Keefektifan pembelajaran Jigsaw dan TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika siswa

Rini Dwi Astuti; Agus Maman Abadi

doi:10.21831/jrpm.v2i2.7339

Keefektifan pembelajaran Jigsaw dan TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika siswa

Rini Dwi Astuti, SMA Negeri 1 Prembun Kebumen Jawa Tengah, Indonesia
Agus Maman Abadi, Jurusan Pendidikan Matematika, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

10.21831/jrpm.v2i2.7339

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan: (1) keefektifan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Jigsaw ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika, (2) keefektifan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika, (3) model pembelajaran yang lebih efektif antara tipe Jigsaw dibandingkan dengan tipe TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian eksperimen semu yang menggunakan dua kelompok eksperimen. Teknik analisis data yang digunakan meliputi: (1) one sample t-test yang digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan keefektifan Jigsaw dan TAI pada masing-masing variabel; (2) analisis multivariat yang digunakan untuk mengetahui ada tidaknya perbedaan keefektifan Jigsaw dan TAI secara simultan; (3) uji lanjut dengan prosedur Bonferroni, yang digunakan untuk mengetahui model pembelajaran yang lebih efektif antara Jigsaw dan TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika siswa. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: (1) pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Jigsaw efektif ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika; (2) pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI efektif ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika; (3) tidak terdapat perbedaan keefektifan antara model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Jigsaw dan tipe TAI ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran dan sikap belajar matematika.

Kata kunci: Jigsaw, TAI, kemampuan penalaran matematika, sikap belajar matematika

The Effectiveness of Jigsaw and TAI Learning in Terms of Students’ Reasoning Competence and Mathematics Learning Attitude

Abstract

This research aims to describe: (1) the effectiveness of cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type seen from the students’ reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitude, (2) the effectiveness of cooperative learning model of TAI type seen from the students’ reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitude, (3) the more effective learning model between the Jigsaw type or TAI type, in terms of students’ reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitude. This research was a quasi-experimental study using two experimental groups. The data analysis techniques consisted of: (1) the one sample t-test carried out to investigate the effectiveness of the Jigsaw-type and the TAI-type in each variable; (2) the multivariate analysis carried out to investigate the difference in the effectiveness of the Jigsaw-type and the TAI-type on two dependent variables simultaneously; (3) the post-hoc test involving the Bonferroni procedure carried out to analyze which one was more effective between the Jigsaw-type and the TAI-type in terms of students’ reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitude. The results of the research show that: (1) the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw is effective seen from the reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitudes; (2) the cooperative learning model of TAI is effective seen from the reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitudes; (3) there is no difference in the effectiveness, between the Jigsaw type and TAI type cooperative learning models in terms of reasoning competence and mathematics learning attitudes.

Keywords: Jigsaw, TAI, mathematical reasoning competence, mathematic learning attitude

Keywords

Jigsaw; TAI; kemampuan penalaran matematika; sikap belajar matematika

Full Text:

PDF

References

Arcavi, A. (2007). Mathematical thinking in Japanese classroom. In progres report of the APEC project: Collaborative studies on innovations for teaching and learning in different cultures (II)-lessons study focusing on mathematical thinking. Tokyo: Criced, University of Tsukuba.

Arends, R. I., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: becoming an accomplished teacher. New York: Routledge.

Borich, G. D. (2007). Effective teaching methods (6th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.

Brodie, K. (2010). Teaching mathematical reasoning in secondary school classrooms. New York: Springer.

Dean, J. (2000). Improving children’s learning: effective teaching in the primary school. London: Routledge.

Depdiknas. (2006). Peraturan menteri pendidikan nasional nomor 22 tahun 2006 tentang standar isi untuk satuan pendidikan dasar dan menengah. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1986). Essential of educational measurement (4^thed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Elliott, S. N., Kratochwill, T. R., Cook, J. L., & Travers, J. F. (2000). Educational psychology: effective teaching, effective learning (3rd ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

Halim, A. (2011). Keefektifan pembelajaran kooperatif tipe Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) dan tipe Team Accelerated Instruction (TAI) pada pembelajaran barisan dan deret ditinjau dari prestasi dan sikap siswa terhadap matematika. Tesis Magister, tidak diterbitkan, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta

Huda, M. (2012). Cooperative learning: metode, teknik, struktur dan model penerapan. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Belajar.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1987). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.

