Font Size:
EFEKTIFITAS MODEL PEMBELAJARAN DISCOVERY LEARNING DAN SNOWBALL THROWING DILENGKAPI CD INTERAKTIF DITINJAUDARP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA
Last modified: 2018-09-03
Abstract
The study aimed to determine whether or not there were differences in the average learning
outcomes of mathematics in the cube and beam subject matter between students who were
subjected to Discovery Learning model, Snowball Throwing equipped with Compact Disc (CD)
Interactive and conventional learning models and to find out which learning model was better .
Data collection methods used are observation and test methods. The sampling technique used is
cluster random sampling. The selected sample is class VIII A, VIIIB, and VIIIC. The initial data in
the form of midterm replication values were analyzed using normality test, homogeneity test and
one-way Anava test so that the experimental group 1, experimental group 2 and control group
could be used as samples. Final data in the form of evaluation tests were analyzed using normality
test, homogeneity test and one-way Anova test. The results of the final analysis using the one-way
Anova test for hypothesis 1 was 84.11, 83.48, and 76.21, while Fcount = 13.71 and Ftable = 3.44
then Fcount> Ftable, so Ho was rejected which meant that there was difference in average learning
outcomes from the three groups. The results of the right-party t test for hypothesis 2 obtained
thitung = 4.55 and t table = 1.97 then t count> t table, so Ho was rejected which meant that the
experimental group 1 was better than the control group. The results of the right-party t test for
hypothesis 3 are obtained t count = 4.78 and t table = 2.03 then t count> t table, so Ho is rejected
which means that the experimental group 2 is better than the control group. The results of the
two-party t test for hypothesis 4 are obtained t count = 0.35 and t table = 2.01 then -table
<thitung <t table, so that Ho is accepted which means that there is no difference in the average
learning outcomes of experimental group 1 and experimental group 2. Hypothesis 5 and 6
mathematics learning achievements with discovery learning and snowball throwing models to achieve KKM. In conclusion, the use of Discovery Learning and Snowball Throwing learning models with Interactive CDs is more effective than conventional learning models.
Keywords: Discovery Learning, Snowball Throwing, Interactive CD, Effectiveness.
outcomes of mathematics in the cube and beam subject matter between students who were
subjected to Discovery Learning model, Snowball Throwing equipped with Compact Disc (CD)
Interactive and conventional learning models and to find out which learning model was better .
Data collection methods used are observation and test methods. The sampling technique used is
cluster random sampling. The selected sample is class VIII A, VIIIB, and VIIIC. The initial data in
the form of midterm replication values were analyzed using normality test, homogeneity test and
one-way Anava test so that the experimental group 1, experimental group 2 and control group
could be used as samples. Final data in the form of evaluation tests were analyzed using normality
test, homogeneity test and one-way Anova test. The results of the final analysis using the one-way
Anova test for hypothesis 1 was 84.11, 83.48, and 76.21, while Fcount = 13.71 and Ftable = 3.44
then Fcount> Ftable, so Ho was rejected which meant that there was difference in average learning
outcomes from the three groups. The results of the right-party t test for hypothesis 2 obtained
thitung = 4.55 and t table = 1.97 then t count> t table, so Ho was rejected which meant that the
experimental group 1 was better than the control group. The results of the right-party t test for
hypothesis 3 are obtained t count = 4.78 and t table = 2.03 then t count> t table, so Ho is rejected
which means that the experimental group 2 is better than the control group. The results of the
two-party t test for hypothesis 4 are obtained t count = 0.35 and t table = 2.01 then -table
<thitung <t table, so that Ho is accepted which means that there is no difference in the average
learning outcomes of experimental group 1 and experimental group 2. Hypothesis 5 and 6
mathematics learning achievements with discovery learning and snowball throwing models to achieve KKM. In conclusion, the use of Discovery Learning and Snowball Throwing learning models with Interactive CDs is more effective than conventional learning models.
Keywords: Discovery Learning, Snowball Throwing, Interactive CD, Effectiveness.
Full Text:
PDF