THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF JIGSAW BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES IN THE TEMPERATURE AND HEAT SUBJECT MATTER IN CLASS X EVEN SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 3 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR 2013/2014.
THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF JIGSAW
BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES IN
THE TEMPERATURE AND HEAT SUBJECT MATTER IN CLASS X EVEN
SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 3 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR 2013/2014
By :
Kartika
Reg. Number 4103322015
Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2014
PREFACE
The authors say the 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.
Thesis entitled " The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type of
JIGSAW Based on Mind Mapping on Student’s Learning Outcomes in The
Temperature and Heat Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester SMA Negeri 3
Medan Academic Year 2013/2014", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree
Physical Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State
University of Medan.
On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr Prof. Dr. Mara Bangun
Harahap, M.Si, as Thesis Supervisor who has provided guidance and suggestions
to the author since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis
writing. Thanks also to Prof. Dr. Sahyar, M.Si, M.M, Dra. Derlina, M.Si, Drs.
Jonny H Panggabean, M.Si, who have provided input and suggestions from the
research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Thanks also presented to
Drs. Makmur Sirait, M.Si, as the Academic Supervisor and also the entire
Lecturer and Staff in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED who have helped the
author. Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster and all teacher in SMA 3
Medan who have helped during this research. I would like to thank especially to
my father M. Amin and my mother Paenah and also my sister Karlina and
Karmila, my brother Bambang Hidayat and all family who have prayed and gave
me encouragement and funding to complete the study in Unimed. I also would
like to thanks to all my friend in Bilingual Physics Class 2010, Feggi Yuandini,
Fitria Andriani, Rindy Wardhani, Rikcy Almeda, Jovan Sitinjak, Uli Dova, Evi
Kamelia, Christine M. Siregar, Nur Azizah Pulungan, Indra N Siahaan, Rofi
Anggriani, James Wilson who have helped, prayed and gave supported to author.
I also would like to thanks to my Komet friends, Ica, Irma febrianti, Wanti
Agustina, Maulidatul Husna, Ika Sundari, Ratna Sari Tanjung, Alfiana, Angki
Fatricia, Edi sudrajat, Hendro and Fakhru razi, who have helped, prayed and gave
supported to author. I also would like to thank to Hexa Helios Group, Dian Gusti
Lestari, Mutiah Siregar, Sukma Mentari, Nita Liswati, Dwinta Cipta RS, who
have helped and gave suppported during my research.
The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this
thesis, but the author is aware there are many drawbacks in terms of both content
and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive
criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of
this paper would be useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan, June 2014
Author,
Kartika
THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF JIGSAW
BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES IN
THETEMPERATUREANDHEATSUBJECT MATTERINCLASSXEVEN
SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 3 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR 2013/2014
KARTIKA ( 4103322015 )
ABSTRACT
The objectives of this research are: (1) To know the student’s learning
outcomes in physics subject taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsaw
based on mind mapping. (2) To know the student’s learning outcomes in physics
subject taught by conventional learning based on mind mapping. (3) To know the
effect of cooperative learning model type of jigsaw based on mind mapping on
student’s learning outcomes in the temperature and heat subject matter. The type
of research was quasi experiment with the population all of student in class X
even semester in SMA N 3 Medan which consits of 14 classes. Sample of this
research was obtained by technique of cluster random sampling.
The sample is X MIA 12 as the experiment class and X MIA 14 as the
control class. Experiment class taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsw
based on mind mapping and control class taught by direct instruction model. The
research instrument has 20 questions in multiple choice forms with 5 options, the
instrument tested validated. In this research obtained the mean of pre-test in
experiment class is 41.41 and in control class is 41.25. After that do the treatment
in experiment class taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsaw based on
mind mapping and in control class taught by direct instruction model, and then
done the post-test.
The mean of post-test in experiment class is 80.16 and in control class
was 68.90. In hypothesis testing obtained t count > ttable that was 5.18 >1.669 at
significant level α = 0.05 and n = 32. So, can be concluded that the student’s
learning outcomes in experiment class differ with control class. Can be concluded
that there is effect of cooperative learning model type on student’s learning
outcomes in the temperature and heat subject matter in class x even semester
SMA N 3 Medan academic year 2013/2014.