Jhonson, D. W., Jhonson, R. T., & Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: a meta analysis. University of Minnesota. Diambil pada tanggal 9 November 2012, dari www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal.pdf.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. T. (2010). Colaborative learning: strategi pembelajaran untuk sukses bersama. (Terjemahan Narulita Yusron). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. (Buku asli diterbitkan tahun 2004).

Kemp, J. E., Morrison, G.R., & Ross, S. M. (1994). Designing effective instruction. New York: Macmillan College Publishing Company.

Kerachsky, S. (2010). Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2009 Results.

Marpaung, Y. (2007). Karakteristik PMRI (Pendidikan Matematika Realistik Indonesia). Disajikan pada Penataran dan Lokakarya Widyaiswara Matematika LPMP Angkatan I dan II, di PPPG Matematika Yogyakarta.

NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM

Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Olatunde, Y. P. (2009). Student attitude towards mathematics and academic achievement in some selected secondary school in southwestern Nigeria. European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 36 No 3, 336-341. http://www.eorojournals.com/ejsr_36_3_02.pdf

Ontario. (2005). The ontario curriculum grades 1-8 mathematics. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/math18curr.pdf

Peker, M., & Mirasyedioglu, S. (2008). Pre-service elementary school teachers’ learning styles and attitudes towards mathematics. Eurasia journal of mathematics, science & technology education. 2008, 4(1), 21-26. http://www.proquest.com

Persky, A. M., & Pollack, G. M. (2009). Instructional design and assessment a hybrid jigsaw approach to teaching renal clearance concepts. American Journal of Parmaceutical Education, 73 (3), Article 49. Diambil pada tanggal 1 Agustus 2012, dari http://archive.ajpe.org/aj7303/aj730349/aj730349.pdf

Popham, W.J. (1995). Classroom assesment. What teacher need to know. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Skemp, R. (1971). The psychology of learning mathematics. England: Middlesex.

Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: theory, research, practice (2nd ed). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Slavin, R. E. (2006). Education psychology: theory and practice (8th ed). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.

Slavin, R. E. (2009). Cooperative learning: teori, riset, dan praktik. (terjemahan Lita). London: Allyn and Bacon. (Buku asli diterbitkan tahun 2005)

Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Stylianides, A. J., & Stylianides, G. J. (2006). Content knowledge for mathematics teaching: the case of reasoning and proving. Proceeding 30th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 5, 201-208.

Suherman, E., Turmudi, Suryadi, D., Herman, T., Suhendra, Prabawanto, S., Nurjanah, & Rohayati, A. (2001). Common textbook: strategi pembelajaran matematika kontemporer. Bandung: UPI

Sutama. (2008). Peningkatan kemampuan penalaran siswa dalam pembelajaran matematika melalui pendekatan kooperatif tipe Jigsaw. Majalah ilmiah pawiyatan, Vol. XVIII, 1-20.

Tatsuoka, M. M. (1971). Multivariate analysis: techniques for educational and psychological research. Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc

TIMSS & PIRLS. (2007). TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievementat the 4th grade. Boston: International student center.

Tran, V. D., & Lewis, R. (2012). The effects of jigsaw learning on students’ attitudes in a vietnamese Higher education classroom. International Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 2.

Usdiyana, D., Purniati, T., Yulianti, K., & Harningsih, E. (2009). Meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir logis siswa SMP melalui pembelajaran matematik realistik. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA, Vol. 13 No. 1.

Washin, B & Salend. J. S. (1988). Team-assisted individualization with handicapped adjudicated youth. Academic journal article from exceptional children, Vol. 55, No. 2. Diambil tanggal 29 Agustus 2012. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3130/is_n2_v55/ai_n285828510

Watkins, Carnell, E., & Lodge, C. (2007). Effective learning in classrooms. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Zakaria, E., Lu Chung Chin, & Daud, Md. Y. (2010). The effect of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics achievement and attitude toward mathematics. Journal of Social Science 6 (2), 272-275

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v2i2.7339