THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY BY USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIR-SHARE (TPS)AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN GRADE X OF SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014.
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS’ PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY BY
USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIRSHARE (TPS) AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT
DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN
OF GRADE X SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014
By:
Anggi Paramita Daulay
IDN 4103312001
Bilingual Mathematics Education Study Program
A Thesis
Submitted to Fulfill the Requirement for Getting the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2014
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks to Allah Subhanallahu Wata’ala give me more spirit to finish my
thesis. The title of thesis is The Difference of Students’ Problem Solving Ability
by Using Cooperative Learning Model Type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and Type
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in the topic of Trigonometry in
Grade X of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014. This thesis was arranged
to satisfy the law to get the Sarjana Pendidikan of Mathematics and Science
Faculty in State University of Medan.
For this chance I want to say thank you for the rector of State University
of Medan, Mr. Prof. Dr. Ibnu hajar, M.Si. and his staffs, Mr. Prof. Drs. Motlan,
M.Sc., Ph.D. for dean of FMIPA UNIMED and his college assistant of Dean I, II,
III in UNIMED, Mr. Drs. Syafari, M.Pd. as Head of Mathematics Department,
Mr. Drs. Zul Amry, M.Si. as Head of Mathematics Education Study Program and
then Mr. Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si. as secretary of Mathematics Department.
Big gratitude to Mr. Prof. Dr. Asmin Panjaitan, M.Pd. as supervisor for his
guide to prepare this thesis. And thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr. Sahat Saragih, M.Pd., Mr.
Dr. KMS. Amin Fauzi, M.Pd. and Mrs. Dr. Izwita Dewi, M.Pd., who has persons
responsible for my thesis from the beginning until end. Thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr.
Bornok Sinaga, M.Pd. as my academic supervisor, Mr. Drs. Arifin Siregar, M.Pd.
as always support me and then thank you so much for all my lecturers and staffs
in FMIPA.
Special thanks to my lovely father Mr. Mohammad Kamaruddin Daulay,
S.H. and my lovely mother Nuraini for giving motivation, pray and all I need in
finishing this thesis. And then thanks for love to my brothers, Mohammad Angga
Ramadhan Daulay, Mohammad Arfan Zulkhoir Daulay and my sister Andini
Salsabillah Daulay.
And then, thank you so much for helping Mr. Drs. Suhairi, M.Pd. as
headmaster of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, Mr. Edi Lokot, M.Si., Mr. Ishak
Saragih, S.Pd. and all staffs in SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan for helping and
supporting in doing research.
v
Also thanks to big family in Bilingual Mathematics Education 2010 for
sadness and happiness in the class, Abdul, Dian, Dwi, Elfan, Erlyn, Falni, Kiki,
Lia, Maria, Matyanne, Meiva, Melin, Mila, Nelly, Petra, Riny, Rully, Sheila, Siti,
Surya, Tika, Uli and Mimi. And special thanks to my ABM Perbaungan friends,
Sheila, Uli, Rici, Jovan, Fery, Biah, Cici, Liza, and Rany.
Especially to my precious Bachtiar Rivai Nasution S.STP thanks to all
your support, hope you stay beside me and be mine forever. To bele’s thanks for
everything my future pharmacist Nurul Khairina Harahap, Zafira Nasution,
Fildzah Fitria, Rifkah Wulandari, Novade Nur Arif Siregar. And also to cici, irna,
putri, anggi yulia, maria, dina, meyna, arum and nanda safira.
The writer should give a big effort to prepare this thesis, and the writer
knows that this thesis has so many weaknesses. So that, the writer needs some
suggestions to make it this be better. And big wishes, it can be improve our
knowledge.
Medan,
Writer,
August 2014
Anggi Paramita Daulay
ID. 4103312001
iii
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS’ PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY BY
USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIRSHARE (TPS)AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT
DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN
GRADE X OF SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014
By:
Anggi Paramita Daulay
ID. 4103312001
ABSTRACT
This research is a quasi experimental to determine whether there is
difference students’ problem solving ability who taught by cooperative learning
model type TPS with students’ problem solving ability who taught by type STAD
in the topic of Trigonometry in grade of X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y.
2013/2014.
The population is used all students of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan in the
year 2013/2014. Sample selected by cluster random sampling is a class XU-1 by
20 students as a class experimental A with cooperative learning model TPS
(Think-Pair-Share) and class XU-2 by 20 students as a class experimental B with
cooperative learning model STAD (Student Teams-Achievement Division). To
obtain the necessary data used in this study to test the form of essays that look at
students' mathematical problem solving ability. Before the test is defined as a data
collection tool, first piloted by two lecturers from the Department of Mathematics
in State University of Medan and one mathematics teacher in SMA Negeri 1
Perbaungan.
From the analysis of the data obtained average posttest results of the
experimental class A is 83.12 and the average value of the posttest results of the
experimental class B is 71.62. Prior to hypothesis testing is done first seen
normality and homogeneity of data such posttest. Normality was tested using
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and homogeneity by using the Levene’s test from tests
performed with SPSS-18, stated that the data posttest normal distribution and
homogeneous, then the hypothesis can be tested with t test result got that
namely
= 5.058 and
= 2.024, then 5.058 >
2.024. This means that
then Ho is rejected and Ha is
accepted. Thus it can be concluded that average students’ problem solving ability
who taught by cooperative learning model type TPS is not equal to average
students’ problem solving ability who taught by type STAD in the topic of
Trigonometry in grade of X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014.
vi
CONTENTS
Page
Sheet of Agreement
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Acknowledgement
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
Identification of Problem
9
1.3
Limitation of Problem
9
1.4
Formulation of Problem
9
1.5
Research Objectives
10
1.6
Benefits of Research
10
1.7
Operational Definition
10
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
12
2.1
12
Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Problems in Mathematics
12
2.1.2 Mathematics Problem Solving
13
2.1.3 Mathematics Problem Solving Ability
15
2.1.4 Mathematics Learning
16
2.1.5 Learning Model
17
2.1.6 Cooperative Learning Model
19
vii
2.1.7 Cooperative Learning Model Steps
21
2.1.8 Cooperative Learning Type TPS
23
2.1.9 Cooperative Learning Type STAD
26
2.1.10 Comparison of Model Cooperative Learning TPS & STAD
31
2.1.11 Supporting Theory of Cooperative Learning Model
32
2.1.12 Summary of Subject Matter
33
2.2
Relevant Research
38
2.3
Conceptual Framework
39
2.4
Hypothesis Research
41
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
42
3.1
Type of Research
42
3.2
Place and Time of Research
42
3.3
Population
42
3.3.1 Population
42
3.3.2 Sample
43
3.4
Variables and Research Design
43
3.4.1 Independent Variable
43
3.4.2 Dependent Variable
44
3.4.3 Research Procedure
44
3.5
Data Collection Instrument
3.5.1 Problem Solving Test
47
47
3.6
Data Analysis of Observation Sheet
50
3.7
Techniques of Analysis Data
51
3.7.1 Problem Solving Ability
51
3.7.2 Data Analysis by Inferential Statistics Technique
51
3.7.2.1 Normality Test
51
3.7.2.2 Homogeneity Test
52
3.7.2.3 Hypothesis Test
52
viii
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
54
4.1
54
Description of Research Data
4.1.1 Description Value Posttest Experimental Class A and Class B
54
4.1.2 Description Level Students in the Problem Solving Ability
55
4.2
Analysis of Research Results
57
4.3.1 Normality Test Data
57
4.3.2 Homogeneity Test
59
4.3.3 Hypothesis Test
60
4.3
Discussion of Results
63
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
67
5.1
Conclusion
67
5.2
Suggestion
67
REFERENCES
68
x
LIST OF TABLE
Page
Table 2.1
Cooperative Learning Steps
22
Table 2.2
Implementation Steps Model Discussion Think-Pair-Share
25
Table 2.3
Score Calculation Developments
28
Table 2.4
Award Level Group
29
Table 2.5
Phases of Cooperative Learning Type STAD
29
Table 2.6
