Siti Sri Wulandari
Meylia Elizabeth Ranu
Surabaya State University
wulan.unesa@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This study describes the application of learning with Problem Based Learning approach to improving student learning outcomes Education Office Administration. Application of Problem Based Learning is able to develop conceptual understanding and innovation of students as a preparation to students in the future, so that students are able to analyze and give birth to alternative solutions to problems in everyday life. It is an impact on improving student learning outcomes. This type of research is classroom action research. The analysis used in this research is qualitative descriptive analysis. The average value of the success of faculty activity data in each cycle is increased in the first cycle of 5.11 and the second cycle of 5.88. For the average value of student learning outcomes in each cycle is increased in the first cycle of 72.50 increased in the second cycle into 87.79. The application of problem-based learning model as an alternative to learning in improving student learning outcomes.
Keywords: Learning, Problem Based Learning, Learning Outcomes.
Every human
being has a desire succeed in life, one of the success that can be education.
Education is the most important means to realize the progress of the nation and
the state. This is because education is a cultural process that aims to improve
human dignity. Education itself is valid for life and do in the neighborhood,
the family, formal education (schools) and community. To that end, education is
a shared responsibility between families, communities, and countries. According
to the Law of the Republic of Indonesia number 20 of 2003 on the national
education system Article 1 states that education is a conscious and deliberate
effort to create an atmosphere of learning and the learning process so that
learners are actively developing the potential for him to have the spiritual power
of religion, self-control, personality, intelligence, noble character, and
skills needed him, society, nation and state.
The education process is planned to create an
atmosphere conducive learning and
fun. Education must also be oriented
to learners and learners should be seen as a
growing and has
potential. The task of educators
is to develop the
potential of students. Based on
the observations, obtained by the fact that the faculty in
developing the competencies of
students still use the lecture method, a way of teaching that is used to convey
information about a subject matter orally. Although
it has been applying the traditional classroom discussions
without real-life examples of the application so that students become passive
in class, there are even students who are bored because
just listening and
fixated on what was said by the lecturer and occasional
notes, so that learning becomes less meaningful.
Learning activity in question is a
learning process in the subject of
science communication.
Therefore, learning the characteristics of the standard of competency to understand and implement
the communication of science
in education and
the learning process starting from the basic to the evaluation requires
an understanding not only on matters
of substance or merely
academic load, but also requires social interaction skills
of the students. Basic
competence to understand the factors of communication in education is quite close to the
reality of the problems that
occur in the community. After learning activities take place is expected for
the changes in behavior that can be
known through the evaluation
of student learning outcomes. According
Dimyati (1999: 20)
the results of learning is "a culmination
of learning process that occurs mainly due
to teacher evaluation". According
Djamarah (1995: 21)
the results of learning is "the value of the
result of an activity that has been done individually or in groups".
This is in accordance with the opinion of Sudjana (2005: 37) learning
outcomes are the results obtained
from the student learning
process which appears in the form
of overall behavior consisting of elements
of cognitive, affective and psychomotor integrally
on students. Therefore, learning
outcomes are the abilities possessed by students after he received his learning experience. Results of study
used by the lecturer to be used as standard or
criterion in achieving educational goals. This can be achieved if the students already understand learning accompanied by a change
in behavior better.
Based on the
description above background, the purpose of this study was to describe (1) Implementation of the learning model Problem Based Learning in Communication Studies courses (2) Is the use of Problem
Based Learning model can improve
student learning outcomes?
II. METHODS
This type of research is the Classroom Action Research (Classroom Action Research). The analysis used in this research is qualitative descriptive analysis. The subjects of this study are students of Education Administrative forces in 2012 amounted to 34. The location of this research at the Faculty of Economics, University of Surabaya. Data collection technique used observation and non-test instrument. Data analysis using descriptive tables. To analyze the results of the assessment given by the observer on the ability of faculty to manage learning by calculating the average score of assessment by two observers using the interval score of 1 to 4, with the provisions of the following criteria:
To analyze the results of the assessment given by the observer on the ability of faculty to manage learning by calculating the average score of assessment by two observers using the interval score of 1 to 4, with the provisions of the following criteria:
1 = not good 3 = good
2 = poor 4 = excellent
Furthermore, above the average will be converted using the following conditions:
1:00 to 1:50 = Not good / not done
1:50 to 2:49 = less good / performing less well
2:50 to 3:49 = pretty good / fairly well done
3:50 to 4:49 = good / performing well
4:50 to 5:50 = excellent / very successfully (Kunandar, 2008: 235)
This type of research is the Classroom Action Research (Classroom Action Research). The analysis used in this research is qualitative descriptive analysis. The subjects of this study are students of Education Administrative forces in 2012 amounted to 34. The location of this research at the Faculty of Economics, University of Surabaya. Data collection technique used observation and non-test instrument. Data analysis using descriptive tables. To analyze the results of the assessment given by the observer on the ability of faculty to manage learning by calculating the average score of assessment by two observers using the interval score of 1 to 4, with the provisions of the following criteria:
To analyze the results of the assessment given by the observer on the ability of faculty to manage learning by calculating the average score of assessment by two observers using the interval score of 1 to 4, with the provisions of the following criteria:
1 = not good 3 = good
2 = poor 4 = excellent
Furthermore, above the average will be converted using the following conditions:
1:00 to 1:50 = Not good / not done
1:50 to 2:49 = less good / performing less well
2:50 to 3:49 = pretty good / fairly well done
3:50 to 4:49 = good / performing well
4:50 to 5:50 = excellent / very successfully (Kunandar, 2008: 235)
Test achievement test, known by the term achievement test is one measure
used to measure the extent to which
someone learners successfully
achieving instructional objectives
that have been set after following the learning process in a given time.
