Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 302
2. Methods
This evaluation research of concerning the application of guided inquiry learning using mixed methods Cohen Manion, 1994; Sugiyono, 2006. This method is used to collect primary
and secondary data are stimulants. Primary data qualitative obtained through the techniques of data collection using the observation sheets, then interview, and documentation study.
Secondary data quantitative obtained through the results of observations analysis regarding the evaluation of context, input, process, and product.
3. Result and Discussion 3.1 The Results of Context Evaluation
The results of observation and interviews of regarding of the teacher preparation indicators in applying guided inquiry learning model on temperature and heat topic shows that the lesson
plan; teaching materials; student worksheet; media; and evaluation tools test along with answer keys and scoring were a good criteria. In addition, the student preparation indicators in
the learning process at the first meeting as the physical condition, present in class on time, brought notebooks, pens, workbooks, and other supporting materials were enough criteria. In
the second and third meeting were a good criteria. The results of context evaluation are presented in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1 the rresults of ccontext evaluation
Figure 3.1 show that the results of the context evaluation can be said to be on a good criteria. Ssome of the findings still require repairs and improvements such as the apperception
questions in the lesson planwere less touching the daily lives of students, student worksheets were less guiding of students to discover the concepts and principles of physics on based the
experiments facts.
3.2 The Results of Input Evaluation
The results ofoobservation and interviews of regarding the inputevaluation for the lesson plan indicator identity, competency standars aandbasic competency, indicators of achievement
and learning objectives, content, teaching strategy, syntax guided inquiry learning model, media, tools, and learning resources as well as the assessment was a good criteria; the
material characteristics indicator suitabilitylity competency standars, basic competency, indicators of achievement and learning objectives was a very good criteria; and the
instructional media indicators suitability competency standars, basic competency, indicators of achievement and learning objectives, and materials, as well as utilizing laboratory
1 2
3 92
95 90
65 58
71
P e
rc e
n ta
g e
Meeting
Teacher Preparation Student Preparation
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 303
equipment or simple tools was a good criteria. The results of input evaluation arepresented in Figure 2.
Figure 3.2. The Results of InputEvaluation
Figure 3.2 shows that the results of input evaluation are good criteria. The said that because the syntax of guided inquiry learning in the lesson plan is not stated clearly, the same
formulationsof learning objectives are not in sync with the formulation of the test items in the evaluation instrument, the experiments guide on the sudent worksheets in general use
laboratory equipment,the less avail tools simple from the surrounding environment.
3.3 The Results of Process Evaluation
The observation results of the learning implementation on the preliminary activities that include teacher activities to aspects of greeting, invite students to sit, guiding students to pray,
attendancechecking, classroom managing, apperception, provide motivation, and deliver the learning objectives are very good criteria, whereas in the student activities with the aspect
sitting position, responding to greetings, praying, responding to the presence, responding to the apperceptionquestions, responding to motivation, listening, watching, and writing learning
objectives are the sufficient criteria with details at first meeting: 65 of the students are very good criteria and 35 of the students in sufficient criteria; The second meeting: 60 of the
students arevery good criteria and 40 of the students in sufficient criteria; and the third meeting: 71 of the students are very good criteria and 29 of the students in sufficient
criteria.
On the core activities with the aspectsare phenomenonpresent, and guide students toformulate the problem on the phenomenonbased, hypothesis proposed, problem solution plan,
conducting experiments and observations, collecting and organizing data, and analysing the results of experiments to find a concept were very good criteria.
On the cover activities with the aspects are guide students to make inferences, reflect conducted, feedback, and giving the evaluation and homework shows good criteria in the first
meeting. In the second and third meetings increased by very good criteria. The Results of the learning process evaluation are presented in Figure 3.
1 2
3 92
65 93
95 60
90 90
71 95
P e
rc e
n ta
g e
Meeting
Lesson Plan Content
Media
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 304
Figure 3.3 theResults of Learning Process Evaluation
Figure 3.3 describes that the results of the learning process evaluation at good criteria. Some aspects implementation are not maximized, among others, the apperception of delivery less
the students initial knowledge digging, the syntax of guided inquiry learning is not clearly communicated, the subject matter was concluded without involving the students, and not to
give reflection and feedback of the evaluationresults.
3.4 The Results of Product Evaluation
The Results of product evaluation in the scores form of the student learning outcomes with aspects of preparing the gridds and test, tests conducted, test resultsanalyse, and report of the
results showed very good criteria more than 90 were completed. The Scores of student learning outcomes post-test are presented in Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4 theResults of Product Evaluation
1 2
3 92
95 90
65 60
71 93
90 95
85 96
93
P e
rc e
n ta
g e
Meeting
Teacher introduction activity Student introduction activity
Core activity Cover activity
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
1 3
5 7
9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
S co
re
Number of Students
Proceedings of MatricesFor IITTEP – ICoMaNSEd 2015
ISBN: 978-602-74204-0-3
Physics Education Page 305
Figure 3.4 shows that almost all the students are in their completion criteria. However, some of the findings of weakness include the formulation of test items are need to be synchronized
with the formula learning objectives in the lesson plan and are also accompanied with the answer key and scoring.
4. Conclusion