EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STAD DAN TPS DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAVI TERHADAP PRESTASI DAN MOTIVASI BELAJAR DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR PADA MATERI SEGIEMPAT SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN BATANG TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013

, Sutrisno (2013) EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STAD DAN TPS DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAVI TERHADAP PRESTASI DAN MOTIVASI BELAJAR DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR PADA MATERI SEGIEMPAT SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN BATANG TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013. Masters thesis, Universitas Sebelas Maret.

[img]
Preview
PDF (STAD, TPS, SAVI, Gaya Belajar, Motivasi Belajar) - Published Version
Download (165Kb) | Preview

    Abstract

    The objectives of this research are to investigate: (1) which of the conventional learning model, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach, and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach results in a better learning achievement; (2) which of the conventional learning model, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach, and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach results in a better learning motivation; (3) which of the students with the visual learning style, the students with the auditory learning style, and the students with the kinesthetic learning style have a better learning achievement; (4) which of the students with the visual learning style, the students with the auditory learning style, and the students with the kinesthetic learning style have a better learning motivation; (5) in each learning model, which of each category of the learning styles results in a better learning achievement; (6) in each learning model, which of each category of the learning styles results in a better learning motivation; (7) in each learning style, which of each category of learning models results in a better learning achievement; and (8) in each learning style, which of each category of learning models results in a better learning motivation. This research used the quasi experimental research method. The population of the research was all of the students of State Junior Secondary Schools in Batang regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The samples were 300 students and divided into three groups, namely: 100 students in control group, 102 students in Experimental Group 1, and 98 students in Experimental Group 2 respectively. The instruments of the research include questionnaire of learning style, questionnaire of learning motivation, and test of learning achievement. Prior to their uses, the test instrument was tested in terms of its content validity, difficulty level, differentiability, performing distractor, and reliability, and the questionnaire instruments were tested in terms of content validity, internal consistency, and reliability. The prerequisite tests included univariate and multivariate normality test of population and variance and covariance matrix homogeneity tests of population. The balance test employed the one-way multivariate analysis of variance with unbalanced cells, and the result of the test shows that three groups had the balanced initial ability. The proposed hypotheses of the research were analyzed by using the two-way multivariate analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research are as follows: (1) both the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach result in a better learning achievement than the conventional learning model, and both the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach result in the same learning achievement; (2) the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach results in a better motivation than either the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach or the conventional learning model, and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach results in a better learning motivation than the conventional learning model; (3) the students with the auditory learning style have a better learning achievement than those with the visual learning style and those with the kinesthetic learning style, and the students with the visual learning style have a better learning achievement than those with the kinesthetic learning style; (4) the learning motivation of the students with the visual learning style is the same as that of both the students with the auditory learning style and the students with the kinesthetic learning style, but the learning motivation of the students with the auditory learning style is better than those with the kinesthetic learning style; (5) in the conventional learning model and in the cooperative learning of the STAD type, the learning achievement of the students with the visual learning style is the same as that of the students with the auditory learning style and that of the students with the kinesthetic learning style, but the learning achievement of the students with the auditory learning style is better than that of the students with the kinesthetic learning style; in the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach, the learning achievement of the students with the visual learning style is the same as that of the students with the auditory learning style and that of with the kinesthetic learning style; (6) in any learning models, the learning motivation of the students with the visual learning style is the same as that of the students with the auditory learning style and that of the students with the kinesthetic learning style, but the learning motivation of the students with the auditory learning style is better than that of the students with the kinesthetic learning style; (7) in the visual and kinesthetic learning styles, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach and that of the TPS type with SAVI approach result in a better learning achievement than the conventional learning model, and both the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach and that of the TPS type with SAVI approach result in the same learning achievement; in the auditory learning style, the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach results in the same learning achievement as that of the STAD type of SAVI approach and the conventional learning model, but the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach results in a better learning achievement than the conventional learning model; and (8) in any learning styles, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with SAVI approach results in a better learning motivation than the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach and the conventional learning model, and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type with SAVI approach results in a better learning motivation than the conventional one. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui: (1) manakah yang menghasilkan prestasi belajar lebih baik, model pembelajaran konvensional, kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI, atau kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI; (2) manakah yang menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik, model pembelajaran konvensional, kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI, atau kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI; (3) manakah yang prestasi belajarnya lebih baik, siswa bergaya belajar visual, auditorial, atau kinestetik; (4) manakah yang motivasi belajarnya lebih baik, siswa bergaya belajar visual, auditorial, atau kinestetik; (5) manakah yang prestasi belajarnya lebih baik dari masing-masing kategori gaya belajar siswa pada masing-masing model pembelajaran; (6) manakah yang motivasi belajarnya lebih baik dari masing-masing kategori gaya belajar siswa pada masing-masing model pembelajaran (7) manakah yang menghasilkan prestasi belajar lebih baik dari masing-masing model pembelajaran pada masing-masing kategori gaya belajar siswa; (8) manakah yang menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik, dari masing-masing model pembelajaran pada masing-masing kategori gaya belajar siswa. Jenis Penelitian ini adalah penelitian eksperimental semu dengan populasi seluruh siswa SMP Negeri se-Kabupaten Batang. Pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan teknik stratified cluster random sampling dan diperoleh sampel sebanyak 300 siswa, dengan rincian 100 siswa pada kelas kontrol, 102 siswa pada kelas eksperimen satu, dan 98 pada kelas eksperimen dua. Instrumen penelitian ini adalah angket gaya belajar, angket motivasi belajar, dan tes prestasi belajar. Uji coba instrumen tes meliputi validitas isi, tingkat kesukaran, daya pembeda, berfungsinya pengecoh, dan reliabilitas. Uji coba instrumen angket meliputi validitas isi, konsistensi internal, dan reliabilitas. Uji prasyarat meliputi uji normalitas univariat dan multivariat populasi serta uji homogenitas variansi dan matriks kovariansi populasi. Uji keseimbangan menggunakan analisis variansi multivariat satu jalur sel tak sama, dan diperoleh simpulan bahwa ketiga kelas penelitian mempunyai kemampuan awal yang seimbang. Pengujian hipotesis menggunakan analisis variansi multivariat dua jalur sel tak sama. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa: (1) model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD maupun TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar lebih baik daripada konvensional, dan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD maupun TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar yang sama; (2) model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik daripada kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI maupun Konvensional, dan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik daripada konvensional; (3) prestasi siswa bergaya belajar auditorial lebih baik daripada visual maupun kinestetik, dan prestasi siswa bergaya belajar visual lebih baik daripada kinestetik; (4) motivasi siswa bergaya belajar visual sama dengan auditorial atau kinestetik, tetapi motivasi siswa bergaya belajar auditorial lebih baik daripada kinestetik; (5) pada model pembelajaran konvensional maupun kooperatif tipe STAD, prestasi siswa bergaya belajar visual sama dengan auditorial atau kinestetik, tetapi prestasi siswa bergaya belajar auditorial lebih baik daripada belajar kinestetik; pada model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI, prestasi siswa bergaya belajar auditorial, visual, maupun kinestetik sama; (6) pada model pembelajaran manapun, motivasi siswa bergaya belajar visual sama dengan auditorial atau kinestetik, tetapi motivasi siswa bergaya belajar auditorial lebih baik daripada kinestetik; (7) pada siswa bergaya belajar visual maupun kinestetik, model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD maupun TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar lebih baik daripada konvensional, dan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD maupun TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar yang sama; pada siswa bergaya belajar auditorial, model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar yang sama dengan kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI atau konvensional, tetapi model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan prestasi belajar lebih baik daripada konvensional; (8) pada siswa bergaya belajar manapun, model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe STAD berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik daripada kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI maupun konvensional, dan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TPS berpendekatan SAVI menghasilkan motivasi belajar lebih baik daripada konvensional.

    Item Type: Thesis (Masters)
    Subjects: H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
    Divisions: Pasca Sarjana > Magister
    Depositing User: Vignasari Kokasih
    Date Deposited: 10 May 2014 19:33
    Last Modified: 10 May 2014 19:33
    URI: https://eprints.uns.ac.id/id/eprint/16020

    Actions (login required)

    View Item