IMPROVING OF ACTIVITY AN STUDENT LEARNING OUT COME BY APPLYING THINK-PAIR-SHARE ( TPS ) TYPE WITH DEMONSTRATION ON TOPIC THE DISTANCE IN 3D- SPACE IN X GRADE SMA SINAR HUSNI ACADEMIC YEAR 2016-2017.

IMPROVING OF ACTIVITY AN STUDENT LEARNING OUT COME BY APPLYING THINK-PAIR-SHARE ( TPS ) TYPE WITH

DEMONSTRATION ON TOPIC THE DISTANCE IN 3D-SPACE IN X GRADE SMA SINAR HUSNI

ACADEMIC YEAR 2016-2017

By:

Padillah Nur Nasution IDN 4123312018

Bilingual Mathematics Education Study Program

SKRIPSI

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The Degree of SarjanaPendidikan

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN 2016

iii

IMPROVING OF ACTIVITY AN STUDENT LEARNING OUT COME BY APPLYING THINK-PAIR-SHARE ( TPS ) TYPE WITH

DEMONSTRATION ON TOPIC THE DISTANCE IN 3D- SPACE IN X GRADE SMA SINAR HUSNI ACADEMIC YEAR 2016-2017

Padillah Nur Nasution (ID 4123312018) ABSTRACT

The problem in this research are the activities and the results of learning math students are still low. So this research aims to know the increase in activity and student learning outcomes after applied learning model cooperative types think pair share at The Distance in 3D-Space in hight school in grade X Sinar Husni Academic Year 2013/2014.

Subjec in this study grade X Sinar Husni high school Medan Academic 2013/2014 that add up to 32 people and objects in this study is the activity and results of student learning material on The Distance in 3D-Space by using cooperative learning model types think pair share. Research instrument used is the observation and tests.

This research is a Research Action class (PTK) consisting of two cycles. In the execution of the cycle I, students are divided into several groups are heterogeneous origin based on initial tests. The group consists of 2 (paired). Whereas, in the implementation cycle II origin groups was formed on the basis of the results of the THB I I where each group consists of 2 people (a pair)

From the results of the analysis of the data obtained an increase in student learning activities are on the increase in the category of medium in which increased by 25% from 56.24% in cycle I became 81.24% in cycle II. Learning outcomes students also experienced an increase, this increase being seen from the presence of the addition of the number of students who obtained a pass learning that is 2 people. 20 people in the cycle I became the 22th person in cycle II and an increase in the average value of class 9 of 62.81 in cycle I became 67.19 in cycle II. Thus, it can be concluded that an increase in the category of very low on the activity and results of student learning after Applying Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Type with Demonstration on Topic The Distance in 3D-Space in X Grade SMA Sinar Husni Academic Year 2016-2017.

iv

PREFACE

First of all, the author is grateful to the God Almighty for His Blessing and chance to finish the study and complete the thesis entitled “Improving of Activity an Student Learning Out Come by Applying Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Type with Demonstration on Topic The Distance in 3D-Space in X Grade SMA Sinar Husni Academic Year 2016-2017.

The author’s special sincerest thanks is expressed to Prof. Dr. Asmin, M.Pd as her thesis supervisor for advices, encouragement, suggestions and knowledge that have been contributed to help the author in compiling this thesis so that this thesis could be finished. Then author also say thanks to Dra. Nerli Khairani M.Si as her academic supervisor for his advices, suggesttion, motivation from beginning until finishing the study. The author’s special thanks are also given to Prof. Dr. Ei Syahputra , M.Pd, Dr. KMS. Amin Fauzi, M.Pd, and Dr. W. Rajagukguk, M.Pd as thesis examiner for their willingnedd to correct, giving advices, encouragement, suggestions and knowledges that have been contributed to help the author in compiling this thesis.

The author also give thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd as the Rector of State University of Medan, Mr. Dr. Asrin Lubis, M.Pd as the Deanof Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Mr. Dr. Edy Surya, M.Si as the Head of Mathematics Department, Mr. Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si as the Secretary of Mathematics Department and Mrs. Dr Iis Siti Jahro, M.Si as the Coordinator of Biingual Program for all the valuable guidance and contribution to complete this thesis. Big thanks for all the lecturers of Mathematics Department and all administrative staff at the faculty, deparment, and bilingual program for their guidance and administrate assistance given. Then, also give thanks to Mr. Drs. H. Sosiar as Headmaster of SMA Sinar Husni Medan, Mathematics Teacher at SMA Sinar Husni Medan and also all of teacher and staff in SMA Sinar Husni Medan who help authors in doing and finishing the research.

v

Thie thesis can not be compiled well without the everlasting love and pray from author’s beloved father, Pangidoan Nasution and the only one author’s Dahna Wati Nasution, also for author’s beloved Brother Anwar Wahyudi and Dedi Ariansah Nasution. for author’s beloved grandma Hj. Hamidah and Hj. Saribanun and my grandpa Hj. Muktar.

