THE EFFECT OF DISCOVERY LEARNING MODEL TOWARD STUDENT HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILL IN DYNAMIC ELECTRICITY SUBJECT MATTER AT SMA RAKSANA MEDAN A.Y. 2014/2015.

THE EFFECT OF DISCOVERY LEARNING MODEL TOWARD
STUDENT ’S HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILL IN
DYNAMIC ELECTRICITY SUBJECT MATTER AT
SMA RAKSANA MEDAN A.Y. 2014/2015

By :
Kristin Natalia T
ID Number. 4113322005
Bilingual Physics Education Program

THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan

PHYSICS DEPARTMNET
FACULTY OF MATHEMATIC AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2015

iv

PREFACE
Praise to God Almighty for all His bless and grace so that the study can be
completed well in accordance with the planned time. This thesis titled "The Effect
of Discovery Learning Model Student’s Toward Higher Order Thinking Skills in
Dynamic Electricity Subject Matter at High School a giant field Academic Year
2014/2015". It’s requirement of a Bachelor's degree in Physical Education,
Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, State University of Medan.
In this moment I would like to thank to Prof. Dr. Sahyar, MS., M.M. as
thesis supervisor who has provided guidance and advice to the author since the
beginning of the writing of the proposal until the end of this thesis. Thanks also
submitted to Prof. Dr. Nurdin Bukit, M.Si as a lecturer comparison I, Sir Alkhafi
Maas Siregar, M.Si as a lecturer comparison II, and Mam Rita Juliani, S.Si., M.Si
as comparison lecturer III. Thanks also to Drs. J H Panggabean,, as academic
lecturer and to all the faculty and staff employees of the Department of Physics
Faculty Unimed who have helped me to finish this thesis. Thank you to Mr. H.
Situmorang as Headmaster in SMA Raksana Medan that has allowed the authors
to conduct research.
Especially the author said thank you so much to father D. Tondang and my
beloved mother B.Sinaga, my sister Yenny Agustina Tondang, my brother Jeffry
Sahputra Tondang, my little brother Maykel Budianto Tondang which has given

support and meet all the needs and affection to the author so author can finish the
study. And do not forget to my friends (Billingual Physics, 2011), especially for
my best friend Evi Mungkur and Mia Manik who always helped me in difficult
condition and we write our thesis together and give support each other. Not forget
to my PPL’s team in Sibolga 2014 for the contributed to make happy when writer
feel bored and my students in Matauli that support me from social media and
many more that can’t be mentioned here.

v

The author has tried as much as possible in the completion of this thesis,
but the authors recognize there are still many weaknesses in terms of content, as
well as grammar, author needs any suggestions and constructive criticism from
readers for the perfection of this thesis. This thesis would be beneficial to the
reader.

Medan, June 2015
Writer

Kristin Natalia Tondang

iii

THE EFFECT OF DISCOVERY LEARNING MODEL TOWARD
STUDENT’S HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILL IN
DYNAMIC ELECTRICITY SUBJECT MATTER
AT SMA RAKSANA MEDAN
A.Y. 2014/2015
Kristin Natalia T
ABSTRACT
This study aims to analyze the effect of discovery learning model toward student’s
higher order thinking skill. The type of this research was quasi experimental, with
experiment class used discovery learning and control class used conventional
learning. The population was all of the tenth class of SMA Raksana Medan
academic year 2014/1015 which consist of seven classes. Sample was taken with a
simple random sampling technique. The data in higher order thinking skill was
collected by essay tests. Data were analyzed with t test. The result of the study
showed that there was positive effect of discovery learning model toward
student’s higher order thinking skill in experiment class or given by discovery
model. It proved from posttest result in experiment class was higher than control

class or there was significant difference of post test score, although in higher order
thinking level, both of class still in less level, but student who given discovery
learning had higher value than control class.
Keyword : Discovery Learning Model, Conventional Learning, Higher Order
Thinking Skill

vi

TABLE OF CONTENT
Approval Sheet

i

Biography

ii

Abstract

iii

Preface

iv

Table of Contentv

i

Figure List

viii

Table List

ix

Appendix List

x

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem Identification
1.3 Problem Limitation
1.4 Problem Formulation
1.5 Purpose of Research
1.6 Research Benefit

