THE DIFERENCES OF STUDENT`S ACHIEVEMENT AND CRITICAL THINKING BY IMPLEMENTING PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL) AND PROCESS ORIENTED GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING (POGIL) ON SOLUBILITY AND SOLUBILITY PRODUCT TOPIC.
(2)
BIOGRAPHY
Siti Fatimah was born in Sambirejo on March 28th 1993. Her father’s name is Nasip and her mother’s name is Tunem. The writer is the first child and have 2 sisters and 1 brother. In 1999 the writer entered the Elementary School in SDN 056607 Sambirejo and graduated in 2005. In 2005 the writer continued her study in MTs Sabilal Akhyar Kwala Begumit and graduated in 2008. In 2008 the writer continued her study in MAN Binjai and graduated in 2011. In 2011 the writer was accepted in Chemistry Department, Bilingual Chemistry Education Study Program, Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan and pass the examination in 2015.
(3)
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Alhamdulillah, praise and gratitude to Almighty God, Allah SWT, for all the graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to writer so the writer can finish this thesis can be finished well.
The title of this thesis is “ The Difference of Student’s Achievement and Problem Based Learning By Implementing Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product Topic ”. This research is done in MAN Binjai in academic year 2014/2015 that prepared to get Sarjana Pendidikan degree of Chemistry Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, State University of Medan.
In this opportunity, a million thanks are delivered to Mrs. Dra. Ani Sutiani, M.Si as thesis supervisor in written of this thesis, for big support, advice, guidance, suggestion and constructive comments from beginning until end of completing this research. Great thanks are also addressed to Mr. Dr. Zainuddin Muchtar, M.Si, Mr. Dr. Marham Sitorus, M.Si, and Mr. Agus Kembaren, S.Si., M.Si as examiner lecturer who had given advice and suggestion to completing this thesis. Thanks also goes to Dr. Wesly Hutabarat, M.Sc as academic supervisor who had motivated and guidance the writer during lecturing, Prof. Dr. Retno Dwi Suyani, M.Si as instrument and observation sheet validator, Prof. Dr. rer. nat Binari Manurung, M.Si as coordinator of Bilingual Program, Agus Kembaren, S.Si,M.Si as Head of Chemistry Department, Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D as a dean of FMIPA UNIMED and all lecturer and staff in chemistry department.
The writer also like to say thanks to Mrs. Drs. Nurkhalisah, MG, M.Ag as a headmaster of MAN Binjai, Mr. Surya Sudariyanto, S.Pd as WKM curriculum, Mr. Mufti Lubis, S.Pd as chemistry teacher for his help and guidance when do the research and also for the all teacher, staff administration, and students in MAN Binjai who had given oportunity and helpful to the writer when do the research.
(4)
v
The writer also like to say thanks to Mr. Dra. Safrimi, M.Pd as a headmaster of SMAN 2 Medan, Mr. Manarsar Manurung, S.Pd as chemistry teacher for his help and guidance when do validation instrument and also for the all teacher, staff administration, and students in SMAN 2 Medan who had given oportunity and helpful to the writer when do validation instrument test.
The special gratitude to my beloved family, special deepest gratitude and appreciation to my lovely father Nasip, my lovely mother Tunem, and my lovely sisters and brothers Nur Paras Wati, Sri Fadilah and Muhammad Ridho. A billion thanks to my parents for their caring, love, prayer, motivation, support, and education.and of course, thank you both for your constant support through the ups and downs of my academic career. It has been bumpy at times, but your confidence in me has enhanced my ability to get through it all and succeed in the end. I can’t adequately express how thankful I am. And for you my sisters and brothers, thanks for everything, we grew up together and you have colored my life, i’m really lucky to have brothers like both of you.
The writer also express thanks to my best friend, Sinta Puspita Sary and big family of CESP’11, thanks for support, help, motivation and enjoyable class ever, full of ambition but full of fun, Bayu, Haposan, Jori, Angela, Angeline, Anggun, Cholida, Debby, Desi, Evina, Fatma, Hesti, Intan, Juliani, Juwita, Lanita, Liesa, Mariani, Nova, Poppy, Rhone, Riris, Ricki, Rusdi, Ruth, Yolanda, and Yuni. Thanks for this 4 years guys and let’s go to the next ambition. Thanks to my friends of boarding house, Mega, Riska, Ria, Igen, Ulan, Rani, Risa, Nadia dan Yuli for laugh, happiness, sadness and also always support me. And thanks for all people, whose name can’t be mentioned, who always support me. I love you all.
