THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES ON STATIC FLUIDS TOPIC AT CLASS XI SMA CERDAS MURNI ACADEMIC YEAR 2013/2014.

(1)

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING MODEL TO IMPROVE STUDENT’S LEARNING OUTCOMES ON STATIC

FLUIDS TOPIC AT CLASS XI SMA CERDAS MURNI A C A D E M I C Y E A R 2 0 1 3 / 2 0 1 4

By:

Nur Azizah Pulungan Reg. Number: 4103322016

Study Program: Physics Bilingual Education

THESIS

Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan

PHYSICS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN 2014

(2)

(3)

iii

BIOGRAPHY

Nur Azizah pulungan was born in Medan at December 26th 1991. Father’s name is Drs. Syarif S. Pulungan and Mother’s name is Faridah Nasution, and she is the second of three children. In 1998, the author entered SD N 106814 and graduate in 2004. In 2004, the author continues her education in SMP Amir Hamzah Medan and graduate in 2007. In 2007, the author continues her education to SMA Cerdas Murni and graduated 2010. In 2010, the author accepted in Physical Education Studies Program in Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Science in State University of Medan.

(4)

PREFACE

The authors say the praise and gratitude to God Almighty, for all the graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to the author that this study can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time.

Thesis entitled "The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class XI SMA Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014", prepared to obtain a Bachelor's degree Physical Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science in State University of Medan.

On this occasion the authors like to thank Mr. Drs. Eidi Sihombing, M.S, as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to the author since the beginning of the study until the completed of this thesis writing. Thanks also to Prof. Dr. Sahyar, M.S., MM, Drs. Pintor Simamora, M.Si, and Dr. Derlina, M.Si, who have provided input and suggestions to complete this thesis. Thanks also presented to Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D as the academic supervisor also as Dean Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and to coordinator of bilingual Prof. Dr. rer.nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si, and the entire lecturer and staff in physics department of FMIPA UNIMED who have helped the author. Appreciation were also presented to headmaster and all teachers in SMA Cerdas Murni who have helped during this research. I would like to thank especially to my father Drs. Syarif S. Pulungan, my mother Farida Nasution and my grand parents also my brothers, Mara Halim Pulungan, S.P., and Muhammad Iqbal Pulungan also all family who have prayed and gave me encouragement and funding to complete my study in Unimed. Especially thanks to all my friends in Bilingual Physics Class 2010, Fitri, Roffi, Rindy, Feggi, Tika, Evi, Uli, Chritine, Jovan, James, Rikcy, Indra, Jeneva, and Riando who have helped, prayed and gave supported me. I also would like to thank to my PPL friends, Fitri, Mimi, Mila, Meilani, Fita, Fika, and Rully who have helped and gave support during writting this thesis

(5)

The author has endeavored to as much as possible in completing this thesis, but the author is aware there are many drawbacks in terms of both content and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of this paper would be useful in enriching the reportoire of knowledge.

Medan, July 2014 Author,

(6)

iii

The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class

XI SMA Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014

Nur Azizah Pulungan (Reg. Number 4103322016) ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research was to find out the difference of students’ learning outcomes using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning on static fluids topic at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni. The research method was quasi experiment. The population was all students at class XI SMA semester II SMA Cerdas Murni consist of 4 classes. The sample of this research conduct two classes and consist of 20 students, class XI-1 as experimental class and class XI-2 as control class and define by cluster random sampling. The result that was obtained the average value in experimental class after given treatment is 74.99 and the average value in control class after given treatment is 65.33. Deviation standard in experimental class is 13.30 and in control class is 10.28. The average value of students’ psychomotor in experimental class is 77.96, and the average value of students’ affective in experimental class is 80.67. Normality test result of both samples are normally distributed. Homogeneity test result of both samples come from a homogeneous population. Hypothesis test result for posttest data using t-test one tail is tcount > ttabel = 2.571 > 1.68 with = 0.05. So it can be concluded that the students’ learning outcome using guided inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning in Static Fluids topic at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