Tests in this study postes a test that is
given after the learning process, this test is intended to determine the level of student understanding of the concept of the material that has been studied.
1). Validity
Test
The validity of the test is obtained by calculating the sensitivity of the grain of each item. Test the validity of this research is to use the product moment correlation formula with the following formula:
rxy =
Specification:
xy = product moment correlation coefficient
= Subject of trials
S
= total score achieved for each item
= total score achieved for each item
S
= total score achieved participants test
= total score achieved participants test
S
2 = sum of squared score of item
2 = sum of squared score of item
S 2 =
sum of squares total score
2 =
sum of squares total score
S
= number of times the score grains
with a total score
= number of times the score grains
with a total score
Product moment coefficient
obtained based on the calculation
compared to the price table. If the price is greater than the rtabel xy, then the
valid product moment coefficient (r xy> rtabel
can be said to be valid).
Criteria of correlation r xy according Arikunto (2009: 72-75) are as follows:
Criteria of correlation r xy according Arikunto (2009: 72-75) are as follows:
0.80 <│rxy│≤
1.00 = very
high
0.60 <│ rxy│≤ 0.80 = high
0.40 <│ rxy│≤ 0.60 = sufficient
0.20 <│ rxy│≤ 0.40 = low
0.00 <│ rxy│≤ 0.20 = very low (no correlation)
Items considered valid if the value of r xy ≥ 0.31. If the value of r xy ≤ 0.31 then the item is considered not valid (not used).
0.60 <│ rxy│≤ 0.80 = high
0.40 <│ rxy│≤ 0.60 = sufficient
0.20 <│ rxy│≤ 0.40 = low
0.00 <│ rxy│≤ 0.20 = very low (no correlation)
Items considered valid if the value of r xy ≥ 0.31. If the value of r xy ≤ 0.31 then the item is considered not valid (not used).
However, to facilitate researchers, testing the validity of the analysis carried out with the aid of SPSS for windows. Validity
test is done by using the correlation
coefficient between the item
to the total. When the correlation between each
of the indicators against the total
score of the constructs showed significant results with results below 0.05
(alpha) then each question is valid
(SPSS for Windows provides facilities calculations).
2) Test Reliability
To determine the reliability of
the entire test must
be used Spearman Brown
formula as follows:
( Arikunto,2006:180)
Specification:
= rxy is called the index
of correlation between the
two parts of the instrument.
= Reliability of the instrument.
Reliability criterion: if rh> rtabel the
items said to be reliable.
Reliability test in this study also uses analysis tools help of SPSS for Windows to simplify the researcher. Reliability test performed using coefficient alpha (Cronbach alpha) were tested with SPSS. Alpha coefficients obtained were then compared with the limit of the minimum reliability value of 0.6, said to be reliable if the value of Cronbach Alpha> 0.6.
Reliability test in this study also uses analysis tools help of SPSS for Windows to simplify the researcher. Reliability test performed using coefficient alpha (Cronbach alpha) were tested with SPSS. Alpha coefficients obtained were then compared with the limit of the minimum reliability value of 0.6, said to be reliable if the value of Cronbach Alpha> 0.6.
At this stage of action
research consists of several cycles, each
cycle through four
stages: planning (planning), action (Action), observation
(Observation), and reflection (Reflective). The implementation of data collection in this study was conducted in two rounds and each round
in this research study design flow mengkuti action.
An outline of the draft study prepared in accordance classroom action research (PTK) in chart form as
described as follows:
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
|
Source: Suharsimi
Arikunto (2010)
Figure 2.1: Flow Class Action Research
Figure 2.1: Flow Class Action Research
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. RESULTS
Activities Lecturer in applying problem-based learning model in cycle I.
A. RESULTS
Activities Lecturer in applying problem-based learning model in cycle I.
Table
3.1 Activities Lecturer
In Cycle I
|
Num
|
Aspects Observed
|
Observer
|
Total
|
Category
|
||
|
I
|
OBSERVATIONS
Teaching and Learning Activities
|
O1
|
O2
|
Score
|
||
|
|
A.
INTRODUCTION
|
|||||
|
1. Guiding pray according to
religion and belief respectively.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
2.
Provide opportunities
for students to dig up information.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
3. Orienting the problem that will be solved in
groups.
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
Pretty Good
|
||
|
4. Communicate the purpose of learning products,
processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan
social character.