Medan, 23 June 2015 Writer,
Siti Fatimah ID. 4113131072
(5)
iii
THE DIFFERENCES OF STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT AND CRITICAL THINKING BY IMPLEMENTING PROBLEM BASED LEARNING
(PBL) AND PROCESS ORIENTED GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING (POGIL) ON SOLUBILITY AND
SOLUBILITY PRODUCT TOPIC
Siti Fatimah (4113131072) ABSTRACT
The main objective of this research is to know the difference of problem based learning model and process oriented guided inquiry learning model toward student’s achievement and critical thinking. This research was conducted in MAN Binjai on the second semester. The sample that is used are the students in grade XI in two classes, one class as experimental class I and the other as experimental class II. The research instrument that is used in this research consist of evaluation test and observation sheet. The research instrument in this research are 20 multiple choice questions from 30 questions were validated by validator and students, with rcount > rtable 0.361, state that it was reliable with high category. The data of research had been analyzed by using normality test and homogeneity test, which is shown that data gain are normal distributed and homogenous. It is a requirement to do hypothesis test. Based on hypothesis test of hypothesis I using t-test was gotten value of significancecount (0,009) < significant level (0.05), so the Ha1 is accepted and Ho1 is rejected. It means that there is differences in student’s achievement that taught by implementing PBL with student’s achievement that is taught by implementing POGIL on solubility and solubility product topic. In hypothesis test of hypothesis II using t-test was gotten value of significancecount (0,175) > significant level (0.05), so the Ha2 is rejected and Ho2 is accepted. It means that there is no differences in student’s critical thinking that taught by implementing PBL with student’s critical thinking that is taught by implementing POGIL on solubility and solubility product topic.
Keyword: Problem Based Learning (PBl), Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL), Student’s Achievement, Critical Thinking
(6)
vi
CONTENTS LIST
Page
Approval Sheet i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Acknowledgment iv
Contents List vi
Figures List x
Tables List xi
Formula List xii
Appendixs List xiii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Research Background 1
1.2. Problem Identification 4
1.3. Problem Limitation 4
1.4. Problem Formulation 5
1.5. Research Objective 5
1.6. Research Benefit 6
1.7. Operational Defenition 6
CHAPTER II LITERATURE STUDY 8
2.1. Theoritical Framework 8
2.1.1. Definiton of Learning 8
2.1.2. Learning Outcomes 9
2.1.3. Factors Affecting The Learning Outcomes 12
2.1.4. Critical Thinking Skill 13
2.1.5. The Learning Model 17
2.1.6. Problem Based Learning Model (PBL) 17
2.1.6.1. The Characteristics of Problem Based Learning Model 18
(7)
vii
2.1.6.3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Problem Based Learning
Model 22
2.1.7. Guided Inquiry Learning Model 23
2.1.8. Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Model (POGIL) 24
2.1.8.1. Parts of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Model (POGIL) 26
2.1.8.2. The Steps of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Model 27
2.1.8.3. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Model 28
2.2. Description of Material about Solubility and Solubility Product 28
2.2.1. Definiton and Unit of Solubility 29
2.2.2. Constanta of Solubility Product 29
2.2.3. The Relationship between Solubility (s) and Constanta of Solubility Product 31
2.2.4. The Effect of Common Ion toward Solubility 33
2.2.5. Solubility and pH 35
2.2.5.1. pH and Solubility of Base 35
2.2.5.2. pH and Solubility of Salt 36
2.2.6. Precipitation Reaction 36
2.3. Conceptual Framework 38
2.4. Hypothesis 40
2.4.1. Hypothesis for Problem Formulation I 40
2.4.2. Hypothesis for Problem Formulation II 41
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODS 42
3.1. Location and Time of Research 42
3.2. Population and Sample of Research 42
3.2.1. Population of Research 42
