Keywords
pendekatan CTL, pendekatan problem posing, prestasi belajar, minat belajar matematika
Document Type
Article
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan keefektifan pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan CTL dan pendekatan problem posing ditinjau dari prestasi belajar dan minat belajar matematika, dan menyelidiki manakah yang lebih efektif antara pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan CTL dan pendekatan problem posing ditinjau dari prestasi belajar dan minat belajar matematika siswa SMK. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian eksperimen semu, dengan rancangan pretest-posttest non-equivalent group design. Populasi penelitian mencakup seluruh siswa kelas XI SMK Negeri 5 Yogyakarta. Dari populasi yang ada diambil secara acak dua kelas sebagai sampel penelitian. Untuk menguji keefektifan pendekatan CTL dan problem posing digunakan analisis one sample t-test pada aspek prestasi dan uji proporsi pada aspek minat. Selanjutnya untuk membandingkan keefektifan pembelajaran matematika melalui pendekatan CTL dan problem posing, data dianalisis secara multivariat menggunakan uji T2 Hotelling. Jika terdapat perbedaan keefektifan, maka dilakukan uji lanjut t-univariat untuk menentukan variabel tertentu yang berkontribusi terhadap perbedaan secara keseluruhan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: (1) pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan CTL efektif ditinjau dari prestasi belajar matematika; (2) pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan problem posing efektif ditinjau dari prestasi belajar dan minat belajar matematika siswa SMK; (3) tidak terdapat perbedaan keefektifan antara pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan CTL dan pendekatan problem posing ditinjau dari prestasi belajar dan minat belajar matematika siswa SMK.
Kata Kunci: pendekatan CTL, pendekatan problem posing, prestasi belajar, minat belajar matematika
A Comparison of Statistics Learning Through CTL and Problem-Posing Approach in Terms of Learning Achievement and Interest in Learning Mathematics
Abstract
This research aims to describe the effectiveness of statistics learning through the CTL approach and problem posing approach in terms of learning achievement and interest in learning mathematics and to investigate which approach is more effective in learning mathematics for Vocational School students. This research is a quasi-experimental research using the pretest-posttest non-equivalent group design. The research population comprised all year XI students of SMK Negeri 5 Yogyakarta. From the population, two classes were randomly selected as the research sample. To test the effectiveness of statistics learning through the CTL and problem-posing approach, one sample t-test was used in the aspect of learning achievement and a proportion test on the aspect of interest in learning. The data were analyzed using the T2Hotelling's test to compare the effectiveness of the CTL approach and problem-posing approach. If differences in effectiveness were found, then further study of t-univariate was done to determine certain variables that contributed to the overall difference. The results show that: (1) statistics learning through the CTL approach is effective in terms of learning achievement; (2) statistics learning through the problem-posing approach is effective in terms of learning achievement and interest in learning mathematics; (3) there is no difference between the effectiveness of teaching using the CTL approach and teaching using the problem-posing approach in terms of learning achievement and interest in learning mathematics among Vocational School students. Keywords: CTL approach, problem-posing approach, learning achievement, interest in learning mathematics
Page Range
67-77
Issue
1
Volume
4
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
10.21831/jrpm.v4i1.12723
Source
https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jrpm/article/view/12723
Recommended Citation
Narendrati, N. (2017). Komparasi pembelajaran statistika melalui pendekatan CTL dan problem posing ditinjau dari prestasi belajar dan minat belajar matematika. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 67-77. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v4i1.12723
References
Alderman, M. K. (2008). Motivation for achievement : Possibilities for teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
Beall, S. (2010). A case study of teaching to multiple intelligences-music and mathematics. Diakses tanggal 29 Juni 2014 dari http://scottbeall.com/MI%20 Case%20study.htm
Cai, J., & Hwang, S. (2002). Generalized and generative thinking in US and Chinese students' mathematical problem solving and problem posing. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(4), 401-421. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(02)00142-6
Depdiknas. (2002). Pendekatan kontekstual (contextual teaching and learning (CTL)). Jakarta: Depdiknas.
