4.8. The Relationship of Student’s Achievement with Student’s Character
Development 59
4.9. Discussion 61
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 66
5.1. Conclusion 66
5.2. Suggestion 66
REFERENCES 67
LIST OF TABLE
Page Table 2.1 The characteristics of discovery learning model
10 Table 2.2 Syntax of discovery learning model
12 Table 2.3 Syntax of direct instruction method
14 Table 3.1 The distribution of sample
25 Table 3.2 The grille of test instrument
27 Table 3.3 The grille of observation sheet of cooperation character
28 Table 3.4 The grille of observation sheet of curiosity character
30 Table 3.5 The questionnaire of s
tudent’s cooperation character 31
Table 3.6 The questionnaire of s tudent’s curiosity character
32 Table 3.7 Research design
36 Table 4.1 Description of class that used as sample
40 Table 4.2 Validity of the test
42 Table 4.3 Difficulty index
44 Table 4.4 Discriminating power
45 Table 4.5 Summary of the instrument test
45 Table 4.6 Data of pretest and posttest
47 Table 4.7 Normality test of s
tudent’s achievement 48
Table 4.8 Normality test of student’s character 49
Table 4.9 The homogeneity test of s tudent’s achievement
49
Table 4.10 Data of student’s achievement in pretest 50
Table 4.11 Data of student’s achievement in posttest 51
Table 4.12 Average value of normalized gain 54
Table 4.13 The Analysis of questions based on posttest result 55
Table 4.14 The summary of student’s cooperation character
57 Table 4.15
The summary of student’s curiosity character 58
Table 4.16 Hypothesis testing 59
Table 4.17 The relationship of s tudent’s achievements with student’s
character development 60
Table 4.18 The percentage of the relationship between s tudent’s
achievements with development of s tudent’s character
61
LIST OF FIGURE
Page Figure 3.1. The flowchart of the research
37 Figure 4.1. The s
tudent’s achievement in experimental class 52
Figure 4.2. The increasing of student ’s achievement in experimental class 52
Figure 4.3. The student ’s achievement in control class
53 Figure 4.4. The increasing of student
’s achievement in control class 54
LIST OF APPENDIX
Page Appendix 1 Syllabus of chemistry subject
70 Appendix 2 Lesson plan of experiment class
75 Appendix 3 Lesson plan of control class
96 Appendix 4 The observation sheet of s
tudent’s cooperation character 115
Appendix 5 The observation sheet of s tudent’s curiosity character
117
Appendix 6 The questionnaire of s
tudent’s cooperation character 118
Appendix 7 The questionnaire of s tudent’s curiosity character
119
Appendix 8 The instrument test before validation 120
Appendix 9 Lattice of Instrument test on buffer solution topic 127
Appendix 10 Table of validity item test 136
Appendix 11 Reliability of instrument test 152
Appendix 12 Difficulty index 154
Appendix 13 Discriminating power 158
Appendix 14 The instrument test after validation 162
Appendix 15 Worksheet of experiment 169
Appendix 16 The result of experiment 174
Appendix 17 The observation data of s tudent’s cooperation character
177 Appendix 18 The observation data of
student’s curiosity character 180
Appendix 19 The development of s tudent’s cooperation character
183 Appendix 20 The development of s
tudent’s curiosity character 184
Appendix 21 The questionnaire data of s tudent’s cooperation
185
Appendix 22 The questionnaire data of s tudent’s curiosity
186 Appendix 23 Gain of pretest-posttest in experimental class
187 Appendix 24 Gain of pretest-posttest in control class
189 Appendix 25 Normality test
191 Appendix 26 Homogeinity test
199 Appendix 27 Hypothesis testing
201 Appendix 28 The calculation of increasing
student’s achievement 203
Appendix 29 Documentation 204
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
After conducting the research and analyzing the data, there are some conclusions
that gotten, they are:
1. The student’s achievement that taught by discovery learning model is
significant higher than the student’s achievement that taught by using direct
instruction method sig
; 0.000 0.05.
2. The student’s chemistry achievement that taught by discovery learning model
is better 100 could pass KKM than taught by direct instruction method
51 could pass KKM.
3. The development of student’s cooperation character that taught by discovery
learning model is 64.54 medium criteria.
4. The development of student’s curiosity character that taught by discovery
learning model is 59.41 medium criteria.
5.2. Suggestion
From the result of the research, there are some suggestion must be raised: 1.
It is suggested for chemistry teacher to use Discovery Learning model in learning Buffer Solution topic to increase the stu
dent’s cooperation character in learning process.
2. It is suggested for chemistry teacher to use Discovery Learning model in
learning Buffer Solution topic to increas e the student’s curiosity character in
learning process. 3.
It is suggested for chemistry teacher to use Discovery Learning model in learning Buffer Solution
topic to increase the student’s achievement in learning process.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of Research
Education is the sector that most important for human civilization in this world. Education is also very important for improving the quality of human
resources especially in Indonesia. If the education quality of certain country is conceited, it will make life level of society will be well in their country. But in
Indonesia the quality of education is still low. It can be seen from one of indicator that has been done by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization UNESCO, for the education quality of development country in Asia Pacific, Indonesia is place in 10 level of the 14 country, whereas quality of
teacher exist in level 14 of the 14 UNESCO, 2010. The quality of education can be achieved with a suitable learning process in
the classroom. However, there are still many facts on the ground that student management system only done by direct instruction method that can not make
students enough understand and lead to passive students which can not foster the student
’s achievement. This is obvious with the discovery of facts in SMAN 5 Medan that the students are still low in chemistry learning outcomes. It can be
seen from the results of daily exams with the KKM value of chemistry is 75, while the students that are able to achieve only 30.
In the other side, the problem of chemistry subject in senior high school is the weakness of teachers in channeling the child’s potency. Educators often
impose their own desire without observing their requisites, interest and talent that exist in each student. The other problem is that the learning model that used by
teacher is still monotonous, while the teachers always use direct instruction method, so the teacher dominates teaching and learning process in classroom that
makes the student is less motivated to study. Direct instruction method also makes student confuse to learn a topic that is abstract or infrequently meet by student,
because by using the direct instruction method, the teacher tends not representing
Kategori