THE EFFECT OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL ON STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016.
THE EFFECT OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL ON
STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC
AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA
ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
By:
Novianti Hutasoit
ID. Number. 4123322010
Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
MEDAN STATE UNIVERSITY
MEDAN
2017
i
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Novianti Hutasoit was born in Lintongnihuta on November 12th 1994. Father’s name is
Manihar Hutasoit and Mother’s name is Ruspita Sianturi, and she is the eigth of eight
siblings. In 2000, the author entered SDN 176354 Lintongnihuta and graduated in 2006.
In 2006, the author continued hiseducation in SMPN 4 Lintongnihuta and graduated in
2009. In 2009, the author continued his education to SMAN 1 Pagaran and graduated
2012. In 2012, the author was accepted in Bilingual Physics Education Studies Program
in Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Science in Medan State
University.
iii
THE EFFECT OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL ON
STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC
AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA
ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
Novianti Hutasoit (ID.4123322010)
ABSTRACT
This research is aimed to know and describe the student’s Achievement using
problem based learning and conventional learning about static fluid topic . This research
employed a quasi experimental pretest and posttest with control design. The populations were
60 students grade XI-science in SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta academic year 2015/2016. The
samples consist of two classes, one class with 30 students as experiment class and one class
as control class with 30 students, while the sampling technique used purposif sampling.
Research instrument used essay test. The data obtained in the study were analyzed by the
computer program Ms.Excel. From the research the pre-test average value of outcomes
experiment class 26.66 and control class 27.83, after giving the treatment the post-test with
the average value of outcomes experiment class 59.66 and control class 49.50. The result of t
test tcount = 3.158 while ttable= 1.661. Because tcount>ttable(3.158>1.661) so Ho rejected. The
result showed that student’s achievement in experiment class had been treated with problem
based learning model have significantly different from control class which had been treated
with conventional learning. In addition, the improvement of PBL in experiment class was
greater than in control class. This meant implementation problem based learning has a
significant effect toward student achievement.
Keyword: Student’s Achiement, problem based learning, quasi experimental.
iv
PREFACE
The author says the great praise and gratitude to God Almighty, 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. This thesis
entitled "The Effect of problem Based Learning Model on Student’s achievement
on Static Fluid Topic at Year XI SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta Academic Year
2015/2016". This thesis was prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics
Education (Sarjana Pendidikan Fisika), Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Science in Medan State University.
On this occasion the author likes to thank to Mr Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc,
P.hD as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author
since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis. Thanks also to
Dr. Makmur Sirait, M.Si, Dr. Alkhafi Maas Siregar, M.Si, and Dr. Sondang R.
Manurung, M.Pd., who have provided many advices and suggestions in
completing this thesis. Thanks also to Drs. Pintor Simamora, M.Si., as the
Academic Supervisor. Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturers and staff
employees of Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in
Medan State University who have encourage the writer during the studying
process. Sincere appreciation was also presented to Principal of SMAN 2
Lintongnihuta, Mr. Drs. Nelson Tambunan, MM, Physics teacher Mr.Sinaga, S.Pd
and all teachers there, who had helped the author during the implementation of
this research. Especially, author also would say thanks to my great lovely father
Manihar Hutasoit, my great lovely mother Ruspita Sianturi, my great sisters
Tiurma, Diana, Terima Uli, Junita, Elis, and Debora and my great brother Charles
Hutasoit, and all my family. And thanks also for my great family, students of
SMA N 2 Lintongnihuta, and Bilingual Physics Education grade 2012, my great
friends in kos Lr. IX No.716 A, who have given loves, motivations and advices to
the author.
v
The author has endeavored as much as possible in completing this thesis,
but the author is aware there are many mistakes either in terms of content or
grammar, then the author welcome for any suggestions and constructive criticism
from readers for this thesis . The author hopes the contents of this paper would be
useful in enriching the means of knowledge.
