be concluded as follows: (1) NHT learning model provided mathematics learning achievement better than GI learning model and direct learning model, GI learning model provided mathematics learning achievement better than direct learning model. (2) The learning achievement of the students with climbers AQ was better than that of those with campers and quitters AQ, and the learning achievement of the students with campers AQ was better than that of those with quitters AQ. (3) In NHT learning model, students with climbers and campers AQ had the same achievement, students with climbers  and campers AQ had better achievement than students with quitters AQ; qqqin GI learning model, students with climbers and campers AQ had the same achievement, students with climbers AQ categories had better achievement than students with quitters AQ, students with campers and quitters AQ had the same achievement; in direct learning model, students with climbers, campers and quitters AQ had the same achievement. (4) In climbers AQ, NHT learning modelqqq gave the same achievement as GI learning model, NHT learning model gave better achievement than in direct learning model, GI learning model gave the same achievement as direct learning model; in campers AQ, NHT learning model gave the same achievement as GI learning model, NHT learning model gave better achievement than in direct learning model, GI learning model gave the same achievement as direct learning model; in quitters AQ, NHT, GI and direct learning model gave the same achievement. Keywords: NHT, GI, Direct Learning, and Adversity Quotient (AQ).

Meningkatkan Aktivitas dan Hasil Belajar Matematika Menggunakan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Group Investigation di SMK Tuma'ninah Yasin Metro

SAP (Susunan Artikel Pendidikan) Vol 1, No 2 (2016): SAP
Publisher : Universitas Indraprasta PGRI Jakarta

Show Abstract | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (438.047 KB)

Abstract

Berdasar hasil Pra Survey yang dilaksanakan di SMK Tuma’ninah Yasin Metro diperoleh informasi bahwa siswa kurang aktif selama pembelajaran serta hasil belajar siswa masih relatif rendah. Sehingga dalam penelitian ini digunakan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Group Investigation (GI) dengan tujuan untuk mengetahui apakah dengan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Group Investigation (GI) dapat meningkatkan aktivitas dan hasil belajar siswa kelas X di SMK Tuma’ninah Yasin Metro semester genap tahun pelajaran 2015/2016. Jenis penelitian ini adalah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas (PTK). Jumlah siswa kelas X adalah 11 siswa. Teknik pengumpulan data melalui observasi dan tes. Instrumen dalam penelitian ini adalah tes tertulis berupa soal tes dalam bentuk uraian untuk mengukur hasil belajar siswa dan lembar observasi untuk mengukur aktivitas belajar siswa. Penelitian ini terdiri dari 3 siklus, setiap siklus meliputi perencanaan, pelaksanaan, observasi, dan refleksi. Aktivitas belajar siswa diamati dengan menggunakan lembar observasi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: 1) Pembelajaran menggunakan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Group Investigation (GI) dapat meningkatkan aktivitas belajar matematika siswa kelas X SMK Tuma’ninah Yasin Metro. 2) Pembelajaran menggunakan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Group Investigation (GI) dapat meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa dengan rata-rata dari 27,5% siklus I menjadi 54,54% pada siklus II dan menjadi 81,81% pada siklus III.