THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOME U S I N G I N Q U I R Y B A S E D L E A R N I N G A N D D I R E C T INSTRUCTION MODEL IN DYNAMIC ELECTRICITYAT GRADE X SMA N 11 MEDAN A.Y 2015/2016.
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOME USING INQUIRY BASED LEARNING AND DIRECT
INSTRUCTION MODEL IN DYNAMIC ELECTRICITYAT GRADE X SMA N 11 MEDAN A.Y 2015/2016
By:
Henriko Hutabarat 409322019
Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted toAcquires Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN 2016
(2)
(3)
iii
ii THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES USING
INQUIRY BASED LEARNING AND DIRECT INSTRUCTION MODEL IN DYNAMIC ELECTRICITY AT GRADE X
SMA NEGERI 11 MEDAN A.Y 2015/2016
Henriko Hutabarat (ID. Number: 409322019) ABSTRACT
This research had been doing at grade X SMA Negeri 11 Medan academic year 2015/2016. The purpose of this research was to find out the average mark of student learning outcomes of using Inquiry Based Learning Model and Direct Instruction Model in dynamic electricity and to find out the significan difference of student’s learning outcomes using inquiry based learning model and direct instructional model in dynamic electricity. The research method was quasi experimental. The population were all students at X class consist of 10 classes. The sample of this research conduct two classes and consist of 40 students, here class X3 as experiment class and class X5 as control class and define by random cluster sampling. The results that were obtained: post-test mean value of the experimental class was 63.92 and 53.30 was the mean value for control class. Standard deviation for two classes were 8.72 and 12.43. Normality test result from the both samples was normal and homogenous, the testing criterion was accept H0 if -2.024< t’ <2.024 and refuse Ho in other condition. Here, H0 was refused because t’ is 3.130 and Ha was accepted. So it can be concluded that there was significant difference of student’s learning outcomes using inquiry based learning model and direct instructional model in dynamic electricity.
(4)
iv
PREFACE
Praise and thanks to God Almighty who has give for all the graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to the author that this study can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time.
Thesis entitled "The Difference Of Student’s Learning Outcomes Using Inquiry Based Learning And Direct Instruction Model In Dynamic Electricity At Grade X Sman 11 Medan A.Y 2015/2016", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics Education, Faculty ofMathematics and Natural Science in State University of Medan.
On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr. Maas Alkhafi Siregar, M.Si., as my Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis writing. Thanks also to Prof. Dr. Nurdin Bukit, M.Si., Dr. Ridwan A. Sani, M.Si., and Dr. Makmur Sirait, M.Si., who have provided input and suggestions from the research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Thanks also presented to Dr. Makmur Sirait, M.Si., as the Academic Supervisor and also the entire Lecturer and Staff in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED who have helped the author. Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster Drs. K. Lumbantoruan, M.Pd., physics teachers Juandi Manullang, S.Pd., and all teacher in SMA Negeri 11 Medan who have helped during this research. I would like to thank especially to my father M. Hutabarat and my mother L. Pasaribu and also my brother and sister Evdoarjo Hutabarat, Riswimina Hutabarat, Elly Kristina Hutabarat, and Listiawati Hutabarat, and all family who have helped, prayed and gave me encouragement and funding to complete the study in Unimed. Especially thanks to all my friends in Bilingual Physics “GEM” Class 2009, Adek Muhammad R., Astrid Pasadena Hrp S.Pd., Agnes M. Damanik, S.Pd, Carolina Nainggolan, S.Pd, Dewi Situmorang S.Pd, Debora B. Sitanggang, S.Pd, Fetriana Simanihuruk, S.Pd, Gita R. Anugrah, S.Pd, Hanna Monika Hutabarat S.Pd, Janiar S. Gultom, S.Pd, Jefri S.Waruwu, S.Pd, Lucius Marbun, S.Pd, Pretty Ambarita, M.Pd, Ribka Tambunan, S.Pd, Rika Yulia, M.Pd, Rita Situmorang, S.Pd, Rani S.N. Damanik,
(5)
v
S.Pd, Tionar M. Malau, M.Pd, Avolen Siahaan, S.Pd, Evi Silalahi, S.Pd, Mas Andri Marbun, M.Pd and Riris Rumahorbo, S.Pd who have helped, prayed and gave supported to author. The author also thanks to my brother and sister in the “Kost Ibu Sri Kolam Ujung”Hendro, Hasbih, Abdul, Prinensis, Perinto, Rollis, Reza, Riswan, Robin, Tomandro, Syahrizal, Cecilia, Melva, Ester, and other who gave support for the author during research.