Medan,
January 2017
Author,
Novianti Hutasoit
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LEGITIMATION SHEET
BIOGRAPHY
ABSTRACT
PREFACE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES LIST
TABLES LIST
APPENDIXES LIST
i
ii
iii
iv
vi
viii
ix
x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem Identification
1.3 Problem Limitation
1.4 Problem Formulation
1.5 Research Objective
1.6 Benefits of Research
1
4
5
5
6
6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Learning Defenition, Purposes, Achievment, and Ability
2.1.1.1 Learning Defenitions
2.1.1.2 Learning Purposes
2.1.1.3 Learning Achievement
2.1.1.4 Learning Activity
2.1.2 Learning Model
2.1.2.1 Problem based Learning
2.1.2.1.1 Defenition and Characteristic of PBL
2.1.2.1.2 Syntax for Problem Based Learning
2.1.2.2 Conventional Learning
2.1.3 Subject Matter
2.1.3.1 Static Fluid
2.1.3.1.1 Density and Specific Gravity
2.1.3.1.2 Pressure on Fluid
2.1.3.1.3 Atmospheric Pressure (Air Pressure)
2.1.3.1.4 Pascal Principle
2.1.3.1.5 Archimedes Principle
2.1.3.1.6 Surface Tension
2.1.3.1.7 Capillarity
2.1.3.1.8 Viscosity
2.4. Conceptual Framework
7
7
7
8
9
10
12
13
13
15
16
17
17
19
20
21
24
24
27
29
30
31
vii
2.5. Research Hypothesis
32
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS
3.1. Research Location and Research Time
3.1.1. Research Location
3.1.2. Research Time
3.2. Research Population and Research Sample
3.2.1. Research Population
3.2.2. Research Sample
3.3 Research Variables
3.4. Research Type and Research Design
3.4.1 Research Type
3.4.2. Research Design
3.5. Research Procedure
3.6. Research Instrument
3.6.1.Instrument of Student’s Learning Activity
3.6.2. Validity Test
3.7. Data Analysis Techniques
3.7.1. Determine Average Value
3.7.2. Determine The Deviation Standard
3.7.3. Determine The Homogenity Test
3.7.4. Normality Test
3.7.5. Hypothesis Test
3.7.5.1. Pre-test ability (two tail test)
3.7.5.2. Post-Test Ability Test
33
33
33
33
33
33
34
34
34
34
35
37
37
39
39
39
40
40
41
42
42
43
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result of Research
4.1.2 Student Outcomes on Experiment Class
4.1.3 Student Outcomes on Control Class
4.1.4 Data Analysis
4.1.5 Hypothesis Test Result
4.2 Discussion
4.2.1 Outcomes of Experiment Class
4.2.2 Outcomes of Control Class
45
46
47
47
48
50
50
50
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Suggestion
51
51
REFERENCE
52
viii
FIGURES LIST
Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.4.
Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.6.
Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.8.
Figure 2.9.
Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.2.
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Hydrostatic Pressure
Pressure Measurement
Forces on an object in water
Objects Floating, Flying and Sinking in Liquids
This Insect Can Walk on Water
Contact Angle
The forces acting on an object moving in a fluid
Scheme of Research Design
Distribution of pretest result
Distribution of posttest result
9
20
22
25
26
27
29
30
36
45
46
ix
TABLES LIST
Table 2.1.
Table 2.2.
Tabel 3.1.
Table 3.2.
Table 3.3.
Table 3.4
Table 4.1.
Table 4.2.
Table 4.3.
Table 4.4.
Table 4.5.
Table 4.6.
Syntax for Problem Based Learning according to Arends.
Density of Substance
The design of the research
The Specipication learning outcomes test in static fluid topic
Student’s learning activity assessment
Criteria Assesment of student’s Learning Activity
Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard
Deviation and Variance on Experiment Class
Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard
Deviation and Variance on Control Class
The Result of Normality Test in Experiment Class and Control
Class
Homogenity Test Result of the both of Class
Hypothesis Test Calculation of Initial Ability/Pre-Test
Hypothesis Calculation test of post-test
16
18
35
37
38
39
46
47
47
48
48
49
x
APPENDIX LIST
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
Appendix 9
Appendix 10
Appendix 11
Appendix 12
Appendix 13
Appendix 14
Appendix 15
Appendix 16
Appendix 17
Appendix 18
Appendix 19
Lesson Plan 1
Lesson Plan 2
Lesson Plan 3
Students Worksheet I
Students Worksheet II
Students Worksheet IIA
Students Worksheet III
Grating Test Results of Learning
Pretest Data of Experiment and Control Class
Posttest Data of Experiment and Control Class
Calculation of Average, Varians, and Standard Deviation
Normality Test
Homogenity Test
Hypothesis Test
Documentation
List of Critical Value for Lilliefors Test
Table of Ranging Area in Below Normal Curve 0 until Z
List of Percentil Value for F Distribution
List of Precentil Value for t Distribution
53
68
81
91
94
100
103
105
110
114
117
120
125
128
132
136
137
138
140
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of
knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Education holds the important role
to produce Indonesian human resources, like as individu or as society because
education can improve and develop the quality of human resources. Improving the
quality of education deserve serious attention and careful. Therefore, various
attempts have been made to improve the quality of education. One is the
developmentof research in the field of education, especially in the teachinglearning process (Sanjaya, 2006). Learning exposes one to a range of possibilities
and choices that life has to offer.The learning process is both a mirror of one’s life
in relation to others and to the wider environment, as well as a compass to help us
to map our way in our life’s journey (Ramphele, 2015). Education is expected to
produce human resources highly skilled, including critical thinking, logical,
creative, and willingness to work together effective that can be developed through
education of physics.