3.2.2. Sample of Research 42
3.3. Variable of Research 42
(8)
viii
3.4.1. Test Instrument 43
3.4.2. Non-Test Instrument 48
3.5. Design of Research 49
3.6. Technique of Data Collecting 50
3.6.1. Preparation Stage of Research 50
3.6.2. Implementation Stage of Research 51
3.6.3. Final Stage of Research 51
3.7. Technique of Data Analysis 54
3.7.1. Normality Test 54
3.7.2. Homogeneity Test 54
3.7.3. Normalized Gain 54
3.7.4. Hypothesis Test 55
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION 57
4.1. Research Result 57
4.1.1. Data Analysis of Research Instrument 57
4.1.1.1. Validity Test 57
4.1.1.2. Reliability Test 58
4.1.1.3. Difficulty Level 58
4.1.1.4. Discrimination Index 58
4.1.2. Data Description of Result 59
4.1.2.1. Student’s Achievement 60
4.1.2.2. Observation Sheet Data of Student’s Critical Thinking 60
4.1.3. Data Analysis of Research Result 61
4.1.3.1. Normality Test of Student’s Achievement 61
4.1.3.2. Normality Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 62
4.1.3.3. Homogeneity Test of Student’s Achievement 63
4.1.3.4. Homogeneity Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 63
4.1.3.5. Normalized Gain of Student’s Achievement 64
4.1.3.6. Hypothesis Test 65
4.1.3.6.1. Hypothesis Test of Hypothesis 1 65
(9)
ix
4.2. Research Discussion 67
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 71
5.1. Conclusion 71
5.2. Suggestion 71
(10)
xi
TABLES LIST
Page
Table 2.1 Indicator of Critical Thinking Skills 14
Table 2.2 Steps of Problem Based Learning Model 21
Table 2.3 Steps of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning 27
Table 3.1 Lattice of Test Instrument 44
Table 3.2 Criteria of Validation Analysis 45
Tabel 3.3 Lattice Sheet of Observations 48
Tabel 3.4 The Design of Research 49
Tabel 3.5 The Percentage of the value of students attitude 56
Table 4.1 Result Testing of Question That is Used 59
Table 4.2 Student’s Achievement Data 60
Table 4.3 Observation Sheet Data of Student’s Critical Thinking 61
Table 4.4 Normality Test of Student’s Achievement 62
Tabel 4.5 Normality Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 62
Tabel 4.6 Homogeneity Test of Student’s Achievement 63
Tabel 4.7 Homogeneity Test of Student’s Critical Thinking 63
Tabel 4.8 Normalized Gain of Student’s Achievement 64
Tabel 4.9 Hypothesis Test of Hypothesis 1 66
(11)
xii
FORMULA LIST
Page
Formula 2.1 Solubility 29
Formula 3.1 Validity Test 45
Formula 3.2 Reliability Test 46
Formula 3.3 Difficulty Level 47
Formula 3.4 Discrimination Index 47
Formula 3.5 Normalized Gain 54
(12)
x
FIGURES LIST
Page
(13)
xii
FORMULA LIST
Page
Formula 2.1 Solubility 29
Formula 3.1 Validity Test 45
Formula 3.2 Reliability Test 46
Formula 3.3 Difficulty Level 47
Formula 3.4 Discrimination Index 47
Formula 3.5 Normalized Gain 54
(14)
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1. Research Background
Education is a container in which there is interaction between learners and educators and is intended to achieve the life and development of the nation and the state. In addition there are other goals to be achieved from such interactions are developing students' potentials both of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor in learning.
An education is not only concerned with an end result, but the most important is the process, in which the students can understand the process and understand the purpose of learning. The role of the teacher is very important in the learning process where the teacher is requested to create an active learning situation, creative, innovative, effective, and fun in the process of learning activities.
In fact, the learning process in the classroom activities are still centered on the teacher (teacher centered), teacher only requires students to memorize concepts and memorizing formulas. Students just sit, listen, record and memorize concepts. Students are not invited to actively follow the teaching, so that learning becomes unattractive and students become bored. Teachers do not provide an opportunity for students to discover concepts, develop the ability to process thought, life skills and cooperation attitudes of students when learn.
