644
students; f teachers skill in doing the assessment toward their students; g concluding the teaching and learning activities.
a. Mean
The scores were then processed to get the average score of all the respondens in data distribution or to get the
Mean
. It showed that the process was gained from the total scores of the respondens devided by the total amount of the respondens. The following
formula is used to gain the result:
Note: Σ is the total score;
X
i
is the score got by each responden
n
is the total amount of the respondens This formula is applied in data processing showed in Table 3.1. The respondens‟ scores
of storytelling skill in English teaching at elementary school before the application of self-
training learning model. Table 3.2 shows the respondens‟ scores of storytelling skill in English teaching to Elementary School students after the application of self-training
learning model. The results of table 3.1 and table 3.2 were:
= 3.28 = 3.88
The results show that the average score of the respondens in applying storytelling in teaching English at elementary school before the application of the self-
training learning model was 3.28. It was the score before the application of self-training learning model. While the average score of the respondens in applying storytelling after
the application of the model was 3.88. These two scores showed the improvement of the respondens in applying storytelling to teach English at elementary school.
b. Standard Deviation
Standard Deviation was counted to see the range of the scores of the respondens in storytelling. The formula to get the Standard Deviation of the respondens before the
application of self-training learning model and after the application of the model is:
Note: SD is standard deviation; Σ is the total amount;
X
is the score before the application of self-training learning model; is the score after the application of self-training learning model.
645 SD before the application of self-training
learning model SD after the application of self-training
learning model Respon
dens‟ Name
Score Mean Respon
dens‟ Name
Score Mean
Sinta 3.83
3.28 0.55
0.30 Sinta
4.50 3.88
0.62 0.38
Hani 3.40
3.28 0.12
0.01 Hani
4.03 3.88
0.15 0.02
Deni 3.14
3.28 -0.14
0.02 Deni
3.48 3.88
-0.4 0.16
Tuti 2.74
3.28 -0.54
0.29 Tuti
3.52 3.88
-0.36 0.13
Σ=0.62 Σ=0.69
So the Standard Deviation is: = 0.16 and 0.17
The numbers showed that the scores of the respondens are close to the average. It tells that the storytelling skill of the respondens after the application of self-training learning
model was better compared to the skill before the application of the model.
c.
z
Score
The counting of the
z
score in this study was aimed to identify the differences between the
respondens‟ storytelling skill in English teaching at elementary school before the application of the self-training learning model and after the application of the
model. The formula to get the scores is:
z =
So the
z
scores to get the data of the storytelling skill of the respondens after the application of self-training learning model in teaching English at elementary school are
as follows: Sinta:
Hani: Deni:
Tuti:
z =
= = 1.26
z =
= = 0.52
z =
= = 0.33
z =
= = -3.15
The counting of the
z
score shows a significant differences between the scores of the respondens and the
z
score
.
It shows that the score of one of the four respondens was far below the average score. While the skills of the respondens in using storytelling to teach
English at elementary school after the application of the self-training learning model are:
646
Sinta: Hani:
Deni: Tuti:
z =
= = 2.72
z =
= = -3.18
z =
= = -6.45
z =
= = -4.27
The data shows that three of the four respondens got the scores far below the average. While the average score of storytelling skill of PGSD students is improved
after applying the self-training teaching model compared to the average score before applying the model.
The respondens were given chance to simulate, practice and a discussion to improve their performance in using storytelling. It was in accordance with the statement
of Joyce
et al.
2009. Joyce
et al.
2009 that self-training learning model provides training and self-training. These procedures helped the respondens to do the practice
and simulation in using storytelling to teach English at elementary school. Eye contact was one of the weak points of the respondens in applying
storytelling. Isbell,
et al.
2004 suggest that eye contact of the teacher is the important factor to make storytelling more personal to the students. The teaching process using
storytelling was improved when the respondens paid attention to eye contact.
CONCLUSION This research came up to a conclution that storytelling skill of PGSD students of UPI
Kampus Cibiru was improved. And the self-training learning model is considered as a learning model to improve storytelling skill of PGSD students of UPI Kampus Cibiru in
teaching English to grade 1-3 of Elementary School.
