THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015.
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND
RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE
AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM
TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015
By:
Siti Fatimah Siregar
4113342014
Biology Bilingual Education
SKRIPSI
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN, 2016
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND
RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND
STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM
TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015
Siti Fatimah Siregar/ 4113342014
ABSTRACT
The objectives of this study are to know the differences of students
learning outcome and memory retention between mind maps and notes write and
stacking (NWS) techniques at ecosystem topic grade X SMAN 11 Medan
Academic year 2014/2015. The type of this research is quasai experimental
research. The population was all students grade X of SMAN 11 Medan, consist of
eight classes. The technique of sampling was random sampling. Thus the research
samples were class X-7 and X-8 consists of 38 students and 37 students. The
result of hypothesis testing using t-test on post-test data about the differences of
students learning outcome between mind maps and notes write and stacking
(NWS) showed that tcount (2.1) > ttable (1.991) , it means that Ho1 was rejected and
Ha1 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant difference of student
learning outcomes in using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at
topic ecosystem in academic year 2014/2015, and the results of hypothesis testing
using t-test on retention data showed that tcount (3.62) > ttable (1.991) , it means that
Ho2 was rejected and Ha2 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant
difference of students’ retention using mind maps and notes write and stacking
techniques at topic ecosystem academic year 2014/2015.
Keywords: Mind Map , Notes Write and Stacking ( NWS) , Students’ Learning
Outcome , Students’ Retention
BIOGRAPHY
Siti Fatimah Siregar was born on November 10, 1993 in Medan, Sumatera Utara.
Her father’s name is Ismail Siregar S.Ag and her mother is Siti Aminah Ritonga. In 2005,
she graduated from SD Al-Hidayah, Medan. Then, she continued her study in SMP
Swasta Budi Satrya Medan in 2008, and in 2011, she finished her study in MAN 1
Medan.
She continued her undergraduate degree at State University of Medan in 2011
after she has passed from national selection and then, she continued her TOEFL test as a
requirement to be a student in Bilingual Program, especially Biology Bilingual Education
Program. During her university years, she attended several activities, regional and
national science competitions to enhance her academic and character development.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Alhamdulillah, foremost writer would like to thank and all praises to
Almighty Good, Allah SWT for blessing hence writer is able to finish my thesis
entitled “The difference of Students Learning Outcome and Memory Retention
Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques at
Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015 to fulfill
one of the requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in Biology
Department, FMIPA, State University of Medan.
The writer would like to thank gratefully for the thesis supervisor
Prof.Dr.rer.nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si. who has generously precious time to
guide, encourage, motivate, support, help, and give all the valuable suggestions
for the writer until this thesis ready to be presented. The enormous appreciation is
addressed to all examiners, Dr.H. Syahmi Edi, M.Si., Dra. Martina Restuati, and
Dr. Melva Silitonga, M.Si. for their valuable advices. The writer would also like
to thank Dr.Hasruddin, M.Pd as the chaiman of Biology Departement, Mrs. Riche
and Mr. Syamsudin for their administrative assistant, and for all lectures of
Biology Bilingual Education Program, and especially for Prof. Dr. Herbert
Sipahutar, M.Si, M.Sc..The special thanks are extended to the headmaster of SMA
Negeri 11 Medan, Drs.K.Lumbantoruan, M.Pd. Pd who helping the writer during
the process of research.
The writer also would like to thank so much for beloved parent, Siti
Aminah Ritonga for their caring, motivation, support, love, and all the best for my
life, thanks for my younger sister Mega Wati Siregar, for their inspiration, love
and sacrifice to support my study in State University of Medan and for my boy
friend Syukran Jamil Tanjung, as my motivator when I tired and less my mood.
Thanks a lot for my best friends, Rahmadyah Kusuma Putri, Atikah Julia
Handayani, Farrahnaz Apriliandini Lubis, and for all my friend who always loved
me, supported me, and made my time more colorful, thanks for unforgettable
moments.
My Allah reward all those who have contributed for this thesis.
Hopefully, this thesis will give benefit to contribute ideas in education
development and to innovate the learning process in the class to be more fun.
