Keefektifan Metode Pembelajaran Kooperatif Model STAD Ditinjau dari Prestasi dan Motivasi Belajar Siswa di Kelas VIII SMP

Authors

Badrun Badrun, SMP Negeri 4 Gamping Sleman, Indonesia
Hartono Hartono, Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Keywords

STAD, achievement, learning motivation

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengungkapkan (1) keefektifan pembelajaran kooperatif model STAD (2) keefektifan pembelajaran konvensional ditinjau dari prestasi dan motivasi belajar siswa, serta (3) perbandingan keefektifan pembelajaran kooperatif model STAD dengan pembelajaran konvensional ditinjau dari peningkatan prestasi dan motivasi belajar siswa. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di SMP Negeri 4 Gamping, Sleman, Yogyakarta. Populasi penelitian ini adalah 215 siswa kelas VIII semester genap tahun pelajaran 2012/2013. Sampel penelitian ini adalah 36 siswa kelas VIII E sebagai kelompok eksperimen dan 35 siswa kelas VIII C sebagai kelompok kontrol. Data dianalisis dengan uji manova, one sample t-test, dan independent sample t-test. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: (1) pembelajaran kooperatif model STAD efektif ditinjau dari prestasi dan motivasi belajar siswa,(2) pembelajaran konvensional tidak efektif ditinjau dari prestasi tetapi efektif ditinjau dari motivasi belajar siswa, dan (3) pembelajaran kooperatif model STAD lebih efektif dibandingkan pembelajaran konvensional ditinjau dari peningkatan prestasi belajar siswa tetapi tidak lebih efektif ditinjau dari peningkatan motivasi belajar.

Kata Kunci: STAD, prestasi, motivasi belajar.

The Effectiveness of the STAD Type Cooperative Learning Method and Motivation Viewed from Students' Achievement in Class VIII SMP

Abstract

This study aims to describe (1) the effectiveness of cooperative learning model of STAD, (2) the effectiveness of conventional teaching model, and (3) describe the comparison between the effective-ness of cooperative learning model of STAD and the conventional teaching model seen from the performance improvementin terms of students' achievement and learning motivation. This research was conducted at SMP Negeri 4 Gamping, Sleman, Yogyakarta. The population is 215 year-eight students in their second semester in 2012/2013. A sample of 36 students of class VIII E as an experimental group and 35 students of class VIII C as control group. Data were analyzed using the manova test, one sample t-test, and independent sample t-test. The results show that: (1) the STAD type cooperative learning model effective in terms of students' achievement and learning motivation, (2) the conventional teaching is not effective in terms of students' achievement but is effektif in terms of students' learning motivation, and (3) the STAD type cooperative learning model is more effective than the conventional teaching in terms of improved students' learning and achievement but it is not more effective in terms of increasing the motivation. Keywords: STAD, achievement, learning motivation.

Page Range

120-134

Issue

2

Volume

8

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.21831/pg.v8i2.8938

Source

https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/pythagoras/article/view/8938

Recommended Citation

Badrun, B., & Hartono, H. (2013). Keefektifan Metode Pembelajaran Kooperatif Model STAD Ditinjau dari Prestasi dan Motivasi Belajar Siswa di Kelas VIII SMP. PYTHAGORAS : Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 8(2), 120-134. https://doi.org/10.21831/pg.v8i2.8938

References

Azwar, S. (2010). Tes prestasi: Fungsi pengembangan pengukuran prestasi belajar. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Borich, G. D. (2007). Effective teaching methods. New Jersey: Pearson.

Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating student to learn. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Depdiknas (2007). Kajian kurikulum matematika SMP. Jakarta: Puskur Depdiknas.

English, L.D. (2002). Handbook of international research in mathematics education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Gillis, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning, integrating theory and practice. London: Sage Publication.

Hiebert, J. & Charpenter, T.P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. (Handbook of research on mathematics teaching, p.67). Toronto: Maxwell Macmilan.

Johnson, D., Johnson R.T, & Stanne, M.B. (2000). Cooperative learning method: A meta analysis. Diakses tanggal 27 Juni 2009 dari www.co-operation.org/pages/cl-method.html.

Joyce, B., Weil, M. & Calhoun, E. (2004). Models of teaching. (7th ed). NewYork: Pearson.

Koehler, M. & Grouws, D. A. (1992). Mathematics teaching practices and their effects. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching. Toronto: Maxwell Macmilan.

Koller, O., Baumert J., & Schnabel, K.. (2001). Does Interest Matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 32, Number 5, pp 448-470.

Marsh, C. (2004). Becoming a teachers. Prentice Hall: Pearson Education Australia.

Martorella, P. H., (1994). Social studies for elementary school children. New York: Maxwell MacMilan International.

Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2005). Effective teaching evidence and practice. (2nd ed). London: Sage Publication.

Nitko, A. J. & Brookhart, S., (2007). Educational assessment of student. (5th ed). Singapore: Pearson Education.

Slavin, R.E. (2005). Cooperative learning, teori, riset dan praktik. Bandung: Nusa Media.

Stevens, J.P. (2009). Applied Multivariate Statistics For The Social Sciences. (5th ed). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

Tella, A. (2007). The Impact of Motivation on Student's Academic Achievement and Learning Outcomes in Mathematics among Secondary School Students in Nigeria. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3 (2), 149-156.

Timothy, PI., & Robinson. (2009). Organizational behavior. New Jersey: Pearson Educational International.