THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTEXTUAL TEACHING LEARNING APPROACH TO IMPROVE STUDENTS LEARNING ACTIVITY AND OUTCOME OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION FOR 7TH GRADE STUDENT SMP NEGERI 1 TEBINGTINGGI ACADEMIC YEAR 2011/2012.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTEXTUAL TEACHING LEARNING APPROACH TO IMPROVE STUDENT’S LEARNING ACTIVITY AND
LEARNING OUTCOME OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION FOR 7th GRADE STUDENT SMP NEGERI 1 TEBINGTINGGI
ACADEMIC YEAR 2011/2012
By:
Desriana Marpaung 408141048
Biology Bilingual Education Study Program
A THESIS
Submitted to Fulfill the Requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2012
(2)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to praise and gratitude to God Almighty for His love and grace that has given the health and wisdom to the author so that this thesis can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time.
Thesis entitled “The Implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning Approach to Improve Student’s Learning Activity And Outcome of Environmental Destruction For 7th Grade Student SMP Negeri 1 Tebingtinggi Academic Year 2011/2012” arranged to obtain S1 degree of Sarjana Pendidikan, faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, State University of Medan.
During writing this thesis, the author had the guidance, assistance and prayer support from the various parties. First and foremost, the writer would like to express the endless gratitude to my beloved parents, Ayahanda Piter Marpaung (Alm) and Ibunda Hoddi D. Matondang, S.Pd for their patience, encouragement including their endless love and pray to me.
Therefore, the author would like to say thank profusely to
1) Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc, Ph.D., as Dean of the faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, State University of Medan.
2) Dr. rer. nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si, as my thesis supervisor and academic supervisor for his valuable time in correcting and critizing the thesis draft until its present form.
3) Dr. Syarifuddin, M.Sc, Ph.D, Dr. H. Syahmi Edi, M.Si, and Dr. Fauziyah Harahap, M.Si, as the lecturer team of examiner for their suggestion and constructive criticism for the revision of this thesis.
4) Prof. Dr. Herbert Sipahutar, M.Sc as he coordinator Bilingual Program Study for his motivation to the author in make this thesis.
5) All the staff in faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science and Biology Department, State University of Medan who have given the knowledge that are useful for the author during academic program.
6) Head of education and culture ministry Tebingtinggi, Zahidin, S.Pd, M.Pd who has given permission for author to do research in SMP N 1 Tebingtinggi.
(3)
7) Principal of SMP Negeri 1 Tebingtinggi, H. Adrul, for his kindness to allow in conducting this research at SMP Negeri 1 Tebingtinggi.
8) Anggiat Simanjuntak, S.Pd as vice headmaster who helped me in conducting the study.
9) Berliana Silitonga, S.Pd as a biology teacher who helped me in conducting the study and teach me how to teach well.
10) Author also say thanks to my sister Rosalina Marpaung and Wariston Panjaitan, Renita Maharani Marpaung for their kindness to the author and for my beloved nephew Gabriel.
11) All my friends especially for Asruri, Noviyanti, Maria, Wenny, Dina, Yeni and others for their motivation, kindness and encouragement to author.
12) For my special friend Patar Tampubolon, S.Si for his kindness and motivation that always support and help the author in doing this thesis.
13) Last but not the least, all sister and brothers in Biology department, State University of Medan for their support in many things whose name cannot be mentioned one by one.