The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this thesis, but the author is aware there are many drawbacks in terms of both content and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of this paper would be useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan, August 2016 Author,
(6)
vi
CONTENT
Page
Legitimation i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Prepace iv
Content vi
Lits of Figure viii
List of Table ix
List of Appendix x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Identification 6
1.3 The Scope of Study 6
1.4 Problem Formulation 6
1.5 Research Objectives 7
1.6 Benefits of Reseacrh 7
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 Theoretical Framework 9
2.1.1 Definitions of Learning 9
2.1.2 Learning Process 9
2.1.3 Learning Outcomes 10
2.1.4 Model of Teaching 16
2.1.5 The Inquiry-Based Learning Model 16
2.1.6 Direct Instruction Learning Model 23
2.2 Subject Materials 25
2.2.1 Ohm’s law and Resintance 25
2.2.2 Simple Circuits 30
2.2.3 Energy and Power of Electricity 35
2.2.4 Electric Circuit of Direct Current 37
2.2.5 Kirchhoff’s Law 38
2.3 Conceptual Framework 38
2.4 Hypothesis 39
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS 40
3.1 Research Location and Time 40
3.2 Research Population and Sample 40
3.3 Research Variable 40
3.4 Research Type and Design 40
(7)
vii
3.4.2 Design of Research 41
3.5 Research Procedure 41
3.6 Data Collection Technique 44
3.6.1 Pretest 44
3.6.2 Posttest 44
3.7 Research Instrument 44
3.7.1 Content Validity 45
3.8 Data Analysis Techniques 46
3.8.1 Calculating the mean of the pretest and posttest and standard deviation 46
3.8.2 Normally Test 47
3.8.3 Homogienety Test 48
3.8.4 Hypothesis Test 48
CHAPTER IV RESULT OF RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Research of Result 53
4.1.1 Pre-test Data 53
4.1.2 Post-test Data 54
4.1.3 Tabulation of Each Test 55
4.2 Data Analysis 56
4.2.1 Normality Testing 56
4.2.2 Homogeneity Testing 57
4.2.3 Hypothesis Testing 58
4.3 Discussion 58
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion 65
5.2 Suggestion 65
(8)
ix
LIST OF TABLE
Page Table 2.1 Phase of inquiry-based learning 22
Table 3.1 Design of research 42
Table 3.2 Specification of test of learning outcomes 45 Table 3.3 Categories student’s Learning Outcomes 46
Table 4.1 Data Normality Test 56
Table 4.2 Summary of Homogeneity Test Result of Data 57 Table 4.3 Calculation of Hypothesis Test of Post-test 58
(9)
x
LIST OF APPENDIX
Page Appendix 1 Lesson Plan Experiment Clas 1 68 Appendix 2 Lesson Plan Experiment Clas 2 77 Appendix 3 Lesson Plan Experiment Clas 3 87 Appendix 4 Lesson Plan Control Clas 1 98 Appendix 5 Lesson Plan Control Clas 2 106 Appendix 6 Lesson Plan Control Clas 3 114
Appendix 7 Work Sheet 1 123
Appendix 8 Work Sheet 2 127
Appendix 9 Work Sheet 3 131
Appendix 10 Specifications of Test on Science Process Skill 135
Appendix 11 Instrument Test 142
Appendix 12 Evaluation Science process Skill Rubric 145
Appendix 13 Data Tabulation 152
Appendix 14 Pretest and Posttest Data 160 Appendix 15 Calculation of Mean Value and Standard Deviation 162 Appendix 16 Normally Test Calculation 165 Appendix 17 Homogeneity Test Calculation 170 Appendix 18 Hypothesis Test Calculation 172 Appendix 19 List of Critical Value for Liliefors 176 Appendix 20 List of percentile value for Distribution t 177 Appendix 21 List of Area Under Normal Curve 0 to z 178 Appendix 22 List of F Distribution 179
(10)
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background
Education is one of efforts to develop the intellectual life of the nation and to improve the quality of human resources. Therefore, education plays an important role towards the progress of a nation. This has been recognized both by the government where so many efforts have been undertaken to improve the quality of education in Indonesia. Such as curriculum improvement, teacher quality improvement, provisioning the International/ Bilingual schools that have the ability to competing and so forth.