Comparison of Type Model Cooperative Learning
Type TPS and Type STAD
31
Table 2.7
The Value Trigonometry Ratios
35
Table 2.8
The signs of Trigonometry Ratios
37
Table 3.1
Research Design of Randomized Control Group Only
44
Table 3.2
Guidelines of Scoring For Problem-Solving Ability Test
48
Table 3.3
Determination of completeness problem Solving
By Individuals
49
Table 3.4
Criteria of Teacher’s Responses
50
Table 3.5
Criteria of Student’s Responses
51
Table 4.1
Student Test Data Experiment Class A and
Experiment Class B
Table 4.2
Description of Student Ability Level Category
Problem-Solving Experiment Class A
Table 4.3
54
56
Description of Student Ability Level Category
Problem-Solving Experiment Class B
56
Table 4.4
Normality Test Results of Posttest Data Both Exp. Class
58
Table 4.5
Homogeneity Test Results of Posttest Data Both Exp. Class
60
Table 4.6
Hypothesis Test Results Data
61
ix
LIST OF FIGURE
Page
Figure 1.1
One Student Answer Sheet
Figure 2.1
Right Triangle
33
Figure 3.1
Procedure of Research
46
Figure 4.1
The Result of Ability Level Problem Solving Category in
Experiment Class A and Experiment Class B
7
57
xi
LIST OF APPENDIX
Page
Appendix 1
Lesson Plan 1 (TPS)
71
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan 2 (TPS)
78
Appendix 3
Lesson Plan 3 (TPS)
85
Appendix 4
Lesson Plan 1 (STAD)
92
Appendix 5
Lesson Plan 2 (STAD)
99
Appendix 6
Lesson Plan 3 (STAD)
105
Appendix 7
SAS 1 (TPS)
111
Appendix 8
SAS 2 (TPS)
117
Appendix 9
SAS 3 (TPS)
128
Appendix 10 SAS 1 (STAD)
136
Appendix 11 SAS 2 (STAD)
142
Appendix 12 SAS 3 (STAD)
153
Appendix 13 Blue Print of Initial Capability Test
160
Appendix 14 Initial Capability Test
161
Appendix 15 Solution Alternative of Initial Capability Test
163
Appendix 16 Guidelines of Scoring For Initial Capability Test and
Problem-Solving Ability Test
166
Appendix 17 Blue Print of Problem-Solving Ability Posttest
167
Appendix 18 Problem Solving Ability Posttest
168
Appendix 19 Solution Alternative of Problem Solving Ability Posttest
170
Appendix 20 Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity (TPS)
174
xii
Appendix 21 Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity (STAD)
172
Appendix 22 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-1 (TPS)
180
Appendix 23 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-2 (TPS)
181
Appendix 24 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-3 (TPS)
182
Appendix 25 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-1 (STAD)
183
Appendix 26 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-2 (STAD)
184
Appendix 27 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-3 (STAD)
185
Appendix 28 Results of Observation Sheet
186
Appendix 29 Result of Initial Capability Test (XU-1)
190
Appendix 30 Result of Initial Capability Test (XU-2)
191
Appendix 31 Validation Sheet of Problem Solving Ability Test
192
Appendix 32 Students’ Problem Solving Ability Experiment Class A
(Posstest)
199
Appendix 33 Students’ Problem Solving Ability Experiment Class B
(Posstest)
201
Appendix 34 Determination of Percentage Students’ Problem Solving for
Each Category I, II, III, and IV on the Posttest (Exp.A)
203
Appendix 35 Determination of Percentage Students’ Problem Solving for
Each Category I, II, III, and IV on the Posttest (Exp.B)
205
Appendix 36 Calculation of Normality Test
207
Appendix 37 Calculation of Homogeneity
208
Appendix 38 Calculation of Hypothesis
210
Appendix 39 List of Student Name
212
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Mathematics is the oldest science and basic science has an important role
in science and technology. The statement is supported by the statement Cockroft
(in Abdurrahman, 2009:253) argues that mathematics should be taught to students
because:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mathematics always be used in all aspects of life.
All area studies require to math skills appropiate.
Can be strong, short and clear in communication.
Can be used for present information in various way.
Increase logical thinking, accuracy and awareness spatial.
Provide satisfaction against to solve challenging problems.
Mathematics education is one of study taught at every level of
education. Mathematics education has a very dominant role in educating students
for developing critical thinking skills, analytical and logical. One of the problems
that occur in the world of education in Indonesia is the low quality of mathematics
education, both in terms of process and learning outcomes, thus causing low
Indonesian student mathematics achievement.
The mathematics problem is a matter of mathematics or mathematical
statement in which there is no procedure or algorithm that can be directly used or
used by students to solve the problems, and the statement must be solved by the
students. Teachers are required to encourage students to actively learn and can
improve the ability of solving mathematical problems which are important factors
in mathematics. Slameto (2010: 94) argues that:
"In the teaching and learning interaction, teachers have a lot to give
freedom to the students, to be able to investigate itself, observing his
own, self-study, finding solutions to their own problems. This will cause
a sense of great responsibility towards what will be done, and
confidence to yourself, so that students do not always cleave to others".
2
The
fact
that
mathematics
education
in
Indonesia
is
still
disappointing. The low outcomes is a serious problem that must be solved,
because the success of the learning process is not only dependent on the teacher
but the students also played a role. Through learning model, teachers can help
students get information, ideas, skills, ways of thinking and expressing
ideas. Therefore, active learning is required of students so that they can improve
their
learning
performance
as
proposed
by
Noor
( http://pages-
yourfavotite.com/ppsupi/abstrakmat2005.html) that:
“Active learning is required of the students, so that they can improve
their learning performance. Therefore, teachers are required to encourage
students to actively learn and can improve reasoning skills in
mathematics which is an important factor in mathematic".
The learning process at schools, many obstacles faced by the students,
one of these obstacles is the lack of student interest in receiving the teacher's
lessons, especially in mathematics is one of study that less diserable for students
and considered is the most difficult lessons since first . As pointed out by Rida
(http://www.duniaguru.com) said that: "The fact show the students relatively low
in mathematic so it’s very rare to find our students understand the concept and
application of mathematics well". Similar to Pranoto (http://www.sigmetris.com),
"With the growing of perception about irrelevance or not beneficial mathematics,
their motivation to learn mathematics will be down, or even disappear".This is in
line with the results of the interview on January 6, 2014 which is disclosed by
math teacher at SMAN 1 Perbaungan, Mr. Edi Lokot that: "The problems often
faced by teachers when teaching mathematics due to the lack of interesting with
math and understanding with the basics of mathematic as soon as assume
mathematical considered a difficult subject and avoid, it makes students being
confused and bored when study ongoing process". And because in SMAN 1
Perbaungan still using learning teacher oriented model.
Trigonometry is a math subject in grade x for this second
semester. Trigonometry has a very close relationship in our lives, both directly
and indirectly. Originally, trigonometry comes as solution of solving of simple
3
planes, with the growing of time, trigonometry is often used in world of applied
sciences, the development of other sciences, and the development of mathematics
itself. On this topic there are many students who have difficulty in solving a given
problem, it’s not surprising because there are too many formulas to remember and
need more understanding. To improve their learning outcomes through the
application of knowledge, learn to solve problems, find something for themselves
and discuss each other with their friends, the way is to choose an appropriate
learning model with the cooperative learning model. Correspondingly Nurgayah
(2011: 66) also states that:
"In the model of cooperative learning is done by developing interaction
and work together in a structural team work, educate among each
students to avoid offense, misunderstanding in learning in order to reach
the learning objective. There are at least three important learning
objectives by implementing cooperative learning model, which is the
result of academic learning, acceptance of diversity or individual
differences, and the development of social skills or cooperation and
collaboration skills".
In the implementation of cooperative learning can change the role of
teachers from teacher-centered role to a role managing a small group activity.
