THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF TEAM GAMES TOURNAMENTS (TGT) TYPE ON OUTCOMES ON HEAT AND TEMPERATURE TOPIC IN CLASS X SEMESTER II SMA NEGERI 1 SIDIKALANG A. Y. 2015/2016.

THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF TEAMS GAMES
TOURNAMENTS (TGT) TYPE ON OUTCOMES OF HEAT AND
TEMPERATURE TOPIC IN CLASS X SEMESTER II
SMA NEGERI 1 SIDIKALANG A.Y 2015/2016

By
Silfiana Safutri Hutauruk
ID. Number. 4123322016
Bilingual Physics Education Study Program

THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2016

ii

BIOGRAPHY

Silfiana Saputri Hutauruk was born in Hutaraja

on May12nd 1994.

Father’s name is M. Hutauruk and Mother’s name is L. Sihombing. The author is
fifth child of five siblings. In 2000, the author entered SD No. 173141 Hutaraja
Sipoholon and graduated in 2006. In 2006, the author continued his education in
SMP Negeri 2 Sipoholon and graduated in 2009. In 2009, the author continued his
education to SMA Santa Maria Tarutung and graduated 2012. In 2012, the author
was accepted in Physical Education Studies Program in Department of Physics,
Faculty of Mathematics and Science in State University of Medan.

iii

THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL OF TEAM GAMES
TOURNAMENTS (TGT) TYPE ON OUTCOMES ON HEAT AND
TEMPERATURE TOPIC IN CLASS X SEMESTER II
SMA NEGERI 1 SIDIKALANG A. Y. 2015/2016
Silfiana Saputri Hutauruk (ID.4123322016)

ABSTRACT
The research aims to determine the effect of cooperative learning model type
Teams Games Tournaments (TGT) to the learning outcomes of students and to
determine learning outcomes of students during learning process on topic heat and
temperature Semester II class X SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang. This type of research was
a quasi-experimental design with two group pre-test and post-test. The population of
this research were all students of class X Semester II SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang
consist of 12 class, the amount of students was 372 students. The sample was done by
cluster random sampling by taking two classes of 12 class. The class that choosen
was X-6 as an experimental class , that consist of 31 students and X-4 as a control
class that consist of 31 students. Based on the result of this research, the average of
pretest on experimental class was 31.12 and control class was 30.32. The both of
class was given with different treatment, experimental class with TGT cooperative
learning model and control class with conventional learning model. After learning
process was finished the class gave the post-test with an average was 76.61 on
experimental class and control class was 63.67. The t-test results was tcount = 5.71 and
ttable = 1.67 then tcount> t table and Ha was accepted. It can be concluded that there was a
difference due to the effect of cooperative learning model of teams games
tournaments (TGT) type on outcomes of heat and temperature topic in class x
semester II SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang A.Y.2015/2016.

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 proposal entitled
“The Effect Of Cooperative Learning Model Of Teams Games Tournaments (TGT)
Type On Outcomes Of Heat And Temperature Topic In Class X Semester II SMA
Negeri 1

Sidikalang A. Y. 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 State University of Medan..
On this occasion the author likes to thank Mr Alkhafi Maas Siregar, M.Si 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 Prof. Drs.
Motlan, M.Sc, Ph.D, Drs. Nurdin Siregar, M.Si and Drs. Muhammad Kadri, M.Sc
who have provided many advices and suggestions in completing this thesis. Thanks

also to Drs. Sehat Simatupang, M.Si., as the Academic Supervisor, and Dr.Asrin
Lubis ,M.Pd as the Dean Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State
University of Medan. Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturers and staff employees
of Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State
University of Medan. State University of Medan who have encourage the writer
during the studying process. Sincere appreciation was also presented to Principal of
SMA N 1 Sidikalang, Drs. Alben Sianturi, Physics teacher Dra. Kardina Gultom,
Edwin Pasaribu 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 M. Hutauruk, my great lovely mother L. Sihombing, my great brothers
Lerry Hutauruk S.T, Dolly Hutauruk S.E, Karlos Hutauruk S.T and Michael
Hutauruk S.T., my great lovely sisters Jelita Sihombing S.Si, Juniati Ginting A.Md
and Paskah Tamba Am.Keb and all my family. And thanks also for my great family,
students of SMA N 1 Sidikalang, and Bilingual Physics Education Study Program

v

2012 (PESP’12), my great lovely friends novita ,dwira, dian, sarah, Debora, novianti,
rini, rohani, reni, asmah, dinda, Rosa, yudhistira, aldo, harmin and jerry, which has
carved memories, both joy and sorrow, and who gives motivations and advices to the

author. And special to my friends Novelita tamba, Grea hutapea, Novita Silalahi,
Dwira Nababan, Yunita Hutabarat, Elisabet Simanjuntak, Lily Batubara and Mewina
Hutauruk, thanks for your support.
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 perfectly. The author hopes the contents of this paper would be useful
in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.