Education is notjustacquiredin a short time, but it requiresalearning process. Learning is a process ofone'seffortstoobtain anew behaviorchangesas a whole, as a result ofhis own experience inthe interactionwith the environment.
Therefore, researchers and other educators give the considerable time to do a study on improving the quality of education, particularly in improving the quality of teachers. As Slameto states that “the role of teachers has increased from as a teacher became a director of learning process. As director of learning process, duties and responsibilities of teachers are more increase, including increasing the function of teachers as lesson planning, learning managers, appraisers learning outcomes, learning motivator, and as a mentor”.
Nowadays, when students do the learning,studentsare usuallydominatedby the writing, recording, listening to the teacherexplainandread a book. These habitsareonlyelements ofwritingor wordsthat causeonly the left brainareworking, while theright brainis not workingat the time ofstudy.Thisunbalancemakes the studentsthinkthat learning isnot fun. Same with learnphysicsat school.
During this time, physics is one of subject that are less attractive to students. It is evident from the low percentage of students’ mastery learning. This is because ion addition to the material in these subjects is difficult to understand, sometimes the delivery of content by teacher lacking attract student. In general,
(11)
physics teacher at school more often discussing the theory of the handbook, providing formulas, and provide examples problems. This led to a physical science reading material and students can only imagine.
Learning models like above causing physics to be one of the subjects which are not interested by student and paradigm of student who assumes that physics is difficult. Thought physics is a subject that close to the daily life and its application can be found directly in our environment. In this case the teacher has an inportant role in instilling positive paradigm for students. So physics is no longer a daunting subject and boring.
Based on preliminary study through the direct observation by interviewing the physic teacher at SMAN 11 Medan suggests teachers tend to still use the conventional learning with lecture and question and answer that is teacher centered. In presenting the subject matter, the teacher explain to the class and give a summary of the material with notes on the board and the student listen and record the important things of the material being taught. This leads to students not directly involved in the learning process and passive. From interviews said also that the students learning outcomes in physics subject is low. When the value of KKM , approximately % of students who did not complete the study in the physics subject.
Many thing can cause low physics student learning outcomes, one of which is the learning process that is not pavor of the students. Student was just as listeners and teachers are more instrumental or teacher-centered. Dominance of teachers in this study led to more students waiting for a dish of knowledge from the teacher rather than finding themselves the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required in the acquiring knowledge.
Based on the observation found that only about 0% students’ in SMAN 11 Medan which like the physics. This is because physics is a subject which is not interesting and not easily. Moreover, if the method of teaching is very nice, it will make them more interested in learning physics. In their daily life, they’ve responded well to the subjects of physics, this can be seen when teachers teach them, they observe and record things that are important.
(12)
According to constructivist view of learning every student construct their own understanding about the content of every case. This perspective based on premise that every people construct their own views of the world around, through integrating the individual experiences and schema with new knowledge. Therefore, constructivism focuses on preparing the students to solve problems in ambiguous situations. From a constructivist perspective, knowledge is not independent of the knower knowledge consists of physical and abstract objects in experience. For example, there is no one true definition of inquiry waiting to be discovered, but an understanding of inquiry is constructed by individual himself. Every students needs to be active to investigating around, because by involved directly in an investigation, student construct their own understanding and built the ability in solve problem and new knowledge. Furthermore, physics is not only a theoritical science, so many of physics concepts can be seen in real life or done using models and media in experiment.
Based on the above condition teachers should apply an appropriate model of learning and can improve students’ learning outcomes in physics. Learning model that suitable for used is inquiry-based learning model. Inquiry-based learning environment is one that provides and supports development of learning experiences where students observe events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations, use critical and logical thinking, generalize observed patterns, and consider alternative explanations. The questions lead to the curious for answers to the question or for solutions to a problem and result in the beginning of exploration and hypotheses creation. These hypotheses lead to an investigation to test the hypothesis or find answers and solutions to the question and/or problem. The investigation leads to the creation or construction of new knowledge based on investigation findings.
Inquiry-based learning models not only include the development of intellectual abilities, but the entire development potential, including the emotional development and skills development. The learning materials are not given directly. The role of students in this model is to seek and find their own subject matter, while teachers act as facilitators and mentors students to learn.
