PERBANDINGAN HASIL BELAJAR IML DENGAN PENERAPAN STRATEGI SL PADA MODEL CBL DAN CPS SISWA IX TITL

Authors

  • Maqhrisa Rusma State University of Malang
  • Setiadi Cahyono Putro Universitas Negeri Malang
  • Hari Putranto Universitas Negeri Malang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26740/jp.v6n1.p23-31

Keywords:

CBL, CPS, SL, Hasil Belajar, Instalasi Motor Listrik

Abstract

The use of learning models and strategies that have not been effective causes a lack of interest in learning for vocational high school students. So that it becomes one of the factors for the low learning outcomes of SMK (vocational high school) students. This research aims to determine the difference in average learning outcomes in the aspects of knowledge, attitudes and skills of electric motor installation study due to the influence of the application of Challenge Based Learning combined with Scaffolding Learning strategies with Creative Problem Solving combined with Scaffolding Learning strategies in class XI TITL SMK students. The method of this study was a pretest and posttest with a quasi-experimental type of research. The Challenge Based Learning learning model combined with the Scaffolding Learning strategy and Creative Problem Solving combined with the Scaffolding Learning strategy are the independent variables in this study. Learning Outcomes of Electric Motor Installation is the dependent variable with the research subjects of class XI TITL A and TITL B SMK as many as 35 students. The results of the t-test on the knowledge aspect of electric motor installations obtained a value of 0.042 and the results of the attitude and skills t-test obtained a value of 0.031. Based on these results, both of them have significant results on the differences from the application of the two models combined with the strategy. The results show that there are differences in the average learning outcomes of knowledge, attitudes and skills because the influence of the CBL learning model combined with the SL strategy is higher than the CPS model combined with the SL strategy for class XI TITL SMK in IML subjects