Medan,15Desember 2015
Writer,
Siti Fatimah Siregar
NIP. 4113342014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL LIST
ABSTRACT
BIOGRAPHY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURE
LIST OF TABLE
LIST OF APPENDIX
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Background of Research
1.2. Problems Identification
1.3. Problem Limitation
1.4. Research Questions
1.5. Research Objectives
1.6. Research Significance
1.7. Operational Definition
CHAPTER II. THEORETICAL REVIEW
2.1 Learning Process
2.2 Learning Outcome
2.3 Retention
2.3. 1 Sensory Register Memory
2.3.2. Long Time Memory
2.3.3.Short Time Memory
2.4 Learning Techniques
2.5 Mind Mapping Techniques
2.5.1. Advantages of Mind Map
2.5.2. How toCreate of Mind maps
2.6 Notes Write and Stacking
i
ii
iii
iv
vi
viii
ix
x
1
1
4
4
4
5
5
5
7
7
8
9
10
10
10
11
12
13
14
2.6.1.Advantages Notes Write and Stacking
15
2.6.2.How to Create Notes Write and Stacking
16
2.7 Conceptual Framework
17
2.8 Hypothesis
19
CHAPTER III. METHOD
3.1Location and Time
3.1.1Location
3.1.2Time
3.2 Population and Sampling
20
20
20
20
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.2.1
Population
3.2.2
Samples
Research Variable
Research Type
Research Procedure
Research Instrument
3.7 Data Collection
3.7. 1 Validity Test
3.7. 2 Reliability Test
3.7. 3 Difficulty Index
3.7. 4 Discrimination Power Test
3.8 Data analysis
3.8.1. Normality Test
3.8.2. Homoginety Test
3.9 Hypothesis Test
3.10 Retention
20
20
20
21
21
22
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result
30
4.2 Discussion
35
4.1.1. Description of Research Results
4.1.2. Description Post-Test Data
4.1.2.1. Normality of Post-test Data.
4.1.2.2. Homogeneity of Post-test Data
4.1.2.3 t-Test of Post Data
4.1.3. Description Re-Test Data
4.1.3.1. Normality Test of Retest Data
4.1.3.2. Homogeneity Test of Retest Data
4.1.3.3. t-Test of Retest Data
4.2.1. Learning Outcome of Students
4.2.2. Retention of Students
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSSION and RECOMMENDATION
5.1. Conclussion
5.2. Recommendation
REFERENCES
30
30
31
31
32
32
32
33
34
35
37
39
40
41
LIST OF FIGURE
The figure 2.1 Example of mind mapping
14
The figure 2.2 Example of notes write and stacking technique
17
The figure 2.3 Conceptual Framework
18
The figure 3.1 Process of Research
23
LIST OF TABEL
The tabel 3.1 Research Design
21
The tabel 3.2 Distribution Questions Topic Ecosystem
24
The tabel 3.3 Validity Coefficient
25
The tabel 3.4 Validity Test Category
25
The tabel 3.5 Reliability Coefficient
26
The tabel 3.6 Difficulty Index
27
The tabel 3.7 Coefficient of Discrimination Power
27
The tabel 4.1 Normality Test Data of Learning Outcome
31
The tabel 4.2 Homogeneity Test Data of Learning Outcome
31
The tabel 4.3 t- Test Data of Learning Outcome
32
The tabel 4.4 Normality Test Data of Retention
33
The tabel 4.5 Homogeneity Test Data of Retention
33
The tabel 4.6 t- Test Data of Retention
34
LIST OF APPENDIX
Appendix 1
Syllabus of Learning Process
43
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan
45
Appendix 3
Instrument
62
Appendix 4 Validity
73
Appendix 5
Reliability
76
Appendix 6
Index Difficulty
78
Appendix 7
Discrimination Power
81
Appendix 8
Values of Pretes, Postest and Retention
83
Appendix 9
Normality Test
85
Appendix 10 Average, Deviation Standard , and Variance
92
Appendix 11 Homogeneity Test
96
Appendix 12 Hypothesis Test
100
Appendix 13 Docummentation
105
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
Background
Learning is a complex thing that happens to everyone and lasts a lifetime.
Signs a learned their complex behavioral changes including changes in the
cognitive, psychomotor and affective. Basically, the concepts in biology are
abstract concepts, therefore need a high imagination power including structure,
function, growth, taxonomy, distribution, and evolution which sometimes have a
lot of foreign terms that are not easy to pronunciation even harder to remember
the students, one of them is ecosystem. In fact many student not interested to learn
which ultimately can only be stored in short term memory only. While the
purpose of the learning process not only to the short term memory to long term
memory but students (Amaliah, 2011).
Meanwhile writing is a process of delivering ideas, thoughts, and feelings
through a letter system.Writing also encourage students to communicate thoughts,
feelings and make his thoughts reflected in written form, so that students will be
remembered in long time period. Therefore things done by creating an interesting
note creative learning students pour the material he had heard from a teacher on
an interesting note will make a repeating back to the memory of his brain so that
the material presented teachers can survive long in the brain. For that we need the
involvement of the various organs of the body from the ear (Audio), eyes (visual),
and hand (kinetic) the make information Easier to understand (Arsyad, 2011).
Proverb of Cofemicus I hear I forget, I see I remember, I do I Understand. This
Strengthens the assumption that the rate of retention of the material will be higher
when students are conditioned to learning more real. Research Magnessen (de
Potter, 2002) Explains that we remember 1% of the read, 20% of that in the
hearing, 30% of the visits, 50% of the Heard and seen, 70% of what is said, and
90% of what is said and done.
Based on preliminary observation in SMAN 11 Medan based on data
research , the mean values obtained pretest score of students in the experimental
class before it is treated by using mind mapping techniques is 40.92 with a
standard deviation of 11.61 and the value of pretest students in the experimental
class before it was treated by using notes write and and stacking technique is
39.09 with a standard deviation of 11.89, the result is showed that Lcount < Ltabel
thus concluded that the data from the both pretest distribution were normal. It is
indicated that learning outcomes of students in this ecosystem topic is low. While
the low learning outcome caused of students easy to forget the learning material
that has been taught, so that student is difficult to answer the post test question.
The other result after homogeneity test Fcount < Ftabel or (1.05 < 1.73 ) can be
concluded that learning outcomes for the two classes have similar varience (
homogeny) can represent the entire population.