Meanwhile, according to Jahro (2009), chemistry is an experimental science, can’t be learned only through reading, writing or listening only. Studied chemistry not only master the body of knowledge in the form of facts, concepts, principles, but also a process of discovery and mastery of procedures or the scientific method.
Solubility and solubility product is a chemical material involves chemical reactions and chemical calculations. This material is also related to the material before them stoichiometry, reaction equations, chemical equilibrium, and the pH of the solution. If the student is still weak in understanding the last material so the
(15)
2
student will have difficulty to understand the material further. Thus resulting in lower student learning outcomes in this matter.
The writer found the same opinion when holding observation in MAN Binjai. From interviews with chemistry teachers (Mr. Surya Sudariyanto S.Pd, Mrs. Herlinawati S.Pd and Mr. Mufti Lubis S.Pd) at the school, said that many students who are less active in the learning process. It is possible that the learning process interesting and less monotonous. The above conditions have implications on the low learning achievement chemistry and attitude of students' critical thinking in the study.
It required an action that can improve the learning process and expected an increase in learning outcomes. One way that can be done to overcome the above problems is to use a learning model that centered to student (student centered learning) and also can develop critical thinking in study groups. Critical thinking is important, because it allows one to analyze, assess, explain and develop thoughts, so as to minimize the risk to adopt a false belief, and think and act by using the false belief. The learning model that can be used is the learning model of problem based learning and learning model of process-oriented Guided Inquiry Learning.
According to Killey (2005), learning model of problem-based learning has advantages in terms of helping students choose a problem, defining the problem, solve problems, help develop critical thinking, oral and written communication and develop an attitude of cooperation within the group. In the teaching model of problem-based learning students are more motivated to work harder than the conventional teaching where students very little participation. The learning model of problem based learning if developed will improve interpersonal skills, critical thinking, search information, communication, respect and teamwork of students. In addition to teaching model of problem-based learning, the model of Process Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning (POGIL) is a learning strategy that provides an opportunity to teach both content and process skills simultaneously. POGIL emphasize that learning is an interactive process to think carefully, discuss ideas, refining the understanding, practice skills, which reflects on the progress,
(16)
3
and assess performance (Richard, et.all. 2009).
POGIL approach is one of the guided-inquiry. POGIL use guided-inquiry, learning cycle of exploration, discovery and application of the concept is the basis for many of the ingredients are well designed for students and used to guide students in building new knowledge. It's importants that teacher act as facilitator, know in advance the results of the experiment (Hanson, 2006).
POGIL learning strategy has strengths in designing the team learned that the teacher as a facilitator rather than as a source of information, students are guided through exploration to build understanding, using discipline content to facilitate the development of important skills including the higher level thinking and the ability to learn and to apply knowledge in new contexts . So that students are able to develop soft skills, such as communication skills, critical thinking with less careful, responsible, and work together.
Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the model of Problem Based Learning and process oriented guided inquiry learning to improve learning outcomes. Results of research conducted by Mutaharoh (2006), concluded that students taught by using the model of Problem Based Learning (PBL) has an influence on the chemistry student learning outcomes when compared with conventional learning models. Based on the results of the calculation of the t-test at a significance level of α = 0.05 was obtained tcount > ttable (4.06 > 2.00).
Correspondingly, Rizqa (2013), concluded that the learning model Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning effect on student learning outcomes. The final result obtained that tcount > ttable (2,67 > 1,67). And the results of research conducted by Adnan (2014), concluded that there are differences in learning outcomes of students that learned chemistry using the model of Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). The final result obtained that tcount > ttable is (2.847 > 2.002).
Thus, learning outcomes are taught with Process Oriented Guided learning model Inquiry Learning has an influence on student learning outcomes. The most striking difference in Process Oriented Guided learning model Inquiry Learning
(17)
4
and Problem Based Learning lies in the problem set by the teacher. The learning model POGIL given little information is then the teacher asking questions so that students who seek and find answers that the proposed teacher independently. While the Problem Based Learning which gives teachers the existing problems in everyday life related to the subject matter. Students in demand for critical thinking in addressing the problem that is given to teachers solve the problem that is given and that allows the student is directed to solving these problems with a solution to the problem is given.