Medan,

May 2016

Author,

Silfiana Hutauruk

vi

LIST OF CONTENTS

Page
LEGITIMATION SHEET
BIOGRRAPHY
ABSTRACT
PREFACE
LIST OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDIXES

i
ii
iii
vi
viii
ix
x
xi

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1
Background ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Problem Identification ......................................................................................... 3
1.3
Scope of Problem ................................................................................................ 4
1.4
Problem Formulation ......................................................................................... 4
1.5
Research Objectives ............................................................................................ 4
1.6
Research Benefits ................................................................................................ 5
1.7
Operational Definition ........................................................................................ 5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Definition of Learning ........................................................................................... 6
2.1.2 Learning Outcomes ................................................................................................ 8
2.1.3 Learning Activities ................................................................................................. 10
2.2 Cooperative Learning Model .................................................................................. 11

2.2.1 Syntax Cooperative Learning Model ..................................................................... 11
2.2.2 Cooperative Learning Model TGT ....................................................................... 12
2.2.3 Syntax Type Cooperative Learning TGT ............................................................. 15
2.2.4 The Characteristics of Cooperative Learning Model TGT ................................... 16
2.2.5 Conventional Learning Model ............................................................................... 18
2.3 Results of Previous Studies…………… .............................................................. 20
2.4 Learning Materials ................................................................................................ 20
2.5. Coceptual Framework ............................................................................................ 39
2.6 Research Hypothesis .............................................................................................. 40
CHAPTER III METHOD OF RESEARCH
3.1 Research Location and Time of Research............................................................ ... 41
3.2 Population and Sample Research ............................................................................ 41
3.3 Research Variables .................................................................................................. 41
3.4 Type and Design of Research ................................................................................. 42
3.4.1 Researh Type ......................................................................................................... 42
3.4.2 Research Design ..................................................................................................... 42

vii

3.5. Research Procedures ............................................................................................. 42

3.6 Research Instrument .............................................................................................. 45
3.6.1 Teacher Interview .................................................................................................. 45
3.6.2 Questionnaire ......................................................................................................... 45
3.6.3 Test Results Learning............................................................................................. 45
3.6.4 Observation ............................................................................................................ 47
3.7 Data Analysis Teqhniques...................................................................................... 47
3.7.1 Normality Test ...................................................................................................... 48
3.7.2 Test Homogeneity .................................................................................................. 49
3.7.3 Hypothesis Test (t Test) ........................................................................................ 49
CHAPTER IVRESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Results ............................................................ ...................................................... 52
4.1.1 Researh Data ......................................................................................................... 52
4.1.2 Student Learning Outcomes On Experiment Class ............................................... 55
4.1.3 Student Learning Outcomes On Control Class ..................................................... 56
4.1.4 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 56
4.1.4.1 Normality Test ............................................................ ....................................... 56
4.1.4.2 Homogeneity Test ............................................................ .................................. 57
4.1.4.3 Hypothesis Test ............................................................ ...................................... 57
4.2 Discussion ............................................................ ................................................ 58
CHAPTER IVCONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion ............................................................ ................................................... 61
4.1.1Suggestion ............................................................................................................... 61
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 62

ix

LIST OF FIGURE
Page
Figure 2.1 Placement In Table Tournaments
17
Figure 2.2 The transfer of heat in everyday life
25
Figure 2.3 The tip of the iron that is heated causing the other end took heat26
Figure 2.4 Convection in Liquids
29
Figure 2.5 Convection in the air
29
Figure 2.6 The process ofland and sea breeze
30
Figure 2.7 The scale of the various Thermometer

31
Figure 2.8 Expansion length
33
Figure 2.9. Expansion Area
35
Figure 2.10 Expansion volume
36
Figure 2.11 The graph of pressure and volume
38
Figure 3.1 Research Step Design
44
Figure 4.1 Distribution Of Pre-test-Post-test
53
Figure 4.2 Distribution Of Pre-test-Post-test
54

viii

LIST OF TABLE
Page
Table 2.1 Syntax Cooperative Learning
12
Table 2.2. Syntax Type Cooperative Learning TGT
15
Table 2.3 Criteria Group Award
18
Table 2.4 Results of Previous Research
20
Table 2.5 Conversion Scale Thermometer
28
Table 2.6 Coefficient of Expansion Various Substances
32
Table 2.7 Table Thermal Conductivity Some Substance
34
Tabel 3.1 Two Group Pretest – Posttest Design
42
Tabel 3.2 Table Spesification Tests of Student Learning Outcomes
46
Table 3.3 Category Control Learning Materials
47
Tabel 4.1 Results Pre-test on Experimental and Control Class
52
Tabel 4.2 Results Post-test on Experimental and Control Class
54
Table 4.3 Summary of Average, Deviation and Variance of pre-test data 55
Tabel 4.4 Summary of Average, Deviation and Variance of post-test data 55
Tabel 4.5 Summary of Normality test on Experiment and Control Class 56
Table 4.6 Homogeneity Test Results Summary Second Class
57
Tabel 4.7 Summary Of Hypothesis Test From Post-test
58