Thus the role of the teacher during monotonous will be reduced and students will
be trained to solve problems, even problems that are considered intractable. There
were 4 of cooperative learning approach according to Trianto (2011: 67), "That
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD), JIGSAW, Investigation Group
(Teams Games Tournaments or TGT), and the Structural approaches include
Think - Pair-Share (TPS) and Numbered Head Together (NHT)”.
Because teachers' mastery of the learning model is still not optimal, the
researcher tried to introduce cooperative learning models for math teachers in
SMAN 1 Perbaungan. One of the cooperative learning model to improve learning
outcomes is cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS). The reason
the researchers chose this learning model because TPS is a type of cooperative
learning that is designed to influence the pattern of interaction that occurs
between students in learning activities. In this case the student is expected to work
in small groups to help each other and be identified with a pattern of cooperation
4
rather than individuals. The advantages of TPS models are shaping individual and
a pair group responsibility, because in this model there are individual tasks and
task groups. So also with cooperative learning model Student TeamsAchievement Division (STAD) is the simplest cooperative learning, with 4-5
people heterogeneously discussions. STAD cooperative learning created between
student interaction with the students and also between students and teachers to
create a learning community. Students not only learn from teachers but also from
fellow students. In STAD cooperative learning requires active student
participation in group discussions. According to Istarani (2011: 68-69), thinkpair-share has strength:
1. Be able to improve students’ reasoning, critical power of students, the
students’ imagination and power of analysis to a problem;
2. Promote cooperation among the students as they work in groups;
3. Improve the ability of students to understand and appreciate other
opinions;
4. Improve students’ ability to express opinions as implementation of
his/her knowledge;
5. Teacher is more likely to increase students’ knowledge when they
finished with the discussion.
And there are some of the strength of cooperative learning model STAD (Student
Teams-Achievement Division), according Nurgayah (2011: 86-88) are:
a. In STAD cooperative learning model, learners are not overly relied on
teachers, but also increased confidence in the ability to think
independently, finding information from a variety of sources as well
as learning from other learners.
b. STAD cooperative learning model develops the ability to express an
idea or ideas verbally and compare with other people's ideas.
c. STAD cooperative learning model can help learners to appreciate
others and aware to the limitations as well as receiving all the
difference.
d. STAD cooperative learning model can help learners to take more
responsibility in learning.
e. STAD cooperative learning model improves academic achievement
and social, including developing a sense of self-esteem.
5
Polya defined problem solving as finding “a way where no way is
known, off-hand… out of a difficulty…around an obstacle”. Polya stated that to
know mathematics is to solve problems. The difference between nonroutine and
routine problems seems to be a key element in how problem solving is currently
being viewed among mathematics educators. The primary purpose of
mathematical problem-solving instruction is not to equip students with a
collection of skills and processes, but rather to enable them to think for
themselves. The value of skills and process instruction should be judged by the
extent to which the skills and processes actually enhance flexible, independent
thinking.
With
above
statement
parallel
according
(http://www.lamath.org/journal/Vol1/What_IS_PSAbility.pdf)
to
Carmen
conducted
a
critical analysis of the research on problem solving in secondary school
mathematics between the years of 1925-1975: “Out of twelve conclusions, one
stated the following. Characteristics of an effective problem solver can be
identified. An effective problem solver: tends to use a wide range of heuristic
strategies; seems to follow some plan of attack when solving a problem and
exhibits trial-and-error ability; has good arithmetic skills; has confidence in own
mathematics ability; tends to check answers for reasonableness and is able to
estimate an answer; and usually obtains an understanding of a problem before
trying to solve it. Some of the mathematicians attempted to make problem solving
into a more detailed process than the mathematics educators. For example, one
mathematician defined problem solving to be the process of evaluating possible
techniques, applying techniques, reaching a solution, checking the results for
accuracy, and writing out the solution in a coherent fashion”.
Research has also been conducted regarding what constitutes the process
of problem solving ability. Polya (1945/1973) posited four problem-solving steps
in How to Solve It: understanding the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the
plan and looking back.
Researcher using this model for cooperative learning has not previously
been applied by the teacher. From the result of survey that conducted by
researcher (February 4, 2014) by giving the problem solving the initial capability
6
test to student of grade XU-1 and XU-2 of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan. In topic of
Angle Size and Angle Triangle as a prerequisites matter of trigonometry topic.
With the initial capability test item:
1. A and B angles are supplementary angles where the ratios is 4 : 5.
Determine size of B angle.
a. What is known and asked of the above question?
b. How to determine size of B angle?
c. How to result of size of B angle?
d. According to Ima, the result size of B angle is
. Is it true
that the results of the calculation Ima?
2. Look this figure.
R
P
O
Determine size of PRQ angle.
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of PRQ angle?
How to result of size of PRQ angle?
According to Sari, the result size of PRQ angle is
true that the results of the calculation Sari?
. Is it
3. Determine size of PRQ in figure below that is stated with a in b.
R
Q
P
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of PRQ?
How to result of size of PRQ?
According to Andi, the result size of PRQ is
it true that the results of the calculation Andi?
. Is
7
4. Calculate size of every angle in ABC triangle.
C
B
A
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of every angle in ABC triangle?
How to result of size of every angle in ABC triangle?
According to Tono, the result size of every angle in ABC triangle is
. Is it true that the results of the
calculation Tono?
This is example from the answer one of student.
Figure 1.1 One Student Answer Sheets
8
At figure 1.1 can be seen that the students know about the problem, but
do not understand the steps of problem solving, making it less obvious steps taken
and no checking solution. Just added the steps of problem solving that students
can answer the question with a perfect score. The initial capability test result also
shown that there was not student who completed to solve problem.
From grade XU-1 with number student is 20 who took the test, the
average of class score that obtained is 53.50 (score scale 0 – 100) and grade XU-2
with 20 students too got 54.62 (score scale 0 – 100). From some of descriptions
above it, it can be seen that many of students who are not able to solve problem
because learning process is meaningful to student that cause to low ability of
students in solving problems. The reality is students just memorize the concepts
and less able to use these concepts if it is encountered in real life problems that
associated with concept that owned. Mathematics teachers have a duty to help
students to improve students’ problem-solving abilities. Teachers should strive
harder to enable students to solve problems because one focus of learning
mathematics is problem solving, so that basic competencies that should be owned
by every student is a minimum standard of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values
which is reflected in learning of mathematics with habits of thought and action to
solve problem.
One of the efforts made to improve students' understanding of the
material trigonometry can enhance the students’ problem solving abilities with the
use of cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student
Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in order to increase students’ problemsolving ability. When researchers put forward this to teacher of mathematics in
SMA N 1 Perbaungan, they welcomed the idea so that the students are used to
learning state centered on teachers who use the lecture method can be
immediately abandoned. From this the researchers wanted to see how the
students’ problem-solving ability through the use of cooperative learning model
type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student Teams-Achievement Division
(STAD) in studying this topic trigonometry.
9
Based on the above background, the authors are interested to research
this with the title : "The Difference of Students’ Problem Solving Ability by
Using Cooperative Learning Model Type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and Type
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in the Topic of Trigonometry
in Grade X of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014".
1.2
Identification of Problem
Based on background that have been raised it can be identified several
problems, as follows:
1. Students’ mathematics learning outcomes is still low.
2. Mathematics is regarded as a difficult subject.
3. Learning activities are still teacher-centered.
4. Students’ mathematical problem solving ability is still low.
5. Knowledge of teachers to various teaching models are not optimal and
not yet implementation of cooperative learning model Think-PairShare (TPS) or type Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in
the learning of mathematics.
1.3
Limitation of Problem
For more directing this research so focused and specific to the problem in
this study is limited to the students’ problem-solving ability on the subject of
trigonometry grade x in SMA N 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014 as well as the
learning model is applied in the model limit by cooperative learning model type
Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD).
1.4
Formulation of Problem
Based on the above problem definition, then the formulation of the
problem in this research :
is there any difference students’ problem-solving
ability taught by cooperative learning model Think-Pair-Share (TPS) type with
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) type in the subject of trigonometry
in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014?