1
4
4
4
5
5

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework

2.1.1 Learning
2.1.2 Learning Theory
2.2 Discovery Learning Model
2.2.1 Definition Discovey Learning
2.2.2 Concept Discovery Learning
2.2.3 Characteristic of Discovery Learnng
2.2.4 Application Procedure Discovery Learning Model
2.3 Conventioanl Learning
2.3.1 Teaching Methods
2.3.2 Answer Question Method
2.3.3 Assesment Method
2.3.4 Material Center
2.4 Scoring
2.5 Learning Outcomes
2.5.1 Cognitive Domain
2.6 Learning Matter

6
6
7

7
8
9
10
10
12
13
13
13
14
14
15
16
19

vii

2.6.1 Current
2.6.2 Potential Difference
2.6.3 Ohm’s Law

2.6.4 Series Circuit
2.6.5 Kirchhoff’s Law
2.6.6 Electric Power
2.7 Relevant Research
2.8 Conceptual Framework
2.9 Hypothesis

19
20
20
21
24
25
26
27
27

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
3.1 Research Location

3.2 Population and Sample Research
3.2.1 Population of Research
3.2.2 Sample of Research
3.3 Research Variable
3.3.1 Independent Variable
3.3.2 Dependent Variable

28
28
28
28
28
28
28

3.4 Type and Research Design
3.4.1 Type of Research
3.4.2 Design of Research
3.5 Research Instrument
3.5.1 Instrument of Higher Order Thinking Skill Test

3.5.2 Validity Test
3.6 Research Procedure
3.7 Data Analysis Techniques
3.7.1 Average Mean
3.7.2 Standard Deviation
3.7.3 Normality Test
3.7.4 Homogeneity Test
3.7.5 Hypothesis Test

28
28
29
29
29
31
32
33
33
34
34
35
35

CHAPTER IV
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Processing and Data Analyze
4.2 Testing and Data Analyse
4.2.1 Average Value and Standard Deviation
4.2.2 Normality Test Data

39
41
41
42

viii

4.2.3 Homogeneity Test Data
4.3 Hypothesis Test
4.3.1 Hypothesis Test for Pre Test
4.3.2 Hypothesis Test for Post Test
4.4 Higher Order Thinking Skill
4.5 Discussion

42
43
43
44
44
46

CHAPTERV
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Suggestion

49
49

REFFERENCES

50

ix

TABLE LIST
Table 2.1 Table of Discovery Learning Phase
Table 2.2 Table of Relevant Research
Table 3.1 The Design of Research
Table 3.2 The Specification of Higher Order Thinking Skill
Table 3.3 Scorinf System Higher Order Thinking Skill
Table 4.1 Data Pretest Experiment Class and Control Class
Table 4.2 Data Posttest Experiment Class and Control Class
Table 4.3 Mean and Standard Deviation
Table 4.4 Normality Test Experiment Class and Control Class
Table 4.5 Test Homogeneity Data
Table 4.6 Summary Calculation Hypothesis Test Pretest
Table 4.7 Summary Calculation Hypothesis Test Capabilities Postest
Table 4.9 Specification of Higher order thinking Skill Level
Table 4.10 Data Pretest and Postest of Experiment and Control Class

10
26
29
30
30
39
40
41
42
43
43
44
45
45

viii

FIGURE LIST
Figure 2.1 Discovery Learning Model Cycle
Figure 2.2 Difference Between Bloom’s Txonomy and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised
Figure 2.3 Charge Moves Past a Fixed Point
Figure 2.4 Series Circuit
Figure 2.5 Parallel Circuit
Figure 2.6 Series Parallel Circuit
Figure 2.7 Series Circuit
Figure 2.8 Parallel Circuit
Figure 2.9 Kirchhoff’s Circuit
Figure 3.1 The Overview of Research Planning
Figure 4.1 Diagram of Data Pretest Experimen Class and Control Class
Figure 4.2 Diagram Posttest Experiment Class and Control Class
Figure 4.3 Diagram of Student’s Higher Order Thinking Skill