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
Pretty Good
|
||
|
B. CORE ACTIVITIES
|
||||||
|
5. Organize students
to learn by giving
Student Worksheet
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
6. things that are not
understood in the MFI and help his friend who
had difficulty
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
7. Solve the problems that have been
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
Pretty Good
|
||
|
8. Conducting investigations
initiated gradually from the formulation of the problem.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
9. Formulate hypotheses on the formulation of the problem that has been
created
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
10. Test the hypothesis that has been formulated
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
11. Develop and present the
results of the discussions that
have been made.
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
Pretty Good
|
||
|
12. Presenting the results of
discussions with full responsibility
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
C. ACTIVITY CLOSING
|
||||||
|
13.
Jointly analyze and evaluate problem solving
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
II
|
MOOD CLASS
|
|||||
|
|
14. Enthusiastic students
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
|
|
15. Enthusiastic teacher
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||
|
16. Time in accordance with the allocation
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
pretty good
|
||
|
17.
Learning activities in
accordance with the Plan of Implementation
of the Semester
|
3
|
4
|
3.5
|
Good
|
||
|
Total score obtained
|
3.68
|
Good
|
||||
|
Value
|
5.11
|
very well
|
||||
Based on Table
3.1 it can be concluded that the activity of lecturers
based observations show the total score obtained 3.68. Total scores
were obtained from the assessment of the
17 components of the
implementation of learning activities using problem-based learning
model. The successful implementation of the learning model can be calculated by the formula:
Value = Score obtained
X 100
Maximum Score
Maximum Score
Value = 3.68 X 100
68
= 5.11
Based on the
success criteria, then the value
of 5:11 on the activity of
the lecturer in the first cycle can be categorized either. In the implementation of learning in the first cycle there are five indicators that
should be corrected in the activities
of lecturers who have pretty good value.
In the preliminary events are 2 indicator of orienting the
problem will be solved in groups and communicate learning goals products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan
social character. Next on the core activities there are two indicators
that have been solving
problems and developing
and presenting the results of
the discussions that have been made.
Last weaknesses found
in the atmosphere of the class
there is one indicator
of that time in accordance
with the allocation. Deficiencies
in the activity of teachers in the first cycle
is expected to be fixed on to the second
cycle of activities.
Activities Lecturer in
applying problem-based learning
model in the second cycle.
Table 3.2 Activities Lecturer
In Cycle II
|
Num
|
Aspects Observed
|
Observer
|
Total
|
Category
|
||||||
|
I
|
OBSERVATIONS
Teaching and Learning Activities
|
O1
|
O2
|
Score
|
||||||
|
|
A. INTRODUCTION
|
|||||||||
|
1. Guiding pray according to
religion and belief respectively.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
2.
Provide opportunities
for students to dig up information.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
3. Orienting the problem that will be solved in
groups.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
4. Communicate the purpose of learning products,
processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan
social character.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
B. CORE ACTIVITIES
|
||||||||||
|
5. Organize students
to learn by giving
Student Worksheet
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
6. things that are not
understood in the MFI and help his friend who
had difficulty
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
7. Solve the problems that have been
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
8. Conducting investigations
initiated gradually from the formulation of the problem.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
9. Formulate hypotheses on the formulation of the problem that has been
created
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
10. Test the hypothesis that has been formulated
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
11. Develop and present the
results of the discussions that
have been made.
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
12. Presenting the results of
discussions with full responsibility
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
C. ACTIVITY CLOSING
|
||||||||||
|
13. Jointly analyze and evaluate problem solving
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
II
|
MOOD CLASS
|
|||||||||
|
14. Enthusiastic students
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
15. Enthusiastic teacher
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
16. Time in accordance with the allocation
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
17.
Learning activities in
accordance with the Plan of Implementation
of the Semester
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
Good
|
||||||
|
Total score obtained
|
4.00
|
Good
|
||||||||
|
Value
|
5.88
|
very well
|
||||||||
In the second cycle in
Table 3.2 it can be concluded
that the activity of faculty based on observations of two observers
show the number of scores obtained
4:00. Total scores
were obtained from an assessment of the 17 components of the implementation of learning activities using problem-based learning model. The successful implementation of the learning
model can be calculated through
the formula:
Value = Score obtained X 100
Maximum Score
Maximum Score
Value = 4.00 X 100
68
= 5.88
In the second cycle of activity
lecturers have been repaired through the reflection of the second cycle is the
preliminary event there will be orienting problem be solved in groups and
communicate learning goals products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan
social character. At the core activity indicator solve the problems that have
been and develop and present the results of the discussions that have been
made. While in the classroom atmosphere in accordance with the allocation of
time indicator. On the implementation of the second cycle of learning is
increased compared to the first cycle that has five indicators categorized
quite good. Thus the activity of the lecturers in the second cycle can be
categorized either once on 17 components with a very good value success or
learning performing very well.
The average activity of lecturers in applying the model of problem-based learning in the second cycle are presented in table 3.3 below.