Thanks for all my lovely family in Bilingual Mathematics 202, who gave support and motivation during completion of thesis. Also thanks for my friend Deri Sitorus and Asrawi Saputra who gave loves and cheers trough completing this thesis. Als thanks to all my family in Fatia Kos who always support and help me during completion of this thesis. The last thanksfor my beloved friend Rani Rahayu Simanungkalit , who already be with me in sadness and happiness, sharing and discovering many unique things together from first semester until end semester.

The writes should give a big effort to prepare this thesis, and writers knows this thesis was weakness. So that, writer needs some suggetions to ake this thesis better. And big wishes, it can improve our knowledge.

Medan, Agustus 2016 Writer,

Padillah Nur Nasution ID. 4123312018

vi

CONTENTS

Sheet of Agrement i

Biography ii

Abstract iii

Preface iv

Contents vi

List of Figure xiii

List of Table ix

List of Appendix x

CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background 1

1.2. Problem Identification 6

1.3. Problem Limitation 6

1.4. Problem Formulation 7

1.5. Objective of Research 7

1.6. Benefit of Reseach 7

CHAPTER II:LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 Teorical Framework 8

2.1.1 Cooperative Learning 8

2.1.2 Demonstration Method 9

2.1.3 Cooperative Learning Model with TPS Type 10

2.1.4 Defenition of Learning 12

2.1.5 Learning Activity 13

2.1.6 Learning Out Come 16

2.2 Research Materials 18

2.3 Relevant Research 22

2.4 Conceptual Framewor 23

2.5 Hypothesis 24

CHAPTER III:RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 25

3.1 Location and Time of Research 25

3.1.1 Location of Research 25

3.1.2 Time of Research 25

3.2 Subject and Object of Research 25

3.2.1 Subject of Research 25

3.2.2 Object of Research 25

3.3 Design of Research 25

3.4 Procedure of Research 26

3.5 Data Collection Techniques 34

3.5.1 Test 34

3.5.2 Interview 34

vii

3.6.1 Data Reduction 34

3.6.2 Interpretation of Data 34

3.6.3 Taking Conclusion 38

3.6.4 Indicators of Success 38

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 39

4.1 The Result of Research 39

4.1.1 Implementation and Researc Cycle I 39

4.1.1.1 Action Planning Cycle I 40

4.1.1.2 Implementation Measure Cycle 1 41

4.1.1.3 Observation I 43

4.1.1.4 Data Analysis 45

4.1.1.5 Reflection Cycle I 50

4.1.2 Implementation and Researc Cycle II 52

4.1.2.1 Problem Cycle II 52

4.1.2.2 Action Planning Cycle II 53

4.1.2.3 Implementation Measure II 54

4.1.2.4 Observation II 56

4.1.2.5 Data Analysis II 57

4.1.2.6 Reflection II 62

4.2 Discussion of Resulth 64

4.3 Research Findings 68

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 70

5.1 Conclusion 70

5.2 Recommendation 70

REFERENCE 72

APPENDIX 75

viii

LIST OF FIGURE

Figures 3.1 Class Action Research Procedure 26 Figures 4.1 Class Action Research Procedure 65 Figures 4.2 Class Action Research Procedure 67 Figures 4.3 Class Action Research Procedure 68 Figures 4.4 Class Action Research Procedure 68

ix

LIST OF TABLE

Table 1.1 List of test scores math class x 3

Table 3.1 Criteria Observation Learning 35

Table 3.3 Criteria for Student Activities 35

Table 3.3 Mastery Level Students 36

Table 4.1 Level of Mastery learning Outcomes Student 39 Table 4.2 Description of Observation Teacher to Implementation 45 Table 4.3 Description Observation of Student learning Activities 46 Table 4.4 Description Test Research Cycle I 47 Table 4.5 Exposure Test Score of Student Learning Outcome 48 Table 4.6 Description Observation Teacher Cycle II 57 Table 4.7 Description Observation of Student Cycle II 58 Table 4.8 Description Student Result Cycle II 59