12
18
20
21
22
23
23
24
24
33
40
41
45

x

APPENDIX LIST

Appendix 1 Lesson Plan I
Appendix 2 Lesson Plan II
Appendix 3 Lesson Plan III
Appendix 4 Worksheet I
Appendix 5 Worksheet II
Appendix 6 Worksheet III
Appendix 7 Test Specification
Appendix 8 Test of Higher Order Thinking Skill
Appendix 9 Validity Test
Appendix 10 Higher Order Thinking Skill Data Experiment Class
Appendix 11 Higher Order Thinking Skill Data Control Class
Appendix 12 Normality Test
Appendix 13 Homogeneity Test
Appendix 14 Hypothesis Test
Appendix 15 Research Document
Appendix 16 Distribution Table Z

52
59
68
76
79
82
85
96
98
101
105
109
112
114
118
120

1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
In performing activities of daily life, people cannot be separated from the
process of thinking hence to survive in the ever-changing circumstances,
uncertain, and the competitive, they must have the ability to acquire, select, and
process information. This capability requires critical thinking, systematic, logical,
and creative and has a willingness to cooperate effective that can be obtained from
the learning process in schools.
Therefore, in the learning process, students should be trained in the skills
of thinking, especially higher order thinking skill. Higher order thinking skills are
very important to be integrated in any subjects, including physics lessons in high
school.
Higher order thinking skill is thinking at a higher level than just memorize
facts or say something to someone exactly like something that was delivered to us.
King et al. assumed that higher order thinking skills include critical, logical,
reflective, metacognitive, and creative thinking. They are activated when
individuals encounter unfamiliar problems, uncertainties, questions, or dilemmas.
Higher order thinking skills (High Order Thinking Skills - HOTS) is a
thought process that is not just memorize and pass back information known. It is
the ability to connect, manipulate, and transform knowledge and experience
already possessed to think critically and creatively in an effort to determine the
decisions and solve problems in new situations. Means the use of higher order
thinking skills must think more than just remembering, understanding and
applying the formula. In a process of learning physics if student use higher order
thinking skill, the learning will be a meaningful learning. Because student do not
only have to remember and memorize formulas but also be able to solve a
problem by using these formulas. Directly or indirectly, student will better
understand the usefulness of these formulas in their daily live, it makes lessons

2

more meaningful, therefore children will not easily forget to formulas and
concepts of Physics.
According to one of the International Study on students' cognitive abilities
are TIMSS (Trends in Mathematics and Science Study) conducted by the IEA
(International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement).TIMSS
2011 results in the field of physics shows Indonesia gained 397 value, this value is
below the international average is 500. The data indicates that the absorption of
learners in learning in physics education. Based on the results of TIMSS, it can be
said that the students' ability to think critically Indonesia is still low
Researcher has observed that higher order thinking skill in physics lesson
is low. Students in X just reached 62 score in final examination physics lesson.
Student in XI achieve score 60, then student in XII just reached 62. Those are
average score student reached in final physics examination. It’s too far from
absolute score (KKM) 75 who students must reached. In addition, students are not
familiar to solve physics problems in divergent question.

According to the

students, they only solve problem that had already given by teacher. Teacher use
conventional learning from beginning till end of learning process, teacher just use
question and answer, discussion tends to procedural and more emphasis on
learning outcomes, instead of the understanding of the concept. Students learn in
accordance with the examples who given by teacher and an example in the book.
The questions were given to students only convergent questions that directly use
the existing formula. Hence, students do not have the opportunity to develop the
creativity and productivity of thinking, it makes when teacher give divergent
question in final examination, student can’t reach out good score.
To overcome this problem, we need model student-centered. One model
that can be used is a discovery learning model. Jerome Bruner in Arends believe
that discovery learning is a model of teaching that emphasized the importance of
helping students understand the structure or key ideas of a discipline, the need for
active student involvement in the learning process, and a belief that true learning
comes through personal discovery (2012;402). Discovery learning is a type of
learning where learners construct reviews their own knowledge by experimenting