National education according to law No. 20, 2003, serves to develop the
ability and character development and civilization of the nation's dignity in the
minds of the people. To that end, education aims to develop students' potentials to
become a man of faith, and fear of God Almighty, the noble character, healthy,
knowledgeable, skilled, creative, independent, and become citizens of a
democratic and responsible (Mulyasa, 2013).
Physics as a science is one of the subjects related to nature so demanding
in learning the necessary investigations in the form of an experiment on such
knowledge. Physics as a subject is not an exception here. Physics is hard to learn
because of the need to understand the laws and know numerical facts,
manipulating them with the knowledge of mathematics and analytical thinking. It
1
2
cannot be understood just by knowing factual data (Fauziah, 2016). The science
and its applications are part of daily life to make our life better and therefore the
development of an individual’s understanding of science and its applications is
one of the objectives of science instruction. Learning physics in schools is still
dominated by the activities of teachers. In the sense of active teachers to teach and
learners passive in learning (Prayoga, 2013). Therefore, not all types of Learning
strategis necessarily improve the acquisition of conceptual understanding.
Research also suggests that higher level strategies are expected to promote
conceptual understanding. Various studies exist in the physics education literature
investigating the effectiveness of Learning strategi on student learning.Until now
most schools will have to clean that purpose. However, the learning outcomes of
students in studying physics has not shown success and satisfaction.
Learning outcomes are also associated with student life perspective
(Ronfeldt, 2015). A fact that when the children were young, their world is full of
questions. In various facets of life, they get the idea that being an adult means left
the world questioning to enter the world know the answer. Schools tend to
encourage the movement of question to answer because success by simply placing
the correct answer blank or mark the correct response. Problem in school tend to
have one correct answer and questions that no response is rare. Therefore, if we
want to know how to learn is more important than knowing all the answers, then
we must realize that a good question is more important than the right answer.
Teaching students to ask questions of quality more important than the truth of the
answers they could provide. The lesson will be interesting and successful, when
linked with experiences in which they can see, feel, give, do, try, think, and so
forth. In this case the learning approach used in schools are less precise.
Observations has been conducted by researchers on students of SMAN 2
Lintong Nihuta, there are some problems that are found in physics learning.
Perspective physics students will be unfavorable. Learning physics is often a
frightening specter for them, filled with formulas, interesting but difficult to
understand the study, there are even some opinion reveals that physics is only for
3
scientists. Furthermore, the way of teaching physics teacher in the classroom
tends to take notes and work on the problems. In addition, about 60% of students
in each class XI science still has a value below KKM standards.
Monotonous teaching methods is the reason why the study of physics be
learning less interesting for students. Moreover, when given a problem most
students do not get to read about and determine what formula is used. Teachers do
not always adopt new instructional strategies seamlessly. According Ravitz (2003)
in (Tamim, 2013) posited that, even when teachers show enthusiasm about the
constructivist teaching approach after participating in professional development
workshops, they might not find it easy to implement it in their classrooms. Hence
develop assumptions on students that physics is suitable only be learned by those
who want to be a scientist or a physicist more details. At the time of teaching and
learning activities take place, the activity of students in working on the problems
of physics given by the teacher is still lacking, although still capitalized, see the
notes and only some students were active. Another case when the teacher asked
the students if the material presented is understandable, students only silence in
other words no student is given a definite answer. Additionally, when a time the
teacher gave a demonstration, students were also less active in its implementation.
