COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES TAUGHT WITH PROBLEM BASED COOPERATIVE LEARNING USING EXPERIMENT AND DEMONSTRATION METHODS ON THERMOCHEMISTRY.

(1)

COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES TAUGHT WITH PROBLEM BASED COOPERATIVE LEARNING

USING EXPERIMENT AND DEMONSTRATION METHODS ON THERMOCHEMISTRY

Baharuddin Yusuf Habiby Harahap IDN. 4113131007

Bilingual Chemistry Education

A THESIS

Submitted To Fulfill Of The Requirement For The Degree Of Sarjana Pendidikan

FACULTY OF MATHEMATIC AND NATURAL SCIENCE STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN 2016

(2)

(3)

BIOGRAPHY

Baharuddin Yusuf Habiby Harahap born in Tanjungbalai, on 02 April 1994. Mother’s name is Khairiah Panjaitan and Father’s name is Drs. Sa'dani Harahap. The author is the fifth child from 6 brothers. In 1999, the author entered Basic School (SDN) 137697 Tanjungbalai, and graduated in 2005. In 2005, the authors continue school in Junior High School (SMPN) 1 Tanjungbalai, and graduated in 2008. In 2008, the authors continue their education in Senior High School (SMAN) 1 Tanjungbalai, and graduated in 2011. In 2011, the author received in the Chemistry Education Study Programm, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, State University Of Medan through SNMPTN (written test). Organization history author during his education at the State University of Medan is mandated as Chairman of FORSIMKA (Chemistry Muslim Silaturrahim Forum) in 2013-2014 and also mandated by the Department of Public Relations (Public Relations) PK KAMMI UNIMED 2012-2015, at the Department of Development Commissioner PD KAMMI Medan 2015-2016, mandated in the field of community service Student Representative Body (BPM) Faculty in 2013-2015. As well as chairman of DPP PERMATA (Central Executive Council of the Association of Tanjungbalai Muslim Students) 2015-2017.

(4)

Comparison Between Students Learning Outcomes Taught With Problem Based Cooperative Learning Using Experiment And

Demonstration Methods On Thermochemistry Baharuddin Yusuf Habiby Harahap

IDN. 4113131007 ABSTRACT

This research purposes to know comparison students learning outcomes taught with problem based cooperative learning using experiment and demonstration methods on material thermochemistry in class of XI IPA SMAIT AL-FITYAN Medan. Population that used in this research all students of XI IPA 2015/2016 Academic Year. Sample that used is all of students in XI IPA SMAIT AL-FITYAN that are first class as experimental class and second class as demonstration class but the all of them using problem based cooperative learning model. Data collection techniques of learning outcomes use test method. Data analysis techniques for hypothesis testing are done by using t-test right side. The result of research show that learning outcomes using problem based cooperative learning with experiment method is higher than demonstration method on material thermochemistry in XI IPA SMAIT AL-FITYAN Medan. Average in experimental class I is 70.5 and experimental II is 62.25.

(5)

FOREWORD

Praise and gratitude writer prayed to Allah, God Almighty, for all the blessings and His blessing that provide health and opportunity to the author so that the study can be completed well in accordance with the planned time.

Thesis entitled "Comparison between Students with Learning Outcomes Taught Using Problem Based Learning Cooperative Demonstration Experiment and Methods on Thermochemistry", arranged to obtain a Sarjana Pendidikan in Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, State University Of Medan.

In this moment I would like to thank: Dr. Wesly Hutabarat, M.Sc, as thesis supervisor who has provided guidance and advice to the author since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis. Thanks also to Mr. Prof. Dr. Albinus Silalahi, M.S, Drs. Eddyanto, Ph.D, and Mrs. Dr. Iis Siti Jahro, M.Si, which has provided input and suggestions from the research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Great thanks delivered to Dra. Ani Sutiani., M.Si as the Academic Supervisor who has provided motivation to the author and to all Mr. and Mrs. Lecturer along with staff Employee Department of Chemistry UNIMED which also plays a role in the settlement process of research and writing of this. A big thank you to the school teachers who have educated writer so I can earn a college degree. Thank to principal, vice-principals, chemistry teacher and students grade XI Science Ikhwan and XI Science Akhwat SMAIT AL-FITYAN field who have helped me during the research process progresses.

