ABSTRAK
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui: (1) manakah yang menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik antara model pembelajaran PBL, GI, atau TPS, (2) manakah yang mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik antara siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi, sedang, atau rendah, (3) pada masing-masing tingkat kreativitas, model pembelajaran manakah yang menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik, (4) pada masing-masing model pembelajaran, tingkat kreativitas manakah yang mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian eksperimental semu. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah seluruh siswa kelas VIII SMP se-Kabupaten Banyumas. Teknik pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan stratified cluster random sampling. Anggota sampel dalam penelitian ini berjumlah 295 orang. Teknik pengumpulan data meliputi dokumentasi, tes dan angket. Uji coba instrumen tes meliputi validitas isi, tingkat kesukaran, daya pembeda, dan reliabilitas. Uji keseimbangan menggunakan anava satu jalan dengan sel tak sama. Analisis data menggunakan anava dua jalan dengan sel tak sama yang kemudian dilanjutkan dengan uji komparasi ganda menggunakan metode Scheffe .
Dari penelitian ini disimpulkan bahwa. (1) Model pembelajaran PBL menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika lebih baik daripada model pembelajaran GI dan TPS, model pembelajaran GI menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika lebih baik daripada model pembelajaran TPS, (2) siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika lebih baik daripada siswa dengan kreativitas sedang dan rendah, siswa dengan kreativitas sedang mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika lebih baik daripada siswa dengan kreativitas rendah, (3) pada siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi dan rendah, model pembelajaran GI menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang sama dengan model pembelajaran PBL dan TPS, model pembelajaran PBL menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik daripada model pembelajaran TPS. Siswa dengan kreativitas sedang, model pembelajaran PBL, GI dan TPS menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang sama, (4) pada model pembelajaran PBL dan GI, prestasi belajar matematika siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi lebih baik daripada siswa dengan kreativitas sedang dan rendah, siswa dengan kreativitas sedang dan rendah menghasilkan prestasi belajar matematika yang sama. Pada model pembelajaran TPS, siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi dan sedang mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika yang sama, siswa dengan kreativitas tinggi dan sedang mempunyai prestasi belajar matematika lebih baik daripada siswa dengan kreativitas rendah.
Kata kunci: Problem Based Learning (PBL), Group Investigation (GI), Think Pair Share (TPS), kreativitas belajar siswa.
ABSTRACT
The objectives of this research were to investigate: (1) which learning model of the PBL, GI, and TPS result in a better learning achievement in mathematics, (2) which students of those with the high, medium or low creativity has a better learning achievement in mathematics, (3) in each creativity level, which were learning models that gave had better mathematics learning achievement, (4) in each learning model, which were creativity level that gave had better mathematics learning achievement.
This research used the quasi experimental research method. The population of the research was all of the students in Grade VIII of Junior Secondary Schools of Banyumas Regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The sample of research consisted of 295 students. Techniques of collecting data used were documentation, test, and questionnaire. The try out of instruments were content validity, difficultly level, discrimination power and reliability. Balance test used one way ANOVA test. The data was analized using two way ANOVA with unbalance, cells then its compared with Scheffe method.
From the research, it can be concluded that. (1) Learning model of PBL gave better mathematics learning achievement than model of GI and TPS, model of GI gave better mathematics learning achievement than model of TPS. (2) students who have high creativity gave better mathematics learning achievement than students who have medium and low creativity, students who have medium creativity gave better mathematics learning achievement than students who have low creativity. (3) in the students with high and low creativity, the GI learning model gave the same learning achievement in mathematics with the PBL and TPS learning model, the PBL learning model gave better learning achievement in mathematics the TPS learning model. The PBL, GI and TPS learning model gave the same learning achievement in mathematics. (4) in the PBL and GI learning model, the learning achievement in mathematics of the students with high creativity were better than the students with medium and low creativity, the students with medium and low creativity gave same the learning achievement in mathematics. In the TPS learning model, the students with high and medium creativity gave the same learning achievement in mathematics, the learning achievement in mathematics of the students with the high and medium creativity were better than the students the low creativity.
Keywords: Problem Based Learning (PBL), Group Investigation (GI), Think Pair Share (TPS), student learning creativity.