It shows students just received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative
to find their own. Furthermore, from the results of tests conducted by teachers of
physics, it is known that the results of student learning about the material of static
Fluid has not reached the expected target. Information about the physics student
learning outcomes obtained from interviews, the average value for 3 years in a
row has not reached the minimum completeness criteria. From this it appears that
student learning outcomes are still low in physics.
Problem-based learning model is an instructional model that presents a
contextual problem that stimulate learners to learn. In classes that implement
problem-based learning, students work in teams to solve real-world problems . So,
student able to solve the problem and get the knowledge and important concept by
their selves ( Etherington, 2014). Problem based learning aims improve students
4
ability to work in a team, showing their coordinated abilities to access information
and turn it into viable knowledge (Eldy, 2013). PBL will happen with meaningful
learning. Because Learners who learn to solve a problem then they will apply the
knowledge possessed or sought to know the necessary knowledge. Learning can
be more meaningful and can be expanded when students are dealing with a
situation in which the concept is applied. PBL can improve critical thinking skills,
foster initiatives learners in work, internal motivation to learn, and can develop
interpersonal relationships in the working group. One advantage of PBL is that
discussion in a small group will empower students to be more independent in their
study. Which means they will stimulate themselves to be more responsible and
directly lead them to spend more time on their studies (Dolmans, 2016).In the
fact shows students are less able to relate the information that has been obtained
from the teacher with information that will be studied and related to everyday life.
This relates to the lack of practice over theory learned and laboratory use are not
effective in schools.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher want to do a research with
the title “ The Effect of Problem Based Learning Model on Student’s
Achievement on Static Fluid topic at year XI of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong
Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.2.Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problem, problem can be identified as
follows:
1. Teaching and learning process is still teacher-centered.
2. Students assume the physics is a difficult subject and less attractive
3. Students only received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative to
find her own
4. Lack of practice over theory learned and laboratory use are less effective in
schools
5
5. Low student learning outcomes.
1.3 Problem Limitation
In order to keep this research become more focused and directed, the
researcher limit the problem as following:
1. The subjects studied are students of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong Nihuta grade
XI Academic Year 2015/2016.
2. The learning model used is a problem based learning model on the
experimental class and conventional learning on the control class.
3. The material that will be taught is static fluid topic.
1.4 Problem Formulation
The problem formulation of this research are:
1. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use
conventional learning in static fluid topic class XI in SMAN 2 Lintong
Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
2. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use the
teaching model of problem based learning in static fluid topic in class XI
SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
3. Is the student’s learning outcomes as a result of the influence of problem
based learning model better than conventional learning in static fluid topic in
Class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
6
1.5. Research Objectives
Based on the formulation of the problem, the objectives to be obtained in
this study are:
1. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use problem based
learning in static fluid topic in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic
Year 2015/2016.
2. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use conventional
learning in static fluid in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta the Academic
Year 2015/2016.
3. To know the influence learning model of problem-based learning is better
than conventional learning in static fluid in semester class XI SMAN 2
Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.6. Benefits of Research
This research is expected to be useful as follows:
1. For researcher, adding the in the future to improve student learning outcomes
using problem based learning.
2. For teacher, as an alternative material to use use learning model
in the
classroom for improving student learning outcomes, and to developing
teaching and learning model on using problem based learning.
51
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion, the conclusions
of this research are as followings as below:
1. Conventional Learning before being given treatment average pretest 27.83and
after giving the treatment the average post-test 49.50
2. Problem Based Learning model before being given treatment average pretest
26.66 and after giving the treatment the average post-test 59.66
3. From the result of hypothesis test tcount> ttable is3.158 > 1.661, so that H0 is
rejected and Ha is accepted. It can be concluded that there is a difference of
student learning achievement using problem based learning model with
conventional, on the other word the learning achievement by using problem
based learning better than conventional learning.
5.2.
Suggestions
Based on the research results and conclusions of the above, then as a
follow-up of this research suggested some of the following:
1. Should mastered all the syntax in Problem Based Learning and arrange a time
to implement all the syntax in a timely manner and the students had no
difficulty in following all the syntax.
2. Should do a simulation before trying out this model to the students so that
students better understand and are trained in the workings of this model when
doing research, so that this problem based learning model can be completed
on time.
STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC
AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA
ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
By:
Novianti Hutasoit
ID. Number. 4123322010
Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
MEDAN STATE UNIVERSITY
MEDAN
2017
i
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Novianti Hutasoit was born in Lintongnihuta on November 12th 1994. Father’s name is
Manihar Hutasoit and Mother’s name is Ruspita Sianturi, and she is the eigth of eight
siblings. In 2000, the author entered SDN 176354 Lintongnihuta and graduated in 2006.
In 2006, the author continued hiseducation in SMPN 4 Lintongnihuta and graduated in
2009. In 2009, the author continued his education to SMAN 1 Pagaran and graduated
2012. In 2012, the author was accepted in Bilingual Physics Education Studies Program
in Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Science in Medan State
University.
iii
THE EFFECT OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING MODEL ON
STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT ON STATIC FLUID TOPIC
AT YEAR XI OF SMA NEGERI 2 LINTONGNIHUTA
ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
Novianti Hutasoit (ID.4123322010)
ABSTRACT
This research is aimed to know and describe the student’s Achievement using
problem based learning and conventional learning about static fluid topic . This research
employed a quasi experimental pretest and posttest with control design. The populations were
60 students grade XI-science in SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta academic year 2015/2016. The
samples consist of two classes, one class with 30 students as experiment class and one class
as control class with 30 students, while the sampling technique used purposif sampling.
Research instrument used essay test. The data obtained in the study were analyzed by the
computer program Ms.Excel. From the research the pre-test average value of outcomes
experiment class 26.66 and control class 27.83, after giving the treatment the post-test with
the average value of outcomes experiment class 59.66 and control class 49.50. The result of t
test tcount = 3.158 while ttable= 1.661. Because tcount>ttable(3.158>1.661) so Ho rejected. The
result showed that student’s achievement in experiment class had been treated with problem
based learning model have significantly different from control class which had been treated
with conventional learning. In addition, the improvement of PBL in experiment class was
greater than in control class. This meant implementation problem based learning has a
significant effect toward student achievement.
Keyword: Student’s Achiement, problem based learning, quasi experimental.
iv
PREFACE
The author says the great praise and gratitude to God Almighty, 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. This thesis
entitled "The Effect of problem Based Learning Model on Student’s achievement
on Static Fluid Topic at Year XI SMAN 2 Lintongnihuta Academic Year
2015/2016". This thesis was prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics
Education (Sarjana Pendidikan Fisika), Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Science in Medan State University.
On this occasion the author likes to thank to Mr Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc,
P.hD as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author
since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis. Thanks also to
Dr. Makmur Sirait, M.Si, Dr. Alkhafi Maas Siregar, M.Si, and Dr. Sondang R.
Manurung, M.Pd., who have provided many advices and suggestions in
completing this thesis. Thanks also to Drs. Pintor Simamora, M.Si., as the
Academic Supervisor. Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturers and staff
employees of Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in
Medan State University who have encourage the writer during the studying
process. Sincere appreciation was also presented to Principal of SMAN 2
Lintongnihuta, Mr. Drs. Nelson Tambunan, MM, Physics teacher Mr.Sinaga, S.Pd
and all teachers there, who had helped the author during the implementation of
this research. Especially, author also would say thanks to my great lovely father
Manihar Hutasoit, my great lovely mother Ruspita Sianturi, my great sisters
Tiurma, Diana, Terima Uli, Junita, Elis, and Debora and my great brother Charles
Hutasoit, and all my family. And thanks also for my great family, students of
SMA N 2 Lintongnihuta, and Bilingual Physics Education grade 2012, my great
friends in kos Lr. IX No.716 A, who have given loves, motivations and advices to
the author.
v
The author has endeavored as much as possible in completing this thesis,
but the author is aware there are many mistakes either in terms of content or
grammar, then the author welcome for any suggestions and constructive criticism
from readers for this thesis . The author hopes the contents of this paper would be
useful in enriching the means of knowledge.
