THE DIFFERENCE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES USING THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) OF THINKING EMPOWERMENT BY QUESTIONS (TEQ)TECHNICAL AND CONVENTIONAL LEARNING AT FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 1 BERASTAGI 2011/2012.

THE DIFFERENCE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
USING THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) OF THINKING
EMPOWERMENT BY QUESTIONS (TEQ)
TECHNICAL AND CONVENTIONAL
LEARNING AT FIRST GRADE OF
SMAN 1 BERASTAGI 2011/2012
By:
Janna Sri Bina Br Barus
ID. Number 408111067
Bilingual Education Mathematics Program

THESIS
of The Requirement for The Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan

MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE FACULTY STATE
UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2012


PREFACE

First of all, I would like to thank God Almighty for His blessing, which
enables me to complete my thesis in order to fulfill one of the requirements to
obtain a Sarjana Pendidikan at the Mathematics Bilingual Department, Faculty
Mathematics and Sains, Medan State University.
Writing this thesis is not an easy task for me. I faced many problems and
challenges, which sometimes made me almost give up. However, I preserved
because this is my obligation.
My special gratitude goes to Dr. Esther Nababan, M.Sc as my consultant
who has given her valuable instruction, advice, ideas, suggestion and sacrifice in
reading the draft my thesis. I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Asmin, M.Pd, Dr. Edi
Syahputra, and M.Pd, Dr. W. Rajagukguk, M.Pd as my examiners, for their
willingness to read and correct this thesis.
My thank also goes to Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc, Ph.D. The Dean of
Mathematics and Sains Faculty, Medan State University. My deepest gratitude
also goes to Prof. Dr. Herbert Sipahutar, M.Sc as the coordinator of Bilingual
Program and Prof. Dr. Mukhtar, M.Pd., the Head of Mathematics Department and
Drs. Syafari, M.Pd, secretary of the Mathematics Education Department, Dra. Ida
Karnasih, M.Sc.Ed, Ph.D as my academic consultant and to all the lecturers who

had advised and guided through academic years at the State University of Medan.
My deepest gratitude is due to my beloved parents, S. Barus and M. br
Ginting and also to my beloved older sisters Jenita Barus, S.S, Erma Barus Amd,
Mewanita Barus AMK and my younger sister Gelora Barus for their moral and
material supports and prayer for me in writing my thesis.
Further, many thanks are offered to Alberto Colia M.Pd, The Headmaster
of SMAN 1 Berastagi and to the Mathemathics teacher, Linda Br Ginting S.Si.,
for their kindness and support during the research.
Sincerely thanks are also addressed for my best friends “SERAPHIM”
(Putri, Togu, Blessing) and Rustam Efendi S.Pd as our leader for the support,
pray, solidarity, and endless friendship. My thanks also go to all friends in

Mathematics Bilingual Education 2008 for their encouragement and their kindness
during spending time in Medan State University and all people that cannot be
mentioned one by one, for their love, support, and pray, may God bless them.

Medan,

September 2012


Writer

Janna Sri Bina Br Barus

THE DIFFERENCE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES USING THINK
PAIR SHARE (TPS) OF THINKING EMPOWERMENT
BY QUESTIONS (TEQ) TECHNICAL AND
CONVENTIONAL LEARNING AT FIRST
GRADE OF SMAN 1 BERASTAGI
Janna Sri Bina Br Barus (NIM 408111067)
ABSTRACT
Learning outcomes are the learning achievements of learners who can be
measured from the students after work the problems given by the teacher at the
time of the evaluation carried out. Based on observation at SMA N 1 Berastagi,
many students have low achievement in learning mathematics. They don’t have
preparation to do learning mathematic and some of them assume that it is difficult
to understand. So, it needs technical to be done cooperative learning to increase
students learning outcomes even though activity learning process.
The purpose of this research is to know the difference student mathematics
learning outcomes using Think Pair Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using

Thinking Empowerment by Questions (TEQ) Technical and conventional learning
in First Grade of SMAN 1 Berastagi. The type of this research is experiment
research. Subject in this research is students X-5 as experiment class and X-4 as
control class SMA N 1 Berastagi with 32 students in each class. The experiment
class I uses TPS learning model using TEQ and experiment class II uses
conventional learning.
There is the difference of learning outcomes that taught by Think Pair
Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by Questions
(TEQ) Technical and than taught by conventional learning at First Grade of
SMAN 1 Berastagi 2011/2012.The student’s learning outcomes that taught by
Think Pair Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by
Questions (TEQ) Technical is better than taught by conventional learning. This
research only conducts one test.
Key Word: TPS Learning Model, TEQ Technical, Experiment Research and
Learning Outcomes