10
1.5
Research Objectives
The purpose of this research : to know any difference students’ problem-
solving ability taught by cooperative learning model Think-Pair-Share (TPS) type
and Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) type in the subject of
trigonometry in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014?
1.6
Benefits of Research
The benefits of this research are :
1. Being incoming material for researchers as mathematics teacher
candidates to apply cooperative learning in every learning process
especially TPS type and STAD type in learning mathematics,
especially on Trigonometry.
2. For teachers and prospective teachers, this study could be a reference
in planning learning trigonometry particular subject.
3. For students, is expected to use the cooperative learning model type
Think-Pair-Share (TPS) can improve the students’ problem-solving
ability.
4. For schools, is expected to be a source of information or contribute
ideas for improvement of mathematics teaching, especially in schools
where the research conducted and the school in general.
5. A comparison may be relevant for future research.
1.7
Operational Definition
To avoid differences in interpretation of the terms contained in the
formulation of the problem in this study, the operational definition be stated as
follows:
1. Mathematical Problem-Solving Ability in this study is the result of
student learning in solving problems on material trigonometry to
problem solving stages as follows:
11
Understanding the problem
Make a plan
Do the plan
Checking solution
2. Learning model is a plan or a pattern that is used as a guide in
learning in the classroom.
3. Cooperative learning is learning that emphasizes the involvement of
the student in the form of a group to achieve a common goal.
4. Cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) is a
cooperative learning that every student is given the opportunity to
think about it first answer to the problem that has been given, and
then made in pairs and then share them with others in a way
presentation results of group discussion.
5. Cooperative learning model type Student Teams-Achievement
Division (STAD) is one type of cooperative learning model using
small groups with a total membership of each group of 4-5 students
are heterogeneous.
In the process of learning, STAD cooperative learning consists of six
steps or phases:
a.
Delivering learning objectives
b.
Presents or deliver material
c.
Organize students into groups to learn
d.
Guiding the work and the working group
e.
evaluate
f.
Giving award.
67
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research and processing of data it can be concluded that:
1. Average students’ problem-solving ability who taught by cooperative learning
TPS is not equal to average students’ problem-solving ability who taught by
cooperative learning STAD in the topic of trigonometry in grade X of SMA
Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014.
2. Using cooperative learning model TPS type can increase students’ problem
solving ability and can increase the average scores of students.
5.2.
Suggestion
Based on these results it is suggested that researchers can provide are as
follows:
1. To mathematics teachers are suggested to use cooperative learning model TPS
type or STAD type as learning model alternative in improving students’
mathematical problem solving ability.
2. Based on problem solving aspect that will be achieved, cooperative learning
model TPS type is more effective that cooperative learning model STAD type
with the requirement teachers should be handle allocation time in the
classroom.
3. For prospective teachers to apply cooperative learning model TPS type in
improving the average value of students' problem solving abilities.
68
REFERENCES
Abdurrahman, M., (2009), Pendidikan Bagi Anak Berkesulitan Belajar, Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta.
Aisyah, N., (2007), Pendekatan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika,
http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default/files/PengembanganPembelajaranMatem
atika_Unit_5_0.pdf (accessed on May 1st/ 1.00pm)
Amustofa, (2009), Strategi Pemecahan Masalah dalam Matematika,
http://amustofa70.wordpress.com/strategi-pemecahan-masalah-dalammatematika/ (accessed on Maret 25th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Anton,
(2010),
Rubric
of
Problem
Solving
Ability.
http://web.njit.edu/`ronkowit/teaching/rubrics/samples/math_probsolv_chi
cago.df (accessed on April 15th 2014/ 4.00pm)
Arini,
(2009), Langkah-langkah Pembelajaran Kooperatif, http://yustiarini.blogspot.com/2009.08/model-pembelajaran-kooperatif.html?m=1
(accessed on January 20th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Arikunto, S., (2007), Manajemen Penelitian, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, S., (2012), Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan Edisi II, Jakarta: Bumi
Aksara.
Asmin and Mansyur A., (2012), Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar Dengan
Analisis Klasik dan Moder, Medan: Larispa Indonesia.
Carmen,
(2010),
Journal
of
Problem
Solving
Ability,
http://www.lamath.org/journal/Vol1/What_IS_PSAbility.pdf (accessed on
July 30th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Dimyati and Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Jakarta: PT Rineka
Cipta.
Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Universitas Negeri Medan,
(2011), Pedoman Penulisan Proposal dan Skripsi Mahasiswa Program
Studi Pendidikan, Medan : FMIPA Unimed.
Ibrahim, M., Rakhmediarti, F., Nur, M., and Ismono, (2010), Pembelajaran
Kooperatif, Surabaya : Universitas Surabaya Universitas Press.
Istarani, (2011), Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Medan: Media Persada.
69
Hartati, (2011), Upaya Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Siswa
dengan Pendekatan TPS pada Pokok Bahasan Pecahan di Kelas V SD
Negeri No. 016505 Taman Sari Kab. Asahan Tahun Ajaran 2011/2012,
Skripsi, FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan
Noor, F., (2005), Pengaruh Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Students Team
Achievement Divisions (STAD) Terhadap Kemampuan Siswa Dalam
Mengerjakan Bukti dalam Matematika pada Siswa SMU,
http//pagesyourfavorite.com/ppsupi/abstrakmat2005.html (accessed on
January 12th,2014 / 2.15pm)
Noormandiri, (2007), Buku Paket Matematika untuk SMA Kelas X, Jakarta:
Erlangga.
Nuralam, (2009), Pemecahan Masalah sebagai Pendekatan dalam Belajar
Matematika, Jurnal Edukasi, Vol. V, No. 1, 142-145.
Nurbaidhi’ah, (2011), Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa Dengan Menggunakan
Model Cooperative Learning Tipe TPS dan Tipe STAD kelas X SMA AlWashliyah 1 Medan T.A 2011/2012. Skripsi, FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan.
Nurgayah, (2011), Strategi dan Metode Pembelajaran, Bandung : Cipta Pustaka
Media Perintis.
Peers, S., (1996), Statistical Analysis for Education and Psychology Researchers,
Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
Pranoto, (2007), Motivasi Belajar Matematika, http://www.sigmetris.com
(accessed on January 12th,2014 / 3.15pm)
Pusdihartati,
(2011),
Model
Pembelajaran
Tipe
STAD,
th
http://digilib.edu/pasca.com (accessed on January 12 ,2014 / 3.25pm)
Rida,
M.,
(2007),
Recrentasi
Pembelajaran
Matematika,
http://www.duniaguru.com/index.phpoption=comcontent&task=vilew&id
=285&temid.com (accessed on January 12th,2014 / 3.01pm)
Sakiben, S., (2010), Perbedaan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika
Siswa yang Diajar dengan Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe TPS dan Tipe
STAD di Kelas X SMK-BM Raksana Medan T.A 2009/2010. Skripsi,
FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi, Jakarta: PT
Rineka Cipta.
Sudjana, (2008), Penelitian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bandung : Remaja
Rosdakarya.
Sudjana, (2005), Metoda Statistika, Bandung: Tarsito.
70
Suhardi,
(2006),
Tujuan
Pembelajaran
Matematika
kemdikbud.go.id/.../Buku%20Standar%20Isi%20SMP(1)
January 17th,2014 / 20.00pm)
oleh
KTSP,
(accessed on
Sujono, (1988), Pengajaran Matematika untuk Sekolah Menengah, Depdikbud,
Jakarta.
Suprijono, A., (2010), Cooperative Learning Teori & Aplikasi PAIKEM,
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Trianto, (2009). Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Jakarta:
Kendana Prenada Media Group.
Wiersma, W., (1991), Research Methods in Education Fifth Edition, USA: Allyn
and Bacon.
USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIRSHARE (TPS) AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT
DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN
OF GRADE X SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014
By:
Anggi Paramita Daulay
IDN 4103312001
Bilingual Mathematics Education Study Program
A Thesis
Submitted to Fulfill the Requirement for Getting the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2014
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks to Allah Subhanallahu Wata’ala give me more spirit to finish my
thesis. The title of thesis is The Difference of Students’ Problem Solving Ability
by Using Cooperative Learning Model Type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and Type
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in the topic of Trigonometry in
Grade X of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014. This thesis was arranged
to satisfy the law to get the Sarjana Pendidikan of Mathematics and Science
Faculty in State University of Medan.
For this chance I want to say thank you for the rector of State University
of Medan, Mr. Prof. Dr. Ibnu hajar, M.Si. and his staffs, Mr. Prof. Drs. Motlan,
M.Sc., Ph.D. for dean of FMIPA UNIMED and his college assistant of Dean I, II,
III in UNIMED, Mr. Drs. Syafari, M.Pd. as Head of Mathematics Department,
Mr. Drs. Zul Amry, M.Si. as Head of Mathematics Education Study Program and
then Mr. Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si. as secretary of Mathematics Department.
Big gratitude to Mr. Prof. Dr. Asmin Panjaitan, M.Pd. as supervisor for his
guide to prepare this thesis. And thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr. Sahat Saragih, M.Pd., Mr.
Dr. KMS. Amin Fauzi, M.Pd. and Mrs. Dr. Izwita Dewi, M.Pd., who has persons
responsible for my thesis from the beginning until end. Thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr.
Bornok Sinaga, M.Pd. as my academic supervisor, Mr. Drs. Arifin Siregar, M.Pd.
as always support me and then thank you so much for all my lecturers and staffs
in FMIPA.
Special thanks to my lovely father Mr. Mohammad Kamaruddin Daulay,
S.H. and my lovely mother Nuraini for giving motivation, pray and all I need in
finishing this thesis. And then thanks for love to my brothers, Mohammad Angga
Ramadhan Daulay, Mohammad Arfan Zulkhoir Daulay and my sister Andini
Salsabillah Daulay.
And then, thank you so much for helping Mr. Drs. Suhairi, M.Pd. as
headmaster of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan, Mr. Edi Lokot, M.Si., Mr. Ishak
Saragih, S.Pd. and all staffs in SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan for helping and
supporting in doing research.
v
Also thanks to big family in Bilingual Mathematics Education 2010 for
sadness and happiness in the class, Abdul, Dian, Dwi, Elfan, Erlyn, Falni, Kiki,
Lia, Maria, Matyanne, Meiva, Melin, Mila, Nelly, Petra, Riny, Rully, Sheila, Siti,
Surya, Tika, Uli and Mimi. And special thanks to my ABM Perbaungan friends,
Sheila, Uli, Rici, Jovan, Fery, Biah, Cici, Liza, and Rany.
Especially to my precious Bachtiar Rivai Nasution S.STP thanks to all
your support, hope you stay beside me and be mine forever. To bele’s thanks for
everything my future pharmacist Nurul Khairina Harahap, Zafira Nasution,
Fildzah Fitria, Rifkah Wulandari, Novade Nur Arif Siregar. And also to cici, irna,
putri, anggi yulia, maria, dina, meyna, arum and nanda safira.
The writer should give a big effort to prepare this thesis, and the writer
knows that this thesis has so many weaknesses. So that, the writer needs some
suggestions to make it this be better. And big wishes, it can be improve our
knowledge.
Medan,
Writer,
August 2014
Anggi Paramita Daulay
ID. 4103312001
iii
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS’ PROBLEM SOLVING ABILITY BY
USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL TYPE THINK-PAIRSHARE (TPS)AND TYPE STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT
DIVISION (STAD) IN THE TOPIC OF TRIGONOMETRY IN
GRADE X OF SMA NEGERI 1 PERBAUNGAN A.Y. 2013/2014
By:
Anggi Paramita Daulay
ID. 4103312001
ABSTRACT
This research is a quasi experimental to determine whether there is
difference students’ problem solving ability who taught by cooperative learning
model type TPS with students’ problem solving ability who taught by type STAD
in the topic of Trigonometry in grade of X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y.
2013/2014.
The population is used all students of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan in the
year 2013/2014. Sample selected by cluster random sampling is a class XU-1 by
20 students as a class experimental A with cooperative learning model TPS
(Think-Pair-Share) and class XU-2 by 20 students as a class experimental B with
cooperative learning model STAD (Student Teams-Achievement Division). To
obtain the necessary data used in this study to test the form of essays that look at
students' mathematical problem solving ability. Before the test is defined as a data
collection tool, first piloted by two lecturers from the Department of Mathematics
in State University of Medan and one mathematics teacher in SMA Negeri 1
Perbaungan.
From the analysis of the data obtained average posttest results of the
experimental class A is 83.12 and the average value of the posttest results of the
experimental class B is 71.62. Prior to hypothesis testing is done first seen
normality and homogeneity of data such posttest. Normality was tested using
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and homogeneity by using the Levene’s test from tests
performed with SPSS-18, stated that the data posttest normal distribution and
homogeneous, then the hypothesis can be tested with t test result got that
namely
= 5.058 and
= 2.024, then 5.058 >
2.024. This means that
then Ho is rejected and Ha is
accepted. Thus it can be concluded that average students’ problem solving ability
who taught by cooperative learning model type TPS is not equal to average
students’ problem solving ability who taught by type STAD in the topic of
Trigonometry in grade of X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014.
vi
CONTENTS
Page
Sheet of Agreement
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Acknowledgement
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
Identification of Problem
9
1.3
Limitation of Problem
9
1.4
Formulation of Problem
9
1.5
Research Objectives
10
1.6
Benefits of Research
10
1.7
Operational Definition
10
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
12
2.1
12
Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Problems in Mathematics
12
2.1.2 Mathematics Problem Solving
13
2.1.3 Mathematics Problem Solving Ability
15
2.1.4 Mathematics Learning
16
2.1.5 Learning Model
17
2.1.6 Cooperative Learning Model
19
vii
2.1.7 Cooperative Learning Model Steps
21
2.1.8 Cooperative Learning Type TPS
23
2.1.9 Cooperative Learning Type STAD
26
2.1.10 Comparison of Model Cooperative Learning TPS & STAD
31
2.1.11 Supporting Theory of Cooperative Learning Model
32
2.1.12 Summary of Subject Matter
33
2.2
Relevant Research
38
2.3
Conceptual Framework
39
2.4
Hypothesis Research
41
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
42
3.1
Type of Research
42
3.2
Place and Time of Research
42
3.3
Population
42
3.3.1 Population
42
3.3.2 Sample
43
3.4
Variables and Research Design
43
3.4.1 Independent Variable
43
3.4.2 Dependent Variable
44
3.4.3 Research Procedure
44
3.5
Data Collection Instrument
3.5.1 Problem Solving Test
47
47
3.6
Data Analysis of Observation Sheet
50
3.7
Techniques of Analysis Data
51
3.7.1 Problem Solving Ability
51
3.7.2 Data Analysis by Inferential Statistics Technique
51
3.7.2.1 Normality Test
51
3.7.2.2 Homogeneity Test
52
3.7.2.3 Hypothesis Test
52
viii
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
54
4.1
54
Description of Research Data
4.1.1 Description Value Posttest Experimental Class A and Class B
54
4.1.2 Description Level Students in the Problem Solving Ability
55
4.2
Analysis of Research Results
57
4.3.1 Normality Test Data
57
4.3.2 Homogeneity Test
59
4.3.3 Hypothesis Test
60
4.3
Discussion of Results
63
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
67
5.1
Conclusion
67
5.2
Suggestion
67
REFERENCES
68
x
LIST OF TABLE
Page
Table 2.1
Cooperative Learning Steps
22
Table 2.2
Implementation Steps Model Discussion Think-Pair-Share
25
Table 2.3
Score Calculation Developments
28
Table 2.4
Award Level Group
29
Table 2.5
Phases of Cooperative Learning Type STAD
29
Table 2.6
Comparison of Type Model Cooperative Learning
Type TPS and Type STAD
31
Table 2.7
The Value Trigonometry Ratios
35
Table 2.8
The signs of Trigonometry Ratios
37
Table 3.1
Research Design of Randomized Control Group Only
44
Table 3.2
Guidelines of Scoring For Problem-Solving Ability Test
48
Table 3.3
Determination of completeness problem Solving
By Individuals
49
Table 3.4
Criteria of Teacher’s Responses
50
