THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISIONS (STAD) BASED ON MIND MAPPING ON LEARNING OUTCOMES OF STUDENTS IN THE DYNAMIC ELECTRICS SUBJECT MATTER IN CLASS X EVEN SEMESTER SMA N 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2012/2013.

The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type of Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Based on Mind Mapping on

Learning Outcomes of Students in The Dynamic Electrics Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester

SMA N 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013

By:

Mas Andri Marbun Reg.Number: 409322022

Physics Bilingual Education Study Program

THESIS

Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan

PHYSICS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN 2013

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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 Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Based on Mind Mapping on Learning Outcomes of Students in The Dynamic Electrics Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan Academic Year 2012/2013", 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.S as Thesis Advisor 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 Dr. Ridwan Abdul Sani, M.Si., Drs. Eidi Sihombing, MS., and Drs. Abd Hakim S, M.Si., Dr. Derlina, M.Si., who have provided input and suggestions from the research plan to complete the preparation of this thesis. Thanks also presented to Prof. Drs. Motlan Sirait, M.Sc, Ph.D., as the Academic Supervisor. Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturer and staff employee of Physics FMIPA State University of Medan who have encourage the writer during the lecture. Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster and all teacher in SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan who have helped during this research Mr. Drs. Suhairi, M.Pd, Mr. J. Simbolon, S.Pd and also to Physics teacher Mrs. Jumiati, S.Pd and Mrs. Zulni, S.Pd.

Gratefully and specially to Dear my lovely father H. Marbun and my lovely mother M. Sihombing and also my young brothers, my youngest sister Angelica Margareth Marbun, and all family who have prayed and gave me encouragement and funding to complete the study in State University of Medan. Especially thanks to all my friend in Bilingual Physics Class 2009, The Gembel Group, Avolen Siahaan, Hanna Monica Hutabarat, Jefri Waruwu and who have helped and gave suppported during my research.

v

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, Juli 2013 Author,

THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE OF STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISIONS (STAD) BASED ON MIND MAPPING

ON LEARNING OUTCOMES OF STUDENTS IN THE DYNAMIC ELECTRICS SUBJECT MATTER IN CLASS X EVEN

SEMESTER SMA N 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2012/2013 Mas Andri Marbun (409322022)

ABSTRACT

This research aims to know the results of student learning by using cooperative learning model of the type of student teams achievement divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping in experiment class and learning conventional models in the control class, and also to know the influence of cooperative learning model of the type of student teams achievement divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping on learning outcomes of students.

Type of this research is quasi experimental. The population of this research is all the students class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012 / 2013 which consisted of 298 students and consisting of six classes regular and 2 class excellent. A sample of this research was taken two classes are determined by means of cluster random sampling, namely class X4 as a experiment class and a class X5 as a control class that each class number 39 students and 41 students.

From the data analysis the results obtained average value of experimental class pretest was 34,1 with standard deviation 10.70 and the average value of the control's class pretest 32,94 with standard deviation 11.06, thus obtained Fcount of 1.06 and Ftable of 1,71. Because Fcount < Ftable (1,06 < 1,71), so that the results for these two classes have pretest homogeneous. Then obtained tcount < ttable (0,47 < 1,99), It concluded there was no significant difference between the results of learning students experiments class with control class. After study completion given obtained average value of experimental class posttest is 76,53 with standard deviation 9.60 and average value of control class is 70,48 posttest with standard deviation 10,77. Both of these data have a normal distribution. Results of hypothesis testing obtained tcount > ttable atau 2,61 > 1,66 so the conclusion is that there is the influence of cooperative learning model type of student teams achievement divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping on the learning outcomes of students.