REFERENCES Akdon. 2008.
Aplikasi Statistika dan Metode Penelitian untuk Administrasi dan Manajemen.
Bandung: Dewa Ruchi. Al-Jafar, A., Buzzelli, C. A. 2004. The art of storytelling for cross cultural
understanding.
International Journal of Early Childhood, 36
1, 35-48. Ananthia, Winti. 2010.
Storytelling in an Indonesian Primary School EFL Context: Teachers Perspectives.
Unpublished Master Thesis. Melbourne: Monash University.
Babbie, E. 2005. Ethics and politics of social research
The basics of social research
eleventh ed.. Belmont: Wadsworth Thomson Learning p.59-83. Brewster, J., Ellis, G., Girard, D. 2002.
The Primary English Teachers Guide
. London: Penguin.
Casey, B., Erkut, S., Ceder, I., Young, J. M. 2008. Use of storytelling context to improve girls‟ and boys‟ geometry skills in kindergarten.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29,
29-48.
647
Casey, B., Kersh, J. E., Young, J. M. 2004. Storytelling sagas: an effective medium for teaching early childhood mathematics.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19
, 167-172. Collins, F. 1999. The use of traditional storytelling in education to the learning of
literacy skills.
Early Child Development and Care, 152
1, 77-108. Cooper, P. M. 2007. Teaching young children self-regulation through childrens
books.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 34
5, 315-322. Creswell, J. W. 2009.
Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches
third ed.. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Damayanti, I. L. 2007. Storytelling in language classroom for young learners: Practical use of home made story and real story.
Englishiana: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, 3
1, 1-12. Davies, A. 2007.
Storytelling in the classroom: Enhancing traditional oral skills for teachers and pupils
. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Fraenkel Wallen. 2007.
How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education 6th Edition
. Singapore: Mc Graw Hill Gadzikowski, A. 2007.
Story dictation: a guide for early childhood professionals
. St. Paul: Redleaf Press.
Garvie, E. 1990.
Story as vehicle: teaching English to young children
. ClevedonPhiladelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Ghosn, I.-K. 2004. Story as culturally appropriate content and social context for young English language learners: A look at Lebanese primary school classes.
Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17
2, 109-126. Groce, R. D. 2004. An experiential study of elementary teachers with the storytelling
process: Interdisciplinary benefits associated with teacher training and classroom integration.
Reading Improvement, 41
2, 122-128. Isbell, R., Sobol, J., Lindauer, L., Lowrance, A. 2004. The effects of storytelling
and story reading on the oral language complexity and story comprehension of young children.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 32
3, 157-163. Ishanah, W. 2004. English as a local content subject in East Javanese primary schools.
In P. Lee H. Azman Eds.,
Global English and primary school: Challenges for elementary education
pp. 183-202. Melbourne: CAE Press. Joyce, B., Weil, M., Calhoun, E. 2009.
Models of Teaching Eighth Edition.
Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Kuyvenhoven, J. 2009.
In the presence of each other: A pedagogy of storytelling
. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Lichtman, M. 2010.
Qualitative research in education: A users guide
second ed.. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
McConaghy, J. 1990.
Children learning through literature: a teacher researcher study
. New Hampshire: Heinemann. McMillan, J. H., Schumacher, S. 2010.
Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry
seventh ed.. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc. Monhardt, L., Monhardt, R. 2006. Creating a context for the learning of science
process skills through picture books.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 34
2, 67-71.
Neuman, W. L. 2006.
Social research method: Qualitative and quantitative approaches
Sixth ed.. Boston: Pearson.
648
Paquette, K. R. 2007. Encouraging primary students writing through childrens literature.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 35
2, 155-165. Phillips, S. 1993.
Young learners
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pinter, A. 2006.
Teaching young language learners
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pringle, R. M., Lamme, L. L. 2005. Using picture storybooks to supports young
childrens science learning.
Reading Horisons, 46
1, 1-15. Sackes, M., Trundle, K. C., Flevares, L. M. 2009. Using childrens literature to
teach standard-based science concepts in early years.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 36
5, 415-422. Sugiyono. 2011.