Key words: jigsaw, mind mapping, student’s learning outcomes
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ratification Sheet
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Table of Content
vi
List of Figure
ix
List of Table
x
List of Appendix
xi
CHAPTER I INRODUCTION
1.1
Background
1
1.2
Problems Identification
3
1.3
Problems Limitation
4
1.4
Problems Formulation
4
1.5
Research Objective
4
1.6
Benefits of Research
5
1.7
Operational Definition
5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.Framework Theoretical
2.1.1 Definition of Learning
6
2.1.2. Principle of Learning and Teaching
6
2.1.3. Model’s of Teaching
7
2.1.3.1. Direct Instruction Model
8
2.1.3.2. Cooperative learning
8
1.Definition of Cooperative Learning
8
2. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning
11
3. Cooperative Learning Objectives
11
4.Advantages and disadvantages of cooperative learning
13
2.1.3.3 Cooperative Learning Model Type of Jigsaw
16
2.1.4. Mind Map
20
2.1.5 Learning Outcomes
21
2.1.5.1 Cognitive domain
21
2.1.5.2. Affective Domain
23
2.1.5.3. Psychomotor Domain
24
2.2 Subject Matter
25
2.3 Journal Research of Cooperative Learning Model Type of Jigsaw
35
2.4 Conceptual Framework
38
2.5 Research Hypothesis
39
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
3.1
Location and Time Reseacrh
40
3.1.1
Research Location
40
3.1.2
Research Time
40
3.2
Population and Sample
40
3.2.1
Population
40
3.2.2
Sample
40
3.3
Research Variables
40
3.4
Type and Research Design
41
3.5
Research Procedure
41
3.6
Tools and Data Collection
3.6.1
Reasearch Instrument
44
3.7
Content Validity
45
3.8
Data Analysis Techniques
45
3.8.1
Reliability Test
45
3.8.2.1 Determining the value of the average and standard deviation
46
3.8.3
Normality Test
47
3.8.4
Homogenitas Test
48
3.8.5
Calculation of Gain Scores Normalized
48
3.8.6
Hypothesis Test
50
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Research Result
4.1.1 Pre-Test Score of Student
54
54
4.1.2 Data Analysis of Pre- Test
56
4.1.2.1 Normality Test of Pre-Test Data
56
4.1.2.2 Homogeneity test of Pre-Test
56
4.1.2.3 Hypothesis test of pre test
57
4.1.3 Post Test Value of Student
4.1.3.1 Data Analysis of Post-Test
58
59
4.1.3.1.1 Normality test of post test
4.1.3.1.2 Homogenity test of post test
4.1.3.1.3 Normalized Gain Experiment Class and Control Class
4.1.3.1.4 Hypothesis Test of Post- Test
4.2 Research Findings
59
60
60
60
61
4.3 Discussion
62
CHAPTER V. CONSLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
64
5.2 Suggestion
65
REFERENCES
66
APPENDIX
68
LIST OF TABLE
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table. 2.3
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table 4.6
Table.4.7
Table 4.8
Table 4.9
Table.4.10
Model of cooperative learning step
Cooperative learning group differences
with conventional learning group
Coefficient of length expansion
several substance at room temperature.
The design of experiment
Specification of learning outcomes
Criteria for assessment of learning
Interpretation of Gain Normalizing Value
Pretest Score and Post Test Score in Experiment
Class and Control Class
Pre test Value in Experiment Class and Control Value
Normality test of pre-test data in Experiment class
and Control class
Homogeneity Test of Pre-Test Data
Hypothesis Test Of Pretest Data
P ost-Test Data in Experiment Class and Control Class
Normality test of post test
Homogenity test of post test
Normalized Gain Experiment Class and Control Class
Hypothesis Test of Post-Test Data
10
14
27
41
44
47
49
54
55
56
57
57
58
59
60
60
61
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.6
Figure 3.1
Figure 4.1
Illustration of jigsaw group
Example of forming jigsaw group
Example of mind mapping
Cooperative learning achivement
Mercury thermometer
Diagram of substance transformation
Flowchart research
Column Diagram Pre test value data in
17
18
20
24
25
31
43
55
Experiment Class and Control Class.