vi

CONTENTS

Page

Legitimation Sheet i

Biography ii

Abstract iii

Acknowledgements iv

Contents vi

Figures List viii

Tables List ix

Appendix List x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background 1

1.2. Problems Identification 5

1.3. Problems Limitation 5

1.4. Problems Formulation 6

1.5. Goal Research 6

1.6. Benefits of Research 7

1.7. Operational Definition 7

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1. Framework Theoretical 8

2.1.1. Definition of Learning 8

2.1.2. Teaching and Learning 10

2.1.3. Learning Model 11

2.1.4. Cooperative Learning 12

2.1.5. Cooperative type STAD 20

2.1.6. Mind Map 23

2.1.7. Learning Outcomes 25

2.3. Mindset 38

2.4. Hypothesis 39

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 40

3.1. Location and Time of Research 40 3.2. Population and Research Sample 40

3.3. Research Variables 41

3.4. Research Design 41

3.5. Procedure Research 42

3.6. Tools and Data Collection 44

3.6.1. The Research Instrument 44

3.6.2. The Validity of Test 45

3.7. Data Analysis Techniques 45

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION 49

4.1. Result of Research 49

4.1.1. Description of Research Data 49

4.1.2. Testing of Data Analysis 50

4.2. Discussion 57

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION 61

5.1. Conclusions 61

5.2. Suggestion 62

ix

TABLE LIST

Page Table 2.1 Model of Cooperative Learning 14 Table 2.2 Cooperative Learning Group Differences With 19

Conventional Learning Group

Table 2.3 Phase of Cooperative Learning Type STAD 21 Table 2.4 Calculation Score Developments 22

Table 2.5 Award Level Group 22

Table 2.6 Resistivity of Materials 29

Table 3.1 The Design of Experiments 41

Table 3.2 Test Prediction 44

Table 4.1 Pre-test Data Normality Test of Experimental and 51 Control Class

Table 4.2 Summary of Homogeneity Test Result of Pre-test Data 51 Table 4.3 Summary of Pre-test t-test Calculation 52 Table 4.4 Post-Test Data Normality Test of Experimental and 53

Control Class

Table 4.5 Hypothesis Test 54

Table 4.6 Test Results of Individual Observations and Results of 55 Student Learning Test Class During The Learning Process

FIGURE LIST

Page

Figure 2.1 Example of Mind Mapping 24

Figure 2.2 An assortment of resistors used for a variety of 30 applications in electronic circuits.

Figure 2.3 The Symbol for a Resistor in Circuit Diagrams 31

Figure 2.4 The Current–Voltage Curve 32

Figure 2.5 A Simple Series Circuit 34

Figure 2.6 A simple parallel circuit 36

Figure 3.1 Step of research 43

Figure 4.1 Bar Chart of Pre-test Data in Experiment and Control Class 50 Figure 4.2 Bar Chart of Post-test Data in Experiment and Control Class 53 Figure 4.3 Category Test Individually and Value Pretest and posttest 56 Figure 4.4. Graph of Category Test Individually and Value Pretest 56

x

APPENDIX LIST

Page

Appendix 1. Lesson Plan I 64

Appendix 2. Lesson Plan II 74

Appendix 3. Worksheet 86

Appendix 4. Instrument of Research 88

Appendix 5. Test Prediction 92

Appendix 6. Pre-test and Post-test of Experimental Class 101

Appendix 7. Pre-test and Post-test of Control Class 102

Appendix 8. Pre-test Result of Experimental Class Recapitulation 103

Appendix 9. Pre-test Result of Control Class Recapitulation 105

Appendix 10. Post-test Result of Experimental Class Recapitulation 107

Appendix 11. Pre-test Result of Control Class Recapitulation 109

Appendix 12. Calculation of Mean Value and Standard Deviation 111

Experiment Class Appendix 13. Calculation of Mean Value and Standard Deviation 113

Control Class Appendix 14. Normality Test Calculation 115

Appendix 15. Homogenity Test Calculation 120

Appendix 16. Calculation of Hypothesis Test 121

Education has a very important role in generating fully human resource both as individuals and as the general public. Improve education in Indonesia in learning activities in schools is an activity that must be improved in order to reach a goal in the form of changes in behavior, knowledge, and skills in self-learners.

In RI law No.20 year 2003 defines education as a conscious and planned to create an condition of learning and learning process so that learners are actively developing the potential for him to have the spiritual strength of religious, self-control, personality, intelligence, noble character, and skills necessary, community, nation, and state. So in the teaching and learning activities need to develop a good learning process so as to create a charming condition and makes students more actively in learning activities.