3

with a domain, and inferring rules from the results of reviews these experiments.
The basic idea of this kind of learning is that learners can design because reviews
their own experiments in the domain and infer the rules of the domain themselves
they are actually constructing reviews their knowledge. Because of reviews these
constructive activities, it is assumed they will understand the domain at a higher
level than when the necessary information is just presented by a teacher or an
expository learning environment (Joolingen.1999). The use of this model is
expected to increase students learn on cognitive outcomes compared to taught by
conventional learning.
Research of models with the type of discovery has been made by Yurahly
et al. (2014) in SMA N 4 Palu, the results showed that the average value of the
experimental class students 6.7% higher than the control class. Putrayasa et al.
(2014) founded the average value of students who learned by discovery model
was 79.39, while the average value of a class of students who follow the
conventional learning was 70.51. Balim (2009) obtained data that the students of
class VII of the Public Elementary School in Turkey who used discovery model
was 71.17 while students who used conventional learning had 67.03 average
values. Yang et al. (2010) conducted a study in Taiwan's elementary education
obtain data that discovery class obtain an average value 57.63 while the class who
do conventional model was 46.41.
From the research conducted, Yang et al. (2010) revealed that the
discovery learning is benefit to the students in the medium and high performance
level, but for the low performance were less used. This weakness was also
founded by Putrayasa et al. (2014) that the discovery model is more effective to
students who have high desire to learn while for students who lack interest in
learning takes a long time to implement this model. Likewise, Yurahly et al.
(2014) found that the model need more time because this model need mature of
teacher as be facilitator and a good motivator.
Based on four studied, researcher interest to do next research to find the
problem of student in learning process, so that the results of this study not only

4

guided the students' difficulties in solving problem, but also other factors
associated with the learning process.
Based on the description above, the researchers felt compelled to examine
and investigate more about the various factors and problems faced by students in
physics with the title: "The Effect of Discovery Learning Model Toward Student’s
Higher Order Thinking Skills in Dynamic Electricity Subject Matter at SMA
Raksana Medan Academic Year 2014/2015".

1.2 Problem Identification
Based on the background, the identification of problems research are:
1. Physics learning process is teacher center.
2. The low student higher order thinking skill. .
3. The lack of analytical ability of students to the problems of physics.
4. The use of methods or models of teaching are less varied.

1.3 Problem Limitation
Based on the identification, the authors limit this problem, those are:
1. Learning model used is the Discovery Model.
2. Subject matter that will be present is Dynamic Electricity to student at SMA
Raksana Medan in 10th grade student.
3. Analysing student higher order thinking skill.

1.4 Problem Formulation
Based on the problem definition, the problem formulations in this research are:
1. How is student higher order thinking skill using Discovery Learning Model in
Dynamic Electricity subject matter to 10th grade student semester II at SMA
Raksana Medan?
2. How is student higher order thinking skill using conventional learning in
Dynamic Electrical subject matter to 10th grade student semester II at SMA
Raksana Medan?

5

3. Is student higher order thinking skill using Discovery Learning Model better
than using Conventional Learning in Dynamic Electricity subject matter to
10th grade student semester II at SMA RAKSANA Medan?

1.5 Purpose of Research
The purpose of this study at SMA Raksana Medan in Dynamic Electricity subject
matter to student in 10th grade are :
1. To analyze student higher order thinking skill using discovery learning model.
2. To analyze student higher order thinking skill using conventional learning on.
3. To analyze which one is better, student higher order thinking skill in discovery
model or conventional learning.

1.6 Research Benefit
After research is complete, the expected benefits of this research are:
1. Student mastery and likely study about physics because students can pull out,
thinking, researching, hypothesized, discuss and conclude physics lessons.
2. As input for physics teachers in an effort to use the model in physics learning
to improve higher order thinking of student

49

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
1. Higher Order Thinking Skill student who given Discovery Learning Model
on Dynamic Electricity Topic in X grade at SMA Raksana Medan
Semester II A.Y. 2014/2015 have initial ability 4.2 and after student given
treatment, there is 41.1% increased level of thinking processes to be 44.3
2. Higher Order Thinking Skill student who given Conventional Learning
that only have 31.96% and initial ability 5.6 increased to 37.56.
3. There is positive effect of Discovery Learning Model to Student’s Higher
Order Thinking Skill because the value of post test in experimental class is
higher than control class, that is 44.3 and 37.56 with tcount > ttable = 2.59 >
1,667 with α = 0,05, therefore, the both value is not significant.
5.2. Suggestion
Based on conclusion, there are suggestion to next researcher, they are :
1. For the next researcher who wants to study discovery learning model, will
be better if motivation prior to students who will present discussion to
improve confidence in the students because it is not all students are ready
to present discussion results when the number of its members was called
by the teacher.
2. Attention to the use of time in learning process for each phase, because it
requires a lot of time, especially when students try to find their own
information in experiment and discussion group.
3. For teacher will be better if using vriaety model moreover discovery
learning to improve student knowledge.
4. For school will be able if giving more attention to laboratory intruments
and giving facility to student and teacher, therfore the learning process to
be meaningfull.