Depdiknas. (2012). Laporan Hasil dan Statistik Nilai Ujian Nasional Tahun Pelajaran 2011/2012. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.
Depdiknas. (2013). Laporan Hasil dan Statistik Nilai Ujian Nasional Tahun Pelajaran 2012/2013. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.
El Sayed, R. A.-E. (2002). Effectiveness of problem posing strategies on prospective mathematics teachers' problem solving performance. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in S.E. Asia, XXV(1), 56-69. Retrieved from http://www.recsam.edu.my/R&D_Journals/YEAR2002/2002Vol25No1/56-69.pdf
Gable, R. K. (1986). Instrument development in the affective domain. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7259-0
Ghasempour, Z., Bakar, M. N., & Jahanshahloo, G. R. (2013). Innovation in teaching and learning through problem posing tasks and metacognitive strategies. International Journal of Pedagogical Innovatio, 1(1), 57-66. Retrieved from http://www.naturalspublishing.com/files/published/2wh2o22kcq662p.pdf
Hosnan, M., & Sikumbang, R. (2014). Pendekatan saintifik dan kontekstual dalam pembelajaran abad 21: Kunci sukses implementasi kurikulum 2013. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.
Hudson, C. C., & Whisler, V. R. (2013). Contextual teaching and learning for practitioners. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 6(4), 54-58. Retrieved from http://www.iiisci.org/journal/cv$/sci/pdfs/e668ps.pdf
Iffah, S. (2009). Keefektifan pendekatan pembelajaran kontekstual dalam meningkatkan pemahaman konsep matematika siswa SMP Negeri 2 Depok Sleman Yogyakarta. Tesis, tidak dipublikasikan. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning : what it is and why it's here to stay. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Kojima, K., & Miwa, K. (2008). A system that facilitates diverse thinking in problem posing. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18(3), 209-236. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1454281
Md Amin, Z., & Md Kamaruddin, N. K. (2008). A study of the effectiveness of the contextual lab activity in the teaching and learning engineering statistics at the Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM). In Proceedings of the 13th Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics (pp. 281-548). Bangkok: Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University. Retrieved from http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/112/1/zulkarnain%2Chafisah.pdf
Menteri Pendidikan Nasional. Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional RI nomor 22, tahun 2006, tentang standar isi intuk satuan pendidikan dan menengah, Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional (2006).
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2005). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London: SAGE Publications.
Presiden Republik Indonesia. (2013). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 65, Tahun 2013, tentang Standar Proses.
Presiden Republik Indonesia. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia nomor 20 tahun 2003 tentang sistem pendidikan nasional, Pub. L. No. 20 (2003). Retrieved from http://sindikker.dikti.go.id/dok/UU/UU20-2003-Sisdiknas.pdf
Rahmawati ES, Y., & Harta, I. (2014). Keefektifan pendekatan open-ended dan CTL ditinjau dari hasil belajar kognitif dan afektif. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(1), 113. http://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v1i1.2669
Setiawan, R. H., & Harta, I. (2014). Pengaruh pendekatan open-ended dan pendekatan kontekstual terhadap kemampuan pemecahan masalah dan sikap siswa terhadap matematika. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), 241. http://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v1i2.2679
Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40248099?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Singer, F. M., Ellerton, N., Cai, J., & Leung, E. C. K. (2011). Problem posing in mathematics learning and teaching: A research agenda. In Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 137-166). Ankara.
Singer, F. M., Pelczer, I., & Voica, C. (2011). Problem posing and modification as a criterion of mathematical creativity. In Marta Pytlak, Tim Rowland, & Ewa Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1133-1142). Rzeszów, Poland: University of Rzeszów.
Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New York: Routledge.
Suhartini, S., & Santoso, R. H. (2014). Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran matematika untuk siswa SMK jurusan akuntansi di Sleman dengan pendekatan pembelajaran kontekstual. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(1), 69. http://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v1i1.2665
Woolfolk, A. (2007). Educational psychology. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.