(13)
4
Study entitled “Effects of Inquiry-based Learning on Students’ Science Literacy Skills and Confidence” done by eggy Brickman, Cara ormally, Norris Armstrong, from niversity of eorgia andBrittan allar fromWest irginia igher Education olicy Commission Division of Science and Research 00 . According to this study, in the sciences, inquiry based learning has been widely promoted to increase literacy and skill development, but there has been little comparison to more traditional curricula. In this study, they demonstrated greater improvements in students’ science literacy and research skills using inquiry lab instruction. They also found that inquiry students gained self-confidence in scientific abilities, but traditional students’ gain was greater –likely indicating that the traditional curriculum promoted over-confidence. Inquiry lab students valued more authentic science exposure but acknowledged that experiencing the complexity and frustrations faced by practicing scientists was challenging, and may explain the widespread reported student resistance to inquiry curricula.
Abdelraheem, A., &Asan, A 00 also done the study entitled “The Effectiveness of Inquiry-based Technology Enhanced Collaborative Learning Environment”. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of inquiry-based learning model enhanced collaborative learning environment on students' learning experiences. Success has been reported in the development of course units using technology as cognitive tools, benefiting both graduate and undergraduate students.Thisstudy showed that well designed an inquiry-based technology enhancedcollaborative learning environment can enhance students learning experiences. In the well designed inquiry-based learning students asks questions. Thesequestions lead to the desire for answers to the question and result in the beginning ofexploration and hypotheses creation. These hypotheses lead to an investigation to testthe hypothesis or find answers and solutions to the question and/or problem. The investigation leads to thecreation or construction of new knowledge based on investigation findings.Students discusses and reflects on this newly-acquired knowledge, which, in turn leadsto more questions and investigations that lead to conclusion.Also found evidence that an Inquiry-based
(14)
technology enhanced collaborative learning can help students acquire and flexibly use complex knowledge.
In Indonesia, some researchers previously have also been researching on application of inquiry-based learning model as an effort to improve student learning outcomes and successfully proved that inquiry-based learning model was able to increase the understanding of the concepts and student learning outcomes. ne of the researchers, rimadani and Alimuf Rohmah Arief 01 who conducted a study entitled “ engaruh Model pembelajaran uided Inquiry dengan Self Assesment terhadap asil Belajar Siswa Kelas X pada Materi Listrik Dinamis di SMA Negeri 1 Krian.Researchers try to apply the guided inquiry-based learning model with self assessment. This research aims to determine the effect of guided inquiry learning model with self assessment to students learning outcomes class X in the material dynamic electricity at SMA Negeri 1 Krian. From the analysis obtained the conclusion that the application of guided inquiry-based learning model with self assessment has a positive effect to students learning outcomes class X in the material dynamic electricity at SMA Negeri 1 Krian.
From study entiled“ engaruh Model embelajaran Inquiry Terhadap asil Belajar siswa pada Materi okok Suhu dan Kalor di Kelas X Semester II SMA N I ercut Sei Tuan T. . 010/ 011” done by Rubianum 011 obtained that the results of student learning in the classroom of experiment, which uses the inquiri-based learning model have an average value 0. with standard deviation 1 .1 . Whereas in the class of control that uses the conventional learning model obtained average value , 0 with standard deviation 1 .1 . In this study there were obstacles experienced when doing research, namely in terms of allocating material at each stage of learning and set up the division of groups of students hard because students do not get used to learning in groups.
(15)
Based on these problems, researchers interested do research influence inquiry-based learning model on dynamic electricity topic, by title T D r nc o S ud n ’ L arn ng Ou co U ng In u ry Ba d L arn ng and D r c In ruc on Mod on Dyna c E c r c y a rad SMAN g r
11 M dan A. 1 1
1. Prob Id n ca on
Based on the background above can be identified some of issues, namely 1. The student’s paradigm who assumes that physics is difficult
. Teacher still use conventional learning teacher centered . Student’s learning outcomes in physics subject is low 4. Students are not directly involved in the learning activity 1. T Sco o S udy
As for the scope of study in this research are
1. Research subject is student of X grade on SMAN 11 Medan academic year 01 / 01 .
. The topic will be learned is Dynamic Electricity by using Inquiry Based Learning Model in experiment class.
. Learning outcomes will researched in science process skills aspect.