50

REFFERENCES

Balim, A. G., (2009), The Effects of Discovery Learning on Students Success and
Inquiry Learning Skills, Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 35,1-20.(Retrieved February 2015)
FHHST, (2005), A Textbook for High School Students Studying Physics. Free
Software Foundation
Gulo,W., (2002), Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit PT Grasindo, Jakarta.
Hewitt, G., (2006), Conceptual Physics, Pearson Addison Wesley, America.
Hosnan, M., (2014), Pendekatan Saintifik dan Kontekstual Dalam Pembelajaran
Abad 21, Ghalia Indonesia, Bogor.
Joolingen, V.W., (1999), Cognitive Tools for Discovery Learning, International
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Vol. 10, 385-397.(Retrieved
December 2014)
Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, (2013), Model Pembelajaran
Penemuan, Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Jakarta.
Krathwohl, D. R, (2002), Theory into Practice (Volume 41), Ohio, College of
Education The Ohio State University.
King, F.J., Ludwika, G., & Faranak, R., (2015), Higher Order Thinking Skill, A
Publication of Educational Service Program.
Lefrancois, G. R., (1997), Psychology for Teacher (9th ed), Wadsworth, Belmont,
CA.
Majoribanks, K., (1991), The Foundation of Students Learning, Pergamon Press,
Australia.
Matondang, Z., (2013), Statistika Pendidikan, Unimed Press, Medan.
Mayer, R., (2004), Should There be a Three Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery
Learning, Journal American Psychological Association, Inc, Vol. 59, No.
1, 14–19. (Retrieved January 2015)
Popham, W.J., & Kenneth, A.S., (1973), Educational Statistics Use and
Interpretation, Harper & Row Publisher, New York.
Putrayasa, I.M., H, Syahruddin., & I Gede, M., (2014), Pengaruh Model
Pembelajaran Discovery Learning dan Minat Belajar Terhadap Hasil
Belajar IPA Siswa. Jurnal Mimbar PGSD Universitas Pendidikan
Ganesha, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1-11. (Retrieved January 2015)

51

Resnick, L.B., (1987), Education and Learning to Think, National Academy
Press, Washington DC.
Russo, R., (2003), Statistic for the Behavioural Science, Psychology Press, USA.
Sadirman., (2009), Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, PT Grafindo,
Jakarta.
Stephens, L., (1998), Schaum’s Outline of Theory and Problem of Bennning
Sattistics, McGraw Hill, America.
Sudjana., (2005), Metode Statistika, Tarsito, Bandung.
Travers, R.M., (1977), Essentials of Learning, Macmillan Publishing Co Inc,
New York.
Trianto., (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana,
Jakarta.
Utari, R., (2009), Taksonomi Bloom, PT Graffindo, Jakarta.
Yang, E., Calvin, L., Emily, C., Tina, C.,& Tak Wai, C,. (2010), The
Effectiveness of Inductive Discovery Learning in 1:1 Mathematics
Classroom, Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National
Central University, Taiwan, (1) 743-747. (Retrieved January 2015)
Yurahly, D., I Wayan, D., & Darsikin., (2014), Model Pembelajaran Guided
Discovery dan Direct Instruction Berbasis Keterampilan Proses Sains
Siswa SMA Negeri 4 Palu, Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Tadulako, Vol. 2 No.
2ISSN 23 383 240. (Retrieved January 2015)
Essentials Teaching., retrieved January from :
http://thesecondprinciple.com/teaching-essentials/beyond-bloomcognitive-taxonomy-revised/
Kompas., retrieved January from:
http://cetak.kompas.com/read/2011/03/03/04463810/peringkat.
pendidikan.indonesia.turun.