x

LIST OF APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Lesson Plan I 75

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan II 80 Appendix 3 Lesson Plan III 85 Appendix 4 Lesson Plan IV 90 Appendix 5 Students Activity Sheet I 95 Appendix 6 Students Activity Sheet II 96 Appendix 7 Students Activity Sheet III) 98 Appendix 8 Students Activity Sheet IV 100 Appendix 9 Alternative Solution Activity I 101 Appendix 10 Alternative Solution Activity II 103 Appendix 11 Alternative Solution Activity III 104 Appendix 12 Alternative Solution Activity IV 106

Appendix 13 Initial Test 107

Appendix 14 Alternative Solution of Initial Test 108 Appendix 15 Blue Print Of Initial Ability Test 110 Appendix 16 Validation of Initial Test 111 Appendix 17 Ability Test I 112 Appendix 18 Alternative Solution of Initial Test I 113 Appendix 19 Blue Print Of Initial Ability Test I 117 Appendix 20 Validaty of Initial Test I 118 Appendix 21 Ability Test II 120 Appendix 22 Alternative Solution of Initial Test II 121 Appendix 23 Blue Print Of Initial Ability Test II 125 Appendix 24 Validaty of Initial Test II 126 Appendix 25 Guidelines of Scoring Techniques 128 Appendix 26 Analysis of Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity I 129 Appendix 27 Analysis of Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity II 130 Appendix 28 Analysis of Observation Sheet of Student Activity I 131 Appendix 29 Analysis of Observation Sheet of Student Activity II I32 Appendix 30 Analysis of Description Test Result I 133 Appendix 31 Analysis of Description Test Result II 135 Appendix 32 Analysis of Exposure Test Score I 137 Appendix 33 Analysis of Exposure Test Score II 139 Appendix 34 Documentation 141

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background

Education is an important factor in growth and development a country . Developed countries in all fields , both in the economic , technology , agriculture or nothing else has can be separated from the role of education .This is because smart people or educated will be able to give positive contribution to the state .But it is important to note that education will be managed to the utmost when each element a good education from the bottom up always oriented to national education goals.

The purpose of national education according to Law No.20 of 2003 states that:

“Tujuan pendidikan nasional adalah untuk berkembangnya potensi peserta didik agar menjadi manusia yang beriman, bertakwa kepada tuhan yang maha Esa, berakhlak mulia, sehat, berilmu, cakap, kreative, mandiri, dan menjadi warga negara yang demokratis serta bertanggung jawab.”

"The purpose of national education is to the development of students' potentials to become a man of faith, fear of god almighty One, noble, healthy, knowledgeable, capable, creative, independent, and become citizens of a democratic and responsible."

The quality of learning and mathematics achievement in Indonesia is still belom changes are encouraging. Association of District Government of Indonesia (APKASI) highlighted the problem of low quality pendiikan in Indonesia is far behind compared to countries in Asia. General mathematics achievement of high school students in Indonesia is lower than the achievement of learning other subjects disclosed in.

One cause of low learning achievement are generally students still think that mathematics is difficult. Abdurrahman (2003: 252) explains: "From various source studies taught in school, mathematics is a field of study that is considered

2

the most difficult by the students both learning disabilities and for those who are not learning disabilities" Besides, it has not used the learning varied, interactive , and the fun will trigger the students do not like math and think math as a scary subject. Learning more centered on the teacher rather than the student. Mendominasipembelajaran teachers, while students just being good listeners and note taker. As revealed by Turmudi (2008: 10) explains that:

“Ilmu pengetahuan (matematika) yang selama ini di sampaikan menggunakan system transmission knowledge ( bagaikan menuangkan air dari poci ke dalam gelas), siswa disuruh diam dengan “manis”, mendengarkan expository (uraian dan penjelasannya ) guru, menirukan ucapan guru, mengimitasikan proses menggambarnya guru, mengkopi apa yang di berikan guru di depan kelas. Dengan kata lain semuanya adalah aktivitas pasif”

"The science (mathematics), which is conveyed using a system of transmission of knowledge (like pouring water from a pitcher into a glass), students are told to shut up with the "sweet", listen Expository (description and explanation) teacher, imitating teachers, mengimitasikan process of drawing teacher, copying what is given to the class teacher. In other words, everything is a passive activity "

This has an impact on the attitudes of students who are less independent, armpits penapat dared to express themselves, always ask for the guidance of teachers and less persistent trying to solve a math problem, so that students understand the knowledge that only to the extent that is given teachers. This fact makes the teaching of mathematics as teaching mathematics at finally resulted in student mastery of mathematics to be relatively low.