1. Prob or u a on
Based on the background that has been explained above so it can be compiled research problems as follows
“Do implementation of inquiry-based learning model can further enhance the student’s learning outcome at grade X of SMA Negeri 11 Medan on Dynamic Electric topic?”
(16)
roblem Formulation above can be divided into several research questions
1. ow the average mark of student learning outcomesof using Inquiry Based Learning Model and Direct Instruction Model?
. Is there significant differencesof students’ learning outcomes usinginquiry-based learning model and direct instructional model? 1. R arc Ob c v
Based on the problem formulation above so the objectives that will be achieved in this research which doing at grade X of SMA Negeri 11 Medan on dynamic electricity are
1. To know the average mark of student learning outcomes of using inquiry based learning model and direct instruction model?
. To know the significant differences of students’ learning outcomes usinginquiry-based learning model and direct instructional model? 1. . B n o R arc
This study provides information on the development process of learning physics by using inquiry-based learning model. This research can be expected a correction or a preliminary study to the development of inquiry-based model in learning physics. For students, this research is expected to facilitate the development of a knowledge base through the experience of the students directly in learning to be able to explore, explain and analyze the physics concept logically and conceptually.
(17)
65
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion
Based on the research result had been doing at grade X SMA Negeri 11 Medan, data analysis, and discussion so can be concluded that: 1. The average value of student learning outcomes using inquiry based
learning model higher than student who get direct instructional model. 2. There is significant difference of student learning outcomes using
Inquiry based learning and direct instructional model in dynamic electricity topic. Base on the result of the analysis of data processing hypothesis testing the t test get that tcount > ttable, Inquiry-based learning model makes students more active, more enjoyable learning condition, and the learning model very supportive in increasing in the student’s learning outcomes.
5.2 Suggestion
Based on research result and discussion before, researcher give suggestions as Experiences of researcher, the time when learning activities occur not manage well. To make the experiments in Inquiry-based learning model can be implemented, it would require the creativity of teachers to design and create a simple lab instruments and also the guidance from teacher when student doing experiment is really needed.
(18)
66
REFERENCES
Abdi, A. 2014. The effect of Inquiry- Based Learning Method on
Students’ Academic Achievement in Science Course.Universal
J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h. 2 ( 1 ) , 3 7 - 4 1
Alberta. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A teacher’s Giude to Implementing
Inquiry Based Learning. Alberta: Learning Reseources Center
Arends, R.1998. Learning to Teach (fourth edition). Singapore:
McGraw-Hill International
Arend, R. 1997. Classroom Instructional Management. New York : The
McGraw-Hill Company
Arikunto, S. 2009. ManajemenPenelitian. Jakarta :BumiAksara
Brickman, P. 2009. Effects of Inquiry-Based Learning on Students’
Science literacy Skills and Confidence.International Journal
for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 3(16), 1-22
Cutnel, J. D. & Johnson, K.W. 2001. Physics Fifth Edition. New Delhi:
John Wiley & Sons.Inc
Eggen, P.D. & Kauchack,D.P.1993. Learning and Teaching 2n d
edition. Needham Height. Massachussets: Allyn and Bacon
Eggen, P.D. & Kauchack,D.P.1996. Strategy for Teachers Teaching
Content and Thingking Skills. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Ergul, R. & Friends. 2011. The Effects of Inquiry Based Science Teaching on Elementary Students’ Science Process Skills and
Science Attitude. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education
Policy (BJSEP). 5 (1), 48-68
Giancoli, C. D. 1985. 2nd Edition Physics Principles With Applications.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc
Killen, R. 1998. Effective Teaching Strategies, Lesson from Reserach
and Practice. Second Edition. Australia: Social Science Press
Kruse, D. 2009. Thinking Strategies for the Inquiry Classroom.
(19)
67
Kothari, C.R. 2004.Research Methodology Method and Techniques
(Second Revised Edition). New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd. Publishers
Koul, L. 1997. Methodology of Educational Research Third Revised
Edition. New Delhi: ikas Publishing House P T LTD
Lane, J. 2007. Inquiry-Based Learning. Penn State: niversity Park,
Scheyer Institute for Teaching Excellence
Rubianum. 2011. Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Inquiry terhadap
Hasil Belajar Sis a Pada Materi Pokok Suhu dan Kalor di Kelas X Semester II SMA N Percut Sei Tuan T.P. 2 2 . niversitas Negeri Medan: Skripi FMIPA nimed.