In improving the quality of education, the educators have a major role to improve the quality of student learning. In conducting learning activities, teachers as a educator besides knowing materials, certainly need to understand the learning model and selecting appropriate learning model to give course material and how the characteristics of the students who received the course material. Failure educators in providing not only because the subject matter did not master the material, but because of the use of models of learning and teaching methods are less appropriate. Therefore, any attempt to do the teacher to improve student learning outcomes is through the use of models of learning and teaching methods appropriate to the subject matter being taught, so that students can learn with a pleasant condition.

To educate is to help learners with full consciousness, either with tools or not, in their obligation to develop and grow themselves to improve the capacity

and role of himself as an individual, community members, and the God’s creation.

2 learn for encouraging yourself to develop talents, personal and other potentials optimally in a positive direction. (Made, 2007:11).

In the teaching and learning process in the classroom most teachers as a center of learning and not involve students so that students are less active. Learning often takes place in one direction without involving students. Due to the lack of an active role of students then students are less engaged in the lesson, not creative, and not interested in following the lessons taught by the teacher. Basically, the teacher acts as a motivator, facilitator, mediator and mentor students in learning. Teachers should be able to increase curiosity and makes the students more active in participating in the lessons.

Physics sciences as part of the Natural Sciences (IPA) is an interesting subject that studied natural phenomena around that often we experience in daily life. However, the physical science learning is often seen as an abstract science theories presented in the form of a less appealing and seem tough, assume that physics is so difficult to be understood and mastered. Subjects are always taught physics with formulas without explaining the physics concept itself so impressed physics lessons to be difficult and tedious. Whereas physics requires more understanding than memorization and not just formulas learned in this lesson but also natural events that occur in the environment.

Learning physics has the objective to solve the problems faced by students in order to have a broader view and to have respect for the usefulness of physics as part of the natural sciences and technology (science and technology). However, reports from the bright print and electronic media showed unsatisfactory results on students' learning outcomes physics.

The quality of learning outcomes in Indonesia is still considered

inadequate, from interviews with researcher’s physics teacher at SMAN 1

Perbaungan known that the average value of final exams on the subjects of physics still unsatisfactory. The low of learning outcomes is due to students learning physics by learning difficulties experienced by students on any subject matter that result in decreased desire to learn the physics. Physics teacher also added that the different ability levels of students in the class is so far because

3 there are some students who have a great interest and there are also students who are not interested in the slightest to learn particular lessons Natural Sciences.

The interview and experience researcher in SMA N 1 Perbaungan seen that many students who are interested less in learn physics because of the formulas that we get in physics and assume that physics is hard because in both physics many things abstract and so students lost understanding of the physics behold often be found in daily life because physics not just learning about formulas but the natural phenomena happened.

Some teachers use only conventional learning models in physics lessons taught in class. The teacher does not use the learning model that correspond to the competencies to be achieved by students in a physics lesson, so that teaching and learning are not giving good results to the students. Many students are not learning competence achieved in the classroom because it does not appropriate model used by teachers.

From the problems discussed above, educators need to do varied learning model to foster interest in learning and students must comply with the competence to be achieved from these lessons. One can use the model of learning in the cooperative. Cooperative learning is a learning approach that focuses on the use of small groups of students to work together in maximizing learning conditions to achieve learning objectives. This Learning Model can be helping students acquire the academic content and skills to address important social and human relations goals and objectives (Arends: 2009).

Cooperative learning has been one of the most researched teaching models. In Arends, Cooperative learning lessons can be characterized by the following features:

 Students work in teams to master learning goals.

 Teams are made up of high-, average -, and low-Achieving students.  Whenever possible, teams include a racial, cultural, and gender mix.  Reward systems are oriented to the group as well as the individual.

The model of cooperative learning was developed to Achieve at least three important instructional goals: academic achievement, tolerance and acceptance to

4 diversity, and social skill development. In Arends, (Slavin: 1996) believed that the focus of cooperative learning group changes the norms of youth culture and makes it more acceptable to excel in academic learning tasks. In addition to changing norms associated with achievement, cooperative learning can benefit both low-and high-Achieving students who work together on academic tasks.