The average activity of lecturers in applying the model of problem-based learning in the second cycle are presented in table 3.3 below.
Table 3.3 Average Activity Lecturer
|
Teaching And
Learning Activities
|
Cycle 1
|
Cycle 2
|
Average
|
Category
|
|
Score Obtained
|
3.68
|
4
|
3.84
|
Good
|
|
Value Activities Lecturer
|
5.11
|
5.88
|
5.5
|
Very
Well
|
In Table 3.3 it can be concluded that the average value of the success of
the activity data in each cycle lecturer is
increased which in
the first cycle of 5.11 and the second cycle of 5.88. Because
the professors activity data
has increased to a
category very well then Semester Implementation Plan made in this study, has
been done very well in cycle II.
2. The
results of student learning to
apply problem-based learning
model.
a. Student results in applying problem-based learning model
1) Individuals and classical completeness Per Cycle
a. validity Problem
Table 3.4 Validity Problem
a. Student results in applying problem-based learning model
1) Individuals and classical completeness Per Cycle
a. validity Problem
Table 3.4 Validity Problem
|
Number
|
Validity Results
|
||
|
rxy
|
Korelasi
|
Valid
/Invalid
|
|
|
1
|
0.72
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
2
|
0.57
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
3
|
0.59
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
4
|
0.44
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
5
|
−0.50
|
Very Low
|
Invalid
|
|
6
|
0.49
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
7
|
0.58
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
8
|
0.77
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
9
|
0.27
|
Low
|
Invalid
|
|
10
|
0.69
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
11
|
0.55
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
12
|
0.51
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
13
|
0.65
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
14
|
0.35
|
Low
|
Invalid
|
|
15
|
0.88
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
16
|
0.66
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
17
|
0.46
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
18
|
0.82
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
19
|
0.68
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
20
|
0.88
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
21
|
0.69
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
22
|
0.44
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
23
|
0.54
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
24
|
0.21
|
Low
|
Invalid
|
|
25
|
0.88
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
26
|
0.40
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
27
|
0.84
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
28
|
0.48
|
Enough
|
Valid
|
|
29
|
0.65
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
30
|
0.75
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
31
|
0.84
|
Very High
|
Valid
|
|
32
|
0.69
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
33
|
0.74
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
34
|
0.61
|
High
|
Valid
|
|
35
|
0.24
|
Low
|
Invalid
|
Based on the table
about the item 3.4
be valid if the
Sig. (2-tailed) is smaller than alpha
(0.05). From the calculation result validity 35
about 30 about
valid and invalid
5 questions. Thus
the matter of proper instruments tested to
the students as much as 30
instruments. Of the 30 instruments will be given 15 questions about
each cycle.
b. Reliability
Table 3.5 Reliability Problem
Table 3.5 Reliability Problem
|
Number.
|
Cronbach
Alpha value
|
Results Cronbach Alpha SPSS
|
|
1
|
≥ 60
|
0.93
|
Based on Table 3.5 then tested
the reliability of the data.
Data reliability test is done by comparing the value of Cronbach alpha value
should be greater than 0.60. From the test results using analysis tools SPSS
for windows obtained Cronbach's alpha value
of 0.93, which means greater than 0.60. Thus the
instrument used in this study is reliable.
c. Results Learning
Products
2) completeness Individuals and classical Per Cycle
Table 3.6 Individual completeness and classical Per Cycle
2) completeness Individuals and classical Per Cycle
Table 3.6 Individual completeness and classical Per Cycle
|
Student
|
the value of post test
|
the average value
|
information
|
|
|
Cycle 1
|
Cycle
2
|
|||
|
1
|
85
|
100
|
92.5
|
Complete
|
|
2
|
85
|
90
|
87.5
|
Complete
|
|
3
|
50
|
65
|
57.5
|
incomplete
|
|
4
|
85
|
85
|
85
|
Complete
|
|
5
|
80
|
100
|
90
|
Complete
|
|
6
|
75
|
90
|
82.5
|
Complete
|
|
7
|
55
|
65
|
60
|
Incomplete
|
|
8
|
80
|
90
|
85
|
Complete
|
|
9
|
60
|
85
|
72.5
|
Complete
|
|
10
|
65
|
90
|
77.5
|
Complete
|
|
11
|
80
|
100
|
90
|
Complete
|
|
12
|
60
|
100
|
80
|
Complete
|
|
13
|
80
|
70
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
14
|
85
|
80
|
82.5
|
Complete
|
|
15
|
80
|
80
|
80
|
Complete
|
|
16
|
70
|
80
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
17
|
65
|
100
|
82.5
|
Complete
|
|
18
|
60
|
75
|
67.5
|
Incomplete
|
|
19
|
90
|
85
|
87.5
|
Complete
|
|
20
|
75
|
95
|
85
|
Complete
|
|
21
|
80
|
95
|
87.5
|
Complete
|
|
22
|
80
|
100
|
90
|
Complete
|
|
23
|
85
|
65
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
24
|
65
|
100
|
82.5
|
Complete
|
|
25
|
80
|
80
|
80
|
Complete
|
|
26
|
60
|
90
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
27
|
75
|
90
|
82.5
|
Complete
|
|
28
|
50
|
100
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
29
|
65
|
95
|
80
|
Complete
|
|
30
|
70
|
100
|
85
|
Complete
|
|
31
|
60
|
100
|
80
|
Complete
|
|
32
|
55
|
85
|
70
|
Complete
|
|
33
|
90
|
95
|
92.5
|
Complete
|
|
34
|
85
|
65
|
75
|
Complete
|
|
Classical Completeness
|
|
|||
|
%
|
72.50
|
87.79
|
80.14
|
Complete
|
Results of the analysis of individual completeness and classical
at posttest each
cycle, ie cycle I and II. Based on
Table 3.6 it can
be seen the results of the
analysis of individual completeness
and classical at
posttest each cycle, ie I and II. With the provisions of the
students said to be completed
individually when reaching a minimum completeness
criteria or above a minimum completeness criteria,
namely 70.00. While
classically, said lessons completed when
≥ 75% of students.
