THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) TYPE TO IMPROVE THE SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS IN STATIC FLUID SUBJECT GRADE X EVEN SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 1 DUMAI ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016.
THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL GROUP
INVESTIGATION (GI) TYPE TO IMPROVE THE SCIENCE
PROCESS SKILLS IN STATIC FLUID SUBJECT
GRADE X EVEN SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 1
DUMAI ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
BY:
Dian Purnamasari
ID Number. 4123121011
Bilingual Physics Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2016
i
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Dian Purnamasari was born in Dumai on January 01st 1996. Father’s name
is H. Izhardi and Mother’s name is Hj. Tempurnawati, S.Pd.Kim, and she is the
second of two siblings. In 2001, the author entered SD 2 YKPP Dumai and
graduated in 2007. In 2007, the author continued her education in SMP N 2
Dumai at acceleration class and graduated in 2009. In 2009, the author continued
her education to SMA N 2 Dumai and graduated 2012. In 2012, the author was
accepted in Physical Education Studies Program in Department of Physics,
Faculty of Mathematics and Science in State University of Medan.
iii
The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group Investigation (GI) Type to
Improve The Science Process Skills in Static Fluid Subject Grade X Even
Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year 2015/2016
Dian Purnamasari (ID. 4123121011)
ABSTRACT
The research aims to know the effect of cooperative learning model type
group investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid subject. This
research was carried out in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Dumai on 2nd semester
Academic Year 2015/2016. This research used quasi experiment type with pretestposttest control group design. Population consisting of two classes. Sample was
taken using technique of cluster random sampling. The number of research sample
is 28 students for experiment class and 29 students for control class. The data of
Science Process Skill is taken by using instrument test in form of essay question
from ten indicators. During the treatment process experiment class was learned by
using cooperative learning model type group investigation, while control class
was learned by conventional learning model. From the result of data calculation
there was differences of mean between two classes, the value obtained of postest
are tcount is about 1.78 and ttable 1.67. Therefore can be concluded that the
instrument of postest just valid for 12 students from 57 students if we see in the
table t distribution and tcount > ttable it means Ha accepted by using t-test one tail ten
indicators were tested. The result shows science process skill in cooperative
learning model type group investigation significantly higher than control class.
The students that give treatment with cooperative learning model type GI in static
fluid have increase in learning outcomes, social skill between each group or
individu because formed in heterogeneous group, the attitude among friend and
science process skill because the students in group together to investigate
problems about static fluid topic. This learning model require the students to be
able to plan the topics to be discussed and train the student’s self-confident to
explain the results of group discussions in front of the class. Result of student
activity also showed student in GI class has good dicipline, cooperate, honesty,
and responsible. It can be concluded that there is the effect of cooperative learning
model type group investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid
subject.
Keyword: Cooperative Learning Model Type GI, Conventional Learning, Science
Process Skill, Static Fluid
iv
PREFACE
First of all the author would like to express gratitude to Allah SWT, the
most gracious and merciful for the opportunity and possibility in completing this
thesis, therefore the thesis entitled "The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model
Group Investigation (GI) Type to Improve The Science Process Skills in Static
Fluid Subject Grade X Even Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year
2015/2016". This thesis was prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics
Education (Sarjana Pendidikan Fisika), Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Science in State University of Medan.
On this occasion the author likes to thank Mr. Dr. Ridwan Abd. Sani,
M.Si as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author
since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis. Thanks also to
Prof. Dr. Nurdin Bukit, M.Si, Dr. Eidi Sihombing, M.S., and Dr. Nurdin Siregar,
M.Si., who have provided many advices and suggestions in completing this thesis.
Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturers and staff employees of Physics
Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State University of
Medan who have encourage the writer during the studying process. Sincere
appreciation was also presented to Principal of SMA N 1 Dumai, Mr. Drs. Auzar,
M.Si, Mrs. Adelia Syahfitri, S.Pd as Physics teacher and Mrs. Tis, S.Si, who had
helped the author during the implementation of this research. Especially, author
also would say thanks to my great lovely father H. Izhardi, my great lovely
mother Hj. Tempurnawati, S.Pd.Kim, my great brother Dinov Fadli, S.E, my great
aunt Dr. Ida Suryati, M.Si, my great uncle Drs. Awalludin, M.Si and all my
family. And thanks also for my great family, students of SMA N 1 Dumai, and
Bilingual Physics Education grade 2012 include Rini, Debora, Reni, Silfi, Dinda,
Dwira, Novita and Rohani, my PPL friends especially Lisna, Mian, and Asmah,
my great friends in MMTC Complex No. 35 boarding house especially my new
family, brother Reza, sister Febry, Miza, Eka, Endang, Oka, Egy, Tari, Isna who
have given loves, motivations and advices to the author.