Medan,
January 2017
Author,
Novianti Hutasoit
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LEGITIMATION SHEET
BIOGRAPHY
ABSTRACT
PREFACE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES LIST
TABLES LIST
APPENDIXES LIST
i
ii
iii
iv
vi
viii
ix
x
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem Identification
1.3 Problem Limitation
1.4 Problem Formulation
1.5 Research Objective
1.6 Benefits of Research
1
4
5
5
6
6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Learning Defenition, Purposes, Achievment, and Ability
2.1.1.1 Learning Defenitions
2.1.1.2 Learning Purposes
2.1.1.3 Learning Achievement
2.1.1.4 Learning Activity
2.1.2 Learning Model
2.1.2.1 Problem based Learning
2.1.2.1.1 Defenition and Characteristic of PBL
2.1.2.1.2 Syntax for Problem Based Learning
2.1.2.2 Conventional Learning
2.1.3 Subject Matter
2.1.3.1 Static Fluid
2.1.3.1.1 Density and Specific Gravity
2.1.3.1.2 Pressure on Fluid
2.1.3.1.3 Atmospheric Pressure (Air Pressure)
2.1.3.1.4 Pascal Principle
2.1.3.1.5 Archimedes Principle
2.1.3.1.6 Surface Tension
2.1.3.1.7 Capillarity
2.1.3.1.8 Viscosity
2.4. Conceptual Framework
7
7
7
8
9
10
12
13
13
15
16
17
17
19
20
21
24
24
27
29
30
31
vii
2.5. Research Hypothesis
32
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS
3.1. Research Location and Research Time
3.1.1. Research Location
3.1.2. Research Time
3.2. Research Population and Research Sample
3.2.1. Research Population
3.2.2. Research Sample
3.3 Research Variables
3.4. Research Type and Research Design
3.4.1 Research Type
3.4.2. Research Design
3.5. Research Procedure
3.6. Research Instrument
3.6.1.Instrument of Student’s Learning Activity
3.6.2. Validity Test
3.7. Data Analysis Techniques
3.7.1. Determine Average Value
3.7.2. Determine The Deviation Standard
3.7.3. Determine The Homogenity Test
3.7.4. Normality Test
3.7.5. Hypothesis Test
3.7.5.1. Pre-test ability (two tail test)
3.7.5.2. Post-Test Ability Test
33
33
33
33
33
33
34
34
34
34
35
37
37
39
39
39
40
40
41
42
42
43
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result of Research
4.1.2 Student Outcomes on Experiment Class
4.1.3 Student Outcomes on Control Class
4.1.4 Data Analysis
4.1.5 Hypothesis Test Result
4.2 Discussion
4.2.1 Outcomes of Experiment Class
4.2.2 Outcomes of Control Class
45
46
47
47
48
50
50
50
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Suggestion
51
51
REFERENCE
52
viii
FIGURES LIST
Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.4.
Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.6.
Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.8.
Figure 2.9.
Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.2.
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Hydrostatic Pressure
Pressure Measurement
Forces on an object in water
Objects Floating, Flying and Sinking in Liquids
This Insect Can Walk on Water
Contact Angle
The forces acting on an object moving in a fluid
Scheme of Research Design
Distribution of pretest result
Distribution of posttest result
9
20
22
25
26
27
29
30
36
45
46
ix
TABLES LIST
Table 2.1.
Table 2.2.
Tabel 3.1.
Table 3.2.
Table 3.3.
Table 3.4
Table 4.1.
Table 4.2.
Table 4.3.
Table 4.4.
Table 4.5.
Table 4.6.
Syntax for Problem Based Learning according to Arends.
Density of Substance
The design of the research
The Specipication learning outcomes test in static fluid topic
Student’s learning activity assessment
Criteria Assesment of student’s Learning Activity
Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard
Deviation and Variance on Experiment Class
Calculation Results Summary of Average Value, Standard
Deviation and Variance on Control Class
The Result of Normality Test in Experiment Class and Control
Class
Homogenity Test Result of the both of Class
Hypothesis Test Calculation of Initial Ability/Pre-Test
Hypothesis Calculation test of post-test
16
18
35
37
38
39
46
47
47
48
48
49
x
APPENDIX LIST
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
Appendix 9
Appendix 10
Appendix 11
Appendix 12
Appendix 13
Appendix 14
Appendix 15
Appendix 16
Appendix 17
Appendix 18
Appendix 19
Lesson Plan 1
Lesson Plan 2
Lesson Plan 3
Students Worksheet I
Students Worksheet II
Students Worksheet IIA
Students Worksheet III
Grating Test Results of Learning
Pretest Data of Experiment and Control Class
Posttest Data of Experiment and Control Class
Calculation of Average, Varians, and Standard Deviation
Normality Test
Homogenity Test
Hypothesis Test
Documentation
List of Critical Value for Lilliefors Test
Table of Ranging Area in Below Normal Curve 0 until Z
List of Percentil Value for F Distribution
List of Precentil Value for t Distribution
53
68
81
91
94
100
103
105
110
114
117
120
125
128
132
136
137
138
140
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of
knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Education holds the important role
to produce Indonesian human resources, like as individu or as society because
education can improve and develop the quality of human resources. Improving the
quality of education deserve serious attention and careful. Therefore, various
attempts have been made to improve the quality of education. One is the
developmentof research in the field of education, especially in the teachinglearning process (Sanjaya, 2006). Learning exposes one to a range of possibilities
and choices that life has to offer.The learning process is both a mirror of one’s life
in relation to others and to the wider environment, as well as a compass to help us
to map our way in our life’s journey (Ramphele, 2015). Education is expected to
produce human resources highly skilled, including critical thinking, logical,
creative, and willingness to work together effective that can be developed through
education of physics.