Figure. 4.2 Column Diagram Post test value data in Experiment Class
and Control Class
59
LIST OF APPENDIX
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8.
Appendix 12
Appendix 13
Appendix 14
Lesson Plan (1)
Lesson Plan (2)
Lesson Plan (3)
Student Worksheet 1
Answer of Worksheet 2
Test Based on Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
Test
Key Answer of Test
Pre-Test and Post-Test Data in Experiment Class
Pre-Test and Post-Test Data in Control Class
Calculation of Average Score and Deviation Standard
of Pre-Test and Post-Test in Experiment Class
Appendix 15 Calculation of Average Score and Deviation Standard
of Pre-Test and Post-Test in Control Class
Appendix 16 Normality Test
Appendix 17 Homogeneity Test Data
Appendix 18 Hypothesis Test
Appendix 19 Table Of Normalized Gain Experimental Class
Appendix 20 Table Of Normalized Gain Control Class
Appendix 21 Table of Calculation Reliability of Research Instrument
Appendix 22 Reliability Test
68
82
95
109
111
112
121
127
128
130
132
133
134
138
140
144
146
148
151
REFERENCES
Arends. R. I. 2009. Learning to Teach. New York: McGraw-Hill
Arikunto, S, 2005. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta
Aunurrahman. 2009. Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Alfabeta: Bandung.
Bahri Djamarah, Syaiful dan Aswan Zain, Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Cet 3.
Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta, 2006.
Dahar, R.W. 1989. Teori-teori Belajar. Erlangga: Jakarta.
Dollard,Mark.W,and Mahoney,Kate.,2006,How Effective is the Jigsaw Method
When Used to Introduce New science Curricula in Middle School
Science?, Journal of Science Educationcccccp
Fitria, Dyan.2013. Effectiveness of jigsaw cooperative learning models in
Quantity and Units on learning outcome grade X SMA N 7 Medan. Medan:
FMIPA UNIMED
Fraenkel, Jack.R.dkk.1990.How To Design Evaluate Research in Education. New
York: Mc. Graw Hill
Hestini, Febriani.2012. Effectiveness of jigsaw cooperative learning models in
heat and tempaerature on learning outcome grade X SMA swasta
Muhammadiyah 1 2011/2012. Medan: FMIPA UNIMED
Idowu,Daniel,.2013,Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Strategy on Nigerian
Junior Secondary Student’s Attitude toward Learning Basic Science,
Journal of Arts, Hunamities and Social science1: 2347 – 5347
Joyce, B, 2004. Models of Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice/Hall International. Ing
Kanginan, M, 2007. Fisika SMA untuk Kelas X. Cimahi: Aksara Pratama
Lie, A., (2008), Cooperative Learning Mempraktikkan Cooperative Learning Di
Ruang-Ruang Kelas, Penerbit PT Grasindo, Jakarta.
Limjuco,Renan. P, and Gravino, Terses.M.,2012,Jig saw Approach in Cooperative
Learning: Its Effect in Problem Solving Skill for Physics,Research
Journal18: 51-63
Long, M, 2000. The Psychology of Education. London and New York: Routledge
Maftei, G.,2012,Teaching Atomic Physics in Secondary Shool with the Jigsaw
Technique,Romanian Report in Physics64 : 1109 -1118
Purwoko.2006. Fisika Bilingual untuk SMA/MA Kelas X Semester 1&2. Bandung:
Yudistira.
Slavin, R. E, 2005. Cooperative Learning: (theory, research and practice).
London: Allymand Bascon
Slavin, Robert E., Cooperative Learning Teori, Riset dan Praktik, Bandung: Nusa
Media, 2008, Cet 1.
Sudijono. A. 2009. Pengantar Evaluasi Pendikan. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers
Sudjana. 2005. Metode Statistika. Tarsito: Bndung.