v
The author has endeavored as much as possible in completing this thesis,
but the author is aware there are many mistakes either in terms of content or
grammar, then the author welcome for any suggestions and constructive criticism
from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hopes the contents of this thesis
would be useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan,
July 2016
Author,
Dian Purnamasari
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Approval Sheet
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Table of Content
vi
Tables
ix
Illustration
x
Appendices
xi
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1
1.2 Problem Identification
5
1.3 Problem Limitation
5
1.4 Problem Formulation
6
1.5 Research Objective
6
1.6 Research Benefit
6
1.7 Operational Definition
7
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Learning Model
2.1.1 Definition of Learning Model
2.2 Cooperative Learning Model
8
8
8
2.2.1 Definition and Characterized
8
2.2.2 Cooperative Learning Model Goals
9
2.2.3 Syntax of Cooperative Learning Model
10
2.3 Group Investigation
2.3.1 Syntax of Group Investigation
11
12
vi
vii
2.3.2 Social System
13
2.3.3 Principles of Reaction
13
2.3.4 Support System
13
2.3.5 Application
14
2.3.6 Instructional and Nurturant Effects
14
2.4 Science Process Skill
2.4.1 Classification of Science Process Skills
2.5 Learning Materials of Static Fluid
15
16
18
2.5.1 Definition of Static Fluid
18
2.5.2 Density
18
2.5.3 Pressure
19
2.5.4 Hydrostatic Pressure
20
2.5.5 Pascal’s Law
22
2.5.5.1 Vessel Related
23
2.5.6 Archimedes Law
23
2.5.7 Surface Tension
26
2.5.8 Capillarity
29
2.5.9 Viscosity
32
2.6 Previous Research
34
2.7 Conceptual Framework
37
2.8 Research Hypoyhesis
38
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODS
3.1. Research Location and Research Time
39
3.2. Population and Sample Research
39
3.2.1. Population of Research
39
3.2.2. Sample of Research
39
3.3 Research Variables
39
3.4 Type and Design Research
40
3.5.Procedure Research
40
3.5.1 Preparation Stages
41
viii
3.5.2 Implementation Stages
41
3.5.3 Completion Stages
41
3.6. Research Instrument
43
3.6.1 Affective
43
3.6.2 Science Process Skills Test
44
3.6.2.1 Observation Instruments Science Process Skills
3.6.3 Cognitive Test
45
47
3.6.3.1 Validity Test
47
3.6.4 Data Analysis Techniques
50
3.6.4.1 Calculating the Average Value and Standard Deviation
50
3.6.4.2 N-Gain Analysis
51
3.6.4.3 Normality Test
51
3.6.4.4 Homogeneity Test
52
3.6.4.5 Hypothesis Test
53
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Research of Research
56
4.1.1
Result of Science Process Skill of Student
56
4.1.2
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
4.1.3
Normality and Homogeneity Test Result
60
4.1.4
Hypothesis Test Data Pretest
61
4.1.5
Hypothesis Test Data Postest
62
4.2 Discussion
62
4.2.1
Cooperative Learning Model of Type GI and SPS of Student
62
4.2.2
Cooperative Learning Model of Type GI and Student Activity
64
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
67
5.2 Suggestions
68
BIBLIOGRAPHY
69
ix
TABLES
Table 2.1
Syntax of Cooperative Learning Model
11
Table 2.2
Aspect of Science Process Skill
17
Table 2.3
Table of Density
19
Table 2.4
Previous Researchers of Group Investigation
34
Table 3.1
The Design of Research
40
Table 3.2
Grid Science Process Skills Test
44
Table 3.3
Achievement Level Indicator Observation SPS
45
Table 3.4
Rate Sheet Observation SPS
46
Table 3.5
Description Category Percent of SPS
47
Table 4.1
Pretest Result
57
Table 4.2
Posttest Result
58
Table 4.3
N-gain Result
59
Table 4.4
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
Table 4.5
Normality Test Result
60
Table 4.6
Homogeneity Test Result
61
Table 4.7
Hypothesis Test Data Pretest Experiment Class and
Control Class
Table 4.8
61
Hypothesis Test Data Postest Experiment Class and
Control Class
62
x
ILLUSTRATION
Figure 2.1
Instructional Outcomes for Cooperative Learning
10
Figure 2.2
Learner Outcomes for Cooperative Learning
10
Figure 2.3
Instructional and Nurturant Effects: GI Model
15
Figure 2.4
Classification of Science Process Skills
16
Figure 2.5
Classification of Basic Science Process Skill
17
Figure 2.6
Hydrostatic Pressure
20
Figure 2.7
Hydrostatic Principal
21
Figure 2.8
Atomizer Pascal
22
Figure 2.9
Pascal’s law on the Piston
22
Figure 2.10
Vessel Related
23
Figure 2.11
Archimedes Forces
23
Figure 2.12
Buoyancy Forces
24
Figure 2.13
Floating Object
25
Figure 2.14
Drifting Object
26
Figure 2.15
Sinking Object
26
Figure 2.16
Surface Tension Examples
26
Figure 2.17
The Attractive Force between Molecules
27
Figure 2.18
Surface Tension Evidence
28
Figure 2.19
Capillary Tube in Water and Mercury
29
Figure 2.20
The Water Level in the Capillary Tube
30
Figure 2.21
The Surface of the Mercury in the Capillary Tube
30
Figure 2.22
Capillary Tube in Liquids
31
Figure 2.23
Stokes Force
33
Figure 3.1
Stage Research Work
42
Figure 4.1
Science Process Skill Ability of Student
56
Figure 4.2
Distribution of Pretest Result
57
Figure 4.3
Distribution of Postest Result
58
Figure 4.4
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
xi
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Lesson Plan-1
71
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan-2
88
Appendix 3
Lesson Plan-3
106
Appendix 4
Students Worksheet-1
122
Appendix 5
Students Worksheet-2
138
Appendix 6
Students Worksheet-3
153
Appendix 7
Lattice Test SPS
165
Appendix 8
Pretest Data Distribution
173
Appendix 9
Postest Data Distribution
175
Appendix 10
The Calculation of Mean, SD and Varians
177
Appendix 11
Normality Test
180
Appendix 12
Homogeneity Test
185
Appendix 13
Hypothesis Test
187
Appendix 14
N-gain test
191
Appendix 15
List of Posttest Score and SPS Score
193
Appendix 16
Counting The Correlation Coefficient
194
Appendix 17
Affective Assessment Criteria
195
Appendix 18
Observation Sheet Affective Assessment
196
Appendix 19
Criteria Scoring Process Skill of Student
198
Appendix 20
Observation Sheet of SPS
201
Appendix 21
Research Documentation
207
Appendix 22
List of Critical Value for Liliefors
210
Appendix 23
Table of Normality-test
211
Appendix 24
Table of F-distribution
212
Appendix 25
List of percentil Value of t-distribution
214
Appendix 26
r-Product Moment Value
215
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Education is a conscious effort that is intentionally designed to achieve the
goal set. Education aims to improve the quality of human resources. Therefore it
is necessary to improve the quality of human resources through learning process
at school. The assessment of learning process toward a more effective and
efficient in inseparable from the role of the teacher as the spearhead of learning in
school.
Physics is just one of the science lessons, and it is a discipline based on
qualitative and quantitative measurements for understanding natural phenomena
around us. Students have difficulty learning physics because physics consists of
more abstract concepts. Many studies were conducted by researchers about
physics, especially force and motion, to better understand them (Doymuş, 2012).
In the curriculum have confirmed that learning Science should emphasize
the mastery of competencies through a series of scientific process. A series of
scientific process is expected to develop the experience to be able to define
problems, propose and test hypotheses through experimentation, design and
assemble the experimental instruments, collect, process and interpret data, and
communicate the results of the experiment orally and in writing (Depdiknas,
2006).
The description above describes that a series of scientific process that
meant is science process skills. Thus, the learning activities of physics in
SMA/MA becomes very important to provide a learning experience directly
through skill development and scientific attitude.
The experience learned directly through the skills development process
and scientific attitude, the learning process that originally centered on the teacher
(teacher centered) are expected to turn out to be a learning process centered on the
student (student centered).