The researcher observation retention too students are low, due to when
teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has been explained the
least student answered and ask students very low frequency, very few students
were asked because the other students did not remember the material which is
repeated by the teacher. Student memory retention is the ability store abstraction
concepts in cognitive structure which is still owned by the student after the lapse
of time from the provision material (Dwi, 2011). The low student retention is one
of the problems that often faced by teacher because the learning process will run
slow so the determined target failure to achieve. After investigeted deeply it found
that student have messy note about this topic, and based on the interview to two
students , they said that teachers do not give students the opportunity to write,
techniques note students who are less attractive and less creative, make lazy
students re-read his notes, so that the absence of reinforcement retention process,
and mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for teachers.
Therefore, teachers have choosed a model and appropriate learning
techniques in order to better engage students optimally in cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor learning outcomes in order to reach a satisfactory and have long-
term memory. The difficulty in studying biology, especially in memorizing can be
overcome by making the shape of a unique and creative notes. When compared
with the form of notes that only the form of writings, which are equipped with
color notes and drawings will be helping students understand the material being
taught by the teacher.
Thus, it can be assumed that in fact most students do not apply
techniques that suitable to their learning styles by which effectively and more
quickly to understand the material being taught teachers. To overcome this, it can
be done by applying methods and techniques such as learning proper technique
mind mapping and notes write and stacking.
Mind mapping media based on Buzan (1994) present information that
connect with central topic, in form of keyword, image, and symbol and picture so
the information can quickly and efficiently learned and remember. Mind mapping
can make students more active and creative and only students who are actively
involved as disvantage of mind mapping technique. Other research result
conducted by Yulika ( 2012 ) stated that mind mapping can increase student’s
learning outcome until 36.18% in the first cycle and 47.29% in the second cycle.
The research conducted by Arisdea, T (2008) , the use of mind mapping have the
influence to the improvement of learning outcomes was 33.89%, learning
retention for one week was 44.95% and learning retention for two weeks was
40.15%. Posttest mean value in the control class and each class experiment at
72.49 and 84.78. While about notes write and stacking technique can make
students easier to remember a problem when students read what he was thinking
at the time and emotionally satisfying students and help students get into the
emotional memory of students, but in the notes write and stacking technique
students only using one colour to make notes.
Mind mapping and notes write and stacking will help students understand
the material and ideas on paper with clear, complete and interesting so that
students can understand most of the information in a shorter time and will store it
in memory of the brain in the long term, which in turn learning difficulties can be
minimized and the amount of detail information could not be included as
disvantage of notes write and stacking technique. Based on the above students
problem , the research with the title "The difference of Students Learning
Outcome and Memory Retention Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and
Stacking (NWS) Techniques at Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan
Academic Year 2014/2015” has been done.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the background,the problems are identified as follows :
1.
Mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for
teachers.
2.
Students make notes are less attractive and less creative, make lazy
students re-read his notes.
3.
When teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has
been explained only two students answered.
4.
Students learning outcome in two class very low, The ability test of
early ( pre-test) both classes given at the beginning of the study which
aims to determine whether the basic understanding are of students in the
same
1.3. Problem Limitation
Due to large of problem identification,the researcher limit the problems
only about learning outcome, retention, mind map, and notes write and
stacking (NWS) on topic ecosystem.
1.4. Research Question
Based on the problem identification, the problems that will be discussed are:
1.
Is there any difference of learning outcome between students taught by
using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem
topic in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning?
2.
Is there any difference of retention between students taught by using
mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic
in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning?
1.5. Research Objectives
The research objectives is to know :
1.
To know the difference of learning outcome between students taught by
using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem
topic in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning
2.
To know the difference of retention between students taught by using
mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic
in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning
1.6. Research Significance
The research results are expected can be beneficial, both theoritically and
practically as follows :
1.
Inform the biology teacher in selecting effective recording techniques to
improve the quality of student learning of the material taught.
2.
Adding the experience for researchers as prospective teachers about the
use of appropriate methods and techniques to be applied so that the
students can understand more information related to the material being
taught and can survive in the long term.
3.
As a guideline for other researchers in creating an effective learning
model biology so as to create an active learning environment and
conducive.
1.7. Operational Definition
1.
Learning outcome is the students’ post test cognitive score, range 0100, as a result of students’ answer on the post-test made for the
students comprised of 30 multiple choice questions.
2.
Retention is students’ score on a test similar to the post-test but the
students were tested 7 days after post-test. The score range between 0100.
3.
Mind mapping is one way to organize and present concepts, ideas, tasks
or other information in form of radial-hierarchic non linear diagram and
present information that connects with central topic, in form keyword,
image, and symbol and picture and color.
4.
Write notes and stacking techniques is derived from the word written is
writing a note which means listening to what the teacher or other person
as he wrote points - the main point, namely the preparation of records
while stacking means write down the thoughts and impressions that
appear on the self that is being submitted by teachers
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the result of research, there are some conclusions:
1. There was significant difference of students learning outcome between
Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The
students learning outcome by the mind map technique 71.7 ± 10.2 (
±
SD) was higher than notes write and stacking technique 66.48 ± 11.5 ( ±
SD) at ecosystem topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year
2014/2015.
2. There was significant difference of students retention between Mind Maps
and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The students retention
by the mind map technique 69.47 ± 10.38 ( ± SD) was higher than notes
write and stacking technique 62.7 ± 10.6 (
± SD) at ecosystem topic
Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.