National education according to law No. 20, 2003, serves to develop the
ability and character development and civilization of the nation's dignity in the
minds of the people. To that end, education aims to develop students' potentials to
become a man of faith, and fear of God Almighty, the noble character, healthy,
knowledgeable, skilled, creative, independent, and become citizens of a
democratic and responsible (Mulyasa, 2013).
Physics as a science is one of the subjects related to nature so demanding
in learning the necessary investigations in the form of an experiment on such
knowledge. Physics as a subject is not an exception here. Physics is hard to learn
because of the need to understand the laws and know numerical facts,
manipulating them with the knowledge of mathematics and analytical thinking. It
1
2
cannot be understood just by knowing factual data (Fauziah, 2016). The science
and its applications are part of daily life to make our life better and therefore the
development of an individual’s understanding of science and its applications is
one of the objectives of science instruction. Learning physics in schools is still
dominated by the activities of teachers. In the sense of active teachers to teach and
learners passive in learning (Prayoga, 2013). Therefore, not all types of Learning
strategis necessarily improve the acquisition of conceptual understanding.
Research also suggests that higher level strategies are expected to promote
conceptual understanding. Various studies exist in the physics education literature
investigating the effectiveness of Learning strategi on student learning.Until now
most schools will have to clean that purpose. However, the learning outcomes of
students in studying physics has not shown success and satisfaction.
Learning outcomes are also associated with student life perspective
(Ronfeldt, 2015). A fact that when the children were young, their world is full of
questions. In various facets of life, they get the idea that being an adult means left
the world questioning to enter the world know the answer. Schools tend to
encourage the movement of question to answer because success by simply placing
the correct answer blank or mark the correct response. Problem in school tend to
have one correct answer and questions that no response is rare. Therefore, if we
want to know how to learn is more important than knowing all the answers, then
we must realize that a good question is more important than the right answer.
Teaching students to ask questions of quality more important than the truth of the
answers they could provide. The lesson will be interesting and successful, when
linked with experiences in which they can see, feel, give, do, try, think, and so
forth. In this case the learning approach used in schools are less precise.
Observations has been conducted by researchers on students of SMAN 2
Lintong Nihuta, there are some problems that are found in physics learning.
Perspective physics students will be unfavorable. Learning physics is often a
frightening specter for them, filled with formulas, interesting but difficult to
understand the study, there are even some opinion reveals that physics is only for
3
scientists. Furthermore, the way of teaching physics teacher in the classroom
tends to take notes and work on the problems. In addition, about 60% of students
in each class XI science still has a value below KKM standards.
Monotonous teaching methods is the reason why the study of physics be
learning less interesting for students. Moreover, when given a problem most
students do not get to read about and determine what formula is used. Teachers do
not always adopt new instructional strategies seamlessly. According Ravitz (2003)
in (Tamim, 2013) posited that, even when teachers show enthusiasm about the
constructivist teaching approach after participating in professional development
workshops, they might not find it easy to implement it in their classrooms. Hence
develop assumptions on students that physics is suitable only be learned by those
who want to be a scientist or a physicist more details. At the time of teaching and
learning activities take place, the activity of students in working on the problems
of physics given by the teacher is still lacking, although still capitalized, see the
notes and only some students were active. Another case when the teacher asked
the students if the material presented is understandable, students only silence in
other words no student is given a definite answer. Additionally, when a time the
teacher gave a demonstration, students were also less active in its implementation.