Sagala, S. 2003. Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, Bandung: Alfabeta.
Slavin, R.E. 1997. Educational Psychology Theory, Research, and
Practice, fifth edition. Massachussets: Allyn and Bacon Publishers Simsek, P. & Kabapinar, F. 2009. The effects of inquiry-based learning on elementary student’s conceptual understanding of matter,
scientific process skills and science attitudes. Journal Procedia
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1190-1194 Sudjana. 2005. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: Tarsito
Spronken, 2007. E periencing the Process of Kno ledge Creation: The
Nature and Use of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education.
New Zealand: niversity of Otago
Tawil, M.&Liliasari. 2014. Keterampilan-keterampilan Sains dan
Implementasinya Dalam Pembelajaran IPA. Makassar: Badan Penerbit niversitas Negeri Makassar
nver, A. O. &Arabacioglu, S. 2011. Overviews on Inquiry Based
And Problem Based Learning Methods. Western Anatolia Journal
Of Educational Science. 303-310
ajocjki, S. 2011. Inquiry Learning: Level, Dicipline, Class Sise, hat
(20)
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Henriko Hutabarat, was born in Londut on September, 15th 1990. Her father is
Mardua Hutabarat. and her mother is Lasmaria Pasaribu. He is the first from ten siblings. In 1997, he joined to elementary school then at SD Negeri No 157612 Pasanggarahan. After graduated from elementary school in 2003, he continued his study to SMP Negeri 1 Kolang and graduated in 2006. Later the author continued his study to SMA Negeri 2 Sibolga and graduated in 2009. In the middle of 2009, the author accepted in Bilingual Physics Education, Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Sciences, State University of Medan and graduated in August 2016.
(1)
Based on these problems, researchers interested do research influence inquiry-based learning model on dynamic electricity topic, by title T D r nc o S ud n ’ L arn ng Ou co U ng In u ry Ba d L arn ng and D r c In ruc on Mod on Dyna c E c r c y a rad SMAN g r 11 M dan A. 1 1
1. Prob Id n ca on
Based on the background above can be identified some of issues, namely 1. The student’s paradigm who assumes that physics is difficult
. Teacher still use conventional learning teacher centered . Student’s learning outcomes in physics subject is low 4. Students are not directly involved in the learning activity 1. T Sco o S udy
As for the scope of study in this research are
1. Research subject is student of X grade on SMAN 11 Medan academic year 01 / 01 .
. The topic will be learned is Dynamic Electricity by using Inquiry Based Learning Model in experiment class.
. Learning outcomes will researched in science process skills aspect.
1. Prob or u a on
Based on the background that has been explained above so it can be compiled research problems as follows
“Do implementation of inquiry-based learning model can further enhance the student’s learning outcome at grade X of SMA Negeri 11 Medan on Dynamic Electric topic?”
(2)
roblem Formulation above can be divided into several research questions
1. ow the average mark of student learning outcomesof using Inquiry Based Learning Model and Direct Instruction Model?
. Is there significant differencesof students’ learning outcomes usinginquiry-based learning model and direct instructional model? 1. R arc Ob c v
Based on the problem formulation above so the objectives that will be achieved in this research which doing at grade X of SMA Negeri 11 Medan on dynamic electricity are
1. To know the average mark of student learning outcomes of using inquiry based learning model and direct instruction model?
. To know the significant differences of students’ learning outcomes usinginquiry-based learning model and direct instructional model? 1. . B n o R arc
This study provides information on the development process of learning physics by using inquiry-based learning model. This research can be expected a correction or a preliminary study to the development of inquiry-based model in learning physics. For students, this research is expected to facilitate the development of a knowledge base through the experience of the students directly in learning to be able to explore, explain and analyze the physics concept logically and conceptually.
(3)
65
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the research result had been doing at grade X SMA Negeri 11 Medan, data analysis, and discussion so can be concluded that: 1. The average value of student learning outcomes using inquiry based
learning model higher than student who get direct instructional model. 2. There is significant difference of student learning outcomes using
Inquiry based learning and direct instructional model in dynamic electricity topic. Base on the result of the analysis of data processing hypothesis testing the t test get that tcount > ttable, Inquiry-based learning model makes students more active, more enjoyable learning condition, and the learning model very supportive in increasing in the student’s learning outcomes.