3. When compared to Mind Mapping and Notes Write and Stacking
Techniques, Mind Mapping was found to produce highest students
learning outcome and retention than Notes Write and Stacking. Because
because mind mapping technique, the teacher acts as facilitator and
students were required to understand the topic personally and It is possible
to remove the student or his ideas are good ideas and systematically. In
Notes Write and Stacking Technique emotionally satisfying students and
help students get into the emotional memory of students.
5.2 Recommendation
Based on the conclusion above, it’s recommended to:
1. Teacher should apply Mind Map in biological learning process especially
at ecosystem topic.
2. Mind Map has positive effect for development of students in ecosystem
topic learning, even there are many preparation to be prepared before
research, especially for timing affectivity.
3. As prospective teacher more creating an effective learning model biology
in ecosystem topic so as to create an active learning environment and
conducive.
REFERENCES
Alsa, A. dan Hardjito, P. (2002). Pengarung Interferensi dan Rehearsal Terhadap
Retensi Belajar Indonesia, 4 (1):83-86
Amaliah, S. (2011), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Take and
Give Terhadap Retensi Siswa dalam Tatanama Ilmiah pada Konsep
Jamur, Skripsi FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah,
Jakarta:http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id./dspace/bitstream/123456789/4968/1
/101317-SITI%AMALIAH-FITK.PDF accessed on March 2nd ,2015.
Arikunto.S. (2008) . Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Arsyad, A. (2007), Media Pembelajaran, PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Buzan, T. (1994), The Mind Map Book, Penguin Group, New York.
DePotter, B.(2002), Quantum Teaching, Kaifa, Bandung
Dimyati dan Mudjiono (1999), Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Dimyati dan Mudjiono (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Dwi, Y. (2011), Pengaruh Pembelajaran Berorientasi Retensi Terhadap
Kemampuan Koneksi Matematika Siswa, FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri
Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta.
Gagne, R.M.(1975). Essentials of Learning for Instructions. Illinois: The Dryden
Press.
Ika, S. (2011), Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD
menggunakan Media Animasi dan Gambar Diam terhadap Aktivitas
Belajar dan Retensi Memori Biologi Siswa Kelas XI SMA Negeri 11
Medan, Tesis, PPs. Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Istarani. 2011. 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Medan: Media Persada
Kimball, J. (1983), Biology Fifth Edition, Addison-Wesley Publisher,United State.
Kurniawati, A. (2013), Penerapan Mind Mapping dan Catatan Tulis dan Susun
Terhadap Kreativitas dan Ketuntasan Belajar , Semarang : Sekaran Gunung Pati
Mento, Patrick Martinelli dan Raymond M. Jones. (1999) . Mind Mapping in
Executive Education: Applications and Outcomes. The Journal of
Management Development. Vol. 18 Issue 4: 21
Millar, A. (1959), The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two, some Limits on
our Capacity for Processing Information, Psychological Review,
101(2),343-355.
Pelson, K. (2004) Mind mapping in learning and teaching: Pupil and teacher
perspective. Galashiels Academy Scottish Borders.
Peterson, L., and Peterson, M. (1959), Short-term Retention of Individual Verbal
Items, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58 (3), 193-198.
Purwanto. (2010). Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Pustaka Pelajar : Yogyakarta,
http://eprints.uny.ac.id/9238/2/bab%202.pdf (accessed on March 2nd,
2015).
Ridhayani, L. dan Binari, M. (2010), Pengaruh Model dan Media Pembelajaran
Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Siswa Pada Pelajaran Biologi di
SMP Swasta Muhammadyah Serbelawan. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi PPs.
Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Sagala, S. (2003), Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, CV. Alfabeta, Bandung.
Santrock, J, (2003), Psycology: Essential Updated Second Edition, Mc Graw Hill,
New York.
Schacter, D. (1987), Implicit Memory: History and Current Status, Journal of
Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition , 23,533568.http://www.unt.edu/rss/class/mike/5640/articles/Schacterimplicitme
m87.pdf
Sprenger, M., (2011), Cara Mengajar Agar Siswa Tetap Ingat, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Sudjana, N. Dan Rivai, A (2003). Teknologi Pengajaran. Sinar Baru Algesindo.
Suroyo. (2002). Penyampaian Sekuen Pembelajaran Berbantuan Komputer
Terhadap Retensi Belajar Ipa. Jurusan Matematika FMIPA Universitas Terbuka.
Jogjakarta
Tri, A, Hairida, Ira, L. (2008), Pengaruh Multimedia Berbasis Mind Mapping
Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Belajar Siswa pada Materi
Hidrokarbon, Universitas Tanjung Pura, Pontianak.
Yulika, E. (2012), Penerapan Model CIRC dengan Teknik Mind Mapping untuk
Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa pada Pembelajaran Biologi Kelas XIIPA SMA Dharma Pancasila, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.
RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE
AND STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM
TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015
By:
Siti Fatimah Siregar
4113342014
Biology Bilingual Education
SKRIPSI
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for The
Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCE
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN, 2016
THE DIFFERENCE OF STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOME AND
RETENTION BETWEEN MIND MAP AND NOTES WRITE AND
STACKING (NWS) TECHNIQUES AT ECOSYSTEM
TOPIC GRADE X SMAN 11 MEDAN
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014/2015
Siti Fatimah Siregar/ 4113342014
ABSTRACT
The objectives of this study are to know the differences of students
learning outcome and memory retention between mind maps and notes write and
stacking (NWS) techniques at ecosystem topic grade X SMAN 11 Medan
Academic year 2014/2015. The type of this research is quasai experimental
research. The population was all students grade X of SMAN 11 Medan, consist of
eight classes. The technique of sampling was random sampling. Thus the research
samples were class X-7 and X-8 consists of 38 students and 37 students. The
result of hypothesis testing using t-test on post-test data about the differences of
students learning outcome between mind maps and notes write and stacking
(NWS) showed that tcount (2.1) > ttable (1.991) , it means that Ho1 was rejected and
Ha1 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant difference of student
learning outcomes in using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at
topic ecosystem in academic year 2014/2015, and the results of hypothesis testing
using t-test on retention data showed that tcount (3.62) > ttable (1.991) , it means that
Ho2 was rejected and Ha2 accepted. It can be concluded that there was significant
difference of students’ retention using mind maps and notes write and stacking
techniques at topic ecosystem academic year 2014/2015.
Keywords: Mind Map , Notes Write and Stacking ( NWS) , Students’ Learning
Outcome , Students’ Retention
BIOGRAPHY
Siti Fatimah Siregar was born on November 10, 1993 in Medan, Sumatera Utara.
Her father’s name is Ismail Siregar S.Ag and her mother is Siti Aminah Ritonga. In 2005,
she graduated from SD Al-Hidayah, Medan. Then, she continued her study in SMP
Swasta Budi Satrya Medan in 2008, and in 2011, she finished her study in MAN 1
Medan.
She continued her undergraduate degree at State University of Medan in 2011
after she has passed from national selection and then, she continued her TOEFL test as a
requirement to be a student in Bilingual Program, especially Biology Bilingual Education
Program. During her university years, she attended several activities, regional and
national science competitions to enhance her academic and character development.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Alhamdulillah, foremost writer would like to thank and all praises to
Almighty Good, Allah SWT for blessing hence writer is able to finish my thesis
entitled “The difference of Students Learning Outcome and Memory Retention
Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques at
Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015 to fulfill
one of the requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in Biology
Department, FMIPA, State University of Medan.
The writer would like to thank gratefully for the thesis supervisor
Prof.Dr.rer.nat. Binari Manurung, M.Si. who has generously precious time to
guide, encourage, motivate, support, help, and give all the valuable suggestions
for the writer until this thesis ready to be presented. The enormous appreciation is
addressed to all examiners, Dr.H. Syahmi Edi, M.Si., Dra. Martina Restuati, and
Dr. Melva Silitonga, M.Si. for their valuable advices. The writer would also like
to thank Dr.Hasruddin, M.Pd as the chaiman of Biology Departement, Mrs. Riche
and Mr. Syamsudin for their administrative assistant, and for all lectures of
Biology Bilingual Education Program, and especially for Prof. Dr. Herbert
Sipahutar, M.Si, M.Sc..The special thanks are extended to the headmaster of SMA
Negeri 11 Medan, Drs.K.Lumbantoruan, M.Pd. Pd who helping the writer during
the process of research.
The writer also would like to thank so much for beloved parent, Siti
Aminah Ritonga for their caring, motivation, support, love, and all the best for my
life, thanks for my younger sister Mega Wati Siregar, for their inspiration, love
and sacrifice to support my study in State University of Medan and for my boy
friend Syukran Jamil Tanjung, as my motivator when I tired and less my mood.
Thanks a lot for my best friends, Rahmadyah Kusuma Putri, Atikah Julia
Handayani, Farrahnaz Apriliandini Lubis, and for all my friend who always loved
me, supported me, and made my time more colorful, thanks for unforgettable
moments.
My Allah reward all those who have contributed for this thesis.
Hopefully, this thesis will give benefit to contribute ideas in education
development and to innovate the learning process in the class to be more fun.