Medan, July 2012
Desriana Marpaung ID. 408141048
(4)
iii
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTEXTUAL TEACHING LEARNING APPROACH TO IMPROVE STUDENT’S LEARNING ACTIVITY AND
OUTCOME OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION FOR 7TH GRADE STUDENT SMP NEGERI 1 TEBINGTINGGI
ACADEMIC YEAR 2011/2012 Desriana Marpaung (ID. 408141048)
ABSTRACT
This study aims to increase student learning activity and learning outcome for 7th grade student SMP N 1 Tebingtinggi academic year 2011/2012 of Environmental Destruction by Contextual Teaching Learning approach. This type of research is action research class. Population in the study were all students of VII SMP N 1 Tebingtinggi academic year 2011/2012 consisting of ten classes with total 250 student. While the study sample that is taken in a random sample of VII-1, consist of 25 students. Data collecting tool in the study of multiple choice test consist of 30 items and observation sheet of activity. Based on the test results of data analysis known that student learning outcome of pretest, post-1 test, post test 2 and post test 3 is expressed normally distributed. While the results showed that the percentage of students' learning outcome in pretest was 32.0 in category very low, at postes-1 (cycle-1) known percentage of the acquisition value of 53.60 in category lower, When postes-2 (cycle-2) percentage of the acquisition value of 71.20 in category of fair and when postes-3 (cycle-3) percentage of student learning outcome 83.60 in high category. While the activity, each cycle has increased significantly. Cycle 1 on the activity of 20% of students achieving at the level of high value, the cycle 2 68%, and the cycle 3 reached 88%. With reference to the results of these studies it can be concluded that Contextual Teaching Learning approach can improve student learning activity and learning outcome of Environmental Destruction for 7th grade student SMP Negeri 1 Tebingtinggi Academic Year 2011/2012.
(5)
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
Ratification Sheet i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Acknowledgement vi
Table of Content viii
List of Figure ix
List of Table x
List of Appendix
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1Background 1
1.2Identification of Problem 3
1.3Scope of Problem 4
1.4Formulation of Problem 4
1.5Objective of Problem 4
1.6Significance of Research 4
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Definition of Learning 6
2.2 Definition of Teaching 7
2.3 Learning Outcome 8
2.4 Learning Activity 11
2.5 Contextual Teaching Learning Conceptual 12
2.5.1 The Understanding of CTL 13
2.5.2 The Characteristic of CTL 14
2.5.3 The Principal of CTL 16
2.5.4 The procedure of CTL in Teaching 20
2.6 Learning Material 22
2.7 Thinking Framework 33
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLODY
3.1 Location and Time 34
3.2 Population and Sample 34
3.3 Variable of Research 34
3.4 Design of Research 34
3.5 Research Instrument 40
3.6 Instrument Test 42
(6)
vii
3.6.2 Reliability Test 43
3.6.3 Discrimination Power 44
3.6.4 Difficulty Index 45
3.7. Data Analysis 45
3.7.1 Student Mastery Level 45
3.7.2 Learning Completeness 46
3.7.3 Indicator Achievement Completeness 47
3.7.4 Non Test Instrument 47
CHAPTER IV RESULT OF RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION
4.1. The Result of Instrument Test 48
4.1.1. Validity Test 48
4.1.2. Reliability Test 48
4.1.3. Difficulty Index 48
4.1.4. Discrimination Index 48
4.2. Description of the Result of Research 49
4.3. Description of Each Cycle 54
4.3.1. Cycle I 54
4.3.2. Cycle II 58
4.3.3. Cycle III 63
4.4. Discussion 66
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1. Conclusion 68
5.2. Suggestion 68
(7)
ix
TABLE LIST
Table 2.1: CTL Approach 21
Table 3.1: The Test of Environmental Distruction Topic 41
Table 3.2: Instrument For Student Activity 42
Table 3.3: Corellation Coefficient Classification 43
Table 3.4: Student Mastery Level 45
Table 3.5: Non test Instrument 47
Table 4.1: Score of Pre Test and Post Test 49
Table 4.2: Percentage of Student Mastery Level Cycle I – III 50 Table 4.3: Completeness Frequency of Student Learning Outcome 51 Table 4.4: Score of every Aspect in Cycle I – III 52 Table 4.5: The Percentage of Student Level of Activity 53
(8)
viii
FIGURE LIST
Figure 2.1: The scheme of CTL` 19
Figure 2.2: The Picture of Air pollution 26
Figure 2.3: The Picture of Water pollution 29
Figure 2.4: The Picture of Oil pollution 32
Figure 3.1: Classroom Action Research Cycle 36
Figure 4.1: Diagram of Activity Cycle I 56
Figure 4.2: Diagram of Percentage Activity Cycle I 56 Figure 4.3: Diagram of Student Learning Out come Cycle I 57 Figure 4.4: Diagram of Comparison Student Activity Cycle I & II 60 Figure 4.5: Diagram of Percentage of Student’s Activity Cycle II 61 Figure 4.6: Diagram of Student Learning Outcome Cycle I & II 62 Figure 4.7: Diagram of Student Activity Cycle III 64 Figure 4.8: Diagram of Student Learning Outcome cycle III 65
