Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran geometri berbasis kecerdasan majemuk siswa SMP kelas VIII

Pasttita Ayu Laksmiwati; Endah Retnowati

doi:10.21831/pg.v14i1.26591

Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran geometri berbasis kecerdasan majemuk siswa SMP kelas VIII

Pasttita Ayu Laksmiwati, SEAMEO Regional Centre for Qitep in Mathematics, Indonesia
Endah Retnowati, Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

10.21831/pg.v14i1.26591

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menghasilkan dan mendeskripsikan proses pengembangan dan kualitas perangkat pembelajaran geometri berbasis konsep kecerdasan majemuk dari Howard Gardner. Penelitian pengembangan ini mengadopsi model pengembangan Plomp terdiri dari tahapan penelitian awal, pengembangan, dan evaluasi. Perangkat pembelajaran geometri yang dikembangkan meliputi rencana pelaksanaan pembelajaran, buku, dan lembar kerja siswa untuk materi Geometri Kelas VIII Semester 2 berbasis kecerdasan majemuk. Kualitas hasil pengembangan ditinjau dari tiga aspek yaitu kevalidan, keefektifan, dan kepraktisan. Berdasarkan penilaian kualitas kevalidan, diperoleh bahwa perangkat mendapatkan kriteria sangat baik. Hal ini terjadi karena perangkat yang dikembangkan sesuai dengan indikator pembelajaran dan prinsip pembelajaran berbasis kecerdasan majemuk. Aspek keefektifan didasarkan pada pencapaian prestasi belajar siswa dan self-esteem. Keefektifan produk berdasarkan prestasi belajar diperoleh dari persentase banyaknya siswa yang mencapai Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM) sebesar 75, dimana diketahui terdapat 82,05% siswa mencapai KKM. Keefektifan juga ditinjau dari self-esteem siswa, dimana setelah pembelajaran self-esteem siswa berada pada level tinggi. Sementara itu, respon siswa dan guru terhadap kepraktisan penggunaan perangkat masing-masing adalah sebesar 4,175 (diklasifikasikan praktis) dan 4,625 (diklasifikasikan sangat praktis). Berdasarkan hasil observasi terhadap pembelajaran diketahui bahwa keterlaksanaan pembelajaran adalah sebesar 96,82% (di kelas A) dan 97,61% (di kelas B), sehingga pembelajaran terlaksana dengan baik sesuai dengan rencana. Oleh karena itu, berdasarkan hasil penelitian tersebut, dapat disimpulkan bahwa perangkat pembelajaran geometri yang dikembangkan layak untuk digunakan.

The Development of Geometry Learning Kit Based on Multiple Intelligences for 8th Grade Students of Junior High School

Abstract

This study aimed to produce and describe the development process and quality of geometry learning kit based on multiple intelligences from Howard Gardner. This study adopted Plomp’s model of research design, consisting of preliminary research, developing, and evaluation. As a result, this research was developed learning kit, which includes lesson plans, a handbook, and worksheets of geometry for 8th graders 2nd semester. The quality of the developed instructions was described by its validity, effectiveness, and practicality aspect. The effectiveness of the product based on learning achievement was obtained from the percentage of the number of students who reach the Minimum Completeness Criteria (MCC), which was 75, where it was known that there were 82.05% of students achieving the MCC. The other effectiveness result can be seen from students’ self-esteem, after following the learning designed, it has a mean score with high classification. The students’ and teacher’s response was 4.175 (can be categorized practical) and 4.625 (categorized very practical), respectively. The result of learning observations showed that the percentage of the implementation learning was 96.82% (class A) and 97.61% (class B), so it can be seen that the learning process was taking place. Thus, the result of the study shows the learning kit was appropriate to be used.

Keywords

perangkat pembelajaran; kecerdasan majemuk; prestasi belajar; learning kit; self-esteem; multiple intelegence

Full Text:

DOWNLOAD PDF

References

Arends, R. I. (2012). Learning to teach. New York, NY: Mc. Graw Hill.

Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Azwar, S. (2014). Penyusunan skala psikologi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Bilgin, E. K. (2005). The effect of multiple intelligences based instruction on ninth graders chemistry achievement and attitudes toward chemistry (Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara). Retrieved from https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12607413/index.pdf

Brownlie, F., Renihan, F., Ladyman, S., Sumanik, G., MacRae, J., & Wickstorm, R. (2003). Enhanching learning: report of the student achievement task force. British Columbia, Canada: Ministry of Education.