Medan,15Desember 2015
Writer,
Siti Fatimah Siregar
NIP. 4113342014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL LIST
ABSTRACT
BIOGRAPHY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURE
LIST OF TABLE
LIST OF APPENDIX
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Background of Research
1.2. Problems Identification
1.3. Problem Limitation
1.4. Research Questions
1.5. Research Objectives
1.6. Research Significance
1.7. Operational Definition
CHAPTER II. THEORETICAL REVIEW
2.1 Learning Process
2.2 Learning Outcome
2.3 Retention
2.3. 1 Sensory Register Memory
2.3.2. Long Time Memory
2.3.3.Short Time Memory
2.4 Learning Techniques
2.5 Mind Mapping Techniques
2.5.1. Advantages of Mind Map
2.5.2. How toCreate of Mind maps
2.6 Notes Write and Stacking
i
ii
iii
iv
vi
viii
ix
x
1
1
4
4
4
5
5
5
7
7
8
9
10
10
10
11
12
13
14
2.6.1.Advantages Notes Write and Stacking
15
2.6.2.How to Create Notes Write and Stacking
16
2.7 Conceptual Framework
17
2.8 Hypothesis
19
CHAPTER III. METHOD
3.1Location and Time
3.1.1Location
3.1.2Time
3.2 Population and Sampling
20
20
20
20
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.2.1
Population
3.2.2
Samples
Research Variable
Research Type
Research Procedure
Research Instrument
3.7 Data Collection
3.7. 1 Validity Test
3.7. 2 Reliability Test
3.7. 3 Difficulty Index
3.7. 4 Discrimination Power Test
3.8 Data analysis
3.8.1. Normality Test
3.8.2. Homoginety Test
3.9 Hypothesis Test
3.10 Retention
20
20
20
21
21
22
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result
30
4.2 Discussion
35
4.1.1. Description of Research Results
4.1.2. Description Post-Test Data
4.1.2.1. Normality of Post-test Data.
4.1.2.2. Homogeneity of Post-test Data
4.1.2.3 t-Test of Post Data
4.1.3. Description Re-Test Data
4.1.3.1. Normality Test of Retest Data
4.1.3.2. Homogeneity Test of Retest Data
4.1.3.3. t-Test of Retest Data
4.2.1. Learning Outcome of Students
4.2.2. Retention of Students
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSSION and RECOMMENDATION
5.1. Conclussion
5.2. Recommendation
REFERENCES
30
30
31
31
32
32
32
33
34
35
37
39
40
41
LIST OF FIGURE
The figure 2.1 Example of mind mapping
14
The figure 2.2 Example of notes write and stacking technique
17
The figure 2.3 Conceptual Framework
18
The figure 3.1 Process of Research
23
LIST OF TABEL
The tabel 3.1 Research Design
21
The tabel 3.2 Distribution Questions Topic Ecosystem
24
The tabel 3.3 Validity Coefficient
25
The tabel 3.4 Validity Test Category
25
The tabel 3.5 Reliability Coefficient
26
The tabel 3.6 Difficulty Index
27
The tabel 3.7 Coefficient of Discrimination Power
27
The tabel 4.1 Normality Test Data of Learning Outcome
31
The tabel 4.2 Homogeneity Test Data of Learning Outcome
31
The tabel 4.3 t- Test Data of Learning Outcome
32
The tabel 4.4 Normality Test Data of Retention
33
The tabel 4.5 Homogeneity Test Data of Retention
33
The tabel 4.6 t- Test Data of Retention
34
LIST OF APPENDIX
Appendix 1
Syllabus of Learning Process
43
Appendix 2
Lesson Plan
45
Appendix 3
Instrument
62
Appendix 4 Validity
73
Appendix 5
Reliability
76
Appendix 6
Index Difficulty
78
Appendix 7
Discrimination Power
81
Appendix 8
Values of Pretes, Postest and Retention
83
Appendix 9
Normality Test
85
Appendix 10 Average, Deviation Standard , and Variance
92
Appendix 11 Homogeneity Test
96
Appendix 12 Hypothesis Test
100
Appendix 13 Docummentation
105
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
Background
Learning is a complex thing that happens to everyone and lasts a lifetime.
Signs a learned their complex behavioral changes including changes in the
cognitive, psychomotor and affective. Basically, the concepts in biology are
abstract concepts, therefore need a high imagination power including structure,
function, growth, taxonomy, distribution, and evolution which sometimes have a
lot of foreign terms that are not easy to pronunciation even harder to remember
the students, one of them is ecosystem. In fact many student not interested to learn
which ultimately can only be stored in short term memory only. While the
purpose of the learning process not only to the short term memory to long term
memory but students (Amaliah, 2011).
Meanwhile writing is a process of delivering ideas, thoughts, and feelings
through a letter system.Writing also encourage students to communicate thoughts,
feelings and make his thoughts reflected in written form, so that students will be
remembered in long time period. Therefore things done by creating an interesting
note creative learning students pour the material he had heard from a teacher on
an interesting note will make a repeating back to the memory of his brain so that
the material presented teachers can survive long in the brain. For that we need the
involvement of the various organs of the body from the ear (Audio), eyes (visual),
and hand (kinetic) the make information Easier to understand (Arsyad, 2011).
Proverb of Cofemicus I hear I forget, I see I remember, I do I Understand. This
Strengthens the assumption that the rate of retention of the material will be higher
when students are conditioned to learning more real. Research Magnessen (de
Potter, 2002) Explains that we remember 1% of the read, 20% of that in the
hearing, 30% of the visits, 50% of the Heard and seen, 70% of what is said, and
90% of what is said and done.
Based on preliminary observation in SMAN 11 Medan based on data
research , the mean values obtained pretest score of students in the experimental
class before it is treated by using mind mapping techniques is 40.92 with a
standard deviation of 11.61 and the value of pretest students in the experimental
class before it was treated by using notes write and and stacking technique is
39.09 with a standard deviation of 11.89, the result is showed that Lcount < Ltabel
thus concluded that the data from the both pretest distribution were normal. It is
indicated that learning outcomes of students in this ecosystem topic is low. While
the low learning outcome caused of students easy to forget the learning material
that has been taught, so that student is difficult to answer the post test question.
The other result after homogeneity test Fcount < Ftabel or (1.05 < 1.73 ) can be
concluded that learning outcomes for the two classes have similar varience (
homogeny) can represent the entire population.