Based on observations and interviews in the school year 2015/2016 semester at school parties, especially the mathematics teacher who taught in class X ipa 1 that, SMA Sinar Husni in improving the quality of education has made various efforts including a complete library books, discipline in the learning process both students and teachers, and involve teachers in training, each subject teacher shall make learning tools such as the annual program, the semester program, syllabus, the implementation lesson plan . thus mathematics learning

3

outcomes of students still tend to low with marked number of students who have not reached the minimum completeness criteria (KKM), where KKM mathematics courses is 7.5 as we can see from the table below:

Table 1.1. List of test scores math class X of SMA Sinar Husni

According to the provisions the Department of Education (in Daryanto, 2011: 191), which is said to be thoroughly studied class when the class there are 85% who have reached the absorption of more than or equal to 65% of learning. In this case, in class X SMA Sinar Husni only 18,75 graduation rates are achieved and it is still far from good.

The generally low level learning outcomes of the student, the school claimed to have made various efforts to improve the quality of education among other complementary library books, disciplined learning process both students and teachers, and involve teachers in training, each teacher shall make devices learning such as the annual program, the semester program, syllabus, lesson plan. However, even so the results of students' mathematics learning still tends to be low. This is the background for the researcher to choose SMA Sinar Husni Medan as a location to conduct research.

Then obtained from observations and interviews related to students who did not complete was found several activities, among others:

1. Students consider math as a difficult subject and moreover complicated delivery with the lecture method in particular the subject of numerous chances abstract concepts.

2. There are many students who do not pay attention to the teacher in explaining the material.

No Score Criteria Sum Presentation

1 ≥ 75 _{Complete 6 18,75 %}

2 < 75 _{Not Complete 26 81,25%}

4

3. Often when given the opportunity to ask students only silence, while the students do not understand the material presented teachers.

4. Sometimes if there are students who asked the teacher, his friends even abusing it.

5. Most of the students can do exercises, while they are not trying to read a book to do the exercises, or ask a friend who can work.

Besides, from the results of interviews with the math teacher, Mr. Retno, said that:

“ Hasil belajar matematika siswa secara umum masih rendah, masih banyak siswa yang memproleh nilai di bawah rata-rata. Saya melihat, secara umum siswa memang kurang menyukai pembelajaran matematika, siswa sangat pasif, sehingga tidak ada keinginan untuk belajar matematika itu sendiri. Sudah sering dilakukan motivasi namun mereka memang seolah tidak berniat untuk mengikuti pembelajaran.”

“ The results of students' mathematics learning in general is still low, there are still many students who memproleh score below average. I see, in general, students did not like the study of mathematics, students are very passive, so there is no desire to learn mathematics itself. It has often performed as motivation, but they did not intend to participate in learning. "

If observed, in general, students do not have the desire to learn mathematics is seen from boredom, saturated paa student learning. There is no interest so that students prefer to passive or inactive. Slavin (in Trianto, 2009: 30) says that "cognitive development largely depends on how far the child actively manipulating, and actively interact with the environment". It can be said that the activity is one of the things that affect the process pembelajran. However, if the problem still persists student activity will decrease. The longer students will get bored, and considers mathematics as subjects of the curriculum demands it. Students can not accept the meaning of mathematics itself and in ahirnya will berampak on student learning outcomes.

See the magnitude of the impact of student activity on student learning outcomes in the field of study of mathematics, let efforts to increase student

5

activity. Lack of activity and student learning outcomes is influenced by various factors including the learning model used by the teacher. Results of preliminary observations conducted by researchers at the School Sinar Husni field indicates that the learning of mathematics in the school in general is still very dull and learning much dominated by the teacher while the students sit passively receiving information, this condition indicates that the methods used by teachers still lack less varied.