Metode Penelitian Pendidikan: Pendekayan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan RD
. Alfabeta: Bandung. Sutarsyah, C. 2004. Designing an English for Young Learners course as a part of
English Department Curriculum. In B. Y. Cahyono U. Widianti Eds.,
The tapestry of English language teaching and learning in Indonesia
. Malang: State University of Malang Press.
Zeece, P. D. 2009. Using current literature selections to nurture the development of kindness in young children.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 38
, 447-452.
649
THE EF FECT OF LEARNING TECHNIQUES AND COGNITIVE LEARNING STYLES ABOUT RESULTS LEARNING OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Experiment Studies In The Grade IV Elementary School of Government Parongpong West Bandung
Budiansyah PPs UNJ Primary Education Study Program
yansah85upiyahoo.co.id
ABSTRACT The Study aims to know the effect of learning techniques and cognitive style on
learning outcomes of the Social Sciences. The method used was experimental study design using disain factorial 2 x 2 with analysis testing ANAVA and subsequently followed by Tukey
test significant level at 0.05
The results showed tha t:1There are differences in the results of social studies students using STAD technique and students who use the Jigsaw technique.2.Social Sciences
student learning outcomes that have a field-dependent cognitive style is higher than the results of social studies student who has obtained an independent field of cognitive
style.3.There is an interaction effect between the use of learning techniques and cognitive style on learning outcomes social sciences.4.There are differences in the ability of social
studies learning outcomes between students who learn the techniques STAD higher than students who studied the Jigsaw technique that has the ability to field-dependent cognitive
style.5.There are differences in the ability of social studies learning outcomes between students who study with STAD technique is lower than students who studied the Jigsaw
technique that has the ability to field independent cognitive style 6.There are differences in the ability of social studies learning outcomes between students who learn the techniques
STAD who has the ability to field-dependent cognitive style higher than students who have the ability to field independent cognitive styles.7. Social Sciences There are differences in
learning outcomes between students who learn the Jigsaw technique that has the ability to field-dependent cognitive style is lower than students who have the ability to field independent
cognitive styles.
Based on the results of this study concluded that the technique of learning and cognitive style affect student learning outcomes social sciences. Recommendations for
teachers is to apply the techniques pemebelajaran stad and jigsaw learning technique as a way to improve student learning outcomes social sciences.
Key words: cognitive style, learning outcomes social sciences, elementary school age children
Introduction
Learning is a harmonious blend of activities that teachers do the teaching and learning activities undertaken by students . Implementation of learning Social to develop the potential
of students to be sensitive to social problems that occur in the community , having a positive mental attitude towards the improvement of all inequality , and skillfully address any
problems that occur everyday , either upon itself as well as affecting the general public .
From observations in the field of learning undertaken at the moment is the classical system of learning speed in mind kecapatan value carried by the average student . Thus , there
will be students who feel that the learning undertaken by teachers too fast , ie students who learn slowly , otherwise there are other students that students quickly absorb the lessons that
650
feel that the teaching is done by teachers too slow . Students who are slow in learning to be confused , while students will find it quickly in learning the bosan..Kenyataan , raises the idea
to design and mengeksperimenkan a method of student-centered learning . The learning method is the method of teaching and learning techniques STAD Jigsaw techniques with
cognitive style . The learning method STAD and Jigsaw technique is a method of learning the Social Sciences . On the basis of this background and researchers interested in analyzing and
assessing of learning methods , especially in teaching social sciences and their application in teaching social studies in the elementary school .
Social Sciences Rudi Gunawan 2013 : 48 defines the Social Sciences is an integrated study materials merupakn simplification , adaptation , modification selection organized of the
various concepts and skills of history , geography , sociology , anthropology , and economics . Learning Outcomes of Social Sciences. According to Bloom in the Etin Solihatin
2012: 5 divides learning outcomes into three domains , namely cognitive , affective , and psikomor . Learning outcomes is basically an ability in the form of new skills and behaviors
as a result of training or experience . Based on the exposure in advance , the researcher can
conclude that the results of social studies is a social science study results that make changes to the student after learning followed by marked mastery of certain competencies in accordance
with the characteristics of the social studies learning through the use of indicators in the 1-7 process skills , namely : observing , classifying , mengenterprestasi , analyzing , applying ,
predicting , and communicating about the social sciences . Learning techniques STAD according to Salvin , et.at in Ibrahim , STAD cooperative
learning approach that is most simple. Say so , because the learning activities carried out are still close to the conventional learning . STAD consists of five main components , which
presented a class , team work , quizzes , individual improvement scores , and team awards . Components using STAD technique in small groups with the number of each group of 4-5
people .