2
The facts on the field show different things. The learning activities are still
centered on the teacher (teacher centered). This is consistent with the observation
in SMA Negeri 1 Dumai that the learning activities are still dominated by the
teacher. Early learning activities the teacher provides learning materials and
students only pay attention, then the teacher gives problems to be solved.
Teachers provide opportunities for discussion so that the matter can be resolved.
However, only 5 of the 30 students making discussions. Here we can see the lack
of social interaction in heterogeneous groups. Furthermore, students who have
completed the matter to come forward to explain to the students in the class. At
the end of the lesson, the teacher provides the opportunity for students to ask
questions about the material that has been given. Students are not familiar
involves cognitive skills or intellectual, manual and social.
Through this method, the student's science process skills are
underdeveloped. It is supported by the results of further observations of the
science process skills during a lesson in class X-Science 1, with the data obtained
as follows: the skill of asking questions of 7.90%, observed of 21.49%; applying
the concept of 6.58%; communicates of 4.61%, while the science process skills of
students in the aspect of asking questions, interpret data, hypothesize, research
plan, organize tools and materials, and predicted not appear. In addition, student
achievement grade X is still low. It is characterized by the results of the midterm
(UTS) in physics achieved by students in the first semester academic year
2015/2016 on average only around 36.88. The average value is still less
satisfactory because a lot of students who received predicate C with KKM 60.
This school uses a national curriculum with the assessment system based on the
predicate. Based on the results of the midterm exam, many students still relatively
predicate C. Some students who achieved predicate B and A. The purpose of
learning physics based on the national curriculum of student-centered learning
activities (student centered) has not been reached.
Based on the observation data from the distribution of a questionnaire
conducted by researchers of December 17th 2015 at X-Science 1 and X-Science 2
3
Class in SMA N 1 Dumai of 57 students which contains questions about activities,
interests and motivation of students to the physics. From the questionnaire it was
found that 45.12% of students said that Physics is hard, boring and unattractive,
54.88% said that physics is an easy lesson, understandable and enjoyable. From
the results of the questionnaire also acquired 0.45% of the students in the class
who stated quite liked physics, while 22, 15% of the class of students who
expressed like physics, then 52, 25% of the class of students who said it was not
like a physics lesson and 25.15% of the class of students who declare mediocre.
From these data it is seen that most students do not like physics because they
consider the physics lessons always synonymous with mathematical formulas that
are difficult to memorize that ultimately give rise to the impression that the
Physics scary and unpleasant. Students become passive during the learning
process. Motivation of students to physics learning still low so that students tend
to be passive in the learning process. As a result, it is often encountered students
talking in class, play cell phone, or draw when learning takes place.
Based on observations in SMA N 1 Dumai, teachers pay more attention
to competency assessment of knowledge, especially physics teachers. It can be
seen many physics teachers provide practice problems in school, homework and
group assignments. According to Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015 Clause 8 explains
that educators assess student knowledge competency through written tests, oral
tests, and assignments in accordance with the competencies assessed. Attitudes
and skills competency assessment underestimated. Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015
Clause 8 explains that educators do attitude competency assessment through
observation as a primary source of information and reporting become the
responsibility of homeroom or classroom teachers. In connection with the
assessment of skills, Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015 Clause 8 explains that
educators assess competency skills through the performance assessment, the
assessment that requires learners to demonstrate a certain competence by using
the practice test, product, project, portfolio, and / or other techniques in
accordance with the competencies assessed. (Permendikbud, 2015).
4
Seeing these facts, the need for an effort to improve learning achievement
and the development of science process skills by selecting the appropriate
learning models the model of learning that support increased student achievement
and have different stages of learning are capable of developing science process
skills in students. One model of learning that has a goal to improve learning
achievement is a cooperative learning model type group investigation. This can be
seen on the stages of the model of cooperative learning type group investigation
with aspects of science process skills there is a relationship between both of them,
so expect the science process skills can be explored and trained to apply this
learning model.
Results of research conducted by China (2008) that the cooperative
learning model type group investigation can improve science process skills of
high school students, then Nurfarida (2009) reported that the cooperative learning
model type group investigation may improve the mastery of concepts of fluid
static and Rahayu (2010) reported that cooperative learning model type group
investigation can improve learning achievement and science process skills of
students. Based on these studies, it is suggested in order to develop a model of
cooperative learning group investigation to improve student's science process
skills in addition to skills hypothesize aspect, communicating, and asking
questions, and develop cooperative learning model type group investigation for
other subjects.
From the description, the researcher is interested to examine the science
process skills of physics in high school with cooperative learning model type
group investigation. This is in accordance with the advice of previous researchers
to implement cooperative learning model type group investigation on the othe
subject matter of physics in class X SMA. Model of cooperative learning type
group investigation apply to developing science process skills in eight of the ten
aspects of the science process skills that involve manual and social skills. This is
in accordance with the national curriculum that emphasizes on a series of
scientific process. Therefore, this research entitled :
5
“The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group Investigation (GI) Type
to Improve the Science Process Skills in Static Fluid Subject Grade X Even
Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai A.Y. 2015/2016”.
1.2
Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problems described above, it can be
identified problems relevant to this research are:
1.
Student achievement is still low, seen a lot of students achieved predicate C.
2.
Lack of motivation of students to physics learning so that students tend to be
passive in the learning process
3.
The learning activities are still centered on the teacher (teacher centered)
4.
The student's science process skills are underdeveloped like to ask questions,
observe, apply concepts, communicate, interpret data, hypothesize, research
plan, organize tools and materials, and predicted not appear.
5.
Lack of social interaction in the heterogen groups
6.
Teachers only see the knowledge competency assessments rather than attitude
and skills competency assessment
7.
Students are not accustomed involve cognitive or intellectual skills, manual
and social
1.3
Problem Limitation
To give a clear scope in the discussion, there should be restrictions on the
problem in the research are as follows:
1. The learning model used is Cooperative Learning Model Type GI (Group
Investigation) in the experimental group and the conventional learning
model in the control class.
2. This research will be investigated the science process skills Physics
students.
6
1.4
Problem Formulation
Based on the problem limitation has been stated above, then that
becomes the problem formulation in this research: Is there the effect of
cooperative learning model GI with science process skills approach of students of
class X Semester II SMA Negeri 1 Dumai in the subject matter Static Fluid A.Y
2015/2016 ?