(7)

CONTENTS

Page

Legitimation Sheet i

Biography ii

Abstract iii

Preface iv

Contents vi

List of Figure ix

List of Table x

List of Appendix xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background 1

1.2. Problem Identification 4

1.3. Problem Limitation 4

1.4. Problem Formulation 4

1.5. Research Objectives 5

1.6. Research Benefits 5

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1. Learning Definition 6

2.2. Learning Principles 7

2.3. Learning Objectives 7

2.4. Teaching Definition 8

2.5. Teaching Principles 9

2.6. Learning Model 11

2.6.1. Conventional Learning 11

2.6.2. Steps in Conducting Conventional Learning 12 2.6.3. Advantages of Conventional Learning 12 2.6.4. Disadvantages of Conventional Learning 13

2.6.5. Inquiry Learning Model 13

2.6.5.1. Guided Inquiry Learning Model 17

2.7. Learning Outcomes 19

2.7.1. Cognitive Domain 19

2.7.2. Affective Domain 20

2.7.3. Psychomotor Domain 21

2.8. Static Fluids 22

2.9. Density 22

(8)

vii

2.11.Fundamental Law of Hydrostatics 24

2.12.Archimedes’s Principle 25

2.13.Pascal’s Law 27

2.14. Conceptual Framework 28

2.15. Research Hypothesis 29

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 30

3.1. Location and Time of Research 30

3.1.1. Location of Research 30

3.1.2. Time of Research 30

3.2. Pupolation and Sample of Research 30

3.2.1. Population of Research 30

3.2.2. Sample of Research 30

3.3. Variable of Research 30

3.3.1. Independent Variable 30

3.3.2. Dependent Variable 31

3.4. Type and Design of Research 31

3.4.1. Type of Research 31

3.4.2. Design of Research 31

3.5. Procedure of Research 32

3.6. Instrument of Research 33

3.6.1. Instrument of Cognitive Domain 33

3.6.2. Instrument of Affective Domain 34

3.6.3. Instrument of Psychomotor Domain 36

3.6.4. Validity Test 38

3.7. Data Analysis Technique 38

3.7.1. Determine The Average Value 48

3.7.2. Determine The Deviation Standard 39

3.7.3. Determine The Normality Test 39

3.7.4. Determine The Homogeny Test 39

3.7.5. Determine The Hypothesis Test 39

CHAPTER IV 43

4.1. Result of Research 43

4.1.1. Students’ Learning Outcomes in Cognitive Domain 43 4.1.1.1. Pretest Data in Experimental and Control Class 43 4.1.1.2. Posttest Data in Experimental and Control Class 44

4.1.1.3. Data Analysis Test 46

4.1.1.4. Normality Test 46

(9)

viii

4.1.1.6. Hypothesis Testing 47

4.1.2. Students’ Learning Outcomes in Affective Domain 47 4.1.3. Students’ Learning Outcomes in Psychomotor Domain 49

4.2. Discussion 50

CHAPTER V 53

5.1. Conclusion 53

5.2. Suggestion 53

(10)

LIST OF FIGURE

Page

Figure 2.1. Inquiry Model ………...………...………... 16

Figure 2.2. Four Different Shapes of Vessel ……….... 24

Figure 2.3. U-Shaped Tube Contains Oil and Water ………... 24

Figure 2.4. Sinking Body ………... 26

Figure 2.5. Floating Body ……… 26

Figure 2.6. Neither Sinking nor Floating Body ………... 26

Figure 2.7. Principle of Hydraulic Jack ………... 27

Figure 3.1. Overview of Research Planning ………...…... 33

Figure 4.1. Chart of Pretest Data in Experimental and Control Class ……. 44

Figure 4.2. Chart of Posttest Data in Experimental and Control Class …… 45

Figure 4.3. Chart of Students’ Affective in Experimental and Control Class ………....…………... 48

Figure 4.4. Chart of Students’ Psychomotor in Experimental and Control Class ………....…………... 50