Techniques Learning Jigsaw Technique in the Rusman Lei 2002 : 218 states that Jigsaw is a technique or method that is flexible cooperative learning . and Jigsaw is a
cooperative learning method that focuses on student group work in the form of small groups of four to six people are heterogeneous and students work together positive interdependence
and responsibility independently.
Understanding cognitive style Witkin in the futu Beautiful Budyawati Luh 2012: 178 defines cognitive style is typical of the way that the functioning of the perceptual activity : a
habit of giving attention , receive , capture , sensing , selecting , organizing the stimulus or the information and proper functioning of intellectual activity , namely : interpreting , classifying,
changing the shape of an intellectual information . Ismanoe Furthermore , in Susanto cognitive style can be divided into two general categories: cognitive style field dependent and
field independent cognitive styles .
Kongnitif Field Independent Style by Witkin in Nasution 2011 : 98 individuals who have a field- independent cognitive style has characteristics such as: 1 the ability to analyze
for separating objects from their environment ; 2 have the ability to organize objects ; 3 have an impersonal orientation ; 4 choose a profession that is individualized ; 5 prioritize
internal motivation and internal reinforcement . Characteristics of the individuals implicated in the independent field activities during the learning process , among other things : 1 more
interested in strengthening the internal and internal motivation ; and 2 tend to construct their own information it receives .
Kongnitif Field Dependent Style describes the characteristics of people who have style kongnitif defendent field is likely to see a pattern as a whole and very often on a fellow
651
human -oriented and social relationshSocial sciences . Individuals who have a field - dependent cognitive style has been identified by the Witkin H. Nasution , among others : 1 .
tend to think globally ; 2 tend to accept existing structures , 3 has a social orientation , 4 tend to choose professions that emphasize social skills , 5 tend to follow the existing goals ,
and 6 tend to work with external motivation , and are more interested in the external reinforcement .
Methods of research methods used in this study is the experimental method . The design of this study can be described in the following table :
Table design treatment by the level of 2x2 or 2x2 factorial design Learning techniques A
Cognitive style field A Cognitive style field B
Technique STAD A1
Technique Jigsaw A2
Cognitive style field
defendent
B1 A1B1
A2B1 Cognitive style field
indefendent
B2 A1B2
A2B2
The place and time of the research conducted at the State Primary School I Ciwaruga Parongpong District of West Bandung. Students who become research subjects consisted of
students of class IV.A and IV.B grade students of SDN I Ciwaruga second semester of the school year 2013-2014 the number of students of class IV A. 25 people consisting of 12 men
and 13 women and class IV.B the number of students with 25 people consisting of 12 men and 13 women , the research conducted in the second semester of 2013-2014 school year
starting in April 2014 until completion .
Population and sample Berasarkan existing populations , can be calculated on a sample group , amounting to 27 of the 25 students were 7 students . Thus is made the object of
experimentation in the study , as many as seven students who belong to a group of students who do not have a dependency with the environment , ie students who have a tendency to
field independent cognitive styles and students who belong to the group of students with an environmental dependency , ie students who have field -dependent cognitive style tendencies .
Tabel Design Experiment
Cognitive style B Learning techniques
A Σ B
Technique STAD A1
Technique Jigsaw A2
Field-dependent
B1 7
7 14
Field-Independent
B2 7
7 14
Σ A 14
14 28
Engineering Data Analysis of data to be analyzed is is the average score of the test results of each experimental group using analysis of variance ANOVA . Two-way ANOVA at
significance level α 2X2 = 0:05 with f test at significant level and a further test using Tukey
652
test was used to test the significance of the test or variable or a combination of two independent variables on the dependent variable .