In particular I would like to thank my parents as well as a motivator and an inspiration in my life, which fought hard in educating and educating me with all toil stream of sweat that never you showed in the eyes of the author, only the author replied with a small smile beautiful when your child can be a degree. All of this is immortal author offerings for both parents father and mother beloved author. Thank Brother Khairussaid alfathani harahap, S.Pd, Khairrussaid al-amani fauzi harahap, S.Pd, brother Safrina Harahap, AmKeb, Wardiatul fitriani harahap,

(6)

AmKeb, and adinda Siti Rahmah alkhairani harahap which always provide motivation, good support moral and material to the author at the time of study and preparation of the thesis.

Especially also to my friends who are on PERMATA (Eza Boediono, Ridwansyah Sihombing, Mahfuzi Irwan, Agus Salim Daulay, Birro Abawayya, Atika, Aji, Nur Ajijah, Herwin Hidayat, Ali Imran, Aidil, Miya, Sutan, Yolanda, Maulana Ayu, Syafira and Riza), KAMMI (Randy, Fajar, Muhammar, Zaidan, Sha'ban, Tika, Sabda, Siti Rahmadani, Sri Ayuni, Widya Wulandari, Uci Wulandari, Liya Yohana and others), FORSIMKA (Khairul, Nur Ilman, April and Qadafi). Friends PPLT SMAN 1 Tebingtinggi. Not forget to classmates bilingual chemistry in 2011.

The author has attempted the maximum extent possible in the completion of this thesis, but the authors recognize there are still many weaknesses in terms of both content and grammar, to the author of any suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for the perfection of this thesis. Presumably the contents of this paper can be useful to enrich science education.

Medan, December 2015 Author,

(7)

CONTAIN LIST

Page

Approval Sheet i

Biography Abstract Foreward Contain List

ii iii iv vi

Figure List ix

Table List x

Appendix List xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Problem Identification 3

1.3 Problem Statement 3

1.4 Problem Limitation 3

1.5 Research Objective 3

1.6 Research Benefit 4

1.7 Operational Defenition 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Learning and Learning Outcomes 5

2.2 Learning Model 6

2.3 Problem Based Cooperative Learning 6

2.4 Experiment Method 8

2.5 Demonstration Method 9

2.6 Thermochemistry 9

2.7 Design Of Thinking 15

2.8 Research Hypothesis 16

(8)

3.1 Location and Time Of Research 17

3.1.1 Location Of Research 17

3.1.2 Time Of Research 17

3.2 Population and Sample 17

3.2.1 Population Of Research 17

3.2.2 Sample Of Research 18

3.3 Variable Of Research 18

3.3.1 Free Variable 18

3.3.2 Bonded Variable 18

3.3.3 Control Variable 18

3.4 Instrument Of Research 18

3.4.1 Validity Test 3.4.2 Reliability Test 3.4.3 Difficulty Level Test 3.4.4 Different Power 3.5 Research Design

3.6 Research Procedure

3.7 Technique Of Data Tabulation 3.7.1 Normality Test

3.7.2 Homogeneity Test 3.7.3 Hypothesis Test

19 20 21 22 23 23 25 26 26 27

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Research Result

4.1.1. Data Analysis Of Research Instrument 4.1.2. Data Of Research Result

4.2. Analysis Of Data Of Research Result 4.2.1.Normality Test Of Post test 4.2.2. Homogeneity Test Of Post test 4.3. Hypothesis Test

4.4 Discussion

29 29 30 30 32 33 34 34

(9)

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1. Conclusion

5.2. Suggestion

38 38

(10)

FIGURE LIST

Page Figure 2.1 process result product on some reaction

Figure 3.1 Research Design

Figure 4.1 Diagram of Average Result the Pre- Test Figure 4.2 Diagram of Average Result the Post Test Figure 4.3 Diagram of Students activity

15 25 31 32 32

(11)

TABLE LIST

Page Table 3.1 Schedule of Research Activities

Table 3.2 Instrument Specification

Table 3.3 Table of Classification Reliability Test Table 3.4 Category of difficulty level the test item Table 3.5 Research Design

Table 4.1 Average of Pre-test Table 4.2 Average of Post-test Table 4.3 Activity Students Table 4.4 Normality Test Table 4.5 Homogeneity Test Table 4.6 Hypothesis Test