In this study various models of learning known one is cooperative learning. Majority of teachers think that they are already implementing cooperative learning each time having students work in small groups. But teachers have not noticed a structured classroom activity so that the role of each member of the group has not seen. In various types of cooperative learning recognized one of them is the type of cooperative learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD).

Based on the existence of these problems the author tries to do research in an effort to improve student learning outcomes by applying the model type Cooperative Learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) using mind mapping. Teachers using STAD present new academic information to students each week or on a regular basis, either through verbal presentation or text (Arends: 2009). In this study the researchers apply the type STAD cooperative model with the method of mind mapping. With these students can be more active in learning and understanding the concepts of physics itself is not just a physics formula and they can understand the purpose and concept of the formula. With this model STAD students can share their knowledge to friends who do not understand the study. Students can share their knowledge with friends and do not hesitate to ask your friends who already understand about the lesson. With mind mapping also students can be more innovative and creative in learning the full creation. Students are also able to express their understanding of physics with mind mapping.

Writer realizes fully that learning cooperative had reviewed by student. The research results that review before is done by Novita ( 2009 ) that uses kind of classroom cooperative obtained that study result of the student with average

5 73,33. Novita ( 2009 ) declaring that the influence significant between use kind of classroom cooperative type STAD against study result of the students.

The difference in general previous research with this study is that previous research, the type of cooperative learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) the student is unable to provide the required media while learning so that the learning process less attractive. In this study, in addition to determine the effect of cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) as well as to make the learning process interesting, so students do not easily get bored in learning physics.

Based on the above, the authors conducted a study using cooperative learning model type of Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X which will be held in SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan. The title is taken the author are: " The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type of Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Based on Mind Mapping on Learning Outcomes of Students in The Dynamic Electrics Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan Academic Year 2012/2013".

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background of the above problems, the main points of the problem taken as follows:

1. The results obtained by students studying physics is still low. 2. Lack of interest and motivation student against learning physics. 3. Teacher learning methods those are less varied and less precise. 4. Less involvement of students in learning.

1.3. Problem Limitation

Because of the breadth of the problems of research and lack of expertise and time, the researchers need do extent of the problem. The extent of the problem being investigated include:

6 1. Implementation of cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) with mind mapping method in the class. 2. Student learning outcomes in the subject matter of the Dynamic Electrics. 3. Subjects of research conducted at the Senior High School class X even

semester of the Academic year 2012/2013.

1.4. Problem Formulation

Based on the background of the above problems, the formulation of the problem in this research is:

1. How the learning outcomes of students using cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Mind Mapping based on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013?

2. How physics student learning outcomes using conventional learning model law on the Dynamic Electric subject matter in class X Senior High School SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan even semester academic year 2012/2013? 3. Is there any effect of using cooperative learning model type Student

Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013?

1.5. Goal Research

As for the objectives of this study were:

1. For know learning outcomes student with use cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on the subject matter in class X Dynamic Electrics semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

2. For know learning outcomes student with using a model of learning Conventional on material principal Dynamic Electrics in the even semester of class X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

7 3. For know large influence cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

1.6. Benefits of Research

The expected benefits of the research in this study are:

1. For provide opportunity to student for expand insight knowledge in the learning process.

2. For material input for physics teachers in selecting appropriate learning model.

3. For provide experience on reader in embed concept - the concept physics. 4. For reference for researcher in do more research further.

1.7. Operational Definition

Operational definition presented in this study as follows:

1. Teaching is a process that works guiding and developing self appropriate with task development should run by students it.

2. Learning type cooperative Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping is one of type or model of learning cooperatively designed for affect pattern interaction student and as an alternative to structure class traditional for grow comprehension concept.

3. Learning Conventional is teaching usually teachers do in classroom use method expository, question and answer and discussion.

4. Learning outcomes is mastery relationships that have been obtainable so that he can produce experience and mastery material lessons learned.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Based on the analysis of the results obtained, the authors present conclusions and suggestions as follows:

5.1. Conclusion

1. Learning outcomes students experiment class are given preferential treatment by using cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in Electric Dynamic subject matter in class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013, with an average value of 34,1 pretes and average value of postes 76,56 include in the good category.