Brown, J. D., Dutton, K. A., & Cook, K. E. (2001). From the top down: Self-esteem and self-evaluation. Cognition and Emotion, 15(5), 615–631. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930143000004

BSNP. (2012). Panduan pemanfaatan hasil UN tahun pelajaran 2011/2012 untuk perbaikan mutu pendidikan. Jakarta: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan.

BSNP. (2013). Panduan pemanfaatan hasil UN tahun pelajaran 2012/2013 untuk perbaikan mutu pendidikan. Jakarta: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan.

Campbell, L., & Campbell, B. (1999). Multiple intelligences and student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Dehyadegary, E., Divsalar, K., Shahsavari, F. P., Nekouei, S., & Sadr, A.J . (2012). Academic engagement as a mediator in relationships between emotional intelligence and academic achievement among adolescents in Kerman-Iran. Journal of American Science, 8(9), 823-832. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.7537/marsjas080912.113

Fitriyani, W., & Sugiman, S. (2014). Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran teorema pythagoras dengan pendekatan ideal berbantuan geogebra. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), 269-284. doi: https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v1i2.2681

Fleetham, M. (2006). Multiple intelligences in practice: Enhancing self-esteem and learning in the classroom. Stafford, UK: The Continuum International Publishing.

Gravemeijer, K. (2004). Local instruction theories as means of support for teachers in reform mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 105-108. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_3

Heming, L., A. (2008). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (Master’s thesis, Western Kentucky University, Kentucky). Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/43646744.pdf

Hewitt, D. (2008). Understanding effective learning: strategies for the classroom. London, UK: McGraw-Hill, Open University Press.

Ignacio, N. G., Nieto, L. J. B., & Barona, E. G. (2006). The affective domain in mathematics learning. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 16-32. Retrieved from https://www.iejme.com/article/the-affective-domain-in-mathematics-learning

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

Leonard, L., & Supardi, S. (2010). Pengaruh konsep diri, sikap siswa pada matematika, dan kecemasan siswa terhadap hasil belajar matematika. Cakrawala Pendidikan, XXIX(3),341-352. doi: https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v3i3.362

Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Value pedagogy and student achievement: Contemporary research evidence. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.

McCombs, B. L. & Pope, J. E. (1994). Motivating to reach students. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

McKinley, J. (2010). Raising black students’ achievement through culturally responsive teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2011). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London, UK: Sage.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 international mathematics reports. Boston, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Boston, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.

Muslimin, Z. I. (2012). Prestasi belajar mahasiswa ditinjau dari jalur penerimaan mahasiswa baru, asal sekolah, dan skor tes potensi akademik. Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi, 3(1), 381-393.

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

Nieveen, N. (1999). Prototyping to reach product quality. In T. Plomp, N. Nieveen, K. Gustafson, R. M. Branch, & J. van den Akker (eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and training (pp. 125-136). London, UK: Kluwer Academic Publisher

Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational asessment of students. Prentice Hall, NJ: Pearson.

Phye, G. D. (1997). Handbook classroom assesment: Learninng, achievement, and adjustment. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Plomp, T. (2013). Educational design research. Eschende: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).

Popham, W. J. (1995). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know. London, UK: Allyn and Bacon.

Reynolds, W. M., & Miller, G. E. (2003). Handbook of psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Robert, L. & Chair, L. (2009). Student learning, students achievement: How do teachers measure up? Arlington, VA: National Board for Profesional Teaching Standards (NBPTS).

Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational psychology. New York, NY: Mc Graw-Hill.

Slavin, R. E. (2006). Education psychology: theory and practice. New York, NY: Pearson Education International.

Widoyoko, E. P. (2012). Teknik penyusunan instrumen penelitian. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Widjajanti, D. J. (2012). Teori kecerdasan majemuk: Apa dan bagaimana mengaplikasikannya dalam pembelajaran matematika. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Penelitian, Pendidikan dan Penerapan MIPA, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2m660Mi

Winkel, W. S. (2004). Psikologi pengajaran. Yogyakarta: Media Abadi.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/pg.v14i1.26591