Sudjana, 2009. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Remaja
Rosdakarya
Trianto, 2009. Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Jakarta:
Kencana
Hewitt, Paul.G. 2006.Conceptual Physics 10thed. CIty College of San Francisco
BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES IN
THE TEMPERATURE AND HEAT SUBJECT MATTER IN CLASS X EVEN
SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 3 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR 2013/2014
By :
Kartika
Reg. Number 4103322015
Bilingual Physics Education Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2014
PREFACE
The authors say the 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.
Thesis entitled " The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type of
JIGSAW Based on Mind Mapping on Student’s Learning Outcomes in The
Temperature and Heat Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester SMA Negeri 3
Medan Academic Year 2013/2014", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree
Physical Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State
University of Medan.
On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr Prof. Dr. Mara Bangun
Harahap, M.Si, as Thesis Supervisor who has provided guidance and suggestions
to the author since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis
writing. Thanks also to Prof. Dr. Sahyar, M.Si, M.M, Dra. Derlina, M.Si, Drs.
Jonny H Panggabean, M.Si, who have provided input and suggestions from the
research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Thanks also presented to
Drs. Makmur Sirait, M.Si, as the Academic Supervisor and also the entire
Lecturer and Staff in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED who have helped the
author. Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster and all teacher in SMA 3
Medan who have helped during this research. I would like to thank especially to
my father M. Amin and my mother Paenah and also my sister Karlina and
Karmila, my brother Bambang Hidayat and all family who have prayed and gave
me encouragement and funding to complete the study in Unimed. I also would
like to thanks to all my friend in Bilingual Physics Class 2010, Feggi Yuandini,
Fitria Andriani, Rindy Wardhani, Rikcy Almeda, Jovan Sitinjak, Uli Dova, Evi
Kamelia, Christine M. Siregar, Nur Azizah Pulungan, Indra N Siahaan, Rofi
Anggriani, James Wilson who have helped, prayed and gave supported to author.
I also would like to thanks to my Komet friends, Ica, Irma febrianti, Wanti
Agustina, Maulidatul Husna, Ika Sundari, Ratna Sari Tanjung, Alfiana, Angki
Fatricia, Edi sudrajat, Hendro and Fakhru razi, who have helped, prayed and gave
supported to author. I also would like to thank to Hexa Helios Group, Dian Gusti
Lestari, Mutiah Siregar, Sukma Mentari, Nita Liswati, Dwinta Cipta RS, who
have helped and gave suppported during my research.
The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this
thesis, but the author is aware there are many drawbacks in terms of both content
and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive
criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of
this paper would be useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan, June 2014
Author,
Kartika
THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF JIGSAW
BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES IN
THETEMPERATUREANDHEATSUBJECT MATTERINCLASSXEVEN
SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 3 MEDAN LEARNING YEAR 2013/2014
KARTIKA ( 4103322015 )
ABSTRACT
The objectives of this research are: (1) To know the student’s learning
outcomes in physics subject taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsaw
based on mind mapping. (2) To know the student’s learning outcomes in physics
subject taught by conventional learning based on mind mapping. (3) To know the
effect of cooperative learning model type of jigsaw based on mind mapping on
student’s learning outcomes in the temperature and heat subject matter. The type
of research was quasi experiment with the population all of student in class X
even semester in SMA N 3 Medan which consits of 14 classes. Sample of this
research was obtained by technique of cluster random sampling.
The sample is X MIA 12 as the experiment class and X MIA 14 as the
control class. Experiment class taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsw
based on mind mapping and control class taught by direct instruction model. The
research instrument has 20 questions in multiple choice forms with 5 options, the
instrument tested validated. In this research obtained the mean of pre-test in
experiment class is 41.41 and in control class is 41.25. After that do the treatment
in experiment class taught by cooperative learning model type of jigsaw based on
mind mapping and in control class taught by direct instruction model, and then
done the post-test.
The mean of post-test in experiment class is 80.16 and in control class
was 68.90. In hypothesis testing obtained t count > ttable that was 5.18 >1.669 at
significant level α = 0.05 and n = 32. So, can be concluded that the student’s
learning outcomes in experiment class differ with control class. Can be concluded
that there is effect of cooperative learning model type on student’s learning
outcomes in the temperature and heat subject matter in class x even semester
SMA N 3 Medan academic year 2013/2014.