Table 3.5
Criteria of Student’s Responses
51
Table 4.1
Student Test Data Experiment Class A and
Experiment Class B
Table 4.2
Description of Student Ability Level Category
Problem-Solving Experiment Class A
Table 4.3
54
56
Description of Student Ability Level Category
Problem-Solving Experiment Class B
56
Table 4.4
Normality Test Results of Posttest Data Both Exp. Class
58
Table 4.5
Homogeneity Test Results of Posttest Data Both Exp. Class
60
Table 4.6
Hypothesis Test Results Data
61
ix
LIST OF FIGURE
Page
Figure 1.1
One Student Answer Sheet
Figure 2.1
Right Triangle
33
Figure 3.1
Procedure of Research
46
Figure 4.1
The Result of Ability Level Problem Solving Category in
Experiment Class A and Experiment Class B
7
57
xi
LIST OF APPENDIX
Page
Appendix 1
Lesson Plan 1 (TPS)
71
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan 2 (TPS)
78
Appendix 3
Lesson Plan 3 (TPS)
85
Appendix 4
Lesson Plan 1 (STAD)
92
Appendix 5
Lesson Plan 2 (STAD)
99
Appendix 6
Lesson Plan 3 (STAD)
105
Appendix 7
SAS 1 (TPS)
111
Appendix 8
SAS 2 (TPS)
117
Appendix 9
SAS 3 (TPS)
128
Appendix 10 SAS 1 (STAD)
136
Appendix 11 SAS 2 (STAD)
142
Appendix 12 SAS 3 (STAD)
153
Appendix 13 Blue Print of Initial Capability Test
160
Appendix 14 Initial Capability Test
161
Appendix 15 Solution Alternative of Initial Capability Test
163
Appendix 16 Guidelines of Scoring For Initial Capability Test and
Problem-Solving Ability Test
166
Appendix 17 Blue Print of Problem-Solving Ability Posttest
167
Appendix 18 Problem Solving Ability Posttest
168
Appendix 19 Solution Alternative of Problem Solving Ability Posttest
170
Appendix 20 Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity (TPS)
174
xii
Appendix 21 Observation Sheet of Teacher Activity (STAD)
172
Appendix 22 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-1 (TPS)
180
Appendix 23 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-2 (TPS)
181
Appendix 24 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-3 (TPS)
182
Appendix 25 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-1 (STAD)
183
Appendix 26 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-2 (STAD)
184
Appendix 27 Observation Sheet of Student Activity-3 (STAD)
185
Appendix 28 Results of Observation Sheet
186
Appendix 29 Result of Initial Capability Test (XU-1)
190
Appendix 30 Result of Initial Capability Test (XU-2)
191
Appendix 31 Validation Sheet of Problem Solving Ability Test
192
Appendix 32 Students’ Problem Solving Ability Experiment Class A
(Posstest)
199
Appendix 33 Students’ Problem Solving Ability Experiment Class B
(Posstest)
201
Appendix 34 Determination of Percentage Students’ Problem Solving for
Each Category I, II, III, and IV on the Posttest (Exp.A)
203
Appendix 35 Determination of Percentage Students’ Problem Solving for
Each Category I, II, III, and IV on the Posttest (Exp.B)
205
Appendix 36 Calculation of Normality Test
207
Appendix 37 Calculation of Homogeneity
208
Appendix 38 Calculation of Hypothesis
210
Appendix 39 List of Student Name
212
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Mathematics is the oldest science and basic science has an important role
in science and technology. The statement is supported by the statement Cockroft
(in Abdurrahman, 2009:253) argues that mathematics should be taught to students
because:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mathematics always be used in all aspects of life.
All area studies require to math skills appropiate.
Can be strong, short and clear in communication.
Can be used for present information in various way.
Increase logical thinking, accuracy and awareness spatial.
Provide satisfaction against to solve challenging problems.
Mathematics education is one of study taught at every level of
education. Mathematics education has a very dominant role in educating students
for developing critical thinking skills, analytical and logical. One of the problems
that occur in the world of education in Indonesia is the low quality of mathematics
education, both in terms of process and learning outcomes, thus causing low
Indonesian student mathematics achievement.
The mathematics problem is a matter of mathematics or mathematical
statement in which there is no procedure or algorithm that can be directly used or
used by students to solve the problems, and the statement must be solved by the
students. Teachers are required to encourage students to actively learn and can
improve the ability of solving mathematical problems which are important factors
in mathematics. Slameto (2010: 94) argues that:
"In the teaching and learning interaction, teachers have a lot to give
freedom to the students, to be able to investigate itself, observing his
own, self-study, finding solutions to their own problems. This will cause
a sense of great responsibility towards what will be done, and
confidence to yourself, so that students do not always cleave to others".
2
The
fact
that
mathematics
education
in
Indonesia
is
still
disappointing. The low outcomes is a serious problem that must be solved,
because the success of the learning process is not only dependent on the teacher
but the students also played a role. Through learning model, teachers can help
students get information, ideas, skills, ways of thinking and expressing
ideas. Therefore, active learning is required of students so that they can improve
their
learning
performance
as
proposed
by
Noor
( http://pages-
yourfavotite.com/ppsupi/abstrakmat2005.html) that:
“Active learning is required of the students, so that they can improve
their learning performance. Therefore, teachers are required to encourage
students to actively learn and can improve reasoning skills in
mathematics which is an important factor in mathematic".
The learning process at schools, many obstacles faced by the students,
one of these obstacles is the lack of student interest in receiving the teacher's
lessons, especially in mathematics is one of study that less diserable for students
and considered is the most difficult lessons since first . As pointed out by Rida
(http://www.duniaguru.com) said that: "The fact show the students relatively low
in mathematic so it’s very rare to find our students understand the concept and
application of mathematics well". Similar to Pranoto (http://www.sigmetris.com),
"With the growing of perception about irrelevance or not beneficial mathematics,
their motivation to learn mathematics will be down, or even disappear".This is in
line with the results of the interview on January 6, 2014 which is disclosed by
math teacher at SMAN 1 Perbaungan, Mr. Edi Lokot that: "The problems often
faced by teachers when teaching mathematics due to the lack of interesting with
math and understanding with the basics of mathematic as soon as assume
mathematical considered a difficult subject and avoid, it makes students being
confused and bored when study ongoing process". And because in SMAN 1
Perbaungan still using learning teacher oriented model.
Trigonometry is a math subject in grade x for this second
semester. Trigonometry has a very close relationship in our lives, both directly
and indirectly. Originally, trigonometry comes as solution of solving of simple
3
planes, with the growing of time, trigonometry is often used in world of applied
sciences, the development of other sciences, and the development of mathematics
itself. On this topic there are many students who have difficulty in solving a given
problem, it’s not surprising because there are too many formulas to remember and
need more understanding. To improve their learning outcomes through the
application of knowledge, learn to solve problems, find something for themselves
and discuss each other with their friends, the way is to choose an appropriate
learning model with the cooperative learning model. Correspondingly Nurgayah
(2011: 66) also states that:
"In the model of cooperative learning is done by developing interaction
and work together in a structural team work, educate among each
students to avoid offense, misunderstanding in learning in order to reach
the learning objective. There are at least three important learning
objectives by implementing cooperative learning model, which is the
result of academic learning, acceptance of diversity or individual
differences, and the development of social skills or cooperation and
collaboration skills".
In the implementation of cooperative learning can change the role of
teachers from teacher-centered role to a role managing a small group activity.
Thus the role of the teacher during monotonous will be reduced and students will
be trained to solve problems, even problems that are considered intractable. There
were 4 of cooperative learning approach according to Trianto (2011: 67), "That
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD), JIGSAW, Investigation Group
(Teams Games Tournaments or TGT), and the Structural approaches include
Think - Pair-Share (TPS) and Numbered Head Together (NHT)”.