CONTENT
Page
Validation Sheet


i

Content

ii

Figure list

iii

Table list

iv

Appendix list

v

CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background


1

1.2. Problem Identification

4

1.3. Problem Formulation

4

1.4. Scope of Research

4

1.5. Research Objectives

5

1.6. Research Benefits


5

1.7. Operational Definition

6

CHAPTER II : REVIEW REFFERENCE
2.1. Theoretical Background

7

2.1.1. Learning and Teaching

7

2.1.2. Cooperative Learning

9


2.1.3. Element of Cooperative Learning

10

2.1.4. Cooperative Learning in Mathematics

11

2.1.5. Model of Learning Think Pair Share

12

2.1.6. The Excess and The Weakness of TPS

14

2.1.7. Thinking Empowerment by Question Technical

15


2.1.8. Conventional Learning

17

2.1.9. Learning Outcomes of Mathematics

18

2.1.10. Material of Research

21

2.2. Conceptual Design

21

2.3. Research Hypothesis

22


CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Time and Place of Research

23

3.2. Population and Sample Research

23

3.2.1. Population

23

3.2.2. Sample

23

3.3. Design of Research

24


3.4. Variable of Research

25

3.5. Research Procedure

25

3.6. Instrument to Collect Data

27

3.7. Data Analysis Technique

28

CHAPTER IV : THE RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Description Data The Research

33

4.1.1. Data Pretest Student’s Learning Outcomes in
Experiment class I and Experiment class II

33

4.1.2. Data Posttest Student’s Learning Outcomes in
Experiment class I and Experiment class II

33

4.2. Analysis of Research Data

36

4.2.1. Normality Test of Student Learning Outcomes

36

4.2.2. Homogeneity Test of Student Learning Outcomes

37

4.2.3. The Hypothesis Test

37

4.3. Discussion of Research Result

37

CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion

40

5.2. Suggestions

40

REFERENCES

41

TABLE LIST

Page
Table 3.1 Design of Research

23

Table 4.1 Summary Data Learning Outcomes Student of Mathematics

34

Table 4.2 The Result Normality Test of Student Learning outcomes

36

Table 4.3 The Result Homogeneity Test Data Pretest and Posttest

36

Table 4.4 Summary of Hypothesis Test

37

FIGURE LIST

Page
Figure 2.1 Sintax TPS combined TEQ

16

Figure 2.2 Relation of Element Learning

19

Figure 3.3 Research Plot

27

Figure 4.1 The improved learning outcomes in experiment class I

34

Figure 4.2 The improved learning outcomes in experiment class II

35

Appendix List
Page
Appendix 1 Lesson Plan 1 Experiment Class I

44

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan 2 Experiment Class I

49

Appendix 3 Lesson Plan 1 Experiment Class II

58

Appendix 4 Lesson Plan 2 Experiment Class II

60

Appendix 5 Format TEQ 1

64

Appendix 6 Format TEQ 2

67

Appendix 7 Validation Assessment Paper Pre Test

70

Appendix 8 Question of Pre Test

74

Appendix 9 The Solution of Pre Test

75

Appendix 10 Validation Assessment Paper Post Test

78

Appendix 11 Question of Post Test

82

Appendix 12 The Solution of Post Test

83

Appendix 13 Data

86

Appendix 14 Statistic of Data

87

Appendix 15 Normal Test

90

Appendix 16 Homogeneity Test

96

Appendix 17 Normalize Gain

98

Appendix 18 Hypothesis Test

102

1

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background
Success in an educational institution teaching-learning process can be seen
from the result of learning achieved by learners. Learning outcomes are the
learning achievement of learners who can be measured from the students after
work on the problems given by the teacher at the time of the evaluation carried
out. Successful learning in school will come from studying the success of their
students. Student success in learning can be influenced by any factor of the
individual from outside the individual and inside individual.
Factors that influence learning can provide positive support in learning,
but can also hinder the learning process. When the result of student learning is
low means the learning process can be said fail. It is a problem in education. This
problem happens in SMAN 1 Berastagi especially those of mathematics.
It can be seen from the achievement of the average score of mid semester
test in class X SMAN 1 Berastagi Academic Year 2011/2012 is 46.93 with a
population of 32 students and the percentage of completeness 22.22% by
Minimum Criteria for completeness is 70.
When researcher observation in this school, researcher get there are some
the weakness of learning, are: (1) student passive in learning process, (2) student
afraid to share student’s opinion to teacher, (3) student stop try to solving problem
when student get difficult problem.
In fact Mathematics as one subject in school was considered quite an
important role in shaping students into qualified, because mathematics is a mean
to study something to think logically and systematically.
As expressed by Hamalik(2009:88) that:
"In mathematics lessonwe will findthe followingpurposes:
1. Inculcate, nurture, and developbasicmathematics knowledge
andpracticalskills.
2. Inculcate,
nurture,
and
developlogicaland
criticalthinking
skillsinabstractthinking patternsso as to solvethe problemsfaced
ineveryday life.