The researcher observation retention too students are low, due to when
teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has been explained the
least student answered and ask students very low frequency, very few students
were asked because the other students did not remember the material which is
repeated by the teacher. Student memory retention is the ability store abstraction
concepts in cognitive structure which is still owned by the student after the lapse
of time from the provision material (Dwi, 2011). The low student retention is one
of the problems that often faced by teacher because the learning process will run
slow so the determined target failure to achieve. After investigeted deeply it found
that student have messy note about this topic, and based on the interview to two
students , they said that teachers do not give students the opportunity to write,
techniques note students who are less attractive and less creative, make lazy
students re-read his notes, so that the absence of reinforcement retention process,
and mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for teachers.
Therefore, teachers have choosed a model and appropriate learning
techniques in order to better engage students optimally in cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor learning outcomes in order to reach a satisfactory and have long-
term memory. The difficulty in studying biology, especially in memorizing can be
overcome by making the shape of a unique and creative notes. When compared
with the form of notes that only the form of writings, which are equipped with
color notes and drawings will be helping students understand the material being
taught by the teacher.
Thus, it can be assumed that in fact most students do not apply
techniques that suitable to their learning styles by which effectively and more
quickly to understand the material being taught teachers. To overcome this, it can
be done by applying methods and techniques such as learning proper technique
mind mapping and notes write and stacking.
Mind mapping media based on Buzan (1994) present information that
connect with central topic, in form of keyword, image, and symbol and picture so
the information can quickly and efficiently learned and remember. Mind mapping
can make students more active and creative and only students who are actively
involved as disvantage of mind mapping technique. Other research result
conducted by Yulika ( 2012 ) stated that mind mapping can increase student’s
learning outcome until 36.18% in the first cycle and 47.29% in the second cycle.
The research conducted by Arisdea, T (2008) , the use of mind mapping have the
influence to the improvement of learning outcomes was 33.89%, learning
retention for one week was 44.95% and learning retention for two weeks was
40.15%. Posttest mean value in the control class and each class experiment at
72.49 and 84.78. While about notes write and stacking technique can make
students easier to remember a problem when students read what he was thinking
at the time and emotionally satisfying students and help students get into the
emotional memory of students, but in the notes write and stacking technique
students only using one colour to make notes.
Mind mapping and notes write and stacking will help students understand
the material and ideas on paper with clear, complete and interesting so that
students can understand most of the information in a shorter time and will store it
in memory of the brain in the long term, which in turn learning difficulties can be
minimized and the amount of detail information could not be included as
disvantage of notes write and stacking technique. Based on the above students
problem , the research with the title "The difference of Students Learning
Outcome and Memory Retention Between Mind Maps and Notes Write and
Stacking (NWS) Techniques at Ecosystem Topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan
Academic Year 2014/2015” has been done.
1.2. Problem Identification
Based on the background,the problems are identified as follows :
1.
Mind mapping as a learning technique is still something new for
teachers.
2.
Students make notes are less attractive and less creative, make lazy
students re-read his notes.
3.
When teacher review the topic and ask question about the topic has
been explained only two students answered.
4.
Students learning outcome in two class very low, The ability test of
early ( pre-test) both classes given at the beginning of the study which
aims to determine whether the basic understanding are of students in the
same
1.3. Problem Limitation
Due to large of problem identification,the researcher limit the problems
only about learning outcome, retention, mind map, and notes write and
stacking (NWS) on topic ecosystem.
1.4. Research Question
Based on the problem identification, the problems that will be discussed are:
1.
Is there any difference of learning outcome between students taught by
using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem
topic in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning?
2.
Is there any difference of retention between students taught by using
mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic
in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning?
1.5. Research Objectives
The research objectives is to know :
1.
To know the difference of learning outcome between students taught by
using mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem
topic in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning
2.
To know the difference of retention between students taught by using
mind maps and notes write and stacking techniques at ecosystem topic
in class X IPA SMAN 11 Medan Year 2014/2015 learning
1.6. Research Significance
The research results are expected can be beneficial, both theoritically and
practically as follows :
1.
Inform the biology teacher in selecting effective recording techniques to
improve the quality of student learning of the material taught.
2.
Adding the experience for researchers as prospective teachers about the
use of appropriate methods and techniques to be applied so that the
students can understand more information related to the material being
taught and can survive in the long term.
3.
As a guideline for other researchers in creating an effective learning
model biology so as to create an active learning environment and
conducive.
1.7. Operational Definition
1.
Learning outcome is the students’ post test cognitive score, range 0100, as a result of students’ answer on the post-test made for the
students comprised of 30 multiple choice questions.
2.
Retention is students’ score on a test similar to the post-test but the
students were tested 7 days after post-test. The score range between 0100.
3.
Mind mapping is one way to organize and present concepts, ideas, tasks
or other information in form of radial-hierarchic non linear diagram and
present information that connects with central topic, in form keyword,
image, and symbol and picture and color.
4.
Write notes and stacking techniques is derived from the word written is
writing a note which means listening to what the teacher or other person
as he wrote points - the main point, namely the preparation of records
while stacking means write down the thoughts and impressions that
appear on the self that is being submitted by teachers
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion
Based on the result of research, there are some conclusions:
1. There was significant difference of students learning outcome between
Mind Maps and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The
students learning outcome by the mind map technique 71.7 ± 10.2 (
±
SD) was higher than notes write and stacking technique 66.48 ± 11.5 ( ±
SD) at ecosystem topic Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year
2014/2015.