1.5
Research Objective
Based on the problem formulations above, the objectives to be achieved
in this study to determine the effect of cooperative learning model GI approach
science process skills of class X SMA Negeri 1 Semester II Dumai in the subject
matter Static Fluid A.Y 2015/2016.
1.6
Research Benefit
The benefits expected from the results of this study are:
For teacher :
1.
Giving consideration for teachers to improve science process skills of
students by providing alternative selecting and applying appropriate learning
models.
2.
Giving more insight to recognize the application of GI models in physics
learning.
For student :
Train science process skills of students as well as providing an atmosphere that is
different from the classroom learning methods were applied.
For researcher :
Expanding their knowledge and experience in the learning of physics by using
cooperative learning model type group investigation (GI).
7
For school :
Can be used as input in an effort to improve the quality of learning in the learning
process at the school
1.7
Operational Definition
The operational definition given in order to avoid the occurrence of
different perceptions of terms available:
1.
Group Investigation is perhaps the most complex of the cooperative learning
approaches and the most difficult to implement. The GI approach normally
divide their classes into five or six member heterogeneous groups. In some
instances, however, groups may form around friendships or around an interest
in a particular topic. Students select topics for study, pursue in-depth
investigations of chosen subtopics, and then prepare and present a report to
the whole class (Arends, 2012: 369).
2.
Science process skills have been described as mental and physical abilities
and competencies which serve as tools needed for the effective study of
science and technology as well as problem solving, individual and societal
development (Akinbobola, 2010: 234). The science process skills which
should be engendered in the teaching and studying of science are those of
measuring, observing, classifying, inferring, predicting, communicating,
interpreting data, making operational
definitions,
posing questions,
hypothesizing, experimenting and formulating models (Ango, 2002: 15).
67
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion, the conclusions
of this research are as followings as below:
1. Implementing of cooperative learning model of type group
investigation (GI) can improve activity of student including of observe,
measure, calculate, predict, hypothesize, interpret data, apply, make
conclusions and communicate, which of in learning process by
implementing cooperative learning model of type group investigation
(GI), students have a good criteria of dicipline, cooperate, honesty and
responsible.
2. From the result of data calculation there was differences of mean
between two classes, the value obtained of postest are tcount is about
1.78 and ttable 1.67. Therefore can be concluded that the instrument of
postest just valid for 12 students from 57 students if we see in the table
t distribution.
3. The students that give treatment with cooperative learning model type
GI in static fluid have increase in learning outcomes, social skill
between each group or individu because formed in heterogeneous
group, the attitude among friend and science process skill because the
students in group together to investigate problems about static fluid
topic. This learning model require the students to be able to plan the
topics to be discussed and train the student’s self-confident to explain
the results of group discussions in front the class. It can be concluded
that there is the effect of cooperative learning model type group
investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid subject in
grade X SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year 2015/2016.
68
5.2.
Suggestions
Based on the research result, data analysis, discussion, and weakness had
been faced such as the researcher has a barrier with timing when implement
cooperative learning model of type group investigation (GI) in do the experiment
and write the discussion of student worksheet (LKS), researcher suggest these
things; reduce the indicator in the lesson plan (RPP) about the science process
skill of student in static fluid subject.
69
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aderogba, A.A., Oyelekan, O.S., (2010), Enhancing Transformative Science
Education in Nigeria Through the Use of Science Process Skills,
International Journal of Contemporary issues in Education 2: 206-212.
Akçay, N.O., Doymuş, K., (2012), The Effects of Group Investigation and
Cooperative Learning Techniques Applied in Teaching Force and Motion
Subjects on Students’ Academic Achievements, Journal of Educational
Sciences Research 2(1).
Akçay, N.O., Doymuş, K., (2014), The Effect of Different Methods of Cooperative
Learning Model on Academic Achievement in Physic, Journal of Turkish
Science Education 11 (4): 17-30, ISSN: 1304-602.
Akinbobola, A.O., Afolabi, F., (2010), Analysis of Science Process Skills in West
African Senior Secondary School Certificate Physics Practical
Examinations in Nigeria, American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific
Research 5 (4): 234-240.
Anggraini, L., (2015), Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to
Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in SMP Negeri 11 Medan
A.Y 2014/2015, Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Ango, M.L., (2002), Mastery of Science Process Skills and Their Effective Use in
the Teaching of Science: An Educology of Science Education in the
Nigerian Context, International Journal of Educology 16 (1): 11-30.
Arends, R.I., Kilcher, A., (2010), Teaching for Student Learning Becoming an
Accomplished Teacher, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, New York.
Arends, R.I., (2012), Learning to Teach Ninth Edition, Mc.Graw-Hill, New York.
Arikunto, S., (2013), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Gillies, R.M., Ashman, A.F., (2003), Cooperative learning : the social and
intellectual outcomes of learning in groups, Routledge Falmer, USA.
Guevara., Almario, C., (2015), Science Process Skills Development through
Innovations in Science Teaching, Research Journal of Educational
Sciences 3 (2): 6-10, ISSN 2321-0508.
Jolliffe, W., (2007), Cooperative Learning in The Classroom, C&M Digitals (P)
Ltd, New Delhi.
70
Joyce, B., Weil, M., (2003), Models of Teaching, 5th Ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., New
Delhi.
Kagan, S., Kagan, M., (2009), Kagan Cooperative Learning, Kagan Publishing,
Canada.
Kanginan, M., (2006), Fisika untuk SMA/MA Kelas XI, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Panjaitan, E.S., (2015), The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group
Investigation (GI) Type to Conceptual Knowledge Student’s in Topic Optic
Geometry Grade X SMA N 1 Perbaungan A.Y 2014/2015, Universitas
Negeri Medan, Medan.
Şimşek, U., Yilar, B., Küçük, B., (2013), The Effects of Cooperative Learning
Methods on Students’ Academic Achievements in Social Psychology
Lessons, International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their
Implications 4, ISSN 1309-6249.
Sudjana, (2009), Metode Statistika, Penerbit Tarsito, Bandung.
Sugiyono, (2012), Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&B, Alfabeta,
Bandung.
Yadav, B., Mishra, S.K., (2013), A Study of The Impact of Laboratory Approach
on Achievement and Process Skills in Science among Is Standard
Students,International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 3:
1-6, ISSN 2250-3153.