2. Learning outcomes students control class are given preferential treatment by using conventional learning model in Electric Dynamic subject matter in class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013, with an average value of 32,94 pretes and average value of postes 70,48 include in the good category.

3. There is any effect of the model type of Cooperative Learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013.

62 5.2. Suggestion

1. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better direct the students more actively in the discussion groups.

2. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better guide students in discussion groups.

3. The researchers want to further examine the type of cooperative learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) furthermore, in order to use the time as effectively as possible.

4. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better the conceptual of physics in the group discussion and test individual.

63 REFERENCES

Aldrich, Clark. 2005. Learing by Doing. Pfeiffer An Important of Willey. San Fransisco

Arends, Richard I. 2009. Learning to Teach Eighth Edition. Mc Graw-Hill. New York

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian. Penerbit Rineka Cipta. Jakarta. Edminister, Joseph A & Mahmood Nahwi. 2003. Theory and Problems of Electric

Circuit Fourth Edition. Mc Graw-Hill. New York.

Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Univertias Negeri Medan, (2008), Buku Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi Mahasiswa dan Standar Operasional (SOP) Kepembimbingan Skripsi program Studi Pendidikan, FMIPA Unimed, Medan

Hergenhahn,B.R.,Olson, M.H,(2008)., Teori Belajar, Edisi ke 7 , Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.

Hewit, Paul G. 2006. Conceptual Physics Tenth Edition. Pearson Addison Wesley. San Francisco

James, dkk. 1970. Studying Teaching. Prentice Hall. USA.

Joyce, Bruce & Marsha Weil.1980. Model of Teaching Second Edition. Prentice-Hall. USA

Klein, Stephen B. 1991. Learning Principles & Applications Second Edition. McGraw-Hill. Singapore

Mudyahardjo, Redja. 2009. Pengantar Pendidikan. Raja Grafindo Persada. Jakarta.

Novita.2009. Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Koperatif Tipe STAD Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa Pada Materi Pokok Gerak Lurus di Kelas X SMA N 1 Hamparan Perak TP 2009/2010. Skripsi. FMIPA,UNIMED. Medan Pidarta, Made.2007. Landasan Kependidikan. Asdi Mahasatya. Jakarta. Slavin, R. Cooperative Learning. Nusa Media. Bandung.

Sudjana,N. 2002. Metode Statistik. Penerbit Tarsito. Bandung.

Trianto. 2007. Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif Berorientasi konstruktivistik. Prestasi Pustaka Publisher, Jakarta.

5 73,33. Novita ( 2009 ) declaring that the influence significant between use kind of classroom cooperative type STAD against study result of the students.

The difference in general previous research with this study is that previous research, the type of cooperative learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) the student is unable to provide the required media while learning so that the learning process less attractive. In this study, in addition to determine the effect of cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) as well as to make the learning process interesting, so students do not easily get bored in learning physics.

Based on the above, the authors conducted a study using cooperative learning model type of Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X which will be held in SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan. The title is taken the author are: " The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Type of Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Based on Mind Mapping on Learning Outcomes of Students in The Dynamic Electrics Subject Matter in Class X Even Semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan Academic Year 2012/2013".

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background of the above problems, the main points of the problem taken as follows:

1. The results obtained by students studying physics is still low. 2. Lack of interest and motivation student against learning physics. 3. Teacher learning methods those are less varied and less precise. 4. Less involvement of students in learning.

1.3. Problem Limitation

Because of the breadth of the problems of research and lack of expertise and time, the researchers need do extent of the problem. The extent of the problem being investigated include:

6 1. Implementation of cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) with mind mapping method in the class. 2. Student learning outcomes in the subject matter of the Dynamic Electrics. 3. Subjects of research conducted at the Senior High School class X even

semester of the Academic year 2012/2013.

1.4. Problem Formulation

Based on the background of the above problems, the formulation of the problem in this research is:

1. How the learning outcomes of students using cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) Mind Mapping based on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013?

2. How physics student learning outcomes using conventional learning model law on the Dynamic Electric subject matter in class X Senior High School SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan even semester academic year 2012/2013? 3. Is there any effect of using cooperative learning model type Student

Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013?