References

<p>Bakker, A., Smitt, J., &amp; Wegerif, R. (2015). Scaffolding and Dialogic Teaching in Mathematics Education: Introduction and Review. <em>ZDM Mathematics Education, 47</em>,1047-1065. DOI: 10.1007/s11858-015-0738-8.</p><p>Dimyanti &amp; Mudjiono. (2013). <em>Perencanaan Pembelajaran</em>. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.</p><p>Gasong, D. (2007). <em>Model Pembelajaran Konstruktivistik Sebagai Alternatif Mengatasi Masalah Pembelajaran</em>. (Online), <a href="http://www.muhfida.com/konstruktivistik.doc">http://www.muhfida.com/konstruktivistik.doc</a>. Diakses 21 Mei 2019.</p><p>Hady, H.S &amp; Joko. (2015). Implementasi Model Pembelajaran Langsung dan Model Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa pada Mata Pelajaran Instalasi Penerangan Listrik di Kelas  XI TIPTL SMK Taruna Jaya Prawira Tuban. <em>Jurnal Pendidikan Teknik Elektro, 04</em>(02), <em> </em>309-316. Dari <a href="http://jurnalmahasiswa.unesa.ac.id/article/14715/44/article.pdf">http://jurnalmahasiswa.unesa.ac.id/article/14715/44/article.pdf</a>.</p><p>Isaken, S.G., Dorval, K.B., &amp; Treffinger, D.J. (2000). <em>Creative Approaches to Problem Solving: A Framework for Change</em>. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendal/Hunt.</p><p>Johnson, L &amp; Adams, S. (2011). Challenge-Based Learning: The Report from the Implementation Project. <em>Jurnal. Austin</em>. Texas: The New Media Consortium.</p><p>Katminingsih, Y. (2009). <em>Vygotsky dan Teorinya dalam Mempengaruhi Desain Pembelajaran Matematika</em>. Malang: Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan PGRI Blitar.</p><p>Majid, A. (2013). <em>Strategi Pembelajaran</em>. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.</p><p>Mamin, R. (2013). Penerapan Metode Pembelajaran Scaffolding Pada Pokok Bahasan Sistem Periodik Unsur. <em>CHEMICA</em>, <em>9</em>(2), 55-60. Dari http: <a href="http://ojs.unm.ac.id/index.php/chemica/article/viewFile/420/pdf">http://ojs.unm.ac.id/index.php/chemica/article/viewFile/420/pdf</a>.</p><p>Mutiara, C., Suyanto, E., &amp; Abdurrahman. (2014). Pengaruh Kinerja Belajar Pada Model Pembelajaran Creative Problem Solving Terhadap Hasil Belajar. <em>Jurnal FKIP UNILA, 2</em>(6). Dari http: <a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://jurnal.fkip.unila.ac.id/index.php/JPF/article/view/5906">http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://jurnal.fkip.unila.ac.id/index.php/JPF/article/view/5906</a>.</p><p>Nurhidayati, A., Putro, S. C., &amp; Widiyaningtyas, T. (2019). Penerapan Model PBL Berbantuan E-Modul Berbasis Flipbook Dibandingkan Berbantuan Bahan Ajar Cetak Pengaruhnya Terhadap Hasil Belajar Pemrograman Siswa SMK. Teknologi Kejuruan: <em>Jurnal Teknologi, Kejuruan, dan Pengajarannya</em>, <em>41</em>(2). Dari http: http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/teknologikejuruan/article/view/11633/5504.</p><p>Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Nomor 41 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Proses untuk Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Doc Player Info (online), https://docplayer.info/32044050-Standar-proses-permendiknas-nomor-41-tahun-2007.html, diakses 22 Juni 2019.</p><p>Rachmanto, E. D. R., Putro, S. C., &amp; Pujianto, U. (2015). Perbandingan Kemandirian Belajar Teknik Animasi 2D Pada Penerapan Tiga Model Pembelajaran Terhadap Siswa SMK. <em>Jurnal Pendidikan Sains</em>, 3(2), 74-80. Dari <a href="http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/jps/article/view/7641/3475.pdf">http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/jps/article/view/7641/3475.pdf</a>.</p><p>Rusman. (2012). <em>Model-Model Pembelajaran Mengembangkan Profesionalisme </em>Guru. Jakarta: Kencana.</p><p>Rusman. (2017). <em>Belajar &amp; Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan</em>. Jakarta: Kencana.</p><p>Sakur &amp; Hutapea, N.M. (2014). <em>Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa dengan Menggunakan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Think Pair Share (TPS) dan Tipe Group Investigation (GI) pada Mata Pelajaran Sistem Operasi Kelas X Multimedia di SMK Negeri 12 Malang</em>. Program Studi FKIP UR</p><p>Siswanto, H.B. (2007). <em>Pengantar Manajemen</em>. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.</p><p>Sodikin. (2014).  <em>Penerapan Model Challenge Based Learning (CBL) dengan Metode Eksperimen dan Proyek Ditinjau dari Keingintahuan dan Sikap Ilmiah Terhadap Prestasi Belajar Siswa</em>. Skripsi Tidak Diterbitkan. Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang.</p><p>Sudjana, N. (2010). <em>Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar</em>. Bandung: Remaja  Rosdakarya.</p><p>Sudjana, N. (2013). <em>Dasar-Dasar Proses Belajar </em>Mengajar. Bandung: PT. Sinar Baru Algesindo.</p><p>Sugiyono. (2011). <em>Metode Penelitian Pendidikan</em>. Bandung: Alfabeta.</p><p>Supardi. (2015). <em>Penilaian Autentik Pembelajaran Afektif, Kognitif dan Psikomotorik (konsep dan aplikasi)</em>. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.</p><p>Supriadie, D &amp; Darmawan, D. (2012). <em>Komunikasi Pembelajaran</em>. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.</p><p>Swiden, C.l. (2013). <em>Effect of Challenge Based Learning on Student Motivation and Achievvement</em>. Montana: Montana State University.</p><p>Windrianti, M. G. (2013). Penerapan Challenge Based Learning (CBL) dengan Pendekatan Keterampilan Metakognisi Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Pada Materi Persegi Kelas VII Smp Kristen 2 Salatiga. <em>Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika</em>, <em>4</em>(9).</p>

Downloads

Published

2022-11-02

How to Cite

Rusma, M., Putro, S. C., & Putranto, H. (2022). PERBANDINGAN HASIL BELAJAR IML DENGAN PENERAPAN STRATEGI SL PADA MODEL CBL DAN CPS SISWA IX TITL. JP (Jurnal Pendidikan) : Teori Dan Praktik, 6(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.26740/jp.v6n1.p23-31
Abstract views: 339 , PDF Downloads: 101