See above issues, the cooperative learning model TPS accompanied by demonstrations, seen as relevant to the above issues in order to minimize these problems. Excellence cooperative learning model TPS with other cooperative learning model is a form of individual and group responsibility, because in this model there are individual tasks and task groups. Each student will think and have their own opinion independent in completing tasks related to the duties partner. So before students enter kepasangannya already have opinions on the materials studied, so that they will cooperate with each other and help each other in pairs members to understand the material and complete their tasks. Cooperative learning model TPS-type learning accompanied demonstration methods expected to be used to improve learning activities and improve the completeness of student learning, especially math.

With this consideration which may encourage researchers to examine this issue, given the importance of choosing the learning method. In connection with the above, the researchers suggested title ‘Improving of Activity and Student Learning Out Come by Applying Think-Pair-Share ( TPS) Type with Demonstration on Topic The Distance in 3D-Space in X Grade SMA Sinar Husni Academic year 2015-2016’’.

6

1.2 Problem Identification

Based on the backround above, some problems can be identified as follows: 1. Mathematics is a field of study that is considered difficult by students. 2. Students still dominant passive and tend to only receive information

from the teacher.

3. Mathematics students outcome are still low

4. The use of learning model that is chosen by teacher irrelevant

1.3 Problem Limitation

Based on the problem identification, the problem that exist is limited on implementation of TPS to increase of activity and student learning out come by applying think-pair-share ( TPS) type with demonstration on topic the distance in 3D-Space in X grade SMA Sinar Husni academic year 2015-2016.

1.4 Problem Formulation

Based on the problem limitation above, then the problem can be formulated as follows.

1. Is the student activity increased by applaying think pair-share type with demonstration on topic the distance in 3D-Space in x grade sma sinar husni ?

2. Is the student matematical learning out come increased by applaying think pair-share type with demonstration on topic the distance in 3D-Space in x grade sma sinar husni ?

7

1.5 Objective of Research

1. To know increasing of student activity on topic on topic the distance in 3D-Space by aplliying of think pair-share (TPS) type with demonstration in x grade sma sinar husni

2. To know increasing of student mathematical learning out come on topic on topic the distance in 3D-Space by aplliying of think pair-share (TPS) type with demonstration in x grade sma sinar husni

1.6 Benefits of Research

1. provide opportunities for students to be more active in the learning of mathematics

2. As an alternative for teachers of mathematics courses in an effort to improve student learning outcomes activities

3. As inputs to schools in improving the quality of learning 4. As a comparative study of the same research in the future

70

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the results of research and discussion that has been described, the conclusions of this research are:

1. Improving student learning outcomes from Test Results Learning. Test Results Learning I to Test Results Learning II is in the category with a modest increase in average increase of 0.66. Where the first cycle of the number of students who pass are 20 people ranged 62.4% and increased by 2 votes, or 6.24%, to 22 people, or 87.5%. Likewise, the average value of the class in which the first cycle ranges from 62.4 increased to 67.19 in the second cycle.

2. Increased activity of the students from the first cycle to the second cycle is in the category with a modest increase in the average increase in 12:52. Where the first cycle aktivitassiswa still around 56.24% increased by 25% in the second cycle into 81.24%

5.2 Suggestions

The suggestions can be submitted from this research are:

1. For recommended to teachers use cooperative learning model Think Pair share as an alternative in mathematics learning process, so learning more variable and can increase the activity and student learning outcomes. 2. In an effort to increase the activity of student teachers should give a

stimulus to the students to act actively, especially on the activity of asking, answering and meanggapi questions. Teachers have to multiply the number of questions and gave it evenly (spread)

71

3. For other researchers who want to conduct further studies, the researchers found the students who move lower has a low learning outcomes. Perhaps it can be further investigated and are expected to pay attention to the weaknesses in this study, and can modify the type cooperative learning model of think-pair-share with other materials so that the future will be better.

72

REFERENCES

Abdurrahman, Mulyono, (2003), Pendidikan Bagi Anak Berkesulitan Belajar, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Arends, R.I. 2012.Learning to Teach (Ninth Edition). McGraw-Hill Companies: New York

Arikunto, S. 2012.Dasar Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Bumi Aksara: Jakarta. Asmin & Mansyur, A. 2012. Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar dengan

Analisis Klasik dan Modern.Larispa: Medan.

Aspar. 2014. Meningkatkan Kemampuan Menyelesaikan Perhitungan Untung Atau Rugi Dalam Perdagangan Dengan Menggunakan Presentase Melalui Metode Pemberian Tugas Pada Kelas VII A MTS Al Khairaat Pusat Palu. Jurnal Pendidikan,vol 17, no. 2, pp. 41-53.