Based on this background, the authors are interested in making the study titled “The Differences of Student’s Achievement and Critical Thinking By Implementing Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) On Solubility and Solubility Product Topic”. 1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the above background of the study, the problems identification in the study was:
a. Students tend to be passive and monotonous in the learning process. b. In schools, teachers still use a teacher-centered learning and less variation
of learning model in the chemistry learning process .
c. Student’s achievement in learning chemistry is still low. It can be seen from the student’s score in final exam is less than 75
d. Student’s critical thinking in the learning process was still low, so that the tendency to participate in teaching-learning process is less.
1.3. Problem Limitation
The Problem Limitation of this research are:
1. The object of research is student of science grade XI in MAN Binjai at Academic Year 2014/2015.
(18)
5
2. The learning model used in this research is Problem Based Learning (PBL) for the experimental class I and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) for the experimental class II.
3. The material that discuss in this research is limited to the subject of solubility and solubility product.
4. Student’s achievement in this research can be divided into two, namely the cognitive and affective. Cognitive domains measured by the Bloom's taxonomy C1 (Knowledge), C2 (Comprehension), C3 (Application), C4 (Analysis) and affective domains in this research of student’s critical thinking skills in learning groups.
1.4. Problem Formulation
Based on the background of research and the scope of research above, the Problem Formulation of this Research are:
1. Is there a significant difference between student’s achievement that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic?
2. Is there a significant difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic?
1.5.Research Objective
The Research Objective of this research are:
1. To know there is a significant difference between student’s achievement that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
(19)
6
2. To know there is a significant difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
1.6.Research Benefit
The Benefits expected from the results of this Research are:
1. For Researchers/Students, the results of the research will add knowledge, ability and experience to improve their competence as a teacher candidate. 2. For Chemistry Teacher, the results of research will provide input on the use
of Problem Based Learning (PBL) model and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) model in the teaching of chemistry, especially on the subject of solubility and solubility product.
3. For Students, this Research is expected to increase the knowledge and experience of student learning.
4. For Schools, this Research is expected to contribute to improving student achievement in schools so as to improve the quality of teaching chemistry at MAN Binjai
5. For the Next Researcher, this Research can be used as a reference in conducting further research.
1.7.Operational Definition
In order to avoid different interpretations in understanding any existing variable in this study, it was necessary given the operational definition to clarify it. The operational definitions of research are:
1. The learning results were essentially the changes that occur in a person after the end of the learning activities. Benjamin S. Bloom (1979) classifies learning outcomes in three domains, namely: cognitive, affective domain, and psychomotoric domain. Cognitive domain includes the ability development of intellectual skills (knowledge) with the levels which
(20)
7
Knowledge (C1), Comprehension (C2), Application (C3), Analysis (C4), Syntesis (C5), and Evaluation (C6). In this study, the observed learning outcome includes two aspects: cognitive domains consist of C1 through C4 and affective domain includes aspects of critical thinking skills and attitudes of students in cooperative learning groups.
2. According to Surya (2013) critical thinking is an active process that includes regular or systematic way of thinking fatherly understand more in depth information, so as to form a belief correctness of information obtained or opinions expressed. Active process was indicated a desire or motivation to find answers and reach an understanding. In this study measured students' critical thinking skills through observation sheet attitude assessment.
3. A learning method of Problem-based Learning (PBL) is one of the alternatives from the many innovative methods are applied in the process of teaching and learning activities to help students in processing the information that has been so in her mind and put together their own knowledge about the social world and beyond (Kusnadi, et.all, 2013) 4. A POGIL learning activity engages students, promotes restructuring of
information and knowledge, and helps students develop understanding by employing the learning cycle in guided inquiry activities. The learning cycle consists of three stages or phases: exploration, concept invention or formation, and application (Hanson, 2006).
5. The matter of solubility and solubility product is one of the lesson in senior high school chemistry class XI. Topic solubility and solubility product includes definition and unit of solubility, Constanta of solubility product (Ksp), the relationship between solubility (s) and Constanta of solubility product (Ksp), the effect of common ion toward solubility, solubility and pH, pH and solubility of base, pH and solubility of salts, and precipitation reaction.
