LITERATURE REVIEW 10 RESEARCH METODOLOGY 41 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 66

2.7 Learning Material 33 2.7.1 The Net Cube and Cuboid 34 2.7.2 Surface Area of Cuboidand Cube 35 2.7.3 Volume of Cube and Cuboid 35 2.8 Sample Implementation of Problem Based Learning Model in Teaching Cube and Cuboid Matter 36 2.9 Sample Implementation of Cooperative Learning Model Think-Pair-Share Type in Teaching Cube and Cuboid Matter 37 2.10 Relevant Research 38 2.11 Conceptual Framework 38 2.12 Hypothesis 40

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METODOLOGY 41

3.1 Place and Time of Research 41 3.2 Population and Sample 41 3.3 Variable and Instrument of Research 42 3.3.1 Variable of Research 42 3.3.2 The Instrument 42 3.3.2.1 Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability Test 42 3.3.2.2 Instrument Trial 55 3.4 Design of Research 59 3.5 Technique of Collecting Data 60 3.6 Technique of Data Analysis 62 3.6.1 Descriptive Analysis 62 3.6.2 Analyzed Assumption Test 62 3.6.2.1 Normality Test 62 3.6.2.2 Homogeneity Test 62 3.6.2.3 Hypotheses Test 62

CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 66

4.1 Research Result Description 66 4.1.1. The Score of Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability Test 66 4.1.2. The Description of Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability Test 68 4.2 Analysis of Research Data 69 4.2.1. Normality Test 69 4.2.2. Homogeneity Test 70 4.2.3. Hypothesis Test 71 4.3 Research Discussion 73

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 76

5.1 Conclusion

76 5.2 Suggestion 76 REFERENCES 77 TABLE LIST Page Table 2.1 Indicators of Critical Thinking Ability 16 Table 3.1 Blue Print of Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability Test 43 Table 3.2 Scoring Guideline of Mathematical Critical Thinking Test 47 Table 3.3 Classification of Validity Interpretation 56 Table 3.4 Result of Validity Test 57 Table 3.5 Classification of Reliability Interpretation 58 Table 4.1 Data of Mathematical Critical Thinking Ability Test in Both Of Experimental Classes 67 Table 4.2 Mean Percentage of PBL Class and TPS Class 69 Table 4.3 One-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test 70 Table 4.4 Homogeneity Variance Test 71 Table 4.5 Independent sample t-test 72

Dokumen yang terkait

Pengaruh model cooperative learning teknik think-pair-share terhadap hasil belajar biologi siswa pada konsep sistem peredaran darah : kuasi eksperimen di smp pgri 2 ciputat

0 11 202

Perbandingan hasil belajar biologi dengan menggunakan metode pembelajaran cooperative learning tipe group investigation (GI) dan think pair share (TPS)

1 5 152

THE COMPARISON OF STUDENTS’ MATHEMATICAL PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY TAUGHT BY COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER AND THINK PAIR SHARE AT SMP NEGERI 13 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2016/2017.

0 2 25

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICAL COMMUNICATION ABILITY TAUGHT BY COOPERATIVE LEARNING THINK PAIR SHARE AND NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER TYPES AT SMP NEGERI 3 KISARAN.

1 6 28

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICAL REPRESENTATION ABILITY TAUGHT BY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING TPS WITH STAD FOR GRADE X IN SMA NEGERI 7 MEDAN.

0 3 23

THE DIFFERENCE OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING AND COOPERATIVE TYPE OF THINK PAIR SHARE TOWARD STUDENTS MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT ON TOPIC OF STATISTICS IN GRADE XI SMA NEGERI 2 BALIGE.

0 6 17

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY BY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIR-SHARE (TPS)AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN GRADE X OF SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014.

0 5 27

INTEGRATION OF AUTOGRAPH IN IMPROVING MATHEMATICAL PROBLEM SOLVING AND MATHEMATICAL CONNECTION ABILITY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING THINK-PAIR-SHARE.

2 6 25

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENT’S MATHEMATICAL COMMUNICATION ABILITY TAUGHT BY COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL THINK-TALK-WRITE TYPE WITH NUMBERED HEAD TOGETHER TYPE ATSMP NEGERI 1 LUBUK PAKAM.

0 2 11

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS’ MATHEMATICAL ACHIEVEMENT BY USING GUIDED-DISCOVERY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL JIGSAW TYPE

0 0 10