Daryanto.2011. Penelitian tindakan kelas dan penelitian Tindakan Sekolah.Gava Media : Yogyakarta

Dimyati, (2006),Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Dyson, B. & Casey, A. 2012. Cooperative Leaning in Physical Education: A Research-Based Approach. Routledge: New York.

Hake, R.R. 1998. Interactive-Engagement Versus Traditional Methods: A Six Thousand-Student Survey Of Mechanics Test Data For Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics Teacher, 66 (1), 64-74. Hamalik, O, (2008),Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bumi Aksara, Bandung

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. 2000. TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

73

---. 2004.TIMSS 2003 International Mathematics Report.TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

---. 2008.TIMSS 2007 International Mathematics Report.TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

---. 2012. TIMSS 2011 International Result in Mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

Isjoni, (2009), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi antar Peserta Didik, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta.

Kunandar. 2008. Langkah Mudah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas sebagai Pengembangan profesi Guru. Jakarta : PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Lie, A. 2004.Cooperative Learning. Grasindo: Jakarta.

Mayer R.E., Alexander, P.A. 2011. Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction : Educational Psychology Handbook Series. New York: Routledge.

NCTM, (2000). Principles and Standards of School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics : USA

OECD. 2014. PISA 2012. Results: What Students Know and Can Do :Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I). OECD Publishing.

Orton, A. & Frobisher, L. 2005.Insights Into Teaching Mathematics. Bath Press: Great Britain.

Polya, G. 2004. How To Solve It : A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. Princenton University Press: New Jersey.

Robinson, A. 1991. Cooperative Learning and Academically Talented Student. The National Reasearch On The Gifted And Talented Team Research. University of Arkansas.

74

Sardiman, (2011), Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, P. T. Raja Grafino Persada, Jakarta.

Slavin R.E. 1985.Learning To Cooperate, Cooperating Learning. Plennum Press: New York.

---. 2008. Cooperative Learning Teori, Riset dan Praktik. Nusa Media: Bandung.

Slavin, R.E., Madden, N.A., Stevens, R.J. 1989. Cooperative Learning Models For The 3 R’s.Educational Leadership,vol. 47, no. 4, pp.22-28.

Sudjana, N. 2009. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. PT Remaja Rosdakarya: Bandung.

Taber, K.S. 2011. Constructivism As Educational Theory: Contingency In Learning and Optimally Guided Instruction. Nova Science Publisher, Inc.: New York

Tanner, H. & Jones, S. 2003. Becoming A Succesful Teacher Of Mathematics. Taylor & Francis e-Library: London.

Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana, Jakarta.

Wang, Tzu-Pu. 2009. _{Applying Slavin’s Cooperative Learning Techniques to a} College EFL Conversation Class. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning,vol. 5, no.1, pp.112-120.

Young, M.R., Rapp, E. & Murphy, J.W. 2010. Action Research: Enhancing Classroom Practice And Fulfilling Educational Responsibilities.Journal of Instructional Pedagogies,vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-10

http://www.republika.co.id/berita/pendidikan/education/read/16/02/01 access sunday 1 february 2016. At 14.00 pm

iii

BIOGRAPHY

Padillah Nur Nasution was born in Mompang Juli on November, 10th 1993. Her father’s name is Pangidoan Nasution and his mother’s name is Dahna Wati.She have brother namely Anwar Wahyudi Nasution and Muhammad Dedi Ariansah Nasution.In 2000 the author starts her education in SD Negeri 142602 Mompang Julu.. She graduated in 2004. In 2004, the author continues her education in SMP Negeri 1 Panyabungan Kota and graduated in 2009. And then in 2009, the author continue her education in SMAN PLUS KOTANOPAN and move to SMA Negeri 1 Panyabungan Kota and graduated in 2012. After graduated from Senior High School, the author continues her education in State Univesity of Medan as student in bilingual class for Mathematics Education 2012.

3. For other researchers who want to conduct further studies, the researchers found the students who move lower has a low learning outcomes. Perhaps it can be further investigated and are expected to pay attention to the weaknesses in this study, and can modify the type cooperative learning model of think-pair-share with other materials so that the future will be better.

REFERENCES

Abdurrahman, Mulyono, (2003), Pendidikan Bagi Anak Berkesulitan Belajar, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Arends, R.I. 2012.Learning to Teach (Ninth Edition). McGraw-Hill Companies: New York

Arikunto, S. 2012.Dasar Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Bumi Aksara: Jakarta.