(21)
71
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the research that have been done, can be concluded that:
1. There is a significant difference between student’s achievement that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
2. There is no significant difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
5.2. Suggestion
1. For chemistry teacher, they should make innovation in teaching of chemistry, one of the ways is by apply Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning model and Problem Based Learning model because this models can improve student’s achievement and critical thinking in chemistry. 2. There is innovation to do Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning
model and Problem Based Learning model on the teaching of other topic in chemistry.
(22)
72
REFERENCES
Abraham, M. R., (1989), Inquiry and the Learning Cycle Approach, International, Journal Of Chemists Guide to EffectiveTeaching, 1, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall.
Alma, B., & Hurriyati, R., (2008), Manajemen Corporate & Strategi Pemasaran
Jasa Pendidikan, Alfabeta, Bandung
Arends, R.I.,(1997), Classroom Instructional and Management, New York, Mc
Graw Hill Book companies, Inc.
Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I., Fallon, H., (2005), Handbook of Enquiry and
Problem-Based Learning. AISHE and CELT, NUI Galway, Galway.
Barrows, H. and Tamblyn, R. (1980), Problem-based Learning: An Approach to
Medical Education. Springer, New York.
Barthlow, M. J., (2011), The Effectiveness Of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry
Learning To Reduce Alternate Conceptions In Secondary Chemistry,
Liberty University, USA.
Bloom, B. S., (1979), Taxonomy of Education Objectivities, The Classification of
Education Goal, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, Longman Inc, USA
Creswell, J.W., (2012), Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Qualitative and quantitative Research, Pearson
Education. Inc., Boston.
Dike, D., (2010), Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa dengan Model TASC (Thinking Actively in a Social Context) pada Pembelajaran IPS, Jurnal Penelitian 1(1): 15-29.
Dimyanti and Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, PT. Rineka Cipta,
(23)
73
Ennis, R.H., (1985), Goal Critical Thinking Curriculum. Dalam Costa, A.L. (Ed): Developing of Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Developing (ASCD).
Fogarty, R., (1997), Problem-based learning and other curriculum models for the
multiple intelligences classroom, Arlington Heights, Illionis: Sky Light.
Hanson, D., (2006), Instructors Guide to Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry
Learning, Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.
Isjoni, H., (2010), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan
Komunikasi Antar Peserta Didik, Pustaka Belajar, Yogyakarta.
Jahro, I.S., (2009), Analisis Penerapan Metode Praktikum pada Pembelajaran
Ilmu Kimia di Sekolah Menengah Atas, FMIPA Unimed, Medan, Jurnal
Pendidikan Matematika dan Sains, ISSN: 1907-7157, Vol 4 No. 1: 29-34.
Killey, M., (2005), Problem-Based Learning, Centre for Learning and
Professional Development, University of Adelaide, Australia.
Kothari, C.R., (1990), Research Methodology: Methods and Technique, New Age
International (P) Ltd., New Delhi.
Kusnadi, Masykuri, M., and Mulyani, S., (2013), Pembelajaran Kimia Dengan Problem Based Learning (PBL) Menggunakan Laboratorium Real dan Virtual Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Matematik Dan Kemampuan Berpikir
Abstrak Siswa, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Jurnal Inkuri,
ISSN: 2252-7893, Vol 2 No. 2: 163-172
Marcut, I., (2005), Critical Thinking-applied to the methodology of teaching
(24)
74
Mutaharoh, (2011), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Berdasarkan Masalah
(Problem Based Learning) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
Purba, M., (2006), Kimia Untuk SMA Kelas XI, Jakarta: Erlangga.
Purwanto, M. N., (2009), Prinsip-Prinsip Dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran, PT
Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung.
Richard S. M., Frank J. C. and Troy W., (2009), POGIL: Process-Oriented
Guided-Inquiry Learning, Chemists’ Guide too Effective Teaching Volume II, 99-101, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, USA.
Riyanto, Y., (2009), Paradigma Baru Pembelajran: Sebagai Referensi Bagi
Guru/Pendidik dalam Implementasi Pembelajaran Yang Efektif dan Berkualitas, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
Rizqa, M., (2013), Efektivitas Model Pembelajaran Inquiry Terbimbing (Guided
Inquiry) Menggunakan Lembar Kerja Siswa Di SMA N 1 Bojong Tahun 2012/2013, Skripsi, FMIPA, IKIP Semarang.
