Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Think Pair Share (TPS) Dan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Siswa Pada Materi Garis Singgung Lingkaran

N. Rahmawati, I. Hanipah
{"title":"Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Think Pair Share (TPS) Dan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Siswa Pada Materi Garis Singgung Lingkaran","authors":"N. Rahmawati, I. Hanipah","doi":"10.25217/numerical.v2i1.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research is to prove whether the learning result of Student Mathematics with cooperative learning model of TPS type is better than the result of student learning of Mathematics with STAD type cooperative learning model on tangent material of circle. The population is the students of State Junior High School 1 East Cikarang. The sample was taken by using cluster random sampling technique from the population by randomized method, ie students of class VIII F and class VIII G as many as 60 students. The analysis test is done by normality test and homogeneity test. Normality test using Lilliefors test and Homogeneity test using Fisher test. While the hypothesis test using t-test. Based on the calculation obtained data that Lilliefors model of cooperative learning model type TPS Lhitung = 0.0954 and for Ltabel = 0.161 (0.0954 < 0.161) and for cooperative learning model type STAD = 0.1266 and for Ltabel = 0.161 (0, 1266 < 0.161), so it can be concluded that the cooperative learning model of TPS type and STAD type cooperative learning model come from the normally distributed population. Homogeneity test using Fisher test obtained Fhitung = 1.15 and Ftabel = 1.86 (1.15 < 1.86) so that TPS and STAD homogen. Hypothesis testing obtained thitung = 2.388 and ttable = 1.651. Because thitung > ttable then H0 is rejected. The conclusion of this research is there are difference of mathematics learning result of students using cooperative learning model of TPS type and mathematics learning result of students using STAD type cooperative learning model in tangent circle material in class VIII SMPN 1 Cikarang East Bekasi.","PeriodicalId":31996,"journal":{"name":"Numerical Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Numerical Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25217/numerical.v2i1.185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This research is to prove whether the learning result of Student Mathematics with cooperative learning model of TPS type is better than the result of student learning of Mathematics with STAD type cooperative learning model on tangent material of circle. The population is the students of State Junior High School 1 East Cikarang. The sample was taken by using cluster random sampling technique from the population by randomized method, ie students of class VIII F and class VIII G as many as 60 students. The analysis test is done by normality test and homogeneity test. Normality test using Lilliefors test and Homogeneity test using Fisher test. While the hypothesis test using t-test. Based on the calculation obtained data that Lilliefors model of cooperative learning model type TPS Lhitung = 0.0954 and for Ltabel = 0.161 (0.0954 < 0.161) and for cooperative learning model type STAD = 0.1266 and for Ltabel = 0.161 (0, 1266 < 0.161), so it can be concluded that the cooperative learning model of TPS type and STAD type cooperative learning model come from the normally distributed population. Homogeneity test using Fisher test obtained Fhitung = 1.15 and Ftabel = 1.86 (1.15 < 1.86) so that TPS and STAD homogen. Hypothesis testing obtained thitung = 2.388 and ttable = 1.651. Because thitung > ttable then H0 is rejected. The conclusion of this research is there are difference of mathematics learning result of students using cooperative learning model of TPS type and mathematics learning result of students using STAD type cooperative learning model in tangent circle material in class VIII SMPN 1 Cikarang East Bekasi.
关于学生在切线问题上的数学学习成绩
本研究旨在证明TPS型合作学习模型的学生数学学习效果是否优于STAD型合作学习模式的学生数学在圆切线材料上的学习效果。人口为东锡卡朗国立初级中学一年级的学生。样本采用整群随机抽样技术,采用随机方法从人群中抽取,即VIII F班和VIII G班的学生多达60名。分析检验采用正态性检验和同质性检验。正态性检验采用Lilliefors检验,均匀性检验采用Fisher检验。而假设检验采用t检验。基于合作学习模型类型TPS的Lilliefors模型Lhitung=0.0954和Ltabel=0.161(0.0954<0.161)以及合作学习模型型号STAD=0.1266和Ltable=0.161,因此可以得出TPS型和STAD型的合作学习模型来自正态分布的群体。使用Fisher检验的均匀性检验获得Fhitung=1.15和Ftabel=1.86(1.15<1.86),从而使TPS和STAD均匀。假设检验结果为:通2.388,表1.651。因为它是可接受的,所以H0被拒绝。本研究的结论是,在第八班SMPN 1 Cikarang East Bekasi中,使用TPS型合作学习模型的学生的数学学习结果与使用STAD型合作学习模式的学生在切圆材料中的数学学习效果存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信