Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 287
3.1.4. Using Student Learning Achievement Group Learning Model Conventional Motivation High
Results of the study group of students with high learning motivation has a number of 16 students, the highest score of 92, the lowest score of 64, the mean score of the group was
75.625 and a standard deviation of 9.330.
3.1.5. Using Student Learning Achievement Group Learning Model Conventional Low Motivation.
Results of the study group of students with low learning motivation has a number of 16 students, the highest score of 92, the lowest score of 64, the train is a group score of 75.625
and a standard deviation of 9.330
3.1.6. Hypothesis Testing Results
Hypothesis testing using analysis of variance or two-way F test by treatment by level design. Two-way F-test for the first hypothesis that learning achievement of students taught physics at
the cooperative learning model TPS is higher than the results of studying Physics I students taught by conventional learning models and the hypothesis that there is an interaction effect
between the model of learning and student motivation to learn on learning achievement Basic Physics I is shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Results of ANOVA Test
Sourrce Sum of Squares
df Mean Square
F
count
F
table
α = 0.05 A
319.515625 1
319.515625 4.725
4.00 B
1711.890625 1
1711.890625 25.319
Interaction A X B 1453.515625
1 1453.515625
21.498 error
4056.6875 60
67.61145833 Corrected Total
7541.609375 63
Hypothesis testing interaction effects between models of learning and motivation to learn the students is significant, it should be tested the effect of simple or simple effect. Prior to testing
the simple effect necessary to test the differences or similarities of the four treatment groups with the application of one way variance procedure. Based on the calculations of F = 17 181
F
table
= 2.76 α = 0.05, thus the average difference between the four treatment groups.
Test for the third and fourth hypothesis further tested with t-Dunnet. Test results for the third hypothesis that learning achievement Basic Physics I use cooperative learning model TPS
with high learning motivation is higher than the results of studying Basic Physics I using conventional learning models with high learning motivation. Fourth hypothesis that learning
achievement Basic Physics I use cooperative learning model TPS with low learning motivation is lower than on learning achievement Basic Physics I use conventional learning
models with low learning motivation can be seen in Table 3:
Table 3. Simple Efek Test by t test-Dunnet
Mean scor learning achievement Basic Physics I
A
1
B
1
A
2
B
1
A
1
B
2
A
2
B
2
Y
11
Y
21
Y
12
Y
22
89.75 75.75
69.875 74.9375
simple effect test for B
1
, the different A to B
1
t
A1B1-A2B1
t
tabel
α=0.05 4.815
1.67 simple effect test for B
2
, the different A to B
2
t
A1B2-A2B2
t
tabel
α=0.05 -1.741
-1.67
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 288
3.1.7. Results Learning Basic Physics I Taught by the Cooperative Learning Model Type TPS Higher than Physics Learning Achievement I: Taught by Conventional Learning
Model.
Based on calculations presented in Table 2 shows that the group cooperative learning model SMT and conventional learning model group gave the price of F = 4725 F
table
= 4.00. This value indicates that the significance level α = 0.05 H0 is rejected, which means that H1 is
accepted. It shows the results of studying Physics I taught by cooperative learning model TPS is higher than the results of studying Physics I taught by conventional learning models, in
accordance with the formulation of hypotheses for the for the first hypothesis. So it can be concluded that there are differences in learning achievement Basic Physics I, which
significantly between students taught by cooperative learning model TPS and conventional learning models.
3.1.8. There Effect of Interaction Between Learning and Motivation Model Of Student Learning Achievement Basic Physics I.
Based on calculations presented in Table 2 shows that the interaction between cooperative learning model TPS and student interest towards learning achievement Basic Physics I put a
price of F = 21 498 F
table
= 4.00. This value indicates that the significance level α = 0.05 H is rejected, which means that H
1
is accepted. This shows there is a significant interaction effect between the model of learning and motivation to learn the students to the learning
achievement of Basic Physics I, in accordance with the formulation of hypotheses to the second hypothesis.
3.1.9. Results Learning Basic Physics I, Taught by the Cooperative Learning Model TPS type with Motivation High Higher than Physics Learning Achievement I: Taught by
Learning Model Conventional High Motivation.
Based on the data in Table 3, the results of testing the effect of a simple look that students who have high motivation to learn is taught with cooperative learning model TPS and
conventional learning model pricing t = 4815 table = 1.67. This value indicates that the significance level α = 0.05 H
is rejected, which means that H1 is accepted. This is consistent with the formulation of the third alternative hypothesis that learning achievement Basic
Physics I taught by cooperative learning model TPS with high learning motivation is higher than the results of studying Physics I taught by conventional learning models with high
learning motivation. Then be concluded that there are differences in learning achievement Basic Physics I, which significantly between students taught by cooperative learning model
TPS with high learning motivation and the students taught with conventional learning models with a high interest in learning.
3.1.9. Results Learning Basic Physics I, Taught by the Cooperative Learning Model TPS Type with Low Motivation Lower than Basic Physics Learning Achievement I: Taught
by Learning Model Conventional Low Motivation.
Based on the data in Table 3, the results of testing the effect of a simple look that students who have high motivation to learn is taught with cooperative learning model TPS and
conventional learning model pricing t = -1741 table = -1.67. This value indicates that the signi
ficance level α = 0.05 H0 is rejected, which means that H1 is accepted. This is consistent with the formulation of an alternative hypothesis in which the four learning achievement
Basic Physics I taught by cooperative learning model TPS with low learning motivation is lower than the results of studying Physics I taught by conventional learning models with low
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 289
learning motivation. Then be concluded that there are differences in learning achievement Basic Physics I, which significantly between students taught by cooperative learning model
TPS with low learning motivation and students taught by conventional learning models with low learning motivation. conventional learning with low learning motivation can be seen in
Table 3.
3. 2. Discussion 3.2.1 First Hypothesis