Rosidah, (2013), Keefektifan Model Pembelajaran POGIL Berbantuan Lembar
Kegiatan Peserta Didik (LKPD) Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, Skripsi, FMIPA, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang
Sabri, A., (2007), Strategi Belajar dan Micro Teaching, Quantum Teaching, PT
Ciputat Press, Ciputat.
Sanjaya, W., (2006), Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses
Pendidikan, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi, PT. Rineka
(25)
75
Sudjana, N., (2009), Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, PT Remaja
Rosdakarya, Bandung
Surya, H., (2013), Cara Belajar Orang Genius, PT Elex Medis Komputindo,
Jakarta.
Trevathan, J., and Trina M., (2013), Towards Online Delivery of Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Techniques in Information Technology
Courses, Journal of Learning Design, Vol. 6 No. 2 : 1-11
Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Kencana
Prenada Media Group, Jakarta
Widyaningsih, S. Y., dkk., (2012), Model MFI Dan POGIL Ditinjau dari Aktivitas
Belajar dan Kreativitas Siswa Terhadap Prestasi Belajar, Jurnal Inkuiri,
(1)
7
Knowledge (C1), Comprehension (C2), Application (C3), Analysis (C4), Syntesis (C5), and Evaluation (C6). In this study, the observed learning outcome includes two aspects: cognitive domains consist of C1 through C4 and affective domain includes aspects of critical thinking skills and attitudes of students in cooperative learning groups.
2. According to Surya (2013) critical thinking is an active process that includes regular or systematic way of thinking fatherly understand more in depth information, so as to form a belief correctness of information obtained or opinions expressed. Active process was indicated a desire or motivation to find answers and reach an understanding. In this study measured students' critical thinking skills through observation sheet attitude assessment.
3. A learning method of Problem-based Learning (PBL) is one of the alternatives from the many innovative methods are applied in the process of teaching and learning activities to help students in processing the information that has been so in her mind and put together their own knowledge about the social world and beyond (Kusnadi, et.all, 2013) 4. A POGIL learning activity engages students, promotes restructuring of
information and knowledge, and helps students develop understanding by employing the learning cycle in guided inquiry activities. The learning cycle consists of three stages or phases: exploration, concept invention or formation, and application (Hanson, 2006).
5. The matter of solubility and solubility product is one of the lesson in senior high school chemistry class XI. Topic solubility and solubility product includes definition and unit of solubility, Constanta of solubility product (Ksp), the relationship between solubility (s) and Constanta of solubility product (Ksp), the effect of common ion toward solubility, solubility and pH, pH and solubility of base, pH and solubility of salts, and precipitation reaction.
(2)
71 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the research that have been done, can be concluded that:
1. There is a significant difference between student’s achievement that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
2. There is no significant difference between student’s critical thinking skills that is taught by using Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on Solubility and Solubility Product topic.
5.2. Suggestion
1. For chemistry teacher, they should make innovation in teaching of chemistry, one of the ways is by apply Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning model and Problem Based Learning model because this models can improve student’s achievement and critical thinking in chemistry. 2. There is innovation to do Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning
model and Problem Based Learning model on the teaching of other topic in chemistry.
(3)
72
REFERENCES
Abraham, M. R., (1989), Inquiry and the Learning Cycle Approach, International, Journal Of Chemists Guide to EffectiveTeaching, 1, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall.
Alma, B., & Hurriyati, R., (2008), Manajemen Corporate & Strategi Pemasaran
Jasa Pendidikan, Alfabeta, Bandung
Arends, R.I.,(1997), Classroom Instructional and Management, New York, Mc Graw Hill Book companies, Inc.
Barrett, T., Mac Labhrainn, I., Fallon, H., (2005), Handbook of Enquiry and Problem-Based Learning. AISHE and CELT, NUI Galway, Galway. Barrows, H. and Tamblyn, R. (1980), Problem-based Learning: An Approach to
Medical Education. Springer, New York.