(11)

LIST OF APPENDIX

Page

Appendix 1. Lesson Plan I ………...………...……. 56

Appendix 2. Lesson Plan II ……….. 69

Appendix 3. Lesson Plan III ………..………...…… 81

Appendix 4. Experiment Worksheet I ……….. 93

Appendix 5. Experiment Worksheet II …...……...……...……...…...….. 97

Appendix 6. Experiment Worksheet III ………..…. 103

Appendix 7. Student’s Worksheet I ………...…….. 107

Appendix 8. Student’s Worksheet II ……….…………... 109

Appendix 9. Student’s Worksheet III ………..……. 115

Appendix 10. Pretest Questions ………. 117

Appendix 11. Lattice of Pretest Questions …...………...…………... 120

Appendix 12. Posttest Questions ………....… 128

Appendix 13. Lattice of Posttest Questions ………..…...………….. 131

Appendix 14. Pretest and Posttest Data in Experimental Class ………. 139

Appendix 15. Pretest and Posttest Data in Control Class ………... 140

Appendix 16. Calculation of Average Value and Deviation Standard ……... 141

Appendix 17. Calculation of Normality Test ………. 144

Appendix 18. Calculation of Homogeneity Test ……… 148

Appendix 19. Calculation of Hypothesis Test ……… 150

Appendix 20. Observation Table of Students’ Affective in Experimental Class ...….……….……….……..…... 153

Appendix 21. Observation Table of Students’ Affective in Control Class .... 154

Appendix 22. Observation Table of Students’ Psychomotor in experimental Experimental Class ……….... 155

(12)

xii

Appendix 23. Observation Table of Students’ Psychomotoric in Control

Class ………... 156

Appendix 24. List of Critical Value for Liliefors ………... 157

Appendix 25. List of Percentil Value for Distribution t ………. 158

Appendix 26. Table of Region Under Normal Curve 0 to z ……….. 159

Appendix 27. Table of Critical values for F-test for Alpha = 0.1 ………….. 160

(13)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Learning process occurs through many ways and takes place all the time toward a behaviour changing in learners. The changing are in the form of knowledge, understanding, skills, and habits that acquired by the lerners. The main activities in teaching and learning are the emphasis on engaging students in learning,

One of the subjects that is taught in school, especially in high school is physics. Physics is the science that studies about natural phenomenon. Therefore, physics is one of the lessons that quite interesting because it relates directly to natural phenomena and knowledge can be applied in daily life.

But in fact physics is one lesson that has the lowest score. This is caused by the large number of students who do not like physics and they think physics is a difficult subject to understand, especially when faced with a complicated formulas and calculations. This fact is in accordance with the results of observations conducted by researchers in SMA Cerdas Murni. Researcher use questioner instrument to observe student interest in physics subject. From the observation result, there is 10 % student say that they don’t like physics, 58 % student say that physics isn’t interest to learn and 32 % says that they like physics, just 5 % student say that they really like physics. Before learn physics, just 13 % student prepare themselves before learn physics, 25 % student sometimes do the preparation, 57 % student just see the title without do the preparation, and there is 9 % student don’t do anything and there is 18 % student interest to solve physics problem by themselves, 41 % student interest to solve physics problem with discussion, 58 % student solve physics problem when the problem is easy and there is 8 % student don’t want to solve physics problem. From the observation result above, researcher conclude that student in SMA Cerdas Murni isn’t interest to learn physics and this will be influenced the student outcome in learning physics.

(14)

Researchers also interviewed three physics teachers in SMA Cerdas Murni. The teachers have the same answer when researcher asking about the student learning outcomes. They say that student learning outcomes that are generally still low at an average of 60, so it can be said score the average student does not achieve the expected criteria. The researchers observed that the physics teachers, especially in class XI SMA generally apply lecturing method more than the other methods in learning activities, in fact the method is not accordance with the purpose of learning. This is due to the teachers are not fully apply the appropriate methods for each materials. The teacher's role is more dominant, material presented by the teacher is more likely to lecturing method, the student learn or repeat the lesson only in exam time so the students do not understand the material overall, when the teacher gives the test higher than the material that has been written, the student can not answer it. This is caused by to students are not beeing regularly to solve a problem. This learning activities becomes a problem for students because some of them are not able to understand the material.