Normaltas Test Results calculation and significance test for normality index price liliefor as a whole are presented in the following table :
Normality Test Results Summary Table data social sciences Learning Outcomes
Data Group N
Lh Lt
Keterangan
Group A1 14
0.1335 0.2270
Normal Group A2
14 0,1081
0,2270 Normal
Group B1 14
0,0931 0,2270
Normal Group B2
14 0,1025
0,2270 Normal
Group A1B1 14
0,2270 0,3000
Normal Group A2B1
14 0,1084
0,3000 Normal
Group A1B2 14
0,1444 0,3000
Normal Group A2B2
14 0,1120
0,3000 Normal
Based on the table above , shows that the price Lilifors count Lh in each group is smaller than the price the price Liliefors table Lt . thus it can be concluded that the sample
comes from a population that is normally distributed . This conclusion implies that the parametric statistical analysis can be used in the analysis of this study .
Test of homogeneity of variance test of homogeneity of variance summary of the results of social studies scores two treatment groups and two groups of attribute categories are presented
in the following table : Table Summary of the results of homogeneity of variance test score results of social studies of
two treatment groups and two groups of attribute categories
source of Variance
Variance Biggest
Variance Smallest
Fh α=0,05:13.13
Ft Description
group A1 dan A2
15,824 7,604
2,0809 2,5769
homogeneous group
B1 dan B2 15,566
7,566 2,0574
2,5769 homogeneous
Test of homogeneity of variance in experimental design emapat cell group A.1 B1 , A.1B1 , A1 and A2 B2 B2 . homogeneity of variance test results conducted on the social
studies scores summarize the overall homogeneity test results are presented in the following table :
653
Table Summary Results of Homogeneity of Variance Test Scores Fourth Learning Outcomes social sciences Cell Design Group
Group Combined
Price Varian
ce Barlet
Description 0.05
A1B1 A2B1
A1B2 A2 B2
4,95 4,67
4,14 7.95
5,43 17,63
0,7892 7,8147
homogeneous
Research Hypothesis Testing statistical hypothesis in this study performed using analysis of variance ANOVA followed by a two-lane Tukey test . summary of the analysis are
presented in the following table : Anova Table 2 Summary of Results of Analysis of Variance Path To Seeing Influence
Techniques Of Learning And Cognitive Style of Learning Outcomes SOCIAL SCIENCES
Source of Variance
Db Sum Square
Mean Square
F
hitung
F
tabel
Factor A 1
24,14 24,14
4,45 4,26
Factor B 1
28,00 28,00
5,16 4,26
Interaction AB 1
146,29 146,29
26,95 4,26
Error 24
130,29 5,43
Total 27
328,71
Very significance because Fb Ft = 26.95 4:26 α : 0.05 followed by a Tukey test ,
Tukey test summary of the analysis are presented in the following table : Advanced Test Summary Table using the Tukey Test
Comparison group N
K dk
Qh Qt
α:0.05 A1 B1 and A2 B1
14 2
24 6,43
2.57 A1 B2 and A2 B2
14 2
24 2,71
2.57 A1B1 and A1 B2
14 2
24 6,57
2.57 A2 B2 and A2 B2
14 2
24 2,57
2,57
Specification : Qh : Qt Calculate q : q dk table : degrees of freedom
n : Number of samples K : number of groups
Discussion of Results discussion of the results of testing hypotheses for further research are as follows :
654
1. The difference in the results of social studies students learn to use the techniques of STAD
and Jigsaw learning techniques . Results of testing the hypothesis that there are differences in the results of social
studies students learn to use the techniques learned STAD and Jigsaw using acceptable techniques . in this case , the mean score of the results of social studies students learn to use
STAD technique significantly higher than the mean score of the results of social studies students who use learning techniques Jigsaw .
This is because the technique STAD cooperative learning group students in learning teams . In the mastery of the material is not divided but overall learning taught by peer tutors
in the material under their control as peer tutors drawn from the students who are good , and cooperative learning is quieter not rowdy . Jigsaw pembeljaran techniques for students who
are shy will find difficulty in explaining . thus STAD technique will be more effective in improving learning outcomes when compared with the results of student learning using
learning techniques Jigsaw .