x

LIST OF APPENDIXES
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

Lesson Plan1
Lesson Plan2
Lesson Plan3
Worksheet 1
Worksheet 2
Worksheet 3
Research Instrument’s
Result of pre-test and post-test in experiment class
Result of pre-test and post-test in Control Class
The calculation of mean, deviation standard , and varians
Normality test
Homogenity-test t
Hypothesis-test
List of critical value for liliefors
Table of normality-test
Table of F-distribution
List of percentile value of t-distribution
Documentation

63
78
89
98
101
103
105
119
121
123
126
131
133
136
137
138
140
141

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1

Background
Education is the foundation for poverty reduction knowledge, solve

problems and resolve all the problems of ignorance of the nation that has been
happening. It is clear, significant and central role of education as he gave the
opening and expansion of knowledge. Education aims to build a nation-clad
structure with values of ingenuity, sensitivity and concern for the life of the
nation. The quality of education is based on the quality of human resources. The
success of development in the field of education will greatly influence
development in other areas such as social and business fields.
According to results of the learning process the existing questionnaire
(75%) apply direct instructional model is characterized by using a lecture in
presenting the material. The students just listening to the material presented by the
teacher. Students (38.23%) want to learn by practical work and demonstrations,
arguing it would be to understand the material because there is real evidence that
done and make conclusions from lab work is done so it is easy to understand and
remember.
Based on the questionnaire distributed by the author in SMA Negeri 1
Sidikalang, physics known as one of the subjects less desirable students. Of the 34
students, argue that physics is an unpleasant subjects (68%) for the reason that
physics is difficult because there are too many use the formula so that students
first learn to feel saturated scared before. The notion that physics is more difficult
a negative trait that causes the urge to study harder will be low due to lack of
interest of students towards physics, so it looks less active students in the learning
process. One of the factors that cause unpleasant students of physics is the study
model used by teachers less varied. It can be seen from the results of the
questionnaire, the students responded very motivated (53%), due to the holding of

1

2

learning and play can enhance the spirit of students to learn physics. According to
Sanjaya, 2013: 14-15 "A teacher needs to have the ability to design and
implement learning strategies considered to match the interests and talents and in
accordance with the level of development of students including utilizing a variety
of media sources and learning to ensure the effectiveness of learning".
The existence of problems in learning affect student learning outcomes in
physics. Based on the results of interviews with teachers of physics, learning
outcomes of students in the subjects of physics at SMAN 1 Sidikalang still low
and unsatisfactory. The average value of students is 70.38 which of course does
not reach a value that is determined by the school KKM is 75 for class X.
The efforts to overcome the problems in learning are given by several
alternatives such as learning and teaching model’s approaches to learning and
model of teaching. The learning approach is the way in which the teachers in the
implementation of learning so that the concepts presented can be adapted by the
students. The learning model is a conceptual framework that describes a
systematic procedure, a learning experience, guidance in planning and
implementing learning.
The efforts to do is to develop an approach that is centered on student
learning and learning model developed is a model of cooperative learning. In the
model of cooperative learning students are given the opportunity to communicate
and interact socially with friends to achieve the goal of learning, while teachers
act as a motivator and facilitator of student activity. There are several types of
cooperative learning model. However, cooperative learning model used is a
cooperative learning model with Teams Games Tournaments (TGT) type. TGT
cooperative learning model is an approach that led to small groups for teaching
and learning to work together as a team to solve the problem, complete a task or
to achieve a common goal.

3

Cooperative learning lessons can be characterized by the following
features:





Students work in teams to master learning goals.



Teams are made up of high-, average-, and low achieving students.



mix.

Whenever possible, teams include a racial, cultural, and gender

Reward systems are oriented to the group as well as the individual.

A second important effect of cooperative learning is wider tolerance and
acceptance of people who are diffrent by virtue of their race,culture,social class,
or ability. A third and important goal for cooperative learning is to teach students
skills of coperation and collaboration. These are critical skills in a society in
which much adult work is carried out in large, interdependent organizations and
communities are be coming more culturally diverse and global in their
orientations (Arends, 2007 : 345). Therefore, this research must be done so that
any changing in learning process next learning and as balance as teacher to using
the spme model.