Asmin & Mansyur, A. 2012. Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar dengan Analisis Klasik dan Modern.Larispa: Medan.

Aspar. 2014. Meningkatkan Kemampuan Menyelesaikan Perhitungan Untung Atau Rugi Dalam Perdagangan Dengan Menggunakan Presentase Melalui Metode Pemberian Tugas Pada Kelas VII A MTS Al Khairaat Pusat Palu. Jurnal Pendidikan,vol 17, no. 2, pp. 41-53.

Daryanto.2011. Penelitian tindakan kelas dan penelitian Tindakan Sekolah.Gava Media : Yogyakarta

Dimyati, (2006),Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Dyson, B. & Casey, A. 2012. Cooperative Leaning in Physical Education: A Research-Based Approach. Routledge: New York.

Hake, R.R. 1998. Interactive-Engagement Versus Traditional Methods: A Six Thousand-Student Survey Of Mechanics Test Data For Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics Teacher, 66 (1), 64-74.

Hamalik, O, (2008),Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bumi Aksara, Bandung

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. 2000. TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

---. 2004.TIMSS 2003 International Mathematics Report.TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

---. 2008.TIMSS 2007 International Mathematics Report.TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

---. 2012. TIMSS 2011 International Result in Mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center: United States.

Isjoni, (2009), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi antar Peserta Didik, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta.

Kunandar. 2008. Langkah Mudah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas sebagai Pengembangan profesi Guru. Jakarta : PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Lie, A. 2004.Cooperative Learning. Grasindo: Jakarta.

Mayer R.E., Alexander, P.A. 2011. Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction : Educational Psychology Handbook Series. New York: Routledge.

NCTM, (2000). Principles and Standards of School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics : USA

OECD. 2014. PISA 2012. Results: What Students Know and Can Do :Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I). OECD Publishing.

Orton, A. & Frobisher, L. 2005.Insights Into Teaching Mathematics. Bath Press: Great Britain.

Polya, G. 2004. How To Solve It : A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. Princenton University Press: New Jersey.

Robinson, A. 1991. Cooperative Learning and Academically Talented Student. The National Reasearch On The Gifted And Talented Team Research. University of Arkansas.

Sardiman, (2011), Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, P. T. Raja Grafino Persada, Jakarta.

Slavin R.E. 1985.Learning To Cooperate, Cooperating Learning. Plennum Press: New York.

---. 2008. Cooperative Learning Teori, Riset dan Praktik. Nusa Media: Bandung.

Slavin, R.E., Madden, N.A., Stevens, R.J. 1989. Cooperative Learning Models For The 3 R’s.Educational Leadership,vol. 47, no. 4, pp.22-28.

Sudjana, N. 2009. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. PT Remaja Rosdakarya: Bandung.

Taber, K.S. 2011. Constructivism As Educational Theory: Contingency In Learning and Optimally Guided Instruction. Nova Science Publisher, Inc.: New York

Tanner, H. & Jones, S. 2003. Becoming A Succesful Teacher Of Mathematics. Taylor & Francis e-Library: London.

Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana, Jakarta.

Wang, Tzu-Pu. 2009. _{Applying Slavin’s Cooperative Learning Techniques to a}

College EFL Conversation Class. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning,vol. 5, no.1, pp.112-120.

Young, M.R., Rapp, E. & Murphy, J.W. 2010. Action Research: Enhancing Classroom Practice And Fulfilling Educational Responsibilities.Journal of Instructional Pedagogies,vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-10

http://www.republika.co.id/berita/pendidikan/education/read/16/02/01 access sunday 1 february 2016. At 14.00 pm

BIOGRAPHY

Padillah Nur Nasution was born in Mompang Juli on November, 10th 1993. Her father’s name is Pangidoan Nasution and his mother’s name is Dahna Wati.She have brother namely Anwar Wahyudi Nasution and Muhammad Dedi Ariansah Nasution.In 2000 the author starts her education in SD Negeri 142602 Mompang Julu.. She graduated in 2004. In 2004, the author continues her education in SMP Negeri 1 Panyabungan Kota and graduated in 2009. And then in 2009, the author continue her education in SMAN PLUS KOTANOPAN and move to SMA Negeri 1 Panyabungan Kota and graduated in 2012. After graduated from Senior High School, the author continues her education in State Univesity of Medan as student in bilingual class for Mathematics Education 2012.