Completeness of individuals with an average percentage reached 80.14%, which means that there are 14 students can
be categorized incomplete after
learning posttest, each .masing as many as
10 students in the first cycle
and as many as four
students in the second cycle. While the classical completeness per cycle is the first cycle of 72.50%, 87.79% second cycle. Of
the learning process also found
that application of learning models based issues have
a significant impact on student learning outcome.
B. DISCUSSION
1. Activities lecturers through the application of problem-based learning model.
1. Activities lecturers through the application of problem-based learning model.
The application of
problem-based learning model can not be separated from Semester Implementation
Plan includes two components: Teaching and Learning Management consisting of
preliminary activities, core activities, and the activities of the cover and
the atmosphere of the class which includes the enthusiasm of students, faculty
and enthusiasm, time management, and suitability Learning Activities teaching
which has been designed. In the first cycle management faculty in applying
problem-based learning method is still quite good. But there are five indicators
that should be corrected in the activities of lecturers who have pretty good
value. In the preliminary events are 2 indicator of orienting the problem will
be solved in groups and communicate learning goals products, processes,
psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan social character. Next on the core
activities there are two indicators that have been solving problems and
developing and presenting the results of the discussions that have been made.
Last weaknesses found in the atmosphere of the class there is one indicator of
that time in accordance with the allocation.
In the preliminary activity indicator will orient sought to solve problems as a group have a pretty good value because of the atmosphere in the classroom to be quite active when professors ask students to find solutions for cases that have been submitted. In the preliminary activities, indicators that have fairly good value subsequent to communicate the purpose of learning products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral character and social skills to students. Students do not understand what has been described lecturer on learning objectives that have been solving problems and developing as a lecturer less utilize learning resources and processes associated with the material factors only speak communication and education so that students get very little concrete knowledge about the problems of communication in education , so that students are less interaction in learning.
At the core activities, indicators that have been solving problems and developing and presenting the results of the discussions that have been made also has a pretty good value because the lecturer is still guiding students to solve problems and develop different learning media Yag with another group when it will present the group's work, and yet everything can present the results of discussions with the innovative media learning. Last weaknesses found in the atmosphere of the class there is one indicator of that time in accordance with the allocation. Lecturer less used the time well because at the time lecturer discussions often help students when engrossed in a discussion with the group so that the lecturer to explain the material seems too fast. Of the five shortcomings of the then faculty to reflect on the second cycle. On the other hand, the stage of the most dominant lecturer activity in this study is the posttest assessment phase. At this stage, observers give high marks because researchers are so disciplined in monitoring the posttest assessment. In addition to supervising the students, researchers also assisted by observers who were also in the classroom. So the students into orderly and do the problems themselves when undergoing post-test assessment.
Personnel management in applying this problem based learning model in the second cycle can be categorized either. Due to the preliminary stage can already be handled well by the lecturers using learning resources in the form of video on communication in education. The aim is to explore the insights and experiences of their students when teaching and learning in the classroom. And proven students are motivated to learn and are skilled in recognizing and solving problems can even be concluded and evaluate about the case given by the lecturer and if there is material that is poorly understood by the students, they dared to ask if there are things that are less understandable in the case of exercise questions. This is a sign that there was an increase from cycle I to cycle II. Reflections are made on the first cycle that lecturers should orientate the problem will be solved in groups and communicate learning goals products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan social character, solving problems that have been and developing, presenting the results of the discussions that have been made. Last weakness is the time in accordance with the allocation.
This proves that the results of this study support the theory of (M. Taufiq Amir, 2010: 21) that Problem Based Learning to prepare students for critical thinking and analytical and to find and use appropriate learning resources. Furthermore, the results of this study are supported by Norris and Ennis in Bahriah (2011) states critical thinking as reasonable and reflective thinking that is focused on making decisions about what to do or believed. This is in accordance with the opinion Nur (1998) which states that one of the factors that affect the quality of learning is the availability of learning tools are accompanied by a commitment to use it in every lesson. The implementation of teaching and learning activities well as a lecturer in the learning process has a high commitment to use the tools of learning. A learning program will be able to achieve the expected results if well planned, all components of teaching should be performed optimally.