Because teachers' mastery of the learning model is still not optimal, the
researcher tried to introduce cooperative learning models for math teachers in
SMAN 1 Perbaungan. One of the cooperative learning model to improve learning
outcomes is cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS). The reason
the researchers chose this learning model because TPS is a type of cooperative
learning that is designed to influence the pattern of interaction that occurs
between students in learning activities. In this case the student is expected to work
in small groups to help each other and be identified with a pattern of cooperation
4
rather than individuals. The advantages of TPS models are shaping individual and
a pair group responsibility, because in this model there are individual tasks and
task groups. So also with cooperative learning model Student TeamsAchievement Division (STAD) is the simplest cooperative learning, with 4-5
people heterogeneously discussions. STAD cooperative learning created between
student interaction with the students and also between students and teachers to
create a learning community. Students not only learn from teachers but also from
fellow students. In STAD cooperative learning requires active student
participation in group discussions. According to Istarani (2011: 68-69), thinkpair-share has strength:
1. Be able to improve students’ reasoning, critical power of students, the
students’ imagination and power of analysis to a problem;
2. Promote cooperation among the students as they work in groups;
3. Improve the ability of students to understand and appreciate other
opinions;
4. Improve students’ ability to express opinions as implementation of
his/her knowledge;
5. Teacher is more likely to increase students’ knowledge when they
finished with the discussion.
And there are some of the strength of cooperative learning model STAD (Student
Teams-Achievement Division), according Nurgayah (2011: 86-88) are:
a. In STAD cooperative learning model, learners are not overly relied on
teachers, but also increased confidence in the ability to think
independently, finding information from a variety of sources as well
as learning from other learners.
b. STAD cooperative learning model develops the ability to express an
idea or ideas verbally and compare with other people's ideas.
c. STAD cooperative learning model can help learners to appreciate
others and aware to the limitations as well as receiving all the
difference.
d. STAD cooperative learning model can help learners to take more
responsibility in learning.
e. STAD cooperative learning model improves academic achievement
and social, including developing a sense of self-esteem.
5
Polya defined problem solving as finding “a way where no way is
known, off-hand… out of a difficulty…around an obstacle”. Polya stated that to
know mathematics is to solve problems. The difference between nonroutine and
routine problems seems to be a key element in how problem solving is currently
being viewed among mathematics educators. The primary purpose of
mathematical problem-solving instruction is not to equip students with a
collection of skills and processes, but rather to enable them to think for
themselves. The value of skills and process instruction should be judged by the
extent to which the skills and processes actually enhance flexible, independent
thinking.
With
above
statement
parallel
according
(http://www.lamath.org/journal/Vol1/What_IS_PSAbility.pdf)
to
Carmen
conducted
a
critical analysis of the research on problem solving in secondary school
mathematics between the years of 1925-1975: “Out of twelve conclusions, one
stated the following. Characteristics of an effective problem solver can be
identified. An effective problem solver: tends to use a wide range of heuristic
strategies; seems to follow some plan of attack when solving a problem and
exhibits trial-and-error ability; has good arithmetic skills; has confidence in own
mathematics ability; tends to check answers for reasonableness and is able to
estimate an answer; and usually obtains an understanding of a problem before
trying to solve it. Some of the mathematicians attempted to make problem solving
into a more detailed process than the mathematics educators. For example, one
mathematician defined problem solving to be the process of evaluating possible
techniques, applying techniques, reaching a solution, checking the results for
accuracy, and writing out the solution in a coherent fashion”.
Research has also been conducted regarding what constitutes the process
of problem solving ability. Polya (1945/1973) posited four problem-solving steps
in How to Solve It: understanding the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the
plan and looking back.
Researcher using this model for cooperative learning has not previously
been applied by the teacher. From the result of survey that conducted by
researcher (February 4, 2014) by giving the problem solving the initial capability
6
test to student of grade XU-1 and XU-2 of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan. In topic of
Angle Size and Angle Triangle as a prerequisites matter of trigonometry topic.
With the initial capability test item:
1. A and B angles are supplementary angles where the ratios is 4 : 5.
Determine size of B angle.
a. What is known and asked of the above question?
b. How to determine size of B angle?
c. How to result of size of B angle?
d. According to Ima, the result size of B angle is
. Is it true
that the results of the calculation Ima?
2. Look this figure.
R
P
O
Determine size of PRQ angle.
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of PRQ angle?
How to result of size of PRQ angle?
According to Sari, the result size of PRQ angle is
true that the results of the calculation Sari?
. Is it
3. Determine size of PRQ in figure below that is stated with a in b.
R
Q
P
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of PRQ?
How to result of size of PRQ?
According to Andi, the result size of PRQ is
it true that the results of the calculation Andi?
. Is
7
4. Calculate size of every angle in ABC triangle.
C
B
A
a.
b.
c.
d.
What is known and asked of the above question?
How to determine size of every angle in ABC triangle?
How to result of size of every angle in ABC triangle?
According to Tono, the result size of every angle in ABC triangle is
. Is it true that the results of the
calculation Tono?
This is example from the answer one of student.
Figure 1.1 One Student Answer Sheets
8
At figure 1.1 can be seen that the students know about the problem, but
do not understand the steps of problem solving, making it less obvious steps taken
and no checking solution. Just added the steps of problem solving that students
can answer the question with a perfect score. The initial capability test result also
shown that there was not student who completed to solve problem.
From grade XU-1 with number student is 20 who took the test, the
average of class score that obtained is 53.50 (score scale 0 – 100) and grade XU-2
with 20 students too got 54.62 (score scale 0 – 100). From some of descriptions
above it, it can be seen that many of students who are not able to solve problem
because learning process is meaningful to student that cause to low ability of
students in solving problems. The reality is students just memorize the concepts
and less able to use these concepts if it is encountered in real life problems that
associated with concept that owned. Mathematics teachers have a duty to help
students to improve students’ problem-solving abilities. Teachers should strive
harder to enable students to solve problems because one focus of learning
mathematics is problem solving, so that basic competencies that should be owned
by every student is a minimum standard of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values
which is reflected in learning of mathematics with habits of thought and action to
solve problem.
One of the efforts made to improve students' understanding of the
material trigonometry can enhance the students’ problem solving abilities with the
use of cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student
Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in order to increase students’ problemsolving ability. When researchers put forward this to teacher of mathematics in
SMA N 1 Perbaungan, they welcomed the idea so that the students are used to
learning state centered on teachers who use the lecture method can be
immediately abandoned. From this the researchers wanted to see how the
students’ problem-solving ability through the use of cooperative learning model
type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student Teams-Achievement Division
(STAD) in studying this topic trigonometry.
9
Based on the above background, the authors are interested to research
this with the title : "The Difference of Students’ Problem Solving Ability by
Using Cooperative Learning Model Type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and Type
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in the Topic of Trigonometry
in Grade X of SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014".
1.2
Identification of Problem
Based on background that have been raised it can be identified several
problems, as follows:
1. Students’ mathematics learning outcomes is still low.
2. Mathematics is regarded as a difficult subject.
3. Learning activities are still teacher-centered.
4. Students’ mathematical problem solving ability is still low.
5. Knowledge of teachers to various teaching models are not optimal and
not yet implementation of cooperative learning model Think-PairShare (TPS) or type Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) in
the learning of mathematics.
1.3
Limitation of Problem
For more directing this research so focused and specific to the problem in
this study is limited to the students’ problem-solving ability on the subject of
trigonometry grade x in SMA N 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014 as well as the
learning model is applied in the model limit by cooperative learning model type
Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and type Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD).
1.4
Formulation of Problem
Based on the above problem definition, then the formulation of the
problem in this research :
is there any difference students’ problem-solving
ability taught by cooperative learning model Think-Pair-Share (TPS) type with
Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) type in the subject of trigonometry
in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014?