5.2 Suggestion
Based on research result and discussion before, researcher give suggestions as Experiences of researcher, the time when learning activities occur not manage well. To make the experiments in Inquiry-based learning model can be implemented, it would require the creativity of teachers to design and create a simple lab instruments and also the guidance from teacher when student doing experiment is really needed.
(4)
REFERENCES
Abdi, A. 2014. The effect of Inquiry- Based Learning Method on Students’ Academic Achievement in Science Course.Universal J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h. 2 ( 1 ) , 3 7 - 4 1
Alberta. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A teacher’s Giude to Implementing Inquiry Based Learning. Alberta: Learning Reseources Center
Arends, R.1998. Learning to Teach (fourth edition). Singapore: McGraw-Hill International
Arend, R. 1997. Classroom Instructional Management. New York : The McGraw-Hill Company
Arikunto, S. 2009. ManajemenPenelitian. Jakarta :BumiAksara Brickman, P. 2009. Effects of Inquiry-Based Learning on Students’ Science literacy Skills and Confidence.International Journal for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 3(16), 1-22
Cutnel, J. D. & Johnson, K.W. 2001. Physics Fifth Edition. New Delhi: John Wiley & Sons.Inc
Eggen, P.D. & Kauchack,D.P.1993. Learning and Teaching 2n d
edition. Needham Height. Massachussets: Allyn and Bacon
Eggen, P.D. & Kauchack,D.P.1996. Strategy for Teachers Teaching Content and Thingking Skills. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Ergul, R. & Friends. 2011. The Effects of Inquiry Based Science Teaching on Elementary Students’ Science Process Skills and Science Attitude. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy (BJSEP). 5 (1), 48-68
Giancoli, C. D. 1985. 2nd Edition Physics Principles With Applications.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Inc
Killen, R. 1998. Effective Teaching Strategies, Lesson from Reserach and Practice. Second Edition. Australia: Social Science Press Kruse, D. 2009. Thinking Strategies for the Inquiry Classroom. Canada: Curriculum Corporation
(5)
67
Kothari, C.R. 2004.Research Methodology Method and Techniques (Second Revised Edition). New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd. Publishers
Koul, L. 1997. Methodology of Educational Research Third Revised Edition. New Delhi: ikas Publishing House P T LTD
Lane, J. 2007. Inquiry-Based Learning. Penn State: niversity Park, Scheyer Institute for Teaching Excellence
Rubianum. 2011. Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Inquiry terhadap Hasil Belajar Sis a Pada Materi Pokok Suhu dan Kalor di Kelas X Semester II SMA N Percut Sei Tuan T.P. 2 2 . niversitas Negeri Medan: Skripi FMIPA nimed.
Sagala, S. 2003. Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, Bandung: Alfabeta. Slavin, R.E. 1997. Educational Psychology Theory, Research, and Practice, fifth edition. Massachussets: Allyn and Bacon Publishers Simsek, P. & Kabapinar, F. 2009. The effects of inquiry-based learning on elementary student’s conceptual understanding of matter, scientific process skills and science attitudes. Journal Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1190-1194
Sudjana. 2005. Metoda Statistika. Bandung: Tarsito
Spronken, 2007. E periencing the Process of Kno ledge Creation: The Nature and Use of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education. New Zealand: niversity of Otago
Tawil, M.&Liliasari. 2014. Keterampilan-keterampilan Sains dan Implementasinya Dalam Pembelajaran IPA. Makassar: Badan Penerbit niversitas Negeri Makassar
nver, A. O. &Arabacioglu, S. 2011. Overviews on Inquiry Based And Problem Based Learning Methods. Western Anatolia Journal Of Educational Science. 303-310
ajocjki, S. 2011. Inquiry Learning: Level, Dicipline, Class Sise, hat Matters?. Georgia Southern niversity
(6)
BIOGRAPHY
Henriko Hutabarat, was born in Londut on September, 15th 1990. Her father is
Mardua Hutabarat. and her mother is Lasmaria Pasaribu. He is the first from ten siblings. In 1997, he joined to elementary school then at SD Negeri No 157612 Pasanggarahan. After graduated from elementary school in 2003, he continued his study to SMP Negeri 1 Kolang and graduated in 2006. Later the author continued his study to SMA Negeri 2 Sibolga and graduated in 2009. In the middle of 2009, the author accepted in Bilingual Physics Education, Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Sciences, State University of Medan and graduated in August 2016.