Barthlow, M. J., (2011), The Effectiveness Of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning To Reduce Alternate Conceptions In Secondary Chemistry, Liberty University, USA.
Bloom, B. S., (1979), Taxonomy of Education Objectivities, The Classification of Education Goal, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, Longman Inc, USA Creswell, J.W., (2012), Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Qualitative and quantitative Research, Pearson Education. Inc., Boston.
Dike, D., (2010), Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa dengan Model TASC (Thinking Actively in a Social Context) pada Pembelajaran IPS, Jurnal Penelitian 1(1): 15-29.
Dimyanti and Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, PT. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta
(4)
Ennis, R.H., (1985), Goal Critical Thinking Curriculum. Dalam Costa, A.L. (Ed): Developing of Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Developing (ASCD). Fogarty, R., (1997), Problem-based learning and other curriculum models for the
multiple intelligences classroom, Arlington Heights, Illionis: Sky Light. Hanson, D., (2006), Instructors Guide to Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry
Learning, Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.
Isjoni, H., (2010), Pembelajaran Kooperatif Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi Antar Peserta Didik, Pustaka Belajar, Yogyakarta.
Jahro, I.S., (2009), Analisis Penerapan Metode Praktikum pada Pembelajaran Ilmu Kimia di Sekolah Menengah Atas, FMIPA Unimed, Medan, Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Sains, ISSN: 1907-7157, Vol 4 No. 1: 29-34.
Killey, M., (2005), Problem-Based Learning, Centre for Learning and Professional Development, University of Adelaide, Australia.
Kothari, C.R., (1990), Research Methodology: Methods and Technique, New Age International (P) Ltd., New Delhi.
Kusnadi, Masykuri, M., and Mulyani, S., (2013), Pembelajaran Kimia Dengan Problem Based Learning (PBL) Menggunakan Laboratorium Real dan Virtual Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Matematik Dan Kemampuan Berpikir Abstrak Siswa, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Jurnal Inkuri, ISSN: 2252-7893, Vol 2 No. 2: 163-172
Marcut, I., (2005), Critical Thinking-applied to the methodology of teaching mathematics, Educatia Mathematica, Vol 1. Nr 1, (2005), 57-66
(5)
74
Mutaharoh, (2011), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Berdasarkan Masalah (Problem Based Learning) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
Purba, M., (2006), Kimia Untuk SMA Kelas XI, Jakarta: Erlangga.
Purwanto, M. N., (2009), Prinsip-Prinsip Dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran, PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung.
Richard S. M., Frank J. C. and Troy W., (2009), POGIL: Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning, Chemists’ Guide too Effective Teaching Volume II, 99-101, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458, USA.
Riyanto, Y., (2009), Paradigma Baru Pembelajran: Sebagai Referensi Bagi Guru/Pendidik dalam Implementasi Pembelajaran Yang Efektif dan Berkualitas, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
Rizqa, M., (2013), Efektivitas Model Pembelajaran Inquiry Terbimbing (Guided Inquiry) Menggunakan Lembar Kerja Siswa Di SMA N 1 Bojong Tahun 2012/2013, Skripsi, FMIPA, IKIP Semarang.
Rosidah, (2013), Keefektifan Model Pembelajaran POGIL Berbantuan Lembar Kegiatan Peserta Didik (LKPD) Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, Skripsi, FMIPA, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang Sabri, A., (2007), Strategi Belajar dan Micro Teaching, Quantum Teaching, PT
Ciputat Press, Ciputat.
Sanjaya, W., (2006), Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi, PT. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
(6)
Sudjana, N., (2009), Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung
Surya, H., (2013), Cara Belajar Orang Genius, PT Elex Medis Komputindo, Jakarta.
Trevathan, J., and Trina M., (2013), Towards Online Delivery of Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning Techniques in Information Technology Courses, Journal of Learning Design, Vol. 6 No. 2 : 1-11
Trianto, (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta
Widyaningsih, S. Y., dkk., (2012), Model MFI Dan POGIL Ditinjau dari Aktivitas Belajar dan Kreativitas Siswa Terhadap Prestasi Belajar, Jurnal Inkuiri, ISSN: 2252-7893, Vol 1, No 3,UNS, Surakarta