1.5. Goal Research

As for the objectives of this study were:

1. For know learning outcomes student with use cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on the subject matter in class X Dynamic Electrics semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

2. For know learning outcomes student with using a model of learning Conventional on material principal Dynamic Electrics in the even semester of class X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

7 3. For know large influence cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter in class X even semester SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan academic year 2012/2013.

1.6. Benefits of Research

The expected benefits of the research in this study are:

1. For provide opportunity to student for expand insight knowledge in the learning process.

2. For material input for physics teachers in selecting appropriate learning model.

3. For provide experience on reader in embed concept - the concept physics. 4. For reference for researcher in do more research further.

1.7. Operational Definition

Operational definition presented in this study as follows:

1. Teaching is a process that works guiding and developing self appropriate with task development should run by students it.

2. Learning type cooperative Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping is one of type or model of learning cooperatively designed for affect pattern interaction student and as an alternative to structure class traditional for grow comprehension concept.

3. Learning Conventional is teaching usually teachers do in classroom use method expository, question and answer and discussion.

4. Learning outcomes is mastery relationships that have been obtainable so that he can produce experience and mastery material lessons learned.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Based on the analysis of the results obtained, the authors present conclusions and suggestions as follows:

5.1. Conclusion

1. Learning outcomes students experiment class are given preferential treatment by using cooperative learning model type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in Electric Dynamic subject matter in class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013, with an average value of 34,1 pretes and average value of postes 76,56 include in the good category.

2. Learning outcomes students control class are given preferential treatment by using conventional learning model in Electric Dynamic subject matter in class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013, with an average value of 32,94 pretes and average value of postes 70,48 include in the good category.

3. There is any effect of the model type of Cooperative Learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) based on mind mapping on learning outcomes of students in the Dynamic Electrics subject matter class X semester II SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2012/2013.

62 5.2. Suggestion

1. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better direct the students more actively in the discussion groups.

2. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better guide students in discussion groups.

3. The researchers want to further examine the type of cooperative learning Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) furthermore, in order to use the time as effectively as possible.

4. The researchers want to further examine the cooperative learning model of the type Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in order to better the conceptual of physics in the group discussion and test individual.

63 REFERENCES

Aldrich, Clark. 2005. Learing by Doing. Pfeiffer An Important of Willey. San Fransisco

Arends, Richard I. 2009. Learning to Teach Eighth Edition. Mc Graw-Hill. New York

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian. Penerbit Rineka Cipta. Jakarta. Edminister, Joseph A & Mahmood Nahwi. 2003. Theory and Problems of Electric

Circuit Fourth Edition. Mc Graw-Hill. New York.

Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Univertias Negeri Medan, (2008), Buku Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi Mahasiswa dan Standar Operasional (SOP) Kepembimbingan Skripsi program Studi Pendidikan, FMIPA Unimed, Medan

Hergenhahn,B.R.,Olson, M.H,(2008)., Teori Belajar, Edisi ke 7 , Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.

Hewit, Paul G. 2006. Conceptual Physics Tenth Edition. Pearson Addison Wesley. San Francisco

James, dkk. 1970. Studying Teaching. Prentice Hall. USA.

Joyce, Bruce & Marsha Weil.1980. Model of Teaching Second Edition. Prentice-Hall. USA

Klein, Stephen B. 1991. Learning Principles & Applications Second Edition. McGraw-Hill. Singapore

Mudyahardjo, Redja. 2009. Pengantar Pendidikan. Raja Grafindo Persada. Jakarta.

Novita.2009. Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Koperatif Tipe STAD Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa Pada Materi Pokok Gerak Lurus di Kelas X SMA N 1 Hamparan Perak TP 2009/2010. Skripsi. FMIPA,UNIMED. Medan Pidarta, Made.2007. Landasan Kependidikan. Asdi Mahasatya. Jakarta. Slavin, R. Cooperative Learning. Nusa Media. Bandung.

Sudjana,N. 2002. Metode Statistik. Penerbit Tarsito. Bandung.

Trianto. 2007. Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif Berorientasi konstruktivistik. Prestasi Pustaka Publisher, Jakarta.