This is in accordance with the opinion Sagala (2003) which says that all the components of teaching should be performed optimally in order to achieve teaching objectives have been formulated before teaching implemented. So that the learning process can be done well then, faculty must design learning will be conducted primarily to determine the appropriate learning approach to the characteristics of the material to be taught and made indicator to determine whether the learning that has been designed to be effective or not.
Learning designed by the lecturer should fully engage students so that students can develop their potential to the maximum. Lecturers are required to have the ability to actively engage learners during learning and create an atmosphere that support in order to achieve the purpose of learning, which according to its competence (Ratumanan, 2004). A similar sentiment was expressed also by Karlimah. (2010) in his research about the study results suggested that teachers in science teaching using problem-based learning model (Problem Based Learning-PBL) as one of the solutions to improve student learning outcomes. Learning using problem-based learning model (Problem Based Learning-PBL) need to be developed by the faculty so that students can learn contextually level to higher level thinking that learning outcomes obtained increases.
In the preliminary activity indicator will orient sought to solve problems as a group have a pretty good value because of the atmosphere in the classroom to be quite active when professors ask students to find solutions for cases that have been submitted. In the preliminary activities, indicators that have fairly good value subsequent to communicate the purpose of learning products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral character and social skills to students. Students do not understand what has been described lecturer on learning objectives that have been solving problems and developing as a lecturer less utilize learning resources and processes associated with the material factors only speak communication and education so that students get very little concrete knowledge about the problems of communication in education , so that students are less interaction in learning.
At the core activities, indicators that have been solving problems and developing and presenting the results of the discussions that have been made also has a pretty good value because the lecturer is still guiding students to solve problems and develop different learning media Yag with another group when it will present the group's work, and yet everything can present the results of discussions with the innovative media learning. Last weaknesses found in the atmosphere of the class there is one indicator of that time in accordance with the allocation. Lecturer less used the time well because at the time lecturer discussions often help students when engrossed in a discussion with the group so that the lecturer to explain the material seems too fast. Of the five shortcomings of the then faculty to reflect on the second cycle. On the other hand, the stage of the most dominant lecturer activity in this study is the posttest assessment phase. At this stage, observers give high marks because researchers are so disciplined in monitoring the posttest assessment. In addition to supervising the students, researchers also assisted by observers who were also in the classroom. So the students into orderly and do the problems themselves when undergoing post-test assessment.
Personnel management in applying this problem based learning model in the second cycle can be categorized either. Due to the preliminary stage can already be handled well by the lecturers using learning resources in the form of video on communication in education. The aim is to explore the insights and experiences of their students when teaching and learning in the classroom. And proven students are motivated to learn and are skilled in recognizing and solving problems can even be concluded and evaluate about the case given by the lecturer and if there is material that is poorly understood by the students, they dared to ask if there are things that are less understandable in the case of exercise questions. This is a sign that there was an increase from cycle I to cycle II. Reflections are made on the first cycle that lecturers should orientate the problem will be solved in groups and communicate learning goals products, processes, psychomotor, behavioral and keteramplan social character, solving problems that have been and developing, presenting the results of the discussions that have been made. Last weakness is the time in accordance with the allocation.
This proves that the results of this study support the theory of (M. Taufiq Amir, 2010: 21) that Problem Based Learning to prepare students for critical thinking and analytical and to find and use appropriate learning resources. Furthermore, the results of this study are supported by Norris and Ennis in Bahriah (2011) states critical thinking as reasonable and reflective thinking that is focused on making decisions about what to do or believed. This is in accordance with the opinion Nur (1998) which states that one of the factors that affect the quality of learning is the availability of learning tools are accompanied by a commitment to use it in every lesson. The implementation of teaching and learning activities well as a lecturer in the learning process has a high commitment to use the tools of learning. A learning program will be able to achieve the expected results if well planned, all components of teaching should be performed optimally.
This is in accordance with the opinion Sagala (2003) which says that all the components of teaching should be performed optimally in order to achieve teaching objectives have been formulated before teaching implemented. So that the learning process can be done well then, faculty must design learning will be conducted primarily to determine the appropriate learning approach to the characteristics of the material to be taught and made indicator to determine whether the learning that has been designed to be effective or not.
Learning designed by the lecturer should fully engage students so that students can develop their potential to the maximum. Lecturers are required to have the ability to actively engage learners during learning and create an atmosphere that support in order to achieve the purpose of learning, which according to its competence (Ratumanan, 2004). A similar sentiment was expressed also by Karlimah. (2010) in his research about the study results suggested that teachers in science teaching using problem-based learning model (Problem Based Learning-PBL) as one of the solutions to improve student learning outcomes. Learning using problem-based learning model (Problem Based Learning-PBL) need to be developed by the faculty so that students can learn contextually level to higher level thinking that learning outcomes obtained increases.