INVESTIGATION (GI) TYPE TO IMPROVE THE SCIENCE
PROCESS SKILLS IN STATIC FLUID SUBJECT
GRADE X EVEN SEMESTER SMA NEGERI 1
DUMAI ACADEMIC YEAR 2015/2016
BY:
Dian Purnamasari
ID Number. 4123121011
Bilingual Physics Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to Acquire Eliglible Sarjana Pendidikan
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2016
i
ii
BIOGRAPHY
Dian Purnamasari was born in Dumai on January 01st 1996. Father’s name
is H. Izhardi and Mother’s name is Hj. Tempurnawati, S.Pd.Kim, and she is the
second of two siblings. In 2001, the author entered SD 2 YKPP Dumai and
graduated in 2007. In 2007, the author continued her education in SMP N 2
Dumai at acceleration class and graduated in 2009. In 2009, the author continued
her education to SMA N 2 Dumai and graduated 2012. In 2012, the author was
accepted in Physical Education Studies Program in Department of Physics,
Faculty of Mathematics and Science in State University of Medan.
iii
The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group Investigation (GI) Type to
Improve The Science Process Skills in Static Fluid Subject Grade X Even
Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year 2015/2016
Dian Purnamasari (ID. 4123121011)
ABSTRACT
The research aims to know the effect of cooperative learning model type
group investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid subject. This
research was carried out in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Dumai on 2nd semester
Academic Year 2015/2016. This research used quasi experiment type with pretestposttest control group design. Population consisting of two classes. Sample was
taken using technique of cluster random sampling. The number of research sample
is 28 students for experiment class and 29 students for control class. The data of
Science Process Skill is taken by using instrument test in form of essay question
from ten indicators. During the treatment process experiment class was learned by
using cooperative learning model type group investigation, while control class
was learned by conventional learning model. From the result of data calculation
there was differences of mean between two classes, the value obtained of postest
are tcount is about 1.78 and ttable 1.67. Therefore can be concluded that the
instrument of postest just valid for 12 students from 57 students if we see in the
table t distribution and tcount > ttable it means Ha accepted by using t-test one tail ten
indicators were tested. The result shows science process skill in cooperative
learning model type group investigation significantly higher than control class.
The students that give treatment with cooperative learning model type GI in static
fluid have increase in learning outcomes, social skill between each group or
individu because formed in heterogeneous group, the attitude among friend and
science process skill because the students in group together to investigate
problems about static fluid topic. This learning model require the students to be
able to plan the topics to be discussed and train the student’s self-confident to
explain the results of group discussions in front of the class. Result of student
activity also showed student in GI class has good dicipline, cooperate, honesty,
and responsible. It can be concluded that there is the effect of cooperative learning
model type group investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid
subject.
Keyword: Cooperative Learning Model Type GI, Conventional Learning, Science
Process Skill, Static Fluid
iv
PREFACE
First of all the author would like to express gratitude to Allah SWT, the
most gracious and merciful for the opportunity and possibility in completing this
thesis, therefore the thesis entitled "The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model
Group Investigation (GI) Type to Improve The Science Process Skills in Static
Fluid Subject Grade X Even Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year
2015/2016". This thesis was prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree of Physics
Education (Sarjana Pendidikan Fisika), Faculty of Mathematics and Natural
Science in State University of Medan.
On this occasion the author likes to thank Mr. Dr. Ridwan Abd. Sani,
M.Si as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author
since the beginning of the study until the completion of this thesis. Thanks also to
Prof. Dr. Nurdin Bukit, M.Si, Dr. Eidi Sihombing, M.S., and Dr. Nurdin Siregar,
M.Si., who have provided many advices and suggestions in completing this thesis.
Thanks also for all Mr. and Mrs. lecturers and staff employees of Physics
Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State University of
Medan who have encourage the writer during the studying process. Sincere
appreciation was also presented to Principal of SMA N 1 Dumai, Mr. Drs. Auzar,
M.Si, Mrs. Adelia Syahfitri, S.Pd as Physics teacher and Mrs. Tis, S.Si, who had
helped the author during the implementation of this research. Especially, author
also would say thanks to my great lovely father H. Izhardi, my great lovely
mother Hj. Tempurnawati, S.Pd.Kim, my great brother Dinov Fadli, S.E, my great
aunt Dr. Ida Suryati, M.Si, my great uncle Drs. Awalludin, M.Si and all my
family. And thanks also for my great family, students of SMA N 1 Dumai, and
Bilingual Physics Education grade 2012 include Rini, Debora, Reni, Silfi, Dinda,
Dwira, Novita and Rohani, my PPL friends especially Lisna, Mian, and Asmah,
my great friends in MMTC Complex No. 35 boarding house especially my new
family, brother Reza, sister Febry, Miza, Eka, Endang, Oka, Egy, Tari, Isna who
have given loves, motivations and advices to the author.
v
The author has endeavored as much as possible in completing this thesis,
but the author is aware there are many mistakes either in terms of content or
grammar, then the author welcome for any suggestions and constructive criticism
from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hopes the contents of this thesis
would be useful in enriching the repertoire of knowledge.