2. The difference in the effect of social studies of outcome variables Y between students
who have a field - dependent cognitive style B1 and a student who has obtained a field - independent cognitive style B2
The second hypothesis Fh = 5.16 α Ft 0:05 = 4:26 then Ho is rejected , which means
that there are differences in average outcomes in social studies students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style and the students who have the ability to field independent
cognitive styles significantly affect the results social studies . The results of the analysis of the average scores obtained by students cognitive abilities styles that students have the ability to
field -dependent cognitive style was higher by 24.21 of the students cognitive ability scores styles that have the ability to field independent cognitive styles of 22.21 .
Based on the research findings there are differences in the influence of cognitive style on learning outcomes social sciences . this means that students who have a field -dependent
cognitive style have better learning outcomes social sciences or higher than students who had a field independent cognitive styles .
3. Interaction between learning techniques and cognitive style on learning outcomes of social
sciences students . based on the results of statistical analysis showed the interaction between engineering
students cognitive learning style , in its influence on the achievement of learning outcomes social sciences . Statistical analysis showed that the learning technique is an independent
variable that can affect the results social studies students. learning outcomes of students who have a field dependent cognitive style menggunkana STAD technique has a mean score of
27.43 is higher than that given learning techniques Jigsaw is equal to 21.00 .
However, if the independent variable affects the ability of cognitive styles of learning outcomes , the students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style were studied
using the technique of STAD had a mean score of 20.86 is lower than the students who have the ability to field independent cognitive styles were learned using the learning techniques
Jigsaw has a mean score of 23:57 . This shows that the social sciences student learning outcomes will be achieved effectively if the learning system provided in accordance with the
students ability. here is a picture that addressed the interaction anatara learning techniques and cognitive style on students learning outcomes social sciences .
655
Figure : 4.2 The interaction between cognitive learning techniques and styles Based on the findings of the study are the effect of the interaction between the technique of
learning and cognitive style on learning outcomes social sciences .
4. The difference in the results of social studies students who have the ability to field
dependent cognitive style that is taught using STAD technique and Engineering Jigsaw . Research hypothesis that states that there are differences in learning outcomes
SOCIAL SCIENCES students have a field dependent cognitive style using the technique of STAD and Jigsaw pembeljaran acceptable techniques . this can be seen from the mean score
of students learning outcomes social sciences . The mean score of the results of social studies students who have the ability to field dependent cognitive cognitive styles that are taught
using STAD technique amounts to 27.43 higher than that of learning using learning techniques Jigsaw is equal to 21:00 , this means that the results of social studies students
using learning techniques STAD is higher than that of learning using learning techniques Jigsaw .
Based on the findings of the study showed that the average score of the results of social studies students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style student using STAD
technique is higher than that of learning using learning techniques Jigsaw . The difference in the results of social studies Y between students given learning
techniques Jigsaw A2 , the group of students who have a field - dependent cognitive style B1 and the students are given learning techniques Jigsaw A2 , the group of students who
have style field - independent cognitive B2
The null hypothesis Ho states that social studies learning outcomes between students who have the ability to field independent cognitive styles were learned using techniques
Jigsaw A2B1 is rejected , no higher than students who learn by using techniques Jigsaw A2B2 was rejected , because QH qt means that there is a difference between the results of
social studies students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style were studied using techniques Jigsaw with students who are studying with students who have the ability to
field independent cognitive styles were learned using techniques Jigsaw and the difference is very significant , because QH = 2 , 57 or = qt 0:05
α = 2.57 it can also be seen in the mean score results of social studies students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style
were studied using techniques Jigsaw is 21.00 lower than the mean score of students learning outcomes social sciences have the ability to field independent cognitive style of learning by
using learning techniques which amounted to 23.57 Jigsaw
Based on the findings of the field there are differences in learning outcomes between students who study social studies with Jigsaw technique that has the ability to field -
dependent cognitive style lower than students who have the ability to field independent cognitive styles .