2. The
results of student learning in
applying the learning model based
problem.
On learning of Communication
Sciences of the activities the first cycle, the second cycle increased learning
outcomes. Results of the study gained an average of classical completeness
student learning outcomes in the first cycle ie 72.50% included in the category
quite well and there are 34 students from 20 students. In the second cycle was
also an increase in average yield of 88.79% classical completeness study was
included in the very good and there are 30 students from 34 students.
Based on action research that has been done can be seen that the use of problem-based learning model is the right model of learning in the implementation of Communication Studies at the basic competence to understand the processes and factors of educational communication because it can improve student learning outcomes, seen in the presentation of research results where there is a difference Among the results of the first cycle and the second cycle. Based on research conducted from the first cycle to the second cycle, the implementation of the study also experienced limitations or shortcomings, namely the lack of a conducive conditioning classes, this was due to the relatively large number of students, so that the classroom atmosphere can sometimes less well conditioned. In addition, the impact of time constraints caused not all representatives of the group can present the results of their discussion.
Thus, this study supports the theory of Suryosubroto (1997: 77) mastery learning can be seen as a group or individually. as a group, learning completeness dinyatakaan has reached at least 75% of the students in the group in question has met the completeness criteria studied individually. Individually, completeness otherwise have been met if someone (students) have achieved the minimum mastery level that has been set for each unit of the material being studied.
Mastery learning is used to determine the level of student mastery against a subject matter. Completeness in terms of learning outcomes per individual called individual mastery while the overall student mastery called classical completeness. The instrument used to determine the cognitive achievement of students is 30 multiple choice questions, where each cycle consists of 15 questions. In the analysis of study results showed an increase in classical completeness of students between the value of the first cycle and second cycle. In the first cycle is known that increasing student mastery learning classical significantly from 72.50% to 87.79%. This increase proves that the application of learning based on problems said to be effective
Based on action research that has been done can be seen that the use of problem-based learning model is the right model of learning in the implementation of Communication Studies at the basic competence to understand the processes and factors of educational communication because it can improve student learning outcomes, seen in the presentation of research results where there is a difference Among the results of the first cycle and the second cycle. Based on research conducted from the first cycle to the second cycle, the implementation of the study also experienced limitations or shortcomings, namely the lack of a conducive conditioning classes, this was due to the relatively large number of students, so that the classroom atmosphere can sometimes less well conditioned. In addition, the impact of time constraints caused not all representatives of the group can present the results of their discussion.
Thus, this study supports the theory of Suryosubroto (1997: 77) mastery learning can be seen as a group or individually. as a group, learning completeness dinyatakaan has reached at least 75% of the students in the group in question has met the completeness criteria studied individually. Individually, completeness otherwise have been met if someone (students) have achieved the minimum mastery level that has been set for each unit of the material being studied.
Mastery learning is used to determine the level of student mastery against a subject matter. Completeness in terms of learning outcomes per individual called individual mastery while the overall student mastery called classical completeness. The instrument used to determine the cognitive achievement of students is 30 multiple choice questions, where each cycle consists of 15 questions. In the analysis of study results showed an increase in classical completeness of students between the value of the first cycle and second cycle. In the first cycle is known that increasing student mastery learning classical significantly from 72.50% to 87.79%. This increase proves that the application of learning based on problems said to be effective
IV.
CLOSING
A. CONCLUSION
A. CONCLUSION
Based on the results
of data analysis and discussion that has been presented, it can be concluded
that the application of learning Problem Based Learning (PBL) can improve:
1. Activities lecturers through the application of problem-based learning model of basic competencies to understand the process and the factors of communication in education has increased from cycle 1 there are five indicators that must be corrected, namely orient problem in looking for solutions that will be in groups, communicate the purpose of learning the product, process, psychomotor, behavioral character and social skills, solve the problems that have been, develop and present the results of the discussions that have been made, in accordance with the allocation of time. And increases in cycle 2 with a category all faculty activity indicator successful implementation of good value with excellent category and its implementation in accordance with the implementation plan of the semester.
2. The results of student learning after the implementation of problem-based learning model on the basis of competence and communication factors in education has increased in each cycle. In the first cycle is known that classical learning completeness students amounted to 72.50%, this value has not met the success indicators of research that is equal to 85%. Finally in the second cycle of classical learning completeness students reached 88.79%, means that this value has met the success indicators of research that is equal to 75%.
Based on the above conclusions generally be concluded that the application of problem-based learning model on the basis of competence and factors used communication in a decent education in the learning with some improvements.
1. Activities lecturers through the application of problem-based learning model of basic competencies to understand the process and the factors of communication in education has increased from cycle 1 there are five indicators that must be corrected, namely orient problem in looking for solutions that will be in groups, communicate the purpose of learning the product, process, psychomotor, behavioral character and social skills, solve the problems that have been, develop and present the results of the discussions that have been made, in accordance with the allocation of time. And increases in cycle 2 with a category all faculty activity indicator successful implementation of good value with excellent category and its implementation in accordance with the implementation plan of the semester.