(9)
x
APPENDIX LIST
Appendix 1: Syllabi 71
Appendix 2: Lesson plan 76
Appendix 3: Assessment 90
Appendix 4: Key answer of instrument 97
Appendix 5: Worksheet 98
Appendix 6: Validity 100
Appendix 7: The Calculation for Validity 101
Appendix 8: Table of Reliability 103
Appendix 9: The Calculation for Reliability 104
Appendix 10: Table of Discrimination Power 105
Appendix 11: The Calculation of Discriminant Power 106
Appendix 12: Difficulty Test 108
Appendix 13: The calculation of Difficulty Index 109
Appendix 14: Pre Test Achievement 110
Appendix 15: Student Learning Outcome in Cycle I 111 Appendix 16: Student Learning Outcome in Cycle II 112 Appendix 17: Student Learning Outcome in Cycle III 113 Appendix 18: Observation Sheet Instrument of Student 114
Appendix 19: Table of Individual Assessment 115
(10)
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1Background
The quality of education in Indonesia is still not encouraging. This is evidenced by the results of student's learning outcomes become decrease. From research in the schools, the logical thinking of students in Indonesia is only about 30% of all the material being taught (PISA:2009)
A comparative study carried out by PISA-OECD (Programme for International Student Assessment- Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), it shows that the average of reading, math, and science achievements in Indonesia are below of the international average. This table will be explaining about Indonesian rank in the international education.
PISA-OECD explains about student achievement in the world with showing the kinds of learning subject and rank for all country in 2000, 2003, and 2006. The first subject is reading, Indonesia get rank 39th from 41 countries in 2000, 39th from 40 countries in 2003, and 48th from 56 countries in 2006. The second subject is math, Indonesia get rank 39th from 41 countries in 2000, 38th from 40 countries in 2003, and 50th from 56 countries in 2006. The third subject is science, Indonesia get rank 39th from 41 countries in 2000, 38th from 40 countries in 2003, and 50th from 56 countries in 2006 (PISA: 2009).
The decreasing of student achievement is caused by many factors, including lack of awareness of education in the world, poor infrastructure, the quality of teacher still low, the prosperity to the teachers are low and lack of student knowledge about the meaning of an education.
Same case with education in north Sumatra. Quantity and quality of education in public schools and RSBI still relatively low. This is evidenced by low learning outcomes of students each year. One of the draft international schools in northern sumatera is SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi.
Based on observations in SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi, student learning outcomes were still low. Moreover, the language used was English. This made
(11)
2
students more confused in the study. They not only learn the material, but also language. It was very felt hard by the student in class VII. VII grade students tend to seek the meaning of the words in the book not understand the contents of the subject matter, so that learning materials often do not fit with the concept.
According to Mrs. Berliana who was one of RSBI biology teacher who taught in class VII, she was often difficulty in teaching biology lesson materials. Students often asked the same question all the time, especially when concerned with the meaning of the word. So she pays little attention to the learning model that she uses.
Sometimes the material that was submitted by the teachers were not all can be accepted by students. Because this case often happen in the classroom, most students will misunderstand about the concept. Misunderstanding in receiving lessons proved to be unfavorable effects for both of teachers and students. For teachers, if the student could not catch the lesson well and she felt like a failure in teaching the subject matter. For students the material that was not entirely well received will affect student learning outcome itself.
The involvement of students in following the course of teaching and learning activities about 60%, classroom management in learning about 70% of the 25 students in the class who follow the learning process. The results of daily tests students' average value was 65. Student learning outcomes was still relatively low, say low because the majority of students on tests of cognitive learning outcomes achieved only at high values of 20 and 70, which means that there were many students who have to perform remedial.
The low student learning achievement to subjects of biology teachers felt uneasy. Hence the need for renewal in the study. One of them by using CTL approach that has not implemented in that school.