30.00 20.00
27.43 20.86
23.57 21.00
10.00 B1
B2 0.00
A1 A2
656
Conclusions based on the findings of the data obtained in the field, the results of hypothesis testing , and pembehasan research results , it can be concluded sebgai follows :
1. The results of social studies for students who learn by learning techniques STAD
technique is higher than that of social studies students learn by learning techniques Jigsaw . Based on these findings , it can be concluded that the technique can STAD
digunnakan to improve learning outcomes social sciences
2. Students who have a field -dependent cognitive style have better learning outcomes social
sciences or higher than students who had a field independent cognitive styles . Based on these findings , it can be concluded that the field -dependent cognitive style may
digunnakan to improve learning outcomes social sciences
3. There is an interaction effect between instructional techniques and cognitive style on
learning outcomes social sciences . based on these findings , it can be concluded that in order to improve learning outcomes that social sciences has the capability field dependent
cognitive style was done by using stad technique . meanwhile, to improve the learning outcomes of social sciences which has the capability of independent cognitive style field
was done by using the technique of Jigsaw .
4. The social studies students who have a field -dependent cognitive style and treated
learning by using STAD higher than those using the Jigsaw technique . Based on those findings , it can be concluded that to improve student learning outcomes social sciences
that has the capacity field dependent cognitive style performed by using STAD technique.
5. Based on these findings , it can be concluded that in order to increase the learning
outcomes of social sciences students who have the ability to field independent cognitive style required the use of learning techniques jigsaw .
6. based on these findings , it can be concluded that in order to increase the learning
outcomes of social sciences students who have the ability to field -dependent cognitive style required the use of STAD technique .
7. Based on these findings , it can be concluded that in order to increase the learning
outcomes of social sciences students who have the ability to field independent cognitive style required the use of learning techniques Jigsaw .
REFERENCES Rudi Gunawan , 2013 Social Education philosophical concepts and applications Revised
Edition New York: CV Alfabeta . Luh Putu Beautiful Budyawati , 2012 Effects of Learning Method and Style Against
Cognitive Outcomes of Early Childhood mathematics , London: Publisher PPS UNJ ECD Early Childhood Education Journal volume 6
Nasution 2011 Different Approach to Learning Teaching peroses , London: Earth Literacy .
Rusman , 2012 Models of Learning Developing Teacher Professionalism , Jakarta : PT Persada King Grapindo
Solihatin Etin , 2012 Learning Strategies PPKN Jakarta : earth Literacy
657
THE INFLUENCE SELF-ACADEMIC CONCEPT AND MATH STUDY ATTITUDE TOWARD SUBJECT MATH WITH MATH OUTCOMES OF STUDENTS THIRD
GRADE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN EAST JAKARTA A quantitative associative study with correlational approach in 02,04 and 08 state
elementary school. At Pondok Kopi, Jakarta Timur YENI SOLFIAH
1
ABSTRACT
This study is aimed to determine the effect of academic self-concept and attitude toward subject math with math outcomes of students third grade elementary school in East Jakarta.
The experiment was conducted at elementary 02, 04, and 08 Morning Pondok Kopi in the second semester of the school year 20112012. The method used is associative with approach
quantitative correlational. The number of samples in this study were 90 students who take the two stage random sampling of the student population in grade III SD SDN 02, 04 and 08
totaling 235 Pondok Kopi student. Students academic self-concept data obtained by filling the questionnaire, then studied
attitudes toward subject mathof data obtained by filling the questionnaire and the data obtained through the study of mathematics test results to learn mathematics. Testing for
normality using the estimated Y error test on X1 and X2 Yatas. Then the test is used to test the linearity of the usefullness Y on X1 of X2.
Based on data analysis using T test and F test For the first hypothesis is obtained T count 5, 847 and t table 1.67; so H0 rejected and H1 accepted. The second hypothesis is obtained t
count 3, 966 and t table 1.67; then so H 0 rejected and H1 accepted. The third hypothesis is further obtained F calculated and F tabel 38.243 0.05; 287 = 3, 11 then the H0 rejected and
H1 accepted. Thus this study concludes that there is a significantly positive influence on academic self-concept of the learning of mathematics. Furthermore there is a significant
positive influence on attitudes toward math subject scores. There is a significant positive influence on academic self-concept and attitude toward math subject learning scores.
Keyword: self concept academic, attitude toward math subject, outcomes mathematic.
A. BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