2

3. Inculcate, nurture, anddevelop the abilitytoappreciate the time-saving
and intelligent, rationaleconomics.
4. Inculcate, nurture, anddevelop an attitude ofmutual cooperation,honest,
andbelieve in yourself. "
Improving the quality ofmathematics educationis necessary,in particularan
increase instudents' mathematicsachievementin schools.
The role ofmathematicsis soimportant, and student thatis the outputof
educationwho

will

criticizedfrom

many

facethe

developmentof

quartersthat

lead

science

and

tostudents'

technologyoften

mathematicslearning

outcomesarestill low.
The number of students who are weak in mathematics is very alarming.
Trianto (2009: 5) states that:
The main problem in learning in formal education (school) today is the low
absorptive capacity of student. This is evident from the average of the
results of study of students which is still very alarming. This achievement is
certainly a result of the current teaching method used and do not touch the
realm of conventional dimensions of the learners themselves, namely how to
actually learn it. In a sense, that the learning process until today still provide
the teacher dominance and does not provide access for student to develop
independently through discovery and thinking processes.
Of the above problems, it’s required to apply a mathematical learning
model that is expected to improve student learning outcomes.Cooperative learning
model can be used as an alternative model for such purpose.
Tritanto(2007:49) satate:” There are some variance of cooperative learning
models, are: STAD, JIGSAW, Team Game Tournament (TGT), and structure
approach like Think Pair Share (TPS) and Numbered Head Together (NHT).” In
this study research choose one learning type it is cooperative learning type Think
Pair Share (TPS).
Think Pair Share is a type of cooperative learning designed to influence
the interaction patterns of student and an alternative to class structure as well as
greater involvement of student in reviewing the material covered in the lesson.
According LiaSaragih, the research results show that:
There is an increase in student class X SMK N 2 Stabat T. A.
2010/2011 with the implementation of Cooperative Learning Model

3

Type TPS (Think Pair Share). The average values obtained for the
initial test 54,86 to test the final lesson in the cycle I was 61,31.
Increase in the average value of student learning outcomes at the
cycle I by 40,7%. For the second cycle the average value
enhancement of student learning outcomes is 68,4%. After the test
with a significant paired t test, the results indicate that significant
changes occur in general.
The above research shows that cooperative learning model type TPS can
be used as one alternative to improve student mathematics learning outcomes.
Therefore, the role of teachers and student in teaching and learning process is
essential in order to achieve the expected goals. Gunawan(2010) state thatThink
Pair Share Learning model would be optimal if the function is combined with
learning strategies using Thinking Empowerment by Questions (TEQ).
Learning experimental research result carried out by Corebima(2006) had
proven that TEQ in TPS strategy as well as in Jigsaw Strategy having bigger
potency to empower student thinking skills then expository strategy. This fact
related with the characteristics of TEQ learning strategy all well as cooperative.
This is supported by statement of Vivilia (2006:14) that Thinking
Empowerment by Questions Technical is an empowering question pattern of
reasoning. Display Thinking Empowerment by Questions Technical cursory look
as a kind of Work sheet student is unknown at this time, substantial differences
are very striking fact, substantial differences that have to do with characteristics
very empowering student reasoning, of this can be seen that the Thinking
Empowerment by Questions Technical is one tool that has the potential to develop
reasoning student.
In this study, researcher selects cooperative learning model type TPS
since these types of cooperative learning is designed to influence student’s
thinking patterns and alternatives for class structure as well as greater
involvement of students in reviewing the material covered in the lesson. Topic
chosen is Trigonometric function and equation who taught in cooperative learning
model type TPS to improve learning outcomes of student in class X SMAN 1
Berastagi.

4

The above mentionedleads to the little of this research:
“The difference student mathematics learning outcomes using Think Pair Share
(TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by Questions (TEQ)
Technical and conventional learning in First Grade of SMAN 1 Berastagi
2011/2012”

1.2. Problems Identification
1. Student’s mathematics learning outcomes is low.
It can be seen only 22,22% student pass in mid semester by criteria
minimum competence is 70.
2. Student passive when teacher teaches by conversional model.
It can be seen from the teacher used teacher-centered learning model so
students are less involved in the learning process.
3. Student’s interest to study mathematics is low.
This is consistent with the expression of one mathematics teacher at
SMAN 1Berastagi who expressed an interest in students learning of
mathematics is still lacking.

1.3. Scope of Research:
The scope of this study is to knowing the difference student mathematics
learning outcomes using Think Pair Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using
Thinking Empowerment by Questions (TEQ) Technical and conventional learning
in First Grade of SMAN 1 Berastagi 2011/2012

1.4. Problem Formulation
Based on the scope of the research, then this study can be formulated as
follows:
Is there difference student mathematics learning outcomes using Think Pair
Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by Questions
(TEQ) Technical and conventional learning in First Grade of SMAN 1 Berastagi
2011/2012?