2. There was significant difference of students retention between Mind Maps
and Notes Write and Stacking (NWS) Techniques. The students retention
by the mind map technique 69.47 ± 10.38 ( ± SD) was higher than notes
write and stacking technique 62.7 ± 10.6 (
± SD) at ecosystem topic
Grade X SMAN 11 Medan Academic Year 2014/2015.
3. When compared to Mind Mapping and Notes Write and Stacking
Techniques, Mind Mapping was found to produce highest students
learning outcome and retention than Notes Write and Stacking. Because
because mind mapping technique, the teacher acts as facilitator and
students were required to understand the topic personally and It is possible
to remove the student or his ideas are good ideas and systematically. In
Notes Write and Stacking Technique emotionally satisfying students and
help students get into the emotional memory of students.
5.2 Recommendation
Based on the conclusion above, it’s recommended to:
1. Teacher should apply Mind Map in biological learning process especially
at ecosystem topic.
2. Mind Map has positive effect for development of students in ecosystem
topic learning, even there are many preparation to be prepared before
research, especially for timing affectivity.
3. As prospective teacher more creating an effective learning model biology
in ecosystem topic so as to create an active learning environment and
conducive.
REFERENCES
Alsa, A. dan Hardjito, P. (2002). Pengarung Interferensi dan Rehearsal Terhadap
Retensi Belajar Indonesia, 4 (1):83-86
Amaliah, S. (2011), Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Take and
Give Terhadap Retensi Siswa dalam Tatanama Ilmiah pada Konsep
Jamur, Skripsi FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah,
Jakarta:http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id./dspace/bitstream/123456789/4968/1
/101317-SITI%AMALIAH-FITK.PDF accessed on March 2nd ,2015.
Arikunto.S. (2008) . Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Arsyad, A. (2007), Media Pembelajaran, PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Buzan, T. (1994), The Mind Map Book, Penguin Group, New York.
DePotter, B.(2002), Quantum Teaching, Kaifa, Bandung
Dimyati dan Mudjiono (1999), Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Dimyati dan Mudjiono (2006), Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Dwi, Y. (2011), Pengaruh Pembelajaran Berorientasi Retensi Terhadap
Kemampuan Koneksi Matematika Siswa, FITK, Universitas Islam Negeri
Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta.
Gagne, R.M.(1975). Essentials of Learning for Instructions. Illinois: The Dryden
Press.
Ika, S. (2011), Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD
menggunakan Media Animasi dan Gambar Diam terhadap Aktivitas
Belajar dan Retensi Memori Biologi Siswa Kelas XI SMA Negeri 11
Medan, Tesis, PPs. Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Istarani. 2011. 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Medan: Media Persada
Kimball, J. (1983), Biology Fifth Edition, Addison-Wesley Publisher,United State.
Kurniawati, A. (2013), Penerapan Mind Mapping dan Catatan Tulis dan Susun
Terhadap Kreativitas dan Ketuntasan Belajar , Semarang : Sekaran Gunung Pati
Mento, Patrick Martinelli dan Raymond M. Jones. (1999) . Mind Mapping in
Executive Education: Applications and Outcomes. The Journal of
Management Development. Vol. 18 Issue 4: 21
Millar, A. (1959), The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two, some Limits on
our Capacity for Processing Information, Psychological Review,
101(2),343-355.
Pelson, K. (2004) Mind mapping in learning and teaching: Pupil and teacher
perspective. Galashiels Academy Scottish Borders.
Peterson, L., and Peterson, M. (1959), Short-term Retention of Individual Verbal
Items, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58 (3), 193-198.
Purwanto. (2010). Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Pustaka Pelajar : Yogyakarta,
http://eprints.uny.ac.id/9238/2/bab%202.pdf (accessed on March 2nd,
2015).
Ridhayani, L. dan Binari, M. (2010), Pengaruh Model dan Media Pembelajaran
Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Siswa Pada Pelajaran Biologi di
SMP Swasta Muhammadyah Serbelawan. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi PPs.
Unimed., Universitas Negeri Medan, Medan.
Sagala, S. (2003), Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, CV. Alfabeta, Bandung.
Santrock, J, (2003), Psycology: Essential Updated Second Edition, Mc Graw Hill,
New York.
Schacter, D. (1987), Implicit Memory: History and Current Status, Journal of
Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory and Cognition , 23,533568.http://www.unt.edu/rss/class/mike/5640/articles/Schacterimplicitme
m87.pdf
Sprenger, M., (2011), Cara Mengajar Agar Siswa Tetap Ingat, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Sudjana, N. Dan Rivai, A (2003). Teknologi Pengajaran. Sinar Baru Algesindo.
Suroyo. (2002). Penyampaian Sekuen Pembelajaran Berbantuan Komputer
Terhadap Retensi Belajar Ipa. Jurusan Matematika FMIPA Universitas Terbuka.
Jogjakarta
Tri, A, Hairida, Ira, L. (2008), Pengaruh Multimedia Berbasis Mind Mapping
Terhadap Hasil Belajar dan Retensi Belajar Siswa pada Materi
Hidrokarbon, Universitas Tanjung Pura, Pontianak.
Yulika, E. (2012), Penerapan Model CIRC dengan Teknik Mind Mapping untuk
Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa pada Pembelajaran Biologi Kelas XIIPA SMA Dharma Pancasila, Skripsi, FMIPA, Unimed, Medan.