Key words: jigsaw, mind mapping, student’s learning outcomes
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ratification Sheet
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Table of Content
vi
List of Figure
ix
List of Table
x
List of Appendix
xi
CHAPTER I INRODUCTION
1.1
Background
1
1.2
Problems Identification
3
1.3
Problems Limitation
4
1.4
Problems Formulation
4
1.5
Research Objective
4
1.6
Benefits of Research
5
1.7
Operational Definition
5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.Framework Theoretical
2.1.1 Definition of Learning
6
2.1.2. Principle of Learning and Teaching
6
2.1.3. Model’s of Teaching
7
2.1.3.1. Direct Instruction Model
8
2.1.3.2. Cooperative learning
8
1.Definition of Cooperative Learning
8
2. Characteristics of Cooperative Learning
11
3. Cooperative Learning Objectives
11
4.Advantages and disadvantages of cooperative learning
13
2.1.3.3 Cooperative Learning Model Type of Jigsaw
16
2.1.4. Mind Map
20
2.1.5 Learning Outcomes
21
2.1.5.1 Cognitive domain
21
2.1.5.2. Affective Domain
23
2.1.5.3. Psychomotor Domain
24
2.2 Subject Matter
25
2.3 Journal Research of Cooperative Learning Model Type of Jigsaw
35
2.4 Conceptual Framework
38
2.5 Research Hypothesis
39
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
3.1
Location and Time Reseacrh
40
3.1.1
Research Location
40
3.1.2
Research Time
40
3.2
Population and Sample
40
3.2.1
Population
40
3.2.2
Sample
40
3.3
Research Variables
40
3.4
Type and Research Design
41
3.5
Research Procedure
41
3.6
Tools and Data Collection
3.6.1
Reasearch Instrument
44
3.7
Content Validity
45
3.8
Data Analysis Techniques
45
3.8.1
Reliability Test
45
3.8.2.1 Determining the value of the average and standard deviation
46
3.8.3
Normality Test
47
3.8.4
Homogenitas Test
48
3.8.5
Calculation of Gain Scores Normalized
48
3.8.6
Hypothesis Test
50
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Research Result
4.1.1 Pre-Test Score of Student
54
54
4.1.2 Data Analysis of Pre- Test
56
4.1.2.1 Normality Test of Pre-Test Data
56
4.1.2.2 Homogeneity test of Pre-Test
56
4.1.2.3 Hypothesis test of pre test
57
4.1.3 Post Test Value of Student
4.1.3.1 Data Analysis of Post-Test
58
59
4.1.3.1.1 Normality test of post test
4.1.3.1.2 Homogenity test of post test
4.1.3.1.3 Normalized Gain Experiment Class and Control Class
4.1.3.1.4 Hypothesis Test of Post- Test
4.2 Research Findings
59
60
60
60
61
4.3 Discussion
62
CHAPTER V. CONSLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
64
5.2 Suggestion
65
REFERENCES
66
APPENDIX
68
LIST OF TABLE
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table. 2.3
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table 4.6
Table.4.7
Table 4.8
Table 4.9
Table.4.10
Model of cooperative learning step
Cooperative learning group differences
with conventional learning group
Coefficient of length expansion
several substance at room temperature.
The design of experiment
Specification of learning outcomes
Criteria for assessment of learning
Interpretation of Gain Normalizing Value
Pretest Score and Post Test Score in Experiment
Class and Control Class
Pre test Value in Experiment Class and Control Value
Normality test of pre-test data in Experiment class
and Control class
Homogeneity Test of Pre-Test Data
Hypothesis Test Of Pretest Data
P ost-Test Data in Experiment Class and Control Class
Normality test of post test
Homogenity test of post test
Normalized Gain Experiment Class and Control Class
Hypothesis Test of Post-Test Data
10
14
27
41
44
47
49
54
55
56
57
57
58
59
60
60
61
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.6
Figure 3.1
Figure 4.1
Illustration of jigsaw group
Example of forming jigsaw group
Example of mind mapping
Cooperative learning achivement
Mercury thermometer
Diagram of substance transformation
Flowchart research
Column Diagram Pre test value data in
17
18
20
24
25
31
43
55
Experiment Class and Control Class.