Medan,
July 2016
Author,
Dian Purnamasari
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Approval Sheet
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Table of Content
vi
Tables
ix
Illustration
x
Appendices
xi
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1
1.2 Problem Identification
5
1.3 Problem Limitation
5
1.4 Problem Formulation
6
1.5 Research Objective
6
1.6 Research Benefit
6
1.7 Operational Definition
7
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Learning Model
2.1.1 Definition of Learning Model
2.2 Cooperative Learning Model
8
8
8
2.2.1 Definition and Characterized
8
2.2.2 Cooperative Learning Model Goals
9
2.2.3 Syntax of Cooperative Learning Model
10
2.3 Group Investigation
2.3.1 Syntax of Group Investigation
11
12
vi
vii
2.3.2 Social System
13
2.3.3 Principles of Reaction
13
2.3.4 Support System
13
2.3.5 Application
14
2.3.6 Instructional and Nurturant Effects
14
2.4 Science Process Skill
2.4.1 Classification of Science Process Skills
2.5 Learning Materials of Static Fluid
15
16
18
2.5.1 Definition of Static Fluid
18
2.5.2 Density
18
2.5.3 Pressure
19
2.5.4 Hydrostatic Pressure
20
2.5.5 Pascal’s Law
22
2.5.5.1 Vessel Related
23
2.5.6 Archimedes Law
23
2.5.7 Surface Tension
26
2.5.8 Capillarity
29
2.5.9 Viscosity
32
2.6 Previous Research
34
2.7 Conceptual Framework
37
2.8 Research Hypoyhesis
38
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODS
3.1. Research Location and Research Time
39
3.2. Population and Sample Research
39
3.2.1. Population of Research
39
3.2.2. Sample of Research
39
3.3 Research Variables
39
3.4 Type and Design Research
40
3.5.Procedure Research
40
3.5.1 Preparation Stages
41
viii
3.5.2 Implementation Stages
41
3.5.3 Completion Stages
41
3.6. Research Instrument
43
3.6.1 Affective
43
3.6.2 Science Process Skills Test
44
3.6.2.1 Observation Instruments Science Process Skills
3.6.3 Cognitive Test
45
47
3.6.3.1 Validity Test
47
3.6.4 Data Analysis Techniques
50
3.6.4.1 Calculating the Average Value and Standard Deviation
50
3.6.4.2 N-Gain Analysis
51
3.6.4.3 Normality Test
51
3.6.4.4 Homogeneity Test
52
3.6.4.5 Hypothesis Test
53
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Research of Research
56
4.1.1
Result of Science Process Skill of Student
56
4.1.2
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
4.1.3
Normality and Homogeneity Test Result
60
4.1.4
Hypothesis Test Data Pretest
61
4.1.5
Hypothesis Test Data Postest
62
4.2 Discussion
62
4.2.1
Cooperative Learning Model of Type GI and SPS of Student
62
4.2.2
Cooperative Learning Model of Type GI and Student Activity
64
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion
67
5.2 Suggestions
68
BIBLIOGRAPHY
69
ix
TABLES
Table 2.1
Syntax of Cooperative Learning Model
11
Table 2.2
Aspect of Science Process Skill
17
Table 2.3
Table of Density
19
Table 2.4
Previous Researchers of Group Investigation
34
Table 3.1
The Design of Research
40
Table 3.2
Grid Science Process Skills Test
44
Table 3.3
Achievement Level Indicator Observation SPS
45
Table 3.4
Rate Sheet Observation SPS
46
Table 3.5
Description Category Percent of SPS
47
Table 4.1
Pretest Result
57
Table 4.2
Posttest Result
58
Table 4.3
N-gain Result
59
Table 4.4
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
Table 4.5
Normality Test Result
60
Table 4.6
Homogeneity Test Result
61
Table 4.7
Hypothesis Test Data Pretest Experiment Class and
Control Class
Table 4.8
61
Hypothesis Test Data Postest Experiment Class and
Control Class
62
x
ILLUSTRATION
Figure 2.1
Instructional Outcomes for Cooperative Learning
10
Figure 2.2
Learner Outcomes for Cooperative Learning
10
Figure 2.3
Instructional and Nurturant Effects: GI Model
15
Figure 2.4
Classification of Science Process Skills
16
Figure 2.5
Classification of Basic Science Process Skill
17
Figure 2.6
Hydrostatic Pressure
20
Figure 2.7
Hydrostatic Principal
21
Figure 2.8
Atomizer Pascal
22
Figure 2.9
Pascal’s law on the Piston
22
Figure 2.10
Vessel Related
23
Figure 2.11
Archimedes Forces
23
Figure 2.12
Buoyancy Forces
24
Figure 2.13
Floating Object
25
Figure 2.14
Drifting Object
26
Figure 2.15
Sinking Object
26
Figure 2.16
Surface Tension Examples
26
Figure 2.17
The Attractive Force between Molecules
27
Figure 2.18
Surface Tension Evidence
28
Figure 2.19
Capillary Tube in Water and Mercury
29
Figure 2.20
The Water Level in the Capillary Tube
30
Figure 2.21
The Surface of the Mercury in the Capillary Tube
30
Figure 2.22
Capillary Tube in Liquids
31
Figure 2.23
Stokes Force
33
Figure 3.1
Stage Research Work
42
Figure 4.1
Science Process Skill Ability of Student
56
Figure 4.2
Distribution of Pretest Result
57
Figure 4.3
Distribution of Postest Result
58
Figure 4.4
Student Activity in Experiment Class
59
xi
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Lesson Plan-1
71
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan-2
88
Appendix 3
Lesson Plan-3
106
Appendix 4
Students Worksheet-1
122
Appendix 5
Students Worksheet-2
138
Appendix 6
Students Worksheet-3
153
Appendix 7
Lattice Test SPS
165
Appendix 8
Pretest Data Distribution
173
Appendix 9
Postest Data Distribution
175
Appendix 10
The Calculation of Mean, SD and Varians
177
Appendix 11
Normality Test
180
Appendix 12
Homogeneity Test
185
Appendix 13
Hypothesis Test
187
Appendix 14
N-gain test
191
Appendix 15
List of Posttest Score and SPS Score
193
Appendix 16
Counting The Correlation Coefficient
194
Appendix 17
Affective Assessment Criteria
195
Appendix 18
Observation Sheet Affective Assessment
196
Appendix 19
Criteria Scoring Process Skill of Student
198
Appendix 20
Observation Sheet of SPS
201
Appendix 21
Research Documentation
207
Appendix 22
List of Critical Value for Liliefors
210
Appendix 23
Table of Normality-test
211
Appendix 24
Table of F-distribution
212
Appendix 25
List of percentil Value of t-distribution
214
Appendix 26
r-Product Moment Value
215
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Education is a conscious effort that is intentionally designed to achieve the
goal set. Education aims to improve the quality of human resources. Therefore it
is necessary to improve the quality of human resources through learning process
at school. The assessment of learning process toward a more effective and
efficient in inseparable from the role of the teacher as the spearhead of learning in
school.
Physics is just one of the science lessons, and it is a discipline based on
qualitative and quantitative measurements for understanding natural phenomena
around us. Students have difficulty learning physics because physics consists of
more abstract concepts. Many studies were conducted by researchers about
physics, especially force and motion, to better understand them (Doymuş, 2012).
In the curriculum have confirmed that learning Science should emphasize
the mastery of competencies through a series of scientific process. A series of
scientific process is expected to develop the experience to be able to define
problems, propose and test hypotheses through experimentation, design and
assemble the experimental instruments, collect, process and interpret data, and
communicate the results of the experiment orally and in writing (Depdiknas,
2006).
The description above describes that a series of scientific process that
meant is science process skills. Thus, the learning activities of physics in
SMA/MA becomes very important to provide a learning experience directly
through skill development and scientific attitude.
The experience learned directly through the skills development process
and scientific attitude, the learning process that originally centered on the teacher
(teacher centered) are expected to turn out to be a learning process centered on the
student (student centered).
2
The facts on the field show different things. The learning activities are still
centered on the teacher (teacher centered). This is consistent with the observation
in SMA Negeri 1 Dumai that the learning activities are still dominated by the
teacher. Early learning activities the teacher provides learning materials and
students only pay attention, then the teacher gives problems to be solved.
Teachers provide opportunities for discussion so that the matter can be resolved.
However, only 5 of the 30 students making discussions. Here we can see the lack
of social interaction in heterogeneous groups. Furthermore, students who have
completed the matter to come forward to explain to the students in the class. At
the end of the lesson, the teacher provides the opportunity for students to ask
questions about the material that has been given. Students are not familiar
involves cognitive skills or intellectual, manual and social.
Through this method, the student's science process skills are
underdeveloped. It is supported by the results of further observations of the
science process skills during a lesson in class X-Science 1, with the data obtained
as follows: the skill of asking questions of 7.90%, observed of 21.49%; applying
the concept of 6.58%; communicates of 4.61%, while the science process skills of
students in the aspect of asking questions, interpret data, hypothesize, research
plan, organize tools and materials, and predicted not appear. In addition, student
achievement grade X is still low. It is characterized by the results of the midterm
(UTS) in physics achieved by students in the first semester academic year
2015/2016 on average only around 36.88. The average value is still less
satisfactory because a lot of students who received predicate C with KKM 60.
This school uses a national curriculum with the assessment system based on the
predicate. Based on the results of the midterm exam, many students still relatively
predicate C. Some students who achieved predicate B and A. The purpose of
learning physics based on the national curriculum of student-centered learning
activities (student centered) has not been reached.
Based on the observation data from the distribution of a questionnaire
conducted by researchers of December 17th 2015 at X-Science 1 and X-Science 2
3
Class in SMA N 1 Dumai of 57 students which contains questions about activities,
interests and motivation of students to the physics. From the questionnaire it was
found that 45.12% of students said that Physics is hard, boring and unattractive,
54.88% said that physics is an easy lesson, understandable and enjoyable. From
the results of the questionnaire also acquired 0.45% of the students in the class
who stated quite liked physics, while 22, 15% of the class of students who
expressed like physics, then 52, 25% of the class of students who said it was not
like a physics lesson and 25.15% of the class of students who declare mediocre.
From these data it is seen that most students do not like physics because they
consider the physics lessons always synonymous with mathematical formulas that
are difficult to memorize that ultimately give rise to the impression that the
Physics scary and unpleasant. Students become passive during the learning
process. Motivation of students to physics learning still low so that students tend
to be passive in the learning process. As a result, it is often encountered students
talking in class, play cell phone, or draw when learning takes place.
Based on observations in SMA N 1 Dumai, teachers pay more attention
to competency assessment of knowledge, especially physics teachers. It can be
seen many physics teachers provide practice problems in school, homework and
group assignments. According to Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015 Clause 8 explains
that educators assess student knowledge competency through written tests, oral
tests, and assignments in accordance with the competencies assessed. Attitudes
and skills competency assessment underestimated. Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015
Clause 8 explains that educators do attitude competency assessment through
observation as a primary source of information and reporting become the
responsibility of homeroom or classroom teachers. In connection with the
assessment of skills, Permendikbud No. 53 of 2015 Clause 8 explains that
educators assess competency skills through the performance assessment, the
assessment that requires learners to demonstrate a certain competence by using
the practice test, product, project, portfolio, and / or other techniques in
accordance with the competencies assessed. (Permendikbud, 2015).
4
Seeing these facts, the need for an effort to improve learning achievement
and the development of science process skills by selecting the appropriate
learning models the model of learning that support increased student achievement
and have different stages of learning are capable of developing science process
skills in students. One model of learning that has a goal to improve learning
achievement is a cooperative learning model type group investigation. This can be
seen on the stages of the model of cooperative learning type group investigation
with aspects of science process skills there is a relationship between both of them,
so expect the science process skills can be explored and trained to apply this
learning model.
Results of research conducted by China (2008) that the cooperative
learning model type group investigation can improve science process skills of
high school students, then Nurfarida (2009) reported that the cooperative learning
model type group investigation may improve the mastery of concepts of fluid
static and Rahayu (2010) reported that cooperative learning model type group
investigation can improve learning achievement and science process skills of
students. Based on these studies, it is suggested in order to develop a model of
cooperative learning group investigation to improve student's science process
skills in addition to skills hypothesize aspect, communicating, and asking
questions, and develop cooperative learning model type group investigation for
other subjects.
From the description, the researcher is interested to examine the science
process skills of physics in high school with cooperative learning model type
group investigation. This is in accordance with the advice of previous researchers
to implement cooperative learning model type group investigation on the othe
subject matter of physics in class X SMA. Model of cooperative learning type
group investigation apply to developing science process skills in eight of the ten
aspects of the science process skills that involve manual and social skills. This is
in accordance with the national curriculum that emphasizes on a series of
scientific process. Therefore, this research entitled :
5
“The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group Investigation (GI) Type
to Improve the Science Process Skills in Static Fluid Subject Grade X Even
Semester SMA Negeri 1 Dumai A.Y. 2015/2016”.
1.2
Problem Identification
Based on the background of the problems described above, it can be
identified problems relevant to this research are:
1.
Student achievement is still low, seen a lot of students achieved predicate C.
2.
Lack of motivation of students to physics learning so that students tend to be
passive in the learning process
3.
The learning activities are still centered on the teacher (teacher centered)
4.
The student's science process skills are underdeveloped like to ask questions,
observe, apply concepts, communicate, interpret data, hypothesize, research
plan, organize tools and materials, and predicted not appear.
5.
Lack of social interaction in the heterogen groups
6.
Teachers only see the knowledge competency assessments rather than attitude
and skills competency assessment
7.
Students are not accustomed involve cognitive or intellectual skills, manual
and social
1.3
Problem Limitation
To give a clear scope in the discussion, there should be restrictions on the
problem in the research are as follows:
1. The learning model used is Cooperative Learning Model Type GI (Group
Investigation) in the experimental group and the conventional learning
model in the control class.
2. This research will be investigated the science process skills Physics
students.
6
1.4
Problem Formulation
Based on the problem limitation has been stated above, then that
becomes the problem formulation in this research: Is there the effect of
cooperative learning model GI with science process skills approach of students of
class X Semester II SMA Negeri 1 Dumai in the subject matter Static Fluid A.Y
2015/2016 ?
1.5
Research Objective
Based on the problem formulations above, the objectives to be achieved
in this study to determine the effect of cooperative learning model GI approach
science process skills of class X SMA Negeri 1 Semester II Dumai in the subject
matter Static Fluid A.Y 2015/2016.
1.6
Research Benefit
The benefits expected from the results of this study are:
For teacher :
1.
Giving consideration for teachers to improve science process skills of
students by providing alternative selecting and applying appropriate learning
models.
2.
Giving more insight to recognize the application of GI models in physics
learning.
For student :
Train science process skills of students as well as providing an atmosphere that is
different from the classroom learning methods were applied.
For researcher :
Expanding their knowledge and experience in the learning of physics by using
cooperative learning model type group investigation (GI).
7
For school :
Can be used as input in an effort to improve the quality of learning in the learning
process at the school
1.7
Operational Definition
The operational definition given in order to avoid the occurrence of
different perceptions of terms available:
1.
Group Investigation is perhaps the most complex of the cooperative learning
approaches and the most difficult to implement. The GI approach normally
divide their classes into five or six member heterogeneous groups. In some
instances, however, groups may form around friendships or around an interest
in a particular topic. Students select topics for study, pursue in-depth
investigations of chosen subtopics, and then prepare and present a report to
the whole class (Arends, 2012: 369).
2.
Science process skills have been described as mental and physical abilities
and competencies which serve as tools needed for the effective study of
science and technology as well as problem solving, individual and societal
development (Akinbobola, 2010: 234). The science process skills which
should be engendered in the teaching and studying of science are those of
measuring, observing, classifying, inferring, predicting, communicating,
interpreting data, making operational
definitions,
posing questions,
hypothesizing, experimenting and formulating models (Ango, 2002: 15).
67
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion, the conclusions
of this research are as followings as below:
1. Implementing of cooperative learning model of type group
investigation (GI) can improve activity of student including of observe,
measure, calculate, predict, hypothesize, interpret data, apply, make
conclusions and communicate, which of in learning process by
implementing cooperative learning model of type group investigation
(GI), students have a good criteria of dicipline, cooperate, honesty and
responsible.
2. From the result of data calculation there was differences of mean
between two classes, the value obtained of postest are tcount is about
1.78 and ttable 1.67. Therefore can be concluded that the instrument of
postest just valid for 12 students from 57 students if we see in the table
t distribution.
3. The students that give treatment with cooperative learning model type
GI in static fluid have increase in learning outcomes, social skill
between each group or individu because formed in heterogeneous
group, the attitude among friend and science process skill because the
students in group together to investigate problems about static fluid
topic. This learning model require the students to be able to plan the
topics to be discussed and train the student’s self-confident to explain
the results of group discussions in front the class. It can be concluded
that there is the effect of cooperative learning model type group
investigation on student’s science process skill at static fluid subject in
grade X SMA Negeri 1 Dumai Academic Year 2015/2016.
68
5.2.
Suggestions
Based on the research result, data analysis, discussion, and weakness had
been faced such as the researcher has a barrier with timing when implement
cooperative learning model of type group investigation (GI) in do the experiment
and write the discussion of student worksheet (LKS), researcher suggest these
things; reduce the indicator in the lesson plan (RPP) about the science process
skill of student in static fluid subject.
69
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aderogba, A.A., Oyelekan, O.S., (2010), Enhancing Transformative Science
Education in Nigeria Through the Use of Science Process Skills,
International Journal of Contemporary issues in Education 2: 206-212.
Akçay, N.O., Doymuş, K., (2012), The Effects of Group Investigation and
Cooperative Learning Techniques Applied in Teaching Force and Motion
Subjects on Students’ Academic Achievements, Journal of Educational
Sciences Research 2(1).
Akçay, N.O., Doymuş, K., (2014), The Effect of Different Methods of Cooperative
Learning Model on Academic Achievement in Physic, Journal of Turkish
Science Education 11 (4): 17-30, ISSN: 1304-602.
Akinbobola, A.O., Afolabi, F., (2010), Analysis of Science Process Skills in West
African Senior Secondary School Certificate Physics Practical
Examinations in Nigeria, American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific
Research 5 (4): 234-240.
Anggraini, L., (2015), Implementation of Group Investigation Learning Model to
Improve Problem Solving Ability in Class VIII in SMP Negeri 11 Medan
A.Y 2014/2015, Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Ango, M.L., (2002), Mastery of Science Process Skills and Their Effective Use in
the Teaching of Science: An Educology of Science Education in the
Nigerian Context, International Journal of Educology 16 (1): 11-30.
Arends, R.I., Kilcher, A., (2010), Teaching for Student Learning Becoming an
Accomplished Teacher, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, New York.
Arends, R.I., (2012), Learning to Teach Ninth Edition, Mc.Graw-Hill, New York.
Arikunto, S., (2013), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Gillies, R.M., Ashman, A.F., (2003), Cooperative learning : the social and
intellectual outcomes of learning in groups, Routledge Falmer, USA.
Guevara., Almario, C., (2015), Science Process Skills Development through
Innovations in Science Teaching, Research Journal of Educational
Sciences 3 (2): 6-10, ISSN 2321-0508.
Jolliffe, W., (2007), Cooperative Learning in The Classroom, C&M Digitals (P)
Ltd, New Delhi.
70
Joyce, B., Weil, M., (2003), Models of Teaching, 5th Ed., Prentice-Hall, Inc., New
Delhi.
Kagan, S., Kagan, M., (2009), Kagan Cooperative Learning, Kagan Publishing,
Canada.
Kanginan, M., (2006), Fisika untuk SMA/MA Kelas XI, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Panjaitan, E.S., (2015), The Effect of Cooperative Learning Model Group
Investigation (GI) Type to Conceptual Knowledge Student’s in Topic Optic
Geometry Grade X SMA N 1 Perbaungan A.Y 2014/2015, Universitas
Negeri Medan, Medan.
Şimşek, U., Yilar, B., Küçük, B., (2013), The Effects of Cooperative Learning
Methods on Students’ Academic Achievements in Social Psychology
Lessons, International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their
Implications 4, ISSN 1309-6249.
Sudjana, (2009), Metode Statistika, Penerbit Tarsito, Bandung.
Sugiyono, (2012), Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&B, Alfabeta,
Bandung.
Yadav, B., Mishra, S.K., (2013), A Study of The Impact of Laboratory Approach
on Achievement and Process Skills in Science among Is Standard
Students,International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 3:
1-6, ISSN 2250-3153.