THE DIFFERENCES OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICAL SPATIAL ABILITY TAUGHT
COOPERATIVE LEARNING NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) AND STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) TYPES AT SMP NEGERI 3 KISARAN ACADEMIC YEAR 2017/2018 Irma Syahputri Lubis*, Edi Syahputra *
College Student, Program School in Mathematics Education Jl. Willem Iskandar Psr. V Medan Estate Kota Medan e-mail:
[email protected] College Student of State University of Medan ABSTRACT The aim of this research is to know whether student’s mathematical spatial ability by cooperative learning number heads together types is better than student’s mathematical spatial ability by student team achievement divisions types for Grade VIII in SMP Negeri 3 Kisaran. The population is all students of grade VIII in SMP Negeri 3 Kisaran A.Y. 2017/2018. Sampling techniques that is used in this research is random sampling. There are two samples in this research namely, Experimental class A is VIII/3 taught by cooperative learning NHT and Experimental class B is VIII/5 taught by cooperative learning STAD. This research using posttest where, data of posttest are normal distribution and homogeneous. After doing treatment in experiment class A and B obtained average score of posttest are 77,42 and 69,84. Hypothesis testing that have been conducted in this research is by calculating manually and results of hypothesis test of data from both experimental class in posttest was found that . It indicates that H₀ is rejected. So, we can conclude that Students’ mathematical spatial ability taught by using cooperative learning NHT type is better than cooperative learning STAD type. Keyword: mathematical spatial ability, numbered heads together (NHT), student team achievement divisions (STAD)
INTRODUCTION
life, mathematics needs to be understood
School as an educational institution that
and controlled by all levels of society is
organizes the learning process has an
no exception of school students as the
important role in transferring knowledge
next generation. Based on Hudojo (in
and skill to students. The role is expected
Sirait, 2017) that mathematics is a tool to
to produce qualified human in science
develop a way of thinking. Therefore,
department. In other words, school
mathematics is indispensable both for
implements teaching–learning activity as
everyday life as well as in dealing with
the
the
realization
educational
of
the
objective.
established
of
science
and
to
technology so that the mathematics must
that
be procured to every student since
education in schools is created through
elementary classes, however, there are
the interaction between educators with
essentially mathematical science is a way
students
the
of thinking deductive formal and abstract.
development of all the potential, skills,
Mathematics not only related to numbers
and characteristics of learners, to the
and operations but also the element of
intellectual,
space as a target. Clear that the object of
Sukmadinata
that
(in
According
advancement
Sirait,
aims
social,
2017)
to
help
affective,
and
physical.
study of mathematics is not just the
As according to Noviani, Syahputra, and
Murad
(2017)
state
that:
quantity, but more focused on the relationship,
patterns,
shapes,
and
“Mathematics is one of the basic science
structures. Students have difficulty in
that has very important influence in life,
learning
because it can prepare and develop
mathematics is abstract things so it is
students’
difficult to understand and boring.
ability to
think
logically,
sociably, and appropriately to solve a
mathematics
because
Mathematics education materials in
problem that occurs in their daily lives”.
schools
Mathematics is also an important subject
statistics, and geometry. These materials
in education system in the world. A
are used, both for mathematics alone and
country
for utilization outside mathematics. These
that
neglects
mathematics
include
aim
arithmetic,
education as a top priority will be left
materials
behind from the progress of all fields
capabilities described by NCTM (in
especially science and technology. Given
Subroto
the importance of mathematics in daily
connection
2012):
to
improve
algebra,
reasoning
ability,
the
5
ability,
communication
ability,
problem-solving
ability,
representational ability. In addition to
difficulties for students to understand geometry material (Sayekti, 2017).
these 5 abilities, mathematics material
NCTM suggested that in the learning
can develop other abilities beyond the
of geometry students can visualize, describe,
NCTM stated that is spatial ability.
and compare wake-up geometry in various
According to Putra (2011) stated that: The distribution of competency
positions, so that students can understand it. Therefore, the spatial ability is required.
standards for SMP, which get the largest
Spatial ability in learning mathematics
share is geometry (41%) compared to
is one of the factors that influence student
other materials such as algebra (29%),
achievement. Spatial power itself is an
numbers
and
individual's ability to see and re-assimilate
opportunities (12%)”. Based on the above
space objects by simply making pictures of
data geometry has a larger study for
the space objects on paper. Spatial ability in
students compared with other branches of
mathematics is very important, as many
mathematics. Therefore, geometry that
students find it difficult to understand
should be more attention to the lesson.
objects or geometry drawings, so that
Geometry is one of the most difficult and
teachers are required to give more than
boring
enough attention to fit spatially with the
(18%),
subject
and
matter
statistics
for
students.
According to Putri (2017) state that:
willingness-indeed
From a psychological point of view,
curriculum's mandate. To solve the problems
geometry
of
in dimension three, one must have spatial
abstractions from visual and spatial
power. Because in the three dimensional
experiences,
a
matter many matters can’t be realized in
mathematical point of view geometry
actual form or build, only visualized or ways
provides approaches to problem-solving.
in the form of dimension two. Visualizing
In learning mathematics, especially the
the three dimensions into a two dimensional
good spatial geometry ability is needed
dimension that requires the imagination and
by
abstraction of learners, so that often make
is
students.
the
presentation
whereas
Because
from
in
learning
geometry, the actual object in the form of 3D is often visualized as a 2D. This three dimensional
visualization
into
two-
according
to
the
them was confused. Sayekti (2017) also says that: “Spatial ability is the ability to see colors, lines,
dimensional shape that needed the good
shape,
and
understanding
the
spatial ability so that it doesn’t cause any
visualization and spatial properties”.
figure
In fact, based on researcher’s
From the fact that researcher’s get, then
preliminary study of students in grade
researcher’s need to improve the student’s
VIII-3 at SMP Negeri 3 Kisaran,
mathematical spatial ability. According to
students have difficulty visualizing in
constructivist learning theory, knowledge can’t
solving geometry problems. This is
simply be transferred from the teacher to the
supported by interviews with one of
mind of students. This means that students must
the mathematics teachers in the class,
be mentally active build knowledge based
who said that students are still having
student’s cognitive structure. An activity which
difficulty
expected able to apply for increase the student’s
in
understanding
issues
related to geometry. Students are still
mathematical
weak in understanding space and
cooperative learning models type Numbered
shape. One of the factors causing low
Heads Together (NHT) and Student Teams
mathematical
Achievement Division (STAD).
students
is
spatial abstract
abilities
of
spatial
ability
are
applying
mathematical
According to Cohen (in Pedersen and
characteristics so that students have
Digby 2014: 251) state that cooperative learning
difficulty
is a generic name that refers to methods for the
in
visualizing
and
constructing the geometry. Based on
organization
the observation that researcher do, the
instruction. These methods include Complex
researcher can conclude that there is
Instruction,
less response that given by students in
Learning together, STAD, and others.
mathematics
class
and
from
and
conduct
Group
of
Investigation,
classroom Jigsaw,
the
According to Istarani (in Nestia, 2017)
observation test, the students that has
refers to the virtues taught by using Numbered
mark more than KKM are 5 students
Heads Together (NHT) are as follows:
with percentage is 14,29%, and the
1. Enhance
students has mark less than