2. The results of student learning after the implementation of problem-based learning model on the basis of competence and communication factors in education has increased in each cycle. In the first cycle is known that classical learning completeness students amounted to 72.50%, this value has not met the success indicators of research that is equal to 85%. Finally in the second cycle of classical learning completeness students reached 88.79%, means that this value has met the success indicators of research that is equal to 75%.
Based on the above conclusions generally be concluded that the application of problem-based learning model on the basis of competence and factors used communication in a decent education in the learning with some improvements.
B. ADVICE
Some suggestion as one of the alternative
solutions encountered in this study are as follows (1) Application of
problem-based learning model is less appersepsi problem so that the necessary
controls and preparation of development plans and better MFI of lecturers, with
how to find and use learning resources in accordance with the material to be
taught. (2) Study of Communication in particular the Basic Competence
understand the processes and factors communications faculty of education should
make an example of a case that occurred in the community phenomenal example of
image / video educational communication process more concrete by using
Model-Based Learning Problems that can improve student learning outcomes.
THANK-YOU NOTE
THANK-YOU NOTE
In this moment I
would like to thank Dr. Susanti, S.Ak, M.Pd and Dr. Waspodo Tjipto Subroto,
M.Pd on referrals and guidance so that I can finish this article.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amir, M.Taufik. (2009) .Inovasi Education Through Problem Based Learning.Jakarta: Kencana.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2006). Research Procedure A Practical Approach. Jakarta: PT. Asdi Mahasatya.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2009). Class Action Research. Jakarta: Earth Literacy.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2010). Procedure Research: A Practical Approach. (Revised Edition). Jakarta:Rinek Reserved
Bahriah E.P. (2011). Indicators Critical and Creative Thinking. On line at http: //www.berpikir critical / critical Internet / indicators of critical and creative thinking «evisapinatulbahriah.htm.10 November 2014 (15:23)
Djamarah, Syaiful Bahri. 2002. Psychology of Learning. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Reserved.
Dimyati, et al, 1999.Belajar And Learning. Jakarta: Rieka Copyright
Karlimah. (2010). Communication Ability and Mathematical Problem Solving Students of Primary School Teacher Education Through Problem Based Learning. Journal of Education PGSD FIP Indonesia University of Education. 11 (2): 51-60
Kunandar. (2008). Easy Steps Class Action research as a Teacher Professional Development. Jakarta: PT. King Grafindo Persada.
Nur Mohamad. (1998) .Teori-theory Cognitive Development. Surabaya: UNESA-PSMS
Ratumanan, GtdanLauren, S. (2004) .Evaluasi Belajar.Surabaya Results: UnesaUniversityPress
Sagala, Syaiful. (2003). The concept and meaning of learning. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sanjaya, Vienna. 2006. Learning Strategies: Oriented Processing Standards Pendidikan.Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media
Sudjana, Nana. 2005 Basics of Teaching and Learning. Bandung: New Light Algesindo.
____________. 2005. Learning and Factors Affecting. Bandung: New Light Algesindo.
Suryosubroto. B. (1997). Teaching and learning in schools. Jakarta: Rineka copyright
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 Year 2003 on National Education System.
Amir, M.Taufik. (2009) .Inovasi Education Through Problem Based Learning.Jakarta: Kencana.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2006). Research Procedure A Practical Approach. Jakarta: PT. Asdi Mahasatya.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2009). Class Action Research. Jakarta: Earth Literacy.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2010). Procedure Research: A Practical Approach. (Revised Edition). Jakarta:Rinek Reserved
Bahriah E.P. (2011). Indicators Critical and Creative Thinking. On line at http: //www.berpikir critical / critical Internet / indicators of critical and creative thinking «evisapinatulbahriah.htm.10 November 2014 (15:23)
Djamarah, Syaiful Bahri. 2002. Psychology of Learning. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Reserved.
Dimyati, et al, 1999.Belajar And Learning. Jakarta: Rieka Copyright
Karlimah. (2010). Communication Ability and Mathematical Problem Solving Students of Primary School Teacher Education Through Problem Based Learning. Journal of Education PGSD FIP Indonesia University of Education. 11 (2): 51-60
Kunandar. (2008). Easy Steps Class Action research as a Teacher Professional Development. Jakarta: PT. King Grafindo Persada.
Nur Mohamad. (1998) .Teori-theory Cognitive Development. Surabaya: UNESA-PSMS
Ratumanan, GtdanLauren, S. (2004) .Evaluasi Belajar.Surabaya Results: UnesaUniversityPress
Sagala, Syaiful. (2003). The concept and meaning of learning. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sanjaya, Vienna. 2006. Learning Strategies: Oriented Processing Standards Pendidikan.Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media
Sudjana, Nana. 2005 Basics of Teaching and Learning. Bandung: New Light Algesindo.
____________. 2005. Learning and Factors Affecting. Bandung: New Light Algesindo.
Suryosubroto. B. (1997). Teaching and learning in schools. Jakarta: Rineka copyright
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 Year 2003 on National Education System.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar