PERBANDINGAN HASIL BELAJAR PESERTA DIDIK MELALUI PENERAPAN MODEL STUDENT TEAMS-ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) DAN THINK, PAIR AND SHARE (TPS) PADA MATERI JAMUR DI SMAN 3 TANJUNG RAJA
Total View This Week0
Total View This Week0
Institusion
Universitas Sriwijaya
Author
PENI FALENTINA SIBARANI (STUDENT ID : 06091281520081)
Yenny Anwar (LECTURER ID : 0014107901)
Kodri Madang (LECTURER ID : 0008016901)
Yenny Anwar (LECTURER ID : 0014107901)
Kodri Madang (LECTURER ID : 0008016901)
Subject
LB1025-1050.75 Teaching (Principles and practice)
Datestamp
2019-10-04 05:05:17
Abstract :
This study aims to know about differences of achievement between students that using STAD and TPS model on mushroom material in SMAN 3 Tanjung Raja. The research method used was Quasi Experimental with Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Sampling using Saturated Sampling Techniques. The method of data collection is done by written tests for learning outcomes, observations for student activities, and questionnaires for students' responses to the application of learning models. Learning outcomes data were tested using t-test, while learning activities, responses, and implementation were analyzed descriptively. Based on the results of hypothesis testing, the sig value is 0.00 (sig <0.05), which is a significant difference in learning outcomes between STAD and TPS (Ha is accepted and H0 is rejected). The class with the STAD model had an average learning outcome of 70.15 with classical completeness of 59.37% while the class with the TPS Model had an average learning outcome of 84.25 with 100% classical completeness. The level of activity of the students with the TPS model was higher than the STAD with the TPS value of 89.57 (very active) while STAD 77.25 (active). The class gain with the STAD model has an average value of 37.65 while the class with the TPS model has a gain average value of 32.40. This means that the class with the STAD and TPS models are both good for improving student learning outcomes. Key Words: STAD, TPS, Learning Outcomes, Activities, Mushrooms
This study aims to know about differences of achievement between students that using STAD and TPS model on mushroom material in SMAN 3 Tanjung Raja. The research method used was Quasi Experimental with Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Sampling using Saturated Sampling Techniques. The method of data collection is done by written tests for learning outcomes, observations for student activities, and questionnaires for students' responses to the application of learning models. Learning outcomes data were tested using t-test, while learning activities, responses, and implementation were analyzed descriptively. Based on the results of hypothesis testing, the sig value is 0.00 (sig <0.05), which is a significant difference in learning outcomes between STAD and TPS (Ha is accepted and H0 is rejected). The class with the STAD model had an average learning outcome of 70.15 with classical completeness of 59.37% while the class with the TPS Model had an average learning outcome of 84.25 with 100% classical completeness. The level of activity of the students with the TPS model was higher than the STAD with the TPS value of 89.57 (very active) while STAD 77.25 (active). The class gain with the STAD model has an average value of 37.65 while the class with the TPS model has a gain average value of 32.40. This means that the class with the STAD and TPS models are both good for improving student learning outcomes. Key Words: STAD, TPS, Learning Outcomes, Activities, Mushrooms
File :
RAMA_84205_06091281520081.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_01_FRONT_REF.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_02.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_03.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_04.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_05.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_ref.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_TURNITIN.pdf
RAMA_84205_06091281520081_0014107901_0008016901_06_ref.pdf
Download
book
BibTex
Latex, Jabref
cloud_download
Original Resource
url resource Institution