5

1.5. Research Objectives
In accordance with the formulation of problems and restrictions that have
been raised, the purposes of this study are as follows:
To get description the difference of student mathematics learning outcomes
using Think Pair Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment
by Questions (TEQ) Technical and conventional learning in First Grade of SMAN
1 Berastagi 2011/2012

1.6. Benefits of Research
The expected benefitsoft this research is to obtain description about the effect
of TPS to student achievement. When applied this research can give benefits like:
1. ForStudents





Improvestudents'activeroleinteaching and learning activities
Increaseunderstanding ofstudentsinlearningmathematics, especiallyonthe
subject oftrigonometry function and education.
Increasestudentinterest in learningmathematics
Improvestudents'mathematicslearning outcomes

2. For teachers
This research can standard an inputfor the teacher tobe able toconsiderbe
betterteaching models inmathematicslearning.
3. ForSchools
The results ofthis studycan contributeto bothschoolsin the improvement
ofmathematicsteachinginX RSBI SMAN 1 Berastagi.
4. For other researchers
This

research

can

inputsandcomparabletoother

researcherswhowant

toexaminethe sameissuesinthe future.

1.7 Operational Definition
1. Learning outcomes are scores of mathematics obtained by student through
the evaluation after the learning process is completed.

6

2. Learning model is something of a plan or pattern that is used as a guide in
planning the learning in the classroom.
3. Cooperative learning is learning which emphasis on active of student who
form a group to achieve common goals.
4. Cooperative learning

type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) is a cooperative

learning where every student is given a chance to think in advance the
answers the problems that have been given, and made in pairs and then
share it with others by way of presenting the results of group discussion.
5. TEQ is the media used to achieve learning goals

38

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions
After analyzing the data, the conclusions are drawn as follows:
1. There is the difference of learning outcomes that taught by Think Pair Share
(TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by Questions (TEQ)
Technical and than taught by conventional learning at First Grade of SMAN 1
Berastagi 2011/2012.The student’s learning outcomes that taught by Think
Pair Share (TPS) Learning Model by Using Thinking Empowerment by
Questions (TEQ) Technical is better than taught by conventional learning.

5.2 Suggestions
Related to the writer’s research, some suggestions are pointed out as follows:
a. Formathematics teacher, in teachingthe materialdistancein spaceorother
appropriatetopicsit is recommended to useThink Pair Share (TPS) learning
models with TEQ as one way ofimprovingstudent learning outcomes.
b. Conduct more than one test to get better description about the methods on
learning activity.For the readers who are interested with this study must
explore the further knowledge and search another reference.

Dokumen yang terkait

TEACHING SPEAKING BY USING THINK PAIR SHARE TECHNIQUE (AN EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH AT THE SECOND GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 14 BANDA ACEH)

0 2 1

IMPROVING CLASS VII A STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY BY USING THINK PAIR SHARE TECHNIQUE OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING METHOD AT SMP NEGERI 7 JEMBER IN THE 2012/2013 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 3 15

IMPROVING THE TENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BY USING THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) STRATEGY AT SMAN 1 KALISAT JEMBER IN THE 2007/2008 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 6 13

IMPROVING THE TENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT BY USING THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) STRATEGY AT SMAN 1 KALISAT JEMBER IN THE 2007/2008 ACADEMIC YEAR

0 3 13

INCREASING STUDENTS’ READING COMPREHENSION ACHIEVEMENT THROUGH THINK PAIR SHARE TECHNIQUE IN PROCEDURE TEXT AT THE FIRST GRADE OF SMA N 1 BANDAR SRIBHAWONO

0 6 48

THE IMPROVEMENT OF ACTIVITY AND INSTRUCTION ACHIEVEMENT OF PANCASILA AND CIVIC EDUCATION USING THE COMPARATIVE LEARNING THINK PAIR SHARE AT THE 7th GRADE STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 3 METRO PENINGKATAN PRESTASI BELAJAR PENDIDIKAN PANCASILA DAN KEWARGANEGARAAN

0 4 82

DEVELOPING STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY THROUGH STUDENT-CENTERED LEARNING AT THE FIRST GRADE OF MAN 1 BANDAR LAMPUNG

3 15 49

THE CORRELATION OF LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES TOWARDS READING COMPREHENSION AT FIRST GRADE OF SMAN 14 BANDAR LAMPUNG

0 4 62

THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS’ MATHEMATICAL ACHIEVEMENT BY USING GUIDED-DISCOVERY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL JIGSAW TYPE

0 0 10

THE EFFECT OF CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS COGNITIVE LEARNING THROUGH THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS)

0 0 12