17 19 21 22 23 31 31 32 33 33 34

(12)

APPENDIX LIST

Page

Appendix 1. Sillaby 42

Appendix 2. Lesson Plan 44

Appendix 3 Clue of Problem

Appendix 4a Instrument Test Before Validation Appendix 4b Instrument Test After Validation Appendix 5a Key Of Answer Before Validation Appendix 5b Key Of Answer After Validation Appendix 6 Format Of Answer Sheet

Appendix 7 Students Work Sheet

Appendix 8 Answer Of Students Work Sheet Appendix 9 Observation Sheet

Appendix 10 Calculation Of Validity Test

Appendix 11 Validity Table of Research Instruments Appendix 12 Calculation Of Reliability Test

Appendix 13 Reliability Table of Research Instruments Appendix 14 Calculation Of Difficult Level

Appendix 15 Difficult Level Table of Research Instruments Appendix 16 Calculation Of Different Power

Appendix 17 Different Power Table Of Research Instrument Appendix 18 Conclusion Table Of Research Instrument Analysis Appendix 19 Tabulation Of Learning Outcomes

Appendix 20 Standard Deviation Appendix 21 Normality Test Appendix 22 Homogeneity Test Appendix 23 Hypothesis Test Appendix 24 F Table

Appendix 25 t Table

Appendix 26 Chi square Table

70 89 98 104 105 106 107 121 123 126 129 130 131 132 133 134 137 138 140 142 144 146 147 149 152 153

(13)

Appendix 27 Product Moment Appendix 28 Schedule Of Research Appendix 29 Documentation

Appendix 30 Letters

154 155 156 158

(14)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Chemistry is an experimental science, it cannot be studied only through reading, writing or listening. Chemistry learning is not only about mastering the collection of knowledge in the form fact, concept, principle but also a certain discovery proicess and mastery of procedure or scientific method. Therefore, chemistry learning is not right if it is done only by monotonous lecture, but it needs method which can give a chance to students to do a process of scientific work (Jahro, 2009).

A discussion which had been done in Integrated Islamic Senior High School of AL-FITYAN on June 2015 about the learning process condition in class, it is known that teachers never use other learning methods except lecture method and debriefing in which students are only silent and less active following the learning activity. Moreover, experimental activity is rarely done, whereas demonstration activity is never done in class. For chemistry material, that is found calculation, but the students always find hardships to understand the concept so they need more time to memorize the formulation.

Learning process was very theoretical and less applied the models which had been developed by experts. On the other word, the teachers still rely on conventional models and rarely evaluate effectivity from model which was used to increase students learning outcomes.

Thermochemistry is one of the chemistry materials which is still assumed difficult and confused by students because the concepts need comprehension well until it influences its application into formulas. Thermochemistry introduces students about feedback heat relation to chemistry reaction or change the physical condition. This material needs a suitable learning method for the students. Then a teacher needs to innovate the learning model to overcome students’ difficulty in mastering thermochemistry to achieve their learning target.

(15)

According to a research done by Yusof (2011), using Problem Based Cooperative Learning has been proved to achieve learning effectivity and increase the result of students learning where about 97 % students get increased on its learning result and only 3 % students don’t. Problem based cooperative learning is the result combination between problem based learning and cooperative learning. It is developed by taking the benefits from problem based learning and cooperative learning then they both are combined. In problem based cooperative learning, students face on problem that is related to learning material. By there is a problem that must be solved by students in learning process so as direct students will be active. From the learning activity, the teacher will find growth value and develop on self each student. (Suharta dan Luthan P.L.A, 2013).

In addition to needing a learning model that can give ease and relief to the students, the concepts of thermochemistry can be understood by doing learning activity. Learning activity that can be done in the form of motor activities, i.e do experiment (practical work) or demonstration. In learning activity, all knowledge must be gained by self-observation, self-experience, and self-investigation (Sardiman, 2009). By doing experiment or demonstration, students are expected to observe indications that occurs, analyze and extract the conclusion until they get the concepts not just to memorize it.

Based on research that have been done by Ma’rifatun (2014) concluded that experimental method shows that learning achievement is higher than demonstration method on application POE learning. Sunartadi’s found (2014) that using Numbered Heads Together learning (NHT) with experimental media resulted a higher learning achievement than using Numbered Heads Together learning (NHT) with demonstration media on acid, base and salt. Latifah’s (2014) explained that problem solving method plus experiment is more effective than problem solving method plus demonstration which concernd on students learning achievement material about salt hydrolysis. This is proved significant level of 5%. Based on the explanation, researcher desires to do research with title:

“COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES

(16)

EXPERIMENT AND DEMONSTRATION METHODS ON THERMOCHEMISTRY”.

1.2. Problem identification

Based on background above, it was identified a number of problems, as stated begun:

1. Are model and method applied still conventional?

2. Are Students still less active in learning process because still a teacher-centered learning?

3. Has the result of chemistry learning been maximal? 1.3. Problem Statement

Based on the background, problem identification and limitation, it can be said that the problem statement : is students learning outcomes taught using experiment method higher than students learning outcomes taught using demonstration method in problem based cooperative learning?

1.4. Problem Limitation

In order to keep this research more focused and directed, this research will be limited as follow:

1. The research has been conducted at Integrated Islamic Senior High School, grade XI Science, odd semester of academic year 2015/2016. 2. The topic has been taught is Thermochemistry.

3. The Model has been used is problem based cooperative learning.

4. The Methods have been used are experiment and demonstration method. 5. Learning outcomes have been measured were cognitive and affective. 1.5. Research Objective

Based on the problem statement above, the objective of this investigation is to find out whether students learning outcomes which are taught with experiment method is higher than students learning outcomes which are taught with demonstration based on Problem Based Cooperative Learning.

(17)

1.6. Research Benefit

Results of this research are expected to be useful as follows :

1. Assisting students in the learning process so that the students’ understand thermochemistry and students learning outcomes rise.

2. Giving insightful thinking for teachers about exact model and method in the learning process which can increase students learning outcomes significantly.

3. This research will give good contribution for schools to repair and increase quality of learning process, especially chemistry subject.

4. For the researcher is Getting experience and knowledge about learning model and method that can be used in learning.

5. As a source in doing the next research. 1.7. Operational definition

Some terminologies that are used in this research defined as operational as follows:

1. Learning outcomes are success level of students’ understanding the subject matter at school that will be explained in score from some test results. Result obtained in the form impression which cause changeover to individual as a learning activity (Djamarah, 2006).

2. Problem based cooperative learning is a combination between cooperative learning and problem based learning that apply challenge for students to solve problem, until students ability both cognitive, affective and psychomotoric can develop (Suharta, 2013).

3. Experimental method is a learning that involve students work with things, materials, and laboratory apparatus both as an individual and group (Hamdani, 2011).

4. Demonstration method is learning method by way to demonstrate things, events, rules, steps to do an activity, both as direct and by using learning media which relevan with topic (Istarani, 2012).

5. Thermochemistry is science that discuss about changing calor of substance that serves reaction.

(18)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1. Conclusion

Based on the research that has been done, it can be concluded that students learning outcomes which taught with experiment method is higher than students learning outcomes which taught with demonstration based on Problem Based Cooperative Learning on material Thermochemistry class XI SMAIT AL-FITYAN Medan Academic Year 2015/2016.

5.2. Suggestions

Based on the discussion and conclusions that have been stated above, the suggest the following:

1. For the teachers and prospective teachers are expected to apply Problem Based Cooperative Learning with experiment methods on thermochemistry materials in an effort to improve student learning outcomes.

2. Need to do further research for different subjects that can be used as a step in improving the quality of education, especially in the field of chemistry studies.

3. Need to do further research to determine the influence models and methods learning in this study toward aspect of psychomotor learning outcomes

(19)

REFERENCES

Brady, J.E dan Humiston., (1999), General Chemistry Principle and Structure, 4th Edition, New York: John Willey & Sons,Inc.

Dimyati, dan Mudjiono., (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran,Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.

Djamarah, S.B., (2006), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Bhineka Cipta, Jakarta. Djamarah, S.B., (2011), Psikologi Belajar (Edisi Revisi), Rineka Cipta, Jakarta. Hamdani., (2011), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Pustaka Setia, Bandung.

Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J. and Gunstone, R. (2000). What is this purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 655-675. 2011 The Effect of Laboratory Method on High School Students’ Understanding of the Reaction Rate 516 Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences (WAJES), Dokuz Eylul University Institute, Izmir, Turkey ISSN 1308-8971.

Iskandar., (2009), Psikologi Pendidikan, Gaung Persada (GP), Ciputat. Istarani., (2012), 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Media Persada, Medan.

Jahro, I.S., (2009), Desain Praktikum Alternatif Sederhana (PAS) Wujud Kreatifitas dalam Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Praktikum pada Pembelajaran Kimia, Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, ISSN : 2085-3653.

Kozcu, N. (2006). Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Laboratuar Yöntemiyle Öğretimin Öğrenci Başarısına, Hatırda Tutma Düzeyine ve Duyuşsal Özellikleri Üzerine Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Muğla Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Muğla.

Latifah, S, Sugiharto, Agung N.C.S., (2014), Studi Komparasi Penggunaan Praktikum dan Demonstrasi Pada Metode Problem Solving Terhadap Prestasi Belajar Siswa Materi Hidrolisis Garam Kelas XI Ilmu Alam SMA Al Islam 1 Surakarta Tahun Pelajaran 2010/2011, Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia (JPK), Vol. 3 No. 3, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Lazarowitz, R. and Tamir P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In: Gabel D. (ed) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp 94-128). MacMillan, New York.

(20)

Markow, P.G. and Lonning, R.A. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in college chemistry laboratories: students_ perceptions and effects on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1015-1029.

Ma’rifatun, D, Kus S.M, Suryadi, B.U., (2014), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran

Predict Observe Explaint (POE) Menggunakan Metode Eksperimen Dan Demonstrasi Terhadap Prestasi Belajar Siswa Pada Pokok Bahasan Larutan Penyangga Kelas XI SMA Al Islam 1 Surakarta Tahun Pelajaran 2013/2014, Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia (JPK), Vol. 3 No. 3, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Özmen, H., Demircioğlu, G. and Coll, R. (2009). A comparative study of the effects of a concept mapping enhanced laboratory experience on Turkish

high school students’ understanding of acid-base chemistry. International

Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(1), 1-24. Petrucci, R. H. (2000)., Kimia Dasar Prinsip dan Terapan Modern, Jilid 1,

Jakarta: Erlangga.

Purba, M., (2006), Kimia SMA, Erlangga, Jakarta.

Roestiyah, N.K., (2008), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Cetakan Ketujuh, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.

Sadiman, Arief S., (2009), Media Pendidikan, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta.

Silitonga, P.M., (2011), Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan, FMIPA Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.

Silitonga, P.M., (2011), Statistik, FMIPA Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan. Suharta dan Luthan,P.L.A., (2013), Application of Cooperative Problem-Based

Learning Model to Develop Creativity and Foster Democracy, and Improve Student Learning Outcomes in Chemistry in High School, Journal of Education and Practice, ISSN 2222-1735 Vol.4, No.25. Department of Chemistry, Science Faculty, State University of Medan, Indonesia.

Sudarmo, U., 2014, Kimia untuk SMA/MA Kelas XI, Erlangga, Surakarta

Suprijono, A., (2012), Cooperative Learning Teori dan Aplikasi Paikem, Penerbit Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta.

Sutresna, N., (2012), Advanced Learning Chemistry 2B, Grafindo, Bandung. Tezcan, H. and Bilgin, E. (2004). Liselerde Çözünürlük Konusunun Öğretiminde

Laboratuvar Yönteminin ve Bazı Faktörlerin Öğrenci Başarısına Etkileri. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(3), 175-191.

(21)

Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovativ Progresif: Konsep, Landasan, dan Implementasinya Pada Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP), Penerbit Kencana, Jakarta.

Trianto., (2011), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana, Jakarta.

Venneman, S. S., Westphal, R. M., & Perez, J. K. (2009). “Cheap But Not Too Dirty The Value of Chemistry Demonstrations in Teaching Neuronal

Physiology to Psychology Majors”. European Journal of Social Sciences.

12(1).

Yusof, K.M., Hassan, S.H.A.S.,Jamaluddin, M.Z. dan Harun, N.F., (2011) Kooperatif berbasis masalah, Global Engineering Education Confrence, 6:366-373, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.