10
1.5
Research Objectives
The purpose of this research : to know any difference students’ problem-
solving ability taught by cooperative learning model Think-Pair-Share (TPS) type
and Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) type in the subject of
trigonometry in grade X SMA Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014?
1.6
Benefits of Research
The benefits of this research are :
1. Being incoming material for researchers as mathematics teacher
candidates to apply cooperative learning in every learning process
especially TPS type and STAD type in learning mathematics,
especially on Trigonometry.
2. For teachers and prospective teachers, this study could be a reference
in planning learning trigonometry particular subject.
3. For students, is expected to use the cooperative learning model type
Think-Pair-Share (TPS) can improve the students’ problem-solving
ability.
4. For schools, is expected to be a source of information or contribute
ideas for improvement of mathematics teaching, especially in schools
where the research conducted and the school in general.
5. A comparison may be relevant for future research.
1.7
Operational Definition
To avoid differences in interpretation of the terms contained in the
formulation of the problem in this study, the operational definition be stated as
follows:
1. Mathematical Problem-Solving Ability in this study is the result of
student learning in solving problems on material trigonometry to
problem solving stages as follows:
11
Understanding the problem
Make a plan
Do the plan
Checking solution
2. Learning model is a plan or a pattern that is used as a guide in
learning in the classroom.
3. Cooperative learning is learning that emphasizes the involvement of
the student in the form of a group to achieve a common goal.
4. Cooperative learning model type Think-Pair-Share (TPS) is a
cooperative learning that every student is given the opportunity to
think about it first answer to the problem that has been given, and
then made in pairs and then share them with others in a way
presentation results of group discussion.
5. Cooperative learning model type Student Teams-Achievement
Division (STAD) is one type of cooperative learning model using
small groups with a total membership of each group of 4-5 students
are heterogeneous.
In the process of learning, STAD cooperative learning consists of six
steps or phases:
a.
Delivering learning objectives
b.
Presents or deliver material
c.
Organize students into groups to learn
d.
Guiding the work and the working group
e.
evaluate
f.
Giving award.
67
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1.
Conclusion
Based on the research and processing of data it can be concluded that:
1. Average students’ problem-solving ability who taught by cooperative learning
TPS is not equal to average students’ problem-solving ability who taught by
cooperative learning STAD in the topic of trigonometry in grade X of SMA
Negeri 1 Perbaungan A.Y. 2013/2014.
2. Using cooperative learning model TPS type can increase students’ problem
solving ability and can increase the average scores of students.
5.2.
Suggestion
Based on these results it is suggested that researchers can provide are as
follows:
1. To mathematics teachers are suggested to use cooperative learning model TPS
type or STAD type as learning model alternative in improving students’
mathematical problem solving ability.
2. Based on problem solving aspect that will be achieved, cooperative learning
model TPS type is more effective that cooperative learning model STAD type
with the requirement teachers should be handle allocation time in the
classroom.
3. For prospective teachers to apply cooperative learning model TPS type in
improving the average value of students' problem solving abilities.
68
REFERENCES
Abdurrahman, M., (2009), Pendidikan Bagi Anak Berkesulitan Belajar, Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta.
Aisyah, N., (2007), Pendekatan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika,
http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default/files/PengembanganPembelajaranMatem
atika_Unit_5_0.pdf (accessed on May 1st/ 1.00pm)
Amustofa, (2009), Strategi Pemecahan Masalah dalam Matematika,
http://amustofa70.wordpress.com/strategi-pemecahan-masalah-dalammatematika/ (accessed on Maret 25th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Anton,
(2010),
Rubric
of
Problem
Solving
Ability.
http://web.njit.edu/`ronkowit/teaching/rubrics/samples/math_probsolv_chi
cago.df (accessed on April 15th 2014/ 4.00pm)
Arini,
(2009), Langkah-langkah Pembelajaran Kooperatif, http://yustiarini.blogspot.com/2009.08/model-pembelajaran-kooperatif.html?m=1
(accessed on January 20th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Arikunto, S., (2007), Manajemen Penelitian, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, S., (2012), Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan Edisi II, Jakarta: Bumi
Aksara.
Asmin and Mansyur A., (2012), Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar Dengan
Analisis Klasik dan Moder, Medan: Larispa Indonesia.
Carmen,
(2010),
Journal
of
Problem
Solving
Ability,
http://www.lamath.org/journal/Vol1/What_IS_PSAbility.pdf (accessed on
July 30th,2014 / 5.00pm)
Dimyati and Mudjiono, (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Jakarta: PT Rineka
Cipta.
Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Universitas Negeri Medan,
(2011), Pedoman Penulisan Proposal dan Skripsi Mahasiswa Program
Studi Pendidikan, Medan : FMIPA Unimed.
Ibrahim, M., Rakhmediarti, F., Nur, M., and Ismono, (2010), Pembelajaran
Kooperatif, Surabaya : Universitas Surabaya Universitas Press.
Istarani, (2011), Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Medan: Media Persada.
69
Hartati, (2011), Upaya Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Siswa
dengan Pendekatan TPS pada Pokok Bahasan Pecahan di Kelas V SD
Negeri No. 016505 Taman Sari Kab. Asahan Tahun Ajaran 2011/2012,
Skripsi, FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan
Noor, F., (2005), Pengaruh Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Students Team
Achievement Divisions (STAD) Terhadap Kemampuan Siswa Dalam
Mengerjakan Bukti dalam Matematika pada Siswa SMU,
http//pagesyourfavorite.com/ppsupi/abstrakmat2005.html (accessed on
January 12th,2014 / 2.15pm)
Noormandiri, (2007), Buku Paket Matematika untuk SMA Kelas X, Jakarta:
Erlangga.
Nuralam, (2009), Pemecahan Masalah sebagai Pendekatan dalam Belajar
Matematika, Jurnal Edukasi, Vol. V, No. 1, 142-145.
Nurbaidhi’ah, (2011), Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa Dengan Menggunakan
Model Cooperative Learning Tipe TPS dan Tipe STAD kelas X SMA AlWashliyah 1 Medan T.A 2011/2012. Skripsi, FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan.
Nurgayah, (2011), Strategi dan Metode Pembelajaran, Bandung : Cipta Pustaka
Media Perintis.
Peers, S., (1996), Statistical Analysis for Education and Psychology Researchers,
Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
Pranoto, (2007), Motivasi Belajar Matematika, http://www.sigmetris.com
(accessed on January 12th,2014 / 3.15pm)
Pusdihartati,
(2011),
Model
Pembelajaran
Tipe
STAD,
th
http://digilib.edu/pasca.com (accessed on January 12 ,2014 / 3.25pm)
Rida,
M.,
(2007),
Recrentasi
Pembelajaran
Matematika,
http://www.duniaguru.com/index.phpoption=comcontent&task=vilew&id
=285&temid.com (accessed on January 12th,2014 / 3.01pm)
Sakiben, S., (2010), Perbedaan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika
Siswa yang Diajar dengan Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe TPS dan Tipe
STAD di Kelas X SMK-BM Raksana Medan T.A 2009/2010. Skripsi,
FMIPA, UNIMED, Medan.
Slameto, (2010), Belajar dan Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi, Jakarta: PT
Rineka Cipta.
Sudjana, (2008), Penelitian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Bandung : Remaja
Rosdakarya.
Sudjana, (2005), Metoda Statistika, Bandung: Tarsito.
70
Suhardi,
(2006),
Tujuan
Pembelajaran
Matematika
kemdikbud.go.id/.../Buku%20Standar%20Isi%20SMP(1)
January 17th,2014 / 20.00pm)
oleh
KTSP,
(accessed on
Sujono, (1988), Pengajaran Matematika untuk Sekolah Menengah, Depdikbud,
Jakarta.
Suprijono, A., (2010), Cooperative Learning Teori & Aplikasi PAIKEM,
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Trianto, (2009). Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Jakarta:
Kendana Prenada Media Group.
Wiersma, W., (1991), Research Methods in Education Fifth Edition, USA: Allyn
and Bacon.