According to Berns & Erickson 2001, CTL can increase student learning achievement. He said that “In Basic Skills as a Foundation for Student Success in the school, Contextualized Teaching and Learning (CTL) is identified as a promising strategy that actively engages students and promotes improved learning and skills development. CTL has been defined in different ways, based on the intent of the group championing its
(12)
3
use. Most recently, he characterized CTL as a “conception of teaching and learning that
helps teachers relate subject matter content to real world situations”.
Chris Mazzeo (2008), broadened the definition, describing CTL as a “diverse
family of instructional strategies designed to more seamlessly link the learning of foundational skills and academic or occupational content by focusing teaching and learning squarely on concrete applications in a specific context that is of interest to the student”
The task of teachers in contextual learning is to assist students in achieving its goals. That is, teachers deal more with strategy than giving information. Teachers just manage class as a team that works together to find something new to students. Teaching and learning process is more marked than teacher centered student centered.
Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) assists students in meeting content standards by applying knowledge to their current and future lives as family members, citizens, and workers. Effective use of CTL:
• Emphasizes problem-solving,
• Recognizes the need for teaching and learning to occur in multiple contexts,
• Reaches students to become self-regulated learners,
• Anchors teaching in students’ diverse life contexts,
• Encourages students to learn from each other in interdependent groups, and
• Employs authentic assessment.
Based on the description above, so the research about “The Implementation of Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach To Increase Student’s Learning Outcome and Activity On Environmental Destruction Topic of Class VII-2 SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012” had done.
1.2Problem Identification
Based on the background of the above problems can be identified the problem as follows:
1. Student learning outcomes are still relatively low.
(13)
4
3. The tendency to use traditional methods of teaching.
1.3Research Scope
Research problem is limited into: a. Subjects of Research
Subjects in this study are the increasing of learning outcomes and student’s
activity by implementing Contextual Teaching Learning. b. Objects of Research
Objects in this study are student class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 with topic Environmental Destruction
1.4Research Question
By considering the background and limitations of problems in the study then the formulation of the problem are:
1. Is the learning outcome of student’s class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic is higher after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach?
2. Do the activities of student’s class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic increase after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach?
1.5Objectives
Based on the research questions above, the research objectives are:
a. To know the increasing of learning outcome of students class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning
b. To know the increasing of activities of students class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach.
(14)
5
1.6Significance of Study
The significance of study that is expected are: 1. Theoretical Benefits
a. The results of this research are expected for teachers of biology in an attempt to improve student learning outcomes and student’s activity with the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach.
b. Input material for researchers as prospective teachers of biology on the application of Contextual Teaching Learning approach to teaching environmental destruction subject matter
2. Practical Benefits
a. The application of active learning strategies that can motivate learners to learn so that educational goals can be achieved
b. Can motivate student to learn biology, so that the student’s learning outcomes can be interested
c. Biology teacher can use CTL in teaching learning process to increase learning outcomes
d. Give some information about classroom action research to the other educational researcher
(15)
69
REFERENCES
Arikunto, S.2002.Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan.Jakarta:Bumi Aksara Aqib, Z. 2008. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Bandung: Yrama Widya. Aloysius, S, (2006), Biology for junior High School, Yudhistira, Jakarta. Arends, R. (2009).Learning to Teach English Edition.New York.Mc.Graw Hill Berns, R. G., & Erickson, P. M. (2001). Contextual teaching and learning:
Preparing students for the new economy, OH: National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education. Columbus.
Brand, B. (2003), Essential Of High School Reform: New Form Of Assessment
And Contextual Teaching And Learning, American youth policy forum,
USA.
Elaine, L. (2009), Contextualized Teaching and Learning, The academic Senate for California Community College. Chancellor’s Office of the California Community Colleges.
Gie, (1985), Aktivitas Belajar Siswa, Penerbit Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.
Hamalik, O. (2009), Proses Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta. Hamalik. (2002). Psikologi Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algesindo. Hull, D. (2004), Teaching Biology Contextually, CORD communication, Inc,
United States of America.
Hull, D. (2004), Teaching Science Contextually, CORD communication, Inc, United States of America.
Lindblom, S. (2006), How Approaches To Teaching Are Affected By Discipline
And Teaching Context. University of Oxford, UK.
Matthew, M. (2000), Contextual Teaching, Professional Learning, And Student
Experiences; Lesson Learned From Implementation. Center on education
and work university of Wilconsin-Madison.
Mazzeo, C. (2008). Supporting student success at California community colleges. Prepared for the Bay Area Workforce Funding Collaborative Career by the Career Ladders Project for California Community Colleges.
Nurkancana, W. (1995), Evaluasi Pendidikan, Usaha Nasional: Surabaya
Pusat penilaian Pendidikan BALITBANG kemdikbud. 2009. Penilaian PISA. Balitbang Kemdikbud, Jakarta.
(16)
70
Richard, L. (2005), Contextual Teaching And Learning In Pre-Service Teacher
Education, The University of Georgia.
Robert, B. (2001), Contextual Teaching And Learning: Prepare Student For The
New Approach, The Ohio State University. Columbus.
Sanjaya, W. (2008), Strategi Pembelajaran, Penerbit Kencana Perdana Media Group, Jakarta.
Sardiman, A. (2003), Interaksi Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Slameto. (1995).Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Smith, p. (2006), Contextual Teaching And Learning Practices In The Family And
Consumers Science Curriculum, Colombia Middle School Decalb
Country, Georgia.
Trianto (2011) .Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif Progresif. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group
(1)
students more confused in the study. They not only learn the material, but also language. It was very felt hard by the student in class VII. VII grade students tend to seek the meaning of the words in the book not understand the contents of the subject matter, so that learning materials often do not fit with the concept.
According to Mrs. Berliana who was one of RSBI biology teacher who taught in class VII, she was often difficulty in teaching biology lesson materials. Students often asked the same question all the time, especially when concerned with the meaning of the word. So she pays little attention to the learning model that she uses.
Sometimes the material that was submitted by the teachers were not all can be accepted by students. Because this case often happen in the classroom, most students will misunderstand about the concept. Misunderstanding in receiving lessons proved to be unfavorable effects for both of teachers and students. For teachers, if the student could not catch the lesson well and she felt like a failure in teaching the subject matter. For students the material that was not entirely well received will affect student learning outcome itself.
The involvement of students in following the course of teaching and learning activities about 60%, classroom management in learning about 70% of the 25 students in the class who follow the learning process. The results of daily tests students' average value was 65. Student learning outcomes was still relatively low, say low because the majority of students on tests of cognitive learning outcomes achieved only at high values of 20 and 70, which means that there were many students who have to perform remedial.
The low student learning achievement to subjects of biology teachers felt uneasy. Hence the need for renewal in the study. One of them by using CTL approach that has not implemented in that school.
According to Berns & Erickson 2001, CTL can increase student learning achievement. He said that “In Basic Skills as a Foundation for Student Success in the school, Contextualized Teaching and Learning (CTL) is identified as a promising strategy that actively engages students and promotes improved learning and skills development. CTL has been defined in different ways, based on the intent of the group championing its
(2)
use. Most recently, he characterized CTL as a “conception of teaching and learning that helps teachers relate subject matter content to real world situations”.
Chris Mazzeo (2008), broadened the definition, describing CTL as a “diverse family of instructional strategies designed to more seamlessly link the learning of foundational skills and academic or occupational content by focusing teaching and learning squarely on concrete applications in a specific context that is of interest to the student”
The task of teachers in contextual learning is to assist students in achieving its goals. That is, teachers deal more with strategy than giving information. Teachers just manage class as a team that works together to find something new to students. Teaching and learning process is more marked than teacher centered student centered.
Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) assists students in meeting content standards by applying knowledge to their current and future lives as family members, citizens, and workers. Effective use of CTL:
• Emphasizes problem-solving,
• Recognizes the need for teaching and learning to occur in multiple contexts, • Reaches students to become self-regulated learners,
• Anchors teaching in students’ diverse life contexts,
• Encourages students to learn from each other in interdependent groups, and • Employs authentic assessment.
Based on the description above, so the research about “The Implementation of Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach To Increase Student’s Learning Outcome and Activity On Environmental Destruction Topic of Class VII-2 SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012” had done.
1.2Problem Identification
Based on the background of the above problems can be identified the problem as follows:
1. Student learning outcomes are still relatively low.
(3)
3. The tendency to use traditional methods of teaching.
1.3Research Scope
Research problem is limited into: a. Subjects of Research
Subjects in this study are the increasing of learning outcomes and student’s activity by implementing Contextual Teaching Learning.
b. Objects of Research
Objects in this study are student class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 with topic Environmental Destruction
1.4Research Question
By considering the background and limitations of problems in the study then the formulation of the problem are:
1. Is the learning outcome of student’s class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic is higher after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach?
2. Do the activities of student’s class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic increase after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach?
1.5Objectives
Based on the research questions above, the research objectives are:
a. To know the increasing of learning outcome of students class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning
b. To know the increasing of activities of students class VII-1 SMPN 1 Tebing Tinggi at 2011/2012 in environmental destruction topic after the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach.
(4)
1.6Significance of Study
The significance of study that is expected are: 1. Theoretical Benefits
a. The results of this research are expected for teachers of biology in an attempt to improve student learning outcomes and student’s activity with the implementation of Contextual Teaching Learning approach.
b. Input material for researchers as prospective teachers of biology on the application of Contextual Teaching Learning approach to teaching environmental destruction subject matter
2. Practical Benefits
a. The application of active learning strategies that can motivate learners to learn so that educational goals can be achieved
b. Can motivate student to learn biology, so that the student’s learning outcomes can be interested
c. Biology teacher can use CTL in teaching learning process to increase learning outcomes
d. Give some information about classroom action research to the other educational researcher
(5)
REFERENCES
Arikunto, S.2002.Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan.Jakarta:Bumi Aksara Aqib, Z. 2008. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Bandung: Yrama Widya. Aloysius, S, (2006), Biology for junior High School, Yudhistira, Jakarta. Arends, R. (2009).Learning to Teach English Edition.New York.Mc.Graw Hill Berns, R. G., & Erickson, P. M. (2001). Contextual teaching and learning:
Preparing students for the new economy, OH: National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education. Columbus.
Brand, B. (2003), Essential Of High School Reform: New Form Of Assessment And Contextual Teaching And Learning, American youth policy forum, USA.
Elaine, L. (2009), Contextualized Teaching and Learning, The academic Senate for California Community College. Chancellor’s Office of the California Community Colleges.
Gie, (1985), Aktivitas Belajar Siswa, Penerbit Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.
Hamalik, O. (2009), Proses Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta. Hamalik. (2002). Psikologi Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algesindo. Hull, D. (2004), Teaching Biology Contextually, CORD communication, Inc,
United States of America.
Hull, D. (2004), Teaching Science Contextually, CORD communication, Inc, United States of America.
Lindblom, S. (2006), How Approaches To Teaching Are Affected By Discipline And Teaching Context. University of Oxford, UK.
Matthew, M. (2000), Contextual Teaching, Professional Learning, And Student Experiences; Lesson Learned From Implementation. Center on education and work university of Wilconsin-Madison.
Mazzeo, C. (2008). Supporting student success at California community colleges. Prepared for the Bay Area Workforce Funding Collaborative Career by the Career Ladders Project for California Community Colleges.
Nurkancana, W. (1995), Evaluasi Pendidikan, Usaha Nasional: Surabaya
Pusat penilaian Pendidikan BALITBANG kemdikbud. 2009. Penilaian PISA. Balitbang Kemdikbud, Jakarta.
(6)
Richard, L. (2005), Contextual Teaching And Learning In Pre-Service Teacher Education, The University of Georgia.
Robert, B. (2001), Contextual Teaching And Learning: Prepare Student For The New Approach, The Ohio State University. Columbus.
Sanjaya, W. (2008), Strategi Pembelajaran, Penerbit Kencana Perdana Media Group, Jakarta.
Sardiman, A. (2003), Interaksi Motivasi Belajar Mengajar, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Slameto. (1995).Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Smith, p. (2006), Contextual Teaching And Learning Practices In The Family And Consumers Science Curriculum, Colombia Middle School Decalb
Country, Georgia.
Trianto (2011) .Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif Progresif. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group