To improve student’s learning outcomes, teachers can perform a variety method, for example using a method of effective teaching and learning in accordance with the objectives set in the curriculum. Inquiry is a model used in learning process, the main purpose of inquiry is to develop skill, intellectual, critical thinking and able to solve problems scientifically. Students are expected to investigate why an event took place then collect and process the scientific data to solve a problem. The advantages of inquiry learning model is make the students able to understand the ideas and basic concepts better than before, encourage them to think and work initiatively, objectively and formulate their own hypothesis, which makes the situation of the learning process become more interesting.

From previous research, Rumahorbo, (2014) in the research journal about the learning quality improvement in class entitled “Effect of Inquiry-Based

Learning Model on Student’s learning Outcomes in Topic of Dinamic Electricity

in Grade X SMAN 2 Balige academic year 2013/2014” obtained that the pretest average value in experimental class was 49.062 and posttest average value was

(15)

83.57 while the pretest average value in control class was 48.8 and posttest average value was 75.67.

Research by Ariska, (2012), entitled “Implementation of Guided Inquiry to

Improve Student’s Learning Motivation and Learning Outcomes of Human

Respiratory System for 2nd Grade Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi”, it was found that the cycle IV of learning outcome increased by 32.3% to 94.94%. The activity of students reached of 97.06%. Other research conducted by Zebua, (2012), entitled “Strategi Pembelajaran Inquiry pada materi pokok Hukum Newton di kelas X SMA Gajah Mada Medan T.P. 2010/2011”, obtained the pretest average value in experimental class is 47.71 and the posttest average value in experimental class is 73.29. While the pretest average value in control class is 43.29 and the the posttest average value in control class is 66.86. Based on these data, there are some improvement in student’s learning outcome using inquiry learning model in subject matter of Newton's Law. Research conducted by Yunus, et al, (2013) obtained that the implementation of physics inquiry based learning can improve student learning outcomes auditory.

Learning outcomes of students taught with inquiry learning model significantly different from taught with conventional learning, with the average value of the test in the experimental class is 70.68 while the control class with an average value of 66.46. The analysis results the standard deviation between inquiry and conventional significance level of 1% (0.01) is ttabel = 2.64 while tcount = 3.80, so that Ho is rejected and Ha accepted. The students who learn in the inquiry learning model is able to learn well, where students can express their own opinion according to their experience with a percentage of 12.1%, whereas in the conventional learning students can not express their opinion better, this can be proven when the students are asked how to overcome the land, water, air and sound pollution with a percentage of 12% (Kamal, et al, 2011). Based on some of these research, it can be concluded that the use of guided inquiry learning model can assist students in learning the scientific method and foster research skills such as working in groups, writing, and verbal expression, experience in solving problem and the other abilities.

(16)

Based on that problems, the author interested in applying guided inquiry learning model to improve student’s learning achievement, especially in the static fluids topic. Thus this study is formulated by the title “The Implementation of Guided Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Student’s Learning Outcomes on Static Fluids Topic at Class XI SMA Cerdas Murni Academic Year 2013/2014”.

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background above, the problems identification of this research are as follows:

1. Students have difficulty to understand the physics concept. 2. Students are not active in physics learning activities.

3. Teachers often use conventional method in learning activities. 4. Teachers use few model in learning physics

5. Teachers still dominate the class in teaching and learning activities.

1.3. Problem Limitation

Based on the problem identification, the authors limit the issues in this research so that the study can be focused and achieve the goals. The limitation of these problems are as follow:

1. Learning model used in this research are guided inquiry learning model for the experimental class and conventional learning for the control class.