Figure. 4.2 Column Diagram Post test value data in Experiment Class
and Control Class
59
LIST OF APPENDIX
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8.
Appendix 12
Appendix 13
Appendix 14
Lesson Plan (1)
Lesson Plan (2)
Lesson Plan (3)
Student Worksheet 1
Answer of Worksheet 2
Test Based on Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
Test
Key Answer of Test
Pre-Test and Post-Test Data in Experiment Class
Pre-Test and Post-Test Data in Control Class
Calculation of Average Score and Deviation Standard
of Pre-Test and Post-Test in Experiment Class
Appendix 15 Calculation of Average Score and Deviation Standard
of Pre-Test and Post-Test in Control Class
Appendix 16 Normality Test
Appendix 17 Homogeneity Test Data
Appendix 18 Hypothesis Test
Appendix 19 Table Of Normalized Gain Experimental Class
Appendix 20 Table Of Normalized Gain Control Class
Appendix 21 Table of Calculation Reliability of Research Instrument
Appendix 22 Reliability Test
68
82
95
109
111
112
121
127
128
130
132
133
134
138
140
144
146
148
151
REFERENCES
Arends. R. I. 2009. Learning to Teach. New York: McGraw-Hill
Arikunto, S, 2005. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta
Aunurrahman. 2009. Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Alfabeta: Bandung.
Bahri Djamarah, Syaiful dan Aswan Zain, Strategi Belajar Mengajar, Cet 3.
Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta, 2006.
Dahar, R.W. 1989. Teori-teori Belajar. Erlangga: Jakarta.
Dollard,Mark.W,and Mahoney,Kate.,2006,How Effective is the Jigsaw Method
When Used to Introduce New science Curricula in Middle School
Science?, Journal of Science Educationcccccp
Fitria, Dyan.2013. Effectiveness of jigsaw cooperative learning models in
Quantity and Units on learning outcome grade X SMA N 7 Medan. Medan:
FMIPA UNIMED
Fraenkel, Jack.R.dkk.1990.How To Design Evaluate Research in Education. New
York: Mc. Graw Hill
Hestini, Febriani.2012. Effectiveness of jigsaw cooperative learning models in
heat and tempaerature on learning outcome grade X SMA swasta
Muhammadiyah 1 2011/2012. Medan: FMIPA UNIMED
Idowu,Daniel,.2013,Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Strategy on Nigerian
Junior Secondary Student’s Attitude toward Learning Basic Science,
Journal of Arts, Hunamities and Social science1: 2347 – 5347
Joyce, B, 2004. Models of Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice/Hall International. Ing
Kanginan, M, 2007. Fisika SMA untuk Kelas X. Cimahi: Aksara Pratama
Lie, A., (2008), Cooperative Learning Mempraktikkan Cooperative Learning Di
Ruang-Ruang Kelas, Penerbit PT Grasindo, Jakarta.
Limjuco,Renan. P, and Gravino, Terses.M.,2012,Jig saw Approach in Cooperative
Learning: Its Effect in Problem Solving Skill for Physics,Research
Journal18: 51-63
Long, M, 2000. The Psychology of Education. London and New York: Routledge
Maftei, G.,2012,Teaching Atomic Physics in Secondary Shool with the Jigsaw
Technique,Romanian Report in Physics64 : 1109 -1118
Purwoko.2006. Fisika Bilingual untuk SMA/MA Kelas X Semester 1&2. Bandung:
Yudistira.
Slavin, R. E, 2005. Cooperative Learning: (theory, research and practice).
London: Allymand Bascon
Slavin, Robert E., Cooperative Learning Teori, Riset dan Praktik, Bandung: Nusa
Media, 2008, Cet 1.
Sudijono. A. 2009. Pengantar Evaluasi Pendikan. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers
Sudjana. 2005. Metode Statistika. Tarsito: Bndung.
Sudjana, 2009. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Remaja
Rosdakarya
Trianto, 2009. Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Jakarta:
Kencana
Hewitt, Paul.G. 2006.Conceptual Physics 10thed. CIty College of San Francisco