1.2

Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problems that have been described, we

can identify issues that are relevant to the research include:
1. Learning is still conventional
2. Low interest student learning in physics.
3. The results of student learning is still relatively low
4. School facilities are not available to make students practices and less
difficulty doing it school lab facilities;

4

1.3.

Scope of Problem
Considering the wide the problem it is necessary to restrictions in the

study are:
1. The learning model used is Cooperative Learning Model TGT (Team
Games Tournament) in the experimental group and the conventional
learning model in the control class.
2. The results of students in the Topic Heat and Temperature of the second
semester class X SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang the A.Y. 2015/2016.

1.4.

Problem Formulation
Based on the boundary problem has been stated, the formulation of the

problem in the study were:
1. How does the learning outcomes of students to taught by cooperative
learning model TGT on the Topic Heat and Temperature of the second
semester in class X SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang?
2. How is the learning activities of students during the learning take place?
3. How does the influence of cooperative learning model TGT with
conventional learning models for student learning outcomes in Heat and
Temperature the Topic grade X semester II in SMA N 1 Sidikalang?

1.5

Research Objectives
As for the purpose of the study is as follows:
1. To determine the learning outcomes of students to taught using
cooperative learning model TGT on the Topic Heat and Temperature the
of the second semester in class X SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang.
2. To determine the effect of TGT learning model with conventional learning
models for student learning outcomes in the Topic Heat and Temperature
the in the second half of the class X SMA Negeri 1 Sidikalang.

5

1.6

Research Benefits
The expected benefits of this research are;
1. As a comparison and reference for further research will examine and
discuss the same research.
2. As consideration for subject teachers to consider the use of cooperative
learning model TGT in the learning process.
3. For the researchers, could further deepen the knowledge of cooperative
learning model TGT to be applied in the future.

1.7

Operational Definition
1. TGT type of cooperative learning model is a model student centered
learning in its approach where there are small groups for teaching and
learning to work together as a team to solve the problem, complete a task
or to achieve a common goal. TGT cooperative learning model is a
cooperative learning model that was developed to engage students in
activities of all students without any difference in status, involves the role
of students as peer tutors and contains elements of the game.
2. The learning outcomes are the abilities of the students after the students
receive a learning experience.

61

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the research results obtained from the data analysis and hypothesis
testing, it can be summed up as follows:
1. The average results of students on experimental class were treated with cooperative
learning model TGT is 76.61 and the average student learning outcomes in the
classroom controls treated with conventional learning is 63.87.
2. Based on the calculation t test showed that tcount>ttable ie 5.7130> 1.67 so Ha is
received. Based on the data obtained it can be concluded that there is the effect of
using cooperative learning model TGT (Teams Games Tournaments) on student
learning outcomes on topic heat and temperature in class X Semester II SMA Negeri
1 Sidikalang A.Y. 2015/2016.

5.2. Suggestion
Based on the results and conclusions of the study, the researchers have some
advice, namely:
1.

For subsequent researchers who want to conduct research using
cooperative learning model TGT (Teams Games Tournaments)
suggested more attention and guiding students to work in groups
with an active way of asking each student about what she had done
in groups so students will be motivated to be active in completing
the task group.

2.

For further research is recommended before starting the learning
process must first be explained to the students how the
implementation of cooperative learning model TGT, so that at the
time of learning the students already understand what will be done
and no time-consuming phases of learning to another.

62

REFERENCES

Arends, R. I., 2007, Learning To Teach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Arikunto, S., 2014, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan Edisi 2. Jakarta: Bumi
Aksara.
Suparno.A.S., 2014, Membangun Kompetensi Belajar. Jakarta:
Departement Pendidikan Nasional.
Hamdani. 2014, Strategi Belajar Mengajar. Bandung : Pustaka Setia.
Isjoni. 2013, Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi
Antar Peserta Didik. Yogyakarta : Pustaka pelajar.
Istarani. 2014, 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Medan : Media Persada.
Trianto. 2013, Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif- Progresif. Jakarta:
Kencana.
Trianto. 2013, Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Progresif, Konsep
Landasan dan Implementasinya Pada Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan
Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Kencana Predana Media Group.
Sanjaya, W. 2013, Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses
Pendidikan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media.
Sardiman. 2014, Interaki & Motivasi Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT Raja
Grafindo Persada.
Sudjana. 2005, Metode Statistika. Bandung: Penerbit Tarsito.
Sutikno, M. S., 2013, Belajar dan Pembelajaran Upaya Kreatif dalam
Mewujudkan Pembelajaran Yang Berhasil. Lombok: Holistica.
Surya, Y. 1996, Olimpiade Fisika SMU X. Jakarta: Penerbit Primatika
Cipta Ilmu.
Supiyanto. 2007, Fisika Untuk SMA kelas X. Jakarta: Phibeta.