2. The material taught is static fluids.

3. Subject of this research is the students at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

1.4. Problem Formulation

In accordance with the limitation problem, the problem formulation of this research are:

(17)

1. How is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?

2. Is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?

1.5. Research Objectives

The research objectives are as follows:

1. To know the student learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

2. To know whether the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model greater than conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

1.6. Research Benefits

After doing this research, the significant benefits expected are:

1. For school : Gives good contribution in order to improve the learning process and the quality of school by increasing student achievement and teacher professionalism.

2. For teacher : As a consideration in selecting learning model in teaching physics.

3. For student : The guided inquiry learning model can improve the student learning outcomes in physics and help students to be more active in the learning process.

4. For researcher : Adds the author’s knowledge in using guided inquiry learning model.

(18)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

1.1. Conclusion

Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion can be concluded that :

1. The average value of students’ learning outcomes using guided inquiry learning model is greater than the students’ learning outcomes using conventional learning.

2. Students’ activity as long as using guided inquiry learning model increased, from the first meeting up to the third meeting. The category of students’ activity is good. And students’ affective as long as using guided inquiry learning model also increased, from the first meeting up to the third meeting. The category of students’ affective is good.

3. Based on the results of data analysis, the processing of hypothesis test using t-test get that tcount > ttable, so it can be stated that the students’ learning outcome in static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning in class XI SMA Cerdas Murni.

1.2. Suggestion

Based on the research result and discussion before, researcher give suggestions as follows :

1. For the next researcher, should use the time effectively thus the syntax in guided inquiry learning model can achieved and occurs well.

2. For the next researcher, should prepare observer for each group to get accurate data and to observe the students’ affective better if researcher take daily notes of students from class teacher.

3. For the next researcher, should give more attention and guidance to students who passive in the learning proces.

(19)

REFERENCES

Alberta, L., (2004), Focus on Inquiry : a teacher’s guide to implementing inquiry based learning, Learning and Teaching Resources Branch, Canada. http://education.ca/media/313361/focusoninquiry.pdf

Albright, K., Robert, P., Ana, V., and Jamie, W., (2012) An Inquiry-Based Approach To Teaching Research methods in Information Studies Education for Information 29: 19–38.

Arends, R.I., (2009), Learning to Teach, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Arikunto, S., (2012), Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta. Ariska, R. N., (2012), Implementation of Guided Inquiry to Improve Students’

Motivation and Learning Outcomes of Human Respiratory System for 2nd grade Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.

Dimyati and Mudjiono, (2002), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta. Hamalik, O., (2006), Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.

Hewit, P.G., (2006), Conceptual Physics 10th edition, Addison Wesley, America. Istarani, (2011), 58 Metode Pembelajaran Inovatif, Media Persada, Medan.

Joyce, B., (2004) Models of Teaching 2nd edition, Prentice/Hall International. Inc, New Jersey.

Joyce, B., and Weil, M., (1972), Models of Teaching, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall International, Inc.

Kamal, S., Jailani, and Rahmi, (2012), Efektivitas Pembelajaran Inquiry Terhadap Hasil dan Aktivitas Belajar Siswa MTsN Sakti Kota Bakti Kabupaten Pidie, Laporan Hasil Penelitian.

Kanginan, M., (2006), Fisika untuk SMA Kelas XI, Erlangga, Jakarta.

Kuhlthau, C. C., (2004), Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services, 2nd ed, Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, C. C. Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari. A. K., (2007), Guided inquiry:

Learning in the 21st century, Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, C. C. (2010), Guided Inquiry: School libraries in the 21st Century,

(20)

Rumahorbo, R.M., (2014), Effect of Inquiry Based learning Model on Student’s Learning Outcomes in Topic of Dinamic Electricity in Grade X SMA N 2 Balige Academic Year 2013/2014. Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan. Sani, R.A., (2013), Inovasi Pembelajaran, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.

Sanjaya, W., (2006), Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran, Kencana, Jakarta. Sanjaya, W., (2009), Strategi Pembelajaran, Kencana, Jakarta.

Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor – Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.

Slavin, R.E., (2006), Educational Psychology: theory and practice (Eight edition), USA, John Hapkins University.

Sudijono, A., (2009), Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta. Sudjana, (2008), Metoda Statistika, Tarsito, Bandung.

Sudjana, (2009), Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung.

Sunardi, (2006), Fisika Bilingual untuk SMA Kelas XI, Yrama Widya, Bandung. Suryabrata, S., (2002), Metologi Penelitian, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta. Trianto, (2010), Mendesain Model pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Kencana,

Jakarta.

Yunus, S. R., Sanjaya, I. G. M., Jatmiko, B., (2013), Implementasi pembelajaran fisika berbasis guided inquiry untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa auditorik, Laporan Hasil Penelitian, FMIPA UNNES Semarang.

Zebua, M.P., (2012), Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Inquiry Terhadap Hasil Belajar Fisika di Kelas X SMA Swasta Gajah Mada Medan Pada Materi Pokok Hukum Newton T.P. 2011/2012., Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.

(1)

83.57 while the pretest average value in control class was 48.8 and posttest average value was 75.67.

Research by Ariska, (2012), entitled “Implementation of Guided Inquiry to Improve Student’s Learning Motivation and Learning Outcomes of Human Respiratory System for 2nd Grade Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi”, it was found that the cycle IV of learning outcome increased by 32.3% to 94.94%. The activity of students reached of 97.06%. Other research conducted by Zebua, (2012), entitled “Strategi Pembelajaran Inquiry pada materi pokok Hukum Newton di kelas X SMA Gajah Mada Medan T.P. 2010/2011”, obtained the pretest average value in experimental class is 47.71 and the posttest average value in experimental class is 73.29. While the pretest average value in control class is 43.29 and the the posttest average value in control class is 66.86. Based on these data, there are some improvement in student’s learning outcome using inquiry learning model in subject matter of Newton's Law. Research conducted by Yunus, et al, (2013) obtained that the implementation of physics inquiry based learning can improve student learning outcomes auditory.

(2)

Based on the background above, the problems identification of this research are as follows:

1. Students have difficulty to understand the physics concept. 2. Students are not active in physics learning activities.

3. Teachers often use conventional method in learning activities. 4. Teachers use few model in learning physics

5. Teachers still dominate the class in teaching and learning activities.

1.3. Problem Limitation

Based on the problem identification, the authors limit the issues in this research so that the study can be focused and achieve the goals. The limitation of these problems are as follow:

1. Learning model used in this research are guided inquiry learning model for the experimental class and conventional learning for the control class.

2. The material taught is static fluids.

3. Subject of this research is the students at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

1.4. Problem Formulation

In accordance with the limitation problem, the problem formulation of this research are:

(3)

1. How is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?

2. Is the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model is greater than conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014?

1.5. Research Objectives

The research objectives are as follows:

1. To know the student learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model and conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

2. To know whether the student’s learning result on static fluids topic using guided inquiry learning model greater than conventional learning at class XI SMA Cerdas Murni academic year 2013/2014.

1.6. Research Benefits

After doing this research, the significant benefits expected are:

1. For school : Gives good contribution in order to improve the learning process and the quality of school by increasing student achievement and teacher professionalism.

2. For teacher : As a consideration in selecting learning model in teaching physics.

3. For student : The guided inquiry learning model can improve the student learning outcomes in physics and help students to be more active in the learning process.

4. For researcher : Adds the author’s knowledge in using guided inquiry learning model.

(4)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

1.1. Conclusion

Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion can be concluded that :

1. The average value of students’ learning outcomes using guided inquiry

learning model is greater than the students’ learning outcomes using conventional learning.

2. Students’ activity as long as using guided inquiry learning model increased, from the first meeting up to the third meeting. The category

of students’ activity is good. And students’ affective as long as using

guided inquiry learning model also increased, from the first meeting up

to the third meeting. The category of students’ affective is good.