It shows students just received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative
to find their own. Furthermore, from the results of tests conducted by teachers of
physics, it is known that the results of student learning about the material of static
Fluid has not reached the expected target. Information about the physics student
learning outcomes obtained from interviews, the average value for 3 years in a
row has not reached the minimum completeness criteria. From this it appears that
student learning outcomes are still low in physics.
Problem-based learning model is an instructional model that presents a
contextual problem that stimulate learners to learn. In classes that implement
problem-based learning, students work in teams to solve real-world problems . So,
student able to solve the problem and get the knowledge and important concept by
their selves ( Etherington, 2014). Problem based learning aims improve students
4
ability to work in a team, showing their coordinated abilities to access information
and turn it into viable knowledge (Eldy, 2013). PBL will happen with meaningful
learning. Because Learners who learn to solve a problem then they will apply the
knowledge possessed or sought to know the necessary knowledge. Learning can
be more meaningful and can be expanded when students are dealing with a
situation in which the concept is applied. PBL can improve critical thinking skills,
foster initiatives learners in work, internal motivation to learn, and can develop
interpersonal relationships in the working group. One advantage of PBL is that
discussion in a small group will empower students to be more independent in their
study. Which means they will stimulate themselves to be more responsible and
directly lead them to spend more time on their studies (Dolmans, 2016).In the
fact shows students are less able to relate the information that has been obtained
from the teacher with information that will be studied and related to everyday life.
This relates to the lack of practice over theory learned and laboratory use are not
effective in schools.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher want to do a research with
the title “ The Effect of Problem Based Learning Model on Student’s
Achievement on Static Fluid topic at year XI of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong
Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.2.Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problem, problem can be identified as
follows:
1. Teaching and learning process is still teacher-centered.
2. Students assume the physics is a difficult subject and less attractive
3. Students only received the knowledge of the teacher without the initiative to
find her own
4. Lack of practice over theory learned and laboratory use are less effective in
schools
5
5. Low student learning outcomes.
1.3 Problem Limitation
In order to keep this research become more focused and directed, the
researcher limit the problem as following:
1. The subjects studied are students of SMA Negeri 2 Lintong Nihuta grade
XI Academic Year 2015/2016.
2. The learning model used is a problem based learning model on the
experimental class and conventional learning on the control class.
3. The material that will be taught is static fluid topic.
1.4 Problem Formulation
The problem formulation of this research are:
1. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use
conventional learning in static fluid topic class XI in SMAN 2 Lintong
Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
2. How does the student’s learning outcomes of students after teaching use the
teaching model of problem based learning in static fluid topic in class XI
SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
3. Is the student’s learning outcomes as a result of the influence of problem
based learning model better than conventional learning in static fluid topic in
Class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016?
6
1.5. Research Objectives
Based on the formulation of the problem, the objectives to be obtained in
this study are:
1. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use problem based
learning in static fluid topic in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta Academic
Year 2015/2016.
2. To know the learning outcomes of students after teaching use conventional
learning in static fluid in class XI SMAN 2 Lintong Nihuta the Academic
Year 2015/2016.
3. To know the influence learning model of problem-based learning is better
than conventional learning in static fluid in semester class XI SMAN 2
Lintong Nihuta Academic Year 2015/2016.
1.6. Benefits of Research
This research is expected to be useful as follows:
1. For researcher, adding the in the future to improve student learning outcomes
using problem based learning.
2. For teacher, as an alternative material to use use learning model
in the
classroom for improving student learning outcomes, and to developing
teaching and learning model on using problem based learning.
51
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion, the conclusions
of this research are as followings as below:
1. Conventional Learning before being given treatment average pretest 27.83and
after giving the treatment the average post-test 49.50
2. Problem Based Learning model before being given treatment average pretest
26.66 and after giving the treatment the average post-test 59.66
3. From the result of hypothesis test tcount> ttable is3.158 > 1.661, so that H0 is
rejected and Ha is accepted. It can be concluded that there is a difference of
student learning achievement using problem based learning model with
conventional, on the other word the learning achievement by using problem
based learning better than conventional learning.
5.2.
Suggestions
Based on the research results and conclusions of the above, then as a
follow-up of this research suggested some of the following:
1. Should mastered all the syntax in Problem Based Learning and arrange a time
to implement all the syntax in a timely manner and the students had no
difficulty in following all the syntax.
2. Should do a simulation before trying out this model to the students so that
students better understand and are trained in the workings of this model when
doing research, so that this problem based learning model can be completed
on time.